Printable View
Questions:
Vs. Storm (ANT), do you keep the following hand on the draw
FOW top Clique 4 lands (1 is a fetch)
And on the play do you keep
FOW Clique Counterspell 4 lands (2 are fetches)
Also if you have 2 outs to empty the warrens postboard (pyroclasm and EE), and your opponent empties with storm count 5 when you are at 20, do you counter one of the storm triggers to buy a turn on the clock (assume this situation comes up with both those hands and your draws for t1/t2 are lands)
I'd say yes to keeping both hands, but it might be right to mulligan depending on how many better 6 card hards you could get.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnziD
In the third scenario do we have mana to cast clique? if no, I think it is correct to FoW.
Okay I'm going to assume when you say "Storm" you are referring to "Belcher" not "ANT" or "TES" because ANT doesn't play Empty the Warrens last I checked. But don't worry, I'll talk about all three lists.Quote:
Originally Posted by alphastryk
If you keep a hand against Belcher with FoW, then when they cast the mana spell that gets them to 4 mana, such as Ritual, Ritual, Seething Song, then you want to stop them there and FoW the Seething Song. If you allow them to go any further, you might get lucky with them trying to cast Charbelcher or you may have just lost the game because they made a bunch of tokens with Empty the Warrens.
Now, if you keep the Pyroclasm hand, without FoW, you are keeping a risky hand because if they have Charbelcher, you're just dead. But if they have Empty the Warrens then you just Pyroclasm. If you're going to use FoW, you don't wait for them to cast an Empty the Warrens. You try to stop them from ever casting it with FoW in the first place. Then if they're still able to sneak some Goblins through, then you just Pyro or EE or Brainstorm and put Terminus on top. Unfortunately if while doing so, they put in 20 goblins on your turn 1 then you're just dead. But I do not think it is ever correct to hold back FoW and wait.
If you are playing against ANT or TES, most of the same rules apply, except that they play discard. So good luck holding on to your FoW's. In the event they try to go off anyway, then it is more important to counter their big spells rather than counter their mana production. The cards I am referring to are Infernal Tutor, Burning Wish, Past In Flames, and Ad Nauseam. In certain situations, Cabal Ritual may be an exception to the rule.
So basically this is a really long winded answer, but going by these rules will help you determine whether or not to keep a certain type of hand against ANT, TES, and Belcher.
Also depends on whether you are on the play or draw. For example, if I got lucky against Belcher Game 1 and won, and I opened the Pyroclasm hand game 2, I may just keep it and cross my fingers that they're on the Empty the Warrens plan. If they aren't, well there's always game 3.
In a nutshell, I wanna see FoW against Belcher, but against ANT and TES, I want to see Counterbalance. Those are the priority cards I will be looking for in those matchups.
Hope that helps!
So he did this on his second turn and I only had 2 mana open.Quote:
Originally Posted by alphastryk
Odds are that there was something you should have FoW'd prior to him having enough mana to even cast Empty the Warrens.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnziD
Both hands have the lands i need, it got disruption in clique and force, pluss counterspell or cardselection in sdt.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnziD
So even if i know what i was up against i would keep both hands
1 i would fow spell chains that would push him/her past 4 mana, and after that i hope i draw into more interaction or do a blowout with clique after a tutor.
2 if he get to cast a empty i would ofcourse counter a trigger if it bought me a turn to find an answer.
Edit: if you expect to mulligan to better 6 card hands than this vs storm, Then you run on better luck than me
TES plays EtW as its primary wincon and ANT has EtW out of the board, just FYI.Quote:
Originally Posted by drocker23
I wasn't aware of that. I assume they bring it in as an alternate win con in sideboarded games?Quote:
Originally Posted by rlesko
yeah, in order to maximize chance to go off as soon as possible, and without the need to storm for 10. Usually 5 storm gets the job done, which is really easy to get in ant (and if you keep a hand that can't either generate 14 gobs by at least turn 2/kill by turn 2 in TES, you are likely playing the deck wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by drocker23
I've historically had more storm hate than most people due to my local Metagame. There was certainly a point in time where my average 6 would be better. Most modern lists it is correct to keep those hands however.Quote:
Originally Posted by Madsk
Hey,
For those interested, I did a writeup of my experiences from New Jersey here: http://exallium.wordpress.com/2014/1...ix-new-jersey/
So..., Lossett lost to Burn and Tezzeret Day one (maybe something else I don't remember). You lost to Zoo, WUR Delver, and drew against Infect. Let's say fatigue isn't a factor at round 8, I'm a bit alarmed by losing to WUR Delver.Quote:
Originally Posted by exallium
Just reading through the standing at Super Sunday, there're plenty of big names there like Haas and Yim. I've heard that Naas slow-played his way into the Top 8. Too bad you dropped out early on Sunday.
I'm not Joe losset. I'm also surprised I lost to uwr delver.
Also, for numerous reasons fatigue was a factor.
I dropped out early due to being 1-2 and having a 14 hour drive home ahead of me ;)
He played TNN in Miracles? Probably a Sideboard card for the mirror, right? Can you tell us more about the deck? Did he have a stoneforge package to go with it?Quote:
Originally Posted by exallium
With people now looking into cards like GosT, True-Name, and the use of Vendilion Cliques, it might do us well to make sure we leave in some number of Terminuses.
I'm personally on the 2 Entreats, 2 Council's Judgement, everything Blue plan. I usually just expect to concede the game if they make a large Entreat, unless I block with my own Angels. For me it's all about CounterTop, and everything else is secondary.
Well. He had a full on stoneforge plan. I asked him about it after the games and he said he was just trying something different. Also saw a dig through time. I'm thinking it was all mainboard, as I did see mystic game 1.Quote:
Originally Posted by decan
I agree with YamiJoey, this version of miracles could require a few terminus to be left in, and I believe access to it would have potentially won me the game.
That was a little... strange. Did Lossett give his opponent enough time to put Vortex trigger on the stack? Better question, did Lossett go thru his draw step the same way every turn, including that controversial upkeep?
Schönegger's so eager to show Lossett how it's done, strongest rail yet.
It doesn't matter how fast Joe draws his card. If the UR Delver guy wanted the trigger to happen, he could just point at his Vortex. In fact though, he forgot about it and even agreed to Joe resolving SDT. At that point it's apparent he forgot about it.
I am DYING to hear Schonegger's opinion after watching Joe through the finals....
Pretty scummy of Joe. He knew he was dead and needed that extra turn to pull out the win. He untapped drew (knowing it was top) and put it right into play tapping his land. Then, the question came up, hey what about the two damage? If I was the U/R player I would have appealed to the head judge. Clearly its a close game, the u/r player would be counting down 3 of his turns til he was dead.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ltj999
Lossett = Scum