Yes. I did that to Nihil yesterday, hihi.Quote:
Originally Posted by KillemallCFH
Printable View
Yes. I did that to Nihil yesterday, hihi.Quote:
Originally Posted by KillemallCFH
Ways you can consistentaly beat ad nauseam on the draw.
2 FoW hands
...
..
Chrome mox into teeg/balance??
On the play its much better because countertop and to a larger extent predict helps hurt them but it definately slightly unfavorable on the draw. On the play its probably slightly favorable.
To actualy combat it you need to be able to consistentaly drop a T2 Shut down peice, So I would play 4 MMage in the board and 3 teeg.
If you predict away the removal peice they tutor for you win. Period they have 1-2 outs in the entire deck.
I can't read half of this post, but if you think 7 anti-combo creatures are needed out of the board, you are really overestimating the power of Ad Nausam. I'm able to consistently beat AdN TES (which seems to be the most powerful AdN deck I've seen so far) without any changes made to the deck (except I added Predict back in in place of Portent), i.e. 4 Fow/4 Daze/3 CB MD and 3 Teegs (and Blue Blasts against TES) out of the board.Quote:
Originally Posted by undone
I still don't get it. How is Oblivion Ring a 2 of, but Bant Charm is bad?
Bant Charm is hands down superior at dealing with Artifacts and Creatures. What decks DON'T play Krosan Grip or Vindicate or Oblivion Rings of their own? All of these cards nullify your O. Rings. Plus Bant Charm deals with them at instant speed and at the end of your opponents turn.
Bant Charm pitches to Force of Will.
Bant Charm counters Ad Nauseum, Swords to Plowshares and Force of Will.
So by what logic is Oblivion Ring superior?
I played this in the Source Anniversary Tournament yesterday to a disappointing 4-3. Oh well. List:
4 Strand
4 Heath
1 Delta
3 Trop
3 Tundra
1 Island
1 Forest
4 Goyf
4 Goose
2 Enforcer
4 FoW
4 Daze
3 Top
3 CB
4 BS
4 Ponder
3 Predict
4 StP
2 O-Ring
2 Needle
SB
4 Blue Blasts
3 Teeg
3 Crypt
3 Grip
2 Jace Beleren
The list is pretty standard, apart from the pair of Jace in the board. In my testing, ITF was a pretty hard matchup, but Jace was a house against them. I kinda expected it to show up in decent numbers so I put some Jaces in the board.
R1 v Ashur (No Source Name) with MUC
G1: I win the die roll and play. I set up CB/Top and float O-ring/Enforcer on top to counter any thing relevant. Eventually I win.
(SB: -3 StP, +2 Jace, +1 Grip [His list was weird, and didn't play that many Artifacts/Enchantments that I saw. No Propaganda or Shackles, and he ran Sower.])
G2: He mulligans. I land a Goose and CB/Top/ He lands a B2B at some point that I basically ignore, just win with a shroud dude.
{1-0}
R2 v Roney (has a name on here, but doesn't post) with Rb Joblins
G1: I mull into a really shitty hand of 4 lands, Daze, Needle, and for some reason keep. I know he's playing gobs so I first turn Needle on Waste. I continue to draw a total of 7 fetches and scoop it up when he lands some beaters.
(SB: -3 CB, -1 Predict, +4 Blue Blasts)
G2: I get double Goyf and a Goose early and he can't win through my beats.
G3: I see a hand filled with a lot of answers but not much gas. I play cantrips into a lot more answers and just play control for a while. Eventually I land an Enforcer and win. I saw a total of 3 StPs, 3 Blue Blasts, and a couple FoWs this game. He also played a Chalice @ 2 at some point, which, had it been at 1 instead, would have really fucked me, since I won off the back of 1 mana removal.
{2-0}
R3 v Matt P. (Peter_Rotten) with Goyf Sligh.
G1: He gets an early Sylvan Library, which I let resolve. I eventually set up CB/Top and win with Goyf.
(SB: -2 Needle, -1 Predict, -1 O-Ring [I think; might've been 2 Predicts, actually], +4 Blue Blasts)
G2: This game was really close. He plays dudes, I play StPs. He plays burn, I go low in life. Eventually I'm at 1 and he has to topdeck burn. He finds a riftbolt, suspends it, and I can't find a Blue Blast on my turn (or an StP on my own Goyf would've let me live), so he wins.
G3: My notes just say "Goyf + Enforcer," so I assume I won this off the back of Goyf + Enforcer. Just a hunch, though.
[Aside: Apparently I really need to start paying attention to what I do. After the game, P_R told me that when I Pondered or Topped, I put the cards back on top in such a way that he was able to see them. I guess I kinda suck at this game.]
{3-0}
R4 v Jay P. (Afro) with Geddon Stax
G1: Yuck. What a bad matchup. He has a busted opening hand and I scoop it up when his board has about 10 permanents I can't answer, including a Smokestacks that is picking off all my land.
(SB: -3 CB, -3 StP, +3 Teeg, +3 Grip)
G2: I play a turn 1 cantrip, and a turn 2 Needle on Waste (I think). He plays a turn 2 Suppression Field against my hand of 2 fetches and a Top. What a beating. I eventually land a Teeg, which slows the game down to a crawl, and he gets a 3Sphere, Defense Grid (again, what a beating), and double Magus. He also lays a Chalice @ 1 at some point (before I got the Teeg, obviously). I have to spend all of mana keeping Teeg and Goyf alive (without Goyf, he starts beating me in with Magi). Eventually I hit a 5th land, let Goyf die, Grip the Chalice, StP a Magus, and O-ring something (over the course of a couple turns). All of this is pretty moot though, as he eventually O-Rings Teeg and plays Geddon, against which I can't do shit due to Defense Grid (and 3Sphere). I scoop it up soon after.
{3-1}
R5 v Rich (no source name, but he ends up T8ing) playing MUC
G1: He lands a B2B while I'm tapped out with 3 duals. I never recover and Morphling seals it.
(SB: -3 StP, -1 Predict, -1 O-Ring, +3 Grip, +2 Jace)
G2: Goose gets there, with the help of CB/Top. I also end up having to deal with 3 B2Bs this game.
G3: I play a first turn Needle on Shackles. Second turn Goyf meets Spell Snare. Third turn Goyf meets Spell Snare. He plays a Keg, I Grip. He plays another Keg, I Grip. I get an Enforcer to pair up with my Goyf and get him down on life. He lands a Morphling. I make what might've been a match-losing play mistake here, although assuming optimal play from my opponent, it wouldn't have mattered. He has Morhpling and I have Enforcer and Goyf, but can only swing with one (multiple Propagandas). I also have a Needle in my hand. Instead of playing Needle naming Morphling beforehand, I swing with Enforcer, and he blocks with a -2/7 Flying Morphling. Had I played Needle first, he might not have responded and I would've been able to get in there with Enforcer for 6, which would've won me the game, since he stabilized at 2. Anyways, he plays another Powder Keg on his turn. I try to O-Ring, he has a Counterspell (I think my hand at this point is FoW + Land). He blows Keg @ 1 and wipes my Needles. He also plays a B2B at some point (which is his 2nd or 3rd one; I know I FoWed at least one earlier in the game). I then swing with Goyf and force him to block with and let die his Morphling. Next turn he topdecks the Shackles, steals my Enforcer, and then topdecks Powder Keg #4 to kill Goyf, which leaves me without any way of winning.
[tl;dr version: He draws lots of Powder Kegs and B2Bs, I make a potentially match-losing mistake.]
{3-2}
R6 v Jeff (no source name) with Merfolk
G1: I'm tired, mad about last match, and playing awfully at this point. He plays lots of little island-walkers and I lose.
{SB: Nothing!}
G2: He islandwalks. I lose.
{3-3}
R7 v I-stopped-taking-notes-and-didn't-write-down-his-name playing W/B Bomberman
G1: He goes first turn Swamp, Sunbeam Spellbomb and I am thoroughly confused. I beat him with green dudes and FoW a Salvagers.
(SB: -2 ???, +2 Crypt)
G2: I play a Crypt. I beat him down or something. He eventually Tendrils for 10. I beat him down some more and win.
{4-3}
Stax is a really tough matchup and MUC is kinda iffy. The MUC player I lost to countered all my CBs and saw multiple B2Bs every game. I kinda expected a lot of Ad Nauseam, and was disappointed to not run into any of it, since that was my primary reason for choosing Thresh. I was kicking myself against MUC for not running a basic plains, but I feel uncomfortable going down to only 15 blue sources. In the future I might run a second basic Island, as having multiple lands that untap through B2B is really important in that MU.
That came out kinda long for a mini-report. Oh well.
@Hammer: Bant Charm doesn't deal with CB, Survival, as well as random white enchantments that cause you a lot of trouble (Humility, Confinement, Moat, Runed Halo). It is also really hard on the manabase when you're under B2B/Moon/Waste-lock. Not being able to deal with enchantments is a huge problem with Bant Charm, and for basically that reason alone, I'm sticking with O-Ring. Being able to hit Instants is moot, because it requires you to leave 3 mana open. Which is very seldom going to happen when facing any of the cards you named.
And guess what? Bant Charm can't, ROFL. It also does shit about Counterbalance and Humility and Survival and Pernicious Deed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Hammer
By what logic is this a valid argument when... Negate would fulfill the same criterias? That you can pitch a certain card is - and I saw that in many discussions now - the last "emergency excuse" to justify a card. But in a deck like Threshold where you have such a overwhelming cardquality, it can be neglected whether 2 cards more or less pitch to Force of Will.Quote:
Bant Charm pitches to Force of Will.
Bant Charm counters Ad Nauseum, Swords to Plowshares and Force of Will.
So by what logic is Oblivion Ring superior?
Look the fact that it can't hit enchantments is a big deal, so if enchantments are a big part of the reason you're playing O. Ring, then sure, that's a valid reason to stick with O. Ring.
But the second part of your argument is the biggest load of crap I've heard all day.
Being an instant, being blue and being able to counter instants are all very strong advantages in legacy.
If you're seriously naive enough to argue that they're not relevent, I have a bridge I want to sell you.
Being able to counter one specific spell type for THREE MANA is basically useless in everything but the control matchup, where it might actually come into play. We don't play a card that can counter any spell for 2; why the fuck would we play a card that can counter only one card type for more mana?Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Hammer
Yes, I know that is only one of its functions, but you are trying to make it seem like that part of the card is in any way relevant, which, frankly, it isn't.
Countering instants with Bant is utterly useless huh :confused:Quote:
Originally Posted by KillemallCFH
You may want to tell that to my opponent yesterday whose StP I countered when my Goyf was swinging in for lethal damage.
Or my opponent yesterday whose FoW I countered.
Hell, half this page is devoted to a discussion of whether we have enough ways to stop the opponent's second attempt to resolve Ad Nauseum.
I'm not saying that Bant should be in the deck.
But arguing that being playable at instant speed, or being able to counter instants are somehow irrelevent is utterly retarded.
Seriously, just play damned Counterspell in those slots. Fuck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Hammer
Maybe I'm just stupid but I don't see why it's better to have to spend all three of your mana types (including your off color) to counter one type of spell when you can counter them all for 2 of your dominant color. (Bant Charm vs. Counterspell). I can see Bant's utility and flexibility as after-the-fact removal of critters and artifacts, but if you are primarily using it as a counter why not increase that card slot's utility as a counter while reducing its mana cost?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Hammer
Enchantments are in fact the reason why I'd always play Ring over Bant Charm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Captain Hammer
Ok. Counterspell anyone? I played Disrupting Shoal pre-Counterbalance just by the way. They both do the same thing you are arguing for.Quote:
But the second part of your argument is the biggest load of crap I've heard all day.
Being an instant, being blue and being able to counter instants are all very strong advantages in legacy.
The Hatfields were playing Counterspell, too. 2 of them.
I just don't have the drive to hype and include a new card into a deck to replace it's established cardchoices which have already been elaborated in mutiple discussions before.Quote:
If you're seriously naive enough to argue that they're not relevent, I have a bridge I want to sell you.
Who the hell said I'm using Bant Charm primarily as a Counterspell.
Why the fuck would you guys even make up some idiotic crap about how I don't use Bant Charm to deal with problem creatures and artifacts.
That's the whole fucking point, that I can use Bant for whatever purpose suits me best for that specific situation. If what I need to do is get rid of a Goyf, that's what I do. If I need it to counter a Swords, then that's what I do instead.
Like I said, if you find yourself O. Ringing away enchantments often, then sure, play that instead.
But all this bullshit about how Counterspell is identical to Bant Charm is pissing me off.
Take it easy there. No need to get so cranky
-PR
Why so aggressive? Can't make your point?
On the discussion:
Oblivion Ring is much better at doing what Bant Charm does with its 2 first effects. If you aren't siding Ring out for something like Krosan Grip or Trygon Predator to deal exclusively with artifacts and enchantments, there's something really wrong going on, unless you actually need that much removal count for those types. That said, Oblivion Ring is a monster removal for game 1. On games 2 and 3 your opponent will bring hate for CB which splashes over Ring. Know what? Deal with that or simply side Ring out for some actual removal.
Regarding the second and third effects, they are simply too weak or too narrow and versatility won't compensate that. We don't play Piracy Charm because every one of its effects suck. We won't play Bant Charm for the same reason. On top of things, Bant Charm costs 3 colored and you can't afford that in a format that sees mana base disruption everywhere.
Quoting IBA, versatily rarely trumps raw power. Oblivion Ring is powerful and versatile. Bant Charm is versatile and mediocre.
I would argue that at instant speed, Bant Charm is actually a more powerful effect than O. Ring.
But, meh, let's just drop this argument okay. We're just going in circles. Run what you want.
I'm not sure where you're getting this from. Both of them are versatile and mediocre. Removal for three mana is inherently pretty bad in a format where the threats cost two. One of them can hit enchantments, the other is an instant and can counter instants. If you care about enchantments, play Ring, if you don't, play Charm. That said, I think the ideal number of either of them to play in this deck is zero.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jaiminho
...and that said, we can't always get what we want. It would be really great not to have to use crappy removal spells for three mana, but Counterbalance exists and many people play it. That's the only reason Oblivion Ring was ever included in the deck. So while Ring and Charm are pretty comparable as cards (they both suck), one of them does what this deck needs and the other one doesn't. So I wouldn't play Bant Charm either -- but not for the reasons you stated.
EDIT -- Better question, is Oblivion Ring better than Engineered Explosives?
Also note that if your meta permits, Krosan Grip is much better than O-Ring (which is much better than Bant Charm).Quote:
Originally Posted by Illissius
EE is more mana intensive (especially to reliably kill CB, it takes 5 mana [3 to play it, so it dodges CB, 2 to activate]), kills your own CB/Goyf, and (minor point) isn't a 3cc card for counterbalance. All those considered, I've always been more happy with O-Ring.Quote:
EDIT -- Better question, is Oblivion Ring better than Engineered Explosives?
I said Oblivion Ring is powerful in contrast to Charm being mediocre, not that it was comparable to something like STP or FOW. It's main reason to be in the deck is to fight CB, but those slots are not occupied by Grip simply because Ring, while powerful (ok, let me restate: powerful enough), deals with other stuff. I also said that's game 1. On game 2, get some real removal out of the board and stick them in place of Ring. EE is obviously a much more powerful card, but it can't do everything for you, might remove some of your own stuff and is slower than Ring most of the times, but is also able to endure more severe mana disruption.Quote:
Originally Posted by Illissius
Rafiq revisited:
So, now that I've played around a bit with Rafiq here's what I've noticed:
He turns Enforcer into a 7/7, flying, problack, doublestriking, 2turn clock of death.
He turns Mongoose into a 4/4 double striking Bear-Goose killer that trades with an opposing Enforcer/Goyf (UG2 killed for G).
He breaks the synergy of an opposing Goyf. (Your 5/6 Goyf becomes a 6/7 first striker vs his 5/6 Goyf)
He beats some ass all by himself.
Even if he lasts only one turn you can easily get 7-8 extra damage out of an attack by playing him... and for only 4 mana.
General misconception:
You compare a board of "Rafiq + anything else" to a board of "just anything else".
Ofc having Rafiq + Mongoose is better than just mongoose... that's pretty obvious.
But is it still better than Enforcer + Mongoose?
"Rafiq + goyf" > "Enforcer + goyf" ?
"Rafiq + Enforcer" > "2x Enforcer" ?
"Rafiq + nothing" > "Enforcer" ?
"2x Rafiq" > "2x Enforcer" ?
I think I made my point clear.
Enforcer is better in almost any situation, imho.