Printable View
Last time I checked you have a year and a half to sculpt a hand against thresh so that part where you drop Shusher and shit on their CB/T that used to force TES to go off fairly quickly before Chant became much less effective do to multiple counters seems pretty good to me. Anyways, yes it is that good.Quote:
Originally Posted by r0ckstAr
Everyone always wants to pay :rg: with every spell :tongue:
You don't have to :D All you really need to do is pay :rg::w: for Chant, or :rg::r: for Pyroblast targeting their Counterbalance.
Hell, add an :rg: to an Infernal/B.Wish that your devoting your LEDs to, game over!
What you fail to understand is that Empty the Warrens in TES is not the same as Empty the Warrens in Belcher, and Empty the Warrens in Belcher is not the same as Empty the Warrens in SITES etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by yawg07
In Belcher, Empty the Warrens is a win condition, the deck is built 100% to generate 10 storm and end the game before the opponent reaches turn 3 (or turn 2 if it uses Leyline of the Meek and/or Goblin Warstrike). In TES, Empty the Warrens is more versatile, you can either generate 10 storm and try and end the game before the opponent reaches turn 3 (or turn 2 if it uses Orim's Chant or Goblin Warstrike), or you can use Empty the Warrens to bait the opponent's counters on to your acceleration, or you can use Empty the Warrens for a small 6 to 8 token army to whittle the opponent down by using multiple attack phases and Orim's Chant Time Walks to the point where you can finish them off with Burning Wish/Infernal Tutor->Tendrils of Agony.
Trying to say, "if Empty the Warren is so good, why doesn't Belcher do better than TES?" is like saying, "if Force of Will is so good, why doesn't Landstill do better than Threshold?" While the card is identical in appearance in both decks, how it actually functions in both decks is radically different.
I have only goldfished with Belcher, so I am not really sure, but can they even reliably get to 10 storm? They run no Igg, Draw 4s, etc and the only thing they have is DR. That means they need to have Wish and Led and then be able to draw into an EtW. In my experience, TES easily makes more tokens than Belcher. EtW is just weak right now because people are prepared for it. I would much rather run 3 tendrils than 3 EtW.
Yes yes, I know it does all those things. And yes I do get my wins out of it.
Whether I'm making 12 guys on turn one, or punishing an opponent who kept a creature-less hate-filled hand.
I didn't mean to come across hard, or ignorant about its potential, I guess I just wonder why so many?
Maybe it could be our metas? My meta has a good share of black/green decks, and ALL decks in the meta run SB answers to Warrens.
I get E.Plagues boarded in against me all the time, all the B/G decks and Landstill players have Deed mained.
All the blue players get their E.Explosives :/ And the other things have Propaganda effects, Pyroclasms, etc
EtW is terrible in my meta, but I can't say it doesn't work haha
What is your metagame like, BreathWeapon?
All the time. And then some. Belcher doesn't run enough black to support Tendrils as a primary win-condition. T.E.S. does. Simple. Empty the Warrens would ideally seem like the weaker choice, but in reality it isn't. Putting your opponent on a two turn clock is ideal in any combo deck. Both decks have explosive first few turns, and getting ten tokens is almost too easy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Belcher
Primary Win: Empty the Warrens.
Secondary Win: Goblin Charbelcher.
T.E.S.
Primary Win: Tendrils of Agony.
Secondary Win: Empty the Warrens.
Both decks use Diminishing Returns as a storm accelerator or win condition searcher.
No. This is definitely not true. On average, Belcher tends to generate 5-7 copies of Empty the Warrens, producing around 10-14 guys. The only way the deck would get 10 storm would be something like Grant, Petal, Dark Ritual, Rite of Flame, Rite of Flame, LED, Burning Wish for Infernal Tutor for Burning Wish for Empty the Warrens. Not so likely.Quote:
Originally Posted by A LegendAll the time. And then some.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
I think what's being asked is more to the effect of: "If you're able to win with Empty the Warrens, why not just play a deck that can play Warrens faster?" Belcher is definitely better at Emptying the Warrens for 10+ goblins on turn 1, while TES is better able to play slightly slower and win with Tendrils, protected by Orim's Chant. So, if EtW is a winning strategy, then Belcher seems like a better choice. In many metagames, this won't be true, and TES will be the better choice.Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
I believe Jak meant 5 Storm for 10 Goblin Tokens, otherwise his comment makes no sense, if Belcher could reach 10 storm it would just cast Tendrils of Agony.Quote:
Originally Posted by b4r0n
Comparing Warrens in Belcher and comparing Warrens in TES makes no sense, just because I use Warrens in TES doesn't mean I should/want to play Belcher instead. Belcher is 63% reliant on winning via Warrens, where TES isn't committed to using Warrens at all, that's a big difference.
Hollywood, theres no need to get defensive over your pet deck every time the word "Belcher" appears in a thread. Calm down big guy. ;-pQuote:
Originally Posted by A Legend
What they're trying to say is it's easier and more efficient for TES to create storm more reliably than Belcher. This is true because of maindeck Ill-Gotten Gains, Brainstorm/Ponder, Diminishing Returns, and Infernal Contract in addition to these cards in the sideboard. Where as Belcher has a singleton Diminishing Returns in the SB as it's only storm generator.
I agree with most of the people in this thread that Empty The Warrens doesn't belong as a three of. Hell, I was considering cutting it in my newest TES list which will be out soon (Working on playtesting). Three Diminishing Returns and three Empty the Warrens is a bit ridiculous, whoever said that their hands would be cluttered up with 4cc cards is absolutely correct. It'd be terrible.
As for newer cards I was working on a 52 card TES list with Street Wraith and Manamorphose which was terrible, Ponder is much better than these options. While ponder costs you mana the card quality is very worth it. I don't think Manamorphose will be worth it in the long run, it's no different than Street Wraith in TES. We don't need filler slots, we need gas.
With Vexing Shusher comes a big change to the sideboard, currently I'm narrowing the sideboard down. Cutting a lot of wish targets so I can support more answers for hate and blue. 4x Vexing Shusher, 3-4x Blasts, and I want to find room for more Shattering Sprees.
Testing stuff aside, I agree 100% on Ponder, that card has been the difference between mulligans, turn 2 wins and ending the game after Diminishing Returns so often I can't see a reason not to run it as a 4 of.
3 Empty the Warrens is arguable, I think it comes down to play style/metagame choices, but cutting Empty the Warrens altogether is atrocious. Even if you never cast Empty the Warrens, it's preventing Meddling Mage/Runed Halo from naming Tendrils of Agony, and Diminishing Returns from removing both kill conditions for Infernal Tutor.
Do you read what you write Breath?Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
I liked 3 EtW when I first started playing the deck because you got those hands where you didn't need to tutor for it or anything, but those days are gone. It was too easy to wipe the board and you were just stuck. I would run a 2nd Tendrils over another EtW anyday.
Yes?!Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
Those days aren't gone, they're just on leap year for some people. Threshold doesn't run enough Engineered Explosives or Stifles to relegate the card to the SB, until I see Stifle + Wasteland as opposed to Counterbalance + Sensei's Divining Top based aggro control, they're staying in the MD.
It's relative, let it go.
The Decklist
Lands
4 Gemstone Mine
4 City of Brass
1 Undiscovered Paradise
1 Tarnished Citadel
Creatures
4 Simian Spirit Guide
Spells
4 Orim’s Chant
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flame
4 Lion’s Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Burning Wish
4 Brainstorm
3 Ponder
2 Infernal Contract
1 Diminishing Returns
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Wipe Away
SB:1 Diminishing Returns
SB:1 Ill-Gotten Gains
SB:1 Cruel Bargain
SB:1 Tendrils of Agony
SB:1 Empty the Warrens
SB:1 Thoughtsieze
SB:1 Pyroclasm
SB:1 Shattering Spree
SB:4 Vexing Shusher
SB:3 Pyroblast
This is what I've been testing, It's been incredibly solid and has been doing great against Threshold.
you must be swinging this baby like a dancing star when you can "afford" to wield a random wipe away ;D
The deck's ability draw a lot of cards and search for whatever it wants absolutely warrants a singleton Wipe Away, which, suffice to say, cannot be countered.
What's he going to do, Infernal Tutor for it? I doubt Brainstorm and Ponder is enough to find Wipe Away when you need it, and drawing Wipe Away when you don't need it is insufferable.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Legend
Just run 4 Ponder.
Right, but it offers you outs. Instead of wasting a Burning Wish to stop a Dreadnought, now you can simply bring it back to an opponent's hand. The Wipe Away serves as a multilateral Time Walk (like Moment's Peace in Landstill), which in combo's case, is a good thing.Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
EDIT: I was a little confused about the 10 storm-count thing earlier (apologies). 5-7 storm count in Belcher is of course the norm.
getting double blue to cast whipe away won't save you any resources compared to wishing for a shattering spree and casting it, most of the time.
for serving the uses you mentioned i can think of better bounce. rushing river can even bounce two targets -.-
for nuking counterbalance krosan grip eats this, btw. (it won't produce blue on a chrome mox though)
You wont be able to find the Wipe Away when you need it and when you won't need it it'll clog op the hand just like the 2-3 Diminishing returns. It doesn't make any sense at all to play 1 Wipe Away mainboard.Quote:
Originally Posted by A Legend
Wipe Away is functionally not even close to Diminishing Returns, so there is no comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by matelml
Plus, Bryant is playing a lone copy, so you know when you're in top-deck mode and you have an Infernal Tutor in your hand, it's not so much a useless card (although you could go for other outs). I can see Bryant's inclusion of it. It's an open slot.