MaxxMatt
Full Members
Basic User
Posts: 482
King Of Metaphors
|
 |
« on: August 26, 2004, 05:31:54 pm » |
|
Hi all,
I didn't write this alone; it’s based on an article that one of Italy’s best Combo-Players – Luca aka "Trix" Simone – sent to me. I translated his article and fleshed it out.
He wrote a primer or "a skeleton to follow" for people playing TPS for the first time, to show the readers all the work done to bring this deck to where it is now, and the understanding that development brought.
Of course, the article barely touches on some structural and obvious points (such as the combo itself, the major strategies, the obvious inclusion of broken cards and so on) because those are too obvious to require elaboration.
Luca followed all the evolutions of U/B/x combo and has played it (in all its different forms) at our tourneys and with great results since the first appearance in the 2001 Invitational thanks to Kai Budde (Pat Chapin collaborated to this "Necro-Academy-Deck" too).
A brief look in the past
The deck always had the same strong and resilient core: Force and Duress have always been "the perfect cards" to protect the bombs of the deck, the powerful draw engines that are often game ending by themselves. A large variety of tutors and the best mana producers in the game help the players to resolve those "bombs".
The first deck was a 5cc-version called Trix because of the combo used to win. Coupling the life-gaining of a resolved Illusion of Grandeur with the life loss of the major engine of the deck (Necropotence and Yawgmoth's Bargain) let the player draw a huge number of cards; usually plenty of tutors and fast mana acceleration to set up last piece of combo: the well-protected Donate. Donating the Illusion of Grandeur to the opponent and letting the upkeep run out was enough to win the game, but breaking it with some maindeck tools (Red Elemental Blast, Seal of Cleansing or simply some bounce) gave the Trix player an “instant" win. Players dropped the green really fast and some tried to cut the White, but White had cards such as Balance, Abeyance, Enlightened Tutor and Seal of Cleansing, so most players stuck with the 4C-Version until Scourge was released. When Tendrils of Agony was printed it immediately replaces the Illusion-Donate slots as primary winning condition, freeing a lot of space in the maindeck. The storm mechanic turned an hard task (winning with Illusion-Donate without having four Necropotence) into an easy one (play 9 spells and then the Tendrils). The Illusion-Donate slots became one or two Tendrils, Draw7s and utility spells. The improvements were clear: the win condition was ReB-Proof and Force-Proof, so the deck became much stronger than it was in the past. The deck maintained approximately that same structure until WotC released Chalice of the Void, Trinisphere, AND Crucible of the Worlds in the three sets of Mirrodin Block. If we took those cards singly, a good combo player could easily work around one or two of them. If an opponent plays ALL of them, however, the combo player usually scoops. The 3Spheres and the Crucibles obliged the combo player to drop Red and White to have a better mana base (fetch lands and basic lands) and to avoid auto-losing to the old shaky mana base. The Chalices forced small changes in the maindeck utility cards, while the manabase changes forced the addition of Misdirection and bounce to the sideboard instead of ReBs and Abeyances.
These italicized comments are my additions to the “primer�.
A side-note on the particular build featured here: it is 95% similar to all the other UB-TPS win in Italy and Europe. It is here to serve as a model of the Archetype, but you shouldn’t view it as the “optimal� build. Most players use different maindeck and/or sideboard configurations according to their personal choices. This list is only a reference to start the discussion. When possible, I'll point out where this list may differ from alternatives that I’ve discussed with other TMD, Italian, and European players.
UB-TPS 2004
Protection
4 Duress
4 Force of Will
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Rebuild
Tutors
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Cunning Wish
1 Tinker
Bombs
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Yawgmoths' Bargain
1 Necropotence
1 Mind's Desire
1 Timetwister
1 Time Spiral
1 Windfall
1 Memory Jar
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
4 Brainstorm
1 Frantic Search
Win
1 Tendril of Agony
Mana Base
4 Polluted Delta
1 Flooded Strand
4 Underground Sea
2 Swamp
2 Island
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Tolarian Academy
4 Dark Ritual
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mana Crypt
1 Lotus Petal
1 Mana Vault
1 Sol Ring
1 Black Lotus
Sideboard
1 Brain Freeze
1 Rushing River
1 Echoing Truth
1 Rebuild
2 Hurkyl's Recall
4 Hydroblast
1 Misdirection
1 Ebony Charm
1 Stifle
1 Meditate
1 Darksteel Collossus
I'll add some details and comments on the cards, because those are the slots that vary among the builds. My comments will try to give credit and underline how a different playstyle and some metagame calls can change the approach of the entire deck to similar game situations.
About the total land count
If you look at the list, I played a total of 15 lands and 9 of them are Wasteland-Proof ( 4 basic lands and 5 fetchlands ). There are 11 blue producing lands and 10 black producing lands. With this distribution you can usually start with a strong first turn of "Land--> Duress" or "Land --> Ritual --> Brokenness" but still have blue mana for deck manipulation and card drawing. If the goal is to play spells during the entire length of the game, I think that is better to have blue lands to find the black ones instead of the reverse. The greater number of blue spells sealed the entire argument totally in favor of Islands instead of Swamps. This land configuration is strong, especially against the “inevitability� produced by a resolved first turn Trinisphere. The combo player can bounce the 3sphere(s) the exact turn he would be able to go off, thanks to all the basic lands. That mana base is really good against ALL the major decks that have a tempo/denial-oriented strategy, such as 4cC and Fish. Having a lot of nearly untouchable lands lets the combo player pass through the defenses of a 4cC deck or through the tempo tricks of a Fish deck.
I have to disagree on one of his choices. He uses LoA as a card drawer for the first turns of the game against a control player, to recover from some bad situations while both are stalling, after a single Draw7 to "steal" another card or do draw additional cards under Necro or Bargain. This follows from the goal that he want to achieve: he want to be able to draw cards and control the game UNTIL he decides that it is time to win or he has the tools to safely do it. He oriented the entire deck to be a Control-Combo instead of considering it as a pure speed Combo. Thus, he has LoA in his maindeck.
On the other hand, I feel really uncomfortable of having a colorless land in a combo deck that is so hungry for colored mana. I need have one or two colored mana sources to safely start my game. From my testing, LoA makes me mulligan too much to consider its impact on the game (when it is in play) so good as to balance his negative aspect. It adds too much randomness even if it is merely a singleton in a redundant deck. From this perspective I swapped it for another colored mana source. Some of my teammates did the same, using another basic land or a Chrome Mox in this slot.
IMHO, Chrome Mox is a good choices if the field is not full of Null Rod, in which case losing two cards instead of one would hurt too much. If there aren't too many stifles in your environment you can consider adding the 6th fetchland to raise the thinning effect in the deck and to better optimize the Brainstorms. However, if Fish, Landstill or 3C-DARgon are frequent matchups, and you need to prepare for their stifles, you can easily swap a fetchland for the fifth basic land, stabilizing the mana base a lot more.
The high number of lands can make you think of adding the Mox Diamond too. I didn’t like it and only a few of the players against which I usually test, tried it and considered it a useful choice. It is too risky to have both Chrome Mox and Mox Diamond in the deck. These choices screw your hand too much and they aren’t solid at all in a mana denial environment (Rods and Shamans are good example of some your worst enemies). I recommend choosing only one of them and testing it in the maindeck. Both of them have significant drawbacks as well as advantages.
About the Fast Mana Acceleration
The deck use a huge amount of 0cc and 1cc mana accelerators. Excluding Black Lotus, Lotus Petal and Dark Rituals they are all permanent and solid mana producers. All the ones that are “one shot� are excellent to speed-up the resolution of all your game ending spells such as Necro, Bargain and Y. Will. The deck runs other cards that can be considered mana accelerators or “storm generators� in some situations and with proper usage (Chain of Vapor, Rebuild, and Cunning Wish and/or Frantic Search; the latter two especially when Academy is in play). We also tested, but decided not to use, other “one shot� mana accelerators that didn’t fit the colors or the philosophy of the deck, despite their use in other fast combo decks such as Elvish Spirit Guide in NeoLong.dec and Tinder Walls or other minor artifact accelerators in Belcher.With less accelerations and a better mana base we tried to achieve the best equilibrium between speed and stability. The fast mana acceleration chosen summarizes this goal extremely well.
About protections
We chose the best defense/disruption from among the ones with the cheapest casting costs. We have proactive-defensive cards such as Duress and reactive spells such as Force of Will. They are maindecked both to protect your game plan and to prevent you from dying to the opponent’s strategy. If well timed, they can slow down the opponent’s path to victory really well. The lone Cunning Wish, if correctly used, is crucial to perfectly cover both the roles. It transforms itself into a threat for the opponent if you are going to win with it or it can become a good solution to the opponent’s threats.
I would like to underline that 8-9 is the mostly preferred number of protections used for this kind of deck. On the other hand, I see different main deck’s configurations that work perfectly in the hands of a good players. Some play only 3 Duress and a total of 8 protections if they want another main deck bomb for example, while some other ones usually choose the nearly total immunity to CotVs by using 2 or 3 Rebuilds instead of 1 Chain of Vapor and a Rebuild. Some prefer the lower cc of Hurkyl’s Recall and maindeck 1 or 2 of them. I also see a lot of people main decking another drawer such as Skeletal Scrying or Fact or Fiction, by cutting the lone Cunning Wish.
About the Draw Engines and Manipulation Elements
All the search and manipulation elements are self-explanatory. If you divide the search spells of the deck into active and passive ones (where “passive� ones need a full turn to give you the tutored card in hand), you see that only Mystical Tutor and Vampiric Tutor are completely passive. All the other elements, once resolved, let you instantly have a nearly total access to your entire cards pool. Some of those cards will be described in the Strategy Section
The choice of Frantic Search is the most debatable one, along with the Time Spiral. The former is considered a bad choice by some players because it has an inherent card disadvantage, while on the other hand players such as Luca himself underlined its strategic value in many situations (With Academy in play, when you have to tap down because of an opponent’s Tangle Wire, when you have 2 dead draws from Brainstorm and so on). The impact of that card in those situations is really game breaking while the rest of the time it is fairly weak, compared to the other broken cards in the deck. I think that being able to capitalize on the “possible� advantages is key to evaluating it. I’m with Luca on the choice of adding Frantic Search in the main deck. It has the added bonus of lettibg the player resolve another cheap spell after his “untapping effect�, so that it is really synergistic with the entire deck strategy and can improve and fuel some broken situations as no other card could.
Time Spiral is another card that usually doesn’t reveal all its potential after a superficial look. When resolved it is a potent “storm-generator� because it let you untap a lot of lands and go-off with the 7 new cards. From this point of view, it is one of the best Draw7s of the entire game and it perfectly substitutes for Wheel of Fortune. The only draw back is its high cc. Especially if you see it in your initial hand, it is really clunky and it isn’t uncommon to pitch it instead of a cheaper Brainstorm when needed. Because of my love for all the possible broken plays of this deck I will keep it in until some better blue Draw7 is printed.
Some players choose to add 2 or 3 Impulses to the maindeck, cutting some cards. They usually take Tinker/Memory Jar out of the maindeck and often cut Time Spiral or Frantic Search as well. Impulses give a lot more consistency to the deck instead of random but risky broken plays after a draw7. Impulses are Istant-EoT-Mini-Tutors and can adjust your hand really well while digging into your deck without leaving useless cards on top of it. On the other hand, IMHO, they aren’t the best choice for this deck because they lower the total amount of spells playable in a single turn, reducing the efficiency of your final Tendrils of Agony. Another point against their use is that, with the print of Darksteel Colossus, I feel really uncomfortable on cutting Tinker. It is really good to have Jar and DSC as primary targets. Cutting it for “consistency� prevents the possibility of a “planB� against decks where going off with tendrils can be difficult.
As last defense of the Draw7s in the deck, I can add that really only a few times they give me new crappy hands without Tutors or other drawers that force me to scoop. In all the other situations they are billion of times better than Impulses because they involve broken plays.
I would like to add a few words on Lim Duul’s Vault. It is one my “pet� tutors, largely under-used because of the UB casting cost. In this deck, which needs the right card in the right time, I feel really bad not having it as my perfect strategy optimizer. It let you dig in the deck as deep you want and chose the best combination of the 5 “bombs� to have in the following turns. It is always HUGE and let you escape from bad topdecking situations in a simple way. It is a card disadvantage as the other Mirage tutors, but it has the added bonus to let you “scry� through the deck until the perfect sequence of cards appears. If needed it instantly searches for a card drawer or protection to fill some holes in your current game plan. Every time I have the needed skills and the needed “balls� to use it, it was really game breaking. I would permanently add it to the maindeck, maybe cutting the 4th Duress that I feel isn’t so crucial in every match up.
Some players here in Italy and in Europre, periodically dedicated different cards to the same slots, since some cards are better for specific matchups or specific tournaments. Some players (such as TMD’s Phele) played in the past multiple copies of Tendrils ( at least 2 or 3 ) and a single Diminishing Returns, taking out the Time Spiral. IMHO, it is a good choice if you would like to win faster, because of the better cc of Diminishing Returns compared with Time Spiral. On the other hand the massive effect that the Spiral had after his use cannot be compared with anything else. I would like to test a lot more the “1-Tendrils-Build� so I cannot run Diminishing Returns in it. 3 Tendrils are clunky too. Phele played Diminishing Returns in his maindeck some weeks ago and he didn’t find it extraordinary at all in this deck.
Pietro “Elric� Cavalletti had a Fact or Fiction AND a Skeletal Scrying in his side or maindeck, switching them back and forth with each other between main and side. He used those 2 cards, not only because they are good drawers, but because they can force an opponent to think if it would be better to tap himself out to block them in their EoT or to let them resolve without wasting his resources but giving a lot of cards to the combo player for the next turn. If they resolve it would be a good thing. If not, the combo players had a safer path to victory during his turn. It is a tricky move, but it really functions even against skilled players that could fear you getting so many cards at once.
About the Winners
I used Tendril of Agony to win against the most opponents. I used only one because it is enough for me. I didn’t like to resolve two minor Tendrils to deal 20 points of damage to my opponents so I practice finding a way to raise the storm count to a win in a single turn. It usually work for me and if I’m in an unexpected situation during which I can’t win with a single Tendrils-Shot, it is enough for me to reuse it with my Y. Will.
There are some decks uses some Infinite-Life-Combos and/or usually Half-Deck themselves trying to win. Against them, I punish their winning condition with my Wish for Brain Freeze. I can cover all my wins only with those 2 different cards.
Luca proposed to me one of the few lists that I see all around the world without a second Tendrils of Agony. He briefly goes over that choice later, but I’ll put my thoughts here. The second tendrils is usually used to raise the rate of drawing it fast enough to win without losing too much time in his search. Strangely enough, he refused to have a second copy of tendrils for the same reason. He told me that he fears to find one or two finishers in his initial hand. He knows that drawing it is usually a waste of time until you are going to win. When you are going to win you are 90% of the times able to search for it selectively. So his conclusions are always oriented to cut all the redundant winners to reach the minimum possible number. “One� is the lowest number, of course. I told him about the possibility of not being able to do cast lot of spells and the need for a second Tendrils to have a safer path to victory with two mini-Tendrils. He correctly explained to me that lowering the number of winners raises a bit the quality of the deck and his ability to get to 10 spells. Most decks usually bring their own life total down well below 20 anyway. Winning with a single Tendrils is a lot easier if you see it from this perspective.
Brain Freeze and Cunning Wish are a “Plan-B� that is employed in a lot of situations. I found it really useful in some counter wars that I could not win against Control Decks or against other combo decks, when the opponent himself is trying to go off. Sometimes, even if you don’t completely deck the opponent with it, you can shut him down, depriving him of his some of his key cards during the few turns you need to win. It perfectly compliments Tendrils very well.
On the other hand, I have to warn all the players that are approaching the deck for the first time. I suggest they use a minimum of 2 Tendrils of Agony because without practice, it is much easier to resolve two Mini-Tendrils and then force the opponent to scoop. 2 Mini-Tendrils are extremely good even when you are drawing cards with Necro and Bargain. It function as a “Mini-Illusion-Of-Grandeur� that can’t auto-kill you. At worst the opponent can Stifle away all your additional copies without removing the real problem: Necropotence or Bargain and the rest of the deck. Regarding this argument I would like to summarize some points (thanks to Pietro aka “Elric� Cavalletti for the summary):
1 Tendrils of Agony:
-Oblige you to not TRY to close the match but to WIN ONLY if you are 100% sure about the total process
-Reduce the effectiveness of having a high storm count after a draw7. If you can’t topdeck or tutor the only Tendrils you can’t win, even in this strong position
-You can’t do 2 Minor-Tendrils consistently enough. You can do a little Tendrils and then try to do another one after a resolved Y. Will or a Draw7. In any case it is really a lot more difficult
-You must counter an opponent’s Duress if you are preparing your victory and you NEED to defend the lone Tendrils in your hand.
-It is a disadvantage in the mirror match, where you have to win faster then the opponent
-It is a disadvantage against a lot of good aggro decks, because you may need 2 little and quick tendrils of agony to safely win
-if you are not an expert player, you could lose more than a game just from this choice.
Maybe Luca can usually prepare his victory extraordinary well, but at first, I suggest you not follow his plan.
About the “Storm Generators�
All the winning condition of the deck are based on the “Storm Mechanic�, so it is crucial to understand HOW well the deck can generate an huge number of spell to kill the opponent in different situations. Among this group of spells, I have
1 Rebuild
1 Chain of Vapour
1 Cunning Wish
1 Mind’s Desire
1 Yawgmoth’s Will
1 Frantic Search
All of them have a primary use while parenthetically they can generate multiple spells in a single turn. They are KEY for any win especially for this reason. On the other hand, they aren’t inherently dead cards in our common game situations. They are always useful on their own AND can improve your path to the win. IMHO, they are some of the best inclusions in the maindeck.
About the Sideboard
Brain Freeze (It is an alternative way of winning the match, totally independent from the opponent’s life points)
Rushing River (It is a 2 for 1 bounce spell and it is universally good, especially thanks to the solidity of the mana base and because it can simultaneously get rid of different things on table such as a creature and an artifact or an artifact and an enchantment and so on.)
Echoing Truth (If the opponent uses and resolves multiple copy of the same spell this is an X for 1 answer to them. At worst it is a solution to a single permanent on table)
Misirection (This card show its strength especially when you have to defend one of your crucial spells in a single counter war or when you want to surprise and nearly defeat an opponent on spells like Ancestrall, Mind Twist or Deep Analysis or some final Bolts against you)
Hurkyl’s Recall (It is on of the best bouncers in the side against artifact based decks because it let the combo player to escape from a bad situation with 3Sphere and Sphere of Resistance on board having only 3 mana instead of a total of 4. It functions very well against Rods and Fat-Artifact-Creatures too. It is crucial in too many games not to be considered)
Hydroblast (It is the perfect substitute for Duress in the sided match against Aggro and/or Aggro/Control. It let you counters ReBs, Pyrostatic Pillars, Blood Moons, red creatures with nasty abilities and IF NEEDED they are “Storm Generators� too. This last aspect and the nearly total lack of Misdirections in the opponent’s decks, convinced us to use them instead of a complete set of BeBs )
Rebuild (Against artifact based decks you always need solutions with different cc. Chain of Vapors, H. Recalls and Rebuilds cover all the possible cc with ease)
Ebony Charm (It is a good answer to Squees, Worldgorger Dragons, Deep Analysis, AKs and after a resolved Y.Will . And these are the most common use. It functions really well even against opponent’s CoW’s targets and in some situations against Madness’ creatures coming from the grave. )
Stifle (It is an answer to opponent’s Storm’s Spell or to opponent’s Titan and so on)
Meditate (It is the cards drawer chosen for the side. It will be discussed later)
Darksteel Colossus (it is the perfect answer to all the hate that some decks usually packed in against TPS. It circumvents Rods and Pillars and some “Tempo-Oriented� strategies, killing the opponents nearly as fast as the entire storm mechanic with the added bonus of doing it only by resolving a single spell instead of a long chain of spells)
I see some people starting to debate whether or not to maindeck the DSC. We have a lot of players that, based on their testing, promote it even in the maindeck or refuse to use it at all. DSC is the clunkiest of your cards. It would be near impossible to resolve it excluding the poor route of Ritualling a lot into DSC. Bleah! Because of a maindeck Tinker and a lot of shuffling effects (Brainstorms and some Draw7s) I think that could be possible to add it even in the maindeck. If you exclude 4cC and some weird form of control decks (EBA, Parfait, Keeper, OldstyleControl), there aren’t decks that play a good way to quickly deal with it. Some decks could bounce it back, but it isn’t a definitive move and an Indestructible 11/11 puts a quick clock on almost all the decks in the format. I tried to swap 1 Tendrils for a DSC and it is good especially against all the decks that prevent you from resolving a lot of spells even during game 1. If workshops are huge in your metagame, I could suggest DSC as a needed insertion for a more complete maindeck. If there are a lot of 4cC and good control decks, I think that the good old Tendrils is a lot better.
Consideration about some personal choices
Why the lone Tendrils of Agony (ToA)?
A lot of people didn’t agree on my decision to play with a single Tendrils in the maindeck. My feelings about itself are that ones:
-In the initial hand it translates itself onto a card loss. If you have two of them you rise the odds of that happening.
-Topdecking a Tendrils is perfectly useless until you are winning. A bit more of some other form of manipulations are always better than a single Tendrils
-It isn’t a blue card
Why do I state that cutting the Cunning Wish isn’t a safe move?
It is an answer in all the situations during which:
-You don’t have a FoW but you have a lot of mana open
-You need a solution or drawer or a secondary way of winning.
-One of the common way to lose with this deck is against two resolved Meddling Mages (Tendrils and Chain of Vapor and you are not able to win with the entire deck if you don’t have a cunning wish or a different solution). Meddling mages are usually used in UW-Fish and in EBA and in some hate decks.
Multiples Meddling Mages are one of the worst nightmares for Luca, and I have to agree with the goal that he achieve with his maindeck configuration. On the other hand, during these times, I didn’t see any of them at all! If in your metagame you could exclude Mages and some decks archetypes, I think that cutting Cunning Wish could be possible even if the entire deck lose a flexible solution to various problems.
Why the single Meditate in side as a Wishable Drawer?
Meditate comes from the need of having a good drawer when your only good way to start drawing cards is you Cunning Wish. Other possible choices were Fact or Fiction and Skeletal Scrying. FoF needs 7 mana to resolve during the opponent’s EoT and usually nets you only 2 or 3 cards. It is infrequent to have 7 open mana during opponent’s EoT, so usually FoF would be Wished in the EoT but resolves in your own turn. It costs a lot of “tempo� that way. If we wish for Skeletal, with the same mana at disposal, it gives you the same amount of cards but it costs you some precious life, that is your “buffer� to use before the death. On the other hand you lose cards in the grave that could be useful in the future in conjunction with Y.Will. Because of the need of usually playing the wished drawer in your main-phase, it is better to resolve a Meditate that net you 4 cards for 3 mana and maybe would not kill you because the opponent usually requires more than one turn to win. On the other hand, you draw more cards in that turn you resolve Meditate, so you can be able to try to go off easily with it.
General consideration of how the deck place itself in this metagame
Mixed feelings and hints coming from me and Luca
UB-TPS is one of the best decks to play in an unknown metagame. The deck doesn’t have too much trouble against some specific decks because it can adapt its winning strategy based on the one used by specific opponents.
Against Aggro decks, you can safely use the buffer of your 20 life points to safely develop you mana and continually change your hand with all your draw7s until you can generate enough spells to win. It is the most common route but it shines only against them.
Against Artifact-based decks, your preferred path to victory is to reach 3 or 4 mana. You can Duress and Force away their most threatening spells and then bounce back all their permanents ONLY when you have an hand that lets you easily win.
Against Control decks the goal of the game is to be able to resolve a single key spell to be able to go off after that (Necro, Bargain or Y. Will but especially Mind’s Desire) or to try to resolve a spell that the opponent must counter only to raise the storm count and then resolve a single Tendrils of Agony.
On the other hand, I’m not saying that there are no “automatic wins� against all opponents. After all our testing we realized that during the first game we have a little edge against almost every deck. TPS can explode during every turn and the opponent must expect it and play consequently. Usually this fear slow down the game tremendously for him and let us collect bombs and protections that inevitably will resolve. The deck also can recover from a lost counter war over a single spell, thanks to the good mana base and the huge mana development of the deck.
I feel to have a 50% rate only against a good slavery deck and a good Tog deck. The first can win because of the huge impact of some of his spell during the game once resolved and because of the great amount of mana at disposal. The latter, because it has Duresses and a quick win condition along with the usual Drains and FoWs. His draw engine is really fast and effective and the right sequence of his spells can nullify all our strategies.
TPS compared to Belcher and Draw7
The major difference between these deck is the quality of the defensive spells and the active threats.
Why would we use 8-9 defensive cards instead of packing in all the additional mana accelerators and the additional drawers that we can find in magic?
The philosophy, that is well established here in Italy and that is beginning to be used in other countries, rests on the assumption and the knowledge that a single well-protected spell is far better than a chain of unresolved ones. The latter strategy usually does best against decks that cannot counter a lot and that cannot interfere with your game plan efficiently. Control and Aggro-Control decks went out of this range and usually are able to interfere with your cards in hand or with your mana development so much that you lose the capability of resolving too many treats without a careful thinking.
Let me explain it better with a simple example.
You start with Land, ESG, Tinder Wall and Timetwister. If the opponent Forces that spell (a thing that should be considered possible with a decent percentage) this move leaves you with 3 cards in hand AND ONLY with a single land in play. If the opponent plays a Wasteland or a Duress or manages to have an active counter (such as Mana Leak or Daze that are easy to resolve in your first turn) you might not be able to win anymore. And in that scenario you are going first. Instead, if the opponent went first, he could easily have a second turn Drain. Deck likes Draw7 and Belcher (and especially Belcher) consume themselves trying to resolve a single final threat without being able to consistently protect it. With all the fast mana accelerators that they use, they are a lot more subject to first turn Trinispheres or Chalices or Null Rods or Pillars. When the opponent resolves one or two of these, without maindeck bounce and a well-balanced mana base you are nearly defeated.
This is another example of how a pure-speed combo player can try to win:
He resolved all his fast mana because he went first. There aren’t so many situations during which you can resolve 2 of your high cc spells (such as both Wheel of Fortune AND Timetwister). Six or seven differently colored mana are difficult to achieve. On the other hand in the same situation a TPS player can resolve a Duress + Draw7 (and maybe even with FoW backup) with a minor mana development and a safer route. You can see how the minor number of threats didn’t translate itself in a lower rate of resolved bombs but exactly in the contrary.
Another HUGE point that can win you games is that while all the additional fast mana or additional draw7 didn’t help you to stop the opponent’s spells, both Force and Duress work in a synergistic way. They are passive or active depending on the situations; their correct use lets you get around the infamous and deadly “opponent’s double counter backup� with a little use of resources and leaving him without defenses at all!
You usually don’t win on the first turn, but it is quite common on turn 2.
On the other hand it isn’t uncommon to recover from desperate situations with both of the players forced in a topdecking mode--especially thanks to the good mana base and the resilient engine.
The combo-control aspect of the deck should be valued a lot more. You are not obliged to win fast. If you think that is safer to win on turn 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 because you are progressively depriving the opponent of resources or because you are collecting spells that can let you resolve the key spell, then wait without any fear. Your best knowledge is that in the only turn when your opponent has his pants down, you’ll win, be it turn 2 or turn 7 or whatever.
A good advantage that we discovered TPS has in game 2 and 3 with this deck is the capability of the deck/player to adapt his strategy to better fight that specific opponent.
Against aggro the “style� of the entire deck should become aggro itself with the addition of DSC and/or the mad use of all the draw7s without touching Necro and Bagain at all.
Against other Combo decks, you can add a few cards (such as Brain Freeze, Stifle and Misdirection) that (with the 8 other protections) can prevent him from easily going off.
Against control you usually have the most efficient defenses compared to theirs, so you have a little advantage even post side. The game should be slowed down a lot and you can play the “control-role� exactly as him (you have Duress for his Drains, Forces for his Forces, Hydroblast for his ReBs, with the only difference that you need less mana to win and you can win in a single turn, rather than needing the 3 to 5 turns of most control decks)
It is you who gets to “choose� to play in these ways against those opponents. Sometimes, though, your initial hands forces you to play different roles. The deck configuration never precludes altering your plan accordance with you hand and future draws.
Sometimes for the combo player the real difficulty is predicting as close as possible the number or the variety of spells that the opponent can use against you, especially in the first turns.
7 cards in hand for the opponent but only 2 mana open translates to a maximum of 4 active counters. If they have 4!!!! Active counters they are both really lucky and with limited ability to recover from a stalling situation after a counter war.
Forcing him to tap out as much as you can is one of the goals that you have to achieve every turn to be able to win. Some unusual instant choices in the card pool serve exactly this purpose.
NEW SECTION
Sideboarding with TPS
This added piece of work come out from my talking with Luca a few weeks ago. We exchanged each others results and hints about how properly use the sideboard in different situations. Before adding it to the primer, I sent it to some TMDers that make me specific questions about TPS, becuase they started testing and playing it . I added this part almost for them, to make their testing work simpler and to complete the range of the possible arguments to cover in this Primer
Sample Sideboard
(Alternative Finishers)
1 DSK
1 Brain Freeze
(Control Elements)
1 Mis-D
1 Echoing Truth
1 Rushing River
1 Rebuild
2 Hurkyll's Recall
4 Hydroblast
1 Stifle
1 Ebony Charm
(Drawers)
1 Meditate
Every time it isn't specified, Cunning Wish remain maindeck.
It is needed to have an alternate winning condition in desperate situations or the possibility to search for a global bouncer for some unexpected opponent's threats.
The only mathcup during which Cunning Wish always goes in the side is against MW.dec
Against 4c-c
4C-C didn't have Duresses to backup his Drains and FoWs. His major denial ( Wastelands ) are nearly useless ( UB-TPS had 4-5 basic lands plus 4-5 fetchlands and, of course, players usually fecth them first ). Gorilla can reveal to be not so useful if the combo player hold all his accelerations in hand until needed ( both to protect them and/or to rise the storm count as well ).
The possible choices could be two:
1) Siding out Draw7s and adding control elements to focus the game only on resolving Necro, Bargain, Y.Will and one of the usual "storm engine" ( Mind's Desire and Tendrils coupled with a "storm generator" as H.Recall and Rebuild on your 0cc artifact )
2) Adding some control elements but keeping all the Draw7s.
Luca choose the 2nd way. If you side as he suggest to you, you have more threats against a control deck as 4C-C that, on the other hand, cannot "check" your hand with Duresses and cannot explode in a single turn after a lucky draw7.
-1 Mana Crypt
-1 Rebuild
-1 Lotus Petal
-1 Frantic Search ( or what do you have in this spot.. )
+1 Misdirection
+2 Hydroblast
+1 Echoing Truth
He sided Hydro in against opponent's ReBs ( to help in the counter wars ), to feed FoWs in a better way and to kill Shamans if he need 2 turns to win instead of one.
At first, that choice didn't like to me, but facing him it revealed to be really a good one.
Echoing Truth come in for Soldiers and for some nasty permanents in the mid-game ( CoW, Shaman, Soldiers, Angels )
Mis-D is in to help the ombo player in the counter wars on a key spell ( Necro, Bargain, Y.Will, Mind's Desire, one of his draw7s )
He told me it isn't a bad matchup pre and post side.
He feels to be at least 60%-40% agaisnt 4C-C if not more according to the ability of the opponent. We always split our wins when we played each other ( me playing 4C-C, him playing TPS ).
Against 4C-hulk ( no waste maindeck of course )
The matchup is far more complex post side rather than preside.
Hulk had the tools to smash the TPS' face if correctly played ( Duress--> Drain--> FoW--> Intuiton--> Something Nasty = Scoop )
Feeding the graveyard of Hulk with some draw7s can be deadly ( Jar and Windfall ). For the same reasons giving cards in his hand is awful
So he opted for the first one options among the two suggested against Control Decks.
He based his game on resolving, if possible, his major bombs ( Necro, Bargain, Y.Will ) and/or protecting his Bouncers to feed an huge Mind's Desire or a Tendrils.
Until now, our tests showed us that it is the best move against Hulk, giving him apparently no added advantage from your own moves.
-1 lotus petal
-1 mana crypt
-1 windfall
-1 tinker
-1 memory jar
+1 echoing truth
+1 rushing river
+1 misdirection
+1 Hurkyll's Recall
+2 Hydro ( only if we expect 3 or 4 ReBs )
Hulk after the first wave of Duresses and Drains would leave all his mana open to Wish for Stifle ( killing the storm-engine ) or for something worst.
So you must rise the number of control elements to be able to equals opponent's ones.
BeBs are for ReBs, red cards in the side and to stop a possible Fling.
All the Bouncers are in to stop an early Atog or to bounce back some CotVs or Rods ( that are frequently sided in against us in by our Hulk ). At the same time they can rise the spells count, so they aren't dead cards.
Against 3C-Dragon
This matchup is rather in you favor because TPS is usually a full turn faster then DARgon.
Post side you must expect Duresses, Swarms and FoWs.
If some players DARgon's would add Arcane Lab to stop your storm-based spells, they are FOOOOL!!! because when they combo you out, all their permanents phase out. So if they not activated the Swarm during the Attack Phase, you can kill the DRAgon multiple times as well.
All the matchup consist on bouncing or countering Swarms to being able to play your multiple treats agaisnt the Dragon itself.
I suggested to Luca to add Brainfreeze to the maindeck postside, to surprise them ( as backup plan ) while they are digging with the Bazaar to find the finisher.
Retrospectively it is a "so-so" move because it isn't always game ending. So it should be better to leave it in the side.
Tormod's Crypts are a poor choice for him to add in the side. They are Stiflable and not sinergic with the rest of the sideboard ( all wishable if you noticed ).
Some smart DARgon players add CotVs post side against you setting them at 0cc or 1cc. We use bouncers with different cc expecially for this reason. This sdefensive strategy agaisnt them functions really well.
Post side the only Wishable targets in the side are Brainfreeze and a global removal for artifacts ( for rodS and CotVs )
+3/4 Hydroblast
+1 Stifle
+1 Echoing Truth
+1 Rushing River
+1 Ebony Charm
-1 lotus petal
-1 mana crypt
-1 windfall
-1 tinker
-1 memory jar
-1 frantic search
-1 rebuild/h.recall ( keep it in if you know that he is siding in CotVs or Rods for some reasons )
(-1 cunning wish, depending on if you want 4 blasts maindeck or 3 maindeck plus one as wishable target)
Against Storm.Based.dec
I thought that this matchup consist only on luck and speed.
I was partially wrong.
Luca opted to go for a "controllish" approach of the post-side's games instead of going for a pure-speed fight because the latter is totally based on luck on draw instead of being based on skills and right choices.
On the other hand, this approach didn't prevent his broken turn 1 or turn 2 kills. IMHO, they are only less frequent than the others.
Some other players opted for a different approach of the game. They kept in all the Draw7s siding in all the additional ones. This tecnique sometimes bring them to an "autoscoop" when your new 7 cards are worst than the opponent's ones.
-1 Windfall
-1 Spiral
-1 Petal
-1 rebuild
+1 Mis-D
+1 Collossus
+1 Stifle
+1 brainfreeze
Jar remain maindeck because of the possibility to tinker into Collossus or Jar itself when needed ( expecially when the opponent is tapped out for some reasons or after a duressing him you saw he owned no stifles or fows )
He tried to summarize me some of his possible moves during this mathup:
He can try to combo-out the opponent as fast as he can, but only if the initial hand let him think to be able to do it at least before the third turn.
He kept in only Twister and Jar. IMHO, Jar can go in side if you have other defensive cards to add from your side.
He usually try a Draw7 ONLY when the opponent is totally tapped out or only after he resolve an huge threat that costed him a lot of resources ( such as Necro for example )
If he resolved Necro or Bargain, and he tried to win in the following turn, resolving or forcing a Draw7 could be a good defensive strategy for this desperate situation.
Infact the opponent tend to draw more than 7 cards consequently rearranging them into a perfect 7-cards-hand. A draw7 can ruin his plan, giving you the needed time to eventually win with a bit of luck.
Against Fish
He told me that he fear more the UW version rather than the UR version because of Meddling Mages.
This TPS, has a better manabase so Gay-Red doens't have so much possibilies to completely shut him down for a long time.
Rebuild is in, both to bounce back null rods and/or rise the spells' count.
Against UW fish he sided in :
+1 Mis-d
+1 collossus
+1 echoing truth
+1 rushing river
+1 rebuild
-1 lotus petal
-1 windfall
-1 spiral
-1 jar
-1 crypt
this let him have different but nearly equal solutions to all the mages, rods and to better control the denial fish's strategy.
agaisnt gay.red he sided in:
-1 spiral
-1 windfall
-1 petal
-1 mind's desire
-1 jar
+1 misdi
+1 collossuss
+1 echoing truth
+2 hydro
Against fish, jar and desireusually go out because of Stifles. It is a good move IMHO. If you know that opponent's doesn't side multiple Stifles
against you I think that that 2 cards should be kept in the maindeck instead.
Crypt and Cunning Wish could be sided out for 2 hydroblast in that situation.
He used Necro and Bargain against Fish not as "a finisher" ( drawing as a mad to combo him out in a single turn ), but drawing less cards each turn and trying to resolve 2 or 3
"mini-tendrils" ( if possible ) to kill the opponent, posing a lot of attention on opponent's stifles.
Regarding the UW version. If Luca was the Fish player, he suggested to name "Duress" as first choice and then "Dark Ritual" and "Y.Will." o r "ToA" as last choices. He found that naming a 4x card is always better than naming key spells against TPS because this choice usually gives to the combo player less resources avaialable ( Duress ) and less mana available ( Dark Rituals ) and a lot more dead draws.
Against Drain.Slavery you can side as against Hulk, keeping out Misdi and H.recall for 2 beb
Against MW.Slavery you can side as against dragon keeping the 4th beB/hydro in the side and the Wish in the maindeck.
He found that after all his testing and all the good results at our tourneys, he had a 50-50 ONLY against MW.slavery and 4C-Hulk, but ONLY if well played.
Against all the other decks, if TPS is well played and you know the opponents, you can easily have 60-70% of your total winning rate
Agaisnt Aggro-Workshop.dec
Their hate isn't so strong against us.
If they not resolve a quick 3Sphere + Smockestak or a luckier 3SPhere+CoW+Strip they could not be able to slow down our mana development.
I suggest you to side in all the bouncers and smash them in the last turn at your disposal, bouncing back all their Artifacts and then safely go to town with 10 spells.
+X Bouncers
-X Draw7s and Cunning Wish
Written by
Luca "Trix" Simone and Massimo aka "MaxxMatt" Mattioli
Edited by Jacob Orlove
Special thanks to "Elric", "InJ", "Vale", "Shaman", "Phele" and all the others players that gave me ideas and constuctive comments for this article.[/quote]
|
