A big fan of Angelo and a new poster here:)Originally Posted by Wiky
A few questions about your list Angelo,
1) Why the basic mountain over a volcanic island
2) How would you sideboard against bug/leovold/tnn and grixis delver with this list?
3) My metagame is full of Dnt, Sneak Show, miracles and delver. Would you recommend this list or your previous ones
4) Did you feel 20 lands is enough in miracles
Sorry english is not my first language so pardon for any errors
Hei People!
"Won" Today a 18 Player Tournament and byes for the Bom Trial with Angelo's List:)
The only thing i changed is the MD mountain..i really dont like the mountain.. i played the 3th volcanic like always.
Sideboard is a little bit different than his because we have always a lot stompy players in Bern..
SB:
1 Contaimnent Priest
1 Blood Moon
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Kozileks return
3 clique
3 Fluster
2 pyroblast
1 Reb
2 wear/tear
Match ups:
2:1 Bug Delver with NO combo..
2:0 Stompy with tanglewire and smokestack
1:1 Draw Nic fit
2:0 Lands
2:1 Dragon Stompy
I was just there for the prices cause i cat go to the Bom:(
So with the first place i get my 7 chinese eternal master booster and i still played top 8 but lost against my lovely Nakama (afrosmile in this forum) 0:2 with his Burg Delver but i would concede anyway even if i would have won:) he won the top 8 after that of course .
Funny small tournament and i really like the List!!!
Can just lose to yugi muto;)
I know there was quite a bit of talk about the Aluren match-up leading up to GP Louisville. Did you guys ever come up with a good plan of attack for boarding against them (I presume yes as Aluren didn't seem to have made much of a splash there)?
REB, REB, REB is our absolute best card against them. Then comes Wear//Tear, then K-Return if they're on the midrange plan. Clique is also decent if they haven't landed an Aluren yet. Don't forget, Snapcaster is free if they have Aluren on the field so with REBs in the yard you just payand counter their combo.
The purpose of any moat is to impede attack. Some are filled with water, some with thistles. Some are filled with things best left unseen.
I decided to start playing this deck, just in time for a win-a-mox tournament in the area. I ended up 13th of 73 at 5-2. My list is pretty different from what everyone else is playing, really based off of old lists from PV and Reid Duke with lots of one-ofs to make me difficult to play against. 4 Jace is insane against Abrupt Decay decks, and the whole deck felt great all day. Just thought I'd share for the hell of it. I'm sure someone will find something they don't like about my list, but I designed it pretty specifically to be this way, for flexibility over redundancy. My matches were:
4-color Delver - 1-2 loss (Still learning here, got WAY impatient and paid for it.)
B/R Reanimator - 2-0 win
Shardless BUG - 1-2 loss (Lost game 3 to Null Rod + Pithing Needle on Jace and didn't see Wear//Tear or Council's Judgement.)
U/R Delver - 2-0 win
Grixis Delver - 2-0 win
BUG Delver - 2-1 win (won game one with one card left in the library and 20 minutes left on the clock. Jace > Liliana. Scooped game 2, turbo-won with Jace game 3.)
BUG Delver - 2-0 win
It was an interesting tournament because I faced a lot of matchups where I went -4 Counterbalance, -4 FOW, so I really got a chance to see how the deck performs when Abrupt Decay is a concern. Going to run it back in a few weeks, hopefully. Here's the list:
4 Flooded Strand
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Arid Mesa
5 Island
2 Plains
1 Karakas
3 Tundra
1 Volcanic Island
1 Snapcaster Mage
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Brainstorm
2 Ponder
4 Counterbalance
4 Force of Will
2 Counterspell
1 Spell Pierce
1 Spell Snare
4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Terminus
1 Supreme Verdict
1 Council's Judgement
2 Entreat the Angels
4 Jace, The Mind Sculptor
SB:
1 Mountain
2 Red Elemental Blast
1 Pyroblast
1 Tormod's Crypt
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Rest in Peace
1 Terminus
1 Baneslayer Angel
1 Wear//Tear
1 Izzet Staticaster
1 Blue Elemental Blast
1 Spell Pierce
2 Vendilion Clique
4 Jace is a bit much. He is an expensive card so he's kinda bad in multiples. Remember the (loose) rule:
- 4-ofs are cards you want to see multiples of in every game, and want it in your opener
- 3-ofs are cards you want to see at least once per game
- 2-ofs are cards you are okay seeing once a game if at all, and they should have a significant effect to make up for how seldom they show up
- 1-ofs are cards you treat as silver bullets in certain MUs and are situationally good, meaning you don't want to have multiples because they may more often than not be a dead card in a given MU
Jace really shouldn't be more than a 3-of in the deck (the 3rd one is to pitch to FoW and still have enough left in your deck to draw into so he's effectively a virtual 2-of).
Also, your list should absolutely be playing 4 Terminuses MD, especially if you play 0 Mentors.
Your SB is very, very outdated but I'm assuming your store has a lot of Dredge or Reanimator. However, Staticaster is just not good in this meta anymore and I think it should have been a 2nd Wear//Tear. W/T is too good to not have 2-of in our SBs, and is more likely than not the reason you lost g3 against Shardless. Baneslayer is also just too slow in the current meta.
The purpose of any moat is to impede attack. Some are filled with water, some with thistles. Some are filled with things best left unseen.
Thanks dude, not really looking for notes. I'm happy with how the deck performed, and was posting this here mostly to let people know that you don't have to be playing 4 Ponder and 2-4 Snapcaster Mages to build a competitive Miracles deck. That said, I disagree with pretty much all of your points.
I like 4 Jace because it is my primary win condition, and because I fully expect the first one or two to be hit with Daze/Spell Pierce/Force of Will, and because the first Jace will often get attacked down or otherwise dealt with, and slamming the backup Jace wins the game on the spot once they have exhausted their answers. Because even just getting a 4-mana Brainstorm to set up a game-ending Terminus is good enough for me. Because I play 22 lands (23 in some games) and I never have an issue getting to 4+ lands. And, as you pointed out, because it's very difficult to get flooded on a blue card when you play Force of Will.
I am playing 4 sweepers maindeck, with a fifth (plus an Izzet Staticaster) in the sideboard. Being able to cast a sweeper on turn 4 no questions asked against Delver is incredible, and being able to board into a fifth sweeper against virtually every fair deck is great. I had no idea that Izzet Staticaster is not good in the meta, given that BBD top 8-ed the GP with one like a month ago. Baneslayer Angel single-handedly won me both games that I drew it in this tournament, and usually earns me a concession without even attacking. It's incredible against any Delver deck that does not have plainswalkers, and really stellar against burn strategies. It wins a fight against most of the creatures in Eldrazi. It's even an okay win condition in the mirror, given that it dodges Flusterstorm and REB, two of the cards that come in in high quantities post-board from a standard Miracles deck and the vast majority of the Swords to Plowshares and Terminus are gone. It's pretty bad against Jace, but as you point out, most Miracles decks only play two.
There is a lot of graveyard-based combo here in St. Louis and the surrounding areas, particularly given the rising popularity of B/r Reanimator, which is why I had the third anti-graveyard hate card for this tournament. I also did a lap around the room and it was fairly obvious I would have to fight against a graveyard deck at least once, which did happen. If I felt that there were less, or if I saw more Storm or Show and Tell, I would either be running a singleton Flusterstorm or could maybe get by with a second Wear//Tear for the fair matchups. But I really don't feel like I need another one, given that against Null Rod/Sylvan Library/Pithing Needle/Sulfuric Vortex post-board I already have 2 Spell Pierce, Spell Snare, 2 Counterspell, Council's Judgement and Wear//Tear, plus other potential answers depending on which really bad hate card I'm up against. I didn't see those answers that particular game, but that's Magic. I certainly did not lose that match because I only had 7 answers to Null Rod instead of 8.
Every single card in my sideboard got used (I guess aside from Izzet Staticaster, though it would have been great had I faced Infect or DnT or Elves, and it is a part of my post-board configuration against Storm as an answer to Xantid Swarm, Dark Confidant and Empty the Warrens that pitches to Force of Will), and each was extremely impactful at different points against different opponents. It's rather insulting to call it "very, very outdated", particularly when it was great all tournament.
Is this a long way of saying: here's my tournament report, I don't want recommendation/suggestion, but I want to state my accomplishment at my LGS anyway?
Others have stated the room for improvement on your list, and I definitely agree with the majority of the community, especially on the SB part. Using you "designed specifically this way for your local meta" is not a valid justification for having strictly inferior card choices.
You're free to run inferior version, but if you're not going to justify or be willing to receive feedback, I see no reason for you to even post here, do you intend to treat this as a parade?
I explained, in fairly specific detail, why I disagreed with his points. Would you like to refute my statements? I can run down each card, the reasons for each number, whatever you would like. I can point to specific deck lists that have had similar numbers, both recently and in the past. Is my writing a paragraph to explain why I disagree with each of his points is not sufficient justification?
I have no desire for a parade, and going 5-2 in a small-to-medium sized tournament is no great accomplishment. Given the insular nature of this particular thread, I would have thought some might want a different take. If I am wrong, then I apologize for wasting everyone's time. I would like however, if you are going to state that my version is inferior, to hear your reasoning. I feel that there is strength in flexibility and that playing a full set of Ponder, more Snapcaster Mage, multiple Predict, etc., all trade off flexibility for redundancy. It would be fairly easy to say that the list I played is less redundant. It is another matter to say that it is inferior, without any justification.
don't feed the trolls. they are unnecessarily negative and close-minded. here are some discussion questions for your list:
(i) what's the justification for the 1x md karakas?
(ii) what are your thoughts on your list's matchup vs d&t? snapcaster mage (for stp) and ponder (for hitting land drops consistently) are traditionally very important here. supreme verdict + 4x jace seem pretty bad and clunky vs d&t.
(iii) what's the reasoning behind the 1x md spell pierce, especially considering you only have 1x md snapcaster?
(iv) what's the reasoning behind the 1x sb blue elemental blast?
(v) i agree with your comment "4 Jace is insane against Abrupt Decay decks". but what do you think are your deck's weaknesses (in addition to d&t like i already point out)?
BBD advocated for removing all 4 terminus against them, have you come to the same conclusion?REB, REB, REB is our absolute best card against them. Then comes Wear//Tear, then K-Return if they're on the midrange plan. Clique is also decent if they haven't landed an Aluren yet. Don't forget, Snapcaster is free if they have Aluren on the field so with REBs in the yard you just pay
Thought this might exercise some of your brains.
Miracles vs Storm. We are miracles and the storm player is going off. What do we do?
https://thelibraryatpendrellvale.com...cles-vs-storm/
Sib
Thanks, here are some of my thoughts:
1. I tried a wide range of land configurations, everything from 24 lands and 0 Ponders to 20 lands and 4 Ponder, and found the sweet spot for me to be 22 lands (main) and 2 Ponder. Within that subset, I started as a Blood Moon deck with up to 6 Island and 3 Plains, but ended up backing off of that once I decided very late that Blood Moon was just worse in a lot of matchups than having a wider array of answers that didn't mess with my ability to have good mana. Even then, I've been between 3 Plains and 2 Plains, 1 Karakas for a while now. For this particular tournament, there were a) not very many Blood Moons in the room and b) a fair number of Reanimator strategies, which both seemed to nudge me towards Karakas as a good land/spell, an uncounterable/undiscardable answer to Show and Tell and any reanimation spell and the occasional 20/20 token and Leovold, though obviously much worse against those decks. My concern was it being slightly worse against Delver decks, but a 1-of is fairly easy to filter away in most situations game 1, and game 2 and 3 I want the SB mountain against Delver decks as it is, so it was usually a straight swap there. Way, way down on the list was the idea of using the Karakas with the Vendilion Cliques, mostly because I'm only playing two and those are only in the sideboard, but that is a thing that could theoretically happen, but is so unlikely given the numbers I'm playing that it would strictly be a bonus, rather than a functional plan. But I was happy in testing with having 18-19 non-blue sources for the purposes of getting Counterbalance down on turn 2 consistently, so that leaves anywhere from 3-4 Plains/Mountains/Karakas/Plateau as valid options, and for this tournament I liked the Karakas. I personally don't see much point in having a second non-basic red source when I have a Mountain in the 75, though that is a direction some would choose to go. In practice, Karakas was great against my Reanimator opponent, and it was something my Shardless BUG opponent commented on taking into account for his SB plan, though I had sideboarded it out since it's not in my mind a great plan to give them an extra card every turn.
2. I would say it's likely that my D&T matchup is a bit worse than a more common list today, though not all that much. While it is true that Ponder is good for hitting land drops, spending 2 mana against a Thalia or getting blown out by Spirit of the Labyrinth or Sanctum Prelate on 1 are things I'd prefer to avoid to the extent that I can. With more lands and fewer Ponders (and against grindy Wasteland decks the plan is to board up to 23 lands), it's much more reasonable to draw lands in the draw step and make land drops every turn than to lean hard on Ponder to find me lands. It's the same reasoning against Chalice of the Void/Wasteland decks (mostly Eldrazi, though if Merfolk were still a deck that is their current plan) where I'd rather have fewer 1-drop cantrips and just more lands and spells so Chalice isn't as backbreaking. As such, it's not as much of an issue to hit land drops, and allows me to use Ponder as more of a selection spell rather than a tool to hit land drops. The card I do miss a lot against D&T is Snapcaster Mage, as Plow -> Snap -> Plow is a great thing against them. If there were more D&T at this tournament for me to fear, there are a lot of other good options for me, from Pithing Needle and Tsabo's Web for active disruption to Koizelek's Return as an additional sweeper, but it was actually the D&T matchup that lead me to put the 4th Terminus in the sideboard, as I'd previously just had 3 and the 1 Supreme Verdict. In practice, I find that very few of my matches against creature decks are over in four or five turns, so having sweepers or powerful cards that are going to be clunky against Thalia doesn't hurt all that much. Pithing Needle/Wear//Tear#2/Tsabo's Web/Snapcaster Mage#2 has been my 16th SB card for a long time, but I've never had reason to go in that direction in a tournament situation. I will say that the plan is to keep in Force of Will and to fight as hard as possible against Aether Vial, as their deck is much, much slower and much more susceptible to Wrath effects when it doesn't have access to Aether Vial. But I do very much miss additional Snapcaster Mages in this matchup in particular, though it might be the only one. I also like Baneslayer Angel here, since I can't really see a situation where it would be correct for them to keep in Swords to Plowshares, and this guy eats every one of their creatures and can block and kill even their scariest creatures equipped with Sword of Fire and Ice or Jitte in most situations.
3. I'm playing with Spell Pierce for a number of reasons, particularly when contrasted with Flusterstorm. First, I feel like I need at least 2, probably closer to 3 or 4, one-mana counterspells to interact with combo in the early game so I don't just die before I can get set up. I think that's pretty widely accepted. Here, I'm playing with Spell Pierce, and depending on the matchup, Spell Snare and blast effects. For Spell Pierce specifically, I like it more against fair decks, given that it can hit both Hymn to Tourach and Liliana, Painful Truths along with Null Rod. I like it more in most combo matchups because it can hit both Sneak Attack and Show and Tell, or Reanimate and Animate Dead, or other things of that nature. Pretty much the only matchup where I prefer Flusterstorm is Storm (and I guess Elves, too, though I'm not too excited about taxing counterspells against Elves), though I'm okay with giving up a few percentage points against a small number of decks to give me a functional card against a lot of the rest of the metagame, and even in those matchups it's not like Spell Pierce is a dead card. I also tend to look at my deck as a cohesive 75, rather than a maindeck and a sideboard, so part of the reason for a Spell Pierce in the maindeck is that it is one of the sideboard cards that I am happiest to draw in game 1. Finally, and I think this cannot be overstated, Spell Pierce out of Miracles is absolutely unexpected, and beyond that, Spell Pierce as a 1-of or 2-of is actually just impossible for most players to play around effectively, even if they know it exists. I've hit more Force of Wills, plainswalkers, Green Sun's Zeniths, critical Brainstorms, etc. than I can count, and against most players, once you show them Spell Pierce, they become paranoid about it and slow way down, even though that's probably the exact wrong thing to do. As a one-of instead of a dedicated plan, it's easy to avoid with Brainstorm, Ponder and Sensei's Divining Top, fairly easy to find with those same cards, and easy to board out in games 2 and 3 when it's bad. Pretty much the best of all worlds. All of these points can be extrapolated to most of the one-ofs in the deck.
To put it a slightly different way, the first Spell Pierce is great against a whole range of decks, the second Spell Pierce is great against most combo decks and against most Abrupt Decay decks and Delver.
4. Blue Elemental Blast is great as a one-of, for a lot of the same reasons as above. I am playing it specifically here because it gives me numbers against a lot of different strategies. Specifically, it's a 4th blast effect against Sneak and Show (and U/R based delver to a lesser extent) and a 3rd hard removal spell against Sulfuric Vortex, which is seeing more play than you'd think and is spectacularly bad for Miracles. It is narrow enough that I can use it as a card against Sneak and Show without devoting too much sideboard space to combo matchups, it's clearly great against something like Burn, and it covers angles that other cards do not. It's also not the absolute worst in matchups that revolve around Red Elemental Blast, though it's often too narrow to be effective there, but as a one-of, it's not difficult to bring in and have it be an occasional blowout if I have nothing else I want to bring in. Mostly, I need 3 removal spells against Sulfuric Vortex and 4+ blasts against Sneak and Show, and no other card fills those roles as efficiently. It is a slot that could also be Pithing Needle or Wear//Tear, depending on what the rest of my sideboard looks like, so it lets me condense SB slots and have a more efficient SB overall. In the tournament that I played in it killed a Young Pyromancer and a Sulfuric Vortex, so it did what it was supposed to do.
5. I haven't had enough live-fire experience to have a great grasp on what this deck's weaknesses are as compared to a 4 Ponder build, though I think Death and Taxes, as you've pointed out, stands a pretty good chance. My sideboard is also less laser-focused on Storm, which could be an issue, as the sideboard as constructed has to bring in 2 Red Elemental Blast there, which are okay but not great. I also have had issues with Dredge, though I think that's pretty common for Miracles in general, and I don't think that Surgical Extraction is better in that matchup than what I'm bringing. I do feel that Predict and Snapcaster Mage are great tactical choices against Shardless BUG, though I also think that Jace and Entreat the Angels are your best cards in that matchup so it's probably a wash. Overall, I feel that the matchups may not be drastically better or worse, just different. What is completely different is that I've ceded the Mentor beatdown plan or the legends creatures plan in favor of the long game, so a lot of the close matchups are not ones that I can just drop Monastery Mentor and win in a turn or two. Instead, I have to play a control game and do everything I can to push the game late, though in practice that has not been an issue. That is not to say that those versions of Miracles cannot play the long game, that would be ridiculous. But it is just to say that I have built the deck with that in mind, playing less efficiency cards and more powerful late-game cards, both in the maindeck and in the sideboard, to make my deck as powerful as possible assuming the game goes long, and doing everything I can to make the game go long where I'm the heavy favorite. I also hate tapping out on my turn with a control deck unless it is a play that completely takes over a game, so I like cards like Ponder and Monastery Mentor a lot less in a control deck, and certainly less than Jace. I like that I can play more effective graveyard hate because I'm not leaning on Snapcaster Mage, and I like that I can play matchup-devastating cards like Baneslayer Angel and Izzet Staticaster without giving up much against the format in general. I also like that creature removal is completely dead against me game 1, and that games 2 and 3 I have the option of boarding in creatures when it is most likely that the opponent has either a) boarded out every removal spell that they can or b) actively made their deck worse by hedging and leaving in Fatal Push or Swords to Plowshares or Lighting Bolt. A side effect is that the opponent often has no choice in post-board games than to use Abrupt Decay on a Sensei's Divining Top, which happened probably six or seven times this tournament and was just awesome.
So in summary I'm not saying this is the best version of the deck, just different, and I think that it's got a lot more play to it than a deck that is hyper-focused on using all of it's mana every turn and making the most consistent plays at every opportunity. I'm a big fan of 2/9 cards vs 5/6 cards in a deck that has nearly complete control over it's draws, as you get all of the benefits of playing powerful, narrow cards and can largely avoid the downsides. It is modeled on the lists from Reid Duke and is actually very close to the one that PVDDR top 8ed with, which may or may not be a selling point, but it has shown me that, even with my less-experienced and more mistake-ridden play, it is functional enough to compete in a modern metagame.
Sorry to add, do you guys encounter situations like you had a top in play, end turn you activate the top, there are no lands, you draw one on your draw step. Main phase you top again to see a land, would guy guys tap top to draw it and lay the land or would you guys draw it and lay it the next turn. Are there any pros and cons to this?
1) What turn is it?
2) What else is in your hand?
3) What else is in your top 3?
4) What lands are in play?
5) What is the board state like?
6) What are you playing against?
In other words; highly conditional
Hello,
I have been playing classic UWR miracles with no mentors MD or sideboard.
Recently thought about UWB and how this deck could behave.
The idea is to switch red for black, changing only sideboard (adding thoughtseize and other black powerful cards) and maindeck Lim Dul's Vault as a 1-2 of.
What do you guys think about lim dul's when we have an operative top and seacrhing for answers like terminus or entreat?
Is this card as bad as I have been told?
As someone who plays Esper Miracles I can assure you, that not having access to any red blast is a huge downside, especially in the mirror match. Counterbalance and JTMS are your biggest enemy (and friend of course) and having an answer to both of them at the cost of just 1 (or 3 with Snappy) mana is amazing.
I think you need very good reasons to give up on red and play black instead. What strong SB cards did you think of?
Lim Dul's Vault is a card that makes way more sense in decks with combo kills or if you need a specific set of cards to immediately take over the game. Having no immediate impact at the cost of 2 mana coupled with card disadvantage does not sound too promising. Especially when you consider that Miracles is actually pretty weak to opponents gaining card advantage. If you feel like you need a 5th Terminus that could also turn into an Entreat the Angels, how about Personal Tutor? It is a sorcery, but costs 1 less, does not require a black splash and doesn't drain life. Would not recommend that either though.
I know that some people tried out Lim Dul's Vault in the Miracle of Science deck which is a hybrid of Miracles and OmniTell if I recall right. There should be a thread about it somewhere, but to keep it short and simple:
Yes! :DIs this card as bad as I have been told?
Very rarely do I like to take out all 4 Terminuses (I'll often go down to 3) unless I know I'm playing against a deck that has no chance of beating me down over the course of multiple combat phases (for example 1-turn-kill creature-combo such as Sneak Show or something like High Tide). YMMV, but from what I've been reading in the Aluren thread (and most other creature deck threads such as Elves and Eldrazi) on how they board against us, most decks go more midrange/grindy so you can expect to see more conservative play out of decks like these in post board games where the pilots would rather get chip-shots damage in instead of risking getting blown out by countermagic with their combo or a Terminus that hits ≥3 creatures. Aluren isn't a fast combo deck and they are more than capable of playing a midrange game while threatening a combo finish. So my conclusion is that taking out all Terminuses is exposing yourself to their midrange plan. Now, if you play Mentors and/or ETAs, then it's less of a risk taking out more Terminuses since you can pretty much fog all day with your blocker army.
For some perspective, here's my current list:
Land (21)
1x Arid Mesa
4x Flooded Strand
4x Island
1x Karakas
2x Plains
4x Scalding Tarn
3x Tundra
2x Volcanic Island
Artifact (5)
1x Engineered Explosives
4x Sensei's Divining Top
Enchantment (4)
4x Counterbalance
Instant (14)
4x Brainstorm
2x Counterspell
4x Force of Will
4x Swords to Plowshares
Sorcery (10)
1x Council's Judgment
2x Entreat the Angels
3x Ponder
4x Terminus
Creature (4)
3x Snapcaster Mage
1x Vendilion Clique
Planeswalker (2)
2x Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Sideboard (15)
1x Blood Moon
1x Containment Priest
2x Flusterstorm
1x Kozilek's Return
1x Meddling Mage
1x Moat
2x Monastery Mentor
3x Pyroblast
1x Rest in Peace
2x Wear / Tear
And I'd probably board something like this:
+1 Meddling Mage
+2 Monastery Mentor
+3 Pyroblast
+2 Wear / Tear
+1 Kozilek's Return MAYBE if they're on the Imperial Recruiter or Recruiter of the Guard build and not the Leovold build (though the Leovold build IMO is objectively better so there's no reason they should play either of the Recruiter versions)
-1 Council's Judgment
-2 to 3 Terminus
-4 Counterbalance
The purpose of any moat is to impede attack. Some are filled with water, some with thistles. Some are filled with things best left unseen.
Responses are not necessarily answers. Spell Pierces, Spell Snares, and Counterspells aren't going to stop hatepiece if you don't already have them in hand and are able to cast them when you need to. Believe me, I used to share the same train to thought, especially regarding the Spell Pierces, when it came to noncreature spells that I didn't want to resolve in the early game (Chalice, Library, Vial, etc.) but I realized that Pierce was just too narrow of a response, even if it was a "better" one in those situations. Plus, Pierce is really, really bad after turn 3 or 4. So that's why I cut it for an Engineered Explosives, which doesn't hit 4-drops (by design since we're not a 4c deck) but is almost never a dead draw since it's so versatile.
I do very much like your 1 MD Karakas, as I run one myself as a pseudo-removal spell. And with Sneak Show and Reanimator becoming more popular, I think Karakas's utility is scaling up. Though I'd never run a 2nd one, especially not in a non-Legends Miracles build.
The purpose of any moat is to impede attack. Some are filled with water, some with thistles. Some are filled with things best left unseen.
So i played a weekly yesterday on our local store and did 3:1..
2:1 Grixis Delver
1:2 °Aggro loam(really close one but on the 3th i cant find more lands and he had the garruk and i the council judgment but not the lands to cast it..
2:1 Goblins
2:0 Grixis Controll
I was unsure how to board against aggro loam..
What do you think about the match up? How do you board?
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
Reply With Quote