Printable View
I'm a fan of more Duress in this metagame, there's more of a need of a guaranteed hit against a number of decks or else you're in a bad place (Chalice/CB but if you're wrong you still get Thorn/Warping Wail/Top/Force).Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebonclaw
The Ad Nauseams have been fine, just need to know when you should stop and win the next turn instead (which has always been a factor). It's actually awesome at times to flip PIF because of LED tricks.
Does running two volcanics, one badlands and only one sea (along with swamp) seem too brave?
@Pelikanudo: you misquoted badly but I think the same Bryant wrote, so it's ok.
It's probably okay, but not desirable.Quote:
Originally Posted by Shaman
I don't read what he writes.
@Shaman:
Does running two volcanics, one badlands and only one sea (along with swamp) seem too brave?
i dont think so. Sure in the context of 8 fetches.
I play 4 fetches 4 gemstones 2 sea 2 volcanic and i am ok. the difference is that me playing less lands have access to more blue producers.
@Pelikanudo: you misquoted badly but I think the same Bryant wrote, so it's ok.
I dont think so, as you can see Mr B. and I ignore each other.
however I do read his posts likely as other posts from other people. it is a way to get better my english as example.
For example this last one seemed quite funny... in deed Mr B. writes sometimes quite funny. I remember when he asked for what? Donations for his damaged Bryantstorms? The hell ha ha ha.
@Pelikanudo: one page back you wrote: "@Shaman: Big picture, narrow minded..... sure sure..." but these are not my words.
I asked if we can try the above configuration of lands as a way to support Pulverize.
I agree, I got in a few games and soon remembered how much I dislike Badlands compared to Underground Sea and Volcanic Island and Burning Wish for Pulverize wasn't effective vs Thorn of Amethyst and Wasteland at all. Because even with 3 /r lands in the deck, if Eldrazi Wastelands the first /r land it takes too long to build back up to 2 /r lands before a Thoughtknot Seer or Warping Wail happens.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
I'm probably having better Ad Nauseams than you because of the 4th Burning Wish vs MD Past in Flames, so I haven't missed the second Chrome Mox or needed the Cabal Ritual over the 14th land and 7th discard. I understand this is all a matter of personal taste, but one of the things I realized about TES compared to ANT is that it's not Chrome Mox so much as the sequencing that makes us faster. With all of our Fetchlands being black and our only Basicland being Swamp, it's better to have the full suite of 7 disruption since we don't want to waste time cantripping or tutoring for discard and need to defend ourselves vs Eldrazi and Death&Taxes immediately. ANT just gives Eldrazi windows of opportunity to disrupt them with hate that we don't, because they have to cantrip for their disruption or fetch for their Undergound Sea - it's the number of discard and fetchland configuration that screws them over more than a lack of acceleration.
This is why I always keep comming back to cutting Chrome Mox(es), we don't need them to be a T2 deck and their absence is only felt after you've resolved an Ad Nauseam - which is kind of win more. Structurually I question the dedication to the card when we aren't married to Ad Nauseam as a win condition and it makes our Past in Flames worse.
We're on the opposite end of Badlands, I played some matches online without it and missed it dearly. Between needing to cast Duress (post-Brainstorm) and then wanting a red source on the turn after (which I couldn't do) or stopping Wastelands effectiveness (Sea + Volc + Badlands). Searching for a second Sea only to be cut off red really hurt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
I think the difference between Burning Wish and PIF is barely noticeable (a 3CMC difference between our two lists), when you consider the fact that you can win with just two Lion's Eye Diamonds and no Lotus Petal/Chrome Mox if need be.
On Chrome Mox, what you're missing is the games where Chrome Mox makes us an entire turn faster against decks with Thalia or Chalice of the Void. Playing a first turn Ponder to find a missing piece (LED/Tutor), Lotus Petal, Chrome Mox, Rite of Flame, Lion's Eye Diamond, Wish/Tutor. It's also a mana source that can't be hit by Rishadan Port/Wasteland/Ghost Quarter which I've had come up. As for Chrome Mox being bad with Past in Flames, sure, it doesn't flash back. But I have had multiple games where I am happy to see it as an initial mana source post-Ad Nauseam to help me finish comboing. While I can see the card isn't the best card in the deck, I believe it has it's place. I can't fault you for not wanting to run it, but I'm confident that it's worthwhile.
Infernal Tutoring #8 is live! Get your dose of Storm teachings and terrible mana base NOW! :)
http://www.theepicstorm.com/tes-infernal-tutoring-8/
I have no idea why there are words missing and wrong punctuation marks all over my segment. That is not what I submitted :/Quote:
Originally Posted by LDX
PM sent, let's fix this?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Regarding Badlands, I think it's a good land to fetch for and a bad land to draw, with Swamp and Bayou already in the deck I'd rather not increase the number of lands that can't cast Brainstorm. As for Chrome Mox, I just don't think drawing a Chrome Mox is as much of a plan as drawing a Duress or a Fetchland, some times Chrome Mox gives you a Time Walk and other times it's the worst land drop ever. The card is more valuable in the deck than in the hand, so as much as I like revealing a Chrome Mox off of an Ad Nauseam I'd rather draw a card that allows me to play a non commital strategy of disrupting their hand or building my manabase. Chrome Mox forces you into lines of play like nothing else in the deck because it takes away your other lines of play. The card has value when drawn and the stars align, where a Duress or a Fetchland is just always putting in the work for you come rain, sleet or snow. I think it's ok to differ tho', because for you it's about a more stable than TES approach and for me it's a more fast than ANT.
The point is that you want 6+ mana asap, run only 8 cards which produce more than 1 mana/card and have a maximum of 7 cards, so you essentially need either LED or two Rituals to make up for the investment made with Chrome Mox if you want to combo off T1 and it gets worse with every Mulligan and/or softcounter involved. If the card would cycle in any way, it would give us less of a headache in those regards if you draw it at any point.
What is the point of adding 3 Chrome Mox to the deck just to increase the odds of T1 wins if we're able to sit on fetches or search for Swamp and discard instead? The Belcher plan has never been consistent and plays right into the hands of Force of Will, I don't see the point of it compared to just being a T2, discard protected Storm deck. It's not like you don't open those T1 hands any more becuase you cut Chrome Mox, they still have to mull for counters because Land, Petal, Ritual, LED, Tutor still happens enough.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
I dont disagree. Mox and I will never be BFFsQuote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
I'm thinking about revisiting the Simian Spirit Guide over Chrome Mox idea.
The rise of Death & Taxes and the popularity of Eldrazi make us want to go off more quickly, so we can use additional accelleration, but Chrome Mox isn't a great option for this for obvious reasons (it costs us a card to get mana out of it), Cabal Ritual is a bit slow and all other options are super inconsistent. I know Simian Spirit Guide makes our Ad Nauseam worse, but it improves our opening hands, and let's face it: we always have an opening hand, but we don't always cast Ad Nauseam.
(I do have to admit this idea makes no sense if you want to try Bryant's latest idea: main deck Past in Flames).
Have you tested Simian Spirit Guide? If so, when was it better than Chrome Mox and when was it worse? If not, test it first; speculation is cheap.
Yes, I have. It requires a slightly different approach when playing for Ad Nauseam, and it makes the Ad Nauseam plan worse, but other than that it's a lot better than Chrome Mox. Guides are awesome against taxing counters, and they are much better when you draw them naturally. They don't add storm, but the extra mana speeds us up big time. In my initial testing (that was about two years ago), it played very nicely, unless I had to go for Ad Nauseam. It turned the deck into more of an Empty the Warrens deck, and it made me want to add Diminishing Returns to the board again.Quote:
Originally Posted by thefringthing
Of course there's an argument to make for a split between Guides and Moxen, but I never tested that. I simply wanted to see if I could replace the Moxen with something else, so I replaced all Moxen with Guides and gave that a spin.
So.....Battle at the Bridge. Wanted to like it. And writing this post caused me to end up not liking it. The improvise mechanic gives me a little hope, maybe a card like this in red that shatters things will pop up. That would probably be more usable.
+
Sorcery speed= Wishable
Artifacts like petal can help cast it to get around taxing effects of things like Thalia and Lodestone Golem without actually having to burn the artifact. This makes it easier to cast than Grapeshot and more feasible that one might be able to wish for and cast it in the same turn for a relevant amount. It even lets something that's been Revoked help pay for it.
Gains life (negligible amounts)
CMC is Ad Nauseum friendly....not sure why you'd 'board in a single copy though.
-
Still doesn't stop Teeg.
Can't serve as a kill condition, unlike Grapeshot
Only one target.
Wishing for and casting it in the same turn to remove a Thalia still costs 4 mana minimum. Which is better than Grapeshot, but not as good as Massacre- if you have the mana and time and Wish to wish for something against D&T, I think you just Wish for Massacre. Only scenario where this is better against D&T is if the opponent has a single problem that needs to die, and has not played a plains- or you're just not playing Massacre.
This seems like a card that's better at putting down Lodestone Golems than it is against D&T.
I dont get it. Its imo worse than Chain Lightning
it pretty much is. I saw the Improvise mechanic and saw a way to dodge taxing effects with a petal or LED onboard and got excited for a minute. Then worked through the card and the scenarios and got unexcited again.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear