Is there a link? I was too busy getting raped at GP KC to watch the coverage.
Printable View
Is there a link? I was too busy getting raped at GP KC to watch the coverage.
Congratulations to Mr Cook yet again!
Until blip gets updated, here's a link to twitch at the right timestamp: http://www.twitch.tv/scglive/b/427147076?t=2h32m30sQuote:
Originally Posted by RaNDoMxGeSTuReS
Fuck yeah Bryant.
"I think these two are friends because they have the exact same 75."Quote:
Originally Posted by phazonmuant
Im at work and I only have sound (shitty old computer) but damn. I feel like listening to baseball on the radio.
Dumb commentaries.
Wish they would just name the spells they are casting.
Yeah the commentators were terrible. Both had no idea what was going on. I actually preferred them to talk about how great the decks looked, because those comments actually made sense.
By the way, they were bad in general, not just during the TES mirror. In the Maverick vs. Tempo Thresh match afterwards one mentioned that Maverick was a good matchup for Thresh. Well, it isn't. It's definitely winnable, but it's definitely not good.
I'm fairly certain they said the opposite, actually--that Maverick is the one with the good Thresh matchup. The sequencing was them talking about how Maverick had fallen out of favor due to a poor combo matchup (which is also patently untrue, Maverick has an amazing matchup vs combo against anything not winning on turn 1 and even then it sort of depends) and that it's current matchup, RUG, is actually pretty good for it. Which is an understatement, Maverick shits on RUG much like The Rock does.Quote:
Originally Posted by Asthereal
Ah I guess I misunderstood them after all the nonsense the spat out. :wink:
Hmmm ... i'm curious about Bryant's game 3 hands in the Quarterfinals. Mull to 5 is rough here. May enlight me, pal?
No manas equals no keeps.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
Words 'o wisdom.
Wow, I need to brush up on the deck. Just went 2-2 in my local. Lost a close match to Sneak and Show where I misassigned my role and lost a game I probably shouldn't have. I Probed and saw Misdirection, Intuition, Griselbrand x2, and a land, and then with Gemstone as my only land I stacked my Ponder: <top> | Rite of Flame | Cabal Therapy | Ponder | <bottom>. I had RoF, IT, BW, DR, LP in hand, so 7 mana once I untapped, just a mana or a color shy of a Past in Flames loop. I wasted my next turn Therapying Griselbrand because I wanted to disrupt him, then of course he drew the Force when I Pondered into a means to attempt to go off. I should have stacked Ponder above and waited on the Therapy until I was ready to go off.
Also lost to UWR beats. Game 1 lost to a timely Wasteland and Stoneforge which beat my 12 goblins. Game 2 I lost to mostly me being tired, but also Meddling Mage on Burning Wish. I can see why Bryant had trouble with this archetype in the top 8.
I'm trying to decide what to play at the Somerset invitational, how do you guys feel about TES's positioning in that meta? Bryant, how do you feel about TES in the invi meta after the Atlanta Invitational?
- Stack RoF on top, Therapy 2nd, draw RoF and ship the turnQuote:
Originally Posted by phazonmuant
- Draw Therapy for turn
- Petal (storm1)
- Tap Mine for R and cast RoF (storm2) for RR
- Crack Petal for B and cast DR (storm3) for RRBBB
- Infernal for RoF #3 (RBB left) (storm4)
- RoF #2 for RRRBB (storm5)
- RoF #3 for RRRRRRBB (storm6)
Option a)
- Therapy for FoW (storm7) with RRRRRRB left
- Burning Wish for EtW (storm8)
- EtW for 18 Goblins
- flashback Therapy for Griselbrand or Intuition
Option b)
- Wish for PIF (storm7) with RRRRBB left
- PIF (storm8) RB left
- RoF RRRRB (storm9)
- RoF RRRRRRB (storm10)
- RoF RRRRRRRB (storm11)
- DR RRRRRRRBBB (Storm12)
- infernal for Wish
- Wish for Tendrils
Option a) is pretty Save but gives him 2 turns to lucksack (even if i can't come up with 2 draws which would Flip over the game in his favor). Option b) gambles that he does not draw a counterspell in his Single turn.
Can't explain why you choose to Therapy for Grizz and slowroll :/ (except my math was wrong, because RoF always confused me a bit ^_^)
Option B should not be possible, because it requires 4 B if you want to cast your Therapy before the Infernal, so Option A is the correct one imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Indeed, so just skip the useless Therapy in Option b) and it worksQuote:
Originally Posted by DarkJester
Edit: I was free to remove it :)
Leaving A Legacy: Storming To Worchester by Bryant Cook
Opening post now contains new links.
Congrats for the result!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
In Round One, Game two: after Probing and seeing no hate, instead of therapying the Ringleader, fetch Sea, imprint Mox with Therapy/Decay and ITutor for DRirual. Next turn double DRit from Mox for Ad Nausem with 16 lives and a land drop plus whatever is drawn for the turn. Is that line of play reasonable enough or is strictly better to take out Ringleader as we will have better outs drawing the following turns?
That's a fine line of play. However, I wanted to cripple the opponents chances of winning as well. I figured with most of the deck being mana I would've drawn one over the several turns I was attacked for two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Opaco
That line definitely is correct. I fixated on casting Tendrils instead of realizing that Empty could just win with disruption, so I kept thinking I needed to IT for DR instead of realizing that IT for RoF is net +1.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Hell, I could read the guy like a book, I could even take his Intuition and Griselbrands if I didn't put him on Force. The only reason I went for it into his Force was I had already burned 2 rituals by the time I got a strong read, so I just hoped my read was wrong.
Bryant - congrats on the top 8!
I didn't realize you were there- that's awesome. I went with a friend after only having played the deck for a couple weeks and got absolutely wrecked (went 3-6, losing at least 4-5 games to my own play mistakes that were so obvious I recognized that I'd misplayed as soon as I did it). I'm certainly not good with the deck yet, but I'm having a ton of fun learning as I go.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
While I did really badly, I did get to match 1, game 1, turn 1 kill a guy on either UW or UWr tempo with ad nauseam -> tendrils for 13 copies. I got the biggest shit-eating grin on my face and it was probably the best time I've had playing Magic. Thanks a ton for the deck/decklist.
Bryant, you should try to convince SCG to do a deck tech at the invitational.
...and that was the last time Bryant Cook owned a Japanese foil version of T.E.S.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay_Gatz
Plain bad idea I fear. I doubt you can explain more interactions than Infernal + LED into Ad Nauseam until your discussion Partner at SCG mentally blanks and need an ambulance because you have to slap him each time he says "Ad Nauseam Tendrils".Quote:
Originally Posted by Jay_Gatz
You don't expect people watching the deck tech understanding the SB engines while it's obvious that even a lot of the pilots have problems choosing the right Engine for given situations.
To be fair, we also both said we came from Syracuse and we looked like we were pretty chatty while shuffling up.Quote:
Originally Posted by sconnell
We probably all noticed that. Also, it was the only good comment coming out of the announcers.Quote:
Originally Posted by Royce Walter
I was a pretty big fan of "it looks like he's burning wishing for tendrils.... Our producer is telling us it's cabal therapy.... Nah, it's tendrils."Quote:
Originally Posted by Kayradis
You're making this up?Quote:
Originally Posted by Royce Walter
I'm sure that's not the exact quote, but that's the sentiment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Star|Scream
It's pointless to pick quotes and drag them through the dirt. We already know all that SCG commentary could be better than it is.
Question: Are all those guys and gals responsible for the Video coverage volunteers or do they get payed. If they do this for (nearly) free i would be rather thankful for their work and overall quality. The worlds biggest tournament series, Bazaar of Moxen still lacks ANY coverage even in it's 7th iteration.
I have a situation question.
It is your turn 3 against a discard opponent who plays no countermagic. You are at 14 life.
On the battlefield: LED, LED, Chrome Mox (imprint therapy), Lotus Petal, Underground Sea
In your hand: Silence, Ad Nauseam, Burning Wish
Graveyard: Ponder, Burning Wish
Can you win this turn?
I see a diminishing returns line, but PIF and IGG aren't showing me a win. Is it there?
i think that your only way, if you want to win that turn is with diminishing returnss
DimRet seems like a pretty likely win. You have a land drop, so only crack one LED to make it more likely to win with IT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Star|Scream
Most discard decks play at most one way to deal with a horde of goblin tokens, so you can also do an IGG loop into Empty for 12 tokens. If they have nothing in their hand that's probably not optimal, but if they have a loaded grip, Mind Twisting them might be good.
My thoughts exactly. While deck techs are nice for attention, showing that you have a deck worth over 10 grand seems like a bad idea. Noticed you swapped out the polluted delta. I'm guessing it was because of Reuben Bresler's commentary last time? I agree, that was pretty annoying and imitating other decks is very useful generally.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
I would just DReturns in that situation Star|Scream. You're almost a lock to win that game with mana floating of your choice as well as a land drop.
Yeah, agreed on the commentary being awful. They couldn't tell what the cards were for shit, what was going on, etc. etc.
They do get paid to do coverage Lemnear and probably quite a bit. I know a guy who does coverage for SCG, but he can't disclose his pay due to a NDA of course. I would gladly do coverage as I at least know what all the decks are trying to accomplish and what the cards are. Only problem for me is I don't really follow standard because I think the format is super lame sauce.
Really sweet tournament report though, sad that you lost to UWR in the top 8.
Are you sure it wouldn't be better to pop both LEDS to have mana available in case you brick on business but you do have cantrips?Quote:
Originally Posted by phazonmuant
Possibly, but if you draw IT, and no LED and you rip multiple lands, you kiss your shot of doing anything that turn goodbye.Quote:
Originally Posted by Star|Scream
I would pass on PIF and IGG because DR is unlikely to fizzle here. Pop both LED (RRRUUU) and get them back into your deck to draw them again. You can still drop a Land for B in Case you draw infernal and LED.Quote:
Originally Posted by Star|Scream
Having Access to Blue mana Post DR is vital to fix your grip with further cantrippin (Into a Wish or LED in most cases)
Those are definitely the correct options - go for DimRet either cracking for RRRUUU or only cracking one for nothing floating. Without doing the math I think that the chances of having multiple cantrips or not having another IMS for a ritual is less likely than either completely bricking off DimRet or needing LED to IT successfully, so I would leave one LED on the board. I try really hard to not crack my LEDs unless absolutely necessary, so that could be a bias on my part in this analysis.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
In any case, I'm pretty sure everyone agrees DimRet is much more likely to win than any other options, and the difference to win between popping both LEDs and only one seem like 5% at most.
If you Crack only one (asuming for UUU) you reduce the Chance of drawing another one off DR or the following cantrippin and often results in forcing you to find not only a Black IMS but a red one too aka a Lotus Petal or a Chrome Mox.Quote:
Originally Posted by phazonmuant
Being forced to Probe, Ponder, Brainstorm into a lesser accelerant like Petal or Mox is nothing you want aside the fact that you have less mana in your Pool to operate with and that all for the Chance of drawing Infernal Tutor, a possible 3-off in postboard games (did StarScream mention if it was postboard?).
I'm 100% sure popping both LED's gives you the most mana and options out of the situation aka not being able to float a Single Red or Black mana into the DR
Edit: with RRRUUU Floating you can even pull off something useful with a drawn EtW or lonely Wish even if the Rest is crap.
Quote:
It is your turn 3 against a discard opponent who plays no countermagic. You are at 14 life.
On the battlefield: LED, LED, Chrome Mox (imprint therapy), Lotus Petal, Underground Sea
In your hand: Silence, Ad Nauseam, Burning Wish
Graveyard: Ponder, Burning Wish
Can you win this turn?
I also lean towards preferring to keep a LED in play when resolving Ad Nauseum or Diminishing Returns, for two reasons:Quote:
Originally Posted by phazonmuant
1. Hellbent
2. It's hedge in case I can't actually go off, which particularly applies for DR since it usually draws fewer cards than Ad Nauseum. DR will put the game in a better situation than it was in lots of situations even when it doesn't convert to a win that turn. In that case, it might be better to be able to have access to LED the following turn rather than potentially lose the 3 mana if you weren't able to spend it right away.
I know the question here was "Can you win this turn?" but there's still a number of ways that DR -> not go off that turn can still end up being a win. For example, you might keep LED, play a land for the turn and play a brainstorm/ponder to set up to win the following turn after untapping with LED + 2 land + mox. Or, you might go gold mana source -> silence on opponent's upkeep -> untap and win on your turn. Or, it might be that a discard spell is enough to get you to your next turn where you can win.
Without knowing the composition of the opponent's deck other than that they have discard and no counterspells, it's hard to know how important it is to be able to win this turn. If the opponent has hatebears or other troublesome permanents, this makes it more urgent to try and win this turn.