Questions Regarding R/G/b TnT

[Anonymous]

Well, I am sorry to post this way down here in Newbie-ville, but I had a few questions/comments relevent to Zherbus's new R/G/b TnT build that is being discussed in the EVF.  If this kind of thing isn't cool please feel free to do what you like with this post (I am sure you were waiting for my permission   )

I really like the new build but a few things occured to me.

1.  Enchantment overload:  After sideboard this build has 13 big threats against Keeper that are enchantments.  These are its only real card advantage threats.  Every one of them is very, very strong, but I wonder if they aren't overkill.  Most Keeper builds run Allay and Aura Fracture as their only enchantment kill.  If I am playing Keeper and I know your only way of gaining a real advantage in the game is through enchantments, and that you are running 13 of them, I am going to try extremely hard to get one of my two ways to kill these permanents, which incidentally negate all 13 in one blow.

I think that running this many important threats that can be addressed through a single card (especially if you rely on them for your late game) is asking to be taken out of the game with a single tutor.  Once your are running enough enchantments to force Keeper to scramble for one of its two answers haven't you done your job?  If they get their answer then it continues to work on every other business spell you draw you lose.  If they get it then they don't need it again because you start on a different threat catagory entirely you win.

That brings me to question #2.

2. Creature threat diversification:  In my experience the Keeper-TnT matchup often goes like this.

1. TnT gets a fast start that Keeper somehow handles.
2. Keeper inhibits TnT's ability to generate strong threats with either mana denial or Shattering Pulse.
3. TnT loses.

Even in games where the Survival engine gets going Keeper can sometimes stall with Shattering Pulse and wastelands long enough to pull out the win.  As a Keeper player I have frequently seen TnT decks unable to find any threat to Survival for becuase their Workshop has been wasted and they don't have an artifact for the Goblin.

For this reason I think that having a single non-artifact threat bears examining, most likely as a sideboard option.

One strong possibility for this potential slot might be Nimble Mongoose.  Another might be Phyrexian Negator.

I am not sure that this is necessary, but it seems worth examining given the amount of hate out there and Zherbus's 'curveball' principal.

I hope these ideas generate some discussion.  I really enjoy reading these boards and am glad for the chance to contribute.

Leo

[Anonymous]

Ok well lets see....

First Off: #1 TnTs enchantments are only threats because they supply a greater number of creatures (Oath of Ghouls, Survival of The Fittest) Or that they completely hose The Opposing Player (Blood Moon). The REAL threats are the juggies and the su-chis and the welders. If you waste a tutor to get a Allay to stop my enchantments then TnT has done its job because its main threats are still alive and beating on you.

Secondly:TnT is not as easy to use shattering pulse on as u think... (EX. Pulse With BB on Jugie, Resp Weld it for a Artifact or Just get juggie back next turn). And now with black over blue TnT gains duress which could screw over ur inifinite pulse gameplan. Also on your comments about negator and nimble mongoose generaly they would be very good choices in a situation like this but with workshops flying around TnT has a much higher chance of gettin a bigger/less suicdal threat out on the first turn... granted u could go forest mongoose or lotus negator... but the mongoose wouldnt be a threat until u reach threshold and with OoG in the mainboard theres no synergy. As for negator hes great when u can drop him first turn against control and put em on a 4 turn clock, but the odds of a 1st turn negator are pretty slim relying on either a 2 mox/sol +land hand or a lotus and the fact that not only can juggie and su chi come out on the first turn they can also be recured through a welder and are really hard to kill with that welder on the board... Also Running 1 "nonartifact/enchantment threat isnt exactly a good a idea in the curreent meta with a ton of creature hate running around already...

Hopefully ive answered any/all questions u had

[Zherbus]

Game 1, Aura fracture isn't accessable. Allay needs to be Cunning Wished, which means it can't grab things like Pulse, STP, or Ebony Charm. Game 2, sure they side in those cards which are obviously good against Legion.

Keep in mind that non-'Legion' builds of TnT are simply a creature element for the offensive with a smattering of enchantment threats. They can counter a Survival, Fracture (which actually has a side effect of stunting Keepers development) a Oath of Ghouls, but there is still a 5/3 swinging at them.

Keeper, outside of combo, will always be one of TnT's toughest fights. As a Keeper player (I am one of the Paragons remember ;P), I personally have a flawless tournament record against TnT and a very favorable playtest record. That's because, like every chum alive, I know how to beat TnT. I knows what makes it tick and I know how to make that tick stop.

My curve ball theory is what makes Gro-a-Tog the deck to beat for the first few months of its conception, its what made TnT so popular in its first half year, it's what changes the format and keeps players on their feet. I expect (read: hope) that this alters enough of TnT's offensive that players again have to adjust playstyle and possible sideboard slots and in the meantime lose some games to Legion.

As for question #2, there really isn't a possibility for that. Firstly, because you want your Workshop mana to be as useful as possible so you can keep the rest of the manabase tight (like a tiger). It's bad enough you can't use it for all the enchantments I have.

Secondly, because there is just no room without cutting something important in the deck list. One could always side Flametongue Kavu over Bone Shredder and beat with that if he desired.

I'll add both your question and my response to the thread.

[Anonymous]

Hey, thanks for the responses.

First off, i think this build is at least very interesting, and quite possibily the beginning of a strong new direction for TnT, so don't think I am just knockin' it.  I am just trying to poke at it a bit and see how it responds   .

In my testing I found that since the inclusion of Sylvan Library in TnT (the u-splash versions) I have been forced to go for Allay a lot more than I used to.  That is a good thing, as IamTehGoo observes, becuase I used to be able to get an Ebony Charm and deal with all the Survivals for one mana (four, including the Wish).  Where it hurts, however, is when you draw the extra enchantment after the goal of tying up my mana for a turn has been realized.

Essentially I am wondering whether you aren't walking into a cards that is already the closest Keeper has to a Silver Bullet against you.  Sligh is strong against Keeper becuase it is fast, but also becuase Keeper is forced to be able to deal with creatures, instants, artifacts, enchantments, and even sometimes lands.  When the Keeper player Tutors for a solution to one of its threats it often simply wins with another.  TnT has some of that strength, but I think having nearly half its non-mana spells fit into one of its catagories simplifies the matchup substantially for Keeper.

I agree with you that Keeper will always be a hard matchup, Zherbus, but what I am curious about is how it can be made better.  I think that cards like Duress are very strong additions for that matchup.  It is fast, cheap, and must be countered.

Another possibility for this matchup is Reccurring Nightmare.  Although an enchantment, the Nightmare virtually guarantee's card advantage if it resolves with a creature (even a utility creature) on the board.  That is different from the other enchantments, which, for the most part, can resolve as long as they don't stay on the board a full turn.  I haven't tested this, of course, but it seems interesting.

The curveball theory is, in my opinion, hardly even theoretical, it is very clearly part of how the game develops.  But curveballs are only effective if they affect how your opponent must 'swing.'  If they can swing for your fastball and hit your curveball out of the park you haven't gained anything.

The ability of this deck to disrupt a control decks hand is great.  That will win you games nothing else could have.  The overflow of anti-control enchantments however, is much less scary because it simply strengthens my default plan against TnT:  Deal with the fat somehow (with what is maindeck, hopefully) and find something with Cunning Wish that makes sure the card-advantage enchantments never, ever bother me.  Obviously such a plan isn't going to work every game, but I like it nonetheless, and it will be more effective against your variant, not less.

Leo

P.S.  On a sidenote you respond to those who wonder if you will be able to keep up with the graveyards of weenie decks but reminding them you have Survival.  If you have Survival on the board against a weenie deck aren't you already winning quite soundly?  Wouldn't the Oath of Ghouls be a classic 'win more' card in that situation?

[Zherbus]

Quote P.S.  On a sidenote you respond to those who wonder if you will be able to keep up with the graveyards of weenie decks but reminding them you have Survival.  If you have Survival on the board against a weenie deck aren't you already winning quite soundly?  Wouldn't the Oath of Ghouls be a classic 'win more' card in that situation?

Yes, sure. I should be mostly winning against aggro anyways though. I feel the only matchup that has changed is Sligh in that free Bottle Gnomes every turn tend to stunt the burn a bit better.

As for my 'curveball' theory, if they swing for a fastball, they probably wont hit the curve ball. Thats the chance I'm taking here. Either you attack them in other ways and they can deal with it, or it makes no difference either way. At the very least a counterspelled Survival isn't as much of a loss since now you can tutor another up.

[Anonymous]

Quote
As for my 'curveball' theory, if they swing for a fastball, they probably wont hit the curve ball. Thats the chance I'm taking here. Either you attack them in other ways and they can deal with it, or it makes no difference either way. At the very least a counterspelled Survival isn't as much of a loss since now you can tutor another up.

You completely ignored my argumentation here in favor of responding only to the metaphore.

Here is the argument that their fastball swing will hit the curve.

Quote The overflow of anti-control enchantments however, is much less scary because it simply strengthens my default plan against TnT:  Deal with the fat somehow (with what is maindeck, hopefully) and find something with Cunning Wish that makes sure the card-advantage enchantments never, ever bother me.  Obviously such a plan isn't going to work every game, but I like it nonetheless, and it will be more effective against your variant, not less.

I think the answer to this problem is to replace some of the anti-control enchantments in the main or sideboard (the chains, maybe . . .) with another curveball that doesn't get answered by by-the-book anti-TnT play.  Options include a fourth Duress, Recurring Nightmare, perhaps a Flesh Reaver.  Nimble Mongoose has some promise, because most Keeper players won't bring in their Kegs even if they know you have it.

The Wheel of Fortune you cut also meets this need by at least forcing a counterspell although I am still not sure if it is good enough to play.

I know the mana bothers you, as it should, but these cards should be competing for slots with the control hosing enchantments, not the artifact fat.

The goal has to be to catch them not only with an unknown variant but also with an unknown variant that their usual plays leave them unprepared to handle.

Leo

[j_orlove]

Quote replace some of the anti-control enchantments in the main or sideboard (the chains, maybe . . .)

Uh, chains are anti-combo. I don't see them coming in vs control.

[Anonymous]

Alright, that's cool.  I thought that might be the case, but I still think the basic form of the critique stands.  If you want to beat the field by doing something unexpected that's fine, but the unexpected cards can't be cards that are answered in exactly the same way as the expected cards.  Especially when you are actually more vulnerable to the standard answer.

For example Suicide Black has several strong threats against control in its creature base, but just because its creature threats are very strong against control does not mean that more creatures make the deck stronger.  On the contrary, whereas the deck as it exists keeps control from finding its good answer to the creatures (The Abyss) with disruption if it cut that element for more creatures it would open itself up to more easily being hosed by Keeper.

Likewise TnT relys on keeping Keeper from getting its hoser (Allay) with pressure from other permanents and spells that require other answers (sorceries and artifact fat).  Cutting that pressure for more enchantments (in this case it is the sorceries that are missing, which keeper would deal with by Wishing for REB or rushing to draw more and have counterspells) leaves less reason for them not to do what they want to do anyway, get their hoser and win.

If there is really no way to address this problem I have to say I don't think this build is an improvement or even a viable curveball.  But I doubt that is the case.  I think if the problem is examined it can be solved.  Adding the 4th duress seems like a start, even if it goes over the chains because the duress will also help against combo.

Leo

[Zherbus]

Quote (Guest @ Feb. 22 2003,14:12)

Quote
As for my 'curveball' theory, if they swing for a fastball, they probably wont hit the curve ball. Thats the chance I'm taking here. Either you attack them in other ways and they can deal with it, or it makes no difference either way. At the very least a counterspelled Survival isn't as much of a loss since now you can tutor another up.

You completely ignored my argumentation here in favor of responding only to the metaphore.

Here is the argument that their fastball swing will hit the curve.

Quote The overflow of anti-control enchantments however, is much less scary because it simply strengthens my default plan against TnT:  Deal with the fat somehow (with what is maindeck, hopefully) and find something with Cunning Wish that makes sure the card-advantage enchantments never, ever bother me.  Obviously such a plan isn't going to work every game, but I like it nonetheless, and it will be more effective against your variant, not less.

I think the answer to this problem is to replace some of the anti-control enchantments in the main or sideboard (the chains, maybe . . .) with another curveball that doesn't get answered by by-the-book anti-TnT play.  Options include a fourth Duress, Recurring Nightmare, perhaps a Flesh Reaver.  Nimble Mongoose has some promise, because most Keeper players won't bring in their Kegs even if they know you have it.

The Wheel of Fortune you cut also meets this need by at least forcing a counterspell although I am still not sure if it is good enough to play.

I know the mana bothers you, as it should, but these cards should be competing for slots with the control hosing enchantments, not the artifact fat.

The goal has to be to catch them not only with an unknown variant but also with an unknown variant that their usual plays leave them unprepared to handle.

Leo

I didn't completely ignore a thing.

Why should I include a 'anti-control' creature when opposing decks prepare to deal with TnT with critter removal? That alone rules out Negator and Reaver in my book right off. Also, Recurring Nightmare is expensive to keep up where as most thing in Legion are a one time, fairly inexpensive hit. That is very important considering the mana sources have been trimmed.

Also, there is only really 2 control hosing enchantments. The Oath of Ghouls.

EDIT: I don't mean to make you shy away from ideas to come up with for Legion, but your suggestions aren't making any sense to me right now. Have you played Legion yet?

[Anonymous]

I have played Legion, and I really liked it.  I am not sure that the changes I am proposing would work or are necessary, but I did notice that I liked some of the card choices (vs. control, which is all I have tested thus far) but not others.  I am trying to explain what I liked and disliked in terms of an organized critique of what kind of thing does and doesn't work in the deck.

Here is what I am arguing.  I hope I will be able to make it more clear, as I realize it is not exactly easy to cubbyhole in the accepted deck theory critique paradigms (if I could just say 'mana curve' or 'double color splash' or some other deck building catch phrase this would be easier).

The goal of a control player, when facing TnT is to keep them from getting card advantage.  The artifact fat is certainly dangerous, but Keeper is very strong against decks that are full of fat mana drain targets and not much else.  If the card advantage threats don't materialize, most of the time Keeper wins.

The card advantage in original TnT came from Survival of the Fittest, Memory Jar and Ancestral Recall, and maybe the Draw-7s.  The Welders also fit in here, I suppose.  If Survival resolved Keeper had two choices.  It could Charm away the Squee and Anger, or it could Allay the Survival.  Either way they had negated every other Survival in the deck but none of the other means of gaining card advantage.

The next step in TnT's development came with the addition of Sylvan Library.  At this time a second Squee was added to many builds also.  Both of these chages made the Charm route much weaker and the Allay route stronger.  This was generally a positive change, because Allay is a much less efficient way of neutering the engine.  If Allay was used then Keeper had used precious resources to attack one aspect of the deck and was more vulnerable to another card advantage play like Wheel or Jar.

Your build adds two elements against control to this mix.

1. Duress
2. Oath of Ghouls

I found #1 to be very strong, as it always is.  It nearly always gets at least a Mana Drain, and that rocks.

I found #2 to be a wrecking ball when it works.  Cheap and effective, a great card to beat control.

When OoG is added to the existing deck structure however, I found an odd thing happening.  I found my roads to card advantage were getting hosed more often than they had before.  Why is this?  I also played several games at the helm of Keeper against Legion and I think I have a theory.

Because I am not worrying about other devestating card advantage spells as much as I am with older TnT builds I am free from the need to get my Allay and also keep something to handle other roads to card advantage.  With the exception of Memory Jar a hand of StP and Allay can handle any threat in the deck.  Duress changes things a bit, which is great, but the simple fact remains:

Because you are running more enchantments than other builds Cunning Wish for Allay, a play that most Keeper builds will be forced to make against TnT anyway, is stronger against you than it would be if you were only running six enchantments maindeck.

After you force Keeper to make the Allay play (or win the game because they can't make it) you never want to see another enchantment.  With your build you most likely will see another one, and that means a dead draw for you.

I have been wracking my brain for a solution to this problem, but I havent' come up with a good one, as you rightly point out.  I am convinced, however, that TnT's threats need to become more, not less diverse, and exploit holes in Keeper's removal suite if they want to get the upper hand.

I hope this helped clarify my argument.  It is hardly damning to the archetype, because it may be that the strengths of black outweigh this weakness, but it is, I think, worthy of consideration.

Leo

[Zherbus]

I basically agree with most of that. Hell, if we ever think of that elusive solution, then perhaps TnT will beat control as regularly as combo beats aggro.

Anyways, give me an email at Zherbus@themanadrain.com

[j_orlove]

Well, what kinds of threats are we using? Permanents. Creatures, Artifacts, and Enchantmenst. TnT is almost all permanents.

I think this is why people like using Duress in TnT--it's a spell.  

So, I propose that we focus our efforts on further sorceries and instants that have powerful effects for low mana costs. These cards certainly show the most promise for TnT, as there are only a few that have even been tested (ancestral, walk, tinker, wheel, duress, tutors, and SB stuff). But aside from Duress, all the SB stuff has been reactive.    Let's get proactive, people!



Edit: since mana is such a consideration, sorceries are probably our best bet, since they're cheaper.

[PucktheCat]

Just so everyone knows, this is 'humanman' in his new memberish shape.

Quote
So, I propose that we focus our efforts on further sorceries and instants that have powerful effects for low mana costs. These cards certainly show the most promise for TnT, as there are only a few that have even been tested (ancestral, walk, tinker, wheel, duress, tutors, and SB stuff). But aside from Duress, all the SB stuff has been reactive.    Let's get proactive, people!

That's the ticket!

The problem, as has been rightly pointed out, is that TnT has fairly limited mana when Workshop can't be used.  That means cheap powerful spells are all we can use.  That is pretty limiting.

Heh, I wonder if TnT could use PoP against Keeper.  It probably wouldn't work for obvious reasons, and because it would only be good against Keeper, but OMG it would be funny when it did!

Leo