Why does no one play Doomsday

[Namida]

Most of the time you can disregard Surgical Extraction. I've yet to encounter a player who uses Extraction post-DD for the shuffle effect. Even G2 or G3 after they know what I play. "EoT extract your Brainstorm!" "Nice play, bro, you got me." :)

Although... I remember a cheeky bastard who extracted the DD in my GY at the end of his turn, after he sacced all of his permanents to Annihilator 6 while I just had one card left in my library. Fortunately, it was CoV! :)

So what you're saying here is that Doomsday isn't weak to cards when you play against people who have no idea how to use their cards against you.

I love Doomsday and the same thing happens to me all the time...people basically shit their pants when they play against me because they think Storm/Doomsday is so hard to play that I must be some sort of Legacy End Boss at events. I just don't know that you can sweep the weaknesses of the deck under the rug with a reason like "Everyone around me isn't good enough to actually think about what the card Doomsday actually does to figure out how their cards interact with it."

[Lemnear]

Yes, you can Grapeshot. But on average you'll burn a lot of your resources to do so. +1 due to Thalia for BW + Grapeshot costs you already 6 mana. That's no small feat to achieve for land-starved TES pilots without using your precious rituals/petals (which also cost +1 in case of Thalia). DDFT pilots cast either Massacre for 4 mana and are very able to do so without burning IMS/rituals due to playing more lands or just get the removal spell this turn and cast Massacre the next turn and just go off. By the way, how do you Grapeshot an Ethersworn Canonist?

And to find one of your 2 CoVs via Ad Nauseam to bounce Leyline is not really a 100% chance as it is for the DDFT player building IU-LED-CoV-LED-BW. I also believe you know that much better, but EtW is always a big risk vs. Thalia/Teeg players because of the SFM package. Silence walking your opponent is something that 5C DDFT can do as well. Many 5C lists even play more chant effects than TES.

I do fully agree with your second statement.

Who Said you have to cast Wish and Grapeshot in a SINGLE TURN? Who Said you have to use Rituals instead of artifacts to increase the stormcount against Cannonist? How is Gaddock Teeg your topic and then you talk about Massacre as a solution to hatebears?

For the leyine/CoV topic I can give you more than enough Real Life experience how I just AN into Whatever to just Wish for PIF, flashback Infernals for LED's, Crack Infernals for UUU and Cycle through the Rest of the deck to find CoV while still having enough mana to humiliate my Opponents by wish for IGG 3 LED's under the effect of Silence for even more mana and storm, create 40+ goblins, flashback PIF, create an Army of 100+ goblins total and still use Wish #3 or #4 for a hilarious grapeshot.

If you face a combination of Teeg, Mother of runes and Cannonist at the same time you've done something wrong tbh.


Considering all the crap Among Mom, Teeg, Thalia, Cannonist and Leyline it's obvious that maniac Doomsday is Miles better then DDFT

[Ogh!]

So what you're saying here is that Doomsday isn't weak to cards when you play against people who have no idea how to use their cards against you.

I love Doomsday and the same thing happens to me all the time...people basically shit their pants when they play against me because they think Storm/Doomsday is so hard to play that I must be some sort of Legacy End Boss at events. I just don't know that you can sweep the weaknesses of the deck under the rug with a reason like "Everyone around me isn't good enough to actually think about what the card Doomsday actually does to figure out how their cards interact with it."

I was joking and not being serious, which I tried to indicate by ":)". But I imagine due to anonymity these kind of things are hard to convey over the Web. I excuse. I agree, SE is a card that can hose a DDFT player and should be taken seriously in any competitive environment.

[Ogh!]

Who Said you have to cast Wish and Grapeshot in a SINGLE TURN? Who Said you have to use Rituals instead of artifacts to increase the stormcount against Cannonist? How is Gaddock Teeg your topic and then you talk about Massacre as a solution to hatebears?

For the leyine/CoV topic I can give you more than enough Real Life experience how I just AN into Whatever to just Wish for PIF, flashback Infernals for LED's, Crack Infernals for UUU and Cycle through the Rest of the deck to find CoV while still having enough mana to humiliate my Opponents by wish for IGG 3 LED's under the effect of Silence for even more mana and storm, create 40+ goblins, flashback PIF, create an Army of 100+ goblins total and still use Wish #3 or #4 for a hilarious grapeshot.

If you face a combination of Teeg, Mother of runes and Cannonist at the same time you've done something wrong tbh.


Considering all the crap Among Mom, Teeg, Thalia, Cannonist and Leyline it's obvious that maniac Doomsday is Miles better then DDFT

Okay, you won. TES > Maniac DD >(xMiles) DDFT in dealing with all "the crap" I've been talking about (the latter inequality being obviously obvious). Thanks for the discussion and keep having fun "humiliating" your opponents with durdling around after you've got the kill and going for infinite storm. What a feat.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

MadZur once made the really good point that it's difficult to objectively and meaningfully differentiate decks that are "really good, but very unforgiving of mistakes" and decks that are "bad."

Certainly, if you take two equally skilled players two decks that are "equally good" if played flawlessly, but one of them is extremely forgiving of mistakes and the other is extremely unforgiving, the player with the former deck will tend to greatly outperform the player with the latter deck. And this is true regardless of what skill level the two players are at because even the best players in the world make plenty of mistakes.

So the answer to the original question of this thread might as well be, from the responses, because the deck is bad.

[Lemnear]

Okay, you won. TES > Maniac DD >(xMiles) DDFT in dealing with all "the crap" I've been talking about (the latter inequality being obviously obvious). Thanks for the discussion and keep having fun "humiliating" your opponents with durdling around after you've got the kill and going for infinite storm. What a feat.

What is this now? You made bold asumptions that TES can't beat Teeg but Doomsday can, I proofed you wrong with the hint to Grapeshot, you changed the topic of the discussion from Teeg to Cannonist and claim it's impossible for TES to handle him or Leyline, I proofed you wrong again (splitting Wish and Grapeshot, artifacts to boost storm, etc) and now you act like a huffy child.

Afaik, you can scoop any time if you are annoyed by my 15 minutes killing sequence I used to pull off if anyone is loud-mouthed consequential how landing Teeg or Leyline is GG against TES (which did happen in the past)

[JACO]

Why doesn't anyone play Doomsday?

For some reason, magic players get a rush playing with cards like Show and Tell. Pathetic really. I bet you think porn is real too.

There are plenty of fantastic decks that nobody plays but there's a point where the deck is only as fantastic as its pilot. Honestly, if you combine a cryptic archetype with a good, dedicated pilot you get a pretty vicious opponent.

Doomsday decks are very powerful and rewarding for skill, but as has been mentioned require near technical mastery and are not as forgiving. I don't think anyone gets a rush playing Show and Tell, but Show and Tell Omniscience and Sneak and Show are both better combo decks, period. They are simpler to protect and harder to disrupt, feature better manabases, and don't rely on the graveyard or much else that is easy to hate. I believe Show and Tell is the best individual card in Legacy at this time, but it's very close, and I believe the field is pretty fair at this time. The blue aggro-control decks are really good with all of the recent tools printed the past few years, and without solid Combo decks like Show and Tell and Ad Nauseam Tendrils they would just dominate Legacy.

[Ogh!]

What is this now? You made bold asumptions that TES can't beat Teeg but Doomsday can, I proofed you wrong with the hint to Grapeshot, you changed the topic of the discussion from Teeg to Cannonist and claim it's impossible for TES to handle him or Leyline, I proofed you wrong again (splitting Wish and Grapeshot, artifacts to boost storm, etc) and now you act like a huffy child.

Afaik, you can scoop any time if you are annoyed by my 15 minutes killing sequence I used to pull off if anyone is loud-mouthed consequential how landing Teeg or Leyline is GG against TES (which did happen in the past)

That's a nice view on the discussion. As far as I remember you are the one who made the bold claim that DDFT is outright inferior to ANT/TES without providing any substantial arguments or any at all in that case. I put forward that there are plenty of realistic and not overly constructed situations in which DDFT fares better than ANT/TES and thus is not outright inferior. Outright inferiority could be interpreted as being strictly dominated in a decision-theoretical sense which is wrong. I wanted to clarify that. Yes, I acknowledge that TES can Grapeshot Teegs and Thalias and even Canonists (the next turn while having artifacts in hour hand) and trust in the two CoVs after boarding or EtW vs. Leyline. But most of the time Massacre/Virtue's Ruin or the 100% probability of drawing CoV via using your storm engine is better. DDFT doesn't even want and need to burn a BW for Gaddock Teeg because you can just build IU-LED-CoV-LED-BW. That's why I started talking about other hatebears.

All I'm trying to say is: Once a hatebear hits, I believe that DDFT has a higher probability of winning that game. I've never wanted to claim that TES(!) auto-folds to hatebears or Leyline, I claim that DDFT deals with them in a superior way compared to TES/ANT, which I believe becomes already pretty clear once you realize that being able to use your storm engine to dispose of at least one hatebear/Leyline is superior to having to burn at least one business spell or trust in a variance card (AdN) to find an out. That is all. Any other implications may be due to my poor writing skills or my tendency to exaggerate to make a point.

Putting TES aside for one moment since my bold assumptions were not about TES but about ANT/TES: In that one T8 match of the last BOM, there was this ANT player who scooped after turn 2 Teeg.

By the way, I act like a huffy child because I dislike your way of conveying information. And because I like being huffy. It's a great feeling.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Also, though a tad clumsy, Doomsday can be tutored up via Personal Tutor, whereas Ad Nauseam cannot. This allows for even more stability with Doomsday, especially in a Hybrid build like back in the days of Mystical.

-ABC

[Acclimation]

DDFT is a great deck that rewards playing extremely tight. The problem? Mistakes can cost you; I've lost games because I simply fetched the wrong land on turn 2. I love the deck though, I've had success with it at my store, and I learned how to play it by banging my head against Tempo Thresh. However, I had more success with Tinfins within the last 2 months of picking up the deck than I had within my 1+ year of playing Doomsday because of how much more forgiving it is (and a large amount of insane luck).

The great thing about taking the time to play DDFT is, is that I can pick up complicated decks a lot easier and play them all day at long tournaments. The deck is one large puzzle, and great for mental workouts.

I should really put the deck back together again, fighting through hate is incredibly satisfying. I feel like fighting through hate with Tinfins is essentially punching as hard as you can, whereas with DDFT is fighting with finesse. Both effective, and both satisfying in their own way.

[Dark Ritual]

The benefit of playing doomsday is that you can actually play through any card generally. Gaddock teeg? Nice card bro, I'll stick this CoV in the pile with top in play to draw with top, chain the top to my hand, copy it bouncing your teeg, and go LED LED top burning wish tendrils of agony targeting you for lethal. You can't do that with ad nauseam being uncastable to teeg so you have to find CoV/decay/an answer before you can do a single damned thing that matters. Oh and meanwhile the opponent is wastelanding your shitty manabase. But I generally don't listen to Lemnear for the fact that he has one of the biggest hard ons for TES on this forum and really thinks that a deck that requires more luck than skill is the best deck in the format. Hint: TES is not the best deck in the format by a long shot.

The reason no one plays doomsday is because the deck is the hardest deck to pilot in the entire game. Winning without having to go through hate is very easy, but at that point most storm decks will actually just win (who knew.) But doomsday is VERY unforgiving. As in if you resolve doomsday and build the wrong stack you actually just lose 99.99% of the time.

Laboratory maniac is only worse with decay and DRS in the format. And the deck is very beatable if you want to beat it. I remember when I first saw the list I cringed. It certainly hasn't aged well and worse still it doesn't run black lotus.

Surgical extraction is answered by a cabal therapy naming surgical or silence/chant. It is possible to win through a surgical extraction in the middle of your combo as well, although you must anticipate it to build a surgical proof pile. The amount of options available when tutoring for any 5 cards is actually close to limitless and in that lies doomsday greatest strength and weakness. Fuck up and you lose. You crafted the perfect pile? Congratulations, you've won.

I did play doomsday for a time, but shelved it due to its intricacies. Definitely the hardest deck to play in the format with ease.

[Lemnear]

Don't see how Lab maniac cares about DRS and Decay. You can hardcast the creature without the Unearth or can stack draw-trigger to fight AD.

Yep, winning 4 fucking tournaments with about 30 contenders in a row piloting though BUG, RUG Delver and S&T variants MUST be luck.

[Ogh!]

Don't see how Lab maniac cares about DRS and Decay. You can hardcast the creature without the Unearth or can stack draw-trigger to fight AD.

Yep, winning 4 fucking tournaments with about 30 contenders in a row piloting though BUG, RUG Delver and S&T variants MUST be luck.

Based on your reports, I'm pretty sure you're a good player and I don't want to question that in any way. But consider this. According to your reports you played 47 games. In these 47 games you took 3 mulligans.

[EDIT: Was wrong about the land thing. You actually opened a 7 without a land four times.]

Some might call that lucky.

[davelin]

Wait a second, there is luck involved with a card game based on random draws???

[Lemnear]

Based on your reports, I'm pretty sure you're a good player and I don't want to question that in any way. But consider this. According to your reports you played 47 games. In these 47 games you took 3 mulligans.

[EDIT: Was wrong about the land thing. You actually opened a 7 without a land four times.]

Some might call that lucky.

I don't have the numbers in my head, so I'll asume you counted correctly :)

While the mulligan number is insanly low on paper it underlines my attitude of being a hardliner then it comes down to mulligans and I just strickly mull hands which have NO initial manasource and work myself into the match with nearly all others (exception MUD and Prison Decks).

You'll notice that I have a much lesser percentage of Turn 1 & 2 kills as promoted in several threads due to that behaviour of not mulling into a miraculous 6- or 5-card-hand.

With the deck being 1/3 Initial manasources while drawing 7 Initial cards out of 60, having a single Initial mana in 44 out of 47 games isn't unreasonable if that's my Minimum requirement to keep it.

Dunno, how that breaks down to luck

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Like do you guys remember the first (Legacy) GP Columbus, where Steve Sadin and Gadiel Szleifer and I'm sure others punted games because they didn't understand the actual Hulk-Flash combo, and then Sadin just won the tournament anyway and the deck just dominated.

I mean there were definitely games where you would lose if you were not very familiar with the deck and win if you were. The deck rewarded understanding. It was not a dumb deck.

But no one said, "Hulk Flash, man it's so good if you play it perfectly," it was just a really fucking powerful deck and in fact so powerful that it could reward you despite imperfect plays.

If you have to pilot a deck flawlessly in order to have a serious chance of winning with it that sounds a lot like saying the deck is bad.

[Koby]

If you have to pilot a deck flawlessly in order to have a serious chance of winning with it that sounds a lot like saying the deck is bad.

I don't often agree with IBA, but he's got a very good point. Assuming masterful skill and a reasonable flexible deck (such as RUG, Esper, or DDFT for example), you could win a fair percentage of the time that you shouldn't.

My position is that the amount of practice required to reach the level where win% becomes 51% is not a good use of time. I don't deny that DDFT has literal million victory paths, only saying that learning the deck is burdensome compared to better decks. For example, assuming the opponent is a goldfish; how much easier would it be to resolve Ad Nauseam vs Doomsday from a mechanic point of view? It's just easier to on your dexterity and mind. Over 9+ rounds that's going to add up significantly.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

I don't often agree with IBA, but he's got a very good point. Assuming masterful skill and a reasonable flexible deck (such as RUG, Esper, or DDFT for example), you could win a fair percentage of the time that you shouldn't.

My position is that the amount of practice required to reach the level where win% becomes 51% is not a good use of time. I don't deny that DDFT has literal million victory paths, only saying that learning the deck is burdensome compared to better decks. For example, assuming the opponent is a goldfish; how much easier would it be to resolve Ad Nauseam vs Doomsday from a mechanic point of view? It's just easier to on your dexterity and mind. Over 9+ rounds that's going to add up significantly.

Actually, you just have to do your homework. Emidln, founder of the StormBoards, wrote an article, among others, that gave 5-card piles, mana costs and how to play it out within their detailed descriptions. Just read, goldfish certain scenarios (there aren't many that vary, if you look at it the right way) to help you remember your piles and make choices that allow you to win fast enough (avg. turn 3), you should be able to pilot it just fine. I did for the 8 months pre-Mystical Banning, FT before that. I don't have a link to the article, but I'm sure its out there.

Also, you would be a fool to abandon the AN path to victory, you should instead play 2 Doomsday, 1 Personal Tutor (This is a better option than B. Wish by a LONG SHOT), 1 AN, 1 PiF and/or 1 IGG (This is actually great with Doomsday in a way that PiF obviously is not), 1 Tendrils, and Grapeshot/Helm combo is awesome and funny in DD builds.

-ABC

EDIT::: I would still be rocking the Doomsday AN Hybrid build, but I sold my LED's at the beginning of Wizards' Mental Misstep Mishap. I haven't had the opportunity to rebuy, but since I just completed Patriot Miracle, they are now my next thing to buy.

[Dark Ritual]

You beat RUG delver with a combo deck? Color me not surprised. I routinely beat RUG delver with ANT, and no it isn't that bad of a matchup if anything it's a good matchup. It only sucks for TES because strip mine is busted and you run shit like chrome mox. Sculpting a winning hand against RUG is definitely not that hard with ANT short of them actually stifling all your fetchlands and wastelanding your nonbasics. It's only really good for TES when they rip the nuts/get lucky, as per usual. TES relies on the pilot running hot to perform, otherwise you'll just draw awkward as shit hands that fold to any meaningful interaction from your opponent. That's why I shelved the deck quite some time ago. Even if you do rip the nuts you aren't guaranteed the win either. I resolved ad nauseam on turn 1 from 19 life at Grand Prix Indianapolis a couple of years back. I FIZZLED and lost to burn. Yup, great deck. My opponent kept a hand with no 1 mana spell to deal me damage with and won.

If you aren't playing your deck perfectly do you really deserve to win anyways? I'd say no.

Gadiel Szleifer and Steve Sadin couldn't figure out how to combo with hulk flash, that's just them being bad honestly. They certainly didn't prepare for the tournament if they never found out how their deck won. They just relied on their opponent scooping to hulk triggering, which is never a good idea. Not to mention it takes a few minutes to figure out how the combo works on their own (grab carrion feeder and karmic guide return hulk. Sack hulk to feeder, fetch kiki-jiki. Activate kiki-jiki targeting guide, in response sack kiki to feeder. Recur kiki-jiki ad infinitum and have a billion 2/2 fliers to attack with. Win.

[Richard Cheese]

Like do you guys remember the first (Legacy) GP Columbus, where Steve Sadin and Gadiel Szleifer and I'm sure others punted games because they didn't understand the actual Hulk-Flash combo, and then Sadin just won the tournament anyway and the deck just dominated.

I mean there were definitely games where you would lose if you were not very familiar with the deck and win if you were. The deck rewarded understanding. It was not a dumb deck.

But no one said, "Hulk Flash, man it's so good if you play it perfectly," it was just a really fucking powerful deck and in fact so powerful that it could reward you despite imperfect plays.

If you have to pilot a deck flawlessly in order to have a serious chance of winning with it that sounds a lot like saying the deck is bad.

MtG is a lot like F1 or WRC in that respect. It's generally a combination of deck power and pilot skill that leads to the big victories. Maybe they should have separate player/builder championships...