[Deck] T.E.S. - The EPIC Storm

[Bryant Cook]

Well Bryant,

so definately 12 lands, finally same conclusion. Good job.
Regarding Empty, I can say now in the meta can be more effective but could prefer tendrils, anyway, as Ive been DDFT player also, so I'll still test the No Tendrils configuration, including the 4th moxen.

the only change will be -1 Tendrils +1 C.Moxen
But again the moxen now repeats too much with the gitaxian...

100% sure about the changes?
they seem a bit risky.
Testing enough?

I like to test my changes throughly before switching the numbers for the public. I can't take everyone's word for it. Twelve lands proved to be fine for now. The number may go back up at a later date.

Regarding your next sentence. I can't tell what you're saying, I understand that there's a language barrier. Where are you subtracting a Tendrils from? The sideboard?

[joemauer]

@Bryant: Since you are running three fetches now, have you considered swapping a sea for a city of brass?

[Bryant Cook]

@Bryant: Since you are running three fetches now, have you considered swapping a sea for a city of brass?

No. I don't see a single reason why I'd want to do that.

[joemauer]

No. I don't see a single reason why I'd want to do that.

City of Brass makes five colors and Underground Sea makes two colors.

Since you have less fetches then you don't run into the I have no lands to fetch problem with two duals.

[Bryant Cook]

City of Brass makes five colors and Underground Sea makes two colors.

Since you have less fetches then you don't run into the I have no lands to fetch problem with two duals.

It's the exact opposite problem. More actual lands, the more there are to fetch.

[Final Fortune]

I like to test my changes throughly before switching the numbers for the public. I can't take everyone's word for it. Twelve lands proved to be fine for now. The number may go back up at a later date.

Regarding your next sentence. I can't tell what you're saying, I understand that there's a language barrier. Where are you subtracting a Tendrils from? The sideboard?

I think he means he's going to subract the kill condition from your list (Empty the Warrens is the Tendrils of Agony slot) and replace it with the 4th Chrome Mox.

Regarding that issue, I can't understand the reasoning for not wanting to play with Empty the Warrens MD, because it's arguably better than Ad Nauseam vs Merfolk and RUG for 1 mana less.

@Bryant

What do you think of Cabal Therapy in the SB over Duress or Thought Seize? For me it's been a virtual Silence in a lot of match ups where the game goes long enough for the opponent to hold multiples of a single counter, and with 4 Gitaxian Probe and 3 Duress you pretty much always know when you either have to wish for disruption or when you can wish for the win.

Have you had time to test the 3 SB Empty the Warrens for the Merfolk and RUG match ups? I think my Sneak/Show match up is pretty winnable thanks to them playing stuff like Misdirection and Overmaster, and even tho' Xantid Swarm does provide an edge vs. Reanimator I think it's better to "sac" that match up in order to gain as much ground vs the popular aggro-control decks as possible.

I was thinking of playing something like,

1 Tendrils of Agony
3 Empty the Warrens
1 Diminishing Returns
1 Past in Flames
1 Cabal Therapy
1 Shattering Spree
4 Death Mark
3 Inquisition of Kozilek

[Pelikanudo]

I like to test my changes throughly before switching the numbers for the public. I can't take everyone's word for it. Twelve lands proved to be fine for now. The number may go back up at a later date.

Regarding your next sentence. I can't tell what you're saying, I understand that there's a language barrier. Where are you subtracting a Tendrils from? The sideboard?

Well,
Gitaxian simply thins the deck, so you'll find the cards more often than not, therefore you'll need to play less lands and maybe less chrome moxen, because you don't want to see 2 in hand and with 4 gitaxian you're likely to find them again more often than not.
This is a point.
The fact is that we've decreased the number of lands and moxen because of including 4 gitaxian, but the question is can parity handle this? what if gitaxian is countered?
This is other Point.
The parity with the number of threats - 10 now including Tendrils OR Empty seems correct, but I've never included/considered Empty OR Tendrils as a Threat, as you can say, now with Gitaxian you can, but you'll need to have them in hand or you'll simply prefer to I.T -> A.N, what happens next doesn't mind.
Apart, as DDFT player, I've found that Tendrils main is absolutly not neccesary, apart from the piles that includes Tendrils (one can be neccesary to avoid quasalys f.e.), if we extrapolate this to TES, it's absurd, as the only real purpose about Tendrils is to get it from I.T beeing casted before A.N. (I don't mention if you have Tendrils in hand which is only good vs control).
And the last Point,
I don't consider Empty warrens worth main, my meta is plagued by Miracles, which they're even playing E.E. main (logical inclusion if you consider that goblins and merfolks are gaining power), apart from those Terminus.

So if you reduce the chances, they become moreless:
- I.T. -> A.N. and -1 Mana
- I.T. -> Tendrils + 9 Storm before
- Tendrils in hand + 9 Storm (less often)
- I recognice No Tendrils main does not get better IGG, D.Returns, PiF.

So definately No Tendrils Main and 4th moxen.
And as Stratagey To Side:
- I don't expect to be extirped B.Wish - I'd put in 2nd games more dures effects. I really would like to see how many times people extirpate my b.Wishes.
- If I would expect to be extirped - this can be by: 3shold, pox(hymn, duress) and countertop as main threats - I'm considering to play 2 Empty in side, so that in these occasions I can side 1, except for the countertop variants, on which we are focused on other problems.

As a note regarding the Strategies To Side In The Post:
- I don't remember any occasion on which I left less than 3 moxen main.
- Regarding to Gitaxian, this should be a card that should not be sided out so much, the concept has changed a litle, with 12 lands 3 moxen and sometimes 2, you NEED at least 3 gitaxian, unless you count karakas on those scenarios. So as conclusion/question, can be considered to side out ponder instead of gitaxian? - contradictory.

Still I'm testing this and as I don't have time, this is theory, so I always prefer demonstrations as yours.

[Bryant Cook]

What do you think of Cabal Therapy in the SB over Duress or Thought Seize? For me it's been a virtual Silence in a lot of match ups where the game goes long enough for the opponent to hold multiples of a single counter, and with 4 Gitaxian Probe and 3 Duress you pretty much always know when you either have to wish for disruption or when you can wish for the win.

Have you had time to test the 3 SB Empty the Warrens for the Merfolk and RUG match ups? I think my Sneak/Show match up is pretty winnable thanks to them playing stuff like Misdirection and Overmaster, and even tho' Xantid Swarm does provide an edge vs. Reanimator I think it's better to "sac" that match up in order to gain as much ground vs the popular aggro-control decks as possible.

I was thinking of playing something like,

1 Tendrils of Agony
3 Empty the Warrens
1 Diminishing Returns
1 Past in Flames
1 Cabal Therapy
1 Shattering Spree
4 Death Mark
3 Inquisition of Kozilek

I'm not a fan at all of a Cabal Therapy over an Inquisition of Kozilek. If it were to replace anything it would be making the Thoughtseize leave due to the lifeloss that it causes. This would have to be tested quite a bit. In General I'm not a fan of Therapy but then again Im not a big fan of Thoughtseize either so I could see one replacing the other.

I have tested multiple Empty the Warrens in the sideboard. While this is a viable option, it's an option that really hinders the deck. With siding in two additional Warrens you're pretty much forced to sideboard out Ad Nauseam since it becomes terrible with multiple Emptys in the deck. At this point the deck is very linear. One option is to side a single additional Warrens instead of two. This way Ad Nauseam won't kill you consistently.

The problems with this game plan is that both decks can have outs. There are Merfolk and RUG players who still for some reason play Stifle and then there are others that play Rough/Tumble and Echoing Truth. Then on top of Merfolk having Echoing Truth sometimes they can actually just create enough blockers sometimes. This usually means a smaller Warrens for 8-10.

Lastly, that's a lot of Deathmark in your sideboard.

Well,
Gitaxian simply thins the deck, so you'll find the cards more often than not, therefore you'll need to play less lands and maybe less chrome moxen, because you don't want to see 2 in hand and with 4 gitaxian you're likely to find them again more often than not.
This is a point.
The fact is that we've decreased the number of lands and moxen because of including 4 gitaxian, but the question is can parity handle this? what if gitaxian is countered?
This is other Point.
The parity with the number of threats - 10 now including Tendrils OR Empty seems correct, but I've never included/considered Empty OR Tendrils as a Threat, as you can say, now with Gitaxian you can, but you'll need to have them in hand or you'll simply prefer to I.T -> A.N, what happens next doesn't mind.
Apart, as DDFT player, I've found that Tendrils main is absolutly not neccesary, apart from the piles that includes Tendrils (one can be neccesary to avoid quasalys f.e.), if we extrapolate this to TES, it's absurd, as the only real purpose about Tendrils is to get it from I.T beeing casted before A.N. (I don't mention if you have Tendrils in hand which is only good vs control).
And the last Point,
I don't consider Empty warrens worth main, my meta is plagued by Miracles, which they're even playing E.E. main (logical inclusion if you consider that goblins and merfolks are gaining power), apart from those Terminus.

So if you reduce the chances, they become moreless:
- I.T. -> A.N. and -1 Mana
- I.T. -> Tendrils + 9 Storm before
- Tendrils in hand + 9 Storm (less often)
- I recognice No Tendrils main does not get better IGG, D.Returns, PiF.

So definately No Tendrils Main and 4th moxen.
And as Stratagey To Side:
- I don't expect to be extirped B.Wish - I'd put in 2nd games more dures effects. I really would like to see how many times people extirpate my b.Wishes.
- If I would expect to be extirped - this can be by: 3shold, pox(hymn, duress) and countertop as main threats - I'm considering to play 2 Empty in side, so that in these occasions I can side 1, except for the countertop variants, on which we are focused on other problems.

As a note regarding the Strategies To Side In The Post:
- I don't remember any occasion on which I left less than 3 moxen main.
- Regarding to Gitaxian, this should be a card that should not be sided out so much, the concept has changed a litle, with 12 lands 3 moxen and sometimes 2, you NEED at least 3 gitaxian, unless you count karakas on those scenarios. So as conclusion/question, can be considered to side out ponder instead of gitaxian? - contradictory.

Still I'm testing this and as I don't have time, this is theory, so I always prefer demonstrations as yours.

Your initial points were just reiterating things I've previously stated. Empty or Tendrils I hand are situational threats but can often be dead cards. TES and those piles of Doomsday decks that have never put up results are different. Not playing a win condition will cost you games. Every win now costs you at least an additional two mana in a format swarming with taxing counter spells such as Daze and Spell Pierce.

If Warrens isn't good because of your Metagame run a Tendrils but something needs to be in there. But at this point do whatever you want because I'm tired of repeating myself.

As for the sideboarding guide. It's a loose strategy guide. It won't work perfectly but for the most part players should follow those general instructions. Gitaxian Probe is still one of the worst cards in the deck and the most easily sided out. In the matchups where it's being brought in its for the slower matchups where additional protection is better. Sideboarding out Ponder so that you can keep in Probes will only hurt the consistency of the deck.

[Bahamuth]

I have tested multiple Empty the Warrens in the sideboard. While this is a viable option, it's an option that really hinders the deck. With siding in two additional Warrens you're pretty much forced to sideboard out Ad Nauseam since it becomes terrible with multiple Emptys in the deck. At this point the deck is very linear. One option is to side a single additional Warrens instead of two. This way Ad Nauseam won't kill you consistently.

May I remind you that we were running versions of TES with mainboard ToA and IGG, and even multiple SSGs AND multiple Ad Nauseams when Ad Nauseam was just printed. Adding 2 4cc spells to your deck does not instantly invalidate AdN, especially because drawing into EtW with AdN is usually enough to win the game once you hit 4 mana.

The problems with this game plan is that both decks can have outs. There are Merfolk and RUG players who still for some reason play Stifle

I'm so happy people actually belive that Stifle is bad now.

and then there are others that play Rough/Tumble and Echoing Truth.

Usually 2. I don't care enough about that.

Those piles of Doomsday decks that have never put up results.

You know just as well that the only reason for this is that no one plays the deck (well).

Every win now costs you at least an additional two mana in a format swarming with taxing counter spells such as Daze and Spell Pierce.

Except if you board in EtW and your opponent doesn't know your exact hand somehow.

[Bryant Cook]

May I remind you that we were running versions of TES with mainboard ToA and IGG, and even multiple SSGs AND multiple Ad Nauseams when Ad Nauseam was just printed. Adding 2 4cc spells to your deck does not instantly invalidate AdN, especially because drawing into EtW with AdN is usually enough to win the game once you hit 4 mana.

I'm so happy people actually belive that Stifle is bad now.

Usually 2. I don't care enough about that.

You know just as well that the only reason for this is that no one plays the deck (well).

Except if you board in EtW and your opponent doesn't know your exact hand somehow.

May I remind you that those cards were cut for good reason? People quickly grew tired of killing themselves with those lists and I couldnt blame them since I was apart of that group. We reently cut the second Ad Nauseam because it was such an awful thing to flip. I will not be playing three copies of a four casting cost card in conjunction with Ad Nauseam. It's going to do nothing but make me want to flip tables and hulk out every time it kills me twice a round.

Same. Keep playing Thoughtscours. Please!

It's relevant. Empty isn't simply "just win".

No. I don't think Doomsday decks are good. They're the hipsters of combo, everyone wants to be cool like them. Except they suck and are terrible to be around. Let's see a good player play Doomsday? Emildn has been trying to convince people for years that deck is good and he's succeeded without results. By far the best long-term troll on this forum yet and people thought Thunderbluff was funny.

I guess you got me on your opponents not knowing specific sideboards. Can't argue that.

[SaberTooth]

In the last BoM a doomsday was in 7 position i gues... but well.. for me tes and ant are better

[Bahamuth]

May I remind you that those cards were cut for good reason? People quickly grew tired of killing themselves with those lists and I couldnt blame them since I was apart of that group. We reently cut the second Ad Nauseam because it was such an awful thing to flip. I will not be playing three copies of a four casting cost card in conjunction with Ad Nauseam. It's going to do nothing but make me want to flip tables and hulk out every time it kills me twice a round.

You won't even be playing Ad Nauseam twice a round because you can just win the game with EtW...

No. I don't think Doomsday decks are good. They're the hipsters of combo, everyone wants to be cool like them. Except they suck and are terrible to be around. Let's see a good player play Doomsday? Emildn has been trying to convince people for years that deck is good and he's succeeded without results. By far the best long-term troll on this forum yet and people thought Thunderbluff was funny.

http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/deck.asp?deck_id=939986
http://www.eternal-central.com/?p=2755

Given that there are like 4 people in the world that are seriously playing this deck, I'm pretty sure those are decent results.

[Bryant Cook]

You won't even be playing Ad Nauseam twice a round because you can just win the game with EtW...

http://magic.tcgplayer.com/db/deck.asp?deck_id=939986
http://www.eternal-central.com/?p=2755

Given that there are like 4 people in the world that are seriously playing this deck, I'm pretty sure those are decent results.

My point still stands. It makes Ad Nauseam unreliable. I will not be killing myself due to three Empty the Warrens in the deck.

As for Doomsday, still not impressed.

[Pelikanudo]

Ok, yes I also didn't want to take out WinCon main, same as DDFT, if you don't play tendrils main, you avoid some piles for some scenarios, same happens with TES, you avoid those 2 mana.
So, Testing 4 moxen 1 tendrils 4 Gitaxian 1 A.N 11 lands 3 dureses No Empty main.

@Bryant!
Please consider me one of the 4 players playing DDFT In the world!.
Be more constructive, please.
In my meta, likely I 'm the only one playing DDFT, next someone joined me...
There are few playing DDFT, but those Few win torunaments, Asheimer, Cheesburguer, Emidlin, Bahamut, all thanks!

See for reference:
http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/dec...6&iddeck=38737

[lambert101]

@Pelikanudo
Congrats on the finish but did you find yourself durdling around with this deck?
How do you deal with Maverick after Mom and Thalia?
Not trying to pick a fight but just don't understand why you would be arguing about DDT vs. T.E.S. in this thread.

@Bryant
How has the three fetch lands been working out? Haven't had time to test. I trust your judgement on this deck and wanted to know how it was working.

[Guy I Don't Know]

Awhile back TES and ANT were two distinct decks. Now I am looking at lists and it seems the main difference is rite of flame over cabal ritual. What are the other differences? I know the origins are different but now with PiF I am wondering if they have merged.

[joemauer]

Awhile back TES and ANT were two distinct decks. Now I am looking at lists and it seems the main difference is rite of flame over cabal ritual. What are the other differences? I know the origins are different but now with PiF I am wondering if they have merged.

There are three distinct differences in the maindecks.

1)rite versus cabal rit, which you already mentioned.

2) Ant stills play more lands while TES plays more Chrome Moxes.

3) TES is five colors so it can support Chant effects(as well xantid swarm) instead of more discard.

With all the complex thought trees that are now brought over to ANT because of the addition of B. wish, I am not sure what advantages it has over TES now. Being easier to play was the only thing ANT had going for it.

But ANT did win the last GP so maybe I am missing something.

[Vacrix]

But ANT did win the last GP so maybe I am missing something.

TES has a trade off for running 5 colors. It plays far fewer fetchlands which means Brainstorm loses a bit of its value. Also, fetches can get basics which makes Wasteland less effective if you expect it via Probe or a Discard spell.

Also, the discard package can be more effective than Chants in certain matchups. For example, when you have to deal with cards like Show and Tell, Counterbalance, as well as hate bears when your protection is IoK or Thoughtseize. Chant doesn't do much of anything in those cases. Also, if a Reanimator opponent's hand is light on reanimation spells, discard can be an effective way to slow them down, though this is rare. Another rare occasion is when you have played EtW, or plan to, and your opponent has access to Deed, EE, or Terminus. I've also played discard effects to good effect against stuff like Merfolk and take their Vial. It can really slow their clock down. In favor of Chant, it can occasionally be played as a time walk which can be especially relevant when the opponent has a brutal attack step on the way. EtW races versus something like Belcher (who is on the play) or the storm mirror can make or break the game when you can skip their combat phase. Also, I've seen decks like Planeswalker control (or some other slow controls decks that choose not to play CB) board in Leyline of Sanctity mainly for the Burn matchup and even against Tempo to shut off their reach but they can port it over to the storm combo matchup as well to force you into Goblin tokens or play around it with a removal spell. That makes Silence fantastic because it doesn't have to target the opponent to shut down countermagic.

TES's advantage over ANT though is probably that its the fastest non-glass house combo deck in the format. Its extremely explosive and has very good protection spells for the storm mirror and control matchups. ANT players like to run Preordain as well to help with consistency. Lately though Preordain has been replaced by Probe quite often. In terms of the speed, TES is actually faster than Belcher quite often (or at least tied) because Belcher has 7/11 win conditions leading to Goblin tokens, while TES can actually get the kill before turn 3 in most of your games. So basically Belcher actually plays and activates Belcher for the kill only 35% of the time and it can misfire and sometimes you have to pass the turn when you need another turn to activate. Next to SI, TES is basically the fastest deck you can play in the format. ANT follow TES in terms of speed but slows down a bit for consistency both in mana base and cantrips, with a discard package that helps it consistently disrupt an opponents strategy while TES focuses its protection more on protecting its own combo.

[Bryant Cook]

TES has a trade off for running 5 colors. It plays far fewer fetchlands which means Brainstorm loses a bit of its value. Also, fetches can get basics which makes Wasteland less effective if you expect it via Probe or a Discard spell.

Also, the discard package can be more effective than Chants in certain matchups. For example, when you have to deal with cards like Show and Tell, Counterbalance, as well as hate bears when your protection is IoK or Thoughtseize. Chant doesn't do much of anything in those cases. Also, if a Reanimator opponent's hand is light on reanimation spells, discard can be an effective way to slow them down, though this is rare. Another rare occasion is when you have played EtW, or plan to, and your opponent has access to Deed, EE, or Terminus. I've also played discard effects to good effect against stuff like Merfolk and take their Vial. It can really slow their clock down. In favor of Chant, it can occasionally be played as a time walk which can be especially relevant when the opponent has a brutal attack step on the way. EtW races versus something like Belcher (who is on the play) or the storm mirror can make or break the game when you can skip their combat phase. Also, I've seen decks like Planeswalker control (or some other slow controls decks that choose not to play CB) board in Leyline of Sanctity mainly for the Burn matchup and even against Tempo to shut off their reach but they can port it over to the storm combo matchup as well to force you into Goblin tokens or play around it with a removal spell. That makes Silence fantastic because it doesn't have to target the opponent to shut down countermagic.

TES's advantage over ANT though is probably that its the fastest non-glass house combo deck in the format. Its extremely explosive and has very good protection spells for the storm mirror and control matchups. ANT players like to run Preordain as well to help with consistency. Lately though Preordain has been replaced by Probe quite often. In terms of the speed, TES is actually faster than Belcher quite often (or at least tied) because Belcher has 7/11 win conditions leading to Goblin tokens, while TES can actually get the kill before turn 3 in most of your games. So basically Belcher actually plays and activates Belcher for the kill only 35% of the time and it can misfire and sometimes you have to pass the turn when you need another turn to activate. Next to SI, TES is basically the fastest deck you can play in the format. ANT follow TES in terms of speed but slows down a bit for consistency both in mana base and cantrips, with a discard package that helps it consistently disrupt an opponents strategy while TES focuses its protection more on protecting its own combo.

This is deceptively biased towards ANT. You mention how great the discard spells are but never mention how Silence can be better. Some of what you said is true though.

• T.E.S. plays just as much discard as ANT does if it needs to post board, it still has Inquisitions.
• Silence is a must counter. Meaning an opponent can't let you resolve it and then play the other counter spell in their hand. This happens with discard effects, I know, I play Duress too.
• Silence can negate multiple spells, Spell Snare, Stifle, Red Elemental Blast, and Blue Elemental Blasts just to name a few.
• Forces Surgical Extraction out of their hand at inopportune times.
• Can stop a Snapcaster Mage.
• Can stop Miracles.
• Silence can "Time walk" against decks. (You mentioned)
• Can be played to fool the opponent. There has been matches won due to Silencing on their upkeep as a time walk then Ad Nauseam on their end step.
• Ignores Leyline of Sanctity. (You mentioned)
• Incredible in the combo mirror. (You mentioned)

This is all I can brainstorm at the moment, I've got to get back to work.

[AriLax]

There are three distinct differences in the maindecks.

1)rite versus cabal rit, which you already mentioned.

2) Ant stills play more lands while TES plays more Chrome Moxes.

3) TES is five colors so it can support Chant effects(as well xantid swarm) instead of more discard.

With all the complex thought trees that are now brought over to ANT because of the addition of B. wish, I am not sure what advantages it has over TES now. Being easier to play was the only thing ANT had going for it.

But ANT did win the last GP so maybe I am missing something.

TES:

Silence is much better against conditional counters (Spell Snare, Stifle), Storm, and Reanimator (as you can't always be on the play to hit their Entomb and you can't always hit their reanimation spell with discard b/c they have so many.).

Also, here is approximately your cumulative distribution of kill turns.

T1: 15%
T2: 50%
T3: 80%
T4: 85%

ANT:

Discard is better against soft counters backed by a couple hard counters (ie. Merfolk's counter suite) and against slower combo (Sneak and Show).

Your mana base is also better against the Merfolk disruption suite.

Also, cumulative distribution of kill turns (based on my old 12 cantrip Grim ANT)

T1: 5%
T2: 20%
T3: 90%
T4: 97%

Most of this has to do with Cabal Ritual hitting threshold around T3 off a curve of cantrips/discard/fetches and with Ad Naus with 0 floating being very unreliable with only 4-5 Petal/Mox.

TL,DR:
If you don't have to kill anyone before turn 3 and aren't facing down a lot of hard counters, but instead are seeing a lot of Daze/Spell Pierce/Wasteland, ANT is a more reliable choice than TES.

If you need to race other turn 2 kills/threats or are playing against conditional counters, TES is much better as ANT really can't do either.

TL;DR of the TL;DR:

ANT > TES: Sneak and Show, Merfolk, certain RUG lists, slightly ahead in most bye matchups (Goblins, Zoo, etc).
TES > ANT: Reanimator, Miracle Countertop, prob Maverick (no idea what Probe-Therapy does here), Dredge, High Tide, Storm Mirrors
No idea: Esperblade


Also, no idea where this whole "TES is harder to play" thing came from. Transitioning between the two decks was almost entirely a matter of figuring out the stylistic differences in cantripping. Sure, TES has more lines to take once comboing, but they are all extremely obvious.

ANT is more about playing the math and maximizing cantrip EV, TES is more about reading the opponent and determining the key break point on when to combo. Neither is more difficult, just different.