U/R Mattiuzzo Landstill

[Stormanimagus]

Any feedback? Shock Wave? I'd really like to bring this deck to the February 16 Waterbury and believe I could pilot it pretty well (I am generally good with interactive decks like these) so I'd like to decide on a final list soon.

[Shock Wave]

This would seem to really help at winning the Stax matchup but aren't we already favored in it? I mean, we have lands to block their dudes (and kill them if they are Jugg and we are Factory), FoW for important spells, Null Rod for Mana and other stuff I've mentioned, Bounce for important stuff. Aren't we good against them without the Chalice? Or do we need it for consistency and efficiency?

You're not really "favoured" in any matchup with Landstill. The deck is designed to go 50/50 against the field, pre-board. Against Stax or Workshop-Aggro, you're certainly not better than 50/50. Your sideboard should be designed to give you an edge in whatever matchups you feel will be prevalent. This is the purpose Chalice serves. I don't have anything to add and suggest you test matchups further to draw your own conclusions.

Can we get away with not doing it against the matchups that matter and still have enough game against them?

No. There's no reason to give your opponent any more opportunity to resolve spells than necessary. Again, Landstill wins by preventing your opponent from being able to cast spells, not by trading one-for-one with them. I can't stress this point any more. If you don't agree with this premise, you should probably design your own Landstill deck and devise your own gameplan.

Anyway, I'm concerned that Chalice @1 is a problem against those decks as I then have 0 ways to bounce their actual men.

I think you need to revisit your gameplan against the decks you plan on facing and what role Chalice will play in those matchups.

As the creator of the deck could you explain to me why you run a MD bounce suite of 3 Chain Of Vapor as opposed to 3 Echoing Truth? Truth seems nuts for our deck as it can:

Truth costs 2 mana. That's huge. You lose to Chalice = 2 when ET is your only out. Those are good enough reasons for me to run CoV instead. I've never been disappointed with it.

Also, I'm not so sure I'd like to completely nuke the Ichorid matchup as it might show up now that people don't really expect it. It can play around the lock components of STAX and that's gotta count for something. I like to include Needle, personally, for that matchup but also for the following:

Please don't play Landstill if you intend on facing Ichorid. Just don't do it. Needle will not help you.

[Stormanimagus]

I'd have to say that I'm actually in complete agreement with you regarding Chalice now as a necessity for the SB .

However, I'm still not totally understanding your thinking regarding ET, and, to a lesser extent, Pithing Needle.

Doesn't it seem pretty powerful to play Chalice for 1 against GAT on turn 2 and then have 3 MD ET still at the ready for any Dryads or TOGs that might slip through? I mean, Threads is a great answer for Dryad, but I'm a bit worried that the decks running only TOG (of which there may be more now) will just eat me alive. Threads is not coming in against them, obviously (CC 3), and an active Chalice @1 against them negates my REB. I suppose I could just NOT bring in Chalice against that build because Chalice @0 doesn't really do enough as they don't really run full power.

The Stax matchup makes much more sense to me now though. Thank you. Being able to cut off their mana consistently when it matters most allows you to maximize cards like R & R by actually being able to cast them because the pressure they are able to put on is limited.

However, I'm still confused about the GAT matchup. given your list from last year, how would you board that matchup?

Chalice seems awesome there but best @1 and then you have 11 dead cards against them in CoV, Stifle, and REB, and those are all important to stopping GAT wouldn't you say?

Now I'm not saying you are necessarily wrong on running CoV over Echoing Truth, but it does seem very good in this scenario vs. GAT and against Stax not too much worse. I see your argument regarding Chalice @2 and having no out against it, but post SB we do have 2 things to stop that from happening too quickly:

Our own Chalice @0 (they have to spend 4 on Chalice @2 and sans Moxen they may not get there til turn 3 unless they have a shop. you should be able to set up drain or FoW by then)

R & R — This is perhaps a worse solution as they'll cast at least 1 and possibly 2 spheres, but if you can find a way to last til you get 4-5 mana this is a good late-game weapon on Chalice @2.

I dunno. I like CoV too, but could ET be a possible sub?

BTW, I'm not saying I think I'll see a LOT of Ichorid at Waterbury, just that it might show up in small numbers and do well. Doesn't Needle have applications across the board that make it worth the SB room? Isn't it a form of denial? Or doesn't it fit in this deck's approach?

[Shock Wave]

Doesn't it seem pretty powerful to play Chalice for 1 against GAT on turn 2 and then have 3 MD ET still at the ready for any Dryads or TOGs that might slip through? I mean, Threads is a great answer for Dryad, but I'm a bit worried that the decks running only TOG (of which there may be more now) will just eat me alive. Threads is not coming in against them, obviously (CC 3), and an active Chalice @1 against them negates my REB. I suppose I could just NOT bring in Chalice against that build because Chalice @0 doesn't really do enough as they don't really run full power.

I never said that other game plans against GAT don't have a good chance of succeeding. You could bring in CotV = 1 and try your ET plan. That may work. However, it doesn't make sense to me to devise a plan focused on situations where things have gone wrong (ie. a dryad has resolved an is starting to get big). The deck is designed to prevent that from happening. Sometimes a Dryad does resolve, and that's not necessarily bad. What is bad is when GAT starts drawing cards, or even worse, resolves a Dryad and then starts drawing cards. Landstill doesn't care about a small Dryad. It has ways of fending it off and absorbing small amounts of damage until an answer is found. The GAT matchup is played like a control mirror. If you consider the options in the sideboard, I'm sure you'll be able to figure out what a good sideboarding plan is.

Chalice seems awesome there but best @1 and then you have 11 dead cards against them in CoV, Stifle, and REB, and those are all important to stopping GAT wouldn't you say?

I could tell you how to board against GAT, but I'd rather see you test it and figure out what works. You have the decklist at your disposal, and you've been given some ideas to consider. I think if you use the information you've been provided and put some work into testing, it will be more beneficial to you come Waterbury.

Now I'm not saying you are necessarily wrong on running CoV over Echoing Truth, but it does seem very good in this scenario vs. GAT and against Stax not too much worse. I see your argument regarding Chalice @2 and having no out against it, but post SB we do have 2 things to stop that from happening too quickly:

Echoing Truth isn't terrible. It's a good option. My preference is Chain of Vapor. They each have their advantages.

BTW, I'm not saying I think I'll see a LOT of Ichorid at Waterbury, just that it might show up in small numbers and do well. Doesn't Needle have applications across the board that make it worth the SB room? Isn't it a form of denial? Or doesn't it fit in this deck's approach?

Needle does have applications. That doesn't mean it is an optimal sideboard card. You can't make room for everything. I can't think of any matchup (except Shop based decks) where I would want Needle. The card seems versatile, but it really is only good at stopping a limited number of threats that concern Landstill (Welder being the big one). For everything else, there are adequate answers.

I think you're trying to design Landstill to have game against every deck. You're not going to do well with that approach.

[hauntedechos]

Mr. Mattiuzzo,

Thanks for giving us Landstill, it's a deck that in any configuration I enjoy playing.  It's actually quite simple to understand how the deck runs, and as such I don't understand the difficulty that the threads author is having with it.

What is the reasoning for Chalice to remain in the SB?  I'm guessing sheer MD space is this on point?  I myself would greatly love to have it main as a lock component (but that's the prison fan in me).  I am under the impression that Landstill, being painfully slow, really needs to set up small soft locks to gain enough tempo to win.  Certainly from the SB chalice would seem to blindside many decks (I'm really looking at Ponder Long and Tropical Storm when set at 1), but given that, wouldn't that be compelling enough to run it main?

I have not yet read the primer, but rest assured after this post (and I suspect it should be the other way around lol), I will be reading it over and over.

I agree with your premise on Gorrila shaman.  Of course not being U is a big factor with all the pitch magic you have.  What I really dislike about him is the fact that I have to pay for the effect.  The deck doesn't want to tap for anything short of a counter, lock component, or factory activation, am I close to the understanding of the deck? with 3 Null Rod and then Chalice from the side, you've got 7 cards that will shut off and lock off the powered acceleration.

In respects to GAT, I would imagen that chalice at 2 would be the corect call here (Goyf, Dryad, Merchant Scroll etc.), and with the potential to drain into 2 extra mana, chalice at 2 doesn't seem all that incredible a feat, barring a clever opponent who doesn't wanna walk into the Drain.  You responded to the threads author by stating that you never said you have to board in chalice, or that you never said it had to be set at 1.  What is your opinion on Chalice in the GAT match?

In concerns with Ichorid:  the only thing that is going to help you with that match up is 4 leyline of the void.  True that you could try Needles to shut off bazaar, but shutting down the yard is more important.  Your counterspells aren't terrible effective here and  Null Rod doesn't help you at all.  Stifle is usefull but again only against a few cards in the deck and Chalice is only going to be of limited usefullness w/o Leyline.

All in all it's a fantastic deck.  I think to have roughly 50/50 across the field pre-board is amazing and It's a feat that is tough to accomplish.  For the same reasons I've always loved playing U/W/B Fish, I love this deck.  I also think that the quicker clock of Fish is offset by the hilarity of watching your opponents frustration build with each land obliterated and each answer qiven the *nope,  sorry mate, nice try though* headshake.

What are your thoughts on Landstills current viability in today's meta?  It would seem that only a well learned pilot would have a chance in todays meta.  The deck is easy to learn, but like Fish requires in depth knowledge of Meta Game trends to be successfull with.

Stormanimagus, I'm 100% positive THAT is what the deck's creator, Mr. Mattiuzzo/Shockwave is trying to get across to you.  You can have him spit out card choices all day long, but unless you test these matchups, you won't gain a sence of timing and understanding WHY you SB in the cards that you do and for what reasons.  I for one have been reading your posts in response to Shockwave/Mattiuzzo's answers and it's like you haven't played a single game against current tournament decks.  A few matches vs. decent pilots should reveal why the cards used are what they are and how they are used and also what, if any, different selections can be made.  I'm not trying to be a jerk and I'm sorry if I come across this way, it's just frustrating to read this thread AND I want to help you develope as a player, especially if you plan on heading to a Waterbury event.  Real testing and lots of it are what you seem to need the most mate, I promise you if you test your ass off, you will understand the deck much better and stand a much better chance in the tournament =)

Cheers
Michael

[Stormanimagus]

Thank you. I understand what you're saying. Unfortunately, I can't really test with more than 1 person before Waterbury (and that's only online) because I don't KNOW that many Vinatage players living in NYC. Neutral Ground is pretty much strictly Type 2 and Extended. The Vintage scene there is pretty much nil. I found ONE player to play against and he was a guy who tried designing a Hulk-Flash deck that wasn't optimal and he also wasn't a great Vintage player IMO. I do take your criticism seriously and will try to test GAT more SOMEHOW before Waterbury, but unfortunately I may just have to go in blind and trust whatever list I come up with. I've had to do it in the past and I've done ok. I've actually usually been a Combo player (Pitch Long, Oath, Dragon, D-Day are all some decks I've played in the past) for the most part, but I have played TMWA so I know a bit about denying the opponent. I realize, however, that this deck is completely different from every other deck I've played, but I like a deck that gives me the chance to outplay my opponent, and, quite frankly, I OWN the cards.

But thanks. I'll try to test some of these cards out. I'll see if I can get some results to relay back.

BTW, it's not that I'm not getting what Shock Wave is trying to say, I was just trying to suck some more insight/wisdom out of the deck's creator . I wanted explanations, but I'm realizing that this deck, unlike other more agressive decks could justify many different card choices. I do think his list is basically optimal, but I think he was also saying that, given a metagame, there are some slots that could be toyed with. I'm not used to that sort of freedom with a decklist.

Thanks for all the advice folks.

[credmond]

I think echoing truths are a definite possibility for replacing the chain of vapors. Chain of vapor is good and very quick, without a doubt, but echoing truth is an ideal card to play against gush tinker style decks. Having truth in there allows you to double answer DSC and Warrens and it also allows you to play COV at 1 with maximum efficiency. Chain of vapor also has the problem of possibly helping a storm player generate storm when they copy your chain and it also allows them the ability to bounce a null rod or a chalice set at zero. So echoing truth is ideal for fighting a combo storm deck that is coming at you with a mix of threats and that gets hit especially hard with COVs set at zero and one.

The slots that I found that you can play with in the basic UR list are the 3rd misdirection, the 4th wasteland, the 4th fire and ice, the 4th null rod, and the time walk. Those really depend on your local meta and what you can expect to face.

I like having 2 crucibles main deck to help out the stax matchup and to have a reasonable chance of seeing crucible in a deck without any tutors. I usually opt for 3 null rods and 2 crucible combination, to help minimize the dead null rod draws and boost the chance of actually seeing crucible in a given game

The new card negate warrants serious consideration in Landstill since it increases your chances of having a solid multipurpose counter up turn one and helps offset the often seen problem in landstill of having a blue source and colorless source of mana on turn two. I have thrown a copy of negate in as well as a mox ruby to great success.

That brings up mox ruby as another serious consideration. Even though it is anti-synergestic with null rod, mox ruby does a lot for the deck by enabling early standstills and negate as well as bringing pyro/REBs online fast on games 2 and 3.

Spell snare is also a card worth considering main deck since it hits a lot of the cards you care about for a mere 1 mana.

A singleton of brainstorm is also worthy of consideration, especially if your meta is big on duress and thoughtseize, it can dodge that kind of assault and protect your early game setup of a turn 2 standstill. By no means do I think a full set of brainstorm should go in landstill but a singleton fits nicely in (test it out for yourself) and should not be dismissed since you won't be running four. You easily have the fetch count to put it to solid use and its great for when the opponent pops a standstill after building up a choice hand. Brainstorm will let you dig further for counters and pitch counters (6 cards deep after standstill is popped) and also help dodge the duresses and whatnot he will throw at you to try to destabilize you.

But don't deviate too far without serious testing. It is a good idea to tweak things to fit your local meta but make sure you balance things out. The canonic UR Landstill deck is well-balanced and performs smoothly and is a good place to bring your deck back to if it starts coming up short in some key matchups.

The key with Landstill is to focus and hone in on the matchups that matter and weight your deck towards meeting and winning those matchups. Its got good game against GAT, combo, Flash, DeezGoyfs and most forms of stax.  If that describes the top8 of your meta then its a good choice to go with.

Notes on sideboard:

Do a lot of your testing post board. The sideboard is where Landstill really shines and is deserving of a great deal of study and planning.

Don't bother prepping at all for Ichorid. You can't afford to weaken your sideboard wiith any flavor of Leyline. Ichorid is your calculated loss.

Chalice of the void is a huge card in the sideboard and something you really have to study how to implement in the matchups since its not always obvious. Chalice of the void is the key card for fighting combo of all flavors from flash to gush tinker to long style decks.

I am not a big fan of rack and ruin. Thorn changed everything as far as that card goes. Thorn means you have to set up a mana drain to even get a chance to ever use it to destroy artifacts in the early game when you need it most. I think as far as fighting Stax and Workshop Aggro there is no magic solution, but gorrilla shaman, viashino heretic, ignot chewer, shattering spree, and energy flux all work better in my experience than rack and ruin in a meta full of thorns and spheres. Shaman works great against stax on the draw. Shattering spree is surprisingly good since it can kill multiple artifacts cheap like rack and ruin and get around things like chalice of the void but it will open up your manabase to wasteland like no other card.  I usually go for something like a 2 spree and 2 flux combination.

Landstill usually does really well against most flavors of stax. The one it has the most problems with is Red Workshop Aggro. The combination of simulacrums (that counteracts your mana denial) and magus of the moon and sword of fire and ice all suckerpunch Landstill's strategy pretty hard.

Threads of disloyalty is a key card in the sideboard and it really shines in Landstill. Always have 3 or 4. Tarmogoyfs are real rough game one but became a major liability to your opponent games 2 and 3. Welders, dreadnaughts, bobs, dryads, grunts, and shamans are all choice targets.

[Mindriders]

I'm a landstill fan, and this is just a brainstorming idea... Has anybody experimented with green? Either as a third color splash or to give this deck a beatdown flavor perhaps?

To be honest, I'm not really fond of UWLS. I like UBLS and URLS but has played them for quite some time and now I'm kinda bored, so I'm looking for some crazy/weird/wacky ideas here...

[Wagner]

A friend of mine used to play a UBG Landstill with Duress and Pernicious Deed instead of Disk. But since disk is long gone and I can't remember why else green was used, not sure it would be viable. Life from the Loam seems awfully inferior to Crucible because of the mana investment and of the lesser ability to sink Drains in it.

[Shock Wave]

Mr. Mattiuzzo, Thanks for giving us Landstill, it's a deck that in any configuration I enjoy playing. All in all it's a fantastic deck.  I think to have roughly 50/50 across the field pre-board is amazing and It's a feat that is tough to accomplish.  For the same reasons I've always loved playing U/W/B Fish, I love this deck.  I also think that the quicker clock of Fish is offset by the hilarity of watching your opponents frustration build with each land obliterated and each answer qiven the *nope,  sorry mate, nice try though* headshake.

You're welcome! I'm happy that some people are enjoying it. If you enjoy frustrating people, and can absorb the occasional loss where you're completely blown out of the water, you will enjoy Landstill. Admittedly, I derive a bit of sadistic pleasure from the hope my opponents have when they are totally locked out of the game and are completely oblivious. I wasn't about to confess this until I knew at least one other person felt the same way. 

What is the reasoning for Chalice to remain in the SB?  I'm guessing sheer MD space is this on point?

Pretty much. The issue with running Chalice main is that it is terrible in your opening draw if you lose the die roll. You could cut 4 cards and squeeze them in, but I feel that would upset the delicate balance of the deck. That balance revolves around three variables: removal, permission, and mana denial. If you were to add four CotV, the list would probably look like:

- 1 Null Rod
- 1 Fire/Ice
- 1 Misdirection
- 1 Chain of Vapor

You really can't cut anything else. Essentially, what you're doing is weakening the removal variable in exchange for a stronger mana denial/permission variables. This isn't an upgrade, as seemingly implied by that statement. Your removal spells have a fixed function, whereas Chalice has a variable function (sometimes mana denial, sometimes "permission"). The real downside to adding Chalice and cutting any removal is that it makes the deck more vulnerable to on-board threats. If something manages to resolve early, it makes your in-hand Chalice dead and obviously a horrible topdeck. Sometimes, Chain of Vapor is a dead draw, but I'm never disappointed to see Fire/Ice off the top.

I can see why you think that Chalice is worthy of main consideration. However, I believe that if you tinker with deck a little bit, you'll understand why it is much more powerful coming out of the board.

I myself would greatly love to have it main as a lock component (but that's the prison fan in me).  I am under the impression that Landstill, being painfully slow, really needs to set up small soft locks to gain enough tempo to win.  Certainly from the SB chalice would seem to blindside many decks (I'm really looking at Ponder Long and Tropical Storm when set at 1), but given that, wouldn't that be compelling enough to run it main?

Judging by the above statement, it is clear that you understand Landstill functions by winning extremely small, and at a minimum of mana expenditure. However, I'm not really sure what your argument for running it main is. Can you please clarify?

I have not yet read the primer, but rest assured after this post (and I suspect it should be the other way around lol), I will be reading it over and over.

I appreciate that. Do keep in mind though, that the primer was written 5 years ago, and has not been updated. For current purposes, it should serve as an introduction to new Landstill players. I am considering writing a modern day primer, however I'm not ready to make that sort of commitment yet. To write a primer befitting of TMD standards takes a lot of work.

The deck doesn't want to tap for anything short of a counter, lock component, or factory activation, am I close to the understanding of the deck?

Yes. Landstill doesn't like tapping its mana. It doesn't want to attack with factories. If a Landstill player is attacking you, it means one of the following:

a) They don't know what they're doing (most probably the case)
b) They have no cards in their hand
c) They are holding multiple pitch counters
d) You lost the game a long time ago and really should scoop up your cards

One of the more advanced game play aspects of this deck lies in the actual tapping of your mana. You can use this tactic to really mindfuck your opponent. It's amazing how you can shift the game to your advantage by causing your opponent to dodge threats that don't exist. This is done by a combination of social engineering and how you represent your mana.

You responded to the threads author by stating that you never said you have to board in chalice, or that you never said it had to be set at 1.  What is your opinion on Chalice in the GAT match?

I don't like it. It stinks when set at 0 in this match-up, and it shuts off important disruption when set at 1. I don't bring it in barring very particular circumstances (AK Tog builds which run full power, or 4c Tog decks).

What are your thoughts on Landstills current viability in today's meta?  It would seem that only a well learned pilot would have a chance in todays meta.  The deck is easy to learn, but like Fish requires in depth knowledge of Meta Game trends to be successfull with.

I'll have to get back to you on that. I've been working with another pet deck recently and have to put some time back into testing Landstill. As a hunch, I imagine that Landstill would be very good in a Workshop metagame. However, this match-up is dicey because those builds tend to vary so greatly. Most builds relying on Metalworker are favourable match-ups. Then there are the scarier builds that run a combination of Welder and fat. That advantage that Landstill has in these match-ups is the consistency of its draws. Often, Workshop based deck cannot afford so it back and are forced to pump out acceleration and threats. Null Rod is obviously huge in these scenarios.

I can't imagine that a new archetype has recently surfaced that Landstill cannot contend with. Aside from Ichorid, I'm comfortable sitting across the table from any archetype.

I think echoing truths are a definite possibility for replacing the chain of vapors. Chain of vapor is good and very quick, without a doubt, but echoing truth is an ideal card to play against gush tinker style decks. Having truth in there allows you to double answer DSC and Warrens and it also allows you to play COV at 1 with maximum efficiency. Chain of vapor also has the problem of possibly helping a storm player generate storm when they copy your chain and it also allows them the ability to bounce a null rod or a chalice set at zero. So echoing truth is ideal for fighting a combo storm deck that is coming at you with a mix of threats and that gets hit especially hard with COVs set at zero and one.

I can't say I agree substituting CoV with ET for the situation you've described is sound reasoning. Consider that decks packing ETW do not want to go all-in against Landstill, for fear of walking into a Stifle. They want to gain card advantage and then go off with Will or ETW when there is little chance of their line of play being thwarted. This line of reasoning is comparable to when players suggest that Stifle is great against Storm-combo decks like Long or TPS. It really is not. Against a competent opponent, Stifle does nothing except buy you a little time.

The slots that I found that you can play with in the basic UR list are the 3rd misdirection, the 4th wasteland, the 4th fire and ice, the 4th null rod, and the time walk. Those really depend on your local meta and what you can expect to face.

Interesting. I would never cut the fourth Wasteland, Fire/Ice, Null Rod, or Time Walk. To my mind, unless you're some freak psychic who can predict a metagame or you have some sort of inside information as to what the majority of the field is playing, there is no exception to that rule. These cards are absolutely critical to the underlying flow of the deck.

I like having 2 crucibles main deck to help out the stax matchup and to have a reasonable chance of seeing crucible in a deck without any tutors. I usually opt for 3 null rods and 2 crucible combination, to help minimize the dead null rod draws and boost the chance of actually seeing crucible in a given game

Also interesting. I never want to see a Crucible in the majority of my match-ups before turn 5. That's the reason there is only one in the deck. I guess if you wanted to hedge strongly against Stax, I could understand cutting the third misdirection for an additional Crucible. However, regarding what you've implied above, it's wrong to suggest cutting a Null Rod for another Crucible with the premise that this specific change is going to be better against Stax. Your game plan against Stax essentially revolves around Null Rod. There is no reason why you would want to run any less than four in this matchup.

It seems that certain players and myself have reached an impasse in reasoning regarding Null Rod. There seems to be players that agree that it is the cornerstone of mana denial strategies and even entire archetypes, but then these same players only run three copies in their lists. This is truly puzzling. If Null Rod is such an important card, why would you not run the maximum number of copies so that you increase your chances of seeing it early? If you see two early, that's not necessarily bad, because that implies that one will most likely be resolving, at which point you should be in good shape. After all, if it is so important, seeing two shouldn't be a sorry sight. If it is, then that requires conceding that Null Rod isn't important enough to warrant four copies. I can assure you that it is one of the most important cards, if not the most important, in this entire deck. If you can agree on this point, then I don't think you'll be able to find a compelling argument for running any less than four.

The new card negate warrants serious consideration in Landstill since it increases your chances of having a solid multipurpose counter up turn one and helps offset the often seen problem in landstill of having a blue source and colorless source of mana on turn two.

I agree that Negate is something worth testing out, perhaps in 1-2 copies as a replacement for the 3rd Misdirection and something else. The "often seen" problem you're referring to is only a problem if you actually need that second blue source. If you're relying so heavily on that opening Drain in your hand, why would you ever keep a hand that doesn't have the mana to support it? 

That brings up mox ruby as another serious consideration. Even though it is anti-synergestic with null rod, mox ruby does a lot for the deck by enabling early standstills and negate as well as bringing pyro/REBs online fast on games 2 and 3.

Mox Ruby also has poor synergy under Standstill, especially considering that you'd be running Ruby in one of the current land slots. The Ruby does not enable REB/Pyro any faster than a regular land drop does. Sure, it enables less likely scenarios such as Land-Ruby + Blast/Stifle or Blastx2, but having access to one blast is most critical, and Mox Ruby does make this play any more likely. Running Ruby carries a higher risk/reward, and this is not the way Landstill is meant to be designed. It is not meant to pump out mana acceleration, and running a non-essential accelerant crosses the threshold of what I consider to be acceptable risk/reward factor.

Spell snare is also a card worth considering main deck since it hits a lot of the cards you care about for a mere 1 mana.

Spell Snare is ok. I personally wouldn't run it, but I don't think it is a poor choice. Again, this sort of card choice leans towards a higher risk/reward.

A singleton of brainstorm is also worthy of consideration

... in place of what, exactly? I'm curious, because I've tested this card in many Landstill manifestations and always reach the same conclusion, that being: "Gee, I wish you were the card I'm actually looking for."

Notes on sideboard

I agree with everything you've stated here, except the blurb about R&R. Yes, it has taken a hit because of Thorn, but all the other solutions you've described also have significant disadvantages. Flux is blastable, and since it becomes more potent in multiples, I wouldn't run this as any less than a 3-of. A lone Energy Flux is rarely good enough to seal the deal against Shop decks, whereas a timely R&R is often backbreaking. Ingot Chewer is a 1-1 trade, which is pretty underwhelming. Shattering Spree forces you to go all-in with your mana, which is never good against Stax. Shaman is rather weak, since it takes five mana to eat a Sphere/Thorn.

In my current testing against Shop decks, it is clear that R&R has gotten weaker, but the dynamic of the matchup has also changed. I'm currently pursuing a different line of play against that deck and so far it has been successful, but I need to go a little further to be absolutely sure that it is sound.

[Stormanimagus]

I agree with everything you've stated here, except the blurb about R&R. Yes, it has taken a hit because of Thorn, but all the other solutions you've described also have significant disadvantages. Flux is blastable, and since it becomes more potent in multiples, I wouldn't run this as any less than a 3-of. A lone Energy Flux is rarely good enough to seal the deal against Shop decks, whereas a timely R&R is often backbreaking. Ingot Chewer is a 1-1 trade, which is pretty underwhelming. Shattering Spree forces you to go all-in with your mana, which is never good against Stax. Shaman is rather weak, since it takes five mana to eat a Sphere/Thorn.

In my current testing against Shop decks, it is clear that R&R has gotten weaker, but the dynamic of the matchup has also changed. I'm currently pursuing a different line of play against that deck and so far it has been successful, but I need to go a little further to be absolutely sure that it is sound.

Shock Wave. You've made a solid impact on my thinking with how this deck works and I am basically in agreement with 95 % of what you've been saying (far cry from some of my presumptive statements earlier, which I apologize for. I honestly like debate, and I'm glad you've been so responsive. There's a maturity on these forums regarding magic that doesn't really exist on the Wizards forums and it's refreshing), but I do have a couple questions still:

1. Is R & R still good enough to warrant the SB space vs. stax? I know this deck rarely likes to tap out for any reason, but I was merely suggesting the Shaman because he serves many of the functions that Chain Of Vapor serves in the MD and, perhaps more importantly, he eats Chalices for good (unless they have welder out in which case they can't set Chalice at 2 through welding anyway). He also kind serves as Null Rods 5 and 6 (I know that's a real stretch because the rod has a one time 2 mana commitment and cuts off more than just moxen, but essentially you are paying R and then 1,2,3,4 or as many mana as you feel you can tap to leave enough open, in order to take out moxen). I guess I'd just like a more in depth explanation as to why the Shaman isn't good for landstill. What other options do we even really have in colors. Here's my short list. I'm sure I'm forgetting some:

Chalice Of The Void
Null Rod

Viashino Heretic
R & R
G. Shaman
Shattering Spree
Ancient Grudge (pretty bad unless you plan on splashing green)
Ingot Chewer

Chain Of Vapor
Hurkyl's Recall
Rebuild
Energy Flux

Next regarding this list is that I think you may be underestimating the power of Energy Flux. Tapping out on your turn after a drain or even just tapping out to play this card should never be a problem. The first flux will lock them out of the game in my experience. They'll either:

a) Tap out to save important stuff.
b) start saccing right away.

And what answers does Stax have to Enchantments? Smokestack?

Anyhoo, I know Flux doesn't exactly fit in with the style of this deck, but I think it is an offensive answer that is not being given enough attention. As far as actually f-ing up stax's gameplan Flux does a ton more for you than Kataki. Kataki IS better choice for decks that can effectively run it because it is also a stick, but Flux certainly causes more problems and the simple reason is that they can't use moxen to simply pay for themselves. They must tap 2 moxen to pay for 1. Basically that, or they must use Ancient Tomb/City per moxen and that'll still set them back as it'll probably keep them off Jugg or Trike for that turn while you build up your offense again.

I know this deck isn't offense but, with the current Stax lists, that just go for the jugular on turn 1, wouldn't an offensive thorn in their side be a better card than a marginal removal spell in R & R? I dunno. I'll certainly have to test Flux before I draw any more conclusions, but it seems a possibility.

Next I'd like to address ET vs. CoV. I think I'm finally in agreement on some things we've argued regarding this card. It IS a really nice out game 1 to Chalice @ 2 (though I think that play will become rare as only MUD even plays Chalice MD and Chalice @ 2 is a big trade-off for them because it shuts down 8 of their 9 spheres). I mean, if we set aside the Chalice @ 2 problem for a moment (as I think it is rare that they'll even know to set Chalice @ 2 game 1 before they really know what you're playing, which, I think, will take them at least 1-2 turns), why doesn't ET warrant consideration for the game-swinging effect it can have in certain matchups at 1 CC more? It is certainly not dead in the matchups CoV was good against right? And it affects a possible Win for the decks we would have a big problem against like Ichorid. Here are the decks where ET does some good stuff:

Ichorid (Slow play them by Stifling some of their early Bazaar. Force them to "go all in" be reanimating Flame-Kin and then bounce all their stuff. I realize that there are lots of Therapies to worry about so I'm not sure this'll work. Anyway though, you get the idea. Echoing Truth their tokens)

Empty Combo (Obvious)
Goblins (Less Obvious, but still good. You'd get tokens they produce from Siege-Gang)
Dawn Of The Dead (Helps potentially swing things against Zombie Infestation)

I dunno. I'm more shakey on ET now that I know Chalice @1 really isn't an option against most GAT lists as you'll want to be able to play REB and Pyro. I guess they both have some perks, ET and CoV, but I'm not sure what outweighs what.

Is ET truly game-changing vs. Ichorid? Does it make the match winnable? Or will they just rape your hand and then go off in your face?

Anyway, ET over CoV is probably not the right choice right now. I am just trying to explain the reasoning that led me to it before.

What I'd really like to discuss is the Stax stuff. R & R? Flux? Shaman?

[feyd]

I think the reason that Mr. M gave concerning energy flux is that it can and usually will be reb'd once game 2 comes around.  Workshop decks can easily, and often do, run red as a way to get around a lot of hate and provide hate of their own.  With one flux in play a workshop player could easily pay for most of his artifacts, perhaps all of them even, ad not have to sacrifice anything at all.  If the shop player has a decently developed gy/board and he has an active welder then energy flux is essentially useless.  A competant shop player can easily survive while inside the energy flux. 
  On the other hand if you wait for the shop player to overextend into an expensive play and you rack and ruin his creature/equipment/lock component then you not only shifted tempo hugely in your favor but you also netted a 2-for-1 trade-off with him. 
   Chalice of the void does not belong in the maindeck IMO.  You are correct when you say that it is a versatile card and its uses are vast but going into a match blind with chalice main deck is pretty counterintuitive.
Here are a few examples:
1: You go into game one with chalice in hand and the ability to cast chalice at 0, or 1 on turn 1.  Against an unkown opponent you can't say with certainty whether either play will be in the slightest bit effective or completely useless.
2: You cast chalice with the optimal number of charge counters on it and still have 3 potentially dead draws later in the first game.
3:  You completely whiff with chalice and end up cutting yourself off at the knees, causing yourself more disruption than your opponent.

Chalice, if used at all, should be in the sideboard.  That way you will have valuable information from game one with which to better utilize chalice.  Like the progenitor of this deck said earlier: this deck was designed in the most broad way so as to have the best possible games against an unknown field.  Chalice is not very useful untill you know how to apply it.

You have made a big stink about how the deck's creator dissagrees with you about echoing truth.  You can certainly take his advise/decklist and trust it blindly.  I think what he was trying to get across is that you should test echoing truth and chain of vapor each against stax/whatever deck and get a feel about how they work.  Personally in my iteration of red/blue landstill I only use 2 bounce spells and they are one each of echoing truth and chain of vapor.  I have no complaints with this setup, but on the other hand I do run more burn spells in the form of lightning bolts which helps with removal/direct damage to the dome.  In my own testing they both have uses but in all honesty chain of vapor is just cheaper and there is nothing they can really target of yours that would set you back if they decided to copy it, which means if it is one threat you are looking to get rid of COV is superior.

I can say with certainty, though, that landstill does not like summoning creatures.  In certain situations they have their uses but in landstill their roles aren't as easily defined or they can be so easily replaced with spells.  For instance gorilla shaman, ingot chewer, and viashino heretic could be replaced with rack and ruin, meltdown, or shattering spree (worst option IMO) for red or hurkyll's recall, rebuild, or even more bounce for blue.  I think out of all those creatures heretic seems to be the best against stax and shaman is decent against an unkown field.  Meanwhile all the blue spells pitch to force/misd and are comparatively costed.

Lastly I would like to drop a fact of life in your lap:  Ichorid walks all over landstill.  The deck functions like a well oiled machine game one against the majority of the field the majority of the time.  It is a fast aggro/combo deck which has far too much disruption far too quickly for landstill to do much about.  They don't cast many spells that are important  and the ones that are important get serious ammounts of protection in the form of cabal therapy...over and over, sometimes unmask, hell I've been unmasked and therapied the same turn by ichorid many times.  There's not much you can do about this matchup.
     Luckily for landstill players (who don't run ichorid hate) the vast majority of the field puts a lot of effort into stopping flash/ichorid decks with all their leylines/needles/crypts.  This ammount of resistance by such a large portion of the gaming community sort of discourages ichorid/flash decks from showing up.  Don't be mistaken: Ichorid and flash DO show up and they do win some but they will evetually get caught in a sticky situation because all that hate in peoples' sideboards to stop them will usually weed them out of the top 8. 

   I hope I have helped a little bit at least.  Good luck with your testing

[Stormanimagus]

All very good points. Yeah, Ichorid is a lost cause. I forgot about Unmask entirely lol. I guess Echoing Truth really isn't the best bounce in the world for what I'd want to use it for.

As for Stax Hate. Yeah, I also forgot about Stax Players siding in REB. Do a lot of them do this? I KNOW MUD won't for obvious mana reasons, but does Mono-Red often do this? Don't they just want to lock the opponent out of the game? I guess REB would be a good choice, but I'm not sure how many Stax players run it all the same.

Question: Excluding REB and Pyro for a moment, how does Stax really get around even 1 Flux? Goblin Welder? Isn't that why we also run 4 Fire // Ice? 2-3 Bounce? Seems like Welder shouldn't be a huge problem. And if they don't have Welder on the board then they WILL be losing their artifacts. Think of a typical situation with a relatively skilled Stax player:

Stax: Turn 1: Shop, Mox, Thorn/Sphere/Trinisphere
LS: Turn 1: Land, Go
Stax: Turn 2: Mountain, Welder (meets FoW and you pay 1), Jugg or Tangle depending on sphere situation
LS: Turn 2: Depending, Land (hopefully factory, depending on if they have waste), Rod, or Land, go
Stax: Turn 3: Tomb/Shop — Juggernaut, go
LS: Turn 3: Land, Go
Stax: Turn 4: Stax swings. You take 5. They play thorn/sphere number 2. You Drain it.
LS: Turn 4: Sink Drain mana into Flux. Play flux
Stax: Turn 5: Even with only 1 mox to support here's their situation.

Mountain, Tomb, Shop (maybe x 2), 1 Mox

Must pay:
2 for Mox
2 for Sphere/Thorn
2 for Jugg
2 for ?

We are talking about 6-8 mana investment minimum and they only have a mountain tomb and mox to pay with. This means they'll have to sac 1-2 things. Now for the first turn they can tap mox and sac it and sac a thorn or other randomness to keep Jugg on the table, but if I wasteland a turn later they'll be in big trouble.

I understand Flux sucks when facing down Welder, but I think it is otherwise a good card that can slowly win you the game against a deck designed to slowly win the game against you.

Now granted you'll most often need to resolve a Mana Drain to resolve it, but you just have to find the right time.
That's why I feel Flux could be of use. I do, however, still see the argument for R & R and may run that instead.

My main concern with Heretic is that you need Red available the turn after you cast it. With wasteland this becomes a problem. I like Heretic as an offensive answer and it is certainly more unexpected and resilient to hate, but I'd like people's opinions on it.

Meltdown. . . Hmmmmm. . .

[feyd]

Just wondering...have you ever played against stax?  I don't think you realize their ability to deny mana.  One of stax' main game plans is to deny mana and make life difficult for anyone trying to cast spells.  Energy flux isn't always easy to cast to begin with, and I'm not saying rack and ruin is any easier to cast, but stax, mainly red workshop, runs rebs/pyroblasts/goblin welders.  You say MUD doesn't have as many options as stax/red workshop?  How about metalworker?  That single card alone could create a beast load of mana, more than enough to pay for the flux, sometimes it could pay for all their artifacts twice over.  That means that if MUD has an active metalworker they could potentially fight through two fluxs with ease.  If they have two metalworkers out they have mana and  more than enough to throw away. 
     Stax doesn't just crumble to flux either, even without REBs.  They sometimes run city of traitors, mana crypt, mana vault,welder, ancient tomb, again metalworker, tolarian academy, or just a crap load of mountains.  They have outs vs flux.  Plus there is the fact that there might be extreme prejudice against all your nonbasic lands and artifacts.  Let's also not forget that you want your mana up all the time and having to tap down for energy flux to keep your own moxen seems lame.  You don't need to worry about them having a crap load of artifacts out but you do need to worry about a few key artifacts staying in play.  If workshop has the opportunity to keep those lock pieces out then you will be in trouble regardless of whether or not you have flux out.  With rack and ruin you can decisively blast their most important pieces hopefully before they equip a sword of fire and ice onto the bugger or before their lock component starts hurting you.

[credmond]

Shockwave,

I don't understand the logic of running Crucible of Worlds as a one of in a deck without tutors. You do realize that as a one-of you will be at poor odds of seeing the Crucible ever in any particular game, don't you?

I have found that having 5 total artifact dumps in the form of null rod and crucible is about right. Running Crucible as a one-of seems mathematically wrong and I have found it to be experientially wrong. Having a two-of of Crucible makes a big difference in terms of actually seeing it and making sure it gets into play when you do see it.

So in a sense the 2nd Crucible bumps out the 4th null rod to make a balanced 2 crucible 3 null rod split. If I am worrying about Stax in a local meta then I might even go up to 4 null rods and drop the 3rd misdirection, etc.

The point is I like to see Crucible in a game so I run 2.

[RJ]

All very good points. Yeah, Ichorid is a lost cause. I forgot about Unmask entirely lol. I guess Echoing Truth really isn't the best bounce in the world for what I'd want to use it for.

As for Stax Hate. Yeah, I also forgot about Stax Players siding in REB. Do a lot of them do this? I KNOW MUD won't for obvious mana reasons, but does Mono-Red often do this? Don't they just want to lock the opponent out of the game? I guess REB would be a good choice, but I'm not sure how many Stax players run it all the same.

Question: Excluding REB and Pyro for a moment, how does Stax really get around even 1 Flux? Goblin Welder? Isn't that why we also run 4 Fire // Ice? 2-3 Bounce? Seems like Welder shouldn't be a huge problem. And if they don't have Welder on the board then they WILL be losing their artifacts. Think of a typical situation with a relatively skilled Stax player:

Stax: Turn 1: Shop, Mox, Thorn/Sphere/Trinisphere
LS: Turn 1: Land, Go
Stax: Turn 2: Mountain, Welder (meets FoW and you pay 1), Jugg or Tangle depending on sphere situation
LS: Turn 2: Depending, Land (hopefully factory, depending on if they have waste), Rod, or Land, go
Stax: Turn 3: Tomb/Shop — Juggernaut, go
LS: Turn 3: Land, Go
Stax: Turn 4: Stax swings. You take 5. They play thorn/sphere number 2. You Drain it.
LS: Turn 4: Sink Drain mana into Flux. Play flux
Stax: Turn 5: Even with only 1 mox to support here's their situation.

Mountain, Tomb, Shop (maybe x 2), 1 Mox

Must pay:
2 for Mox
2 for Sphere/Thorn
2 for Jugg
2 for ?

We are talking about 6-8 mana investment minimum and they only have a mountain tomb and mox to pay with. This means they'll have to sac 1-2 things. Now for the first turn they can tap mox and sac it and sac a thorn or other randomness to keep Jugg on the table, but if I wasteland a turn later they'll be in big trouble.

I understand Flux sucks when facing down Welder, but I think it is otherwise a good card that can slowly win you the game against a deck designed to slowly win the game against you.

Now granted you'll most often need to resolve a Mana Drain to resolve it, but you just have to find the right time.
That's why I feel Flux could be of use. I do, however, still see the argument for R & R and may run that instead.

My main concern with Heretic is that you need Red available the turn after you cast it. With wasteland this becomes a problem. I like Heretic as an offensive answer and it is certainly more unexpected and resilient to hate, but I'd like people's opinions on it.

Meltdown. . . Hmmmmm. . .

A couple quick things...the shop aggro matchup is infinitely better when you have chain of vapor in the main.  The help with the early thorn/sphere until you can find answers to whatever large robots/welders they put into play.  This matchup is better with chain that ET.

Against both stax and shop aggro R&R out of the board is excellent when compared to flux.  Having played stax for years, R&R is a card you don't want to see on the other side because most of your permanents aren't really doing anything.  Newer lists attempt to rectify this situation, but for the most part hitting Crucible/Sphere with R&R will probably be game winning assuming that you aren't already getting blown out.

[Stormanimagus]

A couple quick things...the shop aggro matchup is infinitely better when you have chain of vapor in the main.  The help with the early thorn/sphere until you can find answers to whatever large robots/welders they put into play.  This matchup is better with chain that ET.

Against both stax and shop aggro R&R out of the board is excellent when compared to flux.  Having played stax for years, R&R is a card you don't want to see on the other side because most of your permanents aren't really doing anything.  Newer lists attempt to rectify this situation, but for the most part hitting Crucible/Sphere with R&R will probably be game winning assuming that you aren't already getting blown out.

Yeah, I figured that R & R was better. So perhaps just 3 of those in the SB really is the way to go and just cut the other Shenanigans. Chain is also looking better in most scenarios. Looks like the pros really do build THE BEST DECKS. I'm basically back to Mattiuzzo's original list. I guess I better hope I only see 1 Ichorid deck during the tourney and that it isn't in the finals lol .

[Shock Wave]

I don't understand the logic of running Crucible of Worlds as a one of in a deck without tutors. You do realize that as a one-of you will be at poor odds of seeing the Crucible ever in any particular game, don't you?

Well, let me expand on the logic. I don't want to see Crucible before the mid-game (turn 5ish), except against Stax. It just isn't very good against most decks. When the format was slower, Crucible was really good, but nowadays most decks don't need that much mana to get a serious threat on the board. If I increase the number of Crucibles, I increase the chances of seeing it when I really don't want to. Crucible is the "scoop" card in this deck. It is supposed to come to down after you've stabilized, but it does not help you stabilize. Landstill wins after having battled not to lose. Crucible is a 3cc spell that really doesn't prevent your opponent from winning.

Also, I think stating that the odds are poor of seeing a lone Crucible in a Landstill match is misleading. Yes, it is one card in 60, but Landstill matches are generally very long. Often I'll finish a match with less than 30 cards left in my library. That means that by the end of the game, the odds of me having seeing a Crucible are greater than 50%. The odds of me seeing it early are less, but as the game goes on, the odds obviously increase. The odds of seeing Crucible are less (early game) because this is the time when it is less effective. As the odds of seeing Crucible increase, so does the value of the card when it becomes available.

I have found that having 5 total artifact dumps in the form of null rod and crucible is about right. Running Crucible as a one-of seems mathematically wrong and I have found it to be experientially wrong. Having a two-of of Crucible makes a big difference in terms of actually seeing it and making sure it gets into play when you do see it.

That's great. I'm not going to try to change your mind. If it works for you, stick to it.

So in a sense the 2nd Crucible bumps out the 4th null rod to make a balanced 2 crucible 3 null rod split. If I am worrying about Stax in a local meta then I might even go up to 4 null rods and drop the 3rd misdirection, etc.

I wouldn't bump for the fourth Null Rod for anything. For me, there is no exception to this rule.

[Stormanimagus]

Hey guys, can I bring up something that has yet to be discussed? The Man Lands of the deck. Now Shock Wave had an original config of this:

4 Factory
3 Conclave

But in light of the releasing of Mutavault I think that might change things a bit. Now I know we don't want to go to too many colorless land sources but Mutavault seems really good here at:

a)coming into play untapped
b)being able to be a 3/3 with a factory in play

I dunno. I do like the fact that the Conclave has evasion. That could break a potential Stalemate in the game. Here's a manabase with a different Manland config that I've been working on. Comments/Criticism are, as always, appreciated:

4 Factory
2 Mutavault
2 Conclave
2 Delta
2 Strand
4 Volcanic
3 Island
1 Library Of Alexandria
4 Waste
1 Strip

That comes to 25 land. Thoughts?

[hauntedechos]

4 Factory
1 Mutavault
3 Conclave

You want to keep the conclaves up as 5 ground attackers is enough. If you insist on adding mutavault then I think 1 is the limit really.  It minimizes the amount of colourless mana being added while adding to the % of seeing a manland that isn't mana intensive early.  reducing the conclaves to 3 also reduces the % to seeing a land that comes in tapped, which may or may not be a significant difference.

If I was to add Mutavaults in, that's the configuration I would roll with, but then I'm not the deck's creator and would love to hear what he has to say about the Mutavault topic.

[Stormanimagus]

No more thoughts on the manland config folks?

[feyd]

The real issue is not whether the land is a man-land or not.  The issue is whether it can produce colored mana.  Like haunted said, the fact that it doesn't produce colored mana hurts.  I personally think mutavault is the weakest man land.  It is not as good as mishra's factory seeing as it doesn't have the pump effect.  It does not produce colored mana like conclave.  It dies to all non-basic hate just like the rest of the man lands.  The only thing really going for it is that it comes into play untapped...but seeing as it doesn't produce blue/red anyway this ability is neglible.  Conclave will almost always be a better play.  Even if the mutavault comes into play untapped that doesn't mean it can attack this turn anyway.  Just like all the manlands you will have to wait a turn to attack with the vault.  Colored mana in a landstill build is usually at a premium what with all the strip mine/wastelands/factories you are running.  Conclave > mutavault in my opinion
   Here's the question:  Would you rather have 1 colorless mana open this turn or would you rather have blue mana open next turn?

[Stormanimagus]

The real issue is not whether the land is a man-land or not.  The issue is whether it can produce colored mana.  Like haunted said, the fact that it doesn't produce colored mana hurts.  I personally think mutavault is the weakest man land.  It is not as good as mishra's factory seeing as it doesn't have the pump effect.  It does not produce colored mana like conclave.  It dies to all non-basic hate just like the rest of the man lands.  The only thing really going for it is that it comes into play untapped...but seeing as it doesn't produce blue/red anyway this ability is neglible.  Conclave will almost always be a better play.  Even if the mutavault comes into play untapped that doesn't mean it can attack this turn anyway.  Just like all the manlands you will have to wait a turn to attack with the vault.  Colored mana in a landstill build is usually at a premium what with all the strip mine/wastelands/factories you are running.  Conclave > mutavault in my opinion
   Here's the question:  Would you rather have 1 colorless mana open this turn or would you rather have blue mana open next turn?

I see most of your points. If I wasn't running Mana Drain as a 4-of MD, however, I'd probably say that vault is better and here's why:

Early game Conclave can screw up your mana availability

Mutavault can be pumped by factory (this is not irrelevant when facing down a juggernaut)

Mutavault has 2 toughness as a creature

I dunno. Conclave has certainly been my manland of choice, but perhaps running 1 vault wouldn't hurt? like the config above? 4 Factory 1 Vault and 3 Conclave? That seems pretty solid to me.

[Dante]

Some general comments about the whole thread - I've always had a UR Landstill deck sleeved up for the last couple years and have played it at several small tournaments as well as the last SCG Chicago (to a middle of the pack finish).

My experiences with a build like this was:

- The answer to the question about mana is generally "I will want more blue mana next turn than a colorless this turn" - if you cut something for a Mutavault, it better not be anything that produces or fetches blue mana.

- Null Rod is a 4-of maindeck.  Richard already gave the reasons, but it's rare you see one in your opening hand and don't smile.  If you want to think of the "artifact package [rods + crucibles]" as a "package", 4 of them should be Null Rods.  I believe thinking of them together is an incorrect way since Null Rod is proactive, early disruption and Crucible is a late-game card in this deck.

- 2nd crucible - I cut the 3rd MisD for the 2nd crucible at SCG Chicago and notice a much higher percentage of the time I was wishing the Crucible was something else - I definitely experiences the "hand-clogging" of an early Crucible.  This ties into my next point:

- Pay attention to Rich's comment about not attacking too early - at SCG chicago, I was rusty and there were 3 games I gave away (I may have lost them anyway, but in these cases I literally lost the next turn specifically because I attacked) because I forgot my role - I figured "I have double counter backup, let's get in some damage because my matches go to time a lot".  Well all 3 of those games I needed the 3rd disruption (stifle or red blast) that was in my hand that I couldn't cast because I spent mana to attack and got blasted by a Yawg Will or ETW.  A good rule of thumb for non-experts (e.g. most of us) with this deck is you should only attack if on the opponents turn you will still be able to cast every instant in your hand.  Having a 2nd crucible leads to wanting to drop it earlier than you need to, in addition to not helping the early/mid game.

[mrrstn]

I've been playing Landstill for the past month and it has been hard but rewarding.
I've also been observing the evolution of this thread the past weeks, which I thought would degenerate into nothing but flaming. But I was proven wrong.
I very much like how shockwave is responding to the thread starter. The debate has been really good as it helps me better understand the deck and what nots. The card choices, the logic behind, its very intellectual and mature.
Kudos to you Mr.Mattiuzzo!
I hope you can do the primer soon.
_______

[mrrstn]

I'm currently working on the following list of the February 16 Waterbury and I'd like all of your input on it.

How'd the tournament go? Which particular list did you opt to use?

[Stormanimagus]

I'm currently working on the following list of the February 16 Waterbury and I'd like all of your input on it.

How'd the tournament go? Which particular list did you opt to use?

I used Mattiuzzo's list from Gencon with the following changes : -2 Steam Vents, +1 Mutavault, +1 Island. I went 3-3-1 with the deck but started out 2-0. I made a play mistake here or there, but I'm not able to tell which ones actually may have cost me. All in all I placed 38th and had a good time with the deck. Mattiuzzo is right. It is a highly interactive deck and every game is a struggle. Word of advice to everyone playing at a T1 event. If a player is playing UWB that does not necessarily indicate Fish. I got a big ouch on that one game 2 against a bomberman player when I put him on fish after beating him game 1 (and not seeing his deck really at all), and sided out Null Rod for Threads Of Disloyalty. Big ooops there. lol. Anyhoo, it was a fun tourney and I'm glad I outplayed a lot of people. Things may have been closer to T16 for me if I could have found a way to win, what I thought was a favorable matchup against Travis Laplante. He was bascially playing some old Welder Tricks deck without any real good lock components. He kinda lucksacked game 3 and had Turn 1 Crucible with FoW backup. That was probably the only play that would REALLY lock the game for him (he didn't follow up with waste recursion) because my opening 6 card hand included FoW, Standstill, Waste and other irrelevant cards. If I had been able to waste his Shop on turn 1 I think the game might have gone much differently. Here's the lesson for all you shop players out there. CRUCIBLE IS THE NUTS!!! It is not just good at Waste recursion (although that is obviously a use for it). It is also good at keeping your opponent's wastes at bay. Well Done Travis, and well done going all the way to the Top 8. This was one of the most fun Waterburys yet for me.

Oh, and one more thing. I beat a flash deck 2-0 early. Game 1 was some awesome sauce when he tried to go off turn 2. I had Sapphire and Volc out and I stifled a fetch of his. He proceeds to Pact for ESG, and then flash. I proceed to FoW. He then's Negations it. I then Stifle the Hulk. I had FoW and double Stifle! He was pretty shocked about that one. A highlight of my tourney. . Thanks for the deck Rich. It performed well. My performance was only as good as a moderately inexperienced Vintage player's will be, but I think I piloted it pretty well.

[Dante]

Like you discovered, Sliver Flash should be a hugely favorable matchup because you have SO many 0 and 1 CC disruptive spells in addition to the 4 FOW 4 Drain 2-3 MisD counter package.  Plus you've got Fire/Ice.

So pre-board you have

11 counters
4 stifle
4 Fire/Ice
3 bounce (only if they use a Pact, then you bounce the haste sliver).

Post board you have access to 5 REB and your 4 chalice (chalice for 0 can be a strong play on a deck with 5-7 pacts).  Be aware of Tarmogoyf though!

[mrrstn]

I've been playing this list for the past 1 or so months and I think that there is still room for it to improve.
My meta is mostly Fish, Faeries, Suiblack, STAX (powered and unpowered- and other stax variants), Powered Combo Long Variants, Oath, Flash, Platinum control, and other agrro variants for the unpowered.

4 Volcanic Island
2 Flooded Strand
2 Polluted Delta
1 Steam Vents
4 Mishra's Factory
4 Wasteland
1 Strip Mine
1 Library of Alexandria
2 Faerie Conclave
3 Island

4 FoW
4 Drains
2 Spell Snare
3 Stifle
2 Misdirection
4 Standstill
4 Brainstorm
4 Fire/Ice
1 CoW
2 Nev's Disk
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Vedalken Shackles
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Lightning Bolt
2 Chain of Vapor

Some stuff that should be put into consideration are:
1. I still haven't acquired the other Power i.e. Timewalk and Lotus yet and would just have to do with the Sapphire and the AR.
2. The disk is in the main mostly for some (threatening) permanents that I wasn't able to counter. I drain into it most of the time.
3. Rods are not in the main since majority of the players here are unpowered, and I have to work my way with them in the Swiss before I get into the Top8 where the powered players usually are.
4. GAT is non-existent.

I would highly appreciate if you people can help me iron out the most optimal build for me or my meta.

[TheJesus]

There haven't been many posts in a while so I thought I'd get discussion going again.

I agree that 1 crucible is enough maindeck and also like 2 chalices.  The numbers are perfect for what you want.  As discussed much earlier in this thread, chalice at 0 is not what this deck wants.  Chalices at 1-2 late game are what you're looking for.  Crucible is not required at all.  It is a luxury or a late game lock mostly.  That's why you run the extra copies in the sideboard.

Is Ichorid really an auto-loss. Game 1 is really bad, but I did manage to win 2 of 3 matches against a competent player.  Echoing Truth and Pyroclasm were huge in these victories as was Threads.  It is important to note that my game plan was to deck my opponent via Standstills.  I only once actually attacked him for the win.  Two matches he scooped with an empty board and (mostly) hand.

I don't think the normal Leyline, Tormond's Crypt / Relic of Progenisis plan is what we are looking for.  I was trying to find a 2x sb card and may have succeeded:

Mogg War Marshall

He removes bridges because he self-destructs and gives you blockers.  Plus he's cheap and on-color.  The deck I'm running is from Col_Impact:

    1 Library of Alexandria
    1 Strip Mine
    4 Wasteland
    2 Polluted Delta
    3 Flooded Strand
    2 Island
    4 Volcanic Island
    3 Faerie Conclave
    1 Mishra's Factory
    1 Mishra's Factory
    1 Mishra's Factory
    1 Mishra's Factory
    1 Black Lotus
    1 Mox Ruby
    1 Mox Sapphire
    4 Force of Will
    4 Mana Drain
    1 Ancestral Recall
    1 Time Walk
    1 Misdirection
    4 Stifle
    1 Pyroblast
    1 Crucible of Worlds
    4 Standstill
    2 Chalice of the Void
    3 Null Rod
    1 Chain of Vapor
    2 Echoing Truth
    4 Fire/Ice

SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Crucible of Worlds
SB: 2 Chalice of the Void
SB: 2 Red Elemental Blast
SB: 3 Threads of Disloyalty
SB: 1 Rack and Ruin
SB: 2 Pyroclasm
SB: 2 Ingot Chewer

The extra chalices are mainly against combo, but I'm great against tez and pretty good against tendrils decks already.  So the goblin would go there.