[Deck Article] Keeper Reborn

[bluemage55]

I strongly try to suggest you try to digest the above post, as it clearly articulates the problems with the design of your deck. Theoretically, the flow of the deck seems very poor. You've been given much feedback from experienced players about why this deck is likely to fail. It seems you are convinced otherwise, and that's ok. Now, you're going to have to take the next step and apply your design in practice to loan some credibility to your innovation. It is possible that your deck has some very obscure synergies and flows much better in practice than it seems on the surface. However, trust me when I say that the experienced players on TMD have an uncanny ability to predict, with great accuracy, how a new design will translate in real-time application. We see new, strange deck ideas here every day, and most of them fail miserably. That's perfectly ok, because everyone knows how difficult it is to innovate in Vintage. My point is that if you're seeking feedback from experienced players, and you disagree with what you're being told, then the burden of proof lies with you to demonstrate that your design is capable of performing as you claim it does.

If you'll look above, you'll see that I have indeed read the post carefully and responded both with explanations and questions.

In regards to your question about Fact or Fiction, I strongly recommend adding it and a third Thirst for Knowledge. To me, it just seems like you're moving closer to Slaver, but if you're set of playing something different, at least give your deck a fair chance of drawing some cards when it counts.

You mean 4th Thirst, yes?

Also, would you mind explaning why the singleton Gush is a poor choice?  I'll repost the question I asked above:

Any particular reason why you think it's terrible?  I've found it to do some neat tricks with dodging Wasteland, getting to 3 mana spells on turn 3 without a third land, and just sinking Drain mana into.  Am I falling into the danger of cool things?

[bluemage55]

Double Post

[AngryPheldagrif]

Singleton Gush is suboptimal because while it has limited use as you described, post-restriction that is not justification enough. Any singleton has to be either ridiculously broken or universally useful. Gush as a 4-of is astronomically different in operation than Gush as a 1-of. As a 1-of (and by extension without the possibility of being combined with Fastbond) it becomes strictly worse as a sorcery-speed tutor target than Ancestral Recall in 99% of situations, is significantly worse than Fact or Fiction in terms of hardcasting, and is not broken in any conventional sense. In other words, you have virtually no reason to tutor for it.

Your rationales of making land drops and dodging Wasteland would be relevant if it were present in multiples, but as a singleton you can never count on having it in the right place at the right time. You can't add something that has a ton of drawbacks (hard to cast, provides little advantage) unless it has some specific relevant use, which Gush does not in this deck. 'Randomly useful' is not a rationale with any theory whatsoever behind it, any more than you would add in a maindeck Anarchy because it is randomly useful against White Weenie.

On an unrelated note, you can delete double posts by clicking the [Delete] button in the upper righthand corner of the post.

[Hydra]

If your entire "card engine" is just TFKs, I'm at a complete loss as to how you expect to outclass any of the above listed decks, as they all have engines that are frankly flat out better than just your TFKs.  Stars are at best "cute", and cute doesn't win tournaments.  Tops would be a bit of an improvement, but you're still going to only be better than some of the above listed decks in terms of engines with Tops instead of Stars, and when you're the control deck, your "card engine" frankly *needs* to be better than the other guy's.  That's essentially why Keeper died out in the first place, it's card advantage engine (Skeletal Scrying) proved to be inferior to CS and Gifts and thus it was muscled out.

It makes most sense to compare this deck's card drawing as well as filtering to other decks that utilize Thirst for Knowledge (here I am using the above listed changes to replace Gush with the 4th TfK, and losing the Sphere for T. Crypt):

Control Slaver (before restricted BS as I'm not too sure what a standard build would be right now) ran 4x Thirst, 4x BS, and 1x Fact (no Scroll or Vampiric to tutor for card draw). 
Compared to CS, I have -3 BS, -1 Fact, +1 Ponder, +1 Scroll, +1 Vampiric, +2 Wish -> Gifts, +4 Star.

Bomberman (again, before restricted BS) ran 3x Thirst, 4x Brainstorm,  and 2x Spellbomb (no Scroll, Demonic, or Vampiric).
Compared to Bomberman, I have -3 BS, -2 Spellbomb, +1 Thirst, +1 Ponder, +1 Scroll, +1 Demonic, +1 Vampiric, +2 Wish -> Gifts +4 Star.

In this light, I'm not terribly short on drawing through my library, if at all.  However, I have admitted a concern over an insufficient drawing engine, and if you'll refer to my reply to Shock Wave, I asked if I should run 1x Fact in addition to replacing the Gush with TfK.  As he has not yet responded, how do you feel about it?  Would an additional Fact be sufficient to allay such concerns?  Or is more required?

As far as the comparisons are, it's not appropriate to compare to past decks because of the sheer card drawing power of Brainstorm.  The past CS lists ran 9 cards that specifically read "Draw 3 cards", along with 3 Tutors (Gifts and Scrolls also had the tendency to pop up in CS as well).  Bomberman was running 8 cards that read "Draw 3", but also ran tutors like Trinket Mage to find Top to fix draws and provide a clock.

Your list is running 5 cards that say "Draw 3", a handful of tutors and some cantrips.  This is a significant decline in drawing power, and losing the interaction between Brainstorm and Fetches means not only is your drawing weaker, but your mana base is weakened.  The effect that Brainstorm had on blue decks is such that just retrofitting isn't enough, you're looking at reinventing the wheel.  Just adding FOF isn't enough, as you're still looking at the fact that you're replacing Draw 3s with cantrips, which is a significant drop in power no matter how you slice it.

Also, which CS lists are you referring to?  FoF main?  No Vamp?  I don't believe I've seen any list in well over a year that would be considered "optimal" with those sorts of decisions.

Another thing I'd like to ask about is your use of Will.  Decks like CS can "go off" with Will to stuff their mitt with cards and use Mindslaver to completely incapacitate their opponent.  Long and Gifts used it to generate the storm to just flat out win with Tendrils.  Even the old Keeper decks had Balance or Mind Twist (or both) to completely rob their opponents of outs.  Your deck lacks the ability to do this, which is a severe oversight in design if you plan on Will actually winning games for you.  Yes, sometimes Will for something simple like Recall and replaying Lotus is enough to win the game for you, but every other deck in recent memory that used Will was designed to at least in part capitalize on the "going off" aspect, and your draw engine and win conditions seem designed to negate Will's ability to do that.  I'm very curious as to whether or not you really put much thought into how Will effects the deck design, or if it's just there because it's "broken".

A very good point.  This list lacks the ability to win immediately off Will (except perhaps late in the game by wishing for Brain Freeze).  Most often Will is utilized to generate significant card advantage and establish strong board control (well worth the 2B cc).

Generally speaking, the primary benefit of casting Will for this deck is replaying Ancestral, TfKs, and Thougthseize to generate CA, as well as replenishing the cheap artifacts I have on the board.  Time Walk is of course always appreciated as well.  Most of the time, resolving Will still ends the game for all purposes and intents, despite not being immediately.  I feel the inclusion of Tendrils or Empty would simply serve as win more.  However, I'm open to the idea of utilizing Empty (I loved its many applications when I played Gush storm), but I've not included for the primary reason that I no longer have the benefit of utilizing the Gushbond engine.

Is the current list insufficient to justify the inclusion of Will?

Its not so much that you can't justify its inclusion as it is that you're not using it nearly to its potential.  You are not fully powered, lessening the ability to "go off" with Will.  The lack of Draw 3s to cast off Will mean it's more difficult for you to sculpt an "unbeatable" hand on your Will turn and you have no card that reads "I win if Will resolves" in your deck.  The reason why Gifts was able to be the 800 pound gorilla for as long as it was is because it never had to pass the turn after resolving Will.  While most CS builds didn't win on the spot from resolving Will, they had Mindslaver to make sure that they could pass the turn with no fear of reprisal.  All Will is in your deck is a CA tool, which is a gross misuse of the card compared to how other decks in the format can abuse it.  Will has been the most powerful restricted card in Magic for a quite a long time, and while it's strong enough to boost your deck, not taking advantage of its power is pretty criminal in terms of deck design.

Any particular reason why you think it's terrible?  I've found it to do some neat tricks with dodging Wasteland, getting to 3 mana spells on turn 3 without a third land, and just sinking Drain mana into.  Am I falling into the danger of cool things?

Yes, you are falling into that danger with Gush.  Gush was good unrestricted because you had Fastbond to keep your mana production on track.  Losing Fastbond means while it is free you set yourself way back in tempo, especially with the format slowing down and decks like Fish or Stax rising again.  Against a deck like those putting yourself back a turn or two of mana because you don't have Fastbond could easily cost you the game, and you lack the explosiveness to capitalize on the free cards.  Gush has never been popular in control decks because of the tempo loss associated with scooping up lands, they'd rather have all the mana on the board that they can to take advantage of things like Will.

[lplaat]

I find this thread the perfect example of often heard criticism that regular Mana Drain users i.e. "vintage experts" continually criticise decks posted by relatively new users.

I personally think bluemage55 is doing a great job at responding at commentary about his deck and is providing valuable insights in his card-choices and I think he is defending his choices well.

Keep up the good work and let's hope your deck keeps improving.

Cheers,
lplaat

[Moxlotus]

I find this thread the perfect example of often heard criticism that regular Mana Drain users i.e. "vintage experts" continually criticise decks posted by relatively new users.

If that was true it woudl be near universal.  Meadbert came out of nowhere with his 0 land Ichorid deck and it was like, holy shit, that thing is powerful.  And then there the conflicting arguments.  Not using moxen and sol ring becuase he is afraid of opposing chalices&Rods, but using Stars as TFK bait.  Why not just run the moxen and not assume that every deck is going to have turn 1 chalice for 0 and/or rod?

And finally, there is the "put up and shut them up" approach.  Before Eric Becker was a well known deck builder, he built IT (Intuition Tendrils).  He pm'd it to some people for help and insight and pretty much got laughed at.  "No Tinker-Jar LOL.  3 forces LOLZ!!!"  Then he proceeded to win/split ~9 tournaments before going to Starcity Richmond and getting a Sapphire on Saturday then another one on Sunday.

[Vegeta2711]

I find this thread the perfect example of often heard criticism that regular Mana Drain users i.e. "vintage experts" continually criticize decks posted by relatively new users.

I personally think bluemage55 is doing a great job at responding at commentary about his deck and is providing valuable insights in his card-choices and I think he is defending his choices well.

Keep up the good work and let's hope your deck keeps improving.

Cheers,
lplaat

Yes, because god forbid we give criticism. No, instead we should hand out fruit baskets and candy hearts to everyone who posts. We could become the Deviant Art of the magic world, where if you don't post puff or 'OMG YOU BROKE THE FORMAT CONGRATULATIONS' you are apparently doing a disservice to everyone. If you don't post a deck in the open forum for criticism, what was the point? Just to bestow knowledge on the unwashed masses? Here's the thing people don't seem to understand, everyone at some time or another has gotten their decks criticized on these boards. Yes, even the posters who have been here since the beginning of time.

To start with, how in the world did you know I am from Davis?

It really isn't difficult to look at your e-mail of UCdavis.edu and deduce you are in fact from Davis. 

Anyway, the reason Gush sucks have mostly been listed, but the other reason it's awful is because it doesn't pull a Voltron and combine with anything. With 4 you can chain them and abuse Fastbond and Will and go crazy with them. With one, you have this card that usually looks awkward in an opening hand and has very limited use for shenanigans down the road. The examples you gave with dodging Wasteland and casting a spell off one less land are pretty much the best-case uses for the card and they really aren't even that good. If I were playing Fish or Goblins and my opponent uses a Gush to 'ruin' my Wasteland, I'm probably pumping the first anyway because I just KO'd two lands. Sure it may not be permanent, but for most decks it doesn't need to be, all they wanted to do was knock you off X lands/mana for a few turns.

[bluemage55]

Singleton Gush is suboptimal because while it has limited use as you described, post-restriction that is not justification enough. Any singleton has to be either ridiculously broken or universally useful. Gush as a 4-of is astronomically different in operation than Gush as a 1-of. As a 1-of (and by extension without the possibility of being combined with Fastbond) it becomes strictly worse as a sorcery-speed tutor target than Ancestral Recall in 99% of situations, is significantly worse than Fact or Fiction in terms of hardcasting, and is not broken in any conventional sense. In other words, you have virtually no reason to tutor for it.

Your rationales of making land drops and dodging Wasteland would be relevant if it were present in multiples, but as a singleton you can never count on having it in the right place at the right time. You can't add something that has a ton of drawbacks (hard to cast, provides little advantage) unless it has some specific relevant use, which Gush does not in this deck. 'Randomly useful' is not a rationale with any theory whatsoever behind it, any more than you would add in a maindeck Anarchy because it is randomly useful against White Weenie.

Point conceded.  As noted above, Gush has been removed for a 4th Thirst.

On an unrelated note, you can delete double posts by clicking the [Delete] button in the upper righthand corner of the post.

I don't actually see any such delete button.  Am I missing something?

[Shock Wave]

If you'll look above, you'll see that I have indeed read the post carefully and responded both with explanations and questions.

Well, that's great. It was worth posting because most new users with new decks ideas have difficulty receiving criticism, and for a spell, it seemed like you fit the stereotype. Whether you listen to the advice or not, it's important that you digest it so that when you actually play your deck in a tournament, you'll be able to reflect and say "Ahhh that's what he was talking about!" or "See? He was out to lunch." .

Also, would you mind explaning why the singleton Gush is a poor choice?

AngryPheldagrif is doing a very good job of addressing your concerns. He pretty much has it covered.

[nineisnoone]

So what exactly is Welder/Star supposed to offer? Welder on its own is largely irrelevant aside from recurring Tormod's Crypt and mana tricks, aside from your single Platinum Angel which you want to be Tinkering out anyways. Star? Star is, as Zherbus said, a tempo black hole. I'm going to explain this in the next paragraph. Together? Together the two cards, with the additional requirement of another artifact in play or the graveyard, provide an engine which doesn't even achieve raw parity until the third turn of successful operation. That isn't an engine, it's a cute trick in the worst way.

It's not intended to be an engine.  The most important reason the Stars are being used is that they are artifacts, which means that they pitch to Thirst for Knowledge and can be sacrificed for Tinker.  The fact that they can be used with Welder to draw cards is a cute trick, and I've never pretended otherwise.

Right.  That's what my problem is.  It's just a cute trick, otherwise it's an artifact that does nothing.  Why run cute tricks when you can run good cards?  No one is saying that you're saying its "the bomb diggity."  In fact, the fact that you are saying that's it's a cute trick at best is what confuses me.

I mean, a TFK/Tinker/Platz in hand isn't card disadvantage just because you don't play it on turn 1. It just might be the wrong card at the wrong time, but it's not necessarily "bad."  It's just not the right card at the right time. 

Of course, the thing is when is Chromatic Sphere the right card at the right time?  This is when the "cute trick" comes into view.  That's really the only "right card, right time" for Chromatic Sphere.  But "right card, right time" doesn't amount to much.  In terms of pitching it to TFK, it's as good as any other artifact in the game. And other times, it does nothing, for no really effect. So why not run a card you'd like to draw into, rather than a card you'd like to draw out of?

You try to answer my argument with, "then why run draw spells?", but it's not like people run "Cantrip - U, Draw 1 card."

That said, what sets the Stars apart from other artifacts I can be pitching to Thirst is that they are inexpensive and cycle for a net cost of 1 mana.  So if they are tempo losses, they are better in that regard than AK in that they cycle for a net loss of 1 colorless mana rather than 2 (and do another cute trick in color filtering, which is randomly good for the rare color screw moment and EE).  They also cost you net 0 mana when you have Academy in play.

You can't analyze AK from the rest of it's package. 

That said, if I am just evaluating the 1 AK, then I would tell you not to run that too.  So that doesn't win you much.

Is there a significant problem with an artifact that cycles for net -1 mana?  If so, why is Top considered acceptable?

Would you be as critical if it were Top instead?

I've never seen a 4 Top list outside of a Legacy/Extended Counterbalance deck. In Vintage, I think the most I've seen is 2. You run 5 Spheres.

I wouldn't be as critical.  There would be a morbid curiosity to seeing it in action.  But I would still be critical.

[nineisnoone]

I find this thread the perfect example of often heard criticism that regular Mana Drain users i.e. "vintage experts" continually criticise decks posted by relatively new users.

I personally think bluemage55 is doing a great job at responding at commentary about his deck and is providing valuable insights in his card-choices and I think he is defending his choices well.

Keep up the good work and let's hope your deck keeps improving.

Cheers,
lplaat

I think for the most part he is responding well.  And everybody has to have their backbone where they say "hey, I like this idea and I'm going to run with it regardless of what you say." So I can respect him for that.  IMO, he just choose position that is pretty difficult to defend.

[bluemage55]

As far as the comparisons are, it's not appropriate to compare to past decks because of the sheer card drawing power of Brainstorm.  The past CS lists ran 9 cards that specifically read "Draw 3 cards", along with 3 Tutors (Gifts and Scrolls also had the tendency to pop up in CS as well).  Bomberman was running 8 cards that read "Draw 3", but also ran tutors like Trinket Mage to find Top to fix draws and provide a clock.

Your list is running 5 cards that say "Draw 3", a handful of tutors and some cantrips.  This is a significant decline in drawing power, and losing the interaction between Brainstorm and Fetches means not only is your drawing weaker, but your mana base is weakened.  The effect that Brainstorm had on blue decks is such that just retrofitting isn't enough, you're looking at reinventing the wheel.  Just adding FOF isn't enough, as you're still looking at the fact that you're replacing Draw 3s with cantrips, which is a significant drop in power no matter how you slice it.

Unfortunately, we don't really have any data in the new meta to draw upon.  What is an acceptable or ideal  amount of card drawing may be completely different.  I merely tried to utilize approximately same number of slots in order to generate consistency.  In other words, I'm guessing at how much card drawing is enough, but I'm willing to concede the point to more experienced players such as yourself to add more drawing.

Also, which CS lists are you referring to?  FoF main?  No Vamp?  I don't believe I've seen any list in well over a year that would be considered "optimal" with those sorts of decisions.

I was referring to Brian DeMars' list from some time ago.

For a more recent list, the highest placing Control Slaver list in a Starcity tournament in the last year ran only Thirst x4 and BS x4.  No Fact, but also no Vamp either.

Its not so much that you can't justify its inclusion as it is that you're not using it nearly to its potential.  You are not fully powered, lessening the ability to "go off" with Will.  The lack of Draw 3s to cast off Will mean it's more difficult for you to sculpt an "unbeatable" hand on your Will turn and you have no card that reads "I win if Will resolves" in your deck.  The reason why Gifts was able to be the 800 pound gorilla for as long as it was is because it never had to pass the turn after resolving Will.  While most CS builds didn't win on the spot from resolving Will, they had Mindslaver to make sure that they could pass the turn with no fear of reprisal.  All Will is in your deck is a CA tool, which is a gross misuse of the card compared to how other decks in the format can abuse it.  Will has been the most powerful restricted card in Magic for a quite a long time, and while it's strong enough to boost your deck, not taking advantage of its power is pretty criminal in terms of deck design.

So you're suggesting I retain Will, but find a way to more throughly abuse it?  Do you have any suggestions on how I would go about doing that?

Yes, you are falling into that danger with Gush.  Gush was good unrestricted because you had Fastbond to keep your mana production on track.  Losing Fastbond means while it is free you set yourself way back in tempo, especially with the format slowing down and decks like Fish or Stax rising again.  Against a deck like those putting yourself back a turn or two of mana because you don't have Fastbond could easily cost you the game, and you lack the explosiveness to capitalize on the free cards.  Gush has never been popular in control decks because of the tempo loss associated with scooping up lands, they'd rather have all the mana on the board that they can to take advantage of things like Will.

So why was it considered acceptable for Smmenen's recent Oath list?

I find this thread the perfect example of often heard criticism that regular Mana Drain users i.e. "vintage experts" continually criticise decks posted by relatively new users.

I actually appreciate the criticism I'm recieving from the more experienced members.  They provide suggestions on how to improve, but ultimately I'll make the call on what list to run when I take it to a tourney.  Many of their suggestions have been invaluable.  Even if I end up disagreeing, the resulting dialogue from a debate allows me to reinforce my understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of my choices.

I personally think bluemage55 is doing a great job at responding at commentary about his deck and is providing valuable insights in his card-choices and I think he is defending his choices well.

Keep up the good work and let's hope your deck keeps improving.

Thank you for the kind words, lplaat!

It really isn't difficult to look at your e-mail of UCdavis.edu and deduce you are in fact from Davis. 

Right.  I thought I had clicked to hide my e-mail; it seems I was mistaken.  Thanks for the heads up.

Anyway, the reason Gush sucks have mostly been listed, but the other reason it's awful is because it doesn't pull a Voltron and combine with anything. With 4 you can chain them and abuse Fastbond and Will and go crazy with them. With one, you have this card that usually looks awkward in an opening hand and has very limited use for shenanigans down the road. The examples you gave with dodging Wasteland and casting a spell off one less land are pretty much the best-case uses for the card and they really aren't even that good. If I were playing Fish or Goblins and my opponent uses a Gush to 'ruin' my Wasteland, I'm probably pumping the first anyway because I just KO'd two lands. Sure it may not be permanent, but for most decks it doesn't need to be, all they wanted to do was knock you off X lands/mana for a few turns.

And having heard this repeatedly, I'm convinced.  However, I do still want to pose the question of why Smmenen's Oath list can run the singleton Gush?  Is there some other criteria I'm missing?

Right.  That's what my problem is.  It's just a cute trick, otherwise it's an artifact that does nothing.  Why run cute tricks when you can run good cards?  No one is saying that you're saying its "the bomb diggity."  In fact, the fact that you are saying that's it's a cute trick at best is what confuses me.

I mean, a TFK/Tinker/Platz in hand isn't card disadvantage just because you don't play it on turn 1. It just might be the wrong card at the wrong time, but it's not necessarily "bad."  It's just not the right card at the right time. 

Of course, the thing is when is Chromatic Sphere the right card at the right time?  This is when the "cute trick" comes into view.  That's really the only "right card, right time" for Chromatic Sphere.  But "right card, right time" doesn't amount to much.  In terms of pitching it to TFK, it's as good as any other artifact in the game. And other times, it does nothing, for no really effect. So why not run a card you'd like to draw into, rather than a card you'd like to draw out of?

Because there are no other cheap self-cycling artifacts to run.  I'm running the Stars (think of it as the Top slot, if you want) over a bomb like Sundering Titan and Mindslaver because I feel (1) that the latter are going to be dead cards too often without BS, and (2) without BS the Stars provide valuable replacement functionality in both early card filtering and in filtering mana (which BS does by virtue of finding the apporpriate lands).

You try to answer my argument with, "then why run draw spells?", but it's not like people run "Cantrip - U, Draw 1 card."

Actually, it's 2 colorless, add one mana of any color to your mana pool, draw a card.  And cycling for colorless is the worst that it does.  Among its better functions are pitching to Thirst and being used in conjunction with Welder to draw cards.

In any case, I'm going to advance the argument that people are willing to run cantrip artifacts, because people do use Sensei's Divining Top.  The main difference is that here, I've decided that the secondary functions of Star (cycling without a shuffle effect, and mana fixing) are superior than those of Top (being able to look at the top 3 cards of my library for 1 mana).  But in every other way, it's absolutely equivalent to running Top.

You can't analyze AK from the rest of it's package. 

That said, if I am just evaluating the 1 AK, then I would tell you not to run that too.  So that doesn't win you much.

I'm suggesting that AK is considered a tempo blackhole simply because casting one independently does nothing.  In a similar vein, the fact that Chromatic Star cycles at the worst doesn't make it a tempo blackhole, because in other scenarios it plays a valuable role (whether by pitching to Thirst, being used for Welder tricks, filtering mana, or saving extra cards to refill to 7 for Library later).

I've never seen a 4 Top list outside of a Legacy/Extended Counterbalance deck. In Vintage, I think the most I've seen is 2. You run 5 Spheres.

If you've noticed the updates I put at the bottom of the last page, the Chromatic Sphere has been replaced by T. Crypt.

I wouldn't be as critical.  There would be a morbid curiosity to seeing it in action.  But I would still be critical.

Try testing it to satisfy your curiosity.  I assure you that the neat tricks of the Stars are better than they might seem, and that's why I'm running them over Tops.

[Vegeta2711]

And having heard this repeatedly, I'm convinced.  However, I do still want to pose the question of why Smmenen's Oath list can run the singleton Gush?  Is there some other criteria I'm missing?

Well see that's because Steve will write a 20 page response trying to defend his obviously flawed position regardless of the arguments against him. So the collective whole decided it'd be more efficient to just let people try the deck and figure out on their own the card is awful.

[Smmenen]

How about this: Gush is a free draw spell that is good with Tyrant in play?   With Orchards and Bazaars, it does seem like it might not be good

[AngryPheldagrif]

Also, which CS lists are you referring to?  FoF main?  No Vamp?  I don't believe I've seen any list in well over a year that would be considered "optimal" with those sorts of decisions.

I was referring to Brian DeMars' list from some time ago.

For a more recent list, the highest placing Control Slaver list in a Starcity tournament in the last year ran only Thirst x4 and BS x4.  No Fact, but also no Vamp either.

Jeremiah's list ran Memory Jar, don't forget that. He also ran 4 more large artifacts than you, and had an aggro element with those and 3 Magus of the Moon to justify the reduced draw. And DeMars' list is so thoroughly out of date that I really don't consider it a valid reference.

So you're suggesting I retain Will, but find a way to more throughly abuse it?  Do you have any suggestions on how I would go about doing that?

Fact or Fiction is a good place to start. You just need more brokenness to replay. Cutting the Chromatic Stars for relevant cards will also help. You should really consider diversifying your win conditions beyond a single Platinum Angel.

So why was it considered acceptable for Smmenen's recent Oath list?

I actually think it is utterly useless in his deck, considering his 8 prime lands (Bazaar and Orchard) are not Islands, but as Vegeta said it is much easier just to not argue with him .

[bluemage55]

Well see that's because Steve will write a 20 page response trying to defend his obviously flawed position regardless of the arguments against him. So the collective whole decided it'd be more efficient to just let people try the deck and figure out on their own the card is awful.

Oh, well, clearly this is one of those things I missed due to inexperience.  I bow before your great wisdom.   

[Smmenen]

Well see that's because Steve will write a 20 page response trying to defend his obviously flawed position regardless of the arguments against him. So the collective whole decided it'd be more efficient to just let people try the deck and figure out on their own the card is awful.

Oh, well, clearly this is one of those things I missed due to inexperience.  I bow before your great wisdom.   

Slow down there hoss.   Even a blind squirrel can find a nut, and every once a while the unwashed mana drain masses make good points    Running  gush was more deck building habit than conscious reflection. 

That said, Cody Vinci has been running a singleton Gush in his Drain Tendrils deck for years.  And Steve O'Connel used to play a Gush in his Keeper SB to wish for. 

[bluemage55]

Jeremiah's list ran Memory Jar, don't forget that. He also ran 4 more large artifacts than you, and had an aggro element with those and 3 Magus of the Moon to justify the reduced draw. And DeMars' list is so thoroughly out of date that I really don't consider it a valid reference.

Fair enough.  What would you expect the draw engine of a post 6/20 CS to look like (this is an open question to anyone)?

Fact or Fiction is a good place to start. You just need more brokenness to replay. Cutting the Chromatic Stars for relevant cards will also help. You should really consider diversifying your win conditions beyond a single Platinum Angel.

Well, the reason I'm running the Stars in the first place is that I don't want uncastable bombs sitting in my hand when I need business to win a counter war over Ancestral.

I'm sure that while you're not fond of my execution, you can sympathize with the problem I've posed: without BS, a Thirst + Welder engine can't run that many bomb artifacts, because they're going to wind up sitting in your hand.  How many potentially dead cards do you think I can afford to run?  

The ultimate point of the Stars (or Tops) is that they would make the deck more consistent.  How much can I afford to cut on consistency in favor of big bombs?

Slow down there hoss.   Even a blind squirrel can find a nut, and every once a while the unwashed mana drain masses make good points    Running  gush was more deck building habit than conscious reflection. 

That said, Cody Vinci has been running a singleton Gush in his Drain Tendrils deck for years.  And Steve O'Connel used to play a Gush in his Keeper SB to wish for. 

Well, don't get me wrong, I previously liked the idea of the singleton Gush too.  But apparently everyone else thinks the tempo loss is too damaging, and I'm just going to have to take the word of all these adepts over mine.

[bluemage55]

I have modified the original post to incorporate some of the changes suggested to me on this thread.  I hope this to be the start of many refinements to make the deck ever closer to competitive tier 1.

[Zherbus]

And Steve O'Connell used to play a Gush in his Keeper SB to wish for.

FYI, It was a conditional piece, and there are far worse things you could do for U2 than stop a wasteland while you draw 2 cards, and bring LoA online. Drawing it at awkward times, such as when I need to hold Drain mana up, made it to not be a maindeck option. That was last May though, the last time I piloted XcControl.

I haven't played Keeper since 2002.

[zeus-online]

Well, you where asking for something to measure by...well here's the lists me and a couple of friends have been testing, although not very thoroughly since it's only been a couple of days...also keep in mind that we don't really have much if any dredge around here:

Control slaver, post brainstorm:
Mana: (24)
3 Volcanic island
3 Underground sea
4 Fetch
3 Island
1 LoA
1 Academy
7 Solomoxen
1 Mana vault
1 Mana crypt

Creatures: (6)
3 Goblin welder
1 Gorilla shaman
1 Duplicant
1 Sundering titan

Disruption: (10)
4 Force of will
4 Mana drain
2 REB

Draw/Search: (14)
4 Thirst for knowledge
3 Night's whisper
2 Sensei's top
1 Demonic tutor
1 Vampiric tutor
1 Mystical tutor
1 Brainstorm
1 Ancestral recall

Broken: (5)
1 Yawgmoth's will
1 Time walk
1 Tinker
1 Mindslaver
1 Memory jar

Utility: (1)
1 Echoing truth

The REB's could easily be something else, like T. Crypt. and the big artifacts could be something else like triskelion/platz....The top's are working just fine in finding mana and counterspells....And sometimes they just reveal the nuts just like brainstorm.

Hulk smash, post brainstorm.
Mana: (24)
3 Underground sea
2 Volcanic island
1 Tropical island
1 LoA
6 Fetch
4 Island
5 Moxen
1 Lotus
1 Crypt

Disruption: (11)
4 Force of will
4 Mana drain
3 Duress

Draw/Search: (16)
4 Accumulated knowledge
3 Intuition
3 Impulse
1 Brainstorm
1 Ancestral recall
1 Fact or fiction
1 Demonic tutor
1 Merchant scroll
1 Mystical tutor

Broken: (2)
1 Will
1 Time walk

Utility: (4)
3 Cunning wish
1 Gorilla shaman

Win: (3)
3 Psychatog

Sol ring's missing since i found it laking...It really dosn't help accelerate you much since you really want to cast a 2CC card turn 1 or an intuition.
Vampiric is in the SB for wish. Ponder is also missing, although it could easily be there instead of one of the impulses.
I am not settled on the impulses yet, although they're doing alright. Also tried top, but didn't find it all that good in this deck.

These decks are probably not optimal though, given the short time we've tested them.

Compared to your list they've both got more draw, and atleast the same amount of disruption, although less removal...Also they feature more mana...and i'm trying to get a 25th mana source for the psychatog deck.

A 4th duress might also be good, and running thoughtseize's could potentially be a good idea dependant on the metagame.

I think you should cut the spheres/stars for mana and tops, but i'm pretty sure that you would do better in just turning your proposed deck into slaver if you're running thirsts and welders.

If you want more artifacts for thirst i think you should go with 1-2 tops and maybe a few more Engineered explosives and definetly some crypts.

/Zeus

[bluemage55]

Compared to your list they've both got more draw, and atleast the same amount of disruption, although less removal...Also they feature more mana...and i'm trying to get a 25th mana source for the psychatog deck.

Thank you for the lists.  Would you mind repost updated lists when they are ready for tournament play (I relalize that probably won't be until near or after the 20th)?

A 4th duress might also be good, and running thoughtseize's could potentially be a good idea dependant on the metagame.

I think the ideal amount of proactive disruption isn't going to become clear until we have some tournament data and have a beta understanding of the meta.  Thoughtseize seems fairly logical for this deck as Platz overcomes its eventual late-gate drawbacks over Duress (and MisD-ability isn't really a big problem since its still 2 for your worse 2).  The ability to grab creatures just makes Thoughtseize more versatile removal, something which suits the spirit of Keeper well.

I think you should cut the spheres/stars for mana and tops, but i'm pretty sure that you would do better in just turning your proposed deck into slaver if you're running thirsts and welders.

I'm not quite ready to abandon the Star concept just yet . . . but I might with continued testing.  I've cut down the Stars to 3 in the meantime.

[orgcandman]

Preface:
 I am no expert on keeper.
 I am no expert on clinger.
 I am no expert on XcC.
 I am no expert.

Body:
 I don't think that a "lets react to this, that, and the next thing" are a good gameplan anymore. I used to love playing "pile-o-control," and even placed fairly well with it a few times. There certainly is nothing like setting your opponent up for that devastating balance play. Or draining a clutch spell into a mind twist for the win.

At the end of the day, however, those are reactive plays. You _need_ your opponent to be building resources for the balance play to be devastating. What if your opponent wins by having "The Cheese Stands Alone"? Your attempt at balance seems pretty terrible, since you're gimping your own gameplan and accelerating theirs. What if your opponent is built to win control mirrors. Your twist is jank at that point: They're running the misdirects / rebs / whatever that will cause your gameplan of "lets react to threats" to be strictly worse.

Its really simple in my mind. The DCI said "Hey, that really good card you liked isn't available in 4x anymore." That didn't somehow make tarpan.dec any more viable now than it was in May. Ichorid and Shops are still there, and still need to be addressed. Dropping chromatic star seems worse than even dropping gorilla shaman. At least the shaman will take out bridges when it kicks the bucket and as a bonus can hit opposing moxen in the workshop matchup. Hell, scryb sprites (in my mind) would be better. Anything really.

And don't get this jumbled with "Oh, I've glanced over your list and think XYZ." I've tested this stuff before. I tested star. Hell I tested really bad stuff like Time Stretch, and mediocre stuff like Finkel. I've actually _run_ these cards in tournaments. Against decks similar to what we have in the field (workshop aggro, and slaver). I'm not just theorizing at this point. I have the tournament losses not only to show that humility isn't good, but to prove that the singleton answer approach just doesn't really work as a deck philosophy.

Conclusion:

I guess what I'm really trying to get across here is that just because _blue_ doesn't have the gusto to march the storm count up to 10 on turn 1 anymore (and that is probably debatable...brainstorm is amazing, but there are tons of tools out there) doesn't mean that the format went back to 2001. It just means that _blue_ is at a loss for the moment.

[zeus-online]

Thank you for the lists.  Would you mind repost updated lists when they are ready for tournament play (I relalize that probably won't be until near or after the 20th)?

Probably alot later then that, there are literally no vintage tournaments in Denmark, although i suppose i could edit the decklists as they get tweaked

It was more meant as a thing to measure by, and i think they're a decent picture of what to expect.

/Zeus

Edit: You should probably keep an eye out for lists made by FFY, Rich shay (Atog Lord) and Smemmen...as people usually use some of their lists when they netdeck.

[nineisnoone]

In any case, I'm going to advance the argument that people are willing to run cantrip artifacts, because people do use Sensei's Divining Top.  The main difference is that here, I've decided that the secondary functions of Star (cycling without a shuffle effect, and mana fixing) are superior than those of Top (being able to look at the top 3 cards of my library for 1 mana).  But in every other way, it's absolutely equivalent to running Top.

This how you can play Top (note, this is for demonstrative effect rather than an actual play)
T1
Land, Pay 1 Top, go
T2
Untap, Pay 1 reorder top 3, draw, Land (fetch), break fetch, tap Top, Draw

2 Cards (one card is the lost draw) and 2 mana for another 2 cards.... (note: you can always draw with Top then fetch to get rid of Top)
So yeah, just a cantrip right?
Well, realize the first draw was "Look at the top three cards of your library, then put them back in any order. Draw a card."
The other was "shuffle your library. Draw a card."

::ahem::

Ponder U
Look at the top three cards of your library, then put them back in any order. You may shuffle your library. Draw a card. 

Both of those are Ponders.  Ponder is (somewhat curiously, but still is) restricted. While you can argue that you think Chromatic Star is better (and for the Welder mini-combo, it pretty much is), you can't argue that they are "absolutely equivalent."  You're neglecting the strength of Top and regulating both to mere artifact cantrips.

And if you reeeallly want to run an artifact cantrip, why not just run the free artifact cantrips? Mishra's Bauble and Urza's Bauble?

[bluemage55]

Dropping chromatic star seems worse than even dropping gorilla shaman. At least the shaman will take out bridges when it kicks the bucket and as a bonus can hit opposing moxen in the workshop matchup. Hell, scryb sprites (in my mind) would be better. Anything really.

I don't intend to drop Star as an ideal play.  As discussed previously, their principle purpose is to pitch to TfK.  The fact that they can also be cast and used to cycle or for welder tricks is a plus that is superior to the deadness that Slaver or Sundering Titan would be in the same situation.

I guess what I'm really trying to get across here is that just because _blue_ doesn't have the gusto to march the storm count up to 10 on turn 1 anymore (and that is probably debatable...brainstorm is amazing, but there are tons of tools out there) doesn't mean that the format went back to 2001. It just means that _blue_ is at a loss for the moment.

I agree with you.  Refining this deck is my way of overcoming that loss.

[bluemage55]

Both of those are Ponders.  Ponder is (somewhat curiously, but still is) restricted.

Not quite.  The second draw leaves you with Top on top of your library.  Ponder does no such thing.

While you can argue that you think Chromatic Star is better (and for the Welder mini-combo, it pretty much is), you can't argue that they are "absolutely equivalent."  You're neglecting the strength of Top and regulating both to mere artifact cantrips.

I didn't say that they are "absolutely equivalent".  If you'll read the entire sentence you quoted, you'll note that "absolutely equivalent" is preceded by "in every other way".  And the sentence before that describes how they are different: Star does mana filtering and cycles without a shuffle effect, while Top lets you rearrange the top of your library.  Did I miss something?

And if you reeeallly want to run an artifact cantrip, why not just run the free artifact cantrips? Mishra's Bauble and Urza's Bauble?

Obviously because they don't allow Welder tricks.  As 0 mana artifacts, they also suffer from the fact that they don't do so well against Chalice at 0 (which already nails 8 cards in this deck), and don't synergize well with EE.

[nineisnoone]

Whats the point in saying "absolutely equivalent" and then qualifying that with a substantial part of the effect? But rather than critique your logic, I merely went with the jist of what you have been saying. This entire time you've been marginalizing the non-cantrip aspect of both cards, and saying "people run Top, and Star and Top are the same, so why can't I run Star?" 

It's primarily intended to be a artifact that happens to incidentally provide functionality that has been lost with restricted BS.  Would you be as critical if it were Top instead?

What you are doing is you're marginalizing all the aspects of Top that make the argument "Top and Star are basically the same" completely wrong, so the Welder trick doesn't have anything to measure up to and hence is a pure benefit over Top...  which is what you keep trying to bankroll Star's viability on.

Sure there are different things about them (Top/Ponder) which is obvious. Brainstorm and Recall are different, but the "Draw 3" slapped on them that makes them more the same.  Those differences (as is evident by recent restrictions) are not as profound as once thought.  But at the end of the day Top looked at 3, draws a card.  (If you really wanted to cite the flaw in my argument, it would be that fetch-draw is the shuffle-Ponder, not Top). Sure it's on the top of the deck. But so what? If you had a problem with that Draw with Top to put it on top and then the crack the fetch to shuffle (actually probably the better play, but like I said it was for demonstrative purposes to generate 2 Ponder effects for show).  Plus, if Ponder went onto the top of the deck would that make it better or worse? You don't really say anything about what that means.  And you're really missing the point. Top can dig three for 1 (ala Ponder) and works well fetch-shuffles. Those are the reasons why people play Top.  Those are things that Star can't do.  Hence, you're comparisons to Top are ill-founded.

Bauble's don't synergize with EE?  Umm... You can sac them before you sac your EE.  Why would you set your EE to zero, play Bauble, Sac your EE, and let your EE destroy you're bauble.....

And Chalice at 1 hits 14 cards in your deck, if all of the sudden Chalice was a concern of yours.

You've already stated that the Welder-Trick is just a "cute trick."  So I don't see why it's ending up being the deciding factor for your card choice.

The fact that they can be used with Welder to draw cards is a cute trick, and I've never pretended otherwise.

But hey, I think I've said my piece as best as I could.  Hope this has been useful.

[bluemage55]

What you are doing is you're marginalizing all the aspects of Top that make the argument "Top and Star are basically the same" completely wrong, so the Welder trick doesn't have anything to measure up to and hence is a pure benefit over Top...  which is what you keep trying to bankroll Star's viability on.

Sure there are different things about them (Top/Ponder) which is obvious. Brainstorm and Recall are different, but the "Draw 3" slapped on them that makes them more the same.  Those differences (as is evident by recent restrictions) are not as profound as once thought.  But at the end of the day Top looked at 3, draws a card.  (If you really wanted to cite the flaw in my argument, it would be that fetch-draw is the shuffle-Ponder, not Top). Sure it's on the top of the deck. But so what? If you had a problem with that Draw with Top to put it on top and then the crack the fetch to shuffle (actually probably the better play, but like I said it was for demonstrative purposes to generate 2 Ponder effects for show).  Plus, if Ponder went onto the top of the deck would that make it better or worse? You don't really say anything about what that means.  And you're really missing the point. Top can dig three for 1 (ala Ponder) and works well fetch-shuffles. Those are the reasons why people play Top.  Those are things that Star can't do.  Hence, you're comparisons to Top are ill-founded.

You've missed the point.  My arguments are logically consistent:

1. The primary function of the Stars are to pitch to Thirst for Knowledge and to cycle themselves.
2. The primary function of Tops, if I were to run it, would be pitch to Thirst and to cycle.
3. The key advantage of Stars and Tops over other artifacts is that they can be used to draw with Welder, and that they can cycle cheaply.
4. Top does some things that Star doesn't, and vice versa (Stars cycle without Fetch, filter mana; while Top lets you manipulate your library.
5. I prefer the advantages of Star over those of Top.

Bauble's don't synergize with EE?  Umm... You can sac them before you sac your EE.  Why would you set your EE to zero, play Bauble, Sac your EE, and let your EE destroy you're bauble.....

There are times when you do not wish to draw a card, however.  Such as when you just hid something on top with a topdeck tutor or BS, or if you have 7 cards in hand on your turn.

And Chalice at 1 hits 14 cards in your deck, if all of the sudden Chalice was a concern of yours.

It's a bigger concern as a result.  That's just simply listing another drawback, but obviously the big problem is that it doesn't do Welder tricks.

You've already stated that the Welder-Trick is just a "cute trick."  So I don't see why it's ending up being the deciding factor for your card choice.

Said cute trick is better than the cute tricks of other artifacts.  I'm willing to pay 1 mana for Star or Tap over bauble.

But hey, I think I've said my piece as best as I could.  Hope this has been useful.

It could have been more useful if you understood the point I was making, but I thank you nevertheless.

[hvndr3d y34r h3x]

@ bluemage
It's really an extremely suboptimal use of deck space to include something for the only purpose of being pitched or cycled. I also disagree with what you've deemed to be the function of top. Top's primary function is to increase your card quality. It has an added bonus of synergy with tfk, and welder.