[Deck]RND-Tezzeret

[The Atog Lord]

A minor point, but Gargadon can result in disaster if you get hit by Bribery. On the other hand, if you board out your Robot, Bribery does almost nothing against a Tezz player otherwise.

As an Oath player, Nature's Claim isn't as large a threat as Garagadon. I'd much rather face down a one-for-one removal spell than a threat that also halts as many Oaths as I may have. That said, Claim is much less narrow -- and Workshop decks are better and better.

[ancestral recall]

Why 3CC over 2CC? It destabilizes your mana base as control deck. Against oath you have multiple game plans. One of them is you can repeal his oath after resolving, in this case repeal is a time walk. You can buy a few extra turns and gain for example card advantage with BoB and counter his oath when your opponent tries to resolve it. Another one is you can stop oath from resolving. Third you can let resolve oath with a counter war and after resolving you goes infinite with key and time vault. I think 3cc tezz is not necessary now.

[Zieby]

Regarding Thada:
I have to agree with Cruel Ultimatum, a better card for the Mirror and against Stax is Magus of the Unseen. And that card isn’t played since Gencon.

Regarding Gargadon:
I think that with the hate you need to devote to Ichorid, you don’t have enough place in you ‘re SB to have such a narrow card. The Fact that Chewer is also narrow and only to be used against Stax fills  your SB with cards that are very limited in its use, especially when going to a unknown meta game.

Regarding Perish:
I played it and loved it. If Selki is the only real Fish deck that’s sees play in your metagame, it is realy good. Otherwise Deathmark and Massacre are nice cards to replace Perish.

@ Goober:
I believe if I recall it correctly I won all 4 of them. The thing is that it gives a window to my opponent because I drew a blank. If this card is Ponder, Fact, Regrowth or another card you prefer it helps you to advance quicker.

@ Ancestral Recall:
3cc over 2cc can improve your game against the metagame on a strategic level.
•   If you Repeal Oath you have a Time Walk. If you Claim Oath your opponent needs to find a new one.
•   The fact you can stop Oath from resolving  is a given, because you play 10 Counters, however, moswt Oath deck play also 10 Counters.
•   Why fight over Oath if you have your combo in hand.

[goober]

@ Goober:
I believe if I recall it correctly I won all 4 of them. The thing is that it gives a window to my opponent because I drew a blank. If this card is Ponder, Fact, Regrowth or another card you prefer it helps you to advance quicker.

Yes, but advancing quicker and making your more likely to win aren't always the same thing.  As soon as you get that Twister it makes it a lot harder for your opponent to turn the game around.  That huge advantage of being able to come back even if your opponent regains control could make you win more games than that little extra advantage while you are still in control.

[Rico Suave]

I'm separating "Getting around Gargadon" and "finding other ways to kill you" into two distinct things.  It is safe to say that if the oath mage can "find other ways to kill you," nature's claim on the Oath instead of suspend Gargadon leaves you just as dead.  While Nature's Claim is certainly more versatile than Gargadon (and this weighs in its favor), the scenario Rico describes, where you have a Gargadon for their Oath but they kill you with something else, does not weigh in Claim's favor. 

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been.  My point had more to do with situations where the Oath player didn't bother casting or finding Oath at all, instead opting for a different route to victory altogether. 

There are many times the Oath deck draws something like Key and a tutor, at which point it makes a lot more sense to tutor for Vault instead of Oath.  I was just trying to reinforce the idea that Gargadon is only good against the Oath itself, whereas Claim is good against the Oath while also being good if their plan happens to be rushing for a Vault/Key.  I think it's relevant. 

Maybe I was a bit too harsh on Gargadon in my last post.  It's certainly a great card against Oath.  But my own experiences compelled me to speak up about it because it hasn't been too impressive from what I've seen. 

[ancestral recall]

@ Ancestral Recall:
3cc over 2cc can improve your game against the metagame on a strategic level.

K how can you fix your mana base? For a 3CC tezz list? Cut an underground sea for a tropical island? And what about decks with wastelands, like shop and some fish builds?

[Marske]

Made top 8 in a small Vintage event in Brussels this weekend sporting RND Tezz, same maindeck as posted in this thread. (results will be up soon) got knocked out of top 8 by Tyrant Oath... And I do want to stress Tyrant Oath with maindeck waste / strip (which I obviously walked into like a donk) Still, the maindeck played exceptionally well and I like how it handled itself. I faced the mirror Shops, Tezz and drew with my top 8 Oath opponent to get into top 8.

@ Ancestral Recall:
3cc over 2cc can improve your game against the metagame on a strategic level.

K how can you fix your mana base? For a 3CC tezz list? Cut an underground sea for a tropical island? And what about decks with wastelands, like shop and some fish builds?

If I were to run any splash (Green, White, Red whatever) I'd definitely swap 1 Underground Sea for another Dual and 1 Basic for another. This weakens the "I got 4 basics" plan but not to a point where you become extremely vulnerable to decks wanting to abuse this weakness.

I'm separating "Getting around Gargadon" and "finding other ways to kill you" into two distinct things.  It is safe to say that if the oath mage can "find other ways to kill you," nature's claim on the Oath instead of suspend Gargadon leaves you just as dead.  While Nature's Claim is certainly more versatile than Gargadon (and this weighs in its favor), the scenario Rico describes, where you have a Gargadon for their Oath but they kill you with something else, does not weigh in Claim's favor.  

Perhaps I wasn't as clear as I should have been.  My point had more to do with situations where the Oath player didn't bother casting or finding Oath at all, instead opting for a different route to victory altogether.  

There are many times the Oath deck draws something like Key and a tutor, at which point it makes a lot more sense to tutor for Vault instead of Oath.  I was just trying to reinforce the idea that Gargadon is only good against the Oath itself, whereas Claim is good against the Oath while also being good if their plan happens to be rushing for a Vault/Key.  I think it's relevant.  

Maybe I was a bit too harsh on Gargadon in my last post.  It's certainly a great card against Oath.  But my own experiences compelled me to speak up about it because it hasn't been too impressive from what I've seen.  

I think you're spot on with this post, the current crop of Oath decks have the ability to just choose a different route all together making those 3-4 Gargadon's you boarded in just seem like a bad Mountain goat (because you know, Mountain Goat it just gets to attack faster so ) It's no longer just a "I stop Oath from either resolving or triggering" battle as they have multiple angles to attack you with. They are basically the same deck as Tezz making them just as able to backup the Vault / Key plan. Imho they should be taken care of like we would take care of the mirror. The biggest difference between their decks and something like RND Tezz are the Oath's, Orchards over Confidant, Basics making them have a bit better "oops I just win" factor against Golem decks or non-selkie fish (Selkie is still a bitch to face) and we need to work a bit to auto beat them.

Regarding Thada:
I have to agree with Cruel Ultimatum, a better card for the Mirror and against Stax is Magus of the Unseen. And that card isn’t played since Gencon.

Magus is definitely powerfull although it has some drawbacks like the opponent must cast the artifact in order for you to steal it. While with Thada you get to search the library for it and exile it. Which might be a bigger factor all together. Magus gives your opponent the opportunity to time when to cast the stuff you want to steal.

Regarding Gargadon:
I think that with the hate you need to devote to Ichorid, you don’t have enough place in you ‘re SB to have such a narrow card. The Fact that Chewer is also narrow and only to be used against Stax fills  your SB with cards that are very limited in its use, especially when going to a unknown meta game.

Agreed, as stated earlier I dislike Gargadon because of reasons Rico Suave and myself have been saying in this thread.

@ Ancestral Recall:
3cc over 2cc can improve your game against the metagame on a strategic level.
•   If you Repeal Oath you have a Time Walk. If you Claim Oath your opponent needs to find a new one.
•   The fact you can stop Oath from resolving  is a given, because you play 10 Counters, however, moswt Oath deck play also 10 Counters.
•   Why fight over Oath if you have your combo in hand.

It's not a strategic improvement it's a tactical one, as in it doesn't change your strategy one bit (you're still "time walking" untill you can infi time walk of vault key) Your first point is true, however, Time Walking is "good enough" if you can win with that extra turn, Repeal also lets you deal with stuff claim cannot (Opposing Welder, Confidant, Thada, Cold-Eyed Selkie, Meddling Mage, Pridemage) your other 2 points are rather obvious and don't add a lot imho.

[Grand Inquisitor]

K how can you fix your mana base? For a 3CC tezz list?

The configuration working for me has been:

8x acceleration
6x Fetch
3x Island
3x Underground
3x Tropical (previously Volcanic)
1x Tolarian Academy

While I haven't played it in a tournament, I've tested the following configuration:

(from above)
-1 Tropical Island
+1 sideboard card (usually Mystic Remora for my meta)

+1 Forest in the sideboard

This allows the Misty>Forest play against workshops which can be really solid.  Also, since a lot of my metagame is Oath/Tezzeret, it makes my deck a little threat heavier game 1 with only 23 souces.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Got to play in a small tourney last night with a few discoveries:

1) Repeal did some broken things, but I don't think I'd want too many of them
2) The 23 mana + forest worked fine
3) I used a strategy where I sided down to 20 mana sources against Oath and lots of hate, making that matchup almost unwinnable for them
4) I still think Spell Pierce is a pile

[Marske]

@GI,

1) Repeal did some broken things, but I don't think I'd want too many of them

Awesome, having 3 Repeal makes it show up just enough to see the broken things without being stuck with them.

2) The 23 mana + forest worked fine

Interesting

3) I used a strategy where I sided down to 20 mana sources against Oath and lots of hate, making that matchup almost unwinnable for them

Which is similar to what I do, this works great vs them even if you're UB.

4) I still think Spell Pierce is a pile

Disagree obv

Thanks for sharing your results!

[Tha Gunslinga]

3) I used a strategy where I sided down to 20 mana sources against Oath and lots of hate, making that matchup almost unwinnable for them

What hate, specifically?

[Grand Inquisitor]

What hate, specifically?

I think post board the reactive elements look like this:

4 FoW
4 Mana Drain
3 Duress
3 Seal of Primordium
3 Nature's Claim
2 Thoughtseize
1 Krosan Grip
1 Repeal
(2 Mystic Remora)

So basically you have great coverage on the stack, on the board and attacking their hand.  Show and Tell is probably the most worrisome thing.  With only 20 mana sources you can basically cantrip to victory provided you don't fall into a tempo trap and fail to find removal in the first two turns.

The large anti-art/ench package was mostly in anticipation of playing MUD (along with Oath).  It's still in the early phase of testing/finding balance with the other SB/MD wiggle slots.

[Marske]

@GI,
Would you mind sharing your entire list + SB as this looks rather interesting. I've seen some UBg and UBgr list floating around (see the Brussels report here) doing some interesting things as well.

[Grand Inquisitor]

3 Dark Confidant
2 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Jace, the Mind Sculptor*

4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain
3 Duress
2 Thoughtseize
1 Rebuild
1 Repeal*
1 Mystic Remora*

1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Time Walk
1 Ponder*
1 Tinker

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

8 Solomoxcrypt
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Scalding Tarn
1 Flooded Strand
1 Snow-Covered Island
2 Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Tropical Island
1 Tolarian Academy

Sideboard (15):
4 Yixlid Jailer
3 Nature's Claim
3 Seal of Primordium
1 Krosan Grip
1 Perish
1 Mystic Remora
1 Pithing Needle
1 Forest

This is the list, but I'll add the caveat again that the new stuff (mostly the transition to green) is fairly untested compared with the core (9 months+).  As it stands, I'm guessing it's weak to Fish, but that's always something I've been comfortable with.  It hammers the mirror, oath and ritual combo and can manage against workshops and dredge.  I'm still considering * cards in the MD, changes to which could heavily influence the SB.

[matt_sperling]

1 Jace, the Mind Sculptor*

I hope the * means you are considering adding a 2nd and not considering cutting him.

[Grand Inquisitor]

I hope the * means you are considering adding a 2nd and not considering cutting him.

No, actually I've found it to be weak and clunky.

[Tha Gunslinga]

What are you boarding out vs Oath?

[Grand Inquisitor]

Something like this:

1 Rebuild
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Tinker
1 Tezzeret the Seeker
1 Sphinx of the Steel Wind
1 Sol Ring
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Pearl
~
3 Nature's Claim
3 Seal of Primordium
1 Krosan Grip
1 Mystic Remora

Although now that I think about it, I may have left in Gifts Ungiven > Repeal.

[Smmenen]

@Tha Gunslinga,
Sure I can, you'll most likely still claim how Oath would beat it regardless of what I say either way I'm all for sharing so here you go:

Topic split from here to not clutter up the results thread with discussion regarding a deck. Marske

RND - Tezzeret
As Suggested by M. van Zundert

Main Deck:

//Creatures
3 Dark Confidant
1 Sphinx of the Steel wind

//Recursion
1 Yawgmoth’s Will
1 Timetwister

//Tutor
1 Tezzeret, the Seeker
1 Tinker
1 Mystical Tutor
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Demonic Tutor

//Draw
1 Time Walk
1 Brainstorm
2 Sensei’s Divining Top
1 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Jace, The Mindsculptor

//Disruption
4 Force of Will
3 Mana Drain
3 Spell Pierce
3 Repeal
1 Hurkyl’s Recall

//Kill
1 Voltaic Key
1 Time Vault

//Artifact Mana
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sol Ring
1 Black Lotus
1 Mana Crypt

//Lands
4 Polluted Delta
2 Misty Rainforest
4 Underground Sea
3 Island
1 Snow-Covered Island
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Library of Alexandria

Sideboard:
4 Leyline of the Void
3 Ravenous Trap
3 Duress
2 Energy Flux
1 Rebuild
1 Hurkyl’s Recall
1 Tendrils of Agony

Marske

I don't understand this decklist.  it looks like a hybrid of Bob tez and the new virtually mono blue european tez lists with 3+ tez, 4 drains, 4 spell pierce, and a super duper stable mana base, and a bunch of bounce.  

the thing i like about the new tez lists out of europe is that they have tons of good countermagic to combat oath, and a bunch of tezes to win the game, plenty of basic lands to beat mud, and a ton of bounce for both mud and oath.  

i don't see how this list is an improvement.  repeal may be decent against oath, but it's weak against mud.   i could see repeal if you ran mystic remora, but you don't.  

you might as well run annul insetad.

i see this as better than traditional bob tez against oath, but i don't see this as stronger against either MUD or Fish.   and i don't understand timetwister's role in here at all.  

[Marske]

First, let me note one thing, I'm really glad all you people are talking about stuff regarding this list that now has won 5 weekly events 4 in Europe 1 (Zieby, Myself, Cruel) in the US and has 1 top 8 in an although small but packed meta (Brussels) I've not talked in lenght about this decklist because honestly it just came from a request to see the Tezz list I was running at the time, I was no where near putting up anything "primer-esque" regarding it, or "releasing it", the decks performance has surprised even myself, now one could say it's just the fact that the deck runs the best combo in the world of Vintage and it's pilots have not been total donks (not sure if this is true ) but it has been bigger then I expected when I was working on the list.

Now sure, it's not that this list is doing stuff that no other deck has been doing, It's indeed strikingly familiar to other European Tezz lists as Smmenen has noted, let me try to explain why. (btw if people so desire I'm willing to put up a more "article like" post regarding the process I took to create this list)

I don't understand this decklist.  it looks like a hybrid of Bob tez and the new virtually mono blue european tez lists with 3+ tez, 4 drains, 4 spell pierce, and a super duper stable mana base, and a bunch of bounce.  

It IS a hybrid of Bob Tezz and European (control / storm lists) I took what we were doing with Watskeburt?! and instead of playing a Storm kill I wanted to play the best combo in Vintage^(TM) instead of running 3+ Tezz (which I think is running too much dead cards) I wanted other stuff like Confidant (or Remora which was in the deck) I really like the 4-3-3 split of FoW, Drain, Pierce and I think running 12 counters is a bit too much.

the thing i like about the new tez lists out of europe is that they have tons of good countermagic to combat oath, and a bunch of tezes to win the game, plenty of basic lands to beat mud, and a ton of bounce for both mud and oath.  

I have only 2 counters less then other European Tezz lists, on the other hand, Jace + Repeals are all "time walks" or solutions to Oath and I've had a turn 1 Jace vs Shops past Brussels event that kept Golem from being a real threat for 3 Turns letting me win with Confidant and eventually Tezz. (Yes I had 4 Basics out during that match) I only lost to Oath because I fetched a dual and he ran wastes during top 8.

i don't see how this list is an improvement.  repeal may be decent against oath, but it's weak against mud.   i could see repeal if you ran mystic remora, but you don't.  

you might as well run annul insetad.

I never claimed it was an improvement , ok seriously I had Remora in the deck and then in the SB, but I prefer having Dark Confidant against just about any matchup except against Oath. Repeal isn't the hottest card against shops, this is true, but it's not THAT mediocre, I've bounced Spheres, Chalices and what not and it definitely has it's uses.

What people fail to realize is that a hand with Repeal, Mystical, (preferably FoW backup) and 2 U lands + a Mox is a kill if you run Tendrils (which was just put in the board from the maindeck a few minutes before the event that triggerd this thread), Repeal has about a tenfold more uses then Annul which is very narrow and has always bothered me when I tested it (which I indeed did)

i see this as better than traditional bob tez against oath, but i don't see this as stronger against either MUD or Fish.   and i don't understand timetwister's role in here at all.  

Repeal and Jace combined with Confidant have all been stellar against Fish and have all been carrying their worth against MUD as well, now I'm not claiming these matchups are favorable or anything they are however, very very winnable Fish has not been a real problem, not during testing or events.

Let me quote Brassman (which I rememberd from reading it way back) he explained why he liked twister, and I think it's still very true and also very relevant for this deck as well as it plays out very similar to the deck he ran way back (it just kills differently) :

How did Timetwister work for you? I am most interested in this card. A long time ago, as some may remember, Timetwister was a part of almost every T1 deck much like Ancestral Recall is now where applicable. It fell from grace due to the interaction with the graveyard and newly developing archetypes that shifted the focus away from it.

      How is this card working for you thus far? Happy with it?

    Maxx Matt summed up some of the synergies pretty well, and T00L has almost as much experience playing this list as I do, but I'll throw in my two cents.  I think it's ironic that you say it dropped off the map because of graveyard interaction (which is probably somewhat true), because that's the number one reason I run it.  Timetwister is a great defensive tool against a player who's graveyard is stacked and ready to win.  It can single-handedly win the Ichorid matchup, but it's also great against players who have to Gifts or DT and then pass the turn, or combo players who have been bleeding counters out of your hand for a bigger threat.  
     What I tell people who criticize its randomness, is that you don't *have* to cast it when you draw it.  Unlike a dedicated Storm deck that needs to keep swimming or die, you can sit back if the right play is to sit back.  There are certainly exceptions, but if you have a better board, a better hand, and a better yard than your opponent, you're going to win if you don't cast Twister, the dead card won't kill you.  If you're behind, Twister is just about the best topdeck you can imagine.
     In testing I refer to Twister as "The Ultimate Out."  You know those situations where you try to think of what card saves you, and your only out is something like: rip ancestral, draw into Lotus, Hurkyl's, Will?  Timetwister actually finds those cards, and it wins when your out is *four* seperate cards off the top.  It's tough to time properly, and sometimes it screws you, but it gives your deck outs that no other card (yes, including Will, Wheel of Fortune, and Tinker->Jar) can.

[ancestral recall]

3 Dark Confidant
2 Sensei's Divining Top
1 Jace, the Mind Sculptor*

4 Force of Will
4 Mana Drain
3 Duress
2 Thoughtseize
1 Rebuild
1 Repeal*
1 Mystic Remora*

1 Demonic Tutor
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Yawgmoth's Will
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Brainstorm
1 Gifts Ungiven
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Time Walk
1 Ponder*
1 Tinker

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

8 Solomoxcrypt
4 Misty Rainforest
1 Scalding Tarn
1 Flooded Strand
1 Snow-Covered Island
2 Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Tropical Island
1 Tolarian Academy

Sideboard (15):
4 Yixlid Jailer
3 Nature's Claim
3 Seal of Primordium
1 Krosan Grip
1 Perish
1 Mystic Remora
1 Pithing Needle
1 Forest

This is the list, but I'll add the caveat again that the new stuff (mostly the transition to green) is fairly untested compared with the core (9 months+).  As it stands, I'm guessing it's weak to Fish, but that's always something I've been comfortable with.  It hammers the mirror, oath and ritual combo and can manage against workshops and dredge.  I'm still considering * cards in the MD, changes to which could heavily influence the SB.

I look at this list and some choices seems very strange. Your deck has to following differences:

+ 3 Duress
+ 2 Thoughtseize
+ 1 Rebuild
+ 1 mystic remora
+ 1 ponder

- 2 Repeal
- 3 Spell Pierce
- 1 hurkyl's recall
- 1 timetwister
- 1 mystical tutor

Why you choose for an non interactive disruption package ( Duress and Thoughtseize) over a interactive package like 4 Force of Will, 3 Mana Drain, 3 Spell Pierce, 3 Repeal. Against decks with Sensei's Divining Top these disruption cards are very useless and do nothing. Cards like pierce repeal are better against topdecks or things you don't like on the board.

About mystic remora

You run 4 pitch counters in your decklist (4 fow). With remora in play you have to choose to pay for remora or sac remora. If you pay every turn for remora you lose control because you have less mana and gives an opponent the change to do something useful. The static change you draw a pitch counter while you're tapped (out) for remora is very low. So What's the reason why you choose for this card with only 4 pitch counters.

[Grand Inquisitor]

Why you choose for an non interactive disruption package

Forget FoW and Mana Drain, I'm completely on board with these cards (although I could see scenarios of going down to 3x Drain).  Repeal is something where I see its value, but I don't want too many of them.  Whether that's personal taste or w/e, I think we've already covered that above.

Spell Pierce vs. Duress/Thoughtseize seems to be the center of the disagreement.  I'm willing to concede that Spell Pierce is a better 'general' card because it's superior against Workshops.  I play Duress/Thoughtseize for because (1) it's miles better in the control and combo matchups (2) I think information is invaluable for success in T1 and (3) a major goal of my list is to reach the midgame where spell pierce is especially weak.

About mystic remora

Mystic Remora in the maindeck is because I've cut my 24th land and can move a SB card in.  I feel this is the best choice because it's a strong turn one play against a majority of the field, it's blue and it's strong against Oath?Tez, which I consider the decks to beat (I haven't adequately tested MUD, but maybe it's up there too).

You're right that I don't run Commandeer, etc, so I can't leverage it as well as other lists.  Still, it's a powerful card that slows down the game and often creates a lot of card advantage.  It also works very well with Duress/Thoughtseize.

*In general, I think the strategies of my list are off from what RND is trying to do.  I offered above to split the conversation off from this thread, but no one took me up on it.

[DubDub]

Why you choose for an non interactive disruption package ( Duress and Thoughtseize) over a interactive package like 4 Force of Will, 3 Mana Drain, 3 Spell Pierce, 3 Repeal. Against decks with Sensei's Divining Top these disruption cards are very useless and do nothing. Cards like pierce repeal are better against topdecks or things you don't like on the board.

Duress and Thoughtseize should not be thought of as 'non interactive'.  Spell Pierce doesn't interact with creatures, and Repeal doesn't interact with Gaddock Teeg, or Tinker.  Force of Will doesn't interact with Vexing Shusher (or at least, not profitably in most normal situations).

[Marske]

@Everybody regarding Duress / Thoughtseize,
My biggest problem with these cards has nothing to do with these cards but with a card that has just recently taken up a spot as "Vintage Staple". In the days of Old people had 4x Brainstorm to hide cards from Duress / Thoughtseize, this meant a couple of things, first you had to HAVE Brainstorm in hand and second you needed U mana open to cast it in response to them playing Duress / Seize. Now why do I bring this up? It's 1 card that has altered the landscape and made Duress / Seize "worse" for me, It's name is Sensei's Divining Top...

Any good player can easily keep the spell they really need to resolve floating on top of their decks, safely out of reach of all your Duress / Seizes and what not, they don't need U mana as any color or even colorless mana will do to keep it safe and once it's in play you can use it every turn. That's the biggest reason why I prefer Spell Pierce over it, It lets me interact when they DO go for it and it ignores Sensei's Top entirely (As they do have to cast it), untill they print an instant speed Duress effect (highly unlikely) or ban Sensei's top this well be the case.

I play Duress/Thoughtseize for because (1) it's miles better in the control and combo matchups (2) I think information is invaluable for success in T1 and (3) a major goal of my list is to reach the midgame where spell pierce is especially weak.

I agree with your point 1, however, point 2 is highly debatable, what information do you really need? I've not played with Duress / Seize in any deck (other then TPS) since Top came crashing into the scene. I've been able to "guess" what my opponent has going for them I don't need to "know" what they have in hand as Sensei's top extends that hand by 3 more cards they "could" have so the information you're getting from Duress / Seize actually doesn't mean that much (at least to me). Your point 3 seems obviously the goal of any control deck, I find myself often having 5-6 plus lands and I'm not running Fastbond here... Spell Pierce takes on a different character when you hit the midgame, the way I look at it, Spell Pierce is your early gun and Mana Drain your midgame gun, safe to say Pierce can still be "backup" or good in counter wars or to just keep opponents off UU mana (as they are using their lands to pay for Spell Pierce.

Note, I'm not saying it's good late game or anything as it's obviously incredibly subpar to any other counter (Yes even Cancel) when it gets to the midgame, but it's mana cost together with it's tying down of the opponents mana if they DO pay for it aren't worthless either.

[matt_sperling]

Any good player can easily keep the spell they really need to resolve floating on top of their decks, safely out of reach of all your Duress / Seizes and what not

This assumes they have turns to be topping and an extra mana or two to manipulate the top all the time.  Spell Pierce tends to decline in value in this scenario.  I'm not convinced Top has all that much to do with the Duress/seize v. Pierce decision, since Pierce doesn't do a whole lot either when they have top going and you don't have a pro-active plan. 

[Marske]

Any good player can easily keep the spell they really need to resolve floating on top of their decks, safely out of reach of all your Duress / Seizes and what not

This assumes they have turns to be topping and an extra mana or two to manipulate the top all the time.  Spell Pierce tends to decline in value in this scenario.  I'm not convinced Top has all that much to do with the Duress/seize v. Pierce decision, since Pierce doesn't do a whole lot either when they have top going and you don't have a pro-active plan. 

Since GI was talking on the use of Duress / Seize in the control vs control mirror it's pretty safe to assume both players have some mana and you have Top. Like I said, what I like about Pierce is that I get to interact with my opponent when they do go for it, sure it's not the BEST kinda interaction but it's more intereaction then Duress / Seize gives me.

[ancestral recall]

@ Marske

Thanks for explain my point like I said above. With spell pierce you can interact with your opponent, that's what I was trying to say.

[Grand Inquisitor]

it's pretty safe to assume both players have some mana

This is exactly when I find Spell Pierce ineffective.

[Marske]

@GI,
Tapping down U mana with Ice (Fire/Ice) has been proven effective in the past, baiting people into tapping down UU with Pierce might be just as effective.... I've not experienced any problems what so ever with people that could pay for Pierce, If you have 4 mana, and you tap 2 to play a spell and I pierce you have a couple choices, you Either A: Pay 2 mana B: Counter with FoW or Pierce or Drain or C: you accept it getting countered.

Now Obviously, if C is the case then I might be in trouble, but depending on what I have in hand if you counter with Pierce and I can pay for it you're on the losing hand, if you FoW it's good (obv) if you Drain you just shut off your own Drain to shut off my counter so Now I get to resolve <insert instant speed card here> or another broken thing during my own turn. Now sure, there are infi scenarios when this just doesn't work and the spell you're trying to stop just plain ends the game, but I still think this is a lot better and gives the "defending player" (my opponent) more room to fuck stuff up by making the wrong choice then when I'm facing this scenario with a Duress in hand which is pretty useless.

Now, an argument could be made that you could have duressed that bomb away, but it could very well have been hidden on top or topdecked.

[personalbackfire]

@ Marske:

I don't really buy the whole argument of Top has changed the value of duress. First off you talk, or maybe I'm misreading your argument, as if you always have top. I mean isn't that the point, that any good player will have the top card floating on top of their deck instead of in hand making Duress worse? Well your list only runs two of (I think) the card in it, so how is it you always seem to have it to negate the Duress's coming your way? Worse off for this argument, most people around here, (northeast USA assumption) only play one Top in Tezz/Oath lists, so they won't be seeing as much as you are in general. Therefor, I can assume that since they wont be seeing it every game my Duress is often fine. Second, Duress/seize is usually pretty good on on turn one. Actually it is my experience that this is usually when its best. So that info that you wouldn't be able to gain any other way since its turn one or two is now yours and you have an edge because of it. Not to mention, Top would be pretty much be ineffective at stopping what I want to take at this point in the game.  Lastly, you mentioned Duress as better in the Brainstorm age as they have to tap a blue mana to protect themselves. I find this just wrong. Duress became better after brainstorm was restricted because now players can't reliably protect themselves against Duress/seize. You having top in play has nothing to do with whats in your hand, specifically in your opening hand, assuming you get a top down turn one and start toping immediately to protect yourself from future duress.

I am not saying that their aren't valid arguments for running Pierce over Duress/seize, I just don't buy yours. That is unless I misread/understand what you are saying.