Printable View
I have casted quite a lot t1 brainstorms. When you have like land. Led. 2 petals/1+1chrome. And a rit or led. I have dobe it quite a lot of times. Specialy when I knowthe matchup. They play permanent hate or saw his hand of balance or they have daze + a hand I cant beat (no fow)
Tjen you try to get bussines + mana. And with tes this is not too hard to get. Im sure I won more games this way than I lost them.
@Ebonclaw:
...
I've also tryed all the configurations you mentioned... and from all I just prefer 12 lands and 7 discard 8 threats 3 c.m. and EtW base. this is my preferrence for 1st games. there was a brief period of time in which i tryed 13 fetch manabase with 6 discrds was because of DTT era. but that era is no more existent.
-1 ponder - this card allows you to set up a 2nd turn kill and compressed the deck
- 3rdc.m.: i've always believed 3 c.m. belongs to the deck unless a similar card is printed.
- 1 EtW: well, since the inception of the TryForce EtW base (bahamut thanks) has won me soo many games even vs Omnishow that i cannot conceive in taking this card out of the 60...
- i really would lke to change the manabase to 13 with fetches but i cannot free up a space
- 7th discarc: i just know the difference between having 7 and 6 discard this deck needs 7. this is not Grinding station which doesn mind having disruption because already has 2 tendrils or access to 2 casted PiF loops...
on overall likely the card that could be out could be the 4th b.w. but again icannot do this - bahamut was the person who made this from the 1st as i can agree that somehow b.w. is not the best card in the deck having already 9 threats.
the last thing tha came to my mind was just adding to the B.C. list a single EtW - having a total 61 cards deck, but i quickly discarded it mainly becase then you have less chances to LED and D.R. but in contrast also the logic behind is: well this happens in opening hand but once you fetch with a LandThatShouldBeGemstone, the statistics remain the same for drawing LED or D.R. maybe i try this someday...
@Lemnear
Leovold shuts off EVERY cantrip, invalidates EVERY discard spell and fucks over EVERY killcondition except EtW, with the goblins being vulnerable to all the reemerging sweepers like Golgari Charm or Engineered Explosives thanks to TNN and Noble Hierarch returning to tje metagame
agree, even i have to say yesrday i faced a BUG with leovold and loose. but this was because of mistakes i just should have had in mind that card and the list i tryed did not contain decay just E.Truth, i could have won that match up if i had done the things right. all i can say is that the next time i face this match up i will win. as i'v always done... need to - mentally - adapt...
EtW is gold vs 1st games vs this archetype they do not play EE and neither G.C in base for 1st games. Simple. do you really want to take out a card that set ups a turn faster than A.N vs Agro, D&T and Eldrazi? sure? i've won even vs miracles or omni with EtW 1st games...
also the logic behind is that you dont side out EtW if they only include from 2 to 3 cards hate for EtW... but again EtW is gold in 1st games. i cant agree on backwards..
@Final Fortune
I don't mind cutting down to just Ad Nauseam, but it makes more sense to me to reduce Chrome Mox instead of reduce lands in order to have a more consistent deck - I would just run the Bayou and 2 Mox. I still think Badlands leads to more mulligans than Volcanic Island as well.
you will mind when you need to set up for a soon EtW agains D&T, Agro and eldrazi or even miracles but i agree that if you take out EtW then 3 C.M. are near to nonsense i would replace also 1 for 1 c.rit or a land
I worry more about casting Ad Nauseam than I do about what happens after I cast Ad Nauseam to be honest, Chrome Moc doesn:t let you fight thru disruption.
Agree.
@LDX
...
the ideas behind your text are correct, but you miss something important EtW is a path incredible fast 1 mana less than A.N. that makes the deck having the edge against so many decks... it has nonsense trying to make the deck faster by adding 3rd c.m. and taking out EtW.... completly nonsense... i am always talking about 1st games.
gibbusum:
indeed this is an example of why EtW base is soo needed...
a reflexion:
I wont be tired to say that EtW is the way to go in TES.
do what you want in 2nd and 3rd games, but 1st games EtW is just another path to get the goal of winning. increments the quickness of the deck, makes winning vs agro easy, incremetns the cahnge of winning vs turn 2 hatebears, it is not useless...
the idea of TES is that can win everithing at almost anytime, you need to be able to win quick but also at -somehow - grinding mode, you need to find that path, sometimes you EtW and next win with G.S., sometimes is a bribery, etc.... EtW is a path that can not be taking out...
as example i included 1 bribery again in my side to be symetrical regarding IT to a.n. and B.W to brybery - its great against those emerging reanimator...
Apart, tested Hope and won a match up vs miracles with no decays... the opp. wasnt very good at piloting the deck but i can reach some conslusions which have something to do what i imagined... setting a 1st turn ghirapur puts them in a very bad position and decrement the storm count in such a way that you can disrupt the opp. and at the ssame time reach the storm count needed for the kill. i've took out green all together. needs more testing though...
EDIT: See for http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post661425 for reference and next 3 pages
Bahamut are you by there to try to convice to not to take EtW?
I tend to play G2 without a kill condition in the MD anyways, it's not a radical departure for people to cut it from the MD if the metagame is hostile to tokens. I just think it's weird to cut ETW and max out on Chrome Mox, because I generally cut the ETW in order to be able to cut Chrome Mox as well. For what it's worth I tried a verions with just 4 Duress and 15 lands with no Chrome Mox and no ETW yesterday that was pretty interesting, it's probably the easiest way to fit in 3 /r lands for Pulverize
I have no idea where you see all those "aggro decks" in the format or think that cutting the MB EtW strips you from Goblins. All what got removed is a 6 mana playline off IT and the "EtW in hand" cases.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelikanudo
well, Ill be more concrete:Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
EtW in base is better to have for 1st games vs:
- D&T
- Eldrazi
- BUG Delver - both control and agro
- Grixis agro
- Miracles - at least to me i've won more 1st games vs this archetype becasue of having EtW main than not
- 4 color delver
- Blade
- Jund, Burn, maverick, AgroLoam, etc and OnlyCreatures Deck
Yes, and exactly this is a mistake for 1st games: remove a 6 mana playline off ITQuote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
I don't know but maybe i miss something...
EDIT: What about: adding to the B.C. list a single EtW - having a total 61 cards deck boys ? sure we all have the same reasons for not doing so.... i hpe not to be blamed because of this...
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelikanudo
What you miss is that there are near to no matchups left in the metagame which demand 2 EtW in your 75 and that the IT->EtW playline is no longer worth having 4cc flips off AN. As an additional benefit you can not only draw a lot more cards off AN in general but also gain a MB slot for more discard to fight combo and control decks. All of that is clearly written in the articleQuote:
Originally Posted by Pelikanudo
you mean you are argueing 1 addtional slot in the 75 vs 6 mana playlines in 1st games?Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
you say that becasue having 1 4cc means more A.N. flips and that argumetn is enough in adition to the other one to taking out EtW while from the tryforce era we've been playing that configuration with 0 problems regarding A.N. flips?
sorry can not agree on this. as we are not going to convice each other we can stop the discussion.
You still have 6 mana playlines; You still have access to EtW via IT. The argument is: Goblins are not good right now as a hail mary play simply because of the current and upcoming metagame changes by the return of Griselbrand and TNN which will result into more -x/-x effects overall.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pelikanudo
My default config (pretty much since GP Lille 2015) is zero MB wincons in case you missed it for pretty much similar reasons as today: Griselbrand and sweepers were rampant. After the DTT ban, I tried the 4x EtW in sideboard. Enough for the chronology :)
I don't try to convince; I gave up on that long ago.
@Pelik-
I think what Lem is trying to say is that you're only losing a single 6 mana path to ETW and the natural EtW capability, the latter of which simply cannot be relied upon to carry you to a G1 win, even though if you do happen to have it, you may be more favored pre-boarding in certain matchups, which are less common. Playing a single card just to occasionally improve the odds of sometimes stealing a G1 simply isn't worthwhile. Pushing EtW out of the MB improves the reliability of what you really want to be doing when you open up with a solid hand, which is outright killing. The exchange is that, yes, sometimes you'll miss the occasional T1 12 Goblins GG, but the exchange is just outright killing people holding EEs, Terminus, or a handful of countermagic. You're not even losing the "triforce" base- you still have a 6 mana path to EtW, so you can still probe, therapy, wish, ETW, and therapy again. You're just losing the occasional natural empty, and a 6 mana path to EtW, the first of which is not statistically significant enough to be sacrificing all the relevant places that you're better off being able to reach farther with Ad Nauseum. Most of the time, if you can cast IT hellbent, you're not fetching EtW, you're probably fetching Ad Nauseum for 1 mana more and just ending the game on the spot, instead of having to worry about G1 Terminus/EE/etc. Against other decks, you're not doing either play unless you get rid of some countermagic first. Even if they don't have FoW, Spell Pierce, Daze, and Stifle are all played, and you can't bank on avoiding these in G1 by counting on winning a coin flip. You don't win the flip, you've got to deal with these things first, and therefore the extra discard slot is more valuable (I've preferred the 4x CT and 3x Duress package- I always felt I didn't see disruption quite often enough when I tried a 3/3 or 4/2 split, and I like having the 7th spell for the reasons Lem mentioned).
Don't get me wrong, there have been plenty of games where the MD Empty has done work, the same held true for MB PiF. Everything has its ups and downs- and so does taking out the Empty and being able to reach more fearlessly off of Ad Nauseum. I suggest you try the cut, if you really don't like it, put it back in, I think you'll find you don't miss the EtW as much as you think you will and will find your Ad Nauseums more aggressive, simply ending the game without your opponents getting a chance to even play Leovold or answer your goblins, which they are much more apt to do than they were previously. I think this configuration basically brings TES back to the old days where the focus is on what the deck does best; the MB PiF, EtW, and Ad Nauseum felt like the deck was trying to do too many different angles at once and each individual angle suffered for it because you'd try to go the way the deck was really built to go and kill yourself, or you'd have a PiF hand that wasn't quite good enough to get there this turn, or maybe you just get blown out by a surgical, or you have EtW in hand facing Miracles.
Getting a PiF in your hand is the deck really, really wanting that to be your path whether you liked it or not, and sometimes, it wasn't a great path to be on, even less so now that Surgicals are the cat's meow thanks to B/R reanimator. Having an EtW in your hand feels the same way- this is the path your deck wants you to go down-whether you like it or not-and more and more frequently you're going to find it's NOT the path you want to be taking. You really didn't even want to take that path against Miracles unless you absolutely positively had to anyway, and considering it's one of the most dominant decks, you're going to be finding yourself in that boat fairly often as it stands, with EtW just getting in the way whether it's stuck in your hand pushing you to make some terminal goblins, or getting flipped off of Ad Nauseum when you're trying to kill.
This change is aimed at combating the shifting global meta at the time. If you're piloting the deck primarily locally and EtW does work in your neck of the woods, go for it, play the EtW if it's still getting the job done for you. Hell, play Storm Crow if somehow it's beating everyone in your local meta and they can't figure out how to deal with it. On the larger scale though, dropping the EtW makes sense as we look at decks that feature multiple answers G1 to EtW, with Miracles being the biggest share of the global meta and other decks including crossover hate to deal with BUG's uprising in order to answer TNN. Then there's decks like BUG itself, and unless you win the coin flip in G1, EtW is not what you want in the MD, and even then that's questionable- some lists even play Maelstrom Pulse as a catch all. It's just not worth getting the occasional edge on D&T and maybe Eldrazi/BUG (if you win the coin flip) instead of getting the edge in G1 against everything else where EtW just plain isn't good and gets sided out immediately anyway, especially considering that if you DO win the coin flip and determine EtW is what you want to do, you still have a 6 mana line to it- it's not completely inaccessible.
The changes in the global meta require TES to shift when playing in that field. Once people figure out how to squash the BUG a bit, True-Name might fall out of favor again, and then those EEs and other goblin killing things may fall out a bit also, and then maybe EtW comes back. Xantid finds its way in and out of the board, and I remember when we cut Silence, the mention that if the meta shifts, it might find its way back in (doubtful at this point, proactive discard seems like the way to go forever, but who knows what future cards will bring).
TLDR: Try it. If it isn't working in your meta, then go back. But get a feel for how the deck handles without it, because in an unknown meta/nonlocal meta, this is the configuration you should really be playing. I'd rather be debating more nuanced facets of the deck right now.
If for some reason you hit a wall when thinking on your own, taking a break and mimicking the pros is a viable a solution.
Infernal Tutoring #9 is here!
http://www.theepicstorm.com/tes-infernal-tutoring-9/
It's a good write up and I have the same problems....I think mine come down to trying to analyze the game the way I do when I'm reading an article or studying a snapshot of a gamestate. I can take as long as I want to consider the different routes, and their ups and downs, and usually make an intelligent decision, which may or may not be debatable as the "correct" plays, but at least tend to have solid reasoning behind them. In an actual game though, I have far less time to think about these things objectively, and my mind can blank in a similar manner. Jamming more and more games to where your thought train becomes more instinctual is great, but you'll still get thrown into situations that are unique and occasionally unprecedented- I like that this article illustrates a few of those and exposes some of the thought processes from various angles to apply to similar circumstances in the future. I always look forward to new articles on theepicstorm.Quote:
Originally Posted by LDX
I have mixed feelings about this... I'm glad you could relate to the article but sad that you suffer from similar issues I explained. Well, we'll learn! :DQuote:
Originally Posted by Ebonclaw
Overthinking isn't quite helpful. I wrote my part on that article at 0:30am after a 10,5h day at work so I did not put much thought into it. The deck and your opponents actions tell you what to do and how your winning line is going to look like. Essentially, when I get the drafts of one of the articles, I just look at the Hand of Alexandre, the known info about his opponents cards and the board to see where the journey goes. Its rarely the player who decides if he wins with AN, Goblins, PIF or a Spellchain but the deck and your draws. Storm has a tough time forcing playlines other than the one natural to your drawn cards, which happens if certain hate is in the mix.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ebonclaw
This is a good point, and the one I was trying to make in my above post to Pelik as to elaborate on the benefits of cutting ETW and PiF. If either of these cards winds up in your opener, the deck is pushing you really really hard to go down that path, whether you like it or not. And EtW is not a great path to go down naturally anymore much of the time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
But anyway- I think that's a great approach and tip for players new to the deck, to learn the paths that the deck/situation is guiding you towards, rather than to try to force a path that doesn't fit. When I first started playing Storm, I would make mistakes, lose a game, and then realize that if I'd gone down a different path instead of forcing a specific one, I would have won. I still make these mistakes, but they're less frequent, and when they do happen, I've often at least considered the proper path before picking incorrectly and forcing something I shouldn't have tried to force.
Episode 3 for the series TheEpicStorm.com: TES MATCHUP BATTLES! is up and this time we face Leovold Sultai! Giving a breakdown of the matchup that we are likely to face in a tournament.
http://www.theepicstorm.com/tes-matc...eovold-sultai/
Please let me know your thoughts and opinions thanks!
- Alex Poling
This was a great choice for matchup battles. I love how the matchups chosen are actually relevant and focus on the new hotness that change the way we would normally think about a given matchup. In the same vein that the article addressed D&T when it received Prelate, it's good to see the same relevance in regards to Reid Duke's performance at GP Lousville. This is one of the things I like best about the matchup battles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Polski_
Having said that- I noticed that you recommend no sideboarding. I love killing with Goblins, and absolutely agree that EtW is a good choice to kill with against BUG, but I'm slightly wary of variants of this deck that may feature Golgari Charm or Maelstrom Pulse, or Engineered Plague. To that end, how do you feel about boarding in a singular Chain of Vapor? I realize you argue that trying to fight against specific cards is a losing battle due to variety of different ways BUG can present threats, but giving ourselves diversified options if it means minimal impact to the deck may yet provide value if it opens a given path back up to us.
Opting for Abrupt Decay to outright kill Leovold I don't care for, since you'll have to bring in an rely upon the Bayou in a wasteland matchup, in addition to increasing the CMCs if/when you Ad Nauseum. With the lack of pressure BUG provides, I feel like you could safely drop a Ponder or a Mox- I normally value Moxen more in matchups where Wasteland is a thing, but this changes when the wasteland deck also packs hand disruption, putting real pressure on a Mox in the hand to actually be good. A successful resolution of Ad Nauseum in the scenario you gave would have probably enabled you to just kill outright after Chaining Leovold, and Chain is a fine catch-all for anything else that might be brought in, with the likelihood of finding it after going through half the deck is at least 50%, obviously higher if you board in both Chains, but that may be excessive and cause the strategy to fall prey to what you described- trying to board for specific threats. It's not completely dead though, it obviously can be used to buy a little time against a 'Goyf, or even to create a natural Tendrils kill when targeting our artifact mana.
The other option might be to return Void Snare to the sideboard. I've actually kept mine in; I've valued it over the 4th Abrupt Decay as I've found many situations where I'd wished I still had it, and not enough games where I really wanted to have 4 Decays in the deck- that's pretty much reserved for Miracles and am instead favoring 3x Decay and a Surgical, possibly two against them, so the versatility granted by Void Snare in a myriad of other unforeseeable circumstances seems like it might also provide a way to Burning Wish for Snare, bounce Leovold, and finish the combo with Tendrils in the event that you find two Burning Wishes. This didn't happen in your particular scenario, but given the more aggressive Ad Nauseums the deck is capable of, I think it's reasonable to be able to find yourself with an extra Wish and 3 mana a fair amount of the time.
hi guys just 2 duals away to complete this deck,thanks guys
I have only german FBB ones to offerQuote:
Originally Posted by big_ticket
So with Fatal Push putting BUG back into the DTB it looks like cutting Empty the Warrens is ill advised?
http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/...61/903/3a9.pngQuote:
Originally Posted by Final Fortune
Joke.