What makes counterspells "bad" is that they aren't universally good. Knowing when to put one in your deck and when to play it are important.
1.
Expensive and conditional counters are bad (and these are the one that newplayers seem to be often overattracted to), because you rarely get value. The window to play them is small (e.g. exactly when your opponent plays a spell that can be countered) and easy to miss. Keeping up mana that you can't even be guaranteed will be used is obviously costly in terms of tempo. Conditional ones often lose any ability to get value and thus contort you into sub optimal plays early.
2.
Counters rarely have synergy with your deck. Think about a UW heroic deck in BTT. Ideally you are going to have some creatures and removal (the two most important things). Than you are going to need the heroic enablers. Counters don't make your other spells better. They also don't impact a board immediately. The exception is when your playing a lot of instant bounce.
3.
The hidden cost of mana. Counters in BTT (and to some extent RTR block) are all double costed. But you want to be able to cast them early (e.g. nullify on 2 or cancel on 3), so they push you to be base blue. Yet most decks are going to have a permanent base which is not blue. If your deck needs to be able to cast Nullify and Pharika's cure (or phalanx leader etc) on turn 2 its going to have bad mana. This wasn't true in M13 where mana leak was an excellent card.
4.
They rely on the player's skill a lot (though this isn't really different than Removal). Knowing when you can afford to not use a counter and when you should hold it is a tough decision even for good players. Rules of thumb like "USe it as soon as you can get value" or "Wait for their bomb" are both to simplistic. The problem with not using counter's is that they cost something just to be able to have the decision.
Its funny that people talk about easily playing around counterspells. Because when good player's are including them in a deck its with the goal that you can craft game states where your opponent can't (or shouldn't) afford to play around them. I can place my stymied hopes face up on the table in my UB Control deck on turn 2. You can cast your 2 drop on 3 and your 3 drop on 4 etc... Who got who?
I will add when i spoke to LSV about this a couple of years ago he said he doesn't go infinite in drafts. Ofc I assume hes not speculating on cards or just trying to max out on +EV events. Rather the best players in the world sitting at 8-4s in the most recent sets shouldn't expect to go infinite.
I think you need to re-evaluate your opinion of counterspells. Lots of cards are Master/Fish cards. When you see them your opponent is either an idiot or great. The common ones are things like counters/Silent Artisan/Triton Shorethief. But it could definitely feed into your emotional reaction to losing to them.
Also I had archangels for a while but they are definitely not for UW or MonoB. And they also are pretty tough to cast (Your less than 70% to have two white sources on turn 5). The UW matchup should be approached as follows:
1) Minimize the impact of Supreme Verdict. This is the only card that can't be interacted with. So your game plan can't involve having multiple creatures in play. They have a lot of sweet answers. Don't let them be two for ones. This is what Bident helps.
2) Understand they are going to have a lot of counters, but will also have to tap out. You will get to resolve 4 and 5 drops at least once in a normal game. Jace may be better then Bident as follow up. But bident forces them to answer your creatures one at a time.
3) Revelation is the ultimate trump. If they resolve a big one (4-5+) you are probably not winning the game. Doesn't matter what you cast (Elspeth, Jace, etc...). This is why counterspells and aetherling (the only exception) are the best cards in the matchup. Unfortunately Aetherling is super narrow and I wouldn't want to two (or two JMemoryAdept) because you can't afford to have spots for just one matchup when its possibly only 10-15% of the field.
4) They will have often have Glares/Revokes/Pithing needles. Figure out what their sb plan is. Make it so your sb plan is adaptable. E.g. if they have needles/glare you don't want elspeth. But if they don't have it (or are relying on gainsay to interact), having one in your board is sweet so that you can change it up.
5) Have answers to Archangel. I assume everyone has 4 DSpheres so this comes from for free.
I haven't really watched any videos on the deck. I tried watching some MJ VODs but the sbing was bad so I didn't follow through.
I think Uw >> U. You are only worse vs aggressive decks (those that can punish a slower/more painful manabase). Right now that is exactly where I want to be. if white weenie variants, rdw and MonoBlack aggro become bigger players then I would consider MonoU. I think both are currently well positioned. RG, MonoB and UW are the targets people are gunning for despite MonoU being on the same power level. Will that be true next month? Maybe.
If you want to win in standard you need to just really learn a deck. This is as good as any other (and better than any of the non Black options IMO). No matter what you play you will have some bad matchups (welcome to Standard). Anyone who tells you they broke it or they have no bad matchups is an idiot. Specifically with this deck you need to learn 2 things:
1) Maximize Damage over multiple turns. When to attack with Mutas/Pump Weirds/Use Thassa vs cast spells. Its very important to familiarize yourself with the entire standard meta. To know how they would impact the race.
2) Sideboarding and Gameplans. What you side out vs decks isn't so much about cards "objective" power level. Its about understanding how you lose in a matchup and what you need to prevent/attack. There is too much focus (in this thread and MTGsalvation in general) on not siding out "good cards", instead of what's important. Is it tempo? Card advantage? Blanking an opponents least flexible cards? I could write a million word article on U vs B alone.
I think things like 25th lands, 1 Galerider etc.. are very small changes at the margins. I would only be comfortable commenting on them with authority if I was an expert in this deck (which I am certainly not). In general I am always going to err on the side of mana safety because based on my experience its correct. It could be wrong in this specific case.
First off Lucas, congrats. Too bad about the 2nd instead of win but I'm sure it wont take long for you to be back on the PT.
Couple questions:
1) Why no Glare of Heresy? Especially as a 1 of instead of revoke, as they both hit the same thing except Glare hits Archangel/Elspeth
2) Why Azorius Guildgate instead of the 11th island?
3) Why the 2nd Bident over the 2nd Ephara main?
4) Is 24 Land, 4 Judge's Familiar an option?
5) How do you feel about a 1 of Galerider Sliver to give Mutavaults flying?
1) Glare is narrow and a very minor upgrade on revoke against UW. You already have 4 Detention Spheres to enter elspeth/archangel. Revoke is better in the mirror (where its actually one of the best cards possible). A lot of the other matchups where you would board in glare (basically voice decks) are all good matchups. I would not run any glares unless you expected more Rw then Uw devotion.
2) One of the decisions I was least sure on. Its hard to test with any accuracy, but since I was running Elspeth and didn't expect a ton of straight aggro decks I stayed safe.
3) I was pretty sure Ephara was garbage when I started seeing these lists. Against B and UW (where you want card advantage 4 drops) you side out a bunch of creatures. It also takes a few turns (and does nothing if it gets detentions sphered or revoked immediately) to get going and doesn't make your mutavaults as dangerous. Finally, in most matchups where you want 4s you don't get to develop a board prescence so ephara is limited to the upside of drawing cards (which shes worse at then Bident). Also monoblack should side into 4 lifebane against you. No need to give them a natural target. I don't think you can run 3 bidents main so I ran Ephara and would consider a Jace instead. She is good against RG and Uw Devotion but those are both good matchups. I think people only run Ephara because they see MODO decks with it.
4)Probably. My rule for standard in this format: 1) Play Good cards. 2) Play as many mutavaults as possible (See 1). 3) Do everything humanly possible to not get screwed by your mana. that being said I could see putting a vault in the sb.
5) Maybe worth trying. I found I was rarely attacking with mutavault when they could actually block it (unless they were just dead).
Thassa, God of the Sea 4
Cloudfin Raptor 4
Tidebinder Mage 4
Nightveil Specter 4
Ephara, Goddess of Polis 1
Master of Waves 4
Frostburn Weird 4
Judge's Familiar 3
Bident of Thassa 2
Detention Sphere 4
Rapid Hybridization 1
Godless Shrine 2
Hallowed Fountain 4
Temple of Enlightenment 4
Island 10
Mutavault 4
Azorius GG 1
SB: 15
Revoke Existence 2
Dissolve 1
Dispel 1
Gainsay 3
Domestication 3
Negate 2
Elspeth 1
Bident of Thassa 1
Curse of Swine 1
Generally Speaking outside of the main event there are the following:
Sanctioned Large Side Events: Usually with special prizes or crazy formats.
8 Man Side Drafts: These will fire as soon as they fill. An interesting note is that if you can get 8 people to sign up for any format the organizer will usually run it. E.g. if your tired of BTT you can get BBB if 8 people are down.
Unsanctioned 3v3 Team Drafts: Good players who don't make day 2 can often be found team drafting. Sometimes they play for all the cards but more commonly there is money involved on top. This is similar to what Team Limited GPs used to do on Day 2. For some reason less popular on Day 2 these days (compared to when i started 3-4 years ago).
Unsanctioned Cube Drafts: Rarely will people let random strangers play with a high value cube. Though i have been invited in the past. More commonly some people bring a Pauper/Tribal/Theme cube and you can ask to participate.
FWIW it makes no sense to me to pan DC in a deck that plays Deathright shaman. If your going to turn on their removal either way, you want the best card (on power level).
I think it makes a lot of sense to eschew creatures all together.
Also Primer should have a "Memory Lapse's Up to Date Preferred Version".
The three dark betrayal list is from Saito. He got 2nd, 3rd, 7-2 in 3 PTQs this season with the deck.
I played a variation in a PTQ last weekend to an unexciting 4-0, 0-2 finish. But I think the deck is very good. Its only bad matchup is RG.
As far as I am concerned, Elixir is unplayable in real life. If you lose game 1, you have to side it out. If you go to game 3 with less than 15 minutes you have to side it out. Its worse than a bomb against MonoB. The deck already has serious time concerns for a competitive tournament.
A couple of tips for that version:
- Choose to draw in the mirror.
- Soldiers come in against pretty much every non-black deck and revelation decks.
- Angels come in against every non-black deck. Also bring in a couple in the mirror.
- Replace Dark betrayal with Far//Away (this was my personal tech for the tourney). It comes in versus Obz, Mistcutter, Dragon and GW decks. Do not bring it in vs Mono U, R and other aggressive decks unless a bounce spell is good (as it is vs GW).
First try to focus on what areas you need to improve:
Card Evaluations: Do you know what cards are better than others? Phalanx Leader vs Wingsteed Rider? How good are most of the rares?
Best Source for Improvemnt: Karsten CFB article, talking to good players, LR podcast.
Learning the format: Whats the weakest color (Hint its red). What combinations don't work well in format? What do certain color combinations need (eg. the black cards that BR wants are different then the black cards UB wants). Is the format fast or slow? What makes you want to draw/play?
Best Source: Articles? Sam Black had the m14 article.
Draft Basics: Staying open vs forcing. Drafting with a plan in mind.
Source: BenS ravnica articles. I did a couple of streams on twitch.tv/firstworldproblems where I went over these things as well. Not sure if videos are still available.
Playing Well: Are you missing damage? Reads (note I am NOT talking about tells). Mana Efficiency. Ordering. When to use removal (hint the answer is never).
Sources: Videos, Practice. Streams. I would say videos and streams from pros are good for getting from bad to good. But they play on average below a "very good" level.
--------------------------------
My personal advice given that I was basically leading a magic club in college for a while:
Find someone who is good. Ask them for help whether its during a draft or lunch, dinner etc...
Do Not Argue with Them. They won't always be right, but you will be wrong way more often. Start with memorizing what they say, then move on to understanding what they say.
On magic online it is slightly different. Limited players in general are worse then the constructed plays on MODO. Because there are casual limited players, but almost no casual constructed players.
So you could be the same skill at both, but your competition is better at one.
No idea if Swallower is better than Demon, but to argue against swallower because its vanilla 4/5 makes little sense. The only upside demon has is flying. Which is mainly used avoid being chump blocked. Except demon is easy to chump block by sacrificing creatures. Its exactly the same.
If they have two creatures which are big enough to eat swallower in combat, than they can probably race a demon as well (though not always which is a plus for demon). Against a board of two 4/4s and 1/1 demon is obviously much worse.
4/5 v 6/6 is pretty close, though a 6/6 is obviously a slightly better. The upside of monstrosity is probably worth a little as well.
Which makes it seem like the 4 drop question really only goes to one thing. Which is better on your mana? Because given a near equal power level, casting it on time (and making your manabase more forgiving) is the most important thing. Given that double red on 3 seems important; swallower probably has a leg up
-----------------------------------
In general I find the discussion in this thread hard to follow fwiw. Kamahl seems to be the only one doing structured testing and he isn't saying what hes testing against.
I came to see if anyone had even bothered to see if this is viable against the default best decks in the format (GW Aggro/Midrange, RDW, UW Control, Big RG). And I didn't find a single discussion of those matchups.
1.
Expensive and conditional counters are bad (and these are the one that newplayers seem to be often overattracted to), because you rarely get value. The window to play them is small (e.g. exactly when your opponent plays a spell that can be countered) and easy to miss. Keeping up mana that you can't even be guaranteed will be used is obviously costly in terms of tempo. Conditional ones often lose any ability to get value and thus contort you into sub optimal plays early.
2.
Counters rarely have synergy with your deck. Think about a UW heroic deck in BTT. Ideally you are going to have some creatures and removal (the two most important things). Than you are going to need the heroic enablers. Counters don't make your other spells better. They also don't impact a board immediately. The exception is when your playing a lot of instant bounce.
3.
The hidden cost of mana. Counters in BTT (and to some extent RTR block) are all double costed. But you want to be able to cast them early (e.g. nullify on 2 or cancel on 3), so they push you to be base blue. Yet most decks are going to have a permanent base which is not blue. If your deck needs to be able to cast Nullify and Pharika's cure (or phalanx leader etc) on turn 2 its going to have bad mana. This wasn't true in M13 where mana leak was an excellent card.
4.
They rely on the player's skill a lot (though this isn't really different than Removal). Knowing when you can afford to not use a counter and when you should hold it is a tough decision even for good players. Rules of thumb like "USe it as soon as you can get value" or "Wait for their bomb" are both to simplistic. The problem with not using counter's is that they cost something just to be able to have the decision.
Its funny that people talk about easily playing around counterspells. Because when good player's are including them in a deck its with the goal that you can craft game states where your opponent can't (or shouldn't) afford to play around them. I can place my stymied hopes face up on the table in my UB Control deck on turn 2. You can cast your 2 drop on 3 and your 3 drop on 4 etc... Who got who?
I will add when i spoke to LSV about this a couple of years ago he said he doesn't go infinite in drafts. Ofc I assume hes not speculating on cards or just trying to max out on +EV events. Rather the best players in the world sitting at 8-4s in the most recent sets shouldn't expect to go infinite.
I think you need to re-evaluate your opinion of counterspells. Lots of cards are Master/Fish cards. When you see them your opponent is either an idiot or great. The common ones are things like counters/Silent Artisan/Triton Shorethief. But it could definitely feed into your emotional reaction to losing to them.
Also I had archangels for a while but they are definitely not for UW or MonoB. And they also are pretty tough to cast (Your less than 70% to have two white sources on turn 5). The UW matchup should be approached as follows:
1) Minimize the impact of Supreme Verdict. This is the only card that can't be interacted with. So your game plan can't involve having multiple creatures in play. They have a lot of sweet answers. Don't let them be two for ones. This is what Bident helps.
2) Understand they are going to have a lot of counters, but will also have to tap out. You will get to resolve 4 and 5 drops at least once in a normal game. Jace may be better then Bident as follow up. But bident forces them to answer your creatures one at a time.
3) Revelation is the ultimate trump. If they resolve a big one (4-5+) you are probably not winning the game. Doesn't matter what you cast (Elspeth, Jace, etc...). This is why counterspells and aetherling (the only exception) are the best cards in the matchup. Unfortunately Aetherling is super narrow and I wouldn't want to two (or two JMemoryAdept) because you can't afford to have spots for just one matchup when its possibly only 10-15% of the field.
4) They will have often have Glares/Revokes/Pithing needles. Figure out what their sb plan is. Make it so your sb plan is adaptable. E.g. if they have needles/glare you don't want elspeth. But if they don't have it (or are relying on gainsay to interact), having one in your board is sweet so that you can change it up.
5) Have answers to Archangel. I assume everyone has 4 DSpheres so this comes from for free.
I think Uw >> U. You are only worse vs aggressive decks (those that can punish a slower/more painful manabase). Right now that is exactly where I want to be. if white weenie variants, rdw and MonoBlack aggro become bigger players then I would consider MonoU. I think both are currently well positioned. RG, MonoB and UW are the targets people are gunning for despite MonoU being on the same power level. Will that be true next month? Maybe.
If you want to win in standard you need to just really learn a deck. This is as good as any other (and better than any of the non Black options IMO). No matter what you play you will have some bad matchups (welcome to Standard). Anyone who tells you they broke it or they have no bad matchups is an idiot. Specifically with this deck you need to learn 2 things:
1) Maximize Damage over multiple turns. When to attack with Mutas/Pump Weirds/Use Thassa vs cast spells. Its very important to familiarize yourself with the entire standard meta. To know how they would impact the race.
2) Sideboarding and Gameplans. What you side out vs decks isn't so much about cards "objective" power level. Its about understanding how you lose in a matchup and what you need to prevent/attack. There is too much focus (in this thread and MTGsalvation in general) on not siding out "good cards", instead of what's important. Is it tempo? Card advantage? Blanking an opponents least flexible cards? I could write a million word article on U vs B alone.
I think things like 25th lands, 1 Galerider etc.. are very small changes at the margins. I would only be comfortable commenting on them with authority if I was an expert in this deck (which I am certainly not). In general I am always going to err on the side of mana safety because based on my experience its correct. It could be wrong in this specific case.
1) Glare is narrow and a very minor upgrade on revoke against UW. You already have 4 Detention Spheres to enter elspeth/archangel. Revoke is better in the mirror (where its actually one of the best cards possible). A lot of the other matchups where you would board in glare (basically voice decks) are all good matchups. I would not run any glares unless you expected more Rw then Uw devotion.
2) One of the decisions I was least sure on. Its hard to test with any accuracy, but since I was running Elspeth and didn't expect a ton of straight aggro decks I stayed safe.
3) I was pretty sure Ephara was garbage when I started seeing these lists. Against B and UW (where you want card advantage 4 drops) you side out a bunch of creatures. It also takes a few turns (and does nothing if it gets detentions sphered or revoked immediately) to get going and doesn't make your mutavaults as dangerous. Finally, in most matchups where you want 4s you don't get to develop a board prescence so ephara is limited to the upside of drawing cards (which shes worse at then Bident). Also monoblack should side into 4 lifebane against you. No need to give them a natural target. I don't think you can run 3 bidents main so I ran Ephara and would consider a Jace instead. She is good against RG and Uw Devotion but those are both good matchups. I think people only run Ephara because they see MODO decks with it.
4)Probably. My rule for standard in this format: 1) Play Good cards. 2) Play as many mutavaults as possible (See 1). 3) Do everything humanly possible to not get screwed by your mana. that being said I could see putting a vault in the sb.
5) Maybe worth trying. I found I was rarely attacking with mutavault when they could actually block it (unless they were just dead).
Cloudfin Raptor 4
Tidebinder Mage 4
Nightveil Specter 4
Ephara, Goddess of Polis 1
Master of Waves 4
Frostburn Weird 4
Judge's Familiar 3
Bident of Thassa 2
Detention Sphere 4
Rapid Hybridization 1
Godless Shrine 2
Hallowed Fountain 4
Temple of Enlightenment 4
Island 10
Mutavault 4
Azorius GG 1
SB: 15
Revoke Existence 2
Dissolve 1
Dispel 1
Gainsay 3
Domestication 3
Negate 2
Elspeth 1
Bident of Thassa 1
Curse of Swine 1
2nd Place at 190 Person PTQ.
SB Guide:
MonoB: +3 Domestication, +1 Bident, +1 elspeth. -4 Master, -1 Tidebinder
Mirror: -4 Weird, -3 Familiar, -2 Bident, +Gainsay, Domestication, Revoke, Curse (dispel if they are straight MonoU).
GR Monsters: -3 Familiar, -2 Bident. +2 Negate, +1 Dispel, +1 Curse, +1 Elspeth
UW Control: -4 Cloudfin, Master, Rapid Hybrization, -1 Tidebinder. +2 Revoke, 7 Counters, +1Bident
Sanctioned Large Side Events: Usually with special prizes or crazy formats.
8 Man Side Drafts: These will fire as soon as they fill. An interesting note is that if you can get 8 people to sign up for any format the organizer will usually run it. E.g. if your tired of BTT you can get BBB if 8 people are down.
Unsanctioned 3v3 Team Drafts: Good players who don't make day 2 can often be found team drafting. Sometimes they play for all the cards but more commonly there is money involved on top. This is similar to what Team Limited GPs used to do on Day 2. For some reason less popular on Day 2 these days (compared to when i started 3-4 years ago).
Unsanctioned Cube Drafts: Rarely will people let random strangers play with a high value cube. Though i have been invited in the past. More commonly some people bring a Pauper/Tribal/Theme cube and you can ask to participate.
I think it makes a lot of sense to eschew creatures all together.
Also Primer should have a "Memory Lapse's Up to Date Preferred Version".
I played a variation in a PTQ last weekend to an unexciting 4-0, 0-2 finish. But I think the deck is very good. Its only bad matchup is RG.
As far as I am concerned, Elixir is unplayable in real life. If you lose game 1, you have to side it out. If you go to game 3 with less than 15 minutes you have to side it out. Its worse than a bomb against MonoB. The deck already has serious time concerns for a competitive tournament.
A couple of tips for that version:
- Choose to draw in the mirror.
- Soldiers come in against pretty much every non-black deck and revelation decks.
- Angels come in against every non-black deck. Also bring in a couple in the mirror.
- Replace Dark betrayal with Far//Away (this was my personal tech for the tourney). It comes in versus Obz, Mistcutter, Dragon and GW decks. Do not bring it in vs Mono U, R and other aggressive decks unless a bounce spell is good (as it is vs GW).
There are some people who have blogged with draftcap examples.
I believe the idea was CMC <= 3. With a hard cap on the number of 3s.
When I see this deck it usually just seems like it would be better with 16 lands and slightly more powerful cards.
Card Evaluations: Do you know what cards are better than others? Phalanx Leader vs Wingsteed Rider? How good are most of the rares?
Best Source for Improvemnt: Karsten CFB article, talking to good players, LR podcast.
Learning the format: Whats the weakest color (Hint its red). What combinations don't work well in format? What do certain color combinations need (eg. the black cards that BR wants are different then the black cards UB wants). Is the format fast or slow? What makes you want to draw/play?
Best Source: Articles? Sam Black had the m14 article.
Draft Basics: Staying open vs forcing. Drafting with a plan in mind.
Source: BenS ravnica articles. I did a couple of streams on twitch.tv/firstworldproblems where I went over these things as well. Not sure if videos are still available.
Playing Well: Are you missing damage? Reads (note I am NOT talking about tells). Mana Efficiency. Ordering. When to use removal (hint the answer is never).
Sources: Videos, Practice. Streams. I would say videos and streams from pros are good for getting from bad to good. But they play on average below a "very good" level.
--------------------------------
My personal advice given that I was basically leading a magic club in college for a while:
Find someone who is good. Ask them for help whether its during a draft or lunch, dinner etc...
Do Not Argue with Them. They won't always be right, but you will be wrong way more often. Start with memorizing what they say, then move on to understanding what they say.
So you could be the same skill at both, but your competition is better at one.
If they have two creatures which are big enough to eat swallower in combat, than they can probably race a demon as well (though not always which is a plus for demon). Against a board of two 4/4s and 1/1 demon is obviously much worse.
4/5 v 6/6 is pretty close, though a 6/6 is obviously a slightly better. The upside of monstrosity is probably worth a little as well.
Which makes it seem like the 4 drop question really only goes to one thing. Which is better on your mana? Because given a near equal power level, casting it on time (and making your manabase more forgiving) is the most important thing. Given that double red on 3 seems important; swallower probably has a leg up
-----------------------------------
In general I find the discussion in this thread hard to follow fwiw. Kamahl seems to be the only one doing structured testing and he isn't saying what hes testing against.
I came to see if anyone had even bothered to see if this is viable against the default best decks in the format (GW Aggro/Midrange, RDW, UW Control, Big RG). And I didn't find a single discussion of those matchups.