[Deck] T.E.S. - The EPIC Storm

[Bryant Cook]

I never SB all 10 cards at once, I SB in different sets of cards game 2 and game 3 in order to take advantage of the opponent's preconceptions of what I am and am not playing.

So, you're playing 10 cards for a match-up but not even using them all at once? It kind of makes my point even more valid. You're welcome to give us all more feedback when you've done more testing.

[Turboninja]

I took T.E.S. to a 16-man tournament and split in finals.

I used the list from October on theepicstorm.com

I'm not going to make a big report, because there wasn't a lot of play involved.

1st round 2-0 against mono-black value

It wasn't really strong and the player was had not played legacy in 3 years. Nothing much to say.

2nd round 2-0 against Goblin

Really easy matchup I find.

3rd round 2-0 against Sneak and Show

Game two he showed an Emmy while I got Xantid Swarm and won the next turn.

4th round Draw.

Semi-finals 2-0 against same Goblin.

Finals was against Stoneblade but I had to leave, so we split.

I love the deck, had easy matchups and got 4 turn one wins over 8 games.

I've been piloting for two months now.

That's all :)

[Final Fortune]

So, you're playing 10 cards for a match-up but not even using them all at once? It kind of makes my point even more valid. You're welcome to give us all more feedback when you've done more testing.

No, different sets of cards are used vs different types of aggro-control and control based on what they're playing and SBing in, you have the information advantage via Discard so you can figure out whether or not they're boarding for Empty the Warrens, the graveyard etc. and make adjustments as needed between Ad Nauseam, Past in Flames, Empty the Warrens etc. I SBed vs Island.dec, not Miracles.

[Bryant Cook]

No, different sets of cards are used vs different types of aggro-control and control based on what they're playing and SBing in, you have the information advantage via Discard so you can figure out whether or not they're boarding for Empty the Warrens, the graveyard etc. and make adjustments as needed between Ad Nauseam, Past in Flames, Empty the Warrens etc. I SBed vs Island.dec, not Miracles.

Well, how do you side against Miracles then?

Because that's the best match-up for grinding-station mode, but you're claiming not to use it. Since you would be siding in the Krosan Grips?

Where would you like the Grinding Station package if not Miracles? Delver variants? That plan has a very tough time against a turn one Delver of Secrets.

[Final Fortune]

At the moment I just SB in Grips and PIF/Tendrils vs Miracles so I can double Tendrils thru Wish -> Tendrils -> Infernal -> Tendrils. Warrens are more for aggro-control but I try never to board the same way in both G2 and G3. Mainly the board space is there in order not to have a default boarding plan for both G2 and G3 or on the play or on the draw.

[Bryant Cook]

At the moment I just SB in Grips and PIF/Tendrils vs Miracles so I can double Tendrils thru Wish -> Tendrils -> Infernal -> Tendrils. Warrens are more for aggro-control but I try never to board the same way in both G2 and G3. Mainly the board space is there in order not to have a default boarding plan for both G2 and G3 or on the play or on the draw.

That plan is fine for Miracles.

As for Aggro control, I think slow Empty the Warrens (Past turn 1) are often tough due to Deathrite Shaman + any other creature, which is easier to create when you're not doing it until turn 2-3 and for 10-12 Goblins. I think this is where the speed of Chrome Mox really helps. I know that the empty plan is for D&T too, but that is one of the best match-ups for Ad Nauseam. You're making your best engine worst to give them more possible outs through Batterskull and/or Ratchet Bomb.

[Pelikanudo]

It might be incorrect to discuss TNT here, but I'll just respond very briefly. If you want, we can create a separate thread for the deck. Not sure we need to though, since ANT and TES are already very close to each other, and TNT is more or less a hybrid, which could be discussed in both threads. F.i. my TNT list looks like TES with Cabal Ritual instead of Rite of Flame, and Empty the Warrens on side rather than main deck. Other than that it's just a TES list. (I actually feel TNT should be discussed here rather than in the ANT thread, because the misnamed deck ANT almost never uses Ad Nauseam, where both TES and TNT are tuned around it.)

TNT was designed by Team Nijmegen (Tendrils, hence the name). The idea was to tune for a strong Ad Nauseam mainly. Wish was there for flexibility, better threat density and so you didn't need Tendrils main deck, but Cabal Ritual does give you a slightly higher average CMC than Rite, so you kind of need a few Chrome Moxen.

Team Nijmegen, as far as I know, always used basics, but it's not set in stone. You can play controllish by just playing fetches and not -or very selectively- using them. I'm not sure whether we really need the basics. I'll be more certain when the meta settles, but even if everything just goes back to what it was before Cruise and Dig got printed, even then I didn't run basics, and I never lost because of that fact. My TNT list from back then actually worked really well against Canadian Thresh (which should be the deck that capitalizes most on you not having basics).

Well the Base List I refer to is the following:

http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=8757&iddeck=63928

I really don't know who was the creator, I think was a boy in Barcelona, but maybe was that Team.
The need of Tendrils main is a must in this archetype, and also the Past In Flames,
the need to Grim Tutor in the side was also a must and wanted to make emphasis that it is better to play 4 I.T. 3 B.W. than backwards.
My version was like this except I substituited C.M. by Tropical Island and after some testing I noticed that I preferred T.I. instead of Bayou as you first want to stabilize and next to win.

This was my version:
http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=10493&iddeck=76528 - Look at the rest of Top 8 which I crushed, I crushed so many Blue decks in here...
which was update from then -1 Island +1 T.I and the side also has several changes... as D.P. instead of G.T. or Decays and Krosans. I remember that torunament and I made the easy 9-1 loosing uniquely vs the boy I faced in the finals, whch I won that time...

The behaviour of this deck is more like ANT than TES, at least these 2 archetypes I expose you.
Not much time ago I tried an experiment which consisted in full of B.W. and EtW base instead of PiF and Tendrils, that was a mistake that I shouldn't have even tried...
EtW base requires RoF and C.M.
PiF Loops requires Cabals Rituals and TEndrils Main
B.W. exists in TNT as both toolbox, alternate WinCon and Threat Density - at least in that era.

The last time I'm aware this deck was played was in GP Paris by a friend of Mine (my padawan) - I remember he made Day 2 and crushed a Sourcer by here named Tom T. he was playing TES, he got top 100.

Even I recognize the deck has quick wins - which need to go through LED, is not as quick as TES, this is something I will miss forever from the rest of Storm Archetypes and I include in here TNT also. this is the unique reason I still play TES - because you can bypass a hand of Fluster daze and stifle if you start, as simple as this. I really love the ability of TES to just going off when there is a chance, this ability is only restricted to TES deck. and sadly C.M. contributes to this purpose.
Well I will wait for uncounterable Pyro and a not as bad C.M....


@Lemenear:

You: Well, it doesn't imply that you will run DP and AN in one maindeck or that AN is even required in ANT in the first place. In addition I disagree with "good Ad Nauseams" if you need Red & Black mana post Ad Nauseam in a deck w/o chrome moxen or Rites, but higher average cmc and less options to accelate from zero or one mana float. I disagree with the later term of "better ad nauseams" and point to DP in terms of threat density. If you want a fast and yard-independant option while increasing the threat density in ANT, the solution is DP+EtW, not Wishes imo.

Me: you have worse Ad nauseams if you play D.P. than B.W., agree you need some mana floating, however if you pass the turn you just will win more likely than playing D.P.
I will say SlothTheDark Words in regards to EtW - EtW is a Path To Victory but should not be The Path To Victory for 2nd and 3rd games mosts of the times. I just need to agree, at least in ANT archetypes. I just dont want to choose between Ad Nauseam and EtW, why? I can choose to have both in TNT!

The GP coverage delivered two picture perfect examples of ANT Ad Nauseams w/o mana floated and TNT is even worse requiring red mana.

[JPoJohnson]

Pelikanudo - I don't understand what you're wanting from this thread. Your posts are long and there's no useful or viable content contained in it. You're like an old lady that just keeps talking and talking and never gets to the point of her story.

If you want to develop a deck that, as you have stated with your own words, is an ANT variant, why do you keep posting here in TES and take up time and space that isn't productive to the development of the TES deck. Go post in the appropriate forum and stop spamming up this thread with unnecessary and unproductive posts that annoy everyone.

[Lemnear]

@Lemenear:

You: Well, it doesn't imply that you will run DP and AN in one maindeck or that AN is even required in ANT in the first place. In addition I disagree with "good Ad Nauseams" if you need Red & Black mana post Ad Nauseam in a deck w/o chrome moxen or Rites, but higher average cmc and less options to accelate from zero or one mana float. I disagree with the later term of "better ad nauseams" and point to DP in terms of threat density. If you want a fast and yard-independant option while increasing the threat density in ANT, the solution is DP+EtW, not Wishes imo.

Me: you have worse Ad nauseams if you play D.P. than B.W., agree you need some mana floating, however if you pass the turn you just will win more likely than playing D.P.
I will say SlothTheDark Words in regards to EtW - EtW is a Path To Victory but should not be The Path To Victory for 2nd and 3rd games mosts of the times. I just need to agree, at least in ANT archetypes. I just dont want to choose between Ad Nauseam and EtW, why? I can choose to have both in TNT!

The GP coverage delivered two picture perfect examples of ANT Ad Nauseams w/o mana floated and TNT is even worse requiring red mana.

Wait, is going down to Bolt-/Delver-Range and pass the turn suddenly a legit play against Tempo/Mud/Thalia/Thorn/Chalice/etc. or do you consider that Ad Nauseam mimicing a costy Draw7 is fine in other matchups than control?

[Final Fortune]

That plan is fine for Miracles.

As for Aggro control, I think slow Empty the Warrens (Past turn 1) are often tough due to Deathrite Shaman + any other creature, which is easier to create when you're not doing it until turn 2-3 and for 10-12 Goblins. I think this is where the speed of Chrome Mox really helps. I know that the empty plan is for D&T too, but that is one of the best match-ups for Ad Nauseam. You're making your best engine worst to give them more possible outs through Batterskull and/or Ratchet Bomb.

I'm having mixed results with Empty the Warrens, I usually go for a handful of Goblins and then finish them off with a Burning Wish for Tendrils of Agony. It's hard to judge the efficacy of the strategy, since opponent's SBs differ so much in terms of token hate.

I think I'm going to give your list a try, I know you don't like the Empty the Warrens plan, but have you thought about SBing out the 2 discard spells and SBing in 2 Empty the Warrens in aggro-control match ups? I was thinking we could just rely on Cabal Therapy and Burning Wish->Discard to get thru' the counter wall in the mid-game and the Warrens would let us rape them hard on the play.

[Bryant Cook]

I'm having mixed results with Empty the Warrens, I usually go for a handful of Goblins and then finish them off with a Burning Wish for Tendrils of Agony. It's hard to judge the efficacy of the strategy, since opponent's SBs differ so much in terms of token hate.

I think I'm going to give your list a try, I know you don't like the Empty the Warrens plan, but have you thought about SBing out the 2 discard spells and SBing in 2 Empty the Warrens in aggro-control match ups? I was thinking we could just rely on Cabal Therapy and Burning Wish->Discard to get thru' the counter wall in the mid-game and the Warrens would let us rape them hard on the play.

I mean, I did test it when it was suggested again. I haven't tested it since I moved back to 3 Chrome Mox, which would help that plan.

I just don't think it's reliable against the non-RUG Delver, Delver decks if it's not for more than 10. A Deathrite Shaman and any other creature trump the entire Strategy. Admittedly, Ad Nauseam isn't great in those match-ups, but it's going to be even worse with 3 ETW in the deck which could be disastrous if they're holding sweepers and we don't have a Cabal Therapy in the graveyard (Haven't seen and/or DRS).

I'm extremely happy with my current list, but I'll try the sideboard Warrens plan again (Now with 3 Mox) in the week before SCG:NJ. I likely won't change my opinion as I was just testing this last month and I don't think my list has changed enough to make me change my mind.

[Final Fortune]

Well I think it's a game 2 or 3 strategy when you're on the play, because if you've lost game 1 they are going to Mulligan into Force of Will game 2 and you can Storm out 8 Goblins and get there to reach game 3 and then SB them back out.

With that much acceleration behind them I think they're a pretty strong gambit. I think Ad Nauseam is still OK as long as you use it as a D7 into Warrens + Therapy, or maybe just put in the Past/Tendril kill and cut Ad Nauseam and Ponders.

[Pelikanudo]

I'm having mixed results with Empty the Warrens, I usually go for a handful of Goblins and then finish them off with a Burning Wish for Tendrils of Agony. It's hard to judge the efficacy of the strategy, since opponent's SBs differ so much in terms of token hate.

I think I'm going to give your list a try, I know you don't like the Empty the Warrens plan, but have you thought about SBing out the 2 discard spells and SBing in 2 Empty the Warrens in aggro-control match ups? I was thinking we could just rely on Cabal Therapy and Burning Wish->Discard to get thru' the counter wall in the mid-game and the Warrens would let us rape them hard on the play.

if you plan that strategy vs Tempo, I believe that taking out discard spells is just wrong as they now play Stifle which will target EtW, on the other side maybe you could make mind-games to make the opp. use his/her stifles vs your fetches, but this is not a guarrantied strategy, I would opt to take out other cards instead of discard, discard can also target pyroclasm effects.


@Lemnear:
Wait, is going down to Bolt-/Delver-Range and pass the turn suddenly a legit play against Tempo/Mud/Thalia/Thorn/Chalice/etc. or do you consider that Ad Nauseam mimicing a costy Draw7 is fine in other matchups than control?

No, this is not a legit play against Tempo/Mud/Thalia/Thorn/Chalice/etc, maybe only in the scenarios when you can win on the next turn withouth beeing bolted orThalied.
I consider that Ad Nauseam mimicing a costy Draw7 is fine in other matchups than control, for example vs Combo.

@JPoJohnson: Please add me to your ignore list, I already did so. and problem solved.

[Final Fortune]

if you plan that strategy vs Tempo, I believe that taking out discard spells is just wrong as they now play Stifle which will target EtW, on the other side maybe you could make mind-games to make the opp. use his/her stifles vs your fetches, but this is not a guarrantied strategy, I would opt to take out other cards instead of discard, discard can also target pyroclasm effects.

You obviously don't SB Empty the Warrens vs aggro-control decks that play Stifle, and discard is irrelevant in situations where you're trying to push for Empty the Warrens before they can play their first land. That said, I don't object to SBing out a number of Ponder instead.

[Pelikanudo]

You obviously don't SB Empty the Warrens vs aggro-control decks that play Stifle, and discard is irrelevant in situations where you're trying to push for Empty the Warrens before they can play their first land. That said, I don't object to SBing out a number of Ponder instead.

if you refer to agro-control decks with daze, delver and FoW AND (Nimble OR Deathrite) - well, these archetypes are returning to full stifle package, at least in my meta, but well maybe you refer to other archetypes...

Apart, I' m getting good results vs Miracles in testing!!!!! YES! and I believe TES is the best deck suited to face Miracles, at least in 1st game. I think I am ready to win the MKM Series! ha ha ha.

[Final Fortune]

I have never seen BUG run Stifle MD, it makes no sense for a Hymn/Sinkhole deck to do that.

[Pelikanudo]

I have never seen BUG run Stifle MD, it makes no sense for a Hymn/Sinkhole deck to do that.

p
Agree on this - these decks dont play Stifle

I see this as example of the archetypè I refer to:
http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=18767&iddeck=142325
http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=18767&iddeck=142338
http://tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=18656&iddeck=141404 - this is an example with no stifles - exactly this deck won me , althoutgh 1st game I was able to cast A.N at 13 lifes I regretted to not to play pyroclasm in side... but 2nd was just impossible to win....

In my personal experience I have 0 problems vs this archetype unless they are able to land a null rod but they only play usually 1... or hitting several therapies -
also vs these archetypes sidint out discard is the last thing I do as a duress hitting a hymn is one of the best things you can do, but again I don't use the Overload EtW strategy...
I dont see hymn in these decks...

[Bryant Cook]

I have never seen BUG run Stifle MD, it makes no sense for a Hymn/Sinkhole deck to do that.

But BUG is the only Delver deck that doesnt run Stifle. Even the Grixis decks around here run them. I did some limited testing yesterday and my results were mediocre.

[Asthereal]

I have never seen BUG run Stifle MD, it makes no sense for a Hymn/Sinkhole deck to do that.

This may change. Stifle helps against some of the harder matchups: Miracle triggers, Liliana sacs, Bloodbraid cascades, Wasteland activations. I could go on. And let's not forget the fact that not all Team America/BUG Delver lists run Hymn. There's enough of them running Thoughtseize, or no discard at all. Hymn requires BB, wich puts quite a strain on the mana base. If you can avoid running cards that cost BB, the mana base becomes much more streamlined.

(Side note: If I find time, I will actually test Stifle in my Hymn T/A list. Hymn tends to hit lands every now and then, and Stifle can help keeping them mana screwed. The sequencing is somewhat challenging, but that's a matter of knowing the matchup and prioritizing properly.)

(Second side note: Last time I saw Sinkhole in a blue deck was in 2008.)

[LDX]

Sorry to interrupt, very quick question.

Playing against unknown on the draw. Got a very decent hand for a natural Empty the Warrens on turn 2, around 10, which would be fine against Delver or Miracles. I have a Ponder in hand to accelerate the process, switch to Ad Nauseam for more mana, or get a greater Storm count, and I a Cabal Therapy for protection. I just can't go turn 1 because a lack of IMS.

On his first turn, my opponent plays Tundra > Sensei's Divining Top.

I had the choice between a Ponder and Cabal Therapy for Counterbalance. Without thinking, I went for Ponder, he plays Counterbalance turn 2.

Was playing the Therapy the obvious choice?