Everyone seems to be boarding in Spell Pierce a lot. I strongly suggest 3 in the MD atm.
Frees up SB space AND improves a lot of MUs.
Just my two Pence.
this might be true.
actually I like Tekniques list and there are 2 spell pierce main. They improve burn and combo (especially sneak) mu. Spell pierce is not that good against maverick, but here you can pitch them to force or put them away with brainstorm or never draw them with top.
3 CB and 3 Top might be the better way to go atm, I played 4 - 4 and often ended up with 2 tops (what is not bad) but also with too many CBs and in some matchups they are not that good: sneak and show, maverick, nic fit, MUD, ...
I still want to add the wasteland crucible plan, but have no clue what to cut for it.
How can 3 SDT be the way to go? This card should be a 5of if it would be allowed! I would never ever cut below 4. It's pretty much THE core-card of our deck...
@ Maelig
You're probably correct on the RUG boarding plan, but I choose FoW primarily to stop myself. I want to prevent myself from ever misplaying a force in that matchup as it's too much card disadvantage. It's more to correct my playstyle than it is "correct". Jace could go 100% of the time I agree.
I've never liked surgical. And a lot of S&S players side out intuitions post board. So what am I going to hit with surgical? Emrakul after it's already annihilated me? I'd prefer to have more ways to just prevent it the first time.
@klaus
Although it's true I and others are boarding in pierce a lot, I've actually noticed that it loses a lot of value past the first 2 in any given match. We have no wastelands, and by the time we're seeing pierces 3 and 4 they usually have enough to play around them, even RUG.
@phillip
No one is saying 3 is the only correct number, it's just what some people (myself included) have been using and liking. My philosophy behind only 3 SDTs is this:
There are too many dazes and pierces to be playing around right now and we're trying to run Countertop, we eat mana like crazy and can't afford to try playing another top (and keep open all of the options in our hand + top 3 cards of our library) until the late game.
Even with only 3, I rarely don't see a top by the 3/4th turn, and you should be keeping hands that can interact up to that point in the game, not just "do I have land and a top and I'll look for the rest?"
Yes it replaces itself, but at a cost.
By all means, please keep testing with 4, this deck is still relatively new and we need to test as many variations as possible.
Gegengewicht, Weissagekreisel - Du bist dran.Originally Posted by sdematt
Sorry, it might have came across a little too harsh.
Another question (again): Why is nobody of you toying around with a splash? Black would offer Thoughtseize and Virtue' Ruin(we might not need it), whereas Green offers Krosan Grip, which is excellent material for the mirror. Our manabase is stable enough to squeeze another color in. I cut a Tundra and added a 61st card for my 2 Tropicals. Worked fine, most of the time I do not reveal the Splash in G1, as long as its relevant, and G2/3 you have 2 Dual/8 Fetch for your Splash-colors which is just fine. As another addition the 3rd color opens you the possibility to Engineered Explosives.
So why is nobody trying it out? Is it because of the Tempo-MU? I do not think 2 more Duals do affect it that much though..
Greetings
Spell Pierce is an early / early mid-game card. In that sense it's similar to Stifle and no one would ever consider running two Stifles, because it's suffciently unlikely to draw them in the first quarter/third of the game, when you'll find 1 copy in 30 cards (despite cantrips/filters).
As I said, I'd never go below 3 as long as S&S goes rampant, but then again, I run a Wasteland version.
Spell Pierce is still a narrow counter, which is why I prefer mine in the board. It will help stabilize against SNT early, but as a slow control deck, most decks will be capable of playing around it. I don't run Wasteland to make it better. It is a great sideboard card for certain matchups though.
As far as a splash is concerned, of course a splash is viable. The reason I'm stayibg straight U/W right now is because O Ring is my functional Vindicate in this SNT meta. Right now, RUG is the best performing (and played) deck, so going with the more stable U/W manabase is a good idea, IMO. If the meta shifts to a large concentration of control decks (and thusly, control mirrors), I'd splash black for discard in a heartbeat.
Also, I've decided to cut a Counterbalance for a V Clique, and I've also adjusted my sideboard slightly. I'll post my updated list when I get home from work.
If your preboard matchup against S&T is 30/70, you can just as well put the matchup in the board and focus on other matchups instead.
It's good for the same reason meddling mage is good in this MU (the mage is obviously better, but less useful in other MU). They have to resolve one of their two combo pieces to win. If you manage to counter the first one (OK, that's a big if, but it's not like we don't have a few tools in our bag), then cutting half of their win cons is really huge. Sometimes you can even target a FoW if they already played one and you want to ensure yours resolves. They run so many cantrips that they often find a second copy and they won't combo unprotected if they can avoid it (they could also have misdirection / pierce / flusterstorm, but you have to take your chances). I know it's a bit of a gamble and I can understand why people don't like the card in this MU, but I still think it's superior to both terminus and CB.
Never thought I'd see the day when my U/W Control deck would get put into the DTB. Only about 4 years too late, but whatever. :P
I've been busy building a new computer, but when I get time in a few days, I'll post the new decklist I mentioned a few posts ago, and I'll address some of the stuff that was asked/suggested/etc.
Sorry for the double post, but I also wanted to mention the OP. The OP Primer is rather old, and since I reserved post 2, I think I will copy/paste the original OP Primer to the second post, and create a revision to the OP Primer in the OP (first post).
I am more than willing to accept input from anyone who wants to contribute.
I'm not sure how much room I will have, but I wouldn't mind including a small section for matchup analysis for the DTB or major archetypes, and possibly some boarding plans.
We'll see how much time I have to do so. The last time I wrote a primer for this deck, it took like 2-3 weeks because of how busy I was with work/school. Don't expect any immediate results for this one, but I will get around to it as time permits.
I suggest you put your ego aside and examine the statistically average decklist from the last month, then examine core cards vs fringe cards in the archetype. While it might be nice to have your deck in the spotlight, it would be more informative to have a wide open starting point rather than focusing on your own particular build.
West side
Find me on MTGO as Koby or rukcus -- @MTGKoby on Twitter
* Maverick is dead. Long live Maverick!
My Legacy stream
My MTG Blog - Work in progress
Yeah, but it was worth following all these years. Great work Hanni and all the U/W Control fans.
Glad to see this deck in the DTB section.
I would be more than happy to help out when I have time outside of work. I could pitch in with :
1) an analysis of the various cards in the latest winning decks on The Council
2) my decklist and my sideboarding plans against various matchups
Last edited by yutang; 06-14-2012 at 03:55 AM.
What, you mean the literally two card difference? There are only two major differences from the older lists. I cut Shackles for Terminus, since Terminus is a much better crowd control removal spell due to its speed. I cut Elspeth for Entreat the Angels, as it's far more powerful.I suggest you put your ego aside and examine the statistically average decklist from the last month, then examine core cards vs fringe cards in the archetype. While it might be nice to have your deck in the spotlight, it would be more informative to have a wide open starting point rather than focusing on your own particular build.
The minor tweaks, such as fitting in Spell Pierce, running a singleton V Clique, running Wastelands/Factories/3rd color splash, are all minor tweaks that this deck has experienced throughout the years.
This has nothing to do with ego. None of the fundmantal core of this deck has changed at all, it's simply gained a stronger removal spell and a stronger win condition.
Mosts of the lists I've seen so far haven't deviated from the core. I suspect most of the builds that are drastically different (like those running Temporal Mastery and no Counterbalance) will eventually gravitate to lists more like mine. Two new cards doesn't change the fundamentals of an archetype I've spent years tweaking. Don't mistake my years of experience tuning this deck as "ego." I know what I'm talking about when it comes to this archetype, that's all.
Here's a sample list from the BladeControl thread:
2 snapcaster mage
2 vendillion clique
4 force of will
3 spell pierce
2 counterspell
4 swords to plowshares
3 terminus
1 entreat the angels
4 brainstorm
4 sensei's divining top
4 jace, the mindsculptor
3 stoneforge mystic
1 batterskull
1 sword of X&Y
4 mishra's factory
4 tundra
4 island
1 plains
4 flooded strand
4 polluted delta
1 marsh flats
-------------------------------
So I'm wondering whether: "minus the Stoneforge package plus 4 CB and one additional Snapcaster" warrants a separate archetype in the DTB section. Especially when we're using the general phrase "UW Control". What is more, CB has been run as a SB card in SFM lists before and will be run in more and more (personally I assume "most") SBs/MDs after the introduction of Terminus/EtA, which has made Top a core MD card. No offense, but I fail to see a clear cut here.
Thoughts?
If this Thread would be called "Terminator" or "Miracle Control" then Id accept the split made as these decks differ. They do. In playstyle and in core-cards. The list you posted isn't the common list of Stoneblade. Though I agree with you that UW Control and Stoneblade are by no means something different at all. If this thread would be called with one of the terms mentioned above I would agree. But now it's just two control-decks with different winning-options = Creature to cast // Creature to cheat, so I am unsure.
Greetings
Thread renamed to Miracle Control, since that is actually the category at TheCouncil.es that earned DTB status. I originally renamed it to a more generic U/W control since this thread didn't start out as a Miracle thread and didn't want the title to feel off-topic, but I didn't realise that would cause confusion with Stoneforge U/W. And since Hanni is updating the primer there's not going to be a mismatch issue.
Hanni, when you make the new primer, it would be nice if you took these decks into account as reference. It's not unfair to say that the AVR Miracle cards (and the changes that went along with them, i.e. better library manipulation and thus CB support) are the key behind this archetype's newfound success.
YOU'RE GIVING ME A TIME MACHINE IN ORDER TO TREAT MY SLEEP DISORDER.
this might be why UW control and UW stoneblade are in the DTB section, I don't think that UW miracle had enough top8 appearance to be a DTB. Maybe I am wrong here.
edit: nihils posts makes mine obsolete, so just ignore it.
I hate to be that guy, but Terminus and EtA will be (or already have become) core cards of the StoneBlade archetype as well, which is why I'm not sure the new title helps establishing a clear distinction.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote
/