Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
I'm not so sure burning wish is clumsy with PiF, I mean if you get your wish through then it exiles, if its countered than it still goes to the GY, generally you only need to resolve one tutor, so I'm not sure this is that big of problem.
As for the 61st card being a land, I'm not sure that means anything, I mean you could call anything the 61st card. However you are running 14 cantrips instead of the usual 12, so I think going to 12 or 13 would be acceptable.
As for Grim vs Burning, I'm not sure paying 6 life(either with ad nauseum or twice cast through PiF) and 2 extra mana when you are already main-decking red lands makes sense.
Burning Wish for Virtues Ruin in the SB is a sweet play to beat the maverick decks and burning for EtW means you dont have to take the 4 damage flipping it to AN.
If I wasn't playing chant, I would practice this, as it stands I am boarding in 4 warrens and 2 red lands from my board at times.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
P.S.
The 61st card is always worse than the 60th card. When going for efficiency, adding another card is just decreasing consistency.
That's true... well I'm used to play 61 decks even combos (and played even 63 card Lands deck once) and feel no way obligated with this "rule"... I bit hesitated with storm but it provides more SB versatility and I want enough lands in deck where I keep reasonable no-landers with probe time to time, and probe virtually makes it -4 cards
bottom line - I cannot build the main deck better than this that would feel stronger to me in 60 cards.. so I ended up like that...
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
I'm not so sure burning wish is clumsy with PiF, I mean if you get your wish through then it exiles, if its countered than it still goes to the GY, generally you only need to resolve one tutor, so I'm not sure this is that big of problem.
It is, as it requires the tutor... I played only 4/2 or 3/3+1, sure its better in 4/4 +1 ...I wonder If I wouldn't rather play TES then...
Quote:
As for the 61st card being a land, I'm not sure that means anything, I mean you could call anything the 61st card. However you are running 14 cantrips instead of the usual 12, so I think going to 12 or 13 would be acceptable.
that means same deck 14 lands... hmm need more lands... add one
maybe it would.. but playing 1of preordain =/ ...I'm not sure 12 is usual and 16 is just cantrip into more cantrips, so I'm fine with 14 as I board out 2 preordains out +/- each match
Quote:
As for Grim vs Burning, I'm not sure paying 6 life(either with ad nauseum or twice cast through PiF) and 2 extra mana when you are already main-decking red lands makes sense.
It doesn't matter with Pif as I'm winning that turn, its real pain with Ad Nauseam... on the other hand 4/5 games I combo through PiF and do not use Ad Nauseam unless its necessary
Quote:
Burning Wish for Virtues Ruin in the SB is a sweet play to beat the maverick decks and burning for EtW means you dont have to take the 4 damage flipping it to AN.
I know It is and its mana intensive too.. I'm thinking of running Infest in my board instead
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dillonkbase
I'm not so sure burning wish is clumsy with PiF, I mean if you get your wish through then it exiles, if its countered than it still goes to the GY, generally you only need to resolve one tutor, so I'm not sure this is that big of problem.
It's not clumsy as long as you are running 4 tutor 4 wish because you will usually have a tutor as you burning wish. The tutor will usually be in your hand and lets you double up on mana or protection post combo. Also, if they counter it you can usually use a PiF to get a lethal storm count through your gy so the 1 wish is all it takes some times. Also, just 1 burning wish with the natural tendrils in hand will win games.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dillonkbase
As for Grim vs Burning, I'm not sure paying 6 life(either with ad nauseum or twice cast through PiF) and 2 extra mana when you are already main-decking red lands makes sense.
It's fine as you are mainly comboing off with PiF, but the ad nauseam requires a little bit of caution, as you need extra life for it. I prefer Burning Wish as you can be fast if you need to with the empty route or it gives you the best utility and versatility your deck can give.
I also think it's important to have a maindeck out to Teeg, which Burning Wish gives.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dillonkbase
Burning Wish for Virtues Ruin in the SB is a sweet play to beat the maverick decks and burning for EtW means you dont have to take the 4 damage flipping it to AN.
Ruin and possibly Grapeshot. Grapeshot is great against hatebears or as a 1 sided wrath of god if they don't have mom protection.
Oh, and it lets you showboat for your friends or grapeshot an opponent who is being rude to you for 50 damage.
On a side note grapeshot is more mana intensive if you don't run rite of flame so you usually need a 2nd red source via petal or another land. It definitely isn't mandatory if you aren't running rite of flame, but when I played Ubr Ant I found the mana easily accessible via petal and not having double red never screwed me over.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sloshthedark
It is, as it requires the tutor... I played only 4/2 or 3/3+1, sure its better in 4/4 +1 ...I wonder If I wouldn't rather play TES then...
You probably wouldn't because you get a way less stable mana base. Also playing 4 wish 3 tutor 1 sb or 4/4 1 grim sb, makes Burning wish less of a random thing as you usually have the extra tutor. Also, post combo the extra tutor lets you double up on protection or mana. Burning wish getting PiF when I have drawn the tendrils has won me so many games I can't count.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
For those of you who are running Gitaxian Probe + Cabal Therapy in a Past in Flames list (which I believe to make sense given the synergy between PiF and Probe and between Therapy and Probe), are you opting for Duress or Thoughtseize as your "other" discard spell? Given the number of Snapcasters, Vendilion Cliques, Spellstutter Sprites, and other hatebears running around, and the fact that Past in Flames decks are less reliant on life totals, I am almost inclined to run Thoughtseizes (or at least a split).
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
I'm going to make a bold claim. ANT's sideboard is mostly garbage. The only anti-hate needed are a couple Chain of Vapors, 1-2 Echoing Truth, and a few ways to deal with Counterbalance and Stax. The rest are "upgrades" (imaginary or real) to bounce spells and other filler.
To fill this hole in the sideboard, I've been testing boarding in 4x Delver of Secrets and 4x Dark Confidant against all blue decks, and it's been working beautifully. Even against my playtest opponents who know I'm boarding into the manplan, their sideboard is now less effective and they often can't draw an answer before I deal 9+ damage or draw a few cards. In some small local tournaments, people have been completely blown out (although if they're good, they'll leave in some swords).
Delver will flip something absurd like 80% of the time and really puts a ton of pressure on them. Bob is fine, but a little underwhelming so far. Next plan is to try a 2-2 split of Jaces and Bobs. Both of the duders are likely to come down under a counterbalance lock and force the opponent to search for an answer for them or die, which dilutes their efforts to search for interaction with the combo.
For boarding, I'm operating on the theory that I transform into an aggro-combo deck. Therefore, I want to be less all-in, focusing on pressuring and disrupting my opponent until I can execute a combo-kill. I board in an additional Tendrils to make it easier to cast a couple rituals into Tendrils for the kill. So right now, the plan is:
+ 4x Delver, 4x Bob, +1 Tendrils, +2ish bounce spells
- 4x Preordain, 2x LED, 1x Infernal Tutor, 1x Ad Nauseam, 1x Ill-Gotten Gains, 2ish Flex
The flex can be some number of Petals, Duresses, maindeck bounce, etc.
I'm currently playing Past In Flames in the maindeck along with IGG, no Grim Tutors because of budgetary reasons. 1 Volcanic, but no other splashes off stock U/B.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
phazonmuant
I'm going to make a bold claim. ANT's sideboard is mostly garbage. The only anti-hate needed are a couple Chain of Vapors, 1-2 Echoing Truth, and a few ways to deal with Counterbalance and Stax. The rest are "upgrades" (imaginary or real) to bounce spells and other filler.
To fill this hole in the sideboard, I've been testing boarding in 4x Delver of Secrets and 4x Dark Confidant against all blue decks, and it's been working beautifully. Even against my playtest opponents who know I'm boarding into the manplan, their sideboard is now less effective and they often can't draw an answer before I deal 9+ damage or draw a few cards. In some small local tournaments, people have been completely blown out (although if they're good, they'll leave in some swords).
Delver will flip something absurd like 80% of the time and really puts a ton of pressure on them. Bob is fine, but a little underwhelming so far. Next plan is to try a 2-2 split of Jaces and Bobs. Both of the duders are likely to come down under a counterbalance lock and force the opponent to search for an answer for them or die, which dilutes their efforts to search for interaction with the combo.
For boarding, I'm operating on the theory that I transform into an aggro-combo deck. Therefore, I want to be less all-in, focusing on pressuring and disrupting my opponent until I can execute a combo-kill. I board in an additional Tendrils to make it easier to cast a couple rituals into Tendrils for the kill. So right now, the plan is:
+ 4x Delver, 4x Bob, +1 Tendrils, +2ish bounce spells
- 4x Preordain, 2x LED, 1x Infernal Tutor, 1x Ad Nauseam, 1x Ill-Gotten Gains, 2ish Flex
The flex can be some number of Petals, Duresses, maindeck bounce, etc.
I'm currently playing Past In Flames in the maindeck along with IGG, no Grim Tutors because of budgetary reasons. 1 Volcanic, but no other splashes off stock U/B.
This has been tested off and on for 5-6 years in this style of deck. It's fucking awful. The reason that it's awful is that ANT actually only has a few bad matchups, and this plan solves none of them. Let's walk through them:
(a) faster combo decks with as much or more permission/disruption (examples: Reanimator, Mirror w/Chant effects)
(b) prison decks that can attack basics and/or put up a clock (e.g. Geddon Stax, Dragon Stompy, Faerie Stompy).
(c) permission decks that leverage more than just stack-based counterspells (e.g. Counterbalance.dec (with it's namesake), Team America (with spot discard, Hymn, VClique))
(d) permission-heavy tempo decks with a very fast clock (RUG Tempo/Canadian Threshold)
Man plan doesn't help you at all vs (a) (siding in creatures vs someone who kills you faster than you...) or (d) (they're way more aggressive and won't side out their burn). It's pretty questionable vs (b) since they play a good number of threats and likely can't side out all of their (normally quite large complement of) creature control. (c) has far better trumps in one of the following:
Tarmogoyf
Stoneforge Mystic->Batterskull/Sword
Knight of the Reliquary
Tombstalker
(arguably, Jace, the Mind Sculptor)
This is ignoring the fact that they expect Xantid Swarms and Dark Confidants by now and have accounted for that by keeping around 4 pieces of removal in their decks. It's also ignoring that creatures don't actually deal with them assembling CB/Top.
What might you do to solve these pillars of things that ANT doesn't want to see?
(a)
1. Use specific hate, if it can be classified as a hoser should metagame presence become strong enough.
2. Play more discard spells so you can fight a war of attrition. ANT plays more and better draw than other combo decks (particularly those that sacrifice stability to have speed and lots of protection). Use this to stall the game until those cantrips matter.
(b)
1. Without a fast clock or land disruption, beating these decks is as easy as Hurkyl's Recall, Rebuild, Meltdown, or Pulverize. With a fast clock, you have less time to hit land drops and find your removal. Lists like Ari's with lots of lands and lots of basic lands are much better here than something with 14 lands and gitaxian probes. In terms of ending the game of a deck with 14-17 lands, the last point of damage and Armageddon backed by a Sphere, a creature, or other non-chalice disruption are the same. The same thing that will work best against Dragon Stompy (as many lands and basics as you can afford (Ari Lax's well-known UB list is great here) plus enough mass bounce/removal that you have a good shot of drawing one naturally) also will beat Geddon Stax.
2. It's important to know what is inconvenient vs what is deadly. ANT often plays discard spells so recognizing what your hand might be able to play through when staring down an opponent's opening hand containing Chalice, Trinisphere, Mox, Ancient tomb, City of Traitors is very important. Both Trinisphere and Chalice can be played through, but how you do it is dependent on what your hand might be able to accomplish. Mentally giving up by telling yourself (and probably later your friends) that an opponent outdrew you is the reason you miss the cut when piloting storm.
(c)
1. Play a different deck. Fighting the two main ways of non-counterspell disruption from a blue deck (Counterbalance and Discard) at the same time is nearly impossible when you're trying to string together 8-10 spells. The only thing that has been constant in terms of beating these decks together has been Empty the Warrens, but opponents are quick to adapt with EE, Deed, and Maelstrom Pulse.
2. If you're facing only one, particular strategies are known to hose each. Heavy discard decks are known to be vulnerable to Divert, Disrupt, and Flusterstorm. Counterbalances can usually be dealt with by a mix of hard to counter enchantment removal (Krosan Grip, Reverent Silence, Wipe Away) and discard. Counterbalances are sometimes vulnerable to alternate sideboard plans of Doomsday into Shelldock Isle for Emrakul or Show and Tell into Emrakul but both will eat up large amounts of sideboard space.
(d)
1. The most obvious is change your protection package. These decks are notoriously weak to Orim's Chant, Silence, and basic Plains.
2. That said, this matchup is very winnable in stock lists. Know what's likely to walk into Daze and don't throw something critical like a discard spell or a Brainstorm into it if you can avoid it. Play with knowledge of their Wastelands and Stifles (fetch basics when it's safe if you can). Hold on to those discard spells a little longer until they've spent their manipulation. You're more likely to be able to follow up a bad hand of theirs with comboing and at least they're unlikely to be able to immediately recover from your discard spell by Brainstorming.
3. In lists with fewer lands, Carpet of Flowers and/or basics in the sideboard can help vs their mana denial and soft counters.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
That's a good analysis of the matchups. I know the manplan has been tested in the past, but so far I haven't seen anyone (posting about) testing with Delver. It sounds trivial, one man vs. another, but Delver is actually that good. Going through the specific matchups:
I agree with you on a and b. I have another Thoughtseize and a couple Rebuilds for a and b respectively. The manplan doesn't come in.
c. Your first option (play a different deck) would be correct if CB or BUG had large percentages of the meta, but fortunately they don't. However, Legacy being as diverse as it is, you're likely to run into one of these decks at a larger tournament, and I want to do something more than board in 3 cards to make the matchup 40-60 in their favor instead of something awful like 30-70.
Delver in particular is able to turn the matchup around to favorable postboard. Against heavy discard, given a hand of Delver and Tutor, Delver and LED, or even Delver and Brainstorm, it would be very unusual for them to take Delver with a Thoughtseize turn 1. They will usually leave in 2-5 removal spells, but we're playing 8-10 cantrips (depending on how you board), they're usually playing 4-6, so we're going to hit our men more frequently then they hit their removal. So by the time they find removal, Delver has hit them for 6, sometimes more. It gets under Counterbalance, allowing you to pressure them while you set up for the EOT Wipe Away instead of just sitting there. It's all about stretching them thin - they can try to search for permission or removal, and if they have a 3/2 battling, it forces them to make a decision fast.
Addressing the trumps,
1) Tarmogoyf you can often race. He tends to be a 3/4 in this matchup and Delver comes down faster and flies over. Bob doesn't fare well against Goyf, though, which is one of the reasons I'm not completely sold on him.
2) Mystic is vulnerable to discard. Instead of blowing your discard early, wait until they cast Mystic, then attempt to squire him. Even if Mystic blocks Bob, Bob has drawn you multiple cards at this point.
3) A turn 2 Knight seems like it could be a problem. I haven't tested against a Bant CB list though. It doesn't seem very popular.
4) Tombstalker is big, but he's very, very slow. What's even more embarrassing is if you happen to have a bounce spell handy, you can bounce him to swing through and they usually won't have enough cards in grave to recast him.
5) Jace is a problem, as always. You can attempt to kill them before he can come down, you can attempt to battle him to death, but if he sticks around, you will lose. This is another reason I'm trying out Jaces of my own. You can't protect Jace effectively, but against decks with very few creatures, he can come in through CB and will usually dominate.
d) I've tried Chant packages, didn't find them to be very effective. You're devoting at least 1/3 of your board and weakening your manabase to spells that fundamentally interact in the same way as they're preparing for. Either that, or you're adding Chants and discard, which makes the deck incredibly clunky and reactive. Ari posted not too long ago that Chants are garbage because of how many spell pierces they're running.
I appreciate your advice for how to play the matchup, but I am playing around Stifle and Wasteland. They can usually disrupt you just enough to buy them the 2 turns they need to battle for the win if you're just trying to sculpt a perfect hand, in my experience.
While most people will keep in burn, it's again stretching their searching thin by trying to find 4 bolts to my 8 men. Ever Snapcaster they use to bolt my men is one fewer Snare or Stile I have to play around. Their Delvers flip less frequently (or require suboptimal Pondering or Brainstorming). If they tap out / low to put pressure on you or remove a dude, you can often combo off right there. What's really worrying is the Hatfield RUG Delver playing CB in the side. This plan allows you to actually have a game against them.
The main point is that yes, the manplan hasn't been very effective in the past, but it's good now solely because of Delver.
And emidln,
Quote:
Mentally giving up by telling yourself (and probably later your friends) that an opponent outdrew you is the reason you miss the cut when piloting storm.
There's really no call for making demeaning assumptions.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
lordofthepit
For those of you who are running Gitaxian Probe + Cabal Therapy in a Past in Flames list (which I believe to make sense given the synergy between PiF and Probe and between Therapy and Probe), are you opting for Duress or Thoughtseize as your "other" discard spell? Given the number of Snapcasters, Vendilion Cliques, Spellstutter Sprites, and other hatebears running around, and the fact that Past in Flames decks are less reliant on life totals, I am almost inclined to run Thoughtseizes (or at least a split).
Blue/Red decks are way too popular to run Thoughtseize as the "Other" spell, particularly if you're running Grim Tutors. Vendillion Clique isn't really a huge deal to play around (If you think they have it, save a Brainstorm), and Spellstutter rarely counters anything of too much value. Snapcaster can be semi-annoying, but honestly, usually if they're leaving up Snapcaster + Counter magic every turn you can probably just wait out a Cabal Therapy and/or enough mana to play through Spell Pierce, since they're not doing anything with their mana.
If you want to run Thoughtseize main, you might as well cut Ad Naus, because you'll never really be able to cast it profitably -- a lot of people are already on the verge of cutting it, so this is one more strike against it.
I run 4 Duress main, and usually 3-4 Thoughtseize in the board (in Game 2/3, I often take out Probes for Thoughtseizes, or if I'm siding out Ad Naus I can be a little more aggressive with my life total).
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
In your honest opinion's, what stands a better chance at Indianapolis, LED/Looting Dredge or TES? I've been play testing/practicing with Dredge for the last 2 months but I'm starting to think TES will fair better. Graveyard based decks are back on the radar and TES fairs better against Delver, which is currently the deck to beat. Try to be unbiased.
-Matthew
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Matt
In your honest opinion's, what stands a better chance at Indianapolis, LED/Looting Dredge or TES? I've been play testing/practicing with Dredge for the last 2 months but I'm starting to think TES will fair better. Graveyard based decks are back on the radar and TES fairs better against Delver, which is currently the deck to beat. Try to be unbiased.
-Matthew
I would not play either deck at a big event, but if I had to choose, I'd go with TES, assuming you're very proficient. (There's a separate TES thread to focus on the storm deck with a 5-color manabase.)
However, if you're concerned about Delver, I consider Dredge to have the stronger matchup. The old Canadian Threshold counted Dredge among its weaker matchups, whereas these types of decks (quick clock, plentiful countermagic, Stifle, Wasteland) are decks that Storm pilots do not look forward to facing.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
People will have prepared for dredge. Take that for what it is.
The old Canadian Thresh counted dredge as a favorable matchup, to the point where proper sideboards did not contain any graveyard hate. You had every tool against them in the maindeck already:
-Fast enough to race a DDD hand.
-Early counters for the quick enablers
-Burn both to clock and to remove bridges.
-Stifle on Narco, Ichorid, zealot's ETB
-Wasteland, a card that by itself forced them to try to get hands with two lands or die to Waste+fow/daze.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Malakai
The old Canadian Thresh counted dredge as a favorable matchup, to the point where proper sideboards did not contain any graveyard hate. You had every tool against them in the maindeck already:
-Fast enough to race a DDD hand.
-Early counters for the quick enablers
-Burn both to clock and to remove bridges.
-Stifle on Narco, Ichorid, zealot's ETB
-Wasteland, a card that by itself forced them to try to get hands with two lands or die to Waste+fow/daze.
I'm going to disagree here. David Caplan had a primer (on TCG), I believe, where he discussed the matchups of the deck, but I think it's no longer available on the Internet. He mentioned specifically that Ichorid was a terrible matchup and he considered not sideboarding against Dredge at all because it was that bad.
That being said, he overestimated how bad it was. In a later article (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/l..._Wienburg.html), he said that the matchup was more tenable than he had given it credit for (precisely for many of the reasons you outlined where you do have ability to interact) and that the matchup did indeed justify devoting sideboard slots towards. Edit: Never mind, this is Ben Wienburg and not Dave Caplan.
Wherever you consider the matchup between Thresh and Dredge to lie on the spectrum, I'd still much rather be playing Dredge against RUG Delver than ANT/TES, and I have more experience with storm deck than I do with Dredge.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Yeah, LED/Looting dredge doesn't DDD like old dredge use to. It's still a helpful tool when you don't want to interact, but with so many powerful draw spells now, you often just overwhelm your opponent with threats. Dredge is really combo oriented now, if it wasn't already. An extremely resilient combo deck at that, grave-hate aside. And that's where my conundrum begins, everyone's eyes are on dredge after Adam Prosak stole first with dredge last week. I intended to do the very thing he accomplished, but he got there sooner. Now I'm left wondering if TES is the better choice, in a meta full of graveyard hate and aggro-control. In all honesty, I'm not too familiar with TES, though I did pilot U/B AdN pre-Misstep. I'm very comfortable with Dredge, but Cockatrice would allow me to get acquainted with TES fairly quick, though my time is limited. Thanks for the feedback, guys.
-Matthew
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
For GP:Indy, I recommend UB or UBr*. RUG and Stoneblade both are moving towards playing Spell Pierce, which tends to make Chant effects untenable.
Additionally, I think everyone needs to be prepared for Counterbalance. Historical plans should still be effective, e.g. 4x Empty the Warrens, Doomsday, etc.
*I advise the full 12 rituals / 3-color TES.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Malakai
For GP:Indy, I recommend UB or UBr*. RUG and Stoneblade both are moving towards playing Spell Pierce, which tends to make Chant effects untenable.
Additionally, I think everyone needs to be prepared for Counterbalance. Historical plans should still be effective, e.g. 4x Empty the Warrens, Doomsday, etc.
*I advise the full 12 rituals / 3-color TES.
What 12 rituals are you running? I assume you're counting either LED or lotus petal in addition to the normal 4 dark rit and 4 cabal or rite of flame? I can't imagine running more than 16 non land sources being correct unless you cut land (which seems bad if you're expecting a ton of counterbalance)
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Spell Pierce? Counterbalace? Then I guess I'm back to old school
Sb
4 Dark Confidant
1 Tendrils of Agony
10
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
aaronm678
What 12 rituals are you running? I assume you're counting either LED or lotus petal in addition to the normal 4 dark rit and 4 cabal or rite of flame? I can't imagine running more than 16 non land sources being correct unless you cut land (which seems bad if you're expecting a ton of counterbalance)
Probably talking about Liam's TNT list (i.e. 4 Dark Ritual, 4 Rite of Flame, 4 Cabal Ritual).
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
RaNDoMxGeSTuReS
Probably talking about Liam's TNT list (i.e. 4 Dark Ritual, 4 Rite of Flame, 4 Cabal Ritual).
Does he cut Petal or something? I searched around for his list and couldn't find one -- very surprising to me people are adding additional rituals for this deck, since I usually the games I lose are the games where I have excess mana and can't find action.
Re: [DTB] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
aaronm678
Does he cut Petal or something? I searched around for his list and couldn't find one -- very surprising to me people are adding additional rituals for this deck, since I usually the games I lose are the games where I have excess mana and can't find action.
Here's his list from page 173:
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Past in Flames
4 Brainstorm
3 Cabal Ritual
4 Rite of Flame
4 Dark Ritual
1 Tendrils of Agony
3 Infernal Tutor
2 Preordain
3 Thoughtseize
4 Burning Wish
3 Duress
4 Ponder
4 Lion’s Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
2 Island
1 Swamp
1 Badlands
1 Volcanic Island
2 Bloodstained Mire
2 Scalding Tarn
2 Underground Sea
4 Polluted Delta
Sideboard
2 Wipe Away
2 Pyroblast
1 Echoing Truth
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Silent Departure
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Duress
1 Grapeshot
1 Shattering Spree
1 Infernal Tutor
1 Thoughtseize
1 Past in Flames
