[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils) Storm Combo

[Lemnear]

One thing I have noticed about playing storm, ant specifically is that I often need to wait and be patient to combo off. Many keepable hands and subsequent cantrips dictate that the combo turn may not be turn 3 or 4. I personally like dark confidant in these situations, and it is in these situations that I would be glad I played a dark confidant turn 2 instead of a preordain.

So you wanna tell me that Dark confidant is better fixing draws or finding replacement for discarded combo pieces than cantrips?

Sometimes your opponents deck also does not perform the way it was laid out on paper. Dark confidant takes advantage of those stumbles over time greater than a single cantrip could.

Thats bullshit, sorry. Making an argument out of your opponent being unable to play/build their deck correctly, isn't a base for discussing cards.

Consider also that 2 mana investment is not followed by doing nothing. You're still cantriping or spinning top getting even more value when combined with bob.

You are missing the point: Your opponent isn't a goldfish, sitting around and doing nothing for turns. If you want to argue with the interaction with SDT to grind yout advantage, you might want play SB Counterbalance

I typically bring in DC in the mirror, and sultai decks. Sultai decks usually board out abrupt decay against us and their clock isn't always fast enough because they heavily value hand disruption after you turn 1 them game 1. 😉

You bring in Confidant in the combo mirror? WUT?

[CabalTherapy]

You bring in Confidant in the combo mirror? WUT?

It'd be great if we could keep up a decent atmosphere in here. It's generally a thread where people, who know each other in rl, discuss this wonderful deck in calm fashion.
But since I am on Mr. Raab's ignore list (for sure) he won't read it.
On the other hand, I am still wondering on which basis certain people appoint themselves authorities on a matter; postcount does not equal stormcount.

Ontopic: Confidant is a useful creature against BGx strategies and even if I don't play him I respect opinions to play him there. Lukas Blohon brought it against me in an ANT mirror some time ago and
he knows what he is doing (most of the time I'd say). Ok, he still lost but Confi was nice nonetheless.

[Lemnear]

But since I am on Mr. Raab's ignore list (for sure) he won't read it.

Neither of your accounts in on my ignore list ;)

[naswari]

It'd be great if we could keep up a decent atmosphere in here. It's generally a thread where people, who know each other in rl, discuss this wonderful deck in calm fashion.
But since I am on Mr. Raab's ignore list (for sure) he won't read it.
On the other hand, I am still wondering on which basis certain people appoint themselves authorities on a matter; postcount does not equal stormcount.

Ontopic: Confidant is a useful creature against BGx strategies and even if I don't play him I respect opinions to play him there. Lukas Blohon brought it against me in an ANT mirror some time ago and
he knows what he is doing (most of the time I'd say). Ok, he still lost but Confi was nice nonetheless.

Huh, interesting. Lukas Blohon must know a good plan when he sees it. I would tend to agree with all of your points here, although I must admit I've been enjoying the apparent flabbergasted indignant responses of our friend "Mr. Raab" here.

Setting aside Bob, have you ever experimented with Serenity? I have to say it's a great feeling wrathing a chalice or a thorn of amethyst or 2 before you tendril someone out. lol

[naswari]

So you wanna tell me that Dark confidant is better fixing draws or finding replacement for discarded combo pieces than cantrips?



Thats bullshit, sorry. Making an argument out of your opponent being unable to play/build their deck correctly, isn't a base for discussing cards.



You are missing the point: Your opponent isn't a goldfish, sitting around and doing nothing for turns. If you want to argue with the interaction with SDT to grind yout advantage, you might want play SB Counterbalance



You bring in Confidant in the combo mirror? WUT?

First, no, I didn't say Bob was strictly better than a cantrip at fixing draws or replacing discarded combo pieces. If you didn't understand what I said, let me clear it up. I said that if for some reason or another, I wasn't able to combo early then the more permanent, lasting card advantage engine of dark confidant would make me glad I cast it early instead of say cantripping the turn I cast dark confidant.

Second, I pretty much knew you would say this. In a way you are right that it's somewhat of a fallacy to base the value of a card on your opponent's deck not functioning at 100% efficiency. But then if your opponent's deck ran at 100% efficiency 100% of the time it would also be a mute point because they would probably have won, regardless of whether you drew a Dark Confidant (being the horrible choice for storm that it so obviously is) or some other card. But that's not really how MTG works is it? You have to take advantage of the stumbles your opponents make whether they be misplays (the less common occurrence), or just not seeing the right cards when they need them.

Third, good one. Clearly what I meant by that was that I'm relying solely on the valuable interaction between Top and Bob to win me games. Got me. Next question.

4th, Yes! Dark Confidant in the mirror can be great, it's one of my favorite tools in the mirror. But I guess here again I should assume my opponent is going to operate at 100% efficiency of the deck and just kill me turn one no matter what I draw? We both know how often that happens (okay not too infrequently lol). But barring that if I can disrupt my storm opponent enough and we're left without the pieces and I have a dark confidant and he doesn't, let the value train just keep on chugging.

[bigbobbobber]

On the other hand, I am still wondering on which basis certain people appoint themselves authorities on a matter; postcount does not equal stormcount.

This line is awesome, but it's starting to look like the TES thread here...

[Lemnear]

This line is awesome, but it's starting to look like the TES thread here...

Indeed. People try justifying to still run 5 colors ;)

First, no, I didn't say Bob was strictly better than a cantrip at fixing draws or replacing discarded combo pieces. If you didn't understand what I said, let me clear it up. I said that if for some reason or another, I wasn't able to combo early then the more permanent, lasting card advantage engine of dark confidant would make me glad I cast it early instead of say cantripping the turn I cast dark confidant.

And why is that so? Its important to clearly frame the situation in which you think Confidant was the better play in the context of what you faced, because for me it reads like "Opponent had no clock, no counter, no removal, no gas".

Second, I pretty much knew you would say this. In a way you are right that it's somewhat of a fallacy to base the value of a card on your opponent's deck not functioning at 100% efficiency. But then if your opponent's deck ran at 100% efficiency 100% of the time it would also be a mute point because they would probably have won, regardless of whether you drew a Dark Confidant (being the horrible choice for storm that it so obviously is) or some other card. But that's not really how MTG works is it? You have to take advantage of the stumbles your opponents make whether they be misplays (the less common occurrence), or just not seeing the right cards when they need them.

No one says, mistakes don't happen or players don't stumble over their decks variance or such, but that reserving SB space for situations in which your opponent has no way to pressure you nor an answer to Confidant, is a decision, I can't understand

4th, Yes! Dark Confidant in the mirror can be great, it's one of my favorite tools in the mirror. But I guess here again I should assume my opponent is going to operate at 100% efficiency of the deck and just kill me turn one no matter what I draw? We both know how often that happens (okay not too infrequently lol). But barring that if I can disrupt my storm opponent enough and we're left without the pieces and I have a dark confidant and he doesn't, let the value train just keep on chugging.

It can be great given you manage to slow down your opponent long enough so you can actually profit from Confidant which requires you to shred their hand first, agree? The question to ask here is, if cards like Flusterstorm or Surgical extraction are not better/faster/reliable options to keep your opponent at bay during a game, than trying to grind them down with Confidant, given these cards bave also more application in other matchups

[meffeo]

postcount does not equal stormcount.

This made my day.

Thanks man.

[B88]

Hi guys, here my little report about a tournament i did yesterday, my list has: 2pif, 1nausea, 1petition, 14lands and the SB was: 2carpet 1trop 1toa 1etw 1truth 1hurkyl 4decay 2fluster 2massacre.

T1 - Reanimator 1-2 (g1 he topdecked exhume, g2 won with fast nauseam, g3 i mulled to 5)
T2 - Miracle 2-1 (g1 under balance lock, g2 i couldn't find the second decay, g3 won with Toa from hand with fluster backup for his fluster)
T3 - bug Pod 2-0 (easy MU)
T4 - Team America 2-1 (g1 won with nausea, g2 lost by his Rod, g3 won by natural chain)

some thoughts:
1- fluster works really well against miracle, combo and tempo decks (against Team america i won a game with it because i CT him for double fow and he play one of them and my fluster fish him and let resolves the CT)
2- i usualy play D.Confindant, but as Martin Nielsen said if you he got a removal is a problem because you trade a good card for a card that it usually dead.
3 - carpet seems fine i just use it one time and worked well, but i need more test

[Morden]

sorry for the silly question, but why everyone play a lot of high CMC spells in a deck that runs Ad Nauseam??
I know I know, nausea is a side plan and your main goal is to go by PiF. But is it possible to swap Petition/Pif with Burning Wish?
Just ad nauseam and tendrils MD, 2-3 wishes and fix a little the manabase (maybe a badland in place of swamp). 1 petition and 1 Pif in sideboard of course.

[Ronald Deuce]

Whew! Sorry I've been remiss in responding to some people in the thread. Travelling until early next week.

Dark Confidant has a serious problem that hasn't been addressed: it's an atrocious topdeck at virtually every stage of the game. I've considered running it a few times, but I find myself asking whether it's worth it over any number of other cards, and I keep finding that the answer is no. It doesn't stop us from getting locked out; it doesn't net us the card advantage of Ad Nauseam, and it doesn't let us filter cards like cantrips do; and it actually hurts us to lose life to it in a number of matchups in which drawing cards is useful.

Morden, Burning Wish absolutely has crossed my mind, especially since Worcester. Not exaggerating; I had the worst set of AdNs at that tournament that I've ever had, and among the worst I've ever seen.

With that having been said, I think it's going to require a lot of restructuring to make Burning Wish work in this deck. It requires initial red sources; it pulls us much more strongly toward Empty the Warrens, which itself necessitates an LED or further initial red sources; we can't loop it with Past in Flames; and building an effective wishboard so that we get the best use out of the card is really important, so we're going to have to totally reconfigure our sideboard to accommodate it.

Through the Worcester open, I was running 2x PiF, 1x AdN, Petition, Tendrils, and I'd only seen Ad Nauseam fail me (at most) once per three rounds, usually less. I'm not sure whether it's worth it to tinker with this balance, because it's worked well for me in the past. I think I won a game in round 2 off of AdN, as well, so it still did some good at Worcester. Again, though, playing the card three times in two rounds and totally folding every time feels really bad, even if AdN is too important to cut.

[TokugawaEdo]

sorry for the silly question, but why everyone play a lot of high CMC spells in a deck that runs Ad Nauseam??
I know I know, nausea is a side plan and your main goal is to go by PiF. But is it possible to swap Petition/Pif with Burning Wish?
Just ad nauseam and tendrils MD, 2-3 wishes and fix a little the manabase (maybe a badland in place of swamp). 1 petition and 1 Pif in sideboard of course.

My two biggest problem with wish are A) it strains your mana base more since having red is much more important. Match ups like DnT and Rug Delver, possible more, get much harder. I've always liked that without the decays, the deck feels like a 2 color deck, but the wishes push it into 3 color territory. B) You cant use wish in your PiF loops meaning you still need another tutor card. Although the AdNs would be stronger it weakens the PiF line. AdN is great and is a good way of going off early but I believe PiF is the core game plan of the deck and weakening it doesn't seem correct. This is my opinion on it and hopefully some people agree but some of the more seasoned players on here might have different takes on it.

[Morden]

You both are right, using wishes require to change a little the deck.
I'm not worried so much for the mana, I'd add only 2 BW, red mana can be paid with led or petal, it is the final piece of the combo, I don't require it to start storming (I'd keep cabal ritual, not rite of flames).
About the Pif loop you are right, the deck will become more Nauseam dependent.
Unfortunally I have very little free time now, so I cannot test so much, but I'll do as soon as possible

[naswari]

You both are right, using wishes require to change a little the deck.
I'm not worried so much for the mana, I'd add only 2 BW, red mana can be paid with led or petal, it is the final piece of the combo, I don't require it to start storming (I'd keep cabal ritual, not rite of flames).
About the Pif loop you are right, the deck will become more Nauseam dependent.
Unfortunally I have very little free time now, so I cannot test so much, but I'll do as soon as possible

Aside from tes, I've experimented with the core ant deck and 2 burning wishes, pif in the main and the sb, tendrils in the main and the sb, and no dark petitions. I then experimented with the same setup but cut 10th cantrip and sensei's divining top with 2 chrome mox.

I found that it didn't significantly improve ad naus to warrant the change enough, and as was mentioned before didn't combo well with pif. I did have some games that worked like you would think with ad naus, but the deck overall felt clunkier.

That was my experience but I didn't run it for more than 20 games.

[naswari]

Indeed. People try justifying to still run 5 colors ;)



And why is that so? Its important to clearly frame the situation in which you think Confidant was the better play in the context of what you faced, because for me it reads like "Opponent had no clock, no counter, no removal, no gas".



No one says, mistakes don't happen or players don't stumble over their decks variance or such, but that reserving SB space for situations in which your opponent has no way to pressure you nor an answer to Confidant, is a decision, I can't understand



It can be great given you manage to slow down your opponent long enough so you can actually profit from Confidant which requires you to shred their hand first, agree? The question to ask here is, if cards like Flusterstorm or Surgical extraction are not better/faster/reliable options to keep your opponent at bay during a game, than trying to grind them down with Confidant, given these cards bave also more application in other matchups

First, if I cast DC I would expect my opponent to have no removal. I wouldn't be unhappy if they countered it either despite the value it can generate. I would accept that trade. DC resolving is among the same priority for resolving as a cantrip for me. As for gas and a clock, I simply believe that dark confidant can help give you enough of both. However, you yourself can't be goldfishing either. You also have to be able to disrupt your opponent and not expect dark confidant to do all the work manipulating your deck obviously.

Second, that is not why Dark Confidant is in the board. I've beat this to death already I think.

I agree with your third statement. I have 2 flusterstorms in my board also, don't want 4. I do like surgical extraction as well and it is around the same flexibility in my sb as dc is. For sure DC may come out, but for now, I'm enjoying the games I have him in play and he's done some good work for me. As has surgical. In fact I boarded out my surgicals for serenity, the card I'm currently experimenting with and would like to hear more opinions on.

Kind of tired of talking about dark confidant to be honest I'm just surprised someone would seem to be so vehemently against the idea of running him in storm.

[Idionym]

Hello everyone.

I'm just about to buy ANT on MTGO and I have a couple of questions before I buy the deck.

I've been looking over lists and I think I'm going to go with Caleb Scherer's most recent list, as he is very experienced with storm and I assume he knows what he's doing. The list is pretty stock so if I need to change anything it'd just be the sideboard.

My question is: what do I sideboard for what matchups? Here's the sideboard for reference:

1 Bayou
3 Chrome Mox
1 Tropical Island
4 Abrupt Decay
1 Echoing Truth
2 City of Solitude
1 Empty the Warrens
2 Tendrils of Agony

Some seem pretty obvious. For example, I assume the moxs are for matchups where you need speed. Decays for miracles. Solitude for blue matchups with counters. Other than that, though, I'm not sure when to put in the lands (unless you're just putting them in for abrupt decay), or the echoing truth, or the extra storm cards.

Help on sideboarding in general would be appreciated. I'm not married to this list, obviously, so if anyone would be willing to help me out with a sideboard/list and a general sideboarding guide that'd be awesome!

Thanks!

[Ronald Deuce]

First, if I cast DC I would expect my opponent to have no removal. I wouldn't be unhappy if they countered it either despite the value it can generate. I would accept that trade. DC resolving is among the same priority for resolving as a cantrip for me. As for gas and a clock, I simply believe that dark confidant can help give you enough of both. However, you yourself can't be goldfishing either. You also have to be able to disrupt your opponent and not expect dark confidant to do all the work manipulating your deck obviously . . . .
Kind of tired of talking about dark confidant to be honest I'm just surprised someone would seem to be so vehemently against the idea of running him in storm.

Not to flog a dead horse, but I still think Confidant is counterproductive. Don't get me wrong; I like trying out new sideboard tech, especially for matchups in which we don't have established answers, but I feel like there are a number of problems with Confidant that make it worse than running cantrips/AdN/other things. Lemnear's right that there's a problem with the idea that we can run out a creature and expect it not to get sniped before it nets us cards, but there's a bigger underlying problem: sure, there's a chance your opponent will let the Confidant stick for enough turns to net you cards, but there's at least as big a chance that the game will be decided too quickly for Confidant to matter. They don't need to Plow your Dark Confidant if their Monastery Mentor can hulk out or their Vendilion Clique can yank your business. The added problem, which I mentioned before, is that pretty much any card in the deck except redundant lands is a better card to draw. We're not trying to spend a turn making a dude; we're trying to spend a turn either filtering cards for what we need to go off or just going off.

Quick thing I feel like I should mention, then I'll leave it alone: if you resolve a cantrip (or, for that matter, an Ad Nauseam), it can give you everything you need to win. Confidant doesn't do that.

Hope I'm not piling on, and again, I'm eager to hear ideas that may seem off the wall. I just think Confidant looks better than it is because it's got a similar effect to Ad Nauseam, but it lacks the explosivity or the speed.

[Sloshthedark]

You don't see the advantage of IMMEDIATELY getting additional copies of Decay at instant speed at end of turn against Counterbalance or the option to flachback Ponder + sac SCM for Cabal Therapy for IMMEDIATE cardadvantage compared to a two mana Creature which cantrips A TURN LATER into an unknown card IF IT SURVIVES A FULL TURN?

Bob is worse than a Preordain if you opt to win before turn 4 and ONLY better IF it sticks for at least two turns.

I think the threads Grinding Station pilots have a better idea of if this is an alternative

Snapcaster isn't really impressive as there aren't many instants you want to flashback +is mana-hungry, rarely does profitable things in your comboturn outside of sacing to Therapy so a AD is the best you can hope for postboard... and it's U btw. ... cool trick though...

Huh, interesting. Lukas Blohon must know a good plan when he sees it. I would tend to agree with all of your points here, although I must admit I've been enjoying the apparent flabbergasted indignant responses of our friend "Mr. Raab" here.

Setting aside Bob, have you ever experimented with Serenity? I have to say it's a great feeling wrathing a chalice or a thorn of amethyst or 2 before you tendril someone out. lol

Blohon doesn't have nickname "God" for nothing =D... I don't really like Confidant in the mirrormatch, it's decent if you have nothing else for it... the card is destilled greatness is fun (who'd say flipping cards is so much fun) and can quickly run away with games, but feels better than is... in the mirrormatch you have to play it early+survive early... Italians used to play it as a Miracles plan in the end of 2015, which is very risky imo it works best in G2 against wide range of decks if you build your SB plan around it... which then suffers from your reliance on Confidant in awkward G3 plan, generally the problem of creatures in Storm... I think at 2 it's not even a plan it's inconsistent and cute

if you do...

Serenity - haven't really played it, I haven't really been around Storm during Mystical tutor, I don't think it's worth 3 cards and definitely not worth a splash

sorry for the silly question, but why everyone play a lot of high CMC spells in a deck that runs Ad Nauseam??
I know I know, nausea is a side plan and your main goal is to go by PiF. But is it possible to swap Petition/Pif with Burning Wish?
Just ad nauseam and tendrils MD, 2-3 wishes and fix a little the manabase (maybe a badland in place of swamp). 1 petition and 1 Pif in sideboard of course.

you answered it yourself - you do not cast AN unless you have to... for more BW please follow here
the R requirement along preferably not casting AN at is enough to not play it, I als have my reservations about DP as the card is bad imo but whatever....

Hello everyone.

I'm just about to buy ANT on MTGO and I have a couple of questions before I buy the deck.

I've been looking over lists and I think I'm going to go with Caleb Scherer's most recent list, as he is very experienced with storm and I assume he knows what he's doing. The list is pretty stock so if I need to change anything it'd just be the sideboard.

My question is: what do I sideboard for what matchups?

You should really ask him (FB I guess?)

Btw. doesn't he do Modo too? - what's his nick?

[ScottW]

Hello everyone.

I'm just about to buy ANT on MTGO and I have a couple of questions before I buy the deck.

I've been looking over lists and I think I'm going to go with Caleb Scherer's most recent list, as he is very experienced with storm and I assume he knows what he's doing. The list is pretty stock so if I need to change anything it'd just be the sideboard.

Seems pretty funny to ask this question here if you've read back a number of pages. I'd consider that before buying your deck. Jonathan Alexander proposed a starting list a few pages back with Dark Petition, etc.

[Idionym]

You should really ask him (FB I guess?)

Btw. doesn't he do Modo too? - what's his nick?

I could probably find his MTGO nick, but I kinda doubt that he'd just respond to some random player and help him.