For me, every time I look at my sideboard to revamp it I start off with the baisics that I think are essential for us.
1x Aetherling - another resilient finisher against control or removal heavy midrange deck, once you slam one of these then you can usually win on the spot.
1-2x Doom blade - depending on what kind of removal and how much removal you have mainboarded will dictate how many of these you run. Great removal in the format, hits most threats that need to be dealt with immediately.
1-2x Thoughtseize - usually we want to board in more disruption against the slower decks, the number you run depends on how predominat control and slow Grundy decks are in your meta.
1-2x Pithing Needle - I think having at least 1 is mandatory, though it is up for debate if you should run 2. The versatility of being able to shut down problematic actives is great.
2x Negate - a must in control match ups, 2 is pretty much standard so we can have a much stronger match up. It's also great against plainswalker centric strategies.
1-2 Gainsay - makes our mono blue match that much easier, depending on god mainboard you'll want 1-2, I prefer 2 since post board mono blue usually plays a much slower and more controlling game.
So that 7-11 slots taken up depending on your mainboard configuration. In the last few slots I like to hedge my game against the fast aggro decks that have been popping up all over the place.
I'd love to hear a logical explanation of why bringing in just one copy of a given card is considered an effective strategy.
With one copy, you've only got a 1/4 chance of drawing it by the time you've seen 15 cards, or 50% if the game goes really long and you see half your deck.
If you want the card to reliably affect the game -- if you want to be able to count on it -- why would you run only one? You have to assume that if the card you're sideboarding against is enough of a problem, they'll have more than one, and you don't want them to have a better chance of drawing their problem than you do of getting the answer.
IMHO, the intention of sideboarding isn't to have a slim chance at drawing the right silver bullet for a singleton problem. It's about increasing my odds of winning by focusing on the optimal gameplan.
I'd love to hear a logical explanation of why bringing in just one copy of a given card is considered an effective strategy.
With one copy, you've only got a 1/4 chance of drawing it by the time you've seen 15 cards, or 50% if the game goes really long and you see half your deck.
If you want the card to reliably affect the game -- if you want to be able to count on it -- why would you run only one? You have to assume that if the card you're sideboarding against is enough of a problem, they'll have more than one, and you don't want them to have a better chance of drawing their problem than you do of getting the answer.
IMHO, the intention of sideboarding isn't to have a slim chance at drawing the right silver bullet for a singleton problem. It's about increasing my odds of winning by focusing on the optimal gameplan.
Because a lot of the times we already run answers to problem cards mainboarded.
In the case of thoughtseize, doom blade, and aetherling
we run those mainboard, so they arent singleton copies in the 75.
As for pithing needles, they are good in certain match ups, but it's iffy if you want to run more or not, most of the time they are answers to walkers, UC, and whip, all of which detention sphere does a better job at because you can still play your own after sphere is down. The only thing it hits that sphere doesn't is aetherling in the mono blue MU where you will usually board yours out for an extra BBoV.
Gainsay is again a preference call and depends what else you are running, some people only run 1 because they run syncopates or other counters mainboarded while people who don't find more use out of the second gainsay.
All in all, our side board is both used to hedge against certain match ups and in general, make G2 and G3 easier for us. I hope this helps, cheers.
Sideboarding isnt about boarding in hate to significantly affect a matchup.
Sideboarding is about replacing our weak cards in each matchup with stronger alternatives. This is to ensure that we have an effective 60 cards at all times against all matchups.
This will at times mean boarding in a single copy of a card.
Sideboarding isnt about boarding in hate to significantly affect a matchup.
Sideboarding is about replacing our weak cards in each matchup with stronger alternatives. This is to ensure that we have an effective 60 cards at all times against all matchups.
This will at times mean boarding in a single copy of a card.
That's what I meant by giving us a better g2 and 3, thanks for saying it better :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
I'd love to hear a logical explanation of why bringing in just one copy of a given card is considered an effective strategy.
With one copy, you've only got a 1/4 chance of drawing it by the time you've seen 15 cards, or 50% if the game goes really long and you see half your deck.
If you want the card to reliably affect the game -- if you want to be able to count on it -- why would you run only one? You have to assume that if the card you're sideboarding against is enough of a problem, they'll have more than one, and you don't want them to have a better chance of drawing their problem than you do of getting the answer.
IMHO, the intention of sideboarding isn't to have a slim chance at drawing the right silver bullet for a singleton problem. It's about increasing my odds of winning by focusing on the optimal gameplan.
This is something I've always wondered too. I thought it was just people being cute, but I believe there's math/logic behind including a lot of one ofs in a sideboard.
Think about it this way: say there are a matrix of common cards that Esper might have to worry about. They might have to deal with Underworld Connections or Jace or Sphinx's Revelations or Thassa for example. Look at the sideboard the other guy posted and they talk about 1-2 of Pithing Needle, Negate and Gainsay. Negate handles everything but Thassa, Pithing Needle handles Jace or Connections, Gainsay handles everything but Connections. So you could build a sideboard with 3 Negate and 3 Gainsay and take out the Pithing Needle, but when you do it like that you lose a card that could answer Underworld Connections (instead of 2 Negate, 2 Needle its just 3 Negate).
That's just one of the reasons why you would want to sideboard in just 1 of a card. If you think about each individual sideboard card as a card that gives you the smallest percentage advantage against some subset of cards. Then playing a bunch of 2 ofs actually makes sense. If you played a bunch of 4 ofs, then what will end up happening is against certain cards you'll have 4 or 8 available answers in your sideboard while against others you might have 0. Again... playing a bunch of 2 ofs sort of spreads out what cards and strategies you have answers to. In the last example, you might want 4 cards that can defeat Underworld Connections instead of just 3, and vice versa. Instead of 6 cards that beat Sphinx's Revelation, you might just want 4. These are the sort of tweaks one might make when putting a sideboard together. And over a long 10 round tournament, this sort of thing makes all the difference.
Does everyone agree with my basic cot for our sideboard? I definitely feel that's the strongest way to start it, the other slots will probably need to be used to hedge against aggro fairly heavily. I think 3 SotP will be a good start to this, it will act like a 1 mana removal spell against your run of the mill aggro and be a wall against spike jester, cackler and exzava barring madcap of course.
Does everyone agree with my basic cot for our sideboard? I definitely feel that's the strongest way to start it, the other slots will probably need to be used to hedge against aggro fairly heavily. I think 3 SotP will be a good start to this, it will act like a 1 mana removal spell against your run of the mill aggro and be a wall against spike jester, cackler and exzava barring madcap of course.
I would say that your list is a great starting point, although i would argue that Blood Baron is a must include in sideboard (Aetherling is optional - only include if you expect a control heavy meta).
I don't agree with your basic side-board strategy, though. I have Blood Baron over Aetherling in the side, Dissolve over Negate, and Duress over Pithing Needle.
Pithing Needle has always stricked me as an awkward card. I'd prefer to just disrupt whatever their planeswalkers or enchantments, and against control it's very strong to play before one casts an important spell, to let them tap out to counter Duress instead.
The matches I'm going to bring in Negate(control, G/r) are quite slow and also have strong creatures which are useful to be able to counter.
I don't feel as if I need another Aetherling. My board against control is tight as it is, and that card is only good against control, unlike every other card which serves multiple uses.
Im actually working through my sideboarding plan now, and I am having a difficult time with two matchups in particular:
Mono Blue Devotion:
Mono Red Devotion (midrange):
Which cards in our maindeck are weakest against these two decks?
My feeling is that Azorius Charm is weak against both decks, and I am sideboarding these out for Doom Blades.
Other than Doom Blade, which cards should I be running in my sideboard for Blue Devotion and Red Devotion?
Should we sideboarding into or away from thoughtseize in these matchups?
Azorius Charm is strong against Aggro because it's a 2CMC temporary removal.
There's quite a large number of options that you can employ against both decks.
While both of these decks have aggressive elements, I would not consider them to be aggro. I think Azorius charm is better positioned against Blue Devotion than Red Devotion, however Doom Blade seems to be a strictly better card as it hits almost all creatures (nightveil spectre is still relevant). Obviously Gainsay is solid against Mono U.
Nonetheless, I am having a difficult time determining a good sideboarding 'default' for these matchups
I don't agree with your basic side-board strategy, though. I have Blood Baron over Aetherling in the side, Dissolve over Negate, and Duress over Pithing Needle.
Pithing Needle has always stricked me as an awkward card. I'd prefer to just disrupt whatever their planeswalkers or enchantments, and against control it's very strong to play before one casts an important spell, to let them tap out to counter Duress instead.
The matches I'm going to bring in Negate(control, G/r) are quite slow and also have strong creatures which are useful to be able to counter.
I don't feel as if I need another Aetherling. My board against control is tight as it is, and that card is only good against control, unlike every other card which serves multiple uses.
A lot of what your sideboard is depends on your mainboard, I am using the most common mainboard esper list as my reference.
If I am bringing in duress, I would much rather just have 4 thogrseize in that situation.
I like negate on the side because most lists run 3 dissolves main board along with other counters sometimes.
And while yes, BBoV is hard to deal with, he is not as hard as aetherling, like you said, the control match ups are long, aetherling may be mana intensive at time, but if try left in supreme for BBoV then surprise surprise, that won't work on aetherling.
Does everyone agree with my basic cot for our sideboard? I definitely feel that's the strongest way to start it, the other slots will probably need to be used to hedge against aggro fairly heavily. I think 3 SotP will be a good start to this, it will act like a 1 mana removal spell against your run of the mill aggro and be a wall against spike jester, cackler and exzava barring madcap of course.
I agree that yours is valid. But personally I don't like running two Aetherlings.
As I said SofP is fine if you run 3-4, personally I go in a different direction.
Also you have to consider which decks you are better as a player against. Aggro is usually the worst control match-up but I don't fear it and feel I make rational choices when I play against it, so I don't jam as many anti-aggro cards as others do.
Im actually working through my sideboarding plan now, and I am having a difficult time with two matchups in particular:
Mono Blue Devotion:
Mono Red Devotion (midrange):
Which cards in our maindeck are weakest against these two decks?
My feeling is that Azorius Charm is weak against both decks, and I am sideboarding these out for Doom Blades.
Other than Doom Blade, which cards should I be running in my sideboard for Blue Devotion and Red Devotion?
Should we sideboarding into or away from thoughtseize in these matchups?
In general Esper is the favorite here, not sure why it's causing you a ton of trouble.
Against mono red it may be the way you're playing against it. I can't say unless I watched a lot of your games, but I see some Esper players doing really strange things, like ticking down their Jace's instead of ticking up, taking the wrong cards with Thoughtseize, bringing it weird sideboard cards.
While both of these decks have aggressive elements, I would not consider them to be aggro. I think Azorius charm is better positioned against Blue Devotion than Red Devotion, however Doom Blade seems to be a strictly better card as it hits almost all creatures (nightveil spectre is still relevant). Obviously Gainsay is solid against Mono U.
Nonetheless, I am having a difficult time determining a good sideboarding 'default' for these matchups
Perhaps start a Versus thread for discussion of this specific matchup.
A lot of what your sideboard is depends on your mainboard, I am using the most common mainboard esper list as my reference.
If I am bringing in duress, I would much rather just have 4 thogrseize in that situation.
I like negate on the side because most lists run 3 dissolves main board along with other counters sometimes.
And while yes, BBoV is hard to deal with, he is not as hard as aetherling, like you said, the control match ups are long, aetherling may be mana intensive at time, but if try left in supreme for BBoV then surprise surprise, that won't work on aetherling.
Or you could play 4 thoughtseize + Duress.
Dissolve is much more useful against G/r, and Mono B, and it's probably better against control as well, even though they have many non-creature spells.
Aetherling is definitely very strong against control, but that's the only match he's good as a two of. Because of such, he hardly meets "mandatory" requirements for me.
While both of these decks have aggressive elements, I would not consider them to be aggro. I think Azorius charm is better positioned against Blue Devotion than Red Devotion, however Doom Blade seems to be a strictly better card as it hits almost all creatures (nightveil spectre is still relevant). Obviously Gainsay is solid against Mono U.
Nonetheless, I am having a difficult time determining a good sideboarding 'default' for these matchups
Oh, I didn't see you meant Red Devotion. I actually have never considered R Devotion, which is probably a fault of mine, and would like to hear what cards people think need to be played differently against this compared to R aggro.
I agree with most choices brought up by manticzeus.
Let me comment on your choices:
- Dissolve is a card that you certainly do not want in sideboard. This is an "answer all" card that is not particulary good against anything. You need them in MD to have flexible G1 but there are better cards against every matchup. I've been talking about sideboard flexibility but it doesn't come from cards that are flexible on them own, it comes from cards that are very good in particular scenarios and since you have many different cards good for particular scenarios you have flexible sideboard. This is the flexibility we seek.
- You should have AEtherling AND Blood Baron, for different MUs. I wholeheartedly belive that 2 AEtherlings in 75 is minimal value. If your AEtherling #1 gets Thoughtseized or happens to be ~50 card in your deck your chances to win mirror drops drastically. I strongly advice having second AEtherling in sideboard.
- Pithing Needle is an important card that shuts off CA engines in GR Midrange and Mono Black. I don't like it in mirror because of it's symmetry and I don't want to gamble but sometimes it is useful naming AEtherling if they happen to resolve it somehow. Against GR I think you could play it T1 naming Domri Rade if they started with Elvish Mystic. I know it is a bit of gambling but you probably will be able to counter Xenagos and this is only answer to Domri if you don't want them to get value from it and don't want to tapout for D-Sphere (of course Thoughtseize T1 is another).
I agree with most of this. No one that plays Esper would ever consider Dissolve for the sideboard. It doesn't make any sense. As was explained so well by Sabre, the main-deck is where you want to be general and the sideboard is where we get specific.
I will disagree that 2 Aetherlings is essential. I think 3 BBoV, 1 Aetherling, 1 Elspeth, 1 Jace, Memory Adept (and to a lesser extent 4 J, AOT) are more than enough win cons for me against control.
Let me comment on your choices:
- Dissolve is a card that you certainly do not want in sideboard. This is an "answer all" card that is not particulary good against anything. You need them in MD to have flexible G1 but there are better cards against every matchup. I've been talking about sideboard flexibility but it doesn't come from cards that are flexible on them own, it comes from cards that are very good in particular scenarios and since you have many different cards good for particular scenarios you have flexible sideboard. This is the flexibility we seek.
Not particularly good against anything? Dissolve seems stronger than Negate against control, Mono B and possibly G/r.
- You should have AEtherling AND Blood Baron, for different MUs. I wholeheartedly belive that 2 AEtherlings in 75 is minimal value. If your AEtherling #1 gets Thoughtseized or happens to be ~50 card in your deck your chances to win mirror drops drastically. I strongly advice having second AEtherling in sideboard.
This is true. Him being countered also sucks. But is it really worth it to take up a whole side-board slot? I suppose now that I think about it, the opportunity cost isn't particularly high, it isn't that hard to make that one cut for him. Food for thought.
- Pithing Needle is an important card that shuts off CA engines in GR Midrange and Mono Black. I don't like it in mirror because of it's symmetry and I don't want to gamble but sometimes it is useful naming AEtherling if they happen to resolve it somehow. Against GR I think you could play it T1 naming Domri Rade if they started with Elvish Mystic. I know it is a bit of gambling but you probably will be able to counter Xenagos and this is only answer to Domri if you don't want them to get value from it and don't want to tapout for D-Sphere (of course Thoughtseize T1 is another).
Why not just Duress instead and hit the actual card, or if they don't have it, something else instead?
In general Esper is the favorite here, not sure why it's causing you a ton of trouble.
Against mono red it may be the way you're playing against it. I can't say unless I watched a lot of your games, but I see some Esper players doing really strange things, like ticking down their Jace's instead of ticking up, taking the wrong cards with Thoughtseize, bringing it weird sideboard cards.
I'm not having a ton of trouble with the matchup,
I'm having trouble determining the optimal sideboarding strategy against these decks, which is why I am asking how others sideboard these matchups in the sideboarding thread,
Against control you side in mix of Negates and Gainsays.
What not side in a mix of Gainsays and Dissolves? Or a combination of the three?
Against Mono B you have Negates, Pithing Needles, BBoV, some bring Merciless Eviction, other bring discard, other have Dark Betrayals.
Siding against G/R is difficult as many our mainboard cards are good against them so you do not have many slots. I think that Needles + discard + extra point removal (Doom Blade) are good enough.
Why not Dissolve + Duress here?
I have many cards that need to be sided out against GR. Namely, Syncopate, Azorius Charm and Blood Baron.
In MUs you want Dissolves you just keep the ones you have in MD as still valid all-around answers and bring in Negates for extra scenarios (like countering T3 Connections being on play, etc.). You will still have enough Dissolves and removal to fight their creature threats.
Dissolve can also counter Connections on the play. Can't on the draw, though. Sometimes situations come up where we have only teh Negate and need to counter a creature.
Guess I can't dedicated half of a slot the him hehehe.
I described a game when I 'seized my opponents AEtherling and mine was ~50-th card. I really wouldn't like this to happen in G2 and G3.
Your argument convinced me in the last post btw to add the second Aetherling.
Viable question, the thing is that Duress against them is only good in T1 and T2. Pithing Needle from topdeck can actually do something. Say they have Xenagos out and some cards in hand. You Duress and their only target is another Xenagos. I know this is a corner case but it is something you have to keep eye on.
Of course you can counter my argument saying that they can Destructive Reverly my Needle and it is a valid point.
That is true. But then, Duress is much stronger against control than Pithing Needle is.
Destructive Reverly negating Pithing Needle strikes me as being only a minor factor. MBC can't even deal with Pithing Needle.
What not side in a mix of Gainsays and Dissolves? Or a combination of the three?
This is pretty simple and has been explained to you very clearly several times now. Please go back and review what people have already told you.
Why not Dissolve + Duress here?
I have many cards that need to be sided out against GR. Namely, Syncopate, Azorius Charm and Blood Baron.
We usually run 3 Dissolves main as a hard counter with upside against ANYTHING. We don't run Syncopate, it's not that great.
Dissolve can also counter Connections on the play. Can't on the draw, though. Sometimes situations come up where we have only teh Negate and need to counter a creature.
You don't have to counter t2 plays with this deck. If you've played it for long you'll notice a lot of the time you don't have 2 untapped lands on turn two, especially those of you playing only 26 lands.
Your argument convinced me in the last post btw to add the second Aetherling.
That is true. But then, Duress is much stronger against control than Pithing Needle is.
Destructive Reverly negating Pithing Needle strikes me as being only a minor factor. MBC can't even deal with Pithing Needle.
Not sure which one is best atm
Pithing Needle is sweet against MonoB. Name Whip of Erebos, or after they play Connections name Swamp.
I love 2 Duress out of the side, to be used alongside 4 Thoughtseize. These cards answer early important plays like PW's & CA engines, hose their PW win-cons, and/or clear the way for finishers.
- Dissolve is a card that you certainly do not want in sideboard. This is an "answer all" card that is not particulary good against anything. You need them in MD to have flexible G1 but there are better cards against every matchup. I've been talking about sideboard flexibility but it doesn't come from cards that are flexible on them own, it comes from cards that are very good in particular scenarios and since you have many different cards good for particular scenarios you have flexible sideboard. This is the flexibility we seek.
In this case, I strongly disagree with the flexibility/specialized argument.
In every matchup where people suggest bringing in Negate, we're facing midrange or slower decks. If you side in two Negates, you're only 28% likely to have one in-hand T2 on the draw (25% on the play), and that's assuming you had two basic/shock lands untapped to play it. If you only sided in one, it's obviously a lot less likely. Point is, it's not worth betting on Negate as a T2 play.
We also have 6-7 other answers (D-Sphere, Downfall, etc) to whatever those early threats might be, if any. Given the lack of reliability/need for an early play, why take the lower-cost and less-versatile Negate when we have room for a 4th Dissolve that costs only one more, can also counter their big threats, and gives us a Scry to boot?
- Pithing Needle is an important card that shuts off CA engines in GR Midrange and Mono Black. I don't like it in mirror because of it's symmetry and I don't want to gamble but sometimes it is useful naming AEtherling if they happen to resolve it somehow. Against GR I think you could play it T1 naming Domri Rade if they started with Elvish Mystic. I know it is a bit of gambling but you probably will be able to counter Xenagos and this is only answer to Domri if you don't want them to get value from it and don't want to tapout for D-Sphere (of course Thoughtseize T1 is another).
I'd rather Thoughtseize or Duress than play a Needle without seeing the permanent first.
Question for all: when do you rely on Pithing Needle? We run about 7 copies of D. Sphere and Hero's Downfall, and I'm not sure Needle is the answer to Underworld Connections or Whip because they still get the Devotion. Wouldn't Thoughseize/Duress and enchantment removal be stronger, especially given the increasing prevalence of enchantment/artifact hate like Abrupt Decay?
I love 2 Duress out of the side, to be used alongside 4 Thoughtseize. These cards answer early important plays like PW's & CA engines, hose their PW win-cons, and/or clear the way for finishers.
QUOTE=Sabre;11168740]- Dissolve is a card that you certainly do not want in sideboard. This is an "answer all" card that is not particulary good against anything. You need them in MD to have flexible G1 but there are better cards against every matchup. I've been talking about sideboard flexibility but it doesn't come from cards that are flexible on them own, it comes from cards that are very good in particular scenarios and since you have many different cards good for particular scenarios you have flexible sideboard. This is the flexibility we seek.
In this case, I strongly disagree with the flexibility/specialized argument.
In every matchup where people suggest bringing in Negate, we're facing midrange or slower decks. If you side in two Negates, you're only 28% likely to have one in-hand T2 on the draw (25% on the play), and that's assuming you had two basic/shock lands untapped to play it. If you only sided in one, it's obviously a lot less likely. Point is, it's not worth betting on Negate as a T2 play.
We don't need to counter on t2 very often, maybe Domri Rade after Elvish Mystic...other than that it doesn't really matter. The fact is 1 less mana is VERY relevant LATER.
We also have 6-7 other answers (D-Sphere, Downfall, etc) to whatever those early threats might be, if any. Given the lack of reliability/need for an early play, why take the lower-cost and less-versatile Negate when we have room for a 4th Dissolve that costs only one more, can also counter their big threats, and gives us a Scry to boot?
I'd rather Thoughtseize or Duress than play a Needle without seeing the permanent first.
Question for all: when do you rely on Pithing Needle? We run about 7 copies of D. Sphere and Hero's Downfall, and I'm not sure Needle is the answer to Underworld Connections or Whip because they still get the Devotion. Wouldn't Thoughseize/Duress and enchantment removal be stronger, especially given the increasing prevalence of enchantment/artifact hate like Abrupt Decay?[/QUOTE]
I like Needle against R/G, MonoB and Maze's End at the very least.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1x Aetherling - another resilient finisher against control or removal heavy midrange deck, once you slam one of these then you can usually win on the spot.
1-2x Doom blade - depending on what kind of removal and how much removal you have mainboarded will dictate how many of these you run. Great removal in the format, hits most threats that need to be dealt with immediately.
1-2x Thoughtseize - usually we want to board in more disruption against the slower decks, the number you run depends on how predominat control and slow Grundy decks are in your meta.
1-2x Pithing Needle - I think having at least 1 is mandatory, though it is up for debate if you should run 2. The versatility of being able to shut down problematic actives is great.
2x Negate - a must in control match ups, 2 is pretty much standard so we can have a much stronger match up. It's also great against plainswalker centric strategies.
1-2 Gainsay - makes our mono blue match that much easier, depending on god mainboard you'll want 1-2, I prefer 2 since post board mono blue usually plays a much slower and more controlling game.
So that 7-11 slots taken up depending on your mainboard configuration. In the last few slots I like to hedge my game against the fast aggro decks that have been popping up all over the place.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=546505
With one copy, you've only got a 1/4 chance of drawing it by the time you've seen 15 cards, or 50% if the game goes really long and you see half your deck.
If you want the card to reliably affect the game -- if you want to be able to count on it -- why would you run only one? You have to assume that if the card you're sideboarding against is enough of a problem, they'll have more than one, and you don't want them to have a better chance of drawing their problem than you do of getting the answer.
IMHO, the intention of sideboarding isn't to have a slim chance at drawing the right silver bullet for a singleton problem. It's about increasing my odds of winning by focusing on the optimal gameplan.
Because a lot of the times we already run answers to problem cards mainboarded.
In the case of thoughtseize, doom blade, and aetherling
we run those mainboard, so they arent singleton copies in the 75.
As for pithing needles, they are good in certain match ups, but it's iffy if you want to run more or not, most of the time they are answers to walkers, UC, and whip, all of which detention sphere does a better job at because you can still play your own after sphere is down. The only thing it hits that sphere doesn't is aetherling in the mono blue MU where you will usually board yours out for an extra BBoV.
Gainsay is again a preference call and depends what else you are running, some people only run 1 because they run syncopates or other counters mainboarded while people who don't find more use out of the second gainsay.
All in all, our side board is both used to hedge against certain match ups and in general, make G2 and G3 easier for us. I hope this helps, cheers.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=546505
Sideboarding is about replacing our weak cards in each matchup with stronger alternatives. This is to ensure that we have an effective 60 cards at all times against all matchups.
This will at times mean boarding in a single copy of a card.
That's what I meant by giving us a better g2 and 3, thanks for saying it better :thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=546505
This is something I've always wondered too. I thought it was just people being cute, but I believe there's math/logic behind including a lot of one ofs in a sideboard.
Think about it this way: say there are a matrix of common cards that Esper might have to worry about. They might have to deal with Underworld Connections or Jace or Sphinx's Revelations or Thassa for example. Look at the sideboard the other guy posted and they talk about 1-2 of Pithing Needle, Negate and Gainsay. Negate handles everything but Thassa, Pithing Needle handles Jace or Connections, Gainsay handles everything but Connections. So you could build a sideboard with 3 Negate and 3 Gainsay and take out the Pithing Needle, but when you do it like that you lose a card that could answer Underworld Connections (instead of 2 Negate, 2 Needle its just 3 Negate).
That's just one of the reasons why you would want to sideboard in just 1 of a card. If you think about each individual sideboard card as a card that gives you the smallest percentage advantage against some subset of cards. Then playing a bunch of 2 ofs actually makes sense. If you played a bunch of 4 ofs, then what will end up happening is against certain cards you'll have 4 or 8 available answers in your sideboard while against others you might have 0. Again... playing a bunch of 2 ofs sort of spreads out what cards and strategies you have answers to. In the last example, you might want 4 cards that can defeat Underworld Connections instead of just 3, and vice versa. Instead of 6 cards that beat Sphinx's Revelation, you might just want 4. These are the sort of tweaks one might make when putting a sideboard together. And over a long 10 round tournament, this sort of thing makes all the difference.
Does everyone agree with my basic cot for our sideboard? I definitely feel that's the strongest way to start it, the other slots will probably need to be used to hedge against aggro fairly heavily. I think 3 SotP will be a good start to this, it will act like a 1 mana removal spell against your run of the mill aggro and be a wall against spike jester, cackler and exzava barring madcap of course.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=546505
I would say that your list is a great starting point, although i would argue that Blood Baron is a must include in sideboard (Aetherling is optional - only include if you expect a control heavy meta).
I don't agree with your basic side-board strategy, though. I have Blood Baron over Aetherling in the side, Dissolve over Negate, and Duress over Pithing Needle.
Pithing Needle has always stricked me as an awkward card. I'd prefer to just disrupt whatever their planeswalkers or enchantments, and against control it's very strong to play before one casts an important spell, to let them tap out to counter Duress instead.
The matches I'm going to bring in Negate(control, G/r) are quite slow and also have strong creatures which are useful to be able to counter.
I don't feel as if I need another Aetherling. My board against control is tight as it is, and that card is only good against control, unlike every other card which serves multiple uses.
Mono Blue Devotion:
Mono Red Devotion (midrange):
Which cards in our maindeck are weakest against these two decks?
My feeling is that Azorius Charm is weak against both decks, and I am sideboarding these out for Doom Blades.
Other than Doom Blade, which cards should I be running in my sideboard for Blue Devotion and Red Devotion?
Should we sideboarding into or away from thoughtseize in these matchups?
There's quite a large number of options that you can employ against both decks.
While both of these decks have aggressive elements, I would not consider them to be aggro. I think Azorius charm is better positioned against Blue Devotion than Red Devotion, however Doom Blade seems to be a strictly better card as it hits almost all creatures (nightveil spectre is still relevant). Obviously Gainsay is solid against Mono U.
Nonetheless, I am having a difficult time determining a good sideboarding 'default' for these matchups
A lot of what your sideboard is depends on your mainboard, I am using the most common mainboard esper list as my reference.
If I am bringing in duress, I would much rather just have 4 thogrseize in that situation.
I like negate on the side because most lists run 3 dissolves main board along with other counters sometimes.
And while yes, BBoV is hard to deal with, he is not as hard as aetherling, like you said, the control match ups are long, aetherling may be mana intensive at time, but if try left in supreme for BBoV then surprise surprise, that won't work on aetherling.
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=546505
I agree that yours is valid. But personally I don't like running two Aetherlings.
As I said SofP is fine if you run 3-4, personally I go in a different direction.
Also you have to consider which decks you are better as a player against. Aggro is usually the worst control match-up but I don't fear it and feel I make rational choices when I play against it, so I don't jam as many anti-aggro cards as others do.
In general Esper is the favorite here, not sure why it's causing you a ton of trouble.
Against mono red it may be the way you're playing against it. I can't say unless I watched a lot of your games, but I see some Esper players doing really strange things, like ticking down their Jace's instead of ticking up, taking the wrong cards with Thoughtseize, bringing it weird sideboard cards.
Perhaps start a Versus thread for discussion of this specific matchup.
Or you could play 4 thoughtseize + Duress.
Dissolve is much more useful against G/r, and Mono B, and it's probably better against control as well, even though they have many non-creature spells.
Aetherling is definitely very strong against control, but that's the only match he's good as a two of. Because of such, he hardly meets "mandatory" requirements for me.
Oh, I didn't see you meant Red Devotion. I actually have never considered R Devotion, which is probably a fault of mine, and would like to hear what cards people think need to be played differently against this compared to R aggro.
I agree with most of this. No one that plays Esper would ever consider Dissolve for the sideboard. It doesn't make any sense. As was explained so well by Sabre, the main-deck is where you want to be general and the sideboard is where we get specific.
I will disagree that 2 Aetherlings is essential. I think 3 BBoV, 1 Aetherling, 1 Elspeth, 1 Jace, Memory Adept (and to a lesser extent 4 J, AOT) are more than enough win cons for me against control.
Not particularly good against anything? Dissolve seems stronger than Negate against control, Mono B and possibly G/r.
This is true. Him being countered also sucks. But is it really worth it to take up a whole side-board slot? I suppose now that I think about it, the opportunity cost isn't particularly high, it isn't that hard to make that one cut for him. Food for thought.
Why not just Duress instead and hit the actual card, or if they don't have it, something else instead?
I'm not having a ton of trouble with the matchup,
I'm having trouble determining the optimal sideboarding strategy against these decks, which is why I am asking how others sideboard these matchups in the sideboarding thread,
What not side in a mix of Gainsays and Dissolves? Or a combination of the three?
Why not Dissolve + Duress here?
I have many cards that need to be sided out against GR. Namely, Syncopate, Azorius Charm and Blood Baron.
Dissolve can also counter Connections on the play. Can't on the draw, though. Sometimes situations come up where we have only teh Negate and need to counter a creature.
Your argument convinced me in the last post btw to add the second Aetherling.
That is true. But then, Duress is much stronger against control than Pithing Needle is.
Destructive Reverly negating Pithing Needle strikes me as being only a minor factor. MBC can't even deal with Pithing Needle.
Not sure which one is best atm
Pithing Needle is sweet against MonoB. Name Whip of Erebos, or after they play Connections name Swamp.
In this case, I strongly disagree with the flexibility/specialized argument.
In every matchup where people suggest bringing in Negate, we're facing midrange or slower decks. If you side in two Negates, you're only 28% likely to have one in-hand T2 on the draw (25% on the play), and that's assuming you had two basic/shock lands untapped to play it. If you only sided in one, it's obviously a lot less likely. Point is, it's not worth betting on Negate as a T2 play.
We also have 6-7 other answers (D-Sphere, Downfall, etc) to whatever those early threats might be, if any. Given the lack of reliability/need for an early play, why take the lower-cost and less-versatile Negate when we have room for a 4th Dissolve that costs only one more, can also counter their big threats, and gives us a Scry to boot?
I'd rather Thoughtseize or Duress than play a Needle without seeing the permanent first.
Question for all: when do you rely on Pithing Needle? We run about 7 copies of D. Sphere and Hero's Downfall, and I'm not sure Needle is the answer to Underworld Connections or Whip because they still get the Devotion. Wouldn't Thoughseize/Duress and enchantment removal be stronger, especially given the increasing prevalence of enchantment/artifact hate like Abrupt Decay?
In this case, I strongly disagree with the flexibility/specialized argument.
In every matchup where people suggest bringing in Negate, we're facing midrange or slower decks. If you side in two Negates, you're only 28% likely to have one in-hand T2 on the draw (25% on the play), and that's assuming you had two basic/shock lands untapped to play it. If you only sided in one, it's obviously a lot less likely. Point is, it's not worth betting on Negate as a T2 play.
We don't need to counter on t2 very often, maybe Domri Rade after Elvish Mystic...other than that it doesn't really matter. The fact is 1 less mana is VERY relevant LATER.
We also have 6-7 other answers (D-Sphere, Downfall, etc) to whatever those early threats might be, if any. Given the lack of reliability/need for an early play, why take the lower-cost and less-versatile Negate when we have room for a 4th Dissolve that costs only one more, can also counter their big threats, and gives us a Scry to boot?
I'd rather Thoughtseize or Duress than play a Needle without seeing the permanent first.
Question for all: when do you rely on Pithing Needle? We run about 7 copies of D. Sphere and Hero's Downfall, and I'm not sure Needle is the answer to Underworld Connections or Whip because they still get the Devotion. Wouldn't Thoughseize/Duress and enchantment removal be stronger, especially given the increasing prevalence of enchantment/artifact hate like Abrupt Decay?[/QUOTE]
I like Needle against R/G, MonoB and Maze's End at the very least.