[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)

Quote:

---

I understand your point of view and am not disagreeing with your path but one and a half turns? The protected versions are very solidly turn 3 for me with more turn 1/2 wins than 4+ wins, are you really saying your average turn is 1.5?

---

Yes, the pure-speed deck averages a win by turn 1.5-1.75.

Protected versions can improve their ratio by willingly playing the combo without protection in a significant portion of their games (sometimes you don't have a protection piece, or you can only choose one or the other, etc.), and some may find this to be the best way to play (I know there are cases where I'd be willing to do it). In that case, as troopa' put it, "you could just have the protection when you draw it, and when you don't draw it, have more gas."

Almost guaranteeing protection takes a bit more effort though. If you force yourself to play protection before comboing off (and keep records of it), you'll see that the margin widens quite a bit.

The protection strategy assumes that it will be winning aggro/combo matches long before AdN becomes destabilized through lifeloss, remaining undisrupted by discard, and pre-emptively answering blue in the main. And, for the most part, I believe this is true of protected ANT decks. However, in my testing, the lifecost averages of successful AdN's rise as you water the deck down for protection, and AdN can become an unstable engine by turn 3 against many aggressive decks (some aggro decks can even win by turn 3). Additionally, short term disruption cards like Discard, Chalice, Teeg, and E-Canon are more likely to be casted and slow the protected version down long enough to buy aggro decks enough time to invalidate the use of AdN. While we do have IGG, it is not something that can be done with any real consistency.

The pure-speed strategy almost guarantees a win against aggro (and the protection really doesn't), and is less hindered by discard because of its redundancy. Several disruption pieces are often completely avoided because of the odds of winning so early. Short-term disruption strategies (which are eventually answered, but perhaps not before it is too late) are weaker against the pure-speed strategy; additionally disruption pieces that require bounce are actually most likely answered in a pure-speed build as it runs more card quality than another other build. The notable exception would a build that runs 4x bounce like blacklotus3636. Singletons of protection are quite powerful in the pure-speed strategy, and the deck definitely has the most to gain from the 1st protection/bounce spell as there are serious diminishing returns to any further development of protection functions until you hit a certain threshold whereby your deck plays a fundamentally different role.

Here is my basic rule of thumb: Combo belongs in an aggro-heavy meta (at least heavier than usual), and if you aren't there, then you should probably consider another archetype altogether. But, AdN is a strong card, and it can definitely win blue-matches (with and without protection in game 1). I doubt that combo is actually viable in a Legacy metagame that really prepares for it though. Combo winters are just unlikely until your combombs just overwhelm the control cards available to a format, and I definitely don't see that happening in Legacy.

I'd play combo because it is not expected, not because a metagame can't prepare for it.



peace,
4eak

@4eak
What does ESG in your Fast-List mean ?
.

do you think A.N will be banned for Legacy ?

I dont think so by a single statement :
one of the 3 most spells played is FoW ,A.D has no synergy with this card kind of card by its cost therefore if we Legacy players start to play A.N we will reduce the number of FoWs played .the A.N card even clean the format Agree?

And what about the side because having a 50% first turn win The side is quite important, could you tell me
which cards will you fit in and how will you side vs the most meta match ups?



Thanks

ESG = Elvish Spirit Guide

Summon pact + ESG = 1 free mana, storm count +1

@ Pelikanudo

Quote:

---

What does ESG in your Fast-List mean ?

---

It is the controversial mana-accelerant I use in the deck (I've honestly not found a better choice; it fills a niche).

Quote:

---

do you think A.N will be banned for Legacy ?

---

I think it is too powerful for the format myself. The instant speed is what puts the card over the top. If they made it a sorcery I would say otherwise. The card encourages non-interactive play, and frankly, that isn't very fun for your opponent.

Combo can be answered by the format though, so it isn't like we are going to have a combo winter.

To answer your question directly, I think it is possible that AdN could be banned, but I suspect that if combo became too prevalent, and WoTC had to ban any one card, it would be LED.

Quote:

---

one of the 3 most spells played is FoW ,A.D has no synergy with this card kind of card by its cost therefore if we Legacy players start to play A.N we will reduce the number of FoWs played

---

We most likely will not see FoW in ANT (although, a singleton is always possible), but I highly doubt any deck will ever reduce the number of FoW's we see in Legacy. In fact, FoW might become even more popular, especially if combo became a more mainstream (DTB and what-not) archetype. FoW is probably the strongest card available against ANT, and I doubt ANT's existence would ever lower the number of FoW's played in the format.

Quote:

---

The side is quite important, could you tell me
which cards will you fit in and how will you side vs the most meta match ups?

---

ESG/Pact/Ponder are the cards you take out for the sideboard.

You'll side in protection. Duress/PoN are my usual choices (I'm considering tampering with the main's mana base to just run my preferred Orim's Chant or an REB). Bounce is also a strong choice against permanent based disruption strategies (obviously). I keep a single Wipe Away, a Rushing River, and 2-3 repeals. If I only have one bounce in the deck, then it is Wipe Away. If I need bounce I'll usually bring them all in.


peace,
4eak

@ 4eak

Well I'm fallen in love with your deck my friend I've tryed it in MW and I've won 7 games from 10 in first turn ¡¡¡¡¡¡ yeah and in 2nd game you have 15 cards to face hace, well if WoTc decides to ban A.N or LED is because of the development of your deck , I've seen numerous decks about A.N and yours is the fastest and most solid .
I remember the list D.Gearheart made around A.N trying to fit it into Solidarity , the fastest win he got was 3rd turn....
Congratulations.
Could you tell me which is your side please and more detailed how to side vs the different threats and decks in the current format , I'm mainly interested in :
- 3shold
- 3shold (with c.b )
- Dreadnoutgh (also with c.b)
- Landstill
thanks

EDIT :I have some noob questions :
How exactly LED works in order to pay a part of the converted mana cost of Ad Nauseam?
does LED + Dark+ A.N provides a 1st turn win?
and LED+LED+A.N?
Infernal tutor+Elvish Spirit Guide+ LED + Dark ritual is a win too ritgh?
How does IGG and LED works?

@ Pelikanudo

LED forces you to discard your hand. LED is generally used when you have no hand (or nothing worth keeping) and in response to big spells.


LED is used in 4 circumstances:

1.) LED/IT -- Spend your hand, cast IT, and in response pop LED to go hellbent on IT.

2.) LED to cast Draw phase AdN -- When you will have 5 mana available (and less than 8 or off color) because of LED, and you know you will be drawing AdN, you can play your instant mana spells during your upkeep and pop your LED, float the mana into your draw phase (no mana burn check), draw and then cast AdN. This is very common when you have Brainstorm and Mystical Tutor.

3.) IGG will often target LED/Dark Rit/IT to generate the maximum amount of mana post-IGG

4.) Popping LED in response to AdN can jump-start your mana-supply. Depending upon the circumstances, you may wish to just save your LED and pop it in response to an IT to grab ToA/IGG/Rit. I prefer to use it pre-AdN resolution usually because if I had both ToA and IGG in hand, my LED becomes useless. In this deck, it takes mana to make mana, and popping LED in response to AdN is a powerful play. Don't be scared to pop for blue!

As to winning combinations of cards, here is a quick way to evaluate hands.

Mana:

Lotus petal = +1 mana
LED = +3 mana (must meet above conditions to be popped)
Dark Ritual = +2 mana
Cabal Ritual = +1 mana (rarely thresholded in this version, but if you have threshold, it is +3)
ESG = +1 colorless mana
Summoner's Pact = +1 colorless mana (only on the turn in which you intend to win)
Land = +1 mana (clearly, one per turn)
Chrome mox = +1 mana with a conditional color (requires an extra card, so make a check for a card that you can actually imprint)


Casting Storm Engines:

1.) AdN = 5 mana (3BB)

This is the usual route to victory. Add up your mana and consider the conditions for playing the cards, and you should have no problem figuring out whether you can cast AdN.

2.) IT->AdN = 7 mana (4BBB)

LED is often used in this example, especially since generating the 7 mana is difficult to do on first turn without it.

If you open a 7-mana hand with IT in it, and it makes the color requirements (not usually the problem), then you can cast AdN.

3.) IGG -- this card goes all over the place. It is really the only card that requires thought. This is your 'oh-shit' card, and it plays several roles. It is often used at low life totals.

Storm generation usually includes the use of IT+IGG. For example:

IT->IGG->IT->Tendrils w/LED+DRit = 7 mana (3BBBB) for 7 Storm

IGG is also used to force discards, deal with low storm circumstances where you have ToA in hand and no brainstorm, or retrieving ToA from the graveyard.




peace,
4eak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4eak

@ PelikanudoI think it is too powerful for the format myself. The instant speed is what puts the card over the top. If they made it a sorcery I would say otherwise. The card encourages non-interactive play, and frankly, that isn't very fun for your opponent.

---

What about it being an instant makes it unfair? The 10-15 cards are still drawn if it's a sorcery, and I find myself using it in my mainphase most of the time. Also, you're missing the potential interaction with Burning Wish, that would make the deck even stronger. Probably alot stronger.

@ troopatroop

Quote:

---

What about it being an instant makes it unfair? The 10-15 cards are still drawn if it's a sorcery, and I find myself using it in my mainphase most of the time.

---

I said it was too powerful and unfun, and that being instant speed pushed it over the top. If it weren't instant speed, I don't think it would be as strong.

First, floating LED mana during your upkeep (or even in response to a cantrip after mystical or brainstorm) to draw and play AdN is a fairly common play. This would not be possible if it was a sorcery. The deck's mana-base is just too consistent when it can play its engine at instant speed.

Additionally, even alongside protection, against strong control decks where you can be forced to chain-bomb them in what can be longer games, sometimes you will cast AdN during their End step, tapping them out and blowing their control cards. I've even AdN'd in response to win conditions (as they usually tap out partially for it).

Quote:

---

Also, you're missing the potential interaction with Burning Wish, that would make the deck even stronger. Probably alot stronger.

---

That is ironic because I've been testing Burning Wish as a support card for the protected version of this deck, and many times have I wished that AdN was a sorcery. However, this would be at the expense of LED and anti-control AdN plays, which is something I consider even more broken.

Certainly, if AdN were a sorcery, then it would gain strength from being able to Burning Wish for it. I don't think that strength would match the gains from instant speed.

But, hey, I could be wrong. My end point is that I think the card avoids interaction too much, and it can be a very unfun card to play against. It certainly isn't Yawgmoth's Will or Bargain, but it is still just a bit too good.



peace,
4eak

Its interesting to me that combo can never be good. In most people's minds it is either unplayable or broken. At first I thought it was busted too but after testing with it I found it to be just really good. The fact that a deck has to be built around it to make it good means that you aren't going to see it put into every deck. Its definately a turn 2-3 deck with protection which definately speeds up the format at least 1 turn but I think once the format is prepared for it you'll see it drop off unless its banned altogether.

As for the deck I'm not sure about brainstorm. I feel the mana, protection and tutors work well and although brainstorm may be strong it does not find you a bomb like mystical and infernal tutor do. When I test, all I want is mana and a business spell+protection and brainstorm is not really a business spell. It can do neat tricks with LED but it doesn't really do much unless you already have a business spell. It helps sculpt your hand but all you want is AN so you can win. Just my thoughts

Heres my new list, It is testing well (not perfect but very well) vs red tempo thresh and dreadstill, as well as UWb cunning landstill. (i have also played red matchups and such as well and so on) It appears to have even to favorable matchups in all these games (possibly his failure to understand the lack of value on stifle in this game)

4 Cabal ritual
4 Dark ritual
4 LED
4 Lotus pedal
3 Chrome mox

4 IT
4 Mystical tutor
4 ponder
4 Brainstorm

4 Duress
1 Cabal therapy
1 Rushing river

3 Ad nauseum
1 IGG
1 tendrils

4 underground sea
2 island
1 swamp
7 fetches

SB
4 EE
4 Slaughter pact
3 Cabal therapy
1 tundra
1 Angels grace
2 other (bounce spells perferably)

EE is just so good.... Try it, the threats it doesnt handle in terms of disruption is teeg, and thats about it...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by undone

SB
4 EE

EE is just so good.... Try it, the threats it doesnt handle in terms of disruption is teeg, and thats about it...

---

Hmmm, just to quibble over this : chalice @0 can't be handled neither by EE with your current manabase, can it ?

And if StaX or Chalice-Stompy decks are present is your meta, Serenity -even if a bit slower and less versatile- would be probably better than EE.

I've seen in some topics that you can anounce the A.Nauseam spell and the pop LED in order to pay the mana cost of A.N Can you do ..
a) play D.Ritual ->3 pool
b) play LED , I anounce I'm playing A.N spell and play it having 1 mana in pool and with no hand ?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

I've seen in some topics that you can anounce the A.Nauseam spell and the pop LED in order to pay the mana cost of A.N Can you do ..
a) play D.Ritual ->3 pool
b) play LED , I anounce I'm playing A.N spell and play it having 1 mana in pool and with no hand ?

---

That does not work because of the wording on LED:

Quote:

---

Sacrifice Lion's Eye Diamond, Discard your hand: Add three mana of any one color to your mana pool. Play this ability only any time you could play an instant.

---

The bolded portion means that you cannot play the ability after the declaration of a spell and before paying it's mana costs since you cannot play instants at that time.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tosh

That does not work because of the wording on LED:

The bolded portion means that you cannot play the ability after the declaration of a spell and before paying it's mana costs since you cannot play instants at that time.

---

therefore there is no way in normal situations to play A.N with the mana of LED
I mean LED doesnt help to get a 1st turn win unless you have infernal tutor in hand ritgh?

Quote:

---

I mean LED doesnt help to get a 1st turn win unless you have infernal tutor in hand ritgh?

---

There are many ways in which to win on first turn while using LED. Sometimes it is used directly to cast AdN during the draw phase, othertimes in response to AdN, and often in conjunction with tutors or cantrips. Post-AdN, LED is still very important too.

LED is doing most of its work on T2, but it will still be a powerful card even on 1st turn.


peace,
4eak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4eak

There are many ways in which to win on first turn while using LED. Sometimes it is used directly to cast AdN during the draw phase, othertimes in response to AdN, and often in conjunction with tutors or cantrips. Post-AdN, LED is still very important too.

LED is doing most of its work on T2, but it will still be a powerful card even on 1st turn.


peace,
4eak

---

You cannot cast AdN during your first draw phase using LED...

Quote:

---

You cannot cast AdN during your first draw phase using LED...

---

Oops. I stand corrected. Let me retract that statement! =)

My point was that it has more value to first turn wins than just through IT or even directly casting AdN.


peace,
4eak

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4eak

There are many ways in which to win on first turn while using LED. Sometimes it is used directly to cast AdN during the draw phase, othertimes in response to AdN, and often in conjunction with tutors or cantrips. Post-AdN, LED is still very important too.

LED is doing most of its work on T2, but it will still be a powerful card even on 1st turn.


peace,
4eak

---

My doubts are invading me .....

therefore the only way to get mana from LED to cast A.N is knowing youre goint to draw A.N , This is not a 1st turn win.
I ask if you can cast A.N with + 3more mana open from a played D.Ritual + popped LED in anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

My doubts are invading me .....

therefore the only way to get mana from LED to cast A.N is knowing youre goint to draw A.N , This is not a 1st turn win.
I ask if you can cast A.N with + 3more mana open from a played D.Ritual + popped LED in anyway.

---

Most of all you need LED in play...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

therefore the only way to get mana from LED to cast A.N is knowing youre goint to draw A.N , This is not a 1st turn win.
I ask if you can cast A.N with + 3more mana open from a played D.Ritual + popped LED in anyway.

---

I'm not sure if I understand your post correctly but ...
The most likely way to win first turn via LED is land, Ritual, Ritual/Chrome Mox/Petal/CRitual, LED, Infernal Tutor->AdN.
It's also possible, though unlikely, to go land, Mystical-AdN, Petal, LED, another Petal, Ritual, Brainstorm. (The first Mystical can be a Brainstorm if you have no other play and get lucky.)
If somehow you can generate enough storm and have the win in your hand, you can also go land, Ritual, Petal/CRitual, LED, IT->IGG (getting Ritual, Petal, and Tendrils). This needs another two spells - if those two spells produce at least two additional mana, you go off without Tendrils, as you can IT for it post-IGG. If you drew two LEDs and can cast IT, you win as well.
The chances for these plays rise on the draw, obv.
You cannot ever win with land, Ritual, LED, AdN because of LED's errata. You have to sacrifice it in response to a spell you play, most likely Brainstorm, Ad Nauseam, or IT. You simply can't play a spell in your hand with LED mana (unless it has madness).
(And a good thing that is, else LED would be banned with absolute certainty.)

That said the first-turn win is decidedly less likely without LED because it's harder to a) go hellbent, b) produce enough mana, and c) tutor for AnD/IGG without ITutor (which despite being an okay setup spell kind of depends on LED).
Obviously, the above synergies (and more, like the draw step trick) still work perfectly turn 2 which is perfectly acceptable for a deck playing Duress.
It also makes it easier to use the IGG alternative and to find your win post-AdN via IT or even Brainstorm in a pinch, and cast AnD with mana floating.

That said I don't think it's necessarily the way to go, especially in disruption-heavy lists. It is only really good with IT and Mystical Tutor/Bstorm - the draw step trick, however, leaves you open to countermagic and Chant. If this is a big issue in your metagame I'd strongly consider playing another deck, though.
In my experience with other decks, LED has a tendency to be completely busted half the time and sitting around doing nothing the other - it's come up in testing too, though far less often with AnT than, say, my Dredge deck (or Belcher, for that matter).
Still, in the deck's current incarnation, the LED/IT version is what I'll be bringing to a real tournament. The synergies are more numerous here than in other LED decks I've played.

// gah. Had to apply a few errata ...

4 Eak Q: If I have a Balance and one other card in my hand and use Lion's Eye Diamond to cast Balance, will Balance treat my hand as though it has one card or zero cards?

A: You can't use Lion's Eye Diamond to cast a spell from your hand. You can only play the Diamond's ability when you could play an instant. When the ability resolves (immediately, because it is a mana ability) you have to discard your hand.

because of this statement I can Affirm that LED doesn´t help to get a first turn win which is what we intend to do with the deck Ritgfh? , I agree is good with I.Tutor and with burning and with mystical tutor but can't give us mana in first turn to cast A.N therefore if we are suposed when we play A.N we will win we really don't mind which cards will be drawn . Simple .

what about the Retract /Hurkills effect + Permanent_Artifacts_which_give_more_mana_than_its_cost synergy ?
Do you really think the Í.T + LED is the quieckest way?
do you really think LED helps to our 1st turn win?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

4 Eak Q: If I have a Balance and one other card in my hand and use Lion's Eye Diamond to cast Balance, will Balance treat my hand as though it has one card or zero cards?

A: You can't use Lion's Eye Diamond to cast a spell from your hand. You can only play the Diamond's ability when you could play an instant. When the ability resolves (immediately, because it is a mana ability) you have to discard your hand.

---

You play a land and tap it.
You play Dark Ritual and get BBB.
You play any other card that produces one mana. (4 mana in your pool.)
You play LED.
You play Infernal Tutor (2 mana in your pool).
In response to the tutor, you sacrifice LED. You discard your hand and get 3 mana. Infernal Tutor is still on the stack and can not be taken from there any other way than by being countered or resolving. (Five mana in your pool.)
Assuming the tutor isn't countered, it resolves. You get Ad Nauseam. (Still 5 mana.)
You play Ad Nauseam.

In other words, no, LED can never, ever, win you the game if you don't also have IT or five mana without LED. It does, however, pay for Ad Nauseam when you do have IT.
But it is still at the very least a solid inclusion that has been tested and used to no end in other decks with a similar strategy.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

because of this statement I can Affirm that LED doesn´t help to get a first turn win which is what we intend to do with the deck Ritgfh? , I agree is good with I.Tutor and with burning and with mystical tutor but can't give us mana in first turn to cast A.N therefore if we are suposed when we play A.N we will win we really don't mind which cards will be drawn . Simple .

---

The goal is to win. The speed can get us there, sure. It is conceivable to build an AdN deck without LEDs and more rituals that would indeed be faster. It would, however, most likely lose IT and thus lose consistency because we can't really use other tutors (Spoils and Plunge are out, Cunning Wish and Lim-Dûl's Vault would negate the speed the deck would be trying to accomplish).
Note that LED's relevance is not at all limited to the first turn, in fact the possibility of a turn two win is much greater with it, too (hide AnD from your hand with Bstorm or get it with Mystical).
We also do not always win the game when we play AdN. Sometimes you just get unlucky and draw another AdN and no mana to continue. Or lots of mana but no way to get Tendrils. LED in response to AdN is a very solid option here, as well as LED in response to a post-AdN IT. I would much prefer Mox Diamond when going off but it has just underperformed for me in any other capacity.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

what about the Retract /Hurkills effect + Permanent_Artifacts_which_give_more_mana_than_its_cost synergy ?
Do you really think the Í.T + LED is the quieckest way?
do you really think LED helps to our 1st turn win?

---

Moxen are very awkward to bounce and Petal is useless. Unless you envision this as a storm engine, it won't help much at all (and even then it's problematic as it won't add to your mana without serious cda and needs lots of artifacts which you may or may not have access to depending on luck and, more importantly, hate).

I'm working on a list based on 4eak list trying to cut LED- I.T synergy and trying to get the most speed withouth this synergy,there it goes:
Lands: 12x
1x Swamp
1x Island
4x Underground Sea
2x Flooded Strand
4x Polluted Delta

Mana Accel: 26
4x Lotus Petal
4x Chrome Mox
4x Mox diamond 4x LED
4x Dark Ritual
4x Cabal Ritual
3x ESG
3x Summoner's Pact

Card Quality: 16
4x Brainstorm
4x Ponder
4x Mystical Tutor
4x Retract // the quickest art. bouncer4x Infernal Tutor

Win-Stuff: 6
1x Tendrils of Agony
1x Ill-Gotten Gains // I'm not sure now about this maybe Recall...
4x Ad Nauseam

@ Pelikanudo

Quote:

---

My doubts are invading me .....

---

Read the post directly above where you said this.

Quote:

---

therefore the only way to get mana from LED to cast A.N is knowing youre goint to draw A.N , This is not a 1st turn win.

---

I did not lie. It is possible to win on first turn using LED to pay for AdN's cost. I quickly spoke about the draw phase, and I retracted that (it is the common play on 2nd turn though).

Take this hand:
LED, LED, Mystical, Brainstorm, Land, Mox, Blue spell.

or hands that looked like they weren't first turn hands can become 1st turn hands, using LED to cast AdN:

LED, ESG, ESG, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Brainstorm, Land

These plays are not likely ones, but they exist. LED is very powerful (and important) for T1 wins; even if the card is just not used in the way you want it to be used.

Please note: LED does not require IT. I'd play the card even if IT didn't exist. I'd remove AdN's before I'd remove LED's.

Quote:

---

because of this statement I can Affirm that LED doesn´t help to get a first turn win which is what we intend to do with the deck Ritgfh? ,

---

No. LED adds vital, colored mana in many circumstances, and it is useful not just in conjunction with IT or Mystical. By removing LED from this deck, there are many, many games you will not win that you otherwise could, that includes 1st and 2nd turn kills.

Quote:

---

I'm working on a list based on 4eak list trying to cut LED- I.T synergy and trying to get the most speed withouth this synergy,there it goes:

---

Let's be honest here; you didn't even know how LED worked. How do you expect to start making decklists when you haven't had the opportunity to gain experience and knowledge about an obvious must-play card in a storm deck?

Removing LED is 100% a mistake. Pure and simple.

Go play a hundred games and then maybe you can start tweaking the deck.

Lastly, I think you've misunderstood the win percentages. 57% of your games are still won on 2nd turn. This is a turn 1.5 deck played almost perfectly; it is not a turn 1 deck. You sound way too disappointed when you don't win on 1st turn "7 out of 10" games.



peace,
4eak

Isn't good to play Lim-Dûl's Vault ??

You can tidy your cards for Ad Nauseum and tidy five cards with lower casting cost or tidy your spells for storming easy!!!

I think is very very good play it.

Ps : Sorry for my language :(

Although I love Lim-Dûl's Vault with a passion, I don't think it belongs. The deck already has eight tutors and eight cards that give you cda (without taking LED into account).
It also loses you life, which is not too bad if you're using it as a Mystical but severely limit its ability to stack the library, which it doesn't do that well in the first place.
And it costs two mana, which is very expensive for a deck such as this, especially when other cards fill that role cheaper or without lifeloss and cda. Paying two mana for a card that will often fail to impact your game until t3 won't cut it imo.

I guess you could try it as an additional black card/consistency measure in a combo meta but first you'd have to find one of those and then justify making your deck slower in such an environment.
@ Unmask: //edit: aargh dammit, wanted to delete this passage but there was a respons already. Foiled by my own stupidity again. Unmask sucks.

A little analysis:

- Shattering Spree = isn't good because you play only one/two red lands.
- Rebuild = is good because istant and tutorable with mystical tutor
- Hurkyl's Recall = is good because istant and tutorable with mystical tutor
- Rack and Ruin = I think is good only versus chalice

- Duress = essential
- Thoughtseize = good versus teeg
- Cabal = isn't good
- Unmask = a good idea and + 1 storm count, but can you remove dark ritual o cabal ritual??

- Burning Wish = isn't a good idea because infernal tutor is essential
- Mystical Tutor = essential

- Pact of negation = is bad because with empty is a dead card.
- Orim = is more good than duress if you play IGG.

- Braistorm and Ponder = essential

- Defense Grid = for me is a possible card to play in SB, but brainstorm will be a sorcery :(

- Esg + green pact = 6 cards for + 1 mana and + 1 storming, very very bad for me. Six slots...

Quote:

---

- Unmask = a good idea and + 1 storm count, but can you remove dark ritual o cabal ritual??

---

This card costs 4 and doesnt do anything important that duress doesnt...

Quote:

---

- Burning Wish = isn't a good idea because infernal tutor is essential

---

How is demonic tutor not good X.X

Quote:

---

- Cabal = isn't good

---

Waaaah, after duress or right before you go off its another duress.

Also as to my list a couple pages back, I have come to REALLY like 5-7 discard because it lets you be immune to stifle and still fast.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 4eak

@ Pelikanudo



Read the post directly above where you said this.



I did not lie. It is possible to win on first turn using LED to pay for AdN's cost. I quickly spoke about the draw phase, and I retracted that (it is the common play on 2nd turn though).

Take this hand:
LED, LED, Mystical, Brainstorm, Land, Mox, Blue spell.

or hands that looked like they weren't first turn hands can become 1st turn hands, using LED to cast AdN:

LED, ESG, ESG, Lotus Petal, Ponder, Brainstorm, Land

These plays are not likely ones, but they exist. LED is very powerful (and important) for T1 wins; even if the card is just not used in the way you want it to be used.

Please note: LED does not require IT. I'd play the card even if IT didn't exist. I'd remove AdN's before I'd remove LED's.



No. LED adds vital, colored mana in many circumstances, and it is useful not just in conjunction with IT or Mystical. By removing LED from this deck, there are many, many games you will not win that you otherwise could, that includes 1st and 2nd turn kills.



Let's be honest here; you didn't even know how LED worked. How do you expect to start making decklists when you haven't had the opportunity to gain experience and knowledge about an obvious must-play card in a storm deck?

Removing LED is 100% a mistake. Pure and simple.

Go play a hundred games and then maybe you can start tweaking the deck.

Lastly, I think you've misunderstood the win percentages. 57% of your games are still won on 2nd turn. This is a turn 1.5 deck played almost perfectly; it is not a turn 1 deck. You sound way too disappointed when you don't win on 1st turn "7 out of 10" games.



peace,
4eak

---

I do understand everything even the theory of Relativity , how could you think LED functioning I don't understand, man I'm programmer...,
I think you all TEPS players are focused on the idea that LED is the key and I demnstrated with a deck with no LED can perfectly get the 3rd turn win but of course with A.N ,
I mean of course we are trying to get the most speed but we both know that Fows and Stifles will ruin us the day , first of all you have to build the quickest deck and once you have probed its strength you'll add defense,
well

a) LED doesnt help to get a 1st turn win
b) LED Need to be casted in conjunction to I.T
c) LED obligates you to discard your hand and therefore If you put some kind of defense THIS KIND of defense MUST be PROACTIVE which is something I dislike and I miss from Solidarity
d) MAINLY becasue LED doesnt help to cast a A.N unless you have Mystical or I.T

Another point is that I recognize I didnt know the possibilities of LED but I investigated about it, tested it and my conclusions are INMUTABLE :
you really do not mind which cards you re going to draw with A.N you really MIND how you re going to cast A.N and the spells to protect it . Simple .

this is my last development of a deck with LED and trying to get the quickest victory, the difference betwwen this deck and yours is simple :
1x Swamp
1x Island
4x Underground Sea
2x Flooded Strand
4x Polluted Delta

Mana Accel: 26
4x Lotus Petal
4x Chrome Mox
4x Mox diamond

4x Dark Ritual
4x Cabal Ritual


4x Pact of negation // this defense wil be turned in to 3 ESG 3 Pacts + 2 Retract But definately
// I prefer defense
4x Duresses

Card Quality: 16
4x Brainstorm
4x Ponder
4x Mystical Tutor
2x Retract
1x Tendrils
1x Hurkills R
4x Ad Nauseam
Its worth it to try this build it gets a 3rd turn win withouth discarding our hand

You know which cards you could add to this deck in the side? SpellSnare which is fundamental nowadays to handle the meta, disrupt, (with changing mana colors) REB, orims, stifles


to mine you would be able to add reactive defense otherwise to yours you won't be able

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

a) LED doesnt help to get a 1st turn win

---

Yes it does. (As has been explained.)

Quote:

---

b) LED Need to be casted in conjunction to I.T

---

No it doesn't, except for the first-turn win. (As has been explained.)

Quote:

---

c) LED obligates you to discard your hand and therefore If you put some kind of defense THIS KIND of defense MUST be PROACTIVE which is something I dislike and I miss from Solidarity

---

Okay, valid point here. Much as I like Pact of Negation, counters is still the only thing it protects you from. I definitely think that LED >>> Pact outside of heavily blue metagames where you shouldn't be playing combo anyway - or play a slow version (possibly) where Pact sucks anyway.

Quote:

---

d) MAINLY becasue LED doesnt help to cast a A.N unless you have Mystical or I.T

---

It does many other things beside casting AdN though. (As has been explained.)

Quote:

---

Another point is that I recognize I didnt know the possibilities of LED but I investigated about it, tested it and my conclusions are INMUTABLE :
you really do not mind which cards you re going to draw with A.N you really MIND how you re going to cast A.N and the spells to protect it . Simple .

---

Words like "immutable" have no place in a strategy discussion.
Oh, and you should care what you draw with AdN. After all, you have to win with that and it's not a 100% win. And we do mind how we're going to cast AdN. Mystical Tutor and IT are two 4-ofs that synergize heavily with LED, while AdN is a 3-of or 4-of that synergizes with LED if you can reach five mana by other means. We're able to use LED to cast AdN two times out of three in principle, and it's far from useless in the other third.
I fail to see why reactive control is so important outside of blue matchups that we would ditch a card whose bustedness has been proven time and time again.



@ deck: I have tested Diamond as a four-of, a three-of, than a two-of, then dropped them. Beside being good post-AdN, what does it do? It seems like "producing mana post-AdN" and "sometimes, if I want to win turn 2, and happen to have drawn three lands in my 12-land deck, it's a better Chrome Mox" isn't all that hot. That's what my testing led me to believe, anyway (and I had 16 land at the time).
You might wanna try BWish/Rites instead of Tendrils/ESG/SPact if you're playing Diamonds anyway.

If your deck goldfishes t3, it's not really faster as other versions here.

Please explain to me what Retract does beside being another spell that's good only when you have cast AdN already. It doesn't seem consistent with your assessment that "we don't care what we draw, only how to play AdN".

Spell Snare is a good idea. Hm, Cbalance, Chalice, Teeg/Canonist/Mage. All of those aren't instant speed so you could easily include it in a deck with LED.

Quote:

---

Its worth it to try this build it gets a 3rd turn win withouth discarding our hand

---

Or, you could win first turn with duress backup because of LED. IGG loops can only be used with cabal rituals and LEDs because you need 2 +3s.

Seriously LED is our black lotus, you wouldnt advocate cutting black lotus from vintage combo because "You have to sacrafice it" or cutting demonic tutor. Pact of negation sucks plain and simple, more discard is just better, and LED > pact any day of the week.

Please do not debate LED is good, thats like saying FOW is bad because its card disadvantage, and brainstom is bad because it costs mana and doesnt directly do anything but sorting.

LED is one of the best cards in the deck, and format. You're not going to convince us not to play it, because it's just that good. You're really only convincing us that you're bad at this game.

I would suggest "Les Mise" (Farther down in the New and Developmental) if you don't want to play LED. It's also much simpler to pilot, and just as fast.

I tried several versions of this deck and the ones without LED just sucked. Honestly there is not a better tutor suit than mystical tutor+infernal tutor and both have great synergy with LED. The tempo advantage LED gives you is unparalled in this format. I understand wanting to play pact of negation but LED is just better. You gain a little speed with pact but the speed you get from LED is much more. As for disruption tools, proactive disruption like duress is amazing because it takes out things that might hurt us and gives us a roadmap of what will happen in the future

Isn't this deck very similar to Fetchland Tendrils. The only thing that I see is different is Chrome Mox and Duress.

Similar as in strictly better.

No offence but you can add the doomsday stuff in and this is strictly better then FT.

Quote:

---

Isn't this deck very similar to Fetchland Tendrils. The only thing that I see is different is Chrome Mox and Duress.

---

Also the differance is that this deck is better in the combo mirror, the blue matchups and the black matchup.

We had a theretical idea in testing, involving the "Worst case" so what we did was pit the deck vs non blue god hands on the draw, from 5 bolt effects and 2 lands, to swamp rit hymn duress to Mana mox teeg.

It put the matches at between even and favorable for this deck. This is just unfair.

The card is broken if your deck has an average CC of 1 or less, over powered if its between 1 and 2, so so if its between 2-3 and horrid if your average CC is higher. This deck (or at least mine) is between .98 and 1.08 depending on exact card choice which means it might not be broken. But it boarders on it.

Results are arriving. Go, go AN.

Anyway horrible list with merchant OMG scroll and mox diamond (are you serious?) plus a sideboard that seems mounted 5 minutes before the tournament.

Ah this list needs LED, like all others storm as TES or FT. 4x. This is an axiom.

Quote:

---

Isn't this deck very similar to Fetchland Tendrils. The only thing that I see is different is Chrome Mox and Duress.

---

Except I'm not running Ponder or Sensei's Divining Top, and rather than relying on a very disruptable win with IGG or Doomsday, the deck casts a 5cc spell that draws 10-15 cards and wins from there. The fact that the deck can cast multiple AN's until one finally resolves and wins gives it more resiliency than any other storm combo deck in the format.

Obviously both FT and ANT play accelerants and tutors to win with a lethal Tendrils, but the fact that this deck abuses a 5cc draw 15 rather than a 3cc stack 5 does make a difference.

The deck is also functionally different in that it has to run Chrome Mox, and that it is required to consider the cc and lifeloss that spells cost, which does add some design constraints.

Another big thing is that this deck goldfishes faster than FT. The average goldfish for FT is around 3.5, where the average goldfish for ANT is around 2.5, and I'm counting protected wins for both decks.

Lastly (at least of what I can think of for now), the deck is much easier to pilot than FT and is alot more forgiving of play mistakes (kinda like Belcher). This in itself is probably the most important factor, since the difficulty of a [combo] deck is a huge issue. I believe the primary reason that Belcher has more Top 8's than both TES and FT is for this very reason, and ANT is likely going to parallel Belcher in this area.

Other than that, yes, they are somewhat similar in concept.

Quote:

---

Results are arriving. Go, go AN.

Anyway horrible list with merchant OMG scroll and mox diamond (are you serious?) plus a sideboard that seems mounted 5 minutes before the tournament.

Ah this list needs LED, like all others storm as TES or FT. 4x. This is an axiom.

---

That list is horrible. I'm suprised he won with it, though it just goes to show that Ad Nauseam is so strong that even subpar decklists running Ad Nauseam can do well.

I can't wait to see the results this deck is going to put up once people start playing the B/u/w version often enough.

Honestly, to everyone that thinks the card is overhyped, that couldn't be further from the truth. The ability to draw 10-15 cards (I've drawn over 20 before) from one 5cc instant is just rediculous. It doesn't make storm combo broken, but the card itself is broken, and the card makes storm combo much stronger overall.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jegger

Results are arriving. Go, go AN.

Anyway horrible list with merchant OMG scroll and mox diamond (are you serious?) plus a sideboard that seems mounted 5 minutes before the tournament.

Ah this list needs LED, like all others storm as TES or FT. 4x. This is an axiom.

---

I guess the list doesn't necessarily need a third splash?

I'm not sure about Merchant Scroll, but I can definitely see Mox Diamond. Like honestly, if any of you have goldfished multiple variants of this deck, you'll know that finding the initial mana source is the thing you want most when going off after casting an AdN (irrelevant if you cracked LED in response, but you won't always have that play). I'd probably consider putting in another 4 protection spells over Merchant Scroll (probably Cabal Therapy or Thoughtseize - maybe even a toolbox suite like Repeal/Wipe Away, Pact of Negation, Rebuild, whatever) and finding some way to squeeze in IT #4 and an IGGY. IGGY loop is still way too good to pass up imo.

EDIT: the four cards could easily be splash white for Orim's Chant + a Tundra.

No IGG either.
Some weird splits, too. Four Scrolls (with nothing but Mystical to tutor for preboard) over a playset of IT and the third/fourth AdN. I can live with Diamond in lists that are heavy on land but the 3/3 split should be 4/2 at most in a list with 15 land.
No consistent pre-board disruption ... seems a valid choice to me, but Merchant Scroll dosn't jive with the speed theory.
Maybe he didn't have all the cards? If so, I completely sympathize.

Anyway, good to see the deck get some real action, and an event with 47 people isn't exactly a backwater Legacy FNM wannabe where entering guarantees T8.
Is there a way to find out what he was paired against? There are some fast combos as well as aggro-control lists in there that look like they could have posed problems.

//edit:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanni

Honestly, to everyone that thinks the card is overhyped, that couldn't be further from the truth. The ability to draw 10-15 cards (I've drawn over 20 before) from one 5cc instant is just rediculous. It doesn't make storm combo broken, but the card itself is broken, and the card makes storm combo much stronger overall.

---

qft. Just two days or some such ago I saw it likened to Moonlight Bargain of all things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hanni

Except I'm not running Ponder or Sensei's Divining Top, and rather than relying on a very disruptable win with IGG or Doomsday, the deck casts a 5cc spell that draws 10-15 cards and wins from there. The fact that the deck can cast multiple AN's until one finally resolves and wins gives it more resiliency than any other storm combo deck in the format.

Obviously both FT and ANT play accelerants and tutors to win with a lethal Tendrils, but the fact that this deck abuses a 5cc draw 15 rather than a 3cc stack 5 does make a difference.

The deck is also functionally different in that it has to run Chrome Mox, and that it is required to consider the cc and lifeloss that spells cost, which does add some design constraints.

Another big thing is that this deck goldfishes faster than FT. The average goldfish for FT is around 3.5, where the average goldfish for ANT is around 2.5, and I'm counting protected wins for both decks.

Lastly (at least of what I can think of for now), the deck is much easier to pilot than FT and is alot more forgiving of play mistakes (kinda like Belcher). This in itself is probably the most important factor, since the difficulty of a [combo] deck is a huge issue. I believe the primary reason that Belcher has more Top 8's than both TES and FT is for this very reason, and ANT is likely going to parallel Belcher in this area.

Other than that, yes, they are somewhat similar in concept.

---

But wouldn't any reasonable evolution of FT include Ad Nauseam? That is what I'm getting at. Including Chrome Mox makes sense since you are trying to get more initial mana sources after playing Ad Nauseam, but you are basically playing the same deck. Sure you get rid of the Draw 4s and Doomsday for Ad Nauseam, but that doesn't make this deck much different than FT.