TheManaDrain.com
September 04, 2025, 06:32:15 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
Author Topic: Nauseating your Opponent: today's ANT  (Read 12953 times)
Killane
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 799

I am become Death, the destroyer of Worlds


View Profile
« Reply #30 on: October 25, 2010, 02:24:14 pm »

The fact that a Storm deck made top 8 does not make it a good choice. The Sphere matchup is everywhere and it is NOT favorable, even for TPS. The shop decks TPS was built to kill did not have Resistors that also beat for 5. It's a whole new ballgame.

It's not that Storm decks are bad. I love them- I started thsi thread for crying out loud! But my experience and obsevations have led me to believe that they are not they right choice right now. Yes, you might get a bunch of good matchups and smash face, but it's also just as possible these days to sit down accross from 5 consecutive shop opponents, in which case you need a huge number of god hands to top 8.

Resistors are the natural predator of Storm decks. It just so happens that Storm hasn't received any gits recently (apart from the unrestrction of Gush, more to follow in a moment), whereas someone at wizards obv loves shops.

As far a Gush is concerned, I imagine the "best" Storm deck out there is a Gushbond deck with a Tendrils and/or ETW kill. the Gush engine allows (potentially) greater speed than TPS while still supporting FoW. I am no Gush expert though, and I've had no time to build and test decks recently, so I have no decklist, but I feel that the "correct" direction of Storm right now is Gush, not ANT. Gush is certainly easier to resolve through Spheres Wink
Logged

DCI Rules Advisor
_____________________________ _____
Are you playing The Game?
Pages: 1 [2]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.027 seconds with 17 queries.