[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils) Storm Combo

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CabalTherapy

There are certainly some points which make ANT the superior storm deck. Apart from what has been said already, the most important thing is that TES doesn't play Past in Flames main. Undoubtedly, it is
the best engine card available in Legacy and not playing it main is a crime. In addition, TES's manabase is abysmally bad. Three colours, one basic, 13 lands provide a struggle through every Tempo MU (but of course, TES wins always
on turn 1 or 2. sure thing..., no lands needed at all). Also ANT is more streamlined which is good because you have your 3 ways of winning and most of the time killing lines won't be that difficult to notice. On the other hand, speaking from my play experience with this pile of TES, you will have to figure out how to win from the start, cantrip aggressively and sometimes fold to a Wasteland, a stranded hand or too much preasure.

You have to ask yourself if you want to drive a full-pimp monstertruck or a shaky dirt buggy.

---

PIF isn't the best engine, if your metagame forces you to combo before Counterbalance/Thalia/Thorn/Chalice/Canonist/MeddlingMage/etc. comes down and this is essentially the root of the whole neverending discussion.

Its no wonder, people struggle hard with the manabase, if shitty advice like "you will have to cantrip aggressively" against Daze/Wasteland is given, which is bollocks, as you needlessly expose yourself to wasteland. "Land, go" is a perfect reasonable early game for all storm variants which feels off to plenty of players, but is preety solid against tempo variants or wasteland decks like Lands.dec, UR Delver, etc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

PIF isn't the best engine, if your metagame forces you to combo before Counterbalance/Thalia/Thorn/Chalice/Canonist/MeddlingMage/etc. comes down and this is essentially the root of the whole neverending discussion.

Its no wonder, people struggle hard with the manabase, if shitty advice like "you will have to cantrip aggressively" against Daze/Wasteland is given, which is bollocks, as you needlessly expose yourself to wasteland. "Land, go" is a perfect reasonable early game for all storm variants which feels off to plenty of players, but is preety solid against tempo variants or wasteland decks like Lands.dec, UR Delver, etc.

---

Certainly, land > go is a nice play against some decks but then it is nice to have a deck that works with two basics and has more powerful spells for the next turns.

Basics > 3c landbase
Cabal Ritual > Rite of Flame, Chrome Mox
Past in Flames > Burning Wish

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CabalTherapy

Certainly, land > go is a nice play against some decks but then it is nice to have a deck that works with two basics and has more powerful spells for the next turns.

Basics > 3c landbase
Cabal Ritual > Rite of Flame, Chrome Mox
Past in Flames > Burning Wish

---

Yeah, IF you plan to GENERALLY play more than 3 own turns per game. Unfortunately that bears known problems by itself at times and certain metagames. If overwhelming the opponent with sheer speed isn't relevant in a certain metagame, but beating manadenial however is, ANT is the deck to pick Vice versa and that was Calebs point with the article.

Rather amusing that the guy who just wrote the TES article just won the SCG event with ANT. Unconventional list as usual, however.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottW

Rather amusing that the guy who just wrote the TES article just won the SCG event with ANT. Unconventional list as usual, however.

---

I wish he was on the source, I really want to know what he uses the 3 sided EtWs for and what he cuts etc. Anyone have any insight?

Its based on an old idea, just may be was never tested enought.
Its not good that a new idea wins so fast. Its bad for players. But its just great for him^^

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dr_D

I wish he was on the source, I really want to know what he uses the 3 sided EtWs for and what he cuts etc. Anyone have any insight?

---

I think he mainly used it for the Miracles matchup. He took that idea from Sawatarix who got top8 with it the same day or the day before.

He's been having some impressive results over the past few weeks/months with his ANT list. I still don't really get the maindeck AN plus 2 Petitions, but it seems to work for him. I'm assuming he's running the AN only as an emergency win con against discard heavy/gy hate heavy decks when his two primary ways of winning aren't available and he is forced to either try his luck with AN or just scoop.

@Izor, From Facebook

Q: Hi Caleb! With two Dark Petition... ¿Is Ad Nauseam very bad?

A: It's a bit worse for sure but ad naus is usually a back up plan so I think it's completely worth it to have a more consistent deck over all with 6 tutors.

He also mentioned he was boarding in the Warrens in the D&T matchup as well.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BeardTron

He also mentioned he was boarding in the Warrens in the D&T matchup as well.

---

is it surprising?

At what point do you board in all 4 Abrupt Decay? What comes out??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottW

At what point do you board in all 4 Abrupt Decay? What comes out??

---

Against Miracles and MUD. What comes out is a matter of preference and the list you're playing.

My list is standard 55 + AN + 7th Discard + SDT + 2 preordain. Boarding:

Miracles: -2 Preordain, -4 Ponder, +4 Decay, +1 EtW, +1 SDT. Depending if I see postboard removal or not I might -X Therapy, +X Xantid Swarm.
MUD: -3 Cabal therapy, -4 Duress, +4 Abrupt Decay, +1 EtW, +2 Hurkyl's Recall. Depending on play/draw I will keep discard in and board out preordains.

~Tom

In his testing, Caleb has revealed that Dark Petition does hurt the Ad Nauseum line, but there is an advantage in that you are no longer leaning so heavily on Ad Nausing into an LED. In this manner, it is less clunky, but it is somewhat situation. The Deck is more consistent, and the five-mana tutor with a packed Dark Ritual is actually much less clunky than Grim Tutor. That one mana and 3 life really, really matters. Try goldfishing it. Dark Petition is the real deal, ya'll.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ScottW

Rather amusing that the guy who just wrote the TES article just won the SCG event with ANT. Unconventional list as usual, however.

---

In all fairness, TES also made top 8. Caleb played against Infect, infect, and Shardless in the QF, SF, and Finals respectively which are favorable matchups. Both storm variants had a strong showing this weekend.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheKingslayer

In his testing, Caleb has revealed that Dark Petition does hurt the Ad Nauseum line, but there is an advantage in that you are no longer leaning so heavily on Ad Nausing into an LED. In this manner, it is less clunky, but it is somewhat situation. The Deck is more consistent, and the five-mana tutor with a packed Dark Ritual is actually much less clunky than Grim Tutor. That one mana and 3 life really, really matters. Try goldfishing it. Dark Petition is the real deal, ya'll.

---

In my limited testing I had some problems against Deathrite Shaman and Daze/Spell Pierce with the Dark Petition. Postboard it's pretty risky against decks that pack graveyard hate. Also, you can use Grim Tutor or the Preordain that it replaces to find other things than a win-con more effectively. Next to that I found I often had an LED-line that wasn't possible with DP but would be with Grim Tutor. Ad Nauseam becomes rather awkward if you already have a tutor revealed and do find LED. DP is better if you crack your LED in response to AN though.

Maybe I didn't test enough, but those were my conclusions to dismiss it. I like Sensei's Divining Top more at the moment.

~Tom

Hello guys,
I would like to ask for a little piece of information, quick and simple but really important to improve my game.

I used to pretty much always play ponder on turn 1, then I learned from better players than me (Jona's article, Slosh, Jamie) that playing it on turn 2 is better, as you see one more card.
So I play every Ponder turn 2 now.
I would like to ask: is there any situation where you play Ponder turn 1? When? What makes the difference in choosing turn 1 or 2?
Thanks a lot!

Inviato dal mio GT-S7275R utilizzando Tapatalk

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghiwo

Hello guys,
I would like to ask for a little piece of information, quick and simple but really important to improve my game.

I used to pretty much always play ponder on turn 1, then I learned from better players than me (Jona's article, Slosh, Jamie) that playing it on turn 2 is better, as you see one more card.
So I play every Ponder turn 2 now.
I would like to ask: is there any situation where you play Ponder turn 1? When? What makes the difference in choosing turn 1 or 2?
Thanks a lot!

Inviato dal mio GT-S7275R utilizzando Tapatalk

---

Are you trying to kill on turn 2? If so, your ponder isn't doing as much good being held until turn 2. Are you playing for a longer game? Then it may be best to hold it to turn 2. There's no 100% answer to your question, it's incredibly situational, I'd suggest you keep playing the deck and learn for yourself how to sequence cantrips.

It's certainly not correct to never Ponder on turn 1 by default, it always depends. One of the most common scenarios where you should Ponder turn 1 is when you're currently missing 2 mana to go off on turn 1. Saving your Ponder for turn 2 may be bad here because the mana you spend to play it may be the one mana you needed to go off on turn 2.

Example: Hand: Land, Land, Ponder, Cabal Ritual, Infernal Tutor, LED, blank

With this hand you're able to go off on turn 2 if your turn 1 Ponder finds you another piece of fast mana. However, if you save the Ponder for turn 2 and you then find a Petal or another Cabal Ritual with it, you won't be able to go off because you've already used one of your mana for the turn.

There are more scenarios of course. As a rule of thumb I'd say the more likely you are to be forced to win as fast as possible, the more likely it is that Pondering on turn 1 is the correct play, especially if your hand only missed one piece to go off and you expect to need all your available mana on turn 2.

Likewise, it can sometimes even be the correct play to Brainstorm on turn 1.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tom T

In my limited testing I had some problems against Deathrite Shaman and Daze/Spell Pierce with the Dark Petition. Postboard it's pretty risky against decks that pack graveyard hate. Also, you can use Grim Tutor or the Preordain that it replaces to find other things than a win-con more effectively. Next to that I found I often had an LED-line that wasn't possible with DP but would be with Grim Tutor. Ad Nauseam becomes rather awkward if you already have a tutor revealed and do find LED. DP is better if you crack your LED in response to AN though.

Maybe I didn't test enough, but those were my conclusions to dismiss it. I like Sensei's Divining Top more at the moment.

~Tom

---

ain't surprising, just reading the card this comes up, my skepticism goes that far I haven't even tried that card outside of vintage (would take toom much time and goldfish isnt a real factor for this card i think) and limit myself to asking whether Grim Tutor being DP would be better when this comes up... conclusion - not worth it in real conditions imo (my reality overflows with softcounters) if you play against non U and Miracles a lot it might be better than preordain once in a while

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ghiwo

Hello guys,
I would like to ask for a little piece of information, quick and simple but really important to improve my game.

I used to pretty much always play ponder on turn 1, then I learned from better players than me (Jona's article, Slosh, Jamie) that playing it on turn 2 is better, as you see one more card.
So I play every Ponder turn 2 now.
I would like to ask: is there any situation where you play Ponder turn 1? When? What makes the difference in choosing turn 1 or 2?
Thanks a lot!

Inviato dal mio GT-S7275R utilizzando Tapatalk

---

don't underestimate yourself, imo there is no definitive rule on anything, always depends on your hand, list, MU, experience and your judgement which line brings you better odds to succeed, sometimes the only your playstyle makes the difference

the worst attitude is playing stuff mindlessly, as long as you know what you're doing and know what you look for at what cost you're on the right track, so the answer as always - play a lot and think about what you're doing

to answer the questions specificaly - yes, often, hard to tell, you just "know" by the state of your hand if you've seen a lot of them, examples - hand can kill T1 / the hand looks like classic something you know = needs a 1-2 of type of a card for something (hell, yeah =D)/ I get a significant advantage seeing more if opp has to play pressure in order to win in the MU or I know his hand and have to or lead him to play accordingly to my plans / need to find specific card for T2 - like discard vs. Burn or D+T/ threshold is involved for the flow of the deck...