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

[Togores]

And what could I play instead of the empty?

[vercadium]

Cabal Ritual is just so slow. I was really on the fence about the card for a long time, but I know where I stand now, in TES it's hot trash as we're trying to be a fast deck with a card that's inherently sluggish.

I agree with you in principle, I was just trying to find something to do with that extra sideboard slot (in a non-basic list). It's not like the 3rd Chrome Mox is amazing either.

I don't want to devolve this discussion into the pros/cons of Cabal Ritual and Chrome Mox though, which we've discussed at length before - what I really want to highlight is the room we have in the sideboard and how to work the list to utilise it:

Moving the Bayou to the sideboard to use basics is one way.

If running mono-duals, how else would this space be used? Bonus copies of Chain of Vapor and Surgical Extraction that aren't needed or narrow answers like Shattering Spree don't seem great. Neither are my proposal of Cabal Rituals.

[Asthereal]

Cabal Ritual is just so slow. I was really on the fence about the card for a long time, but I know where I stand now, in TES it's hot trash as we're trying to be a fast deck with a card that's inherently sluggish.

Fair point. I have played with the two Cabal Rits for some time now, and I have mostly really liked them, but they can be a nuisance, and I actually quite often failed to threshold them, so they weren't that good. Maybe I just mostly liked the 20 accell list.

If we want to be fast and run 20 accell, we could play 2x Chrome Mox, 2x Simian Spirit Guide.
Guides are better cards to have in hand, usually, and without Empty main the two Guides won't mess up our Ad Nauseams too much. We still have two Chrome Moxen for free initial mana, and without Empty we get to flip cards until 3 life instead of 4, which is still an improvement.

[Lemnear]

Fair point. I have played with the two Cabal Rits for some time now, and I have mostly really liked them, but they can be a nuisance, and I actually quite often failed to threshold them, so they weren't that good. Maybe I just mostly liked the 20 accell list.

If we want to be fast and run 20 accell, we could play 2x Chrome Mox, 2x Simian Spirit Guide.
Guides are better cards to have in hand, usually, and without Empty main the two Guides won't mess up our Ad Nauseams too much. We still have two Chrome Moxen for free initial mana, and without Empty we get to flip cards until 3 life instead of 4, which is still an improvement.

This topic sounds familiar. Like months ago, in regards to that topic, I have to ask why you want to bother with Chrome Moxen and stuff if you don't plan to rely on EtW?

[Pelikanudo]

And what could I play instead of the empty?

I almost always side out EtW also, but this is not the point, I do not recomend you to take out this card from the main, vs that RUG Match up you played, EtW is in deed The card that likely will make you win as example.

As you take out a business spell, likely I'd bring the 4th I.T.

my opinion regarding I.T. is the same as Bahamut in here - here we are both mathematician.

The 3 stages I consider:
a) Playing 10 Business spells Total
b) 9 --> moving I.T. to the side
c) 8 --> moving EtW to the side

in my opinion you could do b) but not c), my mathematical mind doesn't allow even b), as said just my opinión.

As example of what I think:
If I were to play ANT someday I would play it with at least 2 Grim Tutor in adition to 4I.T.

[Asthereal]

This topic sounds familiar. Like months ago, in regards to that topic, I have to ask why you want to bother with Chrome Moxen and stuff if you don't plan to rely on EtW?

Because you want a fast Ad Nauseam?
If you want a slow Ad Nauseam or a slow Past in Flames kill, there's always ANT.

And yes, a few months ago I tested Guides instead of Moxen, but that was because I drew a million Moxen in my opening hands, which was bugging me to such an extent that I wanted to cut all of them. And I found that a split between Mox and Guide was probably optimal, if a list with Guides would be optimal at all. So here it is.

[Togores]

I almost always side out EtW also, but this is not the point, I do not recomend you to take out this card from the main, vs that RUG Match up you played, EtW is in deed The card that likely will make you win as example.

As you take out a business spell, likely I'd bring the 4th I.T.

my opinion regarding I.T. is the same as Bahamut in here - here we are both mathematician.

The 3 stages I consider:
a) Playing 10 Business spells Total
b) 9 --> moving I.T. to the side
c) 8 --> moving EtW to the side

in my opinion you could do b) but not c), my mathematical mind doesn't allow even b), as said just my opinión.

As example of what I think:
If I were to play ANT someday I would play it with at least 2 Grim Tutor in adition to 4I.T.

Im not gonna play infernal main. I like the card a lot in the side and i wish really a lot of times for it. i want another card. Now its -1 mox -1 empty +2 cabal. But i would like another card instead.
May be a random preordain could do the job...

[Bryant Cook]

Fair point. I have played with the two Cabal Rits for some time now, and I have mostly really liked them, but they can be a nuisance, and I actually quite often failed to threshold them, so they weren't that good. Maybe I just mostly liked the 20 accell list.

If we want to be fast and run 20 accell, we could play 2x Chrome Mox, 2x Simian Spirit Guide.
Guides are better cards to have in hand, usually, and without Empty main the two Guides won't mess up our Ad Nauseams too much. We still have two Chrome Moxen for free initial mana, and without Empty we get to flip cards until 3 life instead of 4, which is still an improvement.

I'm still on Empty as I'm a big fan of the synergy with Therapy and the ability to go off with 4 mana after a Tutor effect instead of five. I'm pretty happy with my list for the moment, I don't really see need for change.

[Dice_Box]

I can see a reason for a change, the current list you have up happens to be illegal.

[Bryant Cook]

If you followed the thread, there has been discussion of the changes over the last few pages. But for those of you to lazy to put 1+1 together, here's the list:

4 Polluted Delta
2 Misty Rainforest
1 Bloodstained Mire
2 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Island
1 Swamp

3 Chrome Mox
4 Lotus Petal
4 Lion's Eye Diamond
4 Dark Ritual
4 Rite of Flame

3 Infernal Tutor
4 Burning Wish
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Cabal Therapy
3 Duress
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Ad Nauseam

Sideboard
1 Bayou
3 Abrupt Decay
3 Xantid Swarm
2 Pyroclasm
1 Void Snare
1 Infernal Tutor
1 Massacre
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Past in Flames

[tescrin]

I'm still on Empty as I'm a big fan of the synergy with Therapy and the ability to go off with 4 mana after a Tutor effect instead of five. I'm pretty happy with my list for the moment, I don't really see need for change.

I've had both played against me (a lot) to reasonable success; though I normally view the Empty plan as unreliable. If your opponent has a Top/Cantrip and 3 outs to empty, they have ~45+% of finding it (33+% with 2); which is what an RNG would do. A human will likely consider keeping a hand with an out to empty if it has real interaction; simply on the reasonable chance you'll go for it. Considering that most people probably have at least two outs (Charm, Persecution, Deluge, EE) due to Elves' presence.

It's a risky move to try to win with it if Elves or Lingering Souls are on the radar IMO; unless you know their deck arch can't handle it (which for D&T and such may well be worth it.)

[Lemnear]

Because you want a fast Ad Nauseam?
If you want a slow Ad Nauseam or a slow Past in Flames kill, there's always ANT.

And yes, a few months ago I tested Guides instead of Moxen, but that was because I drew a million Moxen in my opening hands, which was bugging me to such an extent that I wanted to cut all of them. And I found that a split between Mox and Guide was probably optimal, if a list with Guides would be optimal at all. So here it is.

Fast Ad Nauseam... by shaving an Infernal to enable 9-mana-playlines while 2-for-1'ing yourself for a Mox in a metagame which will see the return of Spell Pierce and Stifle? I have my doubts.

[Bryant Cook]

Fast Ad Nauseam... by shaving an Infernal to enable 9-mana-playlines while 2-for-1'ing yourself for a Mox in a metagame which will see the return of Spell Pierce and Stifle? I have my doubts.

Comments like this aren't constructive. I could say the same about you being a lone person advocating sol lands.

Chrome Moxen and the sideboard Infernal Tutor have worked for more than one person, not to mention, you even admit to siding out a tutor fairly often. There isn't much of a difference.

I've had both played against me (a lot) to reasonable success; though I normally view the Empty plan as unreliable. If your opponent has a Top/Cantrip and 3 outs to empty, they have ~45+% of finding it (33+% with 2); which is what an RNG would do. A human will likely consider keeping a hand with an out to empty if it has real interaction; simply on the reasonable chance you'll go for it. Considering that most people probably have at least two outs (Charm, Persecution, Deluge, EE) due to Elves' presence.

It's a risky move to try to win with it if Elves or Lingering Souls are on the radar IMO; unless you know their deck arch can't handle it (which for D&T and such may well be worth it.)

Most non-miracles lists don't play three outs to be fair, not to mention you're assuming this is post-board with those cards. We have our own disruption to stop them as well (7 discard spells and 4 Gitaxian Probe).

[Lemnear]

Comments like this aren't constructive. I could say the same about you being a lone person advocating sol lands.

Chrome Moxen and the sideboard Infernal Tutor have worked for more than one person, not to mention, you even admit to siding out a tutor fairly often.

Yeah, I'm used to that spot time and time again ;)

Get me right. I know about our position during last spring and during the TC metagame and we can only try to predict how the upcoming metagame looks like. I'm not convinced we can keep following the traits we used for a metagame w/o Wasteland/Pierce/Stifle/Hymn and that's my working focus

I'm mainly siding the Infernal against control and Sol Lands are miles better to reach 9 mana than Moxen.

[Togores]

Edit 2: have to read that report later, Rodrigo.

Warte noch auf deiner meinung ;)

2 hours writting should be worth some hinsights on at least hands to keep.

[Lemnear]

Warte noch auf deiner meinung ;)

2 hours writting should be worth some hinsights on at least hands to keep.

Yeah, I have not forgotten to do this. Had to delay that to find time for an adequate response :)

[vercadium]

For all my chatter here yesterday, I failed to mention that I'm pleased with the list I've been playing. I'm playing the same 75 Bryant has posted above. As I mentioned yesterday, the only high-impact card choice that I'm unsure of is the basics and, at the moment, I believe that any issues the basics present can be avoided by a change in play pattern, rather than a change in lands.

[Pelikanudo]

Comments like this aren't constructive. I could say the same about you being a lone person advocating sol lands.

Chrome Moxen and the sideboard Infernal Tutor have worked for more than one person, not to mention, you even admit to siding out a tutor fairly often. There isn't much of a difference.



Most non-miracles lists don't play three outs to be fair, not to mention you're assuming this is post-board with those cards. We have our own disruption to stop them as well (7 discard spells and 4 Gitaxian Probe).

I'm 100% agree on Lem and Bahamut also.

Why the hell you play the best enabler in the Side there is such a huge difference between 7 and 9 mana....
Even I also usually play the 4th in side most of the 2nd and 3rd games, BUT the 1st games need to be compressed as much as possible.
I would prefer to play 3 B.W. and 4 I.T. and not backwards...
I don't understand why you want to make a good card a bad card...

[Lemnear]

Rodrigo, I commented in the Tournament Report, but I want to leave the response also here for further discussion:

Hey, pal! Took a while but here's my 0.02$ on each round:

R1 - Miracles
G1: the classic Jab-Hook-KO. I'm used to goldfish under these circumstances and maybe this is a reason my results point me in another direction of building the deck. Dunno. I'm interrested in the Miracles build for reasons regarding EtW. I found EtW viable against non-Ponder builds, but complete jank otherwise. Boarding is fine for that layout.
G2: you have 8 outs to find a Volcanic to do actually something with the Wishes. The hand offers three pieces of disruption and two cards which basically do nothing without 5 more mana and among them a red IMS. Mind that a Volcanic still leaves Decay uncastable while any U.Sea/Island/Swamp leaves the Wishes dead. You can't keep that hand based on T1 Xantid alone.
G3: opponent can't count to 5

R2 - Maverick
G1: Belcher-Mode. 10 Goblins is a but risky if he opens with DRS. Giving your opponent three turns is enough to setup Batterskull or fetch Tabernacle (if he runs it). Just food for thought here. Boarding is once more fine. I however wonder if we really need Pyroclasm or if Decay would do the job as well aka saving SB space.
G2: 2x Mother + Teeg is near impossible to break free especially with Clasm. If you pick the Teeg instead of the Thalia, you have the option to Wish for Massacre later and sweep the board despite the Mothers (given that I have no clue about your manabase at that point). Given your Clasm had been a Decay and you have taken out the Teeg with Therapy, would it have been possible to Massacre first and Decay the Knight and win from there?
G3: Belcher-Mimic Vol.2 ... Were your Goblins in G1 also fueled by LED? I try to expand by data-sheet to measure the importance for T1/2 combos and find statistic evidence that Chrome Mox' ability to enable Hellbent is pretty irrelevant. Thx

R3 - Meerfolk
G1: Would have liked to see the Rest of the hand. A sole Petal isn't THAT bad depending on the Rest. A mull to 5 is :/
G2: I'm unsure about the boarding. I know Meerfolk players who Maindeck Chalice, so I tend to bring in Decays at times in place of the Duress' otherwise a T2 Chalice @1 + FoW gets really nasty even if you run Xantids (which could get countered like your other protection). Just something to have in mind. Rest of the game in 3 letters: lol
G3: here come the Decays I talked about. I'm surprisingly also not THE biggest fan of EtW here, so boarding it out is valid. I would have cutted Duress' instead of Therapies because of the fact that you can mess with their 4-off lords and Cursecatchers which is relevant once you want to go for the SB EtW and win the race. He fucks up by not playing the Chalice in two consecutive turns ... sometimes you can't help people ... geez

R4 - Canadian
G1: You ate double Wasteland on your Volcanics? Harsh. Am I mistaken if I suspect that Basics did nothing to affect that game?
G2: once more it appears to be the case that you were choose on BR for your combo turn. Did the Basics at least stabilize the early game?

R5 - UWR Blade
G1: I'm writing all this on my iPhone4 and it begins to feel like torture, Rodrigo xD. Anyways, we have another scenario for double Discard out of 7 in the MB. I know why I'm so used to play Virtual 10 of them. Better lucky than good, I guess. I like your bravery, man.
G2: Fine boarding. EtW is so-so depending if you can dodge the Skull. All Mages on Wish, I guess? You can't win them all...
G3: I still dislike the Island from my last testing with Basics, but I think it's still better than the 3rd Mox. I have no clue what he thought at that point with the Infernal. Period

R6 - Junk
ID: why not

Top 8 - Deathblade
G1: Belcher ftw! Once again: LED; no Mox involved.
G2: i don't like the MB ToA because post-AN the access to it is limited and expensive unless you flip itself. Rest of the boarding mimics the match before. His keep was bad once again and it did not even matter if you hit with the Therapy. Neat.

Top 4 - Lands
G1: Mother of God! Any Black IMS and you explode. I couldn't resist this keep either. Boarding isn't bad, I just fear Tabernacle so keeping EtW is risky. I prefer the 4th infernal against a possible Wasteland lock making the SB IT playline hard to execute
G2: happens.
G3: this might be exceptional, but given the mana you have in your hand and the business you need paired with his 2cc hate, I would have fetched an U.Sea before probing and lowering the Chance to draw more lands slightly. Even if he has Wasteland, you lose nothing with Swamp+Volcanic still delivering all colors you need but with him possibly delaying his 2cc hate the turn you possibly need to draw into business. Being greedy in this situation would've possibly been better.

Sorry for the delay ;D

[Lemnear]

I'm 100% agree on Lem and Bahamut also.

Why the hell you play the best enabler in the Side there is such a huge difference between 7 and 9 mana....
Even I also usually play the 4th in side most of the 2nd and 3rd games, BUT the 1st games need to be compressed as much as possible.
I would prefer to play 3 B.W. and 4 I.T. and not backwards...
I don't understand why you want to make a good card a bad card...

I feel like havin to set this into relation. There is sure a metagame for that 9-mana playline if the field is slower and passive-controlish and you are running options to bridge the mana-gap with powerful cards like Cabal Ritual, but under the assumption that the metagame will return to Wasteland/Pierce/Hymn I have my doubts about the viability of that plan or the "Wish for Infernal and pass the turn" scenario.