@Walked: Glad to hear you've been similarly experiencing success with AF. I agree with you that closing speed is an issue. But that was an issue in the Spreading Seas build, as well. One option would be to add a Clique to the mainboard. I've considered this myself. The problem is that it's basically impossible to know what to cut for it. I feel like all my slots are filled with non-optional cards at this point. You could argue I should move a Crucible from the main to the side for a Clique, but then I'd have to cut something from the side, and I'm not sure what it'd be. Also, as I mentioned above, I think the Crucible-Restore Balance synergy is great -- not to mention that mainboard Crucible (to some degree) makes up for not playing Seas.
@TheAller: Thanks for the feedback. I wish I could run Spreading Seas, but if you're committed to the AF plan (as I am), the Seas are the obvious cut for 3 AF + 1 Restore Balance. To mitigate the loss, I'm playing only 2 Tolaria Wests, with 3 GQs and 1 Tec Edge. Also, thanks to your feedback, I cut one of my Dispels from the board and added a 2nd Queller -- now running 2 Queller, 1 Clique. Maybe one more Queller would be good, but more than that would, I think, be overkill.
Also, I should say, in testing, AF has been insane. Among other things, it's totally shored up my Elves matchup.
I'm not totally sold on Restore Balance -- but playing it + Crucible in the main has felt good so far.
@Lamps R Kewl: Don't mean to be a jerk, but I've seen AF lists 5-0 leagues a few times now -- haven't seen any Scour lists do similarly well. I've also seen SaffronOlive tweet about how good AF is. But to each his own, I guess.
I don't think the choice is between Gideon and AF -- playing 3 AF and 1 Gideon seems fine, good even. BloodyRabbit: I agree if you run AF, you should have more spot removal. This is where I'm at with my AF build: http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/03-04-17-lxJ-uw-control/. I'm running 2 Tolaria West instead of 3, so I can play a fourth Strip Mine effect. Not sure if this is right, but since we're cutting 4 Spreading Seas, seems reasonable to make up for the loss.
@Reverend_Dude: I'm sympathetic to the concern. Spreading Seas is great right now. But still, a lot of times I draw it and really wish it was something (anything) else. One thing to do would be to play only 2 Tolaria West (as opposed to the 3 most AF builds are running) and add a 3rd GQ for a 3 GQ/1 Tec Edge split. Another idea that I've been toying with is maindeck Crucible of Worlds. This lets us recur our GQs, Tec Edges, AND Tolaria Wests. Also, if we ever have to sac lands to Restore Balance, Crucible lets us get them back. My thinking is that this might mitigate the loss of Spreading Seas.
Here's the current build for reference: http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/03-04-17-lxJ-uw-control/. In Dredge heavy metas, we add a third RiP to the board and cut either a Condemn or a Queller (depending on whether Death's Shadow or Combo has a greater share of the relevant meta).
I'm pretty much 100% in favor of the AF/Restore Balance build at this point. My worry is that we don't play Spreading Seas. How negatively is this likely to impact the Tron matchup?
Also, I agree 3 Tolaria is too many, even if you're all in on AF -- I'm playing 2.
Also, I should say, in testing, AF has been insane. Among other things, it's totally shored up my Elves matchup.
I'm not totally sold on Restore Balance -- but playing it + Crucible in the main has felt good so far.
But I do think there are two competitive builds for UW control. And I don't think Scours are in any of them.
I prefer the As Foretold version at the moment.
Here's the current build for reference: http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/03-04-17-lxJ-uw-control/. In Dredge heavy metas, we add a third RiP to the board and cut either a Condemn or a Queller (depending on whether Death's Shadow or Combo has a greater share of the relevant meta).