The reason I've eschewed Probe myself is that I found it often resulted in an unplayable Infernal Tutor - that 'draw a card' clause can really bite you in the ass. This hasn't been an issue for you?
Printable View
The reason I've eschewed Probe myself is that I found it often resulted in an unplayable Infernal Tutor - that 'draw a card' clause can really bite you in the ass. This hasn't been an issue for you?
Probe seems like good tech against Sneak N Show right now. If it wasn't for that deck I would probably dismiss Probe.
Not surprised to see IGG go. If I had four mana and burning wish I would go for either Diminishing Returns, Empty the Warrens, or Past in Flames. IGG is good when the situation arises, but it is too situational.
Though i agree probe is good card to use before deciding to go off but if after probing an opponent and you realise his hands are full of counters, won't you still have to wait for a MB duress to strip his hand off it? Maybe by then, he might have more counters. So why not opt for the reactive route by playing more duress in the first place? Thanks
I don't understand the advantage a Gitaxian Probe has over a 4th Duress, is being free and taking 2 damage to see the opponent's hand really any better than costing B to see the opponent's hand and either remove their disruption, threat or cantrip? Technically Gitaxian Probe allows you to be a turn faster when they don't have disruption, but Duress always achieves parity and actually does something to advance your gameplan when they do have it.
I'm also not a fan of cutting the 2nd Ad Nauseam, the deck is threat light as it is and I want to rely on open handing my threats instead of drawing into them as much as possible. I think Silence probably gets the nod over Orim's Chant, with Sneak Attack there's a non zero amount of Misdirections and Leyline of Sanctity in the metagame. Xantid Swarm is an old favorite, but not being useful in the RUG and Maverick match up makes me want to stick with IoKs in the SB. I don't think IGG is a sacred cow, but it's useful to be able to sb it in vs. aggro and go for the IT-BW-IGG loops with LED so I wouldn't cut it personally unless it was for soemthing vital
Probe is a strong card, but doesn't it force us to rely less on Ad Nauseam? In this case, it may be a good call to put a PiF in the main, make PiF our main plan in g1. This way we can also probably cut a Mox.
That was the idea behind Elie Pichon's list (the ANT list in GP Amsterdam top 8), with 4 Probe, 1 AdN, 1 PiF MD. The good thing with TES is that we could cut PiF in g2 easily, if we face too many extractions effect.
I never tried a PiF MD in TES myself (although I wish-tutor for him quite often in g1), but it may be the way to go if we put Probe in the main.
Because Duress isn't good in every matchup? Duress isn't good when all the opponent has is chaff? Don't get me wrong Duress is a good card but it's not always the best card for the situation. Being able to peek for two life is incredible since it doesn't slow down the deck at all and will take away the fear of unknowing if the opponent has the force of will or not. Probe is much more of a live card in matchups without Force of Will compared to Duress. If they do have Force of Will, bummer, the deck still has protection spells in it. The slot was replacing an inquisition which wouldn't take a Force of Will anyway. Probe is card parity too, without costing mana or speed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
The second Ad Nauseam isn't bad. I even said that, but to be honest, I don't care what you like. Two Probe will make the remaining Ad Nauseam much stronger. Not to mention the percentages of minus one Ad Nauseam/plus two Probe on drawing business in the opener is very minuscule. I'm beginning to wonder if you even read the post before jumping to conclusions, you don't board in Xantid vs Rug or Maverick. There's still three inquisition in the sideboard.
Dionykos- it's a two of, there's no room for a maindeck Past in Flames anyway. in order to add Past in Flames and more Probe you'd have to cut real protection for too many peek effects which isn't worth it in the long run.
I agree. But PiF is probably the way to go for people here who want to play 3/4 Probe. There's also a couple of things I don't like with too many Probes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
1) it kind of makes starting hands with multiple probes quite bad, forces a mulligan, since we lose information about our own starting hand (we don't know what we'll get from the Probes). Of course, if you play only 2, that won't be a problem.
2) It's a bad card to reveal on a Ponder or Brainstorm, often you would rather have an active card. Again you kinda lose the information you could have get from those Ponders and Brainstorms.
But I haven't played the card extensively, so maybe Probe is better than I think.
Test it out for yourselves. Jeez. Like it? Run it. Don't? Oh well.
I don't think it's relevant to compare the utility of Duress vs Gitaxian Probe vs decks without disruption, because you're going to win the game regardless of whether or not you resolved a Duress or Gitaxian Probe vs a deck that can't defend itself from Storm. I don't want to play a card that only tells me when I'm ahead or behind my opponent's disruption, I want to play a card that puts me ahead of my opponent's disruption in order to win thru' the worst case scenarios. Gitaxian Probe just loses value as the match progresses because the opponent's mulligans will give you a better idea as to whether or not he has a counter spell anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
The difference between 9 threats and 10 threats isn't marginal fwiw, it significantly changes the odds of being able to Brainstorm or Ponder into an Ad Nauseam 4tw. And only playing 1 Ad Nauseam creates awkward situations where you draw the Ad Nauseam and can't utilitize your Infernal Tutor and Lion's Eye Diamond in hand or can't cast the Ad Nauseam to bait counters and then tutor into a second Ad Nauseam.
My point regarding Xantid Swarm is that you're sacrificing space on more disruption than you need, where IoK would suffice vs Sneak Attack by discarding the Spell Pierces and Flusterstorms. I suppose IoK is problematic if its one of those Sneak Attack lists that play 3 Misdirection, but then they're playing 3 dead counters vs. Silences anyway. You can pretty much SB in IoK in every match up, Xantid Swarm is much more narrow.
I'm sure the list can still put up wins, I just don't think it's as sturdy as 4 Duress and the 2nd Ad Nauseam.
I appear to have sold my Xantid Swarms when I picked up the FBB German duals for this deck, but hopefully someone will bring Sneak Show to local Legacy tonight and I'll try to jam sideboarded games with it. I like it in principle since Show and Tell decks tend not to have any meaningful removal but are super counterspell dense since their combo is fairly compact.
Goldfishing with Probe has been interesting. Removing the second Ad Nauseam does noticeably improve the remaining copy. I'm still kind of paranoid about Diminishing Returns, but relying on it more has gone okay so far.
If you guys are playing Xantid Swarm for Sneak Attack, I think you should try playing with SB Bribery instead because having an "I win" target is a lot better than either Empty the Warrens and risking a resolved Griselbrand or Diminishing Returns and risking a drawn counter spell. It's pretty much a SB Ad Nauseam vs the exact match ups where you really need a straight path to victory, plus if it fizzles you're still left with sick board position.
Are you crazy? Do you realize how much Japanese foil Briberys cost?Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
(Along with Telemin Performance in certain abstract metagames, legit doesn't sound half bad despite narrowness, SB space permitting; both 3UU targets are potentially tremendous elixirs for those awkward hands where you can't for the life of you find a business spell other than BW. The counterargument is, of course (and this goes for potentially any other Wishable 4+ CMC wincon/storm generator— PiF, IGG, EtW, etc.), "DR can potentially do the same thing for one mana less and has way more applications", but if Griselbrand decks become the top dog in the format this summer, I could definitely see it being correct to play. Note that I'm not backing it at all, I'm just not calling it chaff.)
Also, thank you for reminding me of another major criticism (probably the biggest one, actually) of the new list I forgot to add in my initial go-over— cutting the second Ad Nauseam. I don't feel like debating over it as the debate in question would be frivolous, but I'd just like to add that that should have been in my first post in this thread yesterday.
I most definitely cast IGG more than I cast PiF; not dramatically more (it's probably close to even), but I still cast it a lot.
How is it not relevant? Duress in those match-ups is a blank where Probe is another land drop, tutor, or Lion's Eye Diamond. You're assuming the hand is already capable of winning, probe can fix hands while giving information.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
It is marginal, the percentages are incredibly small especially considering Probe draws a card. Meaning that it can draw into more business spells. In the rare occurrence that you draw a one of, can't create five mana, or Brainstorm it back? Sure, got me bro. I hardly ever bait an Ad Nauseam, if I'm wasting that many resources, that shit better resolve.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
I agree that I'm using a lot of sideboard space on protection, however, they don't fill the same roles. If I had to choose one over the other I'd choose IoK every time. When I originally posted this list did I not say this was a work in progress? In my recent goldfishing I've found that I would really like a sideboard Duress due to the additional information from Probe. Duress and Ill-Gotten Gains may replace the two Xantids. I still believe that Ill-Gotten Gains is a sacred cow though, it's not as useful as people make it out to seem.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
Yes, a five mana spell is the answer. If you could resolve this you were already winning. The point of running Xantid was to get cruical spells to resolve.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
I will not be running a five mana card as an answer for a match-up with counterspells. Sorry.Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTrudeau
I don't plan on adding the second Ad Nauseam back in, I've been really happy with only one. The lone Ad Nauseam really increases the results.
Also, I plan on trying four Silence. Although, I know the second they get Surgical'd or can't kick it to buy time I'm going to be upset. Below is where I'm currently at:
The EPIC Storm
Decklist as of 06/21/2012
4 Gemstone Mine
2 City of Brass
2 Scalding Tarn
2 Underground Sea
1 Volcanic Island
1 Polluted Delta
1 Bloodstained Mire
4 Lion’s Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flame
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Burning Wish
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Silence
3 Duress
2 Gitaxian Probe
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Tendrils of Agony
3 Inquisition of Kozilek
2 Echoing Truth
2 Deathmark
1 Duress
1 Shattering Spree
1 Grapeshot
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Diminishing Returns
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Past in Flames
Dropping xantid swarm off of show and tell is an incredible play, no matter what they drop. As sneak and show is highly unlikely to have any outs to a xantid swarm on the table. If sneak and show becomes the number 1 deck in terms of numbers I could see xantid as a 4 of in the board if not maindeck to fight the SnT menace.
Right now silence > chant in my eyes, having chant misdirected is infuriating. Or when people board leyline of sanctity orim's chant looks pretty terrible. But overall it's a metacall as to which card is better, if you face decks without misdirection or leyline of sanctity chant is the superior card. If you do face decks with misdirection or leyline, I like silence a lot more.
I wouldn't have telemin performance or bribery as a wish target. Good luck resolving those against a deck with spell pierce and such. As sweet as it would be to get a griselbrand on our side of the table as a psuedo bargain in a storm deck, it just isn't likely to occur in practice all that often.
Just so that no one gets the wrong idea, I would just like to reiterate that I'm not backing Bribery or Telemin Performance at all, whatsoever; I was simply stating that in certain (currently only existing in the abstract) metagames, it could be correct to play either 5 CMC wincon, as they enable keepable hands where Burning Wish is the only business spell an immediate kill option (as Empty the Warrens is against so many decks). Combined Griselbrand decks would have to reach the numbers Delver's currently seeing in Standard (possibly more, maybe Jund or even Caw Blade) before I would possibly consider Bribery a suitable Wish target.
List looks better, Bryant, as do the Mets; I was already very displeased when the Twins let go of R.A. Dickey back in 2009, and that vexation has only multiplied over the course of the past few years. Would be awesome if Swarm could somehow be fit in, but it might not be realistic if Maverick continues to be a tier one deck.
I want Xantid in the list, but there's no room right now. I really don't like the sideboard Gains, but the list needs a Duress and there's no point in running a 1 of Swarm.Quote:
Originally Posted by KevinTrudeau
You could just shave a deathmark if you're more concerned with losing to unfair decks than maverick, which given recent top 8 results is probably correct. Or ,as much as you probably would hate to cut it, grapeshot, because its utility is pretty non-existent.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
How is Diminishing Returns or Empty the Warrens better than Bribery when you're forced to wish for your win condition? Vs Sneak Attack or Reanimator, Bribery is essentially a wishable Ad Nauseam for 14 cards with a demon left on the board, where Diminishing Returns and Empty the Warrens give the opponent the ability to either draw a counter or resolve a Griselbrand.
Granted it's narrow, but Burning Wish really sucks ass in the Sneak Attack/Reanimator match up otherwise, and for 7 mana Griselbrand is a pretty good deal. I have no idea what Spell Pierce and Flusterstorm even have to do with playing Bribery as a win condition, when either you out disrupt them with Silence and Duress or you can play thru' their counters completely with an extra LED. We should actually be thanking God nobody is playing Spell Snare right now, it gives LED significantly more utility to act as a "REB" of sorts.
I really don't understand how you can say Burning Wish -> Bribery (Griselbrand) is unplayable compared to playing Infernal Tutor -> Ad Nauseam, when it's better than Infernal Tutor -> Ad Nauseam as long as the opponent is playing Griselbrand. I'd be incredibly tempted to play both Bribery and Reanimate in the SB if I had the space just to metagame vs Griselbrand.dec, because you will face it in the Top 8 quite a bit.
Hi guys, I'm a little new to the TES deck and I've been playing it a lot recently. But I am confused on what situation you would use IGG, PiF or DR? Please give me a specific scenario of when these things would happen.
Especially IGG, I really don't understand the "loop". Thanks all
Igg is pretty conditional, but a good example is when you have dark rit 2 leds and an infernal. You cast the rit and leds, cast infernal making bbbrrr, search for wish and cast floating bbbbr, get igg and cast it floating b, get rit led tutor, cast them into tendrils for 20. Also, drawing double burning wish with leds or several rituals can do it as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jessenator