[Deck] Fetchland Tendrils

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawatarix

has there been a discussion about silence vs. cabal therapy ?

I'm far from a Doomsday expert so i was wondering which kind of protection you prefer and why.
It seems that in a metagame without that many wastelands as it is now, a whitesplash for chants looks appealing.

---

There has been a lot of discussion about it in the past. There is a whole thread about on Stormboards if you are interested.

Typically it is a metagame call. One package usually has an edge over the other in some matchups. That being said, some people have objective and subjective reasons for chants vs discard beyond just metagame. Wasteland isn't awful for the UBRWg DDFT since you can fetch the basics and the deck functions well off those.

Discard gives you more information on your opponents hand which can help sculpt your decision tree (urgency, angles of disruption, foreshadowing the need for an answer, etc). Chants have advantages in beating certain hatecards, ie an opponent who has Stifle, Surgical Extraction, Pryoblast, Hydroblast is easy for Silence but could be tough for Duress.

This is all obvious stuff that I'm sure you get. I typically favor the setups on either end of the spectrum of 7 chants or 7 discard. I've found the splits to be kind of clunky. There are certainly some good arguments for them. I just like having clearer mana requirement priorities. In matchups when you need to fetch basics you then have to decide whether you need swamp over plains.

On the topic of Chants vs Discard. I'd like to actually discuss it here, instead of every time someone posts something telling them to just go to stormboards. Chants are better against Dredge (can chant on draw step after the Dredge, then race), Storm (obvious), Stifle/Surgical/Pyroblast/Snare/Flusterstorm(Delver), IMO Burn but that is debatable(Chants can stop Blasts/Bolts post DD and can Chant walk Eidolon/Race).

Discard is better against Hymns, Show and Tell and CB. It also is generally better in an Unknown format where just having 11 MD cards to gain info is important. Discard makes the deck slightly faster because you can use discard the turn before comboing off, chants don't work well with pass the turn piles. Discard as protection is better against hatebears but chant walking and Karakas helps enough that I don't think one is better than the other at it. Chants are better with Time Spiral though.

One major reason why I used to play chants is because of the ability to pretend to be Miracles and the significantly better RUG Delver match up. Going Strand/Delta to Island/Plains/Tundra or even just Karakas into SDT makes everyone thing you are Miracles, then you cast a Turn 3 Chant and kill them.
I didn't always run a Plains, but almost always did, I cut it when Treasure Cruise became popular and RUG Delver/Wasteland became less popular, then I eventually switched to discard, and ran 3-4 Silence with 3-4 Duress and 1 CT in the SB. I have tested all chants and therapies for an EtW strat that wasn't great.

I currently am on Discard because of the metagame and it is better with Treasure Cruse, also Young Pyromancer with Cabal Therapy is fun.

Chants are crap against storm. Who is running the full combo right against an unknown blue deck? Discard and Probes unveil your tech to Dodge it by either picking it and combo off or by stripping you off one of your combo components to delay your critical turn and deal with Silence later, while the Players with Silence has no information about his/her opponents hand and preferable sequencing of cantrips/disruption throughout the game (especially relevant in the combo mirror)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Chants are crap against storm. Who is running the full combo right against an unknown blue deck? Discard and Probes unveil your tech to Dodge it by either picking it and combo off or by stripping you off one of your combo components to delay your critical turn and deal with Silence later, while the Players with Silence has no information about his/her opponents hand and preferable sequencing of cantrips/disruption throughout the game (especially relevant in the combo mirror)

---

I get what you are saying. And while I do think people have a tendancy to overrate Silence in the storm matchup (Past in Flames says hello) I do think Silence effects have an edge over discard spells in combination with Sensei's Divining Top. A Silence floating on top with an active top is hard to beat for storm,

Wow, a basic Plains only for Silence? Rock solid vs Wasteland but otherwise pretty useless if you want to cast anything other than silence.
Same for Karakas.

right now discard is a rare type of hate and more people start to play decks with only countermagic as their choice of disruption.
So Silence makes perfect sense here as it dodges all kinds of specific countermagic such as spell snare/pyroblast/hydroblast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawatarix

Wow, a basic Plains only for Silence? Rock solid vs Wasteland but otherwise pretty useless if you want to cast anything other than silence.
Same for Karakas.

right now discard is a rare type of hate and more people start to play decks with only countermagic as their choice of disruption.
So Silence makes perfect sense here as it dodges all kinds of specific countermagic such as spell snare/pyroblast/hydroblast.

---

Plains isn't always only for Silence since sometimes people opt for a package of 4 Silence & 3 Orim's Chant. Also in the past the white addition has opened the door for white cards out of the sideboard such as Grand Abolisher, Serenity, and others. With as many cantrips as DDFT runs and as many lands the deck can have (up to 18) a single plains isn't that disruptive.

Karakas is there less to cast Silence or white cards and more to hedge against certain hatecards (hatebears, griselbrand, etc). It serves as a fantastic option to add to your Doomsday piles if necessary. Mass Karakas, 3 in the 75, was considered a viable approach during certain metagames not so long ago.

The manabase is UBRWg DDFT is actually reasonably smooth.

Back on the topic of chants vs discard - right now I'm in the 7 chant camp. I run extra cantrips and I like being able to be slightly more aggressive with cantrips in the early turns and sling chants when I'm ready later. Slower approach but so far so good.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawatarix

Wow, a basic Plains only for Silence? Rock solid vs Wasteland but otherwise pretty useless if you want to cast anything other than silence.
Same for Karakas.

right now discard is a rare type of hate and more people start to play decks with only countermagic as their choice of disruption.
So Silence makes perfect sense here as it dodges all kinds of specific countermagic such as spell snare/pyroblast/hydroblast.

---

Kai, back then the basic plains was quite good, to grind wastelands countermagic decks, just by overloading them with chants.
was usual that you just fetch for plains at the start and then just with the basic plains and without fetching more to trigger styfle begin to chant a rug deck to dead without letting him wastland your only White source.
its quite good, In a 7x chant build the plains was cool.
Played it back ago.
http://www.tcdecks.net/deck.php?id=7561&iddeck=54923

The helm of awakening and grapeshot combo in the sideboard looks pretty sweet, when do board them in?

I had them back in as a second option, usualy vs maverik. It was able to win thru cannonist and tegg.
Did it a few times. And also as a plan b vs decks that could tempve your win options. And grapeshot kills hatebears.
Like dd pile pass.
Including if no sensei on this cards:
Sensei
Sensei
Helm
Grapeshot
Survive.
In my opp turn brainstorm
Im my turn play helm. Then spin into infinite the senseis. Look with one and now draw grapshot and win.

This combo dodges a cannonista and a tegg in play.

Chants are your best card against storm. They can't combo off if you have a Silence you can combo off if they have a discard. How do they combo off if you float a Chant on top off your deck with SDT?

Lab Maniac has kinda replaced Helm Grapeshot because it is cheeper to win through a Teeg, it can't win through a Cannonist, but you can make a pile where CoV is the top card and make a PtT pile.

If you go back to playing Chants/Silence, you might as well just play UBwg again with Ill-Gotten Gains and Infernals.

Thx alot,

Doomsday is maybe the coolest deck out there but honestly, is there at least one reason to play it over other stormdecks like ANT or TES.
I have been piloting both decks for a long period of time now and had also success with them. Now it is time to explore more complicated decks and DDFT seems like the ideal deck to toy around.
I'm still in the learning process and although i've learned a few kill lines the deck doesn't feel as powerful as the other stormdeck mostly because it is slower by a turn or two and the doomsday lifeloss especially if you pass the turn afterwards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawatarix

Thx alot,

Doomsday is maybe the coolest deck out there but honestly, is there at least one reason to play it over other stormdecks like ANT or TES.
I have been piloting both decks for a long period of time now and had also success with them. Now it is time to explore more complicated decks and DDFT seems like the ideal deck to toy around.
I'm still in the learning process and although i've learned a few kill lines the deck doesn't feel as powerful as the other stormdeck mostly because it is slower by a turn or two and the doomsday lifeloss especially if you pass the turn afterwards.

---

The main issue with Doomsday is that you need an additional card for most combo-lines compared to other storm variants, which is basically the draw-into-the-pile card. I sure don't need to tell you the significant difference between needing mana + a combo card (IT/AN/PIF) and needing mana + combo card (doomsday) + draw-in (Ponder/BS/Probe/SDT) with the later Construct also limiting the playability of LED. Being slower and still life-dependant (lightning bolt post-doomsday!) is another downside compared to ANT and the Maniac-kill is iffy with Lightning Bolts, Sudden Shocks and REBs in the metagame

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawatarix

Thx alot,

Doomsday is maybe the coolest deck out there but honestly, is there at least one reason to play it over other stormdecks like ANT or TES.
I have been piloting both decks for a long period of time now and had also success with them. Now it is time to explore more complicated decks and DDFT seems like the ideal deck to toy around.
I'm still in the learning process and although i've learned a few kill lines the deck doesn't feel as powerful as the other stormdeck mostly because it is slower by a turn or two and the doomsday lifeloss especially if you pass the turn afterwards.

---

I think you've partly answered your own question ;)

It is easy to get into a pissing contest about which storm deck is better. In my opinion DDFT is the most rewarding to learn and to play well. I can remember distinct times when after a play session I literally felt "better" with the deck.

There are objective arguments for the deck such as the deck has the potential to win in scenarios where others can't. DDFT also generally has a higher level of card quality which helps make it more consistent and more resilient, especially in grindy match-ups. Naturally there are some trade-offs for these benefits. But, the deck isn't as slow as people make it out to be. Just keep practicing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sawatarix

I'm still in the learning process and although i've learned a few kill lines the deck doesn't feel as powerful as the other stormdeck mostly because it is slower by a turn or two and the doomsday lifeloss especially if you pass the turn afterwards.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

The main issue with Doomsday is that you need an additional card for most combo-lines compared to other storm variants, which is basically the draw-into-the-pile card.

---

I've been playing Doomsday for a very long time and reading false statements about the deck like these over and over again is quite annoying. (I have to say, the only reason that I bother to respond is because I value both of your contributions to the ANT and TES threads on this forum).

Sawatrix, if you are on average two turns slower with Doomsday than with ANT then clearly something is wrong. Since you are still learning how to play to the deck, I hate to say this, but I think this is from the fact that you need more practice.

Lemnear, come on, be reasonable. With Doomsday you most commonly win from Dark Ritual, Doomsday, LED, and either SDT in play or GP in hand. Comparing to ANT, how can you win from just Dark Ritual, Infernal Tutor, LED? With two mana you can go for Ad Nauseam, which isn't a guaranteed kill like Doomsday. If you want to go for PiF than you need at least another ritual, which is also a card. There are quite a few hands from which Doomsday can win faster than ANT (if you replace the Infernal Tutor in hand with a Doomsday), because the cantrip is part of the combo. Where in ANT you would have to cast that cantrip and hope to find a particular combo piece first.

I believe that the real reason that Doomsday is (on average) not faster than ANT is because it's secondary business spell (Burning Wish) is off-color. Burning Wish is however irreplaceable if you want to win with storm, because it allows you to generate 6 storm from a 5 card pile and not play Tendrils main. Without Burning Wish, I wouldn't even try to win with Tendrils.

If you want to really learn how to play the deck, thread carefully. Doomsday has ruined other storm decks for me. I can't play ANT or TES anymore without thinking "if this Infernal Tutor was a Doomsday, I would have just won with this hand". However, the main reason for me to play Doomsday is simply consistency. The number of occasions that the deck truly craps all over itself occur much less frequently for me with Doomsday than with ANT or TES. I stress that this is my personal experience, although I believe that I have played all three decks enough to arrive at a statistic that I can trust.

I'm not interested in starting a full storm deck versus storm deck discussion which regularly plague the ANT and TES threads. I know the advantages and disadvantages of all. And I'm certainly not trying to convince anyone to play Doomsday.

The main difference is that Doomsday lists run more library manipulation and less rituals because draw spells can be used to make a DD Pile cheeper, so basically you get a more consistent deck at the cost of the speed of rituals. I personally think DD can be just as fast as ANT. Current Doomsday lists have been running Treasure Cruise which other storm decks can't use because it messes with Past in Flames and Ad Nauseam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Mhenlo

The main difference is that Doomsday lists run more library manipulation and less rituals because draw spells can be used to make a DD Pile cheeper, so basically you get a more consistent deck at the cost of the speed of rituals.

---

I disagree with this, you are oversimplifying things by a very large margin. Most ANT lists play 4 Brainstorm 4 Ponder 4 Gitaxian Probe and 3 (sometimes 4) slots of some combination of Preordain and SDT. By comparison, Doomsday's 4 BS 4 Ponder 4 GP 4 SDT are hardly significantly more library manipulation. This single slot difference does not explain why Doomsday runs 5 rituals against ANT's 8 or 1 to 3 Lotus Petals instead of 4. Also, in contrast to what you are suggesting, increasing the number of rituals won't speedup Doomsday, you'll just end up with black mana without a meaningful way to spend it. And finally, I can not believe you would call this the 'main' difference.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennotsi

Sawatrix, if you are on average two turns slower with Doomsday than with ANT then clearly something is wrong. Since you are still learning how to play to the deck, I hate to say this, but I think this is from the fact that you need more practice.

Lemnear, come on, be reasonable. With Doomsday you most commonly win from Dark Ritual, Doomsday, LED, and either SDT in play or GP in hand. Comparing to ANT, how can you win from just Dark Ritual, Infernal Tutor, LED? With two mana you can go for Ad Nauseam, which isn't a guaranteed kill like Doomsday. If you want to go for PiF than you need at least another ritual, which is also a card. There are quite a few hands from which Doomsday can win faster than ANT (if you replace the Infernal Tutor in hand with a Doomsday), because the cantrip is part of the combo. Where in ANT you would have to cast that cantrip and hope to find a particular combo piece first.

I believe that the real reason that Doomsday is (on average) not faster than ANT is because it's secondary business spell (Burning Wish) is off-color. Burning Wish is however irreplaceable if you want to win with storm, because it allows you to generate 6 storm from a 5 card pile and not play Tendrils main. Without Burning Wish, I wouldn't even try to win with Tendrils.

---

I gotta agree with ben here. In my initial goldfishing, I've been impressed at how much speed you can coax out of this deck. Granted, the fastest hands typically require some mix of Dark Ritual and Doomsday, but that's not significantly less likely than Tutor+LED, and certainly closer once you factor in the need for additional LED/Rituals for ANT to combo t1, whereas Doomsday can use LEDs or Probes. If people would be ok with me using standardized lists for each, I could actual do some math on how close the numbers are for t1/t2 kills. This doesn't even factor in that you don't randomly die to Ad Nauseam when you're playing Doomsday, so your early kills are guaranteed, whereas a certain amount of the time you will just die to Ad Nauseam.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennotsi

I disagree with this, you are oversimplifying things by a very large margin. Most ANT lists play 4 Brainstorm 4 Ponder 4 Gitaxian Probe and 3 (sometimes 4) slots of some combination of Preordain and SDT. By comparison, Doomsday's 4 BS 4 Ponder 4 GP 4 SDT are hardly significantly more library manipulation. This single slot difference does not explain why Doomsday runs 5 rituals against ANT's 8 or 1 to 3 Lotus Petals instead of 4. Also, in contrast to what you are suggesting, increasing the number of rituals won't speedup Doomsday, you'll just end up with black mana without a meaningful way to spend it. And finally, I can not believe you would call this the 'main' difference.

---

It was an oversimplification, but how ANT runs Cabal Ritual and TES runs RoF, Doomsday runs SDT, and Doomsday needs less mana and more draw spells to combo off was pretty much the point i was trying to make, I should've just said that, at the time I was also think main difference in terms of deck lists not how they actually play. Doomsday also has Ideas Unbound and Burning Wish ->Treasure Cruise and MD Treasure Cruises to draw cards.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bennotsi

Doomsday has ruined other storm decks for me. I can't play ANT or TES anymore without thinking "if this Infernal Tutor was a Doomsday, I would have just won with this hand". However, the main reason for me to play Doomsday is simply consistency. The number of occasions that the deck truly craps all over itself occur much less frequently for me with Doomsday than with ANT or TES. I stress that this is my personal experience, although I believe that I have played all three decks enough to arrive at a statistic that I can trust.

---

You couldn't have put my experiences with ANT and TES in better words. I'm currently toying around with ANT and this is totally true. I also get the feeling, that I am not even faster with ANT, than I am with Doomsday, just because I'm more used to playing Doomsday and I propably don't see all the ANT lines.