[Deck]RND-Tezzeret

[Grand Inquisitor]

Either...A:...B:...or C:

So it's really more complicated than this, but let's make it simple.  I've found that the rate at which spell pierce's effectiveness decays in the midgame is not worth its power in the early game (relative to duress/thoughtseize).  Sure Sensei's Top mitigates duress/thoughtseize, but I've found this is at a point in the game where people can often accomodate 2 mana to play around spell pierce.

[TheBrassMan]

While I like Pierce and dislike Duress (though honestly Pierce was very disappointing in the last event I played in), the Divining Top argument is a little silly.  I've never seen more than 2 in a list, most lists run 1, and there are those that dont run any.  With 5 duress effects vrs. 2 tops, it's a little disingenuous to say that Top makes the card useless, even if it *did* ruin Duress once it was in play (which it does not, even if it's strong there).

[Mantis]

Reading this thread I do not think there is a disagreement over Pierce vs. Duress. Pierce is better in a metagame filled with Shops, like the Dutch meta, while Duress is better against blue decks such as Oath and Tez. And from what I understand large parts of the US are infested by Oath and Tez. Marske plays in Holland while most of the other forum dwellers are US based.

[Marske]

Context people, context...

Sure Duress / Seize are better turn one then Spell Pierce, but the context in which I was discussion was the one set forth by GI, The Mid-Game in which you can assume people have Mana, Top, Some bombs etc etc. My entire point was that Duress isn't as good as it used to be before people started recognizing Top as a good card, I've been Mind Twisted for my entire hand (an effect greater then a single duress) and still won / got back into it because Jace, Top and Confidant were around, a Single Duress, for me doesn't impact the game all that much anymore. Especially in a Meta that consists of MUD, Selkie, Oath.

[Gekoratel]

I think the point people are arguing Marske is that you keep making an implicit assumption that Top is always in play, almost no decks play 3-4 so with 1-2 Tops in your deck your not going to see it by the mid-game more often than not even with all the card draw available in Vintage.  It's certainly true Duress effects lose value when your opponent has Top, no one is really arguing that but the point still arises that if it is midgame and players have excess mana to sink into Top then there's a good chance that they'll have mana to pay for Pierce.  I realize you'll still be able to get value out of the card in drawn out counter wars but it is also quite common that Pierce will have minimal value because either A) your opponent can play around it B) they have enough mana.  If my meta was filled with Shops & Fish I'd want nothing to do with Duress effects but even if that is meta Pierce is rather marginal against Fish decks.

As for people recognizing Top as a good card I'd say that happened at least a year ago.

[Marske]

@Gekoratal,
There have been a lot of assumptions made throughout this thread but Yes, I'm assuming somebody has a Top just like most are assuming they Duress a bomb (and not see a hand with 4 land) but whatever.

Obviously if I was facing Tezz / Painter all day I'd prefer having Duress effects and Remora, but I'm not playing against Tezz / Painter all day.. Most likely any event I'll be playing in over here in Europe gets me something like this: Selkie, MUD, Tezz, Dredge, some homebrew shit, Oath Now, only against Tezz and Oath would I want to have them, leaving 3 match ups where the card is next to worthless in which spell pierce at least has it's uses.

[Marske]

Got in third at TNV (6 people so rather small lost to Zieby running the mirror with red splash and Bomberman) with the same maindeck as the list seen in this thread, I heard some people at the Philly open (Cruel_Ultimatum) were also running this list making top 16. Zieby won the event last night with RND Tezz /w Red splash, I still think the UB shell has values as well (rock steady mana base) and everything that needs handling can be dealt with in the SB.

I'll be posting a bit more about this deck in the near future including a tournament report of my event next sunday (win or lose) to give you guys a deeper view in how the deck works in the real world.

[scifiantihero]

Got in third at TNV (6 people . . .

Did you miss a number there, somewhere?

[Gandalf_The_White_1]

I'd like to make a point regarding the Duress/Thoughtseize vs. Spell Pierce debate, which I don't think has been mentioned yet.  Obviously there are certain situations and matchups where one is better than the other, but I think that one of the most important advantages of Spell Pierce is that it gives you tempo.  In the first few turns of the game, Piercing your opponent's play is like a Time Walk+Duress in a single card.  Conversely, if they try to play around Pierce, you also gain tempo.  Simply having 3x Pierce in your deck can put your opponent in difficult situations.

This advantage of Spell Pierce also makes it synergize well with Repeal, another tempo card.  This is what I see as the fundamental difference between GI's list and the RND build: 3x Spell Pierce & 3x Repeal makes RND Tezz a tempo-based control deck, while GI's build with Duresses and fewer repeals focuses on hand control, and resolving its own threats, rather than board control.  Consequently, GI's build is a more traditional combo/control approach like Tog.  So, I think it's not necessarily about which choice is better, but rather about the overall approach to what the deck is trying to accomplish.  Analyzing the difference between the decks by looking at what cards are swapped for what, and arguing over which of these card choices are better, is therefore a red herring.

[matt_sperling]

I'd like to make a point regarding the Duress/Thoughtseize vs. Spell Pierce debate, which I don't think has been mentioned yet.  Obviously there are certain situations and matchups where one is better than the other, but I think that one of the most important advantages of Spell Pierce is that it gives you tempo.  In the first few turns of the game, Piercing your opponent's play is like a Time Walk+Duress in a single card.  Conversely, if they try to play around Pierce, you also gain tempo.  Simply having 3x Pierce in your deck can put your opponent in difficult situations.

This advantage of Spell Pierce also makes it synergize well with Repeal, another tempo card.  This is what I see as the fundamental difference between GI's list and the RND build: 3x Spell Pierce & 3x Repeal makes RND Tezz a tempo-based control deck, while GI's build with Duresses and fewer repeals focuses on hand control, and resolving its own threats, rather than board control.  Consequently, GI's build is a more traditional combo/control approach like Tog.  So, I think it's not necessarily about which choice is better, but rather about the overall approach to what the deck is trying to accomplish.  Analyzing the difference between the decks by looking at what cards are swapped for what, and arguing over which of these card choices are better, is therefore a red herring.

This makes sense to me, well said.  In these terms, I'd say I haven't found Tezz's engines (Bob and restricted card draw) to be tremendously effective at taking advantage of very momentary tempo advantages, like those gained from Repealing something that the opponent can replay the next turn.  I use 2 repeal because I find it is an effective way to let me counter or thoughtseize something that snuck in early, and because it cycles when I don't need it.  Playing a "tempo" game as opposed to a hand/threat attrition war means you expect to win the game by not giving your opponent a chance to play all his/her threats, rather than by running them out of threats.  I like the attrition style more, but I can see both sides of the coin.

[Grand Inquisitor]

In these terms, I'd say I haven't found Tezz's engines (Bob and restricted card draw) to be tremendously effective at taking advantage of very momentary tempo advantages, like those gained from Repealing something that the opponent can replay the next turn.

Agreed.  Whereas duress either gives you the information so you can seize a window of opportunity or lowers the potential energy of your opponent to give your engine time to get going.

[Marske]

@GTW1,
Thanks for explaining it like you did, that's indeed the way I look at both lists as well.

@GI,
I'm not sure if the information is truly that important, but we can agree to disagree on that point is you like.

[bb-g]

I know this post is close to a necro, but i think it's justified afther all my testings.

I have been running this list since 2 weeks before the BOM tournament and I can tell enyone that this list is very consistant and almost every machup is winnable except...

There's only one big problem in my point of view and that's the machup against Shop strategies. I don't feel this deck is strong enough to compete with these decks.

The strength of this decklist is proven by my 1-st place finish at the BOM4- qualifier and my 10-th place finish in the mainevent, not making it to the Top-8 on tiebreakers.

The list i was wielding:

1 Tezzeret
4 fow
1 jace, the mindsculptor
2 spell pierce
1 spell snare
3 mana drain
1 mox pearl
1 mox sapphire
1 mox emerald
1 mox ruby
1 mox jet
1 black lotus
1 v. tutor
1 d.tutor
1 m. tutor
1 Y.will
1 gifts
1 Ancestral recall
1 Hurkyl's recall
1 Time Vault
1 voltaic key
1 Tinker
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind
1 Time Walk
1 Merchant Scroll
4 Underground Sea
3 Island
1 Snow-covered Island
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Mana Crypt
3 Repeal
1 Sol Ring
4 Polluted Delta
1 thirst for knowledge
2 Flooded Strand
2 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Timetwister
1 Brainstorm
3 Dark Confidant

sb:
1 Sower of temptation
2 energy flux
1 hurkyl's recall
1 P.needle
1 Tormod's crypt
1 Extirpate
1 old man of the sea
1 perish
4 yixlid jailer
1 Mindbreak Trap
1 Seasinger

I'd like to hear from you guys what you wuld replace to make the Shop MU better. I don't feel that the energy flux is enough to combat this deck. I'm considering splashing also green, but to be honest, I like the stability of those 2 colours and if it's possible i don't want to go the way of a third color.  Someone any suggestions?

[Rico Suave]

If you insist on staying 2 colors, I would recommend the following:

1) Max out on Spell Pierce.  I would run 4 Force and 4 Pierce before considering any other counter.

2) Timetwister is not good against Workshops unless you can chain an EOT bounce into Timetwister.  Personally, I would rather play Jace because EOT bounce into Jace is pretty good too.  

3) Instead of the 3 mana Energy Flux, I would opt to use a 1 or 2 mana card to help against Workshops.  If you are afraid of Chalice at 1, you can run Hurkyl's Recall in multiples.  If you are afraid of Chalice at 2, you can run Annul.  But 3 mana is tough in any situation.

Ultimately, the only thing I actually like is running green.  With green you can run maindeck Nature's Claim which is really powerful, and then you can also SB in 2 mana answers like Naturalize or Seal of Primordium to work around Chalice.  If you still prefer a 3 mana solution, you can run Trygon Predator and ruin them.

I don't think the deck loses much by playing green.  Maybe it's just me.  If you're really concerned you can run a basic Forest in the SB and bring it in to stabilize the mana base along with 4 Misty Rainforest.  

[Zieby]

Green can be added by replacing a Sea and a Island for 2x Tropical.

It gives you,

Ultimately, the only thing I actually like is running green.  With green you can run maindeck Nature's Claim which is really powerful, and then you can also SB in 2 mana answers like Naturalize or Seal of Primordium to work around Chalice.  If you still prefer a 3 mana solution, you can run Trygon Predator and ruin them.

But it also gives you the abbility to run Regrowth in the main. This card can be very strong althought not against Shops.
I Also notice that you only play 1 global Artifact bounce spell, this is not sufficient Imho and the card I would exchange is Twister over Rebuild.

btw: Congratz with your preformance

[M.Solymossy]

If you want a better game against Shops, I would suggest going to 3 colors by cutting these cards from the main:
1 spell snare
3 Repeal
2 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Timetwister
3 Dark Confidant

I would add a 4th Mana Drain (this card is bananas in the Shop Matchup, you have to run 4 again.  
I would cut repeal because THEY COST BILLIONS OF MANA to use against your worst matchup, and they cost 3 to do anything relivant against Oath; a matchup that has opposing Spell Pierces.

Timetwister is trash.  You're not ritual combo.  Give it up.  You can hand your opponent the nuts just as easily as you.  It's literally 50/50.

Sensei's top is  a heavy mana investment when the two matchups you have the most problems with as a tezzeret deck both play 4 Null Rod.  

Cut confidant;  It's bad on the draw against Shops and it's every word in the thesaurus under "awful" against Oath.   Everyone argues "Confidants win me the game, wah!"    but in reality, they'll win the oath player the game more often than you.  


play PREORDAIN.  The card is B-A-N-A-N-A-S, BANANAS!

Also, get Fact or Fiction back into the deck.  And Ponder.  They're restricted for a pretty good reason.   Turn 1 Ponder allows you to hit land drops against MUD.

24 Mana. Why is everyone's mana sources going down like my sister?

Play Lotus Petal.  turn 1 Drain on the play is SO important with MUD in the format.   Also allows you to have turn 1 preordain/ponder/recall/etc with Pierce backup.


That's my $0.02


 

[bb-g]

@ Zieby and Soly: Thanks for the advices, i'm building around these and the new results are promising but i still need more testing before making any statements or comments.
@ Zieby: Congrats with the baby!