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

[Asthereal]

I know in some ANT variations you do ... sideboard out a Lion's Eye Diamond...

No you don't.

... in TES, do you ever sideboard out a Lion's Eye Diamond?

No you don't.

... why do you guys consider Mana Confluence to be superior to City of Brass? Because Port?

Yes. Only reason.

Theoretically, City is better if the opponent has no Port, because the damage is a trigger instead of a cost, so stuff can happen before the trigger resolves. Example: (not entirely sure this works, but...) I read about a guy going "I am at one life. I announce Tendrils. Show Tendrils from hand. Tap mana to pay for Tendrils. Tap City for this. City triggers. Trigger on the stack on top of Tendrils. Then Tendrils storm trigger on the stack on top of that." If storm is high enough this kills the opponent before the City trigger kills you.

There are other applications thinkable, but it's very limited. Since this is way more of a fringe case than encountering a Port (Death&Taxes!), Mana Confluence is strictly better than Port. City looks better though, which is also a factor.

[Lemnear]

There were too many mistakes in this games, don't know where to start here :D

Yep. Sat in the U9 to work when I opened the thread to just saw the boarding and skipped the post. Then I saw the talk about boarding out LED and closed the thread immediately. Took me coffee #1 to make a first response.

Given all the questions in the thread and FB group: Shall we join forces at Friday of GP Lille and hold Storm Seminars for 30€/h? ;)

After the "Ambitions 2015" tournament was canceled by Felix, I have no further plans than playing Trials for fun otherwise, getting cards signed, deliver/pickup orders, etc. Think about it :D

I know in some ANT variations you do it, but in TES, do you ever sideboard out a Lion's Eye Diamond? Also, why do you guys consider Mana Confluence to be superior to City of Brass? Because Port?

Because of Port, Tangle Wire and other minor relevant stuff. The question is, why you bother with either card. TES isn't running rainbow lands at all atm and Gemstone Mine remains the superior rainbow land after all. Can't foresee us running more than 4 rainbow lands ever again.

You never board out Probes, Wishes, Petals or LEDs in TES. No exceptions. This is an Ad Nauseam deck after all. ANT could allow itself to do this, as Ritual effects are much more valuable than artifact mana, if your gameplan is to cast PIF rather than Ad Nauseam, especially if you play against Chalice of the Void @ 0 and similar stuff, which ANT can handle much better than TES. Boarding out LED in ANT is also still pretty uncommon

New situation, same decks, in a practice environment.

TES vs Manaless Dredge. Game 2, won the first. I'm on the play. Sideboard was -1 EtW, +ToA

I'm almost certain I talked about this boarding before and made it clear, why it's really bad. Honestly, I stopped reading at this point while I was in the subway, because I was frustrated to see this again and not wanted to follow up with a jerk post. I had coffee and a sandwich in the meanwhile so I'm ready to give an adequate response, by telling you to either board in PIF for EtW in this matchup or don't board at all. EtW can race Manaless and I told you this before. It's kinda funny because of the hand you drew:

Hand is the following:

Volcanic Island
Polluted Delta
Gitaxian Probe
Dark Ritual
Lion's Eye Diamond
Tendrils of Agony
Chrome Mox

1) Do you keep that? I did, hoping to draw an Infernal Tutor and go on a Ad Nauseam to Past In Flames route.

Thats a solid keep, if the ToA was still an EtW and a nice example of why you don't want to board like this, as EtW would win this game, but ToA does nothing. Even worse: The only way to access ToA at this point post-AN is via Wish->PIF->ToA which is a full 4 mana more expensive than wishing for ToA directly. How unreasonable is that?

Turn 1: Considering I can't go this turn, but not fearing a Cabal Therapy yet (no creatures in play, she plays Manaless), I put down the Volanic Island and pay the blue for Gitaxian probe. So I see her hand:

Narcomoeba
Narcomoeba
Mindbreak Trap
Force of Will
Stinkweed Imp
Dread Return
Nether Shadow

Rather annoyed, I draw my card: Lion's Eye Diamond. Pass the turn. She draws and puts Stinkweed Imp in her graveyard.

There is a whole array of mistakes involved by going "Volcanic->blue mana->Probe" here:

1) Why pay mana here? Manaless isn't attacking you before turn 3 anyways so the lifeloss is irrelevant
2) Why not cast Probe first to see whats up and what you are drawing before you make a color-commiting landdrop?
3) How bad is paying mana for Probe if you draw a Ponder or Therapy with it?
4) Why play Probe at all? It would deliver free stormcount for the ToA in your hand for the killturn.
5) Why look into your opponents hand if you have no combo to follow up with or a discard spell at all?

Don't cast a Probe just because you can. It's a wide-spread and bad habit.

Turn 2: Draw Burning Wish.

2) What do you do at that point!? I have no discard in the sideboard for her counterspells. On the spot, my first thought is to bait a Force of Will, or grab Past in Flames right away if she doesn't respond. I play my Polluted Delta, fetch for an Underground Sea, and tap Volcanic Island + Underground Sea to cast Burning Wish. It gets countered, she sacrifices a Narco to her Force of Will, and my Past in Flames is still in my sideboard. I feel like I need that Infernal Tutor, but that with it, my win is assured. I pass the turn.

I personally would have continued playing "land, go" and try to use the wish as counterbait later to fuel stormcount or grab EtW/PIF after drawing into discard. Given your opponent misplayed here by countering the Wish w/o floated mana here with a FoW, you have lost nothing. I would have dropped the Diamond at this point to get around MBT later.

She gets her first cards in her grave on her turn, Dredging for 5, but no creatures are in play yet. She gets a Bridge tho, and a Dredger, and a FoW. So I know only one is in her library.

Turn 3: I draw Brainstorm. I pass. On her turn, she gets more cards.

Turn 4: I draw Ponder. I tap my Volcanic to play Ponder, and I see: Lotus Petal, Rite of Flames, Polluted Delta.

3) Do you shuffle this, or take the Delta and Brainstorm? I took the Delta, but now I feel like it was the bad choice, I could have drawn an Infernal, and play Dark Ritual, Imprint the Brainstorm on the Chrome Mox, and then go for Ad Nauseam. But hey, I drew Delta, so I pass.

I guess it's valid to keep this Ponder and draw the Delta, Brainstorm into Petal + RoF + [unknown card] and put back Mox + ToA at this point (all given that you played the way you did up to this point making a natural ToA from hand very unlikely) and shuffle with the Delta to get another land depending on what the unknown drawn card was. If its a discard spell or cantrip, you can immediately continue for example. Drop the Petal.

On her turn, she attacks with a Nether Shadow and an Ichorid, so 4 total. I drop at 15 due to my fetch. She managed to get a Cabal Therapy in her graveyard and sacrifice her Shadow to it: in response, I Brainstorm. I draw Lotus Petal, Rite of Flames, Cabal Therapy.

4) Shuffling with Delta was mandatory before casting the Brainstorm, right? As I could still win next turn, I would have seen 3 new cards, instead of one. At that time, after that mistake, I realized she was starting with her combos/attacks, but that I still had to get rid of the FoW and the Mindbreak Trap.

What you did here is plain wasting mana and time. We know now that the third card would have been a Therapy, you could have used to get rid of the MBT already and before your next untap step (Thought she used the FoW on Wish? Why talking about FoW here?). Nothing is lost here, depending on what you put back with Brainstorm and if you fetched to get that stuff gone. There are no notes about what you did here. May enlight me?

5) Would you scoop? I felt like there was no way out of this. I kept playing the game (and noted what I did), but there was so many mistakes they're not even worth mentioning. I was crushed

Why? Despite all the mistakes made up to the Brainstorm (which I know nothing about; see above), the game was still wide open and you able to win with AN or PIF. *shrug*

6) While keeping my LEDs in hand, was I losing myself a turn, in case of an Infernal draw, due to Mindbreak Trap? My plan was to Infernal to Ad Nauseam ASAP. I had to bypass/bait/discard 2 FoW + 1 MBT to that. 2 LED + Infernal + Ad Nauseam is 4 spells, she would have been able to counter. Infernal + Ad Nauseam using already in place LEDs isn't as bad.

You also risked it being discarded. We have talked about that before, like we did about boarding ToA, dood. I don't know where the second FoW is coming from. You stated she had MBT + FoW in her opener and you baited her into countering the Wish plus had a therapy available. Did you knew she runs MBT and FoW in board? If yes, why did you not bring in Xantids?

Theoretically, City is better if the opponent has no Port, because the damage is a trigger instead of a cost, so stuff can happen before the trigger resolves. Example: (not entirely sure this works, but...) I read about a guy going "I am at one life. I announce Tendrils. Show Tendrils from hand. Tap mana to pay for Tendrils. Tap City for this. City triggers. Trigger on the stack on top of Tendrils. Then Tendrils storm trigger on the stack on top of that." If storm is high enough this kills the opponent before the City trigger kills you.

You can totally do that. Part of the fact that it's allowed to pay for costs after a spell is announced. One of the few advantages players have who know the rules of the game.

[sawatarix]

wow, you finally answered all the questions.

I'm willing to do a Storm seminar at Lille if someone pays me ;)

About TES, about ANT, about anything ;)

[Lemnear]

Heart of the Storm - Storm Shards #1 @ theepicstorm.com #ArticleOuttaNowhere

[Asthereal]

Theoretically, City is better if the opponent has no Port, because the damage is a trigger instead of a cost, so stuff can happen before the trigger resolves. Example: (not entirely sure this works, but...) I read about a guy going "I am at one life. I announce Tendrils. Show Tendrils from hand. Tap mana to pay for Tendrils. Tap City for this. City triggers. Trigger on the stack on top of Tendrils. Then Tendrils storm trigger on the stack on top of that." If storm is high enough this kills the opponent before the City trigger kills you.

You can totally do that. Part of the fact that it's allowed to pay for costs after a spell is announced. One of the few advantages players have who know the rules of the game.

It works! Awesome. I'll keep that in mind. Not that it really matters, because even though I posted an argument in favour of Confluence/City earlier, I am still on the 2x Gemstone Mine mana base myself, and I still like it.

[LDX]

I'm almost certain I talked about this boarding before and made it clear, why it's really bad. Honestly, I stopped reading at this point while I was in the subway, because I was frustrated to see this again and not wanted to follow up with a jerk post. I had coffee and a sandwich in the meanwhile so I'm ready to give an adequate response, by telling you to either board in PIF for EtW in this matchup or don't board at all. EtW can race Manaless and I told you this before.

Let's settled a couple of things first. I went and read exactly what you said regarding the matchup and boarding in/out ToA.

Manaless has one hell of a problem to race T1 Goblins. Just saying

Don't remove EtW just because he MAY has answers. If you empty the warrens ans he has a hand full of discard and landdestruction, you win. If he keeps a hand with solutions to goblins, you cast AN, If he has both, get rid of discard first. You may Therapy the discard and clear the sweepers with the flashback after goblins are on the field. Common strategy. Don't board ToA. I hate that one as it limits your access to ToA too much (basically to IT + LED post AN)

Ok. There were two honest mistakes. At first, I missread ''Manaless HAS one hell of a problem'' for ''Manaless IS one hell of a problem''. Second, I took things to literally and thought you were specific to the matchup we were discussing. No, I didn't think farther than that, and tried to applied exactly what you were saying. You can be assured that it was not in my intention to frustrate you, or to come here with a ''look, I ask for advice but I don't listen!'' attitude.

That being said, feel free to stop responding if you judge me on a missread. Wouldn't a worthy student at least be able to read the answers you wrote with so much patience properly? I would probably think so, too, but to the point of frustration? Emphasized like you do? I knew I was bad at Magic, but not that much. I don't know your life, but I'm glad to see you had enough wisdom to take a break before answering. I appreciate, I'll take everything you're ready to give, but I would suggest you stop if I really frustrate you. Just be clear with me so I don't harass anyone anymore.

Thats a solid keep, if the ToA was still an EtW and a nice example of why you don't want to board like this, as EtW would win this game, but ToA does nothing. Even worse: The only way to access ToA at this point post-AN is via Wish->PIF->ToA which is a full 4 mana more expensive than wishing for ToA directly. How unreasonable is that?

Following the exposed logic, fair enough.

There is a whole array of mistakes involved by going "Volcanic->blue mana->Probe" here:

1) Why pay mana here? Manaless isn't attacking you before turn 3 anyways so the lifeloss is irrelevant
2) Why not cast Probe first to see whats up and what you are drawing before you make a color-commiting landdrop?
3) How bad is paying mana for Probe if you draw a Ponder or Therapy with it?
4) Why play Probe at all? It would deliver free stormcount for the ToA in your hand for the killturn.
5) Why look into your opponents hand if you have no combo to follow up with or a discard spell at all?

Don't cast a Probe just because you can. It's a wide-spread and bad habit.

1) As irrelevant as it is, if it is totally free of commitment, I would rather avoid to lose life if it's a free choice. You pointed out the commitments it had, thank you for your help.
2) With the hand I had, I didn't think I would be able to go off next turn despite anything I drew, which is why I didn't bother with the land color. Was I wrong? Yes.
3) Terribly bad.
4) I wanted to know what to expect for my ''killturn'', how many counterspells she had, to prepare for it, to know how many disruption I needed and what to bait.
5) To know what to search for with the cantrips in the following plays? I would like to understand how bad such a thought is, please.

I didn't want to cast Probe because I could, I casted it because I felt the need to know how to scuplt a good hand in relation to the number of counterspells she had in hand. You're telling me it's not worth it, fine, but how exactly should the sequence go? If Probe>Adapt>Combo isn't the way to go, what is it? Like, for instance. I have a hand to go this turn. I Probe to start off and see she has 2 counterspells. I mean, I can't go this turn anymore, so wouldn't it be better to know in advance to build around it?

I personally would have continued playing "land, go" and try to use the wish as counterbait later to fuel stormcount or grab EtW/PIF after drawing into discard. Given your opponent misplayed here by countering the Wish w/o floated mana here with a FoW, you have lost nothing. I would have dropped the Diamond at this point to get around MBT later.

I suppose the important part is ''after drawing into discard''. That seems to take into consideration the Probe I did earlier, which you said you wouldn't have done anyway. Should I understand you're just giving me the best outcome for situations I shouldn't have been in at first? Also, regarding the LED, the only thing it does dropping it now is to ''free'' a 3-spells-played slot for the MBT, correct? It's not that you would use the mana for anything? Because if so, I don't see how.

I guess it's valid to keep this Ponder and draw the Delta, Brainstorm into Petal + RoF + [unknown card] and put back Mox + ToA at this point (all given that you played the way you did up to this point making a natural ToA from hand very unlikely) and shuffle with the Delta to get another land depending on what the unknown drawn card was. If its a discard spell or cantrip, you can immediately continue for example. Drop the Petal.

What you did here is plain wasting mana and time. We know now that the third card would have been a Therapy, you could have used to get rid of the MBT already and before your next untap step (Thought she used the FoW on Wish? Why talking about FoW here?). Nothing is lost here, depending on what you put back with Brainstorm and if you fetched to get that stuff gone. There are no notes about what you did here. May enlight me?

You also risked it being discarded. We have talked about that before, like we did about boarding ToA, dood. I don't know where the second FoW is coming from. You stated she had MBT + FoW in her opener and you baited her into countering the Wish plus had a therapy available. Did you knew she runs MBT and FoW in board? If yes, why did you not bring in Xantids?

Seems I was confused with my notes. At many places, I have a second FoW noted in her hand. In my mind too, but I can't figure where she got it from, or how I remember the existence of this one. I'm perplex. It's like we both made an illegal play on turn one, when I asked her to go back at the start so I could take note of everything. Reading her opening hand, I wonder if the Nether Shadow wasn't in a fact a FoW, and that she drew the Shadow at the start of her turn and we didn't do it properly after the recover. That would be, without a doubt, the second FoW. Yeah, way to ask for help when I can't give proper board states...

You also risked it being discarded. We have talked about that before, like we did about boarding ToA, dood. I don't know where the second FoW is coming from. You stated she had MBT + FoW in her opener and you baited her into countering the Wish plus had a therapy available. Did you knew she runs MBT and FoW in board? If yes, why did you not bring in Xantids?

I did not bring the Xantids because I tried to do, literally, as you said earlier. The exact same thing. Evidences don't go in this direction, but I'm actually trying to learn and apply what I can get of your knowledge, Lemnear. Even if, sometimes, taking things too literally is indeed a bad move. What would you side out for the Xantids? Empty the Warrens? (Yes, that was a joke.)

There were too many mistakes in this games, don't know where to start here :D

Well, thank you for spreading your light on us, champion! I surely learned more from that than anything else written in this thread!




Again, if my posts are becoming problematic either for a proper discussion on the thread or as a source of frustration, please, feel free to tell me to go away. I hope you still have a nice day!

Thanks a lot.

[ThiefSlayer]

Hey LDX, I was gonna type a big post, but there's actually just some few things to be said. You are new to the deck, but you are trying your best, and that's the path to success. You don't have to feel bad for showing your mistakes and asking for help, as it's a MTG forum to discuss several aspects of the deck.

Just don't expect everyone to like posts from a newcomer in here. Not that it's not good, actually replies like Lemnear's to your post help a lot new people to get the thought process of the deck. I'm just saying that people here are used to more deep analysis of the deck, but posts like yours should be welcome too.

PS.: I'm also a newcomer to the deck and posted sometimes here before. Then I realized I was still too new to the deck to be saying somethings (learned it the hard way), but a detailed report like yours, even from a begginer can bring a lot of things to discussion, even though they may seem trivial for some people, for other people it doesn't. What I mean is, don't take things personally and you may get a lot of knowledge from here.

[LDX]

Hey LDX, I was gonna type a big post, but there's actually just some few things to be said. You are new to the deck, but you are trying your best, and that's the path to success. You don't have to feel bad for showing your mistakes and asking for help, as it's a MTG forum to discuss several aspects of the deck.

Just don't expect everyone to like posts from a newcomer in here. Not that it's not good, actually replies like Lemnear's to your post help a lot new people to get the thought process of the deck. I'm just saying that people here are used to more deep analysis of the deck, but posts like yours should be welcome too.

PS.: I'm also a newcomer to the deck and posted sometimes here before. Then I realized I was still too new to the deck to be saying somethings (learned it the hard way), but a detailed report like yours, even from a begginer can bring a lot of things to discussion, even though they may seem trivial for some people, for other people it doesn't. What I mean is, don't take things personally and you may get a lot of knowledge from here.

I'll make it short too

While I'm trying my best and while that might be the path to success, I don't want ''my success'' to cause issues to anyone. While posts like mine should be welcomed (and even then, it's an opinion more than a fact), I understand the issue with them. It's why I am very humble in front of all pilots taking time and patience to help noobs out. I've been on the other side too on other subjects, I know how troublesome or annoying a noob can be.

It's precisely because I'm getting a lot of knowledge from here that I don't want to make more troubles than I already cause. I appreciate your concern tho.

[Lemnear]

Ok. There were two honest mistakes. At first, I missread ''Manaless HAS one hell of a problem'' for ''Manaless IS one hell of a problem''. Second, I took things to literally and thought you were specific to the matchup we were discussing. No, I didn't think farther than that, and tried to applied exactly what you were saying. You can be assured that it was not in my intention to frustrate you, or to come here with a ''look, I ask for advice but I don't listen!'' attitude.

Not a big deal in case of this simple misread. I'm kinda thin-skinned for the cycle you correctly described as "ask for advice, ignore it and ask again" which is a pattern in this forum and with my clients *laugh*. I'm a tough discussion partner, but please take that not too serious ;)

Mind, that I can only point you at the approximate direction for certain match layouts (like EtW is good/ok/horrible in [matchup]), because opposing deckbuilding and boarding can vary a lot, so don't take advice in a black/white way. You get the idea.

1) As irrelevant as it is, if it is totally free of commitment, I would rather avoid to lose life if it's a free choice. You pointed out the commitments it had, thank you for your help.
2) With the hand I had, I didn't think I would be able to go off next turn despite anything I drew, which is why I didn't bother with the land color. Was I wrong? Yes.
3) Terribly bad.
4) I wanted to know what to expect for my ''killturn'', how many counterspells she had, to prepare for it, to know how many disruption I needed and what to bait.
5) To know what to search for with the cantrips in the following plays? I would like to understand how bad such a thought is, please.

The point is that in slow matchups which do not pressure the life fast, I value the mana and free stormcount more than the two lifepoints. There is also the advantage of seeing more cards the longer you wait with Probe. Lets imagine you opponent draws the MBT at some point before you combo, instead of having it in her hand the moment you cast Probe turns before your critical turn just because it is "free of commitment". You want to know if you can combo freely once you are ready to go, not 2-3 turns earlier, if you ask me. There is no immediate disadvantage to play "land, go" for a single turn and cast the Probe later other than the 2 lifepoints that don't matter much in this matchup, but give you more insight about your opponents countermeasures and potential speed which should also affect your cantripping decisions. I don't think it's adequate to bring up the "cantrips in the following turns" here as you only had the Probe turn 1.

I didn't want to cast Probe because I could, I casted it because I felt the need to know how to scuplt a good hand in relation to the number of counterspells she had in hand. You're telling me it's not worth it, fine, but how exactly should the sequence go? If Probe>Adapt>Combo isn't the way to go, what is it? Like, for instance. I have a hand to go this turn. I Probe to start off and see she has 2 counterspells. I mean, I can't go this turn anymore, so wouldn't it be better to know in advance to build around it?

Your options to "sculpt" were about zero turn 1 if you pay mana for the Probe. The best value you can gain here in relation to possibilites (chance of drawing into a Ponder/Therapy/IT) is to play "land, go" for your first turn with that hand. Again, your options to "build around hate" are zero with that hand and you need to find a way to combo no matter if she has counterspells or not. Playing around hate is your secondary issue.

I suppose the important part is ''after drawing into discard''. That seems to take into consideration the Probe I did earlier, which you said you wouldn't have done anyway. Should I understand you're just giving me the best outcome for situations I shouldn't have been in at first? Also, regarding the LED, the only thing it does dropping it now is to ''free'' a 3-spells-played slot for the MBT, correct? It's not that you would use the mana for anything? Because if so, I don't see how.

The "drawing into discard" was in context of you having already cast the Probe and seeing the hand you saw. I think it's adequate to follow the actual game step by step, rather than hypothetical scenarios of how I would have played out the hand, just to discuss potential turning points for the game to gain/regain control of the matchup you felt slipping out of your hand. Playing the LED is a good idea to protect them from Therapy in the first place if you don't plan to work with the natural stormcount. Once more the advice to drop the LED was given in the context of you having already played the Probe turn 1. The LED mana here is relevant if you draw into an IT as you had enough mana to cast IT->AN post-Brainstorm afaik.

Seems I was confused with my notes. At many places, I have a second FoW noted in her hand. In my mind too, but I can't figure where she got it from, or how I remember the existence of this one. I'm perplex. It's like we both made an illegal play on turn one, when I asked her to go back at the start so I could take note of everything. Reading her opening hand, I wonder if the Nether Shadow wasn't in a fact a FoW, and that she drew the Shadow at the start of her turn and we didn't do it properly after the recover. That would be, without a doubt, the second FoW. Yeah, way to ask for help when I can't give proper board states...

Well, I'm just confused, but as mentioned before, the primary focus here is to find a way to combo and bother with potential countermeasures afterwards (and just in case), so I'm fine to focus on this matter discussing the scenario and leave the exact counter configuration aside

I did not bring the Xantids because I tried to do, literally, as you said earlier. The exact same thing. Evidences don't go in this direction, but I'm actually trying to learn and apply what I can get of your knowledge, Lemnear. Even if, sometimes, taking things too literally is indeed a bad move. What would you side out for the Xantids? Empty the Warrens? (Yes, that was a joke.)

I don't consider FoW + MBT a typical boarding for Manaless, so I haven't considered it in my precious suggestion. If you know about the counters unlike me), don't follow my advice strictly, but let reason be your sideboard guide and include the Xantids. I'd play them in case of the 2 Duress and a Ponder (no joke)

Thanks a lot.

Ya welcome

[Final Fortune]

Curious if other people have been cutting Xantid Swarms in favour of a better match up vs aggro-control and control decks, I've been trying out stuff like Carpet of Flowers, City of Traitors, Cabal Ritual etc. with fair results and haven't seen much Reanimator or Show&Tell with Leyline of Sanctity lately.

My board looks something like,

1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Grape Shot
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Infernal Tutor
1 Past in Flames
1 Void Snare
1 Thoughtseize
2 Inquisition of Kozilek
3 Abrupt Decay
1 Bayou
2 (Mana Slots)

with 3 Duress, 3 Infernal Tutor and Fetch over Bayou in the MD.

[Lemnear]

Curious if other people have been cutting Xantid Swarms in favour of a better match up vs aggro-control and control decks, I've been trying out stuff like Carpet of Flowers, City of Traitors, Cabal Ritual etc. with fair results and haven't seen much Reanimator or Show&Tell with Leyline of Sanctity lately.

My board looks something like,

1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Grape Shot
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Infernal Tutor
1 Past in Flames
1 Void Snare
1 Thoughtseize
2 Inquisition of Kozilek
3 Abrupt Decay
1 Bayou
2 (Mana Slots)

with 3 Duress, 3 Infernal Tutor and Fetch over Bayou in the MD.

Bryant and I had this topic in a chatter a few weeks ago, but it wasn't in the context of the long-not-seen Leyline but in terms of that Xantid is pointless vs Omniscience if you never get to attack before dying. The Xantids went from 3 down to 2 as a first step as the card is still fine against Miracles and Infect just to name two. I pondered about replacing them with Pyroblasts but wasn't able to gather enough data to see if cutting the bugs appears to be fine. I guess I fear to lose the edge against counter-overloads or SDT+Flusterstorm

I'd like to test a 4/2/2/2 of Decay/Xantid/Pyroblasts/CoV before signing for the GP

[Pelikanudo]

Curious if other people have been cutting Xantid Swarms in favour of a better match up vs aggro-control and control decks, I've been trying out stuff like Carpet of Flowers, City of Traitors, Cabal Ritual etc. with fair results and haven't seen much Reanimator or Show&Tell with Leyline of Sanctity lately.

My board looks something like,

1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Grape Shot
1 Empty the Warrens
1 Infernal Tutor
1 Past in Flames
1 Void Snare
1 Thoughtseize
2 Inquisition of Kozilek
3 Abrupt Decay
1 Bayou
2 (Mana Slots)

with 3 Duress, 3 Infernal Tutor and Fetch over Bayou in the MD.

Hi, long time I don't hear about you!

I'm not currently playing mtg due to a very busy state, but OmniTell has been a great part of my meta so my statement is beeing as fast as posible vs this archetype:
- thats why I still play 4 I.T. main and Bribery --> thinking to switching to Telemins Performance because it seems better vs this archetype
- because I have a personal battle vs Miracles I play 4 A.D. which also serves me to other roles (lately I've been seeing a lot of M.M and Null Rods in Team America builds by here) AND 2 Xantids - as I find them also ok vs miracles
- I think that Xantid adds speeds vs OmniTell in the case you draw it - because the reality is that is that is useless when you draw it if the Opp. intends to play S&T to Omniscience in next turn as opposite to Sneak... AND if you don't have C.Therapy for flashbacking it...

yes, I've not seen too many Leylines lately... but still want to save Xantid for Sneak or Miracles - 2 is ok for me.

A NOTE: in my TNT build is just play more discard effects and bouncers as opposite to TES --> in here discard plus discard and more discard and Raw Power just makes me win vs this archetype (I remember even discarding the Emrakul to make the opp has worse top deck.... imagine.)

A 2nd NOTE: I still play the 12 land manabase with gemstones. and bayou in side.

EDIT: related to pyroblast - long time ago I don't play it and I either don't plan to play it - A.D. acomplishes this role and it is worse than more discard or Xantid vs Control/Agr in my opinion.

[Final Fortune]

Bryant and I had this topic in a chatter a few weeks ago, but it wasn't in the context of the long-not-seen Leyline but in terms of that Xantid is pointless vs Omniscience if you never get to attack before dying. The Xantids went from 3 down to 2 as a first step as the card is still fine against Miracles and Infect just to name two. I pondered about replacing them with Pyroblasts but wasn't able to gather enough data to see if cutting the bugs appears to be fine. I guess I fear to lose the edge against counter-overloads or SDT+Flusterstorm

I'd like to test a 4/2/2/2 of Decay/Xantid/Pyroblasts/CoV before signing for the GP

I think Reanimator and Omniscience are too "fringe" in terms of over all numbers in order to SB against them, and Reanimator seems to be kept in check by the meta especially. Xantid Swarm is ok vs Miracles, but so is Inquisition of Kozilek (or SB Thoughtseize(s), I tend to SB out 3 Duress for 2 Inquisition of Kozilek and a Thoughtseize vs non-blue decks instead of for Chain Vapour because I'd rather discard the problem before it resolves instead of returning it to the opponent's hand and our manabase revolves around Swamp instead of Island vs Wasteland) as you're generally just trading one weakness for another - you lose vs a resolved Top with Inquisition of Kozilek, you lose vs a resolved C.Balance with Xantid Swarm etc. I just feel like they're taking up space right now that could be better put to use vs more common matchups and we could use that space to be a little more durable vs BUG/RUG etc.

@Pelikanudo

I don't think there's anything really wrong with the older lists, but frankly I play against too much RUG/BUG to give up my MD Fetches and Basic and I really prefer the maximum fetchland count in order to get those Brainstorms and Ponders digging as far as possible into the deck. Other than Counterbalance insurance, I think removal/bounce is a waste of time and I'd rather sit back on Swamp and Discard. I can either Burning Wish for an answer when I have to, or I can scoop if the hate does resolve and take the initiative in the next game in order to be able to discard over two turns before they can resolve a hate bear, Null Rod etc.

For me, everything revolves around Swamp, and to a lesser extent Threshold now that I've been boarding out 2xChrome Mox for 2xCabal Ritual.

[HSCK]

Uh, OmniTell is the 2nd best performing deck of the last few months to Miracles.

[Final Fortune]

Uh, OmniTell is the 2nd best performing deck of the last few months to Miracles.

I personally don't see it, I'm not saying the deck isn't good.

[Lemnear]

EDIT: related to pyroblast - long time ago I don't play it and I either don't plan to play it - A.D. acomplishes this role and it is worse than more discard or Xantid vs Control/Agr in my opinion.

You can Decay an Omniscience and S&T? Xantid removes Meddling Mages? ;)

I think Reanimator and Omniscience are too "fringe" in terms of over all numbers in order to SB against them, and Reanimator seems to be kept in check by the meta especially. Xantid Swarm is ok vs Miracles, but so is Inquisition of Kozilek (or SB Thoughtseize(s), I tend to SB out 3 Duress for 2 Inquisition of Kozilek and a Thoughtseize vs non-blue decks instead of for Chain Vapour because I'd rather discard the problem before it resolves instead of returning it to the opponent's hand and our manabase revolves around Swamp instead of Island vs Wasteland) as you're generally just trading one weakness for another - you lose vs a resolved Top with Inquisition of Kozilek, you lose vs a resolved C.Balance with Xantid Swarm etc. I just feel like they're taking up space right now that could be better put to use vs more common matchups and we could use that space to be a little more durable vs BUG/RUG etc.

Please ... OmniTell and Miracles are the two most played and best performing archtypes these days and far from "fringe".

I see absolutely no sense in switching discard spells which occupy your sideboard just to hit creatures and leave you totally helpless in case your opponent topdecks a hatebear. CoV does not care about if your opponent has the hate-permanent in hand or not and is ergo a lot more flexible than additional discard. I'm baffled the idea to handle everything with discard is still around even after the attempts to battle Miracles with Pyroblasts and discard alone delivered a clear result of how bad the idea is to just lose to resolved stuff on the field which opponents topdeck or cantrip into.

It's not that additional discard helps you against the named SDT or Counterbalance either, so there is no reason to point fingers at Xantid vs. Counterbalance. It's funny if you talk about RUG in terms of "common matchups", but call OmniTell "fringe".

I think removal/bounce is a waste of time and I'd rather sit back on Swamp and Discard. I can either Burning Wish for an answer when I have to, or I can scoop if the hate does resolve and take the initiative in the next game in order to be able to discard over two turns before they can resolve a hate bear, Null Rod etc.

For me, everything revolves around Swamp, and to a lesser extent Threshold now that I've been boarding out 2xChrome Mox for 2xCabal Ritual.

How is Wishing for an answer to a topdecked Thalia/Canonist/MeddlingMage/Teeg any less of a "waste of time" than bouncing the creature eot and combo off? You think it's ok to just lose vs. a common play like Medding Mage @ Wish? You point to sitting back and cast discard as if your opponent can never topdeck another hatebear or shit. Dood, you CAN sit back with CoV and just watch IF your opponent topdecks a hatebear instead. There is one hell of a strategic difference.

You run 2 Cabal Rituals in the board? Why not mainboard? I don't have the feeling your SB space is used wisely, but just more of the stuff you already run in the MB instead of using the SB to cover another angle of defense/attack.

[Final Fortune]

You can Decay an Omniscience and S&T? Xantid removes Meddling Mages? ;)



Please ... OmniTell and Miracles are the two most played and best performing archtypes these days and far from "fringe".

I see absolutely no sense in switching discard spells which occupy your sideboard just to hit creatures and leave you totally helpless in case your opponent topdecks a hatebear. CoV does not care about if your opponent has the hate-permanent in hand or not and is ergo a lot more flexible than additional discard. I'm baffled the idea to handle everything with discard is still around even after the attempts to battle Miracles with Pyroblasts and discard alone delivered a clear result of how bad the idea is to just lose to resolved stuff on the field which opponents topdeck or cantrip into.

It's not that additional discard helps you against the named SDT or Counterbalance either, so there is no reason to point fingers at Xantid vs. Counterbalance. It's funny if you talk about RUG in terms of "common matchups", but call OmniTell "fringe".



How is Wishing for an answer to a topdecked Thalia/Canonist/MeddlingMage/Teeg any less of a "waste of time" than bouncing the creature eot and combo off? You think it's ok to just lose vs. a common play like Medding Mage @ Wish? You point to sitting back and cast discard as if your opponent can never topdeck another hatebear or shit. Dood, you CAN sit back with CoV and just watch IF your opponent topdecks a hatebear instead. There is one hell of a strategic difference.

You run 2 Cabal Rituals in the board? Why not mainboard? I don't have the feeling your SB space is used wisely, but just more of the stuff you already run in the MB instead of using the SB to cover another angle of defense/attack.

There are differences in metagames across the world and I don't see Omniscience, let alone Omniscience with Leyline of Sanctity, as much as every one else is saying they are - I made no mention of Miracles being a fringe deck whatsoever and yes RUG/BUG are still fairly popular in my area hence my preference for 8 MD Fetchlands, SB Bayou and wanting to have more relevant cards than Chain of Vapour and Xantid Swarm to SB in against them.

Ok, comparing hate bear decks and Miracles decks is nonsense, first we have the game 1 advantage against hate bear decks by virtue of being a T2 combo deck, meaning we're likely to see a 3 game match at worst. Of those 3 games, we should play the deciding game on the play, which gives us twice as many turns to discard their hate before we could lose the match. I don't find non-blue decks, let alone non-blue decks without MD hate bears or prison pieces, enough of a threat to justify SBing Chain of Vapour at all, nor do I find Chain of Vapour a good strategy vs Chalice of the Void or Trinisphere for that matter. At least with Inquisition of Kozilek and Thoughtseize, I can still SB out ineffectual cards like Duress for cards that statistically reduce the odds that I will see a resolved hate bear or prison pieace. And in the event I do see a resolved hatebear, there is still a chance that I can Burning Wish for an answer, and Burning Wish is a card that is already in the deck, making a comparison between Burning Wish and Chain of Vapour innane, without dilluting my SB/MD with a card that has no application in the aggro-control match up and doesn't let me prevent my opponent from using multiple angles of attack like Discard + Hatebears, Mindbreak Trap + Hatebears etc (in the case of Thoughtseize instead of Inquistion of Kozilek, I've tried 3xThoughtseize as well). Only D&T is really that linear for Chain of Vapour to be a strictly better card, and even then Thoughtseizie/IOK do a better job of addressing Wasteland because you can cast it off of the Swamp instead of a Dual.

So you don't need Chain of Vapour to really make the difference vs D&T, 1 Thoughtseize + 2 Inquisition of Kozilek still lets you SB out Duress for better cards in those match ups and Inquisition of Kozilek can be used in the aggro-control match ups where Chain of Vapour can't.

Ok, Miracles is another matter entirely, because Miracles has the game 1 advantage by virtue of being blue and can protect its prison pieces with counters or cantrip for it's lock pieces as opposed to top deck them, and here I'm just subbing out Xantid Swarm for Inquisition of Kozilek while still using Abrupt Decay to remove resolved hate because obviously hate is far more likely to be drawn, protected and resolved by Miracles than D&T. Yes, I'm obviously more vulnerable to resolved hate from Miracles, but at the same time I should statistically see less of that resolved hate by discarding it from their opening hand. So I'm trading off a card that I think is ok in Miracles for another card I think is ok in Miracles in favour of having something I can SB in the aggro-control match up as well. Inquistion of Kozilek is essentially linearizing disruption/answers to permanent hate in order to compact the total number of SB slots I have to spend on addressing those problems.

I'm not happy with Xantid Swarm at the moment because I don't see the decks it's best against and I have never liked Chain of Vapour (and you already questioned Xantid Swarm vs Omniscience any way, it was only ever really good vs Show&Tell decks that played creatures IMO) and I want to be able to board out Chrome Mox in the aggro-control match ups so I can play a grindier game while still retaining some of my speed. I don't know if Cabal Ritual is better than Carpet of Flowers or City of Traitors for that, it's just something I'm trying out.

I don't get why you mention Meddling Mage, that's usually taken care of by boarding in Grape Shot vs Stonebade any way, but if Meddling Mage ever has the numbers to be a seroius problem then I'd SB 1 Pyroblast to hedge between a post-board MD and Wish removal option. It's not like you SB in Chain of Vapour vs any deck that would play Meddling Mage any way, so to me a lot of your points just seem a bit rantish.

I thought about going to Inquisition of Kozilek over Chain of Vapour a lot, and frankly having the added boarding options vs aggro-control seems more relevant than a card that lets me win a won match up even harder. Maybe I'll just end up cutting the extra acceleration in the SB for a Pyroblast and a Telemin's Performance or something if Meddling Mage and Omniscience start making a presence in my meta, I just find Swarm and Chain overly specific right now.

[Lemnear]

There are differences in metagames across the world and I don't see Omniscience, let alone Omniscience with Leyline of Sanctity, as much as every one else is saying they are - I made no mention of Miracles being a fringe deck whatsoever and yes RUG/BUG are still fairly popular in my area hence my preference for 8 MD Fetchlands, SB Bayou and wanting to have more relevant cards than Chain of Vapour and Xantid Swarm to SB in against them.

No one talked about OmniTell + Leyline. I talk about the average metagame structure according to data painting a different picture than you did calling OmniTell "fringe" and RUG "common" despite the later has only 3% metagame representation. It makes no sense for me to give metagame advice based in what you or me see in our shops.

Ok, comparing hate bear decks and Miracles decks is nonsense, first we have the game 1 advantage against hate bear decks by virtue of being a T2 combo deck, meaning we're likely to see a 3 game match at worst. Of those 3 games, we should play the deciding game on the play, which gives us twice as many turns to discard their hate before we could lose the match.

Wait, you are telling me that you evaluate your starting hand based on how it fares against the 16% of the metagame which do not play blue but any form of hate-permanents, so you don't come in the situation that you keep a solid turn 3 hand against the remaining 84% (which play blue) with Duress and Brainstorm (for example) which gets fucked hard by an unexpected Thalia? Am I the only one evaluating starting hands based on 4/5 of the metagame instead of the 1/5?

Who says you never lose game 1 so you can guarantee being on the play in game 3? What if you lose G1, win G2 and start G3 on the draw? Bank on you drawing into a turn 1 kill opener? Hope you draw into Therapy, name the right thing and your opponent not topdecking a Canonist/Thalia/Thorn/etc.? Really? CoV eliminates a lot of these problems and weaknesses.

Comparing turn 2 Thalia to turn 2 Counterbalance is a valid comparison imo.

I don't find non-blue decks, let alone non-blue decks without MD hate bears or prison pieces, enough of a threat to justify SBing Chain of Vapour at all, nor do I find Chain of Vapour a good strategy vs Chalice of the Void or Trinisphere for that matter.

Which viable non-blue deck doesn't run MB hate permanents? Which of those viable non-blue decks isn't boarding discard and/or more hate-permanents in addition? They ALL do.

At least with Inquisition of Kozilek and Thoughtseize, I can still SB out ineffectual cards like Duress for cards that statistically reduce the odds that I will see a resolved hate bear or prison pieace.

Interresting. I never knew those cards had an effect on topdecks or redundancy of hate-permanents in opponents hand.

And in the event I do see a resolved hatebear, there is still a chance that I can Burning Wish for an answer, and Burning Wish is a card that is already in the deck, making a comparison between Burning Wish and Chain of Vapour innane, without dilluting my SB/MD with a card that has no application in the aggro-control match up and doesn't let me prevent my opponent from using multiple angles of attack like Discard + Hatebears, Mindbreak Trap + Hatebears etc (in the case of Thoughtseize instead of Inquistion of Kozilek, I've tried 3xThoughtseize as well). Only D&T is really that linear for Chain of Vapour to be a strictly better card, and even then Thoughtseizie/IOK do a better job of addressing Wasteland because you can cast it off of the Swamp instead of a Dual.

Burning Wish with a Thorn of Amethyst on the field to find what? Opting to get to 3 mana against D&T post Thalia? Saying that CoV has no application against aggro-control decks like Stoneblade with MeddlingMage/Canonist is totally off and it sounds like you never fueled storm with CoV either. Don't come up with "CoV useless against multiple angles of attack" as long as you are fine to just lose to resolved hate-permanents pre- & postboard.

So you don't need Chain of Vapour to really make the difference vs D&T, 1 Thoughtseize + 2 Inquisition of Kozilek still lets you SB out Duress for better cards in those match ups and Inquisition of Kozilek can be used in the aggro-control match ups where Chain of Vapour can't.

yeah, TS & IoK are better than Duress vs. D&T, but that does not say anything about their strenght compared to CoV or the general nonsense to board discard for discard. Again: Claiming that CoV as no application against aggro-control is 100% wrong. Do you use your own definition of "Aggro-Control = RUG/BUG Delver only" here?

Ok, Miracles is another matter entirely, because Miracles has the game 1 advantage by virtue of being blue and can protect its prison pieces with counters or cantrip for it's lock pieces as opposed to top deck them, and here I'm just subbing out Xantid Swarm for Inquisition of Kozilek while still using Abrupt Decay to remove resolved hate because obviously hate is far more likely to be drawn, protected and resolved by Miracles than D&T.

Never heared of SDT floating counters or increasing the access to those, hu?

Yes, I'm obviously more vulnerable to resolved hate from Miracles, but at the same time I should statistically see less of that resolved hate by discarding it from their opening hand.

...and this is not true at all. Do you think you can prevent a SDT/Ponder/Brainstoem from finding countermeasures and just slam them on the table/float them? Don't use the word "statistically" unless you account the density of Counterbalance/FoW/MeddlingMage/Ponder/Flusterstorm/Brainstorm/SDT postboard.

So I'm trading off a card that I think is ok in Miracles for another card I think is ok in Miracles in favour of having something I can SB in the aggro-control match up as well. Inquistion of Kozilek is essentially linearizing disruption/answers to permanent hate in order to compact the total number of SB slots I have to spend on addressing those problems.

IoK does not deal with FoW; Xantid does. Your whole point in regards to Miracles and Aggro-Control is invalid

I'm not happy with Xantid Swarm at the moment because I don't see the decks it's best against and I have never liked Chain of Vapour (and you already questioned Xantid Swarm vs Omniscience any way, it was only ever really good vs Show&Tell decks that played creatures IMO) and I want to be able to board out Chrome Mox in the aggro-control match ups so I can play a grindier game while still retaining some of my speed. I don't know if Cabal Ritual is better than Carpet of Flowers or City of Traitors for that, it's just something I'm trying out.

I'm not amazed by Xantid either, but it still has application against decks like OmniTell (not to react to S&T but to deal with DTT into FoW or shenanigans alike), Miracles and Infect for example and I'm not convinced IoK can improve tbose matchups in any way. You may want to test with Crystal Vein which lets you pile up lands compared to City of Traitors

I don't get why you mention Meddling Mage, that's usually taken care of by boarding in Grape Shot vs Stonebade any way, but if Meddling Mage ever has the numbers to be a seroius problem then I'd SB 1 Pyroblast to hedge between a post-board MD and Wish removal option. It's not like you SB in Chain of Vapour vs any deck that would play Meddling Mage any way, so to me a lot of your points just seem a bit rantish.

GS was a singleton and can't deal with Canonist. It got cut. I sideboard answers if I expect hatebears which any Stoneblade variant does run. CoV is still absolutely valid to be used as a storm engine. It's not rantish to point at the fact that discard-only failed as a concept more than once and you are running Decays instead of saying "Meh, I can simply discard Counterbalance/Chalice/Thorn/Trinisphere before it gets played"

I thought about going to Inquisition of Kozilek over Chain of Vapour a lot, and frankly having the added boarding options vs aggro-control seems more relevant than a card that lets me win a won match up even harder. Maybe I'll just end up cutting the extra acceleration in the SB for a Pyroblast and a Telemin's Performance or something if Meddling Mage and Omniscience start making a presence in my meta, I just find Swarm and Chain overly specific right now.

This is just too much of a hyperbole to take it serious, not giving any credit to the 16% non-blue decks in the metagame.

[LDX]

Took some time to think about everything said so far. Next games are tomorrow, and while I think I grasp the majority of the help I received, we're never sure enough to avoid a double check. This should be easy to review, let's just hope only a few corrections are needed! As stated last time, we'll focus on what we know for sure instead of speculating on the different scenarios everytime. I'll try to have precise questions on the different matchups and keep the questions short & clean. I also have some general interrogations, but those shall be listed at the end, in the same ''easy question/easy answer'' format. Hopefully this will also help a lot of beginners out here. Thanks for your time!

I will be playing the 05/20 decklist, with the exception of a Pyroclasm instead of a Thoughtseize in the sideboard.

Expected decks (if decklists are important, I can post last week lists)

Player 1
The Gate
Loam Pox

Player 2
Death & Taxes (playing 3 Chalice of the Void sideboard)

Player 3
Burn
Manaless Dredge
Elves! (most likely not, but could make a suprise apparition)

Player 4
Affinity (new deck in town!)

Player 5
Oops! All spells

Player XYZ
(Other players might join, but since it's unlikely, let's just skip every scenario and focus on what we know.)



VS Player 1: The Gate or Loam Pox

What I understood from the advices given

-Win as soon as possible (no, not combo, WIN)

-Because he has Pernicious Deeds isn't good enough of a reason to sideboard out Empty the Warren

-Play the mana artifacts as soon as possible, don't let them be discarded

-My hand shredded, but drawing a cantrip into tutor, with the artifacts on the ground, should be enough to win

-Don't bother the Abrupt Decay vs Pernicious Deeds, it slows down too much when you're trying to win as soon as possible

-Smarter uses of Cabal Therapy / Goblins synergy

-Don't board Tendrils of Agony, it makes it harder to find

-I have to make decisions on the spot regarding the win I'm looking for, between 3 choices: quick AN, artifacts down + top deck mode, or Empty the Warrens and small use of discard

My questions

-I have a blind turn 1 Empty the Warrens. I know he runs Pernicious Deeds and Golgari Charm in his deck, but I have no discard for it, nor can I see his hand. Do I go for it?

-My rituals are in the graveyard, my hand is gone, I have some artifacts in play, no tutors to be found. I draw a Burning Wish. If I go get Past in Flames right now, I can build up mana & storm counters, but I don't have any tutor to win. My Burning Wish is most likely to get discarded anyway. I see three scenarios:
1) go get Past in Flames now, it will be discarded, but you can flashback it when you have an other tutor
2) wait and get your Burning Wish discarded, so the next time you draw one, you can flashback the one in your grave with a future Past in Flames
3) get Past in Flames and go all in, hoping your cantrips in your grave give you something good
Which option do you go for, or is something else more likely to happen?

Sideboarding attempt

None.


VS Player 2: Death and Taxes

What I understood from the advices given

-Combo as fast as possible, you may only have one shot, one opportunity, to seize everything you ever wanted, rest of the song, end.

-They're very weak to early Goblins, don't be afraid to take your shot

-End of opponent's turn Chain of Vapor on Thalia hurts a lot

-Personnal advice: when your combo is done, and you have 12 Goblins, don't bother flashbacking Cabal Therapy on Thalia... get the Stoneforge instead. (Sad story)

-Don't board Chalice of the Void against D&T

My questions

-Pyroclasm and Grapeshot are both in the sideboard. Which one do you sideboard in, which one do you keep out? Knowing there's also a Massacre ready for use.

-The reason we're not boarding the Abrupt Decay against these Chalice of the Void is because it reduces our chance for a turn 1 combo, correct? If not, what's the reasoning behind it?

Sideboarding attempt

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Pyroclasm


VS Player 3: Manaless Dredge, Burn, or Elves!

What I understood from the advices given

-Don't board Tendrils of Agony

-Abrupt Decay is too slow here too

-Learn your own deck before trying to play against your opponent's

-Manaless HAS one hell of a problem to race T1 Goblins. HAS! Just saying

-As with other discard decks, drop the artifacts if you fear the Cabal Therapy

-The longer the game goes on, move the focus from Empty the Warrens to Ad Nauseam

-If you expect the blue shell on Manaless, bring the Xantid Swarm

-Elves are gone to Pyroclasm

My questions

-Bryant sides out 2 Duress and 1 Ponder vs Elves, but talks about Empty the Warrens being unwanted. How important is it over the Ponder? Implying we want to Ad Nauseam as soon as possible.

-How good can Elves! defend against T1 Goblins?

-While it WOULD be counterproductive to go for Goblins and have Pyroclasm in hand, the scenario is too unlikely to happen to play around it and make changes to our sideboard plan, correct?

Sideboarding attempt

Manaless

None.

Burn

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Grapeshot

Elves!

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Pyroclasm


VS Player 4: Affinity

What I understood from the advices given

-Bring Abrupt Decay if they have Chalice of the Void

My questions

-The deck is much faster than D&T, so why are we bringing Abrupt Decay here, and not in D&T, since both run Chalice? Is it because we are not trying for Goblins/combo ASAP?

-Are we better discarding their threat or their hate?

Sideboarding attempt

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
-1 Empty the Warrens
+3 Abrupt Decay
+1 Pyroclasm


VS Player 5: Oops! All spells

What I understood from the advices given

-Stall them, they die

My questions

-Is Empty the Warrens too slow in this matchup? I would board it out and have no threat maindeck, but I don't have a discard in my sideboard.

Sideboarding attempt

None.


General questions

-It seems like Pyroclasm and Grapeshot play the same role. Would it be good to cut of of them for a Thoughtseize? How useful a Thoughtseize could be in my planned games, over an additionnal Pyro/Grape effect?

-How often do you go turn 1 if you can't see your opponent's hand?

-If you have, for instance, a turn 1 go for Empty and a Duress. Do you go for Empty first, then Duress next turn, or do you play safe, play Duress, and Empty next turn? Or do you play anything at all?



Once again, I appreciate quite a lot. Thank you for your time and patience. I will check any answers, but I won't be able to reply. However, I should come back tomorrow by night for a report and probably more gameplay specific questions. I don't seek mastery yet, but hopefully, we'll see an improvement from last time.

Wish me luck!

[Lemnear]

Took some time to think about everything said so far. Next games are tomorrow, and while I think I grasp the majority of the help I received, we're never sure enough to avoid a double check. This should be easy to review, let's just hope only a few corrections are needed! As stated last time, we'll focus on what we know for sure instead of speculating on the different scenarios everytime. I'll try to have precise questions on the different matchups and keep the questions short & clean. I also have some general interrogations, but those shall be listed at the end, in the same ''easy question/easy answer'' format. Hopefully this will also help a lot of beginners out here. Thanks for your time!

I will be playing the 05/20 decklist, with the exception of a Pyroclasm instead of a Thoughtseize in the sideboard.

Expected decks (if decklists are important, I can post last week lists)

Player 1
The Gate
Loam Pox

Player 2
Death & Taxes (playing 3 Chalice of the Void sideboard)

Player 3
Burn
Manaless Dredge
Elves! (most likely not, but could make a suprise apparition)

Player 4
Affinity (new deck in town!)

Player 5
Oops! All spells

Player XYZ
(Other players might join, but since it's unlikely, let's just skip every scenario and focus on what we know.)



VS Player 1: The Gate or Loam Pox

What I understood from the advices given

-Win as soon as possible (no, not combo, WIN) yes. If "win" is not possible "combo" is acceptable

-Because he has Pernicious Deeds isn't good enough of a reason to sideboard out Empty the Warren yep

-Play the mana artifacts as soon as possible, don't let them be discarded yep. Just don't thow them into a known Deed

-My hand shredded, but drawing a cantrip into tutor, with the artifacts on the ground, should be enough to win yep

-Don't bother the Abrupt Decay vs Pernicious Deeds, it slows down too much when you're trying to win as soon as possible

-Smarter uses of Cabal Therapy / Goblins synergy yep

-Don't board Tendrils of Agony, it makes it harder to find yep

-I have to make decisions on the spot regarding the win I'm looking for, between 3 choices: quick AN, artifacts down + top deck mode, or Empty the Warrens and small use of discard yep

My questions

-I have a blind turn 1 Empty the Warrens. I know he runs Pernicious Deeds and Golgari Charm in his deck, but I have no discard for it, nor can I see his hand. Do I go for it? yep. Just yolo against his sweepers is just fine as he can keep a hand with discard/wasteland which will do nothing against the goblins

-My rituals are in the graveyard, my hand is gone, I have some artifacts in play, no tutors to be found. I draw a Burning Wish. If I go get Past in Flames right now, I can build up mana & storm counters, but I don't have any tutor to win. My Burning Wish is most likely to get discarded anyway. I see three scenarios:
1) go get Past in Flames now, it will be discarded, but you can flashback it when you have an other tutor
2) wait and get your Burning Wish discarded, so the next time you draw one, you can flashback the one in your grave with a future Past in Flames
3) get Past in Flames and go all in, hoping your cantrips in your grave give you something good
Which option do you go for, or is something else more likely to happen?

you use flashbacked cantrips to find an Infernal Tutor/Burning Wish before flashing back mana. If you fizzle with the cantrips you can still flash back PIF and the Rituals later

Sideboarding attempt

None. yep


VS Player 2: Death and Taxes

What I understood from the advices given

-Combo as fast as possible, you may only have one shot, one opportunity, to seize everything you ever wanted, rest of the song, end. there is a support angle I have not talked with you about to not flood you with several angles at once and this angle boils down to "wish for massacre asap". If you have massacre in hand and have a fetch or black-mana landrop available, you can clean the board at any time giving you time to play "land, go" and sculpt your hand without further panicing of how to get all the mana together to sweep Thalia and friends adter they hit the board. You can basically slowroll the game with Massacre in hand (Vial on the field + Hatebear in hand aside)

-They're very weak to early Goblins, don't be afraid to take your shot yep

-End of opponent's turn Chain of Vapor on Thalia hurts a lot yep

-Personnal advice: when your combo is done, and you have 12 Goblins, don't bother flashbacking Cabal Therapy on Thalia... get the Stoneforge instead. (Sad story) Do this only if you know about the SFM for sure, otherwise just wait for them to waste mana at potentially topdecked SFM you could never discard anyways and take the equipment with the flashback instead. Advice: Check your yard for Cabal Therapies EVERY TIME you casr EtW. Make this a habit

-Don't board Chalice of the Void against D&T I don't run Chalice of the Void in storm ;)

My questions

-Pyroclasm and Grapeshot are both in the sideboard. Which one do you sideboard in, which one do you keep out? Knowing there's also a Massacre ready for use. If you have all three cards in the SB, board GS and Clasm. I SB out is enough

-The reason we're not boarding the Abrupt Decay against these Chalice of the Void is because it reduces our chance for a turn 1 combo, correct? If not, what's the reasoning behind it? You hint at Chalice in the D&T SB, right? Decay has the problem of costing 3 under thalia and comes with potential color-problems in the presence of Wasteland. I fear you have to accept that sweetspot. You can't prepare for Thalia + Chalice + Wasteland other than relying on the Belcher-Mode. :/

Sideboarding attempt

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Pyroclasm you can board Void Snares or Grapeshot for more Ponders for example


VS Player 3: Manaless Dredge, Burn, or Elves!

What I understood from the advices given

-Don't board Tendrils of Agony yep

-Abrupt Decay is too slow here too yep

-Learn your own deck before trying to play against your opponent's yep

-Manaless HAS one hell of a problem to race T1 Goblins. HAS! Just saying yep lol

-As with other discard decks, drop the artifacts if you fear the Cabal Therapy yep

-The longer the game goes on, move the focus from Empty the Warrens to Ad Nauseam yep ... or PIF

-If you expect the blue shell on Manaless, bring the Xantid Swarm yep. Remove Duress' for those

-Elves are gone to Pyroclasm yep. Another advice: Don't expect EtW for less than 14 T1/2 to stand a chance

My questions

-Bryant sides out 2 Duress and 1 Ponder vs Elves, but talks about Empty the Warrens being unwanted. How important is it over the Ponder? Implying we want to Ad Nauseam as soon as possible. see above. Elves can race/block EtW with a range of starting hands. 10 Goblins on the draw for example should result into you losing to Craterhoof as they block one or the other goblin with Nettle Sentinel or DRS for an additional turn gained and stomp you by turn 3 or 4

-How good can Elves! defend against T1 Goblins? They do pretty good against goblins. see above

-While it WOULD be counterproductive to go for Goblins and have Pyroclasm in hand, the scenario is too unlikely to happen to play around it and make changes to our sideboard plan, correct? I don't see a conflict here. You sweep and play EtW afterwards. Best done in a single turn ;)

Sideboarding attempt

Manaless

None. yep depending on blue-splash

Burn

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Grapeshot yep

Elves!

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
+2 Chain of Vapor
+1 Pyroclasm remlve EtW and bring in GS/Clasm/etc. but no Chains and do not remove Duress. They run discard postboard which you can trade 1-for-1 or delay their combo by discarding Glimpse/GSZ/NaturalOrder. Ruric Thar alone is no excuse for CoV imo


VS Player 4: Affinity

What I understood from the advices given

-Bring Abrupt Decay if they have Chalice of the Void you can do that. If they tend to drop Chalice @ 0, I switch to CoV instead

My questions

-The deck is much faster than D&T, so why are we bringing Abrupt Decay here, and not in D&T, since both run Chalice? Is it because we are not trying for Goblins/combo ASAP? You overestimate their speed in relation to TES'. They don't kill you turn 3 in most cases and you can't afford to lose to Chalice. If you however fear about the speedloss by Decay, board CoV instead and gamble against Chalice @ 1

-Are we better discarding their threat or their hate? You can't discard Chalice @ 0 on the draw. The logic that discard can fix anything is flawed and the reason for my argument with Final Fortune you sure noticed

Sideboarding attempt

-2 Duress
-1 Ponder
-1 Empty the Warrens
+3 Abrupt Decay
+1 Pyroclasm would keep EtW. Decay vs. CoV is imo a matter of the opposing affinity deckbuild and player habit. Personally I'd gamble and run 2 CoV replacing the Duress' as CoV can be used as a storm-engine if life drops too fast


VS Player 5: Oops! All spells

What I understood from the advices given

-Stall them, they die yep

My questions

-Is Empty the Warrens too slow in this matchup? I would board it out and have no threat maindeck, but I don't have a discard in my sideboard. Its a belcher matchup. EtW is no option here if you don't have a proper boarding slot for EtW in this matchup, return the 4th Infernal to the MB if you have it in SB or the PIF. The later would support your plan for stalling them to death

Sideboarding attempt

None. yep


General questions

-It seems like Pyroclasm and Grapeshot play the same role. Would it be good to cut of of them for a Thoughtseize? How useful a Thoughtseize could be in my planned games, over an additionnal Pyro/Grape effect? I play neither of the three. GS and clasm are kinda similar in practical use but fix different problems you can encounter (Counter, Canonist to name just two where one of one option shines and the other sucks. Thoughtseize is a replacement for EtW in combo matchups and to increase the virtual denstiy of discard in the MB up to 10 instead of the regular 6 which has it's advantage in slower but controlish metagames. Personally I cannot justify stuff like Clasm in a metafame wnich contains only 16% non-blue decks

-How often do you go turn 1 if you can't see your opponent's hand? Every game 1. Games 2 & 3 depend on several factors like expected hate, playing blue or not, alternative options to the turn 1 combo attempt, etc.

-If you have, for instance, a turn 1 go for Empty and a Duress. Do you go for Empty first, then Duress next turn, or do you play safe, play Duress, and Empty next turn? Or do you play anything at all? Why should I play EtW before the Duress unless I fear to get my only-but-required black source hit by Wasteland if I lead with Duress? Its also related to the game 1/2/3 you play in. I cannot answer this question without further information about the scenario

Once again, I appreciate quite a lot. Thank you for your time and patience. I will check any answers, but I won't be able to reply. However, I should come back tomorrow by night for a report and probably more gameplay specific questions. I don't seek mastery yet, but hopefully, we'll see an improvement from last time.

Wish me luck!I do

P.S. sorry for the colors, mods. Quoting here was just totally unreasonanle for me to handle on mobile