How about Regress? Dodges Counterbalance (somewhat) and is a hell lot easier to cast than Wipe Away, although Wipe Away is one billion times more certain of resolving.
Printable View
How about Regress? Dodges Counterbalance (somewhat) and is a hell lot easier to cast than Wipe Away, although Wipe Away is one billion times more certain of resolving.
If you like Ponder, find a way to fit it in. My decklist is not the only viable one.Quote:
Hey guys I just wanted to pop in and say a few things!!!! I love combo, and at heart thats what I am, a combo player. I threw together a list i saw on page six and the deck is awsome. I just have a few questions for those of you who have tested more.... No ponder? I sometimes feel like if I had more draw it would be better. ummm... how about empty the warrens? an alternate win over tendrils out of the question? I know w/ AN it makes the lethal tendrils a breeze but I really like having options when it comes to winning. and speaking of tendrils....just one? so basically any deck that can make blue sides in four extract and beats us....not likin that at all. my only other concern w/ the deck would be the mana base..... it just doesnt feel right. I like the fetches but im not sure if the 2 strand 2 mire split is right... maybe if i did run warrens but it just doesnt feel right i dunno. Please, i am not trying to be a dick, i am just trying to help make the deck a little better, and i like whats happening so far... oh I almost forgot... why not throw in a singleton doomsday and a singleton meditate and have ANOTHER OPTION TO WIN....it would dick up the average mana cost but w/ AN and IGG that would be three seperate ways to win ... and i think alot of decks wouldnt know how to handle it...
If you read through earlier pages in the thread, I already tested B/u/r list with EtW. The deck is/was very solid, and is definitely another viable option. I've converted to B/u/w for now because I've found it more consistent and resilient.
No one that I know of runs Extract. Earwig Squad maybe, but that's going to wreck the deck even if the deck runs 3 Tendrils. If you fear Extract/Earwig Squad, run a list with Rite of Flame and Burning Wish.
I haven't had any issues with my B/u/w manabase. If you don't like it, construct it the way that you feel more comfortable. Not a big deal, really.
Doomsday and Meditate are bad in this deck. Neither one is synergistic with AN, and Doomsday would require other cards to be added to the deck (like Top). IGG is much better, IMO. 3 seperate ways to win is unecessary.
Except Wipe Away is terrible with my manabase. My playtesting with the deck so far has shown me that producing UU is too inconsistent. With 14 lands, splashing a 4th color for Krosan Grip doesn't seem like the greatest idea either. This isn't FT so the deck cannot be treated like FT. FT has enough lands to support UU and a 4th color splash, but this comes at a cost: FT has an average goldfish of turn 4, this deck has an average goldfish of turn 2. That changes the dynamics of alot of things, including sideboard answers.Quote:
Repeal is terrible. Split Second cards are going to be a lot better to you because the fact that they deal 3 damage off AdN is irrelevant if your bounce is countered and you don't get to cast AdN. Why aren't you just stealing the sb from older FT lists anyway? It was developed for exactly the type of deck you're trying to play. There was a lot of discussion on how to fight stax, counterbalance, and misc other stuff. Stop reinventing the wheel -- poorly.
Lifeloss IS relevant with AN. Being unable to do anything because of Counterbalance is going to be just as bad as fizzling with AN. Again, this isn't FT.
Sideboards from older FT lists? Do you expect me to go dig through pages and pages of the FT thread so I can copy your old sideboard? LOL. Reinventing the wheel poorly? You're a funny guy.
Most people don't understand this at first, so I'll explain it. The only way to find the 1-of maindeck Repeal (consistently) is to Mystical Tutor for it, which incidentally, is impossible to do under Chalice @ 1.Quote:
Why do you play Repeal?
To draw a card is usual irrilevant because you play it when you are already sure that in the next your turn you win.
And Repeal goes under all permission against CB matchup and you can't play it against the most common hate: Chalice at 1.
Repeal is a card for Vintage.
If you want a card against CB decks without the green splash you use Wipe Away.
If you want a versatile card against hate decks you use E.Truth or Rushing River.
Anyway, I'm agree with Emidln: you can use the SB of FT.
I see that a weak point of this matchup is against aggro or fast clock decks.
More time you wait, and less effective is AN. For this reason IGG is strictly necessary.
So basically, unless the deck dilutes itself by playing 4 bounce/destroy spells maindeck, you just go off through Chalice @ 1 without bouncing it. Going off through Chalice @ 1 is not as hard as you may think.
Game 2, the opponent will drop Chalice @ 0 first, but I have sideboard hate that answers both Chalice @ 0 and Chalice @ 1 anyway.
The fact that Repeal has a cmc of 1 for AN, and also draws a card, makes it the best maindeck 1-of, IMO.
The fact that Repeal can be countered by FoW/Daze doesn't necessarily matter. Most often, the opponent has already spent those on Duress/Chant/AN, which is why they were able to get to the point where they now have Counterbalance in play. So when you do bounce it, they are most likely out of countermagic.
This isn't FT. FT is slow, goldfishing on turn 4. ANT is fast, goldfishing on turn 2. FT is required to answer CounterTop because of this, whereas it's much less relevant for ANT. Split Second is a necessity to FT because of this. That does not automatically make it a necessity to ANT.
I've beat Counterbalance Thresh multiple times in testing by simply casting turn 1 Duress grabbing their FoW and going off turn 2 to before Counterbalance comes down.
I'm not saying split second bounce/destroy is not better. I'm saying that it's not feasible in here without bastardizing the manabase. I'm saying it's not as mandatory in here, as opposed to FT, because the deck is more resilient to Counterbalance.
-----
Now, despite what I've said about FT, Split Second, and the 4th color splash, this deck can become more like FT. In other words, the deck can drop 4 Cabal Ritual and 2 AN for 4 Ponder and 2 more lands, splashing the 4th color (green) for Krosan Grip.
Whether or not turn 3-4 goldfishes w/ maindeck Krosan Grip is better or worse than turn 1-2 goldfishes with maindeck Repeal would need to be determined. However, making said changes may only slow the deck down to turn 2-3 goldfishes (I don't know as I haven't tested).
Looking strictly at tournament resuts, I'd say turn 1-2 wins are better than turn 3-4 wins (Belcher has more Top 8's than FT). However, that is not necessarily applied to ANT.
Personally, I prefer sticking to 3 colors and running more accel.
However, it seems that many of you want to play Ponder. Krosan Grip is obviously better than Repeal at answering Counterbalance. So if you want to build/play the deck like FT, go ahead. Let me know your results.
@Hanni, I think you're really underestimating just how awesome Ponder is when you're running multiple AdNs, anything that sets up AdN for a T2 or T3 LED activation is the nuts. Using Ponder doesn't turn the deck into FT any more than it turns the deck into TES, AdN and LED just abuses cantrips in their own right.
The whole bounce argument is pointless, you cast M.Tutor in response to C.balance resolving so you can find Wipe Away and cast it thru' a C.balance activation or a counter (later on). Again it has nothing to do with FT, it's just common sense to have bounce in the deck for the absolute worse case scenarios or to not have bounce in the deck at all.
Emidlin is right, Repeal is stupid, losing game 1s to random Teegs is unacceptable.
I'd like to note that the lists of FT I'm talking about (Street Wraith lists that were derived from my original Grim Iggy deck) very much goldfished on turn 2. They still required split-second removal for CB because decks that play CB don't let you goldfish on turn 2 because they play Force of Will, Daze, Spell Snare, and sometimes even Counterspell. If you think you're going to be able to walk through a tournament goldfishing the CB decks, you're going to be in for a very rude surprise.
The whole reason I began to slow FT down was because beating aggro even on turn 3-4 is acceptable and it was easier to deal with the control decks when you had a consistent manabase and a lot of cantrips to find stuff like Duress, Krosan Grip, and Orim's Chant. The major problem I see with this deck is that you have three gears: 6th gear with AdN, 5th gear with Infernal Tutor->IGG, and 2nd Gear with Chant + Infernal Tutor loop. Only one of those is going to be a viable option against Threshold.
Well, I'll try some other bounce options, then, including Wipe Away (again). I was having problems with Wipe Away in the B/u/r build... I don't see it being any better in the B/u/w build, but I'll try it again.
Maindeck Rushing River makes more sense than maindeck Wipe Away, though, since the manabase is likely to be under attack against decks with Chalice (DS, for example).
1 3cc bounce spell isn't going to hurt the deck. 4 will, though.
In FT, that is the case, but that is not necessarily the case here. FT is vulnerable because of IGG and Doomsday. Therefore, it must resolve a Chant before it can go off (with IGG) if the opponent has any amount of (free) countermagic in the graveyard. Doomsday is also vulnerable, since opposing countermagic on the Draw 4 (or even Top) causes you to fizzle and lose. I'm also under the impression that Doomsday wins on the following turn after it is cast, giving the opponent an additional draw step, correct? If the opponent counters AN, ANT simply finds and casts another one until one finally resolves.Quote:
The whole reason I began to slow FT down was because beating aggro even on turn 3-4 is acceptable and it was easier to deal with the control decks when you had a consistent manabase and a lot of cantrips to find stuff like Duress, Krosan Grip, and Orim's Chant. The major problem I see with this deck is that you have three gears: 6th gear with AdN, 5th gear with Infernal Tutor->IGG, and 2nd Gear with Chant + Infernal Tutor loop. Only one of those is going to be a viable option against Threshold.
Needing specific cards, like Chant, requires slowing the deck (FT) down in order to win through hate. AN is a completely different animal; that FoW that my turn 1 Duress discarded isn't going to come back to the opponent's hand after I cast AN on turn 2. Maybe FT has a hard time racing Counterbalance because of FoW/Daze, but ANT is different. I've raced Counterbalance multiple times in playtesting, usually using only 1 Duress/Chant to get rid of the 1 countermagic spell in the opponent's hand.
Like I said, tournament results speak for themselves. Belcher is a turn 1-2 combo deck with lots of Top 8's. AN is far more resilient to hate than Belcher is and can go off on turn 1-2 just as consistently. The average win is usually turn 2-3 with 1 protection spell, but the deck can speed up/slow down if it needs to race/fight hate cards. Therefore, arguing that slowing the deck down like FT, to make the deck better, is questionable at best.
I also completely disagree with you about ANT vs Threshold. In my playtesting, there is more than 1 viable option. If I Duress my opponent on turn 1 and he doesn't have anything else to stop me, casting AN turn 2 wins games. If I resolve Chant and can produce enough storm count, IGG is a perfectly acceptable route. Blind IT/LED is obviously a dumb move if you know you are playing against blue... but if Duress shows you're good to go, or Chant resolves, IT/LED is also perfectly acceptable against Threshold. The fact that ANT is less disruptable and less dependant on protection spells gives it more gears than FT, IMO.
I think ANT will obsolete most existing combo decks in the format once it becomes (close to) fully optimized. Just my personal opinion, though.
FT doesn't pass the turn that often after DDAY unless you're really aggro with DDAY, you'd probably learn how to play Storm combo better if you'd pick up FT and get a feel for the "slow rolls" since a lot of it applies to AdN.
What are you trying to say? That I'm bad at playing this deck?Quote:
FT doesn't pass the turn that often after DDAY unless you're really aggro with DDAY, you'd probably learn how to play Storm combo better if you'd pick up FT and get a feel for the "slow rolls" since a lot of it applies to AdN.
Also, this deck is not the same as FT.
Why should I play FT to get better at playing ANT when I can play ANT to get better at playing ANT?
No antipathy intended, knowing each other Storm deck inside and out helps you play your Storm deck. I learned a lot from picking up FT and forcing myself to play Storm combo the way other people were playing it, and those lessons lead me to the first versions of AdN.dec that didn't suck.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hanni
If you took the time, you'd learn a lot from just scrolling thru' FT's thread and looking at MD and SB configurations as well as comparing how the decks set up and go off. Being able to make a comparison between multiple Storm decks will help you out a lot more than playing the same Storm deck over and over, especially when it's an un-tuned Storm deck.
Saying this isn't FT really isn't useful, of course it's not FT, but Emidlin and I both have a ton of experience with Storm combo across the boards and see where one idea can work and another idea can't work. I think if you bridged the gap, you'd be able to see where certain things merge between the decks a lot better.
Maybe I just don't understand the way you speak. I'm pretty sure my starting shell for ANT on page one, the B/U base, was a very strong starting shell to start ANT with. It's very customizable, especially for color splashes.Quote:
No antipathy intended, knowing each other Storm deck inside and out helps you play your Storm deck. I learned a lot from picking up FT and forcing myself to play Storm combo the way other people were playing it, and those lessons lead me to the first versions of AdN.dec that didn't suck.
I remember you advocating both 4 FoW and 4 EtW in your first versions. When you say that your versions didn't suck, it sounds like your saying mine sucked. That's how it is interpreted, regardless of the way you meant it. I'm pretty sure that 4 FoW and 4 EtW is pretty horrible with AN.
I like to look around the other combo threads sometimes, but most of what could/would impact this deck, I've already questioned or tried. Some things obviously don't work. The types of draw, tutor, and other shit for each storm combo deck varies based on the mechanics. I mean, it's not like there is thousands of viable combo cards. Very few existing combo decks are making much use of AN because they aren't designed around it, therefore its going to require some fresh ideas rather than trying to port everything.
I'm not saying that running Ponder is bad. I don't run it because it slows the deck down more than it really needs to be slowed, at least the way I play the deck, with my playtesting of the deck. I've never wished that an ANT in hand was a Ponder, and I like how Cabal Ritual accelerates earlier ANT's, where Ponder would slow that down. Call this playstyle difference if you want, I don't think the deck is strictly better either way.
There's never going to be 1 version of ANT. ANT is so customizable that it can be alot of different variations. Color splashes alone change the deck drastically.
For example, B/R/x would be interesting like this:
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flame
4 Ad Nauseam
4 Burning Wish
I still like my B/u/r version too. Others like playing Kobolds, others like playing Ponder. It's not a big deal, really.
I'm sure I could go read through many pages of the thread to get a few things here and there, but why do I need to do that when I can just look at some decklists for a basic understanding, and then playtest the hell out of a different combo deck (ANT). ANT requires some different cards and designing, so trying to port ideas doesn't always work. Don't think I haven't tried different variations of this deck in playtesting. Just because I don't have a list posted for it, doesn't mean I haven't playtested with cards like Ponder already.Quote:
If you took the time, you'd learn a lot from just scrolling thru' FT's thread and looking at MD and SB configurations as well as comparing how the decks set up and go off. Being able to make a comparison between multiple Storm decks will help you out a lot more than playing the same Storm deck over and over, especially when it's an un-tuned Storm deck.
Rather than questioning my deckbuilding skill, why don't you just offer suggestions to other readers to improve the deck? What you are doing right now is just wasting readers time, IMO. This seems more like PM material to me, and I'd just read it and delete it as spam, rather than have to reply to it in a thread.
So again, because I wasn't taken in by FT, makes me unqualified to build ANT? You assume I haven't played TES, Belcher, SI, and other combo decks before? I've got alot of shit built on MWS that I play with, and that includes combo. Just because I haven't voiced much in certain threads doesn't mean I haven't played the deck. Quit assuming. One does not need to improve innovation to know how to play the deck. I've been playing Legacy for several years now, I've been around. If you're just trying to flop your e-peen around, go do that somewhere else. It's doing nothing for innovation in this thread.Quote:
Saying this isn't FT really isn't useful, of course it's not FT, but Emidlin and I both have a ton of experience with Storm combo across the boards and see where one idea can work and another idea can't work. I think if you bridged the gap, you'd be able to see where certain things merge between the decks a lot better.
What do I need to take from FT to make me better at building ANT? Split second bounce? Ponder? I mean, FT isn't even running AN. Completely different design. If you are implying that FT is a difficult to pilot combo deck and that practicing FT will make me better at piloting combo, I agree. ANT is a very easy combo deck to play, though. Simply playing ANT alot has been making me better and better at playing ANT though, while learning specific plays relevant to ANT.Quote:
Saying this isn't FT really isn't useful, of course it's not FT, but Emidlin and I both have a ton of experience with Storm combo across the boards and see where one idea can work and another idea can't work. I think if you bridged the gap, you'd be able to see where certain things merge between the decks a lot better.
Belcher has more Top 8's because it's easy to play. ANT will probably be similar. Luckily, this might actually make combo more relevant in the metagame. Like I said, until ANT gets banned, I think it's going to obsolete other existing storm combo decks once it gets close to optimized.
I'm very satisfied with my B/u/w build right now.
I wasn't implying you were a bad player or a bad deck builder, I was implying you'd be able to learn more from testing other Storm decks first and then take what you've learned and re-evaluate your approach to Ad Nauseam. It's general advice I'd give to any one, especially any one questioning removal slots or SB options and reinventing the wheel.
Stop reading into shit that isn't there.
I guess stuffing 4 3cc bounce spells is going to be better than 4 1cc bounce spells against Counterbalance, since split second at the cost of castability and life loss is strictly better. I'll quit reinventing the wheel and just port stuff over without questioning it.
I'm running 1 Rushing River maindeck now because it's castable through Counterbalance and can handle multiple permanents. 2U is much easier to cast than 1UU, so I find it stronger as maindeck countermagic. 1 3cc bounce spell isn't so bad. Postboard though, even the 4 Serenity eats at lifetotal being 2cc; fortunately, most Chalice decks don't run countermagic, so IGG is viable and disregards life total. This is relevant against DS. I realize this was in FT, which is why I've been running it in the white build.
I run 4 Repeal as my answer to Thresh, they won't always be able to counter it because of previous cards cast burning up their countermagic. Even if they can, 4 in the deck is fine. Even bouncing Goyf early on to buy time to build up to going off against aggro/control, Repeal is awesome because it is only 1cc to AN (better than IGG vs Thresh), and it cantrips. The ability to cantrip from bounce is pretty good, since it fullfills multiple functions for the deck. Right now, I'm not convinced that split second bounce/destroy is better against Counterbalance in ANT than Repeal. Maybe I'm a noob on this and I'll learn the hard way, but Repeal has been testing wonderfully for me ever since I started playing them.
Postboard, the deck has Slaughter Pact/StP for Teeg/Mage/Dreadnought.
If you would just delete stupidness like "learned a lot from picking up FT and forcing myself to play Storm combo the way other people were playing it, and those lessons lead me to the first versions of AdN.dec that didn't suck," I'd be more inclined to delete some of my post. Telling me to play FT so I get better at storm combo has nothing to do with ANT either, so you could delete that too and put it in a PM next time.Quote:
Stop reading into shit that isn't there.
-----
The deck could also borrow Top from FT. Brainstorm + Top is pretty much the namesake from FT... solid card. There is a better card that combo's with Top than Doomsday (IMO), and that is Counterbalance. In a B/U based list, with the curve so perfectly shaped for Counterbalance, that sounds solid against a Thresh metagame. Drop Chant (and IGG) for Counterbalance and you're good to go... not tutorable with Mystical, but running 4 with Top/Brainstorm should find it often enough.
Taking a page from Hulk Flash, Mystical + Counterbalance is very strong. Much less explosive, but definitely plans to beat hate. Top is also really good at drawing the card that was Mystical'd for. Synergies all around.
I sketched that out before but it was dismissed for some reason. I'd take Top from FT to run Counterbalance, though. Going B/U heavy opens up the deck for Wipe Away, since the manabase can support UU. IGG is worse without Chant, and B/U doesn't have EtW. I think Doomsday would be a good addition to that. This can be problematic, but CounterTop can make IGG work in the rare cases you would need to use it (vs Extirpate, Burn, etc). It's worth the tradeoff in some cases.
B/U Counterbalance ANT
Lands (16)
4 Polluted Delta
2 Bloodstained Mire
2 Flooded Strand
4 Underground Sea
2 Swamp
2 Island
Spells (44)
4 Lotus Petal
2 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Dark Ritual
1 Cabal Ritual
4 Brainstorm
4 Mysitcal Tutor
2 Ad Nauseam
1 Doomsday
1 Meditate
4 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Counterbalance
4 Daze
3 Duress
1 Echoing Truth/Wipe Away
1 Tendrils of Agony
I suppose with 16 lands, the deck could get away with splashing a 3rd color, this was just a basic framework for further innovation. I don't understand why it was dismissed so quickly, though? Counterbalance is a little slow, but it can always be dropped for other sideboard cards in games 2 and 3. It also throws the opponent off gaurd if they try to play around Counterbalance in games 2 and 3.
The only problem this list has is too much high cc stuff. Counterbalance, Daze, Cabal Ritual, and Echoing Truth at 2cc is necessary for Counterbalance. Lowering the number of AN's helps, and Doomsday is less than IGG (when you're going the AN route, not the Doomsday route).
Daze is a very strong disruption card to run, since it answers opposing Counterbalances. Free countermagic is extremely good at answering all kinds of hate, including FoW. Countermagic itself is flawed with LED, but it can still help to resolve AN many other times. Minor disynergies are made up for from other synergies, I think.
That above decklist is obviously unrefined, since I've been working on B/u/w ANT for the meantime... but I still think that route is very interesting. It's worth playtesting with for a little while when I get time to, at least. I'm sure by running Doomsday, I'm missing out on some tech from FT that would benefit the deck, I'm not denying that.
I'm thinking a possible Doomsday pile for the deck right now would be:
Top in play
Daze in hand
Meditate
Dark Ritual
Dark Ritual
Top
Tendrils
Accelerating into Doomsday and casting Meditate on that turn and going off, with Daze, can generate 10 storm. Requires a few other factors to work, but Counterbalance can buy that kinda time and it's only a backup plan to AN. Pretty solid, IMO.
People shouldnt try to squezze in CB into every deck. i give you reasons and compare it to the in my opinion best CB deck out there: ITF.
-Being able to deal with threats that slip through. I know that you play combo and that you want to win, not dealing with threats, but why play CB at all then?
You cant really setup behind a CB, because if something slipped through it beats you down, CB only slows you here (fiddle around with Top and BS to counter something instead of goint for the throat). You can get away with it in a combo heavy meta / format, because your enemy will play setup spells as well and wont bother to put down a Goyf or something.
ITF has STP and sweepers in emergency if a anything gets through.
-Playing the right curve, what makes CB really powerful in ITF is that it can counter stuff at cmc 3 consistently. Granted that it may be enough to hit stuff at cmc 1 and 2 though, which would put you on par with UGW Balanced ThreshThreshThreshThreshThresh.
-You cant compare this to "Not by Sadin himself build Flash deck", it was a good metagame call to play this configuration, aiming at the Flash mirror to outcontroll the opponent and dont go for the pure speed like the others did.
If at all CB fits into a combo controll deck like Previous Level Doomsday and even there its doubtful imo (i like this name over FT, its implying that you play the controll version not the speedy one with Street Wraith and more accel).
Did i miss something? :confused:
You're only sacrificing a few mana acceleration spells to fit Counterbalance. It's just a larger disruption package. By no means does the deck have to drop Counterbalance to win. The deck can easily goldfish turn 2-3 like normal AN when it doesn't go for the CounterTop plan to fight hate. It still has enough accel and enough tutors. Top doesn't necessarily slow the deck down too badly in the face of hate, either.
Again, this is just a slightly tested list. I just think that, since the deck can run Counterbalance in a combo deck (like Hulk Flash did), and synergies abound with Mystical Tutor, that it's worth trying. I'm not saying it's going to be spectacular or anything. Again though, as soon as I suggest it, it gets quickly dismissed. Sad face.
I feel that this is one of the strongest combo decks in Legacy currently - As such, I took it against a fairly tuned WUBG Threshold List, postboard, to see how well it would fare against a fairly hateful deck. Over roughly fifteen games, we concluded an almost even matchup between the two decks. I felt that some preliminary testing would help legitimize the deck. For reference, the lists used;
Threshold (Postboard Testing)
17 Land (Standard Setup)
4x Dark Confidant
4x Tarmogoyf
3x Gaddok Teeg
1x Nimble Mongoose
4x Ponder
4x Brainstorm
1x Portent
4x Force of Will
4x Counterbalance
3x Daze
4x Extripate
3x Top
4x Thoughtseize
Ants!
4x Duress
3x Thoughseize - While the lifeloss is significant, seven maindeck 1cc Discard spells greatly aids in your Threshold, Landstill, Dragon Stompy, Sui-Varient, and many other matches.
1x Chain of Vapor - This was effective at bouncing multiple permanents in order to generate a lethal Tendrils after ANT had been Extripated. I would consider increasing this over the Echoing Truth.
1x Echoing Truth
1x Rushing River - The ability to remove both Counterbalance and Mage/Teeg, or Chalice/Trinisphere is more important than immunity to Force of Will. Hell, half the time, if they force my bounce, I'm happy with it.
4x Brainstorm
4x Ponder - While this card is much debated, I feel that it is much better than Inferal Tutor. Infernal Tutor is rarely good outside without Lion's Eye Diamond, which I have also cut when I removed the Ill-Gotten Gains package. While this does increase my vulnerability to Meddling Mage and Extripate, it increases my ability to sculpt my hand specificly for the deck I'm playing against.
4x Mystical Tutor
4x Ad Nauseam - One could drop one of these for Ill-Gotten Gains, if you choose to leave in the Infernal Tutor and Lion's Eye Diamond setup.
4x Dark Ritual
4x Cabal Ritual - In the late game, they are capable of powering out an Ad Nauseam by themselves. I would play them in almost any build, but if you can give me a legitimate reason to drop them for a random obscure card, I would be fine with it.
4x Lotus Petal
4x Chrome Mox
3x Tendrils of Agony - I was forced into doing several Mini-Tendrils post Extripate or if I was playing against a Countertop repeatedly. This number is very subject to change.
Land - 16 land might feel heavy, but being able to ramp up to a hardcast AdN is sexy. Also, it improves game against Moon effects, control, really anything that has the game go longer than turn 4.
4x Underground Sea
4x Polluted Delta
3x Bloodstained Mire
3x Swamp
2x Island
Hesitant Sideboard
4x Pact of Negation
1x Thoughtseize
3x Massacre - It's free against White Goblins (which is still played randomly in MN....whatever), kills off Landstill's Magi, and is useful depending on what other strange decks/board choices you might run into (Glowrider, True Believer, Gaddok Teeg, Meddling Mage, Ethersworn Canonist, and other things you might think of.)
3x Hydroblast - Dragon Stompy, TES, Goblins, Burn (Which seems like a terrible match, as we're dependent on having a fairly high life total while comboing, Imperial Painter)
4x Graveyard Hate (Crypt, Jailer, whatever) - Ichorid is one of the few combo decks that is fairly immune to the 8 discard spells between main and side. Being able to stop them for 2 turns would be hot. Also, there's not a whole lot else I see you needing to board against. I guess Needle is also a fine call here, depending on metagame.
In addition to the "speed build", I realized it is entirely possible to run a very high casting cost card control deck, such as Landstill, by simply adding in Angel's Grace prior to using ANT. I'll continue testing when I have time using both builds, and will try and get a solid 10 preboard games and 20 postboard games recorded later tonight against Threshold. Keep the thoughts coming before this gets banned!
Goblin Snowman that's very close to what I'm running now although you're pre-boarding pretty heavily for a Threshold environment, I just have 1 MD bounce and 1 Tendrils. I'm running Crystal Vein in place of Cabal Ritual and 4 LED (3 Chrome Mox in my list) as they're such a useful mana source even without Infernal Tutor (which I've gone back and retested and it keeps sucking for me).
Crystal Vein powers out a lot of turn 2 wins where a Cabal Ritual wouldn't have (U. Sea + Dark Ritual + Crystal Vein + Ad Nauseum) assuming you don't have an additional land in hand. It also gives you a lot of mana, uncounterable, for going off without any accelerants.
I'm not sure of the usefulness of Wipe Away - you still need to clear out counters before going off. Repeal seems more interesting at the moment and can buy time just bouncing a Tarmogoyf where the drawn card matters as well as burning you for less off AdN.
I took what I decided was the worst possible matchup (a very heavily prepared Black Threshold List with Gaddok Teeg/Meddling Mage) and built my deck around how to beat it. From my experience, even with this anti-Threshold build, you have no right to go losing to Dragon Stompy, Landstill, or any of the other decks that might give you trouble. I still usually pull 2-3 turn wins (almost always backed up by a Duress or Thoughtseize), but I retain the ability to build an insanely good hand against any deck without a clock or IWIN Button (getting a hand with two Ad Nauseam and 2-3 discard against Landstill, getting a hand with Rushing River + Chain of Vapor for EOT against Chalice of the Void.dec, or what have you). Also, in Minnesota, there is almost no ITF, meaning I can get away with neglecting that matchup (and I'm fairly sure the 7 discard would help a good deal there).Quote:
Originally Posted by ixid
I'm torn on Lion's Eye Diamond. Infernal Tutor is inferior to other options around for tutoring, and is only useful in this deck with Lion's Eye, and doing that really can bite you in the ass if you get disrupted. Lion's Eye turns off Pact of Negation from the board.....I have very little trouble getting to Ad Nauseam mana without it, and it seems far to situational to drop anything else for it.
Yeah, but the lack of colored mana early in a deck that has 15 or less land and relies on cantrips smells fishy. Also, Cabal Ritual is insane later on in the game, as it powers out an Ad Nauseam by itself when you're using more than one at the end of the opponant's turn to bait counters. I know, late game should never be gotten to, but shit happens like turn one Thoughseize, turn two Counterbalance.Quote:
Originally Posted by ixid
Rushing River is better as you can use it to generate three storm by bouncing your own Lotus Petals and Moxen. Chain of Vapor also allows for a rather large amount of potential mana generation when combined with several Moxen and a large hand size. I have not tested Repeal as I am unsure about the usefulness of a random draw versus 1cc or the ability to bounce more than one hate piece. Rushing Rivering away a Trinisphere and Chalice, or a Counterbalance and Meddling Mage can be the difference between losing and winning a game.Quote:
Originally Posted by ixid
Hi,
I' ve been thinking some time about Nauseaum variants. First of all:
Combo & Search/
4 x Ad Nauseaum
4 x Mystical Tutor
4 x Brainstorm
Wincon/
4 x Burning Wish
Protection/
4 x Duress
4 x Pact of Negation
Accel/
4 x Dark Ritual
4 x Rite of Flame
3 x Cabal Ritual
3 x Manamorphose
4 x Lotus Petal
4 x Chrome Mox
Lands/
3 x Polluted Delta
3 x Bloodstained Mire
2 x Volcanic Island
3 x Underground Sea
1 x Badlands
1 x Island
1 x Swamp
Sideboard/
3 x Shattering Spree
3 x Deathmark
2 x Tendrils of Agony
1 x Empty the Warrens
2 x Rushing River
1 x Pyroclasm/ Cave-In
2 x Echoing Truth
1 x Hurky's Recall/Rebuild
So basically, running wish will:
1) help you get a wincon faster (4 copies + mystical and cantrip)
2) Dig substancially more with Nauseaum (since it's just 2CMC)
At the cost of: two mana
More observations:
Nauseaum should be played on your turn to make pacts effective.
The deck becomes quite vulnerable to extirpate since you are only comboing with Nauseaum-Wish----Tendrils.
Pre-Nauseaum
Mystical is great; it gets Nauseaum/Accel/Wish/Pact/Sideboard tools. Brainstorm is complementary.
Post Nauseaum cards:
lotus and mox are necessary to set up after you draw half the deck
Manamorphose: Quite arguable, Ponder can be played here, but manamorphose enables you to finally combo when you just have one mana producer (e.g lotus petal) filtering for black or blue to play remanent cantrips + rits.
It (almost) NEVER fizzles. You can reveal more cards so creating storm is even easier.
The sideboard is quite unfocused. Deathmark (wishable) is just interesting for dealing with Teeg/Mage (so is the black Pact).
Sure someone else has made the point about burning wish before, but I'm unsure if anyone proposed a list.
Any Ideas? Suggestions? Opinions?
How would you fit 2 bouncers mainboard for instance ? (regarding the list)
Just a simple question. How good are your testings? I've been really disappointed by all the variants I tried with many disruptions, mainly because I could combo against aggro (or worse aggro-combo) only at a point where I was already between 10 and 15 life, and I fizzled quite a lot here after. I wonder, if the right direction to go is not a quick combo route, with only 4-6 disruption, but that could go off very often on turn 1 or 2.
I've never had a problem comboing out against quick aggro. I usually just go for the IGGY loop against stuff like Affinity/Burn/Berserk+dudes. IggyPop (and some of the older FT lists) straight up eats aggro, so I don't know why this wouldn't be the same if you just go that direction. Dredge may be a problem, but with 4 maindeck Orim's Chant, fighting dredge is alot easier (response to Narco trigger, chant you?).
Ad Nauseam is usually reserved for the more controllish decks that rely on Tarmogoyf + another dude, backed up by counters and disruption. You get alot more turns to setup a Stifle-proof win con.
I definitely agree with what you say. I used to try ANT in a ponder setting, which required always 3/4 turns to be online. I used to play without LED and IT, as well as IGG obviously.Quote:
Originally Posted by Apex
Today, I tested quite a lot a new version with LED and IT, my random spells being:
2*AN
1*Tendril
1*IGG
1*Infernal Contract
1*Repeal
In such a shell, pact of negation is a bad disrupt, duress and chant are far better, because you want to use LED at its best.
This list is good because it dodges discard and stifle effects. It just has to deal with counterspells, and it does well with duress and chant. It can also be fast and kill turn 2/3 like IGG used to do. It's also possible to do the LED upkeep trick quite fast, and I love it. It dodges discard because it plays 8 cards that enables it to set its topdeck and it plays 26 permanents providing mana.