Printable View
I've been thinking about it I may cut Abeyance for 2 ponders and maybe find room for a 3rd. However, I doubt I'll play 4 ponder. Also people, get ready to cut the cave-ins/earthquakes/rough and tumbles from your boards, with that new little critter from Llyworn we have to play Pyroclasm.
lol, thats funny. I actually believe he prevents playing of Rough/Tumble even if your only paying for the clasm half. :laugh: Does that mean he also counters Dead/Gone and Fire/Ice? :eek:
You actually can still play Rough/Tumble as when you play one half of a split card, as long as it is on the stack the other half is completely ignored.
And it kills Mystic Enforcer! :tongue:
About Ponder:
I'd think that you usually want one of those as a setup-card in more or less every game as they improve your shot for the turn 2 combo in finding what you need/whatever you don't need. This depends on playstyle however. If you always want to combo out as soon as possible, not to many of those should be in the deck. If you are going for a more consistent turn 2/3/4 combo you'd probably want as many Ponders as possible.
What I meant was drawing multiple Brainstorms/Ponders in one game can slow you down. Always having 1 Brainstorm or Ponder seems very nice.Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
I just got back from a 20 person local which I ended up being 3rd, which was my testing for Ponder. I can't say I liked Ponder. A lot of the time I drew it I was wishing it was Abeyance. I think I'm going to be sticking with Abeyance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wastedlife
I don't think ponder was a terrible idea to test, but since Syracuse in known for their control decks, playing both Orim's Chant and Abeyance is pretty damn sexy.
Good showing and it was a blast to play you even though it wasn't much of a match. :)
Today i was testing for one of the first time of my life combo deck in the form of TES, and i have just one question :
how to handle a teeg ?
I face him several time today, and the usual cave-in was useless.
I've had a SB crippling fatigue just for him.
Maybe we should start to think about answer for him.
Beside that, the deck is really strong. The only card that seems weak for me is diminishing return, but well, more playtest could show me that i was wrong, isn't ?
Holo.
Wow, Crippling Fatigue is actually a really good idea for Meddling Mage and Gaddock Teeg removal against aggro-control, I never would have thought of that.
Shouldn't Deathmark be an auto-include for the sideboard? Kills Mage or Teeg.
Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
Crippling Fatigue isn't a bad option choice, but having BB1 in its casting cost seems a little mana intensive if you don't flash it back. Right now I would prefer pyroclasm as its more versatile in addition to the cave-in in the board.
Deathmark is another good option b/c its a 1 mana kill spell for both mage and teeg.
the thing is that, if i bring such a deck in my meta (95 % of thresh), i would like to have answer that are not stopped easily by counterbalance an sensei's divination top (nearly 40 % of the thresh player here in paris have countertop maindeck), that's why crippling fattigue is good. Plus, it can be flashback.
Holo.
That's a nonsensical argument. If your opponent has Counterbalance AND Gaddock Teeg out, you're probably just fucked. If your opponent has the CounterTop engine in play, you almost certainly don't care about creature removal.Quote:
Originally Posted by Holo_rip
Yeah, that's for sure. But that's not all the time that they have gaddock and counterbalancer out.
We have answer to both, and i think that well piloted it can fight through the hate everybody bring for combo (and that's someone who bring belcher to such an environnement who speak).
So well, just trying to find answer.
Holo.
If your metagame is 95% threshold you should be playing something with a lot more game against it than storm combo. Something like MBC.
Eh, you can't pack up your horses and ride into the sunset every time you see Force of Wills, you just have to prepare yourself and your deck if you want to play Storm combo ever again in the future, and there are better decks to play against aggro-control than MBC any way. Go go 100 dollar Affinity deck.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattH
@Crippling Fatigue, I think the important thing about Crippling Fatigue is that it circumvents Force of Will, Daze, Counterspell etc. if the opponent doesn't realize he can't necessarily counter the target after you wish for it.
The man said
NINETY
FIVE
percent. I'm sure it was hyperbole but if not there's no excuse for running uphill.
Also, your threshold player needs help if he's losing to affinity worse than to MBC.
Yes, but my point is if you aren't comfortable playing Storm combo against Threshold or Landstill then you shouldn't be playing Storm combo period. The match up, if you're experienced, isn't as bad as people make it out to be unless they're MDing Counterbalance.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattH
Maindeck Stifle+Deed hurts badly too.
Not really. It does for TES, but a storm combo player will just change to a different storm combo deck that beats up on 4c Landstill if that's the dominant deck. I've played QSI, Grim Iggy, and TES recently in different metagames because they each excel against different sets of control decks. You can even metagame against maindeck counterbalance from Threshold.Quote:
Originally Posted by matelml
Actually, it wasn't. Here in paris, we saw only thresh nowaday.Quote:
Originally Posted by MattH
But well, even it's hard sometime, you can fight through the hate. I pack 4 orim and 3 abeyance. Plus i have MD confidant to stall the game and make a nearly perfect hand before going off.
My plan is'nt winning by turn 1 / 2 / 3 with no protection. My plan is to win the late game turn 5 / 6 so that i can have some protection (at least 1, but two is better).
Holo.
I play 3 Chrome mox because drawing 3 is almost always a mulligan and 2 makes a bad hand or mulligan usually. My rule is: play 4 if you like to have more than 1 or really want to draw 1. Play 3 if you prefer not to draw multiples. As said drawing multiple moxes is not nice and I don't really need to draw 1 either. For the same reasons I play 3 SSG and 3 Cabal ritualQuote:
Originally Posted by chokin
Any less than 4 Mox and 4 SSG is dumb. Cabal Ritual is terrible compared to those cards. I'm testing Crippling Fatigue, I'm not sure how good the results willl be. It seems like it's really slow. However, it gets a second chance to kill teeg.Quote:
Originally Posted by matelml
Quote:
Originally Posted by wastedlife
I have to agree. Cabal Ritual is not needed in this deck b/c your plan is to win as fast as possible and a lot of times you don't have threshold in the graveyard in order to maximize the effectiveness of Cabal Ritual. The only problem I have with crippling fatigue is the mana cost. I think its great that you can flash it back, but the initial costs is why I really don't like it as an wish target.
Win so fast as possibile that you use confidant that is better than night's whisper only if it stays into play 3+ turns. At third turn or more, can't you be in threshold? I use cabal ritual in double copies so I can search it with infernal tutor. This is often good against landstill and others control matchups when with double cabal ritual you can adopt the double tendrils plan.Quote:
Originally Posted by nickrit2000
Quote:
Originally Posted by jegger
I would like to go over the difference between TES and Iggy Pop for a moment. Iggy Pop is a slower combo deck in design which uses cards like intuition and fetch lands in order to achieve threshold. TES doesn't do that b/c all our lands can produce any color. Are lands don't go to the graveyard and we don't use cards to fill our yards up. We simply just win as fast as possible by not using threshold.
What would you cut to play a slow ritual effect in cabal ritual? Dark Confidant? Abeyance? Orim's Chant? I would rather have these cards in the deck then a sub-par ritual.
What do some of the other players think?
Cabal Ritual is OK, but currently not needed. I use it as filler when trying to find out what i really want there...
The only reason why we even ran Cabal Rits back then was to power out Draw-4s. Now that you run something better; Abeyance, you don't really need Cabal Rits anymore, considering that you're going to recover from your Ritual losses via Confidant, so Cabal Rit really isnt going to be needed at all.
I think the only Ritual that's left and worth exploring is Tinder Wall.
We tried Tinderwall, it was cut because the slots that were open made it too hard to find tutor effects to win. We needed something that would draw cards.Quote:
Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
Quote:
Originally Posted by wastedlife
I remember down in Virgina that Byrant added some tinder walls in the deck to help with the mana acceleration, but the addition of dark confidant plus chant and abeyance is just so much better.
I would play tinder wall over cabal ritual though, since you can cast tinder wall on turn 1 and probably go off pretty easily on turn 2.
Aww... Rotten you shouldn't have, really. What do people think of Bound/Determined to get around Counterbalance? The only problem is it's terrible with Dark Confidant.
Doesn't Abeyance also gets pass Counterbalance in a way? (Stop the Top from the top being used)
Also, Bound/Determined doesn't stop Trickbind/Stifle right?
Determined doesn't stop top from going on top. However, it just negates being able to counter anything. Abeyance they can just randomly flip the casting cost.Quote:
Originally Posted by ClearSkies
Also, Stile/Trickbind doesn't work. They say they counter an activated ability or triggered.
What he means to say is that Stifle and Trickbind are not stopped by Determined. Determined says that your other spells can't be countered. Stifle and Trickbind counter abilities, not spells.Quote:
Originally Posted by wastedlife
Yea, I know it doesn't stop Stifle and trickbind, just trying to bring up the point it doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by wastedlife
Are you suggesting that you use Determined and then Orim's Chant/Abeyance afterwards as a setup spell? Or, do you not care about stifle/trickbind because they aren't relevant to your metagame?
I think anything that costs 2 is bad. Xantid Swarm is amazing versus decks that will side out all of their removal. Having to only resolve one spell is so much more easier than having to resolve chant, tutors, mana, and the win. Xantid would have one me games against slow control decks like Tog.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jak.
I believe the main problem with Xantid Swarm is that he not only has to resolve, but has to attack your opponent. I would rather pay 1 mana for chant which is a must counter or your opponent loses the game. In terms of protection, it is very important to play cards that your opponent will have a tougher time to deal with and I firmly believe Orim's Chant and Abeyance is far superior than Xantid Swarm.
I think he is not a bad option, but with better options available to you there is no reason right now to play him. Plus, we have pyroblasts and REB's in the board to help fight blue control decks.
Its all about what card will statistically improve your matchups. I believe its Orim's Chant.
I know. I am saying keep all chants, they are great, but have Xantids SB. Side them in when your opponent takes out the removal. So much more easier to cast one spell preemptively, than casting a spell as you are going off.
Why is it that every time Xantid Swarm gets brought up, someone says "Orim's Chant is better." Duh. Orim's Chant is a no-brainer. It's Abeyance that should be replaced. I'm pretty sure that's what Jak was referring to when he said "anything that costs 2 is bad."
In my experience playing with and against TES, Xantid Swarm > Abeyance.
Thank you. Playing it in the deck was terrible. I cast it once in our tourney and that was just to draw.Quote:
Originally Posted by Volt