@Quasim0ff
At a glance...
a) Don't board out Entreat vs BUG decks
b) Don't board out Entreat vs DnT
@Philipp
So I was rereading your articles and your deckbuilding philosophy, and doesn't your latest build (Ovino - mainboard REB) go against the idea of creating a list designed for a generic meta? How do you justify REB mainboard in a non-Treasure-Cruise field of things like BGx decks, DNT, etc...?
She seems totally reasonable to play in the mirror as she draws you cards, wins fairly quickly, and is doesn't die in one shot to Clique.Originally Posted by YamiJoey
SEVEN WHOLE LOYALTY.
I do really like her. I'm wondering if I can actually play her, but the amount of games I won on just 3 Lands at my win a box was massive. (I'm talking five games out of the seven I won on three Lands, losing two games due to not having enough castable and relevant Spells, and one game to not being able to find an answer to True-Name with a Sofi.) I think she might only be viable in the lower/no Ponder decks. 23 Lands seems where you want to be for that kind of card. (I have cut down to just two Jaces for this reason.)
The conspiracy goes deeper than you might think.Can I pay you for not posting in this thread?
Thank you for your question, that's actually a very good one:
1) I make a distinction between a list I promote publically and play at GPs and a list that I build for a very specific event. Given that I don't play countless individual non-GP events this might not have been apparent, but just look at this list I piloted (quite a while ago), and I'd still pilot something very close to that in the given metagame. (though I lacked a serious bunch of experience back then, but you get the idea/ the direction of thought)
http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=11717&iddeck=85790
The metagame was 40% Delver 40% Combo. The deck that won the tournament preyed on this very inbred metagame, it was Stoneblade.
So, to get this back on point. When I build for a GP I build it for Legacy, not for this GP, because I don't think that there is such a thing as regional bias when it comes to 1000-4000 people tournaments.
Ovino on the other side is a different story. Over 50% of the participants, probably more, are native to Italy, which has had a strong showing of Miracles ever since. *fades away in memories of the good old times...* Oh yeah, I learned a lot from different italian players back in the day. So, umm, Ovino has had a very sharply describeable metagame which was Miracles+Omnitell, that's why I opted for the inclusion of Pyro. (additionally: It kind of included some kind of bargain with Maxime Gilles. :D)
2) I try to make this deck better by the time a new GP comes around the corner:
Top64 in Strasbourg: RIP Miracles > Top8 GP Paris: 2 Ponder Miracles > Top8 GP New Jersey: 4 Ponder Miracles >X GP Lille XXXX
So what's it going to be? The hell do I know, but I know what I don't want: Narrowing down the possibilities because of things that held true for the past. Things might have changed. I mean, maybe they haven't but it's incredibly important to always re-evaluate the point you are standing at. If I should come to the conclusion one day that 4 Ponder is nothing but a fluke I'd make sure I let everybody know should this be the case. (hint: It's not, it's actually hilariously OP)
So we are testing for GP Lille. I've also backspaced my egoistic aspect of building Miracles and am now working in a bigger team, both for constructing Miracles and testing all the MUs of Legacy. This has downsides, sure, a couple of them. But it also has a fair number of upsides, mostly the constant influx of new ideas of people who's minds I trust in one way or another. And I'm the last to tell them to simply fuck off with an idea without having tested it. (sometimes I do/did, but I always go back and test it to make sure)
So, umm I hope that answered your question. Shouldn't this be the case, should you disagree or want me to state something in a different matter, let me know, as always.
On the other hand, though, The Witcher 3 Wild Hunt will release in about 6 hours, so I'm not sure I can be any efficient with answering your question(s). :D
Greetings
X GP Lille XXXX = 8 Ponder Miracles...?
Haha, but thank you, my question is answered.
I think I need some hate for stuff like winter orb/Sylvan, and there's no other card I would cut before the Entreat, I think.
vs D&T, resolving a spell with 2x Plains in CMC is just a struggle.
You definitely want your disenchant effect vs bug delver because of the cards you named and null rod. The hate cards can wreak havoc on us.
They banned Top, so now I play Grixis Delver.
Hey guys. Sorry it's been rather slow coming down the pipeline, but my report for the SCG Cleveland Premier IQ is finally up:
http://www.eternalcentral.com/a-rewa...cy-premier-iq/
I should say this not a full fledged report so much as a memoir in learning miracles. I hope you all enjoy it. If you guys have any constructive comments, do leave them either in the article or here in my forum post in the tournament report thread.
Last edited by Dragonslayer_90; 05-19-2015 at 08:24 AM. Reason: correcting a typo
In regards to Legacy:
Obligatory "This is why Mentor is better" post, wit regarfs to DnT.
I agree it's less explosive than Angels, and that Decay is a beating, but I think I like my new plan against BUG Delver.
@Dragonslayer: I just read your article, and it was excellent. The discussion of your CAPD was excellent. Thank you. :)
The conspiracy goes deeper than you might think.Can I pay you for not posting in this thread?
Looking at your list, here are the cards I would consider cutting:
4 Counterbalance
3 Force of Will
1 Red Elemental Blast
Looking at your board, here are the cards I'd be interested in:
2 Vendilion Clique
2 Flusterstorm
1 Engineered Explosives
2 Wear//Tear
1 Council’s Judgment.
Ultimately I'd take out the 7 blue cards for all but the 2nd Wear//Tear. So how do we differ?
-1 Entreat the Angels
+1 Pithing Needle
+1 Relic
+1 Wear//Tear
vs.
+2 Flusterstorm
Here's my justification for why my boarding process is different:
Overview: So before we talk about card choices, we need to understand why we're doing what we're doing. I would recommend reading Philipp's article if you haven't already, he explains very well what kind of game plan and mindset you should have going into this matchup. BUG Delver is definitely not as "synergistic" or as fast as its RUG counterpart (which combines its typical Stifle/Wasteland package with an extremely low curve, something BUG inherently will have a harder time with due to cards available in the color combination, ex: Bolt vs. Decay), but its strength comes in the fact that each of the cards are independently powerful. What's important to take away from this is an understanding of how we can take advantage of the tradeoff that occurs by switching from red to black. Because the BUG curve is higher and their cards kill a tiny bit more slowly, we are given a precious resource - time. With an extra turn here and there, we are able to more sufficiently develop our mana. What happens when we do this? We enable ourselves to play our strongest cards, most notably Jace and Entreat. As these cards are out of Abrupt Decay range, the BUG player will have a hard time removing it once it has resolved. So our route to victory in this matchup is typically to survive and overwhelm the opponent with superior threat quality. Therefore...
-1 Entreat the Angels - We definitely want to keep all copies of Entreat the Angels. In fact, if there were more space, we'd be bringing in an extra copy. Since our game plan is to resolve Entreat or Jace and beat them that way, it makes little sense to reduce the potential number of win conditions we have.
+1 Pithing Needle - This card is definitely great in that it can stop lots of things the BUG Delver player is trying to accomplish. In my testing, Pithing Needle is most applicable to stop Liliana of the Veil from just ripping us apart. Other targets include Wasteland and DRS (is there something big I'm missing?). And, while these are all great cards to shut down, we can do better. Pithing Needle is something of a floodgate card. It is not a permanent solution to the threats we care about. What happens when the Needle is destroyed? Then we resume getting attacked by the problematic cards. So we try to remove the problematic card before Needle dies - then what good is Needle after? Taking up an entire card to not fully solve the problem is a huge price to pay. A price we can't afford while we're dealing with Hymns, Libraries, and the like. I think it makes more sense to just have another permanent answer like Council's Judgment or EE, something equally as versatile as Needle, or a card that can help us resolve our bombs and win the game, like Flusterstorm. We can always fetch basics, we can always Ponder for removal. There are other ways to answer what Needle solves without its cost.
+1 Relic - The appeal to Relic is that it is a card that neuters the opponents threats (Goyf/DRS) while also drawing a card. Simply put, the card is... not necessary? I mean its cool that we can mitigate their creatures for a while, but it doesn't take too long for them to reestablish what Relic undoes. Their deck is not so blisteringly fast that we absolutely must focus on using cards like Relic to survive. Weighing the pros and cons, the card doesn't contribute enough to our game plan to merit postboard play.
+1 Wear//Tear - It's excessive. We have 1 W/T, 2 CJ, 1 EE, 3 SCM as potential answers to their enchantments and artifacts, as well as a ridiculous number of ways to find them (plug: play the 4th Ponder!). Typically the BUG Delver player will at max have 1 Null Rod, 1 Pithing Needle, and 1 Sylvan Library (correct me if I'm wrong here). For these cards, we have enough answers.
The point about why I'm advocating not boarding in all these extra cards is that there are better cards we can be playing. The pattern is consistent with all three cards, whether it be because the card is not necessary or not powerful enough. The extra space also opens us up to play...
+2 Flusterstorm - Remember that BUG Delver is primarily a tempo deck that heavily focuses on using countermagic to mess you up. Stifle, Force of Will, Spell Pierce, Envelop, their own Flusterstorms - there's a lot of cards they play to just say "No, you can't do that". It's great that you're boarding in a lot of answers, as that's what we want. But it's not necessarily the case that having just answers will always work. We want to strike from a different angle, which Flusterstorm allows us to do. It's both an offensive card that protects our Jaces and Entreats on the stack and a defensive card that fights against their discard and countermagic. This is the combination of versatility and power you want in each of your cards, which makes it much better than the other cards you're bringing in.
That's my 2 cents, this was mostly an exercise for me to practice verbalizing my thought process. Let me know what you agree and disagree on, and I'd be happy to discuss.
Also, vs DNT, I've realized that against good pilots, its definitely okay to be casting a lot of your miracles spells during your turn. Things like tapping Top in your upkeep to counter their Port activation and use your Terminus/Entreat. Sure, its a struggle, but Entreat is so powerful that its worth it to navigate our way around Port to resolve it.
And, another thing while I still remember - I think at one point exallium said not to include Judgment against DnT (correct me if I'm wrong!)? The idea here was that sorcery speed WW is hard to get. I recall saying that against Lands, I board out CJ because sorcery speed WW is hard, and I think he may have applied that DnT. However, this shouldn't apply to DnT. Firstly, they have lots of ridiculous spells we have to fight, like SoFaI and Vial. Secondly, the reason its easier to cast WW against DnT (and a reason we keep Judgment in against them) is because DnT doesn't have access to Thespian Stage. Navigating through a Port or two is doable. Navigating through three or four is way, way harder.
Last edited by AnziD; 05-19-2015 at 01:15 PM.
I'm just saying, Preordain and Thought Scour are both reasonable. Preordain if you want the cantrip to be better on its own, scour if you want to fill your yard for Dig and synergize well with Top, Brainstorm, and Ponder. :)
okay, guys. so this is a pretty serious topic! For me at least.
you guys certainly know when you see an opponent doing sth and you wodner: why would you do this?
bad example: guy forgot to attack.
so today i totally CRUSHED an esper stoneblade opponent who top8 a 150 person open. after game 1 I asked him what he did play against R1. his answer: Miracles, and he didnt play as badly as you did.
I know miracles is one of the hardest decks to play correctly, but im not sure how worried i should be, meaning: did i seriously make a mind blowing mistake? Or was he just salty?
i have been playing miracles a lot, but do u guys still have these moments, when there is a line, which would have been 10x better?
He seemingly wanted to throw you off your game and make you question your decisions. Blow him off. Miracles is a bad matchup and he was probably trying to gain any kind of ground he could.
From my phone. I do my best, dammit!
thanks for the answer. he wouldnt want to specify what i did wrong. esper dude resolved 3 dig through time and still lost. So i guess being salty is totally reasonable. But im just a complete different type of player and i wouldnt ever use this kind of stuff to gain an advantage, thats why im asking.
If he said this while your game was still going he my have been trying to make you doubt yourself. A lot of people try this kind of stuff.
Honestly though, if you did not get 1st and you don't think you made any mistakes you are probably just not aware of them. Its often hard to see your own mistakes. Having better players watch you play can help a lot.
He was probably just salty. I haven't been playing the deck very long but it seems to be both incredibly demanding, and incredibly forgiving. It's really easy to make a mistake that seems obvious in retrospect, and still win the game/match despite it.
If we are talking skill level, I put myself at a very average skill level and find that I win frequently because the power level of the cards available to Miracles is simply so high. The deck is quite difficult to play, but Counterbalance/Top is not and gives many free wins in matchups where it is good. Similarly, the Miracle spells are so powerful that sometimes you'll win with Entreat when you would've lost.
That being said, any opponent who states how bad you are playing in the active match in a non-friendly/joking manner is just attempting to put you on tilt or is just salty (which, depending on how egregious, could actually be an Unsportsmanlike Conduct infraction - it has "A player taunts his opponent for making a bad play" as an example in the comp rules, even). Even if you are playing poorly the only reason to state it out loud would be to put you off your game for an advantage, really. If he brings it up after the game is over in a way that doesn't indicate he is just upset and has valid points about areas you could improve in then that is totally different - knowing the mistakes you make when you win is harder than obsessing over the details of games you lose. I feel a lot of people don't improve off of games they win nearly as much as they should.
I'm trying to finalize my decklist for SCG Worcester this weekend, and I'm having some serious trouble picking between the last few maindeck/sideboard slots. Who wants to help me with some second opinions?
Current maindeck: 4 Ponder, 3 Snapcaster, 2 DTT, basically the stock Ponder list
Current sideboard: 2 Clique, 3 REB/Pyroblast, 1 Wear // Tear, 1 FoW, 2 Flusterstorm, 1 EE, 1 Blood Moon, 2 Rest in Peace, 1 Keranos, 1 Council's Judgment
- I've noticed a lot of people starting to run 2 Containment Priest and 0 Rest in Peace, but these don't seem like they serve the same function. I get the application of Priest against Elves, S&S, and Death & Taxes, but RIP helps against Jund, BGx decks, ANT and Dredge. Not having any graveyard hate seems incredibly risky, is this just a local call for some people?
- Is Blood Moon just too win-more? It's such a beating against the decks that are weak to it that I haven't managed to convince myself it isn't needed
- I'm also considering cutting 1 Snapcaster, 1 DTT and 1 Arid Mesa for 1 Karakas and 2 Cliques. It's sacrificing a bit of the consistency those cards provide in exchange for the additional information (as a non-expert, knowing what my opponent has in hand helps me a lot). Both Joe Lossett and Philipp take the view that Cliques & Ponders belong in different builds of the deck, is anyone out there trying to run both? How have you found it?
Dredge has a harder time beating Priest than RiP, believe it or not. They can't get Creatures into play to trigger Bridge, and they bring in Naturalise effects, not Creture removal.
I have cut Blood Moon. It's good sometimes, but for a big event I'd be playing more consistantly good cards.
I am a huge fan of Vendilion Clique. The card is incredibly powerful. I have yet to find room for it in the main deck, but if you feel like you can make it work then go for it. If everyone is under the assumption you're not playing it G1 it can definitely be a game-winner.
The conspiracy goes deeper than you might think.Can I pay you for not posting in this thread?
Priest
Priest is no substitute for RiP. RiP is the best hoser against Lands. Not a wise move to allow Loam and PFire to run wild by leaning too much on CB.
Blood Moon
It's not Win More. The problem is that you most likely would need multiple moon to make a difference, not just 1. It's not against decks that are weak, it's to punish greedy mana base, help against impossible 12 Post, and push you over the top against otherwise tricky MU like infect, shardless, and MUD.
Clique
You can run both Clique and Snapcaster, that's what I am doing. This help tremendously against SFM package. The issue here is not whether they can co-exist in MD or not, it's where do you come up with card slots. Think this way, you could have easily taken Lossett's Legend version (which has 3 Clique 2 Snap), switch out some clunky cards for Ponder, modify the Mana base a bit. Just run the version that works for you.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote