The more I play Meddling Mage in the board, the more convinced I am that it is the correct decision. It's so nice to be able to completely shut off force of will after they've sided all of their creature hate out.
Printable View
The more I play Meddling Mage in the board, the more convinced I am that it is the correct decision. It's so nice to be able to completely shut off force of will after they've sided all of their creature hate out.
In both my pure Ad Nauseam list and my hybrid Doomsday list I cut out Serenity completely, but I've also been running Duress + Pyroblast main as my protection suite (in some lists I keep Orim's Chant in the sideboard and some I do not). I'm at 16 lands right now and 2 Chrome Mox and the manabase has been stellar. There is ability to slow down to optimize against control and all of the speed is still there (in testing it seemed that for every game Chrome Mox allowed me to win turn 1 it threw me off 2 turns because it forced me to pitch something necessary). This has brought me towards a combination of Krosan Grip/Ancient Grudge/Slaughter Pact/H.Recall/ETruth/Rushing River/Wipe Away/Grapeshot in my sideboard to deal with problematic permanents.
I've noticed that a side effect of moving to the Duress/Pyroblast route is that your alternate win can become playing 2-3 Tendrils and just forcing an opponent into a counterwar. This has been highly effective in the 5-color Doomsday-less build with 4 Brainstorm/4 Top, and 2-3 Tendrils. Another side effect has been that in a UBRg build I can move from Delta/Strand to Delta/Mire and include basic Mountain. This isn't actually all that much of a loss for most builds as they play only a few blue cards (I'm running 8-10 preboard) and the ability to find Badlands 100% was critical for protection.
I wouldn't ever consider more than 2 Extirpate. I currently run 1 and it's primarily a tutor target against blue-based control. I don't think I'd ever want to see 2 of them (even against Ichorid because we win so fast).
emidln:
How many Ad Nauseams and Doomsdays do you run each in your Hybrid? I'm currently running one each, but I feel like maybe adding a couple more of either, but not both, so as to be either 3x Ad Nauseam or 3x Doomsday, and 1x of the other. Which, if any, do you think works better, since you are the premier authority on Fetchland-based Tendrils decks?
I like Meddling Mage also. I tried it in FDDT, and I like it, but my metagame doesn't call for it.
Also, 4x AdN is unneccesary and tantamount to overkill. 3 might even be too much. I'm testing 2, and while I don't really win turn one very much, I go off turn 2 protected VERY often.
I use Tops. Tops work, tops are good.
Emidln: I haven't been using red disruption as it's almost useless against other combo and Dragon Stompy, which is what my meta consists of. I'd like to see your list, but most importantly, your mana base for the red, most preferrably both your 4-c doomsday list, and then the 5-c Ad Nauseam Doomsday-less list.
Pce,
--DC
My first reaction to Meddling Mage was, "Good Idea". But after thinking about it, he's not that easy to cast, especially vs decks running Wasteland (Tempo Thresh, Dreadstill). All he's really going to be chanting is FoW anyway. Chant does a perfectly good job at stopping FoW, as does Abeyance, which is one, easier to cast than MM, and two, terrible. the only point in MMs favor is that it beats face, but so does Dark Confidant.
I'd test MM, but I traded my set. Dark Confidant seems like the best choice if we're going to run a creature.
When we originally suggested MM for DDFT it was because we had 16-18 lands and wanted something that could deal with both Force of Will and Counterbalance. Chant didn't actually do all of that. Now, we still played it alongside Chant, but it wasn't necessarily meant to try to be played against Tempo Thresh. (I certainly never boarded it in.) I was playing it against CB Thresh and Landstill mostly (and it kinda sucked vs Landstill) leading me to testing other stuff like Pyroblast.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
On the subject of Pyroblast, Pyroblast counters Brainstorm, Mystical Tutor, and Ponder. That's actually all the reason I need to play it. If all my Pyroblasts ever do is counter Brainstorm or Mystical Tutor, I'm very happy. It's obviously not Orim's Chant in the combo matchup, but it's a lot better than Orim's Chant in the more prevelant blue-based aggro-control matchup, nearly as good against Ichorid, and will randomly beat aggro decks relying on misc Stifles and Meddling Mages. If you are seeing a lot of other fast combo you should probably have Orim's Chant in the sb anyway. In other matchups, Chant is about as dead as Pyroblast. Granted, it sometimes *might* take away Extirpate (but you don't care in AdN) and it could stall for a turn against an aggro deck (but all aggro decks run Wasteland + other LD seemingly) so you're probably going to end up short on the WW end anyway. I honestly never found that its dead weight was a drawback because when it was dead I could win easily no matter what that slot was (Tarpan/Mountain Goat/Moonlace/etc).
I've been experimenting with the number of business spells in my hybrids. I've gone as low as 11 business (1 AdN, 1 Doomsday, 1 IGG, 1 Meditate, 2 IT, 4 Mystical Tutor, 1 Tendrils) but it didn't quite feel right. I think I'd want an additional Ad Nauseam (they're usually better than Doomsday unless you're facing something with a lot of disruption) or Infernal Tutor maindeck to go to at least 12 business and I'm currently sideboarding 1-2 Doomsday for matchups where I don't want to be an Ad Nauseam deck. Preboard, being an Ad Nauseam deck with a Doomsday/Infernal Tutor backup plan is _probably_ better than being a Doomsday deck with an Ad Nauseam backup plan, but I don't yet have enough data to give that statement weight.
When I've been playing red, my manabase has almost always been this (16 lands):
4 Polluted Delta
4 Bloodstained Mire
1 Volcanic Island
1 Badlands
1 Bayou
1 Tropical Island
1 Underground Sea
1 Island
1 Swamp
1 Mountain
In the 5c build, it's been:
-1 Mire
-1 Mountain
+1 Scrubland
+1 Tundra
SB: +1 Mountain
Black/Red fetching is more important when your primary protection consists of Pyroblast and Duress.
This is a question for the hybrid AN/DD players: Is there a reason to still run Slaughter Pact in the place of Massacre? Some few reasons come to my mind:
- Gaddock is easily answerable through SB Helm+Grapeshot in a Doomsday pile.
- Magus of the Moon is not an issue comparing to the DD FT lists, since this thing runs 4 Petals and 2+ Moxen.
- Multiple Meddling Mages/True Believers/Glowriders/whatever are answered by Massacre, while not by Pact. The variety of bounce+removal doesn't remove the inevitability of the opponent getting rid of them.
- This won't work with Gaddock + Mage, but does it ever happen? Anyway, the alternative here remains to bounce Mage and ignore Teeg with Doomsday.
Slaughter Pact makes the Meditate/LED/LED/Removal/Tendrils pile still cost 2U which is great when you can't actually setup Helm+Grapeshot for whatever reason. Additionally, the Top/Brainstorm/LED/LED/IGG/Tendrils pile can sub in a Slaughter Pact for free if you have any of those cards in hand already (in addition to the 2 + Top/Brainstorm) and still win for like 1U against Teeg. Pact costing 0 compared to 4 off Ad Nauseam is also nice for the games where you don't have to resort to Doomsday because you go off on turn 1-2 before anything came down. Being an instant to answer random stuff has also come up in misc games. Besides, if an opponent does get down multiple hate bears, you can always Grapeshot them away or sometimes even Slaughter Pact only 1 and ignore the rest. The issue of multiple hate bears doesn't even happen as often as it did to DDFT because the hybrid plays more acceleration and can goldfish at a faster rate (even with Doomsday ignoring 1+ bears).Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
3U you mean? You still need to be able to play Top or you are never drawing that Tendrils.Quote:
Originally Posted by emidln
Err yeah, 3U. I need to do some actual testing vs Teeg to determine if Slaughter Pact is worth boarding in for just Teeg because with as much accel as the lists play the difference between 3U and 4U might not be as much as I originally though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
How about the hybrid list skeleton? I kinda can't figure out the minimum requirements for running Doomsday and the full 8 protection package. The first list I tested was more into the DDFT side, with 0 Infernal, 2 Cabal, 2 AN, 1 DD, 4 Top, 2 Ponder, 2 Mox, 15 lands and the usual cards. I feel like maybe fitting in a 16th land, but that makes me want to cut Top, which is bad for every purpose other than racing Belcher. WTB tips for a list that goldfishes turn 2 almost always, or I'd simply play DDFT for that turn 3 kill.
You lose 4 life by revealing Massacre with AN. Thats the reason why I play Pact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
With a Teeg out on the table, you're able to play Massacre? What?
With Gaddock out on the table, I'm able to play Doomsday and win anyway. Where did someone say Gaddock is Massacrable?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
You asked if there was a reason to play Slaughter Pact over Massacre. I gave a scenario where Massacre would be dead (because of Teeg), forcing you to alter your path to victory.
Altering your path to victory isn't really that much of a big deal, since you're almost always required to do that in every game. Besides, they were discussing Pact/Massacre in AN/DD hybrids which run Helm of Awakening / Grapeshot, which would render Meddling Mages and Gaddock Teegs useless.
Ah, sorry. I took his statement out of context then. I thought it was just a general quetion, not situation specific.Quote:
Originally Posted by kicks_422
I saw a few posts about working around Gaddock by throwing in Doomsday. I think it's pretty brilliant. I think the card is underplayed. I have an idea, a hybrid with some possibilities:
Lands
4 [U] Underground Sea
4 [ON] Polluted Delta
2 [WL] Gemstone Mine
Creatures
2 [ALA] Etherium Sculptor
Spells
2 [ALA] Ad Nauseam
1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
4 [7E] Duress
4 [MR] Chrome Mox
3 [CST] Brainstorm
3 [TO] Cabal Ritual
4 [DM] Dark Ritual
4 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
1 [SC] Brain Freeze
1 [WL] Doomsday
3 [CHK] Sensei's Divining Top
4 [MI] Mystical Tutor
3 [FUT] Pact of Negation
3 [SOK] Ideas Unbound
I think Brain Freeze is a better kill option than Empty the Warrens, mellowing out the colors and not ruining you for the Nauseam. It also gets under Teeg and Runed Halo.
Etherium Sculptor is worse than Helm of Awakening because it eats STP and doesn't lower Cabal Rit/Grapeshot/Tendrils. For that matter, Brain Freeze is worse than Grapeshot because it doesn't actually kill the opponent and isn't removal. You need 4x Top. To play 4x Top you need at least 14 lands (that's probably even too light because I hate being at 15 and usually run 16 in Ad Nauseam builds).
We don't actually run Helm+Grapeshot maindeck because it just wastes slots. It's a sideboard option for when you need it vs Meddling Mage or Teeg. Meditate is better than Ideas Unbound in Doomsday piles (specifically because it lets you win without passing the turn into lethal piles with less mana).
WOW! I can't believe my eyes....At the begining of this thread you guys all said (when I mentioned throwing a doomsday or too into the deck) that that was stupid. What gives? A nobody like me mentions it and its awful now all of a sudden its clever? My feelings are hurt.
No, not quite did we ignore the Doomsday thing. Actually, that was whoever that posting at the first pages. Hanni did actually dispatch it without knowing how to play with it (asking if it passed the turn to win or stuff like that). I don't want to name names, but a search would do that for you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twoshirty
Emidln, I'm still interested in your current list, if you could post that. Your googlepages is way out of date.
It might have been clever when I started playing it in the first quarter of the year. It might have been clever when I adapted the strategy further in an attempt to beat control. Readapting it into the same deck that it started in? Not so clever. For the record, the list I'm currently playing is -white (white lands + chant) +red (red lands + pyroblast), -1 igg, +1ad nauseam of what I was playing back around April/May, you know the first time I put Doomsday in this deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Twoshirty
So far I've decided to try the red splash as you said it's ok for blasts to simply hit cantrips and Tutors in the mirror and take out Narcomoebas and draw spells against Ichorid. I haven't done extensive testing, but they are definitely better than chants against Ichorid. Duress doesn't ever do much against Ichorid, though, but it helps that I can race it. So far I like it, but I've dropped chants almost completely. I think I have 2x in my Sideboard, but I don't run white mana which makes me depend soley on Lotus Petals. It's not exactly handy...
I would really like to see the most current list. Is it pretty much certain now that 2x AdN is the way to go? I can't imagine upping it to 3x...2x is working fine for me.
Pce,
--DC
First place at the last tournament of the year: the final of my league with this decklist:
4 polluted delta
4 flooded strand
1 tundra
1 scrubland
1 underground sea
2 island
1 swamp
4 led
4 lotus petal
3 chrome mox
4 dark ritual
4 cabal ritual
4 brainstorm
4 ponder
4 mystical tutor
4 infernal tutor
2 an
1 igg
1 toa
4 orim
2 duress
1 rushing river
SB
4 dark confidant
3 krosan grip
2 tropical island
2 hurkyl's recall
1 echoing truth
1 slaughter pact
1 duress
1 brain freeze
I was expecting many control and aggro-control blue based, so I cut 2 Sensei from main for 2 Duress and I put green in sb for K.Grip that is less versatile than pyroblast but it's the best answer against dreadstill and thresh ugw with counterbalance.
But many people did this reasoning and they left their pet blue deck at home for decks that can do well against blue based decks. So I found a metagame not so difficult and 3/4 of my side was useless.
I found:
turn1: win against fish UBW
turn2: win against burn
turn3: win against whiteweenie
turn4: ID with goblin
turn5: ID with belcher
in top8:
quarterfinals: win with goblin
semifinals: win with faeriestompy
final: win with belcher
Generally easy matchups.
I love ponder, no ways. Often I side in easily 1 ad nauseam, 1 chrome, 1 infernal tutor, 1 cabal ritual, but the card that I'm no happy to side out is ponder.
I finish the year with:
11place and 3place with FT with street wraith
3place with doomsday FT
3place, victory, victory with ant
It's time to change the deck to play.
To those of you running Ponder and/or Sensei's Divining Top in a non-Doomsday build, I have to ask -- why are they better than the cards you replaced them with, and how do they fit in the gameplan? To me, they seem like crutches so you can justify keeping sub-par hands.
This deck can only have so much high quality business spells and not having a way to dig for them creates inconsistency. Having to fit bad cards in order to improve threat density is way worse than having a high enough number of cantrips in order to find your high quality key spells. Just ask Thresh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
But we already have ways to search for key spells -- Brainstorm/Fetchlands, and Mystical Tutor.
Most of what I see being cut are protection spells and copies of Ad Nauseum. I guess I should have phrased the question differently. "Why are Ponder and Top better than the cards they're going to be searching for when we already have eight better ways to find what we need?"
My guess is that the reasoning behind running Ponder/Top is that people want to keep hands like:
Underground Sea, IGG, Dark Ritual, Chrome Mox, Orim's Chant, Infernal Tutor, Ponder/Top
because Ponder/Top might make the hand good, instead of throwing it back like they should.
Ponder is only better than protection or Ad Nauseum if you already have protection or Ad Nauseum in hand. Top is a long game card in a deck that wants to win as fast as possible.
Mystical Tutor gives us a bigger tempo hit and some card disadvantage. This is strictly worse than being able to find something you could use through dig. The main concept here to be understood is that, while you are seeking for your main plan of Rituals into AN into lots of cards, you must be able to dodge some possible inconsistency issues you might have by assembling a sideplan. If you can't find Mystical Tutor, you might not be able to assemble that main plan, while you are still able to filter cards from the top of your library into a possible alternate route. Also, digging with cantrips helps you find those Mystical Tutors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
As far as cutting spells, my list still has 8 protection and 4 enablers (2 AN, 1 IGG and 1 DD). At first, I ran Top in order to be able to assemble the DD alternate plan, but then it became a very important play during my first 2 turns, allowing me to find the cards I need for an effortless turn 3 kill. Also, Top allowed me to cut Infernal Tutor down to a single piece, since those are very bad except when going off. You might think that this made me fizzle with AN more, but Mystical Tutor became my primary tutor after drawing a crap load of cards. This was more than enough to be able to always get that Tendrils either through IT+LED, Mystical+Top/Brainstorm (note that the cost of Mystical+Top is U or 1U, depending on whether Top was already on the board, requiring only a single U after AN resolves) or after IGG recovering those pieces after Chant blocking the opponent of recurring spells.
If of any relevancy, in very recent testing (like... yesterday) with that list, I went 5-5 against Ur Dreadstill (winning through DD twice, AN twice and straight 10 storm Tendrils after counters on Duress and Chants once) and 8-2 against Burn, both pre-board. I didn't test this configuration enough, but being able to go 5-5 against a very hard to beat deck made me confidant enough in the list. It runs 3 Cabal Ritual, 2 Chrome Mox, 4 of each other acceleration pieces, 4 Duress, 4 Chant, 2 AN, 1 DD, 1 Meditate, 1 IGG, 1 IT, 1 Wipe Away and 4 Top along with 8 fetchlands, 3 basics and 4 duals for a UWb mana base. The rest is pretty standard. EDIT: The Burn testing result above is just to note I'm not losing win% on the direct damage matchup while being able to get good results with a bad matchup.
That hand isn't bad at all, you can do a turn 1 mindtwist on your opponent and have a land + Chrome Mox in play and Dark Ritual, Top/Ponder, and IT in your hand.
You're kidding me. Ponder is better in ANT than Mystical Tutor?! How is being able to find what you want 100% of the time strictly worse than finding what you want in four cards of your library? The card advantage argument is moot, since any card disadvantage we accrue will be more than made up by Ad Nauseum.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
The problem with Ponder/Top is that they're really really slow and unreliable. I don't want to spend turns sculpting my hand -- I want to cast Ad Nauseum and go to town. I understand that sometimes you need to do this, especially vs control, but Ponder/Top are not reliable. It's unlikely that you'll get what you want when you want it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
I don't have consistency issues that can't be solved by smart mulligans. I also don't know what this "sideplan" stuff is you're talking about. If you're talking about IGG, I don't see how Ponder suddenly becomes better.
Maybe running Doomsday changes things. I wouldn't know, since I have zero experience with the card. I'm talking about traditional Buw ANT with IGG as your backup plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
Let me get this straight. You're saying that frequently you've played Top in the first two turns, which has allowed you to dig for the card(s) you needed to combo turn three. I don't believe you. The math doesn't add up.
This is interesting, as I've long thought ANT doesn't need four Infernal Tutors. Your point about needing only U after Ad Nauseum is a good one, but you now need a two card combo of Top + Mystical Tutor. I'm not convinced that's tons better than Brainstorm + Mystical Tutor, which we already have. It also weakens the IGG plan significantly. I'm willing to concede that it might be better than some Infernal Tutors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
Yeah, I didn't see that when I posted it. Replace IGG with Tendrils, or something, and my point stands. But ask yourself: "Does Ponder make that hand better?" What if it was a Duress, Ad Nauseum, or ritual?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pulp_Fiction
You missed my point by a mile. Digging is better than tutoring, but tutoring is much more reliable. What I meant was that you shouldn't rely on Mystical Tutor to find your pieces when you can dig into them and actually use Mystical for the last piece or some extra stuff. Using 2 Mystical Tutors in a single game is too much of a drawback. Using 2 Ponders or activating Top twice isn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
The card advantage created by Nauseam doesn't help you combo if the opponent is way ahead of you. You will have to resolve Nauseam in order to have that advantage and it will be the card they are aiming to stop. It's like saying Tendrils gaining life is good because you lose some from fetchlands.
Digging is unreliable compared to tutoring, obviously. But you can't argue that Ponder is slower than Mystical Tutor for it isn't. Mystical Tutor requires you to devote an entire draw to make it work. Running more cantrips makes Tutors faster, while Top also makes it cheaper when you already have it in play.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
I'm talking about IGG, Doomsday (in the hybrid list case), draw 4 (ditto) or wars over Chants and Duresses in a single turn followed by a Tendrils (extremely common against clock-less blue control). You can't narrow your game plan into AN only, since stuff like 2 Dark Rituals will not enable an IGG loop. Anyway, this seems a strength of the hybrid list: more alternate plans. This feature is weakened by running very few digging cards and relying too much on your tutors.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
Top on turn 2 lets me see 3 cards and then draw the chosen card on turn 3. If I have a fetchland or a Mystical Tutor, I'm either able to look at the next 3 and still have 2 mana open so I can draw another relevant spell (I've digged 6 cards so far) or able to draw the tutored card. Even if I have none of those, I can still dig for an extra card (the 4th one) and draw it right away. With 4 Petals and 2 Moxen, there's usually enough mana to go off even with a single land untapped.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
Protected kills require more than only Mystical Tutor and Brainstorm. You'll need to actually dig for a 2nd protection spell, because 1 is almost never enough unless you can simply goldfish your opponent. Having a spare Mystical Tutor to respond CB and get Wipe Away would also shut down the ability to get that last combo piece. Not having enough dig causes that.
In case you didn't have LED to crack in response when playing AN, 1U or U (if Top was on the board already) is far easier to have than UU. If I were to rely on UU almost every time post Nauseam, I'd often find myself in situations that would require IGG cracking LED for enough U, but that could fall into some graveyard hate or maybe W for Chant in case it hadn't resolved yet.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
Regarding the IGG plan, I can still Mystical for IT and do it. It won't happen as often, but in that testing against Burn it worked just fine. In those 10 games, I didn't use AN a single time, DD once or twice and went on the IGG route every other game.
Ponder shares less information with your opponent than Mystical Tutor does. However, it's my opinion that Mystical Tutor is obviously better than Ponder in the finding of important items.
I don't understand the argument though, as both are in the list and serve different purposes entirely. I mean, an entire hand is considered mediocre if either ponder or mystical tutor are in it, whereas in a hand without a blue 1 cmc card will probably be called strictly bad hands.
Pce,
--DC
Kuma's argument is actually Ponder/Top versus the card it's replacing, not Mystical Tutor.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark_Cynic87
Anyone attempting to play the ANT/Doomsday hybrid might want to take a look at the piles I've compiled at http://www.teambzk.org/public/doomsday-piles.html
Wow nice work with all those piles and different scenarios.Quote:
Originally Posted by emidln
I am very interested to incorporate the doomsday piles into my standard Buw ANT build because of the added versatility.
What would you consider the minimum Doomsday package for such a list?
Maybe something like:
1x Doomsday
1x Meditate/Cruel Bargain
2-3x Top
I am currently running 1x IGG for the backup plan.
Thanks
4 TopQuote:
Originally Posted by metalman2785
1 Meditate
1 Doomsday
1 IGG
14-16 lands
The nice part about this package is that IGG and Tops are useful in their own right and Meditate is at least an above-average setup card if you are running 15+ lands (which also make Top better).
In trying to assemble a combo, what's reliable is what's good. In a perfect world, we'd always Ponder into what we need, but the mathematical reality is that Ponder fails far too often. I don't care about card advantage if the cards I'm drawing are unnecessary.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
I'll take -2 card advantage for the exact two cards I need over +0 card advantage and two largely random cards from my deck. Besides, unless you shuffled with the first one, playing two Ponders is diminishing returns.
I only ever use Mystical Tutor for the last piece(s), and I don't usually have to wait long to get two pieces as is. Whether your needs are AN and protection, AN and a ritual, two rituals, or two protection spells, two Mystical Tutors gets it done better than two Ponders.
If Ponder finds you what you need, it's faster than Mystical Tutor. In the incredibly likely event it doesn't, Mystical Tutor is faster.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
It really boils down to what's being cut for Ponder/Top. Ususally, this is Ad Nauseum or protection, both of which are what is usually sought with Ponder in the first place. I'll run the math later, but I'm pretty sure if we assume that we need rituals, protection, and Ad Nauseum one third of the time each, running those cards in the slots is better than trying to dig for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
I guess this depends on your definition of frequently. I don't consider it frequently when you need Top + the desired card in the top three, or Top + Fetchland + desired card in six random cards. Even if you get it that way, that's pretty slow. I'll have to run the math on it later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
If my opponent stops my first protection spell, I finish the combo anyway, and they rarely have the second FoW. One protection spell is enough, unless you're stuck in the rare position of your opponent having two FoW + two blue cards in the first few turns of the game. The longer you wait for a second protection spell, the longer they have to hit that Counterbalance or second FoW.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
All your arguments hinge on Ponder reliably finding what you need, which as I've said over and over is unlikely.
Technically, MTutor is only -1 CA. Luckily, we don't have to decide between cantrips and MTutor anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
On the topic I'd have to say that I have found the ability to Ponder/Bstorm up mana very helpful. In a deck stuffed with mana, filter cantrips are very often superior at finding it. I can't even remember how often I could combo the turn I cast Ponder because I drew into a Ritual/LED/threshed CRitual (Bstorm even has the potential to draw you into the combo right there). Once or twice, I could go off with only one untapped Island in play because I cantripped into Chrome Mox/Petal for black mana. The ability to get a Duress and cast it the same turn and thus get an additional untap step relatively safely is nothing to scoff at, either.
MTutor also doesn't help finding land at all, and that can be relevant in quite a few matchups/situations. Or sideboarded artifacts/enchantments if you have them.
Top is of course undeniably slower than Bstorm/Ponder but it also does more. Might be a metagame choice and I'm not familiar enough with the deck to say if it's better than the usual suspects but to me it seems clear that cantrips belong in combo if they can be supported.
@ emidln
Major props for that compilation. I'm gonna go trade for a Doomsday now.
I was talking about having two Mystical Tutors vs. two Ponders.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noman Peopled
I can see this being relevant if your only mana source is a basic Island or a Tundra, but otherwise, you're rolling the dice instead of taking a sure thing. I almost always mull hands with no black mana anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Noman Peopled
Yeah, Pondering into mana is nice, but over half the cards in the deck make mana. In that situation, it's not like Ponder is solving some huge problem we have.
While I've had Ponder act as an accelerant before, it's very uncommon. Ponder puts one new card into your hand. Brainstorm puts three new cards into your hand and lets you potentially shuffle away two dead cards. These cards aren't fulfilling the same role.
Ponder is a mana fixer in a deck that's half mana. I think that makes it unnecessary.
My bad. Although -2 CA is probably still stomachable in comparison to the tempo loss.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
You may see Waste/Stifle or some such, but you may also have a Sea/Scrubland tapped for Duress/Chant with only blue mana left.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
I'm not saying the "win now, maybe" aspect of Ponder is a strong selling point; just an observation of how some of my games went down.
Well, Ponder still gives you nearly five times the chance of drawing into mana than your next draw step (three cards looked at + possible draw after reshuffling + draw step). Which is even better when you need/want a specific card like Ritual or LED.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
Perhaps equally important is the fact that Ponder gives you a good shot at avoiding mana for the next turn or two as well. Quite relevant in a deck with 50%+ mana sources.
(Again, my following argument does not conclusively prove that Ponder belongs.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Kuma
Ponder is not a mana fixer exclusively. It increases redundancy of every single card in your deck. That's LED, tutors, land, mana spells, Mystical Tutor, everything.
It also increases the chances of drawing into disruption, especially with cards like Serenity where MTutor won't help at all.
And it can get lands (and Moxen), which is good against control, as you can bait counters with heavy hitters so much more efficiently if you don't have to build up 3-4 mana along the way each time.
Also, it's an additional shuffle effect for Bstorm, makes it more likely to use the LED upkeep trick in conjunction with Bstorm (or without if you lucked out), makes Chrome Mox producing blue more consistent, helps find AdN in conjunction with Mystical post-AdN (which is a nice interaction to have overall, and especially against stuff like Chalice @0 and/or if you don't play the full set of IT) ...
Minor points? Maybe. While all of them have come up in testing, it's hard to say how the games would've gone with a different configuration, starting with mulligan decisions.