[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)

[badjuju]

After looking at the storm piles I'm notincing typically you have you already have roughly 5 spells played before you make a pile since the majority of piles storm for 4-6. Can someone give me a basic rundown of what would go on before making a DD pile. Thanks

You will usually be playing Mystical on upkeep, mana spells, mana artifacts, and chants before you DD into a pile. Remember that with DD, you can choose to go off later rather than sooner. Obviously it depends on matchup, but usually you can afford to wait since you only need at least 2 life. Against aggro, you can use the IGG piles that require extra cards in hand. Against control, you can wait and sculpt your hand so you have more spells to play and fight through counters (and subsequently build up storm). Another thing - if you have extra mana, replace the petal in your pile with another top (assuming you already have one), and you can trade 1 mana for 1 storm.

Also, you have to remember how you're counting. I know you're just looking at the DD piles page and seeing the descriptions that say "storms for 4-6 + tendrils". There are always 5 spells in the pile, meaning your storm will be at LEAST 6 (because 5 cards in pile + casting Doomsday). This doesn't include all the stuff I've mentioned before, like casting a petal, chant, and two rituals before going off.

[Crow]

I have got to say these last two pages have been interesting to follow. People disagreeing is how we get debates going.

Personally i have played DDANT for about two months now and gradually learning things. ive also played against regular ANT in that time and the main difference i run into playing against regular ant is that besides the 6-7chants they also pack duress which often tilts the match in their favor as they are essentially packing 10-11 disruption pieces compaired to my 6-7. and they get a peek at your hand seeing how much disruption you have on hand and how fast they can expect to see you combo off.

Could be my own inexperience though but i have yet to win a match against regular ANT <playing tops of their own>. How are you suposed to go about this match, am i missing something obvious or does regular ant simply have a edge in the mirror?

[Waikiki]

The regular ant plays as far as I know 4 chant and 4 duress. Sometimes it plays 2 top aswell.

Where we play 6-7 chants and 4 tops. Which makes it easier for us to find missing pieces and protection. Post board we run an additional 3xantid swarm that must be answered by them else we are free to combo any time.

I think it should be in favor of the DDANT player. Unless its keeping a non chant hand or the ANT player has the T1 kill.

[CUB3X]

False, Traditional ANT will win a match against DD Nauseam usually all the time. Its faster and has more disruption.

[emidln]

Unless you are winning every die and always going off turn 1 on the play, speed is irrelevant in the tendrils mirror. The match is usually won by whomever draws the most amount of disruption. Postboard, these matches are a tossup usually won by whomever was lucky enough to draw Xantid Swarm + Orim's Chant/Silence to buy the turn that Swarm needs to start attacking.

[jegger]

Carpet of Flowers is really awesome against blue (especially Tempo-Decks) cause it crushes their mana-denial plan und you can simply set up your game plan by out-controlling them with Chants, Top and DD. At the moment I'm testing it in the SB Xantid Swarm slot, due to all my opponent keeping creature removal against me; it's usually a non-wasteable land that provides whichever mana you need; I really love that card.

Thanks for the answer.
How many copies do you use?
I'm thinking to use it if the number of tempo decks at high tables is more than 10-15% of the field.

[CUB3X]

And typically DDless ANT is a turn faster then DD versions which is why DDless builds usually will win the mirror

[emidln]

And typically DDless ANT is a turn faster then DD versions which is why DDless builds usually will win the mirror

I can't tell if you're trolling or just high. Speed does not win the ANT mirror.

[Citrus-God]

I can't tell if you're trolling or just high. Speed does not win the ANT mirror.

Word. Stability and disruption wins the mirror.

Play some T1 CUB3X. There are a ton of Menendian articles on Storm Combo mirrors.

[CUB3X]

sorry, i didn't mean its just speed, just that its a factor, and ugh type 1. ya i would play if i had 10,000 dollars to spend on magic lol

[Citrus-God]

sorry, i didn't mean its just speed, just that its a factor, and ugh type 1. ya i would play if i had 10,000 dollars to spend on magic lol

Aren't there any 15 card proxy Vintage tournaments in your area? Other than that, money is a big issue. It's a shame.

[CUB3X]

No unfortuantely. My area is almost all standard. Legacy didn't even pick up until this past summer and even then it was mostly scrubs. Finally shaping up to good decks atleast, not necessarily good people. I have some very funny stories from my legacy meta experiences. i played 43 lands before tendrils and my opponent didn't know what exploration was. and then worst was when i was playing my friends burn deck. played a mirror match and my opponent didn't know what magma jet was...i wanted to just get up and leave the store lol

[Wave]

Statistically, you are as likely to be able to combo with Doomsday on turn 2 as you are with Infernal Tutor (assuming you played the same number of them). The cheaper mana cost of Doomsday 4-6 on turn 2 is comparable with Infernal Tutor's 7-8 mana when you factor in the additional cantrips necessary for Doomsday to work. If you count pass the turn piles, you are a lot more likely to combo with Doomsday on turn 1 or 2 than Infernal Tutor.

Doomsday win on turn 2 is actually harder to play than Ad Nauseam win on turn two. You need Two sorts of colored mana B and U, and you need extra cards in hand or Top in play. To win with Doomsday on turn two you need to play a Top turn one, then you can´t do anyting constructive until turn two, but on turn two you need every colored mana you can produce and thus the chances of going of on turn two is quite low. With an Ad Nauseam you can start of the first turn by doing something constructive as playing a Ponder or mystical that gives you something useful turn two, instead of just wasting one mana on nothing turn one, and thus it is statistically easier to do a turn two win with Ad Nauseam, also Ad Nauseam win only takes black mana which is easier to produce than blue and black. To make an Protected Ad Nauseam win you need B and W mana whereas protected Doomsday require B, W and U. I think it is quite clear that the Ad Nauseam turn two win is bound to happen more often.

Have you ever actually lost a match to Enchantress? I don't know that I have ever done that playing anything derived from FT and I've been playing the deck for a long time. That deck is glacially slow and has...6 relevant cards, all of which can be bounced or removed unless they have 2 copies of a 4-of in play to protect them.

Ok losing against enchantress was stretching it but the other matchups being worse still applies and most of them are being quite common, and to answer your question - Yes he got solitary confinment out and then got the shroud enchantment, next game I mulled to 5 and kept a so so hand and he got the nutz hand with a shitload of sidboarded cards.

Trying to blindly go off turn 2 in the ANT mirror is a good way to Hymn/Mind Twist yourself at the cost of W for the opponent. Doing it against a deck that can not only have 6-7 chants, but also filter Mysticals into Chants with SDT is asking to lose.

The good thing is that you played your top the first turn and thus you are out of mana and haven’t done anything constructive on your first turn :-P. No seriously, when did I say that I would go off unprotected turn two, are you assuming that I am a poor player or what? I’ll get deeper into this later on.

The last time I checked, the defense to Aluren was Mystical->KGrip and laugh at them when they can't deal with SDT hiding your KGrip. You have forever and a day to win that matchup.

This takes a total of 4 Mana on the same turn, one being blue, one being green to pull off, try to do that by turn 3 without emptying your hand (But yeah, the tricks you can do with top is actually great).

Unless you are winning every die and always going off turn 1 on the play, speed is irrelevant in the tendrils mirror. The match is usually won by whomever draws the most amount of disruption. Postboard, these matches are a tossup usually won by whomever was lucky enough to draw Xantid Swarm + Orim's Chant/Silence to buy the turn that Swarm needs to start attacking.

I don’t agree here, yes the mirror matches may drag on but that is just in time thinking what the opponent has and when he can go off, often the mirror just last a couple of turns before either one of you get a protected win. And yeah, you go ahead and board in the Xantid swarms, what are you siding out? One KGrip and…. Oh that’s the only card that was irrelevant, all the other cards sided out just makes your decks less disruptive (Cants) or slower, you go ahead with that plan and I’ll just make something constructive the turn you play the swarms, like playing a spell that does something the turn it is played.

Here’s the problem I have with your strategy, you now have a total of 8 cards that do nothing the turn they comes into play, you can argue that speed is irrelevant but I’ll gain one turn every time you play one of those spells when you do nothing. Speed might be irrelevant to you, but giving the opponents free turns can’t be good. But then again it seems that we just disagree on this point.

On The Ponder VS Top discussion
First turn You play Top and do nothing – you have now seen 7 Cards
My first turn playing Ponder – I have now seen 10 – 11 Cards and drawn one more card than you. You just gave away a turn doing nothing, next turn you have to spend another mana to do anything constructive with the top, thus you have one less mana on the second turn and then you can’t go of since you can’t protect your win. If I played a Ponder the first turn I have two mana available and thus it is easier to go off with a protected win since I can both generate B and W mana. This means that DDANT is not putting up any pressure until turn 3 since it can’t risk going of without protection, whereas the ANT deck is putting up pressure earlier. This example is assuming we both drew lands or had lands on the opening hand. If you play Top first turn and don’t have a land on your opening hand you have to chance and top in your upkeep to get another land or you’re one land behind thus buying the ANT player another turn, this won’t occur with Ponder. And the biggest reason I hate playing Top; (although I use it as a two off in the regular ANT list) using top revealing nothing but shit on top (like 3 useless lands or something) and not having a shuffling effect, with Ponder I just shuffle away the bad draws and proceed to do something relevant, with top I just have to live with the 3 bad draws.

[kicks_422]

To win with Doomsday on turn two you need to play a Top turn one.

Everything else you say after this is now wrong. See what they're saying about learning how to play the card first before criticizing it?

[Davetradint]

I may be wrong, but looks like people are discussing Top and Ponder with a single scenario: to win quickly.
This is not what the deck wants. You do not want to try to win, cast AN or another engine and meet a counter, etc.
You want to be sure to win, it does not matter the turn (obv. 2nd turn win is cooler than 9th turn...)
If your opening hand has business, maybe you can go for it, but if not, what?
Are you going to risk almost or your resources? You can recover, but this works like a sniper: one shot, one kill.
As I said, I may be wrong, but there's some confusion with these two cards. You can win quickly, but if not, you need something helpful midgame and so on.
I wouldn't focus on ending the game as soon as possible, but in winning inevitably.

It's just an opinion...

[Wave]

Everything else you say after this is now wrong. See what they're saying about learning how to play the card first before criticizing it?

The ways of winning on turn two without top is unlikley to happen, they are possible, but unlikley since the commitment of each one is to much. You cannot deny that it is easier and less comitting to win with Ad Nauseam or you would have cut the card entirely already. So what I wrote still applies.

I may be wrong, but looks like people are discussing Top and Ponder with a single scenario: to win quickly.
This is not what the deck wants. You do not want to try to win, cast AN or another engine and meet a counter, etc

The fast win discussion has been about the combo matchup where speed is actually a deciding factor, why else would Belcher have such a good matchup against ANT and DDANT. But to meet your argument in fact, winning faster gives your opponent less time to find resources to fend of your win, combo won’t out control the opponent like Counter Top or Stax and thus you have to win before they have the opportunity to win.

[Pulp_Fiction]

The ways of winning on turn two without top is unlikley to happen, they are possible, but unlikley since the commitment of each one is to much. You cannot deny that it is easier and less comitting to win with Ad Nauseam or you would have cut the card entirely already. So what I wrote still applies.

The fast win discussion has been about the combo matchup where speed is actually a deciding factor, why else would Belcher have such a good matchup against ANT and DDANT. But to meet your argument in fact, winning faster gives your opponent less time to find resources to fend of your win, combo won’t out control the opponent like Counter Top or Stax and thus you have to win before they have the opportunity to win.

Not really, you clearly have limited experience with DD. But that is irrelevant because that discussion just goes around in circles and no one will ever admit when they are wrong. Dave is totally correct in what he is saying. I would highly recommend that you pick up Belcher.

Regarding the second paragraph you wrote ...... read carefully what kicks wrote again. Belcher has a good matchup versus decks running 6+ Chants in the main and consistently win on turn 1-3??? Seriously? You remind me of this kid I used to know, he had an Angel LCD paintball gun when they first came out ($1500) and he talked a big game, but when he went onto the field, he got destroyed and always wondered why. Then he would make excuses for his performance. Never once did it occur to him that paintball requires immense amounts of skill and practice and that the player makes the gun, rather than the other way around.

[johanessen]

I see people giving so much reasons to play straight ANT list -which I agree- and some DD Fanboys critisize him with some lack of explanations. That`s me or that`s what happening?

[Wave]

Not really, you clearly have limited experience with DD. But that is irrelevant because that discussion just goes around in circles and no one will ever admit when they are wrong. Dave is totally correct in what he is saying. I would highly recommend that you pick up Belcher.

Actually I have no problem in admitting when I am wrong (this is internet who cares?) and that my experience with Doomsday might be less than yours, or maybe I am just playing it wrong and stuck in the old Vintage combo thinking. I think most of the ppl posting here do it in learning purpose to play the deck better. I am posting my experience with top in the deck and from my point of view, if you think otherwise meet my arguments and the other pro ANT players arguments with real well developed arguments. Just saying you are inexperienced is still like I wrote before hindering the discussion.

[bruno_tiete]

Doomsday win on turn 2 is actually harder to play than Ad Nauseam win on turn two.

Wait, was his point not IT speed vs DD speed?

Sincerely, if you think Belcher has a good matchup against DDANT, your opponents must be the greatest lucksacks on Earth. They HAVE to Proton Cannon you out, specially in game 2, where you can just MT for Echoing Truth.

Last tournament I played, I beat (no kidding) 2 Belcher players, twice each (for Swiss and Topx). I lost one single game, where the dude Belchered me out on the play.