[Deck] TES - The EPIC Storm

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piceli89

here's the list i'm trying atm. i'm finding myself very comfortable with it, despites it may seem a bit "odd " for some inclusions and maindeck tunings.
Here we go:

// Deck file for Magic Workstation (http://www.magicworkstation.com)

// Lands
4 [WL] Gemstone Mine
4 [AN] City of Brass
2 [MR] Glimmervoid
1 [CHK] Forbidden Orchard

// Spells
2 [ALA] Ad Nauseam
1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
4 [JU] Burning Wish
4 [MI] Mystical Tutor
2 [TO] Cabal Ritual
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
4 [B] Dark Ritual
4 [CS] Rite of Flame
2 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
4 [MR] Chrome Mox
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
4 [US] Duress
2 [PS] Orim's Chant
4 [CST] Brainstorm
2 [LRW] Ponder
1 [TSP] Empty the Warrens
1 [DS] Echoing Truth

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
SB: 1 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
SB: 3 [TSP] Empty the Warrens
SB: 1 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
SB: 3 [GP] Shattering Spree
SB: 1 [LRW] Thoughtseize
SB: 1 [IA] Pyroclasm
SB: 1 [CON] Telemin Performance
SB: 1 [PS] Hull Breach
SB: 2 [SC] Xantid Swarm


So, basically, i found Infernal tutor in 4 copies to be most of the time redundant and not that really useful or optimal, so i cut it to 2 copies ( which seems to be the latest tendency among the TES players, btw) in order to fit the 3rd and the 4th mystical. I know, this inclusion may suggest this deck isn't what was used to be called " TES " one time, but i found mystical to be so useful and versatile ( and synergic with Led-nauseam upkeep tricks) that i couldn't not power up the full set. That card grabs the entire deck and solves the most problematic situations, and allows to play mana untapped adapting to the board situation, period.
Since Infernal tutor was pretty gone, i didn't find a reasonable choice to still keep IGG maindeck, also because i found it to be pretty underwhelming these last times among a sea of snares and fows which can be recurred during the loop by the oppo, and substitued it with a singleton copy of EtW, which seems the best way to achieve a quick victory since g1 agaisnt slow-controllish decks packing Cb+Top, where Ad Nauseam is less likely to get resolves in a quick time. Moreover, the fact that they expect nauseam after some rituals and instead they get 8-10 gobs on their teeth is a winning choice, most of the times.. unless they drop their e.e., of course.
The cut of IGG may be referred also to another choice: in the protections package, i swapped the number of duresses for the chants , and found it to be a good decision. Of course, the duresses are in colour, and other advantagaes other people have already explained. The only fault Duress shows is that, most of the times, it will be brainstormed in response, and, most of all, i found a little weaknes since it doesn't prevent the opponent from cashing in the top and play that force he had the top3s, fucking us hard (usually on the key spell). Btw, has anyone noticed this thing, which seems to be really hurting the comboing mechanic?

For maindeck bouncer, i opted for truth instead of Chain, since Chain sucks against chalice @1 or multiple chalices, and against Cb too, most of the times. It never happened, btw, that i did the "bounce moxes " trick.
Last but not least, Sb packs the ultra new-tech played also by Kolowith durng the Gp chicago, the Alara'd Telemin Preformance, which is usually an automatic gg against landstill (unless he plays eternal dragons, which are likely to be sided out g2 to make room for other blue cards to be pitched to FoW, however) or against storm combo mirror. Seems kinda good.
Or sexy, at least.
The glimmervoids have been really nice for me, and i was never hurt hat much by their drawbacks. And forbidden orchard for the long run WAY sucks, but 1 -ofs is acceptable.
Ah, i also tried to squeeze the "5 fetches + 1 dual of each color+ 4 gemstones" configuration, but effectively, not being able to Orim the opponent even in their upkeep because you have a badland/volcanic/sea is very, very hurting. Rainbow lands 4 life, even if they don't provide shuffle effects ( for that, 4 tutors+2 ponders is quite enough).

---

I couldn't agree with this post more than if I had wrote it myself, Infernal Tutor and Mystical Tutor are the two cards fighting for the same slots in this deck, and I believe Mystical Tutor > Infernal Tutor because it finds you the cards you need to win instead of just being a kill condition. Even 2 Infernal Tutors aren't worth running, you're better off running 4 Ad Nauseam to have a less LED dependent threat and to have more Brainstorm/Ponder -> Ad Nauseam turn 3 wins.

I really, really don't understand why you guys are cutting Ponder for sub-optimal BS like Cabal Ritual #2, MD Empty the Warrens and MD Bounce, because 8 cantrips has been nothing but the nutz and you really need them to make the post Ad Nauseam into Mystical Tutor + Cantrip -> Tendrils of Agony consistent.

Duressing into Brainstorm doesn't seem to be much of a problem for me, but I usually Duress off of a Dark Ritual on the combo turn instead of Duressing before the combo turn. Yeah, Top sucks if it's active, but that's usually a big if in my experience.

Idea:
vs counterbalance :
playing proactive cards like Druid Lyrist by 1cc and before c.b lands the game (4 copies in side).
this is something I've thoutgh and I'll test
another plan is playing the 8 kind of blasts.
Opinions?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

Idea:
vs counterbalance :
playing proactive cards like Druid Lyrist by 1cc and before c.b lands the game (4 copies in side).
this is something I've thoutgh and I'll test
another plan is playing the 8 kind of blasts.
Opinions?

---

lyrist seems really bad here as you need to land it a least a turn before you combo which gives them time to just play another CB or kill the lyrist.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pelikanudo

Idea:
vs counterbalance :
playing proactive cards like Druid Lyrist by 1cc and before c.b lands the game (4 copies in side).
this is something I've thoutgh and I'll test
another plan is playing the 8 kind of blasts.
Opinions?

---

Creature based Enchantment removal is just worse than Vexing Shusher, I use to use the 8 blast plan, but you may as well cut Infernal Tutor and Lion's Eye Diamond at that rate.

Just board in more discard, IMO.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BreathWeapon

I couldn't agree with this post more than if I had wrote it myself, Infernal Tutor and Mystical Tutor are the two cards fighting for the same slots in this deck, and I believe Mystical Tutor > Infernal Tutor because it finds you the cards you need to win instead of just being a kill condition. Even 2 Infernal Tutors aren't worth running, you're better off running 4 Ad Nauseam to have a less LED dependent threat and to have more Brainstorm/Ponder -> Ad Nauseam turn 3 wins.

I really, really don't understand why you guys are cutting Ponder for sub-optimal BS like Cabal Ritual #2, MD Empty the Warrens and MD Bounce, because 8 cantrips has been nothing but the nutz and you really need them to make the post Ad Nauseam into Mystical Tutor + Cantrip -> Tendrils of Agony consistent.

Duressing into Brainstorm doesn't seem to be much of a problem for me, but I usually Duress off of a Dark Ritual on the combo turn instead of Duressing before the combo turn. Yeah, Top sucks if it's active, but that's usually a big if in my experience.

---

The point is that every (decent) storm combo deck should run at least 1 bounce spell to prevent chalice at 0-1 and trinisphere (and counterbalance too, at this point) to give you an instant autoloss. I can see the point of your argument in the fact that running more pure "combo " pieces increases the avg speed of this deck slightly more, but you can have ritual, ritual , duress, duress, land,orim and mystical in your hand, but it won't be useful to you as long as the opponent on the start will throw to you a chalice@1. Moreover, turn 1 trinisphere- and, sometimes, moon effects- throws this deck into despair.
Another point, which seems to be a paradox for the "speed aim" you're searching: if we run the full set of ponders, i think we rely too much on playing in our turn , tapping us out and not being capable to fit the game ( i already said that). But that's just the most little point: if we cut cards like IT ( which sucks in multiples if shows up early in hand , but can pull some random victories by acting like a demonic tutor and grabbing nauseam or whichever finisher we play) to increase the qty of ponders, we are acting like changing completely TES to a crappy ANT, without fetches and surely with more mana problems ( due to the four-colored structure) and , perhaps, dead cards in hand too. I think that this deck should never lose some of its power, which derives from the capacity to pull fast victories having immediately access to the cards which actually can grab your finish spell. I mean, we can also cut completely IT for ponder, but then..what ? We'd pass lots of turn manipulating between BS, ponder and mysticals, losing what makes this deck strong: the ability to play the aggressor role, going off as fast as we can with lightning kills. I increased the numer of ponders and mystical tutors in my list rather than Bryant's one to include some shuffle effects and bettering a bit the thinning /filtering capacity of the deck, but this doesn't mean i'm going to play like ANT which spends usually the first two-three turns sculpting the perfect hand, cleaning the dead cards with the fetches ( something we WON'T be able to do with this deck instead, never) or carrying on cantripping.
If we'd going to play 12 cantrippers, cut IT and cut also bouncers, it would be a super slowish-setup crappy version of TES, or an underpowered version of ANT even more.
And 4 Nauseam are really too suicidal, i played 3-ofs and always revealed 1-2 at least in the process, hurting myself a lot. Counting that an hypothetical list packing 3 Nauseam would have 3 5cc and 2 4 cc, it may seriously be a problem 1) if we can't cast it that early, 2) if the opponent plays an aggro deck which lowers our lives fastly (even burn at this point matters, playing the version with 4 duresses and 2 orims), 3) if we flip 2 of these babies, at least.

Finally, on the Alt Maindeck kill given by EtW, i must say it's not that overwhelming if we cast it after turn 2, since i always found that having on avg 8 goblins is a thing which can be easily handled by the modern -format aggro controls playing good P/T ratio'd critters (trygons,goyf, manlands, merfolks, even slivers..), while control will surely have a mass removal. It always happens. And against combo, well.. they prevent it just accelerating to go off. The point, sadly, is that the more resource (cards) you put into EtW, the more powerful will be, but, differently from ToA which is a sure win, EtW actually isn't, and the lack of cards in the case the opponent manages to stop goblins is so hurting that difficultly the TES player will be able to recover in that 3-4 turns after. So, it's always a "risky" choice.
But it's unexpected as g1 surprise, and , if cast early, it's quite unstoppable, so i'm still reluctant in cutting it.

Running bounce to prevent Chalice of the Void and Trinisphere is non-sensical, because if Chalice of the Void resolves then you can't Mystical Tutor for your bounce spell, and if Trinisphere resolves you may as well scoop. Burning Wish deals with random Chalice of the Void, not Mystical Tutor, so you're better off reducing your dead cards than you are adding a dead card for scenarios where the card isn't even relevant.

8 Cantrips does not turn TES into ANT, 8 Cantrips turns Lion's Eye Diamond into Black Lotus for either turn 2 wins or protected turn 3 wins. On the play, you have at least one turn to set up, and on the draw you'll either need it to find disruption or you'll SB it out for disruption. 4 Ad Nauseam is fine, I've won more games from resolving Ad Nauseam than I've lost games from revealing Ad Nauseam ... it's the Dark Confidant + Force of Will = bad neurosis all over again (cut ETW tho').

Cutting Infernal Tutor and adding Mystical Tutor doesn't turn the deck into a hybrid of TES and AnT, you have to treat Mystical Tutor based TES as its own deck and test it objectively.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BreathWeapon

Running bounce to prevent Chalice of the Void and Trinisphere is non-sensical, because if Chalice of the Void resolves then you can't Mystical Tutor for your bounce spell, and if Trinisphere resolves you may as well scoop. Burning Wish deals with random Chalice of the Void, not Mystical Tutor, so you're better off reducing your dead cards than you are adding a dead card for scenarios where the card isn't even relevant.

8 Cantrips does not turn TES into ANT, 8 Cantrips turns Lion's Eye Diamond into Black Lotus for either turn 2 wins or protected turn 3 wins. On the play, you have at least one turn to set up, and on the draw you'll either need it to find disruption or you'll SB it out for disruption. 4 Ad Nauseam is fine, I've won more games from resolving Ad Nauseam than I've lost games from revealing Ad Nauseam ... it's the Dark Confidant + Force of Will = bad neurosis all over again (cut ETW tho').

Cutting Infernal Tutor and adding Mystical Tutor doesn't turn the deck into a hybrid of TES and AnT, you have to treat Mystical Tutor based TES as its own deck and test it objectively.

---

Ok i followed your advices and finally came to this list, which turns out to be slightly slower but more consistent.

// Lands
4 [WL] Gemstone Mine
4 [AN] City of Brass
2 [MR] Glimmervoid
1 [CHK] Forbidden Orchard

// Spells
3 [ALA] Ad Nauseam
1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
4 [JU] Burning Wish
4 [MI] Mystical Tutor
2 [TO] Cabal Ritual
4 [TE] Lotus Petal
4 [B] Dark Ritual
4 [CS] Rite of Flame
1 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
4 [MR] Chrome Mox
4 [MI] Lion's Eye Diamond
4 [US] Duress
2 [PS] Orim's Chant
4 [CST] Brainstorm
4 [LRW] Ponder

// Sideboard
SB: 1 [SC] Tendrils of Agony
SB: 1 [DIS] Infernal Tutor
SB: 4 [TSP] Empty the Warrens
SB: 1 [US] Ill-Gotten Gains
SB: 3 [GP] Shattering Spree
SB: 1 [LRW] Thoughtseize
SB: 1 [IA] Pyroclasm
SB: 3 [IA] Pyroblast

Now, i included the full sets of the best cantrippers/tutors, and found comfortable, even if still i can't accept having lost a MD bouncer, which was one of the few hopes againts chalice aggro & prison decks.
However..I still packed a singleton IT because i know that it is nuts sometimes, despites its weakesses , and put it instead of 1 Nauseam. You 'll have to be very lucky, because in goldfishing with 4 nauseams i always revealed AT LEAST 2 of thems, draining me 10 lives. Still with 3 ofs i don't feel my head safe when flipping, but i think it's an acceptable danger for being able to find with higher probability.
Now, i still packed 2x cabal rituals too, perhaps because i was convinced that "more cantrips = more threshold-hitting percentage", and i really WANTED this deck to have at least 10 spell- mana accelerants, but now i feel it's possible i can cut it ( perhaps). Suggestions about that slot? Don't tell me EtW or IGG, the mana avg cost is already enough high. Perhaps i could recover the bouncer in that slot, yuk.

On the sideboard, i am convinced too about the possibility to switch nauseam and leds and wishes for some EtW, and whatever else? Pyroblasts? Did anyone test how a LEDless list with EtW w/3-4 Pyroblasts as main kill can perform against CB tops?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piceli89

Did anyone test how a LEDless list with EtW w/3-4 Pyroblasts as main kill can perform against CB tops?

---

What's up with the "LEDless" lately? It's a discussion in the ANT thread, there is a Ichorid thread for it and now TES? Please let's not have the discussion here, it's impossible to play TES without LED. It's the strongest card in the deck!

@Piceli89
You said that your list is slightly slower, and I see it also packs less protection than usual decklists. That's not what TES want to do.

And forgot about being LEDless. Even with only 1 Infernal, you still have 4 mysticals and a lot of cantrips to make it a Black Lotus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenOne

@Piceli89
You said that your list is slightly slower, and I see it also packs less protection than usual decklists. That's not what TES want to do.

And forgot about being LEDless. Even with only 1 Infernal, you still have 4 mysticals and a lot of cantrips to make it a Black Lotus.

---

No, with the "LEDless" issue i referred to someone who said that in g2 boards out LEDs and wishes to add EtW in 3-4 ofs and pyroblasts.. i wouldn't EVER cut LED from the maindeck list. Apologizes for miswriting.
And, GreenOne: i wanted this deck to have somehow a bit more consistency in order to pull off the "combo " (which is, at this point, mainly to cast AN) on turn 2-3 , always trying to dig for a protection spell before. I know it may seem kinda slow- and surely it is than the traditional TES build, but this decklist has been designed to perform slightly better against blue-based decks (which are the ones this deck has problems facing being a combo, i'd never have problems beating zoo or goblins) with a higher number of cantrips which enable more CQ. and Card selection.
I'm still reluctant too in cutting down IT to 1 copy since, as i said, its ability to Demonic Tutor a card is always very powerful, but i think it could efinitely work.
About the procection package issue: the TES lists usually run 6 pieces of protection, both 4 chants/2 duresses or vice versa, and so mine does. What did you mean?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piceli89

About the procection package issue: the TES lists usually run 6 pieces of protection, both 4 chants/2 duresses or vice versa, and so mine does. What did you mean?

---

Last Bryant list plays 4 Chants+3 Duresses+1 Chain of Vapor. If chain of vapor doesn't suit you you could play 4 chants and 4 duresses. It's 2 protection spells more.

Also, remember that the difference between comboing turn 2 or 3 is huge, cause on the play you're actually racing CounterBalance if comboing on turn 2.

This is total speculation.. But, does anyone think that with Wizards taking away mana burn that Lion's Eye Diamond will see the ban list again?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperBean

This is total speculation.. But, does anyone think that with Wizards taking away mana burn that Lion's Eye Diamond will see the ban list again?

---

Wait...they are taking out mana burn? What? I haven't heard of that before.

But I agree that LED is a key card in this deck, and I really don't want it seeing the banhammer.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenOne

Last Bryant list plays 4 Chants+3 Duresses+1 Chain of Vapor. If chain of vapor doesn't suit you you could play 4 chants and 4 duresses. It's 2 protection spells more.

Also, remember that the difference between comboing turn 2 or 3 is huge, cause on the play you're actually racing CounterBalance if comboing on turn 2.

---

I find this statement to be somehow contradictory, before this you told me that my list was way too slow, and now you're advicing to pack more protection spells, which may show up in multiple copies in initial hands causing me to waste some turns not having the right cards with which to go off. I can try a 7 -protection slots , but i think 8 is pure overkill. Maybe in a meta where you're expecting counterbalance.dec at least 3 or 4 matches, but not even ANT plays 8 protection spells.

For the Mana Burn issue: really dunno, but i think this feature is not that good reason to ban LED. There are seriously things way more broken in legacy, which should deserve a way more careful eye ( you know what i'm talking about..).
Oh, i forgot, but Wizards doesn't care about legacy. Sorry.

Apparently it was initially brought up with the release of Magic: 2010

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Piceli89

I find this statement to be somehow contradictory, before this you told me that my list was way too slow, and now you're advicing to pack more protection spells, which may show up in multiple copies in initial hands causing me to waste some turns not having the right cards with which to go off. I can try a 7 -protection slots , but i think 8 is pure overkill. Maybe in a meta where you're expecting counterbalance.dec at least 3 or 4 matches, but not even ANT plays 8 protection spells.

---

Well, to be fair, YOU said that the list was a bit slower (I just took it as data to work on), and I noticed it was packing 1-2 protection spells less than Bryant's latest list. Doesn't seem contraditory to just ask why: it's not like you're trading speed for protection. It's just less protection and less speed for more consistency.
Is that gain in consistency worth it?

I do believe TES is a combo deck wit a fundamental turn of 2. So you either want to cast a Duress or cantrip or Mystical on turn 1 to win on turn 2.
Playing a full set of Brainstorm, Ponders and Mysticals opens you to opening hands with 2 or more cantrips/Mysticals (50%) or 3 or more cantrips/mysticals (20%). So basically you have to waste your first turns playing cantrips that are more likely to find other cantrips, instead of winning.

The deck just needs a number of cantrips that gives you a good number of opening plays without having multiple cantrips (and so less gas/protection/tutors) in opening hand.
Double Mystical tutor is also not great. I think the deck can support 3, but 4 maybe a bit too much.

Also, are the rainbow lands problematic with a good amount of manipulation to play?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GreenOne

Well, to be fair, YOU said that the list was a bit slower (I just took it as data to work on), and I noticed it was packing 1-2 protection spells less than Bryant's latest list. Doesn't seem contraditory to just ask why: it's not like you're trading speed for protection. It's just less protection and less speed for more consistency.
Is that gain in consistency worth it?

I do believe TES is a combo deck wit a fundamental turn of 2. So you either want to cast a Duress or cantrip or Mystical on turn 1 to win on turn 2.
Playing a full set of Brainstorm, Ponders and Mysticals opens you to opening hands with 2 or more cantrips/Mysticals (50%) or 3 or more cantrips/mysticals (20%). So basically you have to waste your first turns playing cantrips that are more likely to find other cantrips, instead of winning.

The deck just needs a number of cantrips that gives you a good number of opening plays without having multiple cantrips (and so less gas/protection/tutors) in opening hand.
Double Mystical tutor is also not great. I think the deck can support 3, but 4 maybe a bit too much.

Also, are the rainbow lands problematic with a good amount of manipulation to play?

---

I would NEVER, after testing, cut mystical tutors to 3. They just grab everything, being so useful you can't renounce to them. Rarely it happened that i had double mystical in my hand, and the sinergy with LED and AN gives this deck the crazy turn2 Nausea it sometimes misses.
What i'm finding more and more, instead, is that Burning wish in multiple copies do really suck. And if i open a hand with double BW, i'm likely to have a very slow hand which can be mulliganed as well. I'm even pondering to cut it down to 3, because, although being so versatile , they depend a lot on LeD to act their best function ( Wishing a thoughtseize may be a good player, but it loses time), very similarly to IT.
I don't know if the 12 cantrips issue is a good point, because both brainstorm and ponder can dig for three cards, and in case we draw other cantrips while not needed, we can just shuffle them back or put them on bottom and filter the "right " cards. While, for example, in a deck packing 4 ITs and 4 Wishes, the percentage of opening with 2-3 of thems is pretty high, and they are absolutely slow and redudndant if put together. A well -sequenced chain of Brainstorms and Mystical tutors not only sculpts the hand, but also provides the right cards with a cheaper cost and also in instant speed, which is awesome.

And playing 4 Mysticals + 4 LEDs with Nauseam, btw, ensures an autowin against discard-decks, so I would really keep Mystical to the full set, it's just too good not to be maximized even in TESesque lists.
About the speed of the deck, my list can pull turns 2 kills, but it's safier to go off turn 3 with protection usually. However, these are pure theorical goldfishes-datas, since I'm NOT gonna go for the all in on turn 2 against a deck i know packs blue when i know even a single daze/snare can fuck me hard. I understand the concept that this deck was built for pure speed and flashing storm enabling, but sometimes waiting just 1-2 turns more sculptng a decent hand is more clever than recklessly drop all the cards and get the counter on your teeth.

EDIT: Chrome mox. Vital to get free mana after AN, but really frustrating if we draw 2 in the opening hand. Has anyone tested a configuration with 3 copies? How did it was ?

Personally, I was never a fan of Mystical Tutor in the deck from the beginning I thought it was more of a Fetchland Tendrils thing. I always thought that Infernal Tutor was enough for the deck but now I couldn't be a bigger fan of Mystical. I'm currently using this list with 4x Mystical Tutors:

Mainboard:

Artifacts:
4x Lotus Petal
4x Lion's Eye Diamond
2x Chrome Mox

Instants:
4x Mystical Tutor
4x Brainstorm
4x Orim's Chant
4x Dark Ritual
2x Cabal Ritual
2x Ad Nauseam
1x Chain of Vapor

Sorcery's:
4x Burning Wish
4x Ponder
4x Rite of Flame
2x Infernal Tutor
2x Duress
1x Tendrils of Agony

Lands:
4x City of Brass
4x Gemstone Mine
2x Underground Sea
2x Badlands



Sideboard:
1x Tendrils of Agony
1x Empty the Warrens
1x Grapeshot
1x Ill-Gotten Gains
1x Diminishing Returns
1x Vindicate
1x Hull Breach
1x Echoing Truth
1x Pyroblast
2x Duress
2x Shattering Spree
2x Red Elemental Blast

Edit: @Piceli89 - As you can see I'm only using 2x Chrome Mox in my deck, and I think I've concluded that as the right number for the deck, at least in my opinion.. I always hate seeing it in my opening hand, but very useful post ADN. I've never had any kind of a problem going off, or felt like the deck was clunky because cutting it. If anything making room for Ponder #4 has helped me quite a bit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SuperBean

This is total speculation.. But, does anyone think that with Wizards taking away mana burn that Lion's Eye Diamond will see the ban list again?

---

Why would they ?

It's not like that makes the card more abusable than it is.

Also, mana burn from LED means you've failed to do whatever you wanted. Which means you discarded your hand for nothing. At this point, the ramifications of taking 0 rather than up to 3 mana burn seem pretty much irrelevant.

Seems to me like people just keep shifting further away from TES and more toward ANT despite what they are saying.
IMO putting more and more dependency on AdN is a bad idea. One of the biggest strengths of TES was winning with either IGG, AdN, D. Returns or ETW.
Giving up that versatility for better AdN's seems like ANT territory.
Just my 2 cents but TES is meant to be fast and have some protection. Cutting ITs and adding Mystical just hurts that