Okay, here's the thing... I'd be lieing if I said I wasn't a little nervous about extirpate... but thats kind of it. And with Surgical Extraction now out people run fewer and fewer Extirpates... Surgical extraction can be countered. We run so many 1cc cards we can also get a consistant 1 flip off a blind CB trigger as well. I've never even seen Exterpate or Surgical Extraction played against me. I see from your list you run 3 Jace. The problem is, you are relying on nothing but luck to have him in your hand... sure you can use top and brainstorm to help in the serch but at the end up the day all you are relying on is luck to get him. Meanwhile your 3 Jace slots could be somthing that help protect thopter/sword combo or get the combo into play. I'm not big on relying on luck. And when you win with Jace you win because you got lucky and drew him.
7 out of 57 chance opening draw
1-3 out of 30-53 to top deck him
I don't like those odds... especially when it seems that this decks major problem is its self. The deck must be streamlined and must be consistant. I'll be playing this weekend on a 70+ tourny. I'll let you know how it goes with thopter/sword as my only win con.
@ Addressing how to kill an opposing Jace
You're playing Red, mainly so you can play Blood Moon, but you also get access to REB. 3 REB's from the board, including all your other crap, should be enough to stop the 1-2 Jace you may see on the other side of the table. Plus, you have Top to manipulate what gets Fatesealed. With MM format, you never really reliably had Top.
Also, you know what kills Jace pretty well? 1/1 Flying Thopters.
@ SFM vs. non SFM
SFM has its own merits in the sense that you can play the Stoneblade plan, but you're not a Stoneblade deck is the main problem, and this isn't a month ago. Everyone has removal for this bastard. I mean, if you get it, then great, but most of the time, with this deck, you won't have time to set up the backup before you get killed.
SFM tutoring for SotM has been VERY sexy, but again, I have E. Tutor.
@ Jace or no Jace
This is pretty debatable. I played the deck before Jace came out, and after. I've liked having 2-3 Jace just to either Filter, or have something to do while I don't draw the combo while under a Bridge or Moat lock. Bridge and Moat are key bombs in this deck, but they don't do anything by themselves.
No Jace means you don't get to bounce creatures, fateseal, and Brainstorm, which is fine, but are the cards you're replacing it with giving you enough value? I'd say at 4 mana, even if you were to replace it with some other awesome card, you're a) cutting your Blue count, and b) probably playing a card that isn't as good as Jace, even in the meta as we speak.
@ 4 E Tutor vs. 2 E. Tutor
Every single European has told me the same thing. Card Disadvantage this and that. Sure, it sucks to have your backbreaking play countered. But, in place of your 2 E. Tutors you could be playing 2 pieces of removal or something. My question is, are those two counters/removal going to get you there? If you're got a bunch of creatures coming against you, with that extra Spell Snare win you the game? But, will getting the EOT Thopter Foundry to pump out 7 tokens? Will the Moat? Will the Humility? If they counter it, then you're hooped unless you've got the sauce against them. But, I'd rather improve my chances of getting the card I need to seal the game.
Counters don't improve the game state if you're at parity or if you're behind. Once your board is disfavourable, countering something irrelevant isn't going to get you there, but perhaps an E. Tutor might. I mean, why did Reanimator play Mystical? Sure, it was card DA, but you got what you needed; you added consistency. Sure, you have to sacrifice actual value for consistency, but isn't that what you're after?
----
I think what we really have to look at is as follows:
a) What makes us better than a deck not playing Enlightened Tutor? Say, Stoneblade/Landstill.
Good guess, it's E. Tutor! That's the defining factor that makes us different (not necessarily better or worse) than those other decks, so you might as well exploit it.
b) How are we trying to win the game?
c) How are we beating other people to win the game?
d) What are the holes in our plan that cause us to lose? Why are we losing?
e) Are the matchups we're poor against acceptable losses for your metagame?
That's how you have to look at it, I think. If you're okay losing to Painter Combo, but winning the Thresh matchup, then awesome.
So, we're trying to grind advantage by playing awesome, hard to answer lockpieces combined with huge value created by Thopter Combo. To win the game, we attempt to grind the game out using removal and lockpieces until we can either attack with a lethal amount of Thopters, or Jace the opponent out.
How do we lose? We get rushed and can't set up, they break through our counter web and combo out/drop too many threats, or they remove our main combo.
How do we combat losing? By having a sideboard that hopefully takes care of annoying creature rushes, or protects our combo, or hates out their deck more.
The real question is, how to do all of this, or to do most of it in the most efficient manner possible.
-Matt
I've seen a couple 1/2-of lists which (apparently) just use SFM as the tutor, with/without batterskull available. That doesn't seem worth the slot. I'd be curious to know (a) how frequently boarding an SFM package in for game 2 (likely against no removal) is worth the slots and (b) whether running her out as a tutor in game 1 has been enough to have the opponent ever leave removal in, blanking 4-8 cards for game 2.Originally Posted by Dalapin
I think I read your report before and skimmed it now, and saw a number of time concerns. How quickly do your non-SFM decks usually find and set up the combo? How often do you have time issues when on the clock?
I'm convinced enough to try without..
Top and Tutor both definitely work well with E Bridge - it seems so unlike Magic to end 8 consecutive terms with no cards in hand but total board control and an intricate plan for your next few moves...
The math is wrong and the conclusion is almost certainly wrong. If you run 4/3/2 Jaces, you have 40/32/22% odds of seeing him in your opening hand, 53/46/34% seeing him by turn 4. With gobs of shuffle effects, top, and brainstorm, this is rarely ever a problem. (A "dig 3" increases those odds another 10% or so each time.)
Obviously, you're as likely to see 1 of 3 Jaces as 1 of 3 ET's. You have better odds to get 1 Jace than 1 Sword/ET and 1 Foundry/ET with the regular numbers.
Streamline-wise, he does board control, card advantage, alternative win condition, protects/enforces your lock with fatesealing, and answers opposing Jaces (which is not a small thing when, as stated, O Ring is often the only md removal out and he can beat you while you're trying to tutor up the combo).
Right now I'm running 3 with the 4th in the board, and I'll probably stick with that. On match-ups (Dredge, ANT) where the best play is "find my answer, now," having 4 ETs + a Wheel of Sun/Moon or Canonist or whatever is crucial. Having the full set available post-board seems crucial for any number in the md..
The fact that ET top-decks the card is also perfect at those times - I used to play Spiral Tide, and having to play around discard with my Merchant Scroll or Cunning Wish was awful. If I didn't have the brainstorm to hide my answer or the mana to drop it immediately, I'd lose it to Duress/Cabal Therapy without fail.
A lot of people seem to fateseal me with jace when I have a top on board - and it seems so terrible for them to be doing that.
- They bump jace up two counters, but they're basically just making you spend two mana instead of one to put the card you want on top.
- Sometimes you can put a threatening looking card on top that you really want them to ship, and see an extra card. (I played a game where my opponent was fatesealing me with Jace, I had a Thopter Foundry in hand already, so I put a thopter foundry on top - he shipped it, I ended up keeping him off Jace ultimate with tokens and then winning).
It seems so much better to either a) brainstorm or b) fateseal yourself (depending on what you need - a card, filtering, or counters going up) if your opponent has a top vs. your Jace. Right/wrong?
(Still want Jace in the deck, for the same reasons you noted)
I think if you have Jace and they have Top, but you have no Top, you Fateseal yourself. If you also have Top, you still Fateseal them. You're hoping at some point they flip Top by mistake, then you Fateseal it away. Plus, you're building counters. Or, the Fateseal yourself plan is still an option, just to dig deeper.
-Matt
Yeah, I can see myself fatesealing them with a top on board if I know I want my top cards to stay (from my top). I think I'd stack the top three in their end step so that I card I want to ship is second if there's a card I want to get rid of.
My opponent in the above example wasn't even playing top, it just seemed to me like he would have gotten so much better value out of fatesealing himself if he was on a jace-to-win plan.
I agree I don't think the slot is necessarily worth it, but having that tutor did allow me to set up the combo earlier than I normally do with the SFM package.
When it comes to time, without 4 SFM to help make the thopter combo happen a bit earlier, the deck is a bit slower. Though I firmly agree with the many posts that have already been made in this thread with regards to time: knowing your match-ups very very well and being familiar with all of Countertop Thopters' many board states is the best way to address time problems; you can't afford to consider all your million tutor-able options in an unfamiliar match-up.
After they board out their removal I'm currently boarding in Clique as my faster win-con for game 2 (perhaps 3) though I've never tried boarding in an entire SFM/Batterskull package. At first glance it seems like a lot of slots.
Has anyone tried boarding-IN SFM package for game 2?
That strategy was used, iirc, with the list from Ovinosex in Italy, where it placed 3rd/100+ people.
-Matt
No Jace? No SFM-> BS?
Surgical Extraction
Extirpate
You need other win cons with this deck. Jace should stay in. Maybe not as a 4 or 3 of, but a well placed above card ruins this deck too easily.
Long time reader, first time poster here. A couple things:
@Gollus, great Amsterdam writeup, however, you mention EE in multiple matches, and there's no EE in your list? Mind clarifying what's different in the list because I think it's one of the strongest I've seen.
Is daze a viable option as a 2 or 3-of? It allows us to run CB out turn 2 with daze/fow backup, and turn 3 drop land again and depending on your turn 1 (did you play top or leave up brainstorm), drop top and have land up, or just have 2 land up for top/counterspell/etc...
In testing with this deck, I have found 4 tutors unnecessary, 2-3 is almost certainly all we need.
SFM package is meh. It just takes up spots and dies. However a 1 or 2-of SFM for SotM I have liked a bit, but I think I still prefer devoting those spots to protection.
As for running her in the board, it's just too many resources gone. Again, I'd prefer to fill the board with protection/more bullets.
Also, dropping Jace is wrong, He's too damn good. Recently I've only been running 2 because of space issues, but I really wish I could push a third in.
In my testing the problem with Daze is it's the opposite of what we want to do, we want to drop a land every turn and play Ensnaring Bridge and Moat. Delaying our CMC 3 and 4 lock pieces is scary to me.
Also Daze is a one trick pony, after your opponents know what's up they just play around it, or play through them if they're aggro and prefer we have less lands on the field.
Isn't this a good thing, effectively delaying the opponent's key plays by a turn? And in the late game of g1, it's BS and Force fodder. Also, this allows us to side some number to all the dazes out for real cards while the opponent still plays around it for at least part of a game. And recently so many decks have taken favor to daze again, we can't just rush a bridge/moat out turn 3/4 without anticipating an opposing daze. In either case, daze on our side helps push anything we need through asap.
I do agree that delaying our plays is scary, but I still feel it's something that warrants more widespread testing in this new meta.
I could see it working in a Daze vs. Daze meta, but I'm skeptical at the moment. Try it out and let us all know!
@Teknique: You are right. I played EE instead of Seal of Cleansing in the SB.
My Deck is very similar to all the others here posted, but the main difference i think is Blood Moon. It won me a lot of games alone or lead the way to victory. Sometimes I can not play white spells without an plains out under Moon but with top and enough islands i find my plains fast enough because i have infinity time as my opponent can't play anything!
Daze has to be tested but i think it won't fit that good. Other Controldecks just counter with FoW or Spellsnare and have 1 mana left to pay for Daze. And against Aggro it's fine but as said, there you want the lands to cast Bridge/Moat.
Drakes claim to be dragons-until the dragons show up.
The dust can count only to 50.
Angels attacked them,............ with swords.
I think you have an excellent point, Daze does not give us anything in the long-game when we play against non-aggro. Against combo it can be very sketchy, and against control it's abysmal unless they run head-long into it.
just play spell pierce. it is much better than daze.
I used to run 2 Pierces in the main back in the day (pre-Stoneblade, pre Misstep, post Survival) and it was pretty decent, since you were always running up against decks with usually a bit more counter power.
-Matt
Hi guys,
I played at a 32-player tournament yesterday in the Netherlands. It was 6 rounds. I won against ANT, Elfcombo and some 6 year old control deck. I lost two rounds against Esper Blade. And I had to play against my teammate who also played CounterTop Thopters. We decided that i won, we didn't play.
The matchup against Esper Blade is really difficult. I had a Torpor Orb in my sideboard wich was nice. I also played Vendilion Cliques, but wished they were Elspeths. I don't like Vendilion Clique (against Esper). Peacekeeper and Ensnaring Bridge are better.
What do you guys side against Esper Blade?
Post dat decklist!
I would use my Pithing Needles for sure. Maybe combine humility with Elspeth for the lock? E-bridge still gets there but turn 3 Batterskull seems really frustrating.... I'm also a fan of shackles (perhaps incorrectly).
This is the list I played yesterday:
CVC 0 (23):
1 Academy Ruins
1 Seat of the Synod
2 Polluted Delta
2 Scalding Tarn
4 Flooded Strand
1 Underground Sea
3 Tundra
6 Island
2 Plains
1 Engineered Explosives
CVC 1 (18):
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Enlightened Tutor
4 Brainstorm
4 Swords to Plowshares
2 Spell Pierce
CVC 2 (9):
4 Counterbalance
2 Counterspell
1 Sword of the Meek
2 Thopter Foundry
CVC 3 (3):
2 Ensnaring Bridge
1 Back to Basics
CVC 4 (4):
3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Moat
CVC 5 (4):
4 Force of Will
Sideboard:
3 Peacekeeper
2 Vendilion Clique
1 Humility
2 Spell Pierce
1 Tormod's Crypt
1 Ethersworn Canonist
1 Pithing Needle
1 Cursed Totem
1 Aegis of Honor
1 Torpor Orb
1 Seal of Cleansing
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote