I played 2 Zoo matches, and in both I boarded out Smash and Flames for Bridge.  Beat the first guy, and lost to the second.  I don't recall any play mistakes so I think it was mostly bad luck.  Then I lost to elves even after boarding in the pillars, bridges, and 4th fallout, partly due to some bad judgment on my part.  Round 4 I was paired up against Bant, which I always lose to.  I somehow managed to win game one but on games 2 and 3 he just got rid of my bridges and beat me down.  Looking back, the deck still looks pretty well and I don't think I would change any thing.  I just need to mulligan a little better and get better pairings and draws next time.

1. Well 2 of 9 burn decks that top 8'd post conflux agree that Hellspark Elemental needs to be in there, but that's not enough to convince me.  I'll test it a bit and consider finding room for it, but I doubt it'll have time to work its way in by tomorrow.  As for taking out Spark Elemental, I've found that when my deck runs only 12 1-drops, I tend to lose more.
2. No.  Neither has anyone else to my knowledge.
3. I'm seeing about half of the net decks starting to run Smash to Smithereens, and I was starting to play test them in the main before I saw that.  They're just too useful when every other deck runs Jitte, which can shut me down.  I've found plenty of other uses for them as well that I don't feel like taking the time to get in to.
4. I'm sure I'd run Flame Javelin in standard, but it's horrible in extended.  I'd run 2 more Flames of the Blood Hands way before that.
5. I actually agree with you that Boseiju is a sub-optimal card, but I really needed an answer to counter spells.

IthilanorStPete: Thank you for reminding me of Vexing Shusher.  I hadn't been testing with it because I didn't have any copies, but I picked up a set today.  And when I was looking for room in my deck a friend suggested dropping Vortex down to 3, but I still have them at 4.  But keep in mind over half the net decks only have 3.

All I did for my main deck was drop the incinerate for a 3rd Volcanic Fallout.  Here's my new SB:

4 Ensnaring Bridge
4 Pyrostatic Pillar
2 Smash to Smithereens
4 Vexing Shusher
1 Volcanic Fallout

(I would really like to find room for some Pithing Needles but I feel the above cards are more important atm)

What I really need help with is my sideboarding choices.  I'll be on here tomorrow morning before heading to the PTQ and hopefully I can get some feedback before then.  If you have a minute to look this over and think I'm doing something wrong, please point it out because I haven't had enough time to test all of these out yet:

vs Zoo:
+4 Ensnaring Bridge
+1 Volcanic Fallout
-2 Smash to Smithereens
-2 Flames of the Blood Hand
-1 Spark Elemental

vs Faeries:
+4 Vexing Shusher
+1 Volcanic Fallout
-1 Flames of the Blood Hand
-4 Spark Elemental

vs Elf combo:
+4 Pyrostatic Pillar
+4 Ensnaring Bridge
+4 Volcanic Fallout
-4 Sulfuric Vortex
-4 Spark Elemental
-2 Smash to Smithereens
-2 Flames of the Blood Hand

vs TEPS
+4 Pyrostatic Pillar
+2 Smash to Smithereens
+3 Vexing Shusher
-3 Volcanic Fallout
-4 Sulfuric Vortex
-2 Flames of the Blood Hand

vs Bant Aggro:
+4 Vexing Shusher
+4 Ensnaring Bridge
-4 Spark Elemental
-2 Smash to Smithereens
-2 Flames of the Blood Hand

vs Next Level Blue:
+4 Vexing Shusher
+2 Smash to Smithereens
+1 Volcanic Fallout
-4 Spark Elemental
-2 Flames of the Blood Hand
-1 Sulfuric Vortex

vs Burn:
+2 Smash to Smithereens
+1 Volcanic Fallout
-3 Sulfuric Vortex

vs Aggro Loam:
+4 Ensnaring Bridge
-4 Spark Elemental

vs Affinity:
+2 Smash to Smithereens
+4 Ensnaring Bridge
-2 Flames of the Blood Hand
-4 Sulfuric Vortex

I'll be playing mono red burn in the PTQ in Indianapolis sunday, and I feel I need to make some last minute changes.  First, I'll start by listing the deck:

11 Mountain
 4 Blinkmoth Nexus
 2 Darksteel Citadel
 4 Great Furnace
 4 Keldon Marauders
 4 Mogg Fanatic
 4 Lava Spike
 4 Magma Jet
 4 Rift Bolt
 4 Shrapnel Blast
 4 Sulfuric Vortex
 2 Flames of the Blood Hand
 4 Spark Elemental
 2 Volcanic Fallout
 2 Smash to Smithereens
 1 Incinerate
(SB)
 4 Pyrostatic Pillar
 4 Ensnaring Bridge
 2 Volcanic Fallout
 2 Smash to Smithereens
 3 Boseiju, Who Shelters All

The reason I'm asking for help is because I have problems beating a couple of the popular decks and I still may be making mistakes with how I choose to sideboard.  The main deck works well and I'm playing it well, but I could still change a couple cards around if need be.  I'm considering dropping 1 sulfuric vortex into the sideboard and replacing it with either a 12th mountain or another incinerate.  Here are the decks I've noticed in the top 8 the most recently over the past month:

1) Zoo (53)
2) Faeries (35)
3) Elf combo (23)
4) TEPS (17)
4) Bant Aggro (17)
6) Next Level Blue (11)
7) Burn Deck Wins (8)
8) Aggro Loam (7)
9) Affinity (6)

I can pretty much assume I'll see a Zoo deck, a Faery deck, and maybe an elf deck, and that the rest will be hit or miss.  I like my game against zoo, and my game against elves is so-so but I don't think I can improve it much by changing anything.  The problem is I keep losing when I test against my Faeries deck.  Right now, this is how I sideboard against Faeries:

-4 Spark Elemental
-1 Incinerate
-1 Sulfuric Vortex

+3 Boseiju, Who Shelters All
+2 Volcanic Fallout
+1 Smash to Smithereens

I'm sure there's someone out there that's played more face-to-face than I have and can tell me some better choices for that match up. Can anyone help?

P.S.  I also lose to Bant Aggro every time.  I'm like 5-10 vs Faeries and 0-12 vs Bant.  I'm wondering if it's even possible for me to win that one.

I should also include how I lose to Faeries.  They have enough draw power that they almost always see a Jitte and a counterspell (or 3).  They just let me beat them down to about 8 life, countering whatever they can, and then equip a Jitte and turn the game around.  Vortex would work great if they didn't always counter it, and I haven't got to use Boseiju to push a Smash through yet, but that's something I was thinking of.  Damage to the face usually doesn't finish them off because they usually have like 4 counters on Jitte by the time I can get them to 0.

That answers my question.  Thanks.

Anybody know why so many people use them?  I've seen them in net decks for T1 and T1.x decks without and cards that rely on them.  I know there's no down side to them (unless someone plays some weird ice age or coldsnap card, which I've never seen happen in a tourney), but with so many people playing them I wonder if there's some benefit that I'm missing.

I like to take advantage of the rules that allow you to write down the names of cards you see played over the course of a game, and was wondering if I could take it a step further.  I'd like to take a binder full of printed out net decks so I could have an idea of what 90% of my opponents are running after seeing a few of their cards.  It would also help me remember which cards to name when using cards like pithing needle.  I've been looking through the floor rules, and can't find anything that would tell me if this is allowed.  Would anyone happen to know if this is legal?  I have to wonder why I haven't seen anyone doing it.

anyone have any examples of times they've used the platinum angel in a game?  I haven't tested it yet.

I agree with webster and Liam... gemstone mines get hit by wastelands, while fetchlands can pull out the basics.  I'm more worried about wastelands hitting my lands than stifles.  I'm still trying to determine the correct number of fetchlands to run.  I think 4 polluted delta is ideal, but then you have the option of running up to 2 bloodstained mires.  The life loss hurts, but only a little.  It helps towards threshold, but only a little.  The biggest thing I consider is its ability to grab either underground sea or a basic swamp, or bayou after the board.  It also depends on the amount of open land slots.  I tried lowering my land count to 11, but had to mulligan a couple hands that may have been ok had I drawn a land, so I'm starting to think 12 is the correct number, perhaps 1 as a bloodstained mire.

I could spend a lot of time talking about timetwister, and I guess I'll just keep working it back in and then taking it out.  The problem is you don't want to give them 7 cards and then pass the turn.  I could maybe see it as good if you're on the play and you replace a hand that you would have mulligan'd while making them draw 7 new cards, knowing they liked their hand enough to keep it.  But I really think it's only good when you can keep taking your turn after it resolves.  

I've had a couple first turn kills this way.  Like you play underground sea, tap for dark ritual, play sol ring, play chrome mox imprint blue, then play timetwister with BB floating.  Then maybe with your new hand you can duress, play mox sapphire, chain of vapor your sol ring, dark ritual, recast sol ring, then tendrils.  This isn't too uncommon (there are lots of combinations of cards in this deck that allow you to do this) and it makes timetwister look really good.  

But I've tried to do this before and drew a hand of 7 that I would normally mulligan with mana floating that I couldn't use.  And now my opponent has 7 more cards too.  You're almost always going to lose win that happens, aren't you?

Even if I wanted to run timetwister, I'm not sure that I'd want to pull anything out.  My build differs from yours by running an extra search card (ponder) and an extra disruption card (thoughtseize) in place of it and a land.  Extensive play testing has told me I need 9 search and 9 disruption for this deck to be successful.  I could run timetwister in place of a search card and sometimes hope to win on timetwister without Ad Nauseam, but that only works about 50/50.

Well I was suggesting cutting merchant scroll because when I test with this deck and draw it, I often wish it was something else.  It usually turns up just hitting me in the head for 2 while Ad Naus resolves.  But if it's working for you, then you should definitely play it.  But that's no reason not to run Imperial Seal.  I guess maybe try dropping ponder, even though that card also has the ability to put what you want in your hand.  During testing I often find that I want more mana or more search, usually more of the latter.  You want to avoid hands that you'll mulligan because you're light on bombs, and cards like imperial seal help prevent that.

I keep putting timetwister in and out of my deck, but I think it's going to stay out now.  By itself, it's horrible.  Meaning you don't want to draw 7 and pass the turn so they can murder you with their new hand.  It's only good when you can float mana and try to go off with the storm counters you already have for the turn -- sometimes you can resolve a fatal tendrils without the Ad Naus on the turn you timetwister.  But I find that sometimes you don't do that, and the times that you're not lucky enough to combo off are almost always detrimental.  I know the long decks run it, but they appear to be better equipped for draw 7's.

And I'd still like to say I like the Tryg Pred.  My biggest problem isn't just waiting til next turn for it to attack, 'cuz you do that with Xantid Swarm.  The difference is the swarms cost G and the TP costs 1UG.  In this deck, you've got to be cutting yourself short when you spend that kind of mana on something.

As for how much artifact removal to run, I don't think 5 slots in your SB is necessarily excessive.  I run 3 chains in the main and 3 recalls in the board.

I was thinking cards like arcane laboratory aren't a problem since I can bounce them, but you have to get rid of their counters first because you'll play bounce, then they'll counter, then you're done.  But seal still seems inferior.  If you're willing to keep a U untapped, Annul might work.  But that also seems like a bad card to me, mostly because I don't see anyone playing either in vintage.

And thanks for the compliments   I'm actually pretty new to vintage and I'm just doing what everyone else is doing... using the threads for ideas and tweaking my own version based on how play testing goes.  I think it's funny how your deck and mine are starting to look more alike, and more like the other decks like meandeck and ICBM.  I didn't want to copy someone else's build, but that's what happens as decks get better, everyone seems to decide on what works best.  If anyone wants to see how far our builds have come, check out the 'potential nut kicking card' thread...

I think the seals are a weak spot in your SB.  I think it's rare to need to see enchantment removal with this deck, and you have plenty of artifact removal already.  I was considering playing Trygon Predator myself, but I don't know if it's right for this deck.  You have to drop it for 1UG and then wait another turn before it starts working, which isn't good for the pace of this deck.  I've considered running slaughter pact to get rid of low cc guys like cursecatcher.  I'm also wondering why people are still running repeal after seeing the success of running 3+ chain of vapors.  It's really good at fixing mana and building up storm counts.

I wouldn't take out Trygon predator just yet, but if it were me, I'd make these changes:

Main:
-1 merchant scroll, +1 imperial seal
-1 repeal, -1 timetwister, +2 chain of vapor
SB:
-2 Seal of Primordium, +2 slaughter pact (or massacre if you run into more UW fish than UBG)

Well I'm not going to base my opinion of a card off one game, but I can see that it would be problematic to play such expensive disruption when constant playtesting has shown that the deck is often a little short on mana.  But I also don't want you to feel like you've been burned by the multiple comments opposing the idea, because it's never bad to see more ideas from which we can pick what we think will work.  However, I'm wondering if you've tried playtesting Mind Twist because I think anyone who has played it in this deck several times would form the same opinion.

I'm curious to see how this deck is developing for the rest of you that have been playtesting it and making changes to it.  I posted my last couple changes, and that's what I'm still running now.  Liam... you're still trying things out, right?  Come up with anything?

You'd think I'd have enough mana to take advantage of a mind twist, but a lot of times during testing I get held back a turn because I'm too short on mana for Ad Naus.  That's why my current disruption is only pact/duress/seize.  In the example you just gave, I still would rather have duress than mind twist.  I'd play a first turn duress, then (assuming it's safe) on turn 2 I'd search for Ad Naus and use all those mana sources to cast it instead.  On another note, my friend was playing his deck against another version of this deck that ran mind twist, and he was able to beat it.  I wish I had more details, but I don't see this deck getting much help from mind twist.

I'm still playtesting to see if 9 disruption is enough, but I definitely still want more than 8.  There's just too many situations where you need it in your opening hand.

I might try cutting a seize for a potence to see if 9 is enough since I went straight from 8 to 10.  That's 6 cards that give me a discard effect for B.

As for the top... spooky, you've made a lot of good choices in making this deck.  I've found myself looking at your posts for ideas on more than one occasion.  But I think you should try it to see how it works with the rest of the cards in the deck.  I wasn't going to play it... I just put it in to test it because I've tested everyone's ideas at least a few times.  But after I saw what it did a couple games, I couldn't bring myself to take it out.  But it is a card that I'll always keep an eye on and if it becomes dead weight, it'll go.

Spooky... have you tried running more chain of vapors yet?  After seeing how well they work in the meandeck version, I've been interested to see who else is playing them.

Webster:  Upon further inspection, I was starting to reach that same conclusion.  Although I was play testing myself with BUG fish and fish hit Ad Long with duress and ended up putting 3 cursecatchers on the board... mass removal would be good in one of those rare situations.

After play testing my build a lot against various decks, I'm finding that I often want more disruption.  Most players agree that 8 is enough, but I disagree.  I see a lot of wins by disrupting on turn 1 and then going off on turn 2.  But there are games where I don't draw into a duress or a pact, and start to think a couple thoughtseizes wouldn't hurt.  So I took out a pact and added 3 thoughtseizes, and it seems to be working well so far.

And I don't know if it's because of the changes I made to my deck, or just statistics catching up with me, but I had 2 games where I could have used a 3rd tendrils.  So I guess I'll be like every one else and run at least 3.  I'm taking out timetwister to make room for it, because lately it's been hurting me as much as helping me.  Don't get me wrong... it's a good card... just risky to play at times.

Only problem is now that I'm not running Necropotence, but it would be very hard to find room for it because every thing else works well.  I'm wondering if it would be a mistake to just leave it out.  I could take out a land, but I'm already down to 11.  And I added mox emerald, but at times I actually need it.  Maybe one of you can talk me in to dropping a card for it.  Here's my current list:

4 polluted delta
3 underground sea
1 bayou
1 swamp
1 island
1 tolarian academy
4 chrome mox
1 mox emerald
1 mox sapphire
1 mox jet
1 black lotus
1 lotus petal
1 mana crypt
1 mana vault
1 sol ring
4 dark ritual
3 cabal ritual
1 sensei's divining top
1 ancestral recall
1 ponder
1 brainstorm
1 demonic consultation
1 demonic tutor
1 vampiric tutor
1 imperial seal
1 mystical tutor
4 duress
3 thoughtseize
3 pact of negation
3 chain of vapor
4 ad nauseam
1 yawgmoth's will
3 tendrils of agony

sb:
1 tropical island
2 yixlid jailer
2 tormod's crypt
3 slaughter pact
3 hurkyl's recall
4 xantid swarm

I've considered running massacre, but the 4 cc can be a problem when you're playing against BUG fish or when you turn it over while ad nauseam is resolving.  But I may have to play it anyway.  Liam's running slaughter pact in his build, which might also work.  Only problem there is that it gets rid of one creature when you may want to get rid of 2 or 3.

I think we could better identify the 'correct' cards by comparing the meandeck and ICBM versions of these decks.  Both seem to be doing well, and both are played in a similar fashion, so any cards played in both builds should definitely be considerations.  Here are the cards found in both decks (I used the meandeck version that placed in 5th at their open, which may be slightly different than Steve's version):

3 tendrils of agony
4 duress
4 chrome mox
4 dark ritual
3 cabal ritual
4 ad nauseam
1 chain of vapor
1 yawgmoth's will
1 imperial seal
1 mana crypt
1 mystical tutor
1 vampiric tutor
1 brainstorm
1 demonic consultation
1 mox jet
1 sol ring
1 mana vault
1 lotus petal
1 demonic tutor
1 nectopotence
1 ancestral recall
1 mox jet
1 black lotus (I'm assuming that was Meandeck's 60th card)
4 polluted delta
2 underground sea
1 bayou
1 swamp

SB:
4 xantid swarm
2 tormod's crypt
1 yixlid jailer
1 island

Meandeck additions:
+1 tendrils of agony
+1 cabal ritual
+2 chain of vapor
+1 swamp
4 thoughtseize
2 island
1 ponder
1 lion's eye diamond

SB:
+1 tormod's crypt
+2 yixlid jailer
1 bayou
3 hurkyl's recall

ICBM additions:

+1 underground sea
1 bloodstained mire
1 tropical island
1 tolarian academy
1 mox emerald
1 hurkyl's recall
4 pact of negation
1 merchant scroll
1 repeal
1 timetwister

SB:

3 oxidize
1 tinker
1 platinum angel
1 engineered explosives
1 massacre


Sorry I didn't see this post earlier.  I'm not sure how you pulled the 60%, but even with a 60% of it resolving, I wouldn't cast a 1st turn Ad Nauseam if I could instead seize or duress first because that makes a 40% chance that you lose the 2 dark rituals and ad nauseam (or whatever combination of 5 mana, and possibly search as well) and have to wait until you can draw ALL that again.  That usually won't happen before they beat you.  If I have duress/seize, I play it on them, take either a counter or whatever can stop me from going off next turn, then I pass turn.  If I have pact, then I go off on turn 1.  Playing blindly, even on turn 1 game 1, can lose you games.

Sorry for all the messages... I'm really not trying to bump my thread (promise), but I wanted to comment on my own post about the similarities between Meandeck and ICBM tendrils.

It's customary to edit a post to add to it rather than reply to your own posts. Posts merged.
-Godder

First of all, there are 47 cards in common, and a few of the differences are in the land package.  That's huge.  I'm currently running 46 of those 47 cards myself, and that's only because I've somehow been able to get away with running 2 tendrils.  The only card I really question is Necropotence.  Someone on here mentioned that it's bad to draw a bunch of cards and then pass turn.  I agree, but every time I take it out and play test I don't win as much as I did when I had it.  And that's not a coincidence.  So I've come to the conclustion that you can pretty much play those 47 cards, and your own flavor with the other 13, and still have a broken deck that is likely to win.  That's assuming the other 13 are cards typically found in ad nauseam decks.

As for the Meandeck additions, it should be noted that even though this deck is called 'meandeck tendrils', the version Steve posted doesn't have the lion's eye diamond.  I was reading in another thread that because Ad Nauseam is an instant, you could top deck Ad Nauseam with a tutor, crack the LED during your upkeep for BBB, and then cast Ad Nauseam during your draw phase.  That makes it more tempting, but I still don't want to run it because the other cards I run in this deck are too important to me.  I've also found that ponder helps me win games.  I don't ever see myself taking it back out.  An the Chain of Vapor is INSANE.  Using one spell that only costs U to both fix your mana and add storm counts is INSANE.  Being able to bounce any nonland permanent for just U is INSANE.  So I think you're INSANE if you don't run at least 3 of these.

As for ICBM, maindecking Hurkyl's recall is a good idea.  I'm not doing it right now, but I'm always considering it.  I'm currently running mox emerald in place of mox diamond and it seems to be doing fine (as long as you have 4 chrome mox).  On another thread I mentioned tolarian academy and why I think the meandeck version needs it.  It belongs here.  I'm still iffy on the timetwister.  It puts 7 cards in their hand too, making me almost not want to play it.  But I've had a few first turn kills that wouldn't have happened without timetwister.  I'd keep a crappy hand that I would normally mulligan because it has a lot of mana and timetwister.  I'd float the mana, cast timetwister, and then have 7 more cards to work with.  In a couple cases, I was able to tendrils for the win without Ad Naus because my storm count was already high enough.  But I really don't notice much difference between playing with it and without it.

As for the sideboards, xantid swarms are going nuts.  I've been having good results too.  Unfortunately, I can't run those and pyroclasms.  I'm still considering switching to splash red instead of green because there are more dudes in the current format that screw this deck over, and they all die to 2.  That and the guy who won with Bob Long (see tournament posts) managed to do well without green.  He also ran sundering titan.  Any thoughts on that?

Then, as usual, there is the pact vs thoughtseize argument.  I'm starting to come to the conclusion that it depends on the area you play in.  I think if you're on the play against a heavy control deck, pact is better.  I'm starting to think for most other situations, discard is better, although the loss of 2 life can, on rare occasions, lose you the game.  My solution to this has been to sideboard whichever of the 2 that I'm not running in the main.  And if you main deck pacts, you may consider sideboarding cabal therapy instead of thoughtseize, since you'll have a better idea of what you'll want to pull out of their hand.  Have any of you thoughtseize players considered keeping pacts in the board for when you're on the play vs control?

Finally, I have a couple of my own preferences that aren't up there.  I play with 2 tendrils instead of 3-4.  It's been working.  Until I notice it's a problem, there's no reason for me to add more.  And sensei's divining top has been discussed on multiple threads.  Extended use of it has shown me that it is NOT a horrible card and should at least be considered.  Once it's on the board, it's almost as good as a ponder and the fact that it takes colorless mana is noteworthy, especially after Ad Nauseam resolves and you're tapped out... I've found myself in situations where I can't afford the blue mana to pull a tutor'd topdeck card, but the mana crypt allows the top to do it easy enough.  As long as it continues to work for me, I'm not dropping it.

And has anyone tried Lim-Dul's vault at any point in their testing?

Nehptis:

That's pretty much what I'm saying.  I should have been more specific that I was referring to your first turn.  I've ran into a lot of situations during play testing where I could win on the first turn if I didn't have to worry about a FoW, and that's why I'd rather have pact than thoughtseize.  In the scenario I mentioned, a pact player with 5 mana could go off on turn 1.  The seize player would wait a turn, and assuming they were on the play or have a mox, they now have mana for negate, making the seize player (who knows about the negate) wait yet another turn.

Wagner:

You don't pact a sphere.  I'm saying the Pact player would have played the Ad Nauseam before the sphere player had a chance to take their turn, but the seize player would wait a turn, because they don't yet know if the other person is playing a counter deck and they need their mana to seize first.

However, by using that argument I'm entering into a debate as to if your goal should be to win on turn 1 or 2 with this deck.  Stormanimagus says there's too many decks that shut down that approach, so I'm still forming and opinion on that.

Sorry... just had to bring up something else that happened while play testing your version.  Here's my hand:

Necropotence
Cabal Ritual
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Duress
Cabal Ritual
Underground Sea
Thoughtseize

It's actually not that bad given the disruption.  But what if I wanted to cast necropotence?  That 4th cabal ritual could be a mox, giving me the initial 2 i need to resolve the other, and allowing me to cast it.  That's another problem I have from time to time, and it can also happens after Ad Nauseam resolves.  Sometimes you need more 0 drops to pay for your 2 drops.

Then why not run more fetch lands?  Most other builds run 5 or 6.  And 13 artifacts isn't enough to warrant Tolarian Academy?  That's almost a quarter of your deck... you have more artifacts than you do lands.  I think it would be rare to tap Tolarian Academy for less than UU or UUU.  If you had a land that said T: Add UU to your mana pool, wouldn't you run it?


Have you been play testing this?  Because Cabal Ritual does NOT help you cast your Ad Nauseam.  At least not any better than say, a mox.  It just nets you +1.  The net of +3 won't occur until you've resolved your Ad Nauseam and put more cards in the graveyard.  The reason I run less than 4 is because I win after Ad Nauseam resolves as it is.  I think we need to focus more on getting the mana to cast Ad Nauseam, making sure it's in your hand, and making sure it resolves.


Well first of all, any card in this deck is usually bad mid-late game.  You don't have enough control to stop combo, so you're dead.  You need life to run the deck, so aggro kills you after a few turns as well.  That just leaves control... and if you haven't killed them in a few turns, they're sitting there with lands on the board and a hand full of cards.  Dead.  Unless you're serving with a Xantid Swarm that they somehow didn't counter.  But I'm still trying to figure out the pact-thoughtseize argument.  Look at all the situations where you'd play either of them.  You're not usually going to have the 6 mana to cast both thoughtseize and ad nauseam, but you'll often have the 5 to cast ad nauseam.  So the player with thoughtseize plays thoughtseize and waits a turn.  The player with Pact plays Ad Nauseam and prays.  Against your typical fish deck, they might have negate and FoW in hand.  Sure, thoughtseize will get rid of one, but you have to wait and get rid of the other.  This gives them time to gain card advantage and shut you down.  With Pact, you play Ad Nauseam, they FoW, then you Pact, then they have no mana on board for negate.  No one pushing thoughtseize has sold me on an argument against this, and things like this happen all the time.  Maybe you won't always be playing fish, but there are other examples.  Like spheres of resistance.  You thoughtseize a 9 sphere deck and they have 2 spheres.  You lose, when the Pact player would have won.  I'm saying this even though I'm testing thoughtseize.  I keep ending up in these situations where I think to myself, "damn... I should have combo'd out.  That wouldn't have happened if I had pact".  What are people afraid of that stop them from playing Pact?  If you do it turn 1 on the play, they'd have to double pitch 2 FoW's.  If they can do that, I'll accept the loss.  And if you're afraid they can play 2 counters, just try to get Ad Nauseam to resolve.  When it does, you're likely to draw multiple pacts, which wins you the game.

And I don't want you to think I'm coming off as negative.  I'm just trying to point out why I'm not convinced so others can do convincing.  I'm still play testing multiple versions of the deck.

Yeah... just change around a few cards and we're running the same deck.  I had time walk for the longest time, and then dropped it because it usually just ended up hitting me in the head for 2 when I cast AdN.  You don't want to cast time walk after AdN resolves... you want to win that turn.  Even with the Bayou in your board, haven't you had trouble pulling green when you need it?  Other than that, I could just as easily run your list.  There was a time that I too ran a couple off color moxen and only 2 cabal rituals.  I up'd the cab rit to 3 when I saw that my current version can often hit threshold and the BBBBB is really nice.  Maindecking recall can be nice.  I was thinking of doing that myself.  And I think Steve was saying he was playing a version with 3 chain 1 recall as well.  And I'm not that good at sideboarding either.  I like your version too.  My biggest problem is what to do against other long decks, which is what I'm currently running 3 thoughtseize for.  Am I the only one that has considered trickbind?

You're not going to miss a land drop after AdN resolves.  It is particularly useful on the 1st turn when you've already played a land and used it to get AdN out, but are short on mana to get a 1st turn kill.  I'm surprised no one else even wants to try it.  You should play test with it a dozen times or so and see what you think.  Also note that I'm aware the MoxD is unrestricted.  I'm only running one because of the low land count.


I wasn't convinced 4 was the right number either.  But when I tried it with 2, I would find that I would die before I'd get mana I needed to ramp back up after tapping out to cast AdN.  I don't know why drawing 2x CM is a mull to 5... maybe 6 if you didn't get what you needed in the other 5 cards, but it's not likely that will happen twice.  And choosing which cards to imprint is much easier after AdN resolves.  I'll consider testing it at 3 to see if it still does what I need it to.


Our opinion differs on that.  Testing has shown me 2 things I'm often short on is search and mana.  I rarely want to see the match reach turn 4, and what I have is barely enough to consistently go off on turns 1 to 3.


I did... like 30 times or more.  The only difference I've noticed after going down to 2 is that I draw more cards with AdN.  Of all the times I've tested this deck, I can't recall a single time that I didn't have a way to get the tendrils when I needed it, even with only 2 copies.


If brainstorm or ponder were unrestricted, the top wouldn't be in there.  I'll consider playing with impulse, but some times it's hard to come up with the 2nd mana when all you want to do is get a tutor'd card in your hand.  That, and merchant scroll costs 2 and I often hated seeing it after I cast AdN because it would hit me for 2 and I wouldn't end up using it.  In that regard, top has been better for me.  What do you think of sleight of hand?


Liam... we've agreed on a few card choices in the other threads.  If you post your deck list, I'll try it out.  I'd recommend trying my decklist about 10-20 times to see how the cards interact with each other.  I tried the ICBM and Meandeck versions several times myself.  I realize because different players have different playing styles, they're going to prefer different styles of deck.  But testing other decks can make you realize you like or dislike a card more than you realized just from testing your own deck.

I use it for either U or B mana after AdN resolves in case the other moxen aren't enough.  After casting AdN, you're always going to have extra land in your hand.  It also helps me get threshold by putting lands in my graveyard, which allows cabal ritual to give me 2 more B's.


I recently added it to my list because I needed another way to draw cards from a topdeck tutor that only costs 1.  I found it to be a better choice than a sub-optimal card such as opt or sleight of hand.  Now that I have 4 ways to pull topdeck cards, that hasn't been a problem.  It also has the added advantage of putting a high cost card in my hand and hitting me for only 1 when I cast AdN.


Ichorid often goes off on turn 2, so unless you happen to have a turn 1 kill, it will often come down to who is on the play.  Jailers force Ichorid to drop mana and play a removal spell before they can go off, possibly allowing you the extra turn you need to get the win.

After spending some time play testing and reading the other threads on Ad Nauseam decks, I figured I'd put my deck up for critique.  I based the original build off this deck off a post by someone whose called ix-ir on here, and tweaked it quite a bit since.  Although it looks a lot like the ICBM build, I only changed a few cards after seeing that build.  And I prefer this build over the Meandeck build, but playtesting that deck convinced me to up my chain of vapor count to 3.  After a great deal of play testing and tweaking, this is what I'm currently running:

12 lands:
4 Polluted Delta
1 Bloodstained Mire
3 Underground Sea
1 Bayou
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Swamp
1 Island

19 acceleration:
1 Black Lotus
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
1 Sol Ring
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Diamond
4 Chrome Mox
4 Dark Ritual
3 Cabal Ritual

9 search:
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Demonic Consultation
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Imperial Seal
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
1 Sensei's Divining Top

8 disruption:
4 Pact of Negation
4 Duress

3 board control:
3 Chain of Vapors

9 bombs:
4 Ad Nauseam
2 Tendrils of Agony
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Timetwister
1 Necropotence

15 sideboard:
1 Tropical Island
2 Yixlid Jailer
2 Tormod's Crypt
3 Thoughtseize
3 Hurkyl's Recall
4 Xantid Swarm

I originally splashed red for the sideboard instead of green, but like most of the other Ad Nauseam players, I've been having better luck with Xantid Swarms.

The mana curve of this deck is lower than the other versions I've seen at an average cost of 1.1.  The deck I copied had an even lower curve... about 0.87, but I had to add bigger spells to it because I kept running out of gas.

Comments are welcome 

You mean when do you want 2-3 U's instead of 1?  How about always?  With this low land count there are times you'll tap out to cast Ad Naus without making your land drop, but end up with a few artifacts on the board.  You tap tolarian academy to play multiple spells like mystical tutor, ancestral recall, and chain of vapor so you can use your chrome moxen and lotus (if any) on your black mana.  You can also use the extra U's for the colorless in spells like Yawgmoth's Will and Tendrils.  I tried running the deck without Tolarian Academy when testing it one night to make room for a 4th underground sea and immediately realized it was an 'error'.

I'm going to ask a silly question.  Is Xantid Swarm really that good?  And if green is already in there, would it be a good idea to run goyf for fish?  What about a single gaea's blessing for painter?  I'm not even sure... does it turn the win into a draw?

And what about red instead of green?  When I was first putting my deck together, I was trying to decide whether or not to splash red.  I decided the main deck choices didn't justify it, but being able to sideboard in cards like pyroblast, REB, rack and ruin, pyroclasm, and Empty the Warrens might make it worth it.  Unless green is better.  From what I've seen, Xantid Swarm alone makes green a better choice, but I wonder if anyone else has considered red.

Well I can't make it, but I'll try to set aside some extra $$$ so I can make it to the next one, even if it's by myself.  Good luck to everyone who attends 

Why no mox diamond?  It helps on turn one if you happen to draw extra land, and it really helps after AdN resolves.  It's better mana fix than chrome, doesn't imprint a card you might actually use, and hits the graveyard to synergize with cabal.  I admit with the low land count I wouldn't want to see more than one, but I do run one in my version.

And what about cabal therapy vs thoughtseize?  With such a high average mana cost (your version has 10% higher costs than the spooky version, and I've killed myself with AdN using that version), thoughtseizes look painful.  With cabal therapy, you can usually name force of will and have a decent chance of pushing your combo through.  At the least, you get to see their hand.

For anyone who's been arguing for repeal or against chain of vapor, chain of vapor definitely seems to be the correct choice.  This deck is really tight on mana, and needs to save all that it can for combo pieces, not board removal.  Sure, you can bounce 0 drops with repeal, but what about the rest?  I could see you dropping a 2nd land and bouncing a sphere or resistance for 1U with chain, but not coming up with the 3U to bounce it with repeal.  And I've got some use out of drawing a card with repeal during the play testing, but it's not necessary.  After AdN resolves, this deck has plenty of ways to pull a tutor'd card.  I just don't know if 4 is necessary.  You usually only need to see 1, and after some testing, I believe 3 is the correct number.

Do you need 2 islands in this version?  You could drop one for a tolarian academy which will usually give you 2-3 U's.

I'm going to do more play testing of this version, but so far I'm having a harder time getting it to work than the ICBM version (which is surprisingly almost identical to the version I came up with after tweaking the list ix-ir posted a few weeks ago).  It's hard enough to get a lot of draws from AdN when you run it as a 4 of, but even harder when you run 4 tendrils.  There were a couple times I tapped out to cast AdN and only managed to draw 7-8 cards before taking lethal damage, and I didn't have the mana to ramp up and do anything before that happened.  I guess there is the advantage of being able to cast 2 in the same turn, but I rarely see enough mana to do that.  I don't even know why ICBM runs 3... I usually do fine with 2.  Once AdN resolves, I almost always see either a tutor or a tendrils with the 10-15 or more cards that I draw.

I'm still hoping to go, but I can't seem to find anyone else to go with me.  I could really use another person to split gas with me.  Are any of you from the Indianapolis area?

I had fun the last time you guys did this, so I plan on attending again.  It looks like me and my friend (we were the 2 from indianapolis... I played fish and he played keeper) will be showing up, and possible another friend or two.

I'm still in favor of a previously posted idea for a deck using AdN (like 2 pages ago) that had an average CC of 0.8.  Actually, it was only 0.81 AFTER the AdN was actually cast, but that's more than good enough.  After some testing and contemplating, I am considering the following:

-Should Intuition be run?  At their EOT, you use it to grab 3 Ad Nauseam, one of which goes in your hand.  Next turn, your CC is down to 0.5-something and you proceed to draw over half your deck if need be.  Let me spell this out further... you now have a few spells that cost 2, then your y will, tendrils, and one ad N, as your only spells that cost more than 0 or 1.  You are going to draw a ridiculous amount of cards.  However, Intuition isn't in my current list because I can still usually draw enough cards at my current mana curve and intuition is too expensive to cast before adN resolves, and not as good as the other tutors after it resolves.

-What about Demonic Consultation?  Every deck I've tried is usually low on tutors (unless I run grim tutor, and usually kill myself), and I wouldn't mind trying a 1 drop to get my adN in hand.  Of course hitting tendrils before adN is BAD.

-What about Death Wish?  It solves the problem caused by demonic consultation, unless you lose death wish and tendrils, which isn't likely with 4 adN.  And it allows you to tutor for tendrils in the board.

-Why are you playing Sol Ring?  It nets you one colorless mana, and I think it should be dropped to make room for more moxen.

-I'm currently trying cabal therapy in place of thoughtseize to avoid life loss.  There aren't a lot of cards that can stop a 1st or 2nd turn ad nauseam other than a force of will (unless they're on the play with drain), and this can get rid of that, as well as show you the rest of their hand, at the least.  But I'm still a little worried about naming it and seeing another counter.

-I added time walk to my decklist.  Just because. It's time walk.

- I've been alternating taking out Lion's Eye Diamond because it doesn't give you mana to cast ad nauseam, and you can often find enough mana without LED once the adN resolves.  However, it's still nice to crack it with an AdN or a Y will on the stack.

- I see the potential in bazaars with so many extra cards getting picked up with AdN, but you will usually use your land drops getting the mana to cast adN, so I'm trying decks without them to make space for cards that allow me to net mana or search.

- Also thinking about personal tutor.  It allows you to look for y will or tendrils.  Only problem is you can't use it for AdN.  You could always p tutor for demonic tutor then adN, but that means having 7 mana on turn 2 or waiting until turn 3.

- I'm testing out a version that runs 10 moxen.  The 5 + 4 chrome mox + 1 mox diamond.  I want to make sure if I tap out to play AdN on my turn, that I can ramp back up if I've already used my land drop.

All this is assuming I'm trying the blue/black version and trying to be able to go off on turn 1 and turn 2 as much as possible, because this deck's win percentage would drop considerably after turn 2 or 3.  I'm looking at something like this:

4 Polluted Delta
2 Bloodstained Mire
4 Underground Sea
1 Swamp
1 Island
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 mox jet
1 mox sapphire
1 mox ruby
1 mox diamond
4 chrome mox
1 lotus petal
1 black lotus
1 mana crypt
1 mana vault
4 dark ritual
4 duress
3 cabal therapy
3 pact of negation
4 ad nauseam
1 yawgmoth's will
1 tendrils of agony
1 chain of vapor
1 hurkyl's recall
1 echoing truth
1 demonic tutor
1 vampiric tutor
1 imperial seal
1 merchant scroll
1 death wish
1 demonic consultation
1 brainstorm
1 ancestral recall
1 time walk
1 ponder
1 mystical tutor

...and one last question if anyone can answer.  What kind of ability is it each time the effect of ad nauseam resolves?  Is it possible to play instants between revealing cards?