Gifts, Empty the Warrens, and Winning Small

[Grand Inquisitor]

Everyone and their mother is aware of Empty the Warrens (EtW).  With very low color requirements EtW adds a dimension of attack to control and combo which allows each archetype much greater tactical flexibility.  Not only this, but it's casting cost is a very respectable four mana and since it's storm, the effect is largely uncounterable.  These combined with the difficulty of removing an army of little 1/1's make it a truly robust kill condition.

While this card adds a lot to ritual based combo and belcher lists, where I'm really interested in this card is how it changes the role of Gifts Combo Control.  Compared with previous lists, EtW will replace (or supplement) Darksteel Colossus and Tinker.  What does this mean?

For the last year+ Gifts and Control Slaver have battled to be the go-to deck for mana drain fans.  One of the most common heard arguments for playing Slaver (besides the crushing effect of a mindslaver activation) over Gifts is Slaver's ability to "win small".  While this phrase is relatively subjective, I always found it to mean the ability to win with limited resources or while keeping up a strong defensive posture, or both.  Because of it's lower investment (relative to Tendrils, and, arguably, Tinker), EtW covers the last reason for playing Slaver by enabling a Gifts player to simply out-wait its opponent in dropping 4-8 goblins and riding out the next few turns.

Obviously there are many cards in Slaver that make it play a lot differently than Gifts.  However, as far as general paths to victory, role choice in different matchups, and the ability to win with limited resources, EtW adds a great asset to a deck that already has a better combo game and a more potent counter wall than traditional Slaver lists.

What do people think of the possibility of EtW spelling the end of Slaver as anything but a metagame deck relative to Gifts Combo Control?

[Smmenen]

 People's viewpoints and opinions are based upon individual information sets - data that is not shared.    To take an extreme, if we were all omniscient, there would be no disagreement about anything.   

I believe that you are setting up a false dichotomy.    I don't agree that Gifts is anymore win big than Slaver is win small.   I believe that it is people's experiences and perceptions that shape this - not the inherent design of either deck.   I believe that certain tactical weaknesses on Gifts may contribute to that perception - as do how we talk about and discuss the operation of both decks, but that doesn't make it objectively true.   


I think what signals the end of Control Slaver isn't the printing of ETW, but the community perception - aided by its primary proponents abandoning its traditional form - that Control Slaver is just a metagame or inferior deck to Gifts.    Rich Shay could pilot his Control Slaver list from a year and a half ago, win a tournament (if he still lived in the NE, this would help him greatly) and our perception of Control Slaver would be different than it is right now.

In short, I think we are often blinded by what Harv Law Professor Roberto Unger calls "False Necessity" - the sense that what is (what exists right now) - is the result of historical inevitability rather than historical contingency.   

In short, I don't see any clear connection between ETW and the demise of Control Slaver.   I think the demise of Control Slaver is basically because the best players (aside from Brian Demars) have abandoned it for Gifts and other decks.   Part of this is because of the advent of troublesome matchups like Pitch Long and Ichorid.   However, I also think that Control Slaver is still an amazing deck.   If anything, it's better now that people don't expect it. 

[Lou]

However, I also think that Control Slaver is still an amazing deck.   If anything, it's better now that people don't expect it. 

I think this is true, and I would also add that EtW now has a home in CS as well. The deck runs the same accelerants as Gifts and usually more red sources, so it probably fits even better, more so in a Burning Slaver list.

Because of this, I don't think Slaver becomes regulated to a metagame decision deck.

As Steve pointed out, just because someone aside from Brian isn't playing the deck does not equate it to rubbish.

I do think if EtW becomes more popular, the environment will shift and adjust, and everything will be ok. Maybe we'll see more Bomberman. The Canadians will love that!

[The Atog Lord]

I know that I've said it before -- years ago -- but I'll repeat myself. Control Slaver is not dead. It has a better Ichorid match than Gifts, and in my testing, of which I have done a lot, Control Slaver has a very good matchup against Gifts. So, EtW isn't any sort of doom for Control Slaver. Rather, it gives Control Slaver a new way to approach what is traditionally one of its troublesome matchups -- Aggro. The use of EtW in Gifts does allow it a better "win small" technique to be sure. But Control Slaver can use that card itself, and Control Slaver still has an edge in the power of Tinker itself being such a ridiculous card. I won't get into whether Gifts or Control Slaver is overall better, but I will say that both decks have certain strengths.

No, the thing most troublesome to Control Slaver at this point remains the presence of well-built and robust Storm combo decks. It bothers me that despite my best efforts -- and I've put a lot of effort into this -- I can't make Control Slaver all that good against Fast Storm Combo decks.

[God_Campbell]

Just this past weekend I switched from gifts back to the exact smae burning slaver list I ran last year give or take a card and top 4ed.

Now that may not seem like a big deal sicne it was a small local tourney, but I can say this, Control slaver is not dead.

The ability to just tinker up a slaver and wreck an opponet one game and the next grab a ETW from the board out of no ware for the win game 2 is just awsome.

Is Control Slaver ever going to be "tier 1" again...probly not, just means it can lay low and strick when it is best to.
 

[Sam Best]

Control Slaver has never been "dead" it has always been good. Just people play it bad JK

[forests failed you]

If anything I think the inclusion of ETW in Gifts deck improves Slaver's Match against Gifts.  The fact that it might be in their hand at any given moment makes it more likely that they will go all in an a midgame Empty.  Slaver can easily beat this play as it gives you time and information about what is in their hand.

Also, many Gifts decks to not play Tinker ---> DSC anymore.  or, more importantly they don't play Tinker to get Black Lotus.  With that in mind, Gifts decks playing ETW without Tinker only have one insane game ending bomb that a Slaver player has to worry about answering early.  In addition, Slaver has multiple bombs that need to be addressed.  Tinker, Yawgmoth's Will, every Goblin Welder that comes into play when there is an artifact in the graveyard, and in the late game Robots.

ETW does improve Gifts match ups against Stax and Fish.  For sure.  However, I think that it makes Gifts weaker against any other Drain deck in the format.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Control Slaver has never been "dead"

Control slaver is not dead

Control Slaver is not dead

the deck does not equate it to rubbish

Wow.  Not that I don't appreciate the feedback, and perhaps my post was a little abrupt in calling it a mere metagame deck, but this is a much more reactionary response than I expected.

To make clear, I was not saying Slaver is terrible, or even mediocre - it's a great deck that continues to evolve.  I'm also not saying that my suggestion on the effect of EtW on the choice between Gifts and Slaver was interminable.  The metagame will change, new cards will be printed, both lists will continue to move forward.  At the end of the day, both of these decks run 80%+ the same cards and will always command a threshold of competency in this format.  I don't expect EtW to cause Slaver to disappear from the tournament scene, that's not how T1 operates (hell, GAT & 7/10 made T4 at Waterbury).

What I've been considering, and what I wanted feedback on was this:

as far as general paths to victory, role choice in different matchups, and the ability to win with limited resources, EtW adds a great asset to (Gifts), that already has a better combo game and a more potent counter wall than traditional Slaver lists

Very little of the response has addressed the real meat of my post.  TAL offers some good points:

It has a better Ichorid match than Gifts...

I like Ichorid, I think it's a tremendously underplayed deck, but I wouldn't allow it to seriously inform my metagame decisions at this point.

(EtW) gives Control Slaver a new way to approach what is traditionally one of its troublesome matchups -- Aggro...

I would say this is more than offset by what EtW offers Gifts against Stax, which was traditionally Slaver's big advantage against Gifts.

Control Slaver has a very good matchup against Gifts...

This was echoed recently by ffy:

As evidence I cite the fact that I am 11-0-1 against Gifts

My experience has been much different.  However, as two of our better Slaver players make this claim, and it is routinely lamented how badly Slaver is played by novices, I think it's worth exploring this matchup in more detail, especially now that EtW is part of the equation.

In brief, I've found that since Welder is an efficient foil for DSC, the quick route is not often available to Gifts in this matchup.  However, it can be effective to allow the welder to resolve, counter the thirst/gifts, and then combo with Drain mana & Will the following turn.  Similarly, you can bait with Gifts or Ancestral during their endstep and then Gifts>Will or something similar.  The reasons why Slaver can't duplicate this strategy is that:

1) it runs more "dead" cards like welder and big artifacts
2) it doesn't win counter wars as effectively G1
3) it's big play requires a welder AND gifts or thirst/slaver

To sum up, Slaver's early game is polluted by interdependence and hefty cards it can't play, and it's mid game is plagued by being unable to win counter wars effectively to set up a big turn.  Again, this is a significant simplification.

Also, I'm much more interested in how EtW affects Gifts ability vs. the rest of the field relative to matchups Slaver used to claim as strong.

the thing most troublesome to Control Slaver at this point remains the presence of well-built and robust Storm combo decks

I would bring this a step further and say that Combo is an increasing presence in the metagame (this is almost an opposite case to Ichorid), and that 'control' decks are increasingly built to perform this way, which exacerbates the way Slaver must approach this matchup.

If anything I think the inclusion of ETW in Gifts deck improves Slaver's Match against Gifts.  The fact that it might be in their hand at any given moment makes it more likely that they will go all in an a midgame Empty.  Slaver can easily beat this play as it gives you time and information about what is in their hand.

I'm having trouble following here.  EtW is more difficult for Slaver to remove, kills in roughly the same amount of time (probably +1 turn), doesn't commit two cards, and is uncounterable.  How does this improve the situation for Slaver?  The point is when Gifts would use this card in this matchup, it wouldn't go all in.

With that in mind, Gifts decks playing ETW without Tinker only have one insane game ending bomb that a Slaver player has to worry about answering early.

Which is this?

In addition, Slaver has multiple bombs that need to be addressed.  Tinker, Yawgmoth's Will, every Goblin Welder

I would say that, especially in lists running thirst instead of gifts, slaver usually can't leverage early welders or yawgwill nearly as effectively as Gifts can.  I have nothing to say to you or TAL about Tinker, the card is nuts in Slaver.

I think that it makes Gifts weaker against any other Drain deck in the format.

I'm really at a loss here.  I think cutting the required slots for win conditions from 2 (tinker, dsc) to 1 (EtW), and having the condition be uncounterable makes EtW a much stronger card in Drain matches.  I'll mention that those running Tinker and Titan MD may have a case.

[Liam-K]

If anything I think the inclusion of ETW in Gifts deck improves Slaver's Match against Gifts.  The fact that it might be in their hand at any given moment makes it more likely that they will go all in an a midgame Empty.  Slaver can easily beat this play as it gives you time and information about what is in their hand.

I'm having trouble following here.  EtW is more difficult for Slaver to remove, kills in roughly the same amount of time (probably +1 turn), doesn't commit two cards, and is uncounterable.  How does this improve the situation for Slaver?  The point is when Gifts would use this card in this matchup, it wouldn't go all in.

I think that it makes Gifts weaker against any other Drain deck in the format.

I'm really at a loss here.  I think cutting the required slots for win conditions from 2 (tinker, dsc) to 1 (EtW), and having the condition be uncounterable makes EtW a much stronger card in Drain matches.  I'll mention that those running Tinker and Titan MD may have a case.

If anything I think the inclusion of ETW in Gifts deck improves Slaver's Match against Gifts.  The fact that it might be in their hand at any given moment makes it more likely that they will go all in an a midgame Empty.  Slaver can easily beat this play as it gives you time and information about what is in their hand.

Emphasis mine.

FFY is correct.  Playing EtW tends to fall into one of three categories.  Extreme early game when you're dropping your moxes anyway and applying a moderate clock is worth the card in resources it will cost your opponent, late game as a "sneaky" tactic when your opponent is poised to disrupt your Will or Tendrils attempt, or midgame as what, in my experience, tends to end badly.  Partly for the reasons he states: your opponent gets both time to react and a full read on you 9 times out of 10, and partly because it probably means either your hand is awful or you just did something retarded.

Think about what your Gifts hands look like around turn 4 when you're not really ready to win.  About 4-5 cards, right?  If you rip EtW off the top and want to cast it for 3-4 on your main phase, first of all that's your whole hand... perhaps more importantly, that means your whole hand is most likely trash.  The best card before your draw step was most likely Brainstorm, and a lot of it was most likely artifact accelerants.  We could debate here whether or not it's correct in this situation to wait for a shuffle effect or to spend your whole hand on a 3 turn clock, but either way your hand is probably not in a great position to win the game.

In scenario B "something retarded" you spent a business spell, most likely Gifts, setting up EtW.  If you did this you're most likely low on mana, because otherwise you'd be setting up for yawgmoth's will.  If you're low on mana and casting Gifts + EtW, you're giftsing for mana, and it probably includes one-shot sources.  Once again we return to eating the largest and most potent part of your hand on a slow, answerable play, but this time the opportunity cost of the play is much more apparent.  Your gifts could have been for cards that do something.


I've found EtW to be better in the CS match than Tinker for the sole reason that it is one card and not two.  They are plan B.  This is not news.

[Grand Inquisitor]

what your Gifts hands look like around turn 4 when you're not really ready to win.  About 4-5 cards, right?  If you rip EtW off the top and want to cast it for 3-4 on your main phase, first of all that's your whole hand... perhaps more importantly, that means your whole hand is most likely trash.  The best card before your draw step was most likely Brainstorm, and a lot of it was most likely artifact accelerants.  We could debate here whether or not it's correct in this situation to wait for a shuffle effect or to spend your whole hand on a 3 turn clock, but either way your hand is probably not in a great position to win the game

I understand the point now.  The expectation is that 1) some quality cards, like a Gifts Ungiven was invested into the Warrens, and/or 2) playing the Warrens gambit reveals a poor hand.

First, if you're hand is terrible, EtW or no, bluffing is about the best you can do.  However, if I had actionable cards like Gifts, Scroll, etc, knowing the matchup I was playing, I wouldn't invest in the EtW gambit.  The kinds of plays I'm talking about, is that you have a hand like:

Drain
FoW
BStorm
Mox
EtW

Perhaps you brainstorm, find another accelerant, and Warrens for 6, but with double counter backup.  This is the winning small I'm talking about - not blowing your entire hand on a three turn win.  These are made even easier with Rebuild or CoV in hand.  I will admit, however, that even in the situation I mention, it may reveal that you don't have the gas for a big turn, and you risk (even with lots of counters) giving them a large amount of drain mana if they hit the EtW.

I find this strategy most useful when both players have just fought and stabilized the midgame.  Neither has a bomb they're ready to leverage, they have some counters, but are sort of vulnerable.  Having EtW and a counter or two could be a much better position than having gifts/YWill/etc and a single counter at this point since you can keep your opponent off balance just long enough to kill with red men.

People's viewpoints and opinions are based upon individual information sets - data that is not shared.    To take an extreme, if we were all omniscient, there would be no disagreement about anything...

Right, so systems are dynamic, time is finite, making information infinite.  Got it.  I always thought postmodernism was a tacit understanding of online forum discussions.

[The Atog Lord]

On the matter of the Gifts vs CS matchup. I realize that this isn't the main point of your post, but it remains necessary to compare the matces of the two decks in order to evaluate whether Control Slaver is viable in the format.

What I've found is that although Gifts may be good at winning counterwars, a resolved Goblin Welder means that a Mindslaver or Sundering Titan, hardcast, is just about uncounterable. Yes, these cards are expensive; but they are nonetheless often able to be cast before too long, especially when tutors are used to fetch mana components.

Even so, and despite these cards, Gifts is far more dependent on Yawgmoth than Control Slaver. Without Tormod's Crypt on the side of Control Slaver, then the match wouldn't be quite so good. However, that one card, which costs nothing and whose artifact type has tremendous synergy with the rest of the deck, warps the matchup to no small degree. It makes Yawgmoth's Will worthless, and it also turns off Gifts Ungiven. The second-to-final card to be mentioned is Tinker. This card, arguabley harder to handle than even Yawgmoth's Will, gives Control Slaver the ability to win out of nowhere. Mind Slaver itself is the final card to mention. Control Slaver can get a very quick Slaver activation against Gifts, and that nearly always ends the game. Whether hardcast, Tinkered, Gifted, or Thirsted, Mindslaver is Control Slaver's trump against a more streamlined and focused Gifts deck.

[Liam-K]

First, if you're hand is terrible, EtW or no, bluffing is about the best you can do.  However, if I had actionable cards like Gifts, Scroll, etc, knowing the matchup I was playing, I wouldn't invest in the EtW gambit.  The kinds of plays I'm talking about, is that you have a hand like:

Drain
FoW
BStorm
Mox
EtW

Perhaps you brainstorm, find another accelerant, and Warrens for 6, but with double counter backup.  This is the winning small I'm talking about - not blowing your entire hand on a three turn win.  These are made even easier with Rebuild or CoV in hand.  I will admit, however, that even in the situation I mention, it may reveal that you don't have the gas for a big turn, and you risk (even with lots of counters) giving them a large amount of drain mana if they hit the EtW.

I would put this under the category of bad hand.  You brainstorm and hit (and keep) another accelerant, so after EtW storm=3, your hand is drain, force.  You have single counter backup next turn (unless you have 6RUUUU...) and it's probably at least even odds you'll be pitching that drain.  Is this the best play with this hand?  Probably, depends what else you saw on your brainstorm.  How are this hand's odds of winning?  I'd probably say poor.

I'd also probably say a hand like this in the midgame is indicative of something fishy going on.  You don't appear to have resolved any business spells, but you're sitting on force and drain so you probably haven't lost a counter war lately.  Did you scroll for force and pray for an amazing brainstorm?  It screams draw-go mode to me.  You are already in a hole.

[dicemanx]

On the matter of the Gifts vs CS matchup. I realize that this isn't the main point of your post, but it remains necessary to compare the matces of the two decks in order to evaluate whether Control Slaver is viable in the format.

Rich, I'm assuming that you're referring to Meandeck Gifts. What are your thoughts on the older TfK-based Gifts that also ran either Needles or Crypts with respect to the CS match-up? Are such builds really inferior to Meandeck Gifts, which by comparison is more YWill-centric and thus has the vulnerabilities that you describe? I haven't touched Gifts in around 6 months, and it seems that there was an overwhelming shift to MDG in the interim. TfK was a very successful approach, and I cannot see what could have changed in the format to shift the balance towards MDG.

[Liam-K]

On the matter of the Gifts vs CS matchup. I realize that this isn't the main point of your post, but it remains necessary to compare the matces of the two decks in order to evaluate whether Control Slaver is viable in the format.

Rich, I'm assuming that you're referring to Meandeck Gifts. What are your thoughts on the older TfK-based Gifts that also ran either Needles or Crypts with respect to the CS match-up? Are such builds really inferior to Meandeck Gifts, which by comparison is more YWill-centric and thus has the vulnerabilities that you describe? I haven't touched Gifts in around 6 months, and it seems that there was an overwhelming shift to MDG in the interim. TfK was a very successful approach, and I cannot see what could have changed in the format to shift the balance towards MDG.

Essentially, people learned how to make gifts piles.  Playing a deck with 10 counters and 4 merchant scrolls also seemed pretty hot when pitch long started to blow up too.

[Smmenen]

People's viewpoints and opinions are based upon individual information sets - data that is not shared.    To take an extreme, if we were all omniscient, there would be no disagreement about anything...

Right, so systems are dynamic, time is finite, making information infinite.  Got it.  I always thought postmodernism was a tacit understanding of online forum discussions.

Not exactly - I was trying to get accross a more specific point.   Let me concretize this principle so that you understand its relevance here.   

Rich Shay has a particular viewpoint regarding Control Slaver, MDG, and the Slaver v. Gifts matchup.    His experience is what informs his understanding of both decks and the matchup.     My experience is very, very different.   Thus, I have a completely different viewpoint.    The difference is that I try to take into account Rich's experiences as best I can and weight my thinking in that manner (do you understand what I mean by that?).   

If Rich Shay knew everything I knew and I knew everything Rich Shay knew, there would be no disagreement on any of this. 

I was making the point that perception and how we think about these things are often just as important as the reality.   This is even more so true in magic where our "Frames" inform our in game play decisions and BECOME reality.

To take a simplistic example, if you understand your deck to be a combo deck, you will play it as such [/i]and that will reinforce your original impression.   

That's a problem for Vintage for many reasons I don't feel like elaborating on at the moment.

Suffice to say, I fully anticipated everything Rich would say in this thread (in fact I prefigured some of my original post with what he said) just as I've been able to anticipate what he would say in other threads.   For instance, this thread: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=32137.0

Why do I try to understand where everyone else is coming from?

I try to beat the problem of limited knowledge by incorporating the viewpoints of everyone I respect into my own worldview of Vintage.   

To provide another example: I anticipated that Brian Demars and Rich Shay would post as they did, if they posted.   Specifically, I expected them to talkl about what Rich sees as a narrow focus in MDG, its vulnerability to T. Crypt, and strategies like that, and the like. 

The problem is that Rich is basically speaking from his experience.  I don't see MDG in that light.   I understand why Rich says, but I dont' thinki that makes it true.   Just as Rich, over time, has adjusted and learned how to beat MDG, he misses the fact that MDG has changed as well.   This goes back to Origin 2005 where we played MDG versus him. 

What I've been considering, and what I wanted feedback on was this:

as far as general paths to victory, role choice in different matchups, and the ability to win with limited resources, EtW adds a great asset to (Gifts), that already has a better combo game and a more potent counter wall than traditional Slaver lists

Very little of the response has addressed the real meat of my post. 

Thus, I tried to address those points in my original post by saying this:

I believe that it is people's experiences and perceptions that shape this - not the inherent design of either deck.   I believe that certain tactical weaknesses on Gifts may contribute to that perception - as do how we talk about and discuss the operation of both decks, but that doesn't make it objectively true.   

So while you may have read my opening statement as a post-modern philosophical statement, I believe you missed the application and seeing how it was a direct reply to the points you raised and sought a response to. 

Stephen

[The Atog Lord]

Peter --

The matchup against your style of Gifts is one I've played far less often than the match against Meandeck-Type gifts. You're right -- the discussion I gave about has been about the CS vs MDG match and not against Brass/GiftsX. It does seem that MDG has become the default Gifts variant now, though as for whether that's a positive move for most players I don't really know for sure. MDG is more focused than other GIfts builds, but in some ways that is what lets narrow strategies work against it. Shutting down MDG's graveyard is very strong; against a deck with more raw draw which is less dependent on Yawgmoth's Will, that strategy might be less effective. Finally, when I was more often playing against Gifts decks with Needle and Crypt, I had more artifact removal in Control Slaver. While I don't remember those cards being too much of a problem in the past, since my later builds have fewer ways to remove them, they might be quite potent. Excellent point to bring up, Peter.


Steve --

I'm glad that you know my opinions well enough to know how I would post in this thread. Really, it could be expected. I tend to swoop in to defend Control Slaver if anyone calls it dead, or dying, or inferior to Workshop Slaver. Paternal instinct, perhaps; but for whatever reason, you can generally count on my comments in such a thread. Further, once the discussion became MDG against Control Slaver, you probably knew that I'd repeat what I've told you before about the match, and how I think that Tormod's Crypt is central because of MDG's narrow use of the graveyard and dependence on Gifts itself. Just like you know that I'd defend Library if anyone called it bad, since I'm a big fan of the card.

Part of this is, of course, our tendency to reiterate the same arguments again and again. We have rather cyclic discussion, and I fully believe that someone so inclined could create a rather accurate computer program which could do a fine job impersonating any of us. That being said, the ability to approach problems from others' perspectives is a very powerful and worthwhile ability. Many conflicts, within and outside of Magic, are best handled by stepping out of our own shoes and into those of the people with whom we are discussing matters. But you probably knew I'd get philosophical by the end here.

[forests failed you]

Just a quick note I'd like to interject here about Tinker/Colossus V. ETW in Gifts.

When I'm playing against Gifts with Slaver the main way that I would usually lose games was if they had turn one or two Tinker for DSC with countermagic.  If they are Emptying for 6-8 guys on turn one or two you have three turns, instead of just two.  That is a huge difference.  ETW is probably better in the early mid game than DSC, just because of the Welder factor; but more than anything I fear a Tendrils from Gifts.  Empty the Warrens usually affords you time to either respond or go broken on your own. 

Remember you don't have to actualy deal with the tokens if you can set up a hard Slaver lock.  Although, my list does have an E Truth floating around in the maindeck.

[Implacable]

After getting absolutely owned in the Drain mirror while playing Repeal Gifts at a Lotus tournament, I switched back to MDG, which should not run Warrens (which we have a separate thread on).  However, the greatest weakness of MDG is no longer its manabase; Fish and Stax have decreased in numbers, and Empty  post-board just annihilates them.  The greatest weakness of Gifts is its graveyard; if the 'yard is controlled, Gifts can't just go for the win; it has to play around Crypt/Leyline.  In my current built of Gifts, I'm attempting to synthesize the best parts of older Repeal Gifts lists and MDG, using Brassman's Gifts list as a base:

4 Brainstorm
4 Force of Will
3 Duress
2 Empty the Warrens
2 Gifts Ungiven
2 Mana Drain
2 Repeal
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Mind Twist
1 Misdirection
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Recoup
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Skeletal Scrying
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Time Walk
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will

4 Polluted Delta
4 Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Black Lotus
1 Dark Ritual
1 Flooded Strand
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sol Ring
1 Tolarian Academy

The best part of MDG is that, following a Gifts, it can just win: Lotus+DT+Recoup+Will is the most common "Win Pile" for me.  However, that pile is obviously susceptible to graveyard hate, and, furthermore, a "Control" Gifts is often necessary to stay in the game; my most common "Control Pile" with MDG is "Force+Drain+Scroll+Gifts".  This list combines those potential plays with the raw power of Warrens and the all-around excellent Repeal, which serves to bounce Explosives and Crypt, most frequently.  Most notable in this list is the lack of Merchant Scroll; it is no longer much good in a deck that wants to apply pressure.  As Steve Menendian wrote, "Meandeck Gifts transformed the format and is no longer capable of controlling the decks around it."  If a Gifts list should now be a combo deck rather than a control one, then this evolution in deck design is what makes sense.

[Gekoratel]

I think Repeal is really good in Gifts as a 2-3 of because it fights through a lot of hate (Chalice, Null Rod, Crypt, Small men) which allows Gifts to combo out at its leisure.  Repeal is also very strong at buying time for the Gifts player against Fish decks making the matchup favor the Gifts side.  My friend Mike Hetherington has been destroying people with Repeal in his Gifts deck for a long time now, the card does so much and is never dead because you can always cycle it on a Moxen.  It is also amazing against Xantid Swarm which could otherwise be a troublesome card for Gifts, now they bounce it once and then either answer it if their draw is slow or just combo off.

Your build is pretty cool looking but I think without Merchant Scroll or TfK in your deck your draw engine is not robust enough.  If your opponent counters a Gifts you just have to sit around for a while and hope to topdeck.  Also REB should be Pyroblast as that card is strictly better.  BTW how good is Mind Twist I haven't played or seen that card played for quite some time.

[LSD/Cruise]

Personally, if you want to answer Crypt, why not just run Needles in the board again? Better yet, take the old school Brassman Gifts approach and run Needles maindecked. Heck, you can even run Gorilla Shaman in this slot as well.

@Repeal: I love this card... but I tend to like Gorilla Shaman more for some reason. Sure Repeal can bounce Xantid Swarms and Chalices, but it's going to comeback. It's also often never dead. I like Gorilla Shaman because it gets rid of it for good, and it gives you the edge in the Drain mirror.

@Gifts Approach: I personally think it's better as a Control deck that plays like a Combo deck, and uses it's Control component's as a fallback to get itself into the game if you're stopped somehow, or your losing because your opponent did more broken things than you did. I dont seem the like Ritual Gifts because it's even more vaunerable to T. Crypt, and it's the fact once your stopped, you really dont have much of a dangerous Control game since your only disruption is 4 Duress and 4 FoW. I also believe Tinker is very strong in this deck and forces every deck to stay on it's heels. Let's just say your opponent is playing Pitch Long. He hasnt really went off yet, but the more time you let it stall, the more time your giving it to sculp it's hand to optimally combo off against you. You get that DSC off Tinker, and you force him to go off pre-maturely. if he bounces it, counter it once and draw counters out of him. So not only has he wasted a Tutor, but he also wasted a Counter. Your playing MDG; you have actual 9-10 Counters, and 6 Tutors to find them. You should also be getting Control Gifts as a way to get an edge against Pitch Long. 

[Implacable]

Although I posted my list as more of an aid to a theory discussion, I appreciate the criticism.

Gekoratel: While I agree that the draw engine is in no way extensive, it's difficult to find room in this deck for card advantage, simply because it's so tight.  I do run Night's Whisper in the board (which is quite a mess right now: why I didn't post it).  I may cut the Mind Twist or the REB for a Whisper, but what I have found in testing is that, because the cards in my deck are so abstractly powerful (Twist, Scrying, Warrens, etc.) means that any card advantage that an opponent has is blunted by the fact that his cards are at least slightly inferior overall.  Mind Twist is extremely good; a Twist for 3 on turn 2 can almost always be played, and it is backed up by a Duress the turn before or a pitch counter. 

LSD/Cruise: Gorilla Shaman is also in my sideboard for the Slaver matchup.  As to Ritual Gifts, I do not believe that it is good against a general tournament metagame, and would not advocate playing it; it is extremely vulnerable to graveyard hate.  RG and MDG's weakness to graveyard hate is one of the principle reasons that I built this deck (which is far less reliant on the yard).  In many ways, this is not a Gifts deck; it is a UBR "Good-Stuff deck" with cards like Repeal and Gifts which solidify its strategies.

[hitman]

DicemanX, I'm not all that familiar with Brassman Gifts/GiftsX but I, personally, think Slaver is better at board control.  If I want to really abuse Gifts, I'd rather have it more focused and fast because it takes a sizable investment to cast, even with Rituals because you're down two cards if Gifts fails to resolve.  If I want to play the control role more often, in this metagame, I want Gorilla Shaman, Sundering Titan, recurrable Strip Mine maindeck or out of the sideboard, and Triskelion.  Can you explain Pithing Needle mainboard to me?  I realize it shuts off Tormod's Crypt, but is it worthwhile when you have more draw and Repeal?  Again, I'm not very familiar with the deck.  Just explaining why I wouldn't favor it over MDG.

[dicemanx]

DicemanX, I'm not all that familiar with Brassman Gifts/GiftsX but I, personally, think Slaver is better at board control.  If I want to really abuse Gifts, I'd rather have it more focused and fast because it takes a sizable investment to cast, even with Rituals because you're down two cards if Gifts fails to resolve.  If I want to play the control role more often, in this metagame, I want Gorilla Shaman, Sundering Titan, recurrable Strip Mine maindeck or out of the sideboard, and Triskelion.  Can you explain Pithing Needle mainboard to me?  I realize it shuts off Tormod's Crypt, but is it worthwhile when you have more draw and Repeal?  Again, I'm not very familiar with the deck.  Just explaining why I wouldn't favor it over MDG.

With all due respect, if you're not very familiar with the deck, I'm not sure why you're commenting on not favoring it over MDG or feel that CS has better board control. In a nutshell, GiftsX/TfK-Gifts was designed to have fewer "dead" cards than CS (Welders and Robots which are conditional cards), and also be a little more flexible than focusing on Gifts Ungiven abuse. I cannot say if such an approach is viable or top tier at this stage (that is essentially my question that I'm posing now), but it certainly did perform very well when it was played.

As to your question about Needles, they served a myriad of purposes. Needles are particularly strong against Ichorid and WGD (also Belcher, although it is no longer played at all it seems), and also have relevant targets against Fish, Stax, and CS. They were also used in conjunction with Orchards to safeguard against Oath's wastelands in GiftsX transformational SBs. They are weakest against Long decks and other Gifts decks, so their use is entirely meta dependent - they would be replaced with Crypts for Long/Gifts heavy metas.

[hitman]

@ DicemanX, I was just explaining why I would favor MDG over TfK Gifts on first impression.  Thanks for the reply.

[LSD/Cruise]

LSD/Cruise: Gorilla Shaman is also in my sideboard for the Slaver matchup.  As to Ritual Gifts, I do not believe that it is good against a general tournament metagame, and would not advocate playing it; it is extremely vulnerable to graveyard hate.  RG and MDG's weakness to graveyard hate is one of the principle reasons that I built this deck (which is far less reliant on the yard).  In many ways, this is not a Gifts deck; it is a UBR "Good-Stuff deck" with cards like Repeal and Gifts which solidify its strategies.

My post wasnt much of criticism towards your build, but rather more of a response of my opinions towards Gekoratel post on Repeal and answering Tormod's Crypt in general.

Gorilla Shaman is crazy good. I side mine in against... well, the Drain mirror. I refuse to Maindeck them, but I love them.

I realized MDG is considered to be "too graveyard reliant." The Control Gifts should be there for a reason. It utilizes card advantage, card quality, library maniplution, and control cards to stall the game out so it can play it's win conditions. It's not hard just playing a Dark Rit and a Rebuild to build storm up for ToA. It's also not hard setting up a Tinker. You basically have "4 Tinkers" in the deck, and 4 Scrolls to find Mystical Tutor which can be translated into Tinker for DSC. You know MDG can play like Monoblue Control if it needs to be, so it can just counter, stall, gain CA, and just win with T1's neo Morphling.   

[Grand Inquisitor]

Implacable, Gekoratel, hitman, LSD/Cruise

What are you guys, Dutch?  This thread isn't about how to beat Gifts hate, which version of Gifts is better, or refining lists.  It's about how EtW changes Gifts roles in certain matchups and how that affects people to play it vs. Slaver.  Obviously some tangential issues are pertinent (TAL's digression into how the Gifts/Slaver matchup can play out).

the main way that I would usually lose games was if they had turn one or two Tinker for DSC with countermagic...ETW is probably better in the early mid game than DSC, just because of the Welder factor; but more than anything I fear a Tendrils from Gifts.

I think you've got a lot of ideas in this post, but I'm sort of confused.  Most non-combo decks lose to T1-2 Tinker + pitchmagic.  Is this the play you worry about, or are you more concerned with a midgame Tendrils (e.g. when considering opening hands)?  I would think you'd be able to lose the pitch battle over Tinker and then play your own welder to save the game.

Also, although we discussed the Gifts/Slaver matchup, that's certainly not where I consider the printing of EtW important.  It's more how EtW allows Gifts to play a role more similar to Slaver against decks like Fish and Stax.

once the discussion became MDG against Control Slaver, you probably knew that I'd repeat what I've told you before about the match, and how I think that Tormod's Crypt is central because of MDG's narrow use of the graveyard and dependence on Gifts itself

Perhaps this question is too broad, but given this, and a format rife with grave hate, how can you explain Gifts popularity relative to Slaver?  Is this mostly because of the greater nuance required to play Slaver successfully?  Is this possibly similar to another drain copmarison from yesteryear when (non FoF) Mono U and Keeper were tops and the more skillful players leaned towards Keeper, and the rest choosing the more streamlined and simplistic strategies of Mono U?  Given the great potential for complicated Gifts, the analogy may initially look poor, but perhaps Gifts allows an easier threshold level of power to average players.  I can see EtW exacerbating this phenomena.

[hitman]

@ Grand Inquisitor, I was replying to Dicemanx and I had a question about other versions of Gifts.  It was off an off topic question; sorry I brought it up here. 

As to your question, I think EtW is better in a deck like Brassman Gifts/GiftsX where it looks like you try to win small more.  Without cards like Repeal in the mainboard, I don't understand why it's better than Tinker/Colossus.  If I can cast one spell, i.e. Repeal, draw a card, replay a mox and cast EtW, it's not a huge investment if it's foiled.  Slaver can cast or tutor for a card it's always played mainboard (E.Truth), Slaver you until it can win or Slaver-lock you, Titan/Walk/Will/Walk/B.Wish/Walk, have a recurrable Triskelion with Welder, or "counter" EtW with an equal or greater EtW by Slaver.  While EtW is good against other decks, it's too slow and easily stopped by Slaver.  Because MDG has little board control, it has to win faster so Slaver can't manipulate the board, at least as much as they would otherwise. 

Modified- I just reread your post and I think I missed your point.  I think you have a strong argument for Gifts being the stronger deck, now; if Gifts has a better combo matchup and a better Fish/Stax matchup because of EtW, why not just play MDG.  I would argue that Fish would just cut Swords and Stormscape to add Duress and E.Truth to adjust.  This would still make Fish a hard matchup for MDG but Slaver would retain a stronger matchup because of its mainboard answers. 

[forests failed you]

I think we need to be careful with calling Empty the Warrens for 12 guys winning small.   When I talk about winning small with a deck like Slaver, I'm talking about making land drops off Crucible of Worlds and turning extra lands in hand into new cards with Brainstorm, constricting an opponent's Mana base with mana denial and Shaman, and using Goblin Welder to weld moxes into Moxes to put you ahead in mana.

There is nothing Small about dumping your hand and making an overwhelming hoarde of guys.True you don't have to do as much damage all at once to win a game with ETW the way you do with Tendrils.  But at the same time you still have to protect yourself from being killed or having  your little men killed while you are trying to beat down with the tokens.

I think that addressing the newfound versatility of a Gifts plan that doesn't require you to storm to lethal all at once as being more resiliant would be a fine thing to say;  However, I'm not sure I subscribe to the claim that Gifts decks have become more equipped to win the small battles. Any time you are winning with 10 copies of storm on the stack, I would consider it an adventure in winning big.

[LSD/Cruise]

What are you guys, Dutch?  This thread isn't about how to beat Gifts hate, which version of Gifts is better, or refining lists.  It's about how EtW changes Gifts roles in certain matchups and how that affects people to play it vs. Slaver.  Obviously some tangential issues are pertinent (TAL's digression into how the Gifts/Slaver matchup can play out).

Sad... when I talked about MDG being able to switch to Monoblue Control and still maintain consistency is pretty much winning small IMO. Slaver lists now run Tormod's Crypt. Good, they've dealt with the aggressive side of Gifts, then it turns into a classic Control v.s. Control mirror. Then again, Gifts isnt suppose to be the beatdown anyways until turn 4 or so. When it does go for the throat, it's gonna do awful if it uses EtW as the win condition. Slaver can just see you running out of gas, Slaver you, and probably keep going until it rips a Yawgs Will and Burning Wish into ToA ftw. You probably wont be playing EtW until turns 3-5 anyways, and 1-2 turns already buys Slaver a lot of time. Heck, if you go   1st turn EtW, Slaver will just chain into draw spells, play Welder, Slaver you, and just do stuff right there. You run out of gas if you do it first turn, and Slaver can (I'll say it again) capitalize on the fact you wasted your first turn making 10 tokens. 

But when I do think of winning big and winning small, I think of Poker styles really. I think of winning big the Tight-Aggressive players who will keep folding hands until they get something good... then they play for keeps. MDG is the best discription for this because it stalls playing MUC until it can develop it's manabase, sculp it's hand, and protect Gifts ftw. If it get's an early explosion, then it's just the Tight-Aggressive player lucksacing into pocket Aces with his first hand dealt. Gifts can play with more "win small" if situation warrants it, like playing around Crypt. Like I said, MDG is  MUC; it can just stall for the next 3 turns with DSC for Tinker via library maniplution and tutors, along with the aid of Countermagic. Burning Slaver I see, is most likely Smallball (Loose-Aggressive) players. If the cost is low, they will make small bets if situation warrants it to see the flop. If something dangerous pops up, they will make small bets keeping his opponent's making decisions. They usually win around post-flop because everyone folds against them. With what they won from the blinds, they use that to carry them throughout the game without much diffculty of using big-time all-in's to fuel their stack. What does this have to do with Slaver? What Demars said; gaining small tempo boosts as the game drags on, and gaining more and more fuel to start buying your opponent out when they run out of fuel. Control Slaver is truely a control deck because it tries to win small until it hits the point in the game where a Slaver resolves, or they can protect their Titan with countermagic due to them chaining into excess amounts of draw.
Mindslaver isnt winning, it's still Control. Sundering Titan is basically winning small since it has a "win-small" effect, and has solid stats for a win condition. it does take around 3-4 turns for it to kill, but it's the win small effect that enables it to stall the game out into your favor.