[Free Article] Oath vs Tezzeret: Vintage Testing

[voltron00x]

In my SCG article this week, I provide some detailed notes from an eight-game testing session of Double Dragon Oath vs Tezzeret.  Decklists for both decks are provided, and the games are played alternating play/draw and pre-sideboard.  From my perspective, these were entertaining and highly interactive (albeit mostly short and brutal) games that are typical of Vintage.  I'm also relatively certain that I want to cut Scroll Rack from Oath.  On the Tezzeret side, Night's Whisper wasn't much of a factor, and I feel like Thoughtcast is probably a better call.

What changes to the decks would you suggest based on these games?  Where were horrendous misplays made, or strategic decisions that seem sub-optimal?  Does this type of detailed playtesting recap offer any value to the Vintage community, and if so, what match-up or match-ups would you like to see in the future? 

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/17775_The_Long_Winding_Road_Oath_versus_Tezzeret_Vintage_Testing.html

[Elfrago]

In the first game the player with Ancestral passed the turn with 8 cards in hand. I suppose Ancestral was played during the opponent upkeep. 

In the last game IMHO the Oath player should have played Misdirection on Thoughtseize, even if the opponent was empty-handed. This way he could protect his turn 2 oath wich is far better than turn 2 impulse.
Also, I found a little strange not playing 'Seize before Vault for the Tezz player.

I also noticed that you never never never lead with duress if you have something else to do on turn 1 play. Protecting your bomb isn't worth spending turn 1 duressing? I'd like to ear your thoughts on this.

Oh, btw, good article .

[shadow00]

I also would like to know how it worked out for you only playing 2 drains instead of the full 4?

[voltron00x]

In the first game the player with Ancestral passed the turn with 8 cards in hand. I suppose Ancestral was played during the opponent upkeep. 

In the last game IMHO the Oath player should have played Misdirection on Thoughtseize, even if the opponent was empty-handed. This way he could protect his turn 2 oath wich is far better than turn 2 impulse.
Also, I found a little strange not playing 'Seize before Vault for the Tezz player.

I also noticed that you never never never lead with duress if you have something else to do on turn 1 play. Protecting your bomb isn't worth spending turn 1 duressing? I'd like to ear your thoughts on this.

Oh, btw, good article .

In G1, that was a main-phase Ancestral Recall.  When I wrote up the recap, I just missed writing that Oath played the Mox Ruby and Pearl.

Someone made the some point re: the Misdirection in G8, and that is definitely the correct play.  I was playing Tezz in these games, and I felt like leading with the Vault was correct.  My instinct is that with my hand being so low in cards, my opponent would not FoW the Vault, preferring to save it for whatever I used to try and find Key or Tezz.  That said, there's no reason not to MisD the TS to protect the Oath. 

Re: T1 Duress/TS, which deck are you referring to, or just in general?  This was an intersting question, so I went back and took a look...

G1, I assume Oath wanted to resolve Ancestral with FoW back-up rather than play Duress or TS.  If the Ancestral resolves, he's way ahead.  If it gets Forced and I FoW back, he's still ahead.

G2 as Tezz, playing the Recall on his upkeep is a way of protecting my "bomb" in a way, since IMO that's the best card in my hand.  Time Vault can always be put back into play with Yawg Will.

G3, Oath does have the choice of Orchard, Duress, pass turn.  However, I'd probably make the same play and just "go for it", seeing as there were multiple Impulses involved.  Some of this might've been a read - but the other question involved with Tezz is actually the difficulty in "protecting" Oath.  If you duress and see FoW and a Duress/TS, you're losing the Oath no matter what. 

G4, I lead with Duress.

G5, Oath leads with Thoughtseize.  However, there is a misplay here.  Oath should've played its land, then jet, then TS.  That way if it gets Misdirected, Oath can Recall in response.  Granted, this Tezz list has no Misdirection, but many do.  Better to get in the right habit, assuming you prefer this line of play (since it gives you more options to choose a card to discard to your own TS).

G6, Tezzeret is on the play w/out TS or Duress.  Oath also has neither.

G7, Oath has a T1 Oath with FoW back-up.

G8, Tezz has no TS/Duress.

[voltron00x]

I also would like to know how it worked out for you only playing 2 drains instead of the full 4?

I spent a lot of time testing with Mastriano's Philly Open 3 list, which played no Drains at all (and had Mystic Remora).  With Shops making a comeback, that seems to be incorrect for the current meta.  2 Drains is certainly enough against Oath, but I'm not sure if it's the right number to play against a larger field with heavy shop representation.  I'd also probably want to change the Night's Whispers to Thoughtcasts and try to find something else to cut for the 3rd Mana Drain... but I like having Repeal.  I actually ran two in an older list.  It gives you an easy out to your own Bob once you get Vault/Key in place, and has plenty of other applications. 

[Gekoratel]

If you're worried about Shops, and rightfully so in our meta, do you think that Thoughtcast is the way to go since you need to run 4 Seat of Synod to support the card.  Or do you have a list that is not running Seat but still has Thougthcast.

[voltron00x]

If you're worried about Shops, and rightfully so in our meta, do you think that Thoughtcast is the way to go since you need to run 4 Seat of Synod to support the card.  Or do you have a list that is not running Seat but still has Thougthcast.

I'd have to test a lot more to say anything definitive, but TC seems to be posting good results here and abroad over the first batch of large tournaments with TFK restricted.  Once you hit three artifacts, TC is just a better Night's Whisper, so you might be able to get by with 3 Seats, or less for all I know.  I suppose it depends if you run the full dedicated play-set and really want to make sure it costs U.  I'm not really the right person to address this, but if you have SCG premium, Menendian wrote a full-on Tezz analysis that went up today (with the caveat that it was written prior to results such as the ICBM tournaments - you can find some of those decklists up already on these forums).

[BruiZar]

All in all a good report. I really wonder why you played time vault first and followed with thoughtseize. The list runs 4 Force of Wills and 1 Misdirection so even though in hindsight it was the correct play, I think it was actually a misplay. You still would have won by playing yawgmoth's will from the yard had it been misdirected, so in the end it wasn't too relevant I guess.

[voltron00x]

All in all a good report. I really wonder why you played time vault first and followed with thoughtseize. The list runs 4 Force of Wills and 1 Misdirection so even though in hindsight it was the correct play, I think it was actually a misplay. You still would have won by playing yawgmoth's will from the yard had it been misdirected, so in the end it wasn't too relevant I guess.

Well, my feeling at the time was this:  if I follow the line of play I took, it would end up with me playing 5 cards and having only two left in hand.  Time Vault, on its own, does absolutely nothing.  If I play it out, now that I'm down to 1 card, and didn't lead with TS, my opponent is probably going to feel relatively safe.  If my last card is another threat (a tutor, draw spell, key, tezz, will, etc) and he has FoW, he can just counter that.  If my last card is something like a Force of Will, it isn't active because I only have one card, and even if I draw another blue spell the next turn, I'm just shipping back with just a Vault in play.  Therefore I'm not sure that playing Force of Will on the Time Vault is the right play, even if he has it.  I also thought he might think that I was baiting out the counter with the Vault and sandbagging something truly obnoxious like Will or Recall.  This was actually my intention to some extent.  My worst fear is that he's holding Orchard, Oath, and a Mox, and FoW as back-up.  How does this hand get around that?  I would need him to Force of Will something so I can resolve the Thoughtseize.

That said, this game got sloppy.  He should've probably played Misdirection on the TS to protect Oath.  In the end, this wouldn't have helped, since I ripped Duress off the top and he would've then proceeded to draw another Oath, but its still probably the right play.  Oath then drawing into Oath was funny, but Tezz trumped that by ripping the Ancestral and going totally OMG-bonkers-berserk from there.

[pierce]

2 drains is not optimal. you ran nat lams legacy in that same list. given that they cost rougly the same, can you provide a single matchup where lat nams legacy is better than drain?

yes, i realize it puts cards back in your deck.

[voltron00x]

2 drains is not optimal. you ran nat lams legacy in that same list. given that they cost rougly the same, can you provide a single matchup where lat nams legacy is better than drain?

yes, i realize it puts cards back in your deck.

Um, what?

Oath ran Lat-Nam's Legacy, and Tezz ran Mana Drain.  They aren't in the same deck, so I have no idea what you're really asking.

If you're suggesting that Oath should run Mana Drain over Legacy, I disagree.  Oath needs some minimal way of shuffling back cards.

If you're asking why Tezzeret runs Legacy over a 3rd Mana Drain, the question is irrelevant as Tezz doesn't have Legacy in the deck.

[Sean Ryan]

Have you tried playing OAth in a Tezzeret shell?  It just seems more powerful and superior in this emerging metagame than either straight OAth or Tezz.