how would you find sb space for a relevant number of copies? or would this be some sorta miser 1-of?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Printable View
how would you find sb space for a relevant number of copies? or would this be some sorta miser 1-of?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Eh, that's really narrow, for the most part I've just learned to rely on discard to keep Counterbalance off the table and kill them before they have time to find a Force of Will with Sensei's Divining Top. I think when TES gets into the habbit of trying to answer the opponent's "threats" when that threat may not even be an actual problem you're generally just playing the deck too conservatively.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
We're never going to make that match up a good one, I generally try to invest all of my energy in beating tempo decks where they don't have any 1 card that jut totally fucks us over. We have speed to deal with Top, ANT doesn't even have that - which really baffles me how the hell that deck consistently places higher.
Bryant on SCG stream against Reid Duke on UWR Miracles
Bryant leading 1-0 ^^ Gogogo!!
1st game was pretty brutal from Reid's sideQuote:
Originally Posted by Elfkid
G2 also pretty harsh
GG Bryant - keep stormin' on
Would like to watch if someone has the link and timestamp at hand
http://www.twitch.tv/scglive/b/538117034Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
around 6:00:00
Thx a lot, pal. Will take a look when at home. Need to dig up Reid's list; maybe I find a reason for this quick loss thereQuote:
Originally Posted by Sloshthedark
simply put manaflood and mana screw ...other than poor CS on BW, BS and a Top spin, nothing happens on Duke's side...Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Sounds like a lot of turns, mana and options to me :/Quote:
Originally Posted by Sloshthedark
P.S. How I love to trade additional Wishes/Infernals in turn 2 for more discard.
Edit: watched it. Nothing too fancy. CS against Wish was bad, aside from that, no mistake from Reid here. Would have been a bit more interresting if the second land would not have been a Plains. Still, eot Decay would have dismembered that one as well.
If anyone wants a full +/- sideboarding guide (made with Bryant's great OP) message me!
Felt so good to watch Bryant crushing a Miracles deck.
He played ANT though. (Like hell, get the Storm decks right SCG plz http://imageshack.us/a/img443/4251/ixgr.png)
I stopped caring about that as SCG's usual crowd are the netdeck-players. I just facepalmed myself as they talked about the number of Rituals and PIF without noticing that PIF isn't even in the Maindeck and that this MAYBE could be a hint at this deck not being build around that card and Ritual effects.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
I just loaded it up. ANT? Looks at opening, sees Wish... Yea, something is wrong here.
Edit:
What was the card in the front of he sideboard?
Unhinged Foil as a divider. Dunno what he uses. I would pick Naughty/Nice for that ... for obvious reasonsQuote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
@Bryant:
Related to the Miracles match up, I saw it
I'd like to ask how did you exactly side in 2nd match up?
Had you sided the same way in 3rd match up in the case you had lost?
Edit: I think also c.s to b.w. was bad in here.
it seems you left a 4 mana cost and low number of c.moxes, but I wonder if the c.b. landed how the game had developed... maybe 75% no FoW was on top at the point you would have played A.D on c.b..... what was the feeling about this?
I think like F.Fortue in here, the kind of games TES wins goes through the path that these 2 games demonstrated... however I need to disagree because 0% possibilitys of win had happened if plains had been island instead and no A.D. had been included...
I never really though on taking out full moxen for miracles match up, I think 1 as máximum was correct, as I conceived Miracles somehow as Reanimator or S&T matchup therefore quick is needed... but also reaching the late game vs miracles c.m. is a bad card, but again I find this contradition... I mean, if instead A.D., C.Mox for sure would have been better in that scenario in that 2nd game. agree?
if you sided like: -3C.M,-1EtW,-1Ponder,-1Duress = +3A.D, +2Pyro,+1T.Seize From opening list I think that I would have left maybe 2 C.M. instead of the 2 pyro, but seems that the truth is that c.moxen is bad vs a control match up andmiracles now it is because of existence of a.d., not only T.A. will profit from it! so even adding pyros seems the ritgh move, is this the reasoning?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
I agree with this a lot. speed in the CB matchup is probably the best solution and pushing on discard is mostly ideal for this (discard on T1 kill on T2) ANT durdles turn 1 and 2 and then gets locked out. the .5 to full turn bump from TES is worth it.
CB+ top is basically a slidable/Scalable Chalice and killing them before its active is better IMO than trying to wait for one of the three decays you boarded in. Probably going to mess with three color for a while and see how it goes.
why not play ANT? too slow, better AN's in TES with access to PiF if needed for late game. Early PiF chains need a lot of set up and not to be fucked with via DRS. and Rite of flame number one is usually about as good as Cabal ritual number one (+1) and less dependent on it being turn three+
I'm not sure why we discuss the boarding here if there is a whole section in the OP about that. What is the logic behind keeping 4 Infernals in the Maindeck but removing all Moxen so T1/2 Ad Nauseeams are not only less likely to happen but also less successful (while increasing the lifeloss and average manacosts you flip to AN?Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelikanudo
I take the OP as reference, so with this list - which has 3 I.T. base I just do not side 1 I.T. leaving only 2 in base I think it is nonsense also, In my list I play the 4th I.T. so for this case I will side out 1 single I.T.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Removing the 3 C.M. is what Bryant proposed from Opening. watching at the video game 2 what you say is what the 2nd game demonstrated, no C.M. was shown with A.N. and he was dependant on Petal for winning. but I believe that if for example no LED has shown from A.N. then the petal had been used to discard c.b. and pass the turn which is equally effective, but for sure not as effective as winning on this same turn...
As said,
a) Miracles is a Control matchup and the unique distinction is c.b.
b) if you play 3 A.D. as mínimum, then c.b. should not matter and the behaviour of the match up should be focused as a Control match up.
c) in a control match up, C.M. is the worst card as we'll reach the late game.
these seem the conclusions, but I'd like to ask Bryant about this. as said in my previous post, I'm not sure also about taking out full moxen against Miracles as I want to also be quick in this match up... for sure 3 A.D. will be included, but not sure about pyro. the logic seems that pyro > C.Mox in a large game vs control.
I've never took out the full moxen from the list... as much 1 C.M., it seems like a different aproach vs miracles. I somehow agree and disagree at the same time, but for sure this is something I'll try on next torunament... so that's why I'd like how he exactly sided... also I think the Reid List has no S.Pierce and yes pyro which is to a certain extent relevant... vs us, by here people plays pierce from 2 to 3 as Jund is a match up to have in mind and pyro just do nothing against them, some lists even play Ancestral Visions vs Jund...