[Deck] Spanish Inquisition (B/x Storm Combo)

[Mental]

Ok then here it goes:

R 1 - Dragon Stompy
G1

Ok ok I knew what he was playing, 'cause he is a friend of mine...
So i was on the play, played a cabal therapy naming trinisphere, which he had in and revealing 2 lands and to powder keg, because i played cabalT with a chrome mox i decided to flashback therapy rermoving 2 keg's and finally winning turn 3-4.

G2
I tried to storm early game which was working quite well until I was forced to play a spoils of the vault, I named infernal tutor, cause i play 4 tutors and 3 tendrils but commited suicide by not finding a tutor in the top 10 cards.

G3
I won in the first turn


R 2 - Eva Green
G 1
Playing a very agressive built he was on 16 lives turn 3 and with not that hard resistance I won in my turn 3.

G2
He was on the play, started swamp, dark ritual, hippy
And I drew just the right thing to win in my turn 1.

R3 - ********
G1
Well it was kind of funny because I was talking earlier with the ******** player and said something that my wb Pox deck beats counterbalance and he assumed that I was playing pox...
So he kept what he thought was a good hand against pox and i won turn 2 while he wasn't having any fows or stifle's.

G2
He was prepared this time but it didn't make any difference...
He couldn't find a fow or stifle and I won turn 2.

R4 - Landstill
R1
He played plains go
I didn't knew what he was playing and assumed he didn't play any counters..
The second and third turn he played 2 mishra's factory's and attacked once..
So i could combo of turn 3 but than it happend: FoW on cruel bargain i was like wtf is this and was kind of shocked cause i had imprinted my second cabal therapy in my chromo mox, but he was mana screwed and i won 3-4 turns later.

G2 First time i boared stuff in: dark confidants...
He was on the play didn't do anything interesting turn 1 and it was my turn..
I drew a card played a petal, dark ritual, confidant, ( still no fow so I decided wtf let's do this) played an other dark ritual drew 4 cards just enough to keep going and won finally with a tendrills

Top 4
G1 - Belcher
Well he won game by me trying to combo of turn 2 and finally finding myself getting fizzeld so that really sucked..
G2
I won turn 2 just by being quicker...
G3
I had 2 Led's 1 belcher, 1 cabal tirual, 1 Land grant and some other irelevant stuff, I took my chances (which where heavilly improved because my opponent mulled to 4)
First I drew an other cabal... then another one, me getting nervous there,.. and then finally another land grant, so won be using his own major threat.

Final Round
My Dragon stompy friend was very lucky and had to play against me for the first prize...
The first prize where 3 taigas and the 2nd where 2 bad lands
I only wanted 2 taigas and he knew I beated everyone i played against so we splited, me getting 2 taigas and a bad lands and he the other cards

Looks like you picked the perfect deck for the Meta, lol.

So you maindecked Cabal Therapy? Is that standard now?

[chocomel]

So you maindecked Cabal Therapy? Is that standard now?

Yes, but I always had them main board ( "always" is not that much time, since I played the deck on 3 tourney's and only started playing it on MWS in 2008)


Has the spoils ever been better than a draw4? I know it's because you only have 3 bargains, but I was thinking of testing it when I get the time.

It depends, sometimes it wins matches you wouldn't have won with a bargain, like having 2 mana floating, 1 spoils, 1 creature 1 tendrils and a high enough storm count, and calling it for culling the weak and finding it in the top 10 cards...
And sometimes you'll lose while not being a bargain, what I had on my tournament...
I think Spoils is only good when you have at least 10+ lives, that gives you most times enough to find what you need and other wise you end up killing yourself.

[B.C.]

So you maindecked Cabal Therapy? Is that standard now?

Cabal Therapy in the maindeck is not necessarily standard, but it has been done quite often. I usually go without it, but it is definitely worth considering.

[Bryant Cook]

Looks like you picked the perfect deck for the Meta, lol.

So you maindecked Cabal Therapy? Is that standard now?

It should be, every combo deck should be playing maindeck protection nowadays.

[B.C.]

It should be, every combo deck should be playing maindeck protection nowadays.


I disagree with this. I've tried Cabal Therapy in the maindeck several times, but I just strongly prefer the fastest build possible. With SI (my build at least) your goal should be to win first turn. Cabal Therapy instead of SSG or something else makes this harder to do.

If you are on the play, the only card you realistically have to worry about is Force of Will. I have never been to a Legacy tournament where over half the field even has FOW in their deck. Assuming you are playing a deck that does have 4 FOW, the chances of them having it in their opening hand (without them trying to aggressively mulligan to it) is roughly 40-something percent. So when you sit down with an opponent, there is only about a 20% chance that your first turn kill will be ruined by FOW. F'in go for it.

Of course these odds are a lot different if you are on the draw. Then you have to worry about Daze/Stifle/whatever. Still, go for it. No fear.

[BreathWeapon]

I agree that Cabal Therapy is bad, but that doesn't mean Land Grant Si shouldn't be running disruption, because the win percentages of Land Grant Si are going to be a lot higher with either Xantid Swarm or Pact of Negation than with out them.

Unless you're using SiTES, you're going to need/want disruption at some point, it just makes life so much easier.

[Iranon]

The problem isn't Force of Will, the problem is Force of Will buying time to play something horrible and lasting. From my experience, there is no adequate solution for the maindeck (solutions exist, but they are worse than the problem). Consider the opening

Therapy for Force, go
Draw a card, Ponder, go

Result: they got to see up to 5 new cards to find a Force (if they didn't, they probably found a Daze for which they have a land out), and will be able to put down a Counterbalance next turn.



The nice thing about protection in the board is the potential for mind games. Mulligan for Force becomes unattractive if Xantid Swarm is a possibility, mulliganing for heavy duty hate isn't good if they suspect you to go all-out or use Therapy.

[Waikiki]

Has anybody been working with the pact list or its just too bad? Cause i'd like to see that evolving.

[BreathWeapon]

Has anybody been working with the pact list or its just too bad? Cause i'd like to see that evolving.

Yes, I use the Pact list on a regular basis, altho' I cut 4 Manamorphose, 1 Vine Dryad and 3 Tendrils of Agony for 4 Xantid Swarm and 4 Goblin Charbelcher. I found Land Grant SI is pointless with out 4 Goblin Charbelcher and that Xantid Swarm is the best disruption with 4 Elvish Spirit Guide.

I doubt the list Evolves beyond that, altho' you're free to try Pact of Negation and Vine Dryad instead of Xantid Swarm.

[Waikiki]

wow I always was a big fan of Manamorphose. How come you cut that piece?

[BreathWeapon]

wow I always was a big fan of Manamorphose. How come you cut that piece?

In the gold fishing world it's a wonderful card, but it doesn't change the fact that Land Grant Si needs disruption if it wants to be viable/more viable than Belcher against blue in the real world.

This is the version I'm using on MWS, ATM.

MD

4 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
4 Pact of Negation
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Meek
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Vine Dryad

SB

4 Goblin Charbelcher
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Oxidize

I'm keeping Vine Dryad in the MD and Xantid Swarm in the SB, too often the Xantid Swarm Time Walks the opponent into Counterbalance and Meddling Mage or get RFGed by Swords to Plowshares. I'm still debating between 4 Tendrils of Agony MD and 1 Tendrils of Agony MD and 4 Goblin Charbelchers MD, but for gold fishes the Tendrils of Agony are faster and don't misfire.

[chocomel]

Yesterday i played a small tournament and in the train back to my house i was pondering over this:
After you have won your first match, you opponent is boarding in his combo hate (assuming he has it in his sb)
And of course he is playing first. If you have a skilled opponent he'll always mull at least one time to find some kind of disruption which is often a chalice or a thorn.
While he's playing first you don't want to "pollute" your deck with things like naturalize to prevent you from a first turn kill, when drawing your 8th card...
So you are hoping that he doesn't drop a chalice so you can go all-in in your first turn.
Here's the problem:
If he's on the play and you boarded in naturalizes and he drops a cotv for 0 you only have 4 land grant and 2 bayou's to get 2 mana on the board.
So getting 2 bayou in play before the 10th turn doesn't happens that often
and most of the times you're dead...
If you boarded oxidizes in you never know for sure if he'll play a chalice for 1 which slows you down quite a bit but doesn't cripples you as a chalice 0..
So what to do when its 1-1 and you decide who may start?
Do you board in the appropriate hate and slow-roll in to a win or don't board at all and just go suicidal t1 'cause you're after all a combo deck so it's all or nothing....

btw I ended up 3th only losing to meathooks (stupid stupid me)

[marit]

Yesterday i played a small tournament and in the train back to my house i was pondering over this:
After you have won your first match, you opponent is boarding in his combo hate (assuming he has it in his sb)
And of course he is playing first. If you have a skilled opponent he'll always mull at least one time to find some kind of disruption which is often a chalice or a thorn.
While he's playing first you don't want to "pollute" your deck with things like naturalize to prevent you from a first turn kill, when drawing your 8th card...
So you are hoping that he doesn't drop a chalice so you can go all-in in your first turn.
Here's the problem:
If he's on the play and you boarded in naturalizes and he drops a cotv for 0 you only have 4 land grant and 2 bayou's to get 2 mana on the board.
So getting 2 bayou in play before the 10th turn doesn't happens that often
and most of the times you're dead...
If you boarded oxidizes in you never know for sure if he'll play a chalice for 1 which slows you down quite a bit but doesn't cripples you as a chalice 0..
So what to do when its 1-1 and you decide who may start?
Do you board in the appropriate hate and slow-roll in to a win or don't board at all and just go suicidal t1 'cause you're after all a combo deck so it's all or nothing....

btw I ended up 3th only losing to meathooks (stupid stupid me)
I don't use any artifact hate in my SB. The common decks with Chalice are Stax, Dragon Stompy, and Faerie Stompie. I don't board for Stax and Dragon Stompy, because it's unnecesary. You win (or combo with EtW) turn one more often than they get their Turn one Chalice or 3sphere. With FS (which is our worst matchup, imo) I use the tombstalke SB, because they have FoW to back ut their chalices. If the other people mull to chalice, you're still okay, since their hand could be subpar, and/or they have less cards. Which lead to much less pressure on you, and more time to build up. I hope this helps.

Congrats on the finish by the way.

[Vacrix]

hey everyone, i play this list regularly at my local game empire in sandiego:

Land Grant 4
Bayou 2
Lotus Petal 4
Chrome Mox 4
LED 4

Dark Rit 4
Culling the Weak 4
Cabal Rit 4

Phyrexian Walker 4
Shield Sphere

Cabal Therapy 2
Duress 2
Cruel Bargain 4
Inferal Contract 4
Infernal Tutor 4
IGG 2
Tendrils of Agony 3
Goblin Charblecher 1

SB:
Phyrexian Negator 3
Naturalize 4
Tomb of Urami 4
Xantid Swarm 2
Massacre 2

i am playing with this list. im missing 2 therapies but sometimes the duresses are better usually against decks where naming force isnt an option.

in my play experience i see alot of hate but i manage to play through most of it. the days when i dont win its because i draw into shit or because i make an occasional mistake or because my opponent has something ridiculous like stifle, FoW, and extirpate and i cant play through all of it.

i go to FNM every friday that i can and i usually go about 4-1 on avg.



heres my tournament report from last nites FNM. i went 10-1 all night, only lost one game:

Set 1 – aggro loam
Game 1
He wins the dice roll and plays first. He keeps a 7 card hand with a main board chalice at 0. I manage to wait a couple turns and play through it with a land grant, go off and win.
Game 2
He keeps a 6 card hand. plays chalice at 0. I kept a hand with a land grant and a boarded in naturalize. I wait to play the land grant because I am worried that he will wasteland my bayou if I play it too early. He drops a blood moon and I wait a couple turns before realizing that I have to fold without basic lands/0 mana sources.
Game 3
I go off turn 1 and win.

Set 2 – B/R standstill variant (with cloud faeries and misdirection)
Game 1
He goes first and drops a steam vents tapped. I start going off, when I realize that he cant stifle, I had the mana to deal with daze, but I was afraid of FoW so I slow played it into a cabal therapy naming force. I got it, and then flash backed naming his impulse. Next turn he dropped standstill. We exchanged a couple turns back and forth. I was going off when I realized that I had 2 tendrils in hand. he only had 4 mana and 8 cards in hand after the standstill. So I baited him into the counterspell by resolving my tendrils at exactly 20 with 4 floating and he took it, counterspell on a copy of tendrils. I played the second and he impulsed in response into nothing.
Game 2
I kept a 7 card hand draw 4ing into a bunch of crap multiple times until I was at 2. I had 4 infernal tutors in hand, an LeD and 2 other cards and passed the turn with nothing floating, after I played therapy flash back with 2 additional tall men in play. He had nothing either but I used one of the infernals to search for another Led and played both. Then on the following turn I infernaled for belcher, broke for hellbent and belched in that same turn off of a ritual I played before that for 30 something because I had landgranted out both land already.

Set 3 – B/W control?? (humility, vindicates, swords, isamura)
Game 1
I kept a 7 card hands. he swords my tall man when I tried to culling. Slowed me down a little bit. Next turn I went off with a dark rit instead and steam rolled him for like 24, turn 2.
Game 2
I dig deep into my deck and find nothing so i strip him of any discard in his hand with my own. I draw an infernal and set up a belcher kill. play out the belcher, and belch the next turn for 16, then the kill the next turn.

Set 4 – Affinity (with ravager and a lot of red apparently)
Game 1
I steam rolled him turn 1.
Game 2
I sided in 4 naturalize expecting to see chalice. I kept a hand of something like draw4, land grant, naturalize, dark rit, culling, and IGG maybe? He didn’t have chalice turn 1 so I ran over him again turn 1 by drawing infernal tutor, draw4ed into more rituals an artifact creature and infernal looped him.

Set 5 – Land still (with extirpate in the board, mainboard stifle)
Game 1
I was really really worried about this match up because he had main board stifle.
He won the dice roll and played the B/U ravinca dual into play tapped.
I kept a hand with infernal/IGG/LED and a dark rit. I decided to go off because I thought that he was bluffing the force and he was. He had a counterspell and I looped him.
Game 2
I sided out belcher, tendrils, 2 duress, and 2 cabal therapy (I don’t have 4 therapy yet), and one IGG. And sided in 3 negator and 4 tomb of urami.
He boarded out his removal like I expected and I got the most amazing hand ever against him. I couldn’t believe it myself:
Culling the weak, chrome mox, dark rit, lotus petal, LED, tomb, infernal tutor.
Then, I drew. Phrexian negator.
I played lotus petal, chrome mox imprint culling, LED, dark rit negator, he plays FoW, I play tomb and break LED and the petal for the token discarding the tutor. He plays 2 meddling mages one naming dark rit and the other naming negator. He draw no answers and I win.

i found that i got the infernal loop alot last night for whatever reason. i played through alot of hate and got a little bit lucky i think.



i have also tried playing a little bit of the pact list and i like it alot but i havent tried it with the pact of negation. how is that working out? with the manamorphasis i have found that it color fixes at some really convient times with the abudance of green available from ESG's and the pacts to search for them. it also helps with the deck thinning i find and i wind up drawing more answers. i find that if i dont have a good 7 card hand however tho it doesnt seem to work out too well for me on apprentice when i mull, but that just might be me so im not sure.

i used to run 4 xantid swarms in the board but i havent found too many uses for them. i find that negator tends to be a much better choice in that the xantid swarm has never been useful for me. i have mulled for it in practice and that hasnt worked, i have tried to dig for it and then wait a turn and that hasnt worked. i have had it in my opening hand that hasnt worked. when i board it in against like mono blue it was useless in play. he just bounced it and then countered it once i had enough cards in my hand to go off successfully. so i am considering dropping them entirely. i havent had too much trouble with meddling mage. usually FoW and chalice. chalice i can play around usually with land grants FoW i can play through sometimes, but if i suspect it i slow play it with a therapy. i find that despite the fair amount of thresh and landstill and other control variants that i find there i dont seem to have too much trouble against them.





@ chocomel
wat i do against decks i know will be boarding in chalice, mull aggressively for a land grant or a land. you can go off through it if u have 1 mana. if u suspect thorn then i think that it would be safer to mull for either naturalize or land grant and then play your staying mana source to try and cast naturalize when they do play it.
against discard racing them is the only thing you can do. the best opening hand against it is probably 2 rit 2 draw4 2 mana source 1 of watev. cz they can most likely get rid of one thing.
stax blows. and so does stompy. all you can really do game 2 is hope that you can find those naturalizes or that they have a shit for a hand.

o and i have found that at least in my most recent tournament last night the naturalizes didnt inhibit be from going off. in 2 mulls to 6 against different players the naturalize was irrelevant and i still had the ritual and draw4 to draw into more stuff. sometimes the naturalize would be better served as something else, but i find that it doesnt really muck up your hand because at least for me i board out my discard for them because the things that i want to get rid of with naturalize are most likely on the field when i would otherwise be trying to get rid of them with discard so i just board it out. and usually a discard spell wouldnt be serving you better unless its like therapy adding to your spell count. its not like your boarding out your draw4's for naturalizes right? or maybe your board out IGG i dont know.

when its 1-1 and your going to game 3 i would go for the turn 1 and maybe just leave in 1 or 2 naturalizes so that you can tutor 1 up if you really need it against solidarity or something.
and i would definetly go for the turn 1 against somethingl like blood moon, trinisphere, or engineered explosives or anything that is fairly hard to get rid of. just go for the turn 1, or try to go for the belcher and at least get it out on the field that way you can take your time in killing him if you think you cant get the storm count high enough.


i hope that was helpful. i might be wrong, but thats how i play SI.



o and in my my version of pact i play 2 belcher main board and 3 tendrils as the win cons. i get turn 2's more consistly then because not going off happens on occasion in which case i dont have much of a problem at least with this version finding the mana to activate it and you hit land alot less often with it. you just have to watch out for that 2(g)(g) you have to pay sometimes, which will usually negate that option if you do in fact run into that problem.
the pact version really does goldfish at insane speeds tho. i couldnt believe it at first.





also i have found that stacking your deck in parts really helps with getting wat you want. i have found that putting the infernal tutors next to the LED's or an LED next to a belcher helps out alot in the long run. as long as you shuffle 7 times after stacking your deck its legal. and it has upped my T1 % by alot. even if my opponent takes it and shuffles it.

[B.C.]

I kept a 7 card hands. he swords my tall man when I tried to culling. Slowed me down a little bit.

This doesn't work if I'm understanding you correctly. Sacrificing a creature is part of the casting cost for Culling the Weak. Swords in response does not work since the creature is already in the graveyard.

[Vacrix]

really? i dont think so. i thot that if i try to play culling the weak, my opponent gets a priority. he StP's my tall man, culling the weak doesnt have a target anymore and it fizzles. or r u saying that because it says 'as an additional cost to play this spell sac a creature' it is an additional cost and therefore cant be responsed to? because you can still respond to the spell right? u just arent picking a target with culling the weak so i think that if he StP's its removed and culling fizzles. but maybe we shud check the ruling on culling the weak.

[Sanguine Voyeur]

Culling the Weak doesn't target, it's an additional cost. As soon as you announce Culling, you pay the mana and sacrifice the creature. There is no time to kill the creature, and if there are none, you can't play the spell in the first place.

[marit]

also i have found that stacking your deck in parts really helps with getting wat you want. i have found that putting the infernal tutors next to the LED's or an LED next to a belcher helps out alot in the long run. as long as you shuffle 7 times after stacking your deck its legal. and it has upped my T1 % by alot. even if my opponent takes it and shuffles it.
That sounds really sketchy. I would not advise doing that, because I don't think there's an official DCI rule on how many shuffles, you just need "sufficient randomization." It's also useless if your opponent takes your deck and pile shuffles it. I wouldn't do it, but if it works for you, then great.

[Pulp_Fiction]

Vacrix, I like your list but do you ever miss Empty the Warrens as like a 1x of? I LOVE Empty against Thresh and those times when you are doing your math and you are 1 mana short of the IGG Loop do you not wish you had 1x Empty in the deck? My other question for you is why Phyrexian Negator in the SB? Isn't Tombstalker just better in every way? I am not criticizing your card choices just wondering why Negator is played over Tombstalker in a deck that can reliably cast him insanely early. Also, would Oxidize be a better SB choice than Naturalize? Anyone who knows how to play against storm combo always drops a Chalice at 0 and this deck can easily win through Chalice at 1.

[Vacrix]

@ marit
ehh yea its risky, but i asked the judge and he said like 7 legal cuts or something like that. but if i play against anyone competent if they see what im doing or they actually care then i tend to get my deck shuffled. the thing is that you win fairly quickly and you go thru few cards so if you wind up going off turn 1 and win, you can just put those 12-16 cards back on top of your library with the ones you want next to each other in the right place and then shuffle it a little bit and its fine. you dont go through each game stacking the deck. it works a little bit differently against control tho. it doesnt really matter what your hand is usually cause you have to slow play it. its just better to go off faster against aggro incase of chalice or thorn or watev and against combo go off before they do.

@ pulp fiction
yes dear god empty the warrens would be nice. i considered the spirit guides and all. i think its called sites?? i just feel like its a little bit unnecessary in my environment. i dont have too much trouble against thresh. usually play through one force. maybe get screwed and take a couple extra turns to go off. but i dont think i have ever lost a whole set to thresh ever. i dont need to board anything either. just play smart. slow play a little bit. try to set up therapy/flashback and then go off. and against thresh i think that some versions run red and pyroclasm so i've always been a little bit sketched about playing it over tendrils. well here is why i like negator. i can cast it turn 1 off of a dark rit or cabal rit. it beats for 5, and goes over the random ophidians cloud of faeries or watev that i mite run into against control. i have found that tombstalker is pretty amazing as far as 2 mana for a 5/5 is concerned but it only really is casted at that price once you get some shit into your grave. other wise it is bascially a negator. if you are playing the man plan, then i would definetly run the tombstalker but if you want just a man to get in there against control i would run negator over it anyday. as long as you dont run into burn your good. so i would play it against mainly landstill and monoblue which i run into sometimes. oxidize is a great choice i guess if you are getting rid of artifacts like chalice or smokestack. but i have found that i only really need the naturalize for trinisphere. you can play around chalice with the landgrants like you said. oxidize is good, but it cant deal with solidarity, blood moon, ivory mask etc that u mite run into. i just prefer naturalize cause its more versatile. but i mite consider running 3 oxidize and 3 naturalize or something cz you are rite its easier to get rid of chalice at 0 with one land grant. i have found that every time i board in the naturalize against chalice its utterly useless and a dead card in my hand. but i play around it anyway and chalice is usually irrelevant unless they resolve it at 1 which is why i board in naturalize at all. its hard to play around chalice 1 cz u have to rely on cabal rituals and LED breakage. and hope u can dig for a naturalize.

anyways is there any 1 G destroy target enchantment? because that would be a nice choice to run instead of naturalize if im running 3 and 3 for the specific matchup. i just think that its safer to run 4 naturalize tho. and i have considered running 1 more belcher in the board and maybe switch into the 1 land version against fast combo or the mirror. but discard is also super impo in the mirror so ya. it mite be a better idea to just load the dice and go first. :P

[Pulp_Fiction]

There is a card called Emerald Charm from Visions which is an instant, it costs G and reads "destroy target non-aura enchantment" which kills any enchantment I can think of that hurts this deck. Also, in the SB with your particular build, you should probably run Deathmark instead of Massacre. Deathmark kills Gaddock Teeg, Meddling Mage, True Believer, and Glowrider which are the only "played" creatures which can hurt this deck.

[GreenOne]

There is a card called Emerald Charm from Visions which is an instant, it costs G and reads "destroy target non-aura enchantment" which kills any enchantment I can think of that hurts this deck.

And if you're worrying about auras you can run Simplify.

[matelml]

also i have found that stacking your deck in parts really helps with getting wat you want. i have found that putting the infernal tutors next to the LED's or an LED next to a belcher helps out alot in the long run. as long as you shuffle 7 times after stacking your deck its legal. and it has upped my T1 % by alot. even if my opponent takes it and shuffles it.

This has to be cheating. Intentionally non-randomizing (or less-randomizing) has to be illegal. I don't know the rules well, but I can't believe that would be legal. Can anyone confirm?

[emidln]

This has to be cheating. Intentionally non-randomizing (or less-randomizing) has to be illegal. I don't know the rules well, but I can't believe that would be legal. Can anyone confirm?

I think this would fall into the same category as mana weaving. I think seven riffles is what has been ruled as providing the necessary randomness, so I don't think this is illegal. Trying something like this is really shady though. If I saw my opponent taking time to do something like this when shuffling I know I'd pile and riffle his deck pretty well to instill some true randomization.

[Vacrix]

@ pulp fiction
ehh yeah death mark is cool but it cant kill multiple mages and it costs mana. death mark is cool but you cant cast it for free. the only time that i wont be able to cast it for free is if they dont have a plains. but if they played a mage or gaddock teeg then the chances are that they have a plains unless they casted it off of a chrome mox or a lotus petal. chances of that are low. and it gets rid of watever else has been relevant. and it can be another free spell to add to the storm count that i can play for free against the rite decks.


@emidln
yea its a bit sketchy and a really great player like you would probably shuffle it. but ehh watev as long as i dont rely on it for wins its never hurts.

[marit]

If you need creature kill, I would recommend Slaughter Pact, it's free and has no drawback provided you use it the turn you combo off.

[Sanguine Voyeur]

Pact removes your ability to try going off again if you fail. There are a number of anwsers for little mana in black. If you really want something free, you can use Spinning Darkness, Massacre, or Contagation to deal with non-Teeg creatures.

[Vacrix]

slaughter pact is probably a better choice for the pact version cause it goes off T1 more consistently but if you fuck up or get screwed out of a win con then you have to use a dark rit to save yourself that you could be using to try and go off again next turn. i have found that they best thing about SI is its versatility in that it can dig through the deck and pass the turn at 2 life with a belcher on the field. massacre i feel the safest way to deal with mage/teeg.

[chocomel]

I would also recommend playing slaughter pact.
It has won me 2 games since I started playing it in my sideboard.
And often when you get your creature kill for meddling mage countered it will take you a long time to find a new answer so you'll end up losing any way.
The downside of massacre is that you must have at least 1 land in play, which you don't have that easy, when only playing 4land grants and 2 bayou's and it's almost impossible to hardcast.
If you really are in trouble it's always possible to burn a dark ritual for not losing the game inyour upkeep, but then I'm afraid you already lost...

[B.C.]

Recently in my own testing I have been disappointed in my build's performance against U-based control decks. Of course these decks will always be the hardest matchup for SI, but I don't see any reason why, if I dedicate my entire sideboard to this matchup, it can't be even-to-favorable games 2 and 3. Yet I wasn't seeing it. I tried multiple combinations of Man Plan (Urami, Tombstalker, Avatar of Discard, Storm Entity) and control elements (Duress, Therapy, Xantid Swarm), but I couldn't make it a good matchup.

Finally I had a moment of clarity where I realized that it could be that the problem is what I was boarding OUT, not what I was boarding in. For a Man Plan or semi-Man Plan board I would usually take out Draw 4's, Tutors, IGG, and some win conditions. This essentially changed the gameplan of the deck. Instead of trying for the combo, you are committed to winning with flying Demons. For a more control-oriented board I would usually take out the SSGs, and then just "thin" the deck by taking out 1-ofs (Belcher, Tendrils, EtW, Tall Robots, LED, Chrome Mox, I. Tutor, Draw 4's). This plan works ok, but it turns the fast combo deck into a slow control deck with a combo finish. It is still a tough game, and not necessarily favorable.

Anyway, I'll cut to the chase. The sideboarding strategy (the OUT side of things) that I discovered works the absolute best for me is:

-4 Phyrexian Walker
-4 Shield Sphere
-4 Culling the Weak
-1 Belcher
-1 Tendrils
-1 Draw 4/Infernal Tutor
+4 Xantid Swarm
+4 Duress
+4 Tomb of Urami
+3 Tombstalker

Pros of this strategy: Leaves almost the entire combo intact. You still have almost all of your Draw 4's and Tutors. You still have almost all of your mana acceleration, with the obvious exception of Culling the Weak, and you still have multiple kill conditions (I always leave in 2 copies of EtW). In ADDITION, you have 7 flying Demons coming in, as well as 8 fantastic disruption cards. Essentially the deck is stacked with threats, and sacrifices only a little speed.

Cons of this strategy: Culling the Weak is fantastic acceleration, and tall robots really help rack up the storm count. Also (and very importantly), you lose Cabal Therapy. It's the best discard spell available if you are easily able to flash it back with robots, but if they are taken out it no longer makes the cut. Another con of this sideboard is that it commits no cards to artifact hate or Meddling Mages/Teeg. This doesn't really concern me, however, since ideally you should be able to race/play around those without much trouble (always pretend to sideboard, though).

I have only tested this sideboard strategy a little, but so far I am overwhelmingly impressed by it. With this build, Xantid Swarm is a must-counter for the enemy. If it hits, you can combo out with Draw 4's or IGG, or land Demons with impunity. So far I have found that I end up pursuing both strategies approximately equally.

[marit]

New SB strategy
I've done some testing, and I really like it. I've just tested vs. thresh, but it's really promising. I do miss Therapy a lot, but I think it's for the better. I'm probably going to test landstill later, UWb cunning and wcbh.

[hypeiv]

@emidln
yea its a bit sketchy and a really great player like you would probably shuffle it. but ehh watev as long as i dont rely on it for wins its never hurts.

This actually happens quite a bit intentionally or not intentionally. I think technically everyone breaks the rules because how many times have you looked through your deck and seen 3 of the same cards next to each other and "un clumped" them. this is the same thing as clumping combo pieces together.

Any time I play a combo deck that goes off on game one I always pile shuffle since all those cards that allowed the combo are most likely still clumped together after game one. It seems to make a difference... thought it could just be psychological

[Xentra]

Hey, Im new to the source but I want to add something about SI. Im using a dryad arbor instead of a second bayou, and it is quite useful.
When you have a culling the weak in your hand, and you want to go off, but you have no creatures, you can just land grant for the arbor, and sac it to your culling the weak.
I don't know if it is better than the bayou, but it's helped me out plenty of times.

Best regards

[marit]

Hey, Im new to the source but I want to add something about SI. Im using a dryad arbor instead of a second bayou, and it is quite useful.
When you have a culling the weak in your hand, and you want to go off, but you have no creatures, you can just land grant for the arbor, and sac it to your culling the weak.
I don't know if it is better than the bayou, but it's helped me out plenty of times.

Best regards

The problem with arbor is summoning sickness. It can't tap for mana the turn it comes into play, and it also needs a different black source to play culling. Breathweapon brought this up a while back. If it works for you, congrats, but I've never liked it.

[Pulp_Fiction]

Holy shit!! I have been screwing around with Pact SI and this list is just completely insane!!! Consistent as hell and it wins a LOT more on turn 1 than standard 2x Land SI!!! I have been trying to convince myself to play SI for a while but it seems like everytime I cast a Draw4 I draw into something awful like 3x fucking tall men and a SSG or something equally abysmal. So I was looking back in the thread and I found BreathWeapon's list for SI with 8x Pacts in it and it runs 0 tall men but has enough creatures to support 4x Culling the Weak. I built the deck up and loved it, it was crazy consistent except for the Pact of Negation. I really didn't like having PoN in a deck that runs LED. Just a personal preference, and everytime I drew into them I was thinking "I wish this was something else". I realize they are in there for a reason but I really just didn't like them in there. But Summoner's Pact was a WHOLE different story. I really think this helps the deck incredibly, it adds storm, fetches creatures, and adds mana .... FOR FREE!!! Here is the build I am currently testing out:

4x Infernal Tutor
4x LED
4x Dark Ritual
4x Cabal Ritual
4x Culling the Weak
4x Land Grant
4x Tendrils of Agony
4x Elvish Spirit Guide
4x Summoner's Pact
4x Infernal Contract
4x Cruel Bargain
4x Chrome Mox
4x Lotus Petal
2x IGG
1x Belcher
1x Tinder Wall
1x Wild Cantor
1x Vine Dryad
1x Dryad Arbor
1x Bayou

I absolutely LOVE Summoner's Pact in this deck! It is always useful unlike drawing excess tall men who will on occassion buy you extra turns but having less of them is just amazing. And playing less creatures does not open you up to Sword to Plowshares at all. You just wait until you can cast Culling the Weak, drop the creature, you maintain priority after it comes into play then cast Culling the Weak which has oracle text of "in addition to the casting cost sac a creature" so your opponent never gets priority thus they can't kill ur dude. Secondly, if you have 2x Summoner's Pact you can get an initial source of black mana by fetching ESG then Wild Cantor, remove ESG cast Cantor and sac for a black .... FOR FREE!! The Tinder Wall is being tested, yes I realize this deck has no use for red mana but I am just seeing if it is necessary or should be another Cantor, for now I like it as is. I also LOVE Dryad Arbor and with all of the fetching techniques if you ever cast and activate Belcher it is almost always going to be a win! Yes, the Pacts are suicidal but after casting 2-3 Draw4s, if you don't win after that ... usually game and decks like this are all-or-nothing anyway and Pact just raises the bar a little! But no joke, test out this build, it is REALLY good!!

As far as the SB goes I really have no idea. For some reason I really want to play something like:

4x Oxidize
4x Tomb of Urami
4x Duress
3x Tombstalker

This deck does just lose to CotV @ 0 but with ESG you can just cast Oxidize, if your opponent is dumb enough to cast Chalice @ 1 you should be able to battle through that. Trinisphere is still tough, it can be done but ... its still really fucking tough. What is everyone's thoughts on this new list for SI?

[Dosan_the_Wisest_Leaf]

How do I deal with Trinisphere? Or is it mearly gg?

Dragon Stompy is admittedly kicking the shit through me.:frown: :cry:

[emidln]

How do I deal with Trinisphere? Or is it mearly gg?

Dragon Stompy is admittedly kicking the shit through me.:frown: :cry:

It really depends on your hand. It's not automatically gg, but you need a lot of planets to align to pull yourself out of it, especially preboard.

Step 1: 3 Mana
The first piece of beating the Trinisphere puzzle is getting to 3 mana. If you're playing SITES or QSI, the best way of doing this is playing fetchlands and passing the turn. If you're playing SITES/Pact SI/BC's SI you'll want to try to get some Spirit Guides and another initial mana source into your hand. If you know your opponent has Trinispheres (this also likely means they play Chalice) then you'll want to lay down your 0cc stuff like Chrome Mox and Lotus Petal as soon as you get the chance. When Trinisphere comes down it's unlikely that Land Grant will remain as an initial mana source, so having these early artifact sources down is important to you actually make it to 3 mana.

Step 2: Using 3 Mana to its fullest
Now that you've got three mana, what do you do with it? Cast spells of course. Which ones depend largely on your current 75 as well as whether you are preboard or postboard. We'll break this step into 2a for no artifact removal, 2b for artifact removal, and 2c for alternate threats.

2a No Artifact Removal

Well, hope isn't completely lost. Even though your spells all cost 3 mana, you have a number of spells that break even or net mana under Trinisphere. Dark Ritual costs 2B and produces BBB. This makes Dark Ritual mana neutral. You can play it for storm or to turn spare green/red mana into black mana. Cabal Ritual costs 2B and produces either BBB or BBBBB. If it is threshed (the only situation in which you are likely to win the game) then you will be netting BB for each Cabal Ritual you play. Culling the Weak will yield BBBB (net B) at a cost of 2B. Lion's Eye Diamond produces BBB for 3, but will empty your hand making Infernal Tutor hellbent. You'll want to look for bombs like Ill-Gotten Gains, Infernal Tutor, multiple Tendrils, or Goblin Charbelcher. These (as opposed to draw4s*) will more easily help you play around the 3sphere. Let's take a look at each one:

Ill-Gotten Gains - Costs 2BB but will do two things: produce an additional 4 storm and enable Infernal Tutor's hellbent mode. With two threshed Cabal Rituals, Ill-Gotten Gains is a mana neutral play that enables Infernal Tutor leaving BBBB to play Tendrils. If you attempt to IGG loop with Infernal Tutor, you will be paying an extra 3 mana for each iteration (the casting cost of Infernal Tutor).

Infernal Tutor - Costs 2B and can double up cards like Cabal Ritual and Tendrils of Agony or, when hellbent, find things like Goblin Charbelcher or a final Tendrils of Agony. If you get 3 permanent mana sources, Infernal Tutor is often used to double up a key spell in your hand before your combo turn.

Double Tendrils - Despite an opponent's Trinisphere, double tendrils remains a viable win condition. Two Cabal Rituals will produce 7 of the 8 mana necessary by themselves. Plays like Dark Ritual for storm and LED for storm can quickly bring an opponent (probably packing cards like Ancient Tomb) into range of double tendrils.

Goblin Charbelcher - This simply doesn't care about storm count. Once it hits play, everytime you hit three mana your opponent gets to roll the dice. Given that you have 3 initial mana sources already, you may already have removed one or both of your lands from your deck. In this case, one belch will likely kill your opponent.

*Draw4s tend to be worse under Trinisphere because finding BBB is usually much harder for most builds (the most common builds utilize Simian Spirit Guides). If you can get to BBB with permanent mana sources, by all means cast all the draw4s that you can get away with.

2b Artifact Removal

If you have artifact removal you cast it, preferably on their end step when they can't simply play the savage LaughatyouiSphere followed by another Trinisphere. Ideally, you now untap and win the game. In fact, I'd probably wait as long as possible looking for a hand that can eot kill Trinisphere and then untap and have a guaranteed win.

2c Alternate Win Condition

This means a fat guy. Get to 3 mana and then play him. This might mean playing an LED so you can activate Tomb of Urami on your opponent's end step. This might mean playing Tombstalker. If you're behind the times, you might still be playing Avatar of Discord, Phyrexian Negator, or Vampiric Spirit, these are still valid threats and something you should play if you have them. In case all of the comboing has fried your mind, you wait a whole turn after you play these guys then you just turn them sideways 2-5 times (once per turn though).

[Knuckles29]

This deck does just lose to CotV @ 1 but with ESG you can just cast Oxidize, if your opponent is dumb enough to cast Chalice @ 1 you should be able to battle through that. Trinisphere is still tough, it can be done but ... its still really fucking tough. What is everyone's thoughts on this new list for SI?

Oxidize won't work... b/c...? it's 1cc!

[Pulp_Fiction]

Sorry, meant to say Chalice @ 0, fixed in my original post. Also, that last list I posted is really good but I don't think it is as consistent as standard 2x Land SI. I certainly think it needs to be developed a little further but it just seems more prone to hand disruption.

[Dosan_the_Wisest_Leaf]

// Deck file for Magic Workstation (http://www.magicworkstation.com)

// Lands
2 [U] Bayou

// Creatures
4 [AL] Shield Sphere
4 [VI] Phyrexian Walker


// Spells
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
3 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
1 [MR] Goblin Charbelcher
2 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
4 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
4 [MR] Chrome Mox
4 [PT] Cruel Bargain
4 [MI] Infernal Contract
4 [MM] Land Grant
4 [EX] Culling the Weak
4 [TO] Cabal Ritual
4 [5E] Dark Ritual
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
4 [FNM] Duress

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [FNM] Cabal Therapy
SB: 4 [SC] Xantid Swarm
SB: 4 [SOK] Tomb of Urami
SB: 3 [FUT] Tombstalker
SB: 1 [RAV] Life from the Loam


This is the list im currently playing. Im pretty new to this deck but I never seem to be able to get Hellbent Tutor because I never want to discard my hand with LeD. Am I playing the deck wrong? Could somebody give a couple me a couple of ecamples how to consistently get this 'loop' with Ill Gotten Gains? Or at least what am I supposed to look for? I have used it once to win when I played Infernal Tutor, sac LED and returned an Infernal Tutor a Lotus Petal and a Dark Ritual giving me extra mana. From there I hellbented for Tendrils and won. I just cant do this often - thats the problem.

[Pulp_Fiction]

Here is how the IGG loop works, now you have to have 2x IGG in your deck to make sure that you can win cause sometimes you will have like 2 storm when starting IGG loop and that 1x IGG won't be enough where as 2x will be enough to kill your opponent.

Example hand:
Opening hand is: Land Grant, Dark Ritual, Tendrils, LED, LED, Infernal Tutor, and Empty the Warrens. This hand is pretty much the nuts, the IGG loop is 2x LED and Infernal Tutor. Here is how it is played: cast Land Grant getting a land, tap land to play Dark Ritual, play both LEDs, cast Infernal Tutor with 1 black floating, as you play Infernal Tutor maintain priority and put it on the stack and blow up both LEDs while Tutor is on the stack which give you hellbent. Tutor resolves with 7x black mana floating, Tutor for IGG and cast IGG with 3x black bloating, bring back Infernal Tutor, LED, and LED, cast LED, LED and Infernal, place Infernal on the stack and blow up both LEDs and go get Tendrils with storm count 9 and play Tendrils for exactly 20. If you wanted to add more storm you could Tutor for the other IGG and bring back LED, LED, Infernal and the play them all, put Tutor on the stack and blow up LEDs, then Tutor for another Tutor and then Tutor for Tendrils that would be savage overkill but little tricks like that are good to know while playing this deck.

Never be afraid to discard your hand with LED when playing Infernal Tutor cause after it resolves you are generally going to win. Now if you have sufficient mana floating you don't need LEDs to make Infernal Tutor work, sometimes you can just get by with bringing back Rituals and especially threshed Cabal Rituals. The best way to learn how to play the deck is to read the primer on the opening page so you understand all of the cards and how they work and then sit down and goldfish the deck like 100 times. And make sure to pile shuffle it after every 5 or so goldfished games cause shit tends to clump together. Also, if you don't know a lot of the format run Duress but in the main but Cabal Therapy is a hell of a lot better.

[BreathWeapon]

Well, I'm glad some one else picked up Pact SI and realized it was superior to Tall Men SI:wink:

I find 4 MD Goblin Charbelcher are essential tho', you need colorless mana sinks for your ESGs and Summoner's Pacts, and you don't have a reason to play Land Grant/Summoner's Pact based SI over Land/Kobold based SI unless you're with out them.

I alternate between 4 Pact of Negation in the MD and 4 Xantid Swarm in the SB, they're interchangeable based on your opponent's SBing and whose on the play/draw.

MD is

4 Goblin Charbelcher
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
4 Pact of Negation
4 Summoner's Pact
3 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Vine Dryad

SB
1 Elvish Spirit Guide
3 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Oxidize
3 Tendrils of Agony

Simian Spirit Guides come in against Goblins etc. to give you more speed on the play, I highly recommend either using them or Tinder Wall.

[Vacrix]

are belchers working out better in place of tendrils? seems reasonable in that you have so much mana hanging around.
interesting board. just for clarification the SSG's are better against gobs in place of pact of negation im guessing.

man this looks like it would do better against stax too since you can use ESG/SSG under trinisphere to get enough for an oxidize.

i have found that xantid swarm has always been a dead card for me in playtesting and tournament play. he counters it, he has an StP for it or i dont draw it. i have found that phyrexian negator has always worked better for me since the majority of players just board out there removal so it functions better as a win condition than a card that assists in your win condition. i dont know, its a personal preference.


whats the plan for stifle here? seems like you will wind up losing during your upkeep alot with this version if that does happen. maybe untap phase, dark rit activate belcher again?


it seems like this is sooo fast that you pretty much beat all combo and aggro without a problem. you can play through chalice with ESG's and land grants. except for pithing needle if you are running 4 belcher.


but what happened to manamorphasis? it seems that was pretty necessary for maintaining color fixing with the ESG's.


i think im going to get this build and test it at FNM near me.



i had a pretty farfetched idea but just throwing it out there because someone is bound to eventually.

Leering Emblem 2
Arifact Equipment
Whenever you play a spell, equiped creature gets +2/+2 until end of turn.
Equip: 2
R

you can use this with phyrexian walkers and ornithopters for a slower played win against control. seems like it might fit in nicely to kobolds SI?

[BreathWeapon]

Manamorphoses makes sense if you play Tendrils of Agony, but Tendrils of Agony doesn't make sense if you play Land Grant. I've tested all of the versions of SI, and Land Grant SI with out Goblins Charbelchers is just terrible compared to Land/Kobold SI with Empty the Warrens.

Post board, Xantid Swarm is awesome, because their Plows go out, and your bugs go in or you force a DCA for game 3.

Post board, Xantid Swarms deal with Stifle and Trickbind, and since Dreadstill doesn't run a lot of removal, you should be fine. Belcher is more or less immune to Stifle and Trickbind, so if you resolve it, you gain inevitability.

[Kanti]

Off shoot question, where does the name of the deck come from?

And, to an above poster who said Xantid Swarm gets countered, Xantid is a MUST counter and is therefore good. A FoW on a Swarm> FoW on Draw4s.

[dude 666]

I'm slightly confused as to the relative benefits of each version of SI. Which is faster, Pact SI or Tall Men SI? Also, which is more resilient, what are the average goldfishes of each, how often they fizzle, specific poor matchups and good matchups, etc?

The reason I'm asking is I may consider throwing this deck together as it seems extremely fun, provided I can get the cruel bargains for a not-ballbusting price.

[Vacrix]

ya i know that belcher gives you inevitablility against stifle/trickbind but if u resolve it after a pact then u are boned unless you have the mana to pull it off.

SITES is kobolds rite? what is the current build for that one?


i tested ur version of the Pact SI with the 4 belchers, and it didnt work too well for me. but apprentice shuffler sucks lol. im gonna proxy it up in place of what i already have for SI.
i run the 2 land version right now with one belcher and MD therapy's. works out fairly nicely for me.



i think that spanish inquisition comes from the actual spanish inquisition. basically the inquisitors came to your house and asked you a question, and if u answered wrong they killed you. which is basically what SI does. "Do you have force?" its obviously more complicated then that but thats the gist of it. :]

[RockOfTheFormat]

I just want to point out that you guys have completely defeated the point of combo in Legacy; win on turn 1 CONSISTENTLY (someone else spell check this for me ok). At least you spent way too much for a misprinted play-set of Infernal Contracts... NiCe?

[The Rack]

Hey dude!!! When's the last time you actually said something constructive!!! You know, you're pretty kool though. I mean, how many people actually just go into threads post nothing to get their post count up and then flame everyone that's playing the deck. I wish I could be more like you!! :laugh:

[m03]

I just want to point out that you guys have completely defeated the point of combo in Legacy; win on turn 1 CONSISTENTLY (someone else spell check this for me ok). At least you spent way too much for a misprinted play-set of Infernal Contracts... NiCe?

Hey, looks like you might flame enough to get banned this time around. Good job.

[RockOfTheFormat]

Hey, looks like you might flame enough to get banned this time around. Good job.

^---- This is the true flame.

m03... shame, shame

But anyways, this is a deck construction forum, you guys wanted help and I offered it. If you can't look past your ego and read the small print, then you will get stuck behind badly constructed, poorly conceptualized decks that have no chance of doing well at Legacy Nats. next month. Maybe some of you are not that worried about that, but for some people it is important. A lot like Flash manifest as a consistently fast deck, this deck must do the same. If you do the math, then you are better to cut some draw fours for Death Wish, and maybe pay attention at your local tourneys while better players are playing strategically better cards. Good luck tomorrow night guys.

[Pulp_Fiction]

@ dude 666: They all have their ups and downs and all basically have the same resiliency due to running draw4s and all of them take almost an autoloss to any stompy or stax variant but will win on occassion due to turn 1 kills in games 1 and 3. QSI isn't played anymore and that was the only one of the SI variants which was slow but had a better matchup against control. Pact SI is strictly for people with lots of combo experience because of its difficulty to play. Now SI is definitely one of the hardest decks in legacy to play because you have to know the format and the cards in your opponent's deck, what they will SB, how to counter SB for game 2, what opening hands to keep, what to imprint on Chrome Mox, whether to wait on casting stuff before or after a draw 4 ... etc. B.C.'s 2x land build or SITES are the best versions to play due to their non-suicidal nature and the fact that if you sort of fail after a draw 4 you can generally cast Empty the Warrens for 12 or so goblins. I used to run B.C.'s list cause I found it the most solid and Belcher in the main is what sold me that that version is superior to Fetchland SI builds. But, personal preference. I like Pact SI better now because when you cast a draw 4 almost everything you draw is useful. But for a person who has never played SI build those versions because Summoner's Pact and Pact of Negation add a whole new level of difficulty towards decision making in the deck.

[Vetinari]

Off shoot question, where does the name of the deck come from?
I always thought it was a reference to Monty Python's The Spanish Inquisition sketch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_python%27s_spanish_inquisition) ("Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!").

[Kanti]

That would make the "cool" factor of the deck go up tremendously. xD

Also, Land Grant SI has been ok in testing, but I am looking for something more solid. Any ideas on other forms of stronger SI's?

[thefreakaccident]

The blue splashed version doesn't lose too much speed, but has a lot of resilience at least compared to the green variant.

[emidln]

I always thought it was a reference to Monty Python's The Spanish Inquisition sketch (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monty_python%27s_spanish_inquisition) ("Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition!").

From the Team Blitzkrieg boards:





i vote for calling the deck "spanish inquisition"
so when we win, and someone said "i didnt expect that" you can grin and say "NOBODY EXPECTS THE SPANISH INQUISITION!!"

[BreathWeapon]

ya i know that belcher gives you inevitablility against stifle/trickbind but if u resolve it after a pact then u are boned unless you have the mana to pull it off.

SITES is kobolds rite? what is the current build for that one?


i tested ur version of the Pact SI with the 4 belchers, and it didnt work too well for me. but apprentice shuffler sucks lol. im gonna proxy it up in place of what i already have for SI.
i run the 2 land version right now with one belcher and MD therapy's. works out fairly nicely for me.



i think that spanish inquisition comes from the actual spanish inquisition. basically the inquisitors came to your house and asked you a question, and if u answered wrong they killed you. which is basically what SI does. "Do you have force?" its obviously more complicated then that but thats the gist of it. :]

That's odd, because Pact SI is more consistent than Tall Men Si, you get to keep hands on Goblin Charbelcher and you get to cast your disruption for 0 mana.

I made Pact SI because I found Tall Men SI inconsistent:frown:

Current versions of SITES are just lands instead of Land Grants, Empty the Warrens instead of Goblin Charbelchers, Simian Spirit Guides instead of disruption and Kobolds instead of Tall Men.

It's really good, and really underplayed.

[Pulp_Fiction]

I haven't seen a post on SITES in a LONG time. I thought the optimal version of that deck was on the first page.

@Marit: You used to play SITES didn't you? Can you post a current list if you still do, I am very curious as to what that deck looks like now.

@ Breath Weapon: I am about to test out 4x Goblin Charbelcher and 1x Tendrils in Pact SI. I am curious, do you find that only 1x IGG is needed in Pact SI? I always played 2x just because of the sick wins it pulls out of nowhere and the ability to pseudo Mindtwist ur opponent on turn 1. I also used to play 4x Tendrils 1x Belcher as a kill in Pact SI but then I turned it into 3x Tendrils 2x Belcher and I think 4x Belcher 1x Tendrils is right because all they can really do to stop you is Pithing Needle. And the reason I like that is you see Needle coming so you can plan around it contrary to playing Empty the Warrens and watching those fuckers get E Plagued, Echoing Truthed, or Exploded up and you have no cards in hand. With Pact SI I am curious of the opening hands you keep. Do you always keep a hand with a turn 1 draw4 or will you mulligan into Belcher? Assume you are playing against random aggro with no disruption because control is a whole different matchup.

[BreathWeapon]

No, the SITES list on the first page is not the most optimal SITES list, the most optimal SITES list runs Kobolds because imprinting them for red mana > blockers.

Against Goblins, I don't mulligan aggressively, I "draw, go" until I feel the hand is capable of ending the game. You've got at least 2 turns against them barring the nut draw with Goblin Lackey on the play.

I've never found 2xIll Gotten Gains useful, if I can't Tendrils of Agony them, I'll cast Goblin Charbelcher and sit on it until I can activate it.

4 Goblin Charbelchers MD is definitely the right number of Goblins Charbelchers, if they SB in Pithing Needle, I'll SB in 3 Tendrils of Agony and let them cast their Pithing Needles and stare at their Swords to Plowshares while I PWN them.

SB is updated a little,

3 Tendrils of Agony
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Oxidize
1 Elvish Spirit Guide

Vs Goblins, I'm just boarding in Tendrils of Agony and Elvish Spirit Guide for Pact of Negation, going off with Draw 4s is much easier with 8 kill conditions.

[chocomel]

Hey guys,
After playing the deck a lot I decided to make some changes.
I didn't like firing blind cabal therapy's naming FOW to random decks which didn't even dropped a land and me winning the next turn, so the second one you draw feels kind of useless against non-blue decks.
While blue isn't so much played around here in Holland I decided to drop 1 cabal therapy and only play 3 of them (I always wanted to do that but didn't knew where to replace it with..)
I had the same feeling with Land grant, in my experience you see often a land grant and a land in your hand, or 2 land grants so i felt that 4 was to much of them so i tried cutting one...
Then Ill-gotten gains, you don't really want it to play it against blue based decks with fows in graveyards or black decks with extirpate's and since I only once used 2 ill-gotten gains to win, I don't think it's really that important to have 2 of them. (except may be if you have to imprint 1, but most of the time's iggy isn't necessary and only makes it easier to win)
First I wanted to replace the 3 slot's with street wraith's but those only make it harder to mulligan and only screw-up some games for cycling yourself to death...
Than I thought about manamorphose but for that one I had to change the whole deck and i didn't think that was worth the effort.
Pact of Negation is in my opinion worse than cabal therapy in this deck, so that wasn't an option either.
So I decided to play Dark Confidants in the mainboard!
While it improves the match-up against control based decks it also makes you mulligan less.
It's a 1 colorless more investment than a post combo cabal therapy, but if it lies around for 1 turn you'll have your investment back and maybe decreased your storm count with 1.
While its black and a creature it can always be imprinted or pitched to a culling the weak.
I find myself winning turn 2 faster with a turn 1 confidant (if it resolves)
The minimum investment of 1 bayou + lotus petal, chrome mox + petal almost always pays back in a solid turn 2 win.
Here's the deck list for reference:

// Lands
2 Bayou

// Creatures
3 Dark Confidant
4 Shield Sphere
4 Phyrexian Walker

// Spells
1 Goblin Charbelcher
4 Lotus Petal
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Land Grant
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Cruel Bargain
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Dark Ritual
4 Chrome Mox
3 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
4 Culling the Weak
3 Cabal Therapy

// Sideboard
SB: 1 Dark Confidant
SB: 1 Cabal Therapy
SB: 4 Naturalize
SB: 4 Xantid Swarm
SB: 3 Slaughter Pact

Right now im playing 61 cards and have some slots open in the sideboard so comment would be appreciated.
I've not decided yet what to cut: the 4th land grant or the 4th chrome mox.
I think i will go for the chrome mox, because with that one it'll cost you 3 cards to play a turn 1 confidant.

Tomorrow I'm gonna play another tournament and i will test the concept of main board confidants.


ps, more comment later, a friend is waiting for me so i have to go..

greetings

Michel

[BreathWeapon]

Pact of Negation isn't worse than Cabal Therapy in SI because Cabal Therapy is unplayable in SI. If your disruption can't protect your black mana sources, then you're screwed unless you draw two black mana sources, and considering Cabal Therapy requires a black mana source in the first place ... If your opponent's aren't FoWing and Dazing your Land Grants or Stifling your Chrome Moxes, he's misplaying the match up big time.

I really, really don't get people who run less than 4 Goblin Charbelchers, what's the point of having the structural weakness of a Land Grant manabase if you aren't using Goblin Charbelcher(s) plural?

[Vacrix]

you see breath weapon, i feel like people dont really want to run so many belchers because that isnt the strength of the deck. belcher is a very nice back up win con or if it happens to be the route worth taking with your hand. the strength of SI has never been speed but rather speed plus the ability to recover from hate, countermagic, discard, or just general distruption. playing the pact version gives you no chance to recover if you are playing a summoners pact to search for something. in addition, i have found that cabal therapy's are actually excellent protection that really helps out when you are trying to sculpt a hand to win when you are slow playing control. the pact version with belchers is exactly what aggro and control players expect out of a combo deck. a deck that fizzles and dies when you throw a rock at it. the only advantage pact SI has over, say Fluctuator, is that it has Pact of Negation sometimes, and it can win turn 1 instead of turn 2. the fact stands that pact SI is really a glass house. what magic players have so much trouble with is that SI goes off, fails, and then builds into another win. i have done it so many times with tall men SI its ridiculous. its resilient to counter magic too, and more so than the Pact version in my own experience that is. i just feel like pact SI is a more consisent belcher deck.
you gain speed and therefore no longer lose to thorn of amethyst, 2nd turn trinisphere, or land/stifle, and instead to turn 1 pithing needle, discard recks you more, and you lose harder to FoW. playing tall men SI i have found that i really am not too afraid of FoW or daze. discard scares me more actually. when my opponent does have a force i dont freak out, i just say to myself, o well i still have a decent hand sitting here that i can build into another winning hand.
pact SI is a good variant, but i believe that it should be more of a rogue variant than anything else. having that speed increases your wins against combo and aggro but you lose hard in the face to control more often. so i guess its more of an environment choice than anything else.


im going to test those confidants though. they sound pretty good. but they look like they would function more as a nice side-in against control than anything else.


by the way i have had alot of success in boarding in Tomb of Urami against thresh. nobody seems to counter my rituals, then i drop tomb and break it with floating mana. works wonders since they board out removal, and it applies alot of pressure and they tap out frequently, in which case they have gotten rid of it and then i go off and kill them for the remaining damage. i figured that most people are probably just boarding in the tomb against monoblue or stax, but really unless your opponent gets 7 cards into the grave and a mystic enforcer by turn 5, he/she is already dead, or at least within ritual, ritual, ToA range.

also, even if my opponents keep in their removal (StP, explosives, etc.), they are tending to keep hands more with FoW than anything else in which case im free to smash face with Urami. i havent run into a stifle on the tomb yet though. so stifle hands are also dangerous unless you are in the play.

[BreathWeapon]

Land Grant based SI is either a win now or don't win at all proposition, if you want a better chance to "come back" over a better chance to "win," then you shouldn't play Land Grant in the first place.

You play Land Grant to play Goblin Charbelcher, the Land Grant manabase has no other justification over a land manabase, stop for a moment and seriously ask yourself why you're playing with Land Grant.

[Vacrix]

well i see what you are saying though. you might as well play with land instead of counterable land, but at the same time, does running land grant really justify taking out all of the MD ToA's and making it basically belcher with card draw?? its B/x storm combo not belcher. i mean, i think that part of the strength of storm combo is that your win condition cant be FoW'ed but sure whatever leads up to it can but storm combo is harder for control to beat in comparison to belcher because of the storm mechanic. and also, if you win game 1 against aggro and control fairly easily because you are so fast, then why do you have belchers in the MD? wouldnt it be better as a side-in? i mean 2 or 3 belchers seems reasonable but removing ToA entirely to a one-of seems a little extreme no?

as for land grant, sure it can be FoW'ed but drawing into more land slows you down because you cant get rid of them without LED. you can at least cast extra land grants and they add to your spell count as well. maybe im just a little bit biased because i havent really run into too many problems with my land grants being forced.


do we have a turn 1, turn 2 win percentage for Pact SI yet anyhow? im curious.

[emidln]

Land Grant based SI is either a win now or don't win at all proposition, if you want a better chance to "come back" over a better chance to "win," then you shouldn't play Land Grant in the first place.

Playing recklessly is a good way to ensure game losses. "win not or don't win at all" is a terrible position that doesn't take into account SI's strengths and ability to leverage incremental card advantage.

[BreathWeapon]

Playing recklessly is a good way to ensure game losses. "win not or don't win at all" is a terrible position that doesn't take into account SI's strengths and ability to leverage incremental card advantage.

I don't necessarily agree or disagree with that statement, but it's true for Land Grant SI regardless of whether or not it's using Artifact Creatures or Summoner's Pact and Dryad Arbor.

@Vacrix,

The advantages of Land Grant are insignificant compared to the disadvantages of Land Grant, more Threshold and less DCA while going off means you've got a better chance of comboing out, revealing your hand and getting your mana source countered means you don't have a chance regardless.

You can't keep a hand on Tendrils of Agony, you can keep a hand on Goblin Charbelcher. Whether or not Goblin Charbelcher can be countered is pointless, because Tendrils of Agony is useless in your opening hand. The opponent can't "sand bag" counters for the win condition, because while combing the odds of being able to resolve multiple threats or resolve a threat with Pact of Negation is too high. It'd be like waiting to countering the Goblin Charbelcher instead of countering the acceleration in Belcher, countering the acceleration is less damaging, but the threat of Empty the Warrens forces you to do it.

[i-never-smile]

I'm currently in the process of learning this deck (lots of goldfishing with Tall Men SI and Pact SI both, with a couple variants of each). This is something I plan on having built so I can play something purely based on speed and broken turn 1 wins...gotta have something really fast with challenging math.

As far as my opinion goes, I'm still rather inexperienced with the deck, but I pose a question: What is the point of running Pact of Negation in the maindeck? I have played storm combo decks with the blue pact before, but the decks and metagames were much slower. Still, it feels like a sideboard card that you maindeck if you expect to see a significant number of matchups with Force of Will and Daze (on the draw) to ruin Game 1. Personally, I like Manamorphose in that slot better, and I came to this conclusion by running 4xManamorphose and 4xTendrils plus 1xBelcher, but imagining what the situation would be like instead if the Manamorphose were Negation Pacts, the 4xTendrils were belchers, and the 1xBelcher was a Tendrils. Of course, it's possible that I'm discounting the real-life benefits of Pact of Negation against Permission truly increase the stability of a belcher kill, but this is again a metagame dependent thing.

[Iranon]

Often, 'reckless' play is the right choice with SI, and I also prefer builds that emphasise speed.
If an opponent doesn't get a turn, Force is the only thing that can stop us.
If they do, we have to also worry about Chalice, Stifle, Brainstorms for Daze, Chants and many other things that can ruin the investment of several cards. If they get more, there are many many troublesome things that can shut us down for good.


However, I dislike maindecking cards that force me to be reckless - SI is also quite good at baiting and eroding a control player's resources.
Pacts by definition run the risk of throwing a perfectly good game away with no chance of recovery.

In comparison, a countered Land Grant is annoying, but not catastrophic. In a typical game, that Force would have countered a Contract powered by a Ritual otherwise... I'm not much worse off, and this certainly isn't an automatic loss.

[BreathWeapon]

Pact of Negation is free disruption, it's the difference between having to bait with a spell, getting it Force of Willed/Dazed and then Time Walking the opponent into Counterbalance and countering Force of Will/Daze and winning before Counterbalance is online. The control decks of today aren't like the control decks of yesterday, they're hybrid control/prison decks, and you have to deal with their counter wall and deal with their counter wall before their lock drops.

I would never run Land Grant if it weren't for Goblin Charbelcher, you can't say Land Grant isn't so bad because they countered the Land Grant instead of the Dark Ritual and Draw 4, because they choose whether or not they'll counter the Land Grant or Draw 4 maximizing the effect of their counter either way.

[Frid]

Isnt cabal terapy better than pact of negation in a deck with 4 LED´s? You loose the pact when you activate LED in response to something.

[TeKo]

+ Therapy with Robots is really strong.

Pact simply sux in a Deck with LED, because you cant use Pact to protect IT and you cant counter 1st Turn disruption.

[BreathWeapon]

No, Cabal Therapy isn't a viable choice, your only viable choices are Xantid Swarm and Pact of Negation. Cabal Therapy + Infernal Tutor sounds great until you realize it doesn't really work like that.

[marit]

No, Cabal Therapy isn't a viable choice, your only viable choices are Xantid Swarm and Pact of Negation. Cabal Therapy + Infernal Tutor sounds great until you realize it doesn't really work like that.
I don't see the merits of PoN. If I go Land, Drit, Draw4 and they go FoW, using PoN is a stupid idea, because if the Draw4 is bad I've lost. If it were Therapy, I'd just Draw4 turn 2. This is my main problem with Pact, it doesn't help a countered Draw4.

[BreathWeapon]

If I go Land.

That's a huge qualifier.

[Frid]

No, Cabal Therapy isn't a viable choice

You should explain why it isnt, i have explained why i think that Pact of negation in a deck with 4 LEDs is a poor choice.

Swantid swarm? In legacy? We have STPs, smother, mogg fanatic, burns etc etc etc.

[marit]

That's a huge qualifier.
You're not really defending your card choice. I could have been more clear, by land I mean mana source.

[BreathWeapon]

You're not really defending your card choice. I could have been more clear, by land I mean mana source.

I shouldn't need to defend the card choice, because if you've played Land Grant SI vs a competent Threshold opponent you'd know why Cabal Therapy isn't viable, those Land Grants and Chrome Moxes should be getting Force of Willed, Dazed and Stifled.

Disruption in Land Grant SI doesn't need to protect the combo, it needs to protect the mana sources, that's why the difference between a Badlands and a Land Grant totally changes whether or not Cabal Therapy is playable (i.e Lands are uncounterable)

You need cards like Unmask, Pact of Negation or Xantid Swarm (ESG) to get thru'.

[marit]

I shouldn't need to defend the card choice, because if you've played Land Grant SI vs a competent Threshold opponent you'd know why Cabal Therapy isn't viable, those Land Grants and Chrome Moxes should be getting Force of Willed, Dazed and Stifled.

So if they daze a chrome mox, do you reccomend playing Pact? It would put you in the same situation if they counter a draw4, praying for a godly 4 cards. I actually dont play therapy anymore, but I still think PoN is a terrible, terrible choice.

[BreathWeapon]

So if they daze a chrome mox, do you reccomend playing Pact? It would put you in the same situation if they counter a draw4, praying for a godly 4 cards. I actually dont play therapy anymore, but I still think PoN is a terrible, terrible choice.

If it's the difference between top decking for mana and having a reasonable chance of success, yeah I'll risk it, that's really what it's there for.

Edit: You also have to consider Pact of Negation is just a round 1 card, round 2 Xantid Swarm comes in.

[badjuju]

I currently play Belcher, but I'm wondering what the advantages of SI are over Belcher and even TES. It almost seems like a middle-man, having near the speed of Belcher but with protection and a Tendrils kill like TES(very relevant) over a Warrens kill. The one thing I don't like is fizzling on draw 4s, and it happens more often than I'd like. Going all in with a draw 4 and flipping nothing has messed me up a lot too. Does that happen often to you guys?

The deck emphasizes speed, but hands can be ambiguous at times, especially if they revolve around draw 4s, unlike Belcher where a hand blantantly tells you whether or not you're going to win this turn.

I mean no offense to advocates of the deck, I just want to know the reasons why I would ever choose to play SI over Belcher if I wanted to play fast combo, or maybe I'm just not playing the deck right?

EDIT:
couldn't you just replace 4 of the tallmen in tallmen SI for 4 pacts? It creates stormcount and thins your deck of actual tallmen so you'll have less of a chance to draw into them. Just a thought.

[Benie Bederios]

I currently play Belcher, but I'm wondering what the advantages of SI are over Belcher and even TES. It almost seems like a middle-man, having near the speed of Belcher but with protection and a Tendrils kill like TES(very relevant) over a Warrens kill. The one thing I don't like is fizzling on draw 4s, and it happens more often than I'd like. Going all in with a draw 4 and flipping nothing has messed me up a lot too. Does that happen often to you guys?

The deck emphasizes speed, but hands can be ambiguous at times, especially if they revolve around draw 4s, unlike Belcher where a hand blantantly tells you whether or not you're going to win this turn.

I mean no offense to advocates of the deck, I just want to know the reasons why I would ever choose to play SI over Belcher if I wanted to play fast combo, or maybe I'm just not playing the deck right?

I believe in testing of Iranon, this deck IS faster than Belcher. It takes a little longer to master the deck though. Where Belcher is just looking at you current hand and look if you can win, here you have that part and a little more. Mulligan decisions are about the same. Just look at your hand and calculate how well you stand for it after your first Draw4( cards in hand, mana floating, what if they counter something). When to break a LED is another tricky point.

About fizzling. Even if you play correctly you can fizzle, that's the problem of Draw4, the advantage is that you have 4 cards in hand afterwards, and hopefully some mana. Just wait for the right todeck and try it again. You can also go for a smaller Tendrils. Just play 5/6 spells, Tendrils to get some life back, wait 2/3 turns and finish it of.

Just goldfish it alot and work on your statistics. If you can calculate how much chance you have to draw a card you need to continue combo you will become a better player.

BB

[badjuju]

I believe in testing of Iranon, this deck IS faster than Belcher. It takes a little longer to master the deck though. Where Belcher is just looking at you current hand and look if you can win, here you have that part and a little more. Mulligan decisions are about the same. Just look at your hand and calculate how well you stand for it after your first Draw4( cards in hand, mana floating, what if they counter something). When to break a LED is another tricky point.

About fizzling. Even if you play correctly you can fizzle, that's the problem of Draw4, the advantage is that you have 4 cards in hand afterwards, and hopefully some mana. Just wait for the right todeck and try it again. You can also go for a smaller Tendrils. Just play 5/6 spells, Tendrils to get some life back, wait 2/3 turns and finish it of.

Just goldfish it alot and work on your statistics. If you can calculate how much chance you have to draw a card you need to continue combo you will become a better player.

BB

Thanks for the info. After goldfishing a bit more, I'm making all the neural connections associated with the deck to evaluate my hand and see what cards I need to win. I've also learned to use draw4's turn 1 just to sculpt my hand to get ready for the next turn.

Still not sure if the deck is actually BETTER than Belcher though. What are your opinions? I've had consistent success in Belcher testing, but I was getting tired of losing to answers for Warrens. Playing SI would eliminate this problem - but is the change worth it?

[BreathWeapon]

Thanks for the info. After goldfishing a bit more, I'm making all the neural connections associated with the deck to evaluate my hand and see what cards I need to win. I've also learned to use draw4's turn 1 just to sculpt my hand to get ready for the next turn.

Still not sure if the deck is actually BETTER than Belcher though. What are your opinions? I've had consistent success in Belcher testing, but I was getting tired of losing to answers for Warrens. Playing SI would eliminate this problem - but is the change worth it?

I'm more or less positive Kobold SI is better than Belcher, turning acceleration into threats with Empty the Warrens, ritual + threat for an even 2 for 2 FoW trade and lands to top deck into draw spells with just makes life so much better. All Belcher does is gold fish, but SI can actually "come back" when things go wrong and it has some flexibility in disruption.

The only down side of the deck is running Kobolds, obv. , or it'd be better than TES IMO.

[Benie Bederios]

I'm more or less positive Kobold SI is better than Belcher, turning acceleration into threats with Empty the Warrens, ritual + threat for an even 2 for 2 FoW trade and lands to top deck into draw spells with just makes life so much better. All Belcher does is gold fish, but SI can actually "come back" when things go wrong and it has some flexibility in disruption.

The only down side of the deck is running Kobolds, obv. , or it'd be better than TES IMO.

Can you explain Kobold SI. There is absolutly no reason to run Kobolds over Robots. Or is it just for coolness.

About the rest your quite right. I play QSI myself and even if you fizzle I can come back some turns later. That's another thing you should remember playing SI. Don't overextend if you fear a FoW: play creature, culling the weak, Draw4 is better than creature, Culling the Weak, Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, Draw4( opponent counters.) It's quite obvious, but still.

This deck isn't better than TES, but only slightly worse. But I prefer QSI over TES anytime, becaue I can pilot QSI much better.

BB

[goobafish]

Can you explain Kobold SI. There is absolutly no reason to run Kobolds over Robots.

Chrome Mox.

[Forbiddian]

Aura of Silence is also played sometimes. Kobolds dodge that.

Also, when would you ever use the toughness? Prolly about as often as you fail to go off until your opponent's turn 3 and he Auras you.

[BreathWeapon]

Can you explain Kobold SI. There is absolutly no reason to run Kobolds over Robots. Or is it just for coolness.

About the rest your quite right. I play QSI myself and even if you fizzle I can come back some turns later. That's another thing you should remember playing SI. Don't overextend if you fear a FoW: play creature, culling the weak, Draw4 is better than creature, Culling the Weak, Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, Draw4( opponent counters.) It's quite obvious, but still.

This deck isn't better than TES, but only slightly worse. But I prefer QSI over TES anytime, becaue I can pilot QSI much better.

BB

Kobolds Imprint on Chrome Mox, and it makes a big difference in what opening hands can be kept and what Draw 4 chains can win. I never said Kobold Si was better than TES, I implied Kobold Si would be better than TES if it didn't have to run creatures.

[Iranon]

One advantage of robots is that even a bad hand will stall Aggro starts until the end of forever.

***

Re my goldfish results: SI without Empty the Warrens would kill at roughly the rate Belcher had a successful combo; slower but well within the margin of error (200 games samples).
For clarification: anything that would kill a goldfish by turn 4 was counted as a success - turn 2 EtW for 10 counted, belching for 50 on turn 5 didn't.

If SI also runs Empty the Warrens, it's strictly faster than Belcher.

You might want to take my results with a grain of salt though. For example, in my testing the addition of Glimpse of Nature improved both goldfish speed and consistency... but other players didn't seem to get the same results.

[BreathWeapon]

The problem with the "blocker" argument is that it's just a wet blanket for combo players who can't mulligan, even with out them SI can take 4 damage before its ability to win is reduced and Kobolds still chump for a turn.

Vs control or aggro-control, the match ups that matter, Imprinting for red is more significant.

[badjuju]

My other question is why the relative success of Belcher is so much greater than SI.

Is it because Belcher is easier to pilot? Is it because people don't want to buy Cruel Bargains? Since June, there have been about 17 top8s with Belcher in various tournaments (some small, some gigantic), and there has been 1 with SI. Do people just not prefer this archetype or do people not know about it?

[BreathWeapon]

My other question is why the relative success of Belcher is so much greater than SI.

Is it because Belcher is easier to pilot? Is it because people don't want to buy Cruel Bargains? Since June, there have been about 17 top8s with Belcher in various tournaments (some small, some gigantic), and there has been 1 with SI. Do people just not prefer this archetype or do people not know about it?

Belcher is just easier to play and more popular, while SI doesn't have much of a following because the dead cards and the drawing blind aspects turn a lot of people off to it.

[badjuju]

Belcher is just easier to play and more popular, while SI doesn't have much of a following because the dead cards and the drawing blind aspects turn a lot of people off to it.

But can't they see the advantages of using Tendrils as a kill? The ability to recover and be able to force that option at any time against counter-based decks is pretty freakin awesome. When playing my Belcher against blue-based decks, if I don't have the hand to play around FoW, I just curl up into a ball and die. Sure I could try and rebuild (which I often do), but they'll usually be stocked up by then anyways. There have been very few games where I've made a comeback without maindeck blasts (in fact of the 100s of games I've played against blue-based, I can count the number of times I've come back after an all-in into a force...on one hand).

It was just always so weird that the deck never picked up in popularity (same with TES. I'm not going to say it's that much more popular cause freaking half of the t8s are by Cook anyways lol).

[Iranon]

There are many pitfalls to SI. Unlike other combo decks, you don't have obvious setup/protection/kill cards (at least not in the fasted versions), so you have many opportunities to throw winnable games away using your cards incorrectly.

Land, Go? Probe for a Force with a Chrome Mox if you don't actually want to imprint anything? Go for something bigger, like a Draw4? Go all in, sacrificing a LED in response?

With SI you usually don't have the luxury of knowing in advance if your hand is lethal. Since it's also quite vulnerable (you can play around countermagic, but a lot of permanent-based hate is deadly and you can't fight it effectively) you need to weigh chances your opponent will do something horrible against your increased chance of fizzling if you try now.

I suppose many people prefer the ability to brush off losses with a 'bah, didn't draw what I needed' rather than 'oops... made the wrong judgment call'. Losing with SI tends to be bad for one's ego :)

[BreathWeapon]

But can't they see the advantages of using Tendrils as a kill? The ability to recover and be able to force that option at any time against counter-based decks is pretty freakin awesome. When playing my Belcher against blue-based decks, if I don't have the hand to play around FoW, I just curl up into a ball and die. Sure I could try and rebuild (which I often do), but they'll usually be stocked up by then anyways. There have been very few games where I've made a comeback without maindeck blasts (in fact of the 100s of games I've played against blue-based, I can count the number of times I've come back after an all-in into a force...on one hand).

It was just always so weird that the deck never picked up in popularity (same with TES. I'm not going to say it's that much more popular cause freaking half of the t8s are by Cook anyways lol).

Most of the people who use Belcher don't use it because they want to play a game of Magic, they use it because they want to circumvent the skill gap and just flip a coin vs control or take advantage of a non-control environment.

Belcher doesn't requiring thinking, and that's what a lot of this format's "combo" players like. The people using SI, TES and FT aren't as opportunistic and play Storm combo as their default choice, at which point you actually start playing Magic again and need a deck to leverage your skill advantage.

It makes sense that Belcher is more popular tho', because it's really the deck for people who don't know what they're doing.

[Dark_Cynic87]

It makes sense that Belcher is more popular tho', because it's really the deck for people who don't know what they're doing.

I giggled with glee. :laugh:

[Vacrix]

taking the discussion off of belcher for a moment...

take a look a this if you guys havent already seen it:

Ad Nauseum 3BB
Sorcery
Reveal the top card of your library. Put that card in your hand and you lose life equal to its mana cost. Repeat this process any number of times.
R

I think that this could be a great draw spell for SI if you put it in the right build. heres an idea:

4 infernal contract
4 cruel bargain
4 infernal tutor
3 ad nauseum
1 ill-gotten gains
1 tendrils of agony
3 burning wish
4 dark ritual
4 culling the weak
4 cabal ritual
4 lion's eye diamond
4 chrome mox
4 lotus petal
4 summoner's pact
4 simian spirit guide
3 bloodstained mire
3 bad lands
2 kobolds

SB:
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Shattering Spree
1 Ill gotten gains
1 cabal therapy
1 pyroclasm
3 phyrexian negator
4 tomb of urami
2 lightning bolt

you have 24 cards with 0 CC, 8 cards with 1 CC, 11 cards with 2 CC, 12 cards with 3 CC, and 5 cards with 4 or more CC. i think that if you draw 9 cards, 3 of them are likely to have 0 CC, of the other 6, 3 are likely to have 1, 2, or 3 CC, so being pessimistic lets say you lose 8 (3CC,3CC,2CC) life. now lets say the other 3 cards are a tendrils and an ad nauseum. you lost 18 life. for 9 cards. i'd say it was a deal if you happened to draw an rituals. its just like an underpowered, underpriced, yawgmoth's bargain. i'd say that would definetly be a win if there was like 1 ritual in there somewhere. the thing is that you should be able to win, or at least dig deeper off of an ad nauseum. it allows you to either get, rituals + burning wish, rituals + LED + burning wish/infernal tutor, or rituals + tendrils. im sure that with more mana from simian spirit guides/summoner's pacts that the buring wish is more than easy to cast and you will have enough mana to play out whatever you draw with an ad nauseum. i would say that we treat it more like a good draw4 spell than anything else. sure it can be forced but so can infernal contract or cruel bargain. the only disadvantage is if you draw into it after a draw4 cause you cant really use it as effectively with only 10 life. the advantage however, is that you can stop before you kill yourself with it. also, burning wish allows for less CC in the deck, and if you run ad nauseum you will most likely not want to run into multiple ToA/ad nauseum/IGG etc..

maybe this would be better in the current Pact build?

[Forbiddian]

Cruel Bargain doesn't have the best synergy with Ad Nauseum. You're playing Black Jack to ten instead of to 20, and you have a higher mana curve potentially.

[idraleo]

At this point my decklist works fairly better. I thoguht it is the most logical way to run AdN in a SI shell, i did a copy/pste from the AD thread:


I just came up with this BR decklist, it have good potential and seems to did a constant 2nd turn closure. It also uses Bunring Wish, wich is very good because reduces our high casting cost only on Ad Nauseam. I run Kobolds over robots because they' re pitchable on Chrome Moxes.

// Lands
4 [DIS] Blood Crypt
4 [A] Badlands

// Creatures
3 [LG] Kobolds of Kher Keep
4 [LG] Crookshank Kobolds
4 [LG] Crimson Kobolds

// Spells
4 [ALA] Ad Nauseam
1 [TSP] Grapeshot
4 [CS] Rite of Flame
3 [EX] Culling the Weak
3 [JU] Burning Wish
3 [PS] Diabolic Intent
4 [FUT] Pact of Negation
3 [JU] Cabal Therapy
4 [MM] Dark Ritual
4 [MR] Chrome Mox
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [TSP] Grapeshot
SB: 4 [A] Red Elemental Blast
SB: 1 [US] Reprocess
SB: 1 [PS] Diabolic Intent
SB: 1 [TSP] Empty the Warrens
SB: 3 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
SB: 3 [GP] Shattering Spree
SB: 1 [JU] Cabal Therapy


The main closure is Grapeshot, wich is better than Tendrils in this build because it is cheaper and thanks to the slow curve we loss less life then UB versions. The protection is the same, 4 Pacts and 3 Therapyes plus the wishable one, the major loss is Brainstorm wich protect us from sweepers, but those decklist plays an huge numer of Tutors so is unfair to did a match where we don' t see any card between AdN, BW and DI...

[Iranon]

I think SI shouldn't rely on Ad Nauseam. A Draw4 with 2 mana left over is often good for a win too, a lesser setback when Forced and Draw4s can also act as setup card in this deck.

Cutting mana while extending the mana curve upwards seems a poor idea. Do we still need IGG with this around? Infernal Tutor, crack LED, Ad Nauseam should work just fine and it will win many games on its own where IGG alone would be a weak play.
On the other hand, an IGG loop is the safer to choice to finish the game if we already resolved a Draw4. Anyone who played 2 Ill-Gotten Gains might want to replace one of them with Ad Nauseam.

Although this thing is powerful, how many win conditions can we cut? Ad Nauseam is actually made stronger by double Tendrils, and we'd still need at least one alternative to avoid something stupid like losing to a True Believer.

***

I think it has no future in a build that strives for speed as it's far clunkier than anything it could replace. If a deck uses it well, I assume it will have more in common with TES than SI.

[BreathWeapon]

I think SI shouldn't rely on Ad Nauseam. A Draw4 with 2 mana left over is often good for a win too, a lesser setback when Forced and Draw4s can also act as setup card in this deck.

Cutting mana while extending the mana curve upwards seems a poor idea. Do we still need IGG with this around? Infernal Tutor, crack LED, Ad Nauseam should work just fine and it will win many games on its own where IGG alone would be a weak play.
On the other hand, an IGG loop is the safer to choice to finish the game if we already resolved a Draw4. Anyone who played 2 Ill-Gotten Gains might want to replace one of them with Ad Nauseam.

Although this thing is powerful, how many win conditions can we cut? Ad Nauseam is actually made stronger by double Tendrils, and we'd still need at least one alternative to avoid something stupid like losing to a True Believer.

***

I think it has no future in a build that strives for speed as it's far clunkier than anything it could replace. If a deck uses it well, I assume it will have more in common with TES than SI.

That's strange, because the card seems best suited for builds that concentrate on speed.


4 Ad Nauseum
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
4 Empty the Warrens
1 Tendrils of Agony
4 Infernal Tutor
8 Kobolds
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
7 Lands

That's balls to the walls with ETW offering some protection against counters. I don't think you worry about Ad Nauseam when you're setting up with Draw 4s, you just treat the Draw 4s as counter bait or count Ad Nauseum as dead when you draw it.

I do agree it feels clunky tho', I don't know if the SI shell makes Ad Nauseum insane or Ad Nauseum makes the SI shell defunct *scratches head*

[Rood]

That shell for AdN would be really bad just counting the CC
3x 5cc
8x 3cc
5x 4cc
8x 2cc

The rest are okay but honestly you're going to take way more damage then necessary with AdN. I'd say it's necessary to cut down most of the draw 4s and definetally not run ETW with AdN.

[BreathWeapon]

That shell for AdN would be really bad just counting the CC
3x 5cc
8x 3cc
5x 4cc
8x 2cc

The rest are okay but honestly you're going to take way more damage then necessary with AdN. I'd say it's necessary to cut down most of the draw 4s and definetally not run ETW with AdN.

At which point running AdN in SI is pointless because it's no longer a supplimental threat and is now a main threat requiring 8 creatures with no ability to bait counters on Rituals or trade 2 for 2 on Force of Will.

I'm not even certain I'd take it over IGG.

[thefreakaccident]

The average CmC of his entire deck (including lands) is 1.46, which is still pretty low.


I don't think there is much of an issue w/ the curve, although, I do not like how many ETW are in the list, you should be running more tendrils in their stead.

[BreathWeapon]

The average CmC of his entire deck (including lands) is 1.46, which is still pretty low.


I don't think there is much of an issue w/ the curve, although, I do not like how many ETW are in the list, you should be running more tendrils in their stead.

You can do either or, ETW is just a more pragmatic card for your actual matches instead of your goldfishes.

[Iranon]

I have a problem with the antisynergy.

Draw4 into Ad Nauseam: with an average CMC of around 1.5 that's on average of 4 cards before you risk killing yourself with the next one. Oh, and you need 2 more mana to continue the chain. Weak.

Ad Nauseam into a Draw4: redundant and unnecessarily painful - you already have the ability to exchange life for cards. You want mana or tutors for a clean kill.



Ad Nauseam is more likely to win in a deck focusing on mana and tutors rather than other bulk draw, and such decks can also use it more reliably. That would no longer be SI though.

[BreathWeapon]

I have a problem with the antisynergy.

Draw4 into Ad Nauseam: with an average CMC of around 1.5 that's on average of 4 cards before you risk killing yourself with the next one. Oh, and you need 2 more mana to continue the chain. Weak.

Ad Nauseam into a Draw4: redundant and unnecessarily painful - you already have the ability to exchange life for cards. You want mana or tutors for a clean kill.



Ad Nauseam is more likely to win in a deck focusing on mana and tutors rather than other bulk draw, and such decks can also use it more reliably. That would no longer be SI though.

You're right, drawing into Ad Nauseam with Draw 4s is bad, but drawing into Draw 4s with ad Nauseam isn't that awful because when Ad Nauseam bring you into the 4 life range it becomes more efficient to stop drawing with Ad Nauseam and cast 2 Draw 4s than risk death.

I don't know if drawing into 4 more dead cards is worth it, but there doesn't seem to be a problem with just resolving Ad Nauseam.

[Pulp_Fiction]

Yeah, I think Ad Nauseum is just a super-fucking-amazing draw4 that can't fizzle. I have been really pissed at SI lately because it seems like every time I cast a draw4 I draw 3 tall men and a Chrome Mox. With Ad Nauseum you don't even need draw4s. Now, as far as the mana base goes why not run Tomb of Urami in the main? You don't need more than 7-10 lands and the only color you actually need is black. As far as kill sources go, I think a 1x Grapeshot 1x Tendrils split should work perfect (I played against fucking True Believer last night with Iggy:(. IGG also isn't needed with Ad Nauseum. And this deck will certainly run Kobolds instead of tall men since imprinting on Chrome Mox is really important. Should Infernal Tutor get cut for Diabolic Intent? Maybe a split of them? 4x of each? Also, since this is SI, our build should rely on pure speed and probably not include any MD copies of Empty the Warrens.

[BreathWeapon]

Yeah, I think Ad Nauseum is just a super-fucking-amazing draw4 that can't fizzle. I have been really pissed at SI lately because it seems like every time I cast a draw4 I draw 3 tall men and a Chrome Mox. With Ad Nauseum you don't even need draw4s. Now, as far as the mana base goes why not run Tomb of Urami in the main? You don't need more than 7-10 lands and the only color you actually need is black. As far as kill sources go, I think a 1x Grapeshot 1x Tendrils split should work perfect (I played against fucking True Believer last night with Iggy:(. IGG also isn't needed with Ad Nauseum. And this deck will certainly run Kobolds instead of tall men since imprinting on Chrome Mox is really important. Should Infernal Tutor get cut for Diabolic Intent? Maybe a split of them? 4x of each? Also, since this is SI, our build should rely on pure speed and probably not include any MD copies of Empty the Warrens.

Infernal Tutor, Lion's Eye Diamond and Ad Nauseam all belong together, but Empty the Warrens is one of the best cards in this deck because it takes advantage of the storm and mana from Kobolds, increases threat density and forces them to counter rituals.


I have this proxied ATM,

1 Tendrils of Agony
4 Empty the Warrens
4 Ad Nauseam
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Diabolic Intent
4 Cabal Therapy
8 Kobolds
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
7 Badlands

but the mulligans hurt really, really bad.

[Vacrix]

how about this list, to utilize speed better with AdN:

1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Tendrils of Agony
4 Ad Nauseam
4 Goblin Belcher
4 Burning Wish
3 Infernal Tutor
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Land Grant
1 Kobold
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Bayou
4 Dark Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Rite of Flame

SB:
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Masssacre
4 Tomb of Urami
4 Xantid Swarm
3 Naturalize

This version is much like pact SI. the strat is to play AdN and draw into either a belcher or a burning wish and infernal loop. if you draw belcher, use all the mana sources floating around to play it and win. you will draw more land grants to search for bayou, and you will most likely find either another land grant to search for the dyrad arbor (which rids the rest of your deck of land). i think that if you resolve AdN you will probably hit with belcher for 1 land, and sometimes 2 land. if you dont draw AdN in your opening hand then you can also have belcher in your opening hand. if that doesnt work, you might get an opening hand with and infernal loop, or you might get a hand with burning wish, into ETW.

i think that a good idea might be to take out 1 AdN, put it in the board, so you can wish for it with burning wish, and add on one more infernal tutor.

another thing to consider would be death wish, if you can draw death wish then you can fetch out a belcher, which might be better than running 3 belcher MD, and instead just have a shit ton of mana and ways to fetch out a belcher.


diabolic intent could also work well, but if you add it with summoners pact, i think that there should be 2 kobolds MD at least, just incase you need one for a culling and one for an intent or something.

[Pulp_Fiction]

Well, I just proxied up and played this list:

4x Ad Nauseum
4x LED
4x Petal
4x Dark Ritual
4x Diabiloc Intent
4x Pact of Negation
4x Infernal Tutor
4x Cabal Ritual
4x Culling the Weak
4x Cabal Therapy
4x Chrome Mox
8x Kobolds
1x Tendrils of Agony
1x Grapeshot
4x Tomb of Urami
4x Gemstone Mine

This deck was insane and just shitty at the same time. You would either cast Ad Nauseum and draw literally 3/4 of the deck if you wanted, mull into oblivion, or struggle getting enought mana to work properly. It should be noted that this deck will literally not fizzle if you resolve Ad Nauseum with 11+ life!!! This deck mulligans like pure shit and so I decided to try some Mystical Tutor action!!!

Ad Nauseum take 2:
4x Ad Nauseum
4x LED
4x Petal
4x Dark Ritual
3x Diabiloc Intent
3x Mystical Tutor
4x Infernal Tutor
4x Cabal Ritual
4x Culling the Weak
4x Cabal Therapy
4x Chrome Mox
8x Kobolds
1x Tendrils of Agony
1x Grapeshot
3x Tomb of Urami
4x Gemstone Mine
3x Forbidden Orchard

Hated this even more but it was 10000000 times better. It consistently went off on turn 2. I was testing it against Zoo (one of my new favorite decks and very tier 1) and out of 6 games it won 4, all of them before turn 3. The only games it lost were where it mulled into oblivion. Now I am going to compare this to Belcher; the only reason I am about to do so is Belcher is the only deck which can keep up with SI in terms of speed. Belcher DOES NOT AND WILL NOT mull into oblivion 2/6 games. In my experience with Belcher (pretty extensive) I have mulled into oblivion maybe 3 times total out of more than 5, 4-5 round tournaments which cut to top 8. This seems to take the deck into reverse.

Now, on the bright side, I came up with a new build of SITES I am going to test out :) And Ad Nauseum is not as broken as everyone seems to think it is; I would prefer to have Mind's Desire ANY DAY over this card. But there is potential. I don't think adding cantrips and shit is the way to go though. There has to be a better way.

@ Breath Weapon: I proxied up your build as well, it mulligans awful man, it almost seems like the deck needs Serum Powder or something, but the times it does go off, it goes nuts and I have been able to make goblin tokens and Tendrils just for the hell of it!! But truthfully I just kept thinking to my self, why run this over SITES or 2 land SI? But I thought the same thing about my 2 builds as well.

Can anyone think of anything to make either of my lists better? I am open to cantrips but I still feel they slow the deck down.

[Vacrix]

umm i think that you forgot tendrils is your lists, pulpfiction.

these lists seem a little land heavy no? fetches + duals would thin your deck a little more so you are drawing what you want.

also, isnt diabolic content doing the same thing as burning wish but for 1 mana more?

i do like the threat density without too high off CC's. looks like you could draw alot with AdN with those builds.

i think that the threat of infernal loop with IGG is too good to pass up. at least run one ya?

[BreathWeapon]

Ad Nauseam and 5cc is just too inconsistent, you need the Draws 4s and 3cc to either set up or start the chain. At best Ad Nauseam is either a suppliment to the Draw 4s, or it's a replacement for Ill Gotten Gains.

I'd consider Strategic Planning for building Threshold for Cabal Ritual, or just sculpting your hand with Brainstorm and Ponder until you're ready to go off.

[Pulp_Fiction]

@ Vacrix: Fixed, forgot to post my kill sources in my lists, sorry.

@ Breath Weapon: I agree with you that it is to inconsistent so we need to make it consistent, because this has the potential to be the most explosive deck in Legacy.

Alright, my new version of SITES turned out to be shitty as hell so I won't even bother with that. However, I think that the Kobolds + Cabal Therapy and Culling the Weak are the way to go. I am not so sure that Infernal Tutor is better than Diabolic Intent in these builds so maybe we can cut LED and Infernal Tutor and jam in some red rituals or something and I just loved Mystical Tutor in the deck. Also, I really think Pact of Negation belongs in the deck. It is really solid. I am just throwing ideas out there so please humor me. What about a build like this:

4x Ad Nauseum
4x Seething Song
4x Manamorphose
4x Petal
4x Dark Ritual
4x Diabiloc Intent
4x Mystical Tutor
4x Culling the Weak
4x Cabal Therapy
4x Chrome Mox
8x Kobolds
1x Tendrils of Agony
1x Grapeshot
3x Tomb of Urami
4x Gemstone Mine
3x Forbidden Orchard

Something different. Seething Song and Manamorphose work incredibly well together but will drawing only one of them at a time prove to be so clunky to make the deck work right? I will test it out.

[BreathWeapon]

The Kobold and Culling the Weak shell just doesn't seem to work for me, slowing down seems like the best option, reducing the acceleration but increasing the tutors, cantrips and land drops.

[Vacrix]

A slow setup build:

2 Polluted Delta
2 Bloodstained Mire
4 Underground Sea
1 Swamp
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox

4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak

4 Phyrexian Walker
4 Shield Sphere

4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
4 Brainstorm
4 Mystical Tutor
3 Meditate
2 Ad Nauseam

2 Tendrils of Agony


after going off with a Ad Nauseam, you can mystical tutor your way into a tendrils and then draw it with the card draw that you draw from AdN. i think also that having only 2 AdN's lowers your total CC which is on the high side anyway, and allows you to draw less of them. i wouldnt mind casting that though off of the first draw4 when im at 10 life.. AdN is like the IGG for QSI cause its not really necessary but it can be very game breaking but only if you draw set it up (like infernal tutor/LED/IGG).


i think that the main problem is that playing it in a fast build makes it clunky and useless in a lot of situations, but when you draw it in the right places, its insanely explosive and game breaking. but when you play a card built for speed in a slower deck, it makes it more consistent when you cast it but will this build have enough mana to play turn 1 mystical tutor go, turn 2 go off? the other builds have access to ESG, SSG, more rituals, and summoner's pact. as the QSI shell gives it more consistency and less speed..

[Pulp_Fiction]

I was just looking around at deck lists and noticed that someone took 3rd place at The Source 2 -Man Tournament with SI. It didn't say who was playing it but it was the 2x land version with 3x Tenrdils and 4x Cabal Therapy main. Does anyone have any idea who this is? And it would be awesome to see a tournament report in this thread as well as an explanation of some of the SB choices. Good to see SI doing well again.

[DireLemming]

I was just looking around at deck lists and noticed that someone took 3rd place at The Source 2 -Man Tournament with SI. It didn't say who was playing it but it was the 2x land version with 3x Tenrdils and 4x Cabal Therapy main. Does anyone have any idea who this is? And it would be awesome to see a tournament report in this thread as well as an explanation of some of the SB choices. Good to see SI doing well again.
Report (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=10073)

[Pulp_Fiction]

Very interesting, thanks for the link. I had no idea that was on here.

[Cire]

how about lich's mirror in this deck?

i mean the deck is made for winning turn 1/2 but if you fizzel you can just put down the mirror and unless they destroy the mirror you'll have another chance to get that turn 1 win when they break it. At the very least you'll have time to regroup by the time they get some artifact destruction. And if they don't have Artifact destruction MD imagine how annoying it would be to keep casting lich's mirror over and over starting turn 1, until you have that 'god' hand that leads to a win immediately after a mirror is broken.

just an idea i had

[georgjorge]

But you could also put something in the deck instead of Mirror which doesn't make you fizzle - a Draw4, Tendrils, Iggy, Nauseam etc. If you obviously could drop Mirror, you don't have a lack of mana, so you could cast all those cards to continue the combo.

[emidln]

The black recycle card is better than Lich's Mirror. When it comes out you don't fizzle. The obvious drawback that we encountered while playtesting it was that even as a 1-of or 2-of, it was usually Chrome Mox fodder.

[Vacrix]

here is an idea. its untested, so yeah:

Lich's Mirror
Final Fortune

(serum powder)

final fortune, if you have enough land, is cool anyway in storm combo. lets you untap, and, i'm pretty sure, you keep the storm from the following turn until it is your opponents turn, so it could be very nice, especially (if this works) you run into additional final fortunes. then you can play lich's mirror to negate the FF and draw 7. btw, can you play spells in your end phase? if so, you could break an LED in your END phase when you would lose the game and then you would shuffle everything into your deck because you lose at the end of turn and then play an instant speed storm spell that you draw (ie. brainfreeze if the storm count is high enough you can win, if not, you can keep going and win using lich's mirror's to keep stalling).

also, mulliganing only works during turn 0 when you draw 7 cards right? you can't mulligan after Lich's mirror. just thought i would check cause it could be sick with serum powder.

would this work in SI? it a bit farfetched but it just might work if its structured correctly. lich's mirror also fits in well to the Pact version, which needs more mana to resolve mirror and FF anyway. and you don't lose to pact of negation or summoners pact, so protection and mana are easy to fit into this.

if the biggest problem lich's mirror faces is chrome mox, you won't have as many problems as you will in Pact SI as it has more mana and i'm not even sure if it runs chrome mox.




also, would 1 AdN in place of a tendrils be good in the land grant/tall man build? or is it hard to fit into that version? or would there be a better replacement for AdN? maybe cut 1 IGG? I mean AdN is an amazing infernal tutor target.



The black recycle card is better than Lich's Mirror. When it comes out you don't fizzle. The obvious drawback that we encountered while playtesting it was that even as a 1-of or 2-of, it was usually Chrome Mox fodder.

emidln, what is the black recycle card?

[emidln]

Null Profusion

[Vacrix]

thanks. is there any testing with it? results?

if not, i will test it, but in which version and what should i cut for it?

[emidln]

thanks. is there any testing with it? results?

if not, i will test it, but in which version and what should i cut for it?

It works fine in place of one of the IGG in the BG Land Grant version. rsaunder played with it for a long time and liked it a lot. I thought it was really cool, but never really pursued SI much in a tournament since I tested it. I might be able to dig up the testing results from the BZK forums. I'll check and post back if I find something interesting.

[Vacrix]

It works fine in place of one of the IGG in the BG Land Grant version. rsaunder played with it for a long time and liked it a lot. I thought it was really cool, but never really pursued SI much in a tournament since I tested it. I might be able to dig up the testing results from the BZK forums. I'll check and post back if I find something interesting.

please that would be really cool, as I actually own the BG land grant version so i could play it in my local FNM tournaments.

[Gaagooch]

What about straight B/G? I know it slows the deck down a little, but I would like to test a list that looks something like this.

4 Xantid Swarm
4 Kobolds
4 Culling the Weak
4 Dark Ritual
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Diabolic Intent
4 Manamorphose
3 Ad Nauseum
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
3 Bayou
1 Forest
2 Swamp
3 Delta/Mire
2 Foothills/Heath

This is just a rough list thrown together and I'm sure it needs work. The entire CMC of the deck is 63 which means a 1.05 avg cmc...AdN is at its best when you can see the most cards out of it, ensuring that you can win after it has resolved. The best way to see the most cards out of it is to play as low an avg cmc in your deck as you can without taking away the consistency or ability to win. I Played U/B AnT at TMLO4 with the avg cmc being exactly 1. I think that if you are going to play AdN you need to find a way to lower the cmc avg of your deck while at the same time not destroying its actual consistency or game.

[GreenOne]

What about straight B/G? I know it slows the deck down a little, but I would like to test a list that looks something like this.

4 Xantid Swarm
4 Kobolds
4 Culling the Weak
4 Dark Ritual
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Diabolic Intent
4 Manamorphose
3 Ad Nauseum
4 Cabal Therapy
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
3 Bayou
1 Forest
2 Swamp
3 Delta/Mire
2 Foothills/Heath



I believe this list needs more robots/kobolds: you have 12 ways of sacrificing creatures (Culling, Cabal, diabolic intent) with only 8 critters in the deck (4 of which cost mana and are not always castable). I'd test your list with:
-2 Diabolic intent
+1/2 creature of choice
+0/1 Ad Nauseam

[Pulp_Fiction]

Only run Kobolds if the deck needs Red mana (to imprint on Chrome Mox), otherwise run Phyrexian Walker and Shield Sphere because they are infinitely better. Xantid Swarm is a good SB card but sucks in the main and should most likely be replaced by Duress (since Thoughtseize takes away life). Cutting green completely with a red splash is IMOP the way to go. Interesting take on the deck though this idea has inspired me to attempt a new build of Ad Nauseam in SI:

8x Kobolds
4x Rite of Flame
4x Culling the Weak
4x Dark Ritual
4x Lotus Petal
4x Cabal Therapy
4x Chrome Mox
3x Ad Nauseam
4x Infernal Tutor
4x LED
1x IGG
1x Tendrils
4x Burning Wish
4x Cabal Ritual
4x Bloodstained Mire
1x Swamp
1x Mountain
1x Badlands

SB:
1x Empty the Warrens
1x Tendrils
1x IGG
3x Shattering Spree
4x Duress
4x Tomb of Urami
1x Meta SB slot

I have not tested this idea yet but I certainly will since I am looking for any and all reasons to play SI again!

[Pulp_Fiction]

Ok, I really should be doing school shit but ... fuck it. I have been testing this deck out a little, and it is fantastic! The only bad thing is that it doesn't mulligan as well as it should but I have had a sick amount of turn 1 kills backed up by Therapy. Burning Wish is exactly what Ad Nauseam SI needed, the card is sick in this deck. The only thing I and thinking about doing is swapping out 2x Cabal Rituals for 2x Seething Song as the deck is oftentimes a little short, but I am not sure how necessary that would be since the deck has no real need for that much red mana. It also feels like it needs 2 additional search spells that aren't Diabolic Intent or Spoils of the Vault. I was thinking Tainted Pact or Plunge into Darkness but Pact is lame and Plunge is so anti-synergystic with Ad Nauseam its crazy. And, the deck also seems like it needs 1x Empty the Warrens in the main. There are those occassional hands where there will be exactly 4x mana floating after a Infernal Tutor and it would be nice to have 1 Warrens (where you will be 1 mana short of IGG loop). Also, with the Cabal Therapys it would not be awful casting Empty after Ad Nauseam since you can just discard all relevant spells in the opponent's hand then swing for the win next turn.

[GreenOne]

It also feels like it needs 2 additional search spells that aren't Diabolic Intent or Spoils of the Vault. I was thinking Tainted Pact or Plunge into Darkness but Pact is lame and Plunge is so anti-synergystic with Ad Nauseam its crazy.
Did you consider Grim Tutor?

[Pulp_Fiction]

Grim Tutor is to expensive, but after a little more goldfishing I have decided that the build I came up with is strictly inferior to TES. I really like how it plays but it needs more action spells and it doesn't mulligan very well at all.

[Pulp_Fiction]

It has been a long fucking time since anyone has posted in this thread! Anyway, I thought it would be a good idea to share this list with you guys. Someone in my meta recently made it to a top 4 split playing some kind of hybrid SI ANT list. I really liked that deck as it reminded me of old school SI! Here is his list:

4x Mystical Tutor
3x Infernal Tutor
3x Chrome Mox
4x Lotus Petal
4x Shield Sphere
4x Phyrexian Walker
4x Dark Ritual
4x Culling the Weak
4x Cabal Therapy
2x Ad Nauseam
1x IGG
1x Tendrils
4x Brainstorm
3x Orim's Chant
1x Echoing Truth/Chain of Vapor

4x Flooded Strand
4x Polluted Delta
2x Island
1x Swamp
1x Underground Sea
1x Tundra
1x Scrubland

I truly don't know how this list plays at all. I have never put it together but it seems interesting and maybe it has some potential. This list may just be garbage but at first glance it looks pretty decent. After talking with the guy a bit he thinks the deck has to many lands and should be cut down to 12 or 13 but aside from that he really doesn't have any complaints. What is everyone's thoughts on this build? Could it thrive in today's meta?

[marit]

It has been a long fucking time since anyone has posted in this thread! Anyway, I thought it would be a good idea to share this list with you guys. Someone in my meta recently made it to a top 4 split playing some kind of hybrid SI ANT list. I really liked that deck as it reminded me of old school SI! Here is his list:

4x Mystical Tutor
3x Infernal Tutor
3x Chrome Mox
4x Lotus Petal
4x Shield Sphere
4x Phyrexian Walker
4x Dark Ritual
4x Culling the Weak
4x Cabal Therapy
2x Ad Nauseam
1x IGG
1x Tendrils
4x Brainstorm
3x Orim's Chant
1x Echoing Truth/Chain of Vapor

4x Flooded Strand
4x Polluted Delta
2x Island
1x Swamp
1x Underground Sea
1x Tundra
1x Scrubland

I truly don't know how this list plays at all. I have never put it together but it seems interesting and maybe it has some potential. This list may just be garbage but at first glance it looks pretty decent. After talking with the guy a bit he thinks the deck has to many lands and should be cut down to 12 or 13 but aside from that he really doesn't have any complaints. What is everyone's thoughts on this build? Could it thrive in today's meta?
That is not a hybrid, SI is defined by it's dependance on Draw 4's, which gives it its speed, explosiveness, and inconsistency. That looks like a deck almost everyone thought of, and IBA posted way back when. One of the first lists meant to abuse Ad-Nauseam. It looks pretty solid though.

[whidye]

The Legacy world championship was my first constructed tournament (I have only done two pre-release tournaments [Odyssey and Onslaught!]); so I was quite inexperienced. I decided to play with the following list, dubbed "The SAINT" because it runs the Spanish Inquisition shell with an Ad Nauseam Tendrils win-con.

The SAINT

10 Swamp
1 Phyrexian Tower
4 Lotus Petal
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Ornithopter
4 Phyrexian Walker
4 Shield Sphere
4 Diabolic Intent
3 Ad Nauseam
2 Tendrils of Agony
1 Silence
1 Angel's Grace
4 Duress
3 Cabal Therapy
1 Slaughter Pact
2 Pact of Negation

Sideboard:
2 Powder Keg
2 Tormod's Crypt
2 Relic of Progenitus
2 Pithing Needle
2 Disciple of the Vault
2 Slaughter Pact
1 Cabal Therapy
1 Vindicate
1 Pact of Negation

I'll quickly describe choices:

Land - mono, hard to disrupt without sinkholes. Cheap. Small accel with tower.
Accel - Cheap, fast and plentiful.
Creatures - Synergy with disciples (maybe they should have been main), free for storm, synergy with other spells.
Combo and protection - fairly disruptive, cheap, only 1 win-con.

SB:
Keg - handles a lot of things. Very useful.
GY hate - for ichorid, thresh.
Pithing - countertop, survival, tireless tribe dredge, sadistic hypnotist dredge, grindstone, etc...
Disciple - great synergy. Alt win-con. Maybe should go main.
Everything else - varies disruption theme.

I ran this list because there is NO legacy in Edmonton, Alberta. I haven't played against any of the common archetypes and therefore I thought combo would be easy to play since I don't have to have much interaction with the opponent (besides discard). As long as I know how to play with the deck, I should be able to win my matches. It's also a budget ANT list. I would have loved scrublands for more white disruption (chants, silence, grace, etc...) but I simply didn't have the cash (same goes for more of my other card selections). My favorite part of this list was that whenever I was comboing out my deck that I designed drew a crowd! I would commonly have eight people watching as my deck drew 12-15 cards off of AdN and then splattered blood all over the opponent. It was really exhilarating having that experience!

Worlds Match-ups:
M1 vs. James King playing Dredge

When I started I had no idea who James King was - I didn't know he was a really good player who has won tournaments before - I only knew after I was filling out the slip and a judge commented: "You've never filled a slip out before, and you beat this guy? Nice job!". I won the roll and duressed him first turn - mainly to discover that all my discard is now useless against my dredge opponent - but I took his breakthrough. A few turns later (my T3) I combo'd out still at 18 life when I AdN thanks to the walkers I had on the field.

Game 2 was different (I sided out all discard, pact of Neg, and sided in kegs, GY hate, needle), and I didn't have time to hold off a huge zombie swarm. I won G3 again, by comboing out very fast (let me tell you, diabolic intent is very nice for removing bridges AND finding cards I need!).
1-0-0

M2 vs. Nate playing Landstill
I went 2-0 against Nate. Having never played against standstill, I wasn't sure when I should break it, but I did it constantly - normally by playing a 0cmc creature (I won because he put standstill down to stop a fast combo; but also while he had no pressure on board) and then using mass discard effects (therapy) to rip his newly drawn cards from his hand. I comboed out both times probably on my eigth turn. It was only frustrating playing Nate because he told me "Can you play faster? Do you need to write all of these cards down?" and I had to read his cards because I've never played against them before. After the match, he got a lot better to talk to.
2-0-0

M3 vs. ???? playing ElfBall variant
Game 1 he crushed me with 24 elves and Garruk overrun on turn 4-5. I commented that it was such a cool concept for a deck, and he was proud to show it off - he told me he went top 8 last year; but lost to the guy sitting on my right, so I knew I was playing a hard match (he used a similar list last time). In the next two games, I took his entire hand apart first turn with ritual, therapy, therapy, flashback (he held 1 foothills, 2 fydhorn, 2 prefect, 2 wren's run - a GREAT CURVE... if he still had them). I comboed out by drawing through AdN and getting him before T4 both times. It sucks because he went from being a really fun opponent to play in the first game, and then just being angry and grumpy in the next two.
3-0-0

M4 vs. Josh playing Landstill
After being up late friday, and not having much sleep the day before, this is where I started to notice play mistakes. I had wrote all over my scorecard that he had FoW in hand (through duress), but I "ignored" it and ramped up mana to AdN then I saw it (game 1). In game two I was able to silence him, then AdN until I hit angel's grace, because I had flipped an AdN, I just ramped up again and then I AdN'd my entire deck ensuring victory. We ended game three in a draw after 5 extra turns - we were the last match still playing.
3-0-1

M5/M6
By this time I was dead tired. I don't know the play mistakes I made, but I do know that my "sideboarding" didn't exist. What I realized after the matches was that when I went to un-sideboard my cards... my sideboard was already intact. I had taken out the cards I wanted to switch, and promptly put them back where they came from instead of switching the piles... I felt really stupid after that, but sometimes those things happen. Both matches went 0-2. I then dropped from the tournament and went to get my first meal of the day!

FINAL: 3-2-1

So, I think my deck did pretty good, and it was at least fun to play! I even got to play a casual game against Ernest - the winner of the championship - on Sunday after we traded a few cards. It was really fun to get to talk to a player like him and talk about our decks; especially getting compliments as he had watched several of my games.

Thanks for reading.

[Barsoom]

Well, nice decklist, i was looking for a budget combo deck to build, that archetipe is missing atm on my own decks, so i think i'll build this, seems fun to play.
Do you have some tips to share about playing this deck, or maybe articles somewhere that i can read about this, beside this thread?

[whidye]

Sure! First off, I'll tell you about the evolution of the deck. Somebody posted (on the wizards forums) a budget mono-B SI list (running draw4's and IGG); when I saw this list it just seemed like a natural fit for Ad Nauseam. Of course, after I posted my initial list some people mentioned that this list has already been tried out - except that it ran blue for mystical tutor and white for orim's chant. Now, because that player had budget in mind (as did I), we kept it mono-B aside from whatever I have added.

For the most part playing the deck is simple; ramp up your mana, play AdN, win the game by drawing 12 cards. Generally, the hardest part for you is to decide if you have enough protection (through duress, therapy, negation) to go off that turn. When you do AdN, you also want to make sure that you have some way to generate mana - either by having some left over in your pool, not having played your land for the turn, or being able to flip a lotus petal. If you miss this step you will fizzle and discard all but the best cards in your hand - DO NOT FIZZLE.

Hands to keep:
I would keep almost any hand that had a creature, some discard and either AdN or a tutor.
I would also keep a hand with lots of discard. The biggest problem with my list is that I don't run thoughtseize (budgeted out) - if you can run it; I would!
Throw away hands with lots of petals and creatures but no way to search/disrupt/protect.

Things to remember/think about:
-Angel's Grace lets you draw the entire library when you Ad Nauseam. [edited]
-Thoughtseize could probably replace at least 2 of the duress. If you are going off slowly, its better to take out their turn 2 goyf rather than face it for the rest of the game.
-A lot of your creatures are required as sacrifices. If you have culling the weak and can win with a topdeck try for the topdeck rather than chumping your ornithopter. Same goes if you have AdN and are waiting for a quick mana accel.
-When you AdN you can safely go as low as 6 life. If you are at 5 life there are a max of two cards that will kill you (other AdN's). If you are at 4 life there is a max of 4 that can kill you. Three life: Four cards again! There are no 3cmc cards in this deck. Watch out for lightning bolt. ;p
-You might want to switch grace for silence - your choice - I haven't played the deck enough to know [bryant, emidln suggest no grace]
-Disciple of the Vault might be a good maindeck decision. You sac a lot of artifacts all the time... maybe remove two ornithopters for disciples.
-Scrublands improve your ability to cast silence/grace, but weaken your mana base to wasteland/price of progress.
-Extirpate might be a good card to have in this deck - but I don't know where it would fit.
-People kept asking me if I had chrome mox in the deck - I have two chrome mox, but they just do not fit in this deck. I would rather have mox diamond; but I don't know where it would fit. In my opinion, this deck should NOT have chrome mox. It might want mox diamond.


The most important thing to remember:
I built this deck knowing a few things about my meta-game and it changed when I went to Indianapolis. I also tested it without actually playing opponents (I just goldfished playtested because there was nobody I could play against). I suggest playtesting it and finding flaws/improvements against real opponents. I know this deck can definitely improve, so help it get there!

One last thing, when this deck was in top-deck mode there was hardly a card I got that I didn't want. Enjoy building budget storm!

[Raindown]

-Angel's Grace lets you IGG-loop the entire library.


How so?

[whidye]

How so?

Play Angel's Grace.
Play Ad Nauseam.
Draw library.
Win the game.

Sorry - I should have been more specific.

[Bryant Cook]

Play Angel's Grace.
Play Ad Nauseam.
Draw library.
Win the game.

Sorry - I should have been more specific.

There's a very large difference between Angel's Grace and Ill-Gotten Gains. You need two cards to win with Angel's Grace (Ad Nauseam and Angel's Grace) one of them being a dead card roughly if not more than 75% of the time. While Ill-Gotten Gains only needs one card - itself.


Why hasn't this deck been put into Casual yet? :)

[claudio.r]

I'm sorry about my ignorance, but how does the IGG loop works ?

[Raindown]

Does the Angels Grace win work?

I thought Angels Grace only protected against damage, and Ad-N. is life loss:really:

[whidye]

@Bryant: I know you TES guys would like this in casual - sorry. Like I said, this was my first tournament - this was my decklist - and SI is an established deck; so I think it fits here. If it doesn't, well, sorry.

The reason I like Angel's Grace in this deck is for when I flip AdN WHILE AdNing. Because I don't have mystical tutor, I have to run more AdN maindeck. Since its easy enough to mana-ramp in this deck, if I flip an AdN and the grace but have to stop because my life is low, I can just grace, ramp, AdN again. It happened in this tournament (M4), and I was extremely glad that I had it in my deck. I don't know if its the best card to have in the deck, but I enjoyed having it.

IGG loop lets you get mana accel/tendrils/draw4 out of your GY again in order to play them again. You play your entire hand then use IGG to get cards back to up storm again and then tendrils - if you are playing draw4, you can draw into another IGG and keep going. As far as I understand it.

EDIT:
Angel's Grace works because you can't lose that turn, so when you AdN and draw your entire library you have enough spells, counters and storm to kill the opponent. Since you can't lose that turn you don't die due to <0 life. Your opponent however will die before the turn ends so angel's grace protects you.

[Bryant Cook]

@Bryant: I know you TES guys would like this in casual - sorry. Like I said, this was my first tournament - this was my decklist - and SI is an established deck; so I think it fits here. If it doesn't, well, sorry. It's a joke dude.


The reason I like Angel's Grace in this deck is for when I flip AdN WHILE AdNing. Because I don't have mystical tutor, I have to run more AdN maindeck. Since its easy enough to mana-ramp in this deck, if I flip an AdN and the grace but have to stop because my life is low, I can just grace, ramp, AdN again. It happened in this tournament (M4), and I was extremely glad that I had it in my deck. I don't know if its the best card to have in the deck, but I enjoyed having it. So...You are relying on a 1 of without Mystical Tutor? This seems like great idea.


IGG loop lets you get mana accel/tendrils/draw4 out of your GY again in order to play them again. You play your entire hand then use IGG to get cards back to up storm again and then tendrils - if you are playing draw4, you can draw into another IGG and keep going. As far as I understand it. The Igg loops is easier to explain like this...
You have Dark Ritual/Lion's Eye Diamond x 2 + Infernal Tutor = Ill-Gotten Gains (-2BB), now you either have B or BB. Return Dark Ritual/Lion's Eye Diamond x 2 + Infernal Tutor = Tendrils of Agony.

[emidln]

Just an FYI: In pre-Infernal Tutor SI we actually still ran IGG because you have enough tall men to loop using Diabolic Intent.

Another FYI: Angel's Grace is fucking terrible.

[whidye]

I was just posting my list. If I had more Silences/Orim's Chants they would have went in the list instead. I didn't. Angel's Grace went in.

It might be terrible, but it still won me a game, and in NO WAY am I relying on it - I just didn't have silence x 2.

[emidln]

Did you test the 4th Cabal Therapy? Even on 8-10 tall men I was hesitant to cut the 4th Therapy because they were just sooo good.

[whidye]

The biggest problem I had with the therapy is that I simply felt unable to "decide" what to name. Since I haven't done testing against real opponents I didn't know what hurts my deck most. Normally, I just called FoW or something (daze/snare/counterbalance/standstill/tarmogoyf/SdT/thoughtseize were typical things I named). I agree a fourth cabal therapy is awesome - but not for me simply because I don't know what to name.

[Pulp_Fiction]

Angel's Grace is just terrible. There is really no point in running it when you run Infernal Tutor as well as Ad Nauseam.

With Therapy ... wait till your opponent plays a land then guess based off the fetch, otherwise, blind name Tarmogoyf if you want to hit most of the time. I usually call Counterbalance or Chalice when I played Cabal Therapy. However, your list did inspire me to give SI with Ad Nauseam one more shot and I came up with a list that I REALLY like:

4x Mystical Tutor
4x Infernal Tutor
3x Chrome Mox
4x Lotus Petal
4x Shield Sphere
1x Phyrexian Walker
4x Dark Ritual
3x Culling the Weak
4x Cabal Therapy
2x Ad Nauseam
1x IGG
1x Tendrils
3x Brainstorm
1x Echoing Truth
1x Empty the Warrens
1x Pact of the Titan
4x LED
3x Cabal Ritual

4x Polluted Delta
1x Swamp
2x Underground Sea
3x Tomb of Urami
1x Volcanic Island
1x Bloodstained Mire

I used to really like Pact SI but never ran it in a tournament due to inconsistencies so I tried to figure out a way to fetch creatures for Culling the Weak then I thought about Mystical Tutor into Pact of the Titan, which has been really interesting! Pact is never dead as it always adds a storm but is often overkill with the already 5 tall men. Other than that it really plays like old school SI but not quite as explosive, getting turn 1 Culling, Ritual, Ad Nauseam with BB floating is fucking sick! Not sure about a SB yet or if this deck could even be viable in the meta. I think it could, as people really are not ready to Urami tokens and goblins to early on! Turn 1 Therapy, turn 2 Urami is really hot as well! EtW is in there just a filler since these decks have a bad tendency to go all-in with IT into LED and only be able to add 4 mana, so turn 1-2 Empty for 12-16 is usually pretty good! Any suggestions or comments??

[Shanghi Knights]

@ pulp

I like your thinking, i never thought of puting tomb of urami in as a turn 1/2 possibility in a deck like this. I always thought it the card of pox/ any crucible deck.

while the play in itself look solid, i can't help but fell it getting swords or EE very quickly. thought any match up with those in the opposing deck would kind of make such a play a bad move. I want to ask is there a way to protect urami once he hits but that kinda seems pointless as i guess you'd rather try to build into some sort of storm combination. but with no lands i can't see either happening easily.

[Pulp_Fiction]

Tomb of Urami is some tech from the old days of B.C.'s SI list! Never use it unless you feel forced to or have stripped the opponent's hand. Swords, EE, and Deed, all wreck this card, but it is there because it can be. Much like EtW it is a backup, incase you need it. Always Therapy before using Urami. Plus, much like the old SI decks themselves, it is VERY unexpected!

But the problem with lists like these are their inconsistencies, TES is everybit as fast as SI is these days, thanks to Ad Nauseam and just as fast so there honestly is not a single good reason to build this deck over DDFT, TES, or ANT. Unless it is for budget reasons, there is no reason to run SI, it is simply inferior in today's meta. Now Belcher is a very similar story, but it is hella faster and often wins before the hate can come down. So if duals and fetches are restricting you, and you want to play combo, build Spoils Belcher then move onto TES since they contain a lot of the same cards.

@whidye: I like your list, and I give you mad props for playing some kind of SI variant in today's meta, even if it was for budget reasons! Blue is truly the way to go with combo, these decks are never consistent enough to put up a series of results, Spoils or Serum Powder Belcher CAN but you have to get decent matchups. So if you want to build a combo deck and don't want to spend a shit ton of money I would build Belcher, I can give you the 2 most optimal lists if you want. Regarding your deck, I would highly recommend you put at least 2 Tomb of Urami in the main, the card is so cool and wins games out of nowhere! Plus you are mono-black so I really see no reason to not run a few in the main!

[Moczoc]

@whidye: I'm quite interestet how your version of the deck would look like without financial restrictions. Would you really play more white (+Scrubland) Silence/Chant and Angel's Grace? How much?

[whidye]

I don't know if you guys expected to read a long ramble about my deck, but here it is anyways ;p


I'm glad that you guys are at least slightly interested in this decklist. I will probably not try out any other lists; because as I said, there is no legacy in my area (in fact, the record that you see in my report [the only eternal tournament I've done] boosted me to a #19 ranking in my province - I hadn't been previously ranked). I really do enjoy playing legacy - I just have no place to play ;(

I have not tested the below list, but I think that without financial restraints I would move towards "this type" of list. Some of it (Disciple in main) is from knowledge gleaned from the tournament. Other choices are just things I would like to try out. I have added more Silence and taken out the pacts. I have added Mox Diamond instead of Tower. The problem with chrome is that it usually provides black - with diamond I have two ways to use it; do not discard a land and sac using disciple trigger, or play it after AdN where it really shines. However, a diamond is worse to see in your opener than a chrome; so I haven't decided on this factor yet. Another non-budget change you will notice is thoughtseize - it depends on your meta, but usually this gives you a lot more breathing room vs. aggro.

Also, I know this list strongly improves with the inclusion of blue - the combo color of choice; but I do not think of myself as a good enough deckbuilder to add blue to this list without it simply becoming ANT/TES. I am okay with that. This list wasn't built to be ANT/TES; it was built as mono-black SI. I think it is also slightly unfair to ask what this list would look like without a budget, since that also moves it towards ANT/TES. The reason the list was kept mono-black was because it was an easy budget choice, stops a lot of mana-hate which I expected (moon/wasteland/B2B/PoP) and the best cards I could add in black were added to it. If you do WANT to keep this deck mono-black I would think about cards like LED/Infernal for a nice tutor engine - but those two work (in my opinion for this deck) worse than walker/intent; however the advantage is that you do HAVE more tutors; and can run less Ad Nauseam. Finding the correct balance between tutors, protection, and raw speed is all up to you and your meta.

Anyways, a proposed list using white protection (silence) instead of blue (negation):

The SAINT

4 Swamp
1 Plains
2 Scrubland
1 Polluted Delta
2 Windswept Heath
2 Mox Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
2 Ornithopter
2 Disciple of the Vault
3 Phyrexian Walker
4 Shield Sphere
4 Diabolic Intent
3 Ad Nauseam
2 Tendrils of Agony
4 Silence
3 Thoughtseize
4 Cabal Therapy
1 Slaughter Pact

Sideboard:
2 Powder Keg
2 Tormod's Crypt
2 Relic of Progenitus
2 Pithing Needle
2 Empty the Warrens
2 Slaughter Pact
1 Thoughtseize
1 Vindicate
1 Pact of Negation


I like this list; but I don't necessarily think it is "strictly better" than my list.
#1: I value moon-hate highly. This deck loses to moons easier than my list.
#2: So many decks run wasteland...
#3: You are taking life loss from your lands. This isn't great and "thinning" doesn't really help this deck. When you AdN you don't care if you see five lands flop in a row (except that you should shuffle better).
#4: It has a higher avg. CMC than my previous deck. It's not the end of the world; but its not better.

Places to improve:
#1: My list in general IS better if it can run more tutors, and less AdN. It has trouble doing this; which blue helps greatly (with just mystical tutor!).
#2: My list has trouble against countertop - and no way to stop it MD. Blue can handle this. My list must pop a silence on their turn to slow them down if I don't have any discard.


So, if you are interested in making a mono-black SI, I would consider all of the information I posted (here and previously). Maybe it is a Tier 1 deck just hiding out for now; but I think the power blue can add outweighs the hate against this deck - but then you move away from an SI build. As such, I'll just stop my rambling and leave you with this:

-I had a ton of fun playing this deck; and so did everybody who watched me (re: "Are you playing TALL MEN?! Awesome!")
-This deck is old-tech, people I played were surprised to be against it and were not prepared causing a few misplays on their part.
-I'm not going to reinvent the wheel with this deck; that's why you guys are here!
-Thanks for your input/interest.

[Barsoom]

I really enjoyed reading your explanations, here above and the previous ones, it seems you put much efforts and love with this deck.
I have some more questions for you:
I actually own a single Mox Diamond, do you think that on the original list (the one on the previous page) will be better a single Mox, or a single Tower, or it's even?
2 Disciple, is really worth it? how many damage you will do usually per game with it?
Thanks for your time, i'm actually waiting the cards that i buyed for this deck on E-bay, i'll do my personal tests soon.

[whidye]

Thanks samsunait!

In my opinion - do not take out the tower for the diamond. The tower is a land, and the diamond needs a land - its just risky and can lead to bad draws. The reason I like tower: It provides a little boost of accel and knocks a walker off to disciple.

I really do like the disciples in this deck - when I sideboarded them in they helped a lot. Here is the list of things disciple is good for:
-Attacking for 1. Defending for 1.
-Killing a goblin lackey, rather than just blocking it.
-Lotus petal sacs.
-Diabolic Intent sacs.
-Culling the weak sacs.
-When your defenders die.
-When you explode powder keg.
-When they explode EE.


I have put quite a lot of effort into getting this deck as optimum as I can for a small investment; and I honestly do love playing it. With your single mox - I would test it out; but I don't know the best slot to place it. I think you will find mox is an excellent card post-AdN, but before, it is usually dead.

However, during testing (solo) - I only tested chrome mox; and I would not run them in this list for almost any reason. Stick with the diamond and see where it takes you ;p

Good luck!

[Barsoom]

A Spanish Nauseam deck placed 3° out of 20 at a recent tournament there. (http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=28764)
The decklist is really similar to whidye's one except less budget, with Brainstom, Mystical Tutor and duals.
The concept anyhow is the same, nice that this kind of deck is showing in some tournaments.

[Xentra]

How about going B/w with white for protection, trying to win of Ad Nauseum. Black gives us great acceleration and tutoring.
I came up with this list

4# Glimmervoid
4# Gemstone Mine
3# Scrubland

4# Lotus Petal
4# Lion's Eye Diamond
3# Chrome Mox

4# Shield Sphere
4# Phyrexian Walker
3# Ornithopter

4# Culling the Weak
4# Dark Ritual
4# Cabal Ritual
4# Diabolic Intent
4# Infernal Tutor
4# Orim's Chant
1# Silence
1# Ad-Nauseum
1# Tendrils of Agony

[Piceli89]

A Spanish Nauseam deck placed 3° out of 20 at a recent tournament there. (http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=28764)
The decklist is really similar to whidye's one except less budget, with Brainstom, Mystical Tutor and duals.
The concept anyhow is the same, nice that this kind of deck is showing in some tournaments.

Wasteland in Combo is busted. i think i'll try some Tendrils in Canadian Threshold soon.

[Gocho]

How about going B/w with white for protection, trying to win of Ad Nauseum. Black gives us great acceleration and tutoring.
I came up with this list

4# Glimmervoid
4# Gemstone Mine
3# Scrubland

4# Lotus Petal
4# Lion's Eye Diamond
3# Chrome Mox

4# Shield Sphere
4# Phyrexian Walker
3# Ornithopter

4# Culling the Weak
4# Dark Ritual
4# Cabal Ritual
4# Diabolic Intent
4# Infernal Tutor
4# Orim's Chant
1# Silence
1# Ad-Nauseum
1# Tendrils of Agony

You don't need white. Some ANT lists uses Duress + Thoughseize for protection so you can keep monocolored. In any case I would go -1 Glimmervoid, +1 Scrubland.

But if you keep In WB, and play LEDs + Infernal Tutor, you MUST play a single Ill-gotten gains to combo via Igg-Loop. With enough tallmans you can combo without LED or Infernal, using Culling the weak or Diabolic Intent. Playing 16 ritual effects + 8 tutors will give you a lot of games.

The first decks with AdNauseam in Spain was based in SI and ended like this:
http://www.deckcheck.net/deck.php?id=24206

- UB decks
- Without LED but with Pact of Negation
- Mainboarding 2 City of Traitors or 2 Crystal Vein to do: T1 Underground ->Mystical for Ad Nauseam, T2 Dark Ritual, City -> Ad Nauseam.
- W for Sideboard Angel's Grace and/or Orim's Chant

[Iranon]

I'm not sure if this is playable... but Death's Shadow interests me.

After a draw-4 it's a credible threat, and since our life is very controllable it can go the distance if an opponent doesn't find an answer. After the first draw-4, it's another creature to use for Culling even if it's not perfect for that. It renders a conventional clock even more meaningless. If both players have exhausted themselves, it's a big threat to dopdeck.

Despite everything I'm not convinced this is playable in the maindeck, even in my favourite version where it'd have additional synergy (first list in the first post, with Glimpse of Nature instead of Diabolic Intent and the second IGG being an open slot that keeps changing).
However, as an alternative to a conventional man plan, what about this: Death Wish into Death's Shadow!
A 3/3 for 4 isn't impressive but it'll grow if we're put on a clock. An 8/8 (after a draw-4) is already quite good.

The best part of this is that we aren't forced to go for Death's Shadow if we don't currently need it. We can blow up Confinements or fetch a lethal Tendrils or something that will force a lethal Tendrils through or... well, you get it.
I absolutely hate diluting B/g SI with cards that don't do anything: Speed and consistency are awesome and imo often not sacrificing for anti-hate cards (especially not against decks that can attack our initial mana sources - which includes everything with countermagic). Death Wish isn't a dead card for killing the opponent, and gets around a few cheap things that may otherwise leave us completely unable to win.

[Gocho]

The problem with Death's Shadow is that he have no evasion. No trample, no flying, no fear, no shadow... So, Zoo could block Shadow and burn you, for example.

But would worth the test. Say us if him works.

[the resurrection]

So, Zoo could block Shadow and burn you, for example. I would never side creatures against Zoo.

Has anyone tested Recross the Paths, in the B/G list ?

[Vacrix]

I would never side creatures against Zoo.

Yeah there isn't a reason to use the man plan against aggro, you should just steam roll Zoo with storm.

I'm actually interested in hearing people's thoughts on Diabolic Intent in the Pact SI list. I have yet to test it, but lists needs about 10 creatures to support it and Culling the Weak and this deck runs 4 Land Grant, 4 Summoner's Pact, and 2 creatures. Could it be done? The deck only runs 1 Tendrils so it would be a nice way to fetch it if you have the right number of spells and 6 mana floating. The only thing is that trying to chain Culling the Weak into Diabolic Intent won't always work and Diabolic Intent can't fetch IGG that well because if you loop it then you need an additional creature. Nonetheless, I think its worth exploring. It doesn't need LED to find stuff but if you end up playing it as the last card in your hand, with enough mana floating you can look for Infernal Tutor looking for IGG, cycling LED, Dark Ritual, and Infernal Tutor into Tendrils.


It should be noted also, that Carpet of Flowers errata makes this deck significantly better:

Carpet of Flowers (G)
Enchantment
At the beginning of each of your main phases, if you haven't added mana to your mana pool with Carpet of Flowers this turn, you may add up to X mana of any one color to your mana pool, where X is the number of Islands target opponent controls.

Now you can play it while you are going off, pass to your 2nd mainphase and add mana like a ritual, AND you can attack with Xantid Swarm and then add mana to your mana pool. Both as significant an improvement to the sideboard against control that the SI archetype could hope for. Its so nuts with Draw4's. The ability to threaten Draw4 (counter), Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, etc. go off. makes the control matchup a little better.

I play this board:
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Carpet of Flowers
4 Tomb of Urami
3 Tomb Stalker

Decks with force//
-4 Summoner's Pact
-3 Goblin Charbelcher
-1 Ill-Gotten Gains

+4 Carpet of Flowers
+4 Xantid Swarm

Stax and Stompy//
-4 Summoner's Pact
-2 Goblin Charbelcher
-1 Ill-Gotten Gains/Draw4/Infernal Tutor/Belcher (your choice really)

+4 Tomb of Urami
+3 Tombstalker


Despite everything I'm not convinced this is playable in the maindeck, even in my favourite version where it'd have additional synergy (first list in the first post, with Glimpse of Nature instead of Diabolic Intent and the second IGG being an open slot that keeps changing).
However, as an alternative to a conventional man plan, what about this: Death Wish into Death's Shadow!
A 3/3 for 4 isn't impressive but it'll grow if we're put on a clock. An 8/8 (after a draw-4) is already quite good.

Maybe in a Glimpse list it could be playable but drawing multiples without a draw 4 is bad. It looks tight as hell but does it matchup to Tombstalker? 5/5 Evasion for BB is pretty good. I think that it would be bad in the MD because it doesn't have haste. It will be really weak in against anything with removal. The man plan is better against decks that tend to board out their removal in games 2 and 3 for more combo hate.


Has anyone tested Recross the Paths, in the B/G list ?

I've tested it in the Pact shell and it was meh. It might work better in the old Land Grant build that runs the tall men to stall.

[the resurrection]

It might work better in the old Land Grant build that runs the tall men to stall.
My thoughts:

4 Elvish Spirit guide
4 Lion's eye diamond
4 Chrome mox
4 Lotus Petal
4 Dark ritual
2 Bayou

4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the weak
4 Land Grant

4 Shield Sphere
4 Phyrexian Walker

4 Infernal Contract
3 Cruel Bargain
4 Infernal Tutor

2 Tendrils of Agony
1 Goblin Charbelcher
2 Recross the paths
2 Ill Gotten gains

@Vacrix
Can I see your PactSI list :-) ?

[Iranon]

Death Wish would fetch a Death's Shadow against Zoo very rarely to never. A bad tutor for a finisher (because overcosted and painful) still isn't dead, and it also gets answers for random junk especially in games 2 and 3.
I probably don't want to sideboard in potentially dead cards and play to my strengths instead. Not losing outright to a random Hate Bear without making concessions is good.

*

Recross the path: Hardcast Land Grant (with a chance to come back) or a Doomsday with a more awkward mana cost, without the ugly but usually irrelevant drawbacks. Hmm. I have attempted Doomsday in an SI-like shell but wasn't all that impressed with it, I think it needs lighter draw effects to pull its weight if what we're looking for is a way to increase speed/consitency.

Seems somewhat good for giving you a late game with the right list though: 'You'll run out of things to stop a Belcher before I run out of Belchers and things that stop things from stopping Belcher'. With the deck in its current incarnations, I'd prefer to chain random junk into random junk into a win though.

*

Carpet of Flowers is interesting. People can stop forget about stopping you with 1-for-1 answers because you do't have to waste a ritual per threat; they'll run out of relevant resources before you do unless they lay down a wrecking ball.
It only becomes truly interesting when the opponent reaches 2 islands which means they have access to Counterbalance and possibly an assortment of hate bears so I wouldn't exepct miracles. However, on the draw it improves our long-term chances while having a decent chance to be mana-neutral in the first turn (opponent can still sit on fetch lands).

[Vacrix]

My thoughts:

4 Elvish Spirit guide
4 Lion's eye diamond
4 Chrome mox
4 Lotus Petal
4 Dark ritual
2 Bayou

4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the weak
4 Land Grant

4 Shield Sphere
4 Phyrexian Walker

4 Infernal Contract
3 Cruel Bargain
4 Infernal Tutor

2 Tendrils of Agony
1 Goblin Charbelcher
2 Recross the paths
2 Ill Gotten gains

@Vacrix
Can I see your PactSI list :-) ?

Well.. the problem with this list is the lands. Having 2 lands makes it very unlikely to find both, which means you will often just be playing Rampant Growth and rearranging the bottom of your library. Its best in one land builds that can often fetch out that land. So I think it really needs to be in a 1 land build if its worth running at all, and that land will have to be easily fetchable. Pact SI does a great job at thinning its deck of the 2 lands because it runs Summoner's Pact and Land Grant. The question is really, does a balls to the wall combo deck really want to build its strategy around something that wins on the following turn. I think not. Doomsday is awesome because you play a cantrip and draw into what you have waiting, or use SDT, but we can't really do that.

As for the Pact SI list, I run this IRL:

Pact SI:
Business:
4 Goblin Charbelcher
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain

Mana:
4 Manamorphose
4 Summoner's Pact
3 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Vine Dryad

SB:
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Carpet of Flowers
4 Tomb of Urami
3 Tomb Stalker

Its awesome.



Death Wish would fetch a Death's Shadow against Zoo very rarely to never. A bad tutor for a finisher (because overcosted and painful) still isn't dead, and it also gets answers for random junk especially in games 2 and 3.
I probably don't want to sideboard in potentially dead cards and play to my strengths instead. Not losing outright to a random Hate Bear without making concessions is good.

If you are going to run Death Wish, then you have to cut a business spell. It fetches anything in the board, but why run that over business? It just adds a lot to the cost. 6 for a Cruel Bargain that makes you lose half your life twice would be better just as an Ad Nauseum, and 4 mana for a 12/12 that doesn't win the game immediately is just subpar when you consider what you are cutting for Death Wish.
You can avoid hatebears entirely with the speed of SI. Besides, Death Wish --> Oxidize is impossible if you trying to get rid of something like Thorn of Amethyst.



Carpet of Flowers is interesting. People can stop forget about stopping you with 1-for-1 answers because you do't have to waste a ritual per threat; they'll run out of relevant resources before you do unless they lay down a wrecking ball.
It only becomes truly interesting when the opponent reaches 2 islands which means they have access to Counterbalance and possibly an assortment of hate bears so I wouldn't exepct miracles. However, on the draw it improves our long-term chances while having a decent chance to be mana-neutral in the first turn (opponent can still sit on fetch lands).

Agreed, its busted in SI because you have such a high threat density. It forces your opponent to play with fewer lands, usually no more than 3, but sometimes just 2. Its great against Merfolk and Dreadstill, but against something like Thresh.. they can play just 1 island in game 3 to avoid it by just fetching their non-island lands with their fetchlands. So its not always the best idea to drop it early. Sometimes its better to wait a few turns either til they tap out, then try to spin off, or wait til they drop 3 or so islands. Carpet of Flowers is good with Belcher. Sometimes you have enough mana to Dark Ritual, bait with a draw4, then play out Belcher, pass, activate during your next mainphase.


Also, I think a relevant question that is a precursor to any discussion of SI is, why play SI in the current meta and which build is the most viable?

The answer is, SI can get the turn 1 kill more often than any other deck in the format. For those dank percentages, you need to be a good pilot, and sacrifice a little consistency. SI also mulligans better than any deck in the format.

Now the question is, what build is the best given the current meta? Power creep has made the tall men plan from the original Land Grant SI pretty weak. 0/6 doesn't stop a Goyf for long. QSI was made obsolete by Ad Nauseum. SITES looks pretty good. Pact SI looks pretty good. What do people play these days? Who still plays this deck IRL or MWS besides myself?

[BreathWeapon]

Since we're posting lists, the final list of Pact SI I played ran 4 Tendrils of Agony MD with the 4 Goblin Charbelchers in the SB and replaced Manamorphose with Pact of Negation, you have to have some kind of answer to Force of Will or Spell Snare/Spell Pierce on Land Grant MD and Manamorphose sucks really bad because it "turns on" their Spell Snares.

I don't mind Death Wish, and I thought about replacing 3 Tendrils of Agony for 3 Death Wish for some time or just replacing all copies of Infernal Tutor for Death Wish and all copies of Tendrils of Agony for Goblin Charbelchers to maximize my threat density.

Recross the Paths looks really damn cool, it's like a Doomsday with bigger piles and a mana refund after you cast it, I have no idea how to break that but it'd be interesting to try.

Also, I think you guys should be SBing 4 Serum Powder to bring in when you don't need disruption vs aggro.

[Vacrix]

Since we're posting lists, the final list of Pact SI I played ran 4 Tendrils of Agony MD with the 4 Goblin Charbelchers in the SB and replaced Manamorphose with Pact of Negation, you have to have some kind of answer to Force of Will or Spell Snare/Spell Pierce on Land Grant MD and Manamorphose sucks really bad because it "turns on" their Spell Snares.

I don't mind Death Wish, and I thought about replacing 3 Tendrils of Agony for 3 Death Wish for some time or just replacing all copies of Infernal Tutor for Death Wish and all copies of Tendrils of Agony for Goblin Charbelchers to maximize my threat density.

Recross the Paths looks really damn cool, it's like a Doomsday with bigger piles and a mana refund after you cast it, I have no idea how to break that but it'd be interesting to try.

Also, I think you guys should be SBing 4 Serum Powder to bring in when you don't need disruption vs aggro.

I tried your list a while back but preferred the Manamorphose over Pact of Negation because it improved my goldfish consistency considerably. I agree its horrid against control but if you punt the stax matchup (or just beat them with speed) then you have 15 cards in the board to deal with control. Carpet of Flowers got better with new oracle text and I've always liked Xantid Swarm. Tombstalker is really just good against stax and I want to drop it for EtW in my board.

I have yet to test Serum Powder though. How has that worked out for you?

Also, the Pact list has enough creatures access to support Diabolic Intent. Would that be worth running in place of some business? I'm thinking about cutting 2 Belcher in my list for 2 Diabolic Intent.

[BreathWeapon]

Diabolic Intent blows, don't bother.

Pact SI wasn't just designed for speed, Pact SI was designed to withstand disruption by turning your robots into "anti-Daze" tech. However that's not enough, because Land Grant eats Spellsnare, so you have to have disruption in order to prevent them from countering Land Grant and mulliganing into Force of Will

Tombstalker, Tomb of Urami and Carpet of Flowers do not work in this deck, you are reliant on Summoner's Pact and there's not a single mana source I'd board out for Carpet of Flowers.

[Iranon]

I find that reasoning deeply flawed. Having a Land Grant countered is annoying but hardly a death sentence. That counter would have gone towards a Ritual-fueled Contract instead, about the same harm done - we just need to topdeck initial mana rather than business and are in a better position when we find what we need. We can recover from either.
The true harm of using Land Grant is already done - broadcasting our weaknesses.

Pact for protecting Land Grants is a case where paranoia lets us scrape for a solution that is worse than the threat. They can mulligan into Force semi- reliably, but not into Force + something to stop us for good (without the robots, they can reliably mulligan into Force and a clock of some sort though).

One drawing point of SI is that we often remain one topdeck away from victory even if we are stopped the first time. I'd be very reluctant to throw that away. The Spirit Guides to play around Daze are nice, and give us a theoretical chance to win under a Trinisphere... but I think if we make too many concessions we destroy a big part of what makes this deck attractive in the first place.
this is why I'm interested in janky outs to janky things that can randomly 'cheat' us out of a win if they aren't dead cards if we just care about doing our thing and killing our opponent.

[the resurrection]

Who still plays this deck IRL or MWS besides myself?
My real-life PactSI List:

1 Goblin Charbelcher
3 Tendrils of Agony
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
1 Ill Gotten Gains --- 1 is enough
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Odious trow --- In this list better than Vine Dryad, for imprinting Mox, Unmask or creating additional storm with Pact
1 Wild Cantor--- Manafix for ESG

4 Summoner's Pact
2 Elvish Spirit Guide
1 Eternal Witness -- LED Trix
1 Bayou
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
4 Cabal Therapy/Unmask

4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual

SB: Still in work
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Oxidize
1 Crumble
2 Unmask/Cabal Therapy
4 Death's Shadow

[BreathWeapon]

Odious Trow is an interesting find, how is the B/G mana requirement compared to Vine Dryad being castable off pitching a Land Grant? I don't have any experience myself, but I imagine being castable off the Rituals and turning Summoner's Pact into color fixing for Chrome Mox and +5 cards for Unmask is solid.

Yeah I'm going to sleeve that up, but it looks like it's sound and I'd love to be able to run Unmask and Pact of Negation post-board.

[Vacrix]

Diabolic Intent blows, don't bother.

Pact SI wasn't just designed for speed, Pact SI was designed to withstand disruption by turning your robots into "anti-Daze" tech. However that's not enough, because Land Grant eats Spellsnare, so you have to have disruption in order to prevent them from countering Land Grant and mulliganing into Force of Will

Tombstalker, Tomb of Urami and Carpet of Flowers do not work in this deck, you are reliant on Summoner's Pact and there's not a single mana source I'd board out for Carpet of Flowers.

Agreed about Anti-Daze tech. I find myself playing around Daze more often than otherwise. Also, I think that Land Grant eats Spellsnare against some decks like Bant Survival or Tempo Thresh (though I’ve seen Thresh lists with Spell Pierce instead), but Merfolk and most Countertop lists don’t bother to run it. You don’t always have Land Grant and you don’t always need it when you do have it. The deck has a plethora of starting mana sources and I agree that Land Grant is by far the weakest of these against control but how often really does the opponent have Spell Snare while you have Land Grant? And how often do you need Land Grant to go off. And should you be keeping a hand that relies on Land Grant against control? I’d love to run Pact of Negation but it was a dead draw most of the time off my Draw4’s and I fizzed more often when playing it.

Iranon pretty much said it. The deck has mulligan power, and top deck power. SI is a bomb that could explode at any moment. If you draw nicely off the top then the game could completely swing in your favor. Too often have I had my initial business countered, and proceeded to win the game because my opponent mulliganed into FoW and then was not able to put a clock on me because his 5 card hand didn’t have any creatures. I don’t want to run Pact because it makes it an all or nothing game plan and I like having a few turns to draw, pass into double business.

As for the board.. Tomb of Urami has been MVP of games 2/3 against stax and even control players who board out their removal. I’d certainly save at least 2 SB slots for those babies. Carpet of Flowers.. has been meh. Players seem to play around it if you play it too early but I guess you are not familiar with how I board:
Decks with force//
-4 Summoner's Pact
-3 Goblin Charbelcher
-1 Ill-Gotten Gains/Cruel Bargain

+4 Carpet of Flowers
+4 Xantid Swarm

Charbelcher eats Force all the time. Xantid Swarms fuel my Culling the Weak for the turn I want to go off. Carpet of Flowers is amazing against Merfolk, often netting me 3 mana per turn to cast business. Carpet is meh against everything else, often just netting you 1.

Stax or Stompy//
-4 Summoner's Pact
-2 Goblin Charbelcher
-1 Ill-Gotten Gains/Draw4/Infernal Tutor/Belcher

+4 Tomb of Urami
+3 Tombstalker

I ditched the game plan of blowing up 3sphere and trying to go off. The deck doesn’t have enough land to support that strat. Flying demons works well enough.

If this board is bad, then what would you suggest I try instead? I really want EtW somehow but it seems so bad with Summoner’s Pact. Breathweapon, what is your board? Does it have x4 Serum Powder?


My real-life PactSI List:

1 Goblin Charbelcher
3 Tendrils of Agony
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
1 Ill Gotten Gains --- 1 is enough
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Odious trow --- In this list better than Vine Dryad, for imprinting Mox, Unmask or creating additional storm with Pact
1 Wild Cantor--- Manafix for ESG

4 Summoner's Pact
2 Elvish Spirit Guide
1 Eternal Witness -- LED Trix
1 Bayou
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
4 Cabal Therapy/Unmask

4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual

SB: Still in work
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Oxidize
1 Crumble
2 Unmask/Cabal Therapy
4 Death's Shadow


VERY interesting list. I jizzed in my pants when I saw Eternal Witness. That’s SUCH a tight play:
(Petal, rit, LED, Pact..from a draw4) Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, LED, Summoner’s Pact, break LED, → Eternal Witness, get back Cruel Bargain..

It obviously works better with multiple LED’s, but is there anything I’m missing? Any other interactions worth noting? IGG loops tricks?

I don’t understand how you manage to run so many 1 drop green creatures with only 2 ESGs. And Vine Dryad is ridiculous. You can remove any green card to play it, including useless Land Grants or Summoner's Pacts or Manamorphose. I tried playing Wild Cantor and found myself stuck with Land Grant and that in hand so I would have loved Vine Dryad in that case. There are other times when I have x2 Pacts and a Dark Ritual and really want Cantor, but those hands are far less common.

Also, how has your board worked out for you? Often with this deck I find myself unable to play Oxidize against anything but Thorn of Amethyst or Ethersworn Cannonist. It doesn’t stop Chalice at 1 or 3sphere.

Also, Death’s Shadow. I already love the card but does it actually work.

[the resurrection]

First of all I have to excuse my jungle english:

It obviously works better with multiple LED’s, but is there anything I’m missing? Any other interactions worth noting? IGG loops tricks? An IGG loop with (IGG and) Eternal Witness is very rare, but possible. She can become as well with Culling the weak a Manamorphose.

don’t understand how you manage to run so many 1 drop green creatures with only 2 ESGs.
6 ESG (4 pact+2 ESG), 6 [G] lands (Bayou/dryad/4 land grant), the 8 mana artifacts; Odious Trow can be cast with black mana. You can replace Wild Cantor with a third ESG.

And Vine Dryad is ridiculous.You can remove any green card to play it, including useless Land Grants or Summoner's Pacts or Manamorphose.
True. I played in the past a similar list with Manamorphose and Dryad, but since I threw out Manamorphose and realised that most of the time I exiled for her an ESG, she wasn't good enough and I replaced her with Trow, which gives the deck (in my eyes) more consistency.

Also, how has your board worked out for you?
The sideboard is my biggest problem. The only cards I would never cut are Swarms and Oxidize. In my opinion Oxidize is the best available artifact removal. My experiences with Oxidize are positive, even if I can't destroy Chalice [1].
Death Shadow was just a quick thought. I'will test him the next days.

[Vacrix]

The sideboard is my biggest problem. The only cards I would never cut are Swarms and Oxidize. In my opinion Oxidize is the best available artifact removal. My experiences with Oxidize are positive, even if I can't destroy Chalice [1].
Death Shadow was just a quick thought. I'will test him the next days.

How does this board look?
SB:
4 Empty the Warrens
4 SSG
4 Ingot Chewer
3 REB/Ritual/Open slot

EtW would significantly increase our wins against blue. The question is, is it worth those sideboard slots. Ingot Chewer is significantly better than Oxidize in that you can still cast it for R under 3sphere.

Out of curiosity, can we play Ingot Chewer to destroy an artifact, but stack its ability so it comes into play, putting its trigger on the stack, and then respond with Culling the Weak? Because that would be nice.

[Forbiddian]

EtW would significantly increase our wins against blue. The question is, is it worth those sideboard slots. Ingot Chewer is significantly better than Oxidize in that you can still cast it for R under 3sphere.

Out of curiosity, can we play Ingot Chewer to destroy an artifact, but stack its ability so it comes into play, putting its trigger on the stack, and then respond with Culling the Weak? Because that would be nice.

Rulings:

I'm around 99% sure Evoke doesn't work that way. 3sphere looks for how much mana you actually paid. That's why daze costs 3 even if you bounced an Island and Force costs 3 even if you pitch a blue. Ingot Chewer might still be better because it can nab Chal 1.

EDIT: I can't RTFC. "I don't really know that much about this deck, but if you're running like Bgr then you could also use Summoner's Pact to get Ingot Chewer."

Yes, you can put the evoke trigger on the stack and then Culling in response. That seems pretty good, actually.

[Julian23]

I'm around 99% sure Evoke doesn't work that way. 3sphere looks for how much mana you actually paid.

100% confirmed.

[FredMaster]

I don't really know that much about this deck, but if you're running like Bgr then you could also use Summoner's Pact to get Ingot Chewer.
Summoner's Pact says "green creature card".

[Vacrix]

EDIT: I can't RTFC. "I don't really know that much about this deck, but if you're running like Bgr then you could also use Summoner's Pact to get Ingot Chewer."

I made the same mistake in the Belcher Thread. I wish it could fetch red creatures. Then you could fetch SSG too.


Yes, you can put the evoke trigger on the stack and then Culling in response. That seems pretty good, actually.

Excellent.

Yea I was thinking the same thing. The only question then is can you evoke it without picking a target for its ability? If so, then it looks like it deserves a board slot.

I'm 90% sure you can play it with SSG for R under 3sphere. I've seen too many Belchers do it for it to be an incorrect play.

[dorsch]

You may evoke Ingot Chewer while there are no artifacts on board. But once its ability triggers you have to destroy an artifact, even if its your own mox.

Getting mana from a Spirit Guide is an activated ability, so it is not affected by Trinisphere.

[FredMaster]

I'm 90% sure you can play it with SSG for R under 3sphere. I've seen too many Belchers do it for it to be an incorrect play.
That's right... Because ppl playing Belcher are usually Level 3 judges.

I just gave a mixture of the above lists a spin on mws (goldfishing). Here are the results:
Turn 1s: 12

Turn 2s: 9

Turn 3s: 5

Fizzle (during the Combo): 19

Fizzle (going off laterthan Turn 3 or Mulligan below 5): 5

I usually went off as soon as possible, although I tried to avoid using a single Ritual for a Draw 4 with no other manasources left.

[Vacrix]

19 Fizzles? You're doing something wrong man. Even 12 Turn 1's is kinda low. Thats less than 50%... What list did you use?

[FredMaster]

I'm not new to Stormcombo in general at all and I have tested the list before this "session". So it's not like I don't know what to do.

// Lands
1 [B] Bayou
1 [FUT] Dryad Arbor

// Creatures
3 [AL] Elvish Spirit Guide
1 [MM] Vine Dryad
1 [GP] Wild Cantor

// Spells
4 [MR] Chrome Mox
3 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
4 [MM] Land Grant
4 [EX] Culling the Weak
4 [B] Dark Ritual
4 [TO] Cabal Ritual
1 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
4 [FUT] Summoner's Pact
4 [PT] Cruel Bargain
4 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
4 [MI] Infernal Contract
4 [FNM] Cabal Therapy
1 [MR] Goblin Charbelcher

[Vacrix]

Alright so I did a little testing with Ewit and she is tight. I think it deserves a permanent spot in the Pact list.

I noticed a few things uses during testing:
1. It can act like a 2nd IGG.
2. It can get you out of sticky situations if you are drawing all mana sources.
3. It doesn't clog up your hand nearly as often as you'd expect
4. I have yet to use it to as a Culling the Weak target.

I'll just talk about a few relevant games. In short, my playstesting today was meh, I had pretty meh percentages today but I haven't played magic in like 3 or 4 weeks, I played on the play every single game... and to be honest I was a little distracted by the combination of background music and some previously ingested hash oil.

Anyway, to the games..

In one game, I won because of Eternal Witness because it acted like a 2nd IGG. I happened to have Tendrils in my hand when I broke 3 LEDs after Infernal Tutor was on the stack. So I searched up IGG, got back Infernal Tutor, LED, LED, and then Tutored up Eternal Witness to get back my Tendrils from the grave ftw. Awesome trix.

In another game, Ewit saved my ass. I mulled to a 5 card hand that I just have to share. Mad tricks:

Mull to 5 on the play: Land Grant, ESG, Cabal Ritual, Infernal Contract, LED

Land Grant --> Bayou, ESG, Cabal Ritual, LED, Contract, break LED for BBB
draw4 --> Petal, Manamorphose, Summoner's Pact, Cabal Ritual

I play Petal, sac for G, Manamorphose for GG --> Land Grant, GGBB in pool, Pact--> Eternal Witness, play Cabal ritual, GGBBBBB in pool, Eternal Witness grabbing Infernal Contract;
draw4 --> Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, Chrome Mox, Belcher, B floating, 5 life

Play Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, Chrome Mox imprinting Land Grant, BBBBBBG floating, play Belcher and activate for 28.

One of the sickest hands I have ever had the pleasure of playing.

The very next hand... I drew jank off a draw4 and if Eternal Witness was an ESG or Manamorphose then I would have won. So there was one game where I really wanted something else.


In short, Ewit was very tight. I will definitely be cutting an MD Manamorphose for it. Also, I really didn't like Manamorphose that much. I really want to run more ESG so that I can actually cast Ewit without LED. So the changes I'm making to my list are:
-2 Manamorphose
+1 ESG
+1 Eternal Witness

What I'd like to test is
-1 Belcher
+1 Tendrils

I've been drawing dead in some games into Belcher without enough mana so I think I'm going to slowly morph the build into a 3/2 of Belcher vs. ToA.

EDIT:

I usually went off as soon as possible, although I tried to avoid using a single Ritual for a Draw 4 with no other manasources left.

You get away with this more often if you run Manamorphose. It cycles you one card deeper off your draw4 AND allows you to convert GG to BB so that you can play your rituals on the fly.

EDIT:
Woah, your list only plays 4 win conditions. How did that work out for you actually? I haven't really tried playing less than 4 Belcher 1 Toa in a while.

[BreathWeapon]

IMO, Xantid Swarm is out, with Odious Trow supporting Unmask I've been using 4 Pact of Negation and 4 Unmask post-board and laughing off their attempts to mulligan into Force of Will. 4 Tendrils of Agony MD is standard, you don't want Goblin Charbelcher until post-board where you want business instead of disruption vs Aggro or you want to board out the Infernal Tutors/IGG vs Aggro-Control

[Vacrix]

IMO, Xantid Swarm is out, with Odious Trow supporting Unmask I've been using 4 Pact of Negation and 4 Unmask post-board and laughing off their attempts to mulligan into Force of Will. 4 Tendrils of Agony MD is standard, you don't want Goblin Charbelcher until post-board where you want business instead of disruption vs Aggro or you want to board out the Infernal Tutors/IGG vs Aggro-Control

I argued this a while back about x4 ToA...until I conceded to your point:


I really, really don't get people who run less than 4 Goblin Charbelchers, what's the point of having the structural weakness of a Land Grant manabase if you aren't using Goblin Charbelcher(s) plural?

Isn't the better strategy to go balls to the wall first game, and then board in protection? Consistent fast hands in game 1 is going to make or break the deck against a lot of the field. Maybe protection main would be better suited to a control meta. You certainly dont need it in aggro or combo metas.

How well is the protection working for you? Summoner's Pact--> Odious Trow--> Unmask looks pretty nuts. I ran into some issues today where I wanted Trow and/or Wild Cantor so I'm going to test it. Whats your list look like now? SB too. Try Ewit if you haven't already. Its badass hax.

[BreathWeapon]

I still believe there's no point in running Land Grant if you aren't running Goblin Charbelchcer, whether or not you run them MD or SB is just a matter of gold fishing vs threat density.

Manamorphose is "meh" and MD Wild Cantor does the same thing more or less, I'd rather use 1xWild Cantor and put the rest of the slots to better use. Pact of Negation, IMO, gives the deck the best winning chances it could ask for in an environment where a Force of Will or a Stifle is GG, no pure goldfish deck has ever been competitive save Belcher and even that's debatable.

I haven't tested Eternal Witness yet, definitely promising tho' off the Draw 4 chain for sure - I'd be happy to hear your experiences with it.

Original list -4 Belcher, +3 Tendril and +1 Trow MD, and 4 Belcher, 4 Unmask, 4 Oxidize post board

[Vacrix]

Well if you read up a few posts, I shared a few experiences with Ewit. Its hard to cast and it clogged up my hand once (though I'm not entirely sure if it would have been better as something else) off a draw4...but I won at least 3 games out of 30 or so that I would have lost otherwise. I am running x2 Manamorphose still because its very hard to get GG to cast it without LED. Also, I didn't much care if it was stuck in my hand because I can always imprint it on Mox or even pitch it for Vine Dryad so it just functioned like another dead Land Grant sometimes. In the previous post, I said that I had yet to use it as a Culling the Weak target. A few games after writing that post, I got enough mana to play a draw4, Ewit back my draw4 and then culling the Ewit to play the draw4 again. Also, I'm undecided about keeping Vine Dryad MD. Rarely will you need 3 Culling the Weak targets so ideally you should cut Vine Dryad, but you cant cast Trow with Land Grant, Ewit, or Dryad Arbor like you can with Vine Dryad. I'd rather not run both.
Also, I'm curious as to if/how Ewit improves the discard matchup.

[Vacrix]

Pact SI top's 8! I went to a 52 man tournament at Knightware Inc. in LA, took 7th losing to Counterbalance in the Quarters. I played the following list:

Pact SI:
Business:
2 Goblin Charbelcher
3 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain

Mana:
1 Eternal Witness
1 Odious Trow
2 Manamorphose
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor

SB:
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Tomb of Urami
4 Tombstalker
3 Unmask


REPORT:
Match 1, Matt with UW Tempo:
Game 1
Mull to 6, kept a He gets Vial, a grip full of countermagic, and a relevant clock. I try to go off and get forced. I don't draw enough business to play through his grip.

Game 2
I mull to 6 again.. I remove ESG to land Xantid Swarm. It resolves, he swords it. He gets Vial again, and starts dropping dudes. I sculpt a good hand that wins with IGG loops because I draw a 2nd swarm. I play swarm, he thinks for a while and then Forces it. I try to go off and am one short of his Daze.

I mulled to 6 and he got good hands both games. I thought this matchup would be much better but on the same token I explained to him exactly how my deck works on the ride up from SD. He knew how to play against me, drew the nuts, played well, and I drew jank. He goes on to take 5th. I start thinking I should have played Solidarity instead. Not a particularly great start.

0-1

Match 2, Belcher:
Game 1
He wins the dice roll, I'd actually prefer to be on the play, and was. He drops 18 tokens with Empty, I chuckled, and go off with an Infernal loop for 26.

Game 2
He mulls to 6, drops 8 tokens turn 1. I win on the first turn again.

I think I'd rather be on the play against Belcher. They often do something on the first turn, but often they Burning Wish into EtW so I'm not too worried about this matchup.

1-1

Match 3, Sligh
Game 1
He gets the hax hand: 6 mountain, and Valakut. I go off and win turn 1 on the draw.

Game 2
Same plan except this time I see Hellspark elemental. I put him on Sligh, win turn 2 on the draw.

2-1

Match 4, Zoo
Game 1
Turn 1, I play out a beautiful, convoluted play with Eternal Witness LED trix, and Infernal Tutor into Tendrils.

Game 2
I mull to 6, keeping a hand without any starting mana. I draw the starting mana and play my draw4, I'm one mana source short of continuing, pass at 10 life. He puts a clock on my shortly afterward with Goyf and Nacatl, I lose in a few.

Game 3
I mull to 6 again, fearing Teeg. I just need starting mana to go off, we pass for 3 turns. I go off and win once I draw a mana source, on turn 3.

3-1

Match 5, Aggro-loam
Game 1
He wins the die roll, and plays Verdant Catacombs, go. I think he's playing discard but doesn't have the turn 1 distruption. I play out my hand and win turn 1 on the draw.

Game 2
He boards in like 11 cards. He gets turn 1 Chalice, but misplays by playing his Zuran Orb after Chalice at 0. Funny enough, the judge is watching our game and puts the orb in the graveyard. I'm sitting on a near-perfect hand of ESG, ESG, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Infernal Contract, Cruel Bargain, Cabal Ritual. He plays out Leyline of the Void and I'm far from Threshold. Eventually I'm sitting on ESG x2, Dark Rit x3, and draw4 x2. All I need to draw is Manamorphose, Land Grant, or Bayou to win. I sit there taking damage from Goyf every turn while he slowly beats me to death. No top decks.

Game 3
I get the hax turn 1.

In this game, I might have wanted Wild Cantor maindeck. I was sitting on Summoner's Pact x2 at one point so It would have enabled me to go off with my x2 Dark Rituals. I couldn't have searched for it through Chalice, but if I were also running Oxidize, then that play would have been more than doable. It makes me want to run Oxidize in the board again.

4-1

Match 6, Belcher

ID

4-1-1


Top 8
The top 8 is x2 UW Tempo, x2 Suicide, x1 Belcher, x1 Counterbalance, x1 Pact SI, and Dredge. The only matchup I wanted to dodge was Counterbalance. I draw Counterbalance. I would have auto-win against Dredge or Belcher. Suicide would have been tricky, but I have the hax turn 1, so at the very least I would win game 1, lose game 2, and win game 3. Matt was on one of the UW Tempo so I didn't want to draw him again, but the other UW Tempo player was making some mistakes so I think he would not be familiar with my deck. Either way, I dodged blue pretty much all day so I guess it was fitting that I finally drew it in the top 8.

Game 1
I keep a bomb turn 1 hand. He has Force. He follows it up with a turn 2 Counterbalance, and then backs it up with a relevant clock. I die shortly. I do notice that he misplays though on my hand. He force my land grant, when he should have forced my business. I figure I can get away with trix postboard; mistake.

Game 2
He keeps his swords in the MD. I keep a hand of Xantid Swarm, Tomb of Urami, Tombstalker, Culling the Weak, Infernal Contract, LED, Chrome Mox. I get greedy, figuring he boarded out Swords, and bust my mana for Tomb. Turn 2 swords. Looking back, I should have played it much differently. I choked probably because everyone propped him up to be such a great player, with Pro-points and shit. Either way, he had hax both games. Turn 2 Counterbalance every game, followed up by a relevant clock. I don't think these games were winnable.



Overall I'm happy with my performance. I made some bomb plays, and didn't make a single play mistake while going off. You can pretty much tell because you lose if you make a mistake. I didn't draw blue, Tombstalker was dead in the board, Tomb of Urami was weaker than I expected, and my opponents who played blue drew nuts. I'm happy with the build, but I've decided, -4 Tombstalker, +4 Oxidize. I won x4 signed Jittes, bought myself some FNM Tendrils and got a playset of sick Mirage Infernal Contracts.

[Philipp2293]

Congratz man! How did those unmasks play out? I guess Pact into Odious Trow -> Unmask is nice, but did it pay off? Also, what were your exact SB plans?

[Vacrix]

Congratz man! How did those unmasks play out? I guess Pact into Odious Trow -> Unmask is nice, but did it pay off? Also, what were your exact SB plans?

To tell the truth, I didn't board them in all day. It was a big mistake.
I was saving them for the stax/stompy matchup if so that I could avoid Chalice @ 1 and 3sphere. I should have boarded them in against Matt on UW Tempo but I figured his matchup would be much similar to Merfolk, and in my Merfolk testing, x4 Xantid Swarm and x4 Tomb of Urami often does the trick. I should have known that Matt would keep his x4 STP and board in his x2 Etutor, x1 Cannonist and x1 Thorn, so I probably should have boarded in x3 Unmask for x2 Manamorphose, x1 Eternal Witness. I didn't really have much experience in the matchup and boarded wrong, though my intuition should have told me otherwise. I just boarded wrong.

I didn't board against any other deck but Probant, and I boarded out x2 Manamorphose, x1 Odious Trow, x1 Eternal Witness, x4 Summoner's Pact, x2 Belcher, for x4 Xantid Swarm, x4 Tomb of Urami, and x2 Tombstalker. I didn't see any white sources in game 1 so I figured maybe he wasn't playing with white. Mistake. I should have boarded exactly the same except -1 Tendrils, -2 Tombstalker, +3 Unmask. I honestly never played with Unmask as I got them at the tournament like 30 minutes before it started so I was seriously not prepared to play with it. My bad.

I was overconfident against Matt and I was intimidated by the Pro Bant player. Its just a lack of experience testing these matchups.

To tell the truth I've done WAY more goldfishing than I've done testing against real people. I've done ALOT of IRL testing against zoo and I'm like 90% against Zoo. I've also done a lot of testing against Merfolk and I'm about 65% against Merfolk. I've done some testing against Dredge (with Force in the board) but not nearly as much as Merfolk and Zoo to get accurate numbers but I can't recall losing a match to Dredge yet; I'm guessing its about 80-90% because they have Cabal Therapy, a fast clock, and run Force/Unmask in the board unlike Zoo. I've also tested against Solidarity and the matchup is pretty interesting. Once they get to UU they have Remand and PtD/Impulse into Force, and post board they get x4 Mindbreak Trap, so its a really bad matchup if you don't go off quickly or if you run into Force, but you get Xantid Swarm from the board so meh. I'd say its like 60% but I have nothing but experience playing both decks to back up that number.

Other than the above I don't have much testing IRL. I'm REALLY comfortable going off against aggro and combo, as we can see from all the turn 1's and 2's I had in the tournament. I play hands for the lols all the time and in doing so uncover puzzle hands that you wouldn't think at first glance you can win with, but after some thought you can, in fact, spin off and win. I've memorized dozen's of hands and am pretty happy with my goldfish speed. Now I need to practice against Matt some more with UW Tempo and Sean, HAVEHEART, who plays Canadian Thresh. I'm lacking in practice against non-Merfolk control players. At the same time, I think that UW Tempo was more than winnable and that the Pro Bant player had hax in game 1, but game 2/3 wasn't out of reach. If I boarded in Unmask I think it would have been a completely different game 2.



Now that I have x4 Pact of Negation and x3 Unmask, I'm going to do some playtesting against an opponent who is just holding Force, with a 5 turn clock and see how that goes. Given those parameters, I should be well prepared when Matt and Sean have some time to playtest.

I'm also going to test x2 Belcher in the board against aggro/combo to see if increased threat density ups the goldfish speed. I'm not quite sure what I should board out for them. Ideas? I'm thinking x1 Manamorphose and x1 Eternal Witness.


Also, is this Pact SI's first top 8? I couldn't find any builds in deckcheck and haven't heard of anyone else placing with it.

[kicks_422]

I've just been goldfishing your list Vacrix. It's awesome. After learning which hands to keep and which hands to throw back, it feels like such a well-tuned machine.

I'm interested in seeing Breathweapon'slist though. Are the 4 Pact of Negations and 4 Unmask in the MD?

[AcidFiend]

I too would like to know how Unmask & Pact of Negation fit in. Seems like you won vs non-blue and died to Blue. Hopefully these cards (do they replace Swarm or add to it?) held you bust through.

[Forbiddian]

Incidentally, seeing your deck or w/e didn't affect any of my plays. I already knew you hate R belcher, and that was the only info that affected anything I did (not boarding in Propaganda). I always leave in three Swords to handle the Xantid Swarms.

UW Tempo makes its living playing Ad Nauseum/Belcher players who think that they can get there. I've got a reasonable clock, the ability to rip lock elements (surprise, you lose!), and a better countermagic suite than anybody else at facing combo. It's the same as Merfolk, but their clock is actually the same speed or slower, and they don't have a turn 2 surprise waiting for you. Merfolk's turn 2 at best is like a Silvergill, and you always know exactly when you're going to die, so it's a bit easier to play through.

I mean, think back to Merfolk testing: when was the last time you tried to turn 1 a Merfolk player even if you had it?


Hopefully we'll both be available in a couple weeks to do some playtesting. Over time and with ideal play, I think it'll be around a coinflip game 1 (maybe I'm a little behind), but then I'm the strong favorite games 2 and 3 (esp from the play).

[Vacrix]

I'm interested in seeing Breathweapon'slist though. Are the 4 Pact of Negations and 4 Unmask in the MD?

He runs them in the x4 of each in the board.



I dug up a few old lists for discussion:

By Breathweapon (his first list):

4 Goblin Charbelcher
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor


I like the x4 Xantid Swarms in the MD. I think that x3 ToA and x2 Belcher is the right MD configuration. I've had the best luck with that. But the x4 Swarm is certainly interesting. I'd imagine it would improve the control matchup but is it at the expense of goldfishing speed? Eternal Witness and Odious Trow have significantly upped my goldfish consistency speed.

By Cire:

2 G/B Dual
1 Dryad Arbor
-3 land

2 Xantid Swarm
3 Elvish Spirit Guide
-5 Creatures

4 Pact of Negation
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain
4 Land Grant
4 Manamorphose
4 Dark Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
2 Tendrils of Agony
2 Cabal Ritual
-52 other spells

The list is rather light on Rituals (-2 Cabal Rituals) but it runs additional lands and no Belcher. MD Pact AND MD Swarm is an interesting mix of protection. This list has a lot of maindeck protection. Surprisingly, it doesn't run IGG.

By Emidln, tested by Marit:

Lands
2 [B] Bayou

// Creatures
4 [AL] Shield Sphere
4 [VI] Phyrexian Walker

// Spells
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
2 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
3 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
4 [TO] Cabal Ritual
4 [B] Dark Ritual
4 [PT] Cruel Bargain
4 [6E] Infernal Contract
4 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
4 [EX] Culling the Weak
4 [MM] Land Grant
4 [MR] Chrome Mox
1 [MR] Goblin Charbelcher
4 [DS] Serum Powder

// Sideboard
SB: 4 [US] Duress
SB: 4 [JU] Cabal Therapy
SB: 4 [SOK] Tomb of Urami
SB: 3 [FUT] Tombstalker

If you go back to post #244, Marit playtests 20 hands with the list, and then it is discussed some. I think that the Land Grant SI shell is less consistent as it is. Could Serum Powder fit into our board?

[Vacrix]

I too would like to know how Unmask & Pact of Negation fit in. Seems like you won vs non-blue and died to Blue. Hopefully these cards (do they replace Swarm or add to it?) held you bust through.

Likely they would replace Swarm. Redundant protection is redudant. You don't really need or want Swarm once you starting going off. Pact/Unmask lets you get through Force. Its a decent idea. Spare Unmasks while going off can just get imprinted on Chrome Mox, or go just get discarded with LED.


Incidentally, seeing your deck or w/e didn't affect any of my plays. I already knew you hate R belcher, and that was the only info that affected anything I did (not boarding in Propaganda). I always leave in three Swords to handle the Xantid Swarms.

UW Tempo makes its living playing Ad Nauseum/Belcher players who think that they can get there. I've got a reasonable clock, the ability to rip lock elements (surprise, you lose!), and a better countermagic suite than anybody else at facing combo. It's the same as Merfolk, but their clock is actually the same speed or slower, and they don't have a turn 2 surprise waiting for you. Merfolk's turn 2 at best is like a Silvergill, and you always know exactly when you're going to die, so it's a bit easier to play through.

I mean, think back to Merfolk testing: when was the last time you tried to turn 1 a Merfolk player even if you had it?


Hopefully we'll both be available in a couple weeks to do some playtesting. Over time and with ideal play, I think it'll be around a coinflip game 1 (maybe I'm a little behind), but then I'm the strong favorite games 2 and 3 (esp from the play).

I agree with the first part. SI starts jizzing everywhere on turn 1, but I invest fewer cards than Belcher. You already knew that. I think that my board is significantly worse against you. Merfolk lacks removal. Thats been its biggest problem in playing against me.

As we can see from the most recent tournament, you are most certainly right. Belcher fails hard against UW Tempo. You have a much more relevant clock than Merfolk, and I made the mistake of equating your deck with Merfolk by the distruption package. UW Tempos clock is far more relevant than Merfolks. They need lords to make shit happen which means they need vial too.

You are wrong about the countermagic package. Merfolk often plays x4 Stifle. Stifle stops Tendrils. Normally if I feared Stifle I could just go for Belcher, which I can but some games you as the SI player just don't have the resources to go for Belcher, namely because you are going to lose in your upkeep to Summoner's Pacts, or to your opponents attack phase after many draw4s. I often find my less experienced opponents bouncing their island for Daze and floating blue for stifle, but a good SI player can play around it by resolving the first draw4 and proceeding to the 2nd mainphase. Even then, sometimes you don't run into Daze, and your opponent plays smartly and just waits to play Stifle. In that case you have to set up Eternal Witness returning Tendrils, double Tendrils, or Belcher with enough for a 2nd activation during your next turn before your upkeep, if you live through your opponent's combat phase. In short, SI has resilience in that it can play through decent control hands if SI has the resources to do so, but it must have the resources. Even then, Stifle should not be overlooked in this matchup.

Additionally, Merfolk has Standstill both in the pre-board and postboard. Drawing into more countermagic is crucial if I don't go off right away. UW Tempo plays Fathom Seer over Standstill, which is significantly worse in the combo matchup. Merfolks turn 2 surprise is Standstill, and it wins games.

SI allows you to play with poker skills. You can read your opponent. If you can find your opponent's tell then you can find out what he is holding in hand. The best part about this strategy is that your opponent isn't always going to recognize what you are doing. In poker, your opponent tries to keep up his 'poker face'. Magic players are not always good at this. I see people topdeck force against me all the time. I don't need them to actually reveal it to know this. In that sense, I do go off against control on the 1st turn sometimes, especially if I think that all they have is Daze.

I have no idea how the UW Tempo matchup will be until I gather more data but the fact that you play STP makes it significantly harder than Merfolk Game 2/3. Your ability to lay down threats like Cannonist/Thorn is even more threatening. I think its better than a coinflip but I love my deck so I'm likely biased. :D I look forward to playing games like the 4th one we played. That was awesome.

[Forbiddian]

You mean the fifth one? The one that you won? :-P.


Oh, you weren't in the car when I was telling this story. So Jeff was playing in a featured match on the SCGs against a Belcher player.

The Belcher player has a sick read on Jeff, and before game 2 when Jeff's thinking about a mulligan, the guy says, "That's not a Force of Will face." "Huh?" "You make a face when you have a Force of Will. That's not a Force of Will face." Jeff responds, "I wasn't aware that I was making a face." <-- If you know Jeff, I'm not sure you do, that part alone is hilarious as hell.

Anyway, Jeff indeed ships his hand and comes up with a six. The guy says, "That's not a Force of Will face, either." Again, after a pause, Jeff mails it back.

Jeff draws his five and the guy goes, "That's a Force of Will face." Jeff keeps his hand. Jeff plays land, go, and the Belcher player casts Land Grant, revealing the ability to cast a turn 1 Belcher (no activation, though), but instead plays Xantid Swarm off of the Bayou. Jeff slaps down Thorn of Amethyst, having never drawn a Force of Will.

Sick reads, my ass.

As often as you "get real info" the guy is bluffing you out with an acting job or you just made a mistake. Even someone like Phil Helmuth can't look at a player and tell what he has. Phil bases his reads on remembering the play history of players (and probably doing background research). Phil makes a read based on his position, the other guy's play history, and the amount bet, not the look in someone's eye when they saw their pocket. The magic analog would be: You've seen me mulligan 4 of the last 5 games and the only game I didn't mulligan I had the Force of Will immediately. This game, I keep my opening 7, so you can bet I've got a Force or Spell Pierce.


Back to magic: I wouldn't compare Fathom Seer to Standstill straight up, especially alongside stuff like Stifle. If you tap out for the Standstill, then SI is pretty free to just go for it (the only risk is drawing into Force of Will, which would only happen I guess one time in 5. Standstill is also hard-countered by Xantid Swarm, which comes down earlier and makes the card draw irrelevant.

From what you said, your main plan vs. Merfolk is Xantid Swarm (which they can't answer and is a trump card), and a lot of extra kick comes from making a 5/5. You'll need to do something else to beat UW Tempo, since we'll always have Swords and our trump cards trump your trump cards.

[Vacrix]

People play Belcher because they don't want to think. I play SI because its a challenge and when I play well, I get results. I like decks that translate into high win percentages against the field. SI is one of those decks, its just hard to play. That Belcher player shouldn't have been playing Belcher, he should have played this deck. SI is the fastest deck in the format and the best at mulliganing. There isn't really a good reason to play Belcher over SI. The game might have been entirely different against a decent SI player.

Honestly, the games I played against you aren't a good representation of what the deck can do. I mulled to 6 on crap hands both games while you kept you 7, had Force in hand both games, and you had the Swords on turn 2. In fact, if I recall you had Force every game we played. Even the game I won. I think it might have been the fifth game actually. If I recall I confused the percentage I'd played so far. When you get the chance, I'd really like to play a set of like 20 sets or so. Then I can make a more accurate judgement about its percentages. Until then, I can't really claim more than 20%, unfortunately. Also, my board was thrown together at the last minute, untested. Unmask + PoN looks promising against FoW.dec

Unmask and Pact of Negation in the board is much stronger than I realized. I just played a few hands, and its really strong. I'll post some more tangible results when I have time to Goldfish a good number of games.

[the resurrection]

There isn't really a good reason to play Belcher over SI.
Belcher has better matchups against U-based decks, while you will fail (especially if you play pact) against everything that plays with brain and a full playset of forces. Even a well timed creature removal or even bolt can kill you.

Besides: Manamorphose is just a wasted slot, unless you are splashing a third colour.

[Iranon]

Countermagic alone isn't a big problem for SI, it recovers quite well thanks to the draw-4s... one reason why I don't like Summoner's Pact is that running your opponent out of relevant instants becomes a much weaker plan. SI only gets into trouble when countermagic buys the opponent time for something worse.

I disagree with Vacrix's assesment that there is no reason to run Belcher over SI though. SI is more vulnerable to staxy lock pieces, white hate bears and occasionally direct damage. It also doesn't typically have a wishboard, which I like a lot in fast combo since it can answer all sorts of problems without running cards that are dead mid-combo.
You can fix any of these weak points compared to Belcher by tweaking your SI list, but from my experience not all of them at once, and doing so will often forgo specific strengths of SI.

[Vacrix]

Belcher has better matchups against U-based decks, while you will fail (especially if you play pact) against everything that plays with brain and a full playset of forces. Even a well timed creature removal or even bolt can kill you.

I disagree. Belcher often invests 5-7 cards to go off, and very rarely does it go off again. Often you need at least 5 cards to go off again. SI only needs 3 cards to go off which means I'm investing far less. Think about it, the other player Forces, using up 2 cards in hand while I use up 3. Often I won't be at a disadvantage after that. Iranon pretty much said it, even if he disagrees with my point:


SI only gets into trouble when countermagic buys the opponent time for something worse.

If you run into Force, either deck fails hard. SI is able to recover though unlike Belcher. Just take a look at Belcher's win conditions. x3 Burning Wish and x4 Belcher FAIL against Force, just like our draw4s and IGG loops. Belcher does have x4 EtW but Belcher will make that play less than half the time. EtW is much better in TES, DDANT, and NLS where EtW is can be protected AND such decks can go off again much more easily due to a plethora of cantrips, tutors and land. Besides, EtW tokens don't always go all the way against blue, and a good control player will counter the big rituals like Seething Song that lead up to EtW. Both decks play Land Grant so when you play those hands, your opponent knows exactly what to counter to stop EtW. EtW alone does not make Belcher strong against blue.


Besides: Manamorphose is just a wasted slot, unless you are splashing a third colour.

I'm slowly but surely agreeing with everyone about this. Likely I'll switch over to +1 Wild Cantor as I run into hands every once in a while where I want it. If I then take out the other manamorphose from my build, I don't know what I would add. I like it because it cycles me into business sometimes, and allows me to use the 5-8 ESG's to better use. Your build that runs x2 ESG can't possibly abuse Manamorphose like mine can. Its been winning me games that I wouldn't otherwise win. I wouldn't run any Manamorphose though if I didn't run x4 ESG.


I disagree with Vacrix's assesment that there is no reason to run Belcher over SI though. SI is more vulnerable to staxy lock pieces, white hate bears and occasionally direct damage. It also doesn't typically have a wishboard, which I like a lot in fast combo since it can answer all sorts of problems without running cards that are dead mid-combo.
You can fix any of these weak points compared to Belcher by tweaking your SI list, but from my experience not all of them at once, and doing so will often forgo specific strengths of SI.

SI is slightly more vulnerable to Stax pieces than Belcher but I think you are approaching the matchup wrong. Belcher might have x8 ESG/SSG and Burning Wish, but a first turn 3sphere spells death for either deck, mainly because they get Ghostly Prison down against EtW tokens, and then start dropping Chalices. 3sphere buys Stax time to lay down more pieces and lock either deck out of the game. I must agree that SI is far worse against Chalice at 1 because Belcher can play around it with Spirit Guides. SI can also play around either Chalice at 0 or 1. You just need the right resources, just like Belcher needs the right resources to beat Chalice at 0 or 1. When it comes to the Stax matchup, I don't see Belcher doing any better than SI if Stax is on the play. If you can win before Stax even gets to play something relevant, then SI is at a much better advantage. Playing against Stax is like playing the Pact SI mirror. They MUST do something relevant or they risking losing next turn. When Belcher lays down EtW, Stax can play ghostly prison. I'd much rather be playing SI in this matchup. If Stax doesn't do something on its turn, which it can't always do, SI is often going to win.

Also, Belcher has a weak Merfolk matchup, while SI has a strong Merfolk matchup, and Belcher also loses more often to decks that play EE while SI doesn't really care about EE, except maybe postboard if it tries to play Swarm or Tomb.

The only conceivable reason to play Belcher over SI is Blood Moon. Pulpfiction has been throwing around a pretty sick list with x4 Blood Moon in the MD. If someone makes that argument, then I concede. Otherwise, SI is better in every way than the conventional Belcher list.

I don't even think we need to discuss how good Pact SI is against other combo and aggro. Its clock is completely insane and should win against any deck that doesn't have some sort of disruption.


Anyway, what does everyone think of Planar Void in the board? Its great against Thresh, Ichorid, Reanimator and loam. I think it might be worth some sideboard space if those are the dominant decks in the meta. Its only an investment of B, and completely shuts down Thresh, Reanimator, and Ichorid's clock. Its not really necessary against Loam, but it might be better against U builds that run Intuition and Force. Thoughts on this?

[BreathWeapon]

Sick reads, my ass.

As often as you "get real info" the guy is bluffing you out with an acting job or you just made a mistake. Even someone like Phil Helmuth can't look at a player and tell what he has. Phil bases his reads on remembering the play history of players (and probably doing background research). Phil makes a read based on his position, the other guy's play history, and the amount bet, not the look in someone's eye when they saw their pocket. The magic analog would be: You've seen me mulligan 4 of the last 5 games and the only game I didn't mulligan I had the Force of Will immediately. This game, I keep my opening 7, so you can bet I've got a Force or Spell Pierce.




Not 100% true, physical tells, timing tells, and vocal tells are still a big part of hand reading in Poker, and Magic players have a lot of both - if you play the game long enough, you will see patterns of behavior develop; whether or not they're aware of those patterns of behavior and are feigning them however is a different story.

I'd read Mike Caro's old book on Poker Tells or either an FBI or body guard's training manual on profiling, a lot of it applies to different walks of life.

Edit: For clarification, I MD 4 Pact of Negation and SB 4 Unmask with the Odious Troll version - Manamorphose sucks ass, and I'd never use a Storm deck with out a MD answer to Force of Will.

Also Serum Powder isn't worth it IMO, I just SB out disruption for Goblin Charbelchers.

[Kangaxx]

Pact SI top's 8! I went to a 52 man tournament at Knightware Inc. in LA, took 7th losing to Counterbalance in the Quarters. I played the following list:

Pact SI:
Business:
2 Goblin Charbelcher
3 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain

Mana:
1 Eternal Witness
1 Odious Trow
2 Manamorphose
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor

SB:
4 Xantid Swarm
4 Tomb of Urami
4 Tombstalker
3 Unmask


REPORT:
Match 1, Matt with UW Tempo:
Game 1
Mull to 6, kept a He gets Vial, a grip full of countermagic, and a relevant clock. I try to go off and get forced. I don't draw enough business to play through his grip.

Game 2
I mull to 6 again.. I remove ESG to land Xantid Swarm. It resolves, he swords it. He gets Vial again, and starts dropping dudes. I sculpt a good hand that wins with IGG loops because I draw a 2nd swarm. I play swarm, he thinks for a while and then Forces it. I try to go off and am one short of his Daze.

I mulled to 6 and he got good hands both games. I thought this matchup would be much better but on the same token I explained to him exactly how my deck works on the ride up from SD. He knew how to play against me, drew the nuts, played well, and I drew jank. He goes on to take 5th. I start thinking I should have played Solidarity instead. Not a particularly great start.

0-1

Match 2, Belcher:
Game 1
He wins the dice roll, I'd actually prefer to be on the play, and was. He drops 18 tokens with Empty, I chuckled, and go off with an Infernal loop for 26.

Game 2
He mulls to 6, drops 8 tokens turn 1. I win on the first turn again.

I think I'd rather be on the play against Belcher. They often do something on the first turn, but often they Burning Wish into EtW so I'm not too worried about this matchup.

1-1

Match 3, Sligh
Game 1
He gets the hax hand: 6 mountain, and Valakut. I go off and win turn 1 on the draw.

Game 2
Same plan except this time I see Hellspark elemental. I put him on Sligh, win turn 2 on the draw.

2-1

Match 4, Zoo
Game 1
Turn 1, I play out a beautiful, convoluted play with Eternal Witness LED trix, and Infernal Tutor into Tendrils.

Game 2
I mull to 6, keeping a hand without any starting mana. I draw the starting mana and play my draw4, I'm one mana source short of continuing, pass at 10 life. He puts a clock on my shortly afterward with Goyf and Nacatl, I lose in a few.

Game 3
I mull to 6 again, fearing Teeg. I just need starting mana to go off, we pass for 3 turns. I go off and win once I draw a mana source, on turn 3.

3-1

Match 5, Aggro-loam
Game 1
He wins the die roll, and plays Verdant Catacombs, go. I think he's playing discard but doesn't have the turn 1 distruption. I play out my hand and win turn 1 on the draw.

Game 2
He boards in like 11 cards. He gets turn 1 Chalice, but misplays by playing his Zuran Orb after Chalice at 0. Funny enough, the judge is watching our game and puts the orb in the graveyard. I'm sitting on a near-perfect hand of ESG, ESG, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Infernal Contract, Cruel Bargain, Cabal Ritual. He plays out Leyline of the Void and I'm far from Threshold. Eventually I'm sitting on ESG x2, Dark Rit x3, and draw4 x2. All I need to draw is Manamorphose, Land Grant, or Bayou to win. I sit there taking damage from Goyf every turn while he slowly beats me to death. No top decks.

Game 3
I get the hax turn 1.

In this game, I might have wanted Wild Cantor maindeck. I was sitting on Summoner's Pact x2 at one point so It would have enabled me to go off with my x2 Dark Rituals. I couldn't have searched for it through Chalice, but if I were also running Oxidize, then that play would have been more than doable. It makes me want to run Oxidize in the board again.

4-1

Match 6, Belcher

ID

4-1-1


Top 8
The top 8 is x2 UW Tempo, x2 Suicide, x1 Belcher, x1 Counterbalance, x1 Pact SI, and Dredge. The only matchup I wanted to dodge was Counterbalance. I draw Counterbalance. I would have auto-win against Dredge or Belcher. Suicide would have been tricky, but I have the hax turn 1, so at the very least I would win game 1, lose game 2, and win game 3. Matt was on one of the UW Tempo so I didn't want to draw him again, but the other UW Tempo player was making some mistakes so I think he would not be familiar with my deck. Either way, I dodged blue pretty much all day so I guess it was fitting that I finally drew it in the top 8.

Game 1
I keep a bomb turn 1 hand. He has Force. He follows it up with a turn 2 Counterbalance, and then backs it up with a relevant clock. I die shortly. I do notice that he misplays though on my hand. He force my land grant, when he should have forced my business. I figure I can get away with trix postboard; mistake.

Game 2
He keeps his swords in the MD. I keep a hand of Xantid Swarm, Tomb of Urami, Tombstalker, Culling the Weak, Infernal Contract, LED, Chrome Mox. I get greedy, figuring he boarded out Swords, and bust my mana for Tomb. Turn 2 swords. Looking back, I should have played it much differently. I choked probably because everyone propped him up to be such a great player, with Pro-points and shit. Either way, he had hax both games. Turn 2 Counterbalance every game, followed up by a relevant clock. I don't think these games were winnable.



Overall I'm happy with my performance. I made some bomb plays, and didn't make a single play mistake while going off. You can pretty much tell because you lose if you make a mistake. I didn't draw blue, Tombstalker was dead in the board, Tomb of Urami was weaker than I expected, and my opponents who played blue drew nuts. I'm happy with the build, but I've decided, -4 Tombstalker, +4 Oxidize. I won x4 signed Jittes, bought myself some FNM Tendrils and got a playset of sick Mirage Infernal Contracts.

Vacrix - I too have realized the necessary effect that a GB creature effect has whenever fetched with pact, but I mainly use it to imprint on a Chrome Mox, whenever I'm in dire need of black mana. My preference has always been Darkheart Sliver becuase of the random life gain effect.

[Vacrix]

Not 100% true, physical tells, timing tells, and vocal tells are still a big part of hand reading in Poker, and Magic players have a lot of both - if you play the game long enough, you will see patterns of behavior develop; whether or not they're aware of those patterns of behavior and are feigning them however is a different story.

Agreed. I looked for, and discovered by brother's tell yesterday. I called him out on not having FoW, he chuckled, discovered, and I went off and destroyed him.


For clarification, I MD 4 Pact of Negation and SB 4 Unmask with the Odious Troll version - Manamorphose sucks ass, and I'd never use a Storm deck with out a MD answer to Force of Will.

How has this worked out for you? Post some results next time you play a bunch of hands. I'd sure like to see how this affects the consistency.

Concering Manamorphose, its far from 'the glue that holds the deck together', but its most certainly an adhesive that improves the consistency. Not only does it color fix better than Wild Cantor (like in the case that you need GG to play Eternal Witness, but only have BG), it turns your draw4 into a draw5, while mid-combo, PoN turns your draw4 into a draw3. We'd all rather run something else, but I haven't found anything yet that is nearly as good as Manamorphose at improving my consistency at chaining draw4's together. I don't understand why people keep saying it 'sucks'. Its actually really good, its just one of the weaker slots in the deck.


Also Serum Powder isn't worth it IMO, I just SB out disruption for Goblin Charbelchers.

Are you playing with Eternal Witness? For quite some time now I haven't run into problems finding Business. I can't recall a hand when playing at Knightware in which I didn't have the spell to continue the draw4 chain or spin off into an IGG loop (this is of course against non-distruptive players). Rather, I found myself short on mana, if at all. Eternal Witness is completely nuts, providing you with access to business via Summoner's Pact. Why would you board in x0-4 Belcher against aggro when MD Eternal Witness often gives you +5 Business after a draw4? I find my game against aggro and combo to be extremely strong and find no reason to waste board slots on it when I could put them to better use to improve the control matchups.

EDIT:


Vacrix - I too have realized the necessary effect that a GB creature effect has whenever fetched with pact, but I mainly use it to imprint on a Chrome Mox, whenever I'm in dire need of black mana. My preference has always been Darkheart Sliver becuase of the random life gain effect.

I'd much rather have Odious Trow. After playing with it, theresurrection was most certainly right. Its much better than Vine Dryad, but not because you can imprint it on Chrome Mox, rather you can play it using black mana, unlike Dark Heart Sliver. I can't imagine the gain life effect is significant enough to warrent Sliver > Trow. Trow has the random ability of regeneration which can randomly stop a goyf in its tracks long enough for you to build a decent hand and spin off.

EDIT2:

Also, when you win you can say "Come on man! You lost to a deck that plays Odious Trow!" :D

[AcidFiend]

I have a Belcher deck that I have played on and off for about a year. I sleeved up Vacrix SI list and honestly had no clue what I was doing. If I couldn't resolve Culling the Weak, rarely could I get enough mana to do anything. Maybe I was just trying to go off Turn 1 or Turn 2 too often. Pacts could fetch me green mana via ESG, but the Green mana was useless for doing anything and I could rarely filter it. Most of the times I could reasonably goldfish a win was with Belcher, and it always felt like a struggle compared to my BR Belcher deck. I rarely got a storm count to 9 before casting a lethal Tendrils. I might post some sample hands and ask which lines of play there are available because I'm just confused right now. Keen to learn more tho since I bought most of the SI pieces.

[kicks_422]

For clarification, I MD 4 Pact of Negation and SB 4 Unmask with the Odious Troll version - Manamorphose sucks ass, and I'd never use a Storm deck with out a MD answer to Force of Will.

I'd like to know why it isn't the other way around - 4 Unmask MD with 4 Pact of Negation in the SB. Isn't Unmask better for more things than the Pacts?

[Vacrix]

I have a Belcher deck that I have played on and off for about a year. I sleeved up Vacrix SI list and honestly had no clue what I was doing. If I couldn't resolve Culling the Weak, rarely could I get enough mana to do anything. Maybe I was just trying to go off Turn 1 or Turn 2 too often. Pacts could fetch me green mana via ESG, but the Green mana was useless for doing anything and I could rarely filter it. Most of the times I could reasonably goldfish a win was with Belcher, and it always felt like a struggle compared to my BR Belcher deck. I rarely got a storm count to 9 before casting a lethal Tendrils. I might post some sample hands and ask which lines of play there are available because I'm just confused right now. Keen to learn more tho since I bought most of the SI pieces.

It runs more like Solidarity than Belcher actually. You need different pieces to begin chaining draw4's together, and the information keeps changing as you draw more cards. I started playing Land Grant SI back in the day about 3 and a half years ago, and when I started to play Solidarity about 6 months ago I saw a lot of similarities in how the decks ran and it was a really easy deck to pick up. Most people call Solidarity the hardest deck to play in the format. I think that Pact SI is on par with Solidarity, if not harder to play. I feel way more comfortable going off with Solidarity than I do with Pact SI, even after all my play experience with it just because SI is way more volatile and high tide often gives you way more flexibility with your mana while SI is unforgiving if you make a mistake.

I've never really taught anyone to play the deck, but I would start by just goldfishing 7 card hands until you can get comfortable going off. Once you can do that, you will start being able to go off more often with 7 card hands and throw fewer back. Also, start on the play because it gets significantly easier, at least in my experience, with the 8th card. Eventually, you will learn which hands to mulligan and which hands to keep. One of the greatest strengths of the deck is in the mulligans, like Belcher, but this deck mulligans much better. This is how my brother picked up the deck but I didn't really tell him how to do it. He's watched me play hands all the time though so that might have influenced how he learned. Another avenue of learning how to play the Pact list would be to start with a much easier list, Land Grant SI. When you lose Summoner's Pact, you lose an elemental of complexity that complicates everything a little more. I would definitely read Emidln's primer to understand the basic elements of the deck and read the link to mtgsalvation where you can find a lot of sample hands for Land Grant SI.

Here's a few sample hands with Pact SI to show you how the deck runs:

Hand 1: (Belcher)
Chrome Mox x2, Land Grant, Infernal Tutor, Goblin Charbelcher, Dryad Arbor, LED (7 cards)
I kept this hand. Why? I have a Charbelcher win in hand, lots of staying mana sources if it meets Force, and all I need is one more turn to start going nuts.
T1: Dryad Arbor, pass.
T2: Draw-->Summoner's Pact, Chrome Mox (Pact), Land Grant --> Bayou, Chrome Mox (Infernal Tutor), LED, Charbelcher, sacrifice LED --> activate Charbelcher, 52 damage.

If you needed to go off turn 1 against Stax or something, I would definitely mulligan this hand.

Hand 2: (Tendrils, after fizz)
Chrome Mox, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Culling the Weak, Goblin Charbelcher, Cruel Bargain, Tendrils of Agony
T1: Chrome Mox imprinting ToA, Dark Ritual, Cruel Bargain
Draw4--> Infernal Tutor x2, Cruel Bargain, Land Grant
Land Grant --> Dryad Arbor, Lotus Petal, Culling the Weak, Cruel Bargain
Draw4--> Summoner's Pact, Infernal Contract, Culling the Weak, Tendrils of Agony
This hand is one mana short of continuing chaining the draw4's together. No matter. With a full grip, you can go for the turn 2.

T2: Draw-->Lotus Petal, Lotus Petal, Summoner's Pact--> Odious Trow, Culling the Weak, Cruel Bargain
Draw4--> Land Grant, Cruel Bargain, Summoner's Pact, Lion's Eye Diamond
Land Grant-->Bayou, LED, Summoner's Pact--> ESG, Infernal Tutor cracking LED in response for BBB, BBBB floating--> Tendrils for 20.

That was a somewhat volatile hand as we can see. I drew too much business off the top and was forced to stop the chain, and pass. Even then I still managed to pull a turn 2 win. Its a beautiful strength of the deck. Sometimes on the play, you are going to D4 yourself down to 5 life, then pass. Its unlikely your opponent can deal 5 damage in the first turn in which case you can go off and win on the following turn. This hand IS vulnerable to a Lightning Bolt, and obviously any disruption. Also, keep in mind that if I was on the play, I would have dug one card deeper into that Lotus Petal in which case I would have been able to win that turn. Funny thing is, against a deck that can't disrupt you, you want to be on the draw because you are rewarded with an additional card when playing 2nd. Often if you can scout, you can find out which opponents are playing aggro and when you win the dice roll, choose to play 2nd.

Hand 3: (Infernal Tutor)
Lotus Petal, ESG, Cabal Ritual x2, LED x2, Infernal Contract
T1: Lotus Petal, ESG, Cabal Ritual, Cabal Ritual, LED, LED, Infernal Contract, breaking only 1 LED for BBB in response
Draw4-->Land Grant, Wild Cantor, Dark Ritual, Infernal Tutor, BBBB floating
Land Grant--> Bayou, Wild Cantor, Dark Ritual, Infernal Tutor breaking LED in response for BBB--> Tendrils for 22.

When you get a hand like that, don't break both LEDs. You might need one for Eternal Witness tricks or to discard stuff that you can't play so that you can get hellbent with Infernal Tutor. That was a solid hand.

Hand 4: (Belcher)
Lotus Petal, ESG, Wild Cantor, Cabal Ritual, LED, Infernal Contract, Cruel Bargain
T1: Lotus Petal, ESG, Wild Cantor-->B, Cabal Ritual, LED, Infernal Contract breaking LED in response for BBB,
Draw4--> Goblin Charbelcher, Culling the Weak, Summoner's Pact, LED
Summoner's Pact--> Dryad Arbor, Culling the Weak, Goblin Charbelcher, LED--Activate Charbelcher for 21

That was a risky hand. Charbelcher has a chance of misfiring in this case, but if you have 1 additional mana, you don't need to break the LED and thus can go off in your upkeep before you lose to Summoner's Pact. Also, I should mention that the top card was Tendrils of Agony. Had I been on the play, I wouldn't need to worry about the volatility of Charbelcher. On the same token, I'm testing Wild Cantor, and had my Cantor been a Manamorphose, then I would dig one card deeper. This is certainly a hand in which Manamorphose would be better than Wild Cantor.

Hand 5: (Tendrils)
Land Grant, Dark Ritual, LED, Infernal Contract, IGG (Mulligan to 5 cards)
T1: Land Grant--> Bayou, Dark Ritual, LED, Infernal Contract breaking LED in response for BBB
D4--> Cabal Ritual, ESG, Culling the Weak, Infernal Contract
ESG, Cabal Ritual, Infernal Contract, BB floating
D4-->Summoner's Pact, Infernal Tutor, Land Grant, Dark Ritual
Pact--> Odious Trow, Dark Ritual, Culling the Weak, Land Grant-->Nothing, Infernal Tutor--> Tendrils for 24.

This hand is a little tricky because you might think, how can you Land Grant for Nothing? As it turns out you don't actually need to find the land. Its a private zone and your opponent can't prove that you can't find it. This is not the same as, say, Demonic Tutor, because Demonic Tutor says to find a card and if you can't find a card in a deck of 60 cards.. then you are doing something wrong. Anyway, its a great hand that shows off what the deck can do even after mulliganing to 5. The hands I threw back were complete jank without any starting mana.

Hand 6: (IGG loop)
Lotus Petal x2, Land Grant, LED, Goblin Charbelcher, Infernal Tutor, Dark Ritual
Method 1 (preferred)
T1: Land Grant-->Bayou, Petal, Petal, Dark Ritual, LED, Infernal Tutor breaking LED in response for BBB--> Ill-Gotten Gains, play Ill-Gotten Gains with BB floating, returning LED, Dark Ritual, and Infernal Tutor.
Dark Ritual, LED, Infernal Tutor breaking LED for BBB--> Tendrils for 22.

Method 2 (Belcher kill)
T1: Land Grant--> Bayou, Petal, Petal, LED, Belcher, break LED for BBB activate Belcher for 37.

Either Method turns out to be a kill, but the IGG loop is preferable because its an ensured 22 life loss while Belcher could deal anywhere between 0 and 51 damage. Also, keep in my that I arbitrarily play my starting mana sources when I goldfish. Rarely do you want to play Land Grant first. This hand could play through Daze if you Start with Lotus Petal.

Hand 7:
Dryad Arbor, ESG, Chrome Mox, Tendrils of Agony, LED, Culling the Weak, Cruel Bargain
T1: Dryad Arbor, Chrome Mox (Tendrils), Culling the Weak, Cruel Bargain
D4-->Bayou, Land Grant, Summoner's Pact, Infernal Tutor
Fizz. Pass.
T2: draw Summoner's Pact, can't go off. Bayou, pass.
T3: draw Chrome Mox, can't go off. Pass.
T4: draw Culling the Weak, Chrome Mox (Land Grant), Pact-->Trow, Pact-->ESG, Culling the Weak, LED, Infernal Tutor breaking LED in response for BBB-->Belcher, activate for 43.

That was a REALLY janky D4. Sometimes you run into hands like that. After that D4 with B floating I could Pact--ESG, Infernal Tutor breaking LED in response for BBB, find a D4 and try to continue, but with Infernal Tutor and LED in hand, I'd rather pass the turn and hope I draw mana sources. I didn't and might have died on turn 3 to aggro. Even then, its a gamble I prefer. Sometimes you get janky draw4s like in the 2nd hand in this set, but its really only when you draw absolute shit like I did, and then fail to topdeck anything good that the deck truly fails. The other time it really fails is when you play a Summoner's Pact and then are forced to pass the turn. You should really avoid playing such hands though.

So of these hands all goldfishing on the play I probably won 6 of them, unless my opponent can't deal 10 damage by turn 3, which is sometimes the case. I had 4 turn 1's, 2 turn 2's, and 1 turn 4 (should be treated as a gameloss in goldfishing).

Here is one other hand, that I didn't just play but is worth sharing because its a avenue the deck can take:
Hand 8: (Eternal Witness trix)
Land Grant, ESG, Cabal Ritual, Infernal Contract, LED (mulligan to 5)
T1:Land Grant --> Bayou, ESG, Cabal Ritual, LED, Contract, break LED for BBB
D4 --> Petal, Manamorphose, Summoner's Pact, Cabal Ritual
I play Petal, sac for G, Manamorphose for GG --> Land Grant, GGBB in pool, Pact--> Eternal Witness, play Cabal ritual, GGBBBBB in pool, Eternal Witness grabbing Infernal Contract;
D4 --> Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, Chrome Mox, Belcher, B floating, 5 life
Play Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual, Chrome Mox imprinting Land Grant, BBBBBBG floating, play Belcher and activate for 28.

There are plenty more hands with Ewit but I can't recall the exact plays off the top of my head. They mostly involve LED trix.

Any questions?

[Vacrix]

I just did a gatherer search for green cards, thinking that if Odious Trow and Eternal Witness were hidden gems, what other cards might we have missed? I thought that maybe my build with x4 ESG might be under utilizing green. I didn't find any green creatures worth running, but I did find some decent looking stuff that I haven't seen discussed yet. This is what I found:

Nostalgic Dreams - Its bad if your hand is small, but it can do some disgustingly good things if you have the right hand size and access to GG.
Hidden Gibbons - Pretty sweet against countermagic. It could fit in nicely with a man plan.
Hidden Guerrillas - If you are on the play, its not bad in a man plan against Stax. Your opponent is guaranteed to drop an artifact in this matchup.
Mirri’s Guile - Provides you with top deck power to find pieces that you need to go off. Shuffle effects like Land Grant and Infernal Tutor make it even better.

I've done it many times, but I'm going to do a search on black cards tomorrow to see if I've missed something.


I'd like to know why it isn't the other way around - 4 Unmask MD with 4 Pact of Negation in the SB. Isn't Unmask better for more things than the Pacts?

I'd much rather have Unmask as well just because you maintain the top deck power if you fizz. What about Cabal Therapy? theresurrection ran it in his list. It provides more storm and can be cast with extra black mana, unlike Unmask. It intrigues me but I imagine that we won't have the creature to cast it for its flashback as often as Land Grant SI can.

[MrSoze]

I'd much rather have Unmask as well just because you maintain the top deck power if you fizz. What about Cabal Therapy? theresurrection ran it in his list. It provides more storm and can be cast with extra black mana, unlike Unmask. It intrigues me but I imagine that we won't have the creature to cast it for its flashback as often as Land Grant SI can.


I've been testing your list for a few days, admittedly against idiots on MWS, and I like Unmask a LOT more than I think I'd like therapy. That one mana is godawful important sometimes, and you never want to miss with a therapy; if you therapy and name force, and your opponent shows you stifle, you have a lot of work to do to win. Unmask just takes care of the problem outright, same goes for Mindbreak Trap. Therapy puts you in the position of having to pay actual mana for the spell and chancing that you'll miss, and I hate that idea.

On the bright side, I'm a believer in the deck, Vacrix. It's phenomenal- I might even switch from NLS or TES over to this for awhile and toy around with it. Are you going to be in Columbus?

[Vacrix]

I've been testing your list for a few days, admittedly against idiots on MWS, and I like Unmask a LOT more than I think I'd like therapy. That one mana is godawful important sometimes, and you never want to miss with a therapy; if you therapy and name force, and your opponent shows you stifle, you have a lot of work to do to win. Unmask just takes care of the problem outright, same goes for Mindbreak Trap. Therapy puts you in the position of having to pay actual mana for the spell and chancing that you'll miss, and I hate that idea.

On the bright side, I'm a believer in the deck, Vacrix. It's phenomenal- I might even switch from NLS or TES over to this for awhile and toy around with it. Are you going to be in Columbus?

Agreed about Cabal Therapy. I'm just not happy with hands in which I'm pitching business to go off, and then not having enough business to continue. I need to test it some more before I can commit it to a SB slot. The man plan has worked so well for me in the past that I'm skeptical about cutting it until I have results to back up a change. I'm happy to hear that Unmask has been working for you.

Good, I'm glad people are taking interest in the deck. :D Its a great deck, seriously underplayed in the format. I really want to go to Colombus. I still have to see if I have time this summer to go because I am usually pretty busy. If I go, though, I will most certainly play Pact SI. It seems to do well at big tournaments. I've only gone to 2 +50 man tournaments, but I top'd 8 both times.

By the way, I'm switching my build back to x2 Manamorphose, and I'm going to now test -1 Belcher, -1 Eternal Witness, +2 Nostalgic Dreams. I've been missing Manamorphose in the hands in which I'm drawing into Wild Cantor. Sometimes that extra card wins you the game.

EDIT:
Also, considering my history with the deck, I've never gone worse than 2-2 with SI, and I used to play Land Grant SI at my local store almost every FNM.

[Forbiddian]

Hate to keep bringing this up, but this is true:



I looked for, and discovered by brother's tell yesterday. I called him out on not having FoW, he chuckled, discovered, and I went off and destroyed him.

As often as this is true:


Jeff slaps down Thorn of Amethyst, having never drawn a Force of Will.


In order to have good data on tell determination, you need to record the times when your assessment was correct and the times when it wasn't. If you simply guess "force" or "no force" over and over, your brain will just remember the times you were right and you'll think you're onto something when you're simply playing by the numbers. The odds that your opponent has a Force active is less than 40%. But your opponent would probably try to mulligan for a Force of Will, so the odds given that he keeps his hand are described by Bayes' Law.

A tell of *CRITICAL* importance is "How often does my opponent mulligan a hand without Force of Will." If you know your opponent almost always ships a 7 without Force from the draw, you can adjust your prediction (such that if he keeps his hand, you know you have to play through a FoW).


Anyway, Ben, when we play in real life, we can do this:

I look at my hand. I decide what to do, then I'll say, "ready" and then you write down whether or not I have a Force of Will (or write "don't know" and guess against the average expected value). Then I mulligan (or not) and we playtest the game. Then we can compare this to my Bayesian calculations to see if you can find any tells. We probably won't get enough games in, but I'll be pretty stunned if you can beat the bayesian model, even after a large number of games.

[BreathWeapon]

Ok,

1) Pact of Negation > Unmask game 1, because Pact of Negation requires 0 resources to respond to Force of Will while Unmask requires 1 card to see if the opponent is playing disruption or not, you're making a mistake every time you cast Unmask and see Kird Ape compared to going off as normal and countering their disruption as needed instead of trying to discard it before you know they're playing it.

2) Manamorphose "sucks" in the sense that it's an unnecessary goldfish card in an environment where goldfish = game loss vs. U.dec. So if Manamorphose is being included over Pact of Negation, then your deck is sub-optimal vs. real opponent's for a marginal utility and speed increase that's not worth losing games over.

3) Goblin Charbelcher and Eternal Witness aren't comparable, Goblin Carbelcher is a threat you can keep a hand on while Eternal Witness is a dead card that increases the virtual number of bombs in your deck as you chain Draw 4s.

Edit: The space argument is kind of irrelevant IMO, you have a ton of space to use any way you see fit and you can rarely make use of all of it, you just want something that cuts unnecessary disruption for an increased goldfish vs. aggro.

Please remember I built Pact SI to withstand disruption in the form of Daze and Force of Will, not to goldfish, using the Pacts was a practical consideration to protect Land Grant and thus enable Goblin Charbelchers and not to just go nuts with a ton of extra mana.

[BreathWeapon]

Hate to keep bringing this up, but this is true:



As often as this is true:




In order to have good data on tell determination, you need to record the times when your assessment was correct and the times when it wasn't. If you simply guess "force" or "no force" over and over, your brain will just remember the times you were right and you'll think you're onto something when you're simply playing by the numbers. The odds that your opponent has a Force active is less than 40%. But your opponent would probably try to mulligan for a Force of Will, so the odds given that he keeps his hand are described by Bayes' Law.

A tell of *CRITICAL* importance is "How often does my opponent mulligan a hand without Force of Will." If you know your opponent almost always ships a 7 without Force from the draw, you can adjust your prediction (such that if he keeps his hand, you know you have to play through a FoW).


Anyway, Ben, when we play in real life, we can do this:

I look at my hand. I decide what to do, then I'll say, "ready" and then you write down whether or not I have a Force of Will (or write "don't know" and guess against the average expected value). Then I mulligan (or not) and we playtest the game. Then we can compare this to my Bayesian calculations to see if you can find any tells. We probably won't get enough games in, but I'll be pretty stunned if you can beat the bayesian model, even after a large number of games.

No it isn't, you're failing to take into consideration your subject knows he's being observed and is self aware of his tendencies - it doesn't work that way.

[Iranon]

@ Vacrix: I was just stating that SI doesn't like the lock pieces, not more. Plenty of decks run Spheres/Chalices/Thorns in the board without the rest of the Stax shell.
Also against true Stax a turn 1 lockpiece, followed by nothing for ages is definitely realistic (they aren't terribly consistent in the first place and it gets worse if they mulligan aggressively for something relevant on turn 1). Belcher has an easier time to win around most of the lesser junk, the difference in the face of a turn 1 Trinisphere may indeed be academic (95% vs. 99% dead and most of the 5% may not be worth playing out because of time reasons).
SI is my favourite combo deck by far, but Belcher having no relevant advantages over it is a very bold claim.

*

Regarding Unmask: This more or less turns the most relevant of their cards into a free Hymn to Tourach... I'm not sure I'm willing to accept useless mid-combo cards for that privilege.
Baiting reactive hate while expending two cards I can already do by having my Contract Forced, and I think the paranoia about having one's initial mana countered isn't entirely justified. As for proactive hate... I'd prefer business and going off in their face.

Cabal Therapy and Xantid Swarms have some redeeming features. The first has later use even when countered/thrown away and can take multiple cards and randomly screw an opponent over. The second shuts off a large portion of our worries in some decks. Both also have natural synergy with the deck. Pact of Negation... is a little extreme. Against decks like Faerie Stompy where going off on turn 1 and biding your time are equally risky it may have its place but again, in nightmare match-ups I'd probably prefer not losing to myself to maximise my chances off bad draws by the opponent.

[Forbiddian]

No it isn't, you're failing to take into consideration your subject knows he's being observed and is self aware of his tendencies - it doesn't work that way.

Wait, so I know that I'm being watched, but other players don't?

I accept that most Magic players are idiots, but they don't know that their opponents can look at them?

[Vacrix]

In order to have good data on tell determination, you need to record the times when your assessment was correct and the times when it wasn't. If you simply guess "force" or "no force" over and over, your brain will just remember the times you were right and you'll think you're onto something when you're simply playing by the numbers. The odds that your opponent has a Force active is less than 40%. But your opponent would probably try to mulligan for a Force of Will, so the odds given that he keeps his hand are described by Bayes' Law.

A tell of *CRITICAL* importance is "How often does my opponent mulligan a hand without Force of Will." If you know your opponent almost always ships a 7 without Force from the draw, you can adjust your prediction (such that if he keeps his hand, you know you have to play through a FoW).

Oh of course. I don't disagree with this. This is more applicable to game 2/3, though, than it is for game 1. Consider that one of the best advantages to playing this deck, especially at an event like the one we went to, is that I'm more likely to know what you are playing than you are to know what I am playing.

If you have no idea what I'm playing, its unlikely that you are going to ship a decent hand for FoW unless I accidentally drop something on the table. In that sense, SI, like Belcher, has a huge advantage in game 1. Come games 2 and 3 your Bayes' Law equatuions become more applicable. Not in game 1 unless, like in our case, you know who I am.
Also, I finish my games in sometimes as little as 5 minutes. I scouted and found out what everyone was playing, thus allowing me to decide which hands were keepable, and which hands had to get sent back. This isn't really possible at a HUGE event like GP Madrid/Columbus where you could get paired against the one guy you hadn't yet seen so this advantage is void in that case; however, in 50ish man tournaments, decks like this one can scout effectively with all the extra time.


1) Pact of Negation > Unmask game 1, because Pact of Negation requires 0 resources to respond to Force of Will while Unmask requires 1 card to see if the opponent is playing disruption or not, you're making a mistake every time you cast Unmask and see Kird Ape compared to going off as normal and countering their disruption as needed instead of trying to discard it before you know they're playing it.
The only problem with Pact of Negation is that it doesn't protect the IGG loop. It by no means makes Unmask any better in this case, but its still an argument against MD Pact.


2) Manamorphose "sucks" in the sense that it's an unnecessary goldfish card in an environment where goldfish = game loss vs. U.dec. So if Manamorphose is being included over Pact of Negation, then your deck is sub-optimal vs. real opponent's for a marginal utility and speed increase that's not worth losing games over.
PoN is significantly better in the control matchup, but the environment in which goldfish = gameloss is one in which opponents are playing Force + relevant lock pieces, or can put on a decent clock.
SI has topdeck power. There are games when just one Force won't cut it, especially if the opponent tries to mulligan aggressively into it, keeping a janky hand with Fow + 1 blue. The opponent must back it up with a relevant clock, and more countermagic, or a lock piece like CB. I have played through CB without Top or Brainstorm before, and I play through 1 counterspell more often than control players expect me to. The opponent doesn't know when you are going to explode. If he starts drawing more non-FoW countermagic, he risks being tapped out if he wants to drop creatures to start a clock. If he doesn't put a clock on, I can sculpt a hand and play through Force/Daze. This strength shouldn't be ignored and I think results should be pitted against each other instead of theory. I'll do some testing today with your build, if you share it, and see how often I'm playing through one Force with my build, and with yours. Then I think our arguments will be more tangible. I'm not completely against PoN in the MD. My intuition and experience with the deck just tells me that I've won too many games when the opponent mulls to 5 for Force.


3) Goblin Charbelcher and Eternal Witness aren't comparable, Goblin Carbelcher is a threat you can keep a hand on while Eternal Witness is a dead card that increases the virtual number of bombs in your deck as you chain Draw 4s.
They are comparable, but the 2nd part is true. Witness allows you a sort of flexibility that makes more Belchers unnecessary, and even dangerous. Too much business is just as bad as too little. I have yet to test Belcher in the board though. I just find it unnecessary to waste space when the aggro matchup is already so good.


The space argument is kind of irrelevant IMO, you have a ton of space to use any way you see fit and you can rarely make use of all of it, you just want something that cuts unnecessary disruption for an increased goldfish vs. aggro.

Please remember I built Pact SI to withstand disruption in the form of Daze and Force of Will, not to goldfish, using the Pacts was a practical consideration to protect Land Grant and thus enable Goblin Charbelchers and not to just go nuts with a ton of extra mana.

I think the only flexible slots are the x2-4 ESG, and then I play x1 Eternal Witness, and x2 Manamorphose for x3 Open slots. I don't think you can really cut anything else except maybe x1 Tendrils. The shell is the shell.

I preferred your build over Land Grant SI more so because it played through Daze and was more consistent. How would much would you say PoN has improved your U matchup?


SI is my favourite combo deck by far, but Belcher having no relevant advantages over it is a very bold claim.
It really is a bold claim, but I stand by it. They are certainly different decks, and EtW is marginally better in certain situations, but Belcher still fails to Force in most cases. There are some cases that EtW is better against Force. Even in those cases, EtW fails against EE and any sort of mass removal that can be played in time. I think that EtW is just as good as SI's topdeck power when you are just facing down FoW. If I were to play Belcher, I would play MD Bloodmoon. That is Belcher's strength over SI, IMO, but its not in the conventional lists, only in Pulpfiction's list.


Cabal Therapy and Xantid Swarms have some redeeming features. The first has later use even when countered/thrown away and can take multiple cards and randomly screw an opponent over. The second shuts off a large portion of our worries in some decks. Both also have natural synergy with the deck. Pact of Negation... is a little extreme. Against decks like Faerie Stompy where going off on turn 1 and biding your time are equally risky it may have its place but again, in nightmare match-ups I'd probably prefer not losing to myself to maximise my chances off bad draws by the opponent.
Agreed.

Breathweapon, you ran MD Xantid Swarms in your original list, I'm assuming as tall men. How did that work out? x2 MD Xantid Swarm doesn't sound like such a bad idea if you don't want to run PoN.


Wait, so I know that I'm being watched, but other players don't?

I accept that most Magic players are idiots, but they don't know that their opponents can look at them?

Dude, I watch players draw their card, look at their reaction to seeing it, and then try to follow it as they riffle it through their hand to see if they drew a land, etc.



On a side note, Nostaglic Dreams was horrid. I'd like to test Mirri's Guile, but I don't really have anyone to play against.

Another side note, not 100% confirmed, but it looks like I'm going to GP Columbus. :D

[BreathWeapon]

Wait, so I know that I'm being watched, but other players don't?

I accept that most Magic players are idiots, but they don't know that their opponents can look at them?

Sigh, no of course your opponent knows he's being watched, but that doesn't mean your opponent knows his tendencies are being observed, studied and documented - if you tell some one you're testing them, they'll behave in such a way as to either pass the test or obfuscate the results i.e. unnaturally and they'll give off false tells. Just think about how stupid it is to say you're going to test some one to see if they're lying before you begin the test, do you think there's any objectivity then? Why do you think these tests are always conducted under false premises? Seriously, this is like psychology 101.

[Forbiddian]

Sigh, any time that you're playing magic, you have to be careful not to give your opponent free information. This is like Magic 101.

Just think about how stupid it is to think that your opponent won't be disguising his tells or broadcasting false information in a real game.



If you truly believe that you can read your opponent, then you should be able to read an opponent who may or may not be giving you false information (which is something a real opponent likely would do). Of course, there are true idiots who actually give away real information and never give away false information, but if anything the fact that you know that I know I'm being tested should help you. You'll put less weight on obvious tells (like after I draw my hand I look at my deck). In a real tournament if you put weight on that, your opponent might be out-acting you.

[AcidFiend]

Thanks for those sample hands - I'll study them and keep at it.

As a side note my friend & I are planning an epic journey from Melbourne to Columbus :D I'll be playing something I'm more comfortable with tho hehe.

Edit: Ok I just goldfished 6 games and felt a bit better with what to do. Most of my 'wins' were from Charbelcher, Tendrils always feels like such a struggle. Anyways I'd love to know about any potential mis-plays or better ways of doing things. Assumed I was playing first each game:

Game 1:
Dark Rit, Culling, ESG, Chrome Mox, LG, Manamorphose, Summoner's Pact (7 cards)
->I shipped this back as it had to win condition and no draw.

Land Grant, ESG, Tendrils, Lotus x 2, Cruel Bargain (6 cards)
1st ->Land Grant (Bayou), pass
2nd ->Draw Cabal Rit, pop Lotus tap Bayou, play Cabal into Cruel. Draw 4 (IGG, Dryad, Chrome Mox, LED). Play Dryad.
3rd ->Draw Dark Rit. Play Chrome Mox (ESG), LED. Tap Bayou for Dark Rit, tap Chrome + Arbor, pop Lotus (BBBBGG). Play IGG, sac LED in response (discarding Tendrils, BBBBB floating). Return Dark Rit, Cruel Bargain & Tendrils. Play Dark Rit (BBBBBBB), play Cruel Bargain (BBBB). Draw 4 (Pact, Culling, Odious Trow, Charbelcher). Play Trow, Culling the Weak, Pact into ESG (BBBBBBG). Tendrils for 20.

Game 2:
Infernal, Charbelcher, Land Grant x2, ESG, Culling the Weak, Manamorphose (7 cards)
1st ->Land Grant for Arbor
2nd -> Draw LED. Land Grant for Bayou. Tap both, Culling the Weak, ESG, Manamorphose (BBBBBB), draw into Culling. Play LED, Charbelcher, crack LED into 49 damage.

Game 3:
Lotus Petal, Land Grant, Culling the Weak, Pact, Cruel Bargain, Manamophose, Dark Rit (7 cards)
1st -> Land Grant for Bayou. Dark Rit into Cruel Bargain (Dark Rit, LED, Culling, Infernal Contract). Play Lotus, pass turn.
2nd -> Draw Manamorphose. Play LED, Pact for Arbor. Tap Bayou for Dark Ritual (BBB), use 1st Manamorphose into Land Grant, use 2nd Morphose into Charbelcher, Culling the Weak (BBBBBB), play Charbelcher, for 44 damage.

Game 4:
Land Grant, Tendrils, LED x 2, Culling, Lotus Petal, Pact (7 cards)
1st -> Play Land Grant for Bayou.
2nd -> Draw Dark Rit. Can play Tendrils for 7.. but meh.
3rd -> Draw Culling. Play a Lotus.
4th -> Draw Cabal Rit. Play LED.
5th -> Draw Infernal Tutor. Pact for Arbor, Culling, Dark Rit, sacrifice Lotus Petal (Graveyard @ 6 cards), Cabal (8 black floating), Infernal cracking 1 LED in response (9 black) -> search up IGG, play IGG returning Cabal, Dark Rit, Infernal. Play all three (8 black floating, 9 storm) for Tendrils -> Tendrils for 20.

This is probably much too slow to win.

Game 5:
ESG x 2, Land Grant, Charbelcher, Cruel Bargain, Pact, Culling the Weak
1st -> Land Grant for Bayou
2nd -> Draw Tendrils. Pact for Arbor, Culling the Weak, Cruel Bargain (1 floating, draw 4: IGG, ESG, Culling, Infernal Contract).

I fizzled...I think.

Game 6:
Lotus Petal, Tendrils, ESG, LED x 2, Dark Rit, Cabal Rit
1st -> Pass
2nd -> Draw Charbelcher. Petal, Dark Rit, Cabal Rit, LED, LED, crack one for blind Belcher. Reveal 37 cards before a Bayou.

Phew.

One question I had coming out of this was if you have no land in hand with double Land Grant, is it better to get Dryad or Bayou first? The advantage of getting Dryad first being you can use its mana second turn. In later testing, I also found myself wishing E Witness was a Wild Cantor so I could fetch it with Pact and filter a Green to Black. I'm sure theres a case for both, and I'm not the greatest at seeing the Witness-lines-of-play anyways.

[BreathWeapon]

Just think about how stupid it is to think that your opponent won't be disguising his tells or broadcasting false information in a real game.
.

I'm lost, if you think the opponent's "acting" makes reading them more difficult and thus unreliable, and if you think knowing your opponent's "acting" should help you read them (but they may be out acting you ?) then how is that not a contradiction in terms? I doubt 99% of MTG players take it seriously enough to bother with "acting" at the table, but if you make them self aware they'll adjust their tendencies accordingly.

If you don't think there's any merit in reading, that's fine, a ton of professionals just happen to disagree with you and I think it's a case by case basis.

[the resurrection]

@AcidFiend
1. don't waste a land grant on turn 1 if you not have the intention to use the mana, such a mistake costs you 1 storm-copy and in a real life a hole match, if you show your opponent what you are playing (see game 5, game 1, game 4)

2. In Game 4:
Turn1: Grant->Arbor
Turn2: (Draw something...) Tap Arbor, play petal, play culling (GBBBB);;;play both LEDs, play Tendrils, cast pact->Witness, sac LEDs (GGGBBBB); cast Witness and Tendrils again

3.
One question I had coming out of this was if you have no land in hand with double Land Grant, is it better to get Dryad or Bayou first?
(in the goldfish) 1. Arbor, then Bayou

4. I never would hold your Game 6 hand->mulligan. This deck can sometimes sucks if you are forced to topdeck something. The playable hands are manasource, ritual, draw4/IT.

[Vacrix]

Land Grant, ESG, Tendrils, Lotus x 2, Cruel Bargain (6 cards)
1st ->Land Grant (Bayou), pass
2nd ->Draw Cabal Rit, pop Lotus tap Bayou, play Cabal into Cruel. Draw 4 (IGG, Dryad, Chrome Mox, LED). Play Dryad.
3rd ->Draw Dark Rit. Play Chrome Mox (ESG), LED. Tap Bayou for Dark Rit, tap Chrome + Arbor, pop Lotus (BBBBGG). Play IGG, sac LED in response (discarding Tendrils, BBBBB floating). Return Dark Rit, Cruel Bargain & Tendrils. Play Dark Rit (BBBBBBB), play Cruel Bargain (BBBB). Draw 4 (Pact, Culling, Odious Trow, Charbelcher). Play Trow, Culling the Weak, Pact into ESG (BBBBBBG). Tendrils for 20.

Land Grant, pass isnt the best play unless you are holding Culling or something, and know you need the extra land. I rarely make that play. As theresurrection said, it just reveals too much information to your opponent, and it makes you particularly vulnerable to creature removal or wasteland on your Arbor, or just wasteland on your Bayou, especially if your opponent knows that you need it to go off because they see Culling.

Other than that, you should use Bayou and ESG to play Cabal Rit, and save your Lotus Petals because they produce B.


Game 2:
Infernal, Charbelcher, Land Grant x2, ESG, Culling the Weak, Manamorphose (7 cards)
1st ->Land Grant for Arbor
2nd -> Draw LED. Land Grant for Bayou. Tap both, Culling the Weak, ESG, Manamorphose (BBBBBB), draw into Culling. Play LED, Charbelcher, crack LED into 49 damage.

You made the right plays here. Nice. This would be a good time to play Land Grant, pass. In this case you are one mana short of Charbelcher, Infernal Tutor--> LED, activate. If you had 6 mana, then I would definitely play the Bayou first. With LED, you didn't need the extra G, and its twice as vulnerable to removal than Bayou is. If your opponent goes STP during his turn or Bolt, etc, then you lose culling, which is crucial to playing and activating Belcher. In this case though, you didn't know you had LED on top so you made the right call. Its just something to take into consideration though.


Game 3:
Lotus Petal, Land Grant, Culling the Weak, Pact, Cruel Bargain, Manamophose, Dark Rit (7 cards)
1st -> Land Grant for Bayou. Dark Rit into Cruel Bargain (Dark Rit, LED, Culling, Infernal Contract). Play Lotus, pass turn.
2nd -> Draw Manamorphose. Play LED, Pact for Arbor. Tap Bayou for Dark Ritual (BBB), use 1st Manamorphose into Land Grant, use 2nd Morphose into Charbelcher, Culling the Weak (BBBBBB), play Charbelcher, for 44 damage.
I'd play it like this:

T1:
Land Grant-->Bayou, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Pact-->Odious Trow (dont play it yet though), Manamorphose adding GB (drawing Dark Ritual), Dark Ritual, GBBBBB floating, Cruel Bargain
D4: LED, Culling, Contract, Manamorphose
GBB floating, play Odious Trow w/ B, play 2nd Manamorphose w/ G adding BB (drawing (Land Grant), Land Grant--> Arbor, LED, Culling the Weak, Infernal Contract breaking LED in response for BBB, BBBBB floating, drawing (Charbelcher, card, card, card)...

You had plenty enough to go off, with BBBBB floating after belcher, all you would need a few mana sources to go off with belcher after hitting both lands. Obviously we played different shuffle effects at different times so naturally the cards would be arranged differently, but all else equal this would have been the right play. The tough play here is to know to add GB with your first manamorphose. Why? Because you might need that single G later for a second manamorphose. It just so happens you drew it. It was a much safer play than adding BB because you know you have Trow in hand so you can definitely use up that G if you have to.


Game 4:
Land Grant, Tendrils, LED x 2, Culling, Lotus Petal, Pact (7 cards)
1st -> Play Land Grant for Bayou.
2nd -> Draw Dark Rit. Can play Tendrils for 7.. but meh.
3rd -> Draw Culling. Play a Lotus.
4th -> Draw Cabal Rit. Play LED.
5th -> Draw Infernal Tutor. Pact for Arbor, Culling, Dark Rit, sacrifice Lotus Petal (Graveyard @ 6 cards), Cabal (8 black floating), Infernal cracking 1 LED in response (9 black) -> search up IGG, play IGG returning Cabal, Dark Rit, Infernal. Play all three (8 black floating, 9 storm) for Tendrils -> Tendrils for 20.

theresurrection covers it well. Ewit tricks are hard to see sometimes. You just have to remember to look at Summoner's Pact + LED x1-4 as an opportunity.


Game 5:
ESG x 2, Land Grant, Charbelcher, Cruel Bargain, Pact, Culling the Weak
1st -> Land Grant for Bayou
2nd -> Draw Tendrils. Pact for Arbor, Culling the Weak, Cruel Bargain (1 floating, draw 4: IGG, ESG, Culling, Infernal Contract).

Thats a tough call. IDK if i'd keep this hand. Its a turn 2 at best and you don't really have much gas after your initial D4. It might have been a safer play to just wait until you can play and activate Belcher via your mana sources. You were only 1 mana short of a turn 2 via BBBBGG, got a bad topdeck, and a bad D4. It happens, but I don't think I would have kept this hand.


Game 6:
Lotus Petal, Tendrils, ESG, LED x 2, Dark Rit, Cabal Rit
1st -> Pass
2nd -> Draw Charbelcher. Petal, Dark Rit, Cabal Rit, LED, LED, crack one for blind Belcher. Reveal 37 cards before a Bayou.

I've kept hands like this before. Its playable if you draw one of several outs. You could draw Belcher, Infernal Tutor, D4, or Summoner's Pact (Ewit trix) for a win (thats 18/53). I disagree with theresurrection on this hand. Its pretty keepable actually. Your chances of drawing something relevant over the next 2 turns isn't that bad. If you need to win within the first 2 turns though, IDK if I'd keep it on the play. I'd probably keep this on the draw though.


One question I had coming out of this was if you have no land in hand with double Land Grant, is it better to get Dryad or Bayou first? The advantage of getting Dryad first being you can use its mana second turn. In later testing, I also found myself wishing E Witness was a Wild Cantor so I could fetch it with Pact and filter a Green to Black. I'm sure theres a case for both, and I'm not the greatest at seeing the Witness-lines-of-play anyways.
As it turns out, Ewit was actually relevant in one of the games you played if you had seen that line of attack. I dropped Wild Cantor, finding myself needing Manamorphose in its place too often. A few times you didn't convert G to B through Cabal Ritual, like in the first game. Often you will use your G for the colorless cost of some spells anyway. Rarely do I find myself screwed because I could have fetched Cantor.
You could drop Ewit if you don't like it. It is a little clunky, but it improves the consistency if you see where to use it.

[Forbiddian]

I'm lost, if you think the opponent's "acting" makes reading them more difficult and thus unreliable, and if you think knowing your opponent's "acting" should help you read them (but they may be out acting you ?) then how is that not a contradiction in terms? I doubt 99% of MTG players take it seriously enough to bother with "acting" at the table, but if you make them self aware they'll adjust their tendencies accordingly.

If you don't think there's any merit in reading, that's fine, a ton of professionals just happen to disagree with you and I think it's a case by case basis.

You're definitely contradicting yourself to say 99% of players don't care enough and then in the very next sentence say that professionals think it's an important part of their game.

Very good, very successful players consistently get outacted by decent opponents because they fall for the mistake of assuming that a reaction is genuine. I even gave a specific example where the psych-out and misread probably cost a player a game because he got out-acted. Incidentally, I never said that reading was useless, it just doesn't happen in the mythical fashion that people in this thread are pretending that it does (probably because you have no experience against non-horrible players or poker).

And the way that the math of the game works out, it's probably better to miss five reads (playing it by the books) than to get outfoxed once into making a bad play. That's why poker players always back up soft reads with hard data, like a betting pattern or other tendencies established over an entire night (or longer).

My experiment posits an upper limit to evaluating the claim that players can be read reliably. Would you like to suggest a different one?

[Vacrix]

Just recently spoiled:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=103637&d=1270060994

Hell Carver Demon 3BBB
Creature - Demon
Flying
Whenever Hellcarver Demon deals combat damage to a player, sacrifice all permanents you control and discard your hand. Exile the top 6 cards of your library. You may cast any number of non-land cards exiled this way without paying their mana costs.
6/6
Think of it as 6 mana for a 1 turn clock.

That could make for an interesting man plan. If it connects, we likely will have threshold, and can go off successfully, likely casting a D4 for free and then continuing the draw chain. If it gets countered, we do have to invest quite a few cards to get it down and it can always eat an STP/PTE. It might be a good plan against heavy discard. I figured if Belcher can successfully play a man plan with stuff like x4 Deus of Calamity, then maybe we could try something along those lines with something significantly better. Its so good in SI if it comes down.. The question is can we get it down. I'm thinking Duress turn 1, play this turn 2, go off turn 3. The board would look something like the following, roughly
SB:
4 Duress
4 Hellcarver Demon
4 Tomb of Urami
3 Oxidize/Xantid Swarm


Thoughts?

EDIT:
Likely having threshold was a mistake. Thats not true. After thinking about it, we ought to cast the cards in our hand before Demon connects that way we have mana floating to successfully resolve a draw4 chain. I'm pretty sure the exiled cards don't go to the grave, we simply cast them from outside the game. Given that, we won't necessarily have threshold, my bad.

[kicks_422]

Why not try it MD even? It would require 8 pinpoint discard, most likely with the tall men package of old (4 Seize, 4 Therapy) or a combination of Seize, Duress, and Unmask. I don't know if it'll make the deck any better than how it already is right now though.

[Vacrix]

Why not try it MD even? It would require 8 pinpoint discard, most likely with the tall men package of old (4 Seize, 4 Therapy) or a combination of Seize, Duress, and Unmask. I don't know if it'll make the deck any better than how it already is right now though.

Agreed. It may not make it better but it is intriguing nonetheless. If only it had haste...

The old school idea isn't bad. I'd prefer x4 Duress x4 Cabal Therapy. Its a terrible draw off a draw 4, basically dead. Not sure if it would work.

[Vacrix]

I ran an experimental list today with moderate success. From the list I usually play
-4 Chrome Mox
-1 Tendrils of Agony
-1 Goblin Charbelcher
-1 Eternal Witness
-1 Odious Trow

+4 Simian Spirit Guide
+2 Manamorphose
+1 Empty the Warrens
+1 Wild Cantor

The full list looks like this:
Pact SI B/g/r:
Business:
1 Goblin Charbelcher
1 Empty the Warrens
2 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain

Mana:
1 Wild Cantor
4 Manamorphose
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor

Justification? Well Chrome Mox is card disadvantage. Manamorphose is the exact opposite, replacing itself and color fixing with your SSG and ESG. Chrome Mox normally would lose you the initial black source if you cut it, but if you up the color fixers to 4 Manamorphose and 1-5 Wild Cantor (via Pact, I'm considering adding a 2nd Cantor), then you should start with a black source pretty often. This was at least my hypothesis. Then I figured if I'm going to have red then why not throw in an EtW and see if its ever more useful than a ToA (like with those hands in which you can't go for IGG loop and would normally play Belcher and pass). Another reason I'd like to add red to the list is that Ingot Chewer is an amazing card. Post board we can bring in x4 Ingot Chewer to deal with artifacts like Chalice, Thorn of Amythest, and Cannonist while also enabling us to use it as a Culling the Weak target. SSG is also more anti-Daze/Cursecatcher tech. We could also get access to cards like Storm Entity and Empty the Warrens.

These were the results after 20 hands, all on the play:
Game 1-20.
1. Turn 2, ToA for 24
2. Turn 1, ToA for 22
3. Turn 1, activate Belcher for 14, activate Turn 2 for the kill
4. Turn 1, ToA for 22
5. Turn 1, D4 into no biz, Fizz
6. Mull to 5, Turn 2 ToA for 22
7. Mull to 6, Turn 2 ToA for 30
8. Turn 1, Belcher for 39
9. Turn 2, ToA for 26
10. Turn 1, ToA for 26
11. Turn 2, ToA for 24
12. Turn 2, Belcher for 48
13. Turn 1, ToA for 20
14. Turn 1, EtW for 24 Goblin Tokens, swing for the kill Turn 2
15. Turn 1, ToA for 20
16. Turn 1, D4 into jank, Turn 3 ToA for 22
17. Mull to 5, D4 into jank, Turn 3 ToA for 26
18. Turn 2, Belcher for 33
19. Turn 1, ToA for 102 (I Tendrils and then IGG loop)
20. Turn 1, ToA for 30

Turn 1 kills: 8 (40%)
Turn 2 kills: 9 (45%)
Turn 3 kills: 2 (10%)
Fizz/loss: 1 (5%)

Analysis:
Interesting. I misfired with 1 Belcher hand, and EtW would have been a ToA in the original list. EtW was crap. I had no problems finding a black source in a single hand. If I drew jank with the D4 it wasn't due to color issues, surprisingly. The high number of turn 2's was due to me not really pushing the deck to its limits on every hand. I was completely alright with a guarenteed turn 2 instead of a volatile turn 1 or a mulligan. The deck does mulligan well but I'll take a turn 2 in a tournament too against aggro if I'm on the play. For some reason I drew like 5 hands that had double land grant. Weird. I kept those hands because they were guarenteed turn 2s. The other 4 hands were just me waiting for one thing.

Conclusion:
This list certainly isn't better if you look at the results; however, the results are a particularly small sample size and I don't believe that they are definitive of this version's potential. I do get way more turn 1 kills with the other list, but I think that this list can certainly be fine tuned some more. I'm going to test this list again except with more business. I'm definitely switching back to 3 Tendrils, and I just might drop 1 SSG for an additional Belcher.

Thoughts?

[kicks_422]

Interesting. Chrome Mox for SSG is well justified, but what I'm worried about the most is how you'd fit in protection. Is that any bit affected?

EDIT: I was thinking of there being no Trow anymore, which works great with Unmask... But since you board out Pacts in G2, I guess that's not a good plan anyway.

EDIT2: I don't know if you've thoguht about it, but any combo deck with access to red should at least give Burning Wish a try, no?

[Vacrix]

Agreed. I'm also unsure how I'd fit in protection as well. The other problem with this list is that Chrome Mox gives you the opportunity to go off multiple times which can be great against control. In that sense, it really is an experiment to see whether or not this list is viable.

I'm thinking that with this deck, you would have to play a man plan board. Boarding in protection looks too difficult unless you somehow fit in slots for a few Chrome Mox in the board.

I was really just going to tweak the maindeck first. Also, keep in mind that I usually board in x4 Tomb of Urami post board, which increases the number of initial black sources. Probably in place of the SSG's.

I'd love to fit in Burning Wish, especially since I could test it IRL cause I own a playset. I'm not sure why I would run it though. What would I wish for? I don't know if the deck has enough mana to abuse it consistently like TES or NLS do since they can sculpt their hand and use it to find protection or removal for hate.

If anyone else is interested in testing this list, let me know. Its my project for the next few weeks.

EDIT:
I just stumbled upon an observation concerning the results. I fizzed once despite having too much business. I have yet to fizz because I don't have business. I think this is in part attributed to some luck but also to the fact that I'm not imprinting my business as often on Chrome Mox so I have business left over more often post-D4. Also, Manamorphose is essentially digging one card deeper, giving my draw5's instead of draw4's. I might be on to something here guys.

[Vacrix]

Alright, I played 20 more hands today. Only changes to that list were -1 EtW, +1 Tendrils.

Results:
1. Turn 1, ToA for 22
2. Turn 1, Belcher for 34
3. Turn 1, ToA for 26
4. Mull to 6, Turn 2 D4, play mistake, fizz
5. Turn 1, ToA for 32
6. Turn 1, ToA for 20
7. Mull to 5, Turn 4, ToA for 20 (w/ IGG loop)
8. Turn 1, ToA for 24
9. Turn 1, ToA for 36
10. Mull to 5, Turn 3, D4, 1 short, fizz
11. Turn 1, Belcher 40
12. Turn 3, ToA for 20
13. Turn 1, Belcher 40
14. Turn 1, ToA for 22
15. Turn 1, ToA for 20
16. Mull to 5, Turn 3, Belcher for 47
17. Mull to 6, Turn 1, ToA for 26
18. Turn 2, ToA for 44
19. Mull to 6, Turn 1, Fizz off D4, too much business
20. Mull to 5, Turn 3, ToA for 28 and Belcher for 36

Turn 1 Kills: 12 (65%)
Turn 2 Kills: 1 (5%)
Turn 3 Kills: 3 (15%)
Turn 4 Kills: (5%)
Fizz/loss: 3 (15%)

Analysis:
Again, Interesting. In game 4, I made a play mistake and lost. In game 7, I make a play mistake and cannot finish the IGG loop. In game 10, My opening hand was a guaranteed turn 3 but I pushed the deck to try for the turn 1 and mulliganed, unfortunately, down to 5. In game 12, I won Turn 3 instead of turn 1 because my SSG was not a Chrome Mox. In game 20, I had enough mana to play Belcher + activate and then ToA.
All in all, some games were Daze proof, the majority of the turn 1's. In others I didn't have a starting black source and was forced to mulligan the hands. The lack of Chrome Mox makes going off twice slightly more difficult, but at the same time, I'm not having to go off twice as often.

Its worth noting that games in which I am IGG looping for the win, I count Turn 4's on the play in my sets as wins, not losses. If you are trying to win with D4's after your opponent gets to Turn 3, you will likely die to burn so I don't count such games as wins.

Conclusion:
This version is much harder to play, due to the fragility of the mana base. SSG's are great in place of Chrome Mox most of the time. Now I'm considering cutting -2 SSG for +2 Chrome Mox and see how that plays. In general, though, I've really been liking my D4's turning into D5's thanks to manamorphose. More often than not, that extra card wins you the game. Also, deck thinning becomes particularly crucial when playing.
Also, I realized that post-board, I can get myself +4 EtW, which is strong against control. That might be a great reason to play this list, especially when we also have access to Ingot Chewer post board.
I think I'm getting better and better as I play this version. Its slightly more tricky than the version I'm used to playing, surprisingly.

The combination of the last 20 games and the current 20 games looks like the following:

Results out of 40 games:
Turn 1 kills: 20 (50%)
Turn 2 kills: 10 (25%)
Turn 3 kills: 5 (12.5%)
Turn 4 kills: 1 (2.5%)
Fizz/loss: 4 (10%)

I still need some work at piloting this deck. I'm definitely pushing more Turn 1's than I did before.

EDIT:
I think that these 2 sets of results are actually pretty good representations of what happens when you play conservatively (1st set of 20 games), or aggressively (2nd set of 20 games). In the 1st set of games, I was playing more conservatively, keeping my 7 often. While in the 2nd set of games, I mulliganed very aggressively and tried to push the turn 1 every chance that I had. The high rate of turn 1, 2, and 3 kills in the 1st set of results would beat aggro all day long at 95% win ratio against non-distruptive aggro, while the rate of turn 1 kills in the 2nd list is representative of the chances you'd get the fast kill against decks you need the fast kill like stax or discard. In that sense, I no longer think that the 2 sets of results should be combined, as the strategy behind each was completely different. Additionally, its worth noting that half of the hands I played were Daze proof. The other half were particularly vulnerable. I'm not sure if thats just Pact SI or this version running SSG. I think 50% is pretty good though. I've never actually recorded the number of hands that were Daze proof. Does anyone care to share such results, if they have them?

Also, Breathweapon, how do you mulligan against a deck in which you know you are playing blue? If you have an unprotected IGG loop in hand, do you go for it, or do you mulligan to a hand with D4's, or do you mullgan for a hand with PoN? Or do you keep a mediocre hand with PoN that just needs one more card to go off (like just missing your initial B)? I'm going to do some extensive testing with your build once I'm done testing this one.

EDIT2:
I also seem to be getting either exactly 20 ToA's or huge ToA's. Hands like game 12 are vulnerable to Lightning Helix.

[Vacrix]

Looks like we might have another dude worthy of the man plan. This was just spoiled:

Thought Gorger
{2}{B}{B}
Creature -- Horror
2/2
Trample
When Thought Gorger enters the battlefield, put a +1/+1 counter on it for each card in your hand. If you do, discard your hand.
When Thought Gorger leaves the battlefield, draw a card for each +1/+1 counter on it.

2BB is certainly an investment when you also factor in the number of cards that we discard after it comes into play. It looks decent though, especially if we can discard some crap, swing for a few, and then if/when its removed, draw a bunch of cards that we can use to go off. In that sense, it has the potential to be a better beater than something like Tombstalker because when it dies, we draw cards that will likely enable us to go off on the following turn. There is a drawback, though. We need to discard a relevant number of cards for it to be big and we need to invest spells to get it down. A hand like Thought Gorger, Dark Ritual, Lotus Petal, ESG, ESG, Card, Card would be good. It would be a 5/5 trample for 4, and if it dies we draw 3. On the draw, which is likely against control, it will be a 6/6. Also, we need for their to be crap in our hands for it to be profitable. Otherwise, Tombstalker is still a better choice.

Also, I have a rules question about how it works midcombo. If we play it, put the CIP trigger on the stack, and then play culling the weak to sacrifice it, what happens? I assume that the leaves play trigger would then go on the stack after Culling the Weak triggers, which means we can't discard and draw. Or perhaps we would draw for each counter on it, which would be none, and then we would have to discard our hands, which would be exceptionally bad. The ideal situation would be to play it, play culling the weak in response, then discard our hands, then draw, but it doesn't look like it can work that way. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.

[TheSleeper]

I fee like plays that are Duress/Thoughtseize/FoW-proof is more valuable and relevant than being Daze proof. Many decks pack discard/FoW, and if this deck can't play through them, theres no reason to play it over ANT. I guess its something thats hard to replicate in goldfishing.

How many non-disruptive Aggro decks are there in Legacy anyways? And how many are you going to battle in the later rounds of a tourney? Not many, if any.

Don't mean to rain on the decks parade or your work Vacrix, just trying to be realistic. To draw from a previous experience, I had done a bit of work on a Belcher build and had my goldfishing numbers way up; until I played real people and just lost to Turn 1 Thoughtseize. I guess its all part of the process though when playing a complex deck like this: you need to be learn/train to play optimally in a vacuum, but then go on to learn to do so against the various common archetypes.

[Vacrix]

I fee like plays that are Duress/Thoughtseize/FoW-proof is more valuable and relevant than being Daze proof. Many decks pack discard/FoW, and if this deck can't play through them, theres no reason to play it over ANT. I guess its something thats hard to replicate in goldfishing.

Sure many decks pack disruption. This deck doesn't roll over and die to disruption though like Belcher does. 4 Charbelcher, 3-4 Burning Wish and 3-4 Empty the Warrens usually gives Belcher about 11 Business spells with which to do something relevant, often shitting some goblins for the win. SI plays 17 business spells, and in Eternal Witness builds, Summoner's Pact functions as a potential way to get back discarded Business. Discard is usually inhibiting but the beauty of SI is that you must back it up with something relevant. The more topdecks you give to SI, the closer it gets to exploding again. Discard will stop SI for a turn, IF you pick the right cards, but SI has a really high chance of topdecking more business. If you really want to make the Belcher comparison, look at how many cards we invest to go off. Often 3 or 4. Belcher doesn't have that luxury because it usually needs every card in its initial 5-7 cards to make the best of the hand. Because we have resources left over in hand after we go for our first draw4, we can attempt to go off again much sooner than Belcher. Now all that assumes that you are on the draw and discard gets a turn. If discard doesn't even get a turn, which is often the case with non-FoW decks, then discard disruption is irrelevant. SI's clock is the fastest in the format. I push 70% turn 1's on the play.

Countermagic is more or less the same way except that they can play the disruption on your turn which negates the advantage of being on the play. Again, if your opponent FoW's something, he better back it up with a relevant clock, Counterbalance, Iona, or more countermagic because SI is going to go off again in 1-4 turns.


Don't mean to rain on the decks parade or your work Vacrix, just trying to be realistic. To draw from a previous experience, I had done a bit of work on a Belcher build and had my goldfishing numbers way up; until I played real people and just lost to Turn 1 Thoughtseize. I guess its all part of the process though when playing a complex deck like this: you need to be learn/train to play optimally in a vacuum, but then go on to learn to do so against the various common archetypes.
I've topped 8 with SI at 2 +50 man tournaments and I'm 2 for 2 at topping 8 then at the big tournaments (haven't really had a chance to go to too many other tournaments), and I've never gone worse than 2-2 even when I was new to the deck back in 2007, and at FNM, once I became a good pilot, I went 3-1 or 4-1 (depending on the number of players) before FNM disappeared from my local stores. The decks I lost to in the top8 were Countertop at the most recent tournament, and he literally had the perfect hand for me both games (FoW + CB), and Stax back in 2007 when I was still new to the deck and made a play mistake. I've been playing the deck IRL since Emidln wrote a primer for it in 07. Its a great deck and extremely under played in the format.


How many non-disruptive Aggro decks are there in Legacy anyways? And how many are you going to battle in the later rounds of a tourney? Not many, if any.
A good pilot gets about 95% against aggro. In tournament (or FNM) play, I can't recall ever dropping a match to aggro. There are plenty of non-disruptive decks. Not just that, there are plenty of non-FoW decks that SI beats pretty consistently. Dredge, Belcher and ANT come to mind. I've never dropped a match to the combo mirror either.


So I compiled all the data from all the SCGs tournaments, if this is more useful to anyone, though I actually think top 8 penetration is a better measurement, since to make top 8 you have to beat other decks that are winning but you can dick around in the loser's bracket without a chance to make any prizes by playing a deck that beats scrub decks and still look good.

But anyway, here's the match win percentage of various decks.

UW Tempo: 65.1
Natural Order, though I have no idea what this field means, it includes Natural Order and Natural Order Progenitus: 59.1
Merfolk: 56.5
Belcher: 55.3
Lands: 54.2
Zoo: 53.6
Aggro Loam: 53.4
Dredge: 53.4
Survival: 52.2
NO Bant: 50.8
Countertop 50.0
Enchantress: 48.3
ANT: 47.1
Painter: 39.8
Elves: 25.0
Ninjas!: 0.0

Given Forbiddian's data (which I trust), if I were to play at the next SCG tournament, I'd likely be playing against the decks which tend to win more. Decks like Lands, Zoo, Dredge, Survival, Belcher, Elves, and Enchantress are practically byes. Merfolk is a positive control matchup. UW Tempo is a matchup I really need to test more (STP ruins the postboard plan) but I think I can get it can be better than even. ANT variants are positive combo matchups because SI is significantly faster. Aggro Loam is also a positive matchup (much like discard). The most dangerous decks are Countertop, which I guess is also covered by NO Bant, NO, NO Prog, etc. Its not as much of the field as it seems. Painter builds vary too much for me to even talk about them but basically builds with FoW are more dangerous. Interestingly enough, Thresh is not in there, but I can't recall dropping a match to them in tournaments (though I probably have once).

Like all decks, SI has some bad matchups. Its great against most of the field. You just need to know what you're doing. Thats really the key. Most people drop the deck and call it inconsistent, but luck is a residue of design. You get lucky if you design your deck well AND you need the experience to abuse that design.

Also, one of SI's greatest strengths is that its a virtually unknown established deck. Very few people I've played against have even heard of the deck and even those that have are not familiar with how it plays and as such make terrible play decisions against it. Because its so hard to play, this will likely always be the case.

[Forbiddian]

Sup, Ben, figured I could clear this up for you:



Also, I have a rules question about how it works midcombo. If we play it, put the CIP trigger on the stack, and then play culling the weak to sacrifice it, what happens? I assume that the leaves play trigger would then go on the stack after Culling the Weak triggers, which means we can't discard and draw. Or perhaps we would draw for each counter on it, which would be none, and then we would have to discard our hands, which would be exceptionally bad. The ideal situation would be to play it, play culling the weak in response, then discard our hands, then draw, but it doesn't look like it can work that way. Someone correct me if I'm wrong.



Thought Gorger
{2}{B}{B}
Creature -- Horror
2/2
Trample
When Thought Gorger enters the battlefield, put a +1/+1 counter on it for each card in your hand. If you do, discard your hand.
When Thought Gorger leaves the battlefield, draw a card for each +1/+1 counter on it.


It enters the battlefield and the first ability goes on the stack.
You culling it in response (or your opponent Swords's it, in response, which makes a fuck of a lot more sense and I assume this is the real question).
Thought Gorger leaves the battlefield, the draw ability gives you 0 cards because it has no +1/+1 counters.
The CIP trigger resolves and you can't add +1/+1 counters anymore, so you don't lose your hand.




This deck doesn't roll over and die to disruption though like Belcher does. 4 Charbelcher, 3-4 Burning Wish and 3-4 Empty the Warrens usually gives Belcher about 11 Business spells with which to do something relevant, often shitting some goblins for the win. SI plays 17 business spells, and in Eternal Witness builds, Summoner's Pact functions as a potential way to get back discarded Business. Discard is usually inhibiting but the beauty of SI is that you must back it up with something relevant. The more topdecks you give to SI, the closer it gets to exploding again. Discard will stop SI for a turn, IF you pick the right cards, but SI has a really high chance of topdecking more business.

Vouch this.


Force of Will is about as strong against SI Pact as Tormod's Crypt is against Ichorid.

It's definitely a good, strong piece of hate, but you definitely need to back it up, since the most you can get out of it is 2 or 3 timewalks (and occasionally you only get 1 Timewalk out of it). It's not like against Belcher where it routinely acts as 4 or 5 timewalks. It's really tough to oversell how important it is that the top spells all cost 3 (or 4 for Tendrils). Land, Ritual, Draw 4 is probably game if you don't come up with the Force. And even if you do you're likely to face another try in the next three turns.

SI Pact can still run its main draw 4 mechanism from 8 life easily (drawing up to 12 cards from that method). Force of Will covering a Lord of Atlantis and one other beater doesn't force SI pact to switch to a weak plan B (the same way Ad Nauseam from eight or ten life only rarely gets the job done). It treats 50% of the format as byes, and it has a thumbs up Merfolk matchup and as good a shot as any combo deck against CB/Top.

[Vacrix]

It enters the battlefield and the first ability goes on the stack.
You culling it in response (or your opponent Swords's it, in response, which makes a fuck of a lot more sense and I assume this is the real question).
Thought Gorger leaves the battlefield, the draw ability gives you 0 cards because it has no +1/+1 counters.
The CIP trigger resolves and you can't add +1/+1 counters anymore, so you don't lose your hand.
Thanks. How unfortunate though. I was hoping to abuse it somehow. Likely its not worth adding.


Vouch this.
We have to play sometime in the near future man. I need to test against UW Tempo!!




Aside, I read through this entire forum and the original one posted on mtgsalvation to look for ideas. Null Profusion was the only thing I really dug up worth discussing. I'm curious to see some builds with it. Its sure as hell easier to hit BBB to play D4's.. NP would likely be played in a much different build then I've played before. I'd probably play it in something with Tall man, likely Iranon's Glimpse List. Has anyone played with it?

[Iranon]

Yes. The beauty of SI is that your opponent needs both light and heavy tools to have a truly good match-up.

No matter if they run 8 free counters and 4-8 regular counters/discard spells... if that is backed up with a conventional clock, we can recover and push for a win multiple times.
On the other extreme: without free counters, even the most vicious anti-combo Stax build can only hope for a coinflip slightly in their favour. They have worse odds of 'winning' on turn 1-2, but better odds of doing something relevant that will probably be enough.



The latter is a good example to show why I distrust most extreme percentages given: against a cheating Stax player who always manages to lock us out on turn 1, we'd still have odds of around 20% over a match.
We can't win if we lose the coin flip. If we win the coin flip, we need to kill immediately in game 1 and 3. Total odds are half of the square of our first-turn kill probability. 50% -> 12.5%, 60% -> 18%, 70% -> 24.5%, 80% -> 32%.

Similarly, even a non-disruptive Aggro deck can race us once in a while... with just a few sideboard slots and counting the few times we'll mulligan into oblivion I'm not buying 95% win chances for us either.
SI is fairly consistent, but telling ourselves we always kill by turn 3 is unrealistic. We can get mana screwed like everyone else - on the whole we mulligan better but have fewer initial mana sources than most.



Anyway, the only decks that should give us serious headaches are the ones where our opponents have free counters to make them live past turn 1 and aslo something to shut down our game for good.
Here it's a bit of a mind game - mostly 'how do they mulligan?' vs. 'how do we play?'. SI can play through any amount of light disruption, and it can race lock pieces. I can't usually do both at the same time.
Decks that feature both can mulligan into a free counter, or they can mulligan into a turn 2 counterbalance/hate bear/lock piece. they usually can't do both.

[Vacrix]

Similarly, even a non-disruptive Aggro deck can race us once in a while... with just a few sideboard slots and counting the few times we'll mulligan into oblivion I'm not buying 95% win chances for us either.
SI is fairly consistent, but telling ourselves we always kill by turn 3 is unrealistic. We can get mana screwed like everyone else - on the whole we mulligan better but have fewer initial mana sources than most.
Always killing by turn 3 is unrealistic. 95% kill by turn 3 is realistic. There is that 5% where we mulligan into oblivion, and there are other times where we fizz and cannot go off again. In my experience, it happens about once in twenty games if not less. I've never dropped a game to aggro or combo in tournament play. Only control and stax. We are often fast enough to win game 1 and even if aggro wins game 2 we will play first and win game 3. 95% refers to winning matches, not games, which is completely realistic. Maybe I'm just a really good pilot or I get really lucky or a combination of both. I don't know. My turn 1 percentage is at least 70% on the play, and upwards of 80% on the draw (I don't really goldfish on the draw too often because its too easy). I assure you I've played enough games for that number to be accurate.



On to some discussion. Too often this thread discusses things unrelated to improving the deck. Null Profusion. Discuss.

(rough list)
NPSI:
Business - 15
4 Null Profusion
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Glimpse of Nature
2 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill-Gotten Gains

Tall men - 11
4 Shield Sphere
4 Phyrexian Walker
3 Ornithopter

Protection - 4
4 Cabal Therapy

Mana - 30
2 Bayou
4 Land Grant
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Dark Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Cabal Ritual

I'm not sure how well it would work in a Glimpse list, but Cabal Therapy + Null Profusion is certainly sexy. The other option is just putting Null Profusion in place of some Business in Land Grant SI, though it might also fit into Pact SI.

EDIT:
@Sleeper
I forgot to mention your comment about FoW/Discard proof vs. Daze proof.
Breathweapon is the genius behind Pact SI and he designed it much differently then how I actually play it. He plays x4 PoN and even more disruption in the board. I tend to lead more toward the Manamorphose-esque builds (his original builds) because I enjoy the consistency. Being Daze proof allows you to protect your initial manasources, namely Land Grant. When you play Land Grant, you reveal your hand 'as an additional cost' to playing the spell. This is an extremely dangerous play against U.dec because its an additional cost, not an effect of the spell. Your opponent can Daze LG if you don't have some way to protect it (via Summoner's Pact or ESG). Especially in the case of Land Grant, if your Biz eats FoW, you want to abuse SI's nuts topdeck power. You can't if your initial mana source is countered. This is part of the reason I'm going to switch back to theresurrection's Eternal Witness variant. I dropped Chrome Mox for SSG to see if the deck could still perform, and it works, but its significantly worse against U.dec because you lose Chrome Mox as a staying-initial-manasource. Without it, you lose some of SI's topdeck power and thats an advantage that is far too strong to overlook.
Also, its important to note that a hand with FoW is great against SI. A hand with Daze + CB is significantly worse against the Pact list. Granted, its still a strong hand but the deck is geared to play through Daze. A player who is not familiar with SI will likely keep that hand which is to our advantage.
Its also worth noting that SI is not Daze proof. Sometimes it will need Summoner's Pact to use with Culling the Weak or ESG to use with Cabal Ritual. The deck is certainly not immune to Daze. It is much better, though, then most of the other lists that we've come up with (in my experience, I can pay for Daze more than half the time, though I've never really gathered enough data to determine this with certainty). In that same sense, no combo deck is immune to FoW. Even Dredge, virtually an anti-control combo deck, can have its discard outlet or draw spell Forced. This deck is just the most vulnerable deck in the format to Force, but its the fastest deck in the format by leaps and bounds. Its a risk I and other SI pilots are willing to take. I'd say having bye's against 50% of the format is pretty awesome.

[kicks_422]

In the list with Null Profusion, wouldn't it be better to run Kobolds? So they can imprint on Chrome Mox?

Also, been trying out the SI Pact list with the 4 SSG's and 4 Manamorphose, over Chrome Moxen. You're right - it's insanely fast. I've been pushing Turn 1 wins often as well with it. I see how Chrome Moxen is missed, though.

Gawd, if only Cruel Bargains were much easier to find.

[Vacrix]

Kobolds might be better but the advantage of running Shield Sphere and Phyrexian Walker is that they, on occasion, give you a few turns to set up. Now that I think about it, though, Null Profusion is a bit weak. It requires SI to go all in, much like Belcher, and that isn't our strength. So I almost immediately gave up testing it. Unless it pushes faster turn one's than Pact SI, I don't think its an SI variant worth pursuing. Has anyone tested it? I'm not going to bother with it.

I'm glad you are testing the BRg list. I'll probably play it at the next tournament. I'm thinking that x4 EtW post board looks really strong. In your testing, I'd recommend boarding like this (against U.dec), though this deserves some discussion:
+4 EtW
+4 Xantid Swarm

-2 Tendrils of Agony
-2 Goblin Charbelcher
-4 Summoner's Pact

EtW looks pretty strong against U.dec. If it doesn't immediately go all the way, we can use the tokens (provided they don't eat a sweeper) to feed Culling the Weak, and we can also go for Xantid Swarm to protect IGG loop--> ToA, or EtW. Though sometimes Swarm can set up a slow Belcher kill (ie. swing with Swarm, drop Belcher, pass, swing with swarm, activate Belcher), I don't think its worth the space. Against U.dec, is there anything else worth boarding in/out? Manamorphose is obviously a questionable slot postboard. We might want to drop it for something else, but it might distort the red sources we need to cast EtW. Then again, Tomb of Urami wins games. Thoughts on this?

Yeah Cruel Bargains are a bitch to find. I doubt you will find them at a local store or dealer. I ordered them online for like 18 a piece back in 07. It was a great investment. I did, however, pick up some sexy Mirage Infernal Contracts at the last tournament. And I got a playset of Foil FNM Tendrils. Now I just need to foil out stuff like Land Grant and I'll be pimpn.

EDIT:
I'm currently doing a little testing with this list.

Pact SI:
Business:
2 Goblin Charbelcher
3 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Infernal Contract
4 Cruel Bargain

Protection:
3 Xantid Swarm

Mana:
1 Odious Trow
4 Summoner's Pact
4 Elvish Spirit Guide
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Land Grant
1 Bayou
1 Dryad Arbor

I'm dabbling back and forth between x3 Xantid Swarm and x2 Xantid Swarm, x1 Wild Cantor. I like it better than Pact of Negation, thats for sure, because it protects the IGG loop and is staying protection which facilitates multiple attempts against U.dec. Its much more compatible with the deck's strategy. It hasn't really been inhibiting yet, and its provided me with a Culling the Weak target sometimes when I didn't have Pact or LG. I'd only play MD Swarms though with x4 ESG MD. Though, the deck can run on as few as x2 ESG (I prefer more Daze protection though).
If only it had haste.. Sigh. Pact-->Swarm, swing, would be sick. Too bad there isn't a protection creature we can search for that doesn't work immediately.

I'll switch back to testing the BRg list soon. I just want to see if this variant is worth pursuing. Breathweapon ran x4 Swarm in his original list. Breathweapon, how did this work out for you?

[kicks_422]

As much as I'm a huge fan of Xantid Swarm, is it really effective in SI? To cast it Turn 1, you'd need to have one of the few initial green sources and use it for that. Have you ever found yourself lacking mana for the turn after the Swarm lands? I'm much more inclined to test out Unmask MDince that could still push the Turn 1 kill with a good hand. I might try that out in the BRG version next.

[Vacrix]

As much as I'm a huge fan of Xantid Swarm, is it really effective in SI? To cast it Turn 1, you'd need to have one of the few initial green sources and use it for that. Have you ever found yourself lacking mana for the turn after the Swarm lands? I'm much more inclined to test out Unmask MDince that could still push the Turn 1 kill with a good hand. I might try that out in the BRG version next.
It makes the Merfolk matchup favorable. My friend owns Merfolk and we test a lot. He plays Mono-blue. The U/w lists are much better because they run STP. Without it, Tomb of Urami or Xantid Swarm usually win you the game.

Actually SI plays quite a few initial G sources:
x4 ESG
x4 Lotus Petal
x4 Land Grant
x1 Bayou
And it gets better if you run Chrome Mox imprinting something G. Its a must counter for Merfolk, and often I seem to sneak it into play. Same with Tomb. If I lead with Lotus Petal, LED, then I can crack Tomb and the Urami token goes all the way (Merfolk don't fly).

Unmask has been alright. Its great.. if you have the right hand. I prefer Swarm ATM.

[kicks_422]

Yeah, I thought about it more, and realized if you could get Swarm to stick, that buys you time to get enough mana if you used up your IMS for it.

[Vacrix]

Yeah, I thought about it more, and realized if you could get Swarm to stick, that buys you time to get enough mana if you used up your IMS for it.
And its a nice Culling target after you are protected and going off, though you better make sure you are going to win with the Culling, or else you will wish you didn't play it. In one game against Merfolk, I thought I had the nuts and tried to go off turn 2 with Culling and failed. Its a mistake I won't make again. You just go off when you are good and ready, since they can't do shit to it until you go off.

[TheSleeper]

Are Cruel Bargains that hard to find? I found 4 at a local store for $10 each (AUD!) and I was stoked. Maybe I just got lucky. 4 x Mirage Infernals as well (obv. no-one plays SI around here).

Anyways I've been testing a bit against a mate who is running combo Elves. Its pretty fun testing against another combo deck - every turn is critical! Often tho on the draw I can go off Turn 2, when his usual kill is Turn 3/4. As my knowledge of the deck improves I've been liking EWitness more and more, usually getting back a Cabal Ritual to crank my mana, or a Draw4.

Haven't explored the Red version at all yet, though EtW vs. Blue would be good. That said, a lot of Blue (non-Merfolk) decks run EE, which was the bane of my previous Belcher deck.

Re: Xantid Swarm -> This guys usefulness might have dropped slightly if people start running the flying Merfolk leveller =[

[Vacrix]

Are Cruel Bargains that hard to find? I found 4 at a local store for $10 each (AUD!) and I was stoked. Maybe I just got lucky. 4 x Mirage Infernals as well (obv. no-one plays SI around here).

Anyways I've been testing a bit against a mate who is running combo Elves. Its pretty fun testing against another combo deck - every turn is critical! Often tho on the draw I can go off Turn 2, when his usual kill is Turn 3/4. As my knowledge of the deck improves I've been liking EWitness more and more, usually getting back a Cabal Ritual to crank my mana, or a Draw4.

Haven't explored the Red version at all yet, though EtW vs. Blue would be good. That said, a lot of Blue (non-Merfolk) decks run EE, which was the bane of my previous Belcher deck.

Re: Xantid Swarm -> This guys usefulness might have dropped slightly if people start running the flying Merfolk leveller =[
Yeah with practice, I'm certain you can get to fairly consistent turn 1's on the draw. I don't even gold fish on the draw anymore because its SO easy (though I probably should). Last tournament I played at, I was mostly on the draw, and I went off turn 1 (or attempted to at least against Matt) most of the time. Btw, against a non-disruptive combo deck like Elves (or Belcher), always be on the draw. It improves your consistency. Scouting was really crucial at the last tournament. I have a knack for remembering faces and decks, so I was able to put each of my opponent on a specific deck before we even sat down (more than half of the time), which helps immensely when deciding whether to play or draw.

Yeah. That said, I don't know about EtW. The only strength is that if the opponent doesn't see any red sources, he might not expect it at all. Even then, it might be a good boarding strategy. Like x4 SSG, x4 EtW. Its a lot of board space though. Probably not worth it.

[emidln]

I don't remember if I mentioned Null Profusion in the primer or in public threads but we tested it and talked about it a lot on the Team Blitzkrieg forums. rsaunder played with it almost religiously in SI and when I tested it, i never lost a game where it resolved. This would have been in Bg or Bu builds of SI. I think we replaced one of the two IGGs we played at the time.

[Vacrix]

So you just played x1 Null Profusion in the QSI/Land Grant lists? It does look good in QSI actually, since resolving it guarantees you will start drawing business, even when you might normally draw dead into Petal Petal, Rit.. And you have the land in that list to slow play, resolving it after a Therapy. I don't think I'd play QSI though when I could just as easily play NLS. I think Pact SI and SITES are the viable lists ATM. QSI and Land Grant are still playable but not as competitive.

[emidln]

We actually had a list of SI that was very similar to the Land Grant list but played 1-3 Meditate in addition to LED/Infernal Tutors. It ran 5-7 lands with a fetch/dual config instead of land grant/dual. I never tried the card in SI.

I'd assume that it would be solid in any lists as a 1-2-of. I mean, you can't really tutor for it, but if you draw it, you auto-win if you can get to 6 mana (which isn't that hard). The killer for me was that it was only *okay* in your opening hand as you sometimes were stuck on like 1-2 cards after casting it where you could easily draw runner, runner 3s and just lose.

[Vacrix]

Could you dig up the list? I'm interested. In the mean time, I'll give it a shot in Pact SI as a 1 of and see how it goes. Summoner's Pact-->Wild Cantor looks really attractive now, netting us 2 cards for 0.

The other thing I thought of recently was Diminishing Returns. I know it looks like a horrible add to Pact SI because we don't have blue sources.. but do we? Sure x4 Lotus Petal provides some blue but Manamorphose is really the draw here, color fixing for UU; if we are stuck it could be an out. Often drawing a new 7 can win us the game, especially if we float mana into the new 7 which is likely. The other option is to Infernal Tutor + LED into it. There is the occasion in which we are sitting on a hand that is one mana short of the IGG loop, or the wrong ritual short (Culling and Cabal tend to be bad with IGG). Sure we can pass the turn and hope to draw that extra mana source, but is this a better option? There will also be the occasion where it sits dead in our hand. Sometimes Ewit and IGG are just as dead, yet we play them. Maybe -1 Ewit +1 DR could be viable.

[BreathWeapon]

Wanted to post this for those interested in SITES,

3 Empty the Warrens
4 Burning Wish
4 Cruel Bargain
3 Infernal Contract
4 Duress
7 Kobolds
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Culling the Weak
4 Simian Spirit Guide
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
7 Lands

The idea here is to graft the Burning Wish/Empty the Warrens/Simian Spirit Guide engine on top of the Draw 4s to force your opponent to counter the acceleration or face an army of Goblins. The main difference is cutting Infernal Tutor (IMO the worst engine in Storm) and replace it with Burning Wish to reach a Recurring Insight, Balance of Power or Diminishing Returns as suplimental engines while getting the normal Empty the Warrens and Draw 4 to start the chain. While I still think Pact SI has an advantage in the sense it's creature slots double as "counter target Daze" and help cast Cabal Ritual, SITES works in a similar sense by turning the kill condition into an uncounterable threat and forcing the opponent to target the acceleration in the deck instead of the Draw 4s and Burning Wish does a pretty awesome job of being a less LED dependent threat itself. Anyway, with the amount of acceleration and bombs in this deck, ripping a Reccuring Insight looks pretty sick and easily in our mana production.

Might be a more solid approach at this point?