PDA

View Full Version : TES @ Eindhoven 3rd of March 2013



Asthereal
03-04-2013, 06:24 AM
This report is a bit different from the others here.
Read only of you want to learn to play TES and need advice on how to NOT play the deck. :tongue:

I played a small tourney with TES yesterday (16 people). I failed miserably, because of mental tiredness and lack of routine in playing Storm in competition (last time was two years ago). But... the deck was brilliant. It was really just me being terrible.

1. Against Jund:
G1. On the play I open Sea>Ponder. He plays a Deathrite guy off a Badlands. I know he's on Jund so I make 10 Goblins on turn 2. It's enough.
Side: -4 Silence, +2 Chain, +2 Decay
G2. I had to mull, and he Inquisitioned an important card away. At some stage I have to go off. I calculate for 5 minutes and find the only possible win. I have to Infernal for an extra Rite of Flame, play Chrome mox not imprinting anything and then I have just enough storm for a lethal Tendrils. But mana colours are also difficult. I have to play Rite first, then Infernal from a red mana, copying the second Rite. But my body plays Rite, Rite... oh shit, I needed to copy that second Rite. I die because of two Deathrite dudes eating my spells.
Side: nothing - perhaps it would be better to side -2 Chain, +2 Thoughtseize, but I hadn't seen that much discard, so I decided to keep the Chains for the possible artifact bounce engine.
G3. I draw badly, cantrip a bit and we go into time. On turn 4 of the extra turns, I go off. The only option is Diminishing Returns, but at least I will have lots of mana floating. I play Wish, crack my two LEDs in response for Black and Red, I write down mana and storm count, and figure out that I needed UU to play Returns, but I forgot to crack a LED for blue. I fucking hate myself at this point and want to quit playing. He kills me on turn 5 of extra time.
That should have been 3-0 for me, but I manage to lose 1-2...

2. Against BUG Still:
G1. On the draw I cantrip a bit and find only protection. He has no clock, so I wait until I find a win. I find one, and go off. I forget about his Deed, and get my three LEDs destroyed. OMG here we go again. Still, since his Deed is gone I can now create 32 Goblin tokens from the EtW I already had in my hand. They go the distance.
Side: -1 Mox, -1 Infernal (for tutor chain option from Wish) +2 Thoughtseize
G2. I have to mull into a difficult 6. He has a million counterspells and a Clique. I die before I find enough protection. No chance here.
G3. He has a lot of counterspells again. I have to play carefully. I at some stage manage to trick him into believing it didn't really matter what I did, so he allowed me to play Petal, Petal, hardcast Probe, and then cannot properly stop Empty the Warrens from my hand. He counterspells one copy, but I get six tokens through. They look like they will go the distance, but in the first turn after time was called I try to do some extra damage with Grapeshot just to be sure. I Silence him. He lets it resolve. I forget to play Chrome mox before cracking my LED, which leaves me one storm short of directly killing him. He is on one life and draws for his turn: Pernicious Deed! His only out. He kills my tokens and we draw. At this point I really hate myself and consider dropping out, but I'm no coward, so I battle on, if only for the experience.

3. Against The Gate or whatever. Mono black with Smallpox, a million discard spells and some dudes.
G1. On the draw again. He discards important stuff. I still manage to Empty for four goblins (still, better than nothing). He draws a Gatekeeper of Malakir and casts it. It stops down my onslaught, but I'm still hoping for a small Tendrils to finish him off from the 12 life he is on. But he draws more discard and a Tombstalker kills me before I can find the kill (Brainstorm shows me only accell, and no way to shuffle).
Side: -4 Silence, +2 Thoughtseize, +2 Abrupt Decay
G2. On the play, I can go for a turn 1 Empty for six tokens. It's such a small number that I doubt they can get there. One Gatekeeper stops me already, and I know he will side in Engineered Plagues, probably even a full set. I decide against it and open with a Duress. I see Seize, Seize, Hymn, Swamp, Swamp, Wasteland, Extraction. Oh fuck. I take the Hymn, since one of his two Seizes will stop me from going off anyway. He Seizes my kill away and continues to draw another five 1 CMC discard spells. He extracts my Infernals, and Lili locks me out. Good news is: he has no clock. He destroys all my lands, and Lili ultimates like three times, destroying my artifact mana. My LEDs survive (because of my choices at the Lili ultimates), and at some stage I have almost no deck anymore, and finally get the opportunity to play Brainstorm, cracking four LEDs in response. I decide to try it, because I have almost no chance at winning anyway in this situation. So I crack the LEDs for UUU, BBB, BBB, RRR and pray I draw a decent 3. I get Rite, Chrome Mox, Brainstorm. Cast second Brainstorm, my extra card is a Gemstone Mine. Shit happens. Worth a try anyway. If I had gone for the turn 1 six tokens, I would have won. Should I have gone for it? I had no way of seeing his hand in the process, otherwise I would have been a mana short of casting EtW.

4. Against LED-Madness-Vengevine or something. Cool deck, but not very good in my opinion.
G1. On the play. I Silence and then make 14 Goblins. He dumps his hand too, but he has Goblin Guide, Basking Rootwalla and a Vengevine. My 14 Goblins are better.
Side: -4 Silence, +2 Chain of Vapor, +2 Abrupt Decay (guessing he would side some permanent based hate - turned out he didn't have much)
G2. On the draw. He again drops his hand, this time with a Guide, a Memnite and an Arrogant Wurm. I turn 1 Ad Nauseam and kill him. Why be lucky against this deck? I needed the luck last round! :(

5. Against UWr StoneBlade
G1. On the play I keep a loose seven, but I correctly estimate he is on a slow blue deck, so my keep is ok (two lands, two protection spells, probe, rite and petal). I open with Duress. I take his FoW. Then I draw and Probe into fine stuff. Turn 4 I go off with silence into a tutor chain. He has no chance.
Side: -1 Mox, -1 Infernal (for tutor chain option from Wish), +2 Thoughtseize
G2. I cannot find protection with my one Ponder, but on turn 2 my hand is one accelleration short of being able to go off twice. He is tapped out (he cast SFM), so I decide to go land-rit-rit-Ad Nauseam to bait a FoW, and then go off again later, hopefully protected. He indeed FoWs my Ad Nauseam. I proceed to never find protection, and actually I draw so badly I cannot even go off again, despite needing only one accellerator. He counters my every play and kills me with SFM carrying SoFaF and a Batterskull.
G3. I have to mull to five. I cantrip a bit and see he has many counterspells. I manage to bait a few, discard some, and I am one mana short of Silence into like 14 goblin tokens. I don't draw that one mana for three turns, allowing him to set up what he needs to stop me. When I finally draw my mana it is too late. Unlucky.

Concluding:
- The deck is brilliant
- I am not so brilliant
- I am only lucky when I don't need it, and never when I do need it (but then again, being so terrible I kind of deserved that)

My list for reference:
Main deck: Bryants latest list -1 Ponder +1 Chrome Mox (I expected aggro and Jund-like stuff and wanted to be a bit faster. Never regretted this choice.)

Sideboard was different though:
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Diminishing Returns
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Past in Flames
1 Grapeshot
1 Hull Breach
3 Thoughtseize (this is personal taste, I don't like Therapies very much)
3 Abrupt Decay
2 Chain of Vapor
This sideboard appeared to be fine. During the tourney I never wanted something else in there.

Lemnear
03-04-2013, 07:11 AM
Did you realize, why Therapy is better than thoughtseize against stoneblade and BUG? You'll likely 2-1 or 3-1 them at the point you mentioned, hell you can even trick them out by casting therapy, Instantly naming a card to provoke a response (spell pierce likely) and make a New choice on resulution.

Match 5 Game 2 is a joke: Why an unprotected attempt in turn 2+ against a deck that mulls into FoW 100% of the time?

Asthereal
03-04-2013, 07:26 AM
I like Thoughtseize better than Therapy mostly because of other matchups than the two you mentioned: against Maverick and other midrange that plays hatebears but no counters, I like to board discard that can target hatebears, and removal for hatebears that make it to the table. Here Duress and Silence have to go, so I am left with only Probes to make the Therapies work well enough. I don't like that, because with my luck, those Therapies just miss. That's why I have Seizes. They always hit. The additional life loss never killed me (yet :tongue:).

In the StoneBlade round I think I played well, and with a little less bad luck (I estimated I had about 75-80% chance of getting what I needed) I would have even won with my mull to five. Game 2 was just unwinnable. The BUG match I should have won regardless of my sideboard choices. I just fucked it up (excuse my language, but then again it was so bad it deserves terrible language). The thing is: if they have multiples in hand, and I have seen their hand already (even if that was before they drew the second copy of whatever card I saw), their only correct play is just to counter a Therapy as soon as I play one. And then the Therapy has made them lose one counter, which Thoughtseize would also have done. The outside chance of Therapy being better than Thoughtseize for me just doesn't cut it.

But again, it's personal taste. I always mention that, because for very good players with well tuned lists and lots of experience and routine, Therapies might be better. Bryant plays them, so they're probably pretty good. :wink: For me personally they don't work well, so I play the safe choice.

Lemnear
03-04-2013, 08:10 AM
I have to mention I really like the concept of writing a report to hint other players on common mistakes and problems instead of just successes which often boils down on "turn 1 Ad Nauseam gets there" with that deck.

Asthereal
03-04-2013, 09:06 AM
Thanks. Yeah I tend to prefer reports that are honest about mistakes and include lots of detail about decisions, so I try to write them the same way. And if you only read reports about successes, you don't get to know about how incredibly unforgiving this deck can be. One mistake and it's lights out. That doesn't happen with a deck like StoneBlade. One mistake can in that deck often be saved by a lovely topdeck or so. If you mess up with TES, you're just done with. That's why it's so incredibly important to be fit, to calculate well, and to execute your combo turn perfectly. Mistakes are easily made, and reading about them can help identify situations where one is prone to make a mistake, and make yourself pause for a sec, rethink, and execute properly.

Funny thing is: if you look at my mistakes, it's all in execution fase. I calculate well, my decisions are informed, my strategies are okay, but as soon as I find the win, I mess it up. That's good to know. Perhaps I will take some more time next tournament to think about each play I make during the execution fase.

jin
03-05-2013, 01:13 AM
Thanks. Yeah I tend to prefer reports that are honest about mistakes and include lots of detail about decisions, so I try to write them the same way. And if you only read reports about successes, you don't get to know about how incredibly unforgiving this deck can be. One mistake and it's lights out. That doesn't happen with a deck like StoneBlade. One mistake can in that deck often be saved by a lovely topdeck or so. If you mess up with TES, you're just done with. That's why it's so incredibly important to be fit, to calculate well, and to execute your combo turn perfectly. Mistakes are easily made, and reading about them can help identify situations where one is prone to make a mistake, and make yourself pause for a sec, rethink, and execute properly.

Funny thing is: if you look at my mistakes, it's all in execution fase. I calculate well, my decisions are informed, my strategies are okay, but as soon as I find the win, I mess it up. That's good to know. Perhaps I will take some more time next tournament to think about each play I make during the execution fase.

I think the thing is to not get too excited when you see the win. Sometimes when you get gitty, you lose focus. Also, I like reports that talk about failures, but you should really give more details on how that failure came to. More details about your opening hands and your SB decisions might help people learn more about your decision making.

I also think that taking note of cantrip cards that you see also greatly help people in learning how you lost with the deck. I don't think the method you did it where by naming cards that didn't get you there is very helpful. Next time, if you are writing a losing report make sure to include:

1. Opening hand choices
2. Board development and disruption that lead you to that position (revealing possibly how to get out of it)
3. SB choice leading to answers or lack there of

As the other poster said, the unprotected Ad Nauseam was helpful in showing that if you have business and no protection, you shouldn't send the business out to bait counter magic as waiting for another business spell is not ideal. Without other information on your hand like if you had cantrips, or tutors, or what not, people cannot learn from that mistake. Besides knowing about the double Dark Ritual and the Ad Nauseam, what other cards did you have? Could you have cantripped into protection? Could you have used IT to bait instead? Could you have Burning Wished into protection? These are all relevant questions that are missing from your report that could help people learn from your mistakes.

You may also provide suggestions on avoiding your situation after every loss. I just didn't feel like I learned as much as I could have from your report...

Asthereal
03-05-2013, 02:11 AM
Good feedback, thanks. :)
I usually don't take too many notes, so most of your tips are somewhat hard to actually do. Next to that I wrote this report during my break from work, while I didn't have the notes with me that I did take, so I wrote it from memory completely.
If you have questions about what you would like to learn more about, let me know. I'll check my notes and see whether I can reconstruct the situation.

Today I will include my sideboard choices in the opening post. EDIT: Done.

EDIT2: Forgot to respond to this comment:

Match 5 Game 2 is a joke: Why an unprotected attempt in turn 2+ against a deck that mulls into FoW 100% of the time?
He was tapped out, did not play Daze, and my hand was one accelleration short of being able to go off again.
I decided I could invest three cards in an attempt and dig for that extra accelleration afterwards to go for a second try.
Actually my hand was pretty awesome apart from the lack of protection... I'll clarify in the opening post.

Artlee
03-05-2013, 04:46 AM
Did you realize, why Therapy is better than thoughtseize against stoneblade and BUG? You'll likely 2-1 or 3-1 them at the point you mentioned, hell you can even trick them out by casting therapy, Instantly naming a card to provoke a response (spell pierce likely) and make a New choice on resulution.


Unfortunately I cannot back this up with a qupte from comprehensive rules, but I am pretty sure that is not allowed given that I am understanding your comment correctly. If you cast therapy and instantly name a card, and opponent does not respond, you took a shortcut and you are not allowed to change name of card. If the opponent does respond, he/she denies the shortcut.

Asthereal
03-05-2013, 04:56 AM
Good question for the rules thread. I'll post it there.

jin
03-05-2013, 06:13 AM
Good feedback, thanks. :)
I usually don't take too many notes, so most of your tips are somewhat hard to actually do. Next to that I wrote this report during my break from work, while I didn't have the notes with me that I did take, so I wrote it from memory completely.
If you have questions about what you would like to learn more about, let me know. I'll check my notes and see whether I can reconstruct the situation.

Today I will include my sideboard choices in the opening post. EDIT: Done.

EDIT2: Forgot to respond to this comment:

He was tapped out, did not play Daze, and my hand was one accelleration short of being able to go off again.
I decided I could invest three cards in an attempt and dig for that extra accelleration afterwards to go for a second try.
Actually my hand was pretty awesome apart from the lack of protection... I'll clarify in the opening post.

Great, glad I helped. The SB choice makes things much clearer for learners. I think this bit at the end where you explain why you went for the Ad Nauseam is also useful in your tournament report for teaching others. It might also be important to note the lands you have in play if you can. Maybe a Dark Ritual and tapping 2 lands would have suffice for Ad Nauseam? Maybe not. We don't know.

Also, I understand that sometimes we have to reconstruct the details from memory, and it's pretty unmotivating to take notes while losing, so great job there! Regardless, thanks for the report. Hope to read more about your experiences in the future.

Lemnear
03-05-2013, 06:16 AM
Unfortunately I cannot back this up with a qupte from comprehensive rules, but I am pretty sure that is not allowed given that I am understanding your comment correctly. If you cast therapy and instantly name a card, and opponent does not respond, you took a shortcut and you are not allowed to change name of card. If the opponent does respond, he/she denies the shortcut.

Edit: Post contains VERY EVIL advices. Do not read if you easily feel filthy taking advantage of mindtricks.

You are correct with this. However the targeted Card is named on resolution and snap-calling cards like Brainstorm, spell pierce or Lightning Bolt often provokes defending players to cast those in response for low value which allows you to Name a new cardname on resolution. It's a shady mindtrick which often rips hands with several different counterspells.

Imagine the opponents hand contains brainstorm, 2 spell Pierce and a FoW with 2 untapped mana. You probe him, cast therapy and snap-Name brainstorm. Since he has Double Protection with Force + Spell Pierce he might not give you the successful discard and brainstorms into something random and let Therapy resolve to show it's failure. At this point however you are allowed to rename but their Window to Counter the therapy is closed and you name "Spell Pierce" instead gett'n rid of 3 cards with one Therapy (2 Spell Pierce + Brainstorm) and if he failed to pick a Blue Card with the Brainstorm he even loose ANY protection AND turns from unbeatable into a goldfish

2nd Edit: The example might Even work better if you snap-call FoW, which provokes a Brainstorm to Hide the FoW ontop of the opponents Library

3rd Edit: feels dirty; takes a shower

Asthereal
03-05-2013, 06:52 AM
@Jin: I didn't have the third land I needed for using only one Ritual with the Ad Nauseam. Actually, my memory tells me I had only one land. Additionally, my opponent was tapped out when I tried the first combo attempt. He could only stop me with FoW + blue card, so I would at least get one FoW and make a possible second FoW worse because he would also have one blue card less. It seemed a good idea at the time, because I had good chances of finding accell for a second attempt. It's just nasty that I get millions of protection spells when I have only 7 in the deck, but after sideboarding I go up to 9, and suddenly I cannot find them anymore. That does suck...

@Lemnear: I put up a question about this in the rules thread. We'll see whether you need that shower, or maybe were just being smart. :wink:
EDIT: The first reply in the rule thread indicates this is actually allowed. Bitter-sweet-sour stuff, man! :eek:

Megadeus
03-05-2013, 07:07 AM
I have to mention I really like the concept of writing a report to hint other players on common mistakes and problems instead of just successes which often boils down on "turn 1 Ad Nauseam gets there" with that deck.

Thats a good point. Usually my tourney reports that I won were either, "This game I sculpted and then silence and won", or "T1 I Played Ad Nauseum from 18 life and proceeded to Win" lol

Lemnear
03-05-2013, 07:11 AM
Conclusion: Black "Ancestral Recalls" are pretty playable xP



Thats a good point. Usually my tourney reports that I won were either, "This game I sculpted and then silence and won", or "T1 I Played Ad Nauseum from 18 life and proceeded to Win" lol

It's common that reports note only the deciding events but not the starting grip or the decisions between because it takes lots of notes and time aside from the understandable low motivation to actually write anything about your own mistakes and/or punted tournaments, even exactly those wield the most precious information for players. There is no valuable information nor entertainment in reading One-liners, describing a game