I'm interested to hear how Lim-Dul's Vault is working out for you. I had it in my build for a while but it never really panned out.
Printable View
I'm interested to hear how Lim-Dul's Vault is working out for you. I had it in my build for a while but it never really panned out.
I've been testing with it for about a month. It's been great. If played on turn two, it can pretty much guarantee a turn three win.Quote:
Originally Posted by AriLax
It edged out Grim Tutor, in my opinion, for a couple of reasons. It's two mana, so it can be a turn faster. It's an instant, so it sets up the win at the end of your opponents turn and doesn't tie up mana on your turn tutoring for something. It's the best Chrome Mox imprint target in the deck (I wouldn't normally consider this a real bonus for a card, but it does come into play often).
They are about on par for a few scenarios. It's generally around the same life commitment as Grim Tutor (can be more at times, can be less). The casting cost is sometimes helpful compared to Grim Tutor. Tutor is better with Dark Ritual, where Lim-Dul's Vault is much better using standard mana sources.
The major con is that it's not as good of a top deck (without a cantrip) as Grim Tutor is.
With Brainstorm / Ponder, you can still setup tricks with Lion's Eye Diamond, albeit a little more convuluted, but still plausable. It helps find sideboard cards (i.e. Wipe Away / Pyroblast), without requiring to be Hellbent. Overall, the extra tutoring really helps the consistency of the deck and will generally ensure a turn 3 win.
Cutting in the amount of land and adding LDV seems counterproductive. I'm also interested to hear how good LDV is. I am anxious to actually play that card at a tournament, because it can make for so many complicated situations (where you can cycle through your deck to add cards from the next/previous 5 to a stack thus seting up for a winning Brainstorm). I suspect the card is not good enough in a TES shell, and you're better off running 2 Preordain or additional rituals.
EDIT: Too slow. Opinion still stands though.
The reason you run a 5c manabase is not just because of cards like chant/grip.Quote:
I like Bryant's 5 colour list, but this is brilliant. It's amazing how it can actually be converted to 3 colours. It kind of makes you wonder if the other 2 colours are really needed now that swarm is cut from the sideboard and IGG is moved to the board making Chant less important as a distinction from discard spells.
Someone please help justify the 5 colour list, as emidln has tempted me to test this 3 colour build. I need major help against fish.
TES is a three color deck with very little land. You want each land to produce all three colors so you don't put yourself in an awkward situation when you don't see a second land. Three color control decks have the luxury of playing much more lands and being able to play the long game. TES wants to combo out ASAP.
Imagine a hand with Duress, Burning wish, Ponder, and a ritual. Ask yourself if you'd rather have a 5c land or a dual land in that situation. I've played with a fetchland configuration, and honestly, it's not an improvement over the 5c manabase.
Running a basic land will not help drastically against wasteland. A competent player will just cut you off of a color while you sit there helpless.
I personally like Bryant's current list. I played it card for card at SCG: Denver, only with a maindeck pyroblast. I'm not entirely sure that's correct. I was anticipating lots of merfolk, but playing against merfolk, I think I would have rather had the 4th chant. Pyroblast is a reactive card. There were situations where I needed to go off with LED and had pyro in hand. Obviously a chant would have been better.
yeah I read your report.. it is evident in it that you believe in your philosophy to win asap. It's almost always ad nauseum and rarely anything else.. too bad it wasn't more detailed about the regular turns. I'd like to hear about how you read the opponent and what was on the board.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clown of Tresserhorn
Coincidentally, Preordain was one of the three cards I was testing for the slot. While cantripping is always nice in this deck, it didn't have what I was looking for. The original reason I made room for 2x LDV (or a tutor / cantrip slot in general) was due to getting mana flooded quite often without any buisness spells in hand. Chrome Mox is an excellent card, but I rarely want to see more than one before going off. It's too stressing on your hand to ever imprint more than one card for multiples (pre-Ad Nauseam). And after removing white, I felt 3 Thoughtseize to be the right number.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bahamuth
When you can conserve land with basics it saves you time (1 turn) rebuilding your mana base. Against decks using Wasteland to slow you down, having two basics can prevent delays in mana development. Having one basic would be incorrect and can fail to the situation you have outlined, having two out can be quite productive.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clown of Tresserhorn
I'm not touting this as the correct manabase configuration. It's worked well in testing so far, but that doesn't make it infallible. I do prefer it at the moment with Wasteland so prevelant. Having the option to ignore mana denial can be quite advantageous.
@3c vs 5c: I've played both and both have their advantages and disadvantages. In my last tournament with TES, I played Emidln's 3c colour list and although I was really happy with it I'll be playing Bryant's list upcoming Sunday.
It's been said a couple of times that the 3c list is more Wasteland proof because it runs basics but I found this could also be a disadvantage at times. I've had to mull some excellent hands because my 1 land was a swamp. Also against Merfs for instance fetching a basic might just be to slow at times when you need the blue mana for a cantrip but you need black or red to use your ritual on the next turn.
A couple of good points have been made on the discard vs Chant topic. Some of the more obvious ones which haven't been said:
- Using discard on your combo turn against a Top in play you can get blown out by a floating counter; you can't have that with Chant (unless they have 1 counter in hand and 1on top but then your screwed with discard as well).
- Chant is great after EtW; Thoughtseize and Duress aren't bad either but not as good as Chant.
- Discard is better vs. Counterbalance and permanent based hate.
- Discard can be played before the combo turn which frees up a mana on your combo turn but allows for top deck counters.
Just a couple of notes for people contemplating the 2 builds.
Ad Naus is just the cleanest, simplest kill. The majority of my matchups were non-interactive, so I just went for the sure thing. I did win a nontrivial amount of games with Diminishing Returns and Ill-Gotten Gains. It's just that those engines either are more random (DRet) or require more setup (IGG). In my match in T8, I won game 2 off a desperate Returns.Quote:
yeah I read your report.. it is evident in it that you believe in your philosophy to win asap. It's almost always ad nauseum and rarely anything else.. too bad it wasn't more detailed about the regular turns. I'd like to hear about how you read the opponent and what was on the board.
In my experience with the deck, you usually won't have time to find the two basics before it's too late. I agree that having a wasteland proof manabase is strong, but only against a deck that isn't putting you on a clock. Part of the reason Merfolk is a tough matchup is because they can disrupt you with wasteland AND crap out monsters. In a deck that wants to win fast, I want my lands to produce all three colors that I'm playing. I'm not saying running basics in a combo deck is wrong. I'm saying that it may not be optimal in a list like Bryant's.Quote:
When you can conserve land with basics it saves you time (1 turn) rebuilding your mana base. Against decks using Wasteland to slow you down, having two basics can prevent delays in mana development. Having one basic would be incorrect and can fail to the situation you have outlined, having two out can be quite productive.
I'm not touting this as the correct manabase configuration. It's worked well in testing so far, but that doesn't make it infallible. I do prefer it at the moment with Wasteland so prevelant. Having the option to ignore mana denial can be quite advantageous.
Merfolk is one of the matchups where this configuration can work towards your advantage. Not allowing their mana denial strategy to take full effect will help you keep up with them. As far as time is concerned, it's not usually too hard to get the Swamp and Island between the first two turns. It allows you to saftely cast a cantrip / discard spell turn 1 without worrying about losing your land on the opponents turn. I'm not disagreeing with you as I agree that it may not be optimal, but so far I have found it too my liking. The current accepted mana base (Bryant's) can have the same discrepancies. If a 5 color land gets Wasted and you only have a dual or fetchland in hand, you fall to the same issues.Quote:
Originally Posted by Clown of Tresserhorn
While playing against Goblins, what is the SB card that you guys most fear coming from it?
I have tested Chalice and Thorn (and ReB). Think asking wouldn't hurt...
No single card actually scares me that much. Possibly Chalice as my knee jerk reaction would be boarding a couple Chain of Vapors. I'm more afraid of them hitting a critical mass of hate that still lets their deck function. If they had White Leyline, Thorn/Chalice, and an Earwig Squad I would be afraid.Quote:
Originally Posted by ScatmanX
This deck cannot afford to run basic lands. If your goal is to run a Wasteland proof mana base, 3 colors in a combo deck will never, ever work. You just have to accept that Wastelands will frequently ruin you and that Merfolk is a poor match because of it.
Now, playing a 2 color deck will let it fight Wastelands. But then it no longer has Burning Wish and it gets worse against everything else.
It is not that problem, we run a great amount of fetchs, and swamp/island. Just get the red mana when you need it to combo off. Sure Wasteland can slow you down, but it is not the greatest threat.
Since when did merfolk become a matchup that we need to ruin our mana base and weaken the deck to play against? I've played against the deck a lot in recent tournaments so I went back and looked at the results and I've won them 6 out of my most 10 recent matches. Play tighter..people who have been playing this deck for a while have positive merfolk matchups.
I don't agree with Merfolk being a positive matchup for this deck. Regardless of your recent personal tournament performances, which is pretty close to the projected matchup percentage in the opening post (albeit 60% compared to 50%), the matchups that this deck has close win/loss percentages with is mainly due to mana denial, with Wasteland being the key culprit (sub prison). Discounting this as a "play tighter" scenario is facetious. This is not being claimed as a solution, just a suggestion in different environments where you may run into many Wastelands.Quote:
Originally Posted by lebron jim
Well, I guess it's important to distinguish between the Merfolk builds. Are you talking about Saito's build with maindeck Spell Pierce, or something like the 16 lords, Standstill-less nonsense? I don't think anyone is really worried about the latter. All of the older builds are very much beatable, so I would only be impressed by a positive record against Saitofolk.Quote:
Originally Posted by lebron jim
7 of them were Ub merfolk...saito's build. I won 4 of those. Also I think it's important to mention that in the 4 matches I lost all of them went to game 3 and all were very close. One of the losses was to Alex Bertoncini playing mono blue who won game 3 by drawing 3 forces and a couple wastelands...this matchup isn't bad.
If you mulled a hand with only basic swamp in my list you'd mull that exact same hand with Bryant's list 100% of the time. The swamp is the 14th land that I play over Bryant's 8th protection spell. In Bryant's list, you'd have a Silence there and you'd quickly mull your almost good opener because of lack of mana.
As far as not being wasteland proof, this deck is extremely good vs wasteland.
The basics chosen were for a very specific reason. You rarely cast red spells outside of your combo turn (the occasional wish->ts aside). This lets an uncracked fetch, petal, or mox function as your red source while your Swamp/Island are used during your critical setup turns. I thought this was obvious but I was probably giving this thread too much credit.
For every game you win because you go turn 1 BS/Ponder, turn 2 play a second land make RB in a 5c list you're going to lose at least one game to enemy going turn 1 Waste your land. When it comes down it, casting spells is extremely important and you don't get to do this as often without basics.
FWIW, I play an extra land (Bayou) in my sideboard and bring in 4 Xantid Swarm with this manabase:
4 Polluted Delta
2 Misty Rainforest
1 Bloodstained Mire
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Badlands
1 Island
1 Swamp
My sideboard has 1 Bayou in it.
If anyone's curious, I'd play extra lands in Bryant's build over the same protection spell too. I don't feel like 13 lands is enough in a metagame with this many Wastelands. If you're playing a matchup without LD, go ahead and side out 1-2 lands.
I have also been liking the 14th land. It actually doesn't set DReturns off that bad. I still have a 70-85% success rate with it depending on how much mana is floating. And I also agree on 7 protection spells. Now I am not sure exactly what u run but I play 4x Duress and 3x Thoughtseize and really like it.
I'm 3-2 against Merfolks in my last 3 tournaments with TES with the Bryant list and ofcourse waste ruined my day in one match but Iggy + Silence own me another match where Adn or EtW would not get there , against a CB deck with Top in the table silence is much more valuable than duress cause they can flip Top and draw Fow from the top to stop you after they show you their "counterless hand".
I didn't tested 3c list but for me it is very clear that silence/chant > duress/seize and that multiple wastelands just happen less than being manascrewed by basic lands.
Now I'm curious. This means you cut the Doomsday Shelldock plan from your side?Quote:
Originally Posted by emidln
I switched to Bryant's main and was planning on trying out Xantid Swarm in the side (because of the Saito-Merfolk matchup) but now I'm tempted to take your list again. Do you mind sharing your sideboard?
Thanks,
Z
I think I've mentioned it elsewhere in the thread, but the Doomsday sideboard plan didn't win signficantly more games than going -1 Ponder, +1 Thoughtseize while on the play postboard. On the draw, it did a lot better, but I wasn't losing enough (and the CB I see isn't hateful enough) to really warrant taking that much space. Madness and Merfolk are a good bit more of the metagame though...
The sideboard that I'd run in a tourney tomorrow would be:
Tendrils of Agony
Empty the Warrens
Grapeshot
Diminishing Returns
Ill-Gotten Gains
Thoughtseize
Pulverize
Bayou
3 Chain of Vapor
4 Xantid Swarm
Thanks, I like it a lot.
You're pretty much screwed against a resolved CounterTop but like you said, I expect a lot more Merfolk and Madness (and other Survival builds), so that's a risk I'm willing to take.
I'll probably be playing this on Sunday.
Thanks again.
If your worried about countertop and already playing the bayou you could always run Reverent Silence in your board.Quote:
Originally Posted by ZZZ
Since its only post-board it seems weak. I'd almost run a forest of some sort main if I was going to bother using the slot.Quote:
Originally Posted by JonBarber
If you run Burning Wish its not resigned to post board
I think all of you missed the part where Bayou is the worst swamp ever unless it's casting Xantid Swarm. This is all assuming you're okay with trying to solve a 2 into a 4 when they can counter either.
If they CB you, you should have (a) got luckier with Duress/TS or (b) gone off sooner. Since we know those don't happen all the time, you can run the plan (c) of playing bait the CB until they have something that isn't crippling on top of their deck. You also probably need to accept that resolved CB is usually GG for your combo deck in g1 since you 2 useful high CC bombs as opposed to the 4-8 that Show and Tell, Doomsday, and Sneak Attack decks have.
So I'm in the process of building and playtesting TES. There is a Stax player in our local metagame. That deck is one nut I have yet to crack... how does TES deal with a T1 trinisphere, without waiting 3 or more turns for the mana to hit it with Chain of Vapor (after sideboard)? Before sideboard I would just feel like scooping to a T1 trini.
Stax doesn't really have a clock, if he doesn't get Crucible-Wasteland or Crucible-Flagstones-Smokestack going under the cover of Trinisphere/Chalice, you can just keep going on until you hit enough mana to get rid of it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyqo
The MU is quite hard, but it's doable. Winning the roll is tech.
Today I won against Dragon Stompy and Pikula, but lost to Bant Aggro and Merfolk. I had abysmal draws against Merfolk, decent against Bant (but he slammed down a RWM and I kept drawing Rituals G1 =/). Drew the nuts against Pikula and Stompy, though.
Any thoughts on Leonin Arbiter, the new hatebear? For reference:
Leonin Arbiter 1W
Players can't search libraries. Any player may pay 2 to ignore this effect until end of turn.
2/2
Not the best hate card imo. E.canonist is better for obvious reasons.
Run rebuilds in the side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Psyqo
Well, you can't grip the new guy though. Although Burning Wish makes the Arbiter a lot less good. Ehh, they both have pros and cons, but I think Canonist is overall better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dia_Bot
I woudn't worry too much about this new hatebear as it can only be played in monowhite decks. Playing it in decks with fetchs seems like a waste of time. And even in DnT Canonist + Mother is probably better against us, as we either need 2 answers or Krosan Grip to get rid of that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ando
Hi guys, I got couple newb questions:
1x Pyroclasm on sb, good or not? Kills Meddling Mages, Canonists and Teeg.
Is there any tips/guide for Diminishing Returns/Ill-gotten gains and Grapeshot? Example situations you want to use these?
Badlands instead of 2nd UG Sea, any noteable difference? Or should I just buy 2nd UG sea?
Read the opening post for a lot of these questions.Quote:
Originally Posted by dsck
Badlands doesn't cast cantrips which are vital in the opening turns of the game.
Every turn but the turn you win you need blue mana. Badlands doesn't tap for blue.
today a I have won a tournament with 64 participants with TEPS, this deck is the nuts !!
I have a question , today I have played 4 burning wish +3 infernal tutor in main deck and 1 infernal tutor in sideboard, but some players preffer to play 4 burning wish and 4 infernal tutor in main, what is better and why ?
First of all, congrats on the finish!
I think nowadays most TES players prefer 4 infernal tutor main, as it speeds up your deck game 1. Even if you happen to have "too much" infernal tutors and/or burning wish in hand, you can still shuffle them away with brainstorm, or use infernal to get an extra led, dark ritual, etc (and burning to get iggy, returns, etw, whatever)
Against certain matchups, I board 1 infernal out. Either It's because you need space to board in some cards or you just want the ability to go burning wish into infernal into ad nauseam/iggy loop.
The landstill matchup is a good example of this, you board in some extra protection (pyroblast, xantids, thoughtseize, whatever). You build up your manabase, try to break through their counterwall and when you succeed you'll be able to use burning wish to find ad nauseam (via your SB infernal), which remains a bomb until lategame against landstill, as they don't have a clock.
http://www.germagic.de/
If there any place for this card anywhere other than the sideboard as a wish target?
*molten psyche