Deck Discussion: Sick Long (Ad Nauseam)

[Jay]

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

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

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

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

8 disruption:
4 Pact of Negation
4 Duress

3 board control:
3 Chain of Vapors

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

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

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

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

Comments are welcome 

[Marske]

Nice looking list but I do have some questios:
Why a Mox diamond instead of a Mox Emerald ? The loss of a land could be very devastating imo.
How is Top turning out ? I had it in my initial list but cut it because it did to little.
Why the Jailers in the sideboard ? Do you really have such a big problem dealing with ichorid ?

--Marske

[Liam-K]

I wouldn't run mox diamond.  You have 12 land and miss tons of land drops already.

I'm still not convinced 4 chrome mox is the right number.  I ran 4 for a while time and felt like they put too much stress on my opening 7 especially in multiples.  Drawing 2x chrome mox is effectively a mull to 5.  I ran 2 and 5 regular mox for quite a while and was totally happy.  Everyone except for me insisting chrome mox was a mandatory 4-of convinced me to try 3 chrome and 4 regular mox, at which point I do notice both the good and bad points more strongly...  I am still very reluctant to add a 4th when I already am having as much trouble with choosing between imprinting and casting a card as I want to deal with.

You look a bit mana heavy, you could probably just scrap 2ish sources for cards. 

I highly recommend testing with the 3rd tendrils.

Sensei's Top looks kind of terrible.  I tested an Impulse for a while and found it pretty decent, though I ended up needing the slot for bounce.  You might like this card if you want more filtering power.

[Jay]

Why a Mox diamond instead of a Mox Emerald ? The loss of a land could be very devastating imo.

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

How is Top turning out ? I had it in my initial list but cut it because it did to little.

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

Why the Jailers in the sideboard ? Do you really have such a big problem dealing with ichorid ?

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

[Jay]

I wouldn't run mox diamond.  You have 12 land and miss tons of land drops already.

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

I'm still not convinced 4 chrome mox is the right number.  I ran 4 for a while time and felt like they put too much stress on my opening 7 especially in multiples.  Drawing 2x chrome mox is effectively a mull to 5.  I ran 2 and 5 regular mox for quite a while and was totally happy.  Everyone except for me insisting chrome mox was a mandatory 4-of convinced me to try 3 chrome and 4 regular mox, at which point I do notice both the good and bad points more strongly...  I am still very reluctant to add a 4th when I already am having as much trouble with choosing between imprinting and casting a card as I want to deal with.

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

You look a bit mana heavy, you could probably just scrap 2ish sources for cards. 

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

I highly recommend testing with the 3rd tendrils.

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

Sensei's Top looks kind of terrible.  I tested an Impulse for a while and found it pretty decent, though I ended up needing the slot for bounce.  You might like this card if you want more filtering power.

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


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

[Liam-K]

my list is far from set in stone, but here's what I'm currently working with

land (11):
4 polluted delta
2 bloodstained mire
2 underground sea
2 swamp
1 tolarian academy

accelertion (18):
1 mox jet
1 mox sapphire
1 mox emerald
1 mox ruby
1 black lotus
1 mana crypt
1 lotus petal
1 mana vault
1 sol ring
3 chrome mox
4 dark ritual
2 cabal ritual

assembly (9):
1 demonic tutor
1 vampiric tutor
1 imperial seal
1 demonic consultation
1 mystical tutor
1 ancestral recall
1 brainstorm
1 ponder
1 time walk

disruption (12):
4 duress
4 pact of negation
3 chain of vapor
1 hurkyl's recall

win (10):
4 ad nauseam
1 timetwister
1 necropotence
1 yawgmoth's will
3 tendrils of agony


sideboard (I'm not the best with these)
1 bayou
4 xantid swarm
3 oxidize
3 tormod's crypt
2 pithing needle
2 slaughter pact

[Jay]

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

[Liam-K]

I've had trouble resolving cabal ritual for threshold when it counts (ie to resolve my first attempt).  If I were to add a third I'd probably replace sol ring.

The sideboard bayou has so far been fine to support the green board.  Siding in a 12th land against certain decks is good too.

Walk is probably the 60th card.  It's been decent.  I think I'm going to take it out and put an impulse back in for a bit and see how I feel.

Hurkyl's is key against chalice=1, among other things.

I found the third tendrils increases my nauseam draw usefulness more than it decreases it, plus it makes consult a lot less dangerous and necro a lot better.  I've started to get out of the pitchlong mindset with necro and found playing it appropriately in this deck often involves drawing less cards in order to play around discard by having life left to draw again if you get hit.  You appreciate tendrils being easier to find when you're not drawing 14 cards and having 2 tendrils still in the deck when you're going to pick up 5 cards after the first one got sent to RFG is nice.

[Stormanimagus]

Personally, I'm more sold on Menendian's approach to this deck with 4x Tendrils. There are too many cards out there that shut down a strategy that is strictly going for the "all in one turn wonder" approach. And IF you are running 4x Tendrils then I believe 4x Pact becomes a terrible choice. Hence, here's a list I think will work well (it is almost exactly Menendian's list with a couple alterations):

Ad Nauseam

Land (10):
4 Polluted Delta
4 Underground Sea
1 Bayou
1 Swamp

Artifacts (13):
4 Chrome Mox
1 Black Lotus
1 Lotus Petal
1 Lion’s Eye Diamond
1 Mana Crypt
1 Mana Vault
1 Sol Ring
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Mox Emerald

Instants (19):
4 Ad Nauseam
4 Dark Ritual
4 Cabal Ritual
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Brainstorm
3 Chain Of Vapor

Sorceries (16):
1 Yawgmoth’s Will
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Time Walk
1 Timetwister
4 Duress
4 Thoughtseize
4 Tendrils Of Agony

Enchantments (2):
1 Necropotence
1 Yawgmoth’s Bargain

The 3 Chain of Vapor instead of 4 is for Mystical Tutor. Lemme explain the card choices for this deck as well as the quantity as best I can:

10 land fetch suite — Fetches are great for this deck as we run Cabal Ritual and it gets us to threshold more quickly. My original list ran Academy in the place of the 4th Sea, but I also had a full set of moxen in that list. 13 artifacts is just not enough to warrant Tolarian Academy IMO.

13 Artifact excel — I think the 4x Chrome mox is vital to what makes this deck tick: black mana sources. Not including LED this deck has 17 black mana sources to help fuel the 8 rituals in the deck. Chrome mox is vital for consistency as it is a free black source that ups storm count. The fact that you have to sacrifice some care advantage for it is irrelevant because you are gaining such enormous CA with Ad Nauseam. Trust me guys, this card makes absolute sense for this deck.

4 Ad Nauseam — The deck's focus.
4 Dark Rit — Free mana
4 Cabal Rit — Some people like to run 2 or 3 but this is a mistake. The vintage environment is not as focused on hosing the GY as it has been in the past and cards like Cabal Rit flourish in this environment. You need a full compliment of these to easily cast your ad nauseam.
1 Vamp & 1 Mystical — These are extremely cheap spells for finding a ritual, Will or Ad Nauseam. Mystical might be a mistake as the blue sources in the deck are somewhat limited
1 Brainstorm — Still a great digging engine and combo protector
3 Chain Of Vapor — This is all-purpose bounce that can also easily put you over the top on storm count by bouncing a mox.
4 Duress —
4 Thoughtseize — I like this over Pact despite the life loss because it's proactive and you are not always trying to win on a single tendrils with this deck. This card is not necessarily bad mid-late game.

 

[Jay]

10 land fetch suite — Fetches are great for this deck as we run Cabal Ritual and it gets us to threshold more quickly. My original list ran Academy in the place of the 4th Sea, but I also had a full set of moxen in that list. 13 artifacts is just not enough to warrant Tolarian Academy IMO.

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

4 Cabal Rit — Some people like to run 2 or 3 but this is a mistake. The vintage environment is not as focused on hosing the GY as it has been in the past and cards like Cabal Rit flourish in this environment. You need a full compliment of these to easily cast your ad nauseam.

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

4 Thoughtseize — I like this over Pact despite the life loss because it's proactive and you are not always trying to win on a single tendrils with this deck. This card is not necessarily bad mid-late game. 

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

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

[Jay]

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

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

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

[Nehptis]

Against your typical fish deck, they might have negate and FoW in hand.  Sure, thoughtseize will get rid of one, but you have to wait and get rid of the other.  This gives them time to gain card advantage and shut you down.  With Pact, you play Ad Nauseam, they FoW, then you Pact, then they have no mana on board for negate. 

I agree that Duress + Pact is better for Ad decks then Duress + Seize.  However, I'm not following your example.  Why would the Fish player suddenly have no mana to cast Negate?
You play Ad
Fish plays FOW (with U1 on-line)
You plact Pact
Then they can play Negate.

The better arguement is that if you only have Ad mana then PoN will win you a single counter war.  Duress / Seize will not.  If you have Ad mana + B then Duress + PoN will win you a double counter war.  To achieve the same result without PoN requires and additional B.

[Wagner]

Like spheres of resistance.  You thoughtseize a 9 sphere deck and they have 2 spheres.  You lose, when the Pact player would have won.

Not sure I understand this one. Let's say that they don't have enough mana for the second Sphere, you counter with Pact the only Sphere they play on their turn. Then what? You are supposed to pay for Pact on your turn and cast Ad Nauseam before they cast the second Sphere?

[Jay]

Nehptis:

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

Wagner:

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

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

[Wagner]

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

If I don't know what my opponent is playing, I must assume he doesn't know what I am playing and that he didn't mulligan into a FoW. At that point I have a 60% chance of him not having a FoW up and I would definitely try a turn 1 Nauseam, with or without Pact or Toughtseize.

[Stormanimagus]

Nehptis:

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

Wagner:

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

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

I agree that Pact is a possible option vs. Thoughtseize, but you're right, I'm skeptical because basically:

You play pact to protect Ad Nauseam = You must win the game that turn.

I don't think this deck can always do that. However, I do believe we can get a 10-12 point tendrils and I believe that can fuel another ad nauseam later that will win you the game. Because control decks and, well, blue decks in general, have lost Brainstorm, Merchant Scroll and Gush, I don't think there's as big a problem with yiedling ridiculous CA in the meantime to those decks. I still believe FoW is a problem and countermagic in general and I think cards like Duress and Thoughtseize are a ton better than pact on that front as they enable you to see your opponent's hand. When you have a powerful combo to win with it has always been an extraordinary help to see the opponent's hand and strategy early in the game/match. Pact seems more aggressive yes, but the game is not as aggressive as it was with Hulk-Flash around.

As for Cabal Ritual, here are my thoughts. You NEED black mana for this deck to function properly. Even +1 is fine. I would run 4 Cabal Ritual for a similar reason to running 4 chrome mox: Black mana. Now I realize the two cards are not really comparable. Chrome mox is a FREE black source and Cabal Ritual is not, but I like the flexibility of Cabal Ritual as a +1 shot in the arm to put me to the mana I might need for Necro or Duress + Dem. Tutor OR to work as a single card to enable Ad Nauseam. Sure, you can say that threshold is hard to acheive without Ad Nauseam, but, as I said before, this deck is NOT always trying to win off the first Ad Nauseam. Being able to cast Ad Nauseam off a single ritual and almost certainly win after resolution off a chrome mox or two seems pretty rockin to me.

Anyway, those are my thoughts for now.
I'll still have to consider pact however, but then I think the deck needs to be a bit more aggressive and combo-based, and would probably run less Tendrils and less Cabal Rituals.

[Liam-K]

If you resolve AdN with more than 15 life, you don't have any higher chance of fizzle than you did with any fast storm deck of yor.  You assume it will happen and if it doesn't it's part of the cost of playing a deck that makes about a quarter of everyone else's deck do absolutely nothing.

Having pact in the deck doesn't mean you lose to the trigger every time adn doesn't work out, either.  It's not hard to play a chrome mox for blue mana and keep a ritual in your hand to pay the trigger next turn.  And you obv don't have a pact or need to use it every attempt.

In my experience against current fish lists, every time I pass them the turn they are going to put something into play that makes it more work for me to win.  They are tempo decks and they do their job well.  The more turns they buy with permanents the more fow's they draw and the more life you can no longer spend on Naus.  I feel like your strategy should be to try to win at the earliest opportunity, because they're trying to force you to do exactly the opposite and waiting plays into their hands.  Case in point: the other day I was testing against fish and had first turn Nauseam with B floating; my hand contained Consult, another Naus, and enough mana to cast the second Naus next turn.  My first Naus got forced and, after considering my options, I decided to let it get countered and try again next turn, conserving gas, rather than Consult for Pact and go all in.  I passed and got strip mined, after which I always needed just 1 more turn to assemble my hand until I died.

[Jay]

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

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

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

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

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

ICBM additions:

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

SB:

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

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

If I don't know what my opponent is playing, I must assume he doesn't know what I am playing and that he didn't mulligan into a FoW. At that point I have a 60% chance of him not having a FoW up and I would definitely try a turn 1 Nauseam, with or without Pact or Toughtseize.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

[Duncan]

If you want to run both Swarm and be able to kill 2 toughness dudes, why not just run Massacre? Against Fish you just attack with Swarm and then cast Massacre to remove their Canonist/MMage/Cursecatcher.

[Jay]

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

[LennonMarx]

Regarding Pryoclasm/Massacre/Slaughter Pact, I think the latter is a pretty good idea. It doesn't do a ton of damage to you off Ad Nauseam and if you need to kill multiple things, aren't you way way behind? I've not tested the deck myself (I'd like to but I haven't yet had time) but if you need to kill say, a Cannonist, a Meddling Mage, and an Aven Mind-Sensor to go off, or even two of the three, aren't you already basically dead? 

[Webster]

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

Even if I had massacre in my SB, I doubt I would bring it in against BUG fish as a 'not-even-damnation-because-goyf-ISSSSSSSSS'. They don't run utility men like UW fish does; and if you're paying FOUR mana to kill cursecatchers, then I really have no idea what you're trying to do.

The only men in BUG fish that you need removal for is cursecatcher, and you already play _plenty_ of that in the MD.

[Jay]

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

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

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

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

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

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

[The_spooky_kid]

sensei's divining top seems subpar.  Its too mana intensive, and slow for this deck.  if you were going to cut anything cut that.

[korangar]

sensei's divining top seems subpar.  Its too mana intensive, and slow for this deck.  if you were going to cut anything cut that.

I'll rather cut a seize than SDT. Top works wonders with topdeck tutots (Vampiric, Mystical and Imperial). Nine disruption slots are enough for this deck.

[Jay]

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

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

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

[Purple Hat]

I keep meaning to test this but I still haven't gotten around to it since business school applications keep kicking my ass.  Has anyone tried mind twist in this deck?  with all the fast mana you can realistically fire of a twist for 4+ on turn 1.  Losing 4 random cards out of an opening hand, especially without brainstorm can really do some damage to pretty much anything.  Hitting mana sources can just take someone out of the game all together.

[Liam-K]

my hand could be nauseam, mind twist, lotus, ritual, ritual, ritual, ritual and I would still rather mind twist were duress or pact

[Purple Hat]

sure, but your hand could also be mind twist, ritual, land, crypt, demonic, chain, cabal rit.  assuming your hand has both nauseam and mind twist seems silly since you'd obviously rather just win the game now.  if you have 4 rituals in hand you can't cast mind twist and ad nauseam because you'll need a way to ramp your black back up.  besides.  we're talking about 9th and 10th disruption spells.  I'm not convinced that something that is occasionally a massive bomb isn't better than thoughtsieze

[Jay]

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

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