It's the same as playing all of your hand into an Ad Nauseam and it gets FoWed. Sure, after it gets countered you have a chance to recover, but let's be honest... how often does that happen?Originally Posted by sigfig8
If you want to go on losing because you're playing against Zoo and he beat you a couple of times and he's holding a Bolt, or because a Gaddock Teeg is on the table, you're welcome.
-----------------------------------------------------
Avatar of kicks_422's creation and property
Actually, I think his question is quite valid, and you patronize him with an answer like this. Really, in regards to the question asked, this answer is complete bullshit.
To clarify: He was asking how DD improves a blue matchup at all, given that the blue player knows what to counter. Don't say "just chant him first", because that would be applicable to any storm engine.
I guess I'm in trouble now, questioning one of the great names in this thread, but go ahead and throw your thugs at me, I can take it.
Well done, you're right. I've been arrogant. I'll explain more in-depth.
Doomsday, as lots of experienced Storm Combo players have already pointed out, lets you come out lots of difficult situations at the little price of putting it into the maindeck along with Meditate and 4 Sensei's Divining Tops (which is not really a sacrifice because that card allows you to consistently cast Ad Nauseam in opponent's turns using LED and Mystical tutor, and it's obviously great with fetchlands, an almost-win against discard decks, an excellent card provider against Control, and so on). It's an aweome card tutor that lets you decide which cards you actually want to use to bypass the hate (even Chalice) and win, differently from Ad Nauseam which is bound to statistical and probability issues. It's you that must control your combo, not your luck.
First of all, you can bypass Gaddock Teeg, which is a little annoyance that many and many decks, from Bant to Zoo (here even maindeck) to Rock and so on. Against the old crappy Kithkin, it's evident that he actually becomes an advantage for you if you're playing DD, because you can have your Chant resolved and then, without needing to have a Slaughter pact or another removal in hand, you can go for the Doomsday pile containing the removal, which guarantees a safe win.
With Saito's build, you're either forced to find a removal wasting resources like Mystical tutor, or you're stuck because of your one-way plan to win the game, which is throwing Ad Nauseam and drawing a bunch of cards. Some people argue that the list can perform well against blue by inducing the opponent to throw counterspells at your discard effects/smalla ccelerations, but lately I've always noticed that blue players conceive Discard effects as something that may be let resolved-especially against a multiple-counters hand-, while chant is always, always a must counter for them, because it's a huge psychological threat: counter it or you're dead.
You can't now how much games I've won by bluffing a combo-turn Chanting them with some spare mana open, and them Daze-ing, me paying, and them Forcing it, making a 3x1.
Against Zoo,as I already mentioned in another post, they can take you down to 12-13 in just two turns. Playing 2 AdN and 2 Tendrils make this risky; why not to have a mathematically full win in the form of Infernal Tutor+LED+IGG, which happens to be good against anything aggroish but without blue or grave-hate?
Against blue aggro-control decks, sometimes Duress and Thoughseize (which I find to be quite horrible in an AdN-only deck) aren't enough, especially since you rely a lot on Infernal Tutor+LED chains and sometimes a-say- Faerie deck can screw you holding the classical "FOw+Blue card+Spell Snare" tryad. Which one do you take, if you're forced to? And if they FoW your duress (which is not probable, though) and you try to go off because you're under some damage pressure (more and more Ugr Faeries are packing Vendilion, Goyf, Bolt), and you throw all your hand into a Spell Snare?
Here, as you can see, playing Dooomsday reduces your engine-dependancy onto Infernal Tutor, and lets you play with ease against aggro-control, not being bound on life-totals questions. I could accept it if you were playing a LED-less ANT list, which has only cabal Rituals at the cc2 spot and also packs Pact of Negation, but in Saito's one I find it to be really risky.
Still, I admit that this one plays fairly better against Countertop decks, because of the 6 discards. In spite of this, sometimes them hiding a counter on the top with SDT is really problematic.
As you can see, I've wrote plenty of really hackneyed stuff, that has been already mentioned 5-6 times.But I write it again very gladly, if it can help one understand why playing Doomsday today is way more advantageous than throwing all of it into Ad Nauseam only, against which people ARE prepared.
Diversifying your options, playing a card against which most of the blue players don't seem to know how to hate it (that's the truth), waiting 'till you're low on life having scultped a God-Hand and, still managing to win, bypassing most of the hate bears, needing only 6 mana to go off without the need to flip (and pack) crappy decks like Chrome Mox..These are all the advantages Doomsday can offer. The point is that most of the average Combo players want it fast and comfortable,so they do not even try to pick it up and learn a bit the piles, which btw is an awesome memory and intelligence-exercise. They are like "ok, i want to build a deck that often can win on turn 2, and who cares if it is not flexible, has basically a single way to win, and is unprepared to face a varied metagame. That Pro player made top8 at a 2220 Gp with it, why shouldn't it work for me too? Let's take his list".
To me, in all honesty, Storm Combo is not only throwing a cc5 instant, hoping to get lucky draws, and cast Tendrils. It's a matter of bluffs, of surprises, of catching the opponent off-guard with unknown and unorthodox ways to win, of calculations and avoiding the problematic things. Doomsday provides all these things, Ad Nauseam does not.
No flame intended, because I already know that the Saitoers are already willing to flame me back- It's just a personal point of view.
-----------------------------------------------------
Avatar of kicks_422's creation and property
Right. Let's do it this way then.
ANT with 7 Duress is by definition a much more aggressive deck. It aims to win the game as soon as possible. It minimizes it's mana usage by playing it's protection a turn earlier if that helps. The deck is goes 'all-in' more often. If you play 2 Ad Nauseam, you potentially have the option to let the first one get countered and resolve the second one. The reality is that this almost never a possibility. It's generally going to involve 2 threshed Cabal Ritual, at least one Mystical Tutor and one of the AdN which you found with cantrips. There can obviously be no LEDS involved in casting the first one. Usually, even if you pull it off, you'll be at too low life to be able to win through AdN.
DDANT is pretty much completely the opposite. It's actually quite close to Solidarity against some matchups, because it prefers to wait and get more protection instead of just win. Of course, in this strategy, you can't expect to wait forever and still be able to win on the back of Ad Nauseam. The reason IGG is usually a bad plan against blue is obvious. Doomsday gives us all we want. It can win at low life, doesn't present a problem with opposing counters like IGG (meaning you don't have to resolve the Chant, which, if you are able to estimate what the opponent is holding correctly, comes down to needing one protection less) and it has the potential to win through all sorts of permanent hate like Teeg and Chalice.
DDANT is obviously slower. It also has worse Ad Nauseams. It's also much harder to play, because waiting blue out requires proper management of your hand, proper cantripping and deciding when the time is right to go win. In return you have a better or even much better blue matchup.
"Part of me belives that Barrin taught me meditation simply to shut me up."
-Ertai, wizard adept
http://solidarityprimer.proboards85.com/index.cgi
Thank you both.
As you say yourselfs, I have read this a thousand times, and I agree with you to some extent (even though I don't play DD. I don't play Saito's list either, but that is of no importance). It was the tone directed at sigfig8 I reacted on.
Since I usually find this thread very very good and informative, I would hate it if it becamse as hostile as the tempo thresh thread for example, where nothing relevant has been discussed in the last year =)
Thank you to everyone for the throrough answer, and for taking me seriously. I've been playing ANT for 6 months or so now, and I am slowly becoming more adept at it. Perhaps now that I've gotten comfortable with Saito's deck, I should try to kick the difficulty up a notch by shuffling in DD and Meditate. I already run 2 tops, and going to 4 by taking out a chrome mox and a ponder would be barely noticeable. There are so many piles, though, that I'm going to have to study them like I would an exam! But as was mentioned before, this is a good exercise of intellectual curiosity and challenge. Both of which I truly enjoy since work often falls short in this domain! Who would have thought Magic would help me grow more than my career!?
I think I'll try out that 2 cards combo in my DDANT sideboard, because it has plenty of space. Maybe I even leave out Krosan Grip for it, I'm not sure on that one though. Isle+Emrakul finally seems like a decent way to win against Counterbalance and that's a fact that I love.
If we can handle Counterbalance on a regular basis, the format is ours. :)
After some early testing, I have found Shell-Emrakul to significantly improve the Countertop matchup. I think even if this is the only matchup in which these cards get boarded in (which it may be), it will still be worth it to me.
If you want to play ADN alongside with cc15 cards, play Vintage.
If you have problems with CB play 3-4 Grips.
Please see 1 page ago when we discussed siding out AdN when you side in Emrakul. Second, why would playing AdN with Emrakul even be acceptable in Vintage? Third, please don't say "If you have problems with CB..." as if you don't have problems with CB. If you claim that you don't, than you're a filthy liar. Finally, quit being such a dismissive d-bag. At least back up your suggestion (3-4 Grips) with some anectodal testing data (i.e. "I tried out Shell-Emrakul, but didn't find it to be as effective as 3-4 Grips vs. CB").
I must agree with B.C., your point of view is ridiculously phrased and doesn't really make sense.If you want to play ADN alongside with cc15 cards, play Vintage.
If you have problems with CB play 3-4 Grips.
On a sidenote: do you play the +2 DD transformational sideboard?
You should go playing Burn instead.
-----------------------------------------------------
Avatar of kicks_422's creation and property
Agreed. My testing has shown the same. The plan of boarding in 3 Grips has never really worked well for me, and I think the Emrakul plan gives a much better shot at actually winning this matchup consistently.Please see 1 page ago when we discussed siding out AdN when you side in Emrakul. Second, why would playing AdN with Emrakul even be acceptable in Vintage? Third, please don't say "If you have problems with CB..." as if you don't have problems with CB. If you claim that you don't, than you're a filthy liar. Finally, quit being such a dismissive d-bag. At least back up your suggestion (3-4 Grips) with some anectodal testing data (i.e. "I tried out Shell-Emrakul, but didn't find it to be as effective as 3-4 Grips vs. CB").
Pls stop acting like you're the 4 year old grandosn of michael corleone.
I've testet this list in the last two weeks and the CBT mu was quite even for me, as the most CBT decks in my meta are quite contolish, wich makes DD worse, cuz they play up to 7 spells in the cc3 slot.
Please learn to spell?Pls stop acting like you're the 4 year old grandosn of michael corleone.
I've testet this list in the last two weeks and the CBT mu was quite even for me, as the most CBT decks in my meta are quite contolish, wich makes DD worse, cuz they play up to 7 spells in the cc3 slot.
More importantly, while Krosan Grip is good against Counterbalance, especially when you can Mystical Tutor it up in response, winning with Doomsday and Emrakul is just plain better. When in doubt, choose to win.
Question for those of you playing the Doomsday/ANT hybrid: how often do you win using Ad Nauseam, and how often do you win using Doomsday? And when do you decide which route to go?
Obviously, with respect to the second question, you go with Doomsday when you can win for sure, because it has the advantage of not being stochastic like Ad Nauseam. But what about in more borderline situations? For example, it's early in the game, and you have some acceleration and a tutor. Do you go for the turn 2 or 3 Ad Nauseam, drawing into a bunch of cards that may or may not win, or do you slow play it, waiting for more acceleration and disruption to set up a Doomsday several turns later? I realize that this will vary depending on your exact hand, your matchup, you life total, and the board situation, but what are factors that lead you towards one route versus the other?
G1, I tend to go for Ad Naus, especially against unknown opponent. I wouldn't say either is "right" or "wrong", but the deck is build to be a speed demon, so why not abuse it. Of course, against unknown opponent, you must duress first.
However, I actually take Ad Naus out when I bring in Bobs, because they don't play too well together
Another question: do you guys tend to save your zero mana artifacts until the last moment (i.e. when about to go off for storm) to build up the storm count, or do you dump them as quickly as possible to avoid hate like discard effects or lock pieces like Chalice, Thorn of Amethyst, etc. that might get dropped? What situations would steer you towards one direction versus the other?
Normally If you don't have to play them, keep those 0 mana artifacts in your hand. This is true against all lock pieces but against a heavy discard deck like eva green or some versions of the rock you're better off play them. Still it can be situational, for instance when you're dropping them you must know that your storm count will be lower thus harder to go off with DD, much harder to chain spells for storm count and win (obviously). In that case Ad nauseam will probably be your egine. somethimes you will want to keep 1 or 2 0 zero manacost artifacts in your hand to create enough storm to win with DD. but this is more of an exception.
There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)
