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

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by thefringthing

I stop paying attention for a couple months and all of a sudden people aren't playing Silence? What's next, cats marrying dogs!?

---

Jesse, is it so suprising that metas and decks changes over time and new printings?


Edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

The other day tested the F.Fortune List posted fewpages ago, wasvery good, I faced a Miracles match up which I won...
I really think like F.F. that is not needed A.Decay vs Miracles if you play the Full Discard Package, the only change I made regarding this list was -1 Xantid + 1 Pyro so having then +1Duress +2Pyros was enough to handle the Miracles Match up. but still keeping the 4 moxen. Now you can play a No Silence TES List and still name the deck TES!! Yeah!
Another issue:
i was able to won a Match up with vs a Death and Taxes with a Thalia in play AND I didnt even had the need to put up the bear, sure nobody got this ;)!
If any is interested I can say how this Match up was...

@Royce, Bryant, F.F. , Bahamut and Lem:
Ok I agree that 5 fetches can be excessive, but I think that 3U.Sea - 1 Volcanic vs 2U.Sea-2V.Island makes more sense to me. what do you think about this?
I think scenarios in which you have a Discard effect and a V.Island can occur more than others in which you have no Access to the Red sorce. but all this is theory...

---

I hate not having lands but Chrome Moxen in my starting grip too much to switch a land for a Mox.

Your suggested split does not adress the issue which is having Volcanic wasted and being unable to get a new one if you have that Volcanic in your starting grip (and need it to play cantrips or casting Wish for protection). We can however debate the impact of having a natural Volcanic vs U.Sea in hand for the average game development under the premise that we run more black cards than red and weight that against scenarios in which you are dead due to colorscrew

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

The other day tested the F.Fortune List posted fewpages ago, wasvery good, I faced a Miracles match up which I won...
I really think like F.F. that is not needed A.Decay vs Miracles if you play the Full Discard Package, the only change I made regarding this list was -1 Xantid + 1 Pyro so having then +1Duress +2Pyros was enough to handle the Miracles Match up. but still keeping the 4 moxen. Now you can play a No Silence TES List and still name the deck TES!! Yeah!
Another issue:
i was able to won a Match up with vs a Death and Taxes with a Thalia in play AND I didnt even had the need to put up the bear, sure nobody got this ;)!
If any is interested I can say how this Match up was...

@Royce, Bryant, F.F. , Bahamut and Lem:
Ok I agree that 5 fetches can be excessive, but I think that 3U.Sea - 1 Volcanic vs 2U.Sea-2V.Island makes more sense to me. what do you think about this?
I think scenarios in which you have a Discard effect and a V.Island can occur more than others in which you have no Access to the Red sorce. but all this is theory...

---

I just want to run as many fetchland as I can get away with. I would run 2 Sea 1 Volcanic in the lists we are seeing now, but I am not sure I would play Gemstone Mines at all. If you also cut the Gemstones, I would run 2 Volc 2 Sea and the rest fetchland.

I don't really think the discussion on the duals vs. fetch question can go much further than people stating their preferences though. I have been running 1 Sea 1 Volc in a Silence list for a long time, but others experience too much problems with that, so they go with 3 duals.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I hate not having lands but Chrome Moxen in my starting grip too much to switch a land for a Mox.

---

Then make use of mulligan!, anyway, I agree and that's why I'm trying to make use of the 13th land. but the logic behind is to play full T.Seize with full moxen so that the Life loss is less relevant as F.F said - I agree on this. but want to make the next tests with 3 moxen and maybe 2 duress 1 T.Seize main. anyway I suggest to at least test the 4 Moxen, 3 T.seize base, is great!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Your suggested split does not adress the issue which is having Volcanic wasted and being unable to get a new one if you have that Volcanic in your starting grip (and need it to play cantrips or casting Wish for protection). We can however debate the impact of having a natural Volcanic vs U.Sea in hand for the average game development under the premise that we run more black cards than red and weight that against scenarios in which you are dead due to colorscrew

---

- The thing is that you want a 1st turn Underground Sea much more times than a V.Island and this scenario will happens the most. (obviously...) so that the U.Sea will be then the first land to be destroyed by a Wasteland.
- Other scenario involves a played B.Wish for X card, if this card is grapeshot and you need to play G.S in the next turn and the Volcanic is destroyed then you're in troubles, for the rest of scenarios in which you Wish for something diff tan G.S. this will be a Discard Effect or PiF or other thing different than a Red Source. - nonproblem in here then.
- If you play for example RoF you're supposed to go off and the odds to be destroyed your V.Island I think are not so hoigh as this should occur in the first turns.

Anyway, as I've been a very conservative TES player, in my Black TES build I used to play CoB in that slot, but I want to agree with you on this. I just played once this build as his was not considered a TES deck...

These are my points.

@TheFrighning.
Yeah, I think some of us by here were waiting for this change to happen so long time ago (F.Fortune among them I think...).... but Bryant dictates the Deck Base for his US Meta... but in my experience Silence is not an option at least in my meta, still I played it as I just enjoyed playing TES on that old era, if wanted to win a Tournament I just played a Different Storm deck (DDFT, ANT, TNT or 'TES with Black') , the good side is that you can NOW play a Full discard package and still call the deck TES! thats why I'm so happy because my Top8 with TES will increment!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

I just want to run as many fetchland as I can get away with. I would run 2 Sea 1 Volcanic in the lists we are seeing now, but I am not sure I would play Gemstone Mines at all. If you also cut the Gemstones, I would run 2 Volc 2 Sea and the rest fetchland.

I don't really think the discussion on the duals vs. fetch question can go much further than people stating their preferences though. I have been running 1 Sea 1 Volc in a Silence list for a long time, but others experience too much problems with that, so they go with 3 duals.

---

I'm with you on this one, however I wouldn't cut Gemstone Mine entirely (I think 2/3 is correct). I think playing 3 duals has been great in the past and I think having the extra shuffle-effects of fetchlands is better than the occasional waste on the Volcanic Island. If your Volcanic Island eats a Wasteland you still have Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox and Gemstone Mine. Also, you only need red mana for a combo-turn or sometimes a turn in which you Burning Wish for a discard spell. Brainstorm-locking yourself is way more devastating.

You guys must be a lot better than me at not drawing all of your fetchland targets, especially when you have five fetchlands. It appears that you're making decisions based on availability rather than the correct numbers.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

Then make use of mulligan!, anyway, I agree and that's why I'm trying to make use of the 13th land. but the logic behind is to play full T.Seize with full moxen so that the Life loss is less relevant as F.F said - I agree on this. but want to make the next tests with 3 moxen and maybe 2 duress 1 T.Seize main. anyway I suggest to at least test the 4 Moxen, 3 T.seize base, is great!



- The thing is that you want a 1st turn Underground Sea much more times than a V.Island and this scenario will happens the most. (obviously...) so that the U.Sea will be then the first land to be destroyed by a Wasteland.
- Other scenario involves a played B.Wish for X card, if this card is grapeshot and you need to play G.S in the next turn and the Volcanic is destroyed then you're in troubles, for the rest of scenarios in which you Wish for something diff tan G.S. this will be a Discard Effect or PiF or other thing different than a Red Source. - nonproblem in here then.
- If you play for example RoF you're supposed to go off and the odds to be destroyed your V.Island I think are not so hoigh as this should occur in the first turns.

Anyway, as I've been a very conservative TES player, in my Black TES build I used to play CoB in that slot, but I want to agree with you on this. I just played once this build as his was not considered a TES deck...

These are my points.

@TheFrighning.
Yeah, I think some of us by here were waiting for this change to happen so long time ago (F.Fortune among them I think...).... but Bryant dictates the Deck Base for his US Meta... but in my experience Silence is not an option at least in my meta, still I played it as I just enjoyed playing TES on that old era, if wanted to win a Tournament I just played a Different Storm deck (DDFT, ANT, TNT or 'TES with Black') , the good side is that you can NOW play a Full discard package and still call the deck TES! thats why I'm so happy because my Top8 with TES will increment!

---

Don't you think I didn't message F.F. more than 3 weeks ago to get his list for my own testing after he picked up the topic of all-discard after I annoyed this thread with that idea already in november? I tested it for a half a day and had some serious bad hands without land(s) but moxen and even twice the infamous double-moxen opener. I used the rest of my testing timeframe to calculate the influence of +1 mox to AN flips under the premise of having cast a Thoughtseize prior to it and the result appeared so marginal compared to the partly shitty starters that I dismissed the idea. Moxen are still best IN the deck and not in hand unless after an AN.

The Wasteland-topic was directed on having Volcanic in your hand as your starting mana for Ponder, but ok, let's say your opponent wastes your U.Sea (you used to Ponder into LED or Wish) instead and your still have a fetch, a discard spell, RoF, RoF, LED and Wish in hand, you are cut off from casting the Discard spell to protect your combo while a GM would work perfect. Now expect iffy scenarios with infernal, Decay and Pyroblast against Miracles *shudder*

Discussions over decknames are stupid. TES is defined by faster, cheaper rituals (RoF), a 5-color supporting manabase and Wish, not over disruption

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

I just want to run as many fetchland as I can get away with. I would run 2 Sea 1 Volcanic in the lists we are seeing now, but I am not sure I would play Gemstone Mines at all. If you also cut the Gemstones, I would run 2 Volc 2 Sea and the rest fetchland.

I don't really think the discussion on the duals vs. fetch question can go much further than people stating their preferences though. I have been running 1 Sea 1 Volc in a Silence list for a long time, but others experience too much problems with that, so they go with 3 duals.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom T

I'm with you on this one, however I wouldn't cut Gemstone Mine entirely (I think 2/3 is correct). I think playing 3 duals has been great in the past and I think having the extra shuffle-effects of fetchlands is better than the occasional waste on the Volcanic Island. If your Volcanic Island eats a Wasteland you still have Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox and Gemstone Mine. Also, you only need red mana for a combo-turn or sometimes a turn in which you Burning Wish for a discard spell. Brainstorm-locking yourself is way more devastating.

---

I have slight problems to understand how people expect to fix a 4-color manabase with only 12 lands without at least a certain base of rainbow-IMS. How do you think of supporting Xantid and Pyroblast against S&T or Pyroblast and Decay if you keep reducing the decks options to fix colors? If there's no more the need for green or we define the new TES standard by having always 2 lands or land+petal for cantrips plus the 2 Ritual colors for our combo turn, I'll revisit the idea to run without goldlands.

I'm amazed that now, after increasing the number of fetches, the topic of brainstorm-locking is hotter than ever.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bryant Cook

You guys must be a lot better than me at not drawing all of your fetchland targets, especially when you have five fetchlands. It appears that you're making decisions based on availability rather than the correct numbers.

---

I wouldn't be suggesting cutting Gemstone Mines for more fetches and duals if this were the case.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I have slight problems to understand how people expect to fix a 4-color manabase with only 12 lands without at least a certain base of rainbow-IMS. How do you think of supporting Xantid and Pyroblast against S&T or Pyroblast and Decay if you keep reducing the decks options to fix colors? If there's no more the need for green or we define the new TES standard by having always 2 lands or land+petal for cantrips plus the 2 Ritual colors for our combo turn, I'll revisit the idea to run without goldlands.

---

I don't run a 12 land 4c mana base. I either run a 12 land 3c, 13 lnd 4c manabase, or a 13 land 3c, 14 land 4c manabase. I remember that I ran a very similar base when Mystical Tutor was still around. The deck was ubw, running 2 Sea 2 Tundra and an island (which certainly doesn't help you fix colours) with a sideboard Trop for Swarms and occasonally Caarpet of Flowers. I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one running these kinds of lists back then.

I'm not saying it's correct to cut Mines, just that it might be better.

hi guys..im new here :smile:

BTW where can i see the latest list of deck?thanks

@Lemnear

Do you have a mathematical proof of the 4th Chrome Mox being marginal after an Ad Nauseam, and a Diminishing Returns for that matter, or do you just have your play testing and sample size to back up that statement? Because if the 4th Chrome Mox is as marginal as you say it is then I'm ready to cut it for the 12th land, I just thought intuitively that the 4th Chrome Mox meant markedly lower life totals for Ad Nauseam, higher win % for Diminishing Returns and higher win% for T1 and thought it would be more significant than you're implying it is.

I honestly don't know, I started playing TES when 11 lands and 4 Chrome Mox was still the norm and don't really mind playing it that way again because I was already used to it. Barring some mathematical proof tho', I think we're all just biased to our own variance with the deck; 4th Mox, 5th Fetchland, 2nd Volcanic Island or whatever they're functional equivalents.

I think my list is pretty solid, the only thing I debate is 1 SB slot and that's the Duress slot; it feels like I change it every week. I think I'm going to go back to Ill Gotten Gains just so I don't have to risk any variance vs pure aggro strategies, I can't find anything else that really makes any difference as a wish target and I don't like Abrupt Decay at all.

@Bahamut

Atm I feel we still can not allow to go 3c. I've tested this in the weeks before the SCG Invi as we chatter about the all-discard list on FB, but was not satisfied by the results. The point about the all-fetch+Duals-manabase is similar to the case with Silence was: it': still not the time for making that switch. It's also possible that Silence makes a comeback if Tempo returns to the metagame. The deck keeps updating to stay viable, so I don't understand the nostalgia about "No silence, no TES". That's why you are here. That's why I am here. That's why I honor each thought-through idea brought up here and test it.

@big_ticket

Wisdom of the List - 0cc - sorcery
choose 1: look at List in this thread like 2 pages back or mind it's available on my Twitter.
0cc - entwine

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

@Bahamut

Atm I feel we still can not allow to go 3c. I've tested this in the weeks before the SCG Invi as we chatter about the all-discard list on FB, but was not satisfied by the results. The point about the all-fetch+Duals-manabase is similar to the case with Silence was: it': still not the time for making that switch. It's also possible that Silence makes a comeback if Tempo returns to the metagame. The deck keeps updating to stay viable, so I don't understand the nostalgia about "No silence, no TES". That's why you are here. That's why I am here. That's why I honor each thought-through idea brought up here and test it.

---

Wait what? We have been talking about 3c lists for a whille now right? I am trying to say that the deck is 3c, with a very minor splash to a 4th in the sideboard at which point we also bring in an extra land.

I'm not saying the 'no Silence no TES' thing anywhere. I am illustrating my point about playing an all-dual manabase by an example that included a lists with Chants from a couple of years back.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

Wait what? We have been talking about 3c lists for a whille now right? I am trying to say that the deck is 3c, with a very minor splash to a 4th in the sideboard at which point we also bring in an extra land.

I'm not saying the 'no Silence no TES' thing anywhere. I am illustrating my point about playing an all-dual manabase by an example that included a lists with Chants from a couple of years back.

---

I get your point here and your intention I share. My sole Problem with the idea is that atm a pure fetch/Dual manabase would put us into positions in which we have to cut us off from certain colors (and cards in hand) at times as even with a Premium hand of 2 fetches you are unable to produce all 4 colors unlike any hand which contains a single GM. I think the idea to get 3 IMS into play to support every line of play with a dual/fetch manabase is a bit farfetched in a deck with 12-13 lands which opts to go lethal in the first 3 turns and is less suited to develop such a stable manabase on the board before comboing compared to ANT which's mainplan feasts on fetchlands + x in their graveyard and whichs prime engine is independent to previous lifeloss because of them taking 3-4 turns to develop that said manabase. I have to operate off a single land + Petal far too often as i'd be willing to colorscrew me in such situations. It's ok if you near never have those problems. This is just the reason why GM is still in (at least) my list.

The part about Silence wasn't directed at you obviously.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

I wouldn't be suggesting cutting Gemstone Mines for more fetches and duals if this were the case.

I don't run a 12 land 4c mana base. I either run a 12 land 3c, 13 lnd 4c manabase, or a 13 land 3c, 14 land 4c manabase. I remember that I ran a very similar base when Mystical Tutor was still around. The deck was ubw, running 2 Sea 2 Tundra and an island (which certainly doesn't help you fix colours) with a sideboard Trop for Swarms and occasonally Caarpet of Flowers. I'm pretty sure I wasn't the only one running these kinds of lists back then.

I'm not saying it's correct to cut Mines, just that it might be better.

---

Advocating only two duals with too many fetchlands was the issue I was addressing.

That's not even my quote you referenced. Regardless, I'd slapbet you that I've never played a Tundra in TES, I believe you're talking about ANT - not TES.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bryant Cook

Advocating only two duals with too many fetchlands was the issue I was addressing.

---

And I am refuting it by bringing up a manabase I'm suggesting that is even more expensive.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bryant Cook

That's not even my quote you referenced. Regardless, I'd slapbet you that I've never played a Tundra in TES, I believe you're talking about ANT - not TES.

---

Yeah sorry, I copypasted carelessly. I wasn't trying to claim having ran ubw TES, I'm just illustrating that running a 3c manabase with a Trop in the board and 13 land isn't completely wild.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

And I am refuting it by bringing up a manabase I'm suggesting that is even more expensive.

---

How are we still talking about the same thing then? The point I was addressing didn't pertain to what you're talking about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

Yeah sorry, I copypasted carelessly. I wasn't trying to claim having ran ubw TES, I'm just illustrating that running a 3c manabase with a Trop in the board and 13 land isn't completely wild.

---

Sure, it's not completely wild but in my opinion it's certainly worse for the reasons Lemnear has pointed out. We're a fast deck that operates on 1-2 lands, we need them to tap for 3-4 colors within the initial few turns of the game. Running more duals/fetches not only makes us a tiny bit slower, it could effect Ad Nauseam (Probes, Seize, fetchlands).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Don't you think I didn't message F.F. more than 3 weeks ago to get his list for my own testing after he picked up the topic of all-discard after I annoyed this thread with that idea already in november? I tested it for a half a day and had some serious bad hands without land(s) but moxen and even twice the infamous double-moxen opener. I used the rest of my testing timeframe to calculate the influence of +1 mox to AN flips under the premise of having cast a Thoughtseize prior to it and the result appeared so marginal compared to the partly shitty starters that I dismissed the idea. Moxen are still best IN the deck and not in hand unless after an AN.

---

Ok, I agree, I did not make any testing yet with 3 moxen 13 land and that's the same feeling I have: don't want to draw so many moxen... I'm trying to use a 13 lands 3 moxen Base.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

The Wasteland-topic was directed on having Volcanic in your hand as your starting mana for Ponder, but ok, let's say your opponent wastes your U.Sea (you used to Ponder into LED or Wish) instead and your still have a fetch, a discard spell, RoF, RoF, LED and Wish in hand, you are cut off from casting the Discard spell to protect your combo while a GM would work perfect. Now expect iffy scenarios with infernal, Decay and Pyroblast against Miracles *shudder*

---

mmm, so if the testing scenario is to have a V.Island in hand as the unique land and this land is destroyed by Wanstelad then I need to agree, but is this specific scenario worth to have 2 V.I and 2 U.Sea? instead of 1-3? if testing demonstrates somehow that this will happen more times than the need to use a Black source to cast discard then I would play the 2-2 Configuration.

I'm evaluating to play the U.Paradise in the 2nd Volcanic Slot. but maybe this is a nonsense thing, because I just want to add as many T.Seize as I can and I'm getting paranoid about Life loss...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Discussions over decknames are stupid. TES is defined by faster, cheaper rituals (RoF), a 5-color supporting manabase and Wish, not over disruption

---

I just exposed my opinión, didnt intend to start a discussion about this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I have slight problems to understand how people expect to fix a 4-color manabase with only 12 lands without at least a certain base of rainbow-IMS. How do you think of supporting Xantid and Pyroblast against S&T or Pyroblast and Decay if you keep reducing the decks options to fix colors? If there's no more the need for green or we define the new TES standard by having always 2 lands or land+petal for cantrips plus the 2 Ritual colors for our combo turn, I'll revisit the idea to run without goldlands.

---

agree, For me in TES 4 Gemsntone is a must... is the unique land that can be used to play B.S, RoF, Dark ritual and even this land does not cause life loss, the best one of all lands we have IMHO.
I agree with you and Bryant that 5 fetches - 3 Dual is not supportable. by experience, at some time in a 4 Fetches 3 dual Mana base I found some scenarios in which you just Fetch for nothing. but these scenarios are few, very few. and will increment if you add +1 Fetch

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I'm amazed that now, after increasing the number of fetches, the topic of brainstorm-locking is hotter than ever.

---

me too, the use of B.S. in here has nothing to do with the use of B.S. in ANT as example.

Apart:
So, If any can try to test the 3 U.Sea - 1 Volcanic Mana base or any has tested this with good results please share.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

Ok, I agree, I did not make any testing yet with 3 moxen 13 land and that's the same feeling I have: don't want to draw so many moxen... I'm trying to use a 13 lands 3 moxen Base.

that's fine if you want more mana maindeck. Just ask yourself how you want to handle the SB tropical then. Switching land for land for going to 14 lands + 2 moxen? Dunno. :)

mmm, so if the testing scenario is to have a V.Island in hand as the unique land and this land is destroyed by Wanstelad then I need to agree, but is this specific scenario worth to have 2 V.I and 2 U.Sea? instead of 1-3? if testing demonstrates somehow that this will happen more times than the need to use a Black source to cast discard then I would play the 2-2 Configuration.

I'm evaluating to play the U.Paradise in the 2nd Volcanic Slot. but maybe this is a nonsense thing, because I just want to add as many T.Seize as I can and I'm getting paranoid about Life loss...

don't play paradise. Having to play a cantrip off a paradise is the worst I can imagine you can to to develop a manabase to pass Daze/pierce. The best I found out to handle TS's lifeloss is to not throw around Probes and TS because you have them but opt to sit on them or shuffle those away in some situations.

I'm testing worst-case-scenarios first for changing lists and the Volcanic one was indeed part of it, second to the one where you have to expose volcanic for Wish->Thoughtseize/DimRet. The more relevant question is how often the T1 combo is prevented by Volcanic if you have a mix of DR, LED and Infernal in your hand but no cantrip to find a black mana source. Count the numbers of you casting T1 cantrips vs. T1 discard and you'll notice that unless you play against a combo deck yourself having a grip of Volc, probe, therapy and Ponder is rarely worse than U.Sea, probe, therapy and Ponder. You'll usually cast discard close to your own combo turn (exception: combo mirror)

agree, For me in TES 4 Gemsntone is a must... is the unique land that can be used to play B.S, RoF, Dark ritual and even this land does not cause life loss, the best one of all lands we have IMHO.
I agree with you and Bryant that 5 fetches - 3 Dual is not supportable. by experience, at some time in a 4 Fetches 3 dual Mana base I found some scenarios in which you just Fetch for nothing. but these scenarios are few, very few. and will increment if you add +1 Fetch

Having either no or not the optimal target for your fetchland is the reason we raged about the idea to run only 2 duals but 6 fetches. A 3/5 split might be justifyable if the other issues we discussed in this thread wouldn't cause problems as well. At some point I'm kinda reliefed that no one came up with 5 fetches, 1 Sea, 1, Volcanic, 1 Badland so far ;)

Apart:
So, If any can try to test the 3 U.Sea - 1 Volcanic Mana base or any has tested this with good results please share.

---

Related to:

don't play paradise. Having to play a cantrip off a paradise is the worst I can imagine you can to to develop a manabase to pass Daze/pierce. The best I found out to handle TS's lifeloss is to not throw around Probes and TS because you have them but opt to sit on them or shuffle those away in some situations.

I'm testing worst-case-scenarios first for changing lists and the Volcanic one was indeed part of it, second to the one where you have to expose volcanic for Wish->Thoughtseize/DimRet. The more relevant question is how often the T1 combo is prevented by Volcanic if you have a mix of DR, LED and Infernal in your hand but no cantrip to find a black mana source. Count the numbers of you casting T1 cantrips vs. T1 discard and you'll notice that unless you play against a combo deck yourself having a grip of Volc, probe, therapy and Ponder is rarely worse than U.Sea, probe, therapy and Ponder. You'll usually cast discard close to your own combo turn (exception: combo mirror)

Also: T1 T.seize to discard Hatebear or C.B. or avoid B.S. into Hide Opp. FoWs or Hymn. or T1 Discard to avoid Reanimate, etc etc.
You just sometimes even pondering into Black Source will not occur also, but this scenarios sure are few.

So, then there is already a consensus about 2-2 Split or still in processing of a final Mana Base.

Im sure 2-2 Split is not the perfect setting, but 3-1 is worse or less worse?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

Also: T1 T.seize to discard Hatebear or C.B. or avoid B.S. into Hide Opp. FoWs or Hymn. or T1 Discard to avoid Reanimate, etc etc.
You just sometimes even pondering into Black Source will not occur also, but this scenarios sure are few.

So, then there is already a consensus about 2-2 Split or still in processing of a final Mana Base.

Im sure 2-2 Split is not the perfect setting, but 3-1 is worse or less worse?

---

And there our points of view differ:

1) I don't value T1 discard against D&T too high because of their hatebear density. I prefer to mull into a T 1/2 Combo instead
2) If I cast discard and they hide FoW, I'm free to combo, no?
3) against Hymn, I prefer dropping my mana and float biz on the top of my deck with BS/Ponder which are perfectly fine being cast off volcanic
4) pondering into a black source can fail, but that rises the question if a hand with volcanic + ponder + black cards was a keeper from the start. Sure, shit happens.
5) i already mentioned combo decks as exceptions
6) while discarding counterbalance is fine, pyroblasting it off a volcanic does basically the same game 2 and you won't waste a thoughtseize t1 in game 1 just to see your opponents hand only

Yeah ... even more anti-storm hatebears!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Yeah ... even more anti-storm hatebears!

---

At least costs RR....

Maybe I'll try out that pyromancer's acension list so I can play bolts main to better fight off hatebears.

Bolts+pyromancer ascension main in TES ?
I must be in the wrong thread i guess


- Team RUG-STAR Berlin -

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

And there our points of view differ:

1) I don't value T1 discard against D&T too high because of their hatebear density. I prefer to mull into a T 1/2 Combo instead

Maybe, but if you dont have a T1 or T2 win you'll die and on 1st games they do not have so high hatebear density, for me at least a T1 discard has been the unique way to win sometimes these match ups, even C.Therapy is high value in here. it is just to get more chances to win this match up.

2) If I cast discard and they hide FoW, I'm free to combo, no?

Sure, but not if you start and on 1st turn.

3) against Hymn, I prefer dropping my mana and float biz on the top of my deck with BS/Ponder which are perfectly fine being cast off volcanic

Ok I prefer hit his potential Hymn or FoW, I referred to Team America variants minly

4) pondering into a black source can fail, but that rises the question if a hand with volcanic + ponder + black cards was a keeper from the start. Sure, shit happens.
Yeah! shit happens

5) i already mentioned combo decks as exceptions
No, you mentioned Combo mirror, I'll prefer to handle: Reanimator and S&T variants., that why 1st turn U.Sea into discard seems so important.

6) while discarding counterbalance is fine, pyroblasting it off a volcanic does basically the same game 2 and you won't waste a thoughtseize t1 in game 1 just to see your opponents hand only

7-8 discard effects vs 2 pyrosblast from Side does not worth it I think, even this scenario will occur in 2nd and 3rd match ups, I want to handle 1st games also. Also Miracles does not play Wasteland

mmm, definately I think I'll try the 3-1 Split for a while... playing 2 duress 1 T.Seize main and 1 IoK, 1T.Seize side instead of the 1 Duress side... although I'm quite satisfied with t he 4 moxen configuration.... and Of course NO A.Decay main

---

EDIT: I meant 12 lands 3 C.Moxen. :)


Apart:
a T1 Discard is great to know how to develop your game plan, unless there is no more mana available because of your unique land beeing destroyed...

Apart_2:
@Royce, Bahamut:
3-1 Split or 2-2 Split?

Hi Bryant I tested this deck for the first time on mtgo the past 2 days I love it. I play the list in your op with a trop in the SB over a xantid swarm was this a ok cut? If I wanted to play a 4th silence out if my SB what would you cut or better from your op what SB slots are open to being changed.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moxnix

Hi Bryant I tested this deck for the first time on mtgo the past 2 days I love it. I play the list in your op with a trop in the SB over a xantid swarm was this a ok cut? If I wanted to play a 4th silence out if my SB what would you cut or better from your op what SB slots are open to being changed.

---

I'm no longer on that list. I'll update it right now.

Thank you so much. If you don't mind would you update your SB strategy section when you get a chance as if now im alt tabbing on mtgo reading it and sbing. Also is this a meta change could you explain why you like seize and duress over silence I think I can guess but i would much rather know what you think.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Moxnix

Thank you so much. If you don't mind would you update your SB strategy section when you get a chance as if now im alt tabbing on mtgo reading it and sbing. Also is this a meta change could you explain why you like seize and duress over silence I think I can guess but i would much rather know what you think.

---

The last 20 pages of the thread are all about it the change.

I don't have time right now to update (Maybe in a few weeks), it's all really the same concepts. This deck isn't very difficult to SB with.

Ok thank you I will check it out I had mostly just read your OP

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

Apart:
a T1 Discard is great to know how to develop your game plan, unless there is no more mana available because of your unique land beeing destroyed...

Apart_2:
@Royce, Bahamut:
3-1 Split or 2-2 Split?

---

2-2. Any hand that has 2+ cantrips you want to fetch a turn 1 Volc, cantrip with the mana, cantrip again t2, then use a second land for discard (ideally). If they waste your Volc, you want another one. Basically the difference is that before we'd almost always fetch a t1 USea, now it's much better to fetch a Volc and getting cut off red is much less of an issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Royce Walter

2-2. Any hand that has 2+ cantrips you want to fetch a turn 1 Volc, cantrip with the mana, cantrip again t2, then use a second land for discard (ideally). If they waste your Volc, you want another one. Basically the difference is that before we'd almost always fetch a t1 USea, now it's much better to fetch a Volc and getting cut off red is much less of an issue.

---

maybe I miss something, but for this scenario, why do you prefer to fetch for volcanic instead U.Sea?

If you want turn 2 to chain cantrip into discard you need Volc & Sea or Sea & Sea.. which do you prefer in case you want to combo of turn 3 with no other land?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Holly

If you want turn 2 to chain cantrip into discard you need Volc & Sea or Sea & Sea.. which do you prefer in case you want to combo of turn 3 with no other land?

---

And the question whether Pelikanudo was missing something has been answered. :cool:

I could swear, I talked about fetching Volcanic first, to NOT flagwaving signalize your opponent that you're playing combo, on the last page.

Why else do you think we are playing Misty Rainforest and Scalding Tarn other than faking to be a Tempo deck? Why should anyone tap out for SFM and crap if they see Polluted Delta into U.Sea?

I'm not seeing how this deck is better than ANT variants right now. The metagame seems very hostile towards it. At what point does stubbornness kick in as a reason people play this deck over other combo decks? It seems to have a rabid cult following of people who Japanese foil it out and whatnot, and that can't be helpful in being open-minded to changes.

I'm not trying to make anyone angry btw, just trying to start an open and honest discussion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7

I'm not seeing how this deck is better than ANT variants right now. The metagame seems very hostile towards it. At what point does stubbornness kick in as a reason people play this deck over other combo decks? It seems to have a rabid cult following of people who Japanese foil it out and whatnot, and that can't be helpful in being open-minded to changes.

I'm not trying to make anyone angry btw, just trying to start an open and honest discussion.

---

This deck's speed and versatility makes it a comparable choice to ANT. ANT, being the slower and more linear deck, is more vulnerable to hate because an opponent has more time to go ahead and play it and ANT has fewer lines to approach victory. I'd say the metagame is simply hostile to Storm in general right now, not TES in particular.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7

I'm not seeing how this deck is better than ANT variants right now. The metagame seems very hostile towards it. At what point does stubbornness kick in as a reason people play this deck over other combo decks? It seems to have a rabid cult following of people who Japanese foil it out and whatnot, and that can't be helpful in being open-minded to changes.

I'm not trying to make anyone angry btw, just trying to start an open and honest discussion.

---

It's easier to hate out the main storm engine of ANT versus TES, but in general the metagame isn't very favorable to either. TES's speed is also a big advantage over it's combo-sibling.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7

I'm not seeing how this deck is better than ANT variants right now. The metagame seems very hostile towards it. At what point does stubbornness kick in as a reason people play this deck over other combo decks? It seems to have a rabid cult following of people who Japanese foil it out and whatnot, and that can't be helpful in being open-minded to changes.

I'm not trying to make anyone angry btw, just trying to start an open and honest discussion.

---

Aha, how was that not a shot at me? Clearly, you haven't seen my collection - I don't base anything off of card availability. It's alright kid, live off your top 8 high, but ANT isn't in any better of a position than TES. But in the mean time, enjoy that full turn extra you need to combo against Death and Taxes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by davelin

It's easier to hate out the main storm engine of ANT versus TES, but in general the metagame isn't very favorable to either. TES's speed is also a big advantage over it's combo-sibling.

---

I feel like maindeckable cards such as Thoughtseize, Hymn to Tourach, and Wasteland are all much better against TES than ANT. The only plus I'd give TES in this metagame is that SB RIPs don't really do anything against it. ANT is much better against Delver decks which seem to be at the top tables. I've played both decks quite a bit, and I really think basic lands + lots of discard are where you want to be.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7

I feel like maindeckable cards such as Thoughtseize, Hymn to Tourach, and Wasteland are all much better against TES than ANT. The only plus I'd give TES in this metagame is that SB RIPs don't really do anything against it. ANT is much better against Delver decks which seem to be at the top tables. I've played both decks quite a bit, and I really think basic lands + lots of discard are where you want to be.

---

its ironic you say that players here are resistant to change, and then you recommend lots of discard... which this deck has switched to recently. I'd ask if you read the thread lately, but its even reflected in the OP, at least the new decklist, that is.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7

I'm not seeing how this deck is better than ANT variants right now. The metagame seems very hostile towards it. At what point does stubbornness kick in as a reason people play this deck over other combo decks? It seems to have a rabid cult following of people who Japanese foil it out and whatnot, and that can't be helpful in being open-minded to changes.

I'm not trying to make anyone angry btw, just trying to start an open and honest discussion.

---

The metagame is hostile to storm in general and a reason the manabase and protection suit changed. You asked for open-minded changes ... and missed them happening.

The advantages of ANT to overpower tempo- & taxing-counters with Cabal Ritual are still the same as the problems of that deck to get a kill going once the graveyard is hated out or other countermeasures kick in because ANT is pretty much limited to a playline involving thresholded Cabal Rituals and only 4 Tutors while being at least a turn slower than TES because of that.

What about questioning the worth of Cabal Ritual now that people rather play discard like Thoughtseize or Hymn than Pierce, which CR was able to overpower in the past or noticing that Grafdiggers Cage, Surgical Extraction and RIP are everywhere? TES can be too fast for Hymn and hatebears while shitting on graveyard-hate (and now even more on SFM). I don't see why this meta is any more hostile to TES than ANT.