Sum of its parts: Optimal Tezzeret

[Grand Inquisitor]

Tezzeret control has been in the metagame for over a year now.  Its consistent performance in the face of shifting competitors and restrictions is reminiscent of other great combo-control decks.  Although there are a number of competitive strategies, I don’t believe there is a better deck you can take to a diverse metagame at this point in time. 

While I’ve commented in a number of related threads, I’ve never put together my opinions on this archetype in a comprehensive way.

Please note that I’m just putting together my judgments here.  I’m not claiming originality, as much of the subsequent discussion will show that most of my findings are empirical.  I looked at what good players and deck builders did and incorporated it.

In that spirit, I’d like to acknowledge the key decklists that served as the basis for the list:

Luis Scott Vargas list from U.S. Nationals Side Event
http://www.morphling.de/printview.php?c=1104&d=1

Jimmy McCarthy and Mike Solymossy lists from Chicago
http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1095

In a lot of ways there were other lists that were equally influential, if only to show what didn’t work.  While this may seem like a backhanded compliment, these contributions are critical.  For example it took seeing an optimized impulse list (like Owen Turtenwald’s from Chicago) to see why Dark Confidant was superior for my list.  As I go through each card I’ll try to explain how these evaluations occurred.

The reason why I chose the title I did is because as the core of blue based combo control becomes more and more dependent on the restricted list, it becomes more and more about cards that search or tutor (as opposed to draw).  The consequence of this is that single cards instead of 2, 3 and 4 ofs are more desirable and are more impactful.  Magic is already a complicated game and trying to make sense of cards and how they’ll play is the most important skill in making these choices.  The list below is the byproduct of careful observations about these emergent characteristics.

The breakthrough I had in constructing this list came after piling over list after list of other Tezzeret variants, lots of playtesting, and finally, some tournament experience at the GenCon prelim.  The last piece was finding a sideboard configuration that was fully integrated with the abilities of the maindeck.  Thankfully this discovery occurred at 5am the morning before the Type 1 Championship.  That I misplayed my way out of the event and that my teammate came in 9th on breakers was certainly disappointing.  However, seeing Hiromichi’s list and especially the performance of the archetype since is more than enough vindication.


Here’s how the deck came together:

1) Testing and observation of T8’s led to an assumption that optimizing time vault was the strongest strategy

2) With time vault as the pivot of a list, the next question is “how aggressive should the list be?”  Our team had a transmute and grim monolith based list that was blazing fast and rolled most of the conventional Tezzeret lists.  The problem was that it was much weaker against two common cards: null rod and mystic remora.  The realization that turned our thinking was that time vault, the most broken combo in magic history actually allowed you to slow down and take a more controlling role.

3) Now with the idea of being more control and less combo, the priority was on rounding out the key components of a control list:
- draw engine
- answer suite
- mana base

Draw Engine

I’ve long favored playing intuition/AK.  When I saw Dark Confidant lists everywhere, it seemed a natural answer to have a more powerful draw engine and a tutor that found answers to the metagame’s most popular draw, Dark Confidant (darkblast) and win condition, time vault (ancient grudge).  It didn’t work like I thought.  The four color mana base gave the deck too much exposure against fish and stax.  To fit the whole draw engine you also needed to cut on other broken cards or mana (which exacerbated the first problem).  Not only this, it didn’t even succeed at what it was supposed to: it wasn’t better in the control matchup.  With duress and the tempo gained from having a subsequently free draw engine the Confidant lists could actually go toe-to-toe with intuition.  Trying to intuition for darkblast was a loser both in terms of card advantage and tempo.

The next idea was to try out the singular draw engine (restricted list, skeletal scrying, jace, etc).  There was no unity to the deck.  The cards did their job, but you weren’t able to plan for them and they weren’t powerful to stand on their own.  Additionally, like intuition, they didn’t buy you any EV for non-control, non-combo matchups.

Impulse was the last thing I tried before Dark Confidant.  It was pretty good.  In some future metagame, I can certainly see using this as the supplement for the restricted list in a control shell.  However, it wasn’t broken.  Casting it didn’t turn the tide of games.  Worse, sometimes you’d go into a black hole of impulsing for impulses and not find the cards you want or gain any card advantage.  It was a reasonably solid card, but it didn’t make the deck better.

I usually don’t like Dark Confidant.  It’s slow.  It’s vulnerable.  As a midgame topdeck it reads: “B1, next turn draw the top card of your deck”.  I was making two mistakes.  First, I was used to looking at it through the lens of the previous metagame.  In a TFK world, there are simply better options and the control mirrors are faster.  Second, I wasn’t looking at the card slot savings that this engine offered.  What made it click was looking at the expected GenCon meta, looking at the 75 cards available and seeing how the sideboard plan worked out.

Actually playing with the card led me to understand much better how much is actually going on with the card.  First, it automatically contributes a ~15% boost to your workshop and fish matchups.  Second, if dropped early enough it’s plenty strong in the control and combo matchups.  Third, in those matchups you’re not committed to more mana for your draw engine; there are tremendous long term tempo gains.  Lastly, it’s a win condition.

This last item can’t be undervalued.  Life is a precious resource in the mirror and for most ritual lists.  It also hedges against stuff like Jester’s Cap/Sadistic Sacrament.  For the recent Philly Open event we were all ready to roll out a transformational sideboard that used Sacrament against Oath, Tez and Ritual decks.  The weird thing was, Sacrament, while great against Oath, didn’t do anything against Tez.  As a Tez player you could lose your robot, time vault and Yawgmoth’s Will and use the card and tempo advantage the other player sacrificed to sacrament to simply out-advantage them and beat down with Confidant.

The sum of these things make for a surprisingly powerful card.


Answer Suite

The printing of spell pierce complicates this section.  However, at the time, it became obvious that duress and thoughtseize were the best option to supplement mana drain and force of will.  The reasons are uncomplicated.  They’re cheap, on-color, hit most of the crucial spells in the game and allow you to dictate the role.  Relatedly, in a large, mostly unknown metagame like GenCon (or the Philly Open), these allow you to much better steer your future plays.  There were contenders that didn't work out.  Spell Snare while good, was just too narrow and hits neither Ancestral Recall nor Yawgmoth's Will.  Counterbalance was too slow and inconsistent.  Trinket Mage complicated the overall design and required playing weaker cards.  Misdirection wasn't sustainable in multiples.  Negate, etc didn't fit the curve.  All of them are decent choices, but none as strong as duress/thoughtseize.

Filling out the rest of the answer suite brings us to a point where we can start talking about the list in total, slot by slot.

So far we have:

23 mana – looking at all of the Tezzeret variants from the restriction to GenCon there’s an obvious pattern that between 23 and 25 mana is necessary to make the deck work.  I’m just starting, so we err on the low side.

3 Dark Confidant – running two makes it inconsistent enough to be pointless, four may be too many as they’re not particularly good in multiples and they’re lousy topdecks.  This seems to be the sweet spot.

4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain – I actually started with only three mana drains.  It became more and more obvious that the format is slow enough so that this card remains very powerful (this is a pre-Zendikar evaluation, hold on for more)

2 Duress
1 Thoughtseize – I could see reversing these counts.  I’m risk averse and didn’t want to be in a late-game situation where Confidant has brought me to a point where I can’t use these.

Let’s talk about the restricted list.  There are a few cards that will go into every combo-control list I ever play:

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth’s Will

If you really have issues with any of these cards, please rethink your interest in vintage.

However, I’m sure there are cards that people would expect on that list that are missing.  Let’s procede:

Thirst For Knowledge – this is a very powerful card, but at three mana and sometimes no card advantage, it’s certainly up for consideration versus other slots.  It ends up making the cut, but mostly because of its strength in the midgame when you’ve drawn chaff and because it makes Merchant Scroll and Gifts Ungiven better.

Tinker – I know, how could you not like Tinker?  Actually, it’s one of my least favorite ‘untouchable’ cards.  It’s slow at three mana, it’s a sorcery and it costs you an artifact.  These are all serious liabilities in the control and combo matchups.  Time Vault makes this card much better, but its value is still largely dependent on the impact of getting a large robot into play.  Right now I think this value is very low.  This elaboration requires addressing the robot slot as well.

When I hear people say Inkwell Leviathan or Darksteel Colossus or Sphinx of the Steel Wind are good in matchup X, where X is not fish, I immediately tune it out.  While the Tinker>robot play is acceptable in the Stax matchup (and admittedly good in the rare workshop aggro matchup), it is terrible against dredge, oath, ritual combo and certainly tezzeret.  If you’re playing this list and losing to Tinker>robot, you’re either unlucky or you’re doing it wrong.  If I could find the sideboard space, I’d move both Tinker and the robot out of the maindeck.

Which robot?  Easy: Sphinx of the Steel Wind.  Based almost exclusively on the rationale above, Sphinx is the obvious best choice.  Game one it’s innocuous and pitches to Force of Will in those non-fish matchups.  Against Fish it is the best card to play hands down.  It’s susceptibility to Sower of Temptation and Echoing Truth is completely offset by its ability to allow you to win at a very low life level.  It’ll even save you from your own Dark Confidant or Mana Crypt while taking infinite turns sometimes.

There are corner cases where Darksteel Colossus or Sundering Titan can kill faster or be more disruptive in matchups where Tinker is typically bad, but these are low-probability events.  The pitchability of Inkwell and Sphinx are of paramount importance now that Thirst for Knowledge is restricted.  Given Sphinx’s advantage in the matchup where it is most relevant seals the deal in its favor.

1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key – Thank you Mike Solymossy for showing me the error of my ways.  Before I truly understood the power of Time Vault, I considered Voltaic Key as superfluous to a tightly built Tezzeret list.  I was utterly wrong.  This card does cute things like combo with Sensei’s Divining Top and fix artifact mana.  However, it is very powerful at opening up lines of play that Tezzeret (the card) is too slow for.  For me, the combo is not Tezzeret > Time Vault, it is Time Vault + Voltaic Key.

Tezzeret the Seeker – I’ve played many Tezzeret (the deck) lists where I failed to include this card.  At five mana, sometimes it’s just too clunky (relative to its vulnerability) even though it can win the game.  Unless the metagame changes, however, I’ve come around to this being a very good addition to the deck.  If nothing else, it offers an additional win condition slot against control/combo/oath and allows the siding out of Tinker + robot, making way for better sideboard cards.  It also steals games.  Along with the nice things it does with Gifts Ungiven or in the late game as a one-card win condition, there will be games where you can vampiric for this or Black Lotus or Tolarian Academy and just push it through in the early turns.  It also enables sideboard options with stuff like Pithing Needle, Tormod’s Crypt and Trinisphere if the situation lends itself to that.

1 Sensei’s Divining Top – Using Dark Confidant as a draw engine requires this card.  When a quick Vault/Key combo is not available you’re often taking on a very controlling role.  To effectively leverage Confidant into the long game, you need this in the deck.  In addition to supplementing the draw engine, Sensei’s Top is a reasonably powered card in that it ensures land drops, hides powerful cards from duress and combos with Key, bounce spells and tutors.  There are a myriad of tricks with this card that involve stacking either the draw effect or the look effect in combination with other responses.  Going into details about this would require its own small primer.  In lieu of that, I’ll just encourage people to treat this card with the same care that Brainstorm has earned; there’s a lot of options wrapped into this 1cc spell.

1 Rebuild – While I maintain the opinion that Tinker>robot is weak in a lot of matches, this doesn’t mean you should ignore it.  You should be able to race this threat most of the time.  However, there will be situations where you have significant advantage, but not enough tutors, etc to set up the combo.  In these cases you’ll want to fetch out Rebuild.  More often, though, this card will be solid game 1 against Null Rod or Workshop decks, or buy you a crucial turn against an opposing Vault/Key.  It can often help ramp mana or get an extra card from Sensei’s Top.  As it cycles, this card exemplifies one of the chief philosophies of my deckbuilding approach: whenever possible have no dead cards.

1 Fire/Ice – Another mini breakthrough was including Fire/Ice in the final list before GenCon.  Darkblast, while tempting, always ran the risk of missing its mark.  Fire/Ice is scroll-able, cycles, and answers some of the key threats to the deck.  It also answers Tezzeret itself, and can take out an unexpecting opponent at low life.

Mana Base

Earlier I mentioned the sweet spot for a mana count seemed to be between 23 and 25.  I always felt 25 to be too high for previous Tezzeret lists and 23 seems untenable in a metagame with any concentration of null rod or workshops.  Going with 24 has resulted in the most consistent hands, the best results against decks that pressure the manabase and allows the right configuration to support three colors.  It would probably work fine to run 23 (and against Drains/Oath/Combo I routinely side down to 22-23 sources postboard), but 24 has the right ‘feel’.  I’d be happy if the statistically savvy out there have mathematical arguments to speak to this intuition.

8 Black Lotus, Sol Ring, Mana Crypt, Moxen
1 Tolarian Academy

These accelerators are obvious inclusions which leaves fifteen spots left to support colors, have sufficient basics, and the fetches to find them.  I’ve settled on the following counts:

2 Islands
1 Snow-Covered Island
6 blue fetches

Having 9 cards to access a basic island is sufficient to combat wasteland.  With six slots left, I split evenly between:

3 Underground Sea
3 Volcanic Island

This is what I’ve been running the last few months.  To be honest, there’s wiggle room to switch a basic or Volcanic Island out for a 4th Underground Sea depending on the expected metagame and sideboard, but for now this has been working.

This leaves the list at:

1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key
1 Tezzeret the Seeker
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain
2 Duress
1 Thoughtseize
1 Rebuild
1 Fire/Ice

3 Dark Confidant
1 Sensei’s Divining Top

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Tinker
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth’s Will

8 Solomoxcrypt
6 Blue Fetches
3 Underground Sea
3 Volcanic Island
2 Island
1 Snow-covered Island
1 Tolarian Academy

= 55 cards

This, in my estimation, is how you build Tezzeret Control.

The remaining cards are metagame considerations and should be tweaked according to the sideboard, but these 55 cards I don’t expect to change for the foreseeable future.

Rounding out the list and sideboard

At GenCon I went with these five:

1 Echoing Truth
1 Misdirection
1 Ponder
1 Fire/Ice (2nd)
1 Mystic Remora

Echoing Truth – this card is usually a staple for me.  It’s incredibly flexible and is the one ‘utility’ card that I feel is strong enough to not need to cycle.  Still, in the most recent event I played in, I decided to cut it.  My rationale was that it doesn’t answer Oath, it’s mediocre in the mirror and it doesn’t do enough against Stax.  I was also hedging that my sideboard would be enough to contain the decks that Echoing Truth would be good against.  While I’d be supportive of people running this card, I’ve come to view it as a crutch for me.  The reality is that I don’t need to be able to answer any permanent to win games and other options are more flexible.

Misdirection – this is another fine card that I cut in the Philly Open event.  At the time of GenCon I would have included this as a near auto-include.  It’s great in the mirror and helps against aggressive decks.  The tricks with Ancestral Recall steal games all the time.  Post-Zendikar, however, I feel this is too risky.  It’s rare that people throw out an unprotected Ancestral Recall (especially in the early game).  Spell Pierce makes this gamble even worse.

Ponder – this card is really underwhelming if you can’t use it in multiples to cheat your mana count down.  That being said, it is solid turn one for setting up your hand, it shuffles for Sensei’s Divining Top and it’s blue.  More than anything this card excels at making your deck 59 cards.

Fire/Ice – Noble Hierarch based fish was being talked up a lot during GenCon and Dark Confidant was being played in Fish, Tezzeret and Stax.

Mystic Remora – This was probably a mistake, but this was my 60th card at GenCon.  It could have easily been other things.


Sideboard

There’s no comprehensive way to do this.  I sought to have coverage against a wide open GenCon metagame and to patch weaknesses in the maindeck.  I also sought to construct both the maindeck and sideboard in a way that maximizes the control and combo matches in game 1 while having stronger board options for Null Rod, Workshop and Dredge decks.

The strategy here being that ritual combo (and belcher) and most of all Tezzeret are capable of stealing games from you with broken hands at a much higher rate than either null rod or workshop strategies.  I also expected a larger portion of the field to be the former group, cards that can be maindecked against them have more overlap and the better players usually play these strategies.  There’s lots of room for argument on these points, but this is what I stick by.

The sideboard I settled on at GenCon:

4 Leyline of the Void
3 Ingot Chewer
2 Mystic Remora
1 Pyroclasm
1 Darkblast
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Pyroblast
1 Pithing Needle
1 Yixlid Jailer

My philosophy on sideboarding is to be flexible.  There are patterns I keep depending on certain matchups, but I try to rethink my sideboarding every game of every matchup.  I do this by shuffling the sideboard in and taking out what I feel are the weakest fifteen cards.  The nature of Vintage is that small changes in decklists can radically shift the way matchups play and what cards are effective.

However, as a general guide, here are some examples:

Tezzeret mirror:
-1 Echoing Truth
-1 Island
-1 Tinker
-1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

+1 Red Elemental Blast
+1 Pyroblast
+2 Mystic Remora

Stax:
-2 Duress
-1 Thoughtseize
-1 Gifts Ungiven
-1 Misdirection
-1 Mystic Remora
-1 Tinker
-1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind
-1 Fire/Ice


+4 Leyline of the Void
+3 Ingot Chewer
+1 Darkblast
+1 Pithing Needle

Fish:
-2 Duress
-1 Thoughtseize
-1 Mystic Remora
-1 Gifts Ungiven
-1 Misdirection
-1 Sensei’s Divining Top

+3 Ingot Chewer
+1 Pyroblast
+1 Red Elemental Blast
+1 Pyroclasm
+1 Darkblast

In addition to knowing why certain cards made the list, it's important to understand why certain cards go missing.  The following were considered and found lacking:

Fact or Fiction - this card is extemely powerful and solid in the matchups I value most.  However, I routinely found that I didn't get my return on investment when I sink four mana into this.  A large part of this is that a good player will make splits that work largely to your disadvantage (usually based on cards they have that you don't know about).  Additionally, with Tezzeret and Gifts Ungiven already occupying the high end of the curve, I found FoF unneeded.  In games where I had acceleration early enough to make FoF relevant, I usually win with the cards that replace it.  This being said, I perfectly understand people who consider this an auto-include.

Mystical Tutor - I find this card hugely overrated.  Then again, I may be guilty of overvaluing card parity.  Still, I hate wasting a draw step regardless of the card this is getting.  Part of this probably has to do with my distaste for Tinker, but much of it has to do with an understanding I've developed.  Certainly Ancestral Recall is important to the early game and one of the most consistent ways to achieve an advantage that will lead to victory.  However, I've learned that there are important circumstances where allowing Ancestral Recall to resolve is the right play.  These occasions are increased when the net effect of the play delivers one less card of advantage.

Imperial Seal - While powerful, this card is comprable to Mystical Tutor in that sometimes you never recover the card advantage.  This has the added shortcoming of being sorcery speed which severely limits your responsiveness.  Both of these are terrible topdecks.

Mana Vault - This card is pretty powerful.  It makes early Gifts and Tezzeret victories that much more likely.  However, the weakness against null rod and the inability to equalize the mana requirements without taking up another slot convinced me to drop it.

It's worth noting that the advent of Spell Pierce makes all of these cards riskier and therefore less powerful.

Post Zendikar

The new cards from Zendikar force a revisiting of certain logic.  In general Oath is much more of a metagame force, Dredge is stronger and early game gambits are more risky.

five residual slots:

1 Thoughtseize
1 Repeal
1 Ponder
1 Sensei’s Divining Top (2nd)
1 Annul

Thoughtseize – This replaces misdirection in response to Spell Pierce and also serves to better combat Oath of Druids.

Repeal – This serves in the Echoing Truth slot.  It’s not as effective against permanent based disruption and not as much of a catch-all.  However, it’s better at responding to opposing Dark Confidants or Oath of Druids.  It’s also never dead and does tricks with Sensei’s Top.

Ponder – see above.

Sensei’s Divining Top – I wanted more early game control and I wanted to make sure Confidant didn’t cost me any games.

Annul – This was entirely based on expectations of the Philly Open metagame.  Oath has been gaining steam and the area is known for its 5c Stax players.  This also bought me an additional slot in the sideboard.


I encourage people to take my sideboard from the Philly Open with a grain of salt.  Dead/Gone was awful and the whole list was based on a risk that Dredge wasn't present in big numbers.  That hedge did pay dividends in swiss, but I was very lucky to get the placement in the top8 that I did, not facing Dredge until the finals.  I tweak my sideboard every time I play, but if I had to play the Philly Open again I'd run this:

4 Leyline of the Void
3 Ingot Chewer
1 Mystic Remora
1 Red Elemental Blast
1 Annul
1 Massacre
1 Pyroclasm
1 Greater Gargadon
1 Yixlid Jailer
1 Pithing Needle


I wasn't able to dedicate time to make this an exhaustive account, but hopefully this will stir some discussion on a deck that is the most commonly played, but not as often discussed.

[Yare]

This is an outstanding post. Thanks for sharing your insights.

I find it really interesting that you cut Mystical Tutor, as this card gets so many different things and even pitches to Force (and Misdirection, if you run it). Your rationale is not completely unpersuasive, however. I may have to look into this.

[M.Solymossy]

I appreciate the multiple name drops, Mr. Houdlette.  No Soly love on the Sphinx?  OH come on!


Do you still feel that Dark Confidant is the best choice with Oath of Druids picking up so much steam?  You linked my ICBM Open list so I don't have to do that, and it proves I love me some Dark Bob-fidants, but I have felt that with Vroman's Oath build being so popular, it's too risky to have your best engine enable theirs.   

Jimmy McCarthy played this in Milwaukee this weekend: 
4 Force of Will
3 Mana Drain
3 Thoughtseize
2 Spell Pierce
1 Mindbreak Trap
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Fact or Fiction
1 Tinker
1 Time Walk
1 Inkwell Leviathan
1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key
1 Tezzeret the Seeker
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Ponder
1 Skeletal Scrying
1 Yawgmoths Will
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Repeal
1 Hurkyl's Recall
1 Fire/Ice
1 Darkblast
1 Thirst for Knowledge
2 Island
1 Snow-Covered Island
6 Blue Fetchland
3 Underground Sea
2 Volcanic Island
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Tolarian Academy
5 Moxen
1 Black Lotus
1 Sol Ring
1 Mana Vault


Our sideboard didn't have anything for dredge.  If I hadn't stupidly convinced Jimmy to cut the Dredge Hate, I think we would have split the finals, instead of taking 2nd and 4th (Both losing to the one said dredge player).

Maybe I'm fearing oath a little too much, but we've been having 14-16 person tournaments and the last two have had at least 3 if not 4 Oath decks.

[heiner]

good post GI, however, I think that it is already outdated in some parts.

Confidant was by far the most powerfull engine some month ago but its power is starting to fade. The problem is that it is so easy to attack and most decs are packing uncounterable hate with darkblast or at lest Fire/Ice.

Repeal/Top is an excellent draw engine (draw 2 for 3 mana) and does a lot of other things so after a lot of testing my engine of choice really is
3xConfidant (maybe 2x)
2xSensei
3xRepeal

Answer suite:
First of all I am not a big friend of going above 10 cards (FoW, Drain, +2x) because there are situations where they are bad topdecs as you need to win or find a solution now!
REB vs. Duress vs. Spell Snare: I really think its a meta decission. You cannot say duress is better because Duress is as dead against fish as REB is vs. stax. I really see no difference there. I currently play 1 REB and 1 Duress if combo continues to decline I would even switch the duress for a second REB. REB is really good against fish and thats why it makes the cut for me right now.  

Wincon:
I really thought that we all have agreed that Tezzeret sucks and that Storm is the pristine wincondition.

Mystical:
I do not aggre with cutting mystical. It is an excellent draw engine. (2 mana for 2 cards) is incredible versatile and fetches Yawg Will and the other combo piece (tinker). There are plenty of matches where you do not care AT ALL about card parity. There aren't only control mirrors in this world! (where you can still side it out)

[jester3397]

Great read, this has been very helpful on the build I'm working on.

Just a clarification, isn't the total 54.

1 Time Vault
1 Voltaic Key
1 Tezzeret the Seeker
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind

4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain
2 Duress
1 Thoughtseize
1 Rebuild
1 Fire/Ice

3 Dark Confidant
1 Sensei’s Divining Top

1 Ancestral Recall
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Tinker
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth’s Will

8 Solomoxcrypt
6 Blue Fetches
3 Underground Sea
3 Volcanic Island
2 Island
1 Snow-covered Island
1 Tolarian Academy

= 55 cards

[xerxes]

I personally like Lava Dart when dealing with confidants, especially when you're running 3 Volcanics. While it is dead unlike Fire/Ice, it really solves the Confidant problem, and an extra land isn't worth much late game when you most likely will be using dart a second time.

[Demonic Attorney]

First-rate post.  I'm thinking of re-starting the primer archives forum and this seems like a fine addition once it's run its course.  A few quick points.

1.  Mystical Tutor.  I agree 100% with cutting this card.  I won't presume to hold myself out as a controlling authority on Tezzeret decks, but I've won my fair share of tournaments with them.  I don't think I've ever run Mystical Tutor in any build of Tez.  Alongside VT, you're giving up a significant amount of card disadvantage which is all the more concerning now that good ways to draw cards have become so rare.  MT can't put together Vault/Key outside of Tinker, and finding Will isn't enough, in my mind, to justify running the card.  The only thing it has going for it is that it's blue, and there are better candidates to up the blue card count.

2.  Rebuild.  I want to look at this from a "Post-Zendikar" perspective.  You say you run the card to deal with Tinker creatures, which is respectable.  My suggestion is, why not Diabolic Edict in its place?  Edict has the added advantage of being able to answer Iona, which is rapidly picking up steam in today's metagame.   The obvious downside is that Edict won't deal with a Tinker creature if the opponent also has a Bob on the table, and it doesn't cycle. 

Still, having played Iona-Oath for a couple of tournaments, one of the biggest foils to the main gameplan is Diabolic Edict on Iona.  I think that you need some kind of countermeasure against Iona-Oath, because Oath of Druids turns one of your main assets (Confidant) into a liability. 

[Grand Inquisitor]

Mystical Tutor

This card is actually pretty powerful against certain matchups.  Against Stax it's easier to gamble since it's likely they can't answer your bomb.  Against Fish, Tinker is disgustingly good.  However, I make it very clear these are not the matchups I'm concerned with.  Against Combo/Oath/Tez, it's only mediocre.  I think we agree that the card is mediocre in the midgame when in topdeck mode, but what about the early game?  The typical targets are Ancestral Recall and Tinker (Yawgmoth's Will being unusable until you've developed your grave more).  I've already made clear my opinion of Tinker, but what about the play they used to call the Paragon Play?  When I first started playing T1, the rule was you countered Ancestral Recall if you could.  No question.  However, as the speed of the format has changed and as I've come to understand momentum and tempo better, it's clear that this decision must be made more carefully.  The most common line of play that changes this judgement is whether my opponent uses mystical or vamp to go get the Ancestral.  This basically changes it to a hugely advantageous play into a Night's Whisper that removes the best card from their deck (albeit it does put it in their grave to fuel YWill).  If I have an overly reactive hand, or don't expect to be able to parry with my own brokeness soon, I'll go after a -1 tutored Ancestral.  However, more often than not, the correct play has been to wait, and pick a fight in the midgame that I'll have more control over.  Often times this choice even lulls the opponent into playing more aggressively than they should, or overestimating their position and letting their guard down.  Regardless, given that the play nets +1 CA instead of +2 is a big deal.  The more I play these matchups, the more I come to think they're always a battle of inches.  Mystical loses you that inch more often than not.

I appreciate the multiple name drops, Mr. Houdlette.  No Soly love on the Sphinx?  OH come on!

 
I definitely thought of that while writing this up, but didn't want to be too heavy handed with lavish Soly-praise.  To be honest, though, after my teamates, the ideas borrowed from your lists before GenCon were the most instrumental in developing the final product.

outdated in some parts...Confidant

Outdated? Recent resultswould seem to disagree with your assessment.

Do you still feel that Dark Confidant is the best choice with Oath of Druids picking up so much steam?

I think it's fine.  Often you figure out you're playing Oath due to early Orchard on their side or Duress on yours.  If not it probably goes like this*: 20% of the time both I'll have Dark Confidant and they'll have Oath early (.44*.44).  When this happens, there's probably a 25-33% chance I have of stopping the Oath.  This means running Confidant will bite me in the ass roughly a sixth of the Game 1's against Oath.  Relative to how much Confidant gets you in terms of performance and saved slots in the MD and SB, I think it's worth it.  I say this given that it's still early in Oath's evaluation.  The deck is definitely for real, and if it starts to take a share of the metagame comparable to Tez, I may reevaluate (certainly local meta considerations should apply).  Right now, I'm sticking with Bob.

*These stats are really loose, and mostly for illustration.  I think the overall characterization is right, though.

Repeal/Top is an excellent draw engine

Repeal/Top is a fine draw engine (not excellent at all).  If I expected to play control all day, I'd consider it (and I'm working on a very different deck where it's more appropriate).  However, the dual choices being made here is to (1) hedge the entire deck against combo/control/oath and (2) have Confidant as a card that is good enough and buys you win% and sideboard space against the other matchups.

First of all I am not a big friend of going above 10 cards...REB vs. Duress vs. Spell Snare: I really think its a meta decission. You cannot say duress is better because Duress is as dead against fish as REB is vs. stax. I really see no difference there. I currently play 1 REB and 1 Duress if combo continues to decline I would even switch the duress for a second REB. REB is really good against fish and thats why it makes the cut for me right now.   

Wait, are you saying you should supplement Drain+FoW or not?  I even admit that you could go with more Thoughtseize instead of Duress, but I choose not to because I'm risk-averse to life loss.  Even Duress hits many more targets than the other cards you mention.  Spell Pierce is the only thing that comes close, but I feel it's too weak in the midgame and peoples' arguments that the early game is paramount have not convinced me.  Not to mention that it's arguable that duress/seize are better (albeit leave you more vulnerable) in the early game as well.

Wincon:
I really thought that we all have agreed that Tezzeret sucks and that Storm is the pristine wincondition.

Sorry, I'm going to need more than this.  What are you talking about?  Sam Best played a stormy version of Tez against me in the T4 of the Philly Open.  His cards were more interdependent and made him more susceptible to Mystic Remora, both of which I exploited.

Lava Dart

I think it's fine for people to argue for Lava Dart vs. Darkblast as a sideboard choice.  In the maindeck Fire/Ice is certainly better.

Rebuild...

This is interesting.  On the one hand, your comment makes me want to reeavaluate Rebuild with the same lens I used to cut Echoing truth.  On the other hand, there's a lot more that Rebuild does, and cycling is not a small point in my mind.  As far as needing to answer Iona, I've looked around and haven't found anything compelling that is maindeck material and answers this card once in play.  From there I just decided to focus on stopping the Oath.

total 54

You're right.  I was copying/pasting stuff back and forth and lost track somewhere.  I don't have time right now, but will figure out what's missing an update in my next post.  Thanks.

[The Atog Lord]

GI, this is one of the best things I've read on TMD in a while. Thank you.

I was going to ask about the exclusion of Mana Vault, but you already covered that. I was also going to ask about Mystical Tutor, which has been since the days of Control Slaver an auto-include in my lists. But what you said did strike a chord with me -- lately, it has been a much less successful play for me to grab Ancestral with Mystical. If the only means an early-game opponent has of halting this is to hit it with a Force, then you're going to be getting at worst card parity: no real loss for the play since you're both down two cards. But Spell Pierce changes the equation; walking into Spell Pierce puts you right down on cards. I also walked into a Misdirection once at CossCon. That wasn't a pleasant experience.

Another issue with my list from Nick's tournament was the lack of Duress. I finished 2-2, but believe I could have done far better if I'd had Duress. As you touched on, the ability to know the opponent's hand is enormous. As we construct our decks around tutor chains and powerful single cards, having information about an opponent's threats and answers becomes increasingly important. And Duress does so while also nixing his best card.

Now, as for Sadistic Sacrament. I'll admit that I've not tested the card much, but I love it in theory. You mentioned that you had concocted a sideboard plan which involved pushing through this card. I'd be interested in hearing more about that, as I've been meaning to test out a sideboard using that very plan.

Finally, for the Top/Repeal draw engine. I might be biased, as I've been wanting to make a deck around that combo since the night at Brassman's house where I first read the card. It wasn't good enough then (in the Gush era). And it wasn't quite good enough in the Thirst era that followed. I'm hoping that it may be good enough now. It's very clean, and both components are quite strong on their own. If your deck is working for the most part, the fact that you can bounce a Bob or an Oath can be a large tempo gain. And I've been nothing short of thrilled with Top as a card itself. That said, your point about Bob not requiring subsequent mana is quite an argument in his favor.

Again, great post. It really did get me thinking.

[LordHomerCat]

It's weird, after spending the last couple months intentionally not playing Time Vault decks, and then coming back this weekend and playing what was really a good evolution of the deck I played at the ICBM Open (Soly's new list), I actually came to a lot of different conclusions.  Maybe it is a big geographical thing, but I am not really that concerned about the other blue decks, I am concerned about Fish and Stax (and Oath to some extent).  The list Soly and I played which he posted earlier had no Bobs, in large part because of the major Oath presence out here, and ran a massive number of sideboard cards for Stax and Fish.  I also love Mystical in the deck against everything but Tezz, because it makes Merchant Scroll that much better and because getting Recall right away against someone who can't stop you is the best thing you can do.

I don't understand the Storm comment heiner made.  Do people actually play storm cards in Tezz?  I never play 10 spells in a turn, let alone 10 spells with 2BB open, unless I am casting Will on like turn 25.  I would much rather have a Tezzeret (who was insane for me all day Saturday), who does something on his own.

Fact or Fiction is not spectacular, and especially with Confidants I can understand cutting it.  The second top is the same, although I personally would never play two, I can see the justification.  I don't like MisD much right now, but that goes with the large amounts of Stax and Fish decks out here where it sucks.  We played a Trap main and it was pretty solid, and is like a 5th Force against Stax when you are on the draw.

I like Rebuild or Hurkyl's main to deal with Stax and Null Rod.  Bouncing a giant monster is not really what I am looking for, as you can race all the Tinker monsters and if they get Iona your edict with no counter protection is unlikely to matter, and even if you kill it you then need another counter so they can't just combo you out anyway.  That is way to ridiculous a set of circumstances to make me want to cut my best card game 1 against Stax and a very necessary answer to Null Rod.  We played Hurkyl's, in fact, because being cheaper is very good and the deck was built with an eye toward Shops before Tezz.

Also, I am on record as saying how much I hate Library, but we played it anyway just because I think you need a way to answer your opponent.  If they play turn 1 Library, you need some way to compete or else you just lose, and that sucks, so to me I wouldn't play the deck without either Library or Strip Mine and I think we know how bad Strip Mine would be here.  I think of it as a necessary evil, because all the Oath and Tezz decks here have it and so I need to fight back somehow.  Again, if no one plays it out there then I would not either.

I definitely think it is really interesting to see how you came to this list though.  I also find it really interesting how different areas take the same data and draw such different conclusions about it (not just Midwest and East Coast, but also the European Tezz lists which look so different).

[voltron00x]

This post and Stephen's version of something similar on SCG this week are excellent not for the end result (which isn't bad either, mind you, but several individual card choices are meta-dependant so the idea of a globally optimized Tezz list doesn't really work for me as a concept), but rather for highlighting the PROCESS by which someone can attempt to optimize a deck based on the field they expect.  Stephen spelled this out a little more explicitly than you do.  

For instance, once you have Rebuild and choose to include Mana Vault (which has that nice interaction with Key), I've grown pretty fond of ETW (EOT or Upkeep Rebuild -> ETW is a good win con against Stax, and similarly dumping out even 4 ETW tokens T1 against Shops gives them fits), which makes Mystical better, which gives you another draw spell (FoF) to fetch with Mystical, etc.  One change in a build to deal with a certain meta problem can swing the pendulem of other card evaluations one way or another and create a ripple effect.

Anyway, kudos on the post and your performance at the Open IV.

[MirariKnight]

Whether or not your opponent used a card-disadvantage tutor to get Recall is irrelevant.  On the margin, it is still a matter of whether or not you want to use a counter to deny them drawing three cards.  The effect of Recall is the same, regardless of how they got in position to cast it.

I'm going to have to agree with Gregg here. Countering Recall after they found it with a -1 tutor almost seems better than countering it otherwise. If I suspect that they found it with a -1 tutor, I would be more inclined to think that the Tutor>Recall=all the gas in their hand, and if you can cut it off by countering Recall, that seems like the right play.

Re: Mystical Tutor
I'm firmly in the camp that Ancestral is the card that, when it resolves for you, most directly translates into game wins. Having a cheap way to find it early is critical. I used to hate Mystical Tutor for the same reasons listed, but finding Recall outweighs it's many drawbacks, in my opinion.

Also I agree with Matt, I really appreciated this as well as the other Stephen's article this week, mainly for the process used to refine the deck, which is applicable to every deck in every format.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Whether or not your opponent used a card-disadvantage tutor to get Recall is irrelevant.

Nope.

Countering Recall after they found it with a -1 tutor almost seems better than countering it otherwise

This misses the point entirely.  When I look at answering opponent threats (and btw, this is what playing control is all about), it's not 'am I able to stop this', it's 'do I need to stop it'.  Not allowing your opponent to dictate the roles in the game by engaging or not engaging in a counter war is very useful.  If Ancestral is there only gas and they have a reactive hand, you're doing them a favor.  They may wiff on the Ancestral giving you more time.  By taking the bait, you're making their cards more useful.  If you avoid the fight and invest your resources in a counter-punch, you could be in a much better position.

Ancestral is the card that, when it resolves for you, most directly translates into game wins

I agree...when it draws three cards.  If it costs you a draw to get there, I think the effect is very different.  As I mentioned, sure there's an argument that it helps leverage Yawgwill.  My retort is that this is an environment, maybe more than any before it in T1, where a non-lethal Yawgwill leaves you extremely vulnerable to losing the game.

choices are meta-dependant so the idea of a globally optimized Tezz list doesn't really work for me as a concept

I'm very sympathetic to this perspective.  Still, I'm making the argument that outside of a completely whacked out metagame, I'd play this list (which has 5-6 slots and SB to adjust to specific threats).  I think it's that good.

Mana Vault...EtW...FoF...Mystical Tutor

This is a series of arguments based on cards I think are bad.  My experience is that while synergy can work to your advantage, interdependence can cost you just as much.  This also has everything to do with the title for the post.  This list is all about cards that have the synergies I value along with being strong independently.  The cards quoted above 'ask to much' from me as a deck pilot relative to what they contribute.

geographical thing

I don't think this is that big of a difference.  I played at GenCon, I played at Philly, I look around at the T8's, I don't see a big difference.  The mid-atlantic metagame is well known for solid performances for stax and oath (and fish occasionally).  I played the 5c stax list twice and if not for FoW'ing the wrong thing I would have been 2-0 (instead of 1-0-1).  My plan worked exactly as expected even though my maindeck was heavily slanted towards the mirror.  I haven't lost to Fish in months, but I've made adjustments.  Ichorid is an entirely different animal.  I'm certainly leaving the caveat for Oath out there; it's a serious deck, it may be a monster.  Still, right now, more people are playing Tez and winning with Tez than any other archetype.  Even in your fish and stax infested meta, you and Mike end up cleaning up pretty often.  Maybe it is because of the specific slot adjustments you guys have made, but I've had similar results against fish and stax.

I hate Library

I actually love LoA, but I agree that it's not great in the current meta.  My answer has been duress, bob, and the explosiveness of conventional combo-control.  Between these factors I've found that I rarely lose to LoA and I'm much happier with my manabase.

Sadistic Sacrament

It was wierd, we really thought we were on to something.  It definitely wiped out Oath, but it was strangely ineffective against Tez (Bob was enough).

Top/Repeal draw engine

I'm working on it too, and it may end up being good enough with the right structure around it.  I'm not nearly as enamored by the idea of going back to storm as a lot of others.  I think Vault/Key is really a game changer in that regard.  If Oath or some other factor makes Dark Confidant the wrong choice, I'll likely work on intuition/ak.  I think for comparable tempo you get much more card advantage.  Then again, you gotta find room for the slots.  It's an interesting problem to work on, but right now I'm both happy with bob and I can't get the returns on mana to make it work.  That being said, Sensei's Divining Top is awesome.

[voltron00x]

If there was a card that cost 4UUU and made you discard three cards as an additional cost and it drew three cards, it would be as must-counter as Ancestral Recall.  Sunk costs are only relevant in indirect ways - for example, in this or that game situation, I might be less afraid of Ancestral Recall because he tapped his only blue source to cast it and, therefore, cannot use that blue source to do stuff I am afraid of.

Are you serious?  We should do business you and me.

sunk cost...Ancestral Recall is not a must-counter because of its efficiency - who cares what they paid for the spell?  those costs have been paid already and are now irrelevant - but because of its effect.

Have you tested Opportunity?

I played Opportunity in Peasant EDH, in Psychatog Control, and man is it a house there.

Anyway, I've actually never tested with ETW, I've only played against it, and in certain match-ups its been quite strong, but you're right - it does ask you to run certain cards you might not like in a vacuum.

Personally I am a big fan of Fact, and I consider Mana Vault one of the better cards in the deck provided you're playing a full package of Gifts, Fact, Tezz, Tinker, and a Tinker target you might actually be able to cast (ie Inkwell, Sundering Titan).  I suppose if you've decided that you're not playing FoF and Sphinx is your Tinker target, you lose value from Mana Vault.  I do find your comment about Fact perplexing.  Yes, your opponent is making a decision based on what they have in hand, but unless your hand is empty, that's symmetrical, and you're still usually drawing 2-3 cards.  FoF is also a card that helps keep Mana Drain mana relevant.  FoF is a card that is a house in the Swiss rounds where opponent's skill level comes into play, but is probably less powerful in the elim rounds.  I suppose tournament size is a factor here also - I might not run the card in a 20-person event where I knew 15 of the players were very capable.

Mystical is card I'd find it difficult to cut, but I suppose I might do so if I needed to find room to target something specific in the meta.  Mystical is just so powerful in combination with TFK / Recall / Top, even ignoring its ability to find Recall itself (or cards like Tinker or Will, or Fire/Ice, or Rebuild, etc).

[Rico Suave]

The point he is making, in regards to letting Ancestral resolve, is that sometimes you can let your opponent resolve it if it would not result in him winning that turn.  This is generally not an issue when your hand is very slow or reactive (in which case you counter it), but if you have a means to take advantage of your opponent tapping important mana it's possible to win before they untap.

For example if you have Vault/Key in your hand, or a way to find it and complete it on your next turn, are you going to spend your only counter stopping Ancestral?  Or would it be better to save it, so that you could just untap and Force through a win?  It's important to note that drawing 3 cards is only relevant if you get a chance to use them.  

While it's not always the correct play to let Ancestral resolve, there are times where it's right.  The old motto of "always counter Ancestral" was before the time where opponents could untap and combo out on turn 3.  

Similarly, I have used Ancestral as bait.  Remember that Ancestral is not the most critical card in a control mirror - Yawgmoth's Will is.  When your hand is Ancestral/Drain/Will, and you put your opponent on 2 counters, the correct play is to let your opponent counter Ancestral and then go to resolve Will with Drain back-up.  If you blow your Drain getting Ancestral to resolve, it's quite possible you won't draw into another counter to resolve that Will next turn.  Sure you might draw business, but it's possible you're not going to be casting Will and you'll end up passing the turn back instead of winning.

That being said, Mystical is a card that is very interesting.  The card itself performs very well against Stax and Fish, and the inclusion of Mystical depends heavily on 2 main factors:
1) How your deck already performs against Stax/Fish
2) What the expected metagame will be

If you already feel comfortable against Stax/Fish, or don't expect much of either, then Mystical can become a liability in a field full of control/combo/Oath.

That being said, if the deck were heavily metagamed to beat combo/control/Oath in the first place, Mystical is invaluable at shoring up what could turn into weak matches.  

Mystical is not the sacred cow it once was.  It is nevertheless a useful card for specific purposes.  While it is not stellar against a control mirror for example, it isn't dead either.  Sure the standard play of Mystical->Ancestral will put you ahead if it resolves.  However it can still set up Vault/Key through Tinker and it finds Will.  It gives you a path to victory at a very cheap cost and is a very tempo oriented card.

Ultimately it boils down to what the other 74 cards in your deck are doing.  

[zeus-online]

I wouldn't say that AR is a must counter, just like every other counterable spell in magic it depends very much upon the situation...

Against belcher decks (Running blue obv.) i almost always let AR resolve since they usually just get 2-3 mana sources, which they then use to power out some huge bomb, and thus by countering the bomb instead of the AR they're down to almost no resources.

Although AR is quite often a card that is worth countering.

There is also the mentioned situation where you're better off saving your counter to back-up a threat.

[Grand Inquisitor]

sunk cost and Ancestral Recall

I think we can move on.

[voltron00x]

So my article for next week is some extremely detailed analysis of the field at the Philly Open IV.  You know, the type of stuff you normally never see for Vintage.

Specifically as relevant to Tezz, this primer / post gave me some ideas on what to look for, some of which is below.  In the article, you can find all kinds of stuff... breakdown on Thorn vs Sphere, the total # and type of each piece of Ichorid hate (any guess as to the total # of SB cards dedicated to Ichorid, or the %?  We have lists for 67 of 68 players, so 1005 total SB cards...), the total # of Null Rod and Wasteland in the field, the breakdown on Tezz Tinker targets, etc.  Obviously I'll post a link once the article goes up.

Of the 16 lists from the Open IV I think you can call "Tezz" and be close to having an understanding of the deck in question:

10 of 16 played Fact, and 2 of 3 in the Top 8
10 of 16 played Fire/Ice, and 3 of 3 in the Top 8
13 of 16 played Mystical Tutor, and 2 of 3 in the Top 8
3 of 16 played MisD, and 1 of 3 in the Top 8  
12 of 16 played Bob, and 2 of 3 in the Top 8 (total of 36 Confidants, breakdown as follows... 2 Bob:  1, 3 Bob: 10, 4 Bob:  1)

Of the 16 Tezz players:  3 made top 8, 3 made "virtual" top 8 (extending through all 15 point players - that's 3 total, so it adds no more Tezz players), and 8 of 16 had 3 or more wins total in the Swiss (5 wins:  3, 4 wins:  2, 3 wins:  3)

[Will]

I don't think this is that big of a difference.  I played at GenCon, I played at Philly, I look around at the T8's, I don't see a big difference.  The mid-atlantic metagame is well known for solid performances for stax and oath (and fish occasionally).  I played the 5c stax list twice and if not for FoW'ing the wrong thing I would have been 2-0 (instead of 1-0-1). 

Steve, you probably do not know who I am from my name, but I was your round 6 opponent at the Philly Open IV that you beat.  I was playing 5cStax and lost, but I don't think that the statement you made is really accurate at all.  Not meant to insult or attack you, because I respect that you beat me, but something like that is not totally true to say the least.  In our matchup, I won Game 1 as my deck did throughout pretty much the whole tournament against Tezz.  (I was 3-1 in Game 1s with 1 loss because I didn't draw a colored source).  If I recall correctly, game2 I did not draw a colored source until you had lethal on board and a Dark Confidant in play for 6 turns generating huge card advantage.  You had lethal 5 or so turns earlier and failed to realize, but that misplay wasn't crucial as you won the game still because I did not draw a colored source.  (I had Welder, Demonic, Tinker, and Recall in hand from turn 3 or so and did not draw a single relevant colored source until about turn 11-12)  Game 3, I opened with Gemstone Mine, Mox Emerald, Mox Ruby, Strip Mine, Demonic Tutor, and Red Elemental Blast.  I opened with DT getting Crucible to keep REB mana up.  You cast turn 1 Island, Mana Crypt into Time Walk and I countered.  In hindsight it was probably a misplay but at the time I was banking on the Strip Lock to get me there so it would have been devastating if you had more lands than I did.  Next turn I drew Tangle Wire and began my Strip Lock.  I had you locked down pretty handily with Strip leaving you with just a Mana Crypt untapped and had the opportunity to play my Tangle Wire.  I decided not to because I figured that tapping just your Mana Crypt was not worth losing my Gemstone Mine and tapping out the next 2 turns to do so.  I passed, and you proceeded to go Mox, Mox, Yawg. Will, Land, Mox, Time Walk, Time Vault.  On your Time Walk turn you tutored for Tezz. in your upkeep and proceeded to win.  Neither of these games were flukes per se but saying that if you didn't FOW the wrong thing in the other matchup you would have been 2-0 against Stax is leaving a lot out.  You may or may not have won Game2 had I hit a colored source earlier, and Game3 you had to have hit runner runner to get there.  All I am really trying to say is that your Stax matchup is not nearly as good as you made it seem.  I enjoyed reading the mini-primer as a whole, but your analysis of that matchup is incorrect in my perspective. 

[MaxxMatt]

@GI & Mystical Tutor

Rico Suave nicely summarized my feelings about this card really well.

My last, strong, concrete argument about the inclusion of MT even bbin an optimized Tezz build come out by looking at which cards you opted for.

Rebuild, Brainstorm, Ponder, DarkConfidant, SenseiDiviningTop, Repeal, Fire/Ice are 8/10 cards will tranform your disadvantage tutor in a cards' parity tutor for game breaking bombs. It is more than enough to balance a couple unlucky topdecks with a lot of optimized cards/spells coordinations.

I will sure side it out game 2 & 3. Neverthless, I respect it for his strength during all noncontrol matchups.
Your own specific deck's shell support a better usage in control matchups, too.
Aside when you are in topdecking mode with Tezz without a board ( no Confidant/Sensei/nothing ) and no business spells, MT will let you try to go broken with Bombs.

I'm not saying it is an autoinclude in your deck if you have to face 60/70% of combo/control mirror matches to win but IMHO, his own flexibility is far more important than his strenght and the coral effect of the deck will weight and pressure opponents more with it maindecked rather than without it.


@GI & Protections choices

Have you thought about this Post Zendikar protection's configuration?

4 FoW
3/4 Drain
3/4 Spell Pierce
0/1 Misdirection

Is the value of checking opponents hand and depleting a couple of bombs higher than being able to protect your own bombs in a more efficient way, especially quicker than before? I suppose them being comparable if you have not enough informations about metagame.

An "optimal" Tezz. shell should be build for mixed metagame and then "adapted" to specific ones. I'm going to test my sentence, but I fear about Spell Pierce being far more "general porpouse" than discards effects because they fill turn 1 gap of control decks in a more armonical way.

Counter opponents FoW during your turn 2 key dark confidant spell
Counter opponents business spell during their turn 1
Counter opponents turn 1 topdecked bomb
Counter opponents bomb with triple counter backup and only three mana without fearing their strong topdeck or top deck adjustment via Sensei/Brainstorm/Ponder
Abuse of Islands and not Underground Sea

Duress and Thoughtsize are creepy bombs but can't avoid opponents to have a come back if luck will help them. They usually let you counter on your first turn which is usually better than duressing on turn 1 because don't tap you out leaving you with your own lone duressable FoW.


I'm going so extreme into this argument since weeks that I'm going to ask you if or with which frequence you can state to abuse of Mana Drain mana. If it is unfrequent or slower, try the Mana Drain / Spell Pierce swap

4 Force of Will
4 Spell Pierce
3/4 Discard Effects of choice
0/1 Pitch counter of choice.

It is a blast during my tests. Barring an improved CotV@1 vulnerability, I found Tezz deck being more game breaking in the early and middle game.
You can optimize strong and unconventional plays a full turn before which is KEY to combo opponents out in a more efficient way.
Have you ever tried similar decks configuration?



I found your readings, as usually, really insightfull! Good work!

MM

[Grand Inquisitor]

6 opponent at the Philly Open IV

I'll admit my account was brief and maybe misleading.  Might you admit that Stax has really taken a beating since Vault/Key came on the scene and especially since Tez started maindecking Dark Confidant?

I'm not a particularly good player, but I happen to have learned how to play the control matchup really well.  Alternatively, one of the gaping holes in my Vintage skillset is how to evaluate lines of play against workshops.  Since I've started playing this list I've been beating shops regularly anyways.  This is something that hasn't happened in my entire six year history of playing combo-control against shops.

If anything the points you mention in your post confirm my arguments.

colored source...YawgWill...Tezz

While stax can be adaptive, I think the current metagame asks too much of it.  This happens from time to time with that deck.  There are too many stresses on slot choices trying to cover everything from Time Vault to Oath, to things with power/toughness.  Null Rod is probably the best card Stax could run right now, but you don't see it because the inherent mana and consistency issues make it a non-option.  Color selection (and mulligans as happened to my other Stax opponent) are much bigger factors in Stax chances of losing as well.

Just looking back through recent NY and PA events, Dark Confidant (and Oath) are dominating, while rare workshop decks that do T8 have been WSA or a mono version with null rod.

greggg230, BruiZar

I hear what you guys are saying.  I just think your context is asinine.  If you want to go with a business analogy, fine...

The point isn't whether you invest more once you've sunk costs.  That's like having me be the player who just mystical'd for Ancestral Recall.  Do I cast it now that it's in my hand or not?  Derf.  You try to draw three cards.

But that's not what we're talking about.  We're talking about me looking at it from a competitor's standpoint.  If I'm competing with another firm and they have a project that will gain them X market share or land a Y$ contract (and we're in direct competition), does it matter to me what their costs are to accomplish these things?  Absolutely.

Like in business, in a game of magic resources are the main constraint.  What it takes you to accomplish some effect is paramount.

Similarly, as Vintage has gotten more competitive, you see winning decks cutting fat or cute effects for cards that are leaner, more risk-averse and have a better flexibility+power/cost ratio.  It's not completely analogous to stretching out supply chains and specialization, but there are similarities.

My last, strong, concrete argument about the inclusion of MT even bbin an optimized Tezz build come out by looking at which cards you opted for.

Rebuild, Brainstorm, Ponder, DarkConfidant, SenseiDiviningTop, Repeal, Fire/Ice are 8/10 cards will tranform your disadvantage tutor in a cards' parity tutor for game breaking bombs. It is more than enough to balance a couple unlucky topdecks with a lot of optimized cards/spells coordinations.

MMatt, can you rephrase that?  I don't understand what you're getting at.

4 FoW
3/4 Drain
3/4 Spell Pierce
0/1 Misdirection
...
4 Force of Will
4 Spell Pierce
3/4 Discard Effects of choice
0/1 Pitch counter of choice.

Something that perhaps I didn't emphasize enough in my original post is the way that Duress/Seize (and Top/Confidant) allow the deck to curve out better than other versions of Tez I've played.  Spell Pierce is a solid card, but sometimes I find it forces you to play more defensively or it mucks up lines of play because you have less control (than duress/seize) when you can play it.

The above is looking at Spell Pierce compared with duress/seize.  Comparing it for the mana drain slots is something else entirely.  I think that combination works well for Oath since it really wants/needs to play the early game.  In Tez I never found a combination of cards that made an aggressive list the right play.  One of my organizing assumptions is that Vault/Key allows you to take a more controlling role instead of being more aggressive...hopefully I'm right about that  

[heiner]

Mystical Tutor

This card is actually pretty powerful against certain matchups.  Against Stax it's easier to gamble since it's likely they can't answer your bomb.  Against Fish, Tinker is disgustingly good.  However, I make it very clear these are not the matchups I'm concerned with.

Ok, I am very concerned with these matchups so probably thats why I rate it higher. If you expect to have 50% or more control mirrors, I may be fine with cutting mystical. Still, mystical->ancestral is cheap card advantage and therefore a solid play. And I really don't care whether this reduces my chances to randomly draw into it.

outdated in some parts...Confidant

Outdated? Recent resultswould seem to disagree with your assessment.

With outdated I mean that it has been well accepted by the metagame and people have already started to implement counter measures. You won't catch anybody off guard by playing a condidant.

Repeal/Top is an excellent draw engine

Repeal/Top is a fine draw engine (not excellent at all).  If I expected to play control all day, I'd consider it (and I'm working on a very different deck where it's more appropriate).  However, the dual choices being made here is to (1) hedge the entire deck against combo/control/oath and (2) have Confidant as a card that is good enough and buys you win% and sideboard space against the other matchups.

Actually repeal/top is much better agains non control decs compared to thirst for example because its so versatile. Sensei finds hate quickly vs. combo, repeal handles null rod, etc, etc. So if one draw engine is good against non control decs, then it is repeal/top.

First of all I am not a big friend of going above 10 cards...REB vs. Duress vs. Spell Snare: I really think its a meta decission. You cannot say duress is better because Duress is as dead against fish as REB is vs. stax. I really see no difference there. I currently play 1 REB and 1 Duress if combo continues to decline I would even switch the duress for a second REB. REB is really good against fish and thats why it makes the cut for me right now.   

Wait, are you saying you should supplement Drain+FoW or not?  I even admit that you could go with more Thoughtseize instead of Duress, but I choose not to because I'm risk-averse to life loss.  Even Duress hits many more targets than the other cards you mention.  Spell Pierce is the only thing that comes close, but I feel it's too weak in the midgame and peoples' arguments that the early game is paramount have not convinced me.  Not to mention that it's arguable that duress/seize are better (albeit leave you more vulnerable) in the early game as well.

4xFoW + 4xDrain is not under discussion imo. I believe that you should add a maximum of two more disruption spells e.g. duress, REB..

Wincon:
I really thought that we all have agreed that Tezzeret sucks and that Storm is the pristine wincondition.

Sorry, I'm going to need more than this.  What are you talking about?  Sam Best played a stormy version of Tez against me in the T4 of the Philly Open.  His cards were more interdependent and made him more susceptible to Mystic Remora, both of which I exploited.

I found Tezzeret very dissapointing to say the least. Its expensive, sorcery speed, does not win asap and there are just so many 2/x creatures around that kill him. So far I am loving my EtW which again improve my matchups vs. stax and fish. Its also a great finisher in control mirrors as I have into extra turns multiple times where tezzeret/vault wouldn't have been fast enough. Of course the repeal/top engine fits that windcondiction much better as well. Repeal/mox allows you to storm quickly even in control matchups as it represents no card disadvantage. 6 Goblins are a real thread already.


And of course I have to back greggg230, BruiZar. Efficiency/mana cost is of course relevant when evaluating a card or a possible play but as soon as the cost is paid, the effect on the stack is everything that counts. Of course if somebody pays 7 mana + 3 cards for his ancestral I am in good shape already, but if I counter it I am in even better shape. (-3 cards vs -0 cards is the same difference then -0 cards vs +3 cards)

[Grand Inquisitor]

I am very concerned with these matchups

Then a lot of your choices make sense.  EtW is definitely solid against shops and fish.  My strategy is to use the sideboard to focus on those.

people have already started to implement counter measures

This was very obviously true at GenCon as well, yet a Dark Confidant fueled deck won it.  I guess if that's your definition of outdated, then who cares?  The card is still effective.  Ancestral Recall is outdated

Actually repeal/top is much better agains non control decs compared to thirst for example because its so versatile. Sensei finds hate quickly vs. combo, repeal handles null rod, etc, etc. So if one draw engine is good against non control decs, then it is repeal/top.

I'll agree that Top helps a lot against combo.  I'm already running two; I like the card.  My problem is that I feel repeal is very mediocre.  It does a lot of things reasonably well, but nothing great.  I'm fine giving it one slot, but I'm not going to build an engine around it (again it makes sense with EtW, but I don't like that card either).  A big part of it is that both of these cards are not very good in multiples on their own.

I found Tezzeret very dissapointing to say the least. Its expensive, sorcery speed, does not win asap and there are just so many 2/x creatures around that kill him.

I agree with you completely.  Those are the same things I brought up at the start.  Still, I've come around on the card.  It's like a big version of Dark Confidant: it has a lot of deficiencies, but when you look at the sum of what the card does across game situations and how it allows you to cheat on other slots, it ends up being worth it.

I am loving my EtW...a great finisher in control mirrors as I have into extra turns multiple times where tezzeret/vault wouldn't have been fast enough. Of course the repeal/top engine fits that windcondiction much better as well. Repeal/mox allows you to storm quickly even in control matchups as it represents no card disadvantage. 6 Goblins are a real thread already.

We're going to have to agree to disagree.  In the same way I think Tinker is dead weight in the control matchup, I find the same of EtW.  The extra-turns scenario is just too rare to make it worth it IMO.

And of course I have to back greggg230, BruiZar. Efficiency/mana cost is of course relevant when evaluating a card or a possible play but as soon as the cost is paid, the effect on the stack is everything that counts. Of course if somebody pays 7 mana + 3 cards for his ancestral I am in good shape already, but if I counter it I am in even better shape. (-3 cards vs -0 cards is the same difference then -0 cards vs +3 cards)

If this is the logic you guys are going to use then I'll just add that once you're done drawing the three cards the effect is no longer relevant, so I don't care if you draw three cards; it's dumb.  Sure you can counter it, but you don't have infinite counters.  You have to allocate your resources to answering appropriately powerful threats.

[Demonic Attorney]

I split off the debate over countering Ancestral and "sunk cost."  In the process of doing so, the forum software hit a snag and two posts were lost.  I'll manually copy/paste them into the new thread.  If you're interested in pursuing that topic, please do so there.

[MaxxMatt]

My last, strong, concrete argument about the inclusion of MT even bbin an optimized Tezz build come out by looking at which cards you opted for.

Rebuild, Brainstorm, Ponder, DarkConfidant, SenseiDiviningTop, Repeal, Fire/Ice are 8/10 cards will tranform your disadvantage tutor in a cards' parity tutor for game breaking bombs. It is more than enough to balance a couple unlucky topdecks with a lot of optimized cards/spells coordinations.

MMatt, can you rephrase that?  I don't understand what you're getting at.

Let me try to explain my argument following your initial line of thoughts. It may sounds clearer:

Mystical Tutor - I find this card hugely overrated.  Then again, I may be guilty of overvaluing card parity.  Still, I hate wasting a draw step regardless of the card this is getting.  Part of this probably has to do with my distaste for Tinker, but much of it has to do with an understanding I've developed.  Certainly Ancestral Recall is important to the early game and one of the most consistent ways to achieve an advantage that will lead to victory.  However, I've learned that there are important circumstances where allowing Ancestral Recall to resolve is the right play.  These occasions are increased when the net effect of the play delivers one less card of advantage.

1) You aren't overvaluing card parity. It is the most important component when choosing what to play. I'll come back on this argument later.
2) You aren't wasting draw steps with MT, if you exclude Tezz.dec forced to topdeck without a board/hand. In a lot different game situations, almost any of you business spells will help you to nullify pratical cards disadvantage producted by MT: Rebuild can cicle, DConfidant give you a double draw step, Repeal will bounce & cicle, F/I can tap & cicle, SDTop will exchange the top card of the deck for you if needed, BS & Ponder simply put the MysticallyTutored card directly in your hand.
3) Tutors effects aren't easily replaced with drawers/businessspells/protections


You will not have to leave MT maindecked because of these spells but because of them when needed MT will search for you crucial spells almost in card parity during those matchups cards' parity count the most.

During preside control matchups, you fear topdecking MT with not so strong hand; sometimes against combo decks, too.
in these possibly marginal game situations, MT is really bad, but if you face the same opponents in any other possible game situation, you'll find MT more than decent.
Postside, you'll simply minimize the risks of dead draws replacing MT with other more efficient spells. Even after this postside swap, I don't feel to regret about that damn MT played during game one, because I'm sure, the REST of the deck helped me to nullify the inherent disadvantage derived from his play ( cicling, drawing, gaining tempo etc etc ) leaving me with only the strength of the card fetched in this way.

We have not so many efficient tutors effects can be compared with MT, DT, VT, Tinker & Scroll. I'm not sure to be ready to drop one of them. Decks are hungry of crucial strong tutors. Business spells are chosen among the most flexible ones. Almost 2/3 among all the spells in your deck can replace itself with other cards during the game, giving you a lot of advantages over your opponents. ONLY few of them, will directly search for CRUCIAL spells.

In a game of priority and decisions such as MtG, I found the role and the presence of ALL the tutors far more game breaking than any other possible spells choice.

4 FoW
3/4 Drain
3/4 Spell Pierce
0/1 Misdirection
...
4 Force of Will
4 Spell Pierce
3/4 Discard Effects of choice
0/1 Pitch counter of choice.

Something that perhaps I didn't emphasize enough in my original post is the way that Duress/Seize (and Top/Confidant) allow the deck to curve out better than other versions of Tez I've played.  Spell Pierce is a solid card, but sometimes I find it forces you to play more defensively or it mucks up lines of play because you have less control (than duress/seize) when you can play it.

I'm sure about Duress plus counterspells being more aggressive and controllish than SPierce.
Anyway, putting this argument on a more theoretical point of view.

If someone will force you face 1 of each the possibly different decks available in Vintage at moment... wouldn't be SPierce better than Duress/Thoughtsize?
Deeper on this argument, "better" isnt' the proper word to use, I mean, wouldn't you find blue.SPierce ( rather than black.Discards ) being more flexible, more efficient, more sinergic witha BLUE based control deck that NEED to win in the middle game and not AFTER the first duress?

If you know your opponents, checking their hands or being able to counter their threats is usually the same. My argument fails only when referred to bad control players ( not your case, of course ) or cards such as Extirpate & co. . Against them you can side additional proactive protections.

SPierce and Discards are both 1cc but instant and blue for a strong effect during early game, seems more appealing to me rather than sorcery speed and terribly black.

[Bill Copes]

Hypothetically, if Iona Oath garners the same meta presence as Tezerret and Dark Confidant becomes outmoded as the draw engine of choice, what are everyone's thoughts as the replacement "optimal" draw engine?  Is Mystic Remora or Night's wisper the answer, or does something better exist?

Also, is it worth bringing up hypothetical questions such as this? The "deck to beat" swap hasn't exactly happened yet, but things appear to be swaying in that direction.

[voltron00x]

Hypothetically, if Iona Oath garners the same meta presence as Tezerret and Dark Confidant becomes outmoded as the draw engine of choice, what are everyone's thoughts as the replacement "optimal" draw engine?  Is Mystic Remora or Night's wisper the answer, or does something better exist?

Also, is it worth bringing up hypothetical questions such as this? The "deck to beat" swap hasn't exactly happened yet, but things appear to be swaying in that direction.

I don't think Iona Oath will ever be 30% of the metagame.  If it reaches anywhere near that point, the metagame can simply hate it out by attacking Oath itself (Spell Snare, Spell Pierce, EE, Krosan Grip, Gargadon, Powder Keg, graveyard hate, additional use of Duress / TS, or use of cards like Diabolic Edict).

I think a more interesting question is, if the use of cards like Fire/Ice (in Tezz itself) and Darkbast (in Shop decks) make Confidant an unreliable draw engine, where does Tezz go to next, or do Tezz players just accept that people are going to attack their draw engine?  Repeal + Top is an interesting option, probably the one I like the best so far.  I haven't been impressed at all with Night's Whisper, although I know people that do think its a solid option.

[Gekoratel]

I don't buy the argument about Confidant being hated out, Bob has been the draw engine of choice since World's and even with people adopting Tezz with 2 MD answers to Confidant he has still remained a fine choice.  In the mirror getting your Bob killed by Fire|Ice is fine its a 1-1 trade where you both invested the same amount mana and future confidants are still live.  Darkblast is clearly worse since your opponent has answers to your current and future Confidants but playing future Bobs still has value since you take away draw steps from your opponent trading 1-1.

As for Oath I know this has already been discussed but when your opponent has Orchard then Bob being a creature has no drawback.  If I know my opponent is playing Oath then I'm going to adopt my play-style of the match accordingly.  Also against an unknown opponent given the option of Duress + setup spell or turn 1 Confidant I'm generally going to go with Duress.  This could be wrong but I'd rather have the information of how to play the rest of the game and avoid getting blown out by turn 1 Recall, Time Walk into bustedness, Necro etc.

[voltron00x]

Jeff, I meant the question more like this:

If I'm playing Sam Best's list from the Open, I can make your Bobs a liability using my Repeals to gain tempo whenever you try and run out Bob, and your Fire/Ice is dead against me while mine is live against you, giving some small measure of virtual advantage.  Plus, Sam's list actually makes use of Mana Drain mana with those Draw 7s (although we've discussed previously the use of draw 7s and I think you know my opinion there). 

I'm just curious to see how Tezz, in and of itself, will metagame and adjust to this type of thing.

Honestly, I don't think there's anything better than Bob, or Repeal / Top if you're looking to avoid having your draw engine attacked... and I think that's a good thing.  Its clearly better for the vintage meta than TFK was.

[Anusien]

Running Oath does more than just blank Dark Confidant.  It really makes it difficult for Tezzeret to move ahead in the game.  Tezzeret needs some cards that just advance it through the game indiscriminately.  It needs ways to just get more cards in its hand.  Playing without Bob is a huge liability if your deck is built around it.  I think Dark Confidant should be on the way out in a reasonable metagame.