[Deck] Slaver USA

[Eandori]

NOTE: This deck has changed througout this thread!  The current list is not what you see here on this first post, so read on if you wish to see the most recent list!

A ~20 card change from standard Control Slaver, using Red White and Blue.  No Black.

I built this deck a month ago and I have put it through some testing.  It definately seems powerfull, it has many new combinations that were not possible with the standard Control Slaver.  I'm still playing with the deck list, but the current build is pretty solid and I'm happy with it.  I'm posting this deck in the "Newbie" forum because my last thread got moved here.  So I supposed I'll wear the dunce cap until the moderators feel I'm allowed back in the normal forum.

Anyways, here is the deck and descriptions are below.

Spells (36)
4 Goblin Welder
1 Platinum Angel
1 Pentavus
1 Mirror Universe
2 Mindslaver
2 Disenchant
2 Swords to Plowshares
2 Abeyance
3 Isochron Scepter
1 Moat
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Tinker
4 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Enlightened Tutor
4 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will
 
Mana Sources (25)
3 Island
1 Plains
3 Tundra
3 Volcanic Island
4 Flooded Strand
2 Darksteel Citadel
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Sol Ring

Sideboard
2 Tormod's Crypt
3 Rootwater Thief
1 Triskelion
1 Timetwister
1 Time Walk
1 Balance
1 Kaervek's Torch
1 Abeyance
2 Squelch
2 Darksteel Citadel

My Observations of this deck:
I lost some POWERFULL spells with the removal of black, no doubt.  Tutors, Yawgmoth's Win, and Duress were all extremely usefull and it's a great deck with the standard build.  I wanted to try some different versions of Slaver and see how they came out though.  So I removed black and splashed white for more control.

Goblin Welder had more room for abuse then what I saw in the original Control Slaver build.  His ability to trade my opponents artifacts as well as mine is extremely powerfull and can really trip up many decks.  The problem I constantly ran into, was none of their artifacts were in the Graveyard for me to target for a trade.  Disenchant helps with that.

Battles for control are all about counter wars.  Control Slaver decks do a few things VERY well.  One is fill up your graveyard with super artifacts to be welded into play.  One of the combo's I noticed is welding a discarded, or previously countered Isochron Scepter into play.  The welding ability cannot be countered, only stifled, and that just delays 1 turn.  When the Isochron hits play you can imprint any spell in your hand.   Consider this for a moment...

Early game, you cast Isochron and it gets counterspelled or blown up.  Later you draw Ancestral Recall, you weld the Scepter out of the graveyard, imprint your Recall on it, and start drawing cards like mad.

Or imagine if early game you imprint disenchant, or Abeyance on the scepter.  You've blown up enough artifacts, or you need more counter power etc.  So you weld the Isochron into the graveyard, weld it back out and imprint a new spell on it.  All of which could not be countered, only stifled which is easy to get past.

Abeyance or Orim's Chant...  This was a quite a decision for awhile.  They offer very similar abilities, but in the end I chose the Abeyance.  It's a cantrip on it's own, only letting creatures/artifacts/enchantments get cast and creatures to attack.  But since my deck packs plow, disenchant I can deal with those.  Since my deck does not have as much card drawing, I went with Abeyance and I'm pleased with the results.  Abeyance on a Scepter is suprisingly powerfull, shut down the counter war, bleed a counter so they can keep their options open, and drawing a card for 2 mana helps a TON.

Burning Wish.  I moved the Time Walk, Balance, Twist, and Torch to the sideboard to make room for more main deck spells.  I told myself "If I ever draw the wish, and end up really wishing it was a walk, twist, etc. instead, then I'll go back to maindeck on those.  I never yet did.  Every time I draw the wish I'm able to get the card I want and make use of it.  I think this is one of my best changes in comparison to standard Control Slaver.

The lack of direct creature removal from Control Slaver can at times be bad, as well as no direct artifact/enchantment destruction.  I have played games where not having those caused me to lose, or take a severe hit before I won.  I really like having those answers in this version of slaver.

Moat/tutor.  Moat shuts down lots of decks, it has been THE thing that wins the game too many times for me to deny it.  The Enlightened Tutor has been suprisingly powerfull in this deck, grab any color artifact you need, get a Citadel to give your welder something to weld that cannot be counterspelled, get that Isochron for the Ancestral in your hand, get the mindslaver so your thirst will dump it to the graveyard, etc.  I still try to figure out how Mystical Tutor could fit in the deck, right now it's out though and seems to work fine.

No Sundering Titan, +1 triskelion.  Not having the mana denial has been fine so far.  Sure the Titan can spell doom in 3 turns if you tinker him out, but in games where my "bust out" is that severe, I have never yet lost unless the opponent had something that would have stopped the Titan as well.  That's the real comparison right?  If changing the Titan for a Triskelion makes the deck win or lose.  The Triskelion has been VERY helpfull in removing small creatures or doing that last point after Mirror goes off.

Mirror Universe.  I'm an old school magic player, I love this card even if it does not kill anymore.  In this deck it has done a great job of putting me 1 point from winning, as well as bringing me back to life after getting pounded while establishing control.

Mirror Universe + Slaver Lock + Abeyance + Counterspells = a very easy setup to win the game in a couple of turns.

Anyways, that's it.  My Slaver USA deck.  Hope you like it.

[Moxlotus]

1. Why is this deck better not playing broken black cards?

2. You should be dominating the midgame and late game-why need the Scepter?

3. Moat...I thought it was established in the other thread that Moat comes down too late and doesn't do anything worthwhile against most decks.

4. Mirror Universe-why not actually play a spell that does something useful for yoU?

5. What are the Thiefs in the board for?  Combo will kill you before you ever get an activation.

6. Have you played this deck at all?

[warble]

Oh harsh.   Very harsh.  Probably true, but so harsh man!

I would like to note that white generally doesn't see splash play nearly as much as black (note Yawgmoth's Win, 2 restricted tutors, duress) This is because having one Yawgmoth's Will versus one Moat is SO stupid to contemplate.  How about disenchant versus Demonic Tutor?  Enlightened Tutor versus Vampiric Tutor?  Okay I think we know why people choose black over white . . . and if we don't then I'm going to cry.

[Eandori]

6. Have you played this deck at all?

Moxlotus, comments like this don't help these forums.  They just bring the discussion down a couple of notches and cause people not to post because they get tired of being ripped on.  I hope you don't act like this in real life.

1. Why is this deck better not playing broken black cards?

Well, the deck might be better in the standard build.  I never stated it wasn't.  The point of trying a new deck or a new version of a deck is to explore how an old thing might work in a new way.  That's all I'm doing here.  So far, the deck plays pretty solidly.

2. You should be dominating the midgame and late game-why need the Scepter?

I see two reasons mainly.  First, not even the standard build of Control Slaver always dominates mid and late game.  Or it would never lose right?  This deck seems no different in that respect to standard Control Slaver, not from what I have observed and yeah I've played both a decent amount now.

Second, the Scepters in any of my decks are for helping me get ahead in card advantage, not to stretch a lead into a farther lead.  I believe they do a good job with that too.

3. Moat...I thought it was established in the other thread that Moat comes down too late and doesn't do anything worthwhile against most decks.

When I stop winning type 1 games because this card was on the table, I'll agree with you.  How about that?

4. Mirror Universe-why not actually play a spell that does something useful for yoU?

Umm, this does something very usefull.  It normally either pulls me out of the fire when I was about to die, or it puts my opponent at such low life that he must fear a welder beatdown for 1.  I've found this card to be VERY usefull actually.

5. What are the Thiefs in the board for? Combo will kill you before you ever get an activation.

Well there's your opinion on this, and there's what I, and others have experienced in game.  Like I stated in the other deck discussion(Sushi) I have won games against combo because Thief pulled out the win conditions before they hit the table.  Also in the other thread, you have another poster "Hi Val" that built Sushi and tried it against Hulk.  I'm not sure I would have played it the way he did, but even he had time to remove many cards from Hulk.  So you continually saying it won't happen, didn't really change the fact that it did, and still does.

[Moxlotus]

I see two reasons mainly. First, not even the standard build of Control Slaver always dominates mid and late game. Or it would never lose right? This deck seems no different in that respect to standard Control Slaver, not from what I have observed and yeah I've played both a decent amount now.

Control Slaver absolutely dominates the midgame.  It loses when it gets behind in the early game.

Second, the Scepters in any of my decks are for helping me get ahead in card advantage, not to stretch a lead into a farther lead. I believe they do a good job with that too.

Since when has Slaver had problems getting ahead in card advantage? Also, Scepter+card takes a lot of mana and a few turns to gain card advantage-and that is assuming you have the mana and your opponent doesn't do anything.  Null Rod will give your opponent a huge advantage, as would any bounce spell.

When I stop winning type 1 games because this card was on the table, I'll agree with you. How about that?

So, what decks noawdays that don't suck anyways are shut down by Moat?

Umm, this does something very usefull. It normally either pulls me out of the fire when I was about to die, or it puts my opponent at such low life that he must fear a welder beatdown for 1. I've found this card to be VERY usefull actually.

So, instead of putting into play a Platz to stop you from dying, you opt to switch life totals and try to prevent your death for a few more turns?  Or a Pentavus to get infinite blockers and eventually fly an army into your opponent's face?  Or put a trike into play for Ping recursion?  

I have won games against combo because Thief pulled out the win conditions before they hit the table. Also in the other thread, you have another poster "Hi Val" that built Sushi and tried it against Hulk. I'm not sure I would have played it the way he did, but even he had time to remove many cards from Hulk. So you continually saying it won't happen, didn't really change the fact that it did, and still does.

And as Hival said, Rootwater Thief still didn't do much to affect any game-and Tog is slower than Storm Combo and Dragon, which means that it will have even less an effect if you live that long.

EDIT: Sorry if I sound harsh and mean.  I do not mean this as an attack on you personally or anything like that.  It's just that it seems that in 2 days you have posted 2 decks that appear to show little testing and still claim them to be really good.

[Demonic Attorney]

I am posting in this thread for two reasons.  First, I want to offer some non-insulting advice to Eandori.  I think too many people have exhibited a hostile demeanor towards this guy who has done nothing malicious, and has taken a fair amount of abusive remarks with a remarkable degree of good humor.  Second, I want to emphasize the fact that CS needs black to be good.  It just does.

1.  Moxlotus is right.  CS loses most often when it falls behind in the early game.  This makes Isochron Scepter a liability in CS since it's a significant tempo investment early on.  It ties up your mana and your early game plays to an extent I don't think CS can afford.

2. Moat and Mirror Universe have had their day in terms of utility.  I tried Universe in a very, very early protoype of my version of Slaver.  It's just too slow to matter.  The same applies to Moat.  Storm decks will kill you all at once, other Slaver decks will take your turns for you and maneuver you into a losing position, Sensei and Dragon will draw you out, and Stax will erode your board position to the point where Moat and Universe will accomplish nothing.  I admire your creativity with Universe; I too thought of it back in the heyday of Oshawa Stompy.  Unofrtunately, even then it wasn't fast or powerful enough.  Now, it would only be a liability for you.

3. Rootwater Thief is too slow for this format.  Some builds of Fish, which are designed around the concept of slowing the opposing deck down to their power level don't use it.  If Fish can't slow the opposition down enough for Thief to help, CS doesn't have a chance.  This is deckspace that could be used much more efficiently.

4. I notice your main deck is 61 cards.  You really, really shouldn't run decks with more than 60 cards in them.  I used to do things like this when I was first getting into type one; I know sometimes a build just seems too tight to make any cuts from at all, but seriously-- find one.  It will improve the quality of your draws immensely.

5. Innovation is laudable in a game where the vast majority of players are content to go online and have someone else be in charge of their deckbuilding and sideboarding strategies.  However, eventually the question will always come down to this:  Are you playing the best possible deck?  And the answer to that question is inescapably a simple "yes" or a simple "no."  Innovation won't get you into any top 8s if you're playing a weaker version of an established deck which, with respect, is what you seem to be doing here.  Yawgmoth's Will is a game plan in and of itself in CS.  Demonic Tutor is one of the best cards ever made.  I can't justify cutting either one of these for a newer version of the deck that is just not as good.  I can understand being unhappy with Duress, though.  It's very metagame-dependent.  If Duress hasn't been working for you, try Skeletal Scrying in its place.  It tends to work better in metagames not dominated by control or combo.

In conclusion, let me say again that ultimately, deckbuilding comes down to an effort to assemble the best deck out there.  Innovation can often help with this but if your deck is just a weaker version of something that's already out there, you're only hurting your own chances of doing well.

[Morganti]

Innovation is laudable in a game where the vast majority of players are content to go online and have someone else be in charge of their deckbuilding and sideboarding strategies.  However, eventually the question will always come down to this:  Are you playing the best possible deck?  And the answer to that question is inescapably a simple "yes" or a simple "no."  Innovation won't get you into any top 8s if you're playing a weaker version of an established deck which

~snip~

In conclusion, let me say again that ultimately, deckbuilding comes down to an effort to assemble the best deck out there.  Innovation can often help with this but if your deck is just a weaker version of something that's already out there, you're only hurting your own chances of doing well.

quoting that, becasue that is  avery important statement

Innovation in Vintage expecially, is very difficult.

so many cards, so little time.

to properly innovate in vintage, one has to study the decks to beat, look at them, see how well they do against each other, then figure out if they have comman flaws that can be exploited, and have a deck built arround those exploits.

as a deck builder, i am not building for pro level play, but rather, to see if i can put together something kinda cool, or hose a specific deck in the metagame, or to see if maybe jst maybe i have done something that might go un noticed by every one and there net decker friends.

i build decks for multi player, for single player, for tier 3 level play.  I don't expect my innovations to win me ptq's or top 8s, since i don't do much tourney play.  but, if i did, i would probably not net deck, even knowing what i know about vintage, i would try and break the mold so ta speak.  i would take an idea, and run with it.  Sushi as a deck is something that could be refined into a contender, weaking slaver, by removing the parts of it that make it hawt, isn't innovation, unless you are changing the style of the deck, using the old back bone.  anyhow,  random thoughts

~D~

[Eandori]

Great comments so far guys, keep'em coming!

I don't believe this version of Slaver is really using the same backbone.  I played CS for awhile to get a feel for how the deck works, and this one feels quite different.  

The way I use the Isochrons isn't as much as a mana deficit as MoxLotus and others seemed to assume.  Most of the time, I will thirst and discard the Scepter unless I had something better.  Then weld it into play and use it when needed.  If I weld it into play, then imprint a mana drain on it, I don't lose any mana, just card advantage until I can use it a few times.  Same with all the other cards.

So many of you speak from this perspective of "why not use black, because black has more broken cards."  Well, stop and think about that some more.  Does simply having broken cards in a deck mean it's going to win?  Do all decks need those SAME broken cards to be powerfull?  I would state that Oath, Fish, etc. are perfect examples of how you DON'T need those broken cards to be powerfull.  You CAN build decks without those cards and they can be good.

"Oath has no Demonic Tutor, no Yawgmoth's Will, how can it win?!?"

It wins because it works on a different principle, and it's strong at what it does.

Having said all that, I'm not claiming Slaver USA is another example of a deck at the level of Top 8 type 1 quality.  I'm claiming it's a version I have been playing and experimenting with, that has been very powerfull and uses different combinations, which ultimately is really a different deck.

[crazynlazy]

So many of you speak from this perspective of "why not use black, because black has more broken cards."  Well, stop and think about that some more.  Does simply having broken cards in a deck mean it's going to win?  Do all decks need those SAME broken cards to be powerfull?  I would state that Oath, Fish, etc. are perfect examples of how you DON'T need those broken cards to be powerfull.  You CAN build decks without those cards and they can be good.

You can build good decks without these cards and will be able to keep up with the other player unltil somone gets an amazing topdeck. CS should be able to outdraw the other player and then destroy them with a yawgmoth's will or a turn one tinker... These cards are the only reason CS is any good, because it can have such amazing plays (I'm not saying it can't be good without these) but if you are playing in a CS mirror without the super broken cards like will and demonic tutor you will most likely lose which is why people play black.

[Mixing Mike]

Mirror Universe + Slaver Lock + Abeyance + Counterspells = a very easy setup to win the game in a couple of turns.

I thought a Slave lock won the game on it's own.  It looks like your biggest 'cool combo' is just a flasy way of winning with cards you don't even need to win.  Just a nitpick...

[Hi-Val]

"Oath has no Demonic Tutor, no Yawgmoth's Will, how can it win?!?"

It wins because it works on a different principle, and it's strong at what it does.

A point should be made here that Oath DOES lose a lot because it doesn't have these cards. It can't run Will because of the Blessing dealie, and DT is a little slow. Since it cannot run these, it doesn't have the broken plays that other decks have and it loses to them. That's why monoblue was a good deck until it hit bomb after bomb. It couldn't keep up. Oath is the same way. Purposefully neglecting Yawgmoth's Will is folly, IMO.

[einlanzer625]

A point should be made here that Oath DOES lose a lot because it doesn't have these cards. It can't run Will because of the Blessing dealie, and DT is a little slow. Since it cannot run these, it doesn't have the broken plays that other decks have and it loses to them. That's why monoblue was a good deck until it hit bomb after bomb. It couldn't keep up. Oath is the same way. Purposefully neglecting Yawgmoth's Will is folly, IMO.

I agree here Hi-Val, and honestly, will seems to have a very good place in CS, even if youre just recurring a mox so you can weld into something else.  Everyone talks about broken wills, but come on, i remember one Jonathan Finkel using wills to recur lands against Benafel's Ponza deck at Nats like...5 years ago or something.

This is one of those decks that will is just SO good in it isnt funny.  Its no Long.dec or anything, but its almost as close as youre going to get without being combo (TPS, etc)

They dont refer to it as Yawgmoth's Win for no reason .

Now im not saying cut the white, im merely saying splash a little black for will.

[Eandori]

I played this deck again at the local tournament this weekend.  Same deal against Psychatog, severely owned a Tendrils deck and Doomsday deck.  Isochron+Abeyance just flat out shut them down.

I lost to a Dragon deck, it could have honestly gone either way.  He had super pulls though, 2nd game I got triple duressed by turn 3 and lost all my denial (which my hand was FULL of).

I'm now play testing the deck with a small change, I'm trying out Intuition in place of the Enlightened Tutor.  It's working well so far, I don't lose card advantage and I normally fill up the graveyard with stuff I want to weld into play.  A few times I have cast Intuition for Welder, Mana Drain, etc. when I REALLY needed it.  Once I the lock is down, the lock is down, and I don't need to draw more.

I'm considering putting in one Underground Sea in place of an island, and Yawgmoth's Will.  4 colors might be a bit much, but the will IS INDEED a huge card.  With 1 Mox Jet, the Lotus, The underground Sea, and 4 search lands that can get it, I should have enough access to black, and it's a late game spell usually anyways.  I'm still undeceided, but we will see.

I know lots of you don't like the changes I made to Control Slaver.  It really does have a lot of potential though.  White gives the ability to deal with things that CS could not before.  I'm going to keep playing/testing this for awhile.

[Necrologia]

White gives the ability to deal with things that CS could not before.

Like what? Blue, red and black together give you:

Arcane Lab, Sphere of Resistance, and Drain/Force, against storm combo, BEB vs Dragon.

Pentavus and Triskelion beat aggro single handedly.

Scrying, REB, Welder trump most control.

What matchups is White so strong in that it's better than Will?  If, instead, you add the black splash just for Will, what match up is white worth cutting half your basics over?  I just don't see where a typical Control Slaver build with 4 Islands is ever worse off than a 4 color slaver build with only 2.

[Eandori]

Well, first things first.  Trinisphere being restricted impacts me by worrying less about land destruction locks using the 3sphere.  I'm not as worried about running less basic land now.

A few times against friends I was playing standard CS.  I had no ability to destroy enchantments, and my ability to destroy/remove artifacts relied on 2 things.  My opponent either needed an artifact in his graveyard so I could weld them to switch, or I needed to get some artifact destruction from his own deck, and play it against him while mindslavering his turn.  For enchantments, my only shot was to use his cards against him with a mindslaver, or to counterspell it on the way out.  One VERY IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE about packing disenchants in my slaver build, is that since I pack Disenchants I can blow up an artifact my opponent controls to turn on my welding to disrupt his momentum.  How many times have you other CS players been stuck with a welder in play, artifacts in play on your opponents side, but none in his graveyard for you to use for disruption?

CS does not run as many counters as other decks, stuff does get into play against even standard CS.  CS tries to just overwhelm them, or never let them control another turn at that point to get the win.  But there ARE cards and locks that CS cannot get out of.  One VERY SIMPLE way to shut down CS is a typical sideboard card these days, Ground Seal.  While I was playing standard CS another guy got out Planar void, and some enchantment that said I could not attack unless I removed a card in my graveyard.  My only shot at winning was decking him, and we had a counter war and I lost.  My Angel hit the Graveyard, and was removed from game along with my shot at a win.

Standard CS also does not pack creature removal.  Red Elemental Blast, and Flametounge Kavu are not always enough.  Neither is Triskelion.  You try to win by either locking down their turns and not attacking yourself, counterspelling the creatures so they never make it into play, or by finding some tricky way to remove their creatures after you mindslaver them.  Swords to Plowshares is as it has always been in MTG, cheap, fast, and extremely efficient.  No recursion with a plow, that dude is GONE.  If my opponent knows I'm packing Swords to Plowshares, he must continue to fear them even after getting his creatures into play. 

Abeyance will just slam the door shut on many decks.  Against many counterspell decks, they no longer get to blast off all those instants on your discard phase.  You want to cast your stuff, you better damn well do it at the start of my turn.  Or if I Abeyance them on their turn, they better hope I don't have counters in hand!  Because anything I choose to counter during their turn I will get to counter. Best of all, Abeyance is a cantrip so I don't lose card advantage.  On a scepter, the Abeyance is amazing.  Just this last weekend, I had different opponents concede 4 times due to a 1st or 2nd turn Abeyance dropped on an Isochron Scepter.  A Dragon deck, Doomsday, and a Kobold Clamp deck that storms you with Tendrils of Agony.  Abeyance can win counter wars, period.

Finally, Balance and Moat are both in my sideboard.  The Balance I can grab with a Burning wish, and Moat has literally won so many games for me I cannot deny it's power.  I should NOT need to defend Balance as a powerfull card in the Vintage format.  Balance is *the* most powerfull white card in the game.

Anyways, I have been playing with the changes for a few days now and I REALLY like it.  Yawgmoth's Will does the job like it always does, Intuition was a great change for Enlightened Tutor.  It has pretty much been the tutor I needed in the deck, while at the same time often filling up my graveyard with Artifacts I can weld back out.

Another thing to mention, is many of you throw out comments as if risk does not exist while playing.  If my opponent has 2 blue untapped, and cards in hand, he MIGHT be packing a Mana Drain.  I MUST consider this when I play.  Same thing the other way around.  If my opponent knows I'm packing counter magic, Disenchant, Abeyance, and Swords, I can deal with just about anything that hits the table except lands (CS has that problem too.)  I think this might be one of the main reasons some of you just don't see on the screen how this deck can be good, and how it's actually a threat when you play against it. 

[Eandori]

Just to follow up and be complete, my deck list has changed.  It's now...

Spells (36)
4 Goblin Welder
1 Platinum Angel
1 Pentavus
1 Mirror Universe
2 Mindslaver
2 Disenchant
2 Swords to Plowshares
2 Abeyance
3 Isochron Scepter
1 Intuition
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Tinker
4 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Yawgmoth's Will
4 Mana Drain
4 Force of Will
 
Mana Sources (25)
2 Island
1 Plains
3 Tundra
1 Underground Sea
3 Volcanic Island
4 Flooded Strand
2 Darksteel Citadel
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Sol Ring

Sideboard
1 Tormod's Crypt
1 Sundering Titan
1 Triskelion
1 Timetwister
1 Time Walk
1 Balance
1 Kaervek's Torch
1 Cranial Extraction
1 Abeyance
1 Fire/Ice
2 Squelch
2 Darksteel Citadel

I'm still playing with and changing the sideboard quite alot.  Fire/Ice has a lot of potential in this deck.  It just has not yet appeared good enough to go main deck.  I'll keep testing.

[crazynlazy]

mirror universe does what for the deck? it should be cut for something good like intuition also I don't think I've ever seen a CS deck without 4 AK's/brainstorm so I would cut the disenchants for 2 AK/brainstorm and cut both abeyances for AK/brainstorm. Only run AK's if you are going to choose it both times and if you do choose brainstorm than the intuitions are less needed.

[Mixing Mike]

I had no ability to destroy enchantments.......One VERY SIMPLE way to shut down CS is a typical sideboard card these days, Ground Seal.

Standard CS also does not pack creature removal.  Red Elemental Blast, and Flametounge Kavu are not always enough.  Neither is Triskelion. 

On a scepter, the Abeyance is amazing. 

I think this might be one of the main reasons some of you just don't see on the screen how this deck can be good, and how it's actually a threat when you play against it. 

Anything on a stick is Card DISadvantage.

For everything else I quoted from you, you've basically taken CS, and added it with reactive cards.  Reactive cards are cards that are only good then they can be played.  Things like Swords and Disenchant.  They're a dead card in the real game of Magic until you're opponent gives you a worthy target.  In a real CS deck, they play pro-active threats.  Cards that are threats that also hep you answer your opponents threats.

Also, you speak of momentum, and I'm going to assume you mean tempo there.  You can't talk about tempo if you're running Scepters in your deck.  You pay 2 mana for a card that your opponent can easily play around.  Say you're in the mirror.  They can Weld it out, Echoing Truth it back to your hand (while gaining a card on you as well), or just counter whatever you tagged onto it with a Mana Drain, move to the second main phase and sink it into some huge draw spell, Yawgmoth's Will, a hardcasted Mindslaver, Tinker, etc....

I also see you're still playing that huge dead artifact Mirror Universe.  What exactly does it do?  It's a nice toy against aggro, but I'd rather just play a Tinker and grab out a Pentavus against them and win the game, nevermind Mirror Universe.

I don't see how Moat has won you any games.  If someone still wins with the attack step then your deck should already have a decent matchup against them.


If you have any issues with anything I've said in this post, please PM me and we'll play a game or two, my CS vs. yours.  I promise I'll demonstrate what I've written here.

[Moxlotus]

You're playing a control deck that doesn't use 4 Brainstorms.  That is enough to make yourself look like you don't understand control.

[The Atog Lord]

Eandori,

I am very happy to see that you are innovationg with Control Slaver. Trying new card combinations and taking what the “authorities” say with a grain of salt are vital to the progress of the format. And I am very glad to see that you are taking the criticism you’re receiving well.

Now, I’d like to outline the problems I see in this build.

My first concern is that any time I see a Control Slaver deck devoid of Yawgmoth’s Will, I become sad. Ever since I first started discussing this deck on these boards, long ago, people have suggested cutting that card for some reason or another. While I may be wrong, it remains my belief to this day, just as it did then, that any Control Slaver build without Yawgmoth’s Will is not built correctly. I won’t belabor the point, but if you’d like to hear some of my previous rantings about the subject, just use the search feature.

And, as an aside, I think that just about any deck that I’d take to a tournament would involve Yawgmoth’s Will. There may be exceptions – I just can’t think of any right now.

Now, on the matter of white. You seem to have crossed Control Slaver with Keeper. However, when adding a new card (or set of cards) to a deck, the question to ask yourself is whether the cards being added help the deck accomplish its goals. In this case, I’m not sure that they do. Why? Because Control Slaver, unlike Keeper, does not seek to dominate the board before winning.

The flaw in adding white to Control Slaver is found in the way in which Control Slaver uses its control elements. Keeper uses its control elements to stop an opponent’s gameplan  and shut down an opponent. Control Slaver, on the other hand, uses its control elements more like Necro Trix used Duress and Force of Will. It seeks only to delay the opponent long enough for its combo to get online; thus, it can afford to do a less complete job of stopping an opponent than something like Keeper.

Part of Control Slaver’s strength is the ability to combo out. What’s Control Slaver’s best answer to starting down lethal damage next turn? I’d much rather activate a Mindslaver and then try to combo off, rather than Swords one of the creatures. And having Swords in the deck means less space can be dedicated to the combo. Swords just doesn’t fit in with Control Slaver’s game plan well enough to justify maindeck inclusion.

Finally, yes, there are certainly cards with which Control Slaver has major problems. Null Rod is very strong, opposing Welders can be scary, and Ground Seal isn’t my idea of a good time. However, this does not necessitate white’s inclusion in the deck – blue and red are capable of dealing with these cards on their own.

Red has artifact removal covered, and in that regard I’d rather have Rack and Ruin than Disenchant any day of the week. Red is also excellent at removing most creatures, because the best creatures in Type One are small. Atog included. That leaves us with only huge monsters, like Akroma. Which leads us to bounce spells like Echoing Truth.

Echoing Truth removes Akroma and Spirit of the Night and Atogatog, creatures with which Red may have some trouble. Moreover, it removes Ground Seal, and it removes Null Rod. It’s like Swords and Disenchant rolled into one card. And it even pitches to Shimmering Shoal.

Now, you might say, “but Disenchant and Swords are better solutions. They’re permanent!” To which I would respond that, while they are sometimes better, they are not so superior to bounce that they warrant the inclusion of white or – terrible to say – the exclusion of black. For, bouncing an Oath’d up creature is fairly strong. And oftentimes, when removing a card like Null Rod or Ground Seal, a single free turn is all you need to win. And unlike Disenchant, Echoing Truth deals with all four copies of their Ground Seal.

So, in conclusion, I think that the addition of white to Control Slaver does not move the deck in a positive direction. I also think that the exclusion of black in Control Slaver makes cute woodland creatures burst into tears.

However, I’ve been told in the past that ideas I’ve been working on were bad, only to have proven myself right. I would really enjoy being proven wrong. Good luck, and keep innovating – the format needs it.

[Eandori]

Thanks for the great comments Atog Lord, I really enjoyed reading your post. 

I liked your comparison of Disenchant Vs Echoing Truth.  I do feel there are a few more angles to consider though.  Putting one of my opponents artifacts into his graveyard enables me to weld his artifacts back and forth to disrupt him.  Putting them back into his hand would not have the same effect.  Also, in type 1 I end up playing against quite a few of the same cards as in my deck.  I'm not convinced that I would want to bounce permanents that might include mine.  Something else in favor of Echoing Truth is the fact it's blue so I can pitch it for FoW.  Echoing Truth does give more disruption against creatures though, helping out my plows etc.  I'll have to try it a little bit and see what I think.  It does have potential.

I'm just not sure I agree about Swords to Plowshares.  The same argument could be made against Force of Will... less room for combo.  But we all know that Force of Will is just so effective at shutting down what your opponent is doing that it's worth it.  I look around the format of Type 1, and I see TONS of recursion.  Put a creature in the GY, and it might come back out.  Swords stops that problem cold and if I have my lock going, I really don't care if he gained another 20 life, I will win.  Just simply having Swords in my deck forces my opponent to play a bit more reserved then normal.  It has indeed won games for me.

I agree with almost everything you said about how your Typical CS works.  Again I would like to state that I don't entirely play this deck like your typical CS, it is played a bit more like keeper, but when the lock is set, it's set.

I agree with what you said about the Will, notice that i have it back in the deck now.  I tried it without Will and It did work, but it's indeed stronger with it.

I think what I might try after your post, is Slaver USA with Mirror Universe--->+1 Abeyance, 2 Disenchant--->+2 Echoing Truth.  I have really grown to love the inclusion of Abeyance in this deck.  Sure I don't have brainstorms, but brainstorm does not shut down your opponent on your turn, and neither brainstorm or abeyance give card advantage or take it away.

Mixing Mike, I finally got MWS up and running on my Laptop.  I'll be getting used to the software for a few days then yeah, I would love to meet up with ya and play some games.  I love Vintage MTG, so good players + good attitudes = a great time

[Necrologia]

I'm just not sure I agree about Swords to Plowshares.  The same argument could be made against Force of Will... less room for combo.  But we all know that Force of Will is just so effective at shutting down what your opponent is doing that it's worth it.

Force of Will isn't just used to shut the opponent down, it's used to make sure your plan goes through undisrupted. Compare that to Swords which is only useful for stopping the opponent. It's the reason combo decks run Force on occasion, but never StP. Force can help advance your gameplan, StP can only be used to slow theirs.

I look around the format of Type 1, and I see TONS of recursion.  Put a creature in the GY, and it might come back out. 

The only common recursion spells still used in Type 1 today are Yawgmoth's Will and Timetwister. Timetwister's run exclusively in combo decks where there won't be any creatures to swords, and if Will resolves you're toast anyway. Every once in a while people talk about unrestricting Regrowth. If that doesn't show the decline of recursion in the format today I'm not sure what can. Goblin Welder can be used to recur Juggies and such I guess, but if they're welding and you aren't, you're in a bad enough position anyway where a single Swords isn't going to help you.

Swords stops that problem cold and if I have my lock going, I really don't care if he gained another 20 life, I will win.  Just simply having Swords in my deck forces my opponent to play a bit more reserved then normal.  It has indeed won games for me.

I don't think anyone has ever argued that the life gain from StP is a valid reason to exclude it. It's not used based on what running white does to your mana base, especially when 90% of what it can hit is handled by Fire/Ice, Trike, and the elemental blasts.

How much differently does an opponent have to play against you knowing that you run StP? Dragon has to be careful comboing out I suppose. Other than that I don't see how it matters. It's not mass removal so aggro decks will just drop as much as they can like usual, and if you're busy spending resources to kill CS's Welders, you'll die to all their draw.

Also, as Moxlotus said, the loss of Brainstorm is pretty much an abomination in modern vintage control. Brainstorm ups your chance of seeing an early force against fast decks, lets you run on a few less land as you can dig for the 3rd one, and lets you hide important spells from discard. It's also amazingly good with fetchlands and tutors. This is in addition to little things like putting Pentavus back so you can tinker it out for instance. Brainstorm does so much for so little mana it's extremely hard to justify not running a playset.

[warble]

With respect to Brainstorm:

There is one REALLY major reason to not run Brainstorm, that would be that you run 4 Chalice of the Void and expect to set it to 1.

The reason Slaver doesn't run 4 Chalice of the Void should be obvious here...it's win condition (goblin welder) would be chalice'd.  So...yeah...I concur...where did brainstorm go?

Just as a side note, how would "slaver USA" do if you made it into "3cc USA?"  It seems like it runs more control cards then necessary for slaver, but not enough for 3cc, and so many situational cards it might actually enjoy being morphed into 3cc.

[Mixing Mike]

The reason Slaver doesn't run 4 Chalice of the Void should be obvious here...it's win condition (goblin welder) would be chalice'd.

No that's not it at all.  It doesn't usually run Chalice because of Brainstorm.  Thinking it's because of Goblin Welders shows how poorly you understand the deck.  Goblin Welders are a tool you don't need to win any given game.  You play Chalice for 1?  I'll play TFK and Yawgmoth's Will to find my Tinker and play it, then Mindslave you anyways and proceed to win.

[Eandori]

I think sometimes in Magic we players get stuck into a mindset.  You MUST play X card to win, or why would you play anything but Y?  I don't disagree that Brainstorm is a great card, I don't disagree that it can help your draw, hide cards against discard, and help put cards back into your deck for other effects.  All those effects are great.

But at the same time, if my opponent is beating me down with a creature, Brainstorm does not kill the creature.  It just might help me get to a spell that can deal with the creature.  If I'm locked down because some artifact or enchantment, Brainstorm does not deal with those.  It just may help me get a card that does.  Playing lots of draw spells is an effective way to make your deck seem thinner, because you get to the spells that you need faster.

But what if the spell I needed was already in my hand?  Brainstorm helps me get answers or win conditions, what if I already had those in my hand?

Essentially, the standard version of CS has some discard, more tutor, and more card draw then my version.  My version has more answers, less card draw, less discard.  I also have the ability to shut down a counterspell war while cantripping.  I also have the ability to gain massive card advantage by welding out scepters and imprinting usefull spells on them.  My deck is a bit more defensive, and has the possibility to gain more card advantage through scepter.

My original thought with playing standard CS was "wow, this slaver lock is really solid once it gets going.  This deck works by aggressively playing to get a lock on.  What if I could make a version that can establish the same lock, but can get there more defensively with the ability to shut down other combo's?"  I followed that thought and kept trying different CS builds until I came upon the deck you see posted here.  Yes, I did lose some of the ability of standard CS, but I picked up new strategy and ability that standard CS does not have.  You must realize, that once a slaver lock is down, you will win.  Does getting to that lock defensively or aggressively end up being better?  Well, any player should be able to see there is no solid answer.  It can entirely depend on how each games goes.  Case by case situation.

Many of you have stated your disagreement with the deck, and why.  Although I do see many of the points, and agree with many of them too, I'm not yet willing to just submit and say the standard version of CS is "better."  My deck can get out of tight spots that your standard CS build can not.  It is... a different deck.  I'm going to keep playing it for awhile and get more feeling for what I like, don't like, and keep looking at what could change to solidify the build.

I could just build the typical CS list, but where's the fun in that?  Right now I have a version that's my own, I really enjoy playing it, and it seems just as strong to me.  I don't have a lot of reason currently to do something else.

[Necrologia]

If my opponent is beating me down with a creature, Brainstorm does not kill the creature.  It just might help me get to a spell that can deal with the creature.  If I'm locked down because some artifact or enchantment, Brainstorm does not deal with those.  It just may help me get a card that does. 

When you're being beaten down by a creature, Brainstorm helps you find an answer. When you're being hosed by an enchantment, Brainstorm helps you find an answer. The great thing about Brainstorm though, is that when you're not getting beaten down by a creature it throws the worthless answer back into the deck. Early on it helps dig for that next land you need to cast Thirst. Card quality is just as important as quantity.

But what if the spell I needed was already in my hand?  Brainstorm helps me get answers or win conditions, what if I already had those in my hand?

Don't cast Brainstorm then? If a card is only dead when you have the perfect hand I don't see a problem with it.

I also have the ability to gain massive card advantage by welding out scepters and imprinting usefull spells on them.  My deck is a bit more defensive, and has the possibility to gain more card advantage through scepter.

Each time you weld a scepter in then out, it takes 2 welder activations that could have been better spent messing with the opponent, or recurring an expensive artifact. You're also not getting anywhere close to card advantage out of it. Imprinting an instant on a scepter is card disadvantage. You need to use it several times in order to actually get ahead on the trade. Ignoring the opponent removing your rather vulnerable scepter, now you say you're going to spend extra turns feeding it more cards? Card parity seems like a more realistic goal here.

My original thought with playing standard CS was "wow, this slaver lock is really solid once it gets going.  This deck works by aggressively playing to get a lock on.  What if I could make a version that can establish the same lock, but can get there more defensively with the ability to shut down other combo's?"

CS does not have to aggressively get the lock up. Tinkering or Draining into a Pentavus is wins just as well as a hard lock in many situations. Even if the lock was the only way to go though, why would you intentionally slow the deck down? Threats are better than answers, proactive is better than reactive. What other combo are you hoping to shut down that taking the opponent's turn can't deal with?

You must realize, that once a slaver lock is down, you will win.  Does getting to that lock defensively or aggressively end up being better?  Well, any player should be able to see there is no solid answer.  It can entirely depend on how each games goes.  Case by case situation.

I'm afraid there is a solid answer here. Winning now is better than winning later. It's much the same way that Severance+Belcher is a better kill than Morphling, it's easier to maintain control for a single turn while belcher does it's thing, compared to the 4 or more than Morphling can take. In the same way, it's easier to draw into a slaver lock than it is to sit around and dig for the proper answer to whatever the opponent's doing for a few turns before locking.

I could just build the typical CS list, but where's the fun in that?  Right now I have a version that's my own, I really enjoy playing it, and it seems just as strong to me.  I don't have a lot of reason currently to do something else.

The fun in playing a regular CS build is in winning, and knowing that you're playing a near perfectly optimized deck. I applaud your attempts at building a new deck, goodness know this format can use all the deckbuilders it can. CS just isn't the best place to start from. The deck's gone through so many tweaks and had so much field testing at this point that it just doesn't need a complete overhaul.

[Eandori]

Don't cast Brainstorm then? If a card is only dead when you have the perfect hand I don't see a problem with it.

Actually, if you just cast a Brainstorm, then casting another one does not do much.  It only digs the 3rd card out from behind the other 2 cards you just put back.  In those situations, I normally wait until I draw 1 or 2 more cards, or shuffle before I cast the next Brainstorm.

Each time you weld a scepter in then out, it takes 2 welder activations that could have been better spent messing with the opponent, or recurring an expensive artifact. You're also not getting anywhere close to card advantage out of it. Imprinting an instant on a scepter is card disadvantage. You need to use it several times in order to actually get ahead on the trade. Ignoring the opponent removing your rather vulnerable scepter, now you say you're going to spend extra turns feeding it more cards? Card parity seems like a more realistic goal here.

Yes, it has been dually noted and I agree that Scepter does not gain card advantage until I have used it more then 2 times.

What I'm telling you is that's exactly what I do.  Get one out there and use it more then once.

The other point people keep missing, is Scepter itself is a type of threat to board/hand advantage.  If I have a scepter with Plow/Disenchant/Mana Drain/Abeyance/Ancestral etc. then my opponent MUST consider that I can use that every turn.  They MUST change their tactics in order to deal with having that setup on the table.  Sometimes it causes decks to slow down immensely, sometimes, they just can't deal with it period, Sometimes they end up spending lots of counters and something else to get rid of the scepter. 

Saying that Scepters just give you -2 cards is like calling Brainstorm stupid because it gives no card advantage.  The truth is, there is alot more going on with each of those.

CS does not have to aggressively get the lock up. Tinkering or Draining into a Pentavus is wins just as well as a hard lock in many situations. Even if the lock was the only way to go though, why would you intentionally slow the deck down?

Actually if you look at the deck list, my deck also has Drains/Pentavus/TInker.  So I did not lose that ability.  The goal was not to slow the deck down, the goal was to give the deck more answers/defense.  The question you just asked me leaves out the most important thing about what I changed on the deck... adding defense/answers.

Threats are better than answers

Wrong, case by case basis.  This statement is FAR too general for me to agree with.

proactive is better than reactive

What do you think a counterspell is?  How many does YOUR deck pack?  Again, Wrong!  Case by case basis.

What other combo are you hoping to shut down that taking the opponent's turn can't deal with?

I just described a situation where I got shut down WITH my slaver lock in play.  My opponent had Planer Void, my graveyard was empty, and he had an enchantment that stated I could not attack unless I removed a card from my graveyard.  CS had no enchantment destruction, his deck had no enchantment destruction, I had less cards in deck and no way to kill him (Angel was toast)

Or my opponent having Ground Seal in Play?  It's a VERY common sideboard against CS these days.  My deck can remove that.

I'm going to end up re-hashing many old points here.  You should be able to realize the value of having solid answers in a deck.

I'm afraid there is a solid answer here. Winning now is better than winning later. It's much the same way that Severance+Belcher is a better kill than Morphling, it's easier to maintain control for a single turn while belcher does it's thing, compared to the 4 or more than Morphling can take. In the same way, it's easier to draw into a slaver lock than it is to sit around and dig for the proper answer to whatever the opponent's doing for a few turns before locking.

I believe you are going down a bad route in deck building with this statement.  Magic players over the entire life of Magic have built and played decks that kill fast and kill slowly.  What's important is winning, and any player must admit that things that let you "win now" can often be not solid of an offense as slow kills.  Again, case by case basis.

The fun in playing a regular CS build is in winning, and knowing that you're playing a near perfectly optimized deck.

I do not need to win games I play to have fun.  I want to feel challenged and to discover new things as well as win.  One of the most WONDERFUL things about this little game we call Magic The Gathering is the strategy involved in deck building, not just playing.  I realize other people feel fine just grabbing somebody else's deck and playing it to win.  I feel cheap doing that, I want my own deck to win.  We all have our own desires in this game.

I applaud your attempts at building a new deck, goodness know this format can use all the deck builders it can.

Agreed, and thanks.

CS just isn't the best place to start from. The deck's gone through so many tweaks and had so much field testing at this point that it just doesn't need a complete overhaul.

Due to the ever-changing meta game of Magic, I don't think I will ever agree with this statement.  Beyond the fact new cards come out all the time, the meta game in one area can be VASTLY different from the meta game in another area.

[Freelancer]

Don't cast Brainstorm then? If a card is only dead when you have the perfect hand I don't see a problem with it.

1)Actually, if you just cast a Brainstorm, then casting another one does not do much.  It only digs the 3rd card out from behind the other 2 cards you just put back.  In those situations, I normally wait until I draw 1 or 2 more cards, or shuffle before I cast the next Brainstorm.

Each time you weld a scepter in then out, it takes 2 welder activations that could have been better spent messing with the opponent, or recurring an expensive artifact. You're also not getting anywhere close to card advantage out of it. Imprinting an instant on a scepter is card disadvantage. You need to use it several times in order to actually get ahead on the trade. Ignoring the opponent removing your rather vulnerable scepter, now you say you're going to spend extra turns feeding it more cards? Card parity seems like a more realistic goal here.

2)Yes, it has been dually noted and I agree that Scepter does not gain card advantage until I have used it more then 2 times.

What I'm telling you is that's exactly what I do.  Get one out there and use it more then once.

The other point people keep missing, is Scepter itself is a type of threat to board/hand advantage.  If I have a scepter with Plow/Disenchant/Mana Drain/Abeyance/Ancestral etc. then my opponent MUST consider that I can use that every turn.  They MUST change their tactics in order to deal with having that setup on the table.  Sometimes it causes decks to slow down immensely, sometimes, they just can't deal with it period, Sometimes they end up spending lots of counters and something else to get rid of the scepter. 

Saying that Scepters just give you -2 cards is like calling Brainstorm stupid because it gives no card advantage.  The truth is, there is alot more going on with each of those.

CS does not have to aggressively get the lock up. Tinkering or Draining into a Pentavus is wins just as well as a hard lock in many situations. Even if the lock was the only way to go though, why would you intentionally slow the deck down?

3)
Actually if you look at the deck list, my deck also has Drains/Pentavus/TInker.  So I did not lose that ability.  The goal was not to slow the deck down, the goal was to give the deck more answers/defense.  The question you just asked me leaves out the most important thing about what I changed on the deck... adding defense/answers.

Threats are better than answers

4)Wrong, case by case basis.  This statement is FAR too general for me to agree with.

proactive is better than reactive

5)What do you think a counterspell is?  How many does YOUR deck pack?  Again, Wrong!  Case by case basis.

What other combo are you hoping to shut down that taking the opponent's turn can't deal with?

6)I just described a situation where I got shut down WITH my slaver lock in play.  My opponent had Planer Void, my graveyard was empty, and he had an enchantment that stated I could not attack unless I removed a card from my graveyard.  CS had no enchantment destruction, his deck had no enchantment destruction, I had less cards in deck and no way to kill him (Angel was toast)

Or my opponent having Ground Seal in Play?  It's a VERY common sideboard against CS these days.  My deck can remove that.

I'm going to end up re-hashing many old points here.  You should be able to realize the value of having solid answers in a deck.

I'm afraid there is a solid answer here. Winning now is better than winning later. It's much the same way that Severance+Belcher is a better kill than Morphling, it's easier to maintain control for a single turn while belcher does it's thing, compared to the 4 or more than Morphling can take. In the same way, it's easier to draw into a slaver lock than it is to sit around and dig for the proper answer to whatever the opponent's doing for a few turns before locking.

7)I believe you are going down a bad route in deck building with this statement.  Magic players over the entire life of Magic have built and played decks that kill fast and kill slowly.  What's important is winning, and any player must admit that things that let you "win now" can often be not solid of an offense as slow kills.  Again, case by case basis.

The fun in playing a regular CS build is in winning, and knowing that you're playing a near perfectly optimized deck.

8)I do not need to win games I play to have fun.  I want to feel challenged and to discover new things as well as win.  One of the most WONDERFUL things about this little game we call Magic The Gathering is the strategy involved in deck building, not just playing.  I realize other people feel fine just grabbing somebody else's deck and playing it to win.  I feel cheap doing that, I want my own deck to win.  We all have our own desires in this game.

I applaud your attempts at building a new deck, goodness know this format can use all the deck builders it can.

9)Agreed, and thanks.

CS just isn't the best place to start from. The deck's gone through so many tweaks and had so much field testing at this point that it just doesn't need a complete overhaul.

10)Due to the ever-changing meta game of Magic, I don't think I will ever agree with this statement.  Beyond the fact new cards come out all the time, the meta game in one area can be VASTLY different from the meta game in another area.

I quoted the whole thing - I will answer every line though.     (I added 1) to 10) to make it easier readable, my comp is to slow to quote everything seperately)

1) Brainstorm digs 3 cards deep at instant speed and can shuffle ANY card back when combined with a fetch (not to forget other pro's). It is simply better than any other 1 mana cantrip in this game. Its only rarely worse than a serum visions, and the times its better than visions are more frequent AND matter more. Innovation is great but picking 'bad' cards because you want to inovate is no good if you want to win.

2) I know you love scepter but here are some reasons behind why it really isn't that great in vintage;
- Everybody and there mother runs artifact hate main or sideboard these days, anything that succesfully hits a scepter immediatley 1-2's.
- CS doesn't like null rod, scepter even makes this worse
- It is slow it costs 4 mana to gain card parity. You are also trieing to fix the mid/lategame off control slaver while there have never been problems in that department.
You already named most off the advantages, now I seriously think that the disadvantages weigh much heavier for control slaver than the advantages (especially because you are fixing something that doesn't need to be fixed -control slaver always had a powerfull mid/late game-).

3) The deck doesn't need more answers and defense, it needs a more powerfull early game. If you really insist on adding answers to everything may I suggest engineered explosives. Its really a great catch all answer.
If you add a card that needs 4 mana and than gets usefull you slow the deck down inevitably. Even if it can be spread out over several turns.

4) How is this case by case? For every threat you need a particular answer (counterspell can't deal with everything either) and at the right moment. While a threat is always good.

5) Same as the last argument, but you also need a catch almost everything spell (ie. drain/force) otherwise you die horribly to combo and hate cards (or threat's if you like).

6) I am not even going to get into your scenario (the one about ground seal/void/random enchantment) since it rarely happens in a tournament. If you want a answer though trie engineered explosives or bounce. (EE has been used more and more)

7) Offense is the best defense. Those words apply here as well, I'd rather kill my opponent NOW than deal with every thread he trows at me. If you want such a deck go play keeper.

8) I can't really comment on this since its really personal but knowing how to play a deck well and making small tweaks is also very challenging even though it doesn't sound like a lot off trouble.

9) Innovation : Good, and I always love it when people trie to innovate. Keep at it.

10) In what meta is your deck better? It really isn't that great in the global metagame (you know the one with TPS fast combo regular CS keeper and the other big names).


Ps. I don't want to sound harsh but you really got some key concepts wrong. (the answer VS. Threat issue for instance) There are some great articles on the net wich cover a lot off ground. I know this takes ages to read (it sure took long for me ) but if you want to compete and build your own competetive decks you need to do this.

[Eandori]

1) Brainstorm digs 3 cards deep at instant speed and can shuffle ANY card back when combined with a fetch (not to forget other pro's). It is simply better than any other 1 mana cantrip in this game. Its only rarely worse than a serum visions, and the times its better than visions are more frequent AND matter more. Innovation is great but picking 'bad' cards because you want to inovate is no good if you want to win.

Abeyance is NOT a bad card.  Yes, it's more then just a cantrip.  It will single handedly shut down some decks, win counterspell wars, and help my deck with the card draw I don't have through normal methods.

2) I know you love scepter but here are some reasons behind why it really isn't that great in vintage;
- Everybody and there mother runs artifact hate main or sideboard these days, anything that succesfully hits a scepter immediatley 1-2's.
- CS doesn't like null rod, scepter even makes this worse
- It is slow it costs 4 mana to gain card parity. You are also trieing to fix the mid/lategame off control slaver while there have never been problems in that department.
You already named most off the advantages, now I seriously think that the disadvantages weigh much heavier for control slaver than the advantages (especially because you are fixing something that doesn't need to be fixed -control slaver always had a powerfull mid/late game-).

First, Scepter is NOT always 4 mana.  In fact, at least half the time it gets it's first use after coming into play I spent 2 mana because I welded it out.  Everytime after that it's 2 mana to use.  Your 4 mana analogy is much more like 5% of that cards usage in my experience playing it, the other 95% of the time I spend 2 mana to use it.

Second, playing artifact hate against a deck with welders is VERY often a losing battle.  If my opponent plays artifact hate with spells, it's very easy to weld-switch artifacts and make spells fizzle.  Other times I will let them spend the card then just weld it back out.  Sometimes I will force them to spend more resources trying to blow up the scepter while I move my bigger threats into play like Mindslaver, Pentavus, etc.

Third, if my opponent plays just too much artifact hate for me (which BTW, is NOT most decks I play against) then I will just sideboard out the scepters for something else.  No biggie.  On average, the HELP me more then HURT me.

3) The deck doesn't need more answers and defense, it needs a more powerfull early game. If you really insist on adding answers to everything may I suggest engineered explosives. Its really a great catch all answer.
If you add a card that needs 4 mana and than gets usefull you slow the deck down inevitably. Even if it can be spread out over several turns.

If you have a deck with a strong mid/late game then you have two options I see to help it.  #1. make the deck faster so your "late" game becomes "mid" game, and your "mid" game becomes "early" game.  I would state, that since like many of you believe CS is already "as finely tuned as it can be" that the deck will NOT become faster.  So the next choice is to #2. Give the deck more answers to help the game move into the mid-late game area where the deck is strong.

Obviously, I chose path #2.

4) How is this case by case? For every threat you need a particular answer (counterspell can't deal with everything either) and at the right moment. While a threat is always good.

THINK about your answer a bit more here.

You have a mindslaver on the table, I have 1 Tiaga, 1 plateau.  In my hand is a kird ape, 3 lightning bolts, and a disenchant.  Do I play another threat and cast the Kird Ape?  Or do I disenchant your Mindslaver so you don't cast my Kird up, shoot him, or bolt me with my own bolts a few times.

You play the Disenchant of course, because just like I said "Threats are not always better then answers, it's case by case"

One can imagine thousands of situations to support when threats are better, AND worse.  I should not have to explain this.

5) Same as the last argument, but you also need a catch almost everything spell (ie. drain/force) otherwise you die horribly to combo and hate cards (or threat's if you like).

Again, this is a horrible over-generalization of the entire game of Magic.  If your opponent has Akroma in play, you have a hand full of counterspells, you die.  Same situation, you have a plow, now you might live if you can get it through.  Counterspells MUST catch spells on the way out, and your lying if you try to state nothing gets out against ANY specific deck.  Stuff gets out.  That's what answers are for.

6) I am not even going to get into your scenario (the one about ground seal/void/random enchantment) since it rarely happens in a tournament. If you want a answer though trie engineered explosives or bounce. (EE has been used more and more)

I'm not unwilling to try out different cards for the defense/answers I'm adding to CS.  I just have not yet tested with EE yet.  Right now I'm still testing out my current build and I'm pretty satisfied with it.

7) Offense is the best defense. Those words apply here as well, I'd rather kill my opponent NOW than deal with every thread he trows at me. If you want such a deck go play keeper.

I just will never agree with that.  However, had you stated "Offense CAN BE the best defense" I would agree.  It depends on the decks that are matched up, and the players behind them.  Case by case basis.  A statement like your would lead people to believe that slow & steady decks will never win tournaments.  And I don't think you want to make that statement because the past 12 years of Magic proves you wrong.

8) I can't really comment on this since its really personal but knowing how to play a deck well and making small tweaks is also very challenging even though it doesn't sound like a lot off trouble.

Yes, and you can do the exact same thing with a deck you build.  So you gain nothing there.  You just lose the ability to build your own deck.

9) Innovation : Good, and I always love it when people trie to innovate. Keep at it.

Cool I will   and thanks.

10) In what meta is your deck better? It really isn't that great in the global metagame (you know the one with TPS fast combo regular CS keeper and the other big names).

  In my local area people simply play decks that are very capable of beating a standard CS build.  I liked the basic CS deck, and wanted to give it a different try to see how it could do.  In my local meta game, I feel my deck is stronger then typical CS.  I'm still play testing it against the rest of the field slowly.

Ps. I don't want to sound harsh but you really got some key concepts wrong. (the answer VS. Threat issue for instance) There are some great articles on the net wich cover a lot off ground. I know this takes ages to read (it sure took long for me ) but if you want to compete and build your own competetive decks you need to do this.

Thanks for the comment here.  I just disagree, I think I'm seeing it clearly.  I already agree that my build might not be the best.  There is no arguement there.  But I will never agree with the general statements like answer vs. threat etc.  My 8 year career in MTG has shown that to be situationally true.

[Eandori]

One more thing...

Quote
1) Brainstorm digs 3 cards deep at instant speed and can shuffle ANY card back when combined with a fetch (not to forget other pro's). It is simply better than any other 1 mana cantrip in this game. Its only rarely worse than a serum visions, and the times its better than visions are more frequent AND matter more. Innovation is great but picking 'bad' cards because you want to inovate is no good if you want to win.

Abeyance is NOT a bad card.  Yes, it's more then just a cantrip.  It will single handedly shut down some decks, win counterspell wars, and help my deck with the card draw I don't have through normal methods.

The last few tournaments, I have had Duress played on me several times.  You know what the most common card that got removed from my hand was? 

Abeyance.

They left Force of Will, Mana Drain, and Thirst for Knowledge in my hand.  It happened like 8 times at least that way, not always with the same hand of course, but if Abeyance was in my hand, it almost always got pulled.  I take that as a direct sign of what my opponent saw as the biggest threat.