[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils) Storm Combo

[Lemnear]

For example, G2 he blind therapies and names Duress Turn 1, I have two Cabal Therapy in my hand--whoops (I still think naming Tutor or LED is better than naming discard in the dark). So of course he blames me for his miss. This type of stuff happens--we've been there. I think he made a couple other mistakes as well but I won't get into them. Fact of the matter is I've been there, too.

The only question I have here is: Did he have the turn 2 kill or not? If not the play is broken stupid

[Jonathan Alexander]

Totally agreed. I hear a lot of people on this board say they hate the storm mirror. I get that the first couple of turns are extremely draw dependent, but if neither person has an unbelievable draw, the discard and sequencing matters a ton. Also postboard when most decks have things like Surgical and Flusterstorm, there are ways to interact turn 0/1, so the player better able to evaluate how cautiously to play and when to seize the initiative generally wins. If it were just a coin-flip, then I wouldn't be 80%+ in the mirror over dozens of matches.

I think the longer games are actually worse than the ones that end within the first 3-4 turns, because then it really just boils down to topdecks. In the early game, you can have interesting mindgames (postboard mostly) and small decisions that boil down to risk evaluation, which can be super interesting when it comes to discard spells. But when neither player really has any cards in hand but graveyards are full, the person drawing a hard business spell first simply wins. And if they don't, that's because the other player happened to draw something to stop them (Flusterstorm, basically).
Storm can win out of nowhere, that's why we play it. Thinking that's not true in the mirror is delusional. I have lost games in the mirror where my opponents didn't notice they had a kill in their hand, where they declined to protect their artifact mana from discard despite not having any other cards and countless other things. But I have also won games in the mirror where I misread my opponent's deck on the draw, screwed up cantrips, ignored sideboard cards like Surgical and just flat out played horribly overall. I honestly can't think of a matchup in all of Magic where decisions have as little impact on the outcome of a game as the Storm mirror. Of course, they matter when someone simply can't play the deck, but I believe as soon as you have basic lines down, you simply don't go below 45% unless you continuously play against people with silver bullets like Aegis of the Gods and the like.

Obviously, this doesn't mean you can't always improve your play, but it will have much more impact in matchups other than the Storm mirror.

To those claiming positive records in the mirror, do you have actual data? I'm genuinely interested in your approach to the mirror. Maybe I have a different picture of how it works out because roughly 80% of my games in the mirror are against Pascal, but I barely see games come down to unintuitive lines. (Disclaimer: That number is a very conservative estimate, it's probably more than 80%.)

[Ronald Deuce]

Why are you cutting green cards that you don't want against decks with Wasteland because of Wasteland?

That's not what I was saying. I meant that I don't want to run, e.g., Abrupt Decay against a deck with Wasteland, which it sounded like people were trying earlier in the thread, and I don't want to have a bunch of green slots in the sideboard because I feel like the only times I've found green to be useful (and at the same time to not stretch our mana base too far) was against Miracles (note, again, that I haven't faced certain decks in my metagame). Swarm and Carpet haven't done me much good. I was saying that their requiring green makes them even more iffy in a bunch of matchups, so I haven't been running them lately.

[EDIT: In other words, I'm running five green cards (Decays and a KGrip) and one Tropical in the 'board. I don't see the point in running Swarm or Carpet right now because they stretch our mana and I can't see the purpose of running either of them when the other green cards will do. I'd rather have sideboard space for other stuff right now, if for no other purpose than to test things.]

[Patrunkenphat7]

@Jonathan: I have a similar experience in the mirror as phazonmutant but don't have any actual stats that I can show you to back it up. Some general tips I have are:
-Board down to 14 land
-Whoever has better access to PiF will win the game after you pass the turn 1/2 explosive win phase; this means I will snap off a Grim for PiF as soon as I can if we are in a yucky midgame state
-Don't go autopilot on your discard
-Utilize cantrips in anticipation of protecting important cards and trick opponent into using their discard incorrectly
-Consider playing out LED to protect it if it's the most important card at that moment in the game
-And my most controversial piece of advice... 6 Tutors, 2 PiF, 1 Empty is much better than the 5 Tutors, 1 PiF, 1 Ad Nauseam, X Preordains plan that 99% of people seem play in the mirror online. I have come to this conclusion over a long period of time and don't expect to win many people over with it, but I feel very favored in Storm mirrors right now because of my list. Ad Nauseam is over-hyped vs most combo decks.

[Lemnear]

-And my most controversial piece of advice... 6 Tutors, 2 PiF, 1 Empty is much better than the 5 Tutors, 1 PiF, 1 Ad Nauseam, X Preordains plan that 99% of people seem play in the mirror online. I have come to this conclusion over a long period of time and don't expect to win many people over with it, but I feel very favored in Storm mirrors right now because of my list. Ad Nauseam is over-hyped vs most combo decks.

I don't see Dark Petition being a slick topdeck in a matchup where both players shred their opponents hand, while Preordains offer the option to not only find more discard early, but also to float business.

[BeardTron]

Variance, for example, means I had to drop from the event at 2-0 because my daughter started puking everywhere. Talk about getting top decked....lol

[Patrunkenphat7]

I don't see Dark Petition being a slick topdeck in a matchup where both players shred their opponents hand, while Preordains offer the option to not only find more discard early, but also to float business.

Which is one of many reasons I like Grim Tutors more, and like I said in my advice for the matchup, you can immediately fire it off to grab a PiF. My Grim Tutor vs the opponent's Preordain is probably the difference in the game with all else equal.

@BeardTron I can relate to the daughter-related variance drops haha.

[BeardTron]

The only question I have here is: Did he have the turn 2 kill or not? If not the play is broken stupid

Game 1 he was on play . He Turn 1 blind Therapy on Force of Will then T2 makes 12 goblins and I kill him two turns later.

In Game 2 he did not have the T2 "kill". He did have the pieces to make 10-12 goblins if I recall correctly but then I Therapied his LED, then Extracted them. Then took his Tutor next turn then killed him turn after that. Not sure why he didn't play his LED when he saw I had Therapy ...

If he would've named Tutor or LED in Game 2 it likely would've taken me longer giving him more draw steps.

[phazonmutant]

I think the longer games are actually worse than the ones that end within the first 3-4 turns, because then it really just boils down to topdecks. In the early game, you can have interesting mindgames (postboard mostly) and small decisions that boil down to risk evaluation, which can be super interesting when it comes to discard spells. But when neither player really has any cards in hand but graveyards are full, the person drawing a hard business spell first simply wins. And if they don't, that's because the other player happened to draw something to stop them (Flusterstorm, basically).
Storm can win out of nowhere, that's why we play it. Thinking that's not true in the mirror is delusional. I have lost games in the mirror where my opponents didn't notice they had a kill in their hand, where they declined to protect their artifact mana from discard despite not having any other cards and countless other things. But I have also won games in the mirror where I misread my opponent's deck on the draw, screwed up cantrips, ignored sideboard cards like Surgical and just flat out played horribly overall. I honestly can't think of a matchup in all of Magic where decisions have as little impact on the outcome of a game as the Storm mirror. Of course, they matter when someone simply can't play the deck, but I believe as soon as you have basic lines down, you simply don't go below 45% unless you continuously play against people with silver bullets like Aegis of the Gods and the like.

Obviously, this doesn't mean you can't always improve your play, but it will have much more impact in matchups other than the Storm mirror.

To those claiming positive records in the mirror, do you have actual data? I'm genuinely interested in your approach to the mirror. Maybe I have a different picture of how it works out because roughly 80% of my games in the mirror are against Pascal, but I barely see games come down to unintuitive lines. (Disclaimer: That number is a very conservative estimate, it's probably more than 80%.)

I also don't have hard stats, but I can remember losing 2 games out of the 15+ times I've played the mirror since mid-Treasure Cruise season. Human memory is faulty of course, could be a couple either way.

Definitely some of it is that I've played the deck and the mirror quite a bit so I know what to do, whereas most opponents miss lines, don't play artifact mana, etc. That will bias results. Another factor is that I've been on 2 Flusterstorm, 1-2 Surgical for nearly the entire time since I picked storm back up, which is more and better combo hate than most have. So probably my record wouldn't be as good against exclusively top-class opponents, but that's true of all mirrors. When the skill is equal, by definition the mirror is dominated by luck.

Besides the times where they should win, or are outgunned, there are times where smart discard use makes or breaks the game, on both sides. Like when you have close to a kill so you take the ritual instead of the tutor from an opponent who is also close to the kill. Or when you Ponder, leave a tutor on top to kill next turn, and they Duress taking Tutor. That's about judgment calls and reads.

[Jonathan Alexander]

@Jonathan: I have a similar experience in the mirror as phazonmutant but don't have any actual stats that I can show you to back it up. Some general tips I have are:
-Board down to 14 land
-Whoever has better access to PiF will win the game after you pass the turn 1/2 explosive win phase; this means I will snap off a Grim for PiF as soon as I can if we are in a yucky midgame state
-Don't go autopilot on your discard
-Utilize cantrips in anticipation of protecting important cards and trick opponent into using their discard incorrectly
-Consider playing out LED to protect it if it's the most important card at that moment in the game

To be honest, I consider all of these basics, although I have to say the land thing depends on your list. I definitely prefer 14 lands + 1 Mox to 15 lands, but not entirely sure on 14 vs. 15 without.

-And my most controversial piece of advice... 6 Tutors, 2 PiF, 1 Empty is much better than the 5 Tutors, 1 PiF, 1 Ad Nauseam, X Preordains plan that 99% of people seem play in the mirror online. I have come to this conclusion over a long period of time and don't expect to win many people over with it, but I feel very favored in Storm mirrors right now because of my list. Ad Nauseam is over-hyped vs most combo decks.

I don't see how more hard business being better than less hard business is controversial. When games come down to topdecks, the person with better odds to topdeck naturally has better odds to win.

Definitely some of it is that I've played the deck and the mirror quite a bit so I know what to do, whereas most opponents miss lines, don't play artifact mana, etc.

To be honest, if the mirror really came down to skill, players missing basic lines would never win. But they still do. Of course, if players mess up really simple things like miscounting Tutor -> Past in Flames loops, that will heavily reduce their win percentage. However, I see loads of people not understanding lines like Tutor, crack LED, discard Past in Flames, get Cabal Ritual, profit. (Side note: I watched an unnamed pro play the Storm mirror in Seattle; instead of going for this line, they Cabal Therapy'd their opponent for Duress, see Therapy, not play their LED, but topdeck to still win the game next turn.)

So probably my record wouldn't be as good against exclusively top-class opponents, but that's true of all mirrors. When the skill is equal, by definition the mirror is dominated by luck.

This is not actually true. It's a common misconception. If two players are equal in skill (in anything, really), games are not primarily decided by variance but by form. Because really, no two players consistently play on the same level. We make so many mistakes in everything we do, but in competition it comes down to the timing of these mistakes, which is, quite simply, form. If I play 10 games of any mirror match and split them 5-5, that doesn't mean that mirror is a coin flip. It can also mean my opponent and I are on similar skill levels and simply take turns in making mistakes.

Besides the times where they should win, or are outgunned, there are times where smart discard use makes or breaks the game, on both sides. Like when you have close to a kill so you take the ritual instead of the tutor from an opponent who is also close to the kill. Or when you Ponder, leave a tutor on top to kill next turn, and they Duress taking Tutor. That's about judgment calls and reads.

This happens very rarely. As I said, there are certainly edges you can gain, but they are neglible, that's my whole point.

[Ronald Deuce]

I've been on 2 Flusterstorm, 1-2 Surgical for nearly the entire time since I picked storm back up, which is more and better combo hate than most have.

Are there other matchups in which these cards have been particularly useful? What does the rest of your sideboard look like at the moment? One of the reasons I ask is related to my previous few posts.

If two players are equal in skill (in anything, really), games are not primarily decided by variance but by form. Because really, no two players consistently play on the same level. We make so many mistakes in everything we do, but in competition it comes down to the timing of these mistakes, which is, quite simply, form.

This is extremely important, and not just for playing this deck. It's worth pointing out that deciding to keep or ship a hand is a crucial situation to which this statement applies.

[Lemnear]

Game 1 he was on play . He Turn 1 blind Therapy on Force of Will then T2 makes 12 goblins and I kill him two turns later.

I don't know how this is possible unless you opponent misses to flashback the Therapy lol. You might want to clear this up for me. Thanks

In Game 2 he did not have the T2 "kill". He did have the pieces to make 10-12 goblins if I recall correctly but then I Therapied his LED, then Extracted them. Then took his Tutor next turn then killed him turn after that. Not sure why he didn't play his LED when he saw I had Therapy ...

If he would've named Tutor or LED in Game 2 it likely would've taken me longer giving him more draw steps.

Turn two goblins is a valid reason to fire off T1 discard vs. Discard in a vacuum, but if he saw that he missed with the Therapy and a backlash is coming, he has to drop his mana and go into the float-business-mode.

[BeardTron]

@Lemnear

He did flashback therapy when he made the Goblins in Game 1. He had to choose between LED, Tutor, Brainstorm and He took the Tutor but Brainstorm got me there. I drew really hot this game.

[Lemnear]

@Lemnear

He did flashback therapy when he made the Goblins in Game 1. He had to choose between LED, Tutor, Brainstorm and He took the Tutor but Brainstorm got me there. I drew really hot this game.

The value of this pick waxes and wanes with your access to red mana. If you had no red source otherwise, the LED would have been more interresting to pick tbh as it would have costed you mana volume and color at the same time. Also interresting: Why did YOU not play the LED in your first turn to evade the value Therapy in case goblins come down or simply played the Brainstorm to hide your Tutor in case he throws goblins at you?

[Ronald Deuce]

The value of this pick waxes and wanes with your access to red mana. If you had no red source otherwise, the LED would have been more interresting to pick tbh as it would have costed you mana volume and color at the same time. Also interresting: Why did YOU not play the LED in your first turn to evade the value Therapy in case goblins come down or simply played the Brainstorm to hide your Tutor in case he throws goblins at you?

I would've hit the LED regardless, but I've only played Storm versus Storm once. I don't remember much except that I won the discard war early by Duressing a Tutor and leaving him without any business and, I think, with only one Ritual.

I guess I'm just not sure what the opponent was hoping to do there. What would be a reason to pick the tutor or the Brainstorm? It feels to me like locking someone out of fast mana or accelerants is a pretty cash play, and I've found that when opponents strip out an LED or a CabRit early in the game it can often knock me out at least as effectively as taking a tutor.

[Lemnear]

I would've hit the LED regardless, but I've only played Storm versus Storm once. I don't remember much except that I won the discard war early by Duressing a Tutor and leaving him without any business and, I think, with only one Ritual.

I guess I'm just not sure what the opponent was hoping to do there. What would be a reason to pick the tutor or the Brainstorm? It feels to me like locking someone out of fast mana or accelerants is a pretty cash play, and I've found that when opponents strip out an LED or a CabRit early in the game it can often knock me out at least as effectively as taking a tutor.

Depends on the rest of the hand. If there are other red sources available or already two Rituals, picking the LED makes no sense obviously. Its not enough data for me to discuss the matter in detail.

[BeardTron]

The value of this pick waxes and wanes with your access to red mana. If you had no red source otherwise, the LED would have been more interresting to pick tbh as it would have costed you mana volume and color at the same time. Also interresting: Why did YOU not play the LED in your first turn to evade the value Therapy in case goblins come down or simply played the Brainstorm to hide your Tutor in case he throws goblins at you?

Ya it was likely a mistake on my part not to play out LED my first turn. My first turn I spent w a Ponder and tucked away business to make his 2nd therapy not really matter. Then brainstorm took it home.

[JamieW89]

I can't stand the mirror match at all, either someone wins quickly or someone wins the lategame topdeck war. Sure, there are interesting spots on turn-1 & 2, especially involving discard, but it's nothing like playing against blue decks.

Having 70%-80% in the mirror match seems like positive variance to me, unless you're playing against people who don't know how to count (obviously having 70% with ANT in any matchup requires a decent edge in skill, but in the mirror it's not so easy to find those edges).

Playing/Mulliganning worse in matchups I don't find interesting (Most fast matchups, especially non-blue) is definately a leak in my game though.

Having said that, I did find the storm mirror very interesting and unique when people were still playing Chant effects.

This is not actually true. It's a common misconception. If two players are equal in skill (in anything, really), games are not primarily decided by variance but by form. Because really, no two players consistently play on the same level. We make so many mistakes in everything we do, but in competition it comes down to the timing of these mistakes, which is, quite simply, form. If I play 10 games of any mirror match and split them 5-5, that doesn't mean that mirror is a coin flip. It can also mean my opponent and I are on similar skill levels and simply take turns in making mistakes

Nice point.

[thefringthing]

TES vs ANT was my favourite Legacy matchup to play back when TES played Silence. It was pretty unwinnable for ANT, but never boring.

[Sloshthedark]

Unlike most of the people I enjoy to play the mirror match, used to feel favoured because of playing 2Pif instead of 1 and having actual SB instead of none, still feel a bit favoured because of experience, not sure about the build, the experience is different if it's an actual tournament or you do not know the opponent, I can see it becoming boring if you play the same guys over and over (like every other deck) or you want to test like 20 games against a deck... btw. I'm 4-4 for the last year

TES vs ANT was my favourite Legacy matchup to play back when TES played Silence. It was pretty unwinnable for ANT, but never boring.

I had the exact opposite experience, TES got a lot better since - both in disruption and BS+fetchland effectivity to be a favourite now but It wasn't my impression back then, Silence was usualy very pasive card... I've never lost to TES with ANT but lost my fair share with TES to ANT

but it was definitely interesting, also had a 7 chant DDFT in the LGS back in the day, good old times...