Miracle Control

[Valtrix]

Having printed out boarding plans is not going to win you a tournament.

I highly advocate printing out boarding plans. First, if you've gone through the trouble of doing this it means that you've really spent a lot of time thinking about each of the matchups. If you've gotten to this point, then you know you've probably spent enough prepping in this area. Because realistically you'd probably figure out boarding plans anyway, even if you didn't bother writing it all down. This also helps you make sure your sideboard is doing exactly what you want. A lot of times after making boarding plans I decide that something isn't working out how I thought it might, or that I actually need more help in a certain matchup, and I make a couple changes and feel better with the sideboard overall. Making a list also means that you have to do less thinking in the middle of a match. Not that you should go on autopilot of course--one must always be ready to adapt--but, especially in longer tournaments anything you can do to make your time easier is good.

Boarding plans could quite possibly prevent a draw too, especially for those new to the deck. Plus, is there any way having written boarding plans would actually hurt you? I think not, so there's no reason not to have them.

[Cipher]

Meh, true elite players don't bring things like dice, pens, sideboard guides, etc...


I think the process of making the plans is more helpful than the actual plans, themselves. I've been doing that for years and it forces you to analyze what your gameplan is in every matchup. When you're new to a deck it does speed things up a lot. It's also entertaining to watch pro's stream and clearly forget to board out cards, until they get heckled by their stream's chat.

[twndomn]

Boarding plans could quite possibly prevent a draw too, especially for those new to the deck. Plus, is there any way having written boarding plans would actually hurt you? I think not, so there's no reason not to have them.

You're taking a partial statement out of context. He's not arguing against the value of boarding plans. Yes, you should have a basic, default, go-to boarding plan for most MUs. He's saying one should Observe your opponent's card choices Game One. If you deduce that your opponent is Not Running Stifle/Wasteland, then your original boarding plan will get modified accordingly, for example. Observing and anticipating your opponent is more valuable than blindly following a piece of paper. That is the point, imo.

[Ancestral]

Well, it's not all that easy. I have written articles. A lot of them. With a lot of sideboardplans. Yet people still ask. Understandably so, due to the fact that decks change, my mainboard changes, my side 15 change, my opponents decks change. A tournament setting is nothing but a variation of what you have been preparing for. That's why I hate boarding plans.

I once played against BUG Delver and didn't board Flusterstorm, contrarily to what I advocate. Why did I do that? Because my opponent was playing a very strange build of BUG that seemed to skip on Discard and Stifle, for whatever reason. But I didn't just blindly board what it said on my sheet, I adopted.

Having printed out boarding plans is not going to win you a tournament. You are going to win yourself a tournament. Nobody else can do that for you. You can pick up a list that is arguably better than most, but this still doesn't guarantee a win. You can follow advices people give you. But, again, this will not mean immediate success. Skill, familiarity and adaptability are the skill set that will make you successful in Legacy. (and oh boy is this different in other formats. *thinks about my PT experiences and shivers*) If you play well enough, and understand which role your deck has in a specific MU and what the underlying plan of the opposing deck is, then you will board towards the kind of unattainable goal of a perfect boarding plan, that only really works if you have access to your opposing 75. And this is what I've been thinking of turning into an article. It should highlight the skillset needed to board somewhat correctly. Because, let's be honest: You don't need to board 100% correctly. All you need to do is do it somewhat right as long as you're good. So yeah, I believe that this article that I've been dreaming of should/could enable a careful reader to board on their own. Giving you my 50 1:1 plans against the current Legacy metagame with my list as it stands now might appear unbelievably helpful at first, but will turn out to be somewhat utter thrash in a months time. (if the boarding isn't accompanied with an explanation) I believe that it is part of mastering and understanding a deck that you board from your feel, and yes I know that I am a way too intuitively thinking/acting player. I just hate boarding plans.

Greetings

BRAVO!! the sideboarding plans in this threats its already annoying, i understand that people want to improve and having somone who´s expert with the deck and helpfull has ein its really good, but please try to think to yourselfs a little! and that´s why i had to give you another congratulations about this post!! just pretty well said!!

I do have some issues with this deck in all stages of the game once in a while, and i play this decks for over 3 years now ! its a thing that happens and its a good think because it means that the game is not all the same, and thats why its fun too because its a constante learning process!

i read all this comments recently and i disagree with some, and agree with others, and sometimes we are both correct becuase (for example) some people try to blank decay, others try to overwelming it, and i think both options can be valid and if those players has doing good with those options why have we to put just right or wrong in a boarding plan when there is a good number of reasons for each of the options?

for conclusion a general idea can be good but don´t try to put just right or wrong in every decision because tunnel visions makes us worst player

[AnziD]

Philipp, I definitely see where you are coming from in your disdain for boarding plans. In an ideal world where I am a master of this deck, I too would share your view. However, as many of us (myself included) have yet to reach that level, it seems that at least premeditating certain plans would be useful, if even to just use it as a baseline that can be adapted and morphed (like you did in your example against BUG Delver). I think that adaptation and morphing is actually an advanced technique, but one that is definitely necessary to know. So! Please write away, I know that you'll do a great job explaining it. Additionally I'd like to clarify that what I had in mind would not include a specific card-by-card guide, but also a conceptual explanation for why each choice is made.

[sherko7]

Looking to get anyone's opinion on my list below. I'm playing U/W version without the splash with 1 B2B main and 1 in the side. Need help on my remaining SB slots as well!

The 2 Snaps can be 1 Snap 1 Clique, or could be 1 Snap +1 Island, depending on my mood. Haven't played enough games yet to warrant playing 22 lands, but mana screw does happen every now and then. If I had to, I'd cut 1 Snap for an Island/another Dual.

4 Flooded Strand
4 Polluted Delta
2 Arid Mesa
6 Island
3 Plains
2 Tundra
(21 lands)

4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
2 Dig Through Time

4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Counterbalance

4 Force of Will
1 Counterspell

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Terminus

2 Entreat the Angels
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Back to Basics
1 Council's Judgement

2 Snapcaster Mage

SB:

1 Back to Basics
1 Disenchant
1 Rest in Peace
1 Gafdigger's Cage
1 Containment Priest
1 Council's Judgement
1 Supreme Verdict
1 Spell Pierce
1 Flusterstorm
2 Vendilion Clique
4 slots left

[melaar]

Hi Philipp,

If Julian's Deck = f(Philipp's Deck) as I think... then you play now 2 DTT : http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=16495&iddeck=123437
If this is the case what can you tell us about this change since your last list ?
I really like the card that's why I play 3 MD, as R. Duke.

Thanks

[JBMage]

Okay guys,

I'm back and in the mood of answering questions! Please just shoot them at me, if you'd like to know something or if your question hasn't been answered by the, mostly excellent, responses in this thread. :)

Greetings

Hi Philipp,

Congratulations for all the work and dedication made in the Legacy community, notably on Miracles.
It's remarkable to see successful lists in different corners of the World based on some of your deckbuilding decisions.

If you were invited for the next Legacy Super League, 8 man tournament (only one deck) with the following players:

• You
• Jean Mary Accart
• Jacob Wilson
• Thomas Enevoldsen
• Carsten Kotter
• Tom Ross
• Fabian Gorzgen
• Pierre Sommen

Would you play Miracles in this field?
If Yes, would your 75 change a lot comparing to your actual list?


Best Regards

[AnziD]

Hmm... so as an exercise to see what more I could learn from this thread, I went through (almost) each and every post Philipp posted here... and I've copied down a bunch of important things he's said here:

https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...it?usp=sharing

Not sure if this is useful or not, but I feel like it should help with redundant stuff? There's some stuff I chose not to put in (like all the silly stuff about splashing black), but if anyone thinks there's info that would be crucial, then please let me know so I can add it in. I also tried keeping most of the stuff relevant to the 4-Ponder list, but obviously advice and theoretical concepts on other lists have applications as well.

[Einherjer]

Yo,

@melaar: I just underrated Dig Through Time at the beginning, I'll be honest. Once I realized that it became apparant that cutting a Jace for a second one would fall in line with once of the underlying principles that is "play as few copies of everything, for as long as you have the same results" - as said earlier - if I could get away with just playing 1 Raging Goblin as my win-condition while winning the same amount of games and not drawing more often than I do now, then I'd just play this one Goblin. I mean, this isn't the case whatsoever but you get my point. Following this same thought was the cutting of the sideboarded win-condition and the shaving of the 3rd Jace. As long as I can get away with it I'll do it. And it seems just as if I could. :)


@JBMage: That's an amazing question. I havn't heard that one before. First and foremost: This idea sounds awesome and maybe I should see if we couldn't organise something along these lines, though it would be hard to decide who would be granted the power to invite people, hmm.

So, when playing in such a small metagame you can certainly things you could never get away with when playing a Grand Prix or a SCG event. And this is extreme metagaming. First I'd do a level-1 consideration according to the wine-in-front-of-me-principle.

Jean-Mary Accart: Shardless BUG
Jacob Wilson: Canadian Threshold
Thomas Endevoldsen: Death and Taxes
Carsten Kötter: UWR Control
Tom Ross: Infect
Fabian Görzgen: Maverick/Junk
Pierre Sommen: Shardless BUG

Then I would go ahead and would try to peek into their minds, seeing what they would think of the metagame, that appears to be absolutely empty of any real combo deck, which would not only favor the non-blue decks by quite a bit but would also incenticize cutting Force of Wills. I would then conclude that at least Jean-Mary Accart and Carsten Kötter would indeed switch to a unfair strategy, probably being OmniTell and Storm, respectively, leading the format to look pretty normal again.

The expected metagame from a level-2 consideration does not warrant big changes, and I won't be doing a level-3 look at things at it might get too blurry, and at the end of the day, let's be honest - people like to play what they like to play.

To be perfectly honest: I do not think that i would change much. Anything, to be frank. :)


@AnziD: Holy shit! *blushes* That must have been a lot of work! Props for that, Sir! Hopefully you didn't capture stuff I said at the beginning of Miracles when I was trying to have it be called "Terminator" and would play the 4-C-Version? I'll have to take a look to take through it to see if there are many things that I now see differently. (there surely are some) - Wow, just wow. :)

Greetings

[AnziD]

@AnziD: Holy shit! *blushes* That must have been a lot of work! Props for that, Sir! Hopefully you didn't capture stuff I said at the beginning of Miracles when I was trying to have it be called "Terminator" and would play the 4-C-Version? I'll have to take a look to take through it to see if there are many things that I now see differently. (there surely are some) - Wow, just wow. :)

Haha it definitely did take a couple hours to go through. I was so surprised in the beginning reading your posts because you sounded like a TOTALLY different person

Also lol @ E-Sperminator

[Einherjer]

Hehe, yeah I can imagine so. I also said a lot of stupid stuff back in the day. :)

Btw guys, there will be an podcast-episode on Miracles over at EverdayEternal tomorrow. Keep an eye out for that! :)

Greetings

[Dragonslayer_90]

Haha it definitely did take a couple hours to go through. I was so surprised in the beginning reading your posts because you sounded like a TOTALLY different person

Also lol @ E-Sperminator

DAYUM AnziD. Thank you so much for doing the work of compiling all that you have. I wish I had time to go through the whole document but I am rather busy at the moment. I believe this will be very helpful for getting more of Ein's insights with the deck into the primer that will be completed not too long after I finish school and graduate in May. With yours and Ein's permission I'd like to use some of the document at some point probably for the primer. You can even help integrate some of these posts into the primer if you want as it is another google doc linked in my sig. The goal is to have a completely updated new primer up and running in a little over a month if not earlier.

[phazonmutant]

All praise lord and savior Einherjer. May these hallowed forums ring forevermore with these holy words from on high.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

If this turns into a larping session, I'm so out of here.

From my phone. I do my best, dammit!

[twndomn]

Did the King James version of the Holy Bible for Miracles just got published or something?

[rickster]

How would you sideboard against a miracles opponent with monastery mentor?

Lossett was talking on his stream last night how mentor is really strong in the mirror if people don't sideboard properly.

Would you leave in 1-2 copies of terminus in the dark if you had no idea if your opponent sided in mentor?

[exallium]

Regarding the sideboarding issue Philipp mentioned earlier... why do we as a group not just explicate all the sideboarding details as exallium is doing? It seems like that would end a lot of hassle. Naturally there are lots of different lists, but I think we do have certain staple lists, like Philipp's, that we could focus on. And once a comprehensive list (likely with explanations) is created, it could be inserted into the OP of this thread or something. I mean most of the work is literally done for us already, its just a matter of compiling everything together.

In all honesty I think your document is a lot more valuable than mine. Nice work. I can see sideboard guides as a "framework", but Ein's right in that one needs to learn to adapt. Blindly following a sideboard guide feels like a hack to get around needing to be able to adapt, and I think that that would actually hinder people if they don't fully understand what they are looking at.

EDIT: Also, I'm recognizing some of these questions as coming from me.

[Poron]

In the mirror I add as many EE as possible for Entreat. They help a lot for Mentors as well.

Should Mentor become relevant I would make 3x EE or 2EE and 1 Academy Ruins. Nowadays I only play 2 EE and 1 Pyroclasm

[AnziD]

DAYUM AnziD. Thank you so much for doing the work of compiling all that you have. I wish I had time to go through the whole document but I am rather busy at the moment. I believe this will be very helpful for getting more of Ein's insights with the deck into the primer that will be completed not too long after I finish school and graduate in May. With yours and Ein's permission I'd like to use some of the document at some point probably for the primer. You can even help integrate some of these posts into the primer if you want as it is another google doc linked in my sig. The goal is to have a completely updated new primer up and running in a little over a month if not earlier.

Of course! The great part is Philipp's explanations are so in-depth for a lot of the theory that there is not so much work left to do. I think an additional exercise could be to add in extra segments for some of the more fringe decks; but this format is so expansive that there is a lot to cover and doing it all so soon would be impractical. But its a goal we can work towards.

Another idea would be to have a section where we understand in what situations each card is good or not (ex. writing about when Counterbalance is bad, such as vs BGx decks like Shardless and Maverick, or why Flusterstorm is good against BUG decks with Stifle but less so against BUG decks with Hymn). A primer strategy like that would enable the reader to be the one in the driver's seat.

How would you sideboard against a miracles opponent with monastery mentor?

Lossett was talking on his stream last night how mentor is really strong in the mirror if people don't sideboard properly.

Would you leave in 1-2 copies of terminus in the dark if you had no idea if your opponent sided in mentor?

Check out Post 23 here: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...ZOzmVN9pk/edit. Intuitively, playing against Monastery Mentor is somewhat the same as playing against Stoneforge Miracles, so the boarding guideline would be as is posted there.