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

[Final Fortune]

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.



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.



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.



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



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.



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?



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



...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.



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



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



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"



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.

I don't care about aggregate statistics, I care about my metagame.


Yes, I do take into consideration the other 84% of the metagame, and that's why I play a card that I can SB in those other 84% of matches rather than a card I can't.

Chain of Vapour has no application vs aggro-control decks because there is no aggro-control deck I would SB them in against, not BUG. RUG, UR or UWR and as far as I'm aware aggro-control in Legacy is defined by Delver of Secrets and Wasteland. What aggro-control deck in Legacy plays Thalia, and if I didn't expect Thalia why would I have boarded Chain of Vapour at all? They either play Meddling Mage, in which case Pyroblast is better than Chain of Vapour, or they play Ethersworn Canonist in which case you can wish for Grape Short.

I said Thoughtseize and IOK aren't as good as Chain of Vapour vs D&T, but they are good enough vs D&T. Trading discard for discard isn't nonsense, you always SB in Thoughtseize vs D&T anyway and IOK follows the same established principle.

As far as decks without MD hate, Elves and Burn? I don't think my win% vs either is determined by Chain of Vapour at all, and I don't think my win% vs D&T loses enough to matter given its presence in the meta. Yes I took losing game 1 vs D&T into consideration, I clearly stated it. I see less resolved hate with discard less than I do with Chain of Vapour vs D&T, and while I have no statistics to prove it I think it logically follows.

Yes IOK has problems vs Sensei's Diving Top, while Xantid Swarm has problems vs Terminus and Swords to Plowshares. Yes IOK doesn't address Force of Will, while Xantid Swarm doesn't address Counterbalance. Neither are great in the match up, it's just that I'd rather spend 2 cards on disruption/answers than 4 in my SB. So slightly worse vs D&T, equally mediocre vs Miracles so I can have something to SB in the RUG/BUG match ups.

A lot of the arguments vs IOK can be addressed by Thoughtseize as long as you can afford the life anyway.

I haven't cut GS, I've killed plenty of Canonists with it. I could run Massacre, but I don't like running so many SB cards for non-blue match ups.

Citing Abrupt Decay as proof all discard strategies failed is hyperbole, even if I didn't SB at all vs D&T I would still have a + win %. As long as Duress is cut for something better that's all that matters IMO.

I'll try Crystal Vein.

[sawatarix]

I found my Top4 match at GP Kyoto with japanese comments, hilarious ! :D

http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/1434611707

[Lemnear]

I don't care about aggregate statistics, I care about my metagame.

You should if that's your base for you giving advice to other peoples

Yes, I do take into consideration the other 84% of the metagame, and that's why I play a card that I can SB in those other 84% of matches rather than a card I can't.

Yeah you CAN SB IoK against FoW.dec but to me that does not make sense at all. At least not if you point at Xantids swarms being useless.

Chain of Vapour has no application vs aggro-control decks because there is no aggro-control deck I would SB them in against, not BUG. RUG, UR or UWR and as far as I'm aware aggro-control in Legacy is defined by Delver of Secrets and Wasteland.

Your arguments roots on your inability to differ "aggro-control" and "tempo"? Excellent, dood. Decks like Deathblade do run neither card and are ergo no "aggro-control"? You don't run outs to Meddling Mages out of UWR Delver aka Patriots SB?

What aggro-control deck in Legacy plays Thalia, and if I didn't expect Thalia why would I have boarded Chain of Vapour at all? They either play Meddling Mage, in which case Pyroblast is better than Chain of Vapour, or they play Ethersworn Canonist in which case you can wish for Grape Short.

Aggro-control decks in Legacy run Canonist or Meddling Mage. No one talked about Thalia in that context and only CoV adresses MM & Canonist. You don't think it's within your opponents gameplan that you need to split your Wish->GS over two turns and expose a red manasource to Wasteland just to dig you out of that hole? Oh and you need at least an artifact in addition for that

I said Thoughtseize and IOK aren't as good as Chain of Vapour vs D&T, but they are good enough vs D&T. Trading discard for discard isn't nonsense, you always SB in Thoughtseize vs D&T anyway and IOK follows the same established principle.

erm ... no? I SB -2 Duress +2 CoV running no SB discard at all. Running 3 SB discard spells and losing to resolved permanents is no established principle. Removing dead Duress for IoK/TS means wasting 3 slots for increased qualitiy of a strategic angle which does not win the game nor helps you to recover. I could point to CoV fueling stormcount in those regards.

As far as decks without MD hate, Elves and Burn? I don't think my win% vs either is determined by Chain of Vapour at all, and I don't think my win% vs D&T loses enough to matter given its presence in the meta. Yes I took losing game 1 vs D&T into consideration, I clearly stated it. I see less resolved hate with discard less than I do with Chain of Vapour vs D&T, and while I have no statistics to prove it I think it logically follows.

Ruric Thar and Eidolon are no MB hate for you? Are I'm talking with a metagame freshman? Burn is even boarding a full playset of Pillars in addition to the 4 MB Eidolons. Just saying. The bolded part is hilarious, Captain Obvious. Reads like "I see less of my Infernals countered if I discard the counters before". Brilliant

One MAY discard hate, the other removes hate IF it comes down. Apples and Oranges, but nice way to sidestep my points about hate-density, tempo aspects and topdecked hate

Yes IOK has problems vs Sensei's Diving Top, while Xantid Swarm has problems vs Terminus and Swords to Plowshares.

...which usually get drastically reduced postboard unlike SDTs.

Yes IOK doesn't address Force of Will, while Xantid Swarm doesn't address Counterbalance.

IoK only adress the Counterbalance in hand, no drawn/cantripped into ones. if you have a protected turn 2 combo (on the play) in your hand against an opposing hand of FoW+Counterbalance+[RandomBlueCard], Xantid wins this game turn 2, while IoK does not.

Neither are great in the match up, it's just that I'd rather spend 2 cards on disruption/answers than 4 in my SB. So slightly worse vs D&T, equally mediocre vs Miracles so I can have something to SB in the RUG/BUG match ups.

you waste two SB slots on mana (with the MB veing already 40% mana) and 3 on discard, so don't point at efficient use of SB space to tackle various matchups. I agree that I have no SB for RUG Delver, a deck with 3% metafame representation, but that's acceptable after I play more and strongermmana mainboars ro get around Daze and friends

A lot of the arguments vs IOK can be addressed by Thoughtseize as long as you can afford the life anyway.

...which you would not do as you consider tempo decks your primary enemy.

I haven't cut GS, I've killed plenty of Canonists with it. I could run Massacre, but I don't like running so many SB cards for non-blue match ups.

non-blue does not equal Elves/Burn/D&T which you can control with creature removal but also includes Lands.dec, MUD and Painter that's why I moved away from creature removal like GS or Pyroclasm and play general solutions like CoV instead. I just keep the Massacre because I want not to be surprised by Thalia if I keep solid game 1 hands vs. the 84% blue decks in the format.

Citing Abrupt Decay as proof all discard strategies failed is hyperbole, even if I didn't SB at all vs D&T I would still have a + win %. As long as Duress is cut for something better that's all that matters IMO.

It's just that I think 2 Xantids + 2 CoV + 2 Pyro are a lot more flexible than 2 IoK + 1 TS + 1 Grapeshot + 1 VS + 1 Bayou overall and leave less blindspots across the metagame. You have 10 discard spells in your 75 not talking about options to wish for them. Too much of the same for my taste.

I'll try Crystal Vein.

Mind that I played them as Wasteland was gone due to TC with all the consequences to the metagame caused by that. With Wasteland back, I could see color issues

[Asthereal]

Your arguments roots on your inability to differ "aggro-control" and "tempo"? Excellent, dood. Decks like Deathblade do run neither card and are ergo no "aggro-control"? You don't run outs to Meddling Mages out of UWR Delver aka Patriots SB?

This is of course a matter of definition, but here you are in the wrong I fear.

Aggro Control is the same as Tempo: drop a fast threat, disrupt the opponents development while attacking.
You are agressive and controllish at the same time, hence Aggro Control.

Midrange is the other side of this coin: not really aggressive but also not really controllish.
DeathBlade is a midrange deck, and so are most Patriot lists, the new Grixis thing and stuff like Maverick.
Midrange relies more on high impact cards (best example is Batterskull, but also Young Pyro and Knight of the Reliquary).

Of course there are crossovers, but this is how I heard we should define the two.

But anyway, more important is the ability to define what a deck aims to do, and how we should respond.
Midrange tends to be a good matchup for TES (high impact cards take time to set up, which we don't grant them).
Tempo strategies are harder, because they typically work with a faster clock and faster disruption.

[Lemnear]

I found my Top4 match at GP Kyoto with japanese comments, hilarious ! :D

http://www.nicovideo.jp/watch/1434611707

It's as over the top as south american football commentators

[Lemnear]

This is of course a matter of definition, but here you are in the wrong I fear.

Aggro Control is the same as Tempo: drop a fast threat, disrupt the opponents development while attacking.
You are agressive and controllish at the same time, hence Aggro Control.

"tempo" is a subtype of the "aggro-control" supertype which pairs creatures with disruptive elements to hinder opposing game development. If you think about, it the concept includes a lot of decks, which are not even related to the common, narrow definition of "Counter + Creatures". Death & Taxes IS an "aggro-control" supertype and a "tempo" subtype just at RUG Delver as it chokes your opponent from developing their mana and play the spells they want. Deadguy Ale is an aggro-control supertype. Deathblade is an "aggro-control" supertype as well but isn't running Wasteland or Delver, which are (alongside Daze and/or Stifle) staples of the "tempo" subtype, but are not related to the "aggro-control" supertype.

It's like trying to find a common definition of "combo" cores pointing to Brainstorm + Ponder, willingly ignoring Belcher, Oops!, SI, etc.

Forgive me my little digression to deck theory, which would be an honor for me to continue while having a beer, if you could also make it to GP Lille, but limiting the "control"-aspect of the "aggro-control" supertype to "Counters" (ignoring discard, taxing effects, Sphere-Effects, Landdestruction, etc) and define a supertype based on cards one of his subtypes runs, appear narrow minded to me, especially as a foundation to discuss strategic SB approach based on supertypes. (Edit: Hope that wasn't unnecessarily complex to make my point clear. If so: sorry, pal)

Midrange is the other side of this coin: not really aggressive but also not really controllish.
DeathBlade is a midrange deck, and so are most Patriot lists, the new Grixis thing and stuff like Maverick.
Midrange relies more on high impact cards (best example is Batterskull, but also Young Pyro and Knight of the Reliquary).

"midrange" as a subtype exists within the "aggro-control" supertype and spreads from Blade-variants to TheRock to NicFit just to name a few. They drop the eaely game focus for more powerful threats and control elements to trump opposing ones if the game goes longer. Do not confuse Patriot (UWR Delver) with UWR Blade as the later runs TNN instead of Delver and uses a different, less tempo-orientated counter- & removal-layout and is also lacking Wastelands at times. They overlap a lot, but one is "tempo" and the other is a "midrange" deck at heart, like 12-Post is a "control" supertype despite running S&T + Emrakul. Maverick and Grixis are indeed "midrange" subtypes.

It's important to note that most people are fine with blue and non-blue "midrange" decks, but the idea of non-blue "tempo" or "aggro-control" still has not made circles.

But anyway, more important is the ability to define what a deck aims to do, and how we should respond.
Midrange tends to be a good matchup for TES (high impact cards take time to set up, which we don't grant them).
Tempo strategies are harder, because they typically work with a faster clock and faster disruption.

Here I agree and we come to the problem I'm discussing with Fortune: Is it expedient to fight hate (which can and will slip) ON THE BATTLEFIELD with HAND CONTROL elements?

[Asthereal]

It seems we have learned very different definitions. Probably because we have read different articles about this. Let's just drop the Aggro Control thingy and stick to Midrange and Tempo as definitions, since in this way at least we know what the other guy is talking about.
You are right about non-blue Tempo though. Stompy style decks are often more Tempo oriented than Canadian Thresh even. In a Stompy deck, you have to disrupt, and you have to be agressive, or else you just lose to the inevitablity and consistency of the other decks out there.

I would oppose to calling Death&taxes and Maverick tempo decks though. I feel they are more midrange, especially because they are not very agressive. Turn one MoR or mana dude is not agressive at all. Additionally, their disruption is slow paced (turn 2 earliest). But anyway, they both do try to disrupt a lot, and giving them time to drop two hate bears seems bad, just like it seems bad to allow a slow Team America hand to draw and cast multiple Hymns.

... we come to the problem I'm discussing with Fortune: Is it expedient to fight hate (which can and will slip) ON THE BATTLEFIELD with HAND CONTROL elements?

We usually do both. We keep discard that can hit a permanent, and we side in removal to get rid of those that slip through. FinalFortune knows this just as well as we do. The question is where to put emphasis on. Let's face it: discarding stuff is better than having to remove it. Once a permanent hits, it hampers us, or dramatically improves the opponent's chances: Omni allows them to win on the spot, Thalia/Thorn hamper our cantripping. There are exceptions of course, but the general rule stands. But inevitably stuff will slip through, so removal is mandatory, at least to some extent. What is best is very much dependent on the situation. On the play turn one I'd like to go Probe>Therapy and get rid of dangerous stuff. On the draw with a mediocre hand a Thalia will probably require me to find a Chain wile casting cantrips for 2 mana each, which sucks, but isn't impossible.

[KaiSchafroth]

It's as over the top as south american football commentators

I just loved the dramatic camera cut to the BS at 01:30

[Lemnear]

It seems we have learned very different definitions. Probably because we have read different articles about this. Let's just drop the Aggro Control thingy and stick to Midrange and Tempo as definitions, since in this way at least we know what the other guy is talking about.

During my time there was only the SchoolsOfMagic.txt and the Scrye Magazine available lol

You are right about non-blue Tempo though. Stompy style decks are often more Tempo oriented than Canadian Thresh even. In a Stompy deck, you have to disrupt, and you have to be agressive, or else you just lose to the inevitablity and consistency of the other decks out there.

I agree. "Stompy" these days is a "tempo" concept even then the roots of the deck were different ones.

I would oppose to calling Death&taxes and Maverick tempo decks though.

Didn't call Maverick Tempo.

I feel they are more midrange, especially because they are not very agressive. Turn one MoR or mana dude is not agressive at all. Additionally, their disruption is slow paced (turn 2 earliest). But anyway, they both do try to disrupt a lot, and giving them time to drop two hate bears seems bad, just like it seems bad to allow a slow Team America hand to draw and cast multiple Hymns.

D&T stalls the opponents gameplan to get ahead itself, which is a tempo concept. If it was a midrange concept, we would see real gameenders and powerful threats, but the deck is really struggling against those. If you are fancy, you can call Maverick the midrange-variant of D&T like UWR blade is the midrange-variant of Patriot Delver. A lot of shared stuff, but with a different focus towards turn 4+

We usually do both. We keep discard that can hit a permanent, and we side in removal to get rid of those that slip through.

Exactly.

FinalFortune knows this just as well as we do. The question is where to put emphasis on. Let's face it: discarding stuff is better than having to remove it.

Sure he does. I'm only in the fence about him being ok with scooping to stuff that slips through in addition to make the SB less flexible in the process. That's the core of my problem with the idea.

Once a permanent hits, it hampers us, or dramatically improves the opponent's chances: Omni allows them to win on the spot, Thalia/Thorn hamper our cantripping. There are exceptions of course, but the general rule stands.

But we are not talking about CoV vs. Omni, but of Xantid in this matchup and to an extend about IoK being unable to discard FoW, DTT, Omniscience or Emrakul and all what the opponent needs is finding a S&T with his cantrips as you can only hit one half of the combo and can't clear the way for your combo either. I don't see a reason to pick on Xantid for being bad post-Omniscience in the face of all the limitations IoK comes with which can also barely disrupt the combo either, but is totally pointless to support your own combo here.

There is no question that Thorn, Canonist and Thalia are annoying as hell. Same is true for Eidolon/Pillar from Burn. Not being prepared for your opponent to topdeck an 8-outer or cantrip into FoWs/Canonists/Meddling Mages/etc. (see: Blade decks) is lose. How depressing is casting IoK, seeing FoW against Miracles and being doomed to watch your opponent having the time to find a Counterbalance while Xantid dkes not deal with FoW but also disables SDT from interacting with you

But inevitably stuff will slip through, so removal is mandatory, at least to some extent. What is best is very much dependent on the situation. On the play turn one I'd like to go Probe>Therapy and get rid of dangerous stuff. On the draw with a mediocre hand a Thalia will probably require me to find a Chain wile casting cantrips for 2 mana each, which sucks, but isn't impossible.

Cantripping into CoV is a lot better than casting your cantrips and see the IoKs and Thoughtseize, no? CoV is like a condom: Better have one, even if you don't need it, than needing one, but having none with you.

[Asthereal]

D&T stalls the opponents gameplan to get ahead itself, which is a tempo concept. If it was a midrange concept, we would see real gameenders and powerful threats, but the deck is really struggling against those. If you are fancy, you can call Maverick the midrange-variant of D&T like UWR blade is the midrange-variant of Patriot Delver. A lot of shared stuff, but with a different focus towards turn 4+.

SFM into Batterskull is a very midrangy thing to do. Other than that we might indeed call Mav a midrangy version of D&T. I played a lot of Maverick in the past, and it's just sooo slow. And D&T is actually even slower usually. That's why I generally even rank D&T as a more or less control deck.

But we are not talking about CoV vs. Omni, but of Xantid in this matchup and to an extend about IoK being unable to discard FoW, DTT, Omniscience or Emrakul and all what the opponent needs is finding a S&T with his cantrips as you can only hit one half of the combo and can't clear the way for your combo either. I don't see a reason to pick on Xantid for being bad post-Omniscience in the face of all the limitations IoK comes with which can also barely disrupt the combo either, but is totally pointless to support your own combo here.

There is no question that Thorn, Canonist and Thalia are annoying as hell. Same is true for Eidolon/Pillar from Burn. Not being prepared for your opponent to topdeck an 8-outer or cantrip into FoWs/Canonists/Meddling Mages/etc. (see: Blade decks) is lose. How depressing is casting IoK, seeing FoW against Miracles and being doomed to watch your opponent having the time to find a Counterbalance while Xantid dkes not deal with FoW but also disables SDT from interacting with you.

I won't argue against you there. IoK is just strictly worse than Thoughtseize/Duress/Therapy, whichever you don't already run four of. Xantid shines against Omni, and while I don't necessarily like it much against Miracles usually, it does have its merits in stopping them from hiding crap on top of their deck and drawing it with Top when needed, so I'll probably side it in anyway.

IoK can actually suck even against a deck where it should be good. Just think about it. Against Burn it should be awesome. Costs no life, grabs Eidolon or REB/Pyroblast if needed, or just the most damaging burn spell. You cast your IoK. He has Mindbreak Trap. Oh...

CoV is like a condom: Better have one, even if you don't need it, than needing one, but having none with you.

Nice one!

[Pelikanudo]

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

Well, I believe that Xantid is far superior vs S&T than Pyroblast and A.D. can destroy M.M and is far superior than Pyro vs Miracles.

I'm still waiting for that Uncounterable Pyro!

@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.

in my experience and specifically vs RUG with Stifles , I dont think it' s worse to have gemstone instead of Fetches:
- they play Stifle so you are vulnerable to them more often than not
- Wastelands ruin your day, but Gemstone save that day as it is more polivalent as Unique Mana Producer in play.
- Also once you have fetched a second time for a land you have less chances to find another land.
- I will be happy if they spend a daze just to decrease my gemstone counters... - I still have 2!

I usually would sit back on Swamp when playing TNT and 15 lands... but vs RUG for me this is just luxurios playing TES...
Sure nobody agree on this...

Related to null rod:
I've seen this card in BUG builds - when you play vs this archetype you play an attrition game - hymns, and counters usually doesnt make you win on first turns... this happens on 2nd and 3rd games - 1st games I just win easily - thats why I'll side maybe a couple of A.D. I remember tha last match up I lost and was specifically because of Null Rod, for that scenario I had: ton of mana and 1 business.
Sure nobody agree on this...

[Lemnear]

SFM into Batterskull is a very midrangy thing to do. Other than that we might indeed call Mav a midrangy version of D&T. I played a lot of Maverick in the past, and it's just sooo slow. And D&T is actually even slower usually. That's why I generally even rank D&T as a more or less control deck.

I think we should relate the "speed" of D&T directly to the mana it's opponent has available to work with. It doesn't necessarily matter if the deck takes 6 or 7 turns to kill if its opponent never has more than 1 mana available and can't basically play anything regardless which is tempo-territory ;)

IoK can actually suck even against a deck where it should be good. Just think about it. Against Burn it should be awesome. Costs no life, grabs Eidolon or REB/Pyroblast if needed, or just the most damaging burn spell. You cast your IoK. He has Mindbreak Trap. Oh...

Hahahaha ... if you would play Burn in Berlin you would likely have Pillars and MBT in your SB X]

Well, I believe that Xantid is far superior vs S&T than Pyroblast and A.D. can destroy M.M and is far superior than Pyro vs Miracles.

We're not talking about cutting Decays, but about options of getting rid of MM in decks running Wasteland. Xantid is bad against S&T->Omniscience while Blast can counter the S&T.

I'm still waiting for that Uncounterable Pyro!

Can't argue with that

in my experience and specifically vs RUG with Stifles , I dont think it' s worse to have gemstone instead of Fetches:
- they play Stifle so you are vulnerable to them more often than not
- Wastelands ruin your day, but Gemstone save that day as it is more polivalent as Unique Mana Producer in play.
- Also once you have fetched a second time for a land you have less chances to find another land.
- I will be happy if they spend a daze just to decrease my gemstone counters... - I still have 2!

Gemstone as topic again? Making points based on a matchup with 3% metagame representation? Still don't adress the matter that your opponent can watch your Gemstones run out of counters while you try to stabilize and gather the required 2-3 lands you need anyways to get around Daze/Wasteland/Pierce?

[LDX]

Things went better. Way better, but not good enough for me. Yet.

I ended the event 4-0.

The EPIC STORM

vs Death & Taxes: 2-1
vs Manaless Dredge: 2-0
vs The Gate: 2-1
vs Affinity: 2-1

I won't bother going in details with all matchups, but I need some clarifications on a few things.

Death & Taxes: 2-1

G1: I'm on the draw. My hand is the following:

Burning Wish
Burning Wish
Chrome Mox
Rite of Flames
Swamp
Lotus Petal
Gitaxian Probe

He plays turn 1, put a Mother. My turn, I draw Rite of Flames. Probe (see no hard threat, finds Probe) > Probe (finds Fetch) > Swamp > Petal > Chrome Mox (Imprint BW) > RoF > BW for Empty, 16 Goblins. He scoops.

Sideboard: -2 Duress, -1 Ponder, +2 Chain of Vapor, +1 Pyroclasm

G2: I'm on the draw: My hand is the following

Underground Sea
Brainstorm
Burning Wish
Swamp
Dark Ritual
Rite of Flames
Chain of Vapor

I keep, as I'm pretty confident in getting a mana artifact soon, or at least via Brainstorm. I'm also glad to already have a Chain of Vapor in hand. So he plays first: Chalice for 0, Aether Vial. I'm like, ok? My turn. I draw Cabal Therapy, I dare a blind Cabal before Thalia hits, naming Thalia. I see no Thalia, but no threats. I pass the turn. He draws... Chalice of the Void.

By his turn 2 (so I played 1 turn, yes), he has Chalice @0 and Chalice @1.

Needless to say I lost the game. Even if I tried to bounce is Chalice at 0 before losing my CoV possiblity, hell, he would have played it again.

G3 was a natural Empty for 8 Goblins on turn 1 while on the play. I had the Brainstorm backup in case of anything, but he couldn't deal with it.

I don't know how to feel about this. The loss on game 2 was shocking. As I was told, I didn't board Abrupt Decays in, but else than that, what else could have saved me? Better luck? I mean, the worst case scenario just happened. I'm sorry to insist, but how bad would boarding 3 AD just for the games we're playing on the draw? I value your wisdom, TES players, but this experience left too much pain to just be put aside. The guy is tired to lose to me tho, I expect 3 Chalice of the Void maindeck next week. He was dead serious. I'm afraid.


Manaless Dredge: 2-0

G1 Manaless HAD one hell of a problem to race T1 Goblins. HAD! Just saying

On a more serious note, I had one question, one critical missplay I made, but that didn't cost the game yet because of a lucky Tutor draw.

Sideboard: -2 Duress, -1 Ponder, +3 Xantid

I had a hand that looked like this, after a mulligan:

Xantid Swarm
Empty the Warrens
Bayou
Lotus Petal
Lotus Petal
Rite of Flame

I was on the play. I went for Empty the Warrens right away, but my Rite of Flame got countered by a FoW. First, I know my sequence was wrong as I went Land > Petal > Petal > Flame instead of Land > Petal > Flame. However, woud it have been better to wait a turn, play Bayou > Xantid, and wait? I needed the Storm counter to cast Empty from my hand, but I didn't want the Petals to be discarded either, so I just went ham T1 instead of waiting T2. Was I too cocky? After all, Manaless can't even play Cabal Therapy before turns T2 anyway, and as I was on the play...

Also, the lack of Duress didn't hurt me at all (to my surprise, I admit), but I think I had quite a bit of luck on that round.


The Gate: 2-1

G1 was a walk with Ad Nauseam.

Sideboard: None

G2 was epic as hell, he won that one, but not after a 15 minutes Ad Nauseam started at 7 life. I was one Storm counter short to kill him and his 28 life points, as he had a Jitte online on a Phyrexian Revoker that named Lotus Petal. Yes, I drew Petal, and would have won with them.

G3 was too many Goblins, too soon, after he kept a very slow hand (Nighthawk + Bitterblossom + Jitte, no discard)

I didn't feel like Abrupt Decay would have helped here, even against Jitte, but I'm thinking toward Chain of Vapor vs his Phyrexian Revoker, removing 2 Ponder. I would have won easily game two if he didn't have a Revoker online, and by the time I found enough mana for BW + Removal, he had enough counters on Jitte to save it. Void Snare wouldn't have been enough, I needed to remove before my turn. Thoughts?


Affinity: 2-1

By far the most intense match. While G2 vs The Gate was intense, this G1 was something out of this world. She CRUSHED me, yet she didn't know what a Storm deck was.

I was on the play. I had a Gitaxian Probe and a Cabal Therapy to most likely win by turn 3 from hard casting Ad Nauseam, which I have in hand with some cantrips. I go for my Probe + Cabal turn 1, I see her perfect hand. I however name Mox Opal, which she has x2. I know she doesn't have enough mana. I pass, she draws a third Mox Opal in 8 cards.

Turn 1 Cranial Plating equipped. My can trips fizzle, I lose, hard. Can't wait to see the video footage on this one.

G2, I'm so afraid of her deck that I don't know where to start.

Sideboard: -2 Duress, -2 Ponder, +2 Abrupt Decay, +1 Pyroclasm, +1 Grapeshot

I keep a hand with Grapeshot, some cantrips, and a LED. I play Land Go, she has 3 creatures at the end of her first turn. I manage to kill 2 of them and leave her with an Ornithopter and an empty hand. I soon go for an Ad Nauseam, but the Ad Nauseam fizzles, despite my 4 lands in play. I keep a hand to win next turn via Past in Flames, but at one condition: she needs to NOT draw a Cranial Plating, or I lose at her turn. I'm at 3 life. She doesn't draw the Cranial Plating, I win as expected on my turn via PiF.

After that win, I calm down, and remove the 2 Abrupt Decay to bring back the Ponder, as the -2 life from last game scared me too. G3 was a proper Ad Nauseam turn 2. Yet, I'm quite afraid of next thursday: if she manages to learn what she's playing and what TES is, she will most likely have her chances. I'm now scared of Affinity.



All in all, I'm very glad of th help I received, it surely relieved me tonight. I was still disappointed a few times as I knew my plays were getting sketchy and I didn't feel as confident as I should have been, but I hope to see this mistakes back on video footage and come back with those. I think the best compliment I received tonight was: ''I know you have the same deck, but you play it totally differently, I don't know what to expect anymore.'' -Alexe, the Manaless player. She's 8-3 in our standing, at first place, I'm now 7-4, right behind her.

The league is far from over, and I expect a lot of meta calls next week: the Chalice main deck for D&T, maybe Loam Pox return, a switch from Manaless Dredge to Burn or Elves!. I'll try to come back after I review the video footage, but for now, I'll let you guys do your theorycrafting in peace.

Thanks a lot for your help, I hope we aren't stopping there :)

[Plague Sliver]

Death and Taxes with maindeck Chalice...that's what we've come to in 2015, ladies and gentlemen

[Pelikanudo]

We're not talking about cutting Decays, but about options of getting rid of MM in decks running Wasteland. Xantid is bad against S&T->Omniscience while Blast can counter the S&T.

I prefer to play 4 just Decays instead of Splits of Decays/Xantids/Pyros. I will not cut my 4th decay for a pyro. I dont think Xantid is bad vs Omnitell if you play it in your first turn - I can conceive this card as P.Nelde - you maybe need to play more than 2 copies to be effecive vs this archetype. it also can serve to flahbak therapy and apart, expecting to use pyro to just counter S&T it's not the way a card in my side acts vs this archetype.

Related to M.M plus Wasteland in a single deck - well the unique decks I faced with this setting are:
a) Patriot - I lately don't see this archetype in my meta
b) BUG (Control Not Tempo - Tempo doesn't play M.M) - Wich also plays Null Rod - thefore A.D. is just more polivalent - still didn't encounter any mana issue when played vs this archetype - my fault was in deed to not contemplate Null Rod AND M.M. only and lost because of this.

Gemstone as topic again? Making points based on a matchup with 3% metagame representation? Still don't adress the matter that your opponent can watch your Gemstones run out of counters while you try to stabilize and gather the required 2-3 lands you need anyways to get around Daze/Wasteland/Pierce?

This was a specific point of view related to the comment Final Fortune wrote. That's all. I don't know if F.F. meta is 3% RUG. and neither wanted to discuss this topic with you again.


EDIT: @LDX What a fantastic meta to play TES with!!! Envy.

[Lemnear]

Things went better. Way better, but not good enough for me. Yet.

I ended the event 4-0.

This sounds as a leap compared to the reports a few weeks back. Glad to see

The EPIC STORM

vs Death & Taxes: 2-1
vs Manaless Dredge: 2-0
vs The Gate: 2-1
vs Affinity: 2-1

I won't bother going in details with all matchups, but I need some clarifications on a few things.

Death & Taxes: 2-1

G1: I'm on the draw. My hand is the following:

Burning Wish
Burning Wish
Chrome Mox
Rite of Flames
Swamp
Lotus Petal
Gitaxian Probe

He plays turn 1, put a Mother. My turn, I draw Rite of Flames. Probe (see no hard threat, finds Probe) > Probe (finds Fetch) > Swamp > Petal > Chrome Mox (Imprint BW) > RoF > BW for Empty, 16 Goblins. He scoops.

Sideboard: -2 Duress, -1 Ponder, +2 Chain of Vapor, +1 Pyroblast

I don't get the Pyroblast here :/

G2: I'm on the draw: My hand is the following

Underground Sea
Brainstorm
Burning Wish
Swamp
Dark Ritual
Rite of Flames
Chain of Vapor

I keep, as I'm pretty confident in getting a mana artifact soon, or at least via Brainstorm. I'm also glad to already have a Chain of Vapor in hand. So he plays first: Chalice for 0, Aether Vial. I'm like, ok? My turn. I draw Cabal Therapy, I dare a blind Cabal before Thalia hits, naming Thalia. I see no Thalia, but no threats. I pass the turn. He draws... Chalice of the Void.

By his turn 2 (so I played 1 turn, yes), he has Chalice @0 and Chalice @1.

Needless to say I lost the game. Even if I tried to bounce is Chalice at 0 before losing my CoV possiblity, hell, he would have played it again.

G3 was a natural Empty for 8 Goblins on turn 1 while on the play. I had the Brainstorm backup in case of anything, but he couldn't deal with it.

I don't know how to feel about this. The loss on game 2 was shocking. As I was told, I didn't board Abrupt Decays in, but else than that, what else could have saved me? Better luck? I mean, the worst case scenario just happened. I'm sorry to insist, but how bad would boarding 3 AD just for the games we're playing on the draw? I value your wisdom, TES players, but this experience left too much pain to just be put aside. The guy is tired to lose to me tho, I expect 3 Chalice of the Void maindeck next week. He was dead serious. I'm afraid.

First of all, there as nothing involved I would call a mistake. Chalice @ 0 & 1 is rough so you dom't beed to feel bad about that. Looking at this hand, there was only 1 greedy alternatice to consider to "Swamp->Therapy->Thalia" and that was gambling against Wasteland by playing the Underground Sea and pass. This way you have had the option to cast CoV eot or respond to something with Brainstorm. So, if your opponent does not follow up with another restricting play, its pretty likely, that you combo turn 2 after an eot Brainstorm. Wouldn't have saved you here, but it's an option to have in mind. Don't board Decays

Manaless Dredge: 2-0

G1 Manaless HAD one hell of a problem to race T1 Goblins. HAD! Just saying

lawl

On a more serious note, I had one question, one critical missplay I made, but that didn't cost the game yet because of a lucky Tutor draw.

Sideboard: -2 Duress, -1 Ponder, +3 Xantid

I had a hand that looked like this, after a mulligan:

Xantid Swarm
Empty the Warrens
Bayou
Lotus Petal
Lotus Petal
Rite of Flame

I was on the play. I went for Empty the Warrens right away, but my Rite of Flame got countered by a FoW. First, I know my sequence was wrong as I went Land > Petal > Petal > Flame instead of Land > Petal > Flame. However, woud it have been better to wait a turn, play Bayou > Xantid, and wait? I needed the Storm counter to cast Empty from my hand, but I didn't want the Petals to be discarded either, so I just went ham T1 instead of waiting T2. Was I too cocky? After all, Manaless can't even play Cabal Therapy before turns T2 anyway, and as I was on the play...

Tricky. The problem here is that I'm not overwhelmed by 8 goblins only in addition to you knowing he has counters. I would have played Xantid off the Bayou because you double timewalk your opponent if Xantid gets FoWed for whatever reason and if not you have another drawstep to find cards that fuel your stormcount and would result into a two-turnclock rather than the three-turn-clock you could have created by the turn 1 combo. Verdict: You took a risk without the option to kill your opponent any faster.

Also, the lack of Duress didn't hurt me at all (to my surprise, I admit), but I think I had quite a bit of luck on that round.

Should not surprise you.

The Gate: 2-1

G1 was a walk with Ad Nauseam.

Sideboard: None

G2 was epic as hell, he won that one, but not after a 15 minutes Ad Nauseam started at 7 life. I was one Storm counter short to kill him and his 28 life points, as he had a Jitte online on a Phyrexian Revoker that named Lotus Petal. Yes, I drew Petal, and would have won with them.

G3 was too many Goblins, too soon, after he kept a very slow hand (Nighthawk + Bitterblossom + Jitte, no discard)

Game 2 you can drain him to 2 and just PIF the turn after for the win? We talked about that game 3 scenario. I'm glad you saw why that Jitte nonsense should be nothing of your business.

I didn't feel like Abrupt Decay would have helped here, even against Jitte, but I'm thinking toward Chain of Vapor vs his Phyrexian Revoker, removing 2 Ponder. I would have won easily game two if he didn't have a Revoker online, and by the time I found enough mana for BW + Removal, he had enough counters on Jitte to save it. Void Snare wouldn't have been enough, I needed to remove before my turn. Thoughts?

Affinity: 2-1

By far the most intense match. While G2 vs The Gate was intense, this G1 was something out of this world. She CRUSHED me, yet she didn't know what a Storm deck was.

I was on the play. I had a Gitaxian Probe and a Cabal Therapy to most likely win by turn 3 from hard casting Ad Nauseam, which I have in hand with some cantrips. I go for my Probe + Cabal turn 1, I see her perfect hand. I however name Mox Opal, which she has x2. I know she doesn't have enough mana. I pass, she draws a third Mox Opal in 8 cards.

Turn 1 Cranial Plating equipped. My can trips fizzle, I lose, hard. Can't wait to see the video footage on this one.

G2, I'm so afraid of her deck that I don't know where to start.

Sideboard: -2 Duress, -2 Ponder, +2 Abrupt Decay, +1 Pyroclasm, +1 Grapeshot

I keep a hand with Grapeshot, some cantrips, and a LED. I play Land Go, she has 3 creatures at the end of her first turn. I manage to kill 2 of them and leave her with an Ornithopter and an empty hand. I soon go for an Ad Nauseam, but the Ad Nauseam fizzles, despite my 4 lands in play. I keep a hand to win next turn via Past in Flames, but at one condition: she needs to NOT draw a Cranial Plating, or I lose at her turn. I'm at 3 life. She doesn't draw the Cranial Plating, I win as expected on my turn via PiF.

After that win, I calm down, and remove the 2 Abrupt Decay to bring back the Ponder, as the -2 life from last game scared me too. G3 was a proper Ad Nauseam turn 2. Yet, I'm quite afraid of next thursday: if she manages to learn what she's playing and what TES is, she will most likely have her chances. I'm now scared of Affinity.

That's what I way talking about in terms of Decay may being too slow. Don't stress yourself further. Matchup is fine

All in all, I'm very glad of th help I received, it surely relieved me tonight. I was still disappointed a few times as I knew my plays were getting sketchy and I didn't feel as confident as I should have been, but I hope to see this mistakes back on video footage and come back with those. I think the best compliment I received tonight was: ''I know you have the same deck, but you play it totally differently, I don't know what to expect anymore.'' -Alexe, the Manaless player. She's 8-3 in our standing, at first place, I'm now 7-4, right behind her.

Well, that does indeed sound pretty nice.

The league is far from over, and I expect a lot of meta calls next week: the Chalice main deck for D&T, maybe Loam Pox return, a switch from Manaless Dredge to Burn or Elves!. I'll try to come back after I review the video footage, but for now, I'll let you guys do your theorycrafting in peace.

Thanks a lot for your help, I hope we aren't stopping there :)

Greetings to your group and apologies that I do some coaching lol

[Jay_Gatz]

I don't get the Pyroblast here :/

Probably meant pyroclasm, not pyroblast

[Lemnear]

Probably meant pyroclasm, not pyroblast

Makes sense. Pardon my brainfart of not thinking of this. Too many list floating around in my head at times, duh!

[Bryant Cook]

I would side in Decay versus Affinity. I've found that a lot of them play some number of the following: Revokers/Chalice/Cannonist/Thalia.

-2 Duress
-3 Therapy
+3 Decay
+1 Chain of Vapor
+1 Void Snare

If you wanted to keep in 2 Therapy you could take out ETW instead.

[sawatarix]

Here it is: My own Legacy Storm Deck Tech & Interview !!

Check it out, it's in japanese.
I might also translate it the next days if there is a high demand.

- Kai

http://www.hareruyamtg.com/article/s...ry/detail/1185