it was with a silence.
Drinking does not help naming correct cards.
Spellcheck helps typing.
ps - go phillies
Printable View
it was with a silence.
Drinking does not help naming correct cards.
Spellcheck helps typing.
ps - go phillies
If you play xantid swarm, then you absolutely have a lot more game against LoS than lists that don't (aka mine and most other TES players'), and I wouldn't recommend Silence over Chant. I still insist that silence is better than chant if you run a list sans boardable non-targeted protection.Quote:
Originally Posted by Bryant Cook
Pyroblast is pretty useless against LoS-protected-counterspells unless you were planning on comboing without using LED, or casting ETW. That being said, ETW is a perfectly good way to get around LoS, but it's not nearly as desirable of a finish as Tendrils. EtW is the easiest finish we have to disrupt both before and after casting it, unless you have it in your hand already, and all decks that have any goblin token hate are going to have it the same games (2 & 3) that LoS is on the table.
emidln's list is quite interesting. The focus on Ad Nauseam reminds me of Vintage ANT decks with 4 Ad Nauseam and 3 Tendrils of Agony which are consistent killing machines.
As far as I call tell emidln is pulling the kill to the earlier possible turn and the only engine that can consistently do that is Ad Nauseam. To do this the deck must be designed with that in mind hence the Mox Diamond, less reliance on IT and disruption. If I can launch AdN earlier in the game I'll have more life to spend so the damage for flipping a 5c is reasonable. And IT -> AdN is pretty frequent so which not just add more AdN?
His version is most likely faster but more prone suicides. Am I willing to live with more suicides if I can get faster kills?
This is divergent development and I for one like it, maybe emidln is on to something. I'll give it a go in the coming week though personally I've been using focusing less on AdN by putting IGG maindeck as the default maindeck go to engine (traumas of AdN suicides with 20 and 18 life)
I think people just refuse to stop with Ad Nauseam for no real reason. Once you're at five or six, you're usually missing either a mana or a business spell. If you're short on mana, you can just pass the turn and kill them next turn if they're not threatening lethal. Not vs red decks, obviously, but you can just draw twelve cards from Ad Nauseam and usually be in a good spot.Quote:
(traumas of AdN suicides with 20 and 18 life)
I think people also forget you can Ritual -> Ad Nauseam on your opponent's end step. I know I usually forgot about that when playing this deck. As for Emidln's variation, I think it's an interesting take. I don't think it would work well for me though, as I have a tendency for awful AN flips - to the point where I maindeck IGG and focus on that as an engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by frogboy
If I can AdN at opponent's end step I can also avoid passing my turn, letting the opponent untap and do his business by killing him on the stop. I only AdN at opponent's end step if playing vs control having Orim's Chant and other business.
I've also pushed IGG main to have another engine vs aggressive decks that place me in low life points. So far it has been working well.
My changes from Bryant's maindeck:
-1 fetchland
-1 EtW
+1 City of Brass
+1 IGG
My metagame consist of Affinity (loads), Merfolk, RDW and Counterbalance. So I've also changed the sideboard:
+1 Meltdown
+1 Chain of Vapour
-1 Echoing Truth
-1 Pyroblast
This allows for more consistent casting of Orim's Chant, added versatility with Chain of Vapour while decreasing cost (1U to U) and is a preemptive move vs. some of the hate I'm seeing (Ethersworn Cannonist, Chalice of the Void and Thorn of Amethyst).
So far I hadn't have problems with Mindbreak Trap thanks to Orim's Chant and Duress.
Been playing the deck for 2 months now and am pretty happy with it.
I think spree is always better than meltdown...Quote:
Originally Posted by tangram
That really depends on whether you trust that you can produce enough red mana. In this deck, you generally can, but that does not mean one is strictly better than the other by any means.Quote:
Originally Posted by ComboMan
I had 1x Shattering Spree and 1x Meltodwn split on the last tourney. And the only situation where I wished for artifact removal I went for Meltdown. For 2R I managed to wipe my opponent board with the exception of a Disciple of the Vault and win shortly after. If I had used Shattering Spree it would also probably do the job.
But I honestly prefer to split if possible as Shattering Spree can hog red mana.
Spree is generally better than Meltdown. Even vs. Affinity. Wiping their board is nice, but you usually only care about the Canonist. Spree is also better vs. Stax variants, as it takes 3 mana to kill a Trinisphere and 2 other artifiacts, as opposed to the 4 it takes from Meltdown. One mana makes a huge, huge difference vs. that deck.
How do you figure Shattering Spree costs 3 mana to kill trinsiphere + 2 other artifacts? Would it not be 5? Or am I missing something obvious here..
edit: My bad, this was pretty obvious.
Trinisphere only checks the total number of mana spent, so you only need to pay 3. If there's a chalice at one in play, on the other hand, you'd need an additional copy as the first would get countered.Quote:
Originally Posted by naarou
Oh, duh moment. For some reason forgot replicate counted towards total CMC.
It doesn't. It counts towards total cost. Trinisphere only cares about the later.
/edit: Oh, I guess you actually meant total cost. Nevermind.
If enchantress has elephant grass though the EtW plan is horrid. And they play it as a 4 of. But really, the MU is still in our favor because enchantress dies to a single cleanfall or other global enchantment destruction from the wishboard. They also lack a clock and in the time it takes for them to set up a lock we should be able to get there with bounce spells. And if we EtW and they don't have grass it's GG's. That's the MU we want to see the most people.
Can people stop going on and on about the shattering spree trinisphere argument? I've heard it mentioned a thousand times on every forum I go to. It costs RRR to destroy a chalice on one and a trinisphere okay? We good now? It's just so fucking annoying hearing the 5 mana argument for it all the time seemingly. Really.
Yeah, Julian, I meant total cost. I'm having a series of retarded moments today, especially considering I already knew the interaction between SS and 3sphere.. I just failed to remember it before I posted that.
I realize the answer to the question I asked is obvious, and it's probably been covered before. As stated, I've actually dealt with this interaction several times and did indeed know it. It was a mistake to ask the question, granted, because I could have looked it up myself, and I realize that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Ritual
That being said, I'm pretty sure the only thing more annoying than people attempting to gain understanding of previously covered topics by asking questions (where is this "argument" you speak of?) is when people make extremely offensive posts for absolutely no reason other than to vent frustration with other's quest for knowledge.
Yeah, his response was a little harsh, but you have to remember - that question has been asked and answered in this thread countless times before.Quote:
Originally Posted by naarou
Yeah, I realize I shouldn't have asked it and in hindsight understand how retarded it was. I acknowledged that. His response was unwarranted though.
So.... how do you deal with Trinisphere again? :tongue:
Oh man, why is your average combo player so annoying?