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

[Dice_Box]

This is a gamblers deck, take a punt. Personally for me option 2 is the safe one, but if he can only Dredge once next turn, then I would say that's better odds than option number 3.

[Lemnear]

Just wanna mention that if you shuffle before casting the Probe and hit mana you can cast Ad Nauseam. If you hit something like IT or more cantrips, you can likely kill with a natural count of 10 as well.

It's a bit early to do the math for hitting LED, IT, RoF, DR, Probe, Ponder and Brainstorm and then add another layer of calculation for the cards drawn with the cantrips which also provide the kill if you find LED, RoF, DR or Probe.

Without having done math, the chances to sculpt something deadly here look not that bad. Remember that your opponent gets 2 more turns with the Goblin Route to find more bridges/moebas/Dread Return Targets/etc.

I can see avoiding a headache here and just go for option 2 even if your opponent gets to dump another 25% of his deck during the next two turns, which should be enough to kill you


Edit: I would take a close look at his grave: if he doesn't play Dread Return combo, you have more options

[sawatarix]

ninjad by lemnear

[Asthereal]

This is a nice example where I would want to have Returns on side. :tongue:
Then you can safely put back Therapy and land, then fetch and Probe.
If Probe gets you a mana source, just Ad Nauseam him. If not, Returns with UR floating should be good as well.

But anyway, here's the calculation:
- Winner cards you can hit are: 3x Petal, 3x Ritual, 3x Rite, 3x LED, 4x Infernal = 16 cards
- Hitting Cabal Therapy would make situation 2 and 3 the same, so "makes no difference" = 4 cards
- You have 50 cards total left in the deck after fetch shuffle, including 3x Probe
Ponder or Brainstorm make you lose an initial mana source, so chances of going off get slimmer.
Hitting Probe will just allow for anothe draw, so I will not count them in the total. Non-winners = 27 cards
Total amount of cards = 47

So chances for a direct win: 16/47 = 34%
Chances for getting situation 2: 3/47 = 6%
Chances for not directly winning: 58/47 = 60%

If the latter is to happen, going for 16 goblins without Cabal Therapy defense seems a loser. He has two turns, where he will dredge 10+ cards, hit at least one Moeba (he has 90+% chance of hitting one or more), which will allow him to continue the combo. This means he should get enough Zombies to block the Goblins and win later on, not even taking into account the fact that he might have the Flayer of Zealot kill.
So you will probably have to wait a turn. You will have the card drawn from Probe, plus another draw step. That should get you a win the turn after, provided he doesn't kill you with the dredge 5/6 he has next turn, or remove the Wish from your hand with his Therapy.

So, based on this info, what should you do?
My vote goes to option 3 here, since option 2 I estimate gives you a chance to win of below 40%, and option 3 gives you a 34% instant win, and a 40% chance at "the same or better". Main question is: does my estimation for winning % in option 2 make sense? My gut tells me 30-40% but we don't know the Dredge list, so it's very hard to tell.

[Lemnear]

This is a nice example where I would want to have Returns on side. :tongue:
Then you can safely put back Therapy and land, then fetch and Probe.
If Probe gets you a mana source, just Ad Nauseam him. If not, Returns with UR floating should be good as well.

But anyway, here's the calculation:
- Winner cards you can hit are: 3x Petal, 3x Ritual, 3x Rite, 3x LED, 4x Infernal = 16 cards
- Hitting Cabal Therapy would make situation 2 and 3 the same, so "makes no difference" = 4 cards
- You have 50 cards total left in the deck after fetch shuffle, including 3x Probe
Ponder or Brainstorm make you lose an initial mana source, so chances of going off get slimmer.
Hitting Probe will just allow for anothe draw, so I will not count them in the total. Non-winners = 27 cards
Total amount of cards = 47

So chances for a direct win: 16/47 = 34%
Chances for getting situation 2: 3/47 = 6%
Chances for not directly winning: 58/47 = 60%

If the latter is to happen, going for 16 goblins without Cabal Therapy defense seems a loser. He has two turns, where he will dredge 10+ cards, hit at least one Moeba (he has 90+% chance of hitting one or more), which will allow him to continue the combo. This means he should get enough Zombies to block the Goblins and win later on, not even taking into account the fact that he might have the Flayer of Zealot kill.
So you will probably have to wait a turn. You will have the card drawn from Probe, plus another draw step. That should get you a win the turn after, provided he doesn't kill you with the dredge 5/6 he has next turn, or remove the Wish from your hand with his Therapy.

So, based on this info, what should you do?
My vote goes to option 3 here, since option 2 I estimate gives you a chance to win of below 40%, and option 3 gives you a 34% instant win, and a 40% chance at "the same or better". Main question is: does my estimation for winning % in option 2 make sense? My gut tells me 30-40% but we don't know the Dredge list, so it's very hard to tell.

1) You forgot that drawing a Ponder/BS can make you find RoF or LED too.
2) In addition drawing another Probe off a brainstorm can setup another line with LED to fix colors.
3) Hitting another Probe of the initial Probe is relevant for the natural 10-count
4) Yeah, the calculation is complex and I asume the chance to win is about 40% without taking your opponent into consideration.
5) is 40% enough for you?

[vercadium]

I'll complete my overview on the deck changes with my thought process on the sideboard changes below.

As a page has past since I discussed the main deck, here are links to the relevant posts - Post #1 (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23361-Deck-T-E-S-The-EPIC-Storm&p=824173&viewfull=1#post824173) & Post #2 (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23361-Deck-T-E-S-The-EPIC-Storm&p=824197&viewfull=1#post824197).

--------------------

Ok, so first off, I think these are 100% locks at the moment. I wouldn't dream of changing them:

2 Xantid Swarm
2 Abrupt Decay
1 Thoughtseize
1 Void Snare
1 Grapeshot
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Past in Flames
1 Infernal Tutor

That's 11 cards. So the remaining four I reckon can consist of the following possibilities that are, in my opinion, at least defensible:

+<=2 Pyroblast
+<=2 Pithing Needle
+<=2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Abrupt Decay
+1 Thoughtseize
+1 Xantid Swarm

--------------------

Let's break these down:

Pyroblast.

I'm in an awkward place with Pyroblast. It wasn't too long ago it was being proclaimed as the holy grail. It's both amazing and horrible.

So it's ok against anything with counter-spells obviously, with added awesomeness against High-Tide/Omni-Tell etc. But what's it actually good against? i.e. When does its unique trait make it better than other options?

Decks with counterspells that have must-answer blue permanents. The most relevant of these is Meddling Mage. Yes, you can hit Brainstorm, Show and Tell, Counterbalance (before the lock gets online) and a ton of other sweet cards with it too.

So, for me, whether this card is good enough is really down to how much Meddling Mage is out there. The answer? Quite a lot.

I love versatility, I really do. It's great being able to blow up Meddling Mage and not be stuck with a grip of Abrupt Decay when they have Spell Pierce and Force of Will instead. How amazing is that - how can I not play it?

So why is this choice not a lock?

I hate how it is reactive instead of proactive - it's at odds with the core concept of this deck.

Let's be honest, it's absolutely awful with Lion's Eye Diamond and Infernal Tutor. Is that a terminal issue? If our most important spells are Infernal Tutor and Burning Wish, and the ones we most commonly want to protect, how can we even consider the card when the best thing we can protect is Burning Wish when not used with Lion's Eye Diamond?!

It's a good card, but its a reactive card that is only great for us when we use it in a semi-proactive manner (i.e. not protecting our "going off" spells).

A tough decision, we'll talk more about it in the conclusion.

Pithing Needle.

Pithing Needle is powerful against certain decks while still being flexible enough for varied use. One thing that's easily overlooked is that it's castable using any of our initial mana sources which is a fairly big deal in terms of the consistency of the cards we bring in. If you haven't been stuck in a situation were you can't cast the Abrupt Decay in your hand, or you have to break a crucial Lotus Petal to do so, you're lying (or haven't played the deck for long).

I hadn't even thought about Pithing Needle seriously until 2 days ago so I'm finding it difficult to evaluate. Lemenar, how long have you been playing with Pithing Needle now? Could you give me an overview of how the card has been performing for you and what you like and dislike about it?

I really like being able to fight Griselbrand and Sensei's Divining Top with one card. Both of the decks that attack us with these are becoming quite common. This is Legacy, so an important thing to note is that, like Pyroblast, what makes it playable is that it has a myraid of utility.

Chain of Vapor, Abrupt Decay and Thoughtseize.

With the printing of Void Snare (yay!), we no longer need to rely on Chain of Vapor as our only out to a possible Leyline of Sanctity.

It's still a great catch-all answer though, with something semi-relevant you can do with it in most games. I do think we still should have at least one, but the 2nd could be too much.

In this metagame Abrupt Decay is the better removal spell, so a 3rd copy of it instead could be argued (though it's much worse against Thalia, Guardian of Thraben when you do play against it). Also, you don't want to draw too many Abrupt Decay in a single game and with 3 that becomes much more common. It also increases your overall CMC which is relevant - I hate flipping Abrupt Decay with Ad Nauseam.

Thoughtseize is kind of our alternate Chain of Vapor. That might sound ridiculous, but the 2nd Chain of Vapor and 2nd Thoughtseize overlap quite a bit. Both have situations where they are much better than the other, but based on the metagame, I think the 2nd Thoughtseize is preferable.

I'm sticking with 2 Abrupt Decay and I've decided against the 2nd Chain of Vapor. Whether or not I run the 2nd Thoughtseize will be discussed in my conclusion.

Xantid Swarm.

Xantid Swarm is obviously very powerful against Show and Tell and the other blue decks that have little or no removal. This is Legacy though and that's still quite a narrow criteria no matter how popular these decks get. I personally don't think there's enough of these decks to warrant a 3rd copy. Also, if you resolve one unmolested, you don't want to draw any more. I'll be sticking with just 2.

Conclusion.

So, after that consideration, I think these 12 are locked:

2 Xantid Swarm
2 Abrupt Decay
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Thoughtseize
1 Void Snare
1 Grapeshot
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Past in Flames
1 Infernal Tutor

With these being our outstanding options for the 3 remaining cards:

+<=2 Pyroblast
+<=2 Pithing Needle
+1 Thoughtseize

I've decided on the 2nd Thoughtseize over the 1st Pyroblast as I think in many situations it can accomplish the same task as Pyroblast, but has more relevant match-ups.

So would I rather have +2 Pithing Needle or +1 Pithing Needle and +1 Pyroblast?

I'm going to hate playing against Meddling Mage from tempo decks, but we don't have a ton of bad stuff to board out in those match-ups anyway. I'm going with +2 Pithing Needle for now.

--------------------

So, finally, I have arrived at my current list:

//Card Draw and Selection (12)
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Gitaxian Probe

//Tutors (7)
4 Burning Wish
3 Infernal Tutor

//Targets (2)
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Empty the Warrens

//Disruption (7)
4 Cabal Therapy
3 Duress

//Ritual Mana (8)
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flame

//Artifact Mana (11)
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
3 Chrome Mox

//Land (13)
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Tropical Island
2 Polluted Delta
2 Flooded Strand
4 Gemstone Mine

//Sideboard (15)
2 Xantid Swarm
2 Pithing Needle
2 Abrupt Decay
1 Chain of Vapor
2 Thoughtseize
1 Void Snare
1 Grapeshot
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Past in Flames
1 Infernal Tutor

Thank you for reading my long posts, I hope they've contributed something productive to the discussion or your understanding. I could just dump a list, but I think how we arrive at our decisions is just as important. If you feel there's factors I haven't considered or you have a different perspective, please let me know and together we can come to the correct decision. :)

[Asthereal]

You forgot that drawing a Ponder/BS can make you find RoF or LED too. In addition drawing another Probe off a brainstorm can setup another line with LED to fix colors. Hitting another Probe of the initial Probe is relevant for the natural 10-count
Edit2: *SNIP AGAIN!

Damn, I'm not rusty, I'm starting to doubt myself while I was actually doing fine.

Idea: Probe into Cantrip. Cantrip draws LED, Rite or Petal.

Line for LED: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Cantrip, LED, LED, Petal, Rite, Wish, (sac LEDs), Tendrils = 18 (no IMS to cast our Ritual).
Line for Rite: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Cantrip, LED, Petal, Rite, Rite2, Wish, (sac LED), Tendrils = 18 (no IMS to cast our Ritual).
Line for Petal: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Cantrip, LED, Petal, Petal, Rite, Ritual, Wish, (sac LED), Tendrils = 20 (only way)

So Cantrip finds Petal is a win. The others aren't.

Odds: Ponder sees 4 cards, Brainstorm sees 3 cards, 3 Petals left in 46 cards.
Ponder: 4/46 * 3 = 0,26 and Brainstorm: 3/46 * 3 = 0,20
Seems worth to add, though it's not great odds.

Brainstorm into Probe could also win, losing the Rite, but we need a Petal, Mox, LED, Probe or Ritual to go because miss one Storm:
Line: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Brainstorm (put back Rite, Wish), Petal, Ritual, LED, Probe , (resp sac LED for RRR), Wish, Tendrils = 18
So we need an additional card to cast that costs no mana. Petal (3x), Mox (3x), LED (3x), Probe (2x), Ritual (3x) all work. That's 14 out or 46.
So Brainstorm must find 1 of 3 Probes AND 1 out of 14 other cards in 46 cards total. That's 3/46 * 14/46 * something. I forgot how this works exactly.
Let's just be optimistic and go for 3 here (WILD guess). That's 3/46 * 14/46 * 3 = 0,06 Wow, 6%. So Ponder and Brainstorm both have 26% chance of winning.

Lines:
So chances for a direct win: 16/47 = 34%
Chances for Cantrip into win: 7/47 * 0,26 = 4%
Chances for getting situation 2: 3/47 = 6%
Chances for not directly winning: 58/47 = 56%

So I guess it still all depends on how we evaluate the chances of the Dredge player. I thought we have 35-40% chance to win with 17 Goblins and two Bridges removed, but this greatly depends on what the OP missed that was still in the yard of the Dredge player, and whether the Dredge list has Dread Return into sick stuff or not. The OP said the Dredge player had nothing yet, but that means all the good stuff is probably coming now. Moebas, Ichorids, a new Bridge, perhaps a Dread Return and a target. Who knows what comes up in 11 cards dredged?

[Lemnear]

Edit2: *SNIP AGAIN!

Damn, I'm not rusty, I'm starting to doubt myself while I was actually doing fine.



you did an awesome job here.

Idea: Probe into Cantrip. Cantrip draws LED, Rite or Petal.

Line for LED: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Cantrip, LED, LED, Petal, Rite, Wish, (sac LEDs), Tendrils = 18 (no IMS to cast our Ritual).
Line for Rite: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Cantrip, LED, Petal, Rite, Rite2, Wish, (sac LED), Tendrils = 18 (no IMS to cast our Ritual).
Line for Petal: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Cantrip, LED, Petal, Petal, Rite, Ritual, Wish, (sac LED), Tendrils = 20 (only way)

So Cantrip finds Petal is a win. The others aren't.


Tbh, you can still choose to increase your number of goblins to a possible one-turn clock with Wish -> Infernal -> EtW which isn't that bad either.

Odds: Ponder sees 4 cards, Brainstorm sees 3 cards, 3 Petals left in 46 cards.
Ponder: 4/46 * 3 = 0,26 and Brainstorm: 3/46 * 3 = 0,20
Seems worth to add, though it's not great odds.

Brainstorm into Probe could also win, losing the Rite, but we need a Petal, Mox, LED, Probe or Ritual to go because miss one Storm:
Line: Brainstorm, (fetch), Probe, Brainstorm (put back Rite, Wish), Petal, Ritual, LED, Probe , (resp sac LED for RRR), Wish, Tendrils = 18
So we need an additional card to cast that costs no mana. Petal (3x), Mox (3x), LED (3x), Probe (2x), Ritual (3x) all work. That's 14 out or 46.
So Brainstorm must find 1 of 3 Probes AND 1 out of 14 other cards in 46 cards total. That's 3/46 * 14/46 * something. I forgot how this works exactly.
Let's just be optimistic and go for 3 here (WILD guess). That's 3/46 * 14/46 * 3 = 0,06 Wow, 6%. So Ponder and Brainstorm both have 26% chance of winning.

Lines:
So chances for a direct win: 16/47 = 34%
Chances for Cantrip into win: 7/47 * 0,26 = 4%
Chances for getting situation 2: 3/47 = 6%
Chances for not directly winning: 58/47 = 56%

So I guess it still all depends on how we evaluate the chances of the Dredge player. I thought we have 35-40% chance to win with 17 Goblins and two Bridges removed, but this greatly depends on what the OP missed that was still in the yard of the Dredge player, and whether the Dredge list has Dread Return into sick stuff or not. The OP said the Dredge player had nothing yet, but that means all the good stuff is probably coming now. Moebas, Ichorids, a new Bridge, perhaps a Dread Return and a target. Who knows what comes up in 11 cards dredged?



in essence both ways are 40:60 gambles in out opponents favor. Therefore going for goblins should be the way to go ad you have a guaranteed threat established and still have the chance that your opponents deck screws him rather that hoping your deck does not screw you ;)



Pithing Needle.

Pithing Needle is powerful against certain decks while still being flexible enough for varied use. One thing that's easily overlooked is that it's castable using any of our initial mana sources which is a fairly big deal in terms of the consistency of the cards we bring in. If you haven't been stuck in a situation were you can't cast the Abrupt Decay in your hand, or you have to break a crucial Lotus Petal to do so, you're lying (or haven't played the deck for long).

I hadn't even thought about Pithing Needle seriously until 2 days ago so I'm finding it difficult to evaluate. Lemenar, how long have you been playing with Pithing Needle now? Could you give me an overview of how the card has been performing for you and what you like and dislike about it?



I dislike not being able to control my opponents Ponder and Brainstorm setups for Counterblance and Terminus as well as not being able to prevent Clique; I love to fuck with some miracle players mindset of "SDT fixes that hand" and screwing with their idea to hide counterspells from discard.

I love to have a permanent "fuck you griselbrand"-sign on the battlefield and me not having to fight over his combo Pierces rather than their counter; I hate that unlike with Xantid, I still have to care for their cards in Hand

I like dropping it turn 1 against Belcher; I hate not having 4 in the SB for the matchup

I like the versatility in several matchups; I hate having less outs to Meddling mage

I hate asking me the question if Needle isn't less flexible than Pyroblast and if they should either be run alongside or replace each other; I love to hear from your testing experiences

I really like being able to fight Griselbrand and Sensei's Divining Top with one card. Both of the decks that attack us with these are becoming quite common. This is Legacy, so an important thing to note is that, like Pyroblast, what makes it playable is that it has a myraid of utility.

[d0nkey]

You gotta risk it to get the biscuit.

[Pelikanudo]

My hand before sending 2 back is: Misty Rainforest, LED, Burning Wish, Dark Ritual, Rite of Flame, Gitaxian Probe, Cabal Therapy, Lotus Petal. Now, with an uncracked fetch, LED, and a Lotus Petal, I should have no trouble getting the colors I need, the main issue is what to actually do this turn.



call me crazy but that specific hand was perfect for Doomsday in Side plus Shitty IU in base.
the less worse path would have been D.R.

Related to the question, It all depends on Gitaxian. if it draws nothing, maybe put as many gobs as you can is the less worse option. but I asume the player will do bad things on his next 2 turns, in these situations there are lot of things to evaluate in that moment... anyway..

also maybe an option if you start is just hoping he will not draw 2nd therapy and using fetch to volcanic to pretend to be other deck is likely what I will do.

[Lemnear]

call me crazy but that specific hand was perfect for Doomsday in Side plus Shitty IU in base.
the less worse path would have been D.R.

Related to the question, It all depends on Gitaxian. if it draws nothing, maybe put as many gobs as you can is the less worse option. but I asume the player will do bad things on his next 2 turns, in these situations there are lot of things to evaluate in that moment... anyway..

also maybe an option if you start is just hoping he will not draw 2nd therapy and using fetch to volcanic to pretend to be other deck is likely what I will do.

The points to evaluate are:

a) can your opponent make up for the 2 lost Bridges within the next two turns to kill 17 goblins?
b) does your opponents grave indicate any combo?

The option to go for goblins and remove the bridges has the best odds of winning this match and puts your opponent under pressure instead of having a 55%+ chance of plain loosing.

[Pelikanudo]

The points to evaluate are:

a) can your opponent make up for the 2 lost Bridges within the next two turns to kill 17 goblins?
b) does your opponents grave indicate any combo?

The option to go for goblins and remove the bridges has the best odds of winning this match and puts your opponent under pressure instead of having a 55%+ chance of plain loosing.

I will evaluate the option of:

c) Pretending to be a RUG Player meaning he will name FoW AND he will not hit 2nd C.Therapy - evaluate the chances of that, so the question is playing b.s. you can still pretend to be a RUG player, which was the land already in play? as the next turn you just will win, sure if not b) then not c).

EDIT: Seem you're ritgh about hitting bridges maybe.
which are the Chances of drawing a 2nd therapy?

[Lemnear]

I will evaluate the option of:

c) Pretending to be a RUG Player meaning he will name FoW AND he will not hit 2nd C.Therapy - evaluate the chances of that, so the question is playing b.s. you can still pretend to be a RUG player, which was the land already in play? as the next turn you just will win, sure if not b) then not c).

EDIT: Seem you're ritgh about hitting bridges maybe.
which are the Chances of drawing a 2nd therapy?

Dunno. Higher than dumping Bridge #3 & #4 to maybe get enough blockers for all the Goblins.

Your plan still requires your opponent to miss with Therapy #1 (as a Dredge player I would blind-name BS). We still have no clue if he even could have disguised himself as RUG or if the first land was an U.Sea

[d0nkey]

Dunno. Higher than dumping Bridge #3 & #4 to maybe get enough blockers for all the Goblins.

Your plan still requires your opponent to miss with Therapy #1 (as a Dredge player I would blind-name BS). We still have no clue if he even could have disguised himself as RUG or if the first land was an U.Sea

He played Cephalid Colleseum on turn 1. I would imagine he will be able to win after he dredges 15+ cards next turn.

I would still risk it for the biscuit.

And by risk it, I mean I would lead with probe and see what happens.

[Bryant Cook]

Played the list at a local tonight, beating Maverick, UR Delver, Reanimator, (ID with UR Delver), Miracles and Reanimator (5-0-1). Needles were only relevant once, but it wasn't as expected. Needle on Griselbrand forced an Iona naming black, I then made a lethal amount of Goblins. The list felt tight. I did find myself siding in five cards so that I could bring in Tendrils too against Miracles & Reanimator, when doing so I sided out a Therapy. Those are match-ups where the guarantee to hit something turn one over the Duress is huge - just my initial thoughts.

[wonderPreaux]

Played the list at a local tonight, beating Maverick, UR Delver, Reanimator, (ID with UR Delver), Miracles and Reanimator (5-0-1). Needles were only relevant once, but it wasn't as expected. Needle on Griselbrand forced an Iona naming black, I then made a lethal amount of Goblins. The list felt tight. I did find myself siding in five cards so that I could bring in Tendrils too against Miracles & Reanimator, when doing so I sided out a Therapy. Those are match-ups where the guarantee to hit something turn one over the Duress is huge - just my initial thoughts.

Your experience with Needle is exactly the sort of thing I would expect, actually. It is very good at forcing the opponent down certain lines and, since TES is so adaptable, you can just counter the line you force them on. Out of curiosity, what prompted you to board in Tendrils in the Miracales and Reanimator matches? The natural storm line seems appealing for slow control, but idk what purpose the mained Tendrils serves against reanimator, other than countering iona on red or something.

[Bryant Cook]

Your experience with Needle is exactly the sort of thing I would expect, actually. It is very good at forcing the opponent down certain lines and, since TES is so adaptable, you can just counter the line you force them on. Out of curiosity, what prompted you to board in Tendrils in the Miracales and Reanimator matches? The natural storm line seems appealing for slow control, but idk what purpose the mained Tendrils serves against reanimator, other than countering iona on red or something.

You answered your own questions.

[sawatarix]

iona naming black is always wrong against TES - same for meddling mage naming infernal tutor.
They should name red (or Burning Wish with Meddling Mage) because this shuts down the kill and ways to escape like void snare)
Exception: the games where we board in Tendrils of Agony but i'm not a huge fan of boarding the 1 copy we have in the mainboard because i don't see any reason to do so.

[wonderPreaux]

You answered your own questions.
I'm guessing the boarding was something like:

- 1 EtW
- 2 C. Mox
- 1 Ponder
- 1 Cabal Therapy
+ 1 Tendrils of Agony
+ 2 Pithing Needle
+ 2 Abrupt Decay/Xantid Swarm

Do you often bring Tendrils in against Miracles? It's an option that hadn't really occurred to me, usually I try for really fast hands against Miracles, but the natural storm chain seems like a good option if they force the game to go long.

[vercadium]

Alas, I'm not sure if I should be flattered that no-one other than Lemnear had any other viewpoints to add to my post yesterday (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23361-Deck-T-E-S-The-EPIC-Storm&p=824357#post824357) or insulted that no-one else bothered to do so.


I dislike not being able to control my opponents Ponder and Brainstorm setups for Counterblance and Terminus as well as not being able to prevent Clique; I love to fuck with some miracle players mindset of "SDT fixes that hand" and screwing with their idea to hide counterspells from discard.

I love to have a permanent "fuck you griselbrand"-sign on the battlefield and me not having to fight over his combo Pierces rather than their counter; I hate that unlike with Xantid, I still have to care for their cards in Hand

I like dropping it turn 1 against Belcher; I hate not having 4 in the SB for the matchup

I like the versatility in several matchups; I hate having less outs to Meddling mage

I hate asking me the question if Needle isn't less flexible than Pyroblast and if they should either be run alongside or replace each other; I love to hear from your testing experiences

Thank you for your reply and insight Lemnear. I haven't played with Pithing Needle yet, so any statements I could make would be mere conjecture. Rest assured I will share my expieriences from testing when I have.


Yeah I'd rather try Bayou too (casts more relevant spells), but Bayou+Volcanic doesn't cast Decay...
I still have to test the Taiga. If I like it, I will post it here.

Taiga shouldn't even be a consideration - just look at the colour breakdown of our deck. Tropical Island vs Bayou is the only option for that 13th land. Bayou casts more spells, but Tropical Island adds consistency. I think Tropical Island is the correct choice.

Regardless of everyone's opinion on that, with a Tropical Island/Bayou main-deck as the 13th land, what do people think of a 5th fetch-land in place of the second Volcanic Island? I'll miss having that stability and redundancy against Wasteland and also being more vulnerable to Stifle, but it does help our low land count deck hit all its colours more reliably and has the added benefit of being a shuffle effect. Having less fetch-land targets than we have fetch-lands is detrimental in some scenarios though. We ran 1 Volcanic Island for literally years, so this isn't an outrageous suggestion.

Another change I'd consider from my list (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23361-Deck-T-E-S-The-EPIC-Storm&p=824357#post824357) is:

MD:
-1 Duress
+1 Thoughtseize

SB:
-1 Thoughtseize
+1 Pyroblast

As an aside, I think side-boarding in Tendrils of Agony in the Miracles match-up is pretty strong and I would recommend that as the default option going forward.

[Marcelo65]

I m reading your thoughts on the maindeck changes. Very interesting discussion going on here.
If we are looking fot more consistency I have a new tech which may lead to some sick moves:
Why aren't we chain multiple Burning-Tree Emissaries into Grapeshot. 2 Emissaries allow storm 3 and are still viable as blockers/attackers and food for CabalTherapies.
But I m not sure if we want to play the full set main. Testing will tell.

[Asthereal]

Taiga shouldn't even be a consideration - just look at the colour breakdown of our deck. Tropical Island vs Bayou is the only option for that 13th land. Bayou casts more spells, but Tropical Island adds consistency. I think Tropical Island is the correct choice.
This is the kind of condescendence we cannot use on a forum like this. This holds back any innovation. All innovation looks weird at first, not just mine. Remember when Bryant said the Probe was bad because it didn't do anything? He wasn't wrong in his remark, but he was proven wrong by the performance of the card. At least, many feel that way.

We are focussing more on duals here. You have to admit that with 12-13 lands, it's hard to consisently get to three lands, and Tropical demands we do that very thing if we want to be able to cast all our spells from our lands. I was looking into a way to cast all our spells from just two lands.

ANT has this setup: Tropical + Badlands. Unfortunately this isn't an option for us, because we usually need initial B and R to go off. Taking this into consideration, and the fact that I want to be able to cast Decay from two lands as well means my only option is Sea + Taiga. I don't like it either, but Bayou + Volcanic doesn't cast Decay.

If you don't like my idea, fine. Others have already mentioned they don't believe in it. I will try it when I get the chance, simply because I think we are moving the mana base into an ANTish direction, only with two lands less. That feels bad, and therefore it's worth looking into solutions.

[vercadium]

This is the kind of condescendence we cannot use on a forum like this. This holds back any innovation. All innovation looks weird at first, not just mine. Remember when Bryant said the Probe was bad because it didn't do anything? He wasn't wrong in his remark, but he was proven wrong by the performance of the card. At least, many feel that way.

We are focussing more on duals here. You have to admit that with 12-13 lands, it's hard to consisently get to three lands, and Tropical demands we do that very thing if we want to be able to cast all our spells from our lands. I was looking into a way to cast all our spells from just two lands.

ANT has this setup: Tropical + Badlands. Unfortunately this isn't an option for us, because we usually need initial B and R to go off. Taking this into consideration, and the fact that I want to be able to cast Decay from two lands as well means my only option is Sea + Taiga. I don't like it either, but Bayou + Volcanic doesn't cast Decay.

If you don't like my idea, fine. Others have already mentioned they don't believe in it. I will try it when I get the chance, simply because I think we are moving the mana base into an ANTish direction, only with two lands less. That feels bad, and therefore it's worth looking into solutions.

My apologies if what I said was condescending towards you; I honestly didn't intend my frankness to be taken as such. The reason I am so blunt regarding Taiga is that I believe it makes very little sense compared to Bayou, which could at least be argued, even if it's incorrect when compared to Tropical Island. Normally, I would start off with well thought out reasoning, but I am also entitled to outright dismiss something when I believe it holds no merit.

I think your logic regarding Taiga is flawed and I'll try to explain why I believe this is the case below. This does not stifle innovation and I welcome any new arguments or perspectives you have around it.

We have more black cards than red. The black and blue cards are the ones that more often need cast over multiple turns and on our 1st turn (discard/cantrips), so our re-usable mana sources are more effective in that colour. Moreover, our 9 red cards that are in the deck (4 Rite of Flame, 4 Burning Wish, 1 Empty the Warrens) are often cast only on the turn we're "going off", which makes breaking a petal for that source much more plausible, than say, having to break one for Duress because we have Volcanic Island + Taiga in play.

Here's the colour options we have with 2 lands, which is only relevant when we don't have Chrome Mox, Lotus Petal or Gemstone Mine:

Taiga + Underground Sea = RGUB = 4 different colour sources with 2 lands.
Bayou + Underground Sea = BGU = 3 different colour sources with 2 lands.
Tropical Island + Underground Sea = UGB = 3 different colour sources with 2 lands.

Taiga + Volcanic Island = RGU = 3 different colour sources with 2 lands.
Bayou + Volcanic Island = BGUR = 4 different colour sources with 2 lands.
Tropical Island + Volcanic Island = UGR = 3 different colour sources with 2 lands.

As you can see, this more or less balances out regardless, so the Taiga doesn't really help that much to hit more colours with only 2 land when compared to Bayou. However, I will concede that it hits more colours a small % of the time, as we're more likely to fetch Underground Sea on turn 1 than Volcanic Island. Still, compared to the big issues, this is not relevant.

Red is our tertiary colour in my opinion. For our opening hands, Blue and Black are often the most crucial compared to red, as we often lead with a can-trip or discard. The point of the 13th land is so that we have a fetch-able source for our green sideboard spells. This leaves the only option being Tropical Island and Bayou.

Your point regarding casting Abrupt Decay with Taiga is null as, while you are correct that it does help you cast your red spells more consistently when used with Abrupt Decay off of 2 Lands and no Chrome Mox, Lotus Petal or Gemstone Mines - Abrupt Decay is a 2 of in my sideboard, that is only used in some match-ups, so that scenario will not occur often enough to justify making a sub-optimum change that has negative impacts in the much more commonly occurring scenarios I have mentioned.

To clarify - ultimately I feel like that small improvement of mana-fixing, which is only sometimes relevant for Abrupt Decay, is not worth leading with a Mountain (particularly in Game 1) instead of an Island or Swamp, which is relevant in many more cases. I'd rather have the Island personally.

Hopefully that has shed some light on my stance on the matter. You are entitled to disagree, as was I.

[davelin]

This is the kind of condescendence we cannot use on a forum like this. This holds back any innovation. All innovation looks weird at first, not just mine. Remember when Bryant said the Probe was bad because it didn't do anything? He wasn't wrong in his remark, but he was proven wrong by the performance of the card. At least, many feel that way.

We are focussing more on duals here. You have to admit that with 12-13 lands, it's hard to consisently get to three lands, and Tropical demands we do that very thing if we want to be able to cast all our spells from our lands. I was looking into a way to cast all our spells from just two lands.

ANT has this setup: Tropical + Badlands. Unfortunately this isn't an option for us, because we usually need initial B and R to go off. Taking this into consideration, and the fact that I want to be able to cast Decay from two lands as well means my only option is Sea + Taiga. I don't like it either, but Bayou + Volcanic doesn't cast Decay.

If you don't like my idea, fine. Others have already mentioned they don't believe in it. I will try it when I get the chance, simply because I think we are moving the mana base into an ANTish direction, only with two lands less. That feels bad, and therefore it's worth looking into solutions.

Don't take it so personally, the statement was hardly condescending. With a deck with 12-13 lands it's frequently the case you'll only have 1 land in the opening 7. Having that land be a Taiga is a feel bad.

[Lemnear]

Alas, I'm not sure if I should be flattered that no-one other than Lemnear had any other viewpoints to add to my post yesterday (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23361-Deck-T-E-S-The-EPIC-Storm&p=824357#post824357) or insulted that no-one else bothered to do so.

Your question was pretty much directed at me, so I answered, which is the least I could do. There is not reason to be flattered or insulted.


We are focussing more on duals here. You have to admit that with 12-13 lands, it's hard to consisently get to three lands, and Tropical demands we do that very thing if we want to be able to cast all our spells from our lands. I was looking into a way to cast all our spells from just two lands.

ANT has this setup: Tropical + Badlands. Unfortunately this isn't an option for us, because we usually need initial B and R to go off. Taking this into consideration, and the fact that I want to be able to cast Decay from two lands as well means my only option is Sea + Taiga. I don't like it either, but Bayou + Volcanic doesn't cast Decay.

If you don't like my idea, fine. Others have already mentioned they don't believe in it. I will try it when I get the chance, simply because I think we are moving the mana base into an ANTish direction, only with two lands less. That feels bad, and therefore it's worth looking into solutions.

TES is trying to cast all it's spells off 2-3 initial mana sources (read 1-2 lands) which is a huge difference to ANT, which feels comfortable to drop 3-4 lands instead. Building the manabase according to ANT, but just with fewer lands, is a conceptional problem.


Regardless of everyone's opinion on that, with a Tropical Island/Bayou main-deck as the 13th land, what do people think of a 5th fetch-land in place of the second Volcanic Island? I'll miss having that stability and redundancy against Wasteland and also being more vulnerable to Stifle, but it does help our low land count deck hit all its colours more reliably and has the added benefit of being a shuffle effect. Having less fetch-land targets than we have fetch-lands is detrimental in some scenarios though. We ran 1 Volcanic Island for literally years, so this isn't an outrageous suggestion.

We had the topic about 2 months ago in this thread and I dared to make a long post back when, explaining why you want the the second Volcanic. Maybe you or any other dear forum user wants to dig that up. I'm lazy at this point and rather post a mikro-spoiler from HotS 7 - Storm Shards:



During the unveiling of the beforementioned list, there was a lot of confusion about running 2 Underground Sea and 2 Volcanic Island instead of a further emphasis towards shuffle-effects by running only a single Volcanic, but 5 Fetchlands. Even more radical suggestions like 1 Underground Sea, 1 Volcanic and 6 Fetchlands popped up for discussion, but those suggestions missed a few points. While I love shuffle-effects in a deck which contains full sets of Ponder and Brainstorm like the next guys does, running Volcanic Island or Underground Sea only as singletons can cause several serious problems at times.

The first and obvious flaw in the plan to reduce the actual number of mana-producing lands is the existence of Wasteland. Hands down, this colorless Sinkhole is a cornerstone of the Legacy metagame and not being prepared to fight it equals losing games. Seeing your singleton Dual destroyed and your remaining 4+ Fetchlands (see: beforementioned land-configuation) unable to put either a red- or black-producing land into play, can be the backbreaker for your attempt to go into the combo. To prevent running out of quality targets (in terms of color), or running out of targets altogether (in case you drew/fetched every one of your duals, which turns further drawn Fetchlands into blanks), the list settled on an equal amount of Fetchlands and Duals. Furthermore, several possible scenarios underline the importance of running 2 of each Dual, like drawing an opening hand containing Underground Sea, a Fetchland, Ponder, Cabal Therapy and Thoughtseize. There is no way to squeeze out the maximum of value without a second Underground Sea in your 60, as it would be impossible to cast Ponder prior to fetching a second land and still being able to cast a discard-spell. Throwback: Now imagine Wasteland hitting your Underground Sea with that hand! Suddenly your discard-spells are turned off, as the Fetchland has no Underground Sea left to dig up!

[Plague Sliver]

Played a mini gauntlet today with a few store regulars.

Shardless BUG - 2-0

Miracles - 2-0

UW Thopters - 2-0

Death and taxes - 1-2

Continuing my bad run against D&T. It's go off quick or sandbag for Massacre, I got greedy in games 1 and 3. Well, hard to beat top decked Thalia.

Didn't get to use Vapor Snare or Pithing Needle in the board, but was nice to know they were there. Got jammed vs Thopters game 2 playing Leyline of Sanctity, passed the turn with 45 goblins and killed him anyway at 1 life with his batterskull, mystic, snapcaster on board.

I really like going down from 3 to 2 decays because of Ad Nauseam.

[Lemnear]

Played a mini gauntlet today with a few store regulars.

Shardless BUG - 2-0

Miracles - 2-0

UW Thopters - 2-0

Death and taxes - 1-2

Continuing my bad run against D&T. It's go off quick or sandbag for Massacre, I got greedy in games 1 and 3. Well, hard to beat top decked Thalia.

Didn't get to use Vapor Snare or Pithing Needle in the board, but was nice to know they were there. Got jammed vs Thopters game 2 playing Leyline of Sanctity, passed the turn with 45 goblins and killed him anyway at 1 life with his batterskull, mystic, snapcaster on board.

I really like going down from 3 to 2 decays because of Ad Nauseam.

Define "got greedy" against D&T. The topdeck-hatebear issue is the reason I'm not find of the discard-hatebear-with-Thoughtseize-plan which pops up here at times.

Looking forward to the storm-showoff in about a month

[Plague Sliver]

I had a greedy 7 card keep, on the draw, vs D&T. It was Empty, Rite, Chrome Mox, Ad Nauseam, LED and 2 lands. I figured I could draw a lot of topdecks to go off turn 1 or 2, but it didn't happen. Probably a mulligan with no dig spells.

Game 2 I made 12 goblins turn 2.

Game 3 I mulled to 6 and kept one of those hands with acceleration and no mana where drawing one mana source would have let me make 12 goblins. Turn 1 probe, see garbage, opt not to Therapy, he top decks turn 2 Thalia. There was an interesting sequence where his revoker named lotus petal instead of LED as I expected him to. This was the blowout because I had one land ported and another land plus lotus petal to chain of vapor his thalia. Obv big fail on my part.

I didn't need LED to naturally Empty, but I had two of them in my hand to build storm. We talked about this after and I could have mindgamed a little bit by playing out the LED so he might name it instead.

They were greedy keeps. Well, game 1 was pure greed, and for game 3...I usually don't like going down to 5, it puts me way too far behind and I'd rather gamble if there are so many outs.

Also for what it's worth, I keep my probes in for the storm and cycling, and took out all 3 Duresses. The plan is to blind name Thalia with Therapy everytime and buyback for Jitte/Batterskull. Against Taxes I also side the Infernal back in because I'll maximize my chance of goblins any day of the week. I pretty much took your advice to heart and don't rely on the Decays they are too expensive. My sideboard still has a singleton Chain for this matchup.

[Lemnear]

I had a greedy 7 card keep, on the draw, vs D&T. It was Empty, Rite, Chrome Mox, Ad Nauseam, LED and 2 lands. I figured I could draw a lot of topdecks to go off turn 1 or 2, but it didn't happen. Probably a mulligan with no dig spells.


Here I see a virtual mulligan to 5 with a Chrome Mox and a LED which can cast nothing without a Brainstorm as you have both business spells of TES already in hand and unless the mana source you draw is a Dark Ritual, you can only dump a maximum of 8 Goblins w/o Cabal Therapy against a deck with SFM. On the draw gambling for a Topdeck DR or a BS (while praying that your opponent don't drop Thalia in his turn 2), is indeed greedy

Game 2 I made 12 goblins turn 2.

Game 3 I mulled to 6 and kept one of those hands with acceleration and no mana where drawing one mana source would have let me make 12 goblins.


happens. Better than a mull to 5

Turn 1 probe, see garbage, opt not to Therapy, he top decks turn 2 Thalia. There was an interesting sequence where his revoker named lotus petal instead of LED as I expected him to. This was the blowout because I had one land ported and another land plus lotus petal to chain of vapor his thalia. Obv big fail on my part.

I didn't need LED to naturally Empty, but I had two of them in my hand to build storm. We talked about this after and I could have mindgamed a little bit by playing out the LED so he might name it instead.

They were greedy keeps. Well, game 1 was pure greed, and for game 3...I usually don't like going down to 5, it puts me way too far behind and I'd rather gamble if there are so many outs.

Also for what it's worth, I keep my probes in for the storm and cycling, and took out all 3 Duresses. The plan is to blind name Thalia with Therapy everytime and buyback for Jitte/Batterskull. Against Taxes I also side the Infernal back in because I'll maximize my chance of goblins any day of the week.


yep

I pretty much took your advice to heart and don't rely on the Decays they are too expensive. My sideboard still has a singleton Chain for this matchup.

[RaNDoMxGeSTuReS]

Played terribly this weekend in KC.

2-1 Elves
0-2 BUG Delver
2-0 UWR Delver
2-0 UWR Delver
1-2 Deathblade
2-1 Maverick
2-1 Eggs
0-2 Sneaky Show
Drop

5-3 overall.

[jake556]

Played terribly this weekend in KC.

2-1 Elves
0-2 BUG Delver
2-0 UWR Delver
2-0 UWR Delver
1-2 Deathblade
2-1 Maverick
2-1 Eggs
0-2 Sneaky Show
Drop

5-3 overall.


Play it out 6-3 for $50?

[Lemnear]

Played terribly this weekend in KC.

2-1 Elves
0-2 BUG Delver
2-0 UWR Delver
2-0 UWR Delver
1-2 Deathblade
2-1 Maverick
2-1 Eggs
0-2 Sneaky Show
Drop

5-3 overall.

What happened in the SneakShow matchup?

[Bryant Cook]

Won a 139 player side event at GP:Worchester for a foil set of Modern Masters. Deck felt very good and my Ad Nauseams were noticeably better.

I played with Needles both events and never was able to cast them despite siding them in three or four times. Void Snare was used three times, once to bounce a Leyline and then Iona & Goblin Guide (believe it or not! it gave me lethal with Empty tokens).

2-0 Esper Deathblade
2-0 Omnitell
2-0 NicFit
2-1 bUrg Delver
2-0 UWr Delver
2-0 UR Delver
1-2 UWR Delver (Jared Beottcher)

Top 4

2-0 UWR Delver (Jared Beottcher)
2-0 Shardless BUG (Two turn 1 ETW = 14 with Therapies)

I also took down a win-a-box defeating Reanimator twice.

2-1 Reanimator
2-1 Elves
2-1 Reanimator

[P-E]

Congrats Bryant , TES is still here and fully alive !!

[Togores]

Why would u say it gave u better nauseams If u cutted the 3rd mox wich usualy does this?

Of you dont played the 1st page list?

congrats anyway!!!!

[Bryant Cook]

Why would u say it gave u better nauseams If u cutted the 3rd mox wich usualy does this?

Of you dont played the 1st page list?

congrats anyway!!!!

I updated the OP with the list I played. Not the content though.

[seilaquem]

Won a 139 player side event at GP:Worchester for a foil set of Modern Masters. Deck felt very good and my Ad Nauseams were noticeably better.

I played with Needles both events and never was able to cast them despite siding them in three or four times. Void Snare was used three times, once to bounce a Leyline and then Iona & Goblin Guide (believe it or not! it gave me lethal with Empty tokens).

2-0 Esper Deathblade
2-0 Omnitell
2-0 NicFit
2-1 bUrg Delver
2-0 UWr Delver
2-0 UR Delver
1-2 UWR Delver (Jared Beottcher)

Top 4

2-0 UWR Delver (Jared Beottcher)
2-0 Shardless BUG (Two turn 1 ETW = 14 with Therapies)

I also took down a win-a-box defeating Reanimator twice.

2-1 Reanimator
2-1 Elves
2-1 Reanimator

Congrats on the great finishs! =D

BTW, since you got such great results, would you mind writing a report? I´ve been having a lot of trouble against BUG , miracles and reanimator, and you seemed to be alright =D

Thanks a lot for the fast replies and congrats again

[seilaquem]

This seems like a double post, but it isn't.

I just got a sneak attack as a prize on a 8-man tournament =D
I used the old version w/ cabal ritual. (2 Chrome mox/2 cabal ritual, w/ tropical island in the maindeck)

Match-ups:
2-0 Goblins (AN FTW)
1-2 miracles (AN on 1st game, then 2 t2 canonists on the following games, backed up w/ soft counters (game2) and countertop (game3) =/)
2-0 Junk (got 2 AN victories through t1 chalice on both games, w/ thespian combo waiting for me on T4. In this matches, cabal rituals really shined =D)

top 4:
1-1 - BUG delver (but he was a teammate, and had to leave early, so he conceaded ^^)
2-0 - Goblins (close games.
game1 got through discarding a sharpshooter and killing the 2nd w/ grapeshot =D,
the 2nd game got a risky hand OTDraw , getting the IMS to 16 goblins)

Guess I gotta thank everyone here for the testing and feedback, since I have been following the thread since page 180 (^^), and my teammate that pointed out how i could win against him against bug delver...

If any of you think it will be helpful, i can write a more detailed report.

[Togores]

So with the 13 land deck u never got flooded?

Do you sided out the tropical in some matches?

how good where the 2 chain of vapor? im still not sure if they are so good. Usualy I would prefer another decay and xantid.

[Bryant Cook]

Congrats on the great finishs! =D

BTW, since you got such great results, would you mind writing a report? I´ve been having a lot of trouble against BUG , miracles and reanimator, and you seemed to be alright =D

Thanks a lot for the fast replies and congrats again

Not likely, I didn't take any notes as it was a side event. I could write stuff from memory, but it wouldn't be completely worthwhile.


So with the 13 land deck u never got flooded?

Do you sided out the tropical in some matches?

how good where the 2 chain of vapor? im still not sure if they are so good. Usualy I would prefer another decay and xantid.

No, no and they were fine. Then don't play them? Remember, you don't have to run my list!

[seilaquem]

Not likely, I didn't take any notes as it was a side event. I could write stuff from memory, but it wouldn't be completely worthwhile.

that's too bad. I guess i'll still have to figure out how to battle reanimator =/




So with the 13 land deck u never got flooded?

Do you sided out the tropical in some matches?

how good where the 2 chain of vapor? im still not sure if they are so good. Usualy I would prefer another decay and xantid.

I still am not 100% sure about going back to 3 CMs (just because I am enjoying cabal ritual so much), but the extra land is great. It's not like there is a HUGE difference between 12 to 13 lands. it is still a "wastable" land to cantrip T1 if you want to play around wasteland

Also, chain of vapor is great. It helps against hate, and you can use it to proactively increase the storm count. It can help a lot against leyline and reanimator , and it's better protection against burn, since they are playing 4 eidolons main, which can be a huge pain =/

[RaNDoMxGeSTuReS]

What happened in the SneakShow matchup?

I was at 2 life game one with Tendrils for 28 on the stack against my opponent. She tried to Misdirect a copy to kill me? That doesn't work. She calls a floor judge who rules it, in fact, does kill me. I lose game 2. I should have appealed to the head judge. The floor judge later apologizes for being an idiot.

I was pretty titled. Never had a reason before to appeal a judge ruling before. Felt pretty awful.

Game two she casts Show and Tell and drops in Emrakul. I drop in Xantid Swarm. I can only Tendrils for 14. She's at 15. I lose. She was very salty about winning, too. Sometimes I just don't understand people.

I didn't play Pithing Needle. Replaced them with 1 Massacre and the third Xantid Swarm. Didn't want needle all day. Massacre helped me beat Elves and killed a flipped delver and TNN against UWR Delver to buy enough time to win the game.

Also, people in the Midwest are idiots. Everyone that cast Meddling Mage against me named Tendrils of Agony. Both did so with perfect information of my hand knowing I'd win the following turn.

Didn't play out the last round for $50 because I honestly didn't care about the money. Just wanted to go home and enjoy the rest of my vacation.

[seilaquem]

(...)

Also, people in the Midwest are idiots. Everyone that cast Meddling Mage against me named Tendrils of Agony. Both did so with perfect information of my hand knowing I'd win the following turn.

Well, did they have lethal on board? cause if they don't havet, you can still empty the warrens and attack them on the following turn.

Also, if you have enough storm, you could simply grapeshot them all the way. It wouldn't be showboating them in this situation...

(I am aware that tendrils is better, but there were other lines you could try to play around pikula... you should be thankful they didn't name burning wish. cause then you would be dead on the spot )

[RaNDoMxGeSTuReS]

Well, did they have lethal on board? cause if they don't havet, you can still empty the warrens and attack them on the following turn.

Also, if you have enough storm, you could simply grapeshot them all the way. It wouldn't be showboating them in this situation...

(I am aware that tendrils is better, but there were other lines you could try to play around pikula... you should be thankful they didn't name burning wish. cause then you would be dead on the spot )

She had Emrakul in play?

[Koby]

Well, did they have lethal on board? cause if they don't havet, you can still empty the warrens and attack them on the following turn.


He just mentioned he could storm for 7, so that's 14 goblins. 6 of which would die to Emrakul, leaving 8, to attack his opponent down to 7 life, then lose on the second attack to lethal damage.

That's a bad suggestion.

[seilaquem]

He just mentioned he could storm for 7, so that's 14 goblins. 6 of which would die to Emrakul, leaving 8, to attack his opponent down to 7 life, then lose on the second attack to lethal damage.

That's a bad suggestion.

sorry, that comment was addressed to the meddling mage problem. He complained he couldn't win against a meddling mage naming tendrils. I just answered how he could play around it. (just edited the post)

Unless the S&Show was a UWR variant that played meddling mage...

[Lemnear]

I still am not 100% sure about going back to 3 CMs (just because I am enjoying cabal ritual so much), but the extra land is great. It's not like there is a HUGE difference between 12 to 13 lands. it is still a "wastable" land to cantrip T1 if you want to play around wasteland

There is a big difference in having 20 initial mana sources vs 18 for Ad Nauseam flips aka Self-inflicted damage, opening hands, mulligans and to overcome softcounters.

[seilaquem]

There is a big difference in having 20 initial mana sources vs 18 for Ad Nauseam flips aka Self-inflicted damage, opening hands, mulligans and to overcome softcounters.

Yeah, i thought about it considering the count of lands only, but I wasn't considering IMSs in the deck. thats a great POV that I hadn't considered. Thanks a lot =)

I was already convinced that the tropical belonged to the main, since it's a great way to fight against tempo strategies.

So I'll just try the 3rd mox on main and remove the cabal rituals... it's more directed to the "2nd/3rd turn kill" of TES.

Guess I was playing the deck more focused like an ANT deck.

[RaNDoMxGeSTuReS]

sorry, that comment was addressed to the meddling mage problem. He complained he couldn't win against a meddling mage naming tendrils. I just answered how he could play around it. (just edited the post)

Unless the S&Show was a UWR variant that played meddling mage...

I killed both UWR Delver opponents with Empty the Warrens when they had Meddling Mage out?

I didn't complain, nor did I say I couldn't win against a Meddling Mage. Learn to read.

For example, my opponent probes me and sees Dark Ritual, LED, Infernal Tutor, Land. He still named Tendrils of Agony with his Meddling Mage. Why the hell would you do that given perfect knowledge of my hand?

The thing is -- no you wouldn't.

[Pelikanudo]

Won a 139 player side event at GP:Worchester for a foil set of Modern Masters. Deck felt very good and my Ad Nauseams were noticeably better.

I played with Needles both events and never was able to cast them despite siding them in three or four times. Void Snare was used three times, once to bounce a Leyline and then Iona & Goblin Guide (believe it or not! it gave me lethal with Empty tokens).

2-0 Esper Deathblade
2-0 Omnitell
2-0 NicFit
2-1 bUrg Delver
2-0 UWr Delver
2-0 UR Delver
1-2 UWR Delver (Jared Beottcher)

Top 4

2-0 UWR Delver (Jared Beottcher)
2-0 Shardless BUG (Two turn 1 ETW = 14 with Therapies)

I also took down a win-a-box defeating Reanimator twice.

2-1 Reanimator
2-1 Elves
2-1 Reanimator

How have you sided vs the UWR variants and BURG Delver?

[Plague Sliver]

I was at 2 life game one with Tendrils for 28 on the stack against my opponent. She tried to Misdirect a copy to kill me? That doesn't work. She calls a floor judge who rules it, in fact, does kill me. I lose game 2. I should have appealed to the head judge. The floor judge later apologizes for being an idiot.

I was pretty titled. Never had a reason before to appeal a judge ruling before. Felt pretty awful.

Game two she casts Show and Tell and drops in Emrakul. I drop in Xantid Swarm. I can only Tendrils for 14. She's at 15. I lose. She was very salty about winning, too. Sometimes I just don't understand people.

Sorry to hear that, man. I don't know what I would have done after I realized the judge's mistake. Cooler heads prevail... and winners should never be salty. End of story.

As for idiots naming Tendrils with Mage, I hope to play more of these Magicians in the future, that's for sure.


There is a big difference in having 20 initial mana sources vs 18 for Ad Nauseam flips aka Self-inflicted damage, opening hands, mulligans and to overcome softcounters.

Yeah, I play the 13th land in my list (tropical island) as well. But to be honest, I'm not sure it's the right call. I only do it because I'm running out of sideboard slots, and trying to be greedy by running both Pyroclasm and Massacre in the board. It becomes a "null" card in game 1 most of the time, and then I'm wondering why I don't just play a 4th Chrome Mox or even a Preordain.

But then I remember how bad a 4th Chrome Mox is, and I regain my senses.

Game 1 the tropical island is pretty much a wastable island, and Game 2 and 3 when I side vs. Miracles I bring in the hate stuff and side out the second Volcanic Island, bringing me to 12 lands anyways.

So what am I trying to say here? I do run 13 lands main, but I'm not sure it's right. But I'm pretty comfortable with it, so I do it. My suggestion is to do what makes you comfortable, and not necessarily what everyone does, or what Bryant does (sorry Bryant). This is a math-heavy deck, but sometimes you need some sub-optimal configurations to give you that irrational edge/comfort zone.

[wonderPreaux]

Yeah, I play the 13th land in my list (tropical island) as well. But to be honest, I'm not sure it's the right call. I only do it because I'm running out of sideboard slots, and trying to be greedy by running both Pyroclasm and Massacre in the board. It becomes a "null" card in game 1 most of the time, and then I'm wondering why I don't just play a 4th Chrome Mox or even a Preordain.

But then I remember how bad a 4th Chrome Mox is, and I regain my senses.

Game 1 the tropical island is pretty much a wastable island, and Game 2 and 3 when I side vs. Miracles I bring in the hate stuff and side out the second Volcanic Island, bringing me to 12 lands anyways.

So what am I trying to say here? I do run 13 lands main, but I'm not sure it's right. But I'm pretty comfortable with it, so I do it. My suggestion is to do what makes you comfortable, and not necessarily what everyone does, or what Bryant does (sorry Bryant). This is a math-heavy deck, but sometimes you need some sub-optimal configurations to give you that irrational edge/comfort zone.

I was trying Simian Spirit Guide as my sixtieth, it was an ok slot. However, I'm not sure if having room for another chain of vapor in the board and averting the 3CMC monkey is worth carrying Trop in the main (http://puu.sh/avlf1/b117007667.png). Conversely, I'm not sure the extra accel is worth the volatility of flips off ad nauseam just to have the slightly more focused initial 60 (SSG is pretty much the worth Rit effect, not even a spell, etc). I wouldn't just play whatever "feels comfortable", though, even if your sixty+fifteen is only marginally better when youve found that long-researched configuration, you should still be testing to find that true-optimal 75.

[Bryant Cook]

I'd like to point out that thirteen lands isn't some new crazy revelation, we've ran that many before. It just happened that we shaved a land when making room for Gitaxian Probe.

[wonderPreaux]

I'd like to point out that thirteen lands isn't some new crazy revelation, we've ran that many before. It just happened that we shaved a land when making room for Gitaxian Probe.
I recently finished reading all the old TES threads, and it is intriguing that both the sideboard Infernal Tutor and 13th land have come up before. I just wish the 13th land didn't have to be a Trop. It's also kinda funny that so many posts in the old threads were about a shortage of good rainbow lands, and now when we have mana confluence we're at a point in time where we're sporting duals and fetches instead.

[Lemnear]

I recently finished reading all the old TES threads, and it is intriguing that both the sideboard Infernal Tutor and 13th land have come up before. I just wish the 13th land didn't have to be a Trop. It's also kinda funny that so many posts in the old threads were about a shortage of good rainbow lands, and now when we have mana confluence we're at a point in time where we're sporting duals and fetches instead.

I don't know why this should be surprising. The deck is no longer 5 colored and because of the powercreep in the game, the deck was required to maximize it's cantrips further and gaining a more stable manabase. The times, in which you could afford to eat damage with every tapping of a land or could play "land, go" for 3-4 turns, like AJ Kerrigan did in his very youth, just to kill your opponent with a single Silence and near full life, are long passed.

[wonderPreaux]

I don't know why this should be surprising. The deck is no longer 5 colored and because of the powercreep in the game, the deck was required to maximize it's cantrips further and gaining a more stable manabase. The times, in which you could afford to eat damage with every tapping of a land or could play "land, go" for 3-4 turns, like AJ Kerrigan did in his very youth, just to kill your opponent with a single Silence and near full life, are long passed.

It is just amusing to think that we could pretty easily run all 5c lands if we wanted now, but its not even relevant anymore. if every other deck has higher card quality (and some decks from a couple years ago don't exist anymore because they didn't get higher card quality) and stable operations then this deck would have to tune itself to that same caliber as well.

On a larger overall topic, does anyone else think the list for TES, as a whole, is kinda "locked in" at this point? It seems like, now that it's effectively preboarded for the meta and cramming all the haymakers we can fit into a 75, that there just isn't a lot to change anymore. Anytime I see a TES list that topped a daily, and it's running some tech like Telemin or Ignorant Bliss in the board, I just think "well, to make room, theres no card X, so this guy is just dropping matches to deck Y..." while the current list with Pithing Needle feels really balanced generally. Does anyone else have that same feeling looking at the Needle list that it's the end of flex-slots barring some huge meta shift or, heaven forbid, we actually get new relevant cards for combo?

[Lemnear]

On a larger overall topic, does anyone else think the list for TES, as a whole, is kinda "locked in" at this point? It seems like, now that it's effectively preboarded for the meta and cramming all the haymakers we can fit into a 75, that there just isn't a lot to change anymore. Anytime I see a TES list that topped a daily, and it's running some tech like Telemin or Ignorant Bliss in the board, I just think "well, to make room, theres no card X, so this guy is just dropping matches to deck Y..." while the current list with Pithing Needle feels really balanced generally. Does anyone else have that same feeling looking at the Needle list that it's the end of flex-slots barring some huge meta shift or, heaven forbid, we actually get new relevant cards for combo?

Nothing is ever "locked". I read such stuff back then we ran 4 Silence, 2 Duress, 1 Therapy and 2 more in the board until I annoyed the shit out of this thread with my "we need more Therapies in the MB due to Gitaxian Probe and EtW!" and we all switched to 3 Silence and 4 Therapy then, just to shook up the "locked slots" of Silences and Rainbows with our all switch to discard-only shortly later.

The beauty of the deck is it's ability to adjust itself to any metagame change within a short period of time and it wouldn't be groundbreaking news if we return to silence at some point in the future if the metagame shifts once more in the white instants favor. I'm no romantic in terms of creating a stale image of a deck in my head as people did in the past with comment like "TES' signature card is Silence and without it, the deck is Burning ANT or TNT!".

[Pelikanudo]

I recently finished reading all the old TES threads, and it is intriguing that both the sideboard Infernal Tutor and 13th land have come up before. I just wish the 13th land didn't have to be a Trop. It's also kinda funny that so many posts in the old threads were about a shortage of good rainbow lands, and now when we have mana confluence we're at a point in time where we're sporting duals and fetches instead.

The era of 3 I.T. base was the era of Mainly 2 Mystical Tutor main. (2 more threats than now) If I wanted to include a land I will include likely a fetch, but I dont think 1 slot in side is enough reason to put in a nonsense Land instead of I.T. for all your first games.

Apart, can anyone answer me to the question about how Bryant sided vs BUG and UWR? and I have other question: was Grapeshot relevant in any of the match ups and on averall?
Thanks.

[Lemnear]

Against Jared he boarded in 2 Decays and the Tendrils; kept EtW in too.

Guys, boarding on the fly should become natural and your knowledge gained by spotting your next round opponents or by chatting with them should flow directly into your boarding plans instead of strict +/- sheets preciously constructed. Some Miracles pilots side out Terminus, some won't; this should affect your plan of keeping EtW or not as well as considering to board in xantids. The same is true for RUG Delver if they board out 1-2 Bolts for flusterstorms or the like: suddenly Xantids are appealing.

In all honest, all information in regards to boarding and how to approach matchups is in the OP and the exact plans should be deceloped on the fly instead of thinking in Patterns

[vercadium]

Against Jared he boarded in 2 Decays and the Tendrils; kept EtW in too.

Guys, boarding on the fly should become natural and your knowledge gained by spotting your next round opponents or by chatting with them should flow directly into your boarding plans instead of strict +/- sheets preciously constructed. Some Miracles pilots side out Terminus, some won't; this should affect your plan of keeping EtW or not as well as considering to board in xantids. The same is true for RUG Delver if they board out 1-2 Bolts for flusterstorms or the like: suddenly Xantids are appealing.

In all honest, all information in regards to boarding and how to approach matchups is in the OP and the exact plans should be deceloped on the fly instead of thinking in Patterns

Yes, side-boarding should be natural, adaptive and most importantly based on understanding. You are correct that strict sheets of +/- often under perform and are not the way to go.

I believe you exaggerate "boarding on the fly" however. There is still a correct, optimum sideboard based on defaults for a given match-up that should be used as a baseline and known before entering an event. Yes, there will be changes based on the opposing player and I'm not saying it's "set in stone", as information you receive will change your plan.

Sure, if they board out Terminus, you can use Empty the Warrens. Yes, Xantid Swarm is appealing if they are boarding out 1/2 Flusterstorms for Lightning Bolt. You're right in both of these cases, but realistically, how often are you going to be able to gather such precise information? 15% of the time?

Of course, there will be random scenarios where you know the guy, or you overheard him talking to his friends before the game. But for most other occasions, even if we assume the pilot is some master of the mind who knows 50% of the time exactly what is going out and coming in, it's still worth taking the time to create and discuss an optimum default sideboard strategy for the match-up.

I would argue, that even at 50%, unless you have good & solid information, that side-boarding away from this optimum configuration based on your 'gut' is more likely to get you blown out. If your information is good & solid, then by all means, stray from the path and use that advantage. Otherwise, just like the main-deck, there is a correct default and following this will often yield more consistent results.

[Lemnear]

Yes, side-boarding should be natural, adaptive and most importantly based on understanding. You are correct that strict sheets of +/- often under perform and are not the way to go.

I believe you exaggerate "boarding on the fly" however. There is still a correct, optimum sideboard based on defaults for a given match-up that should be used as a baseline and known before entering an event. Yes, there will be changes based on the opposing player and I'm not saying it's "set in stone", as information you receive will change your plan.

Sure, if they board out Terminus, you can use Empty the Warrens. Yes, Xantid Swarm is appealing if they are boarding out 1/2 Flusterstorms for Lightning Bolt. You're right in both of these cases, but realistically, how often are you going to be able to gather such precise information? 15% of the time?

Of course, there will be random scenarios where you know the guy, or you overheard him talking to his friends before the game. But for most other occasions, even if we assume the pilot is some master of the mind who knows 50% of the time exactly what is going out and coming in, it's still worth taking the time to create and discuss an optimum default sideboard strategy for the match-up.

I would argue, that even at 50%, unless you have good & solid information, that side-boarding away from this optimum configuration based on your 'gut' is more likely to get you blown out. If your information is good & solid, then by all means, stray from the path and use that advantage. Otherwise, just like the main-deck, there is a correct default and following this will often yield more consistent results.

Yes, there is a default boarding plan for each matchup and that one is a) covered in the OP and b) nearly free from individual card choices but conceptional guidelines. Everything that goes beyond the default boarding plans (which start by removing the unneccessary Duress against creature decks or cutting some cantrips in fast matchups or boarding Moxen in slow, grindy matchups) described there is a result of additional information (knowing your opponents 75 during Top8 elimination; because you face the same people over and over at a local event; etc.).

Therefore, the sole answer to the question of how Bryant specificly boarded in his match against Jared should have minimal impact to your own boarding plans in the future, which is all I wanted to highlight

[Megadeus]

Played TES for the first time since like February. I haven't gotten to try the new lists with Cabal Ritual yet. I hate it. I also forgot it was supposed to have 2 Volcanic, so I had to play a Steam Vents. Lol. Went 3-1 though splitting the finals. Beat Merfolk, Lost to URW Delver, Beat Maverick, then beat URW Delver in the semi's (same guy).

Only really interesting game was my finals match. In game 1 he had a double force, spell pierce hand with a delver on T1 and 1 land. I cast cabal therapy on T2 and he forces pitching TNN. Next turn I cast LED and he spell pierces, I decline to pay, cast ponder. A couple of turns later I cast therapy, he dazes, so I know his hand is force, volcanic, STP, and a mystery card. I cast 2 LEDs, then infernal and crack them, he didnt have another blue card and I emptied. Game 2 he ponders. I keep a no lander, with 2x Probe, 2x Petal, Burning Wish, chrome mox, and LED. I Draw like a ponder. I Probe. He dazes. I probe. see he has no way to interact. Draw rite of flame. Cast Petal petal chrome mox, LED, Rite of Flame, Burning Wish. for Tendrils. GG. Felt good. Not sure how I would change the deck, but I think the 13th land seemed fine. I boarded in Trop every game. Also Since I told the URW delver guy in the swiss that I brought in Xantid Swarm, in the T8 I faked them and noticed he kept in 2 STP so that was cool.

[Bryant Cook]

Played TES for the first time since like February. I haven't gotten to try the new lists with Cabal Ritual yet. I hate it. I also forgot it was supposed to have 2 Volcanic, so I had to play a Steam Vents. Lol. Went 3-1 though splitting the finals. Beat Merfolk, Lost to URW Delver, Beat Maverick, then beat URW Delver in the semi's (same guy).

Only really interesting game was my finals match. In game 1 he had a double force, spell pierce hand with a delver on T1 and 1 land. I cast cabal therapy on T2 and he forces pitching TNN. Next turn I cast LED and he spell pierces, I decline to pay, cast ponder. A couple of turns later I cast therapy, he dazes, so I know his hand is force, volcanic, STP, and a mystery card. I cast 2 LEDs, then infernal and crack them, he didnt have another blue card and I emptied. Game 2 he ponders. I keep a no lander, with 2x Probe, 2x Petal, Burning Wish, chrome mox, and LED. I Draw like a ponder. I Probe. He dazes. I probe. see he has no way to interact. Draw rite of flame. Cast Petal petal chrome mox, LED, Rite of Flame, Burning Wish. for Tendrils. GG. Felt good. Not sure how I would change the deck, but I think the 13th land seemed fine. I boarded in Trop every game. Also Since I told the URW delver guy in the swiss that I brought in Xantid Swarm, in the T8 I faked them and noticed he kept in 2 STP so that was cool.

Fo what it's worth, I'm not playing Cabal Ritual at the moment. My most up to date list is in the opening post.

[mario91234]

Played 5 matches yesterday. Beat burn, elves, bant, and jund. Lost to miracles in t8. Did not play stock list. Diminishing returns was needed vs jund. Only t1'd elves. Mulled to 6 a lot.
Props to pizza, diminishing, rite of flame, and chill opponents.
Slops, no play-draw rule, losing and getting zilch

In the miracles matchup, i was at 3 therapy, 2 decay, 2 problast, 2 swarm, 2 silence after board w both thoughtseize and therapy and IT in side. Is this excessive or just what ya gotta do? Game 1 i lost to casting 4x brainstorms and bricking on a protection spell to race his top-cb/force draw. G2 i jammed goblins since he had a clique hand and ended up e-tutoring(didnt know about) for the GG. Things seemed to come together pretty well for my opp that match.

Overall, feel very prepared for tales tournament. Any advice on the miracles games and sideboarding would be helpful.

[Lemnear]

Played 5 matches yesterday. Beat burn, elves, bant, and jund. Lost to miracles in t8. Did not play stock list. Diminishing returns was needed vs jund. Only t1'd elves. Mulled to 6 a lot.
Props to pizza, diminishing, rite of flame, and chill opponents.
Slops, no play-draw rule, losing and getting zilch

In the miracles matchup, i was at 3 therapy, 2 decay, 2 problast, 2 swarm, 2 silence after board w both thoughtseize and therapy and IT in side. Is this excessive or just what ya gotta do? Game 1 i lost to casting 4x brainstorms and bricking on a protection spell to race his top-cb/force draw. G2 i jammed goblins since he had a clique hand and ended up e-tutoring(didnt know about) for the GG. Things seemed to come together pretty well for my opp that match.

Overall, feel very prepared for tales tournament. Any advice on the miracles games and sideboarding would be helpful.

Cut Silences, adjust manabase and don't run 11 protection spells to complain later that you are bricking. SB advice for Miracles is in the OP (if your list is totally different, further SB advice is impossible to give without knowing your list)

[Megadeus]

Okay, I now see the differences between your current list and what I played last night. I'm not sure if I'm a fan of the third chrome mox, but I honestly can't think of what else I would want it to be. So glad this deck is on 4 Therapy now as well, since that card was the absolute nut. Are Pithing Needles for like the tempo match up to name wasteland or miracles for top?

[Lemnear]

Okay, I now see the differences between your current list and what I played last night. I'm not sure if I'm a fan of the third chrome mox, but I honestly can't think of what else I would want it to be. So glad this deck is on 4 Therapy now as well, since that card was the absolute nut. Are Pithing Needles for like the tempo match up to name wasteland or miracles for top?

I doubt you can find space in your MB to add the needles for Wasteland only (without removing overall better cards). Other than that I primary added Needles as splash hate against SDT and Griselbrand/SneakAttack but it has more use like against:


DRS
Symbiote/Quiron
Cephalid Coliseum
Candelabra
Eye of Ugin
Aether Vial
Engineered Explosives
Equipment cards
Planeswalker cards
Charbelcher/Undercity Informer
Dark Depths/Thespian's Stage
Seige-Gang Commander
Cursecatcher
Forgemaster
Rishadan Port
Goblin Welder
Grindstone
Scavenging Ooze
Relic of Progenitus/Tormod's Crypt/Nihil Spellbomb
Queasy Pridemage
Knight of the Reliquary
Man-land Cards
Grim Lavamancer
Vampire Hexmage
Sterling Grove
Academy Ruins

That's some relevant and less-than-relevant targets to keep you interested

[Bryant Cook]

Okay, I now see the differences between your current list and what I played last night. I'm not sure if I'm a fan of the third chrome mox, but I honestly can't think of what else I would want it to be. So glad this deck is on 4 Therapy now as well, since that card was the absolute nut. Are Pithing Needles for like the tempo match up to name wasteland or miracles for top?

I've wanted the Mox back, I really noticed weaker Ad Nauseams with Cabal Rituals.

[Megadeus]

I definitely wouldn't want it main board. I do like it as an option though. The only slot I'm not a fan of is the third chrome mox anyway. I'm Just not sure what else to actually play outside of maybe like a random spirit guide, but that seems pretty bad.

[Megadeus]

I've wanted the Mox back, I really noticed weaker Ad Nauseams with Cabal Rituals.

I'll admit that there was a time last night that because of Cabal not being a mox, I wasn't able to go of after an ad nauseam. Dunno. Third mox may be alright, I just keep remembering all of the times that I draw a double Mox opener or something

[vercadium]

Yeah, I really like the 3rd Chrome Mox and I think the deck is better with it, but it is incredibly frustrating when multiples are drawn naturally. Brainstorm alleviates this significantly though. I don't think there's a perfect solution to that flaw at the moment.

[mario91234]

Cut Silences, adjust manabase and don't run 11 protection spells to complain later that you are bricking. SB advice for Miracles is in the OP (if your list is totally different, further SB advice is impossible to give without knowing your list)

I wasn't bricking. My opp's hands were top/brainstorm/force/cb/plow/entreat/fetch and he drew tundra for turn g1.
G2, i look at pierce/brainstorm/force/clique/lands.

How many interaction spells are optimal to play post board? My deck post side was 13 lands, rits, 1 mox, 10 cantrips, 7 tutors, and the 11 interaction.

[Lemnear]

I wasn't bricking. My opp's hands were top/brainstorm/force/cb/plow/entreat/fetch and he drew tundra for turn g1.
G2, i look at pierce/brainstorm/force/clique/lands.

How many interaction spells are optimal to play post board? My deck post side was 13 lands, rits, 1 mox, 10 cantrips, 7 tutors, and the 11 interaction.

When I have to ask how you plan on beating SDT + CB or Clique with Silence or Xantid? Both are crap if your opponent responds with Clique, even worse if they block your swarm. Both also do nothing against the SDT actions.

Does this mean that you shove 2 Moxen, 1 Therapy, 2 Ponder + 1 EtW into your SB in exchange for the Xantids, Decays and Pyroblasts? Asuming you ran 3 Silences (like the latest list we had with 3 Silences, 4 Therapies), I would have cutted those, the EtW and the 3rd Mox for 2 Decays, 2 Blasts, 1 ToA

I still don't get what you want to express with "Game 1 i lost to casting 4x brainstorms and bricking on a protection spell".

[Asthereal]

I still don't get what you want to express with "Game 1l i lost to casting 4x brainstorms and bricking on a protection spel".
Lem, your comment was that if you play 11 interaction, you shouldn't be surprised to brick.
He only played 11 interaction game 2, not game 1. That would be cheating. :cool:

What I would want to play postboard:
4 Brainstorm, 4 Probe, 3 Ponder (11)
4 LED, 4 Petal, 4 Rite, 4 Ritual, 2 Mox (18)
13 Land (13)
7 Tutor, 1 Ad Nauseam (8)
That leaves room for 10x interaction tops.

2x Decay, 2x Peedle, 6x Discard seems best.

Am I wrong here?

[mario91234]

2 silence, 2 pyro, 2 xantid, 3 therapy, 2 decay post board. Am i understanding correctly that xantid and silence are bad vs miracles? In the first game i needed any protection spell on my brainstorms to win.

[Lemnear]

Lem, your comment was that if you play 11 interaction, you shouldn't be surprised to brick.
He only played 11 interaction game 2, not game 1. That would be cheating. :cool:

What I would want to play postboard:
4 Brainstorm, 4 Probe, 3 Ponder (11)
4 LED, 4 Petal, 4 Rite, 4 Ritual, 2 Mox (18)
13 Land (13)
7 Tutor, 1 Ad Nauseam (8)
That leaves room for 10x interaction tops.

2x Decay, 2x Peedle, 6x Discard seems best.

Am I wrong here?

Yeah, my bad. I still a) consider 11 protections spells postboard overkill and b) do not understand the sentence I bolded.


Edit:

2 silence, 2 pyro, 2 xantid, 3 therapy, 2 decay post board. Am i understanding correctly that xantid and silence are bad vs miracles? In the first game i needed any protection spell on my brainstorms to win.

They are. If I understand you correctly, you fired 4 Brainstorms and still did not find a protection spell, despire all options to shuffle, to Ponder or to wish for TS?

[mario91234]

I kept: petal, led, rit, mine, brainstorm, probe, IT. I saw more led, another 2 brainstorms and an additional IT plus lands before dieing to cb lock. I infernal'd for the 4th.

[Lemnear]

I kept: petal, led, rit, mine, brainstorm, probe, IT. I saw more led, another 2 brainstorms and an additional IT plus lands before dieing to cb lock. I infernal'd for the 4th.

Ah, you did not draw into protection and used the term "bricking" for that. The correct sequence T1 here would have been to put back Brainstorm and LED on top, draw LED turn 2 and Infernal for LED #2 via Petal. This way you would have seen more fresh cards while having 2 LEDs & 1 Infernal & 1 Brainstorm in hand with a land in play. In the end it might not have changed much ... dunno

[Asthereal]

2 silence, 2 pyro, 2 xantid, 3 therapy, 2 decay post board. Am i understanding correctly that xantid and silence are bad vs miracles? In the first game i needed any protection spell on my brainstorms to win.
I'm not the expert on this matchup, but let's look at what will kill us:
- CounterTop lock
- Permission spells (4x FoW, 2-4 Spell Pierce, 0-2 Counterspell, 0-2 Flusterstorm and 0-2x Envelop post board)
- Hate bears (usually Meddling Mage, though some play Canonist, which I would prefer in my Miracles list)

They usually keep in Terminus, in case we dump the Warrens on the board on turn one.
They usually cut 4x StP, 1x Karakas, 1x Entreat for 3x Meddling Mage and 3x extra Permission spell.
At least, that's what I would probably do.

We need stuff that is useful against all that. Swarm only works against permission spells, and it dies to Terminus. Silence also only works against permission spells. Decay kills Meddling Mage and Counterbalance. Pithing Needle stops Top, which also prevents them from floating a permission spell on top of their deck, outside the reach of our discard. Our discard can hit any of the important spells.

So yeah, Swarm and Silence are meh in this matchup. If you would post your entire list with 60 + 15, I could suggest a boarding plan for you.

[Lemnear]

I'm not the expert on this matchup, but let's look at what will kill us:
- CounterTop lock
- Permission spells (4x FoW, 2-4 Spell Pierce, 0-2 Counterspell, 0-2 Flusterstorm and 0-2x Envelop post board)
- Hate bears (usually Meddling Mage, though some play Canonist, which I would prefer in my Miracles list)

They usually keep in Terminus, in case we dump the Warrens on the board on turn one.
They usually cut 4x StP, 1x Karakas, 1x Entreat for 3x Meddling Mage and 3x extra Permission spell.
At least, that's what I would probably do.

We need stuff that is useful against all that. Swarm only works against permission spells, and it dies to Terminus and Clique. Silence also only works against permission spells but is pointless if your opponent has Clique in his hand. Decay kills Meddling Mage and Counterbalance. Pithing Needle stops Top, which also prevents them from floating a permission spell on top of their deck, outside the reach of our discard. Our discard can hit any of the important spells.

So yeah, Swarm and Silence are meh in this matchup. If you would post your entire list with 60 + 15, I could suggest a boarding plan for you.

This is correct. Thanks for hinting at Meddling Mages which are also common cards Xantid and Silence cannot adress

[wonderPreaux]

Hi everyone, had an interesting opener that I wanted some thoughts on. I was on the play, against an unknown opponent:

http://puu.sh/az7fN/5641e7e88e.jpg

Would you keep this hand? Any ritual lets you go off turn 2 (unprotected), Brainstorm can open up some shenanigans with Ad Nauseam, LED, and a cantrip, but on the surface this hand does a whole lot of nothing, especially turn 1. Given that Chrome Mox can't even accel you into anything turn and it restricts my use of Duress, this seems like a mull in hindsight. I'm wondering what you all think of it, though (FWIW, the opponent turned out to be on lands and so I won anyway because it was game 1 *shrug*).

[Lemnear]

Hi everyone, had an interesting opener that I wanted some thoughts on. I was on the play, against an unknown opponent:

http://puu.sh/az7fN/5641e7e88e.jpg

Would you keep this hand? Any ritual lets you go off turn 2 (unprotected), Brainstorm can open up some shenanigans with Ad Nauseam, LED, and a cantrip, but on the surface this hand does a whole lot of nothing, especially turn 1. Given that Chrome Mox can't even accel you into anything turn and it restricts my use of Duress, this seems like a mull in hindsight. I'm wondering what you all think of it, though (FWIW, the opponent turned out to be on lands and so I won anyway because it was game 1 *shrug*).

Well, it's a virtual mulligan to 5 but you have 3 IMS, protection and Ad Nauseam itself with LED being able to pay for Spell Pierce. Near guaranteed turn 3 combo. Clear keeper.

[Asthereal]

Hi everyone, had an interesting opener that I wanted some thoughts on. I was on the play, against an unknown opponent:

http://puu.sh/az7fN/5641e7e88e.jpg

Would you keep this hand? Any ritual lets you go off turn 2 (unprotected), Brainstorm can open up some shenanigans with Ad Nauseam, LED, and a cantrip, but on the surface this hand does a whole lot of nothing, especially turn 1. Given that Chrome Mox can't even accel you into anything turn and it restricts my use of Duress, this seems like a mull in hindsight. I'm wondering what you all think of it, though (FWIW, the opponent turned out to be on lands and so I won anyway because it was game 1 *shrug*).
What cards make this hand work? Analysis of our first draw:

Good:
Brainstorm probably fixes it. Small chance that would brick. (4)
Ritual makes you go off T2. (4)
Tutor or Wish means an Empty for 10 guys T2. (7) (/15)

Meh:
Empty itself gives 8 dudes T2. (~1)
Ponder is a bit of a gamble but should be good to set up a turn 3. (~4)
Cabal Therapy could be okay, buy lots of time. (~4) (/~9)

Bad:
LED and Petal won't work yet, but may work after the second draw. (-6)
Rite doens't seem to add anything here either. (-4)
Mox would suck big time (-2)
Lands are useless now. (-11)
Duress would probably not be good, unless against Miracles. (-2) (/-25)

Doesn't count:
Probe (4)

So in a deck of 49 cards (so minus the Probes), we have:
Good: 15 (31%)
Meh: 9 (18%)
Bad: 25 (51%)

Seems we should mull this? Funny that Lem calls it a clear keeper.

[mario91234]

Good feedback. Much appreciated.

[Megadeus]

I think I'd keep it,though it would definitely feel like a loose keep

[Bryant Cook]

I'd snap keep that. Do you honestly expect a better mulligan? You don't have to combo off on the next turn either. A turn three is fine with this grip.

[Megadeus]

True. If on the draw, a thoughtseize can fuck up yourday, but on the play it seems fine

[Bryant Cook]

True. If on the draw, a thoughtseize can fuck up yourday, but on the play it seems fine

Sure. Because all of the best decks in legacy play four Thoughtseize.

<sarcasm>I think a resolved Counterbalance or Nullrod might also beat this hand, might as well mulligan. They hid those cards in response to your Duress.</sarcasm>

EDIT: Apparently I need to start wrapping things in sarcasm tags.

[wonderPreaux]

Sure. Because all of the best decks in legacy play four Thoughtseize.

I think a resolved Counterbalance or Nullrod might also beat this hand, might as well mulligan. They hid those cards in response to your Duress.

Nullrod wouldn't really be an issue since it's game 1. I'd prolly fold to a Thalia/Eidolon though.

[Lemnear]

What cards make this hand work? Analysis of our first draw:

Good:
Brainstorm probably fixes it. Small chance that would brick. (4)
Ritual makes you go off T2. (4)
Tutor or Wish means an Empty for 10 guys T2. (7) (/15)

Meh:
Empty itself gives 8 dudes T2. (~1)
Ponder is a bit of a gamble but should be good to set up a turn 3. (~4)
Cabal Therapy could be okay, buy lots of time. (~4) (/~9)

Bad:
LED and Petal won't work yet, but may work after the second draw. (-6)
Rite doens't seem to add anything here either. (-4)
Mox would suck big time (-2)
Lands are useless now. (-11)
Duress would probably not be good, unless against Miracles. (-2) (/-25)

Doesn't count:
Probe (4)

So in a deck of 49 cards (so minus the Probes), we have:
Good: 15 (31%)
Meh: 9 (18%)
Bad: 25 (51%)

Seems we should mull this? Funny that Lem calls it a clear keeper.

I fear you miss the bigger picture here:

1) How good do you expect your mulligan to be?
2) Why shouldn't a turn 3 combo be fine too?

Especially with an eye on the turn 3 combo, your whole analysis is wrong as RoF, Lands, Petals and Ponder are suddenly all valid draws while more discard buys you plenty of time in most cases. The only "dead" draws for this hand are 2 moxen and 3 LEDs, so your chance of being able to combo in turn 3 (opponents interaction aside) is >80%

[Tengo_Hambre]

Hi All,

So i'm pretty new to legacy but grabbed this deck and have been doing reasonably well in my brief experience with it. I'm curious though if any of you have ever tried running xantid's in the main? I'm currently trying 2 and have been pretty pleased. There are obviously matchups where they are amazing, and some where they are horrendous like elves and goblins, but i've actually found them to be reasonably good against most delver variants despite the OP's claim that they shouldn't be used in those matchups. Now I realize that i have a mere fraction of his experience and so i'm asking to see if anyone else has tried this? They can chump in a pinch, sacrifice to therapy, and frankly i'm usually pretty ok with them eating a bolt as that's another turn to find action usually. and if they don't have the bolt, i attack them next turn and go off with impunity. I guess it's like having silence that can sac to flashback therapy too.

My first tournament with the deck was starcity dallas earlier this year where i got off to a 5-1 start but stumbled to a 5-4 finish. I had 4 duress, 1 thoughtseize 1 therapy at the time due to limited cards and found several occasions where my duress would reveal multiple relevant counters and i would only be able to take one of them.

My second tournament i tried playing with 4 therapy and 2 swarm to a 3rd/4th place finish in a 70 person side event at GP minneapolis and was pretty pleased with the swarms; where therapy couldn't take care of relevant interaction, swarm could usually clean up the rest...

So starcity is returning to dallas this weekend and i'm on 4 therapy, 2 swarm and 1 duress (finally saw reason and cut the 4th chrome mox for a duress) unless someone can talk me out of it. what are your thoughts?

[Bryant Cook]

Took down a local last night dropping two games with an overall record of 5-0-1. Game three of the finals versus Death & Taxes I resolved an Ad Nauseam from 8 life on his end step by tapping five lands (six total in play), untapping and winning. The better Ad Nauseams have been really nice. I did lose game two to a situation to where if I had Massacre in my sideboard I could've won, but I'd rather have more diverse cards for other match-ups as well. The situation was that he had Mother + Cannonist, I actually had Decay + Chain in my hand and was planning on winning on my turn when he played Thalia. Can't win them all! I still wouldn't change anything.

[Vandalize]

Hi All,

So i'm pretty new to legacy but grabbed this deck and have been doing reasonably well in my brief experience with it. I'm curious though if any of you have ever tried running xantid's in the main? I'm currently trying 2 and have been pretty pleased. There are obviously matchups where they are amazing, and some where they are horrendous like elves and goblins, but i've actually found them to be reasonably good against most delver variants despite the OP's claim that they shouldn't be used in those matchups. Now I realize that i have a mere fraction of his experience and so i'm asking to see if anyone else has tried this? They can chump in a pinch, sacrifice to therapy, and frankly i'm usually pretty ok with them eating a bolt as that's another turn to find action usually. and if they don't have the bolt, i attack them next turn and go off with impunity. I guess it's like having silence that can sac to flashback therapy too.

My first tournament with the deck was starcity dallas earlier this year where i got off to a 5-1 start but stumbled to a 5-4 finish. I had 4 duress, 1 thoughtseize 1 therapy at the time due to limited cards and found several occasions where my duress would reveal multiple relevant counters and i would only be able to take one of them.

My second tournament i tried playing with 4 therapy and 2 swarm to a 3rd/4th place finish in a 70 person side event at GP minneapolis and was pretty pleased with the swarms; where therapy couldn't take care of relevant interaction, swarm could usually clean up the rest...

So starcity is returning to dallas this weekend and i'm on 4 therapy, 2 swarm and 1 duress (finally saw reason and cut the 4th chrome mox for a duress) unless someone can talk me out of it. what are your thoughts?

The main problem with Xantid Swarm maindeck is that 4 Swords to Plowshares, that were otherwise useless, suddenly become relevant. Eating a Bolt or Abrupt Decay is usually fine.

Xantid Swarm is especially nice in the sideboard because people usually board out spot removal against T.E.S, making it wonderful protection postboard. It's also pretty useful against decks that tend to play few to no removal (aka Show and Tell, Merfolks, Elves).

[Lemnear]

Hi All,

So i'm pretty new to legacy but grabbed this deck and have been doing reasonably well in my brief experience with it. I'm curious though if any of you have ever tried running xantid's in the main? I'm currently trying 2 and have been pretty pleased. There are obviously matchups where they are amazing, and some where they are horrendous like elves and goblins, but i've actually found them to be reasonably good against most delver variants despite the OP's claim that they shouldn't be used in those matchups. Now I realize that i have a mere fraction of his experience and so i'm asking to see if anyone else has tried this? They can chump in a pinch, sacrifice to therapy, and frankly i'm usually pretty ok with them eating a bolt as that's another turn to find action usually. and if they don't have the bolt, i attack them next turn and go off with impunity. I guess it's like having silence that can sac to flashback therapy too.

So you really want to fetch your Tropical Island against Delver as your first land to drop Xantid Swarms, turning on their remocal, just to realize that you need black and red mana aka two more initial mana sources to win? Fine plan, because mana supply was NEVER an issue against Tempo decks, right? /sarcasm

It's a Silence that needs to attack (reads: you have to pass the turn) AND is vulnerable to everything from Plowshares to Bolts. Xantids have their place in fighting decks what have massive non-creature counters, no removal at all and/or are slower control matchups. Delver is the complete opposite and the plan is flawed not only because of the Xantid Swarm itself and opponents possible ways to interact with it, but because you mess with your own manabase in a matchup which is all about the mana.

[itrytostorm]

Took down a local last night dropping two games with an overall record of 5-0-1. Game three of the finals versus Death & Taxes I resolved an Ad Nauseam from 8 life on his end step by tapping five lands (six total in play), untapping and winning. The better Ad Nauseams have been really nice. I did lose game two to a situation to where if I had Massacre in my sideboard I could've won, but I'd rather have more diverse cards for other match-ups as well. The situation was that he had Mother + Cannonist, I actually had Decay + Chain in my hand and was planning on winning on my turn when he played Thalia. Can't win them all! I still wouldn't change anything.

Congrats on doing well with the deck. I was the elves player you beat in the side event before you won the the real side event for the MMA set. Like the changes to the list and I just have to get back to correctly SB'ing after taking 8 months off from it :tongue:

[JUNI0R]

Has anybody tried out defense grid instead of xantid swarm recently, if so what are your opinions?

I've been struggling against counter-top, I recently moved to the 2 pithing needle, 2 abrupt decay sideboard for them but I am wanting a little more. Maybe I'm attacking the matchup from the wrong angle.

I thought defense grid may work better than xantid swarm as you can bring it in against control decks that may leave in some creature removal. It is a turn slower than xantid swarm but I'm usually not going off turn 2 against control decks and you don't have to worry about attacking or keeping a 0/1 alive.

From what I was able to find, defense grid was used in an early version of the deck but has long since been dropped.

[wonderPreaux]

Has anybody tried out defense grid instead of xantid swarm recently, if so what are your opinions?

I've been struggling against counter-top, I recently moved to the 2 pithing needle, 2 abrupt decay sideboard for them but I am wanting a little more. Maybe I'm attacking the matchup from the wrong angle.

I thought defense grid may work better than xantid swarm as you can bring it in against control decks that may leave in some creature removal. It is a turn slower than xantid swarm but I'm usually not going off turn 2 against control decks and you don't have to worry about attacking or keeping a 0/1 alive.

From what I was able to find, defense grid was used in an early version of the deck but has long since been dropped.

Defense Grid costing 2 means that even on the play it can get Spell Pierced, also bring in 6 disruption cards seems like it'd be a big dilution of the deck. there are games where you actually race the Counterbalance or Clique and you can't do that if your hand is all hate cards. Further, Defense Grid is more for Griselbrand decks because they tap out for SnT/Exhume and thus can't use all their FoW/Dazes, Miracles can just slow roll open mana and ignore Defense Grid more and more as the game goes on.

[davelin]

Has anybody tried out defense grid instead of xantid swarm recently, if so what are your opinions?

I've been struggling against counter-top, I recently moved to the 2 pithing needle, 2 abrupt decay sideboard for them but I am wanting a little more. Maybe I'm attacking the matchup from the wrong angle.

I thought defense grid may work better than xantid swarm as you can bring it in against control decks that may leave in some creature removal. It is a turn slower than xantid swarm but I'm usually not going off turn 2 against control decks and you don't have to worry about attacking or keeping a 0/1 alive.

From what I was able to find, defense grid was used in an early version of the deck but has long since been dropped.

Grid still doesn't prevent miracles being able to counter one if not more spells during your turn. Pretty ineffective hate if you still need to dig for discard before going off.

[mario91234]

6-3 at tales of adventure.

Report of losses
R1- Sneak+show
g1 he mulls to 6, t1 grissle. I win if he doesnt have force.
g2 he keeps garbage handle and i win on 5 cards w/ xantid
g3 i likely punted. opp's hand is 5 mystery cards and 4 lands in play. (3 untapped) There's about 5 cantrips he has cast this game.
He is at 16.
My board is 2 gold lands, fetch. Hand is 2x Dark rit, LED, Wish, Infernal, Pyroblast. Yard is brainstorm and xantid. Top card is ponder. My sequencing: Fetch, Dark rit, Infernal (get dark rit), dark rit, wish (get tendrils), rit->spell pierce. I pyroblast. He swan songs. I lose 2 turns later to combo. After discussing it, the proper sequence was likely rit->infernal (rit)->rit->rit (5 floating)-> Led->wish(access to 5 mana currently w/o led). If thats's his hand, he wins if he casts pierce then swan, any other outcome is gg.

r6-RUG
g1-i jam a t3 bloodmoon through infernal+led shenanigans. He looks at his stifle and scoops them up a couple turns later.
g2-I draw too many chrome mox and cantrip into oblivion. Goyf's eat me
g3-I make 6 gobs on t1. Opp is at 7 with a goyf and I have 4 gobs now. I decline to lava spike (this was wrong in hindsight). Fast forward 5 turns later, I have 3 wishes gone and my hand is IT/LED/Ad naus with 4 mana in play. My opponenet is at 3 after 2x forces(pitching stifles) and fetches and another goblin attack. Board is flipped delver+goyf vs 3 gobs and he has cast multiple cantrips (3 cards in hand). I go and get grapeshot and it meets the 3rd stifle. I'm out of win cons and can only put him to 1.

r8-Miracles
g1-pierce, jace, brainstorm, force and 3 lands on the play is his 7. He draws top on his first drawstep. I get close to winning.
g2-I win on t2 after he forces my silence and I decide to ad naus with 0 floating.
g3-I was never in this game. Blind name counterbalance shows me a clique, force, and brainstorm and a gone CB. He aggressively brainstorms and locks himself. the 2nd brainstorm pulls him into double UU. He gets a 2nd CB and proceeds to blind flip countering my next 4 spells. I get clique locked.

My wins were RUG, BUG, Blue elves, RB entomb/painter, oops all spells, and another blue deck.

List for shame:

4 Gemstone Mine
1 Volcanic Island
2 Underground Sea
3 Chrome Mox
4 Lotus Petal
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Burning Wish
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flame
3 Cabal Therapy
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Empty the Warrens
2 Misty Rainforest
1 Scalding Tarn
2 Silence
1 Thoughtseize
1 Blood Moon
2 Mana Confluence
SB: 1 Past in Flames
SB: 1 Diminishing Returns
SB: 2 Xantid Swarm
SB: 1 Empty the Warrens
SB: 2 Abrupt Decay
SB: 1 Grapeshot
SB: 1 Tendrils of Agony
SB: 1 Tropical Island
SB: 1 Chain of Vapor
SB: 1 Cabal Therapy
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Blood Moon

[Megadeus]

Careto elaborate on the blood moon?

[Pelikanudo]

6-3 at tales of adventure.
r6-RUG
g1-i jam a t3 bloodmoon through infernal+led shenanigans. He looks at his stifle and scoops them up a couple turns later.


just to be constructive, but this is one of the most absurd things related to magic I've never read. anyway lot of thanks as this was absolutly funny.
again, IMHO.!

[Lemnear]

6-3 at tales of adventure.

Report of losses
R1- Sneak+show
g1 he mulls to 6, t1 grissle. I win if he doesnt have force.
g2 he keeps garbage handle and i win on 5 cards w/ xantid
g3 i likely punted. opp's hand is 5 mystery cards and 4 lands in play. (3 untapped) There's about 5 cantrips he has cast this game.
He is at 16.
My board is 2 gold lands, fetch. Hand is 2x Dark rit, LED, Wish, Infernal, Pyroblast. Yard is brainstorm and xantid. Top card is ponder. My sequencing: Fetch, Dark rit, Infernal (get dark rit), dark rit, wish (get tendrils), rit->spell pierce. I pyroblast. He swan songs. I lose 2 turns later to combo. After discussing it, the proper sequence was likely rit->infernal (rit)->rit->rit (5 floating)-> Led->wish(access to 5 mana currently w/o led). If thats's his hand, he wins if he casts pierce then swan, any other outcome is gg.


you combo'd too early for my taste. With Ponder on top you could have wished for targeted discard (that's why we hace TS/Duress in the board instead of Therapy) and either provoke a counter here or gain information about your opponents hand. There are plenty of options available with those you don't have to throw your whole hand in the face of 5 unknown cards :/

r6-RUG
g1-i jam a t3 bloodmoon through infernal+led shenanigans. He looks at his stifle and scoops them up a couple turns later.


I mean ... WTF. Blow your hand for Bloodmoon in a 4-color deck without any Basics. Funny bad beat story for your opponent regardless

g2-I draw too many chrome mox and cantrip into oblivion. Goyf's eat me


Brainstorm them away, ignore your lifecount and work towards PIF. This should be possible if you casted plenty of cantrips.

g3-I make 6 gobs on t1. Opp is at 7 with a goyf and I have 4 gobs now. I decline to lava spike (this was wrong in hindsight). Fast forward 5 turns later, I have 3 wishes gone and my hand is IT/LED/Ad naus with 4 mana in play. My opponenet is at 3 after 2x forces(pitching stifles) and fetches and another goblin attack. Board is flipped delver+goyf vs 3 gobs and he has cast multiple cantrips (3 cards in hand). I go and get grapeshot and it meets the 3rd stifle. I'm out of win cons and can only put him to 1.


come on ... 6 goblins?

r8-Miracles
g1-pierce, jace, brainstorm, force and 3 lands on the play is his 7. He draws top on his first drawstep. I get close to winning.
g2-I win on t2 after he forces my silence and I decide to ad naus with 0 floating.
g3-I was never in this game. Blind name counterbalance shows me a clique, force, and brainstorm and a gone CB. He aggressively brainstorms and locks himself. the 2nd brainstorm pulls him into double UU. He gets a 2nd CB and proceeds to blind flip countering my next 4 spells. I get clique locked.


why you casted 4 spells right into counterbalance instead of sandbagging spells here?

My wins were RUG, BUG, Blue elves, RB entomb/painter, oops all spells, and another blue deck.

List for shame:

4 Gemstone Mine
1 Volcanic Island
2 Underground Sea
3 Chrome Mox
4 Lotus Petal
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Burning Wish
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Ponder
4 Brainstorm
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flame
3 Cabal Therapy
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Empty the Warrens
2 Misty Rainforest
1 Scalding Tarn
2 Silence
1 Thoughtseize
1 Blood Moon
2 Mana Confluence
SB: 1 Past in Flames
SB: 1 Diminishing Returns
SB: 2 Xantid Swarm
SB: 1 Empty the Warrens
SB: 2 Abrupt Decay
SB: 1 Grapeshot
SB: 1 Tendrils of Agony
SB: 1 Tropical Island
SB: 1 Chain of Vapor
SB: 1 Cabal Therapy
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Blood Moon


playing the full 5c manabase for 2 Silences? Bloodmoon is crap.

[mario91234]

@Lem, I didn't "just jam" into CB. i had options over the course of 4 turns in the face of his blind counterbalance. Every time I started on a line, it was nullified. My hand vs rug was land, petal, empty, dark rit, wish, wish, infernal. Are you telling me you'd mull? Against sneak, I definitely think going to it that turn is correct. He could just have sneak attack and creature w/ petal. Gold lands are great and silence is great.

For people actually interested in blood moon, it's in there to give additional lines. Sometimes, you just want a 5 mana combo that's imune to stifle, or 6 mana combo thats immune to daze...you get the point. Obviously it's complete trash if your opponent plays a threat before then. only cast it if you're opponent loses to it. It won me 3 separate games. If you're skeptical, try it out on a not so major event. It was good enough that I wanted a 2nd in my board.

[Megadeus]

It's interesting since you still have petal and chrome moxen to make the colors you need. I'm not sure if I like it though

[Lemnear]

Game 3 on the draw vs. daze.dec with 3 dead card in your hand with a best case of 6 Goblins? Very likely a mulligan for me

[laserstone]

How much worse is (2 Usea, 1 Volc, 1 Blands) than (2 Usea, 2 Volc)?
Are there any advantages to playing the 3 Dual, 3 Fetch, 6 Rainbow manabase over the 4-4-4 split?

[Kidbails]

How much worse is (2 Usea, 1 Volc, 1 Blands) than (2 Usea, 2 Volc)?
Are there any advantages to playing the 3 Dual, 3 Fetch, 6 Rainbow manabase over the 4-4-4 split?

The first question is addressed in the OP, but basically badlands can't cast a cantrip, and therefore you must mulligan more. I've never had a problem with the manabase as it is now.

I would only play the 3 dual, 3 fetch, 6 rainbow configuration if I decided to go back to playing silence. If you play the OP's list, I'd definitely stick to the 4-4-4 split because it makes your brainstorms better and you are slightly more resilient to wasteland.

[laserstone]

I've never had a problem with the manabase as it is now.

Yeah, the reason I was asking is because I don't have the 2nd Volcanic, only the Badlands, and getting the Volcanic may be tough (poor student, been saving for this deck for a long time, but could only nab one Volc before the prices doubled :frown:).

Playing Bloodstained Mires as fetches, which can't fetch Trop from the board, do you still recommend the 4-4-4, and if so, should the Trop in the board be a Bayou?

[Kidbails]

Yeah, the reason I was asking is because I don't have the 2nd Volcanic, only the Badlands, and getting the Volcanic may be tough (poor student, been saving for this deck for a long time, but could only nab one Volc before the prices doubled :frown:).

Playing Bloodstained Mires as fetches, which can't fetch Trop from the board, do you still recommend the 4-4-4, and if so, should the Trop in the board be a Bayou?

Badlands is a fine replacement for the time being, it just means you'll end up having to mulligan more often.

The bloodstained mire thing is a bigger problem because it can't get tropical island. In that case, you could play a bayou, but this is definitely not a good replacement. This could be a situation where I play extra rainbow lands and cut the tropical island in the board, but this is also not ideal (obviously).

[Megadeus]

I think at that point I may want to play the old 6 rainbow land configuration honestly. Storm decks are the one style deck in the format where you lose too many percentage points when playing with sub optimal choices to even be good.

[jake556]

Yeah, the reason I was asking is because I don't have the 2nd Volcanic, only the Badlands, and getting the Volcanic may be tough (poor student, been saving for this deck for a long time, but could only nab one Volc before the prices doubled :frown:).

Playing Bloodstained Mires as fetches, which can't fetch Trop from the board, do you still recommend the 4-4-4, and if so, should the Trop in the board be a Bayou?

Compliments of my buddy Jack http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=7562&d=243382&f=LE

[laserstone]

Compliments of my buddy Jack http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=7562&d=243382&f=LE

This is one of the decklists I based my own list off of. I'm not a fan of Silence though.

[Lemnear]

How much worse is (2 Usea, 1 Volc, 1 Blands) than (2 Usea, 2 Volc)?
Are there any advantages to playing the 3 Dual, 3 Fetch, 6 Rainbow manabase over the 4-4-4 split?


The bloodstained mire thing is a bigger problem because it can't get tropical island. In that case, you could play a bayou, but this is definitely not a good replacement. This could be a situation where I play extra rainbow lands and cut the tropical island in the board, but this is also not ideal (obviously).


Yeah, the reason I was asking is because I don't have the 2nd Volcanic, only the Badlands, and getting the Volcanic may be tough (poor student, been saving for this deck for a long time, but could only nab one Volc before the prices doubled :frown:).

Playing Bloodstained Mires as fetches, which can't fetch Trop from the board, do you still recommend the 4-4-4, and if so, should the Trop in the board be a Bayou?


Man, it's nice being able to just quote myself on most repeating topics with this gem:



Fetchlands deserve a special mention. A lot of people have the opinion, that the kind of fetchlands does not matter much as long as they can target all dual lands in the deck, which is wrong from a strategic point of view. Using a Polluted Delta to put an Underground Sea into play sends a completely different message to your opponent than putting a Volcanic Island onto the battlefield with the help of an Misty Rainforest or Flooded Strand. The later options likely lead your opponent to believe that you are playing some kind of RUG Delver or Patriot Delver and will cause him/her to make some miserable plays in the face of combo like tapping out for a Tarmogoyf. TES uses it's fetchlands to disguise itself in game one's early turns. This is especially true if you are required to cast a turn one cantrip like Ponder, a situation in which it is usually advised to begin the game with a Volcanic Island rather than an Underground Sea. No Legacy player would necessarily expect storm combo by opening with Flooded Strand → Volcanic Island → Ponder. The fetchlands in the list I presented earlier disguise you as RUG Delver and it's free to you to change those to mimic a deck like Patriot Delver with Scalding Tarn + Flooded Strand for example, but I advice you to run a mix of Fetchlands in any case: Surgical Extraction and Pithing Needle are common sideboard cards.

...

During the unveiling of the beforementioned list, there was a lot of confusion about running 2 Underground Sea and 2 Volcanic Island instead of a further emphasis towards shuffle-effects by running only a single Volcanic, but 5 Fetchlands. Even more radical suggestions like 1 Underground Sea, 1 Volcanic and 6 Fetchlands popped up for discussion, but those suggestions missed a few points. While I love shuffle-effects in a deck which contains full sets of Ponder and Brainstorm like the next guys does, running Volcanic Island or Underground Sea only as singletons can cause several serious problems at times.

...

The first and obvious flaw in the plan to reduce the actual number of mana-producing lands is the existence of Wasteland. Hands down, this colorless Sinkhole is a cornerstone of the Legacy metagame and not being prepared to fight it equals losing games. Seeing your singleton Dual destroyed and your remaining 4+ Fetchlands (see: beforementioned land-configuation) unable to put either a red- or black-producing land into play, can be the backbreaker for your attempt to go into the combo. To prevent running out of quality targets (in terms of color), or running out of targets altogether (in case you drew/fetched every one of your duals, which turns further drawn Fetchlands into blanks), the list settled on an equal amount of Fetchlands and Duals. Furthermore, several possible scenarios underline the importance of running 2 of each Dual, like drawing an opening hand containing Underground Sea, a Fetchland, Ponder, Cabal Therapy and Thoughtseize. There is no way to squeeze out the maximum of value without a second Underground Sea in your 60, as it would be impossible to cast Ponder prior to fetching a second land and still being able to cast a discard-spell. Throwback: Now imagine Wasteland hitting your Underground Sea with that hand! Suddenly your discard-spells are turned off, as the Fetchland has no Underground Sea left to dig up!

;D

[Tengo_Hambre]

So i ended up 21st at scg dallas this weekend after losing my win and in match and then drawing the final round to guarantee top 32. Here is a tournament report with details i can remember.

R1: burn (W)
Game 1 i get 12 goblins in on the play before eidolon hits. Glad i won the dice roll.
Game 2 therapy nabs eidolon turn 1 and i ad nauseam for the win turn 2

R2: fish (L)
Game 1 i have the opportunity to make 12 goblins using brainstorm-probe-LED trick but fail to put empty back on top of my library...punt (note: i did hit a point where past in flames in my board would still have gotten me the game but i wasnt running it today)
Game 2 double force and no discard ensures my doom

R3: fish (W)
Game 1 turn 2 empty for 10 goblins gets there just barely before he could build up enough blockers with vial and lands
Game 2 he mulls to four and keeps a force-less hand. Unfortunate loss for him here.

R4: burn (W)
Game 1 i mull to 5 and he hits turn 2 eidolon on the play. Manage to kill it with wish for pyroclasm but burn too many resources to kill him in time.
Game 2 turn two empty for 16 gets it done
Game 3 i look to make 18 goblins turn 3, cast wish and look through my board to find it empty-less...oops. Left it in my mainboard after wishing for it the previous round. I settle for tendrils for 18 (leaving him at 1 after a fetch) and hope to hit one of the two emptys or a wish for grapeshot. A few turns of draw-go finds him another land and an eidolon. I empty for 6 the next turn and attack for the win. Got lucky not to be punished for sloppiness here.

R5 UR delver (W)
Game 1 his only action is delver plus snapcaster bolt. I go to make a bunch of goblins from a low teens life total and he decides to snap-bolt me mid sequence (i think he was afraid of me ad-nauseam-ing into some sort of counter. He admitted to being out of the game for a while.) anyway, the 2 bonus storm allow me to tendrils for lethal.
Game 2 he flips an early delver and hits me into the single digits. The time comes to go and i can tendrils for the exact 18 lethal. Probe reveals an irrelevant daze which he wound up donating to the storm count. Would have been lethal anyway though he was annoyed with himself after the game.

R6 fish (W)
Game 1 probe revealed a counterless hand of fish and ad nauseam from a high 19 life ended it the next turn.
Game 2 double cursecatcher plus a known daze delayed me a few turns, when i finally had the mana to play through them he had found a force.
Game 3 turn 1 probe reveals two true names, 2 lords and a daze with and island and another irrelevant card. He hits a wasteland for my only land but i have a second chrome mox a turn later after missing a land drop. I lay one into the daze and then the second with an imprint, followed with a couple of rituals, led, wish, empty for 16 which gets the job done. Probably a bad keep on his part and some mis-sideboarding when we talked after the game; TNN is way too slow to matter and his hand had no clock and no real action outside of wasteland+daze.

R7 BUG delver (L)
Game 1 mull to a 6 of probe, brainstorm, petal, therapy, mine and misty. He lays a turn 1 delver, i draw duress and then probe him to reveal land, goyf, hymnx2, force. Follow up with therapy on hymn. He flips delver with a daze and lays goyf. I lay a fetch and brainstom, which he dazes, so i fetch but lose out on the shuffle. I draw into fetch fetch ritual and die a few turns later.
Game 2 i keep a turn two kill with a probe (it was something like chrome mox, led, petal, dark rit, gemstone mine, tutor, probe) probe reveals force, daze, brainstorm, double wasteland and some more lands. I pass the turn without laying a land hoping to draw discard or a swarm. I hit the swarm on my turn 3, play a land and the swarm, he brainstorms and then forces pitching force. I have enough mana still to empty through a daze so i go for it but he managed to brainstorm into a spell pierce. My gemstone mine eats a wasteland the next turn. He hits a dark confidant a few turns later after ive built enough steam to try again, i go for it with only artifact mana and end up eating another counter. I lose shortly thereafter.

R8: BUG delver (ID)

Here was my list- i went back to 4 chrome moxes-i hate drawing them in multiples but love a few things about them, 1) they're a non waselandable, repeatable source of mana even though they're card disadvantage. 2)even when you have nothing to imprint they're a free storm count. 3) they make it much more difficult to brick off of ad nauseam even with no land drop left and 0 mana floating. This is my biggest reason for running the full playset...i really hate resolving ad nauseam and not winning, which happened a few times in a side event the day prior with a duress in the place of the last mox (more for lack of a mana source than the damage taken from duress)

4 lions eye diamond
4 lotus petal
4 chrome mox
4 dark ritual
4 rite of flame

4 gitaxian probe
4 brainstorm
4 ponder

3 infernal tutor
4 burning wish

4 cabal therapy
2 duress

1 ad nauseam
1 empty the warrens

2 scalding tarn
2 misty rainforest
2 volcanic island
2 underground sea
1 tropical island
4 gemstone mine

Sideboard
3 abrupt decay
3 xantid swarm
1 massacre
1 pyroclasm
1 void snare
1 empty the warrens
1 tendrils of agony
1 duress
1 thoughtseize
1 grapeshot
1 infernal tutor

Note: i cut past in flames from the board because i almost never want it...you have to have multiple of your 2 rituals, burning wish AND infernal tutor for it to ever be useful which has happened to me twice in my admittedly minimal experience with the deck. How often do you guys find yourselves wishing for the past in flames? And am i using it wrong (i usually look to be grabbing it the turn i go off)? Should i be grabbing it a turn prior and then using it in conjunction with led mana or something?

Also, i will say i was pleased with the extra mox and maindeck tropical island all day and took mental note of several times where i was saved by having mana from one or the other over the 3rd duress. That said, i would like to have a 7th protection spell in the main and am not sure what to replace if i continue ignoring the 3 mox conventional wisdom. Currently considering shaving a ponder or just going up to (gasp!) 61 cards. Thoughts?

[vercadium]

Personally, I can't see myself ever going back to the old mana-base or Silence in the foreseeable future. I'm sure there are exceptions were I would, like scenarios where everyone starts playing Spell Snare and Stifle, but none of these seem likely. The current list just feels so tight; I feel like we've reached something of a milestone with the decks development.

As a semi-related aside, I finally confessed that I'll never get to use my Planeshift Foil Orim's Chants again. They're being sold. :'( </3.

[Lemnear]

Here was my list- i went back to 4 chrome moxes-i hate drawing them in multiples but love a few things about them, 1) they're a non waselandable, repeatable source of mana even though they're card disadvantage. 2)even when you have nothing to imprint they're a free storm count. 3) they make it much more difficult to brick off of ad nauseam even with no land drop left and 0 mana floating. This is my biggest reason for running the full playset...i really hate resolving ad nauseam and not winning, which happened a few times in a side event the day prior with a duress in the place of the last mox (more for lack of a mana source than the damage taken from duress)

4 lions eye diamond
4 lotus petal
4 chrome mox
4 dark ritual
4 rite of flame

4 gitaxian probe
4 brainstorm
4 ponder

3 infernal tutor
4 burning wish

4 cabal therapy
2 duress

1 ad nauseam
1 empty the warrens

2 scalding tarn
2 misty rainforest
2 volcanic island
2 underground sea
1 tropical island
4 gemstone mine

Sideboard
3 abrupt decay
3 xantid swarm
1 massacre
1 pyroclasm
1 void snare
1 empty the warrens
1 tendrils of agony
1 duress
1 thoughtseize
1 grapeshot
1 infernal tutor

Note: i cut past in flames from the board because i almost never want it...you have to have multiple of your 2 rituals, burning wish AND infernal tutor for it to ever be useful which has happened to me twice in my admittedly minimal experience with the deck. How often do you guys find yourselves wishing for the past in flames? And am i using it wrong (i usually look to be grabbing it the turn i go off)? Should i be grabbing it a turn prior and then using it in conjunction with led mana or something?

Also, i will say i was pleased with the extra mox and maindeck tropical island all day and took mental note of several times where i was saved by having mana from one or the other over the 3rd duress. That said, i would like to have a 7th protection spell in the main and am not sure what to replace if i continue ignoring the 3 mox conventional wisdom. Currently considering shaving a ponder or just going up to (gasp!) 61 cards. Thoughts?

I have no problem with passing the turn after Ad Nauseam as long as you calculate the possible damage output from your opponent. This usually happens if I start my flips with a bunch of cantrips and Tutors/Wishes but no mana in sight and proceed to work towards PIF in these cases.

PIF is an MVP against grindy discard-matchups and decks dealing lots of damage in short time. There is no issue in getting several Rituals if you double those in your hand with Infernal or use cantrips accordingly, as usually 3 rituals are enough for a PIF loop. You neither need Infernal AND Wish as you can chain those into each other to place an Infernal in your graveyard and a wish in your hand. I find myself working towards the PIF loop pretty often.

I doubt you need more protection spells as you can wish for your SB discard anytime you need it without drawing them in matches you want gas instead. I mean, you have basically 10 discard spells in your mainboard to break through defense and 12 cantrips to find them, on top of 4 Infernals to double the discard in hand. That's nearly half your deck, so I usually rise an eyebrow evertime I read that peoples are unable to find at least 1 protection spell over several turns ;)

Why do you run 2 sweepers and 2 discard spells in your SB which are redundant but can't find space for PIF?

[Megadeus]

I wouldn't cut PiF. Like Lem said, it is one of your best options versus the discard decks. Being able to just sit and infernal for redundant rituals and such as they tear up your hand only to simply wish for pif and kill them is just a very nice option to have

[Tengo_Hambre]

I have no problem with passing the turn after Ad Nauseam as long as you calculate the possible damage output from your opponent. This usually happens if I start my flips with a bunch of cantrips and Tutors/Wishes but no mana in sight and proceed to work towards PIF in these cases.

PIF is an MVP against grindy discard-matchups and decks dealing lots of damage in short time. There is no issue in getting several Rituals if you double those in your hand with Infernal or use cantrips accordingly, as usually 3 rituals are enough for a PIF loop. You neither need Infernal AND Wish as you can chain those into each other to place an Infernal in your graveyard and a wish in your hand. I find myself working towards the PIF loop pretty often.

I doubt you need more protection spells as you can wish for your SB discard anytime you need it without drawing them in matches you want gas instead. I mean, you have basically 10 discard spells in your mainboard to break through defense and 12 cantrips to find them, on top of 4 Infernals to double the discard in hand. That's nearly half your deck, so I usually rise an eyebrow evertime I read that peoples are unable to find at least 1 protection spell over several turns ;)

Why do you run 2 sweepers and 2 discard spells in your SB which are redundant but can't find space for PIF?
The redundant sweepers are a product of wanting one to be viable against plainsless decks. I never went for massacre but also never played vs a plains. I did go for pyroclasm a few times and was fairly pleased with the card. The redundant discard was so i could board one in and still have a wish target, though i never ended up taking this line of play. I can definitely find space for past in flames, i just found myself rarely wanting it so i played other cards instead.

For grindy discard matchups, are we talking jund, shardless bug, bug delver, or other decks I'm not thinking of? Im also curious how this line of play usually goes. If youre tutoring for burning wish you need to be hellbent or have the wish there to reveal, which means you are probably not tutoring for it anyway. If youre hellbent, you need 9 mana to chain tutor-wish-pif-begin flashback, and if you have that much mana, why not just chain a tutor once and empty, or go get ad nauseam? Otherwise, the pif route sounds like a multi turn one that is still very situational ( if you have red rituals you'll need access to RB after you pif to get the black for tutor-a minimum of 6 mana before casting it, for example). When you guys go the pif route do you often wind up emptying or do more often work into a lethal tendrils? Anyway, I'm not trying to say you guys are wrong or that the card is bad, but i would like some more description of some specific lines of play you've taken with it to better understand how and when to use it. My logic isn't figuring it out. Also, What rough percentage of games do you find yourself in a situation to use past in flames? Ive wanted it occasionally but not very often, perhaps 1 in 30 games.

I have never passed the turn after an ad nauseam; i tend to keep going until i can kill them that turn or kill myself (only done that once so far). This is a play pattern i can definitely work on (though at least i know myself well enough to tune the deck toward this tendency ;p). Anyway, i will definitely add this to my bag of tricks for the future :)

[wonderPreaux]

Hi again everyone, I'm on a bit of a cold streak with this deck lately, and I'm hoping I can snap out of it soon. The past 3 dailies in a row, I've ran into Miracles and lost to it, very frustratingly. The Miracles deck seems to be everywhere online, and I've run into some aggravating techs postboard like Ethersworn Canonist or Leyline of Sanctity. I'm wondering if anyone has had similar experience lately, or has any suggestions on flex slots I could tinker with, or other suggestions for a very Miracle-heavy meta.

It just gets to be annoying facing that deck because I feel like I have to draw significantly better than them in 2 games to win, which just isn't a consistent plan. There are games where I even get a good hate piece, like Needle on Top, and it just doesn't matter because they have a hand full of counters and hatebears. Obfuscating things more is that they can just open absurdly too, like a postboard game I lost where the opponent opened 2 Leylines of Sanctities, and then still have Force of Will + Blue card for my t1 Ad Nauseam, it's hard to train myself to play around counters when the opponent just has absurd hands like that.

[Lemnear]

The redundant sweepers are a product of wanting one to be viable against plainsless decks. I never went for massacre but also never played vs a plains. I did go for pyroclasm a few times and was fairly pleased with the card. The redundant discard was so i could board one in and still have a wish target, though i never ended up taking this line of play. I can definitely find space for past in flames, i just found myself rarely wanting it so i played other cards instead.


this is imo a topic of the philosphy you have of piloting the deck. I for myself, don't see me wasting resources to sweep creatures other than hatebears (which are all white except Eidolon).

For grindy discard matchups, are we talking jund, shardless bug, bug delver, or other decks I'm not thinking of?


You can add BUG Control with Deeds and Lilianas or Deadguy to that category as well

Im also curious how this line of play usually goes. If youre tutoring for burning wish you need to be hellbent or have the wish there to reveal, which means you are probably not tutoring for it anyway. If youre hellbent, you need 9 mana to chain tutor-wish-pif-begin flashback, and if you have that much mana, why not just chain a tutor once and empty, or go get ad nauseam? Otherwise, the pif route sounds like a multi turn one that is still very situational ( if you have red rituals you'll need access to RB after you pif to get the black for tutor-a minimum of 6 mana before casting it, for example).


for a lot of those matchups you can simply drop mana and float business with your cantrips or chain your tutors/wishes turn 4 turn and slowroll in the face of Lilana or a slow clock of Shardless Agent untill you have enough rituals/cantrips in your hand/graveyard to blow your opponent out with a flashbacked PIF via permanent manasources including Petals or LEDs. Key is to gather as much permanent mana as possible.

When you guys go the pif route do you often wind up emptying or do more often work into a lethal tendrils?


obviously this depends completely on your available mana, the turn and your opponents options. I can't give a general advice for such questions

Anyway, I'm not trying to say you guys are wrong or that the card is bad, but i would like some more description of some specific lines of play you've taken with it to better understand how and when to use it. My logic isn't figuring it out.


oh my ... I dunno if specific situations really help for a deck which is best piloted on intuition. Some lines overlap with the natural-10-count-blueprint to create more stormcount to battle Batterskulls lifegain or to replay Discard (like against FoW + Stifle in opponents hand) or as the mentioned comback-move against discard as mentioned above.

Also, What rough percentage of games do you find yourself in a situation to use past in flames? Ive wanted it occasionally but not very often, perhaps 1 in 30 games.


1/6 if I shoulf guess

I have never passed the turn after an ad nauseam; i tend to keep going until i can kill them that turn or kill myself (only done that once so far). This is a play pattern i can definitely work on (though at least i know myself well enough to tune the deck toward this tendency ;p). Anyway, i will definitely add this to my bag of tricks for the future :)



Edit:

Hi again everyone, I'm on a bit of a cold streak with this deck lately, and I'm hoping I can snap out of it soon. The past 3 dailies in a row, I've ran into Miracles and lost to it, very frustratingly. The Miracles deck seems to be everywhere online, and I've run into some aggravating techs postboard like Ethersworn Canonist or Leyline of Sanctity. I'm wondering if anyone has had similar experience lately, or has any suggestions on flex slots I could tinker with, or other suggestions for a very Miracle-heavy meta.

It just gets to be annoying facing that deck because I feel like I have to draw significantly better than them in 2 games to win, which just isn't a consistent plan. There are games where I even get a good hate piece, like Needle on Top, and it just doesn't matter because they have a hand full of counters and hatebears. Obfuscating things more is that they can just open absurdly too, like a postboard game I lost where the opponent opened 2 Leylines of Sanctities, and then still have Force of Will + Blue card for my t1 Ad Nauseam, it's hard to train myself to play around counters when the opponent just has absurd hands like that.

Playing against miracles again and again is crap for any storm deck. Period. There are however quite some sneaky techs to try if you have some self loathing and want to keep storming in an field full of Miracles. A tech you can try are Young Pyromancers which Kai championed in Prague in an ANT shell while TES can even drop them T1 on a more reliable base unlike its storm twin and care less for Leylines, Canonists, Meddling Mages or spells getting stuck in the Counterbalance

[wonderPreaux]

Edit: Playing against miracles again and again is crap for any storm deck. Period. There are however quite some sneaky techs to try if you have some self loathing and want to keep storming in an field full of Miracles. A tech you can try are Young Pyromancers which Kai championed in Prague in an ANT shell while TES can even drop them T1 on a more reliable base unlike its storm twin and care less for Leylines, Canonists, Meddling Mages or spells getting stuck in the Counterbalance

I know running into Miracles over and over prolly isn't good odds, its just awful running into the fun-police day after day, which is sort of why I think of this as a cold streak. I tried the Pyromancer tech a while ago, and my main gripe about it is just that its hard to get there on it's own, even if they do board out all the removal, there's SCM, Clique and the occasional hatebear/Batterskull. Though, I have yet to try Pyromancer + Pithing Needle, I'd only ever tried the techs separately. If the Miracle decks don't go away, I'll either explore the Pyro/Pithing sb or I might switch to a more "Grinding Station" sort of deck, since my self-loathing/storm-love is just too overwhelming to try and full-out metagame the Miracles decks with something like Goblins (the deck, not the storm card :P).

[Asthereal]

If the Miracle decks don't go away, I'll either explore the Pyro/Pithing sb or I might switch to a more "Grinding Station" sort of deck, since my self-loathing/storm-love is just too overwhelming to try and full-out metagame the Miracles decks with something like Goblins (the deck, not the storm card :P).
You could try a Doomsday list. Doomsday has way more options to fight Miracles than any other Storm variant.

[bennotsi]

You could try a Doomsday list. Doomsday has way more options to fight Miracles than any other Storm variant.

I can confirm that. It also appears some ANT players are now preferring to run multiple Sensei's Divining Tops in the sideboard instead of Young Pyromancers to grind out that matchup. Doomsday already runs 4 of those and also plays more lands because you don't run Infernal Tutor, which helps in grindy matchups. You can still sideboard 4 Abrupt Decays if you want and you may even go as far as sideboarding Shelldock Isle and Emrakul. However, between Karakas and Terminus I'm not sure how much I like going for Emrakul. You can play Doomsday with or without white, but I think the Silences give you a nice edge in the Miracles matchup as it negates their float a force on top strategy without having to board into Xantid Swarms.

[Lemnear]

You could try a Doomsday list. Doomsday has way more options to fight Miracles than any other Storm variant.

Doomsday is best without storm spells at all

[Asthereal]

Doomsday is best without storm spells at all
That's the beauty of Doomsday. You don't ever need to play a Storm spell in your main deck. Just build a Wish pile and get Tendrils from the board.
The main deck will contain the other wincons you care to play, like Lab Man and/or Entreat the Angels.

[Lemnear]

That's the beauty of Doomsday. You don't ever need to play a Storm spell in your main deck. Just build a Wish pile and get Tendrils from the board.
The main deck will contain the other wincons you care to play, like Lab Man and/or Entreat the Angels.

Doomsday has it's own merrits of needing enough mana/cards to cast Doomsday, draw into the pile and being able to proceed, as pass-the-turn-piles are usually suicide in the current metagame.

[Asthereal]

Doomsday has it's own merrits of needing enough mana/cards to cast Doomsday, draw into the pile and being able to proceed, as pass-the-turn-piles are usually suicide in the current metagame.
True for most of the meta, but we were talking about Doomsday as an option against a Miracles-infested meta, and pass the turn piles are actually very valid in that matchup.

[Lemnear]

True for most of the meta, but we were talking about Doomsday as an option against a Miracles-infested meta, and pass the turn piles are actually very valid in that matchup.

Telegraphing your opponent with a pass-the-turn DD to keep bis mana open and Clique-blowout available isn't valid, neither can you get past existing problems of 1cc-spells-fueled-combos vs. miracles

[Asthereal]

Telegraphing your opponent with a pass-the-turn DD to keep bis mana open and Clique-blowout available isn't valid, neither can you get past existing problems of 1cc-spells-fueled-combos vs. miracles
Of course it all depends on what he is holding.
Combo cannot beat a Miracles God hand, not even Doomsday.

Anyway, we should go back on topic, before this becomes the Doomsday thread. :rolleyes:

[Pelikanudo]

Regarding beating miracles:
you all say its true - beating a God hand from miracles is almost imposible., definately its not a match I like to see - I enjoy the match up the most!, also the pilots who play it are very good players in my meta...

A thing I could do related to the DD. is: having 2 DD in side plus Emrakul and Sheldock Island (4 extra slots - you can take out maybe decays and other stuff)so on 2nd and 3rd game you just can side 1DD+S.I+Emralkul so you have the option to wish and I.T. for DD which is 2 mana less than A.N.

Also assuming Karakas is not drawn by Miracles. and that opponent will not be able to terminus on our turn. - the first scenarios is less likely to occur.

I just didnt tryied this, but you're rithg when you say that DD is just better as its a 3 mana cost alsobut needs a specific pile vs c.b. and Emrakul is the most effective.
I'm not sure if this can work but is 2 less mana tan other engine and once you played the DD, opp. has 2 more turns vs S.I or die!

If someone could just test this could be great!

[ThomasDowd]

Regarding beating miracles:
you all say its true - beating a God hand from miracles is almost imposible., definately its not a match I like to see - I enjoy the match up the most!, also the pilots who play it are very good players in my meta...

A thing I could do related to the DD. is: having 2 DD in side plus Emrakul and Sheldock Island (4 extra slots - you can take out maybe decays and other stuff)so on 2nd and 3rd game you just can side 1DD+S.I+Emralkul so you have the option to wish and I.T. for DD which is 2 mana less than A.N.

Also assuming Karakas is not drawn by Miracles. and that opponent will not be able to terminus on our turn. - the first scenarios is less likely to occur.

I just didnt tryied this, but you're rithg when you say that DD is just better as its a 3 mana cost alsobut needs a specific pile vs c.b. and Emrakul is the most effective.
I'm not sure if this can work but is 2 less mana tan other engine and once you played the DD, opp. has 2 more turns vs S.I or die!

If someone could just test this could be great!


This was done about 3-4 years ago in ANT frequently. it worked. kind of. also before terminus and before common karakas play.

people see this line now.

Talk about DD in the DD thread please.

Not here

[DireNTropy]

SCG IQ + Weekly Event Reports

In the past 5 local tournaments I have compiled a match record of 16-2-2 (IDs in final rounds) with the deck, so I was feeling confident in trying it at a larger event. I played ANT and Doomsday extensively for the past year, both online and in paper. Switching to TES has resulted in the best results out of all the storm decks I've played. I'm including reports from both an SCG IQ and the last weekly event due to the differences in the matchups.

SCG IQ

Round 1 - Dredge

Game 1: I lose the die roll and draw my opening 7, which contains Dark Ritual, Infernal Tutor, Lion's Eye Diamond, a Fetchland, and Cantrips; good enough for a turn 1 Empty the Warrens. My opponent starts by playing a Cephalid Coliseum (suddenly Empty the Warrens doesn't seem like a great plan anymore), casts a Lion's Eye Diamond, taps the Coliseum to cast Breakthrough for 0, putting 9 cards in the graveyard. Fortunately for me there isn't a single dredge creature. My opponent then breaks the Lion's Eye Diamond for red to cast a Faithless Looting and passes the turn. I draw a Lotus Petal for my turn, and decide, with the Cabal Therapies in the yard, that casting an Ad Nauseam with no mana floating is safer than casting Empty the Warrens for 12 goblins. I go to 1 life and fail to find a Burning Wish or Infernal Tutor and have to settle for an Empty the Warrens for 34 goblins. My opponent draws and scoops. I comment on my opponent's bad luck of seeing 13 cards with no dredge creatures. I side out Cabal Therapy (especially bad on the draw), and side in Chain of Vapor mainly to fight Iona.

Win - T1 Ad Nauseam into 34 goblins (1-0)
-3 Cabal Therapy
-1 Empty the Warrens
+2 Surgical Extraction
+2 Chain of Vapor

Game 2: I draw my 7 and immediately mulligan to 6 with my opponent, who further mulligans to 5. My 6 card hand is slow - a Duress, Ponder, tutor, ritual, and lands. He starts with an Unmask, exiling a Cabal Therapy, to discard my tutor, plays a Mana Confluence and casts a Faithless Looting, again discarding no dredge creatures. I start my turn by fetching an Underground Sea and decide to cast Duress over Ponder, seeing a singleton Gemstone Mine. My opponent draws for the turn and casts Breakthrough for 0, discarding a Stinkweed Imp. I play a land, Gitaxian Probe, Ponder, draw a Gitaxian Probe, floating mana and an Ad Nauseam on top of my library. My opponent dredges the Stinkweed Imp into Cabal Therapy and a Golgari Thug. I draw for the turn, cast Gitaxian Probe to cast Ad Nauseam, with an unused Lotus Petal, producing a Tendrils of Agony for the win.

Win - T3 Ad Nauseam into Tendrils of Agony (2-0)

1-0 (2-0)


Round 2 - Jund Loam

Game 1: I lose the die roll and draw my opening 7. My opponent mulligans down to 6 cards and starts with a Fetchland. I play Gitaxian Probe, see a hand of 5 lands including a Grove of the Burnwillows and 2 Mutavaults, and follow with a Ponder. The next turn I'm able to tutor for and cast Ad Nauseam, revealing sufficient mana and Burning Wish. He asks to see the Tendrils of Agony in my sideboard and scoops.

Win - Turn 2 Ad Nauseam into Tendrils of Agony (1-0)
-1 Cabal Therapy
-1 Duress
+2 Chain of Vapor

Game 2: I play Gitaxian Probe and see a hand of Pack Rat, Verdant Catacombs, Life from the Loam, and Abrupt Decay, and cast Empty the Warrens on turn 1 for 14 goblins. My opponent fails to find an answer in two draw steps. I notice my opponent has a Traditional-Chinese Burning Wish and comment on how I've been looking for one more to finish my set. He says he'll be willing to trade it to me after the tournament, what an awesome guy!

Win - Turn 1 Empty the Warrens for 14 goblins (2-0)

2-0 (4-0)


Round 3 - Maverick

Game 1: I lose the die roll and draw my opening 7, a very slow opening hand with discard and cantrips. My opponent opens with a Windswept Heath. I play Gitaxian Probe and see Knight of the Reliquary, Umezawa's Jitte, Scavenging Ooze, Windswept Heath, Verdant Catacombs, and Scrubland. I decide against casting Cabal Therapy on his Scavenging Ooze, and instead play a Ponder, leading to a shuffle. My opponent plays Scavenging Ooze and passes. I cast Cabal Therapy naming Knight of the Reliquary, cast Ponder, and again shuffle. He attacks with the Scavenging Ooze, Wastelands a land, and decides to keep mana open in case of Past in Flames. I take another hit from the Scavenging Ooze, after exiling the Knight and drop to 9. I activate a fetchland on my turn and chain Infernal Tutors for 20 damage with Tendrils of Agony. I consider myself incredibly lucky to not have seen a Thalia in 4 turns and prepare my sideboard to fight both Thalia and Gaddock Teeg.

Win - Turn 4 Tendrils of Agony (1-0)
-3 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Thoughtseize
+1 Karakas

Game 2: I expect to face a heavy assortment of annoying 2-mana creatures and throw away an opening 7 of 3 lands, 4 cantrips. I keep a not so stellar 6 card hand. He plays a forest and passes. I play a land and Ponder, hitting nothing and shuffle. He plays a land and an Ethersworn Canonist. I play a land, Ponder, and shuffle. He plays a Thalia, in response, I cast a Brainstorm. I ponder again and play a chrome mox, which pays for another chrome mox. He casts a Gaddock Teeg and wastelands my Underground Sea. I lose in a couple of turns, hoping to draw Karakas and Chain of Vapor with a hand full of rituals.

Loss (1-1)

Game 3: On the play for the first time this tournament! I throw back a slow opening 7 and open the following:
Fetchland
Chrome Mox
Lotus Petal
Rite of Flame
Empty the Warrens
Brainstorm

I make the decision to go all in on 8 goblins turn 1: I play Chrome Mox, exiling a Brainstorm, Lotus Petal, Land, Rite of Flame, Empty the Warrens. He plays a land into turn 1 Deathrite Shaman. I draw a Lion's Eye Diamond and swing for 7. He untaps and plays a Thalia, Guardian of Thraben. I draw a Dark Ritual, attack for 5, and tap my land to play Lion's Eye Diamond. He plays a Qasali Pridemage, and wastelands my Underground Sea. I draw an Infernal Tutor and Attack for 2, my goal being to cast a Grapeshot for the last 5 damage, which will require at least 3 initial mana sources or a Karakas to bounce the Thalia. Unfortunately he uses the Pridemage to destroy my Lion's Eye Diamond and quickly ends the game. He tells me later he topdecked the Deathrite Shaman (which prevented 6 total damage) and I debate on whether or not it would have been better to Brainstorm for a larger Empty the Warrens on turn 2.

Loss (1-2)

2-1 (5-2)


Round 4 - BUG Delver

Game 1: I lose the die roll and start with a relatively slow 7. He plays turn 1 Underground Sea and passes. I play a ponder and float business on the top of my library. My opponent plays a Tropical Island, Ponder, and shuffles. I brainstorm, putting back a Ponder and an Infernal Tutor. My opponent casts a Hymn to Tourach, discarding a Burning Wish and a Brainstorm. I play a Ponder for the turn. My opponent wastelands my Underground Sea. I play a Duress and see Abrupt Decay, Wasteland, Daze, and discard the Daze. I tutor for Ad Nauseam into a Tendrils of Agony. I'm lucky that my opponent didn't find a fast creature to pressure my life total.

Win - Turn 3 Ad Nauseam (1-0)
-1 Cabal Therapy
+1 Pyroblast

Game 2: My opponent starts with a mulligan to 6, plays an Underground Sea and passes the turn. I cast a Gitaxian Probe, seeing Force of Will, Swan Song, Surgical Extraction, Wasteland, and Hymn to Tourach. Since my hand has both redundant mana and tutors, I cast Cabal Therapy and take the Force of Will, reasoning that if he casts Swan Song later I'll be able to flash back Cabal Therapy. He plays a Hymn to Tourach, taking my Infernal Tutor and a ritual. He then casts Surgical Extraction on my Infernal Tutor. We both cantrip for a few turns, with a couple of my lands hit by Wasteland and my hand by a Thoughtseize. I start my turn by casting Duress, taking Swan Song, eventually casting Empty the Warrens for 12 goblins. He cantrips, looking for a sweeper for two turns and extends the hand.

Win - Turn 6 Empty the Warrens for 12 goblins (2-0)

3-1 (7-2)


Round 5 - Jund

Game 1: I win the die roll (first time!) and start with a pretty strong hand. My opponent mulligans to 5 looking for lands. I cast Duress, and see a hand of Lightning Bolt, Punishing Fire, Abrupt Decay, and creatures. I take the Lightning Bolt and tutor for Ad Nauseam, leading to a Tendrils of Agony.

Win - Turn 3 Ad Nauseam into Tendrils of Agony (1-0)
-1 Empty the Warrens
+1 Empty the Warrens

Game 2: He starts with a Deathrite Shaman. I play a Ponder and shuffle. My hand is now completely full of mana and no action. He casts a Hymn to Tourach and the next turn he lands a Dark Confidant. My hand at this point is 2x Rite of Flame, 2x Dark Ritual, Cabal Ritual. He casts a Liliana and a Thoughtseize. I never draw business and lose.

Loss (1-1)

Game 3: I mulligan away a slow hand. I keep a Belcher hand and summon 10 goblins on turn 1. He comments on his outs and plays a Grove of the Burnwillows and passes. I draw a land and attack for 10. He plays a Tarmogoyf and passes. I attack for 9 and pass. He draws his card for the turn and extends the hand.

Win - Turn 1 Empty the Warrens for 10 goblins (2-1)

4-1 (9-3)


Round 6 - ID

We find out that all the 4-1's except 1 can ID into the top 8. My opponent and I have good enough tiebreaks that we can ID.

ID

4-1-1 (9-3-3)


Top 8 Quarterfinals - 4C Deathblade

Game 1: Since I have a lower seed, I'm on the draw. My opponent starts with a land into Deathrite Shaman. I play Gitaxian Probe and see Sensei's Divining Top, Wasteland, 2x Deathrite Shaman, and Brainstorm. Especially after losing to Deathrite Shaman, I immediately plan to set up for Ad Nauseam rather than a fast Empty the Warrens since even a single Deathrite prevents quite a lot of damage. The next turn my Brainstorm is hit by a Spell Pierce and double Wastelands keep me a single mana off from tutoring for and casting Ad Nauseam. Stoneforge Mystic summons a Batterskull to the board and two swings later I start sideboarding. Looking back I think a better plan would be to use Cabal Therapy to get rid of 2x Deathrite Shaman and then cast a medium sized Empty the Warrens, especially with the Cabal Therapies available to take care of any tutored Batterskulls. I side in Pyroblasts in case of Meddling Mage, which I found out was the correct call.

-1 Cabal Therapy
-1 Ponder
+2 Pyroblast

Game 2: I open a hand with Gitaxian Probe, 2x Cabal Therapy, Burning Wish, Rite of Flame, Pyroblast, and Land. I start with a Gitaxian Probe and see Force of Will, Brainstorm, Deathrite Shaman, Jace, Karakas, and Land. The next turn I play a Land, cast Cabal Therapy and Pyroblast the expected Brainstorm in reponse. I name Force of Will with Cabal Therapy and pass. My plan now is to cast Burning Wish for Infernal Tutor and combo the following turn. I play a Chrome Mox and punt the game by exiling a Cabal Therapy instead of a Rite of Flame and cannot cast the Burning Wish in my hand. I lose shortly afterwards.

4-2-1 (9-5-3)


Props
-Great opponents!
-Great company driving to the event
-Dodging the 4 Miracles players at the top tables
-Completing my playset of Traditional-Chinese Burning Wish

Slops
-Turning a Chrome Mox into a Mox Jet to cast Burning Wish...
-Deathrite Shaman destroying goblins by being a 1/2.
-My lands mercilessly being destroyed by Wasteland
-Losing the die roll 4/5 times

Stats
-Cast Ad Nauseam 6 times
-Cast Empty the Warrens 4 times (1 loss and 1 off of an Ad Nauseam)
-Natural storm 1 time




Weekly Event

My notes and memory of the matches aren't as complete as from the previous event.

Round 1 - Death and Taxes

Game 1:
I'm on the play and pay 2 life to cast Gitaxian Probe and see 2 Karakas, a Plains, Stoneforge Mystic, Phyrexian Revoker, Mother of Runes, and Swords to Plowshares. My opponent plays a Plains and summons a Mother of Runes. I tutor for Ad Nauseam into Tendrils of Agony.

Win - T2 Ad Nauseam (1-0)
-3 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Thoughtseize
+1 Karakas

Game 2: My opponent opens with Wasteland into Aether Vial. I pay 2 life to play Gitaxian Probe and see the following monstrosity:
Spirit of the Labyrinth
Stoneforge Mystic
Phyrexian Revoker
Rishadan Port
Ethersworn Canonist
I cast Cabal Therapy and name Ethersworn Canonist and set up for a Empty the Warrens next turn. Fortunately my opponent doesn't draw a white mana source and can only cast a Phyrexian Revoker naming Lion's Eye Diamond after putting a counter on Aether Vial. I tutor an Empty the Warrens for 12 goblins and flash back Cabal Therapy to discard the Stoneforge Mystic. I am able to attack with goblins for the win.

Win - T2 Empty the Warrens for 12 goblins (2-0)

1-0 (2-0)


Round 2 - Miracles

Game 1: I win the die roll and Ponder to set up. The next turn I play Gitaxian Probe and see Counterbalance, Force of Will, Vendilion Clique, Jace, and Arid Mesa. I luckily have Empty the Warrens in hand and resolve it for 10 goblins. My opponent cannot find a Terminus and I win.

Win - T2 Empty the Warrens for 10 goblins (1-0)
-1 Empty the Warrens
-1 Cabal Therapy
-1 Ponder
+2 Pyroblast
+1 Past in Flames

Game 2: My Ponder is countered by Red Elemental Blast. My Burning Wish is countered. My Brainstorm is hit by a Snapcaster flashing back Red Elemental Blast. Vendilion Clique and Snapcaster Mage attack for the win.

Loss (1-1)

Game 3: My opponent leads with a fast Counterbalance. Later in the game I cast a discard spell to trigger Counterbalance and find the top card is a land. I cast rituals and cast Ad Nauseam with no mana floating, finding a Past in Flames; I discard roughly 15 cards. The next turn I cast a monstrous Past in Flames to eventually find Tendrils of Agony.

Win - T4 Ad Nauseam into Past in Flames (2-1)

2-0 (4-1)


Round 3 - Esper Deathblade

Game 1: I cast a fast Empty the Warrens for 10 goblins against a Deathrite Shaman.

Win - Empty the Warrens (2-0)
-1 Cabal Therapy
-1 Ponder
+2 Pyroblast

Game 2: I cast a fast Empty the Warrens after being hit by a Thoughtseize and Surgical Extraction. I discard my opponent's Zealous Persecution.

Win - Empty the Warrens (2-0)

3-0 (6-1)


Round 4 - Miracles

Game 1: My opponent resolves a Vendilion Clique and a Snapcaster Mage. I cast Burning Wish for Massacre, and on my next turn, cast Massacre into a small Empty the Warrens for 6 goblins. They are able to attack twice before my opponent finds a Detention Sphere. A Counterbalance + Sensei's Divning Top, Jace the Mind Sculptor, and Vendilion Clique end the game in my opponent's favor.

Loss (0-1)
-1 Empty the Warrens
-1 Cabal Therapy
-1 Ponder
+2 Pyroblast
+1 Past in Flames

Game 2: I cast a Gitaxian Probe and see Entreat the Angels, Terminus, Force of Will, Misdirection, Jace, and Counterbalance. I cast discard and cantrip for a couple of turns and my opponent is able to Stone Rain two of my lands with a Back to Basics. However, a very strong Ponder the turn before allows me to tutor for and cast an Ad Nauseam into Tendrils of Agony.

Win - T4 Ad Nauseam (1-1)

Game 3: My opponent lands a quick Counterbalance and I play out my artifact mana when given a chance while discarding his Brainstorm. We both continue to draw lands and I am able to tutor for an Ad Nauseam with tons of mana floating and find a Past in Flames. My opponent has a land on top of his library and I cast a Rite of Flame; in response he activates a fetchland to reveal a Counterbalance on top. I cast the mana in my hand and cast Past in Flames to flashback a pyroblast on the Counterbalance in order to resolve my tutors and win with Tendrils of Agony.

Win - T6+ Ad Nauseam into Past in Flames (2-1)

4-0 (8-2)

Stats
-Cast Ad Nauseam 4 times
-Cast Empty the Warrens 5 times (1 loss)
-Cast Past in Flames 2 times (both maindeck)



Mainboard

4x Gitaxian Probe
4x Ponder
4x Brainstorm

3x Duress
4x Cabal Therapy

3x Burning Wish
3x Infernal Tutor
1x Empty the Warrens
1x Ad Nauseam

4x Rite of Flame
4x Dark Ritual
2x Cabal Ritual

4x Lotus Petal
4x Lion's Eye Diamond
2x Chrome Mox

4x Polluted Delta
4x Bloodstained Mire
2x Underground Sea
2x Volcanic Island
1x Badlands

Sideboard

2x Pyroblast
2x Chain of Vapor
2x Surgical Extraction
1x Karakas

1x Void Snare
1x Thoughtseize
1x Grapeshot
1x Massacre

1x Infernal Tutor
1x Past in Flames
1x Empty the Warrens
1x Tendrils of Agony

I've been playing the mainboard in the last 6 tournaments, to a combined match record of (20-4-3), with all the draws being ID in the final rounds. My losses have been to Miracles, Esper Deathblade, and 2x Maverick. I really like having 8 fetchlands to make the brainstorms stronger as well as being more resilient against Wasteland. The sideboard has stayed relatively constant, switching around the 2 Surgical Extractions for Pyroblast, Chain of Vapor, or Pithing Needles. I am happy with having 2 Surgical Extractions to have a fighting chance against fast combo and graveyard strategies. Some notes about the build:

Ad Nauseam
The biggest difference I noticed when switching from ANT to TES is the increased strength and consistency of Ad Nauseam. Even with only 2 Chrome Mox in the deck I have yet to lose due to not finding an initial mana source. Having Burning Wish lowers the dependency of finding both an Infernal Tutor and a Lion's Eye Diamond.

Cabal Ritual
Having 2 Cabal Ritual in the maindeck helps to cast Ad Nauseam off of Burning Wish and also provides a very strong source of mana lategame.

Badlands
I replaced the third Chrome Mox with a thirteenth land. I have used a third Underground Sea but noticed that there were many times that I wanted to fetch a land to cast discard the current turn and then produce red mana for the combo turn. I have found that the number of times this has been applicable has been greater than the times Badlands is the sole land in my initial hand with cantrips, and would likely be better than a Chrome Mox anyways.

Sideboard
By constructing the manabase solely with fetchlands and dual lands, I decided that keeping the deck strictly three colors is better for consistency. This does leave the deck weaker against Blue combo decks and Miracles, which is partially addressed from including Pyroblast, Surgical Extraction, and Karakas.

TLDR
4-2-1 (9-3-3) at SCG IQ
2-0 vs. Dredge
2-0 vs. Jund Loam
1-2 vs. Maverick
2-0 vs. BUG Delver
2-0 vs. Jund
0-2 vs. Esper Deathblade

4-0 (8-2) at Weekly Event
2-0 vs. Death and Taxes
2-1 vs. Miracles
2-0 vs. Esper Deathblade
2-1 vs. Miracles

Thanks for reading and I'll be interested in any feedback!

[wonderPreaux]

I'd love to see at least 1 Pithing Needle in the SB of that deck, Needle has been nothing but good to me in testing, no matter how many colors I run. Have you really been alright with no Gemstones and 3 Burning Wish only? I'm unsure myself on how many Gemstone to run in 3c, but I'm not sure I'd ever cut Wishes, love to see them most of the time.

In your round 3 game 3 against Maverick, is there a reason you didn't just go land > Brainstorm? If you hit Dark Ritual or Rite or Petal+Petal or Probe+LED or Tutor+Dark Ritual+LED or Wish+Rite+Rite or Wish+Rite+LED or Wish+LED+LED, suddenly you have a far more viable 10/12/14/14/14/14/14/14 Goblins, respectively. While those might be narrow outs, I think 8 Goblins has such low odds of getting there that you have to just get greedy and try for the big hit of Brainstorm. (Odds of Brainstorm hitting Dark Ritual/Rite is 35.2%, not factoring the combo hits, if anyone is really curious I could crunch the numbers of all the outcomes, but I estimate it to be close to 40%, which feels way better than 8 Goblins). EDIT: Your top 3 were Dark Ritual, LED and Infernal Tutor, so you could've had 14 Goblins, hindsight's 20/20, but I would've used the Brainstorm to try and go turn 1.

Off-topic: I wanted to touch base with everyone about the Shardless BUG matchup. Taking the stock list as reference, I'm inclined to board out Empty the Warrens and one of the 3 Chrome Moxen, due to sweepers, and the general slowness of the matchup. From there, I board in Tendrils of Agony, for the natural lines (very relevant, as Shardless has little defense from it, also solves splash Meddling Mage), but from there I'm unsure what is a good 2nd slot. I'm between Chain of Vapor to hedge against Null Rod/Meddling Mage, or Pithing Needle to curb Lilliana/DRS/Wasteland/Jace. I'm leaning towards Chain, because you can win quickly enough to stop planeswalkers/DRS/Wasteland from beating you a lot more often than you can beat a Meddling Mage or Null Rod and giving Shardless time to accrue advantage seems like one of the ways to lose, so the card facilitating the fastest wins seems best.

[Lemnear]

Round 3 - Maverick

-snip-

Game 3: On the play for the first time this tournament! I throw back a slow opening 7 and open the following:
Fetchland
Chrome Mox
Lotus Petal
Rite of Flame
Empty the Warrens
Brainstorm

I make the decision to go all in on 8 goblins turn 1: I play Chrome Mox, exiling a Brainstorm, Lotus Petal, Land, Rite of Flame, Empty the Warrens. He plays a land into turn 1 Deathrite Shaman. I draw a Lion's Eye Diamond and swing for 7. He untaps and plays a Thalia, Guardian of Thraben. I draw a Dark Ritual, attack for 5, and tap my land to play Lion's Eye Diamond. He plays a Qasali Pridemage, and wastelands my Underground Sea. I draw an Infernal Tutor and Attack for 2, my goal being to cast a Grapeshot for the last 5 damage, which will require at least 3 initial mana sources or a Karakas to bounce the Thalia. Unfortunately he uses the Pridemage to destroy my Lion's Eye Diamond and quickly ends the game. He tells me later he topdecked the Deathrite Shaman (which prevented 6 total damage) and I debate on whether or not it would have been better to Brainstorm for a larger Empty the Warrens on turn 2.

Loss (1-2)


In your round 3 game 3 against Maverick, is there a reason you didn't just go land > Brainstorm? If you hit Dark Ritual or Rite or Petal+Petal or Probe+LED or Tutor+Dark Ritual+LED or Wish+Rite+Rite or Wish+Rite+LED or Wish+LED+LED, suddenly you have a far more viable 10/12/14/14/14/14/14/14 Goblins, respectively. While those might be narrow outs, I think 8 Goblins has such low odds of getting there that you have to just get greedy and try for the big hit of Brainstorm. (Odds of Brainstorm hitting Dark Ritual/Rite is 35.2%, not factoring the combo hits, if anyone is really curious I could crunch the numbers of all the outcomes, but I estimate it to be close to 40%, which feels way better than 8 Goblins). EDIT: Your top 3 were Dark Ritual, LED and Infernal Tutor, so you could've had 14 Goblins, hindsight's 20/20

All 3 routes are wrong here. Considering that you have 3 IMS here and a RoF in hand, any RoF, DR, Petal in the top 3 creates 12 goblins rather than 8 (not to talk about options like LED, Probe or stuff in the top 3 which present even more options). The fact that you don't want to brainstorm-lock yourself here, using the land to cast the blue instant (while having the Mox in your hand, which you might want to shuffle away if the cards drawn with BS are not good enough aka "un-mulligan"), leaves only one option: play Fetch, drop Petal, sac Petal for blue, Brainstorm.



Off-topic: I wanted to touch base with everyone about the Shardless BUG matchup. Taking the stock list as reference, I'm inclined to board out Empty the Warrens and one of the 3 Chrome Moxen, due to sweepers, and the general slowness of the matchup. From there, I board in Tendrils of Agony, for the natural lines (very relevant, as Shardless has little defense from it, also solves splash Meddling Mage), but from there I'm unsure what is a good 2nd slot. I'm between Chain of Vapor to hedge against Null Rod/Meddling Mage, or Pithing Needle to curb Lilliana/DRS/Wasteland/Jace. I'm leaning towards Chain, because you can win quickly enough to stop planeswalkers/DRS/Wasteland from beating you a lot more often than you can beat a Meddling Mage or Null Rod and giving Shardless time to accrue advantage seems like one of the ways to lose, so the card facilitating the fastest wins seems best.

I don't know why you are talking about Meddling Mage in BUG. I'm also not too afraid of the Deluges as they took the spot of Charms in most lists i saw lately which they often can't cast in time or in response to Therapy's Flashback, which should affect the previous suggested switch of EtW -> ToA you can still find in Bryant's SB guide. Other than that I can see that you might want to board out a Ponder and the 3rd Mox for something like Needles or Pyroblast (depending in your SB choices of course) to block DRS, Lilianas, Wastelands or to combat their blue drawengines

[Pelikanudo]

This was done about 3-4 years ago in ANT frequently. it worked. kind of. also before terminus and before common karakas play.

people see this line now.

Talk about DD in the DD thread please.

Not here

it is a proposal for TES deck, therefore it is correct in here its place.
Thanks

[Lemnear]

it is a proposal for TES deck, therefore it is correct in here its place.
Thanks

Is this the proposal for a certain number of Doomsdays, and the Shelldock-Combo in the SB?

[Asthereal]

it is a proposal for TES deck, therefore it is correct in here its place.
Thanks
It wasn't. Someone mentioned he was considering moving to ANT because he lost to Miracles all the time, and he felt ANT had the better chance in that particular matchup. I responded by saying Doomsday would probably have an even better chance against Miracles. Afterweards a discussion started that I tried to stop, because it was of course off topic.

We can, however, go into detail on the idea of adding a Doomsday to the sideboard of TES. It's a valid choice if we run 12 cantrips, but it also asks for an Ideas Unbound or Meditate somewhere in the 75, which would be somewhat costly considering the little space we have to fool around with.

[Lemnear]

It wasn't. Someone mentioned he was considering moving to ANT because he lost to Miracles all the time, and he felt ANT had the better chance in that particular matchup. I responded by saying Doomsday would probably have an even better chance against Miracles. Afterweards a discussion started that I tried to stop, because it was of course off topic.

We can, however, go into detail on the idea of adding a Doomsday to the sideboard of TES. It's a valid choice if we run 12 cantrips, but it also asks for an Ideas Unbound or Meditate somewhere in the 75, which would be somewhat costly considering the little space we have to fool around with.

I have tried that months ago (The SB Doomsday and switching out a single MB cantrip for Ideas Unbound, not the lets-lose-to-stifle-or-wasteland-or-karakas-Emrakul-plan) and it wasn't really adressing any existing problems.

The matchup isn't good for storm, but I'm sure if both players have average draws, its possible to "bleed out" Miracles in some games and win the match. You don't have to start every game on the draw against T1 Top, T2 Counterbalance with FoW backup and lose to it due to not finding a Decay or getting mauled by a T3/4 Clique. Pushing yourself and the deck in this matchup too much is doomed to fail. If you still need additional help in addition to the 4 SB dedicated for that matchup, you can still choose to add the xantids in that matchup or rebuild the SB towards combating Miracles.

I don't see a leap in the matchup just by switching to another storm-variant, rather than playing colorless-12-post (not to confuse with MUD) which I tend to do to annoy Miracles ;D

[mario91234]

4-1'd split t4 at redcaps corner. Lost to a miracles. G3 on play thoughtseize see only fluster and anti-empty cards. Take fluster. Next turn setup brainstorm/led/probe/nauseum. See a 2nd fluster. Lose.

Beat jund, manaless w/counters, miracles, and elves. Played my list w a top over the sb blood moon. Top was good. Going forward, im thinking of cutting the swarms since miracle opponents consistently have removal for them. Looking to add 3rd decay and 2nd top.

I will admit thatplaying the non-city list is optimal for the top plan.

[Pelikanudo]

Is this the proposal for a certain number of Doomsdays, and the Shelldock-Combo in the SB?

this was what I proposed for a TES:

Regarding beating miracles:
you all say its true - beating a God hand from miracles is almost imposible., definately its not a match I like to see - I enjoy the match up the most!, also the pilots who play it are very good players in my meta...

A thing I could do related to the DD. is: having 2 DD in side plus Emrakul and Sheldock Island (4 extra slots - you can take out maybe decays and other stuff)so on 2nd and 3rd game you just can side 1DD+S.I+Emralkul so you have the option to wish and I.T. for DD which is 2 mana less than A.N.

Also assuming Karakas is not drawn by Miracles. and that opponent will not be able to terminus on our turn. - the first scenarios is less likely to occur.

I just didnt tryied this, but you're rithg when you say that DD is just better as its a 3 mana cost alsobut needs a specific pile vs c.b. and Emrakul is the most effective.
I'm not sure if this can work but is 2 less mana tan other engine and once you played the DD, opp. has 2 more turns vs S.I or die!

If someone could just test this could be great!

[Lemnear]

this was what I proposed for a TES:

Regarding beating miracles:
you all say its true - beating a God hand from miracles is almost imposible., definately its not a match I like to see - I enjoy the match up the most!, also the pilots who play it are very good players in my meta...

A thing I could do related to the DD. is: having 2 DD in side plus Emrakul and Sheldock Island (4 extra slots - you can take out maybe decays and other stuff)so on 2nd and 3rd game you just can side 1DD+S.I+Emralkul so you have the option to wish and I.T. for DD which is 2 mana less than A.N.

Also assuming Karakas is not drawn by Miracles. and that opponent will not be able to terminus on our turn. - the first scenarios is less likely to occur.

I just didnt tryied this, but you're rithg when you say that DD is just better as its a 3 mana cost alsobut needs a specific pile vs c.b. and Emrakul is the most effective.
I'm not sure if this can work but is 2 less mana tan other engine and once you played the DD, opp. has 2 more turns vs S.I or die!

If someone could just test this could be great!

Let me set this straight: you want to remove Ad Nauseam and EtW (Because of terminus) in your MB for the Emrakul (vulnerable to Terminus + Karakas) and 3cc setup spells because you wanna gamble against SDT/Ponder/Brainstorm finding one of these outs within 2 turns with Emrakul not entering the battlefield before turn 3 in 97% of all cases? Is that correct?

[Bryant Cook]

4-1'd split t4 at redcaps corner. Lost to a miracles. G3 on play thoughtseize see only fluster and anti-empty cards. Take fluster. Next turn setup brainstorm/led/probe/nauseum. See a 2nd fluster. Lose.

Beat jund, manaless w/counters, miracles, and elves. Played my list w a top over the sb blood moon. Top was good. Going forward, im thinking of cutting the swarms since miracle opponents consistently have removal for them. Looking to add 3rd decay and 2nd top.

I will admit thatplaying the non-city list is optimal for the top plan.

You shouldn't be siding in Xantids versus Miracles anyway. It seems like a lot of your issues are in understanding match-ups. Also, how the hell is Top good in a deck that wants to win turn 1/2? This is what frustrates me about you Mario. It's the same concept that you had with your Deathrite Shaman idea a few months ago, you keep adding in midrange concepts into a fast deck. It's not where you would like to be.

[mario91234]

I stopped bringing them in bryant. You were right. If i could have t1-2 hands consistently in sideboarded games through protection i would absolutely agree w you. The deck isn't consistent in that aspect. Top completely sucks if your only land is gold, but on 1 landers you are in a rough spot vs miracles anyhow. I was able to beat miracles solely through amassing better cards. I feel that exclusively in the miracles match, we need a backup plan in case our opener cant jam. Having top+decay accomplishes that better than needle+decay.

Actually, i think duress makes the deck more midrangey than silence does. I need my protection spells to always help me go off, not sometimes.

[Bryant Cook]

I stopped bringing them in bryant. You were right. If i could have t1-2 hands consistently in sideboarded games through protection i would absolutely agree w you. The deck isn't consistent in that aspect. Top completely sucks if your only land is gold, but on 1 landers you are in a rough spot vs miracles anyhow. I was able to beat miracles solely through amassing better cards. I feel that exclusively in the miracles match, we need a backup plan in case our opener cant jam. Having top+decay accomplishes that better than needle+decay.

Actually, i think duress makes the deck more midrangey than silence does. I need my protection spells to always help me go off, not sometimes.

You sideboard out one to two copies of Chrome Mox in that match to ensure a higher card quality, while not slowing down the deck to a halt using poor cards like Sensei's Divining Top in a deck with admittedly, not a lot of shuffle effects and Gemstone Mine which shouldn't be used for rearranging cards. Our back-up plan should be to grind them down with storm cards that are applicable in other match-ups while not hindering the deck, if we don't happen to have Pithing Needle or Abrupt Decay.

Your statement about Duress is ridiculous and further proves that you are having a tough time understanding the fundamentals of the deck. Duress along with Cabal Therapy actually make us faster as they reduce the colored mana requirement of our combo turn.

[mario91234]

I actually just bring out every mox. Sure, duress does improve speed. I don't value speed as highly as you do in the deck and it reflects in my play.

[Bryant Cook]

I actually just bring out every mox. Sure, duress does improve speed. I don't value speed as highly as you do in the deck and it reflects in my play.

Do you not plan on ever resolving a lethal Ad Nauseam? You might actually just be playing into their game too much by slowing yourself down to the point where they have gained too much of an upper hand.

You're right, it does reflect in your play.

[wonderPreaux]

I don't know why you are talking about Meddling Mage in BUG. I'm also not too afraid of the Deluges as they took the spot of Charms in most lists i saw lately which they often can't cast in time or in response to Therapy's Flashback, which should affect the previous suggested switch of EtW -> ToA you can still find in Bryant's SB guide. Other than that I can see that you might want to board out a Ponder and the 3rd Mox for something like Needles or Pyroblast (depending in your SB choices of course) to block DRS, Lilianas, Wastelands or to combat their blue drawengines

While I do understand and agree with the dynamic of Deluge over Golgari Charm that you mentioned, Meddling Mage in Shardless BUG is a thing. Savannah in the SB to power Meddling Mage is something Lejay popularized, I ran into it last night (playing against Lejay), and it does pop up once in a while. I might try the Pithing Needles next time, leaning on maindeck Tendrils to beat possible Meddling Mage, if I had Pyroblast they'd really shine though.

[DireNTropy]

I'd love to see at least 1 Pithing Needle in the SB of that deck, Needle has been nothing but good to me in testing, no matter how many colors I run. Have you really been alright with no Gemstones and 3 Burning Wish only? I'm unsure myself on how many Gemstone to run in 3c, but I'm not sure I'd ever cut Wishes, love to see them most of the time.

I have tried running Pithing Needle in place of Surgical Extraction and I think the choice may be dependent on the metagame. Surgical Extraction is stronger against Reanimator, Rogue Hermit (on the draw), and various dredge strategies, whereas Pithing Needle is stronger against Belcher, Wasteland + Deathrite Shaman decks, and Miracles. I think we already have positive matchups against Wasteland and Deathrite Shaman decks, and many cards are already being boarded in against Miracles.

I have found little difference in consistency between running 4 fetchlands over 4 Gemstone Mines, with the downside that a Badlands may be necessary in the maindeck. Running 4 additional fetchlands helps against Wasteland decks as you can play the fetchland and pass to have 2 lands available on the next turn, in addition to the obvious benefits of having additional shuffle effects with cantrips. I would probably run Scalding Tarn over Polluted Delta to try to disguise as Sneak and Show/Tempo, but I prefer the old frame.

I haven't had any trouble finding a business spell with 3 Burning Wish + 3 Infernal Tutor, and I think the Cabal Rituals in the maindeck are required to consistently find Ad Nauseam through Burning Wish + Infernal Tutor as well as bolstering the Past in Flames plan. I could go down to 6 discard, as Burning Wish can act as a very slow hand disruption spell, but I've been happy with 6 tutors.


In your round 3 game 3 against Maverick, is there a reason you didn't just go land > Brainstorm? If you hit Dark Ritual or Rite or Petal+Petal or Probe+LED or Tutor+Dark Ritual+LED or Wish+Rite+Rite or Wish+Rite+LED or Wish+LED+LED, suddenly you have a far more viable 10/12/14/14/14/14/14/14 Goblins, respectively. While those might be narrow outs, I think 8 Goblins has such low odds of getting there that you have to just get greedy and try for the big hit of Brainstorm. (Odds of Brainstorm hitting Dark Ritual/Rite is 35.2%, not factoring the combo hits, if anyone is really curious I could crunch the numbers of all the outcomes, but I estimate it to be close to 40%, which feels way better than 8 Goblins). EDIT: Your top 3 were Dark Ritual, LED and Infernal Tutor, so you could've had 14 Goblins, hindsight's 20/20, but I would've used the Brainstorm to try and go turn 1.

All 3 routes are wrong here. Considering that you have 3 IMS here and a RoF in hand, any RoF, DR, Petal in the top 3 creates 12 goblins rather than 8 (not to talk about options like LED, Probe or stuff in the top 3 which present even more options). The fact that you don't want to brainstorm-lock yourself here, using the land to cast the blue instant (while having the Mox in your hand, which you might want to shuffle away if the cards drawn with BS are not good enough aka "un-mulligan"), leaves only one option: play Fetch, drop Petal, sac Petal for blue, Brainstorm.

After the Brainstorm, assuming no LED + cantrip (roughly 8% of finding this combination) was hit off of the brainstorm, I would have one IMS (land or Petal) + 4 cards in hand, two likely being a Rite of Flame and an Empty the Warrens with the option of having a guaranteed Chrome Mox. Therefore, in order to cast the Empty the Warrens on turn 1 I would have to find +2 mana, so Rite of Flame, 2x Lotus Petal, and Dark Ritual work, which (if my math is correct), comes out to roughly 38% (16% to see 1 out of 3 Rite of Flame out of 54 cards, 2% to find 2 out of 3 Lotus Petals assuming no Rite of Flame, and 22% to find Dark Ritual assuming no Rite of Flame), to make 10-12 goblins on turn 1. In order to cast a tutor I would need +4 mana in addition to finding the tutor, which would be difficult (turns out my top 3 cards were just that, but I think this is a low % play).

Of course, doing these calculations would be impractical during an actual game, but your approximation was close, about 45% to make 10-12 goblins if we used Brainstorm on turn 1, which may be better than gambling on 8 goblins turn 1 (which loses to turn 1 Deathrite Shaman/turn 2 Stoneforge Mystic, barring sweepers, which would beat any number of goblins). In figuring out whether to use the Lotus Petal or fetchland, I think that using the Lotus Petal has a higher upside, but has the potential of resulting in a hand which has no action on turn 2 (a loss due to Thalia). This is highly unlikely though and using the Lotus Petal probably gives the best probability of a guaranteed turn 2 win.

EDIT: Math

[Pelikanudo]

Let me set this straight: you want to remove Ad Nauseam and EtW (Because of terminus) in your MB for the Emrakul (vulnerable to Terminus + Karakas) and 3cc setup spells because you wanna gamble against SDT/Ponder/Brainstorm finding one of these outs within 2 turns with Emrakul not entering the battlefield before turn 3 in 97% of all cases? Is that correct?

Exactly.
pros:
- you reduce the average mana cost of threats in 2 , regarding A.N via I.T. and B.W. to X so you'll be quicker than ever. Ex.: Land+Rite+B.W.+LED.
- it avoids Conterspell effects once you have the setup.
- avoids etherswornn canonist
- I believe that can be an alternative plan vs other decks, Ex.: Blade Control.

Cons as said:
- Emrakul + Shelldock Island + 1DD needs to go to main on 2nd and 3rd match ups.
- vulnerable to Karakas or 3rd turn Terminus only in your turn.
- not sure if a M.M. naming Emrakul will ruin the plan also, I think so.
- Taking out EtW and A.N. main, the 3rd card could be ponder. (sure you take out A.N, but the virtual mana is 5 for I.T. and B.W.!)

I'm not saying I would play this, or it's the key to beat miracles but It's something I'd like to test vs miracles to see if it works.
can you guarantee that this does not work vs miracles?

I remember the Era when played DD and won a tournament, I had Emrakul main, and that time people was surprised about that plan, won some other tournaments and a friend of mine too. but next times we even removed Emrakul for 2 reasons: a) people finally expected Emrakul. b) is the worst card you can draw. I dont think a) occurs by the moment.

[Lemnear]

I have tried running Pithing Needle in place of Surgical Extraction and I think the choice may be dependent on the metagame. Surgical Extraction is stronger against Reanimator, Rogue Hermit (on the draw), and various dredge strategies, whereas Pithing Needle is stronger against Belcher, Wasteland + Deathrite Shaman decks, and Miracles. I think we already have positive matchups against Wasteland and Deathrite Shaman decks, and many cards are already being boarded in against Miracles.


of course it is. You may choose to run Pyroblast if your meta is suited for them.

I have found little difference in consistency between running 4 fetchlands over 4 Gemstone Mines, with the downside that a Badlands may be necessary in the maindeck. Running 4 additional fetchlands helps against Wasteland decks as you can play the fetchland and pass to have 2 lands available on the next turn, in addition to the obvious benefits of having additional shuffle effects with cantrips. I would probably run Scalding Tarn over Polluted Delta to try to disguise as Sneak and Show/Tempo, but I prefer the old frame.


who runs Delta anyways? It's the worst Fetchland for TES in terms of disguising. Badland is a horrible land to start the game with. I see the idea of casting discard turn 1 and accelerating with RoF into Wish off a single land, but that scenario is far more limited than being able to cantrip with your only land into a second, to not only achieve a similar color-access, but also more initial mana sources which are required anyways, if your Rituals/RoF and Infernals/Wishes are not all of the same color. To test the impact you can create a tally sheet and draw random 6 with the idea that the 7th card is the Badland and see how many times you wish it has an Island-subtype compared to the times it is relevant for producing RB ALONE

I haven't had any trouble finding a business spell with 3 Burning Wish + 3 Infernal Tutor, and I think the Cabal Rituals in the maindeck are required to consistently find Ad Nauseam through Burning Wish + Infernal Tutor as well as bolstering the Past in Flames plan. I could go down to 6 discard, as Burning Wish can act as a very slow hand disruption spell, but I've been happy with 6 tutors.


no one said you have to cast Wish and Infernal in one turn. PIF works with 3+ Rituals/RoF which aren't too hard to accumulate. Cabal Ritual is nice, don't get me wrong, but you need two red mana to pay for PIF & the Wish for ToA (3 red if you need to grab EtW if stormcount isn't high enough or Leyline of Sanctity is in play). Cabal Ritual doesn't help you to pay for all the red mana required.

After the Brainstorm, assuming no LED + cantrip (roughly 8% of finding this combination) was hit off of the brainstorm, I would have one IMS (land or Petal) + 4 cards in hand, two likely being a Rite of Flame and an Empty the Warrens with the option of having a guaranteed Chrome Mox. Therefore, in order to cast the Empty the Warrens on turn 1 I would have to find +2 mana, so Rite of Flame, 2x Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual + black card work, which (if my math is correct), comes out to roughly 30% (16% to see 1 out of 3 Rite of Flame out of 54 cards, 2% to find 2 out of 3 Lotus Petals assuming no Rite of Flame, and 12% to find Dark Ritual + black card assuming no Rite of Flame), to make 10-12 goblins on turn 1. In order to cast a tutor I would need +4 mana in addition to finding the tutor, which would be difficult (turns out my top 3 cards were just that, but I think this is a low % play).

Of course, doing these calculations would be impractical during an actual game, but your approximation was close, about 40% to make 10-12 goblins if we used Brainstorm on turn 1, which may be better than gambling on 8 goblins turn 1 (which loses to turn 1 Deathrite Shaman/turn 2 Stoneforge Mystic, barring sweepers, which would beat any number of goblins). In figuring out whether to use the Lotus Petal or fetchland, I think that using the Lotus Petal has a higher upside, but has the potential of resulting in a hand which has no action on turn 2 (a loss due to Thalia). This is highly unlikely though and using the Lotus Petal probably gives the best probability of a guaranteed turn 2 win.


I was wrong about drawing 1 Petal as an out. You are on the play here, so even a turn 2 combo would be fine in case the brainstorm doesn't really help and you want to shift to a more stable, long-term gameplan (like drawing lands) and therefore shuffle the Mox back. Why do you need an additional black card in your Brainstorm if you can imprint the RoF into the Mox, fetch for U.Sea, cast Ritual and have your BBBR for EtW? Did I miss something?

[Tammit67]

I was able to beat miracles solely through amassing better cards. I feel that exclusively in the miracles match, we need a backup plan in case our opener cant jam. Having top+decay accomplishes that better than needle+decay.

I can't agree with the bolded statement. You can't amass better cards when you let them find their permanent based hate easier and/or let them float counterspells on top and/or resolve EoT entreat. If you want to amass better cards, let your cantrips do the work, don't fight them on the axis they are arguably the best deck in the format for fighting on. You aren't going to out-top the best sensei's divining top deck in the format, that's ridiculous.


Actually, i think duress makes the deck more midrangey than silence does. I need my protection spells to always help me go off, not sometimes.

I have no idea what you are talking about. If you are saying duress is slower, that's demonstratively false when you consider the color requirements for the combo turn. if you are saying duress is a lasting solution to counters, sure whatever. that does not mean we are midrange and aren't looking to kill people at the earliest possible opportunity. If you are finding the tradeoff on color requirements isn't worth blanket answering everything then stick with silence. I'm not finding them useful personally.

[DireNTropy]

who runs Delta anyways? It's the worst Fetchland for TES in terms of disguising. Badland is a horrible land to start the game with. I see the idea of casting discard turn 1 and accelerating with RoF into Wish off a single land, but that scenario is far more limited than being able to cantrip with your only land into a second, to not only achieve a similar color-access, but also more initial mana sources which are required anyways, if your Rituals/RoF and Infernals/Wishes are not all of the same color. To test the impact you can create a tally sheet and draw random 6 with the idea that the 7th card is the Badland and see how many times you wish it has an Island-subtype compared to the times it is relevant for producing RB ALONE

I agree that having a Badlands as the only land in your opening 7 is terrible. My argument is that the likelihood that Badlands is your only land (and in this case, it's replacing a Chrome Mox, which is arguably worse), may be less than the likelihood that you would want a fetchland to produce black mana on the current turn and then red mana on the combo turn. The benefit to running a Badlands increases with the number of fetchlands and I have not decided whether or not it's worth the risk of not being able to cantrip on turn 1 (I have had to mulligan a couple of hands for this reason).

It also provides a slight benefit against Wasteland as a third land, since a single Wasteland cannot completely cut off of a color.


no one said you have to cast Wish and Infernal in one turn. PIF works with 3+ Rituals/RoF which aren't too hard to accumulate. Cabal Ritual is nice, don't get me wrong, but you need two red mana to pay for PIF & the Wish for ToA (3 red if you need to grab EtW if stormcount isn't high enough or Leyline of Sanctity is in play). Cabal Ritual doesn't help you to pay for all the red mana required.

I often cast Burning Wish for Infernal Tutor and then pass the turn, but of course it's better to combo on the same turn. Cabal Ritual also helps with discard heavy matchups where it may be the only ritual you have in your hand and adding +3 mana is great value. However, Cabal Ritual is definitely the first ritual effect to be cut from the deck.


I was wrong about drawing 1 Petal as an out. You are on the play here, so even a turn 2 combo would be fine in case the brainstorm doesn't really help and you want to shift to a more stable, long-term gameplan (like drawing lands) and therefore shuffle the Mox back. Why do you need an additional black card in your Brainstorm if you can imprint the RoF into the Mox, fetch for U.Sea, cast Ritual and have your BBBR for EtW? Did I miss something?

You are right, a single Dark Ritual is enough. That raises the probability of a successful brainstorm to roughly 46%. I think the Brainstorm play is probably the best play in that it gives you a decent chance to win on turn 1, while also providing setup for a longer game.

[Lemnear]

Exactly.
pros:
- you reduce the average mana cost of threats in 2 , regarding A.N via I.T. and B.W. to X so you'll be quicker than ever. Ex.: Land+Rite+B.W.+LED.
- it avoids Conterspell effects once you have the setup.
- avoids etherswornn canonist
- I believe that can be an alternative plan vs other decks, Ex.: Blade Control.


Dood, asuming to get the BBB Sorcery resolved without resistance is one thing, but gambling against Wasteland in Blade Decks is another. Speed is also pretty relative if you have to pass a turn to draw Shelldock and another one to untap it.

Cons as said:
- Emrakul + Shelldock Island + 1DD needs to go to main on 2nd and 3rd match ups.
- vulnerable to Karakas or 3rd turn Terminus only in your turn.
- not sure if a M.M. naming Emrakul will ruin the plan also, I think so.
- Taking out EtW and A.N. main, the 3rd card could be ponder. (sure you take out A.N, but the virtual mana is 5 for I.T. and B.W.!)


you forgot Wasteland, Needle, Jace, Liliana, Detention Sphere, Stifle, etc.

I'm not saying I would play this, or it's the key to beat miracles but It's something I'd like to test vs miracles to see if it works.
can you guarantee that this does not work vs miracles?


"guarantee" is a big word. You should have gathered enough experience yourself to realize, that Miracles is indeed able to sweep a T1 goblin ambush, but in the case of Doomsday, we are talking about a virtual 3-turn-clock instead of the usual 2 goblin-swings to kill your opponent and this time you can't even finish the job with Grapeshot or a small Tendrils. Both EtW and Doomsday are very commiting for a play which is the usual prey of miracles (overextending aggro).

I remember the Era when played DD and won a tournament, I had Emrakul main, and that time people was surprised about that plan, won some other tournaments and a friend of mine too. but next times we even removed Emrakul for 2 reasons: a) people finally expected Emrakul. b) is the worst card you can draw. I dont think a) occurs by the moment.

[Bryant Cook]

The opening post has been updated.

[CabalTherapy]

I changed fronts yesterday and played TES for the first time after having some good results with ANT.
I sleeved up the 75 from the OP and went into mighty 4 rounds of action.

Round 1 burg Delver
I am on the draw in the first game and he thinks I am on Grixis Delver and keeps accordingly. He lands Deathrite via Tropical and says go. I can look at his hand with Gitaxian Probe and see nothing relevant. At this point I have Ad Nauseam and 2 LEDs in hand with the Brainstorm/Probe setup but manage to get there with additional 2 Probes after the Brainstorm, 2 Lotus Petals, 2 LEDs and Burning Wish for Tendrils. In the next two games he manages to assamble pretty powerful hands, where I draw mana sources. In the third game there was a situation where he had a flipped Delver and three cards in hand (one of which I knew was Spell Pierce), and I had some mana, Infernal and Wish but unfortunately Wish on Thoughseize was not possible due to not enough mana for Infernal > Burning Wish > Tendrils, and EtW wasn't an option. Up to this point I had just one Tutor and drew the Infernal from top, so I guess a earlier tutor for Thoughtseize wasn't a solid either.
I boarded nothing in game 2 and in game 3 2 Xantid Swarms. Not sure about that but I thought of giving it a try.
1:2
0-1

Round 2 Zoo
Easy MU where my opponent scooped to my second turn 14 dudes in the first game. In the next one, he burned me down to one life while I had just some cantrips and mana sources. I went for Brainstorm > found shit and Ponder > Ponder > Brainstorm and hit a Burning Wish which allowed a straight Tendrils kill.
Again, I boarded nothing.
2:0
1-1

Round 3 BWg Bladedeck (not sure how to call this)
I think that I went for a fast Ad Nauseam and killed him with Tendrils. In the next game the deck felt like a carddisadvantage machine because I cantripped into shit, had to shuffle and drew shitty cards like Rite of Flame or Chrome Mox while he had Ethersworn Canonist and Mother of Runes. In game three I managed to kill him with Ad Nauseam from 16 life without mana floating.
2:1
2-1

Round 4 MUD
I can storm him out in my second turn on the play with him having only a Glimmerpost (or something like that) in play. Ad Neauseam got there.
Then he sideboards nothing and slamms his cards onto the table: Chalice 1, Trinisphere and Lodestone Golem = gg. I had 2 Abrupt Decays here but opted to move to the main deck constellation for the decisive match. A fast AdN should be the key in this MU on the play. Or a good loard of discard against his hate permanents. In fact, he took mulligan down to 2!!! and I can combo him out easily with a solid AdN on turn 3.
2:1
3-1

Well, this was my first TES experience. I can see this deck well-positioned if people start slamming their GSZs, where the combo player is in need to win fast. Nevertheless, sometimes TES just discards cards because Chrome Mox is a necessary evil shit and the density of draws with weak mana accelerators (single RoF, Moxen or even multiple Petals without a business spell or a solid win) was fairly frequent. Certainly a fun deck to play and tougher to play than ANT. This assumption is true because in my opinion the difference between the complexity level is caused by TES playing weaker cards therefore the kill is sometimes harder to assemble. Past in Flames and the powerhouse Cabal Ritual were missed. Excuse moi for the comparative statement but as a ANT player it is easier to me to evaluate this deck in comparison to the other well-known storm deck. Maybe I will play this pile again.

[Asthereal]

you forgot Wasteland, Needle, Jace, Liliana, Detention Sphere, Stifle, etc.
Actually, Lily, Jace and Detention Sphere effects don't work.
You get to cast Emry, so you get the additional turn, and then annihilate for six.
That's why this plan actually makes some sense. Not in TES, but in DD it does.


Round 3 BWg Bladedeck
That's probably a Deadguy Ale variant: BW Confidant/Stoneforge stuff with Deathrites and sometimes some extra green stuff.

[Lemnear]

Actually, Lily, Jace and Detention Sphere effects don't work.
You get to cast Emry, so you get the additional turn, and then annihilate for six.
That's why this plan actually makes some sense. Not in TES, but in DD it does.

Ah missed the cast-Trigger

[mario91234]

re-read the primer. I understand more about needle's applications. I fear that with the myriad of ways miracles can still interact w/ us via CB/clique/counters, only shutting down one piece of that is narrow. Yes, the primary objective is to win early. Is needle actually more pro-active than more discard in that matchup? In my opinion, the matchup boils down to the following.

On play: you jam t1, or setup for t2-3 provided your opponent only has 1 source of instant speed interaction.
If miracles plays a top, game becomes considerably more difficult as additional discard is practically worthless.

On draw: If miracles has top, t1 is almost a must, discard is a complete dog vs active top. Without top, we can likely assume they have 2 ways to interact. In the latter, discard becomes excellent.

If we are ever in a situation when discard is bad, natural tendrils seems like the only avenue to victory. In the past, we had access to chant effects to compensate for discard's incapability against top. In my understanding, needle gives access to this angle of play against top without playing gold land AND is pro-active. However, needle is incapable of being the sole source of disruption to help us storm off, but paired with discard is potent.

For example, If opponent has one piece of disruption floated on top, they will likely draw it with top then allow needle through. paired with the discard, we will be able to go off that or the following turn.

But, with 2 pieces of disruption, opponent has two avenues. Counter the needle and still be protected (favorable for us if the 2nd piece is not force). or allow top to be shut off and require us to draw 2 more aspects of protection.

This is where my concern comes from and how I can't appropriately value the late-game implication of needling top and not being able to go off. Do our draws become comparably better than miracles since they no longer have sculpted draws?

Please inform me if I've misunderstood. Thanks Bryant

[Lemnear]

re-read the primer. I understand more about needle's applications. I fear that with the myriad of ways miracles can still interact w/ us via CB/clique/counters, only shutting down one piece of that is narrow. Yes, the primary objective is to win early. Is needle actually more pro-active than more discard in that matchup? In my opinion, the matchup boils down to the following.

On play: you jam t1, or setup for t2-3 provided your opponent only has 1 source of instant speed interaction.
If miracles plays a top, game becomes considerably more difficult as additional discard is practically worthless.

On draw: If miracles has top, t1 is almost a must, discard is a complete dog vs active top. Without top, we can likely assume they have 2 ways to interact. In the latter, discard becomes excellent.

If we are ever in a situation when discard is bad, natural tendrils seems like the only avenue to victory. In the past, we had access to chant effects to compensate for discard's incapability against top. In my understanding, needle gives access to this angle of play against top without playing gold land AND is pro-active. However, needle is incapable of being the sole source of disruption to help us storm off, but paired with discard is potent.

For example, If opponent has one piece of disruption floated on top, they will likely draw it with top then allow needle through. paired with the discard, we will be able to go off that or the following turn.

But, with 2 pieces of disruption, opponent has two avenues. Counter the needle and still be protected (favorable for us if the 2nd piece is not force). or allow top to be shut off and require us to draw 2 more aspects of protection.

This is where my concern comes from and how I can't appropriately value the late-game implication of needling top and not being able to go off. Do our draws become comparably better than miracles since they no longer have sculpted draws?

Please inform me if I've misunderstood. Thanks Bryant

You render their card-quality machine AND their counterbalance-lock useless ... permanent ... for one colorless. It's not that Miracles is a one-trick-pony and was EVER a victim to a single card from storm, but if you manage to keep their CB-lock and SDT under control, you can grind them out of counters as they can stumble over a lot of shitty natural draws like endless lands or Miracles.

[Bryant Cook]

This is where my concern comes from and how I can't appropriately value the late-game implication of needling top and not being able to go off. Do our draws become comparably better than miracles since they no longer have sculpted draws?

Please inform me if I've misunderstood. Thanks Bryant

You need to stop focusing on the long game against Miracles, while we can beat them there if need be, it's not about creating better draws over time. It's about ensuring that they don't have the right cards at the right moment, which is part of the hiding cards from discard spells factor. They're essentially allowed to have a ten card hand with a top in play, Needle is there to limit access to this additional, extra hand.

[Pelikanudo]

Ah missed the cast-Trigger
What Asthereal said is what I meant.

Terminus only in the turn Emrakul is casted.
no Jace, no Lili, no D.Sphere.

anyway I just was considering options to handle Miracles.
maybe I'll give it a try and let you know... I'm happy to play again DD!

if you were going to put in I.U. main where you would put it, instead of what? maybe I just dont use I.U....

[Lemnear]

What Asthereal said is what I meant.

Terminus only in the turn Emrakul is casted.
no Jace, no Lili, no D.Sphere.

anyway I just was considering options to handle Miracles.
maybe I'll give it a try and let you know... I'm happy to play again DD!

if you were going to put in I.U. main where you would put it, instead of what? maybe I just dont use I.U....

I replaced a Ponder in these lists

[Asthereal]

I replaced a Ponder in these lists
If I were to add Doomsday to a TES list, I'd play a 13 land version with 2x Chrome Mox.
That gives a slot for main deck Ideas Unbound.
Cutting a Ponder would make sense, but we need a cantrip to make a Doomsday kill work.
Cutting one makes a Doomsday kill less likely.

The main disadvantage of trying to play Doomsday in TES is that TES usually wants to actually cast its cantrips as fast as possible, in order to sculpt a hand that blows up on turn two. Sandbagging cantrips may lead to not doing anything for three turns or so, which is of course a pretty bad idea. Doomsday lists run Top, 16+ lands and a couple of extra cantrips, so they get to sculpt a hand while keeping a draw effect online for when they want to go off. It just works better that way.

So going out of our way to get Doomsday to work in TES seems like it would only weaken the main game plan. Still, I'll give it a shot sometimes, just to see how often I actually get the DD kill to work, and whether that might in some metas compensate for the reduced effectiveness of our main game plan.

PS. Emry+Shelldock in a TES shell not only costs two additional sideboard slots, because getting Doomsday in there costs another (and maybe two if you want to be able to play it main deck), and it costs a main deck slot for the Ideas Unbound. So you need to at least make four slots available in the 75. I don't see how we can pull that off without seriously weakening other matchups. And that's without even arguing whether Emry+Shelldock would actually be such an improvement. It might work just as well as 2-3 Peedles on side. That requires extensive testing, and if it does help increase our chances against Miracles with say 5%, is it worth it making the deck worse against the rest? I don't think it is.

[Lemnear]

In all honest, I tested a sole SB Doomsday without the Shelldock or Emrakul and decided to cut a Ponder in Order to not damaging my Ad Nauseams by removing a Mox for a dead 2cc card.

It failed and I burried the idea. I have no interrest in discussing Doomsday + Emrakul in spot of Ad Nauseam for slow control matchups as both paths have the same problems as is "get the card in your hand and cast it without it getting countered". It's the same angle just with more dead draws in the deck and I bet within a page of discussion there would be the talk of about how how good SDT is with Doomsday. In short: there IS already a Doomsday thread

[Asthereal]

I have no interrest in discussing Doomsday + Emrakul in spot of Ad Nauseam for slow control matchups as both paths have the same problems as is "get the card in your hand and cast it without it getting countered". It's the same angle just with more dead draws in the deck and I bet within a page of discussion there would be the talk of about how how good SDT is with Doomsday. In short: there IS already a Doomsday thread
More or less what I said in my PS.
It costs too many slots for very little chance of improving just one matchup.
If one feels Emry+Shelldock is needed, that one is probably better off switch decks.

[wonderPreaux]

@Bryant: I looked over the updated opening post, and I want to ask about a few of the matchups mentioned

Miracles: You mentioned in an earlier post that you sided out a Cabal Therapy when you sided in Tendrils of Agony for Miracles, in the OP it suggests another Ponder can be sided out when making room for a storm card. Is there a particular scenario where you'd want more Ponders versus more Therapies? I think if I'm bringing in Grapeshot, for instance if I see Canonist or Meddling Mage, I would want to side out Therapy because the Grapeshot is more if a removal spell than a business spell (you can natural Tendrils, probably can't natural Grapeshot, lol) and I wouldn't want to have too many cards that just answer/discard things. With Tendrils, I could see it going either way, since Tendrils is another business spell that's resilient to counters and it can be supported by both Therapy and Ponder.

Esperblade: I'm curious how well EtW works for you postboard. Since Ad Nauseam is typically so strong against control, does that option feel weaker when you're carrying along 2 cmc 4 storm cards, as well as Abrupt Decay? Also, given the higher likelihood of various sweepers (I've seen all kinds of stuff out of Esperblade), is EtW a go-to play like it would be against Delver decks, or is it just another win-con to help play through Meddling Mage and Surgical Extraction? Against UWR Delver, where Ad Nauseam is less effective and sweepers are less likely (but still possible), this boarding plan seems crystal clear, I'm just wondering how it interacts with Esperblade.

Burn: Should Burn be treated like DnT style decks, or possibly get it's own reference? Eidolon really changed the way the matchup plays out, and even if EtW is somewhat risky, I'd rather get something down before Eidolon than try for a natural storm chain or something like that after Eidolon. Whats also interesting is that EtW deadens their Eidolon, because once the Burn player is behind on board, Eidolon becomes a liability.

Storm: Is there a particular situation where siding in PiF is the optimal choice in the spot EtW occupies? I typically bring in the Infernal Tutor for speed's sake, and if I see Surgical Extraction I opt for Tendrils of Agony instead. I hadn't thought of maining the PiF, and the situations I can think of where it'd be useful would be against TES if they do early pressure with a Goblin all-in and thus you need a win that doesn't use life, or if ANT is on the play and siding Confidants, since you can get hit for damage and then Mind Twisted by Therapies and you can top PiF to bounce back.

Thanks for the updates, I really appreciated all the upkeep you handle for the thread.

[sawatarix]

How good is our Matchup against Tempodecks like RUG Delver or Burg Delver?

I played Burg Delver on thursday at the weekly legacy tournament here in berlin and it was comically easy to beat TES (also have to mention that my opponent was a experienced player who knows what he is doing)
I also had a lot of Testing games against Lemnear and the Matchup felt so miserable for TES.
It seems that TES has a lot of problems fighting taxing counter like spell pierce.
Any ideas how to improve these matchups?

[Lemnear]

How good is our Matchup against Tempodecks like RUG Delver or Burg Delver?

I played Burg Delver on thursday at the weekly legacy tournament here in berlin and it was comically easy to beat TES (also have to mention that my opponent was a experienced player who knows what he is doing)
I also had a lot of Testing games against Lemnear and the Matchup felt so miserable for TES.
It seems that TES has a lot of problems fighting taxing counter like spell pierce.
Any ideas how to improve these matchups?

Have we played a single match this year or since the deck moved to all-discard and 13 lands? Nope. I guess the matchup is less desasterous than before.

[sawatarix]

Silence should be superior to duress against tempo decks so the matchup got even worse i guess

[Lemnear]

Silence should be superior to duress against tempo decks so the matchup got even worse i guess

As you mentioned, the primary Chokepoint is mana. I guess that point improved with not only more lands but also more shuffle effects for BS/Ponder to get rid of crap, being able to blow Wishes aggressively for discard without having to RoF first and no longer need white mana to pay for Silence which was a burden under the pressure of Wasteland.

Moving to ANT yourself, you sure know that all-discard is fine as long as you have enough IMS to maneuver around Daze and Pierce (even with the additional benefit of Cabal Ritual and more lands which are huge against Tempo strategies and often are strong enough to overcome softcounter without the need for Duress or Therapy).

[bennotsi]

Perhaps a stupid question, but: How often do people you play against name Tendrils of Agony against TES when they play Meddling Mage? I don't think it's the best target for them to name, I would probably name Burning Wish in most games, but how often do people name Tendrils?

[Kidbails]

Perhaps a stupid question, but: How often do people you play against name Tendrils of Agony against TES when they play Meddling Mage? I don't think it's the best target for them to name, I would probably name Burning Wish in most games, but how often do people name Tendrils?

It's easier to find a way to remove the Meddling Mage before you cast tendrils of agony than it is to find a way to remove Meddling Mage before you cast Burning Wish or Infernal Tutor (At least in my limited experience). As such, I'd name burning wish as well. This also shuts off 1/2 of the potential goblin lines, as well as PiF or Diminishing Returns (if you run it). Naming tendrils shuts off one of the main win-cons, but it becomes relatively easy to remove at that point with and extra burning wish or chain of vapor from the sideboard.

I'd name burning wish too.

[wonderPreaux]

Goodluck to Royce and Bryant, who i'm assuming are bringing TES to scg Syracuse tomorrow. I'll be keeping an eye out for you guys in the feature matches

[Bryant Cook]

Royce and I were both live for top eight up until round seven of eight. I started off 5-0 and then variance happened pair with a bad match-up, a decent showing.

[wonderPreaux]

Royce and I were both live for top eight up until round seven of eight. I started off 5-0 and then variance happened pair with a bad match-up, a decent showing.

good features at least. were there any interesting matches or highlights off camera? are you heading to dc?

[(nameless one)]

good features at least. were there any interesting matches or highlights off camera? are you heading to dc?

Apparently he beat a MUD player with a Trinisphere

[sawatarix]

Well done Bryant.
I saw your feature match versus shardless bug, why did you board in pithin needle?were you afraid of liliana, engineered explosives or deathrite shaman?
still wondering why

[Bryant Cook]

Well done Bryant.
I saw your feature match versus shardless bug, why did you board in pithin needle?were you afraid of liliana, engineered explosives or deathrite shaman?
still wondering why

Wasteland, Shaman, Lilliana and theoretically their fetchlands. They just have a lot of targets.

My match-ups were:

MUD 2-1
MUD 2-1
BUG Delver 2-1
Shardless BUG 2-1
Lands 2-1
Mono-Red Sneak 1-2 (Ended game three with six lands in play along with a Mox and a LED – Couldn't find a tutor effect)
UWr Delver (See coverage) 1-2
BUG Delver 2-0

It's worth noting, Royce had the same record and finished 19th.

I will likely not be in DC, but I will be at the invitational.

[sawatarix]

But do we care about wasteland, shaman and liliana? i think not at all.

Every card we board out weakens the combo itself and
all we want is to execute the combo as fast as possible against slow decks like shardless bug. like we saw on camera, they don't have always force of will+blue card on turn 1 or 2 so going off very fast is important.
More importantly, what did you board out for the needle(s) ?

[Bryant Cook]

But do we care about wasteland, shaman and liliana? i think not at all.

Every card we board out weakens the combo itself and
all we want is to execute the combo as fast as possible against slow decks like shardless bug. like we saw on camera, they don't have always force of will+blue card on turn 1 or 2 so going off very fast is important.
More importantly, what did you board out for the needle(s) ?

I sided out a Ponder and a Mox. Needle shutting down any of those cards dramatically slows down the already glacially slow Shardless decks. A lot of TES's speed creates Goblins, creating time to ensure an Ad Nauseam is worthwhile.

[Bryant Cook]

@Bryant: I looked over the updated opening post, and I want to ask about a few of the matchups mentioned

Miracles: You mentioned in an earlier post that you sided out a Cabal Therapy when you sided in Tendrils of Agony for Miracles, in the OP it suggests another Ponder can be sided out when making room for a storm card. Is there a particular scenario where you'd want more Ponders versus more Therapies? I think if I'm bringing in Grapeshot, for instance if I see Canonist or Meddling Mage, I would want to side out Therapy because the Grapeshot is more if a removal spell than a business spell (you can natural Tendrils, probably can't natural Grapeshot, lol) and I wouldn't want to have too many cards that just answer/discard things. With Tendrils, I could see it going either way, since Tendrils is another business spell that's resilient to counters and it can be supported by both Therapy and Ponder.

I usually side in the Tendrils myself, but I was displaying options. I change my boarding strategies all the time, I don't do always copy/paste for every round. The opening post isn't meant to be an exact instruction guide as much as it is to teach you how cards should and can be used.


Esperblade: I'm curious how well EtW works for you postboard. Since Ad Nauseam is typically so strong against control, does that option feel weaker when you're carrying along 2 cmc 4 storm cards, as well as Abrupt Decay? Also, given the higher likelihood of various sweepers (I've seen all kinds of stuff out of Esperblade), is EtW a go-to play like it would be against Delver decks, or is it just another win-con to help play through Meddling Mage and Surgical Extraction? Against UWR Delver, where Ad Nauseam is less effective and sweepers are less likely (but still possible), this boarding plan seems crystal clear, I'm just wondering how it interacts with Esperblade.

They're a slow deck that doesn't apply pressure, Ad Nauseam is still incredibly effective even with those cards in the deck.


Burn: Should Burn be treated like DnT style decks, or possibly get it's own reference? Eidolon really changed the way the matchup plays out, and even if EtW is somewhat risky, I'd rather get something down before Eidolon than try for a natural storm chain or something like that after Eidolon. Whats also interesting is that EtW deadens their Eidolon, because once the Burn player is behind on board, Eidolon becomes a liability.

This was an oversight, I was updating a lot of pre-existing content and forgot that Burn received a new edition. I'll try to update it soon.


Storm: Is there a particular situation where siding in PiF is the optimal choice in the spot EtW occupies? I typically bring in the Infernal Tutor for speed's sake, and if I see Surgical Extraction I opt for Tendrils of Agony instead. I hadn't thought of maining the PiF, and the situations I can think of where it'd be useful would be against TES if they do early pressure with a Goblin all-in and thus you need a win that doesn't use life, or if ANT is on the play and siding Confidants, since you can get hit for damage and then Mind Twisted by Therapies and you can top PiF to bounce back.

Thanks for the updates, I really appreciated all the upkeep you handle for the thread.

As mentioned above, I like to switch things up. I've sided in Tendrils and/or PIF in the past, but I'd like to keep Tutor in the side. Otherwise Wish must get PIF/ETW, which can be weak depending on the game state.

[wonderPreaux]

I usually side in the Tendrils myself, but I was displaying options. I change my boarding strategies all the time, I don't do always copy/paste for every round. The opening post isn't meant to be an exact instruction guide as much as it is to teach you how cards should and can be used.

I understand that what you want to side in/out might change depending on what you notice in the games, with that in mind, my question was about what signals you'd use to differentiate something like that. Siding out the 3rd Ponder versus 4th Cabal Therapy, for instance, seems like a really borderline thing to me. Like, if I were to see 2 V-Cliques and a SCM in their hand/board, or something like Venser, game 1 I might be inclined to board our the Ponder as having the 4th Therapy to go after what would appear to be a higher number of creatures can be really relevant. By contrast, if I were to see in game 1 cards like their own Ponder and techs like Spell Snare, I might put them on a slower more diverse counter composition, and the extra Ponder to help sculpt natural Tendrils would appeal more to me compared to the Therapy that would be struggling against higher densities of cantrips and hard counters


As mentioned above, I like to switch things up. I've sided in Tendrils and/or PIF in the past, but I'd like to keep Tutor in the side. Otherwise Wish must get PIF/ETW, which can be weak depending on the game state.

That's an interesting point about Tutor, especially since it gives you access to whatever Wish-Board card you are maining after board. Like above, I'm curious as to what signals you use to decide whether to bring in Tendrils or PiF. Surgical Extraction postboard would push me towards boarding in Tendrils, but I'd have no way of knowing whether that's coming going into game 2. Does being on the play/draw affect the decision? For example, being on the draw means a natural Tendrils is slightly more achievable. Would the opponent running TES instead of ANT be a signal to board in PiF since discard is technically denser through Wish and Goblins are a possible occurrence?

I'm sorry if this comes off as a lot said about really minor things, but it is very interesting to analyze opponents, and pretty rewarding too, as far piloting TES goes. Since you have the more experienced feel for picking up on these signals, I can't help but be curious about your mindset as to what influences the sideboarding.

[Deviruchi]

I sided out a Ponder and a Mox. Needle shutting down any of those cards dramatically slows down the already glacially slow Shardless decks. A lot of TES's speed creates Goblins, creating time to ensure an Ad Nauseam is worthwhile.

I agree with this way of thinking. Let's say you've also seen Savannah and/or Meddling Mage in addition to Null Rod during g2. Would you swap Needles for AD?

[Lemnear]

Perhaps a stupid question, but: How often do people you play against name Tendrils of Agony against TES when they play Meddling Mage? I don't think it's the best target for them to name, I would probably name Burning Wish in most games, but how often do people name Tendrils?

Doesn't matter to be honest, as you would never gamble on your opponent being an idiot. If you feel you are playing against Meddling Mage in game two/three, board accordingly. I guess I saw ToA named twice over the last two years (more frequent: Dark Ritual and Infernal) and chained it once while hard-killing via AN -> PIF -> Grapeshot the other time.


Siding out the 3rd Ponder versus 4th Cabal Therapy, for instance, seems like a really borderline thing to me. Like, if I were to see 2 V-Cliques and a SCM in their hand/board, or something like Venser, game 1 I might be inclined to board our the Ponder as having the 4th Therapy to go after what would appear to be a higher number of creatures can be really relevant. By contrast, if I were to see in game 1 cards like their own Ponder and techs like Spell Snare, I might put them on a slower more diverse counter composition, and the extra Ponder to help sculpt natural Tendrils would appeal more to me compared to the Therapy that would be struggling against higher densities of cantrips and hard counters.

First, why ponder to board out a Therapy instead of a Duress if you argue with Cliques and Co.?


I agree with this way of thinking. Let's say you've also seen Savannah and/or Meddling Mage in addition to Null Rod during g2. Would you swap Needles for AD?

I would rather use CoV then, instead of gambling on the green mana to cast Decay against a deck running Wasteland


Edit:


Esperblade: I'm curious how well EtW works for you postboard. Since Ad Nauseam is typically so strong against control, does that option feel weaker when you're carrying along 2 cmc 4 storm cards, as well as Abrupt Decay? Also, given the higher likelihood of various sweepers (I've seen all kinds of stuff out of Esperblade), is EtW a go-to play like it would be against Delver decks, or is it just another win-con to help play through Meddling Mage and Surgical Extraction? Against UWR Delver, where Ad Nauseam is less effective and sweepers are less likely (but still possible), this boarding plan seems crystal clear, I'm just wondering how it interacts with Esperblade.


EtW works as Esperblade and Esper Deathblade are pretty slow, but features several angles of attack with FoW, Thoughtseize and Meddling Mages postboard and EtW often screws certain gameplans of them, leaving you with the occasional need to disarm Zealous Persecution and the usual Batterskull. I usually don't board in ToA for that matchup personally

Burn: Should Burn be treated like DnT style decks, or possibly get it's own reference? Eidolon really changed the way the matchup plays out, and even if EtW is somewhat risky, I'd rather get something down before Eidolon than try for a natural storm chain or something like that after Eidolon. Whats also interesting is that EtW deadens their Eidolon, because once the Burn player is behind on board, Eidolon becomes a liability.


Burn, D&T, MUD, Dredge ... all the same gameplan

[mario91234]

2x 3sphere decks r1+2? thats absurd. Good run, unfortunate loss to uwr.

I consistently am boarding in grapeshot vs blade and BUG as outs to possible meddling mages or just to kill a delver/deathrite.

Gonna be testing out some infernal contracts this wednesday ^_^

[Asthereal]

Gonna be testing out some infernal contracts this wednesday ^_^
Don't bother.

But if you do bother, don't forget to swap Rites for Cabal Rituals.
Rites don't help casting Contracts too well.

[Bryant Cook]

Two feature matches from over the weekend added to the OP.

[Plague Sliver]

Congrats Bryant on a strong finish. At least they're calling it "Ad Nauseam" now.

[Lemnear]

Gonna be testing out some infernal contracts this wednesday ^_^

Bryant tested them afaik (at least as a 1-off in the SB as helooked for a replacement for the Dim.Ret.)

[seilaquem]

hello, everyone,

I've got a national qualifier competition on this weekend, and the meta here is D&T, BUG delver and burn (w/ eidolons) heavy.

How am I supposed to treat the burn matchup, now that they play 4 eidolons maindeck? Should I return to the empty the warrens plan?

My deck right now is the same as bryant's, but I changed the sideboard (-1 chain of vapor, +1 massacre).

I was thinking about running about adding a reforge the soul and the cabal rituals back to accelerate the gameplan, and be less AN dependant, in order to improve the burn matchup. Or should I just aim for the fast kills? (removing warrens for a infernal tutor)

[Tom T]

hello, everyone,

I've got a national qualifier competition on this weekend, and the meta here is D&T, BUG delver and burn (w/ eidolons) heavy.

How am I supposed to treat the burn matchup, now that they play 4 eidolons maindeck? Should I return to the empty the warrens plan?

My deck right now is the same as bryant's, but I changed the sideboard (-1 chain of vapor, +1 massacre).

I was thinking about running about adding a reforge the soul and the cabal rituals back to accelerate the gameplan, and be less AN dependant, in order to improve the burn matchup. Or should I just aim for the fast kills? (removing warrens for a infernal tutor)

Against Eidolons you can just play the Chains or Pyroclasm if you like them. However, I would like to test Angel's Grace for shits n giggles against Burn. Angel's Grace into Ad Nauseam seems like fun against that deck (also against Elves' lethal Craterhoof or Ruric Thar). :tongue:

[Bryant Cook]

hello, everyone,

I've got a national qualifier competition on this weekend, and the meta here is D&T, BUG delver and burn (w/ eidolons) heavy.

How am I supposed to treat the burn matchup, now that they play 4 eidolons maindeck? Should I return to the empty the warrens plan?

My deck right now is the same as bryant's, but I changed the sideboard (-1 chain of vapor, +1 massacre).

I was thinking about running about adding a reforge the soul and the cabal rituals back to accelerate the gameplan, and be less AN dependant, in order to improve the burn matchup. Or should I just aim for the fast kills? (removing warrens for a infernal tutor)

Well it hurts the Burn match-up when you cut a Chain of Vapor from the side for a Massacre. Chain is effective in both match-ups where you would use both of those slots where Massacre is really only effective in one. Sideboarding in Chain against burn can be very effective at dealing with Eidelon for the one turn that you need to.

[Togores]

Just change -2 pithing +1 massacre and may be another decay/chain or so.

[seilaquem]

Just change -2 pithing +1 massacre and may be another decay/chain or so.

but I have been using the needles very often. in every game i casted it, it was very relevant. specially against delver tempo strategies.

and, eventhough it's not gonna be a lot of people, I know there will be at least 1 RUG and 1 miracles. so the needles are essencial.

[davelin]

but I have been using the needles very often. in every game i casted it, it was very relevant. specially against delver tempo strategies.

and, eventhough it's not gonna be a lot of people, I know there will be at least 1 RUG and 1 miracles. so the needles are essencial.

What are you naming against Rug, wasteland?

[Nuke is Good]

I've played Cheeri0s in MTGO and loved the concept of storm decks. With my collection I can build TES and it looks fun as it can run a MD silence which I like. Is the learning curve on this deck difficult and should I work my way up with Belcher/ANT before trying this one out?

[seilaquem]

What are you naming against Rug, wasteland?

I did 2 things:

when landlight, I name wasteland
also got to name scalding tarn against a UR delver deck, while having 3 lands on hand, when I had one of mine on hand, after fetching for the turn 1.

delaying their mana denial plan is really neat. It works well naming "liliana of the veil" as well.
these were cards i were losing too much to =/

[saur]

I've played Cheeri0s in MTGO and loved the concept of storm decks. With my collection I can build TES and it looks fun as it can run a MD silence which I like. Is the learning curve on this deck difficult and should I work my way up with Belcher/ANT before trying this one out?

Work through Bryant's practice hands (Cook's Kitchen series?), and read a bunch of the tournament reports on the front page. Goldfish a few times or play against friends. You should be good to go after that.

[Lemnear]

I've played Cheeri0s in MTGO and loved the concept of storm decks. With my collection I can build TES and it looks fun as it can run a MD silence which I like. Is the learning curve on this deck difficult and should I work my way up with Belcher/ANT before trying this one out?

We dismissed Silence for several reasons rooted in the current metagame landscape. On learning the deck:

1) you have to figure out which is the right Path to take in certain situations (Natural 10-count/Ad Nauseam/Goblins/PIF) and how to work towards that chosen direction which is a lot different from ANT which has less complex traits. This is crucial to beat critical matchups like D&T or combo mirrors

2) understand that the deck is very redundant and you can burn Wishes/Infernals to get additional gas or protection at will.

3) learn to sequence and maximize cantrips. This deck does not work with the attitute of "Fetchland + cantrip can fix all". If you are auto-casting Probe turn 1 or regulary fetch U.Sea turn 1, you are doing it wrong.

4) as cards like Moxen and RoF have a pretty low power level compared to Cabal Ritual, you cannot afford wasting a single card to bait counters or the like.

[Megadeus]

One important thing that I think more experienced players do that less experienced players aren't as good at with this deck is what Lem said about figuring out what line to win you will be taking, except that you need to figure it out in time so that you aren't wasting your resources.

[Bryant Cook]

3) learn to sequence and maximize cantrips. This deck does not work with the attitute of "Fetchland + cantrip can fix all". If you are auto-casting Probe turn 1 or regulary fetch U.Sea turn 1, you are doing it wrong.


I take umbrage to the bolded statement. I do both most of the time, we need black and blue far more than we need red mana and it provides the best use of our mana for cantrips/discard spells before the combo turn where we actually need the red mana. I also regularly cast Gitaxian Probe on the first turn as I'd rather have their hand influence my cantripping and ability to go off quicker. Holding Probes until the combo turn effectively slows you down as you don't need the card drawn if you were waiting on resources.

I believe holding Gitaxian Probes is highly overrated.

[Lemnear]

I take umbrage to the bolded statement. I do both most of the time, we need black and blue far more than we need red mana and it provides the best use of our mana for cantrips/discard spells before the combo turn where we actually need the red mana. I also regularly cast Gitaxian Probe on the first turn as I'd rather have their hand influence my cantripping and ability to go off quicker. Holding Probes until the combo turn effectively slows you down as you don't need the card drawn if you were waiting on resources.

I believe holding Gitaxian Probes is highly overrated.

Well, I prefer to keep back Probes and U.Sea so I don't have a neon sign on the table turn 1 telling my opponent I'm playing storm. I prefer to Ponder T1/Brainstorm T2 off a Volcanic and cast discard of a fetched U.Sea turn 2. Holding back Probes is also a cheap trick to feed the natural 10-count.

[Bryant Cook]

Well, I prefer to keep back Probes and U.Sea so I don't have a neon sign on the table turn 1 telling my opponent I'm playing storm. I prefer to Ponder T1/Brainstorm T2 off a Volcanic and cast discard of a fetched U.Sea turn 2. Holding back Probes is also a cheap trick to feed the natural 10-count.

I suppose I don't have that luxury.

Either way, I still think it's better to just fire them off. Sure, but storming to ten isn't that hard to do either way.

[Vandalize]

I suppose I don't have that luxury.

Either way, I still think it's better to just fire them off. Sure, but storming to ten isn't that hard to do either way.

Yeah, nothing's worse than cantripping into mana or business, then G.Probe the turn you're about to combo and find those 2 permission spells. You most likely have to ship the turn back.

[Tom T]

The deck is hard because choices are very situation dependant. You can't make up guidelines like "situation A -> do this", because it's not just dependant on your hand and wether you're on the play or the draw. It's also dependant on what you think you're opponent is playing, if he knows what you're playing. Those are factors that (sometimes) are incredibly important for making the right choice. And that's exactly the fact why playing TES is hard: the line you're aiming for constantly changes.

So yeah, sometimes you cast GP on your first turn and sometimes you don't.

[Lemnear]

So yeah, sometimes you cast GP on your first turn and sometimes you don't.

That's why I made the point about some bad autopilot-habits I witnessed over the years, like probing turn 1 "just to know what you are up against", casting discard turn 1 for either the same reasons mentioned before and/or without being able to combo for turns, mindlessly playing lands directly into wasteland just to find yourself colorscrewed, etc.

[Ebonclaw]

I almost always lead with GitProbe for the following reasons- apologize for formatting due to phone

The deck is full of "reveal your hand" cards between the four probes and 7ish discard spells. I can almost always know the contents of my opponent's hand in its entirety on my combo turn anyway. Sometimes I have a cabal therapy and sometimes gitprobe draws me into it, regardless, there are quite a few match ups that require targeted interaction/discard on t1 or t2. Death and taxes springs to mind. Sometimes gitprobe will find the fetch you'd rather drop t1 than the gemstone mine your opener contained. The faster I know what I'm dealing with, the faster I can decide what path to pursue, and the card I draw from the probe might alter that decison. Having the next card you draw from probe being ad nauseum is far different than drawing ETW or burning wish. Having 2 gitprobe in hand is usually not great unless you're just going off t1 or something, it's fine to fire one off early and hold the other till later, unless you've decided to go for the natural 10. Lastly, in many games, sometimes you get a free win t1 or t2 by just going for it, miracles doesn't always have the force, deliver doesn't always have the spell pierce, and jund doesn't need to be able to cast that t2 hymn, shift their priorities to dealing with the 14 goblins you just dumped on them. Probe reveals these games to you but only if you cast it! Example- playing Dallas SCG open recently- game 3 against punishing jund. I kept a solid opener. I was tempted to actually hold the probe as jund is less interactive, figuring I probably had a free t1 where he drops a land, maybe a deathrite, and passes back and then I go off with an extra card. I decide to lead with probe anyway because of the super snap keep my opponent did to see exactly why he was so happy. I see bayou, thoughtseize, hymn, deathrite, fetch, REB, and liliana. Dear god, that's terrifying. I decided to go ahead and just make 14 goblins before shipping the turn back, taking the match.

There are a couple of cases where I might hold a gitprobe, but not many. One might be if I can go for an early natural empty with LED and I can use a brainstorm to deposit the etw back on top of my deck, cast probe, hold priority, and break the diamonds to cast for mana to cast it with- I've had to do this once after an awkward ad nauseum from 12 life.

There's a certain argument to be made about trying to keep your deck hidden, but this is only relevant game one, and many decks are not ready to deal with storm game 1 anyway, and you can only keep the deck hidden for so long. Im not saying dont conceal the deck if possible, but weigh whether the benefit of keeping the deck hidden is better than the benefit of knowing what ypur opponent has, turning on pinpoint cabal therapies, seeing a new card, and making your route decision faster and more accurately. Not finding extra business or mana you need or missing out on a powerful therapy can cost you a lot more than surrendering information about the deck you're playing to your opponent. It would feel real bad to lose a mirror match on t2 with a probe in hand and a therapy on top of your deck for example.

So I have to say, I lean with Mr. Cook on the probe t1 the vast majority of the time.

[Megadeus]

Meh. Like had been said, it's really dependant upon the deck, but in a meta full of various hate bears and permission spells, knowing what you are up against early is great

[Royce Walter]

In the dark I think it's better to fire off your first Probe ASAP since the chance that you see something like Ancient Tomb + Chalice, draw into a Therapy to take your opponent's Deathrite to make Empty for 8-10 viable, or want to cast Ponder and can be helped by the knowledge of their hand + an extra card are more useful than waiting to make sure you can beat their hand on the combo turn. Additional Probes can always be used to clear the way, of course, but the first one you should just fire off (and usually pay 2 life for, the opportunity cost of drawing a Ponder/Therapy is worth it almost all the time).

[Lemnear]

I almost always lead with GitProbe for the following reasons- apologize for formatting due to phone

The deck is full of "reveal your hand" cards between the four probes and 7ish discard spells. I can almost always know the contents of my opponent's hand in its entirety on my combo turn anyway.


it can make one hell of a difference, if you have to pay mana in your combo turn to see your opponents hand and his latest drawn card(s), or if you get away with paying 2 life instead.

Sometimes I have a cabal therapy and sometimes gitprobe draws me into it, regardless, there are quite a few match ups that require targeted interaction/discard on t1 or t2. Death and taxes springs to mind.


It's ridiculous how many times I have to read this stuff. You can identify D&T by their first landdrop & turn 1 play without Gitaxian Probe. Probe alone does nothing against their (topdecked) turn 2 hatebear, so all that's left is the effect of thinning your deck and boosting stormcount for goblins. Once you realize that you are facing D&T you should try to combo asap and not wasting your time trying to discard a potential hatebear just to lose to Wasteland, Port or the right next hatebear coming. Unless I have the turn 1 combo (on the play) basically in my hand, I'm gladly use the Probe to boost my turn 2 goblin-count right before their hatebear comes down. In games 2 & 3 you go for the belcher-route regardless, so the infos delivered by Probe are almost worthless

Sometimes gitprobe will find the fetch you'd rather drop t1 than the gemstone mine your opener contained. The faster I know what I'm dealing with, the faster I can decide what path to pursue, and the card I draw from the probe might alter that decison.


My knowledge of the opponents deck and my starting grip mostly dictates the initial gameplan which is rarely COMPLETELY altered by a single card drawn off Probe unless you have once more the turn 1 combo in hand and just need to check if the path is clear or you need to draw a random mana source or the like. If my hand favors a turn 2 combo attempt finishing with Empty the Warrens, I don't need to see my opponents potential Golgari Charm turn 1; turn 2 is enough and I get the additional value of knowing his drawn card AND an increased storm count (see also Death & Taxes Team America, etc. on the play)

Having the next card you draw from probe being ad nauseum is far different than drawing ETW or burning wish.


if your inital hand offers no base to work towards a certain goal, the card you draw is not relevant. If your hand has 6+ mana and you just need a business-spell to explode, you also don't cast Probe for the peek into your opponents cards. I hope you get my point.

Having 2 gitprobe in hand is usually not great unless you're just going off t1 or something, it's fine to fire one off early and hold the other till later, unless you've decided to go for the natural 10. Lastly, in many games, sometimes you get a free win t1 or t2 by just going for it, miracles doesn't always have the force, deliver doesn't always have the spell pierce, and jund doesn't need to be able to cast that t2 hymn, shift their priorities to dealing with the 14 goblins you just dumped on them.


once more: these scenarios are rooted on a starting grip being able to combo turn 1 and it's pointless to discuss those. We are talking about casting Probe turn 1 if it's not guaranteed that you are able to combo turn 1 or turn 2.

Probe reveals these games to you but only if you cast it! Example- playing Dallas SCG open recently- game 3 against punishing jund. I kept a solid opener. I was tempted to actually hold the probe as jund is less interactive, figuring I probably had a free t1 where he drops a land, maybe a deathrite, and passes back and then I go off with an extra card. I decide to lead with probe anyway because of the super snap keep my opponent did to see exactly why he was so happy. I see bayou, thoughtseize, hymn, deathrite, fetch, REB, and liliana. Dear god, that's terrifying. I decided to go ahead and just make 14 goblins before shipping the turn back, taking the match.


Why would you pass the turn, if you are able to create 12+ goblins on the play, no matter the card you drew off the Probe? Bad example.

There are a couple of cases where I might hold a gitprobe, but not many. One might be if I can go for an early natural empty with LED and I can use a brainstorm to deposit the etw back on top of my deck, cast probe, hold priority, and break the diamonds to cast for mana to cast it with- I've had to do this once after an awkward ad nauseum from 12 life.


more examples of guaranteed turn 1/2 combo attempts

So I have to say, I lean with Mr. Cook on the probe t1 the vast majority of the time.

[davelin]

In the dark I think it's better to fire off your first Probe ASAP since the chance that you see something like Ancient Tomb + Chalice, draw into a Therapy to take your opponent's Deathrite to make Empty for 8-10 viable, or want to cast Ponder and can be helped by the knowledge of their hand + an extra card are more useful than waiting to make sure you can beat their hand on the combo turn. Additional Probes can always be used to clear the way, of course, but the first one you should just fire off (and usually pay 2 life for, the opportunity cost of drawing a Ponder/Therapy is worth it almost all the time).

+1

[Asthereal]

In the dark I think it's better to fire off your first Probe ASAP since the chance that you see something like Ancient Tomb + Chalice, draw into a Therapy to take your opponent's Deathrite to make Empty for 8-10 viable, or want to cast Ponder and can be helped by the knowledge of their hand + an extra card are more useful than waiting to make sure you can beat their hand on the combo turn. Additional Probes can always be used to clear the way, of course, but the first one you should just fire off (and usually pay 2 life for, the opportunity cost of drawing a Ponder/Therapy is worth it almost all the time).
This, by the way, is a brilliant argument why Probe's "free storm!" merit is usually just nonsense.
In rare situations, saving Probe for the combo turn can make you fizzle, by the way: Infernal but no LED, cannot cast/play the drawn card. Don't forget about that. Or do forget about it once, and then never again. :wink:

I only save my Probe in either of these cases:
A. I can pretend to be playing another deck, and profit from that.
B. I have a hand that is very likely to go off via Brainstorm, cast LEDs and Probe for the business spell.
C. My opening play will be Duress/Seize, and I want to save Probe to know what he drew the turn after.

[tescrin]

Even as a non-storm player I'm kind of outraged by this willingness to throw out probes for no reason. Let your opponent telegraph what they're doing.

I mean really? A freakin' Chalice example!? What is that, 1% of the meta? What if you Don't draw Cabal therapy? You've telegraph'd combo to your opponent. What if your opponent had a line of Monolith->Metalworker instead of chalice; you've told him "hey!!! If you don't chalice right now you lose!!"

The difference if I'm in non-blue is I may start with Discard instead of DRS; if you had a weak hand you may just lose now where as had I not known what you were on DRS is the correct play 100% of the time. What if I Brainstorm T1/T2 and all the knowledge you gained is useless? You have to do the check again (with the caveat that what; 60%-75% of good decks have brainstorm?)

When you look at someone's hand T1 you have to remember that at least 3 cards are going to change in most games:
-1 land
-The card they play
-The card they draw

Waiting a single turn means you see at least +1 card, if not +2 from a ponder (plus information if they shuffled or not) and up to +4 from a brainstorm (plus information is they shuffled or not.)

[Royce Walter]

Even as a non-storm player I'm kind of outraged by this willingness to throw out probes for no reason. Let your opponent telegraph what they're doing.

I mean really? A freakin' Chalice example!? What is that, 1% of the meta? What if you Don't draw Cabal therapy? You've telegraph'd combo to your opponent. What if your opponent had a line of Monolith->Metalworker instead of chalice; you've told him "hey!!! If you don't chalice right now you lose!!"

The difference if I'm in non-blue is I may start with Discard instead of DRS; if you had a weak hand you may just lose now where as had I not known what you were on DRS is the correct play 100% of the time. What if I Brainstorm T1/T2 and all the knowledge you gained is useless? You have to do the check again (with the caveat that what; 60%-75% of good decks have brainstorm?)

When you look at someone's hand T1 you have to remember that at least 3 cards are going to change in most games:
-1 land
-The card they play
-The card they draw

Waiting a single turn means you see at least +1 card, if not +2 from a ponder (plus information if they shuffled or not) and up to +4 from a brainstorm (plus information is they shuffled or not.)

You can exchange chalice with being on the draw and seeing some other lock piece (counterbalance and thalia are both pretty prevalent). In any of these cases, you now know that your chances of having the opportunity to win on the following turn are extremely low and you should aggressively brainstorm to go off / empty when you might otherwise wait a turn to go for a tendrils kill.

Basically, my feeling is that you can make better use of the free information than your opponent can. Additionally, they might reasonably think you're on a delver deck with probe.

[wonderPreaux]

Even as a non-storm player I'm kind of outraged by this willingness to throw out probes for no reason. Let your opponent telegraph what they're doing.

I mean really? A freakin' Chalice example!? What is that, 1% of the meta? What if you Don't draw Cabal therapy? You've telegraph'd combo to your opponent. What if your opponent had a line of Monolith->Metalworker instead of chalice; you've told him "hey!!! If you don't chalice right now you lose!!"

The difference if I'm in non-blue is I may start with Discard instead of DRS; if you had a weak hand you may just lose now where as had I not known what you were on DRS is the correct play 100% of the time. What if I Brainstorm T1/T2 and all the knowledge you gained is useless? You have to do the check again (with the caveat that what; 60%-75% of good decks have brainstorm?)

When you look at someone's hand T1 you have to remember that at least 3 cards are going to change in most games:
-1 land
-The card they play
-The card they draw

Waiting a single turn means you see at least +1 card, if not +2 from a ponder (plus information if they shuffled or not) and up to +4 from a brainstorm (plus information is they shuffled or not.)

As a storm player, I think you need to calm down and reevaluate the posts. We're not "throwing probes out for no reason", theres a difference between using a singleton probe to lead off on the play, versus tossing them all out turn 1. I think using the Probe as a lead is often correct, here's why:

Scouting: As the "Chalice example" shows, scouting can be really relevant. Not just because it lets you know whether to throw out a Therapy versus a Ponder, for instance, but because it lets you know when you can go off. When I Probe turn 1 and see the Chalice, not only do I know I have to remove the Chalice if I can't go off but I also know I can now go off right now if I want to. Also, knowing if Wasteland exists so you can lead with Trop/Gemstone instead of U. Sea is relevant, even if Chalice is 1% of the meta, you're being ignorant if you throwout the whole lesson based on the example. Wasteland and Force of Will are far more relevant in the meta, and Probe scouts those just fine too, hope thats sufficient for you.

Complete Information: Yes, cards in hand change over the course of the game so your look at the opponents hand is a fleeting advantage. However, knowing what you're going to be holding is prime info for you too. If you ever tried Belcher or some other such deck, you've seen those awkward hands with 2+ Probes/Street Wraiths and have had to make that choice whether your hand will actually get there. Sandbagging a Probe is a smaller version of that issue.

Let's say you open U. Sea, Gemstone Mine, Probe, Ponder, Rite of Flame, LED, Lotus Petal. If you Ponder initially, without Probe, you don't know whether you need Protection + Business or just Business, if the very top card is Tutor/Wish and you didn't Probe you not only missed out on 12 Goblins but also on the knowledge that such a plan would or wouldn't work etc. If we replace Ponder with Brainstorm here, the example becomes even more obvious: acting without as much knowledge as possible about both players hands makes it harder to find the fastest most intrusive path to victory.

Now, as mentioned, multiple Probes obfuscates things, lets look at this hand instead: Probe, Probe, Dark Ritual, Misty Rainforest, Brainstorm, Burning Wish, Lotus Petal. Here, we don't throw all out Probes at the opponent, just the one. This is because Probe not only improves Ponder and Brainstorm, but it makes the other Probes better as well. If I see FoW, 2-3 lands and other counter-ish cards, I know I'm in for a longer games and I know to save the second Probe for a later turn when I hope to go off. If I see Thalia or something, though, I know I have to get my shit together and the latest I'd wait to Probe is next turn after they've made their first land drop.

Now, there are some counterarguments to this and I'm going to address them too, because that's how reasonable discourse goes.

Technical Interactions: Let's say you're on the play and keep Chrome Mox, Probe, Underground Sea, Infernal Tutor, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual. If you Probe here and draw a land, you can't go off because you can't get Hellbent, so... just don't Probe, easy. If you open LED, LED, LED, Brainstorm, Volcanic Island, Burning Wish and Gitaxian Probe, guess what, you're not leading with that Probe either. Use some common sense, if there is an obvious anomaly about how your hand operates that makes leading with Probe a bad idea, just don't do it. I don't think Bryant or Royce is trying to install any lock-step routines here and neither am I, this is just a GENERALLY correct move, if you identify the exception to the generality, then of course you act differently.

Storm Count: Given that the primary win condition here is Ad Nauseam, you often don't need to concern yourself with storm count. Playing on MTGO, I try to get as close to 10 as possible because it leaves less clicking, but darn it all if Ad Nauseam -> stuff -> Tendrils isn't just the lengthiest of processes. If you, from amusement or necessity, actually have to Grapeshot someone, you have Past in Flames to enable that. Regarding Empty the Warrens, my failed attempts there are more often due to being a turn too late rather than 2 Goblins too few. The initial Probe lets you optimize your pursuit of the green-dude assault, and getting in there with the optimal speed is going to win you more games than slow-rolling to get 2 more guys (notice I'm saying it will win MORE games because we're talking about generalities, there are obvious exceptions to this as well, but I'm arguing the general case).

Natural Tendrils chains are the most relevant case for conserving a Probe, as you can't swing with Tendrils multiple times and don't have a storm engine to increase the cards you have to play around with. However, not only is this a relatively uncommon route to victory for this deck, it's also the one where you would most definitely want the info an earlier Probe would have provided anyway. Knowing the opponent's counters/hand is invaluable before going because it lets you bait their counters for storm count, or alert you from the start that you couldn't, for whatever reason, pursue a more typical line. For a prime example of what I'm talking about, look at game 1 of the Dan Jordan/Bryant Cook feature match where an initial Probe shows Bryant the 2 Force of Wills his opponent has and lets him thus plan out his next 3 cantrips to sculpt a natural Tendrils line past his opponent's own Force of Wills.

Impersonating another deck: This is the one that I take the most issue with, because I feel it's highly over-rated. It's one thing to use Misty Rainforest instead of Polluted Delta so you look less obvious as a Storm deck, it's quite another to gimp your own plays for the chance to maybe confuse an opponent. I feel like making your hand less dynamic so you can pretend to be Delver is idiotic. In your example of "what if they had Monolith > Metalworker" as justification to hold a Probe, you have to ask "what would they react to Tempo with anyway"? If you go Volcanic > Ponder > Pass, trying to look like some flavor of Tempo or even control with a poor draw, it's not as though MUD wouldn't move in with a Chalice to seal off cantrips/Delver/SDT anyway. An example of this occurred earlier in the thread where a newer player attempted to feign tempo against Countertop, only for the opponent to just lock them out with Counterbalance because it's as much agame winner against Tempo as it is against combo. Further, as much as Probe might make a Jund opponent's choice between Thoughtseize and DRS easier, knowing they have the Thoughtseize lets me drop artifact mana, or just go off because it's Jund. Most important is the fact that we're talking about game 1, where sided hate doesn't get into the party and what we're doing is often fundamentally better than whatever the opponent's going to be doing, so being able to effectively execute our gameplan most quickly and effectively is going to be fundamentally more valuable than whatever mental edge you get against a temporarily urked opponent. I don't sit down across from my opponent to try and angle-shoot through my game 1s, I reach over and try to bend the opponent over with a card that says "storm" somewhere in the textbox.

[JamieW89]

I think a decent guideline is that you need a reason to do anything. This is quite ovious and goes for most decisions, but many people do play automatically too much.

Some reasons to cast a probe turn-1:
* You will follow up with a spell that becomes much better with information. E.g. Cabal Therapy and going off but also Cantrips to a certain extent.
* Land management in regard to Wasteland (having the option to play an uncracked fetch (or perhaps pass without playing a land sometimes) when your hand would be destroyed by a wasteland)
* Unclear gameplan. If your hand can take multiple routes quite easily then information is valuable.
* You have multiple probes.
* You know/expect your opponent to be on a deck that likely requires quick action on your part. Probing will dig a bit deeper for action and let you evaluate better.

And for not probing:
* Strong reasons for wanting it turn 2 (or 3). You know you're playing Delver and will likely be able to empty next turn but unlikely to do so this turn even with an extra card. Similar situation with a hand with Chain of Vapor, Artifacts and Tendrils and the like for which the clear path is a 10-spell natural tendrils.
* You have a different use for the card. Maybe you have LED, a brainstorm, Ad Nauseam and a probe and you need to use LED mana for AdN.
* When you feel you can disguise yourself as another deck (Sneaky Show/RUG Delver likely).

[mario91234]

probe on t1 if you have ANY outs to a turn 1 combo line.

still probe on t1 if you could use a blue spell on turn 1.

also probe if you have any lines that aren't directly clear. E.g option to cast therapy or ponder on t1.

^pretty much the guidelines.

[alderon666]

Snap Probe T1 against unknown opponent. Don't even play the land first, they might just Daze it (never actually happened)...

If I have 2 Probes, I might consider keeping the second one to see what my opponente draws. And maybe even hold it until the combo turn to garantee that I don't lose to topdecked counterspell.

Only real reason not to instantly burn a Probe is if your hand has Brainstorm/Ponder, 2x LED and some bussiness (or not). That way you can BS business to the top and Probe while cracking LEDs in response.


All the jazz about not letting them know you're on storm seems a little overrated. You can probably improve your game much more by learning your deck better instead of worrying about this kind of Jedi mind tricks...

[thefreakaccident]

Snap Probe T1 against unknown opponent. Don't even play the land first, they might just Daze it (never actually happened)...

If I have 2 Probes, I might consider keeping the second one to see what my opponente draws. And maybe even hold it until the combo turn to garantee that I don't lose to topdecked counterspell.

Only real reason not to instantly burn a Probe is if your hand has Brainstorm/Ponder, 2x LED and some bussiness (or not). That way you can BS business to the top and Probe while cracking LEDs in response.


All the jazz about not letting them know you're on storm seems a little overrated. You can probably improve your game much more by learning your deck better instead of worrying about this kind of Jedi mind tricks...

But once you have mastered the deck in its' entirety, then the only thing that's left is Jedi Mind Tricks. We're all professionals here, right?

How do you play poker without bluffing?

I'm fixin to derail this thread.

[ThomasDowd]

But once you have mastered the deck in its' entirety, then the only thing that's left is Jedi Mind Tricks. We're all professionals here, right?

How do you play poker without bluffing?

I'm fixin to derail this thread.


That shipped sailed a while ago.

[Lemnear]

Scouting: As the "Chalice example" shows, scouting can be really relevant. Not just because it lets you know whether to throw out a Therapy versus a Ponder, for instance, but because it lets you know when you can go off. When I Probe turn 1 and see the Chalice, not only do I know I have to remove the Chalice if I can't go off but I also know I can now go off right now if I want to. Also, knowing if Wasteland exists so you can lead with Trop/Gemstone instead of U. Sea is relevant, even if Chalice is 1% of the meta, you're being ignorant if you throwout the whole lesson based on the example. Wasteland and Force of Will are far more relevant in the meta, and Probe scouts those just fine too, hope thats sufficient for you.


First, we need to make clear that we are only talking about game 1 in general as the whole "disguise" topic only matters there. On the draw you can tell a lot of opposing decks based on their opening play without a Probe and unless I have a turn 1 combo or a Therapy as well, auto-casting Probe is questionable. Take an example of you having Gemstone and Misty, Brainstorm and a probe in your hand against an opener of Topical -> Delver. Wouldn't you want to cast the probe turn 2 to see if that obvious RUG Delver opponent holds/has drawn a stifle for your fetch or reveal that he maybe shouldn't follow up with tarmogoyf and tap out vs. Storm?

Complete Information: Yes, cards in hand change over the course of the game so your look at the opponents hand is a fleeting advantage. However, knowing what you're going to be holding is prime info for you too. If you ever tried Belcher or some other such deck, you've seen those awkward hands with 2+ Probes/Street Wraiths and have had to make that choice whether your hand will actually get there. Sandbagging a Probe is a smaller version of that issue.


In a Format in which basically each deck starts with "4 Brainstorm, 4 Ponder, 6 Fetchlands" I don't value the early information if my opponents hand too high unless I can combo the same turn or the turn after. For my taste there is a bit too much emphasis in this discussion of hitting a miraculous LED or so with a blind draw off probe "which completely alters your gameplan". Just saying

Let's say you open U. Sea, Gemstone Mine, Probe, Ponder, Rite of Flame, LED, Lotus Petal. If you Ponder initially, without Probe, you don't know whether you need Protection + Business or just Business, if the very top card is Tutor/Wish and you didn't Probe you not only missed out on 12 Goblins but also on the knowledge that such a plan would or wouldn't work etc. If we replace Ponder with Brainstorm here, the example becomes even more obvious: acting without as much knowledge as possible about both players hands makes it harder to find the fastest most intrusive path to victory.


come on. These hands are exactly the examples we don't have to discuss. There are 6 mana turn 1 and all you need to hit is an 8-outer and if you draw a manasource like LED, RoF or DR you can gamble once more on hitting a 10-outer (this time with EtW and AN in addition) with Ponder if you sac LED in response

Now, as mentioned, multiple Probes obfuscates things, lets look at this hand instead: Probe, Probe, Dark Ritual, Misty Rainforest, Brainstorm, Burning Wish, Lotus Petal. Here, we don't throw all out Probes at the opponent, just the one. This is because Probe not only improves Ponder and Brainstorm, but it makes the other Probes better as well. If I see FoW, 2-3 lands and other counter-ish cards, I know I'm in for a longer games and I know to save the second Probe for a later turn when I hope to go off. If I see Thalia or something, though, I know I have to get my shit together and the latest I'd wait to Probe is next turn after they've made their first land drop.


I have to ask here: would you play the Brainstorm here off the land misty rainforests digs up or would you sacrifice a Petal to do so with a hand which is already not that strong? I don't think you want to cast that brainstorm before your turn 2 unless you are a gambling man and want to push turn 1, hoping to find at least 3 mana via Probes and Brainstorm (color issues aside) and if you want to save the Brainstorm here for another turn as your only possible turn 1 play you can count on, I don't see it a mistake to simply drop the Misty and pass the turn on the play.

Now, there are some counterarguments to this and I'm going to address them too, because that's how reasonable discourse goes.

-snip-

Storm Count: Given that the primary win condition here is Ad Nauseam, you often don't need to concern yourself with storm count. Playing on MTGO, I try to get as close to 10 as possible because it leaves less clicking, but darn it all if Ad Nauseam -> stuff -> Tendrils isn't just the lengthiest of processes. If you, from amusement or necessity, actually have to Grapeshot someone, you have Past in Flames to enable that. Regarding Empty the Warrens, my failed attempts there are more often due to being a turn too late rather than 2 Goblins too few. The initial Probe lets you optimize your pursuit of the green-dude assault, and getting in there with the optimal speed is going to win you more games than slow-rolling to get 2 more guys (notice I'm saying it will win MORE games because we're talking about generalities, there are obvious exceptions to this as well, but I'm arguing the general case).


these 2 goblins can make one hell of a difference once you play against DRS and it's lifegain. As long as I win around 40% if my games with goblins, stormcount remains relevant. I don't get what saving Probes for turn 2 goblins has to do with "slow-rolling"

Natural Tendrils chains are the most relevant case for conserving a Probe, as you can't swing with Tendrils multiple times and don't have a storm engine to increase the cards you have to play around with. However, not only is this a relatively uncommon route to victory for this deck, it's also the one where you would most definitely want the info an earlier Probe would have provided anyway. Knowing the opponent's counters/hand is invaluable before going because it lets you bait their counters for storm count, or alert you from the start that you couldn't, for whatever reason, pursue a more typical line. For a prime example of what I'm talking about, look at game 1 of the Dan Jordan/Bryant Cook feature match where an initial Probe shows Bryant the 2 Force of Wills his opponent has and lets him thus plan out his next 3 cantrips to sculpt a natural Tendrils line past his opponent's own Force of Wills.


Oh, it's not THAT uncommon if you ask me. There is enough self-inflicted lifeloss in the format that 8-9 stormcount is enough to finish a game, but I still see people mindlessly fetching Ad Nauseam from their deck with 6 mana float, missing that their hellbent Infernal equals 3 stormcount if its chained into Wish into ToA. The early info aspect isn't relevant, if you aim to reach a natural storm-kill, unless your opponent is running discard. Here, being on the play/draw may alter your decision

Impersonating another deck: This is the one that I take the most issue with, because I feel it's highly over-rated. It's one thing to use Misty Rainforest instead of Polluted Delta so you look less obvious as a Storm deck, it's quite another to gimp your own plays for the chance to maybe confuse an opponent. I feel like making your hand less dynamic so you can pretend to be Delver is idiotic.


it is and no one said you should make a bad play like fetching Volcanic Island as your first land if you hand is full with black spells or the like. The same is true with Probe-casting or turn-1-discard-or-cantrip-questions.

[Pelikanudo]

Hi all related to the Gitaxian probe discussion...

well, I've played G.P. in so many ways depending on the scenario that I could not say if it's well played or not if I've not seen the game developing. and you all boys waste the time if you don't limítate more the scenarios, so I will propose some Case Studies scenarios and give my opinion and you can share also yours, just to help

Common Scenario to All:
- it's first turn
- you start
- you're in the next SCG tournament meta inmediatly to occur.
- Your opponent does not know you and neither your deck.

Different Scenarios:

I play the Opening list but -1 Tropical +1I.T. and more options for B.Wish
Following Hands + G.P:

a) Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Scalding Tarn, RoF = Keep G.P. I'll do scalding to volcanic to ponder, maybe Ponder makes me change my mind.
b) Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Volcanic Island, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind.
c) Gemstone Mire, Volcanic Island, B.Wish, Brainstorm, RoF, LED = Likely to Keep, but not sure.
d) Scalding Tarn, Duress, B.Wish, Volcanic Island, RoF, LED = I keep in here G.P.
e) Underground Sea, Ponder, Gemstone, Dark Ritual, Duress, I.Tutor = Play G.P, I want to know which route is better
f) Underground Sea, Ponder, C.Mox, Dark Ritual, Duress, I.Tutor = Play G.P., I want to know which route is better
g) Underground Sea, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Duress, RoF, Lotus Petal = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind, I'll likely to suffle if not finding business
h) Underground Sea, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Gitaxian Probe, RoF, Lotus Petal = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind, I'll likely to suffle if not finding business
d) Scalding Tarn, Duress, B.Wish, C.Mox, RoF, LED = Play G.P.

I just feel thats it what I'd do all the days of the week - really like this phrase Lem!, maybe you dont agree, and really nothing will happen. Joke.
hope this helps!

[Tom T]

Hi all related to the Gitaxian probe discussion...

well, I've played G.P. in so many ways depending on the scenario that I could not say if it's well played or not if I've not seen the game developing. and you all boys waste the time if you don't limítate more the scenarios, so I will propose some Case Studies scenarios and give my opinion and you can share also yours, just to help

Common Scenario to All:
- it's first turn
- you start
- you're in the next SCG tournament meta inmediatly to occur.
- Your opponent does not know you and neither your deck.

Different Scenarios:

I play the Opening list but -1 Tropical +1I.T. and more options for B.Wish
Following Hands + G.P:

a) Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Scalding Tarn, RoF = Keep G.P. I'll do scalding to volcanic to ponder, maybe Ponder makes me change my mind. play probe and ponder looking for business. Also you can check for stifle which will determine your choice of landdrop that turn

b) Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Volcanic Island, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind. everytime I ponder I'll probe first to see an extra card. Also ad nauseam or mana+business wins here
c) Gemstone Mire, Volcanic Island, B.Wish, Brainstorm,
RoF, LED = Likely to Keep, but not sure.
Would totally keep this, and volcanic go. Keep BS up for potential discard.
d) Scalding Tarn, Duress, B.Wish, Volcanic Island, RoF, LED = I keep in here G.P.tarn, go
e) Underground Sea, Ponder, Gemstone, Dark Ritual, Duress, I.Tutor = Play G.P, I want to know which route is better same as B
f) Underground Sea, Ponder, C.Mox, Dark Ritual, Duress, I.Tutor = Play G.P., I want to know which route is better led is win, and after that possible ponder into Goblins
g) Underground Sea, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Duress, RoF, Lotus Petal = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind, I'll likely to suffle if not finding business same as B
h) Underground Sea, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Gitaxian Probe, RoF, Lotus Petal = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind, I'll likely to suffle if not finding businessplay 1 probe and ponder
d) Scalding Tarn, Duress, B.Wish, C.Mox, RoF, LED = Play G.P. (You're making 12/14 Goblins here

I just feel thats it what I'd do all the days of the week - really like this phrase Lem!, maybe you dont agree, and really nothing will happen. Joke.
hope this helps!

[Lemnear]

Hi all related to the Gitaxian probe discussion...

well, I've played G.P. in so many ways depending on the scenario that I could not say if it's well played or not if I've not seen the game developing. and you all boys waste the time if you don't limítate more the scenarios, so I will propose some Case Studies scenarios and give my opinion and you can share also yours, just to help

Common Scenario to All:
- it's first turn
- you start
- you're in the next SCG tournament meta inmediatly to occur.
- Your opponent does not know you and neither your deck.

Different Scenarios:

I play the Opening list but -1 Tropical +1I.T. and more options for B.Wish
Following Hands + G.P:

a) Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Scalding Tarn, RoF = Keep G.P. I'll do scalding to volcanic to ponder, maybe Ponder makes me change my mind.

probe, Gemstone, Ponder as you can't hide that you are TES with Gemstone and sure don't want to waste the Fetchland-shuffle just for faking being RUG
b) Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Volcanic Island, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind.

I see a turn 1 combo if you draw IT/BW. Would not leave that chance slip
c) Gemstone Mire, Volcanic Island, B.Wish, Brainstorm, RoF, LED = Likely to Keep, but not sure.

keep, Volcanic, go
d) Scalding Tarn, Duress, B.Wish, Volcanic Island, RoF, LED = I keep in here G.P.

keep, Tarn, go
e) Underground Sea, Ponder, Gemstone, Dark Ritual, Duress, I.Tutor = Play G.P, I want to know which route is better

probe here. You can't hide your nature with those lands and might wanna know if to Ponder or to Duress
f) Underground Sea, Ponder, C.Mox, Dark Ritual, Duress, I.Tutor = Play G.P., I want to know which route is better

there is no red Source for EtW anyway. Probe first
g) Underground Sea, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Duress, RoF, Lotus Petal = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind, I'll likely to suffle if not finding business

Probe first as you have no Hände to disguise and once more have to decide between discard and cantrip
h) Underground Sea, Ponder, Dark Ritual, Gitaxian Probe, RoF, Lotus Petal = Keep G.P., maybe Ponder makes me change my mind, I'll likely to suffle if not finding business


d) Scalding Tarn, Duress, B.Wish, C.Mox, RoF, LED = Play G.P

guaranteed turn 1 Goblins here

I just feel thats it what I'd do all the days of the week - really like this phrase Lem!, maybe you dont agree, and really nothing will happen. Joke.
hope this helps!

pretty sure it was "any day of the week? ;)

[Tom T]

So during testing I came across some awkward hands and I felt like listing some starting hands just for practice. I know I like to figure theoretical hands out and thought I wouldn't be the only one. :wink:

t tried to list those which are hard to decide if one should mulligan or not, or have multiple first turn plays.

List: Discard spells only as protection, 1 IT in side, Tropical main (13 land)


1. On the play, hand of 7, unknown opponent, pre-board

1.1 Gemstone Mine, Chrome Mox, Burning Wish, Gemstone Mine, Volcanic Island, Dark Ritual, Rite of Flame

1.2 Underground Sea, Volcanic Island, Gitaxian Probe, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Lotus Petal, Gemstone Mine

1.3 Gemstone Mine, Burning Wish, Lotus Petal, Rite of Flame, Ad Nauseam, Burning Wish, Ponder

1.4 Gitaxian Probe, Cabal Therapy, Duress, Duress, Misty Rainforest, Ponder, Lion's Eye Diamond

1.5 Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, Dark Ritual, Ponder, Burning Wish, Empty the Warrens, Gitaxian Probe

1.6 Gitaxian Probe, Duress, Gemstone Mine, Cabal Therapy, Flooded Strand, Lotus Petal, Cabal Therapy

1.7 Burning Wish, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Lion's Eye Diamond, Empty the Warrens, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm

1.8 Underground Sea, Infernal Tutor, Flooded Strand, Chrome Mox, Infernal Tutor, Ponder, Gemstone Mine

1.9 Cabal Therapy, Duress, Ad Nauseam, Duress, Volcanic Island, Misty Rainforest, Ponder

1.10 Burning Wish, Infernal Tutor, Duress, Cabal Therapy, Gemstone Mine, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm

1.11 Ponder, Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Dark Ritual, Misty Rainforest, Flooded Strand, Lion's Eye Diamond

1.12 Dark Ritual, Duress, Cabal Therapy, Cabal Therapy, Gemstone Mide, Dark Ritual, Burning Wish

1.13 Dark Ritual, Underground Sea, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Burning Wish, Flooded Strand, Gemstone Mine

1.14 Ad Nauseam, Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Underground Sea, Rite of Flame, Cabal Therapy, Gitaxian Probe

1.15 Burning Wish, Chrome Mox, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox, Rite of Flame, Brainstorm


2. On the play, hand of 6, unknown opponent, pre-board

2.1 Brainstorm, Lotus Petal, Ad Nauseam, Burning Wish, Dark Ritual, Brainstorm

2.2 Rite of Flame, Brainstorm, Infernal Tutor, Lion's Eye Diamond, Ponder, Lotus Petal

2.3 Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Lion's Eye Diamond, Gitaxian Probe, Ponder, Volcanic Island

2.4 Gemstone Mine, Tropical Island, Ponder, Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Empty the Warrens

2.5 Burning Wish, Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Lotus Petal, Brainstorm, Gemstone Mine

[paeng4983]

1. On the play, hand of 7, unknown opponent, pre-board

1.1 , ( Keep )

1.2 , ( Mull )

1.3 ( Keep )

1.4 ( Keep )

1.5 ( Mull )

1.6 ( Mull )

1.7 ( Keep )

1.8 ( Mull )

1.9 ( Keep )

1.10 ( Mull )

1.11 ( Keep )

1.12 ( Mull )

1.13 ( Keep )

1.14 ( Keep )

1.15 ( Keep )


2. On the play, hand of 6, unknown opponent, pre-board

2.1 ( Urrghhh .. Keep )

2.2 ( Keep )

2.3 ( Keep )

2.4 ( Mull )

2.5 ( Mull )

[Asthereal]

2. On the play, hand of 6, unknown opponent, pre-board

2.1 ( Urrghhh .. Keep )

2.4 ( Mull )

2.5 ( Mull )
I'd probably go:

2.1 Mull (Petal>Brainstorm is the only play. Bricking means losing immidiately because of the Brainstorm lock.)
2.2 Keep
2.3 Keep
2.4 Keep
2.5 Keep

The last two we have very limited chances of getting a better five, I feel.
I agree with most of the 1.X choices, though I would keep the 3x Protection hands probably. But that may have something to do with what they tend to play here. 60-70% blue decks, more protection is fine. :cool:

[Togores]

Bryant. Why you would only side one random pithing vs rug? Also having one is great att all times if u side it. And a second one could easily be brainstomed away if u get to draw it or just run in into a daze as a discard for it. So why not just swaping for 2 ponders?

[Tom T]

1. On the play, hand of 7, unknown opponent, pre-board

1.1 , ( Keep )

1.2 , ( Mull )

1.3 ( Keep )

1.4 ( Keep )

1.5 ( Mull )

1.6 ( Mull )

1.7 ( Keep ) would you GP here, or mox(GP) Brainstorm?

1.8 ( Mull )

1.9 ( Keep ) would you T1 Ponder or Duress?

1.10 ( Mull )

1.11 ( Keep )

1.12 ( Mull )

1.13 ( Keep ) T2 10 Goblins most likely without protection?

1.14 ( Keep )

1.15 ( Keep ) Would you imprint the GP or play it and LP into Brainstorm?


2. On the play, hand of 6, unknown opponent, pre-board

2.1 ( Urrghhh .. Keep )

2.2 ( Keep )

2.3 ( Keep )

2.4 ( Mull )

2.5 ( Mull )

[paeng4983]

1.7 Burning Wish, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Lion's Eye Diamond, Empty the Warrens, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm
Tom T: would you GP here, or mox(GP) Brainstorm?
- Lotus Petal into Brainstorm (definitely I’ll get something from that).
(Then make sure that ETW is the top most card of my library)
If I get a land drop it, or imprint whatever color I get from Brainstorm.
Maybe I can get one or two more spells off that Brainstorm cards.
(assuming I only get one)
Drop LED. Probe, crack LED, get ETW for five or six.
That’s 12-14-16 goblins on turn one.

1.9 Cabal Therapy, Duress, Ad Nauseam, Duress, Volcanic Island, Misty Rainforest, Ponder
Tom T: would you T1 Ponder or Duress?
- I will just pass. Then Fetch and Ponder on my second turn.
Digging at a possible 5 cards is much better than digging for 3 or 4.
I have CT and Duress in case I’ll go off. Besides, we can look like we’re something like BUG deck.

1.13 Dark Ritual, Underground Sea, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Burning Wish, Flooded Strand, Gemstone Mine
Tom T: T2 10 Goblins most likely without protection?
- Two things were running in my mind when I said keep. First, a very clear 1st turn Flooded pass. Another strategy of “looking like a blue base deck.” In this way, its like a free probe for us the moment he drops his land and/or cards. Second, if it is a non blue then, definitely I’d go for it, from goblin plan to Ad Naus plan whatever the deck gives me. If it is a blue base deck, then for sure I’ll take my time.
Oh, if he has a turn one Duress/ Thoughtseize or Trinisphere or Chalice of the Void, then let it be. ^_^

1.15 Burning Wish, Chrome Mox, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox, Rite of Flame, Brainstorm
Tom T: Would you imprint the GP or play it and LP into Brainstorm?
- Against unknown opponent, with this hand, I’d probably imprint the probe and dig off my library.
Having a Mox Sapphire is a good thing especially if I ran into cantrips later on.

[paeng4983]

1.7 Burning Wish, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Lion's Eye Diamond, Empty the Warrens, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm
Tom T: would you GP here, or mox(GP) Brainstorm?
- Lotus Petal into Brainstorm (definitely I’ll get something from that).
(Then make sure that ETW is the top most card of my library)
If I get a land drop it, or imprint whatever color I get from Brainstorm.
Maybe I can get one or two more spells off that Brainstorm cards.
(assuming I only get one)
Drop LED. Probe, crack LED, get ETW for five or six.
That’s 12-14-16 goblins on turn one.

1.9 Cabal Therapy, Duress, Ad Nauseam, Duress, Volcanic Island, Misty Rainforest, Ponder
Tom T: would you T1 Ponder or Duress?
- I will just pass. Then Fetch and Ponder on my second turn.
Digging at a possible 5 cards is much better than digging for 3 or 4.
I have CT and Duress in case I’ll go off. Besides, we can look like we’re something like BUG deck.

1.13 Dark Ritual, Underground Sea, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Burning Wish, Flooded Strand, Gemstone Mine
Tom T: T2 10 Goblins most likely without protection?
- Two things were running in my mind when I said keep. First, a very clear 1st turn Flooded pass. Another strategy of “looking like a blue base deck.” In this way, its like a free probe for us the moment he drops his land and/or cards. Second, if it is a non blue then, definitely I’d go for it, from goblin plan to Ad Naus plan whatever the deck gives me. If it is a blue base deck, then for sure I’ll take my time.
Oh, if he has a turn one Duress/ Thoughtseize or Trinisphere or Chalice of the Void, then let it be. ^_^

1.15 Burning Wish, Chrome Mox, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox, Rite of Flame, Brainstorm
Tom T: Would you imprint the GP or play it and LP into Brainstorm?
- Against unknown opponent, with this hand, I’d probably imprint the probe and dig off my library.
Having a Mox Sapphire is a good thing especially if I ran into cantrips later on.

[Tom T]

1.7 Burning Wish, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Lion's Eye Diamond, Empty the Warrens, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm
Tom T: would you GP here, or mox(GP) Brainstorm?
- Lotus Petal into Brainstorm (definitely I’ll get something from that).
(Then make sure that ETW is the top most card of my library)
If I get a land drop it, or imprint whatever color I get from Brainstorm.
Maybe I can get one or two more spells off that Brainstorm cards.
(assuming I only get one)
Drop LED. Probe, crack LED, get ETW for five or six.
That’s 12-14-16 goblins on turn one.


I missed that one, thanks for pointing out!

On another note, I'm writing a couple of programs for my calculator to calculate the probability to draw a certain card. That worked, but now I'm trying to figure out the following.

Imagine you play a Brainstorm. There are 53 cards left in your deck, among those are 4 Lotus Petal and 4 LED. What is the probability that among those 3 cards there is at least 1 Lotus Petal and 1 LED.

I know it has to do with multivariate hypergeometric distribution, but here's the problem: There is one random card which can be one of the wanted cards. Also, I also want the formula to calculate with drawing more cards than 3.

Any ideas?

[callahan09]

I missed that one, thanks for pointing out!

On another note, I'm writing a couple of programs for my calculator to calculate the probability to draw a certain card. That worked, but now I'm trying to figure out the following.

Imagine you play a Brainstorm. There are 53 cards left in your deck, among those are 4 Lotus Petal and 4 LED. What is the probability that among those 3 cards there is at least 1 Lotus Petal and 1 LED.

I know it has to do with multivariate hypergeometric distribution, but here's the problem: There is one random card which can be one of the wanted cards. Also, I also want the formula to calculate with drawing more cards than 3.

Any ideas?
This should help:
http://www.gatheringmagic.com/chrismascioli-100512-of-math-and-magic-part-1-the-hypergeometric-distribution/

[Tom T]

This should help:
http://www.gatheringmagic.com/chrismascioli-100512-of-math-and-magic-part-1-the-hypergeometric-distribution/

Thanks! That helped a lot but didn't answer the scenario, because Chris addresses only situations where he demands exact amounts of specific cards.

I found this:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/magic-general/330369-mtg-math-hypergeometric-distribution

It helped me put up a formula to calculate the probability of drawing 2 different cards at least once in X draws. (Brainstorming in a LED and Petal with 4 of each in the library left and a library of 53 ->3,28%)

[Ogh!]

Thanks! That helped a lot but didn't answer the scenario, because Chris addresses only situations where he demands exact amounts of specific cards.

I found this:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/magic-general/330369-mtg-math-hypergeometric-distribution

It helped me put up a formula to calculate the probability of drawing 2 different cards at least once in X draws. (Brainstorming in a LED and Petal with 4 of each in the library left and a library of 53 ->3,28%)

This is correct. In particular:

P(1LED and 1LP and 1REST) 3.07%
P(2LED and 1LP and 0REST) 0.10%
P(1LED and 2LP and 0REST) 0.10%

P(0LED and 0LP and 3REST) 60.57%
P(1LED and 0LP and 2REST) 16.90%
P(0LED and 1LP and 2REST) 16.90%
P(2LED and 0LP and 1REST) 1.15%
P(3LED and 0LP and 0REST) 0.02%
P(0LED and 2LP and 1REST) 1.15%
P(0LED and 3LP and 0REST) 0.02%

[Tom T]

This is correct. In particular:

P(1LED and 1LP and 1REST) 3.07%
P(2LED and 1LP and 0REST) 0.10%
P(1LED and 2LP and 0REST) 0.10%

P(0LED and 0LP and 3REST) 60.57%
P(1LED and 0LP and 2REST) 16.90%
P(0LED and 1LP and 2REST) 16.90%
P(2LED and 0LP and 1REST) 1.15%
P(3LED and 0LP and 0REST) 0.02%
P(0LED and 2LP and 1REST) 1.15%
P(0LED and 3LP and 0REST) 0.02%


Does this formula consider that you've stacked your deck randomly and that, while you're drawing, the order doesn't change? I mean, I think we're calculating now that you're drawing 3x 1 card and that the deck is randomized (is this a word? :p) in between.

[Ogh!]

Does this formula consider that you've stacked your deck randomly

Yes.


and that, while you're drawing, the order doesn't change?

This doesn't matter conceptually. You could reshuffle your deck after having drawn the first card from BS, and then another time after having drawn the second card. It wouldn't affect our probability calculation as long as we account for the fact that we do not put the card(s) back that we have drawn (which we do) and that the deck was "properly randomized" in the first place.


I mean, I think we're calculating now that you're drawing 3x 1 card and that the deck is randomized (is this a word? :p) in between.

I think, I understand what you mean. Your/my calculation accounts for the fact that we do not replace a card after having drawn one. This is the correct way to calculate the probability you're looking for.

[Lemnear]

So during testing I came across some awkward hands and I felt like listing some starting hands just for practice. I know I like to figure theoretical hands out and thought I wouldn't be the only one. :wink:

t tried to list those which are hard to decide if one should mulligan or not, or have multiple first turn plays.

List: Discard spells only as protection, 1 IT in side, Tropical main (13 land)


1. On the play, hand of 7, unknown opponent, pre-board

1.1 Gemstone Mine, Chrome Mox, Burning Wish, Gemstone Mine, Volcanic Island, Dark Ritual, Rite of Flame

keep
1.2 Underground Sea, Volcanic Island, Gitaxian Probe, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Lotus Petal, Gemstone Mine

keep
1.3 Gemstone Mine, Burning Wish, Lotus Petal, Rite of Flame, Ad Nauseam, Burning Wish, Ponder

mull
1.4 Gitaxian Probe, Cabal Therapy, Duress, Duress, Misty Rainforest, Ponder, Lion's Eye Diamond

keep
1.5 Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, Dark Ritual, Ponder, Burning Wish, Empty the Warrens, Gitaxian Probe

mull
1.6 Gitaxian Probe, Duress, Gemstone Mine, Cabal Therapy, Flooded Strand, Lotus Petal, Cabal Therapy

keep
1.7 Burning Wish, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Lion's Eye Diamond, Empty the Warrens, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm

keep
1.8 Underground Sea, Infernal Tutor, Flooded Strand, Chrome Mox, Infernal Tutor, Ponder, Gemstone Mine

keep
1.9 Cabal Therapy, Duress, Ad Nauseam, Duress, Volcanic Island, Misty Rainforest, Ponder

keep
1.10 Burning Wish, Infernal Tutor, Duress, Cabal Therapy, Gemstone Mine, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm

mull
1.11 Ponder, Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Dark Ritual, Misty Rainforest, Flooded Strand, Lion's Eye Diamond

keep
1.12 Dark Ritual, Duress, Cabal Therapy, Cabal Therapy, Gemstone Mide, Dark Ritual, Burning Wish

mull
1.13 Dark Ritual, Underground Sea, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Burning Wish, Flooded Strand, Gemstone Mine

keep
1.14 Ad Nauseam, Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Underground Sea, Rite of Flame, Cabal Therapy, Gitaxian Probe

keep
1.15 Burning Wish, Chrome Mox, Gitaxian Probe, Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox, Rite of Flame, Brainstorm

mull

2. On the play, hand of 6, unknown opponent, pre-board

2.1 Brainstorm, Lotus Petal, Ad Nauseam, Burning Wish, Dark Ritual, Brainstorm

keep
2.2 Rite of Flame, Brainstorm, Infernal Tutor, Lion's Eye Diamond, Ponder, Lotus Petal

mull
2.3 Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Lion's Eye Diamond, Gitaxian Probe, Ponder, Volcanic Island

keep
2.4 Gemstone Mine, Tropical Island, Ponder, Gemstone Mine, Lotus Petal, Empty the Warrens

keep
2.5 Burning Wish, Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, Lotus Petal, Brainstorm, Gemstone Mine

keep

Took a while to respond. Outcome shouldn't surprise you guys. If questions appear, lemme know

[Asthereal]

If questions appear, lemme know
I have one:

Why keep 2.1 and mull 2.2? Both have only a Petal as IMS, but 2.2 has Ponder and Brainstorm as cantrips, where 2.1 has 2x Brainstorm. This means 2.1 has Petal into Brainstorm as only play, and not finding a land means you lock yourself out of the game. 2.2 can Ponder instead, which digs a card deeper for the land, increasing the chances of finding your land by 33%. On this fact alone I would say 2.2 is 33% better than 2.1. The potential Brainstorm lock only adds to this percentage. What's your analysis? What did I miss?

[Lemnear]

I have one:

Why keep 2.1 and mull 2.2? Both have only a Petal as IMS, but 2.2 has Ponder and Brainstorm as cantrips, where 2.1 has 2x Brainstorm. This means 2.1 has Petal into Brainstorm as only play, and not finding a land means you lock yourself out of the game. 2.2 can Ponder instead, which digs a card deeper for the land, increasing the chances of finding your land by 33%. On this fact alone I would say 2.2 is 33% better than 2.1. The potential Brainstorm lock only adds to this percentage. What's your analysis? What did I miss?

You asume that I would cast a spell in my first turn here, which isn't the case. The reason for keeping 2.1 and mull 2.2 are the remaining cards. Let us remove the Petal, the cantrips and other blanks:

2.1 Ad Nauseam, Dark Ritual
2.2 Rite of Flame, Infernal Tutor, Lion's Eye Diamond

If you draw a dark Ritual or initial mana sources for hand 2.1, it can combo within the first 3 turns despite the mulligan, unlike 2.2.

[Asthereal]

It's the main thing I consider for my calculation about keeping a hand, yes. "What does this hand do?" 2.1 is better from the point of view of doing nothing at all and just hoping to draw awesome stuff. But let's look at the vacuum considerations:

Are you really willing to start on the play, and simply say "go"?
This means the opponent will know that you cannot really do anything, and that you need more stuff to go off. He'll recon you are on one of these decks: Storm, Belcher, Dredge. And saying "go" means we have no proper means to cast business on turn one. No lands to cast cantrips or no cantrips to cast off lands. Probably the first. They will be prone to counter our Petal with that info. Saying "go" with that hand loses to any Spell Pierce (or better counter), Thoughtseize (or Duress, Inquisition). Besides that, what are the odds of drawing into useful stuff? We want a land, another Petal, a Ritual or maybe a Mox. That's 13+3+3+3=22. 22 out of 53 is 42%. The rest just doesn't help us. Chances are very high that we'll just sit there for two turns, not being able to do anything. My guess is that casting Brainstorm off of Petal is actually the better play here.

[Lemnear]

It's the main thing I consider for my calculation about keeping a hand, yes. "What does this hand do?" 2.1 is better from the point of view of doing nothing at all and just hoping to draw awesome stuff. But let's look at the vacuum considerations:

Are you really willing to start on the play, and simply say "go"?
This means the opponent will know that you cannot really do anything, and that you need more stuff to go off. He'll recon you are on one of these decks: Storm, Belcher, Dredge. And saying "go" means we have no proper means to cast business on turn one. No lands to cast cantrips or no cantrips to cast off lands. Probably the first. They will be prone to counter our Petal with that info. Saying "go" with that hand loses to any Spell Pierce (or better counter), Thoughtseize (or Duress, Inquisition). Besides that, what are the odds of drawing into useful stuff? We want a land, another Petal, a Ritual or maybe a Mox. That's 13+3+3+3=22. 22 out of 53 is 42%. The rest just doesn't help us. Chances are very high that we'll just sit there for two turns, not being able to do anything. My guess is that casting Brainstorm off of Petal is actually the better play here.

The point is, that if you even find a land, you are still stuck with 1 IMS, except that you let your opponent now that you are playing storm. There is no advantage in replacing an IMS + Cantrip for another IMS. It's pointless to discuss the impact of counters or discard on your decisions of how to play these hands as both are too weak to seriously fight back. Sure you can drop the petal and pass the turn to be able to respond to a thoughtseize.

[Asthereal]

The point is, that if you even find a land, you are still stuck with 1 IMS, except that you let your opponent now that you are playing storm. There is no advantage in replacing an IMS + Cantrip for another IMS. It's pointless to discuss the impact of counters or discard on your decisions of how to play these hands as both are too weak to seriously fight back. Sure you can drop the petal and pass the turn to be able to respond to a thoughtseize.
Shouldn't we mulligan both 2.1 and 2.2 to five then? Let's face it, both have almost no chance to beat any of the most played decks, except for maybe a bad D&T hand.

Trading the Petal for a sustainable mana source does make sense if we want to cast the second cantrip. The sustainable mana source will be vulnerable to Wasteland though. It's hard to calculate odds for both liones of play. On the play simply doing nothing and hoping to draw into good cards is usually just a recipe for disaster, but Petal into cantrip also has limited chances for success.

[Lemnear]

Shouldn't we mulligan both 2.1 and 2.2 to five then? Let's face it, both have almost no chance to beat any of the most played decks, except for maybe a bad D&T hand.

Trading the Petal for a sustainable mana source does make sense if we want to cast the second cantrip. The sustainable mana source will be vulnerable to Wasteland though. It's hard to calculate odds for both liones of play. On the play simply doing nothing and hoping to draw into good cards is usually just a recipe for disaster, but Petal into cantrip also has limited chances for success.

I prefer saving the Petal and hoping to topdeck a Mox, a land or another Petal to be able to combo than praying to find a better 5 than a 6 already containing Petal + Dark Ritual + Cantrip + Ad Nauseam. i have no idea why you want to ship that reasonable 6 in 2.1 against an unknown opponent. You can also keep 2.2 with the same mindset of "if I draw another IMS" but you have less outs to blind-hit than 2.1 which was the reason for me to mark it a mulligan. Petal into cantrip to find a land simply doesn't make sense.

[Bryant Cook]

Open question to everyone:

It's been a month or two with Pithing Needle, how has it been for everyone? Has it been better than additional Abrupt Decay/Pyroblast?

[Vandalize]

Open question to everyone:

It's been a month or two with Pithing Needle, how has it been for everyone? Has it been better than additional Abrupt Decay/Pyroblast?

Everytime I was able to resolve it against Miracles it was awesome (except once, that I needled his SDT, and he kept flipping CMC 1~2 blindly, to counter my stuff, but I guess that happens). I don't usually board it in against other decks (maybe against Reanimator and Sneak and Show, but haven't played these in a while).

I think the main reason to like Pithing Needle over Pyroblast is that it's proactive. And the main reason to like Pithing Needle over the extra Abrupt Decay is obviously the prohibitive mana cost of the latest.

[saur]

Open question to everyone:

It's been a month or two with Pithing Needle, how has it been for everyone? Has it been better than additional Abrupt Decay/Pyroblast?

I've top 4'd two events with 20+ people with Pithing Needle in the board recently. Miracles was strangely absent from my metagame during this time, so my experience might not speak for everyone. But for the sake of discussion, I'm going to run through some of my matchups and how I evaluated Pithing Needle after game 1.

1) RUG Delver. Only PN target is Wasteland. I decided not to bring it in. Wasteland would have blown me out, but fortunately my opponent never played one.

2) BUG Delver. Both times I managed to go off before Lilliana was a possibility. Opponent preferred to play blue lands to hold up Flusterstorm and Daze rather than waste my lands.

3) UW Stoneblade. This player runs no Wastelands and 2x Sensei's Divining Top, which I didn't even see until it was too late for him in game 3. Since we don't have a many ways to beat Tap SDT -> Draw FoW, is it worth siding in PN in this matchup?

4) 12 Post. I brought in PN blindly to stop Engineered Explosives. It turns out this 12 Post list only boards in more FoW and Flusterstorm against combo.

5) Death and Taxes. PN would stop random tricks like vial in Thalia in response to Chain of Vapor on Thalia, or Mother of runes giving Thalia protection from blue, but the DnT players in my area haven't learned to save hatebears for my combo turn yet so they all just die to Burning Wish -> Massacre if the game goes long.

Long story short, I sided in Pithing Needle once against 12 Post. It wasn't fantastic. This is only based on my limited experience.

[Lemnear]

Well, the question was if Decay/Pyroblast would have been better for the current metagame or against Miracles/S&T in particular. I have no tournament data to add anything useful to the discussion, other than agreeing that lucky CB blindflips are indeed annoying

[BrettF]

For anyone who is not loving needle, i would advocate using a sb slot to move the trop back to the sb and play a 5th fetch as the 13th land.You can sb up to 14 lands in the matchups that want it. Just making the deck better as a whole could be stronger than a sb card that never has room to be boarded in. Eg: improving brainstorms, not drawing trop g1, avoiding wasteland etc

[Tom T]

Open question to everyone:

It's been a month or two with Pithing Needle, how has it been for everyone? Has it been better than additional Abrupt Decay/Pyroblast?

I don't have any experience with Miracles lately, but I have against RUG- and BUG Delver. In those match-ups they are pretty awesome to have in your opening hand. However, this is usually not the case and later on it becomes a dead draw and I wish it is another discard spell at that moment.

On another note, I've been missing the 10th business-spell occasionally. I'm opting the second Ad Nauseam at this rate. My fellow dutchmen from Team Nijmegen (Bahamuth and co.) play the 2nd Ad Nauseam for a pretty long time and seem to be sold on it.

Rob, if you read this, can you share your experience with that configuration?

~Tom