Grimlong Vs IT, whats the better choice?

[NaNaKy3k]

I'm not sure why people are saying IT just can't beat drains. Slaver is a favorable matchup, and I'll stand by that statement. I went 1-3 vs. slaver in Richmond, largely because of bad luck. Here is what happened in the 7 games I lost to slaver during the weekend.

3 games turn 3 slaver
2 via mana screw
1 via TFK into the absolute balls (DT, Lotus, and land)
1 he had answers to my business spells and then I lost

With Grimlong, i dont think your oponent would have had 3 turns
Anywais, agains stax Grimlong has 3shatering sphree and 4hurklys&esg, that most of the times is enought

[pyr0ma5ta]

As a sidenote to the original post: Grimlong is cooler, because sometimes you will be able to Tendrils your opponent to -infinite. I did it today in playtesting. It went something like:

Sapphire, Brainstorm
Jet, Ritual, Ritual, Lotus, LED, Desire for 8.

The 8 cards were kind, as was able to Rotate Academy into play, play a couple more spells and Regrow the Desire for something like 18. Now I had so many tutors RFG that I controlled the game and I went regrowing Timetwisters, underwhile using Desire to cap the chaff out of my library, using Hurkyll´s Recall and Lotus to pay for all my spells until I managed to Twister into a hand that contained Regrowth, Lotus, Mind´s Desire, Hurkyll´s Recall and three irrelevant cards. Desire now left me with 8 cards between hand and Cementery and I had infinite Timetwisters.

Do that in a tournament and the audience will be in awe  :shock:  :shock:

Ow.  Intense.

[Moxlotus]

I'm not sure why people are saying IT just can't beat drains. Slaver is a favorable matchup, and I'll stand by that statement. I went 1-3 vs. slaver in Richmond, largely because of bad luck. Here is what happened in the 7 games I lost to slaver during the weekend.

3 games turn 3 slaver
2 via mana screw
1 via TFK into the absolute balls (DT, Lotus, and land)
1 he had answers to my business spells and then I lost

With Grimlong, i dont think your oponent would have had 3 turns
Anywais, agains stax Grimlong has 3shatering sphree and 4hurklys&esg, that most of the times is enought

Maybe its just us, but when we tested Long it couldn't fight its way out of Rod, Chalice @1, Cow/waste, trinisphere set up--but IT certainly can.  If I were to play a combo deck in a drain heavy environment, it would be Long.  But if it were in a Shop heavy and Gifts light, there is no question that I would be playing IT.

It is interesting to note that the more stable "Long" list JDizzle played day 1 of Richmond is within a few cards of the more aggressive "IT" list that Endress played day 2--I think they were about 6 cards different.

[Smmenen]

I think that if you are debating which to play, you should play IT. 

[M.Solymossy]

Grimlong is not at all for the fient of heart.  If you play it, you better know it... Inside.. and out.. and you better know every possible threat your opponent can throw at you, within the first 2 turns.

if your opponent opens with tropical island Mox Impulse... I think you assume oath.  Do they play Chalice?
Island go--- Slaver or gifts.. maybe oath?   IT, TPS?  3color Long?


ect ect

know your threats and your opponents

[Illuvatar Reborn]

i think it all depends on the player playing either deck, and how much experience they have with it.

[yespuhyren]

As much as this is true, I would have to assume that you would need more experience to play Grimlong, though I could of course be wrong.

[Moxlotus]

I  think the big differentiator is Force of Will.  Having FoW in your deck fundamentally changes how it works and plays out

Endress experimented with 0 Force day 2.  He went X-2 for 19th place--so results were inconclusive on if it force belongs in IT.

[ErkBek]

I  think the big differentiator is Force of Will.  Having FoW in your deck fundamentally changes how it works and plays out

Endress experimented with 0 Force day 2.  He went X-2 for 19th place--so results were inconclusive on if it force belongs in IT.

FoW inconclusive? It belongs in the deck. IT needs to protect its will more than any other deck.

[Moxlotus]

By inconclusive I meant that it would have been obvious if Endress crapped out.  But he went X-2, so if one loss would have been a draw both versions could have made top 8.  That's why I said "inconclusive"--because both were successful.

[Komatteru]

By inconclusive I meant that it would have been obvious if Endress crapped out.  But he went X-2, so if one loss would have been a draw both versions could have made top 8.  That's why I said "inconclusive"--because both were successful.

Careful there.  One tournament does not equate to something being good or bad.  Decks that are bad win from time to time, and decks that are good lose from time to time as well.  The good or bad-ness of a deck is something you need to analyze with a mix of theory (the starting block), testing, and then more theory.

[Moxlotus]

Very true JDizzle.  While FoW probably is optimal in the deck, the limited results and the shortcomings Endress and I have found while playing the deck make it not an automatic inclusion.

[Toad]

For my own reference (and quite off topic), why is that Intuition-Tendrils deck called Intuition-Tendrils when It's really just UB TPS with Intuitions over Gifts Ungiven?

[Imsomniac101]

Ummm. Because the way it executes it's plan is radically different. I think Endress said this in his article; that IT is closer to Gifts in execution than it is to TPS.

[Toad]

Maybe. If you take the decklist posted in the first post, swap the 3 Intuitions for 3 Gifts Ungivens and the clunky Perplex for a Recoup, you have an *exact* copy of the TPS lists that were played in Europe lately (well the last I saw only had 1 Grim Tutor and the 4th Force of Will, but that's rather minor). Both decks have the same mana base, the same core acceleration, the same fundamental turn, the same maindeck Rebuild, the same protection and the same disruption, so I yet don't see how both decks execute their game plans in radically different ways. I've read the article about the deck, and still don't see.

Think of the deck as TPS without the need to play a draw seven spell to win, but also with stronger setup going into the late game.

This line tells me they probably have a misunderstanding on how TPS works, or used weird TPS decklists for their gauntlet. Exactly like this deck, most TPS builds only ran 1 Draw7, Timetwister, and hardly need It to go off. And the late game setup is far stronger with Gifts Ungiven than with Intuition, for quite obvious reasons.

[ErkBek]

Maybe. If you take the decklist posted in the first post, swap the 3 Intuitions for 3 Gifts Ungivens and the clunky Perplex for a Recoup, you have an *exact* copy of the TPS lists that were played in Europe lately (well the last I saw only had 1 Grim Tutor and the 4th Force of Will, but that's rather minor). Both decks have the same mana base, the same core acceleration, the same fundamental turn, the same maindeck Rebuild, the same protection and the same disruption, so I yet don't see how both decks execute their game plans in radically different ways. I've read the article about the deck, and still don't see.

Think of the deck as TPS without the need to play a draw seven spell to win, but also with stronger setup going into the late game.

This line tells me they probably have a misunderstanding on how TPS works, or used weird TPS decklists for their gauntlet. Exactly like this deck, most TPS builds only ran 1 Draw7, Timetwister, and hardly need It to go off. And the late game setup is far stronger with Gifts Ungiven than with Intuition, for quite obvious reasons.

IT's maindeck is about 7-10 cards different than that of TPS. It's SB is about 13 to 14 cards different. All together that is 20-25 cards. How is that not a whole new deck?

TFK Gifts and Slaver are only about 10 cards different in the maindeck and at most 10 different SB cards, and those are considered completely different decks.

Most TPS decks run twister, tinker, and jar (some run time spiral, windfall, and/or wheel too). The sideboard is also totally different from TPS decks, especially those that run cunning wish. I understand how TPS works quite well and have piloted it to countless t8's and 1 mox split.

IT is better than TPS. IT pulls out the "luck factor" that TPS needs to win tournaments.

[Toad]

IT's maindeck is about 7-10 cards different than that of TPS. It's SB is about 13 to 14 cards different. All together that is 20-25 cards. How is that not a whole new deck?

The only differences with TPS is 3 Intuitions vs. 3 Gifts Ungiven. Oh, and Perplex, the card that made everyone laugh hard here when they saw it. That's hardly 10 maindeck cards. Considering the sideboard, well, that's highly irrelevant since sideboards are made to be tweaked for each metagame. Nevertheless, I've seen a lot of TPS packing 4 Dark Confident in the sideboard as a setup in the Control matchups. TPS played here havent packed Tinker, Memory Jar, Windfall, Time Spiral and Wheel of Fortune for a very long while (though Tinker and Darskteel Colossus is a standard sideboard plan), that long time basically being when Gifts Ungiven got printed.

I've been playing the deck a bit to get a clear feeling about it. I used Intuitions the very same way I used Gifts Ungiven in TPS. I used the very same setups to beat Control. And after an afternoon of playing it, I still don't see why this is a new deck. Nevertheless, I've already found myself in situations where Intuitions ended up terrible and would have won me the game if they had been Gifts Ungivens instead. And I yet have to cast Gifts Ungiven in TPS and wished It was an Intuition.

[Whatever Works]

i think it all depends on the player playing either deck, and how much experience they have with it.

EXACTLY!!!

And if in doubt play IT... Not because it is a better deck by any means, but because it is an easier deck to play. Thats not taking a shot at the deck, but instead recognizing the difficulty of playing grimlong correctly.

[nicofromtokyo]

So the reason to play IT over another Storm.deck would be because it's easier to pilot? I agree on the fact that IT is simplier to use than Grim Long, and the plan to beat your opponent is far more obvious than a Gifts pile, but do these reasons make it the deck to play? I found Litz.Long (list somewhere on the forum) pretty easy to play too, and however funnier.

[ErkBek]

So the reason to play IT over another Storm.deck would be because it's easier to pilot? I agree on the fact that IT is simplier to use than Grim Long, and the plan to beat your opponent is far more obvious than a Gifts pile, but do these reasons make it the deck to play? I found Litz.Long (list somewhere on the forum) pretty easy to play too, and however funnier.

The reason to play IT over Grim long is that it destroys stax. I'll sum up this entire thread for everybody

In a metagame filled with mana drains, play Grim Long.
In a metagame filled with stax and/or fish, play IT.
IT is easier to pilot than Grim Long. 

[Khahan]

For IT tendrils, I need 11 proxie slots for a 10 proxie tournament. Out of these, what is best to cut and for what:
Mox Sapphire
Mox Jet
Mox Pearl
Mox Ruby
Black Lotus
Mana Crypt
2 Grim Tutor
1 Intuition
Ancestral Recall
1 Timetwister

Can I get by with cutting an off color moxen for a land? Basic land or fetch land?
What about replacing a grim tutor with a 2nd perplex?  It can still find most any card in the deck I would need.

Other 'powerful' cards I have to consider are 1 mana drain. The extra counter could always be nice, but with the UU do me in?  Or Time walk: I think I'd be looking at the mana crypt or an off color moxen. 

Or any other card I might be missing?

yes, I know I can easily get an intuition for $15 or the crypt for about $40. But I've got a big house payment, 2 kids and a 3rd kid due in the next 2 weeks. Even the $20 entry fee for the tournament is pushing it for me right now

[ErkBek]

For IT tendrils, I need 11 proxie slots for a 10 proxie tournament. Out of these, what is best to cut and for what:
Mox Sapphire
Mox Jet
Mox Pearl
Mox Ruby
Black Lotus
Mana Crypt
2 Grim Tutor
1 Intuition
Ancestral Recall
1 Timetwister

Well, it really depends on your metagame. I'd probably cut the twister unless your metagame has lots of random stuff (twister bad vs. drains and stax, but amazing vs. fish, ichorid, sui). If you've got lots of drains you could cut 1 intuition, 1 merchant scroll, and 1 land for tinker, jar. and another cabal rit leaving you with a slightly more aggressive build vs drains that still has a good game vs. stax. If you've got lots of stax and fish I'd cut a mox for another basic land otherwise with infi stax cut twist for FoF.

[forests failed you]

I would definately say that Grimlong is the deck to play. 

Yeah, sure, IT has a stronger game against Stax.  But post board Grimlong gets enough stuff that it can pretty easily handle anything besides Stax's nut draw.  Secondly, What Stax?

Thirdly, Grimlong is broken.  Stupid, unfair, fast broken.  IT isn't much faster than TPS was six months ago.  Basically, to me IT seems like a redundent clunker of a combo deck that goes off turn three to four with protection and can randomly win on turn two if it has the nuts.  Congratulations, Gifts does the exact same thing. 

Grimlong is actually a much more powerful deck than IT, however it has to be in the hands of somebody who understands how to play it properly.  (Which is most likely why nobody plays it).  Basically, if you are a mediocre, or newer combo player I'd say IT is most likely the deck to play;  then when you are ready for the training wheels to come off give Grimlong a spin. 

[Moxlotus]

Basically, to me IT seems like a redundent clunker of a combo deck that goes off turn three to four with protection and can randomly win on turn two if it has the nuts.  Congratulations, Gifts does the exact same thing. 
 

Then the real question is "why play Gifts when you could play IT?" since IT go off usually the same turn, can randomly go broken, and has a godly Stax matchup?

The reason to play IT over Grim long is that it destroys stax. I'll sum up this entire thread for everybody

In a metagame filled with mana drains, play Grim Long.
In a metagame filled with stax and/or fish, play IT.
IT is easier to pilot than Grim Long.   

[PucktheCat]

For IT tendrils, I need 11 proxie slots for a 10 proxie tournament. Out of these, what is best to cut and for what:

I think I'd be looking at the mana crypt or an off color moxen.

kobefan has already answered your question, but I wanted to emphasize that cutting Mana Crypt is definately not right.  That card is much better than an off color mox and is probably better than an on color mox as well.

Then the real question is "why play Gifts when you could play IT?" since IT go off usually the same turn, can randomly go broken, and has a godly Stax matchup?

I've thought about this question a bit, since I have watched Eric destroy a Stax heavy meta with IT and I am myself a Gifts player.  My answer was, of course, that Gifts has a good matchup with IT ( ).  Generally, I think Gifts has a better matchup with Drains than IT as well.  IT is insane against decks that rely on stopping mana development to win because they have accleration and an untouchable mana base, but Gifts is usually better against decks that don't attack your mana because it plays more business spells in place of some of IT's weaker accelerants.

[ErkBek]

Congratulations, Gifts does the exact same thing. 

For a while I would ask myself (and occasionally I still do), if gifts goldfishes only a turn slower than IT, yet plays mana drain, why not play gifts. You have to look a past the goldfish rates and the card names. I think a major distinction between the two strategies is how the decks handle mana denial. Normally a turn 1 chalice at zero or null rod will cause gifts (and grim long) to be significantly slowed down, to the point of if the opponent does anything else of relevance, they just lose. Gifts abuses artifact mana better than any other deck in the format, however when that supply is cut off it hobbles to find an answer. Gifts can be a tempo black hole as tog once was.

On the other hand, IT stable mana base combined with 6 rituals (and tutoring power of intuition) give the deck the power to just ignore most mana denial strategies. I win over chalice at 0 or 1 and null rods all day on basic lands. This is something that many decks just can't do. The only time I feel that I need a bounce spell to actually win the game is when my opponent has multiple different lock components excluding a 3sphere (ie: 2sphere + rod or rod + Cotv @1).

IT is a broken deck too. I'm not sure where people got the impression that it wasn't. Its fundamental turn (for the goldfish) is about 2.75. However, the goldfish doesn't mean much when you are playing against another vintage deck. Grim long's goldfish is probably about turn 2, but if its land is wasted then it is turn 3 or 4, unless the opponent actually does something else in which case it just loses. Gifts goldfishes on turn 3.5 but a null rod suddenly turns the deck into MUC. IT doesn't really fit that mold. Lands don't get wasted and a null rod or chalice is hardly a speed bump.

IT's trade off for this stability is a worse mana drain matchup. Slaver is favorable, but gifts isn't.

Grim long is a good matchup though, I'm 4-0 in tourney play vs. long, and I know others are winning that matchup as well. IT's disruption holds long at bay long enough for IT to just win.

IT isn't much faster than TPS was six months ago.  Basically, to me IT seems like a redundent clunker of a combo deck that goes off turn three to four with protection and can randomly win on turn two if it has the nuts. 

Is this a bad thing?

[Smmenen]

Grim long is a good matchup though, I'm 4-0 in tourney play vs. long, and I know others are winning that matchup as well. IT's disruption holds long at bay long enough for IT to just win.

While persuasive, that's hardly conclusive evidence of a favorable matchup.  Who won the die roll?  Did either of the players make mistakes? 

[Komatteru]

While I've sworn off Long for tournaments indefinitely, I can definitely pull the cards back out of the binder and pound you a few times in some test games, Mr. Becker.   

Yeah, you saw it here.  I took Long apart and put it back into the binders.

[forests failed you]

The question is "Why would you want to destroy a Stax heavy meta, let alone play in one?"  If the metagame is Stax heavy something is clearly wrong with the players you are playing against.  Stax is a realy poor metagame choice right now with all of the Slaver and Combo floating around.  So it actually wouldn't surprise me if the the Stax players you guys are pwning are actually awful and don't know what they are doing;   especially if the majority of the field thinks that Stax is the way to go after the results of Richmond Va.

Secondly, Grimlong has a much better match up against Gifts and Slaver than IT does.  Grimlong has a favorable match up, whereas IT has something close to an even match up against both decks.  If Gifts, Slaver, and IT have emerged as the top metagame decks, why wouldn't you just play Grimlong if you had the ability to do so competently.  I've been playing and testing Long since Richmond and all I have to say is that the deck is actually retarded.  I will most likely be playing it at the next SCG event;  Its far and away the most powerful deck in the format.


Haha, Dizzle has traded in his Dark Rituals and Yawgmoth's Bargin for Heartbeat of Springs and Weird Harvests!!!  TOP 4 @ Team constructed PTQ Colombus!

[Moxlotus]

If the metagame is Stax heavy something is clearly wrong with the players you are playing against.

Vroman and Chang must be god-awful players for playing Stax then.

Is the metagame shifting?  Yes.  All of these results were done pre-Richmond and at Richmond.  Was the meta Stax heavy? It definitely was in our area.  Will it tilt back to Stax at some point?  More than likely.  If it does, will IT be an amazing choice?  Certainly.  Again, this goes along with selecting the deck based on what you think your metagame will be.