|
Jeb Springfield
|
 |
« Reply #30 on: September 24, 2014, 05:05:55 pm » |
|
@Chubby Rain: A fair reply. Thank you.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Smmenen
|
|
« Reply #31 on: September 24, 2014, 07:22:08 pm » |
|
Alot of the structural elements of this deck are very similar to the mono blue control deck I Top8ed the 2004 Vintage Champion ship with, and I like alot of what's here (since it's borrowed from what I used to play - like the enchantment trifecta), but I think there are some errors here. I would DEFINITELY play an Engineered Explosives. It's counter-intuitive in a mono chromatic deck, but it's absolutely needed. It complements back to basics by taking out moxen, can wipe out Empty or Pyromancer tokens, and can take out Chalices etc - and evade them, by paying Colorless. And it's not hard to get a single off color mox to use it to kill an Oath.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chubby Rain
|
|
« Reply #32 on: September 24, 2014, 07:49:05 pm » |
|
Alot of the structural elements of this deck are very similar to the mono blue control deck I Top8ed the 2004 Vintage Champion ship with, and I like alot of what's here (since it's borrowed from what I used to play - like the enchantment trifecta), but I think there are some errors here. I would DEFINITELY play an Engineered Explosives. It's counter-intuitive in a mono chromatic deck, but it's absolutely needed. It complements back to basics by taking out moxen, can wipe out Empty or Pyromancer tokens, and can take out Chalices etc - and evade them, by paying Colorless. And it's not hard to get a single off color mox to use it to kill an Oath.
Some structural elements are similar (I mean, there are only so many ways to build mono blue control), but the list you played in 2004 focused more heavily on the mana denial element with 4 x Wastelands and 4 x Back to Basics. It also ran two 5 drops and no other spells with casting costs greater than 3 (excluding FoW and Misdirection) - blowing up Moxen is not always in this deck's interests. I did try Engineered Explosives in subsequent builds but found it lacking - it should be noted that this is more of a indication of where the metagame was rather than the card. Which is why I think you committed an "error" in saying there are "some errors here". |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"
"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"
"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"
Random conversations...
|
|
|
|
Wagner
|
|
« Reply #33 on: September 25, 2014, 03:44:51 am » |
|
The chalice on 6 from bob was so, so bad..but besides that the games were very entertaining! Game one was so weird. I think he misplayed Jace so so bad. He could either have won by fateseal when Bob had very little relevant cards in his deck, or bounce the Metalworker 2 turns and kill with Trinket. He tried and failed to get a counter up instead, which I think was the worst option. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
StanleyAugust
|
|
« Reply #34 on: September 25, 2014, 07:34:51 am » |
|
The chalice on 6 from bob was so, so bad..but besides that the games were very entertaining! Game one was so weird. I think he misplayed Jace so so bad. He could either have won by fateseal when Bob had very little relevant cards in his deck, or bounce the Metalworker 2 turns and kill with Trinket. He tried and failed to get a counter up instead, which I think was the worst option. Yes I didn't get that either. He could have bounced a Metalworker, attacked with Trinket and if Bob didn't draw a threat in the next two turns, David would have won. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mmcgeach
|
|
« Reply #35 on: October 01, 2014, 09:41:00 am » |
|
How has Dig Through Time been in this list?
I've been using it in the original list (by Miguel Angel Díaz - Mono Blue Control) as a 2-of and it seems pretty good. Some observations from my experiences:
1) Utilizes the GY but isn't stopped by cage.
2) helps dig for the big threats (Jace, Trinket, Sphinx), which can be hard to find sometimes
3) also helps dig for sideboard cards post board. This deck has no tutors.
4) great with the Sensei's Top plan - blows past junk on the top, finds juicy yum-yums underneath
5) not great early on, although 1 in the opener is ok cause.... it pitches to force.
6) late-game it can be either win-more or too-little, too-late.
7) mid-game in a top-decking war, its awesome.
8) also, I never cast it for more than 2 mana. Always for 2.
I think the closest comparison is Fact or Fiction. It's probably better in this deck than Fact or Fiction is, cause there's no way to get stuff out of the GY. (I like Fact better in a deck with yawgwill & snapcaster).
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fsecco
|
|
« Reply #36 on: October 01, 2014, 01:20:54 pm » |
|
I still think someone should test this vs FoF to see if your claim holds. I mean, play with this and think, by the time you resolve it, if it would've been better to be a FoF.
I mean like, when you resolve Dig, first take only the five cards and give them to your opponent tester to split, like a FoF. Write down what you ended up in your hand and GY. Then, rewind and take the whole seven and see if there was a major difference. I bet you'll find out Dig will be better most of the time - FoF will shine only when if reveals something like a Mox, Lotus, a Tutor or Will and a restricted bomb.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Andreas
|
|
« Reply #37 on: October 01, 2014, 04:37:28 pm » |
|
But what would you cut for Dig Through Time?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fsecco
|
|
« Reply #38 on: October 01, 2014, 04:51:11 pm » |
|
Depending o the meta, probably 1 Jace and 1 Trap.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Andreas
|
|
« Reply #39 on: October 02, 2014, 06:48:35 am » |
|
Those with more experience with the archetype, how would you see the deck's matchup against Gush builds and BUG fish?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
mmcgeach
|
|
« Reply #40 on: October 03, 2014, 10:02:02 am » |
|
Oh man, don't ever cut a Jace. That's basically the only path to victory. Dig Through Time is good because it gives you another way to FIND a Jace.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
fsecco
|
|
« Reply #41 on: October 03, 2014, 10:15:46 am » |
|
Oh man, don't ever cut a Jace. That's basically the only path to victory. Dig Through Time is good because it gives you another way to FIND a Jace.
I disagree. Specially if your meta has a lot of creatures, then Jace gets a lot worse. 3 is fine (I wouldn't cut below that). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
DuKeLiO
|
|
« Reply #42 on: October 08, 2014, 07:46:36 am » |
|
Having more Jaces in the deck, means you can sacrifice it without fear. Also, in a deck with Back to Basics the bounce ability is very good. In this kind of deck you need to land a Jace ASAP to refill your hand and build card advantage to seal the game. I think four are fine.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
zeus-online
|
|
« Reply #43 on: October 08, 2014, 08:05:17 am » |
|
.
|
|
|
|
« Last Edit: February 25, 2015, 04:37:04 pm by zeus-online »
|
Logged
|
The truth is an elephant described by three blind men.
|
|
|
|
mmcgeach
|
|
« Reply #44 on: November 24, 2014, 01:27:11 pm » |
|
I made top 8 in a 30-man with this deck. A couple changes, remarks:
I played
-1 repeal
-1 cage (still 1 in the SB)
-1 spell snare
-1 misstep
-1 mindbreak trap
+1 engineered explosives (+1 more in the SB)
+1 chalice of the void (+1 more in the SB)
+1 misdirection
+2 dig through time
Some games I won by just resolving Back to Basics. Others I won with drain -> consecrated sphinx, or drain -> trinket mage -> lotus -> sphinx.
Biggest, bestest card was Chalice of the Void. That is totally insane here. I used Chalice at 0, 1, and 2 at different points. I did chalice = 0 on the play against storm combo. I did chalice at 1 against a grixis control list with preordains. I did chalice at 2 against a UW deck with meddling mage, snapcaster, disenchant, and spirit of the labyrinth. These were amazing blow-outs. There's about six 1-cmc cards in this list and 4 2-cmc cards (mana drains), which means that I can play chalice at 1 against a lot of decks for huge value, chalice at 2 against any deck if I've already used a mana drain or two, and chalice at 0 whenever I don't want to get blown out by yawgmoth's will or tinker. Your opponents are thinking "Chalice is annoying, sure, but I'll bring in ingot chewer against shops" - these players are NOT prepared to face chalice of the void from a list running 15 counterspells and no other relevant artifacts.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
MTGFan
|
|
« Reply #45 on: November 24, 2014, 03:26:06 pm » |
|
I made top 8 in a 30-man with this deck. A couple changes, remarks:
I played
-1 repeal
-1 cage (still 1 in the SB)
-1 spell snare
-1 misstep
-1 mindbreak trap
+1 engineered explosives (+1 more in the SB)
+1 chalice of the void (+1 more in the SB)
+1 misdirection
+2 dig through time
Some games I won by just resolving Back to Basics. Others I won with drain -> consecrated sphinx, or drain -> trinket mage -> lotus -> sphinx.
Biggest, bestest card was Chalice of the Void. That is totally insane here. I used Chalice at 0, 1, and 2 at different points. I did chalice = 0 on the play against storm combo. I did chalice at 1 against a grixis control list with preordains. I did chalice at 2 against a UW deck with meddling mage, snapcaster, disenchant, and spirit of the labyrinth. These were amazing blow-outs. There's about six 1-cmc cards in this list and 4 2-cmc cards (mana drains), which means that I can play chalice at 1 against a lot of decks for huge value, chalice at 2 against any deck if I've already used a mana drain or two, and chalice at 0 whenever I don't want to get blown out by yawgmoth's will or tinker. Your opponents are thinking "Chalice is annoying, sure, but I'll bring in ingot chewer against shops" - these players are NOT prepared to face chalice of the void from a list running 15 counterspells and no other relevant artifacts.
Exactly what I discovered with my Mono Blue Faerie Stompy deck. Playing 4 Chalice of the Void and 4 Trinket Mage in the mainboard just wrecks so many decks. And of course, they have a much harder time dealing with it when you play counterspells in addition to Chalice, whereas against a Shop deck they could just find their hate and get rid of it easily. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chubby Rain
|
|
« Reply #46 on: November 28, 2014, 05:46:12 pm » |
|
Congrats on the finish, Mike.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"
"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"
"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"
Random conversations...
|
|
|
|
birds of paradise
|
|
« Reply #47 on: September 28, 2015, 03:55:08 pm » |
|
so post chalice/TFK changes, i hope we'll see more MUC. Does the deck want TFKs?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Chubby Rain
|
|
« Reply #48 on: September 28, 2015, 06:44:22 pm » |
|
so post chalice/TFK changes, i hope we'll see more MUC. Does the deck want TFKs?
Definitely. The deck was always in the market for instant speed card draw. The bigger issue was the prevalence of Pyroblast and the presence of Gush based Tempo decks (Blood Moon is much better against Gush than Back to Basics). |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Why are we making bad decks? I mean, honestly, what is our reason for doing this?"
"Is this a Vintage deck or a Cube deck?" "Is it sad that you have to ask?"
"Is that a draft deck?" "Why do people keep asking that?"
Random conversations...
|
|
|
Space_Stormy
Basic User
Posts: 187
Trinket Mage or bust!
|
|
« Reply #49 on: September 29, 2015, 04:14:34 am » |
|
so post chalice/TFK changes, i hope we'll see more MUC. Does the deck want TFKs?
Definitely. The deck was always in the market for instant speed card draw. The bigger issue was the prevalence of Pyroblast and the presence of Gush based Tempo decks (Blood Moon is much better against Gush than Back to Basics). You had me at Trinket Mage. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
