Miracle Control

[twndomn]

Divert is mostly for the early game Thoughtseize/Hymn. People are overly timid when they consider Misdirection's loss at CA. In many match-up, Misdirection should be considered as 5th FoW. If you can Misdirect against a Show and Tell's counter, or against an Abrupt Decay, the loss in CA is irrelevant.

In Miracle, you want to maximize your probability of having Turn 1 Top. Turn 1 land then Enlightened Tutor, to delay your draw, so you can draw a Top, that's unnecessarily slow. ET is a good card and it should be considered, but not the SDT slot.

[cschacal]

Maybe you are right not shaving the top because droping an early top is always good but in a lot of games you are just dealing with first turn threats with pierces and swords anyway and I'm not sure if having an early top is more important than the versatility of the E. tutor that can be both top or counterbalance. E. Tutor with Back to basics and Moat is also very good against several difficult pairings so I will try to give room for 2 in my 75 and if I miss the top too much I will shave another card instead.

About the divert/misdirection I think if you divert a hymn it is game over because is a 3x1 and with misdirection is a 3x2 that is also good but if the same happens with a thoughtseize is a 2x1 with divert and a 2x2 with misdirection. Discard it is important in the first turns that is when Divert can be useful so against discard divert is better. Using misdirection to protect a counterbalance against an Abrupt Decay is a 2x2 so it does not provide CA but it allows us to maintain the soft lock/CA engine running but if the board is empty on their side the redirected decay will hit nothing so it wil be a 2x1 and I disagree with you about the CA. In a control deck CA is everything. For that reason I just run 3 FOW main deck. You may feel comfortable running 4 FOW against the unfair decks but some times we die because the card disadvantage it provides against the rest of the field. Maybe we should just remove the counterbalances and board in higher cost cards that they can not deal with.

[Pelikanudo]

Maybe you are right not shaving the top because droping an early top is always good but in a lot of games you are just dealing with first turn threats with pierces and swords anyway and I'm not sure if having an early top is more important than the versatility of the E. tutor that can be both top or counterbalance. E. Tutor with Back to basics and Moat is also very good against several difficult pairings so I will try to give room for 2 in my 75 and if I miss the top too much I will shave another card instead.

About the divert/misdirection I think if you divert a hymn it is game over because is a 3x1 and with misdirection is a 3x2 that is also good but if the same happens with a thoughtseize is a 2x1 with divert and a 2x2 with misdirection. Discard it is important in the first turns that is when Divert can be useful so against discard divert is better. Using misdirection to protect a counterbalance against an Abrupt Decay is a 2x2 so it does not provide CA but it allows us to maintain the soft lock/CA engine running but if the board is empty on their side the redirected decay will hit nothing so it wil be a 2x1 and I disagree with you about the CA. In a control deck CA is everything. For that reason I just run 3 FOW main deck. You may feel comfortable running 4 FOW against the unfair decks but some times we die because the card disadvantage it provides against the rest of the field. Maybe we should just remove the counterbalances and board in higher cost cards that they can not deal with.

And what about Redirect?

[Shawn]

Redirect seems very mopey, I'd rather just run more Counterspells since they are more flexible in hitting creatures in those matchups and planeswalkers while being a lot better in other matchups. Even then, I usually board out some Counterspells against the aggro versions of bug so I'd rather just play some other card that wasn't a reactive UU spell.

[R3D]

Hello all,

For several months I’m following this topic. Today I registered myself to become an active member and share some ideas with you all.

When the miracle cards were released I immediately built an UW miracle deck. I liked the way how the deck tried to establish control with the cb-lock, although sometimes I found the deck too threat-light. This could be due my inexperience to the deck back then. I was happy when I added 2 sfm + 1 batterskull to the list, but sometimes I still thought the list was too light on threats (establishing control but not being able to cast a threat and losing control because of this). It was especially problematic to protect yourself against decks that are more or less invulnerable to cb.

With the recent printing of abrupt decay, the occasional weaknesses of cb became more prominent. I went through the same kind of thinking process like Joe did and I came to the conclusion that counterbalance is too fragile to justify it’s slots in the mainboard.
I thought that the miracles deck needs another, more general, way to drag the game into the lategame so the UW(r) deck would be able to stabilize against most of the decks in the field.

My idea was to use standstills and move CB to the board, so I could still use cb in the matches in which it is good (e.g. storm/RUG delver etc). This may sound strange, but my experiences are that standstills are good in UWr miracles. Especially when you used some resources to wipe the board. In that case standstill become a tool to refill your hand. It also is doing a good job in protecting a resolved jace. Furthermore standstill works very nice with top (card quality due filtering is nice under a standstill..) and is actually slowing down the opp. It is nice to notice that I played several games in which I break my own standstill at the end of the opp. turn by casting a huge entreat and kill the opp the next turn (preferable vs. nonblue decks..)

Here is my list.
Miraclestill:
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Brainstorm
2 Counterspell
4 Force of Will
3 Spell Pierce
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
2 Entreat the Angels
3 Terminus
1 Engineered Explosives
2 Crucible of Worlds
3 Standstill

3 Island
1 Plains
1 Karakas
2 Volcanic Island
4 Tundra
4 Flooded Strand
2 Scalding Tarn
2 Misty Rainforest
1 Celestial Colonnade
4 Mishra's Factory

SB:
2 Pyroblast
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Moat
1 Terminus
2 Disenchant
1 Humility
2 Rest in Peace
1 Flusterstorm
3 Counterbalance
1 Enlightened Tutor

What im still thinking about:
- I used to play this list like +2 wasteland; -1 Celestial Colonnade; -1 crucible
My experiences were that I almost never used the wastelands to destroy nonbasics because I wanted to make my landdrops and that wastelands weren’t that needed because the list doesn’t play like an oldschool landstill list. All you need to do with this deck is making your landdrops and slow down the opponent so the brute force of your winconditions can do their job. I’m still not sure if it is right to ditch wasteland completely. This could be meta-call.
- The colonnade is there to be tested. This could also be a dust bowl, another basic, or maybe an academy ruins (in this order). The colonnade is probably too mana intensive.
- I’d like to squeeze in two vendillion cliques into this list. I don’t know what to cut. Maybe I’ve to try out -1 colonnade; -1 crucible; +2 cliques.

I’m interested in your opinions and thoughts. Hopefully we can improve this deck together.

Thanks for reading this long message!

With kind regards,

R3D

[cschacal]

I think that is very risky to play a standstill in a metagame with snapcasters and cliques but it can be tested as well as ancestral vision to change the CA engine of the deck. The main point here is that if we consider that the counterbalances are bad in this meta and should be substituted by other cards then the tops loss a lot of value in the deck and should be changed transforming this deck into a totally different one with less weight on abusing miracle cards.

I do not like playing manland cards in decks with so few creatures because you are making the opponent removal better.

[twndomn]

Hello all,

My idea was to use standstills and move CB to the board, so I could still use cb in the matches in which it is good (e.g. storm/RUG delver etc). This may sound strange, but my experiences are that standstills are good in UWr miracles. Especially when you used some resources to wipe the board. In that case standstill become a tool to refill your hand. It also is doing a good job in protecting a resolved jace. Furthermore standstill works very nice with top (card quality due filtering is nice under a standstill..) and is actually slowing down the opp. It is nice to notice that I played several games in which I break my own standstill at the end of the opp. turn by casting a huge entreat and kill the opp the next turn
R3D

Standstill is useless. If you have done enough testing, you would have known. Based on what you have written, it's obvious that you have not played Competitive Legacy.

First, your opponent just needs to put down turn 1/turn2 Delver or Vial or Goblin Lackey, that basically turns your Standstill into a useless card, you wish the card's a Brainstorm. You then need to EoT StP, then put down Standstill, which is a lot less frequent.
Second, with Standstill in play, you create Anti-Synergy with Miracle cards. You need to have at least W open, in case you draw Terminus. However, often you might not even Want to Termius from the Standstill cards you draw. So you end up with Terminus in your hand, now needing a Brainstorm/Jace to put that card back, good job at ruining the point of Miracle.

With CB-T in play, you have the perfect cards with CMC 2 and maybe CMC 3 cards on top of your library, do you put down Standstill? It's entirely possible for your opponent to intentionally play a spell to break Standstill, just so you don't have the CB-T lock anymore. Ok, so you don't put Standstill in play, then it's a dead card in your hand, another useless anti-synergy junk.

[Dzra]

Standstill is not a control card. It is aggressive: play threats, drop Standstill, pressure them until they are forced to crack it or die. It doesn't work very well when literally the only pressure you have doesn't come until turn four.

Really, Counterbalance is still great against most decks. It's just not reliable against GBx anymore.

[R3D]

Hi,

Thanks for your replies. I appreciate it.
@ cschachal: You’re right about the manlands. That’s a good argument to consider. I haven’t had too much problems with this, because I activate mishras lategame most of the time. I also tested visions, I didn’t like it better then Standstill, because standstills are doing more work when played correctly. You're also right about standstill being an aggressive card. I don't know why it is working for me as a controlcard. Maybe I'm misleaded by something and is the deck covering up the mistake i'm making by playing standstill as a controlcard. Don't know what it is.

@twndown: You’re definitely right about the turn 1/2 threats. I considered these arguments and am still thinking about it. I also have to remark again that this list plays different then an original landstill list.
I can’t agree that I don’t play competitive legacy. I tested against several tier decks including BUG/RUG/Sneaky Show/maverick (?)/UW helm/ and several control deck. My playtesting lacks in testing the mirror and Esperblade.
About the anti-synergy: when I board in cb, most of the times I board out standstill. Drawing a terminus isn’t a problem most of the times. My experiences are that the card advantage seems to nullify the negative effect of the anti-synergy, while adding a positive effect to your resources.

@ Dzra: Maybe I have gotten to obsessed by the fear of abrupt decay destroying miracles. You’re right that cb still does a lot of good work for the deck. That’s why it is still in the sb. Maybe it still deserves a spot in the md.

Well, it seems like I’ve got a lot of work to do☺ I think this list could work (added 2 cliques now while removing 1 collonade and 1 crucible). I also realize that playing standstill seems counterintuitive. I will put some effort in this list, but also will playtest with the ordinary UWr miracles list.

R3D

Edit: it also could be that this list fits my playstyle more and that I find it more difficult to play the ordinary UWr correct.

[twndomn]

like I mentioned in this thread http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...ol-cards-techs

The real problems in this match-up are Deathrite Shaman and Liliana. DRS accelerates Liliana into play, or provides the extra mana to overcome spell pierce, while doing the 2 loss of life every EOT. I cannot count the number of times my opponent would first discard my counter, then follows up with Liliana. Even with CB-T in play, BUG can still resolve a Liliana, flipping a CMC 3 card in Miracle is not that easy.

Abrupt Decay in BUG is the toolbox that would take care anything problematic, CB in this match-up. I'm willing to trade my CB for AD, as long as I can keep Liliana and DRS away from the board.

[TkDodo]

@R3D: I'm with you regarding moving Counterbalance to the side. First of all, it frees up some maindeck space for other goodies, like Vendilion, which I really love; or more Snapcasters, which is also great. It also doesn't matter much that this turns on their removal spells, since this creatures do their work with ther triggered abilities. Second, you don't need to consider your CB curve, since you will most likely only bring it in when your 1s matter most (against all sorts of combo and RUG, and maybe the mirror), because that is where CB is at its best. So you don't need to fill up your maindeck with suboptimal spells just because, you know, you need another 3 for your curve. Also, as discussed, it's not very good against BUG and a lackluster against Maverick as well.
However, I don't think this deck needs another "drawing engine" instead, neither Ancestral Vision nor Standstill. I mean, this deck can generate so much card quality with Brainstorm, Top and Jace and lots of virtual card advantage with Terminus and Snapcaster/Clique already that I've never had the need for more raw card draw.

[Dzra]

However, I don't think this deck needs another "drawing engine" instead, neither Ancestral Vision nor Standstill. I mean, this deck can generate so much card quality with Brainstorm, Top and Jace and lots of virtual card advantage with Terminus and Snapcaster/Clique already that I've never had the need for more raw card draw.

I kind of disagree here. Unless you're running Mystic, you probably can't end the game in a consistent and timely way (unlike Stoneblade). Without some way to generate CA and with little to no pressure, this deck can get (or stay) on the back foot pretty easily. In Christmas land, they'll run every single card into a Terminus and you'll win on the spot, but BUG/RUG can pretty easily apply pressure with one or two creatures at a time. I haven't given up on Counterbalance yet, but Ancestral Visions might be a decent CA alternative against Abrupt Decay.

[Jiaozy]

I kind of disagree here. Unless you're running Mystic, you probably can't end the game in a consistent and timely way (unlike Stoneblade). Without some way to generate CA and with little to no pressure, this deck can get (or stay) on the back foot pretty easily. In Christmas land, they'll run every single card into a Terminus and you'll win on the spot, but BUG/RUG can pretty easily apply pressure with one or two creatures at a time. I haven't given up on Counterbalance yet, but Ancestral Visions might be a decent CA alternative against Abrupt Decay.

Without Counterbalance to net you some CA NOR a decent clock you can't hope to do well with the deck.
Against BG decks they're slightly worse but even countering a card or two before they find the Decay to remove it is already good enough.
At worst it's a 1:1 trade, at best you nail something like Liliana, Goyf or win a counter war for something relevant (Jace, Entreat).

[Mike_]

Btw, could Granite Shard in sideboard be useful against something like gobbos?

[DragoFireheart]

I kind of disagree here. Unless you're running Mystic, you probably can't end the game in a consistent and timely way (unlike Stoneblade). Without some way to generate CA and with little to no pressure, this deck can get (or stay) on the back foot pretty easily. In Christmas land, they'll run every single card into a Terminus and you'll win on the spot, but BUG/RUG can pretty easily apply pressure with one or two creatures at a time. I haven't given up on Counterbalance yet, but Ancestral Visions might be a decent CA alternative against Abrupt Decay.

Ancestral Vision is... alright, I guess. It's at its best if you start with it in your hand as you can cast it right away and expect cards to come after their initial assault. However, it's a really bad top deck. At least CB can possibly counter something if you top deck it. AV is just junk if you need to top deck something to win it for you. It's almost as bad as drawing a land late game due to having to wait three turns for it to do anything. It can also screw up your Miracles if you've been purposely keeping a Terminus near the top of your deck ala SDT.

[Einherjer]

I just felt like sharing what I was testing at the moment. It is an extremely strange take on Miracles. I've been playing very stock lists for a loong time... I started a few months before GP Ghent. I tried pretty much everything, from Miracleblade, to creatureless Miracle, to a Miracle with alot of flashy (legendary) creatures, to a 4Counterbalancelist, then I played without Balance and so on. A friend of mine kept placing very good with takes on Miracle, that sounded strange. He was playing cards like Burning Wish, Cunning Wish, Pyroclasm and even Stifle. While some of you might stop reading now, I'd like you to stay with me. I was unsure whether or not it was just due to him being a good player or to his lists being superior to mine ( 99% of the time an UWR-List, pretty stock, only a few metagame-slots from time to time ). But soon I left Miracles to toy around with BUG, another pet deck of mine. Nowadays, with BUG running rampant everywhere I thought about building Miracles again. It's main goal is not to beat Maverick any more. This led me to playing 2 Terminus only. Making it 4 Miraclespells. This, then brought me to the point of cutting a SDT. OMG, he cut a SDT?! Is he mad or just bad? Well, I hope neither nor. I've been a 4 Top advocate since the early days. Normal Miracles without 4 Tops is bullshit. But my recent list does not play alot of Miracles, and it tends to play out faster in one way or another. So, here is the list I am rocking atm.

4 Tundra
3 Volcanic Island
4 Flooded Strand
4 Scalding Tarn
4 Island
2 Plains
1 Mountain

4 Brainstorm
3 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Ponder

4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Lightning Bolt

2 Terminus
2 Entreat the Angels

4 Snapcaster Mage

3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor

4 Force of Will
3 Stifle
2 Counterspell
2 Spell Snare

1 flexible Slot ( could be everything, Stifle, Spell Pierce, Jace, Terminus, Verdict....everything, really )

Okay, there are a few other cardchoices many would not agree upon.

4 Snapcaster Mage - If you read my previous posts you might know that I tended to play 1-3 Snapcaster, simply due to 4 being too much (for normal Miracle), not for this variant. We play alot of Instants and Sorceries, making Snapcaster the true powerhouse he used to be.

3 Stifle - So what is this card actually doing? It can prevent us from getting wasted out of the game. It can provide a tempobonus in certain MUs where playing lands actually matters --> Mirrormatches. It disables cards that are supergood vs us, for example Pernicious Deed. It can pull off some (unexpected) tricks in a variety of matches, for example stifling a Miracletrigger or a SDT activation, or a Shaman-ability, or a Jace ultimate or like anything else. Legacy is full of triggers.

This deck should be geared pretty well to cope with all of this modern midrangestuff, bolt just adds more creatureremoval for Shaman and works just fine as a Planeswalkerremoval too. I have only been testing vs the real deck to beat of now - BUG Midrange/Control, I've only played 20 games but those tended to be rather easy, though this is not enough to state a true matchup-analysis. Maybe somebody would like to test this too? I'd be happy!
If not, I'd still appreciate your ideas and thoughts.

Greetings

[klaus]

4 Tundra
3 Volcanic Island
4 Flooded Strand
4 Scalding Tarn
4 Island
2 Plains
1 Mountain

4 Brainstorm
3 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Ponder

4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Lightning Bolt

2 Terminus
2 Entreat the Angels

4 Snapcaster Mage

3 Jace, the Mind Sculptor

4 Force of Will
3 Stifle
2 Counterspell
2 Spell Snare

1 flexible Slot ( could be everything, Stifle, Spell Pierce, Jace, Terminus, Verdict....everything, really )

Greetings

I'm not a fan of Stifle in control decks. Most experienced players agree on Stifle being a spell for decks that can use the small time window to actually get there. Also, the mana denial plan is moot w/o Wasteland [I'm not advocating Wasteland for any Miracleish deck].

Moreover I don't think the full SCM playset will pull its weight by making up for all those early games when you've got 1-2 stuck in your hand. Blade lists can balance out that downside scenario by transforming equipped 2/1ers into actual threats. Your list will never win via combat damage outside of EtA, basically leaving you with mostly useless SCM bodies. Don't get me wrong, I enjoy rocking 2-3 in my approaches, though I view them strictly as gy tutors and hate to see them in my openers most of the time.

Regarding your mana base: unless your SB boasts 6+ red cards I would recommend replacing the singleton Mountain with an Arid Mesa (which you should definitely include even if you opt to stick with that Mountain)

The thing about cutting CB is that your Storm MU decreases considerably. So unless your meta is extinct of that breed, I would keep at least two in the MD.

------------

On a different note: I'm currently testing 3 MD Supreme Verdicts and dig them. I'll let you guys know about future fingings on that choice.

[Jiaozy]

Btw, could Granite Shard in sideboard be useful against something like gobbos?

Did you even READ the card?!

What does it do against Goblins??
Kill a Lackey!

Do you have the time to wait turn 6 (maybe 4) to answer a Lackey?
NO.
Not at all!!

So why in the world would you play it?

Please refrain from spamming the thread with useless, untested stuff like this...

Test the card, see how it works, see what it does and then come back here.
One, maybe two games (but I don't think it would've taken that long) would've been enough to make you realize how bad that card is.

[Dzra]

Moat is really solid at fighting Goblins and pretty much any other tribal deck. What I haven't decided on is whether Enlightened Tutor is worth a spot or not. It has a ton of synergy with the MD (and powerful SB bombs), but the card disadvantage can also set you up for a blowout.

[DragoFireheart]

Moat is really solid at fighting Goblins and.

Siege-Gang Commander

No, it's not. They'll just shoot you with goblins.