[Deck] ANT (Ad Nauseam Tendrils)

[Nemavera]

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.

I play it as a 4-of at the moment, but maybe I'm cutting one and another card to add 1-2 Swarms back to my board for the combo mirror and the merfolk matchup.

Played a tournament yesterday and went 4-0-1 (I drawed the last round with my friend a landstill-player, so that we get prize 1+2, and we played for the first pick and I won 2-0, so in fact 5-0-0)
The matchups were pretty easy:

Zoo 2-0
White Wheenie 2-0
Zoo 2-0
Zoo 2-1
Landstill 2-0

I won three times via Ad Nauseam, one time with IGG-Loop and seven times via Doomsday and killed 4 Gaddock Teegs :> DD is just that awesome!

My list was:

2 Flooded Strand
3 Polluted Delta
2 Misty Rainforest
2 Scalding Tarn
2 Underground Sea
2 Tundra
1 Tropical Island
1 Island
4 Lotus Petal
2 Chrome Mox
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Dark Ritual
2 Cabal Ritual
2 Silence
4 Orim's Chant
1 Krosan Grip
4 Brainstorm
4 Sensei's Divining Top
2 Ponder
4 Mystical Tutor
3 Infernal Tutor
1 Doomsday
1 Meditate
1 Ad Nauseam
1 Tendrils of Agony


SB: 4 Carpet of Flowers
SB: 1 Silence
SB: 1 Tropical Island
SB: 2 Krosan Grip
SB: 1 Echoing Truth
SB: 1 Pact of Negation
SB: 1 Chain of Vapor
SB: 1 Hurkyl's Recall
SB: 1 Slaughter Pact
SB: 2 Doomsday

[Muradin]

How was Carpet of Flowers for you? Isn't Xantid Swarm the better alternative against blue decks such as Merfolk?

Congrats on your finish!

[ColeM]

I'm glad to hear someone has been testing Carpet of Flowers. I have been too busy/lazy to try it out.

Xantid Swarm is probably better against Merfolk than Carpet but it dies quite easily against Canadian Thresh (I prefer not making more of my opponent's deck good against me). Carpet should allow the storm player to easily work through the oponent's mana denial in both matchups if it resolves - making most of the opposition's deck irrelevant. If Carpet gets countered, thats one less piece of relevant disruption you have to worry about.

[badjuju]

Congrats Chris.

Nice matchups btw

[Rico Suave]

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...

You are right, it does not matter what turn the win is achieved as long as the win is achieved.

However there is a lot to be said about speed. Numerous times I have gone for a win on turn 2 to see my opponent was waiting to drop their CB/Teeg/Canonist on the next turn - a turn they never got. Why do I need Top to dig for an answer to a card when I can just win before any of them are able to be cast?

The longer games go on, the more likely your opponent is able to establish a game-winning board state. The longer games go on, the more relevant your opponent's cards become.

Goldfishing as fast as possible is not always the correct way to play, though it can be right at times, but regardless when you give your opponent more time they are going to cast their Ponders/Brainstorms, dig with their own Tops, get an extra attack phase or two, get an extra land drop to Waste your land, and ultimately your opponent will always benefit more from extra turns than you will.

This idea is called tempo and it is the only reason to play this deck. It just so happens that tempo is one of the hardest things to describe about this game, but everyone knows when they see it (he won the turn before I could cast my bomb and win the game!).

As for a non-DD Tendrils vs. DD Tendrils, speed is largely irrelevant. The fact that non-DD builds run more disruption, however, is critical.

[alderon666]

You are right, it does not matter what turn the win is achieved as long as the win is achieved.

However there is a lot to be said about speed. Numerous times I have gone for a win on turn 2 to see my opponent was waiting to drop their CB/Teeg/Canonist on the next turn - a turn they never got. Why do I need Top to dig for an answer to a card when I can just win before any of them are able to be cast?

The longer games go on, the more likely your opponent is able to establish a game-winning board state. The longer games go on, the more relevant your opponent's cards become.

Goldfishing as fast as possible is not always the correct way to play, though it can be right at times, but regardless when you give your opponent more time they are going to cast their Ponders/Brainstorms, dig with their own Tops, get an extra attack phase or two, get an extra land drop to Waste your land, and ultimately your opponent will always benefit more from extra turns than you will.

This idea is called tempo and it is the only reason to play this deck. It just so happens that tempo is one of the hardest things to describe about this game, but everyone knows when they see it (he won the turn before I could cast my bomb and win the game!).

As for a non-DD Tendrils vs. DD Tendrils, speed is largely irrelevant. The fact that non-DD builds run more disruption, however, is critical.

Yeah, sure. But the way you put just makes it looks like the turn 1 Ponder always leads to a turn 2 win, which is not true at all.

Top adds a whole new level of consistency to storm, you always draw the best of the three cards on the top of your library. And while it is slow against every kind of permanent-based disruption, it owns counters as you can just throw Chants at them until one sticks.

Speed kills. But if you're playing in a blue meta with Merfolk/Tempo ***** once a Chant has ben FoW'ed taking a chance and praying the don't have another FoW or Daze just plain sucks. I'd much rather try to win a game on turn 15 with DD fighting through all the shit they throw at me, than testing if they have a second Fow + blue card on turn 3.

If you push speed too much there are going to be situations where the only thing you can do is dump your hand and pray. While if you're playing DD and Top it opens a larger window for your skills to matter instead of just relying on luck.

[Rico Suave]

Yeah, sure. But the way you put just makes it looks like the turn 1 Ponder always leads to a turn 2 win, which is not true at all.

Top adds a whole new level of consistency to storm, you always draw the best of the three cards on the top of your library. And while it is slow against every kind of permanent-based disruption, it owns counters as you can just throw Chants at them until one sticks.

Speed kills. But if you're playing in a blue meta with Merfolk/Tempo ***** once a Chant has ben FoW'ed taking a chance and praying the don't have another FoW or Daze just plain sucks. I'd much rather try to win a game on turn 15 with DD fighting through all the shit they throw at me, than testing if they have a second Fow + blue card on turn 3.

If you push speed too much there are going to be situations where the only thing you can do is dump your hand and pray. While if you're playing DD and Top it opens a larger window for your skills to matter instead of just relying on luck.

Yes, there are a lot of good things that can be said about Top when a quick kill is not feasible or the best choice. It is very strong with fetches, it can put your resources to use if you weren't going to use them anyway, and it can even provide a back-up plan if something goes horribly wrong.

The question becomes, are you going to run Top instead of Ponder, despite the fact Ponder is clearly better in this deck?

Keep in mind Ponder has a number of advantages over Top beyond the goldfish.

1) Multiple Ponders are not so bad, but multiple Tops are awful and clunky. I've used a lot of excuses to justify running 3+ Tops in decks that they don't belong in, but they are just that - excuses. It can be tough to realize when it is wrong and I am no exception to this.

2) Ponder has much better synergy with Brainstorm, if only because it can shuffle. Top and Brainstorm is mediocre synergy, especially if you're lacking a shuffle effect where it's downright bad synergy.

3) Ponder is simply better at creating storm. With Top you can play it to create storm, but in order to get any use out of it (beyond a blind cantrip) you need to dump more mana into it. Thus, playing Top and using it to find a Dark Ritual is almost pointless, whereas Pondering into that same Ritual will actually begin to generate mana.

Essentially, there are a number of plays that open up simply because you have an extra mana open. This gives the deck more flexibility in its plays, allowing you to play around situations that are quite simply not possible otherwise (Daze being a great example). The deck is more agile and is perhaps more rewarding of skill by being able to do the right thing at the right time instead of being a step behind.

It is much like Intuition-AK in control decks. The deck gains more raw power and is better in the long run, but it raises a number of other issues that could be solved by playing a less demanding set of cards.

Once again I'm not saying Top has no place in the deck. I'm saying that 4 Ponder and 4 Brainstorm belong in the deck before a single Top does, and then what do you start cutting to fit in Top? Builds with DD are especially limited in deck space...

[GreenOne]

Top also messes up with the opponent's game plan in numerous ways:
- They often have to counter it if they think you're playing countertop.
- They can't play Standstill on turn 2 if you have a Top in play.
- They have to find a reasonable clock fast or bury themself under your higher card quality. This can mess up with their cantrip selection. And even if they manage to have a nice clock, the chance of you going off with an engine that doesn't care about life points (as long as you have 2) increases (with Top in play, comboing out with doomsday is easier).
- Top is a great tool to hide cards from opponent's discard spells.
- Top allows you to have virtually nine cards in hand the turn you're going off against control decks.
- 2xTop is a storm generator.

[NQN]

@Nevamara: Do you really like Swarm? I´ve been hating him all the time. First of all, as a 2-off you won´t have him in your opening 7 most of the time.
Then you have to fetch Tropical against decks you don´t want it (merrows,Canadian) and he doesn´t even win against Canadian.
I love Carpet of Flowers in theorie as both decks basicaly have only 4 FoW to disrupt you but win via Manadenial+daze-effects. Carpet just stops it and fuels faster wins. I haven´t had time to test it (atm dredge seems sicker to me) but I already buyed 4 Carpets :)

[Pulp_Fiction]

Top also messes up with the opponent's game plan in numerous ways:
- They often have to counter it if they think you're playing countertop.
- They can't play Standstill on turn 2 if you have a Top in play.
- They have to find a reasonable clock fast or bury themself under your higher card quality. This can mess up with their cantrip selection. And even if they manage to have a nice clock, the chance of you going off with an engine that doesn't care about life points (as long as you have 2) increases (with Top in play, comboing out with doomsday is easier).
- Top is a great tool to hide cards from opponent's discard spells.
- Top allows you to have virtually nine cards in hand the turn you're going off against control decks.
- 2xTop is a storm generator.

QFT!!!! Good to find someone that actually understands storm combo in legacy!!!

[jegger]

I play it as a 4-of at the moment, but maybe I'm cutting one and another card to add 1-2 Swarms back to my board for the combo mirror and the merfolk matchup.

Thanks for the answer.
Yes, with your pairings Carpet is not the optimal choice. Perhaps you are unlucky with pairings about the use of Carpet and usually you are infested from tempo decks. I don't know.
I've done a little bit of test with Carpet against Dreadstill UGR and Kikko's Gift and it's a must counter. It's very good in some mategames.
Best regards and happy christmas.

[alderon666]

Top also messes up with the opponent's game plan in numerous ways:
- They often have to counter it if they think you're playing countertop.
- They can't play Standstill on turn 2 if you have a Top in play.
- They have to find a reasonable clock fast or bury themself under your higher card quality. This can mess up with their cantrip selection. And even if they manage to have a nice clock, the chance of you going off with an engine that doesn't care about life points (as long as you have 2) increases (with Top in play, comboing out with doomsday is easier).
- Top is a great tool to hide cards from opponent's discard spells.
- Top allows you to have virtually nine cards in hand the turn you're going off against control decks.
- 2xTop is a storm generator.

And the list goes on...

- Mystical Tutor into Tendrils + Ponder costs UU, while Top can be played with black mana, which tends to be more abundant especially in no decks with no Chrome Moxes
- Tops allow you to play Ad Nauseam with mana from LEDs
- Top somehow allows you to Ponder EOT the turn you combo out, while it is slower it justs saves you one mana on the turn it actually matters

In the end it's a matter of speed versus quality. Ponder is faster, but the advantage given by STD on the long run is huge. Maybe there's not a better card, it's just different styles of play.

[Davetradint]

The ponder VS Top discussion is senseless.

It's a matter of approach. If someone wants to go faster with the deck, this player may think it's better to use 4x ponder + 0-2x Top instead of the opposite.

It's not a mistake about deckbuilding, but a different approach to the gameplan of the deck. There's nothing wrong in playing 4x ponder if it works for someone, but THIS deck is able to use and abuse Tops like no other.

I think that time and results will confirm which build is most efficient: DD or non-DD, Tops or no Tops.

One last comment: if this deck is created or updated with the Tops (please "fathers" of the creature let us know), we should think about it and realise that it is designed to use them. Therefore to not be fast as hell, as instead, to have a chance midgame without risking your *ss.

That's just a thought...

[CUB3X]

I'm not sure how many people who have tested carpet but what do you typically take out to bring them in??

[alderon666]

I'm not sure how many people who have tested carpet but what do you typically take out to bring them in??

Well, your opponent has to be playing Islands... and some mana denial (Wasteland/Stifle) and Daze. So that's Merfolk, Tempo *****.

[Rico Suave]

I think that time and results will confirm which build is most efficient: DD or non-DD, Tops or no Tops.

Time and results have already confirmed non-DD lists out perform DD lists.

Time and results have shown Ponder is far more widespread in AN combo than Top.

Time is just waiting for people in this thread to wake up and stop playing a pet deck.

[rsaunder]

You're really susceptible to misleading statistics, aren't you?

You have to look at the number of FT lists that use DDay compared to the number of lists that Don't use DDay (what you seem to have done) and THEN compare them to the number of total times they were played (what you didn't do) to get an accurate percentage of each and see which deck performs better overall. Then, to be holistic about it, you have to look at the metagames in which each performed better and worse.

But thanks for playing and trying to bash a good deck. Better luck next time.

[kicks_422]

It's true that more non-DD ANT lists are T8-ing. But that's probably because more people play those decks than DDANT. One of the reasons is maybe because these players think non-DD is better. However, it might also be because they just haven't learned or can't udnerstand how to play Doomsday effectively. Whether that be because of a lack of time for practice or of personal preference, we'll never know.

DDANT also sometimes just gets too complicated to play compared to ANT where you just land the Ad Nauseam and go auto-pilot from there. My head hurts just playing DDANT online in crafting out DD stacks to get out of situations. I would imagine it would be worse for long tournaments.

[emidln]

In an effort to get away from this discussion, here is a play scenario. You are playing a game one against an unknown opponent and are on the play. You are playing Pulp_Fiction's hybrid list*. You mull then keep this opening hand:

Sensei's Divining Top
Brainstorm
Misty Rainforest
Flooded Strand
Dark Ritual
Doomsday

You lead Misty Rainforest->Island, Sensei's Divining Top. It resolves and you pass the turn. From here:

If your opponent leads with Taiga, Wild Nacatl, what do you do?
If your opponent leads with a blue fetch, pass, what do you do?
If your opponent leads with a Bayou, Thoughtseize, what is the most damaging card they can take and why?

Not all of these situations have finite endings. Some are just to see how you play with limited information while trying to improve your own position.


*for reference, pulp_fiction's hybrid maindeck in shorthand
9 u-fetch
2 sea
2 tundra
1 trop
1 island
4 petal
2 mox
4 rit
2 crit
4 led
4 bs
2 ponder
4 sdt
3 chant
3 silence
1 kgrip
4 mystical
3 infernal
1 adn
1 dd
1 med
1 igg
1 toa

[badjuju]

I don't get where everyone is saying that DDANT is a WAAY more complicated than ANT. You mean you actually have to use your brain a little bit? Sure. But for the most part DDANT can follow the same strategy as ANT and still do fine. DD is an OPTION and not a necessity for winning. I find myself using the standard pile more than half the time when DD, and the post-board piles aren't too difficult either as long as you can count your mana correctly. Familiarizing yourself with things like Brainstorm/Top/LED tricks due to DD will help you become more than just a better DD player, you'll improve yourself as an overall Storm player.

EDIT: Just saw emidln's post. Here's how I'd go about it. Correct me if I am wrong, please. I am still learning the deck and could use any help!

If your opponent leads with Taiga, Wild Nacatl, what do you do?

Untap, draw a card, and use the Island to Brainstorm. I want to see as many cards as possible, and hopefully go off ASAP before I'm within range of burn. Given that I have Dark Ritual in hand, I only need XXU after Dark Ritual to go off with DD. Because my opponent did not lead off with a fetch, I will most likely have to wait another turn or two (or depends what I get off of my Brainstorm) before going off because I will need to rack a storm up to 10 instead of 9 (which I am currently 2 storm shy of). Given that my Brainstorm is ass, I can play and crack a fetch then top before passing the turn. EDIT: So I was just trying to see if I could optimize the IGG DD pile here with LED/LED/IGG/Cantrip/Tendrils when I noticed that emidln cut the a card from the hand, so you can't pull that pile till the next turn.

If your opponent leads with a blue fetch, pass, what do you do?

The same as the previous, but I will play a Tundra before Brainstorming to avoid Daze and Stifle. EDIT: I will play a fetchland and Brainstorm (without cracking the fetch), then weigh my options from here. This allows me to play around Daze and seeing what I have while still not walking into a Stifle.

If your opponent leads with a Bayou, Thoughtseize, what is the most damaging card they can take and why?

After a bit of thinking, I think they will take the Doomsday out of fear. Taking a the Brainstorm seems like a weaker choice because I still have Top in play to help me sculpt. Dark Ritual may be another option when they see that I am low on black sources (fetched an Island first and have a Tundra in hand), but I still believe that DD is the correct choice.