Gideon's Intervention vs. Jace's Defeat

>>54948221
What matchups are you considering when you're thinking of putting these in?

Also, can we see the full decklist?

>>54948273
Refer to Side Board, don't want to type that again.
---
Creatures:
Kefnet the Mindful x2
Linvala, the Preserver x1
Spell Queller x2
Torrential Gearhulk x2
Planeswalkers:
Gideon, Ally of Zendikar x2
Gideon of the Trials x1
Spells:
Blessed Alliance x2
Censor x3
Declaration in Stone x1
Disallow x3
Essence Scatter x2
Forsake the Worldly x2
Fumigate x1
Glimmer of Genius x1
Imollating Glare x3
Negate x2
Pull from Tomorrow x4
Enchantments:
Cast Out x2
Lands:
Irrigated Farmland x3
Island x10
Plains x5
Port Town x3
Prairie Stream x3

Sorry it took so long, also Jace's D cause guy I played against who I asked after the match said Jace cause extra counter spell and Gideon's I because I ran into a couple of situations where I countered a threat only for it to be played again 2-3 turns later and a lack of counter spells in hand (Usually threat = planeswalker).

NOTE: More often than not I could resolve those "threats" without counter spells due to Spell Quellers and Cast Outs, it would just be a massive pain in the dick.

No Supreme Wills?

>>54948640
this

>>54948640
What would you replace it with?

>>54948640
Let me rephrase: What would you replace with Supreme Wills?

>>54948675
some/all of the Dissallows; maybe even one of the negates. This would slightly weaken your win-rate in the control mirror, but in return, go with Jace's defeat in the sideboard, which would increase your win-rate in control mirrors.

Maybe cut one dissalow from your mainboard and one from your sideboard, and replace them with Supreme Wills.

>>54948737
So essentially one Supreme Wills in deck, one in side board, and Jace's Defeat in sideboard for control mirrors?

Have you ever considered placing your entire shit game onto 'the sideboard' and doing something with your life?

>>54948967
Nice b8

>>54948926
Yes, although you could also run 2 Supreme Wills in the maindeck if you prefer the consitency; you might even want to replace the third Dissalow with a Supreme Will.

This is, of course, merely a suggestion. I'm certain that you have much more experience playing UW control than me; If I say one thing and your gut says annother, go with your gut.

>>5492
3 things:
1: That Jackass am I right?
2: I may take out one Censor and one Disallow out of my deck and replace with two Supreme Wills while going with Jace cause you made me take into account Control Mirrors (which I probably should have thought of before)
3: Thank you for the advice, I really appreciate it. Now, Imma piss off to Netflix and watch some Twilight Zone.

>>54948221
My question is why run Jace's Defeat at all when you can just run negate? In the current meta no jace planeswalkers are played and blue rarely runs more than 6 creatures in their deck, unless its some weird jank.
Negate counters everything Jace's Defeat would in a control match up BUT it's also useful in other games and can counter their red/black cards in control as well.

What blue cards are you even scared of? glimmer or engulf the shore? One of the hundred of counters negate also deals with?

>>54949998
The main reason is it's a counter spell that can deal with a lot of those Blue spells while also taking care of Torrential Gearhulk, which is god damn everywhere. I guess I see your point, but if you're going up against a control deck, you better be expecting that fucking Torrential Gearhulk. Jace's Defeat is just one more card to deal with TG while still working as an answer to counter spells.