[Deck] Ugwr Intuition CounterTop

[jazzykat]

Yeah, after doing some actual testing I came to the same conclusions.

Exploration requires a deck built entirely around it, and I was trying to fit way too many different strategies into a single archetype. The result was an incoherent hodge-podge. I should have been able to see this earlier, but I really wanted to have my cake and eat it too…

Anyways, thanks for the thoughtful reply, and again for this thread.

Thanks for doing the testing. I had an idea to jam everything into the same deck more along the lines of CAB Jace mixed with this deck. Maybe I will give it another shot but I think with the meta as open as it is you either have to be very flexible or very focused in your game plan. Going halfway will leave you blaise against too many decks.

[Swing4Five]

Thanks for doing the testing. I had an idea to jam everything into the same deck more along the lines of CAB Jace mixed with this deck. Maybe I will give it another shot but I think with the meta as open as it is you either have to be very flexible or very focused in your game plan. Going halfway will leave you blaise against too many decks.

That was also my idea... and my results. If you do end up giving it another try, and manage to find a list with positive results, please share with the rest of the class!

[Taurelin]

First of all, my compliments and thanks for this thread and this deck. So far, I've been playing stuff like SwanThresh and Supreme Blue for quite a while. But the Intuition-engine seems to be just this extra edge that those decks were lacking.

One question:

Intuition: ... Three is the right number, as you never want to see two in an opener, and resolving one is all it takes, but you still want to see at least 1 a game.

(...)

Core choices and user customization

These cards are not to be cut under any circumstances, as talked about in card choices
2 Intuition

I would really like to play Counterspell as a 3-of in the deck. Is it possible/advisable/a cardinal sin to cut Intuition down to 2 copies for that? Or would it be better to cut a land? Or even risk playing 61 cards?

Thanks for your help!

[Nidd]

I would really like to play Counterspell as a 3-of in the deck. Is it possible/advisable/a cardinal sin to cut Intuition down to 2 copies for that? Or would it be better to cut a land? Or even risk playing 61 cards?

Thanks for your help!

I play only 2 copies and I'm perfectly fine. Brainstorm and SDT are plenty of cardselection and I've always found an Intuition when I've needed one.

[Taurelin]

I played the deck in a small tournament (Paderborn, Germany - 22 players) and came in 6th.

MUs:
Eva Green (2:0)
Ichorid (2:1)
Canadian Thresh (0:2)
MUD (0:2)
Merfolk (2:1)

List:
// Lands
3 [ON] Flooded Strand
2 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn
3 [ZEN] Misty Rainforest
3 [B] Tropical Island
3 [B] Tundra
2 [B] Volcanic Island
2 [CS] Snow-Covered Island
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Forest
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Plains
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Mountain
1 [TSP] Academy Ruins

// Creatures
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
4 [AL] Force of Will
3 [5E] Counterspell
4 [CS] Counterbalance
4 [CHK] Sensei's Divining Top
4 [MM] Brainstorm
2 [TE] Intuition
3 [WWK] Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 [U] Swords to Plowshares
3 [SHM] Firespout
1 [RAV] Life from the Loam
1 [FD] Vedalken Shackles
1 [FD] Engineered Explosives

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [SHM] Firespout
SB: 3 [TSP] Krosan Grip
SB: 3 [4E] Red Elemental Blast
SB: 2 [ALA] Relic of Progenitus
SB: 2 [TSB] Tormod's Crypt
SB: 2 [SOK] Pithing Needle
SB: 2 [R] Blue Elemental Blast

I agree that 2 Intuition are sufficient. The other minor changes I made were some SB-slots and the full set of basics, which I felt were necessary.

[ivanpei]

I'm with you Taurelin, did you find the Shakles-EE-Loam-Ruins package ok? Was it quick enough? Would you have prefered punishing fire-Grove? On another note, Countertop seems really bad right now. The printing of GSZ really messed up the deck's plan to lock people out. Everyone now has + 4 Pridemage (that are beyond countertops curve). Anyone feel the same way? I think fires-grove sort of reduces the deck's reliance on artifacts/enchantments. Anyone has a fire/grove centric list?

[Valtrix]

I think 2 intuitions are probably fine. I first started with 2, then moved to 3, but in general having the third intuition can make for more awkward draws. With the way the format is moving I think the 3rd one is less useful, since it shines most against countertop (which is on the decline).

61 cards I think is fine: The deck really wants a lot of different things in it, and I think that 23/61 manabase is better than 22/60 or 23/60.

Also, I think 4 different colored basics are just too much. For one it's a strain on your manabase, but your color reliance is so small that you can afford to not run either a mountain or a plains depending on your build. Always having 3 different basics is very good in my opinion, because it lets you work around choke very well to get EE @ 3 and having access to the colors is just really good.

Ivanpei, I know you still don't like Ruins/EE/loam, but I think it's still incredibly useful. It's never been "fast," so you go for it against the slow decks when the combo is most relevant anyway. If it won't help you then you intuition for something else and if you draw ruins/EE/loam you're not out anything. Since there's effectively no opportunity cost to run the combo, you always want to have access to it G1.

I don't think countertop is all that bad. In reality it's always trading 1 for 1, which you're fine with. Being able to protect goyfs from swords and randomly wreck games makes it more worthwhile in my opinion. Plus, since we're running intuition, it's a combination that can also be assembled more reliably.

I've been working on synthesizing a new list to incorporate punishing fire/grove combo, but haven't got it streamlined to a point where I'm happy with it yet. I mostly haven't been developing much because I've been spending time with other things right now. My untweaked version of what I had was this:


// Lands
2 [IN] Island (2)
1 [TSP] Academy Ruins
2 [R] Volcanic Island
3 [R] Tropical Island
4 [ZEN] Scalding Tarn
1 [RAV] Forest (2)
4 [ZEN] Misty Rainforest
1 [ON] Flooded Strand
1 [ZEN] Mountain (3)
3 [A] Tundra
1 [FUT] Grove of the Burnwillows

// Creatures
4 [FUT] Tarmogoyf

// Spells
1 [FD] Engineered Explosives
3 [WWK] Jace, the Mind Sculptor
4 [R] Swords to Plowshares
4 [AL] Force of Will
4 [5E] Brainstorm
4 [V09] Sensei's Divining Top
3 [SHM] Firespout
1 [RAV] Life from the Loam
2 [TE] Intuition
1 [FD] Vedalken Shackles
4 [CS] Counterbalance
1 [ZEN] Punishing Fire
1 [6E] Counterspell

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [FUT] Grove of the Burnwillows
SB: 2 [FD] Engineered Explosives
SB: 1 [SHM] Firespout
SB: 1 [TE] Intuition
SB: 1 [FD] Vedalken Shackles
SB: 3 [ZEN] Punishing Fire
SB: 2 [ZEN] Spell Pierce
SB: 1 [SOM] Ratchet Bomb
SB: 2 [6E] Counterspell

I think that it's fine to cut REBs from the board. It's a good card for sure, but I always wanted it to do more. Sure it was some nice extra removal against decks, but there seemed to be more flexible cards. With punishing fires the game against merfolk is significantly bolstered, and intuition is very good against any slower decks you may want it against. The deck is certainly a little more oriented around beating creature decks, so I dislike a little bit the lack of as many counterspells for combo, but there's only so much you can do.

And, while I may not be developing as much, I always keep updated with this thread (notification of responses through email), so I will always provide my input should anybody post.

[ivanpei]

I like that list alot. I am now eating my own words on Conditional counters. Spell snares are terrible right now. I see you have a full set of Fires between MD and SB. Looks hot. I'll give your list a run. Cheers!

[Taurelin]

did you find the Shakles-EE-Loam-Ruins package ok? Was it quick enough?

Yes, it was a good package. Loam by itself was very, very useful vs LD (note that 4 of my opponents played Wasteland). And the Ichorid-pilot scooped to Ruins+Crypt postboard twice.

And no, it wasn't always fast enough. I had serious troubles keeping Canadian in check. I never got a CB online at all. However, he played perfectly, always had enough counters and Stifles and left me defenseless against his beatdown. He won the tournament, by the way.

Would you have prefered punishing fire-Grove?

I guess vs Canadian and especially vs MUD (a horrible MU, as far as I can see) it wouldn't have changed much.

Also, I think 4 different colored basics are just too much. For one it's a strain on your manabase, but your color reliance is so small that you can afford to not run either a mountain or a plains depending on your build.

I guess that's my personal playstyle (too cowardly). The thing is that you need all those colors reliably particularly vs those decks that play both creatures and Wastelands (e.g. Goblins and Merfolk). And these are also the MUs in which CB is less useful, so it's not always necessary to have UU by turn 2.

[Valtrix]

I guess that's my personal playstyle (too cowardly). The thing is that you need all those colors reliably particularly vs those decks that play both creatures and Wastelands (e.g. Goblins and Merfolk). And these are also the MUs in which CB is less useful, so it's not always necessary to have UU by turn 2.

What I'm saying though is that you don't need the three "off-color" basics. You always want the forest to have access to life/goyf. However, if you look at the deck you have 4 white cards (swords) and 4 red cards (firespout/punishing fire). Now, it's very easy to play around this in a game and to only go get a color right when you need to cast a spell (or they'll try to take a different color away), so having prolonged access to that color doesn't really matter, in my experience. Yes you need them, but you only need them once or twice, which means that you don't need basics for both of one (protect one color, just get the other when you need it).

Hmm, I don't feel like I did a very job explaining what I meant to say, but does that make sense?

[Taurelin]

Hmm, I don't feel like I did a very job explaining what I meant to say, but does that make sense?

Of course, don't worry about that. You even explained that point in the opening post.

When you run basics the Plains is better than the Mountain because you’ll usually have more relevant white cards against aggro (Swords and Path) than your lonely Firespouts, and there are oftentimes when you want white but not red, but never the other way around. Plus, you really only want a Mountain turn 3 to Firespout, but might want Plains sooner than that.

I don't want to sound like a stubborn child. I just can't help listening to this voice in my head that says "Yes, but still...". I hope with growing experience I will get more confident about running fewer basics.

[Valtrix]

One of the trickiest things with the deck is managing your manabase, surprisingly, which starts with how you build your manabase. I look at the opportunity cost this way. The chance that the 4th color basic will be necessary in the game seems less likely than the fact that it wasn't a dual to provide you with blue (and thereby let you fetch other basics more easily). Now, I had already said your color dependence is low, which is one reason to not run so many basics. Additionally, by running only 3 colors in basics it lets you focus your fetches, which I think is more important because then you can more reliably get the basics/fetches when they matter.

What exactly is your main concern about not running all 4 basics colors? That you might want all 4 against wasteland decks? Or is it just that you want more basics in general against wasteland decks?

[Taurelin]

What exactly is your main concern about not running all 4 basics colors? That you might want all 4 against wasteland decks? Or is it just that you want more basics in general against wasteland decks?

Both, actually. Not only do I like to have each off-color vs decks like Canadian or Merfolk (where I always want Goyf and StoP and Firespout and even REB...). But each Wasteland also makes their Daze / Spell Pierce etc stronger.

The way I see it, it is not such a bad thing to be able to cast each spell in the deck just with the help of basics.

[Valtrix]

It seems to me that you think that by running more basics you can negate all wastelands. You can't really, however, because in any game you're going to naturally draw nonbasics that you want to play. In terms of defending against wasteland then basics allow you the opportunity early game to go fetch the colors you want, or against decks with wasteland recursion to not be completely screwed. I don't think that the 4th color basic will matter for you much, because the way you should be playing is getting a basic early, then getting your other color on a dual and casting whatever spell you need to cast.

I don't disagree that having basics is a good strategy. The argument that we're looking at is this:

Choice 1:
Play 4 colors of basics, allowing us access to all 4 colors. However, this reduces the consistency for getting a particular basic because of fetches and reduces our consistency in general when we have less blue.

Choice 2:
Play 3 colors of basics, allowing more consistency to get the color we want. Furthermore we are more consistent to get blue.

In my opinion the second choice is more relevant.

[Taurelin]

Understood. So:

by running only 3 colors in basics it lets you focus your fetches

Like Mana Drain stated in the opening post, W > R as far as color requirements and the choice of additional basics are concerned. If I interpret your points correctly, my manabase might look like this:

// Lands
4 [ON] Flooded Strand
4 [ZEN] Misty Rainforest
3 [B] Tropical Island
3 [B] Tundra
3 [B] Volcanic Island
2 [CS] Snow-Covered Island
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Forest
1 [CS] Snow-Covered Plains
1 [TSP] Academy Ruins

This way each fetchland is able to get me each but 1 colored land. And I am still able to cast 3x Firespout even if all of my red sources are wasted.
________________________

Another question:
In the tourney I had no chance at all vs MUD. And in online testing I had some problems vs Affinity, too. Might some additional artifact-hate in the SB be a good idea?
- Trygon Predator ?
- Ancient Grudge ?
- Energy Flux ?
- Grip no.4 ?

[Koby]

Ancient Grudge is good with the Intuition package, while Energy Flux actually locks out artifact decks all together. Each one has it's strengths and weaknesses, but I think that Ancient Grudge works better with the plan at this point.

[Valtrix]

Taurelin,

That manabase is almost exactly what I run. However, I run a 9th blue fetch over the 3rd tundra. Since I have access to basic white already and a small color reliance I'd much rather be able to turn that tundra into a volcanic island, tropical island, or basic island instead. Plus I like added synergy with top. That said, I can't fault you for running a tundra over the 9th fetch. I'm actually running groves/fire, so my manabase has 1 grove of the burnwillows in addition (and is 61 cards total MD).

Also, keep in mind that since this deck has life from the loam you get a little more wasteland resistance than other decks you might be playing.

In testing I had found affinity to be somewhat rough as well, though there are still a lot of answers to deal with the deck. I don't have a lot of testing and they're are a lot of versions, but a lot of times it comes down to if they can stick platings or not. If not, you can usually win. I think versions with punishing fire might be better at beating them now because fire hits a lot of the guys they can equip, though I haven't tested the matchup.

Also, could you direct me to a list of MUD? I'm not 100% sure what you're talking about, so I can't quite phrase suggestions about beating it right now.

[Taurelin]

Also, keep in mind that since this deck has life from the loam you get a little more wasteland resistance than other decks you might be playing.

Sure! That's one of the reasons why I started to love this variant of the CounterTop archetype.

Also, could you direct me to a list of MUD? I'm not 100% sure what you're talking about, so I can't quite phrase suggestions about beating it right now.

Maybe it is more popular here in Germany at the moment. It looks partly like a stompy shell (Ancient Tomb, Chalice of the Void...) and uses Metalworker to ramp into some big artifact-beaters like Wurmcoil Engine, Steel Hellkite or Lodestone Golem.

The list I had to play against also had lots of mana-denial (Wasteland, Rishadan Port, Sundering Titan), and I lost one game to a Platinum Angel equipped by Lightning Greaves.

I don't know if this is typical, but the list in the opening post of this thread contains most of the stuff I saw in the match.

@ TC-decks there are several variations.

Thanks for your help and your feedback, btw!

[Valtrix]

Well, I'd have to guess that the matchup is probably not the best for us. This deck is very much metagamed at most of the field out there, so having a lot of high CC threats makes it a little awkward with only swords for hard removal. I would say that your best options are to hope for Jace to generate a lot of advantage, because he seems very strong in this MU. EE recursion doesn't do a lot in this matchup, but Engineered explosives can be very strong to deal with their disruptions elements like Chalice. I'd hope that they're not too fast so that you can focus on finding the right cards with tops and being prepared to deal with their threats with swords and counterspells. It's also fortunate that smaller cards like lodestone golem and metalworker are killed by firespout.

Fortunately the beauty of this deck, in my opinion, is that you can easily adjust your sideboard to crush any MU that you think you might have problems with. If things are really an issue I think that running 3x Ancient grudge in your board should do the trick--That makes intuition into a 4 for 1, which hopefully is enough for you to win the game. You do have some other options though, but I only theorize that they might be useful and am not completely sure what is best (Most of these are 3x to get with intuition):
3x Shattering Pulse (Likely too slow, but could potentially lock the game up
1/3x Nevinyrral's Disk (Good, because it gives us outs to progenitus/emrakul too and wrecks their board. Can be slow to get online though with ruins)
3x Devout Witness (Probably not as good as capsule)
3x Aura Flux (Okay, but I could still see you losing because of needing to deal with a big threat)
Alternately you could run path to exiles in your board, which in combination with counterspells and swords might allow you to just deal with all of their creatures and have a lot of utility in other MUs as well.

So, I presented several solutions, but I think the best ones would probably be to run 1 or 3 disks because of their utility in other matchups or to run 3 ancient grudges in the board for their speed/high CA. Given the choice I'd probably play one disk to have an out to progenitus and emrakul, and 3 if those decks were actually very prevalent in your metagame.

[Taurelin]

I like the idea of a recurring Nev's Disk. And I think I'm really going to try it. The thing is that this solution is - like you said - much more universal, and it will help in many other MUs as well. I'm not only thinking of Emrakul/Prog, but also about stuff like Enchantress.

Thx for your input again!