Printable View
On the note of storm combo vs storm combo, has anyone tried fighting Solidarity? That match up is impossible. They just FOW/(counterspell cantrip thing that brings the card back to your hand) until turn 3-4 and then wait until I go again and then beat me off my storm. It's quite annoying.
Thoughts?
Resolve Orim's Chant?
Hello everybody, this is Jason Golembiewski. I don't actually post or read much on the source, but a few friends told me I was being name dropped so I figured I'd give a few words. First I want to talk about my experience with the deck. A year and a half ago when I was first getting into competitive legacy I picked up and learned the standard TES list mostly thanks to this thread. I learned to play it and did so for about a month then retired it. I'm more of a rock style player. The entire week prior to the tournament I brewed and tested a black white aggro discard deck. 3am the night before while running the gauntlet for some friends I just said fuck it, this black white deck is not cutting it and TES is a lot of fun, so I switched at the last minute.
The first few rounds of the tournament were really me remembering and figuring out how to play the deck. I am far from any kind of expert on the deck and I am not going to claim to be. I played a lot of matches that I should have never won, I blame that mostly on my opponents not being too good and I have a really stone solid mind going into any match, jedi mind tricks don't work on me.
I for sure was running hot that day as you can see by my turn 1 kills. It sucked that the flame had to die game 3 vs. Reanimator dude in the semis but I am still happy to have made it that far.
I probably made some mistakes but clearly I knew enough to be dangerous with this deck. For example I knew ETW should have came out and I thought about it during sideboarding, but at the same time I didn't have much to bring in and it added to the threat density to help for that faster kill so whatever, it did the job. If I had tested a bit more and really got to know the deck I probably would have been more prepared.
My thoughts on past in flames: It's an okay wish target if you have room, I don't like it in place of iggy as they do different things. I didn't have any and nobody in my group did either so I didn't even bother with it, it was completely not needed and would not have changed anything.
That's all I have for now, I will try to stop by here every couple days or so or you can message me, thanks for reading.
Congratulations on the finish! Id wanted to have a Tendrils (You) and Tendrils (Ari) in the finals, however :laugh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Magicsk8ngenius
A question for those running Shattering Spree but not Meltdown in the sideboard: isn't Meltdown better against Chalice of the Void and artifact lands? What's the real advantage of Shattering Spree? Is the situation just that you always only want to destroy one artifact, and that artifact isn't a Chalice on 1?
Spree is stronger against Trinisphere, countermagic, expensive affinity dudes, Lodestone Golem, and in any situation where you may have dropped your own artifacts into play already.Quote:
Originally Posted by thefringthing
Spree destroys Chalice@1 for an additional R.
In my opionion it's just more flexible. Being able to get rid of an anoying artifact and possibly comboing on the same turn is quite useful.
What about Pulverize? seems huge.
I once had my Ad Nauseam taken by Tidehollow Sculler and my opponent already had Cannonist since turn 2. I drew Burning Wish, wished for Spree. Pass the turn, it didn't get discarded. Untap, Lion's Eye Diamond, Lion's Eye Diamond, Spree with Replicate. Killing both of the artifact creatures, in response crack both LED's for BBBBBB. Ad Nauseam floating a black?Quote:
Originally Posted by jjjoness'
Pulverize is bad because you have to hardcast it in this deck and at that point meltdown is better. If you could sack one mountain sure I would run it in a heartbeat but unfortunately you need 2 mountains, something this deck lacks unless you want to tweak the manabase.
I'd say meltdown is better overall against affinity than spree. Because when you meltdown you armageddon them and kill their ravager's, moxen, and whatever else they have out that costs 2 or less unless you ritual it out to kill more stuff.
Spree is better against 3sphere and stompy in general though; you generally have to lay down artifact mana fast against them because they can make it uncastable and meltdown kills the artifact mana you've laid down. There's also the sweetness where you pay RRR with spree to kill both chalice and 3sphere in one fell swoop.
Hey dude(s). I've not really posted in the TES bit on the source yet, so I thought i'd chime in on this one :). One of my main test partners in real life is Silent Requiem (who is a bit of a solidarity genius to be honest...). Its a really fascinating match-up, and I think overall we're not quite 50/50 with them, as solidarity can be pretty nimble at times. There are a couple of strategies/tricks up our sleeve though.Quote:
Originally Posted by jin
As the game goes on, things start to get in the favour of solidarity pretty quickly, so the main thing to say would be if you get a quick one it might be well worth just going for it. The critical thing is when they get to 3-4 lands, then I think the 'beatdown' role switches over to them and you need to become the control deck. This is especially possible after the board if you're still using some good ol' fashioned pyroblasts.
Some really specific tactics i've found useful include doing a really small empty the warrens early (say 4-6 tokens) and keeping all your disruption up to try and just stop them going off. Another thing to notice is that silencing/chanting in your own upkeep the turn you want to go off so they can't use their resets and storm away themselves. this will allow you to resolve an ad-naeusium (remember, it and dark ritual are both instants ^^). This might well draw you enough disruption to go off and stop them at the same time. Remember also that storm-hijacking works both ways ^^. If you lead with a mainphase chant turn 3-4 they might decide to go off in response rather than counter it (reasoning that if it resolves, then they are probably dead). If this pressured go off fails (which if they are not quite prepared, the fizzle chances are higher) then a naturally cast tendrils will probably make it (or maybe dark rit. ---> tendrils).
So... I hope that that helps! If you want to discuss it more just PM me, as its probably too niche a match up for really open debate, but I would say that testing against it with TES is some of the most mind-bending magic possible to play, and is certainly much more complicated and nuanced than 'resolve a chant'
The Spanish Tunnel King
PS If they bring in flusterstorm, this match becomes a bit more nightmare-ish....
Hey dude(s). I've not really posted in the TES bit on the source yet, so I thought i'd chime in on this one :). One of my main test partners in real life is Silent Requiem (who is a bit of a solidarity genius to be honest...). Its a really fascinating match-up, and I think overall we're not quite 50/50 with them, as solidarity can be pretty nimble at times. There are a couple of strategies/tricks up our sleeve though.Quote:
Originally Posted by jin
As the game goes on, things start to get in the favour of solidarity pretty quickly, so the main thing to say would be if you get a quick one it might be well worth just going for it. The critical thing is when they get to 3-4 lands, then I think the 'beatdown' role switches over to them and you need to become the control deck. This is especially possible after the board if you're still using some good ol' fashioned pyroblasts.
Some really specific tactics i've found useful include doing a really small empty the warrens early (say 4-6 tokens) and keeping all your disruption up to try and just stop them going off. Another thing to notice is that silencing/chanting in your own upkeep the turn you want to go off so they can't use their resets and storm away themselves. this will allow you to resolve an ad-naeusium (remember, it and dark ritual are both instants ^^). This might well draw you enough disruption to go off and stop them at the same time. Remember also that storm-hijacking works both ways ^^. If you lead with a mainphase chant turn 3-4 they might decide to go off in response rather than counter it (reasoning that if it resolves, then they are probably dead). If this pressured go off fails (which if they are not quite prepared, the fizzle chances are higher) then a naturally cast tendrils will probably make it (or maybe dark rit. ---> tendrils).
So... I hope that that helps! If you want to discuss it more just PM me, as its probably too niche a match up for really open debate, but I would say that testing against it with TES is some of the most mind-bending magic possible to play, and is certainly much more complicated and nuanced than 'resolve a chant'
The Spanish Tunnel King
PS If they bring in flusterstorm, this match becomes a bit more nightmare-ish....
Right! I was thinking that each copy would be countered, but the copies aren't cast, so the Chalice will only trigger once. Similarly for Counterbalance. That settles my concern. Thanks!Quote:
Originally Posted by jjjoness'
What an Epic play. I would love to see your opponent's face :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
I started testing TES, and I like it this far. I think the value of Thoughtseize has gone up considerably because of Snapcaster Mage. Nothing more frustrating than a spell pierce in your opp's gy and you unable to duress it away. Is it wrong to play 3 Chrome Mox and adding another land? I feel like moxen are the best against aggressive decks which are our better matchups anyway, and adding another land makes us slightly less prone to Wasteland.
Now, I'm not a Storm expert, but don't you think that backing up cad selection with fallacies is poor policy?Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
Shattering Spree once did X so it's much better than Meltdown.
Honestly, I feel that Shattering Spree is a better card, but the reason your giving for new readers is totally misleading.
My quote had nothing to do with the debate. Settle down a bit. I just wanted to share something awesome I did with Spree it could've been done with Meltdown just as easily.Quote:
Originally Posted by Master Shake
If broken plays are misleading. I'll be sure to keep them all to myself for future reference.
I like to here about broken plays,tell me more lol. Anyways i just did some testing agenst merfolk and man it sucked for me. I went 2/6. It made me wonder if investing in a storm deck was a good idea or not. Do i jsut accept it as abad match up and move on? I think im going to put basics in my list so i dont get blown out by wastlands.
Merfolk isn't that bad match-up... it's about 50/50 actually.Quote:
Originally Posted by gamer4life
Putting in basics is not the right call. Keep on playing and improve on your skills, that's all it takes.
If you don't like storm decks then trade off the high dollar pieces namely LED's and underground sea's or sell them. You can't really complain about having 4 LED's even if you hate storm to death because getting rid of them for other legacy staples isn't that hard and if it is just sell them.
Merfolk can waste us all they want; we can go u. sea, duress, take FoW. You wasted my land cool I'll either play another one or I'll just go chrome mox/lotus petal into ad nauseam with these sweet rituals and tutors in the grip that I cast off of chrome moxen and lotus petal's.
You can't run a 5 color (well essentially 4 color) deck with basics when said deck runs 13-14 lands. You will lose games where you draw that miser's swamp/island and can't produce the right colors of mana.
If you can do broken things with a card while answering whatever your opponent does I take that as a good thing. Simply hilarious to go 2x LED, shattering spree, ad nauseam with a black floating.