[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by IamPhil

Round 7: Jeff Abbot, Reanimator, 1-1-1 concede
Jeff and I had some amazing games, and probably my hardest match to date. If you've ever seen a guy with long black hair in a white button down shirt, red tie, and pin stripe vest, you've seen Jeff. I saw Jeff go to time against another ANT player two rounds earlier. Jeff called Black with Iona, swung past an unblocking Xantid Swarm to put his opponent within lethal on the first of extra turns, and his opponent dug, dug, dug with Top and fetches to hit his one Wipe Away. Didn't get it, then blocked with Xantid, didn't get it, and conceded.

Ironically enough, at one point Jeff's opponent looked at the top card of his own deck with a judge sitting beside him. I could discern no reason why Jeff's opponent could, or would, do this, and promptly got a game warning. If you're out there, what was the game state? And if you goofed, what was your reasoning?

---

I was playing DDANT and played against Jeff in round 5. Jeff had played extirpate on something (maybe Brainstorm), which I announced resolved. I've always thought Extirpate was a pretty worthless card [see my signature from like 2 years ago :) ] and joked that mabye Extirpate actually did something for once and shuffled away my out (Echoing Truth, Wipe Away, or 4x Mystical). Playfully, I flipped the top card of my library to demonstrate, at which point the judge gave me a warning for looking at extra cards. I had a pretty long discussion with him (the judge) after the round regarding the warning, and agree that according to his interpretation of the rules, I violated the rules of the game. I still disagree with his interpretation as Extirpate had already resolved and randomization of the library was part of the resolution of the spell (Extirpate) anyway, but no big deal. Also, who doesn't do the "forbidden peek" every once in a while following a close mulligan?; I don't think I've ever seen a warning given out for that. I do understand the event was "competitive," but I was just trying to have a little fun.

I was playing Emidln's standard DDANT list from a few months ago, with a relatively standard sideboard (3 Xantid, 3 Grip, 2 Lands, Rebuild, Echoing T, S. Pact, Doomsday#2, Disenchant, Harmonic Convergence, Ravenous Trap) As usual, I was relatively satisfied with the deck, even though my play wasn't the greatest. I lost round 3 or 4 to zoo. Won game 1, as per usual, lost game 2 to the quick beats + burn plan. After game 2 I knew he had Teeg so I kept a loose 6 card hand of 3 lands+Echoing Truth+LED+Rit...guess I should have muliganed that one...I then picked up my second loss to Jeff w/ Reanimator in a tough three games. He played extremely well, but I feel as though his draws in the close games (1 and 3) were well above average, while mine were not. I even got him with the Ravenous Trap in game 3 after he cracked a delta and Entombed Iona - too bad he had a second Iona...

I don't feel as though deck is quite as well positioned in the metagame as it was a few months ago, at least not as it is built currently. People are sideboarding shitty cards like Extract and Sadistic Sacrament, and Reanimator is becoming more and more popular, and with 4x duress, 4 thoughtseize, 4 FoW, 4 Daze, and a quick, relevant clock the matchup feels slightly unfavorable.

Can anyone who plays DDANT post their latest list? I think I'm going to have to switch some of the MD chant effects (currently playing 6) for a couple duresses...

I will, without a doubt, be playing this list at the SCG 5k in Indy in a couple weeks. This has been something I've posting about on storm boards for several months due to a lot of success, and there is a half-finished primer floating around ( http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0Ae...NHNjdGdt&hl=en ) including an extensive sideboard guide and discussion for the list against blue decks, non-blue control, and aggro.


// Maindeck
4 Polluted Delta
4 Scalding Tarn
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Badlands
1 Swamp
1 Island
4 Lotus Petal
2 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Dark Ritual
2 Cabal Ritual
4 Brainstorm
4 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Ponder
1 Meditate
4 Duress
3 Thoughtseize
4 Burning Wish
4 Mystical Tutor
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Doomsday
1 Tendrils of Agony

// Sideboard
1 Tendrils of Agony
2 Empty the Warrens
1 Doomsday
1 Infernal Tutor
1 Cruel Bargain
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
1 Thoughtseize
1 Pulverize
1 Deathmark
1 Pyroclasm
1 Slaughter Pact
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Echoing Truth
1 Wipe Away


If you aren't as comfortable as I am without chant effects or you feel the need for rev silence in your metagame, it'd be easy enough to switch out a fetch or an Underground Sea for a Trop Island to support some number of Swarms in the Clasm/Pact/ETruth/Wipe Away slots. I don't put a lot of emphasis on IT->IGG due to a lot of Duress effects. I see IT->IGG primarily as a plan against aggro with a primary gameplan of Duress + AdN or Duress + DD.

There you go, jrp.

4x Burning Wish successfully plays around Extract and Sadistic Sacrament. Multiple people have had strong results with NLS, so I suggest giving it a try. As emidln has said, you can still run Xantid Swarms over Thoughtseizes if you'd rather play with chant effects and be able to use the IGG plan more.

Looks like I have to follow the trend of people switching from DDANT to NLS. People in my Meta are discussing to SB Extract and Sacrament.

Another plus is that the deck looks even more challenging.

Btw, would you suggest to board the IGG plan out VS decks like Merfolk etc which could return 2 FoW + U card with IGG? Or would you rather run Trops and Swarms SB?

Thanks emidln, looks like I'll need to dig out my Burning Wishes! Haven't used them since I was play AdN TES like a year ago...

NLS looks more like an unpowered Vintage deck rather than a legacy deck (So many bombs...) I haven't played a Legacy storm deck in quite a while without chant effects, so I'm sure it'll be a little different. I think I'll try at first with the 3 color manabase, and adjust if I really find myself wanting swarm/a chant effect/rev silence. I'm really liking the idea of a 3 color manabase against tempo thresh, and ETW against CB decks. Also, I bet NLS's aggro matchup is even better than previous incarnations of DDANT considering the duresses and higher concentration of bombs.

In my sideboarding guide, I always side out IGG for ETW against blue. I would side out IGG even if I brought in Xantid Swarms. You can always Wish->IGG if you need it.

what's NLS stand for?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by myw002

what's NLS stand for?

---

Next Level Storm

Who here has looked at the recent GP lists?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by UberNewHacks

Who here has not* looked at the recent GP lists?

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by myw002

I don't see how LED would be a hindrance towards PoN.

---

Your options are crack LED and lose PoN, or save PoN and lose LED. Either way the synergy between the two is awful and you cannot use both.

In general, it is good to see players switching over to Duress effects from Chant effects. It always confused me why people clung to the Chants when they are awful against the deck's only bad matchup.

The concept of Saito's list is interesting, but the list itself is still bad. I am testing a similar list with 1 Tendrills 1 IGG, 4 Ponder instead of 2 Ponder 2 Top and Crystal Vein instead of City.

@Bahamuth: I'm kinda new to this deck, what exactly do you mean by "interesting" when talking about Saito's concept? And why would you play Ponder instead of Top? From my (little) experience I can say that Top was like the MVP of the deck for me, turning Mystical into Demonic Tutors for U.

To my mind the only bad matchup this deck has is DragonStompy. And maybe Faerie Stompy, but when did you see that deck the last time?!
Dreadstill isn't that easy to defeat, but Swarm and Carpet help a lot.
Standart Countertop doesn't play Stifle and no Wastelands. Moreover many lists include Natural Order, which is really bad against Combo. I'm not afraid encountering CounterTop. Preboard it's slightly positive for them and postboard it should be even with an slight edge on our side.
Chant is the best Protection Spell. Duress isn't that strong. Moreover it's better against Zoo and Goblins than Duress, due to the ability to Chant-walk these decks.
There is just one reason not to play Chant: You're playing Burning Wish and don't want to loose green.

I played NLS for quite some time and it's a really good deck, but it's much more complicated than DD/ANT, due to many pass-the-turn piles and you need a lot of experience to get the full value out of the deck.

Do you ever finds yourself cutting Ill Gotten Gains from the MD because it's just so easy to win via Ad Nauseam or Doomsday vs aggro Game 1 and it's more or less dead weight vs aggro-control? Also, isn't the SB a little much? I think clearing space for 1 MD Bayou and 4 MD Carpet of Flowers is probably a good idea, a lot of those targets are just redundant IMO.

@ Nemavera: Such blind singularity is never good. Both Duress and Chant serve their function and serve it admirably they do. Duress is stronger against decks running the counter-top engine than chant could ever hope to be in a million years. Chant is more volatile against other combo decks than Duress could ever hope to be. I think the trick to saying things such as what you said above is to explain your expected metagame.

PS

@BreathWeapon: I have often cut IGG because it is rarely stellar anymore. Against aggro AdNos is almost always sufficent and against blue IGG is usually very poor and basically costs you 4 life... Do you actually mean playing Bayou and Carpet maindeck? (That is what MD means as far as I am aware)

Chant doesn't loose to SdT hiding a Force, which Duress does. Duress has the advantage of being able to pick a Counterbalance, but you'll need another Duress/Thoughtseize to get rid of their FoW. Moreover Duress is pretty bad on the draw, due to Daze and Brainstorm, and to a lesser extent Ponder setting up CB on turn 2 (hiding it on top f the library).

Duress has its advantages over Chant, due to hand information and moreover you can plan according to your opponents hand. Furthermore you can duress an EE and go off with Empty the Warrens.
Yet Chant just asks: FoW or not?

To my experience IGG is really good, not just because of IGG-Loops against Aggro, but it can strip your opponents hand and it allows many pass-the-turn piles and normal IGG Piles with Doomsday. You can IGG-Loop through a Pyrostatic Pillar and win when you're on 10 or less life, which can happen very easy against Zoo, if they're on the play.

Against Aggro-Control I usually keep IGG, cause especially against CounterTop taking in Grips and Doomsdays makes Ad Nauseam very unreliable. Nevertheless if you're playing without Doomsday, keeping Ad Nauseam and boarding out IGG might be the right plan.
Nevertheless it depends on whether you play Chants or just discard (Duress, Thoughtseize). If you play the latter boarding out IGG against decks with FoW seems to be the right thing.

In my 3-4c NLS lists I have caught myself cutting IGG from the maindeck for that exact set of reasons. It always turns out to be a mistake because I lose a ton of flexibility in Doomsday, Go piles and SDT/BS+cards in hand piles. Since I don't have Infernal Tutor in my maindeck, I don't often go Infernal Tutor->Ill-Gotten Gains (although I can wish into this chain). I still believe IGG proves itself off Doomsday though. I have to admit, only have one 4cc and two 3cc to hit is nice though.

Duress has issues with SDT. If you suspect your opponent is doing this you have to build a hand with two bombs in it or hide something on top of your own SDT. Further, and I've done this in tournament play, you can Wish->Pulverize and force their action if you really feel that you need to see that top card with a Duress.

That said, the hand information given by Duress/Thoughtseize is critical to making the pass-the-turn Doomsday piles viable. You have to know exactly what can happen to you if your opponent isn't a goldfish, and Chant just doesn't cut it by itself here. Hand information is also critical to making ETW an effective tool against decks like Counterbalance which may be packing Firespout or Engineered Explosives.

By playing Duress/Thoughtseize, you lose quite a bit in the Tempo Threshold / Team America style matchup where their deck is 14 land + 4 wasteland + 8 clock + 8 deck manipulation + 26 (mostly situational) counters. Recent tournament data suggests that these are not the top decks currently. Of the top decks, Duress/Thoughtseize is as or more effective against Merfolk, and is significantly more effective against Counterbalance. In the mirror, there is a tactical tradeoff forcing you to play proactively (and incidentally causing vulnerability to chant-walk). Against Reanimator, Duress/Thoughtseize effects are superior as they are effective offensively and defensively. Against Zoo, Thoughtseize is effective at taking hate bears (where you just board Duress out). While you can chantwalk Zoo to keep them from playing creatures, I don't believe you actually need that boost to beat them in a race, particularly if your postboard looks like that of my NLS list.

It's also important to note that I can cast turn one disruption off a basic land. Having basic Swamp/Island in the deck allows additional freedom against certain disruption decks and guarantees that I can continue casting my disruption as long as I need to. While it's possible to do this with Chants/Silences, you're forced to fetch into your splash color's basic, something most current lists don't do.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Julian23

@Bahamuth: I'm kinda new to this deck, what exactly do you mean by "interesting" when talking about Saito's concept? And why would you play Ponder instead of Top? From my (little) experience I can say that Top was like the MVP of the deck for me, turning Mystical into Demonic Tutors for U.

---

Saito's list is more agressive than anything I've ever tested. I've been trying out the 2 mana land (without Top, Crystal Vein is definitely better) and 2 AdN mainboard and the list is just so fast. Especially because Duress as protection let's you be much more agressive than regular lists with Chants. It doesn't mean it's better though, because Duress has it's disadvantages as stated above. I do think it's the right choice in this kind of deck though.

I don't think Top really fits in a deck like this. I don't think the interaction with Mystical is significant enough to defend playing a much slower cantrip instead of Ponder. Top is simply too slow.

I'm going to try out NLS soon as well, and I thought about cutting the IGG too. My experience with Doomsday comes from DDANT, and I can barely remember any situation at all where I needed the IGG in my deck for Doomsday at all. I know this deck is different, but I'm still going to try the deck out without IGG.

I agree with the reasoning of playing Duress over Chant in this deck. 4 Colours is such a pain. This deck can potentially also play the agressor (not as much obviously) thanks to Burning Wish into EtW, and Duress fits that plan much better.

By the way emidln, I have to ask... Do you think this is the best form of storm combo right now, or do you play it because it's the most complex and fun form?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bahamuth

Saito's list is more agressive than anything I've ever tested.

---

I have been goldfishing that list too and I agree with this statement. I actually like it a lot more than I thought I would with the 2 Ad Nauseam and only 2 Sensei's Divining Top. In the board though, I think I'd rather have Krosan Grip for the CounterTop matchup, but I understand why Reverent Silence is used since basically free is pretty good in a combo deck. My main concern is how this build is vulnerable to Sadistic Sacrament, though. Also not really a fan of the Dark Confidant switch.

I've also tried out emidln's NLS list, but I feel like without lots of practice with Doomsday it's going to be very difficult to pilot. I really like the explosive "I win!" of hitting Ad Nauseam, I guess.

Maybe I should stick with TES. :)

I believe my NLS list, or a very close derivative, is the best deck in the format. It addresses the current problems of the format while providing a fast and flexible kill condition. Common hate like Gaddock Teeg, Sadistic Sacrement, Chalices, and discard doesn't cause it much concern. It takes a lot out of the pilot to be able to apply Doomsday to win through some of the strange situations that come up in Legacy, but I believe that the power provided is worth it.

This isn't the most complicated storm deck in the format for the record. If you take the NLS list, cut Ad Nauseam, chrome mox, and protection, you can end up with a straight Doomsday deck (3 DD, SB: 1 DD) playing 4 Brainstorm, 4 Ponder, 4 SDT, 4 Street Wraith. If you use Street Wraith slots for protection, you could probably use that as a tournament deck. You'd be missing out on a lot of raw power by dropping Ad Nauseam, which is why I haven't been playing that deck already.

Hello, I'm rather new to this deck and was looking for some advice. This is what I run;


Artifact

2 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Lotus Petal
2 Sensei's Divining Top

Instant

1 Ad Nauseam
4 Brainstorm
4 Cabal Ritual
4 Dark Ritual
4 Mystical Tutor

Sorcery

4 Duress
1 Ill-Gotten Gains
4 Infernal Tutor
4 Orim's Chant
2 Ponder
1 Tendrils of Agony

Land

2 Bloodstained Mire
2 Flooded Strand
2 Island
4 Polluted Delta
1 Scrubland
1 Swamp
1 Tundra
2 Underground Sea

Sideboard

4 Dark Confidant
1 Angel's Grace
1 Brainfreeze
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Echoing Truth
1 Extirpate
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Pact of Negation
1 Slaughter Pact
1 Wipe Away
1 Sadistic Sacrament
1 Thoughtseize

Is there anything I'm doing that's blatantly wrong? Especially in the sideboard, that is where I'm the most unsure.

Might be a typo, but I see you have 4 Brainstorm MD and 1 Brainstorm in the SB. Other than that, it looks pretty standard for a non-Doomsday ANT deck to me.

It was a typo it's supposed to be Brainfreeze lol

I know the deck is pretty standard but I'm just not sure on sideboard choices... is there anything I'm missing or anything I don't need?

Depends on your metagame, but you might want to think about adding Krosan Grip or Reverent Silence for some enchantment removal if you see a lot of CounterTop. I would personally remove the Pact of Negation and/or Brainfreeze for one or both.

I consider taking this to a tournament tomorrow but how in the name of every combo player in existance is this deck meant to beat Merfolk? I just got rapped so hard, I didn't stand a chance at all between Stifle, Wasteland, Cursecatcher, Daze and Force maindeck! I run Saitos List with 4 Duress 2 Thoughtseize and never felt there was any sequence of plays that might have possibly won any game for me. I feel deflated...

Merfolk and Counterbalance are both really bad match-ups.

You don't say...
So do we just surrender to the Fishmen or what's the general approach in that matchup? Early AdN without protection? Or open yourself to even more hate (and less life total) but play at least 1 protection spell before AdN? To me it felt there was no time to do so. With Saitos list and 3 Reverrent Silence from the sb the CB matchup doesnt even feel that bad.

So heres an interesting question that came up on the U/W tempo thread, so I figured I would post it over here to see if I could get some discussion from some more experienced storm players:

Question after GP Madrid:
Playing against ANT your hand:
Tundra
Fetch
Fetch
Wayfarer
Brainstorm
Force of Will
Ethersworn Canonist

You start, play wayfarer, he on his turn draw, play a land, and casts Orims Chant.
Question is To FoW or Not to Fow?

The best way to defeat Merfolk is with a lot of experience and a lot of practice. You honestly just cannot expect to pick up this deck and perform well against blue, especially against a more aggressive blue version like Merfolk. You will be under a lot of stress and there is so much going on that you will feel overwhelmed at first.

The best way to win the match is to practice combo against aggro-control for a long time, so that way instead of feeling overwhelmed you will have most of it become automatic. Frequently, even with a lot of experience, I run into many situations where I have to sit in the think tank longer than normal. But I wouldn't be able to focus on those new situations without knowing what to do with the rest of my game plan.

In short, there is no substitute for practice. Play Tendrils against Merfolk, then switch and play Merfolk against Tendrils, then try two-fisted testing when your partner gets bored. Then analyze what went wrong and what you can do to improve it.

Quote:

---

Question after GP Madrid:
Playing against ANT your hand:
Tundra
Fetch
Fetch
Wayfarer
Brainstorm
Force of Will
Ethersworn Canonist

You start, play wayfarer, he on his turn draw, play a land, and casts Orims Chant.
Question is To FoW or Not to Fow?

---

No.

Welcome to combo, Julian.

I've had the extreme pleasure of playing against blue decks non-stop in testing AND in tournaments. The experience is both aggravating and challenging. The more you play it, the better you will get at it.

As a rule of thumb, Chant is better against fish and Duress is (slightly) more valuable in the CB matchup just because you have a chance to steal it on the play. The fish matchup is much harder than the CB matchup from my experience, mainly because they have a much faster clock. Backed by Cursecatcher, you're most likely going to have to count your mana +2 instead of the usual +1 for Daze. It really comes down to draws for both decks. Fish pressure is often discombobulated and not always as streamline as they'd like it to be, so as long as they don't kill you too quickly you should have a fighting chance. Another huge player in that matchup is Xantid Swarm. Resolve it and then do whatever you feel like.

The CB matchup I've actually played quite a bit. The reason why it is so difficult is because even if you have Chants, they can still counter your stuff with CB. What generally happens games 2/3 is I'll side in Carpet of Flowers, Xantid Swarm, extra Doomsdays, and Krosan Grips. You can build up tons of DD mana with Carpet and then try and steal counters using Xantid Swarm (which conveniently evades Spell Pierce). I disagree with the people that argue against Xantid Swarm, saying that it "turns your opponent's removal on". It's more like a mindgame during g2/g3 because that's usually the first thing they side out vs combo, and you force them to make sub-par siding decisions because they need to keep answers for the insect. CB is usually responded to with Mystical for Krosan Grip. It's annoying because you have to have both Chant and give up gas to answer CB, but they usually don't have a fast clock so this gives you tons of time to set up a Doomsday win (which generates tons of storm on its own).

That's all with DDANT though. It's really the most equipped deck to fight against U-based decks IMO.

EDIT: Rico Suave is 100% right. Experience is what the matchup is all about. If you're getting discouraged by this, you have two options: practice a lot or play another deck. These days when my opponents open with a blue fetch, I am 100% mentally prepared for the war of attrition. You need to play the deck a lot more to get to that point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Draener

So heres an interesting question that came up on the U/W tempo thread, so I figured I would post it over here to see if I could get some discussion from some more experienced storm players:

Question after GP Madrid:
Playing against ANT your hand:
Tundra
Fetch
Fetch
Wayfarer
Brainstorm
Force of Will
Ethersworn Canonist

You start, play wayfarer, he on his turn draw, play a land, and casts Orims Chant.
Question is To FoW or Not to Fow?

---

Chances of him being able to win turn 1 protected are extremely small. Like 2% small. This doesn't mean you have 98% chance to win if you don't FoW though. Not many ANT players are willing to spend a Chant as a bluff, although if this were a bluff, casting it turn 1 would be bad timing because the chances are big the opponent doesn't bite. I'd estimate the chances of him bluffing to be no larger than 50%.
What also has to be considered though, is wether FoWing or not will matter in this situation. Almost every hand that wins through IGG (in which case countering the Chant actually matters) can win trough AdN as well, in which case your FoW does nothing.
Given that you are most probably going to win this game if you get another turn, and that FoW Chant will only do something in a small amount of cases, not FoWing is the right play.

EDIT: Kinda ninjaed by Rico there. :)

The Merfolk matchup isn't as bad as it seems to you. Most list don't even run Stifle as far as I know. In that case, they only have FoW as a hard counter, and winning the game is probably going to cost you about 2 mana more than usual. It's quite doable, given that Merfolk players don't run Brainstorm for some weird reason, which pretty much means the game will be in your favour the longer it lasts. Doomsday is a much better tool against Merfolk for that reason, unless you are able to win before some of their counters come online (i.e. turn 1).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesmilord

I disagree with the people that argue against Xantid Swarm, saying that it "turns your opponent's removal on". It's more like a mindgame during g2/g3 because that's usually the first thing they side out vs combo, and you force them to make sub-par siding decisions because they need to keep answers for the insect. CB is usually responded to with Mystical for Krosan Grip. It's annoying because you have to have both Chant and give up gas to answer CB, but they usually don't have a fast clock so this gives you tons of time to set up a Doomsday win (which generates tons of storm on its own).

---

I have always agreed with the idea that turning your opponent's removal on is a weak argument.

However, the factor I have against Xantid is not so much that it turns their removal on, but that it is not gas. If you are playing against CB/Top in particular, you can end up in situations where you have Xantid, Grip, mana, but no gas. Sure you can win through their spells...but you don't have any spells that actually win.

There is a fine line to walk when boarding in tons of "awesome" cards yet still maintaining the threshold of mana/business to actually follow through on the advantage those spells give you.

This is one reason I like Bob especially. You can play Bob and he will likely eat the same removal/counter that Xantid would, except you can afford to keep a hand with Duress/Bob/Ritual/LED/lands. The same hand with Xantid instead of Bob is most likely a mulligan.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico Suave

I have always agreed with the idea that turning your opponent's removal on is a weak argument.

However, the factor I have against Xantid is not so much that it turns their removal on, but that it is not gas. If you are playing against CB/Top in particular, you can end up in situations where you have Xantid, Grip, mana, but no gas. Sure you can win through their spells...but you don't have any spells that actually win.

There is a fine line to walk when boarding in tons of "awesome" cards yet still maintaining the threshold of mana/business to actually follow through on the advantage those spells give you.

This is one reason I like Bob especially. You can play Bob and he will likely eat the same removal/counter that Xantid would, except you can afford to keep a hand with Duress/Bob/Ritual/LED/lands. The same hand with Xantid instead of Bob is most likely a mulligan.

---

I think that argument is fine for a non-DD deck.

For a DD deck, the plan I mentioned has been amazing for me. Because DD does not ask for a specific set of cards in hand (except for a cantrip), you will eventually find one along the way and still not need all the gas because the amount of storm it generates by itself is more than enough.

Just a little question: in a UBG Ant deck like saito's list, against what decks would you side in Dark confidant, and what would you side out for it. Probably the mirror but what else?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesmilord

I think that argument is fine for a non-DD deck.

For a DD deck, the plan I mentioned has been amazing for me. Because DD does not ask for a specific set of cards in hand (except for a cantrip), you will eventually find one along the way and still not need all the gas because the amount of storm it generates by itself is more than enough.

---

I was referring more the point of being stuck in a situation where you're drawing Grip, Swarm, lands, fast mana, a 2nd Swarm, a 2nd Grip, and having all the answers to their stuff but having no way to capitalize on it. I guess you could say this isn't a problem with correct boarding, but this raises another point:

If you're boarding in Carpet and Swarm and Grip and extra Doomsdays, what are you siding out? There reaches a point where *something* isn't right. Like, if you take out cantrips your Doomsdays are much worse. If you take out mana for Carpet, well, that's marginal. If you take out Duress/Chant for Xantid, it sort of defeats the purpose. If you side out strictly mana, you may be able to better win a slow game of attrition but become worse at developing and getting into the mid-late game in a good position (not to mention you face tougher mulligans).

While the general approach varies depending on whether DD is present or not, there is still a level of equilibrium in regards to land-acceleration-protection-search-bomb that makes the deck optimal against CB decks. Personally, I don't think it's wise to play 10+ protection, 3 CB answers, and leave the deck sort of hobbling along when it really needs something that was boarded out.

I don't claim to have the answer for a DD version, as I haven't played it recently, but if you could elaborate more specifically on exactly what comes in and out it may help to clarify things for me.

I would side him in against pretty much every deck that doesn't play a shitton of removal and in which drawing additional gas is important because you have to water down your deck a bit to fight the hate.
Remember, 1 beat of Bob reduces the Storm you need by 1 and he can also block, if necessary.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rico Suave

I was referring more the point of being stuck in a situation where you're drawing Grip, Swarm, lands, fast mana, a 2nd Swarm, a 2nd Grip, and having all the answers to their stuff but having no way to capitalize on it. I guess you could say this isn't a problem with correct boarding, but this raises another point:

If you're boarding in Carpet and Swarm and Grip and extra Doomsdays, what are you siding out? There reaches a point where *something* isn't right. Like, if you take out cantrips your Doomsdays are much worse. If you take out mana for Carpet, well, that's marginal. If you take out Duress/Chant for Xantid, it sort of defeats the purpose. If you side out strictly mana, you may be able to better win a slow game of attrition but become worse at developing and getting into the mid-late game in a good position (not to mention you face tougher mulligans).

While the general approach varies depending on whether DD is present or not, there is still a level of equilibrium in regards to land-acceleration-protection-search-bomb that makes the deck optimal against CB decks. Personally, I don't think it's wise to play 10+ protection, 3 CB answers, and leave the deck sort of hobbling along when it really needs something that was boarded out.

I don't claim to have the answer for a DD version, as I haven't played it recently, but if you could elaborate more specifically on exactly what comes in and out it may help to clarify things for me.

---

I posted this a few pages back.

The key is that the cards are replacing a counterpart and not stealing the limelight of other slots. Once again, when it comes down to it, DD requires the least amount of resources and allows the most amount of time over the course of a long game vs blue to storm off of. You won't need to play a slew of artifact mana spells or chain Infernal Tutors cause DD will generate more than half the storm by itself - counter wars will take care of the rest. This allows you to spend the entire early game sculpting, building your mana base, and answering their problematic cards. You are the control player in this matchup. I know it's bizarre concept, but it works.

All this said, it's still an uphill battle. I've kinda figured it out, but I'm nowhere as keen a pilot as nemavera. I would ask him, as he probably knows this deck the best.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesmilord

Yep. Like so:

-2 Infernal Tutor
-2 Chrome Mox
-2 Cabal Ritual
-1 Ad Nauseum
-3 Lotus Petal
-1 Silence

+3 Xantid Swarm
+3 Carpet of Flowers
+2 Krosan Grip
+2 Doomsday
+1 Tropical Island

I might still want the third Grip somewhere. I just don't feel safe with only two.
If I see or suspect Meddling Mage, then yes, Chris is right about the Slaughter Pact.
Chris also likes to take out a third Infernal Tutor (or at least used to). It's preference I think. Infernal Tutor is obviously worse without more Chants and Ad Nauseum, but I still like its synergy enough with LEDs to keep it in. Keeping in Ad Nauseum is also okay sometimes IMO, cause control decks will tend to keep slow hands with lots of disruption. A lot of times you can go the first 5-6 turns unscathed.

All the people who say they have done well with REB or Chain of Vapor against CB...uhhh, you're either a lucksack or just flat out lying. Anything that is 1CC to deal with CB is very difficult to pull off. There are only very small windows of opportunity where you can get rid of it with a 1CC spell, and even then you're risking that they don't have counter backup.

---

@Yesmilord: So what is your list looking like right now?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Yesmilord

Once again, when it comes down to it, DD requires the least amount of resources and allows the most amount of time over the course of a long game vs blue to storm off of.

---

Not really, Ad Nauseam requires the least amount of resources. DD's only advantage in terms of resources is that it does not require a healthy life total. In regards to mana and other usable spells, AN is superior.

At anyrate, let me highlight the problems I have with this boarding plan:

-1 Silence
+1 Xantid Swarm

See, the gain here is really marginal. Sure I guess Swarm is better, but is it really worth a SB slot to "upgrade" from a Silence to a Swarm?

-2 Cabal Ritual
+2 Carpet of Flowers

Another marginal gain. You replace a perfectly fine, if not great, mana source in Cabal Ritual with a different mana source. In fact it's tough to say Carpet is actually better anyway.

See, some of these changes are just not worth it. I'll expand on this a little bit more in a different point of view.

Going back to the original point of Xantid Swarm, here is the real problem: the reason Counterbalance/Top is a bad matchup is because of Counterbalance. Yet you board in Carpet, Doomsday, and Xantid Swarm. None of those cards answer the problem at hand. In fact, Swarm is there to answer what, 8 cards? And 4 of them are Daze? And it doesn't deal with the CB itself?

You board in a whopping 11 cards, and still only have two cards after boarding that let you answer the most dangerous card they can present - cards you cannot readily find because CB shuts the deck down. To be fair, you did say you were testing Duress instead of extra Chants, so kudos. But still, this is a very greedy number for a deck boarding in that many cards. I think you can afford to find room for a 3rd Grip. =p

Chant effects are actually quite weak against CB. Swarm is a great card against Merfolk. But that's about it honestly. It's just not good anywhere else.