Winning a Sapphire in Bluebell (4/3)

[Tobi]

Desire doesn't really fit in the deck. Without setup spells like grim tutor and impseal desire can be weak. You don't want to play a lot of high cc spells that don't win the game on they're own when you have a bob out. This deck also sacrafices some of the explosive combo plays that long or even tps can make to improve the shop matchup with bob, which also helps in many other matchups as well.

Sorry, but are you kidding? Since when doesn't Desire belong in a storm deck? Even more into this one, since hitting a Tendrils with Desire is gg. It is one of the strongest cards a storm deck can play. You cannot just sit on your Bob and wait for something better.
Granted, it is not very good against MUD, but against any other deck it is invaluable.

And which explsive combo plays do you think this deck cannot perform compared to long or tps?

[Gekoratel]

Desire was in the original list that we had of this deck as it is a threat and blue which fit the bill.  But after testing with the card I was continually unimpressed, when I was firing off a Desire it was often for 3-5 cards because I was hitting land drops consistently and not storm cards.  The combination of cards it was revealing never got me there and it often sat in my hand dead unless I drew a Force to pitch it.  I believe that the threat density of this deck is lower than a TPS or Long which is what made the Desires marginal.  Also its another high CC spell to reveal to Bob which is a strike against the card.  Lastly, we were tuning this deck to beat field of MUD/Fish and I have always boarded Desire out vs. Shops & Fish because their mana denial is too strong.  With that in mind we didn't think it would be a good choice for the metagame.  If there were more Drains in our meta then Desire would gain some value.

I do agree that with running 3 Tendrils you will likely win of a midrange Desire if it is one the cards that you reveal but I was just unimpressed in testing.

[Tobi]

Alright, with a higher landcount you may be hitting lands more often. Desire is, just like any draw-7, a gamble. Therefore also Tinker/Jar may be a bit weaker.

It seems to be a bit of a paradoxon: a high landcount in a stormdeck

I always tried to keep the number of lands as low as possible, but in the current MUD meta this is not a good idea, so upping the landcount is the correct answer. I guess the task is to find the correct ratio.

[Evenpence]

Desire doesn't really fit in the deck. Without setup spells like grim tutor and impseal desire can be weak. You don't want to play a lot of high cc spells that don't win the game on they're own when you have a bob out. This deck also sacrafices some of the explosive combo plays that long or even tps can make to improve the shop matchup with bob, which also helps in many other matchups as well.

I would argue GWSx has better desires than any deck in the format.  The list I tested with 5 bounce spells can create crazy amounts of storm.  Right now I'm testing out forces in GWSx with four bounce spells (1 chain, 2 hurk, 1 rebuild) and desire is invaluable vs. decks with a lot of countermagic.

The card is decent vs. Fish, but terrible against shops.  The main strike against the card is it's 6 CMC in a deck running 4 bobs.  I'll test more, but I think it's going to stay in my list.  I'd rather have it than Bargain in a list with 4x Forces.

[Killane]

Desire doesn't really fit in the deck. Without setup spells like grim tutor and impseal desire can be weak. You don't want to play a lot of high cc spells that don't win the game on they're own when you have a bob out. This deck also sacrafices some of the explosive combo plays that long or even tps can make to improve the shop matchup with bob, which also helps in many other matchups as well.

I would argue GWSx has better desires than any deck in the format.  The list I tested with 5 bounce spells can create crazy amounts of storm.  Right now I'm testing out forces in GWSx with four bounce spells (1 chain, 2 hurk, 1 rebuild) and desire is invaluable vs. decks with a lot of countermagic.

The card is decent vs. Fish, but terrible against shops.  The main strike against the card is it's 6 CMC in a deck running 4 bobs.  I'll test more, but I think it's going to stay in my list.  I'd rather have it than Bargain in a list with 4x Forces.

Agreed- Desire is Bonkers Bonkers Bonkers in GWSx - of course i'm biased because it's my favourite magic card ever, but I've won games against opponents at 150+ life with GWSx because of Desire- games that no other Storm engine coudl possibly have won. With multiple Tendrils, your chances of Desire for 5+ beinh just plain lethal are much higher than TPS for example, and I can't recall ever loosing after hitting Storm 8 with Desire in any dec that runs it. It's too good not to inlcude in a Storm deck, plus it's by far your best tool vs Drains.

[M.Solymossy]

Agreed- Desire is Bonkers Bonkers Bonkers in GWSx - of course i'm biased because it's my favourite magic card ever, but I've won games against opponents at 150+ life with GWSx because of Desire- games that no other Storm engine coudl possibly have won. With multiple Tendrils, your chances of Desire for 5+ beinh just plain lethal are much higher than TPS for example, and I can't recall ever loosing after hitting Storm 8 with Desire in any dec that runs it. It's too good not to inlcude in a Storm deck, plus it's by far your best tool vs Drains.

I desired for >5 AND memory Jar'ed last tournament in TWO seperate occasions  (one desire @ 12, one @7) with TPS.  I lost both of them.

[Tempus]

I desired for >5 AND memory Jar'ed last tournament in TWO seperate occasions  (one desire @ 12, one @7) with TPS.  I lost both of them.

I remember TPS standing for That Plays Stalled...