Discussion, Burning Slavery. Building, playing, insights, and so much more.

[Hi-Val]

Those COTVs were there because Rich thought Meandeck was playing Retract combo : D

Rich, do you like Rack and Ruin over Gorilla Shaman? The shaman combos quite well with Welder but it doesn't have the surprise factor of RnR. One could make an argument for being able to Mystical up RnR instead, but that doesn't seem incredibly compelling.

[The Atog Lord]

Those COTVs were there because Rich thought Meandeck was playing Retract combo

Meandeck Retract is so powerful that Meandeck is waiting until a Triple Lotus Event to unleash it. There is no doubt but that Retract will get restricted within four days of the deck's unveiling. Be prepared.

I'm actually curious how both versions of CS fare against decks like TT confidant, IT and Grimlong.

First, I'll admit that Control Slaver's combo match isn't wonderful.

IT and Grimlong are very different decks. IT attempts to spend a few turns preparing for the combo, and then it explodes using the resources which it has accumulated. Grim Long, on the other hand, seeks to win right away, and there is less set-up incorporated into its game plan. The CS match against both decks can go either way. However, I'd rather face IT than Grim Long, given my choice. Grim Long is faster than IT, and therefore more likely to win before Control Slaver has had the chance to set up its defenses. Steve's double-first-turn-wins against me demonstrate that quite well.

A trait shared by both decks, however, is their love of Yawgmoth's Will. Both combo decks actually have a rough time against a resolved Tormod's Crypt. I am fully aware that either deck is quite capable of winning without invovking the numen of Yawgmoth. However, this win is slower for both decks. In fact, were I to play in a tournament tomorrow, I'd actually cut the sideboard Crypt from my deck and the three Chalices and play Leyline of the Void. Yes, I think both of these decks depend that much on Yawgmoth's Will. In fact, that's how I configured my deck for a side tournament at SCG, and the recent Emerald tournament in Bloomington, IN.

Rich, do you like Rack and Ruin over Gorilla Shaman?

I do. Gorilla Shaman is a fine card for hitting Moxes. Against Stax type decks, combined with a Goblin Welder, he can destroy whatever he wants. However, in general, Moxes are the least of my concerns. I'm far more concerned with hitting Null Rod, a card that Shaman has a hard time reaching. Especially against many of the decks that actually play Null Rod. Another few of my favorite Rack and Ruin targets are Chalice and Pithing Needle. Both of these cards can also be turned against Shaman, but have a rough time stopping Rack and Ruin. As for the synergy between Shaman and Welder,  I'd rather not have to rely on having an active Welder to remove a smokestack. In short, while I certainly understand why people run Shaman, and while I have nothing but respect for that card, he hasn't been powerful enough for me to run. There have been many times when an opponent has dropped him against me in the mirror, where he has had an impressive feast on my moxes. However, in almost none of those games did he actually have a hand in determining who won or lost.

[forests failed you]

The Duresses and Crypts are really good against Combo.  I've never actually lost a match to a combo deck in an event playing Burning Slaver.  But, mabye I'm just lucky.  I've also been known to board in REBs against some builds of storm combo (as I am very sneaky)   Just to randomly hit their Brainstorms and other random Blue spells.  Especially, if they are playing a more draw 7 oriented deck;  I don't hesitate to bring in a REB or two to hit random bombs.  Tinker, TimeTwister Recall et cetera. 

[RezDawg]

Since Brian and Rich (sorry don't know you but I'll pretend I do and call you by your first names) are here, I'm sure both of you do extensive playtesting and I notice either of you run intuition in your decks.  Why have both of you dismissed this card?  It seems like its a mini gifts and I good way to put robots in the grave and in Brian case strip mine in the grave.  I understand the need for fodder to go with TfK, but to help with having an on-line welder and getting pieces to help with a big yawg will or whatnot.  Seems advantageous for the deck, *shrugs*.

[Hi-Val]

Since Brian and Rich (sorry don't know you but I'll pretend I do and call you by your first names) are here, I'm sure both of you do extensive playtesting and I notice either of you run intuition in your decks.  Why have both of you dismissed this card?  It seems like its a mini gifts and I good way to put big artifacts in the grave and in Brian case strip mine in the grave.  I understand the need for fodder to go with TfK, but to help with having an on-line welder and getting pieces to help with a big yawg will or whatnot.  Seems advantageous for the deck, *shrugs*.

I can field that. Intuition is quite a good card. I'm not sure that it's better than Gifts, though. With Gifts, you can just get two cards and send them both to the yard; if you run only a singleton Slaver or Largeman, then you have no guarantee of getting it in your hand. Also, Intuition doesn't make the busted card advantage piles that Gifts can. It's still a really silly good card, but when the deck isn't trying to do just one thing, it loses some potency. My TurboTitan deck from two years ago used Intuition to grab AK as well as to bin a Titan or two so that I could weld one in. With the deck being so singularly focused on just welding Titan in, Intuition packed a lot more punch.

[forests failed you]

Intuition is a very saucy card right now, and I honestly feel that the decks that Slaver has the most problem with tend to run the Intuition AK engine.  Decks like Tog that pack AKs and Duresses are a nightmare match up, as are the Gifts/Tendrils decks that are sporting that engine.  The reason for this is that those decks draw a lot of cards really quickly and don't really have a draw engine that Slaver can easily stop from running.  On the flip side of that arguement, it is much easier for a deck packing lots of cheap can trips that by turn two or three are netting them card advantage to easily out draw and out counter Slaver's TFKs and other draw spells. 

Unforttunately, these types of decks, as well as Slaver decks like Turbo Slaver that want to run AK Intiution and go busted;  have a tough time dealing with specific threats since they have to devote so much space to draw cards.  Against control decks having Six extra cards that gain you card advantage is sauce;  however, against Stax and Fish... Decks with cards that slow you down and inhibit you from abusing lots of draw, you tend to have a lot of problems.  It really is a trade offf, and the key is to find a deck with a solid middle ground.  Slaver has decent and winnable match ups across the board/  which was my intention with my build of Burning Slaver.  The deck has the capability to win and handle and situation as well as fair match ups acrossed the field.  From there I try to use playskill and knowledge of the format and my opponent's decks to push the match ups into my favor.  If the metagame moves away from Workshop decks and Fish decks and we begin to see a field full of control and combo I strongly suspect we will again see a resurgence of TurboSlaver and Tog/Tendrils AK decks.

EDIT:  I meant to say this in the beginning:  The reason AK intiution is so good in the control mirror is that it gives you added draw spells that help you race to will faster than a deck that doesn't play it.

[SiegeX]

I'm curious how you guys justify using 1 Mindslaver and 1 Mana Vault vs 2 Mindslavers..  Although the Vault produce mana, after testing ive found that the extra Slaver makes a noticible difference on how fast you can toss it into the yard and thus not even have to worry about hardcasting the Slaver.   In addition, having two in the deck minimizes the effect of drawing one, I don't have to worry about getting that TFK to ditch it and I still have another one as a tinker target.

[sean1i0]

I'll go ahead and take a crack at the reasons that would compel me to run a Mana Vault over a 2nd Mindslaver.  First of all, as far as I see it, Mana Vault is really an autoinclude in a slaver deck.  First of all, it's more mana, faster.  The faster a slaver deck can reach a certain threshold of mana, the better shape it's in; that's not because I actually plan on hardcasting mindslaver either, although I will gladly do that if given the right opportunity, but because the more mana I have to chain draw spells or play tinker a turn faster or play more spells during a will turn, the happier I'll be.  Secondly, it pitches to thirst.  This really is a minor point, but worthy of being noted.  Thirdly, it's another welder target, whether that weld is for a mindslaver or a sundering titan or a lotus, etc.  Fourthly, and lastly unless I've forgotten something, it gets around chalice for 0 and is a bit more difficult for a mox monkey to eat if you drop it the turn you plan to weld it.

As far as why a CS deck can get away with playing just 1 mindslaver, as it obviously can, I would say that gifts ungiven and tinker, coupled with enormous card draw and tutors for said cards, are the reasons that this can be done.  Also, in Brian's slaver list, he can just as easily combo out with tendrils, so he doesn't *need* to get slaver.  The same goes for Rich's deck; while not necessarily optimal, he could definitely win a game by welding in a huge robot and beating down for a few turns with massive counter backup.

Hope all that helps.

[Hi-Val]

I'm actually on Rich's side here about the Slavers; I suppose that Gifts acts as a second Slaver, but having two real ones in the deck makes me feel much more comfortable about being able to execute a reliable gameplan. There are also situations where you will Slave someone in a Will turn and for whatever reason, want to continue slaving them after it. It might seem minor but I feel that Time Walk effects are crucial to CS, and so every bit helps.

[The Atog Lord]

Hi Val is correct.

As the metagame changes, Control Slaver must also adapt. This is the nature of a deck which seeks to thwart the opponents' plans -- it must take those plans into account in its design. I have certainly used a single Mindslaver along with a Gifts Ungiven in the past. However, in the current metagame, the chief objective of the deck is to Slave the opponent. The metagame is such that in most situations, a single Mindslaver usage will end the game. The result of this is that a second Mind Slaver becomes a good idea. I won't say that not running two is wrong or incorrect. But I will say that at the moment I prefer two.

Tinker will get a Mindslaver just fine in plenty of situations. However, hardcasting a Slaver with a Welder out is pretty much an uncounterable win. And, as Hi Val said, having a second one there if something should happen to the first one is a nice bonus, too. Finally, without an active Welder, Gifts is oftentimes sub-par. Whereas, a hardcast Slaver will still end the game when activated most of the time, and I've hardcast quite a few Mindslavers.

[RezDawg]

I'm still trying to learn this deck, but IMHO while slaving your opponent usually means game over it doesn't HAVE to slave your opponent to win.  if you're run DSC you win in couple turns, if you run titan its few turns, either way thats a path to victory which doesn't involve slaver.  What I see while trying to learn this deck is thats it takes it roots from Weissman's The Deck and trys to negate the opponents strategy and put a finisher on the board once the game is under control and win.  Granted slaving an opponent accelerates this extremely quick but not necessary to win the game.

[forests failed you]

Slavering my opponent isn't necessarily my primary game plan.  Most of the time I'm just trying to improve my board position and keep my opponent's mana and tempo under control.  If you can do that, Slaver can do pretty much whatever it wants, whenever it wants.  Most of the time game one I'm much more concerned with setting up a Yawgmoth's Will and protecting it via counterspells and protected draw spells, than actively trying to agressively Mindslaver my opponent's turn.

Granted sometimes it is nice to just pitch a Slaver into the Yard on turn two and Slaver an opponent for no good reason... But more often than not including another expenisve robot is a hassle when you draw it, can't cast it, or if you cast it risk having it drained and costing you the game.  Also, I cut my second Slaver to make room for another busted and versitile card (Crucible of Worlds)  Including a different artifact, over a redundent (though insanely powerful one), gives your deck more and better answers to versitile and problematic threats.  

For a long time I swore that I'd never cut the second Slaver from my deck because it is far and away the most powerful robot in Slaver.  (For a long time my robot base in Slaver was 2 Mindslavers and 1 Pentavus) But as I tested I changed my mind about the number of Slavers in my deck.  The more versitile my deck is the more games I tend to win.  I have better answers to threats which allow me to outplay opponent's, and stop hate cards that are very strong against my deck.  

I'm not saying 1 Slaver is right or wrong or whatever;  I actually don't care about that.  I build my deck   so that I have the cards that I need to win as many matches as possible.  For me, I can't justify playing two redunent cards when I have so many Tutors in my deck that can find situational answers to anything.  My advice would be..  If you think that two Slavers are the absolute nut-high, run it, kick some ass, and win.  Everybody will tell you that your tech is awful, and then two months later they will just copy you anyways.  Vintage is funny like that.  The key is to play the cards that you are most comfortable with, that you think provide you the most opportunity to try and win as many matches as possible.  

[sean1i0]

Well, in actuality, I usually play with 2 mindslavers in a CS deck.  However, if you had to cut either a mana vault or the 2nd mindslaver from a CS deck, i think i would sooner cut the 2nd slaver.  The reasons for that are the ones I listed above; I think that a CS deck can work without a 2nd slaver much easier than it could work without a mana vault.  In general though, I'll have to agree that I generally prefer the 2nd slaver because (a) I feel more assured about find one by the time I need to and (b) what Hi-Val said about Yawg. Willing.

However, if my decision in a particular build of slaver were to be a the 2nd slaver or another card that I felt would help the deck run smoother, that is the time I am most likely to cut it.

[The Atog Lord]

Sean, may I ask why you're suddenly comparing the virtues of a second Mindslaver to that of Mana Vault? Unless I am mistaken, no one is questioning whether Mana Vault deserves a place in the deck.

[sean1i0]

That was in response to SiegeX's question.  That's what I thought we were all talking about.  If that question's not being posed, then I agree on both accounts that Mana Vault is unquestioned in the deck and that other than in answer to that question there is no reason to compare their virtues.  (It wouldn't be the first time that I got lost in my own train of thought.)

[SiegeX]

Heh for a second I thought you were referring to me since my name is Sean too. Anyway I digress.  The reason why I compared the 2nd Slaver to Mana Vault is because of past discussions we have had on CS (remember that other 10page thread).  Although yours (Rich) and Brian's do run Mana Vault there did not seem to be an overwhelming consensus that it was a staple card for CS.  Perhaps I should be asking what did you replace with the 2nd Slaver for those who only run one and what was your justification for it.  Nevermind that part, I missed the reference to CoW above.

[Wolven]

Just a thought on the whole RnR vs Mox Monkey question:

I've made the switch from Gifts to Slaver, and I was curious: Has Meltdown ever been tested? It could be an exelent target for Burning Wish, destroys needle/chalice/null rod for only 3 mana, and if u drain anything Vs. Stax u should be able to wipe their entire board. Obvious downside is that u won't have any Welder fodder left either, but thats why we play Will.

[forests failed you]

Yeah, I tested it.  The problem was that blowing up my entire board sucked.  True, it can wipe Stax's entire team, but you don't really need to do that to beat Stax.  If you are playing Burning Slaver with the MD Shamans, has everything it needs to walk all over Stax right in the maindeck.  If you are Wishing, it is most likely for an answer to either Null Rod or Chalice.  E Ruin is a really efficient way to take care of that problem.  Ideally, I'd love to play both, but the board is so tight that one can't really afford to play two wish targets that find similar effects.  More often than not, it is good enough to find a cheap answer to what ails you and remove it from play.  From there you can usually buy yveourself enough time to win the game.  Yes, Meltdown can situationally be busted, but the difference between two mana and three mana, (or four and five mana if you are trying to use it all in the same turn) is huge when the problematic card that is bugging you is shutting off your mana.  Null Rod. 

[Hi-Val]

I'm still trying to learn this deck, but IMHO while slaving your opponent usually means game over it doesn't HAVE to slave your opponent to win.  if you're run DSC you win in couple turns, if you run titan its few turns, either way thats a path to victory which doesn't involve slaver.  What I see while trying to learn this deck is thats it takes it roots from Weissman's The Deck and trys to negate the opponents strategy and put a finisher on the board once the game is under control and win.  Granted slaving an opponent accelerates this extremely quick but not necessary to win the game.

With the ridiculous amount of bounce in the format right now, I'd be hesitant to run a blind Tinker for Colossus, and unless it would really seal the game, I wouldn't get Titan either (though it's effing good, no doubt). I'd rather get Trike because its ability to really effect the board in terms of welder and smalldude advantage as well as being hardcastable in ways that the others are not.

I'm finding that instead of setting up an infinite lock, my usual wins that involve things like Will are made up of finding Trike or Colossus and just using Mindslaver to Time Walk my opponent out. The card takes on other powers when the opponent is under a clock. Having two Mindslavers is in many ways like running another specialized answer in the deck; sometimes the answer to a threat is to win instead, and when that isn't possible, stealing a turn from the opponent is pretty good as well.

If you were building a CS sideboard right now, what would it be? I suppose this is geared more towards traditional CS instead of BS (threadjack!) because it has more flex slots. What are the threats to CS right now? What cards can come out in matchups? What is the deck weak against? What is it strong enough against that the sideboard doesn't need to be stocked with answers?

[forests failed you]

Burning Slaver can't consistently beat IT;  even with the 3 SB Duress.  What else is necessary?  Is it time to start playing Chalice in the SB, as Rich has been advocating for some time?

I've also found that bringing in REBs from the board to counter FOW, Intuition and BS has proved to be quite techy against IT, whereas it traditionally has been a gamble against Grimlong or other fast Tendrils decks.

What modifications could Slaver, in general, make to improve its match ups against IT? 

With the resurgence of Combo in the meta I can now get behind moving a lone copy of Tormod's Crypt into the maindeck to help combat the combo decks...  However, what else could be done to improve the combo match up.  With all the combo decks in the format, being played by competent players, ie Becker, Smenen, Endress...  How serious do you believe the combo threat is at the moment, and what adaptations does Slaver need to make in order to continue to be a solid Metagame call for the next SCG event?

[seer]

I thought most IT players were sideboarding out FoW vs Slaver to make ReB less potent?

[The Atog Lord]

Good question, Brian.

I know I've said it before, but Tormod's Crypt being on the table fundamentally warps IT's gameplan. It is not that IT can no longer win, but it is fair to say that their primary gameplan is compromised quite a bit. When you combine that with its zero mana requirement, the fact that zero-costed artifacts are especially good in Control Slaver, and the fact that it is quite good in other matches as well, a single maindeck copy becomes especially worthwhile.

Now, on the matter of the sideboard. As you know, Steve beat me at SCG. I went over out match again and again in my mind, wondering what I could have done differently. How do you beat a turn one combo kill with Duress backup? The answer, I think, is Leyline of the Void. I know, I'm continuing with my love of graveyard hate. But what other card could have saved me in that situation? The current crop of combo decks are, like their ancestors, Yawgmoth's Will decks. They can win without invoking the will of that demon, but it sure isn't as easy or as clean. And it likely won't be first turn.

Finally, let me just make one last observation about the current crop of combo decks. They scoop to Extract.

[forests failed you]

We have been testing Leyline a bit;  The problem is that it requires you to play with multiples in your sideboard in order to have it in your opening hand consistently.  This means two things:  Firstly, you are compromising the versatility of your sideboard options by playing with several Leylines in the board, and secondly when you board... even if you have a Leyline in your opening hand it is extremely likely that you will draw more leylines throughout the game and they will be poor draws.  Also, Leyline is answerable by a turn one Chain of Vapor.  If the suspect that you are bringing it in, or if the game goes to game three they will likely have answers to it.

However, I do have to admit it has proved to be INSANE against Ichorid based decks.

I have also concluded that Leyline is a much better board plan for a more standard control Slaver deck that is not playing with Burning Wish.  The MD Burning Wish requires you to devote several SB slots to it and those are likely the slots where one would slip the Leylines.  Therefore it seems like it has to go either one way or the other.  Burning Wish, or Leyline of the Void.

That is so easy to discover that it suggests conspicuousness or little need for perspicacity in the observer.  You really can't afford to cut the staple board cards that all Slaver decks want to play... Rebs, Racks, Duress et cetera.

I think that in order to have Leyline consistently enough to be relevent against combo it has to be at least a three of.  Do you think it is worth the risk and commitment in order to play this devastating and powerful (though answerable) card against combo?  Or do you think that having Crypts and Duresses is enough to say the match up in your favor. 

It is also significant that because of the nature of the match up you have a lot of cards that can come out, which means that your speed in being able to answer combos threats goes up immensely.

Rich, have you tried bringing in your REBs against IT?  what did you think>

EDIT:  Even if they do board out FOW there is still a plethera of spicy cards that are very important and consistently relevent to IT's gameplan that are hit by REB.  Just being able to hit their turn one Brainstorm sets them back a great deal.  I don't hesitate to hit the first blue spell I can with my REBs because in the early game I am more than happy to trade card for card with combo decks;  especially when it gains me tempo. 

[pyr0ma5ta]

Finally, let me just make one last observation about the current crop of combo decks. They scoop to Extract.

With the advent of TurboCap.dec (Evenpence's monstrosity), many combo decks are mainboarding 1 Tendrils and sideboarding 3 more.  If you do manage to randomly Extract ftw in game 2, it won't work in game 3; they'll just make sure to have 2 or 3 Tendrils.

[The Atog Lord]

We have been testing Leyline a bit;  The problem is that it requires you to play with multiples in your sideboard in order to have it in your opening hand consistently.  This means two things:  Firstly, you are compromising the versatility of your sideboard options by playing with several Leylines in the board, and secondly when you board... even if you have a Leyline in your opening hand it is extremely likely that you will draw more leylines throughout the game and they will be poor draws.  Also, Leyline is answerable by a turn one Chain of Vapor.  If the suspect that you are bringing it in, or if the game goes to game three they will likely have answers to it.

I have also concluded that Leyline is a much better board plan for a more standard control Slaver deck that is not playing with Burning Wish.  The MD Burning Wish requires you to devote several SB slots to it and those are likely the slots where one would slip the Leylines.  Therefore it seems like it has to go either one way or the other.  Burning Wish, or Leyline of the Void.

That is so easy to discover that it suggests conspicuousness or little need for perspicacity in the observer.  You really can't afford to cut the staple board cards that all Slaver decks want to play... Rebs, Racks, Duress et cetera.

You raise a good point that Burning Slaver has less flexibility in its sideboard than my build. I can find room for four Leylines, but that may not be an option for your build.

On the second point, if you play Leyline, it makes you have three dead cards in your deck. However, just how bad is that? In the Control Slaver mirror, where games tend to go long and lots of card drawing resolves, having dead cards is pretty bad. However, in the early game, it matters less. In the early game, where you're only seeing maybe ten cards, this is less likely to be an issue. And I'm not concerned about having a good midgame or lategame against IT or Grim Long. I'm much more concerned about surviving into that midgame. The rest will take care of itself given the nature of the decks. So, while I wouldn't want Leyline in a control mirror, I'm willing to put "dead" cards into my deck against combo because the game will likely be decided before I notice that they make my draws a little worse.

Rich, have you tried bringing in your REBs against IT?  what did you think>

I haven't tested it, but I could see bringing it in if to do otherwise would be to leave dead cards in your deck.  I don't bring in REB against Oath, because the cards I'm concerned wtih are not blue, and essentially the same principal applies to this matchup. With four Leyline, and Duress, I already have plenty of cuts to make in this matchup.

[dicemanx]

Just out of curiosity, I'm wondering how you envision playing with Leylines post SB when the following scenarios come up. Let's say you fan a hand that looks like this:

FoW
AR
Brainstorm
Thirst for Knowledge
Mox Ruby
Island
Polluted Delta

Now this is a pretty good starting hand, and it has FoW. Would you keep this hand against fast combo like Grimlong if you sided in 4 Leylines? What about IT? My question is essentially how aggressive you intend to mulligan if no Leyline appears in hand. It's conceivable that you can mull yourself into oblivion starting from hands that are average or above average, but are contingent on the strength of the opening hand of the opposing combo deck.

Has anyone actually done much testing with Leylines in any sort of Drain deck, whether CS or Gifts? I'm very curious what the results are (if any).

[Hi-Val]

Unless the combo consistently wins on turn 1, I feel like Tormod's Crypt is a fine hedge against them because if you *get* a turn, you can drop it. Leyline is pretty saucy, though. There's old stuff like Arcane Lab and Sphere of Resistance as well. I'm in favor of Crypt, mainly because of its artifact nature. That Leyline (or Planar Void) has a continuous effect though should not be discounted.

[PucktheCat]

Rich, have you tried bringing in your REBs against IT?  what did you think

I can say from experience that this is a bad idea.  IT sides out many of its blue cards against control specifically because of REBs, so you are often left with just a few Brainstorms and other sundries to blast.  IT can easily win the game without ever offering you a blue spell to target.  This almost happened to me in a game against Eric.  I had two REBs in hand when he Yawg. Willed.  I only survived because he misplayed.

I guess players might start keeping in the Forces and so on now that the lists are public, but until that starts happening REBs are bad in that matchup.

The best cards, by far, are Duress and Mind Twist.  Mind Twist, in particular, is insane in this matchup.  FFY, I know you and I have been back and forth about this before, but I gave up on the discussion because IT wasn't public yet.  Now that it is public I will renew my claim that there is no better card to stomp Becker's monstrosity than Mind Twist.  Especially since the deck sides out its countermagic, it has no real way to stop it.  Most combo decks threaten to win before you can get Twist to resolve, but IT is a bit slower, and with Confidant sided in it is even slower still.

The other reason for Mind Twist is stupid hate, but I consider that somewhat subsidiary.  I will say that it saved my bacon last weekend though, when I pulled 3x Pyroblast from a Goblin player's hand in a game 3.

[Moxlotus]

@Slaver stuff against IT:

Tormod's Crypt kicks IT square in the testicles game 1.  Game 1 it is hard to go off without will.  You have Bargain, bounce and maybe a draw 7 to get your storm.  Game 2 it gets significantly worse because of Bobs, Desire and Tendrils #2-3/4, but it still is an obstacle.

REB basically sucks against IT.  Game 2 so much blue stuff gets boarded out you can hit Brainstorms and Ancestral and that's about it.

Duress is pretty damn good against IT.  IT likes to have a few disruption, then go off with its single tutor/bomb.  If that gets Duressed away, IT will sit there and beat off until you kill me or I rip something off the top.  I can only imagine what Mind Twist would do to the deck--it doesn't look pretty.

[Scoops666]

Seeing all this chat about REB, has anyone tried it in the maindeck? It seems like it would give the deck a sweet trick against not only Gifts and the mirror, but Fish and IT as well (game 1- before they've boarded out lots of blue cards against us).