TheManaDrain.com
September 16, 2025, 01:32:24 pm *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8
  Print  
Author Topic: [Premium Article] So Many Insane Plays: The Return of Burning Long!  (Read 45247 times)
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #180 on: January 19, 2013, 10:24:31 pm »

I won another tournament with this today in Vacaville (16 players). Half of top 4 was Burning Tendrils.

Dave Williams and Lou Christopher also split 1st/2nd with my deck at a 16 man in Las Vegas today as well.  
« Last Edit: January 20, 2013, 01:01:44 am by Smmenen » Logged

Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #181 on: January 22, 2013, 01:15:01 am »


But even Steve's comments about his tournament play shows one of the structural problems endemic to the archetype: it's extremely difficult to play.


I'm not reviving this part of this thread for the purpose of gloating (which would serve no real purpose), but quite the opposite, to say: you are right. 

This deck IS extremely difficult to play.  I have now played with this deck in three tournaments, and won two of them (the two larger ones).  In the process, I've had the opportunity to observe other people play this deck.  I've also talked with teammates, like Paul Mastriano, who have observed others as well.  And I have to say that you are absolutely right.   

This deck is very difficult too, so much so that in the last tournament I played, I observed one player playing this deck, and I *literally* thought everything he did was wrong.   This is not hyperbole:

* Every land drop was wrong (his land drop sequencing was suboptimal)
* Every Mox sequence was wrong
* Every tutor choice was wrong
* When he played Necro was wrong
* The mana he used to play Necro was wrong
* The amount of cards he drew with Necro was wrong
* The cards he discarded with Necro were wrong.

In short, I didn't see a single correct play.   

As you point out, the enormous opportunity for error should mean diminishing returns for a deck like this.   And yet, I think it actually means the opposite. 

In my newest article on the history of Vintage, I take a very close look at Brian Weissman's innovation, The Deck, and analyze a wide swath of Brian's writings.   One of the things that I found so endearing about his creation is this: that The Deck provides -- and offers to pilots -- never ending self-improvement.  That is, the ceiling is so high with that deck that it is, more so than probably any other deck, performance scaling directly to ability.  The worse a player is, the worse the player will do.  The better the player is, the better the player will do. 

That is extremely attractive.  The idea of continuous improvement, of scaling or leveling up, of becoming better over time with a deck is extremely appealing.  It means that this is a Type I/Vintage weapon, where you can improve over time and get better and better.  It's something you can take the time to learn, and it will reward you.  It puts skill, once again, back into the very center of the format -- where decision making, where pilot ability, is the most important variable. 

The flip side of the incompetence I've observed is very high levels of competence.  I watched David Ochoa and Ryan Reynalds play it very, very well.  I only disagreed with three plays that I saw David make (in one game, I don't think he was aggressive enough with Necro, and in another I would have done a trick stack sequence (involving Ponder, response Hurkys, response break Jar), and the third was a mistake he made in our mirror match).  The point is that the more technically proficient the player, the better they will perform.  I'm pretty sure that had I not beaten David in the mirror, he would have won our tournament (I could be wrong though). 

The point you were making though, that this deck is so difficult to play that my salesmenship may mislead players, I think has been proven wrong.   The deck has now won several major tournaments in Europe, and I've watched increasingly competent players in both Ohio and California learn and master this deck.  I've now played 3 mirror matches in tournaments, and have not lost a single game (despite losing the die roll in all of them, where there was a die roll).  That has to be extremely attractive to players who believe they are highly skilled and highly able players.   Paul Mastriano made top 16 in the invitational, losing one of his two matches to the illegal deck.  And I've watched players I find to be very good do very well with this as well, here and abroad.  Players other than me have proven able to win with this. 

My point though is this: while being difficult to play is certain a barrier or a challenge, it's also a worthwhile challenge.  As long as a deck is not actually impossible to play, it promises that the better you are, the better you will perform.   What more could we possibly ask for in Vintage?   I'd rather play a deck with an extremely low floor and an extremely high ceiling, than a deck with a high floor and more limited ceiling.   Wouldn't you?   I find most Grixis, Dredge and Workshop decks to have high floors, but lower ceilings than Long.  It's hard to really scrub out, but the potential for maximizing performance by truly exceptional play is simply not there in the same degree.  That's my opinion, at least.   
Logged

Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #182 on: March 09, 2013, 09:30:46 pm »

I got 1st place in Vacaville again with this deck. #3inarow
Logged

Metman
Basic User
**
Posts: 295



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #183 on: March 09, 2013, 10:04:10 pm »

Congratulations on another win Steve. 

I don't subscribe to your premium articles, but only for one reason and it's not because I think you don't deserve the money for writing nor is it because I don't think it is worth it.  I simply do not have enough time during the school year to read, analyze, test, and therefore invest in Magic.  Come summer I plan on spending the time and perhaps money on reading articles outside of "free content."

With all that in mind, I was hoping you would be writing a report on your win.  I would like to hear about, not just you the lines you took, but also the lines you considered and did not take.  Playing a Storm deck such as Burning Long has been complicated and frustrating at times in my testing because I do not think I am aware of all the possible decisions I could be taking.  If you were to write a report it would be nice to hear about some lines you know others may take but that would not necessarily be the best.  Does that make any sense?   
Logged

Recently moved to West Phoenix and looking for Vintage players. Please PM me.

Check out my Vintage Magic Blog
http://vintagemagicponderings.blogspot.com/
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #184 on: March 10, 2013, 11:50:29 pm »

If that's the kind of report you are looking for, I strongly encourage you to read my last Vacaville tournament report, as it is 40 pages of exactly that content.  I decompressed game states for detail line analysis, even quizzing readers on sequencing and branch play.  Or you can get all of my Burning Tendrils articles together for the combo package on eternal-central (which discounts all of them).
Logged

Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #185 on: May 05, 2013, 02:46:38 am »

A few updates:

* I published another Vacaville Report about a month ago.  For people who really want to learn how to play this deck, I invite you to get inside my head with this article as I illustrate how to think through each situation.  I also present puzzles for the reader before I suggest the answers.  

Since Matt and others brought this up in their reports, I only ran Time Vault/Key in one tournament as an experiment, and only advocate for it in the Oathless version, which I discuss in the my report.  I don't run Key/Vault in the Oath version.  I played 2 other cards in those slots at the Eudemonia event, but I only ran the Key/vault thing in one event as an experiment. 

* Worldslayer wrote a very entertaining report with this archetype here /

* Matt Elias wrote another entertaining report here: http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=45237.0

* Most recenty,  I see Soly and Jimmy McCarthy both got 1st and 2nd at the Twuan Invitational today with this deck.  I look forward to seeing their reports.
You can see all of the updates here: https://twitter.com/ThallidTosser

And a cool photo of the finals:

* Finally, Eternal Central created a combo pack where you can buy the first 4 articles I wrote on this archetype for a 20% discount on the first four articles: http://www.eternalcentral.com/?p=3681

« Last Edit: May 05, 2013, 03:13:46 am by Smmenen » Logged

Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #186 on: May 13, 2013, 03:12:30 pm »

A couple more updates:

* Someone won the Bazaar of Moxen trial with this deck using Matt Elias 2 repeals in it.

http://www.watchdamatch.com/tournois/coverage/bom-day-4/

Color Control
Björklund Rasmus

image_carte

12 Lands :
1 Tolarian Academy
4 Forbidden Orchard
4 City of Brass
3 Gemstone Mine

2 Créatures :
2 Griselbrand

46 Other Spells :
4 Dark Ritual
4 Duress
4 Oath of Druid
4 Burning Wish
2 Repeal
2 Hurkyll’s Recall
2 Chrome Mox
1 Wheel of Fortune
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Black Lotus
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Sol Ring
1 Lotus Petal
1 Time Walk
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Opal
1 Vampiric Tutor
1 Lyon’s Eye Diamond
1 Yawgmoth’s Bargain
1 Mana Vault
1 Brainstorm
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Necropotence
1 Windfall
1 Mana Crypt
1 Demonic Tutor
1 Memory Jar
1 Ponder
1 Mind’s Desire
1 Mox Opal

Sideboard :
3 Ancient Tomb
3 Nature’s Claim
1 Hurkyl’s Recall
1 Thoughtseize
1 Show and Tell
1 Shattering Spree
1 Grapeshot
1 Tendrils of Agony
1 Balance
1 Yawgmoth’s Will
1 Empty the Warrens

The difference from the list in my articles and this are:

+ 2 Repeal
+ 3rd Gemstone

Tinker is too good to cut, IMO, for a bunch of reasons.   Moving on:

* Soly and Jimmy played this deck in the finals of the Twuan serious open:
http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=45305.0

* And Ray Robillard and Matt Elias played it to top 4 at the TDG open.

http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=45300.0
« Last Edit: May 13, 2013, 11:05:14 pm by Smmenen » Logged

JACO
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 1215


Don't be a meatball.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #187 on: May 13, 2013, 07:30:36 pm »

A couple more updates:

* Someone won the Bazaar of Moxen with this deck using Matt Elias 2 repeals in it.

http://www.watchdamatch.com/tournois/coverage/bom-day-4/
Just to clarify, it Top 8'd the 180 man Vintage TRIAL, it did not win the main event nor the Trial. The lists posted are not in order of finish.
Logged

Want to write about Vintage, Legacy, Modern, Type 4, or Commander/EDH? Eternal Central is looking for writers! Contact me. Follow me on Twitter @JMJACO. Follow Eternal Central on Twitter @EternalCentral.
brianpk80
2015 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1333



View Profile
« Reply #188 on: May 13, 2013, 09:22:52 pm »

The Main Event was won by BUG Fish.  
Logged

"It seems like a normal Monk deck with all the normal Monk cards.  And then the clouds divide...  something is revealed in the skies."
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #189 on: May 13, 2013, 09:43:20 pm »

I knew that - I watched the finals Smile
Logged

Samoht
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1392


Team RST


View Profile Email
« Reply #190 on: May 13, 2013, 09:58:34 pm »

I knew that - I watched the finals Smile

Oh, because you said the deck won the BoM in your post, so we all thought that you didn't know.
Logged

Char? Char you! I like the play.
-Randy Bueller

I swear I'll burn the city down to show you the light.

The best part of believe is the lie
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #191 on: May 13, 2013, 10:36:35 pm »

I intended to write the word "trial," and thought I had. 
Logged

Samoht
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1392


Team RST


View Profile Email
« Reply #192 on: May 13, 2013, 10:50:47 pm »

I intended to write the word "trial," and thought I had. 

Except that it also didn't win the trial, it just Top 8'd.
Logged

Char? Char you! I like the play.
-Randy Bueller

I swear I'll burn the city down to show you the light.

The best part of believe is the lie
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #193 on: May 13, 2013, 11:03:59 pm »

I intended to write the word "trial," and thought I had. 

Except that it also didn't win the trial, it just Top 8'd.

I was told it won the trial on twitter.  How do u know?
Logged

Samoht
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1392


Team RST


View Profile Email
« Reply #194 on: May 13, 2013, 11:28:38 pm »

A couple more updates:

* Someone won the Bazaar of Moxen with this deck using Matt Elias 2 repeals in it.

http://www.watchdamatch.com/tournois/coverage/bom-day-4/
Just to clarify, it Top 8'd the 180 man Vintage TRIAL, it did not win the main event nor the Trial. The lists posted are not in order of finish.

I trust JACO to have fact checked.
Logged

Char? Char you! I like the play.
-Randy Bueller

I swear I'll burn the city down to show you the light.

The best part of believe is the lie
JACO
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 1215


Don't be a meatball.


View Profile WWW
« Reply #195 on: May 13, 2013, 11:38:15 pm »

I intended to write the word "trial," and thought I had. 

Except that it also didn't win the trial, it just Top 8'd.

I was told it won the trial on twitter.  How do u know?
I was told MUD won that trial, but perhaps the information I have was incorrect.
Logged

Want to write about Vintage, Legacy, Modern, Type 4, or Commander/EDH? Eternal Central is looking for writers! Contact me. Follow me on Twitter @JMJACO. Follow Eternal Central on Twitter @EternalCentral.
PETER FLUGZEUG
Full Members
Basic User
***
Posts: 275


New Ease


View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #196 on: May 14, 2013, 03:02:57 am »

@smennen:

did you see how awesome abrupt decay was in the finals, when it blew up that chalice on 2? I think we get to see more and more how good of a card that is.
Logged

I will be playing four of these.  I'll worry about the deck later.
quicksilvervii
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 679


There will be water if Ka wills it.


View Profile
« Reply #197 on: May 14, 2013, 03:11:59 pm »

@smennen:

did you see how awesome abrupt decay was in the finals, when it blew up that chalice on 2? I think we get to see more and more how good of a card that is.


The card is definitely playable, I just think that it needed some time to really find a proper home.
Logged

When there is no wind, row.
voltron00x
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1640


View Profile WWW
« Reply #198 on: May 16, 2013, 10:44:16 am »

I played Balance in my sideboard last Saturday, and it was terrific.  After 10 rounds of Swiss, I'm 7-0-3 matches, 14-1 games, and I am definitely making some suboptimal plays.  I'm also 1-2 elimination rounds, though I think my strategy in game 2 of the top 8 in the previous event was entirely wrong and cost me the match.

I also think that, if the metagame by me stays so focused on blue (Landstill, Bomberman, Merfolk), that I will opt to skim out some sideboard cards in favor of 2-3 Defense Grid.

I beat Will on Martello Shops thanks to Ancient Tomb at exactly the right time letting me stick an Oath in game 2, and winning on turn 1 on the play game 1 (technically I won on turn 2 as I used Time Walk, but long story short, Will didn't get to take any turns).  4x Ancient Tomb is the right number against Shops, surely, but things have to give somewhere.  Perhaps with 2 Repeal I can go to 2 Nature's Claim in the board.

I've been thinking about trying a 3rd Griselbrand with a Show and Tell main and another in the sideboard.

I may add Tinker back to the deck as well. 
« Last Edit: May 16, 2013, 10:48:57 am by voltron00x » Logged

“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”

Team East Coast Wins
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #199 on: May 16, 2013, 01:39:43 pm »

I had a similar experience, and I think others (Soly) have as well.  At one point from the Team Serious Open through two Vacaville tournaments I had played 14 undefeated matches in a row, including against players like David Ochoa.   I don't think I've ever done that before in Vintage/Type I -- even in the Gush eras, etc.  

From October to the present moment, I have played in 5 tournaments now, and ended up 1st place in three of them.  I think my overall match record is something like 20-4, although bear in mind that my deck was not as refined in the first tournament as it is now.   Many of the new players have the benefit of alot of the technology I worked on since then, like Lab Maniac, which was not in the original published sideboard in my primer.   I hadn't, for example, figured out that I should playing multiple Hurkyl's Recalls maindeck.  That was a design innovation I only figured after my first tournament, and after doing research for my History of Vintage series, and played in the Team Serious Open

As I wrote in my team serious report:

Quote
The changes (from my original published primer to my team serious Open list) are as follows:

1) I added two Hurkyl’s Recall maindeck, and cut Demonic Consultation and Empty the Warrens to make room for them.  
2) I added two more Ancient Tomb and two Hurkyl’s Recall to the sideboard, cutting Thoughtseize, Empty the Warrens, a Shattering Spree, and Nature’s Claim from the sideboard.

The recognition that Hurkyl’s Recall would also be a mana accelerant reinforced my decision. As early as the Spring of 1994, Hurkyl’s Recall has been used as a mana accelerant in 4 Mana Vault, and later, in early 1997, with 4 Mana Crypts as well, to power out, first Fireballs, and then huge Prosperities. This deck is the modern descendant to those more primitive designs, where Tendrils of Agony has replaced threats like Kaervek’s Torch and Fireball. The emphasis in the early decks on

Also, I was using Shattering Spree rather than Nature's Claim because Dredge players at that point had not yet adopted Leyline of Sanctity.  That was a change I made after the Team Serious open for the Vacaville series that allowed me to win those.  

Re: some specific card choices:

* I ran Balance in my original primer's sideboard, and played it in the Vacaville tournament last year.   I ended up cutting it just for space reasons.  It's good against Beats/Fish decks, but my basic problem is that even against those decks it doesn't win the game by itself.  Even after you Balance, you still have to do more work to win.  Also, Balance is very hard to use because you have to decide which land to sacrifice and which cards to discard -- and in my experience, it's very easy to make a mistake in that respect.  Do you discard a Ritual or a Duress?  Do you sacrifice Gemstone at 2 or Orchard?  Make the wrong choice and you lose.    
* I've toyed with 3rd Griselbrand, but ultimately never pulled the trigger.  He's a fine man.  
* I've tested a single Defense Grid maindeck in that floating 2nd Mox Opal/Thoughtseize/ETW slot, and it's actually really good.  One of the things I liked about it is that I can Tinker for it as well.  
* I can't imagine playing without Tinker.   Tinker does so much for the deck.  Jar is the best draw7, and Tinker is the most efficient way to get it.  Just as important is the Tinker for Black Lotus, burning Wish for Will and the Tinker for LED when you already have Lotus or used it so you can Burning Wish for Will, and have two Loti out of the bin.  I also prefer the 2 Mox Opal lists at the moment, and in those lists, you can use Tinker to take out a Mox Opal to find Jar, and then play another Mox Opal at that time. 

I've said in this in all three of my tournament reports, but my #1 favorite thing about this deck is the fact that the ceiling is so ridiculously high on it.  It has a much lower floor for performance than most decks too, since if you aren't very good you will get crushed.  But even with my 10 years of experience with this archetype going back to the original Burning Tendrils deck which I helped get get restricted, tons of testing, and 5 tournaments, I still feel like I have much more to learn, and am always getting better.  There are very strange sorts of interactions, like triggering Maniac with a Bargain, that come up rarely, but need to be learned and mastered.

This archetype is the epitome of the Weissman ideal of a deck in which the pilot is always striving to improve with time and practice. Learning more about the deck and becoming better every tournament, if not every match, makes this deck increasingly addicting over time. The better you become with it, the more addicted you will become



Logged

voltron00x
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1640


View Profile WWW
« Reply #200 on: May 16, 2013, 02:05:44 pm »

Thanks for the thoughtful response. One of the best posts I've read on TMD in a long time.
Logged

“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”

Team East Coast Wins
voltron00x
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1640


View Profile WWW
« Reply #201 on: May 16, 2013, 06:48:03 pm »

I considered playing Mind Twist, too  Very Happy
Logged

“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”

Team East Coast Wins
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #202 on: May 16, 2013, 07:02:49 pm »

Which suffers from the same problem as Balance Smile

Here's the excerpt from my first Vacaville Report describing the game where I played Balance:

http://www.eternalcentral.com/?p=3506

Quote
Game 1:

My opening hand was:

 

Although this hand is land-lite, and has an overabundance of one-casting cost mana acceleration, an odd bottleneck, there are mitigating factors at work. First, this hand has Brainstorm, the universal fixer. If it resolves, Brainstorm is likely to smooth out this draw and find another mana source. Brainstorm will be all the more potent since I’ll have an 8th card in hand to work with, digging three more cards down.   

Second, this deck has a nontrivial chance of simply drawing a zero casting cost artifact accelerant either off the draw or with Brainstorm, and then use that mana source to play Sol Ring. After all, this deck has 15 artifact accelerants, 13 of which cost zero mana. The double Dark Rituals will also be useful for gearing up for a fast win with Yawgmoth’s Will if the proper ingredients come together. I can’t justifiably throw this hand back, although Mental Missteps are a nightmare here. Sequencing will be critical to survival.

Turn 1:

My opponent opens with Tropical Island into Noble Hierarch. This simple sequence tells me everything I need to know. My opponent is likely playing Bant Fish, and probably has at least one counterspell of some sort in hand. I need to be cautious of Wastelands, and make sure I am not putting myself in a lethal position if I am Wastelanded. I suspect he also runs Null Rod or Stony Silence. It is ironic that my hand is oddly impervious to that at the moment. Most importantly, my Oath of Druids is now live, as long as I can resolve it.

I draw Mana Crypt on my turn, and while maintaining a cool exterior I am giggling inside. I now face a difficult sequencing question. What do I do? I can play Oath, Sol Ring, Brainstorm, or do nothing at all. I decide to proceed cautiously.

I play Mana Crypt, which resolves. I then play Sol Ring, to bait out Mental Misstep. Sol Ring resolves. This signals to me that my Brainstorm will likely resolve. But should I Brainstorm here?

What would you do? Take a moment to think about it, and make a note of your play.

My goal in this scenario is clearly to resolve Oath of Druids. If I play Oath, and he doesn’t have Force of Will, I will likely just win next turn. He’ll have to Plow his own creature to prevent me from triggering Oath, which means he’ll need a Swords to Plowshares in hand and have the will to use it in that manner, rather than wait and try to Plow my Oath target. However, if he does have a Force in hand and a blue spell to pitch, then I’m left with Brainstorm, two Rituals, and a Burning Wish in hand – not a terrible place to be.

If I wait, and Brainstorm now, I may find a Duress to clear out any possible Force. Then again, waiting may simply give him more time to find a Force. In either case, Brainstorm might dig up another Oath.
 
On the basis of this train of thought, I decide to play Oath. I play City of Brass and cast Oath of Druids. He plays Force of Will. I take the punch. The problem is what happens next.

Turn 2:

My opponent plays a Wasteland, and Wastes my City of Brass. Ouch. I should have foreseen the possibility of what happens if he Forces my Oath and also has a Wasteland. I instantly regretted my sequencing choice, and not because he had Force of Will. I begin to suspect that I talked myself into the wrong line of play.

He attacked me with his Exalted Hierarch, sending me to 18, and passed the turn.

Luckily, my deck, in a forgiving mood, decided to give me another opportunity to stay in this game. I drew Forbidden Orchard in my draw step after losing my Mana Crypt roll (sending me to 15).

Now what? The dream sequence here is Brainstorm into Mox Opal and another Oath. But that would be unlikely at best. The only real question here is whether I should Brainstorm now, giving my opponent an Orchard generated spirit token with an Exalted creature already in play, or wait until his end step.

It seemed to me that the chances of hitting something useful, like a Chrome Mox and Necropotence or a Black Lotus and a Draw7, were sufficiently high that I should main phase Brainstorm.

I cast Brainstorm, drawing: Memory Jar, Duress, and Gemstone Mine. With the benefit of hindsight, it now became apparent that I definitely should have Brainstormed on turn 1. I would have seen Duress, which I could have played on turn 2, and then likely resolved Oath on turn 3 or earlier. As they say, there is no use crying over spilled milk. One can reflect on mistakes when a tournament is over. What I needed now was a plan.

I had plenty of tools. I had Duress, Memory Jar, and Burning Wish for business, and a pair of Rituals for acceleration. I already had Sol Ring and Mana Crypt in play as well. Next turn, I could, at a minimum, Ritual, Duress, Ritual, Jar with no less than three black mana floating, and a potential additional land in play (if I want to play the Gemstone Mine). I could even play the Burning Wish inside the Jar (drawing it with the Jar). This plan seemed solid. I put back Burning Wish and then Memory Jar on top of that. I passed the turn back.

Turn 3:

My opponent played another Hierarch, and attacked me for 3 with the double Exalted spirit token, sending me to 12, and passed the turn back.

On my upkeep, I lost the Mana Crypt roll again, and fell to 9 life. In my draw step, I drew Memory Jar. Unfortunately, my opponent preempted my plan with an end-of-draw-step Vendilion Clique. Upon seeing my hand, he understandably sent the Jar to the bottom of my library, which drew me the Burning Wish. So what now?

In play I have: Orchard, Mana Crypt, Sol Ring. In hand I have Gemstone Mine, Burning Wish, Dark Ritual, Dark Ritual, Duress. His board is Clique, double Hierarch, Tropical Island and a Spirit token. I was clearing facing death in three turns if not two.

I saw two possible courses of action. One involved Burning Wish for Yawgmoth’s Will. The other involved Burning Wish for Balance. My life was already precarious, and he would be able to attack me for 5 next turn, sending me to 4. Then, I would have a chance to play Ritual, Ritual, Yawgmoth’s Will and replay the City of Brass, the Rituals and cast Brainstorm, and hope to Brainstorm into something useful.

On the other hand, if I Wished for Balance, I could Balance now, wipe his board and preserve most of my hand, trying to live to fight another day. I would just need one good business spell in the next few turns. I did not put much thought into it, but I decided to Balance on the merits of relative card advantage.

I tapped Mana Crypt and cast Burning Wish. I played Gemstone Mine and cast Balance. It resolved. He lost his board. I debated which land to keep in play, but decided to sacrifice Gemstone Mine and keep my Orchard in play. I had to discard a card. My hand had two Rituals and a Duress. He only had two cards in hand.

What would you discard in this situation?

I thought about it for a moment, but couldn’t decide. I had blown through enough of his hand that it seemed like he didn’t have countermagic left. I felt like the Rituals gave me a stronger chance of going broken. I discarded Duress. Yet, in retrospect this seems mistaken. The Duress is a business spell that could buy me time and fight through a counterspell.

I passed the turn back.

Turn 4:

My opponent drew a card, played a Tundra, and passed the turn.

I lost another Crypt roll (my third straight) falling to 6 life. I then drew a Lotus Petal, and passed the turn.

Turn 5:

He drew a card for the turn and played a Dryad Militant. He then passed the turn.

I won my Crypt roll and drew Griselbrand, which I had the mana to cast. Delighted, I cast Dark Ritual, to attempt a double Ritual (followed by Duress) and hard cast Griselbrand. Unfortunately, he Mental Misstepped the first Ritual.

I resolved to try against next turn, except that on turn 6, I lost my Mana Crypt roll and thereby lost the game.

Analysis:

This game was a comedy of errors. The only correct play, where there was a meaningful choice, was the play of leading with Sol Ring to bait out Mental Misstep.

Let this game be an illustration of how to make every kind of error: sequencing errors, Burning Wish errors, and discarding errors, and how those errors compound themselves. First, I clearly mistimed Brainstorm. I should have led with Brainstorm (after resolving Sol Ring), which would have allowed me to Duress first, very likely resolving Oath. Even if he had Cliqued the Oath, I would have been able to play and resolve Jar, likely winning the game. The flip side of this mistake was playing turn one Oath headlong into Force of Will.

Oath is my game winning play. I should have properly set it up, instead of rushing in on turn one because I had other goods cards in hand as a backup plan. There was no need to resolve a turn one Oath. That was not only greedy, it was foolhardy. Brainstorm also protects me in case he Wastelands my City, which is what happened. I was very lucky to draw another land immediately. Not Brainstorming almost lost me the game on account of Wasteland.

The second mistake was Burning Wishing for Balance. In retrospect that seems like a miscalculation. I could have played Duress and Burning Wish, and then next turn Ritual, Ritual, Yawgmoth’s Will to attempt to generate card advantage that route by replaying Brainstorm and City. I would be able to play two Dark Rituals out of the graveyard, and hopefully win the game.  Had I sequenced the entire game better, the Burning Wish for Yawgmoth’s Will might have also been able to replay Oath in time not to lose the game.

Third, Getting Balance was not only a mistake, but I compounded that mistake by discarding the wrong card to Balance. Discarding Duress instead of a Dark Ritual prevented me from being able to hard cast Griselbrand. On the turn I drew Lotus Petal, I would have cast Duress, which would have been Misstepped, then resolved Ritual, Petal, Griselbrand on the following turn, and taken over the game from there.

Finally, I probably sacrificed the wrong land to Balance. Although a Gemstone Mine with 2 counters is not that great, given my precarious life situation, it was probably better than Forbidden Orchard at that point.

Each of my misplays cost me not only an opportunity to win the game, but a good chance. Had I just played turn 1 Brainstorm, turn 2 Duress, I would have had a game winning turn three Jar or Oath, depending on which card he left in my hand with Clique.

In retrospect, I consider this game to be a perfect teaching tool. If football coaches review tape and schematics, I offer this game to you as a schematic of, if not what to avoid, an illustration of the kinds of pitfalls and mistakes that can happen.

I also view it as an example of the kinds of interaction that Vintage games force. Vintage is sometimes criticized as a non-interactive format – I offer this game as a counter-example.  My opponent Forced, Wastelanded, Cliqued, and Misstepped me. I Duressed and Balanced him! My plays cost me dearly. This was a game that I could have won many different ways, yet it also illustrates how challenging this deck may be to play as well.

I began to sideboard, but rethought my position. I decided to keep my deck as it was, and then sideboard aggressively for game three, should there be one.
Logged

Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #203 on: May 17, 2013, 08:17:01 pm »

I intended to write the word "trial," and thought I had. 

Except that it also didn't win the trial, it just Top 8'd.

It did win the trial.  You can watch the match here: http://www.twitch.tv/watchdamatch/b/402263649
Logged

Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #204 on: May 19, 2013, 03:14:46 pm »

For some reason, that match, which was quite fascinating, has now disappeared. 
Logged

EvilDrReef
Basic User
**
Posts: 2


View Profile
« Reply #205 on: May 20, 2013, 01:23:42 pm »

Twitch doesn't store videos forever. Unfortunately it is not, and should not be treated like, an archive.

EDIT: Apparently twitch does save videos forever... IF the video creator checks the "save forever" checkbox manually for each video they want to save.  I'm going to try to archive the vintage videos myself when I get home from work tonight, just in case.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2013, 02:11:34 pm by EvilDrReef » Logged
mmcgeach
Basic User
**
Posts: 318


View Profile
« Reply #206 on: May 20, 2013, 04:10:07 pm »

I also think that, if the metagame by me stays so focused on blue (Landstill, Bomberman, Merfolk), that I will opt to skim out some sideboard cards in favor of 2-3 Defense Grid.

So, I've tried this plan.  I ran with 1 maindeck defense grid and 2 more in the board.  It's pretty good... but not spectacular.

- defense grid really does save you if you start chaining draw-7's together, since you're giving your opponent a new hand of potential countermagic every time.
- defense grid also saves you against stuff like standstill or mystic remora, for the same reason.
- defense grid is a must-counter for your counter-spelling opponent, and they usually have to force it.
- sometimes defense grid loses the game for you since it lets your opponent know they can't interact with you, and that they should try to win quickly with tinker or vault-key. 
- also sometimes it loses the game for you by slowing you down a turn, when just trying to win would have won.
- it's not terrible against shops cause it turns on mox opal and tolarian, and taps to tangle wire.  So the 1 maindeck is pretty reasonable.

I dunno.  I've considered defense grid, boseiju, city of solitude, and xantid swarm... I think xantid swarm is best but doesn't work in the oath build, and after that i think defense grid is the most playable of what remains.

Would love to hear more about your experiences playing this deck.  And to see that match video, if it can be recovered.

Logged
Smmenen
2007 Vintage World Champion
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 6392


Smmenen
View Profile WWW
« Reply #207 on: May 20, 2013, 06:07:25 pm »

Running a single Defense Grid maindeck is entirely defensible.  It has alot of synergy with the deck, from Academy/Mox Opal to other effects.  It's an easy turn one play, and it's pretty good at shutting down countermagic.  

The match was quite interesting, although I did not get a chance to watch it closely.  Here's what I remember:

The Burning Tendrils player won game 1 & 3.   Game 1 they had an early Oath, found Griselbrand, and that was all she wrote.   Game 2 was lopsided in the other direction.

Game 3 was very interesting.  The combo player resolved an Oath, but the control pilot had double Grafdigger's Cage.  The control pilot Forced something.  Then, the combo pilot cast Burning Wish for Show and Tell, but it was Drained.  The control pilot, however, just drew a Sol ring, played it and passed.  Then, the combo pilot played a Necropotence, and drew a few cards, but not a ton becuase his only mana was two Orchards and a City, and there were already a few tokens in play.   He then, IIRC, hardcast Griselbrand to win the game by b. Wishing for Tendrils.  

I was hoping to go back and do a play-by-play analysis of the game, to see what, if anything, i would have done differently.  I'm pretty upset they took it down.

Here are the top 8 decklists: http://www.morphling.de/top8decks.php?id=1751

As I said, Burning Tendrils won the trial.
« Last Edit: May 20, 2013, 06:48:08 pm by Smmenen » Logged

voltron00x
Adepts
Basic User
****
Posts: 1640


View Profile WWW
« Reply #208 on: May 20, 2013, 06:42:13 pm »

I love me some City of Solitude (http://www.classicdojo.org/tourney/t2.970916mel.txt) but I also feel like the difference between 2 mana and 3 mana is enormous.
Logged

“Win as if you were used to it, lose as if you enjoyed it for a change.”

Team East Coast Wins
hashswag
Basic User
**
Posts: 130


View Profile
« Reply #209 on: May 21, 2013, 02:06:51 am »

In my testing, Defense Grid has either been bait or a final play of the turn to set up a clear path for the next turn, since it was rare that I'd be able to find bait/discard, grid, a bomb and enough mana in my first 7-9 My opponent would then either destroy it on their turn or play out enough mana to hold up chain/decay/sabotage/hurkyll's/etc + 2 mana to remove grid in response to a bomb and force. I found myself eventually preferring extra Thoughtseizes in the 75 against control, since finding 2 duress effects in the my first 9 tended to win me the game more often than not.

Also, Defense Grid seems to turn on Abrupt Decay against BUG fish and the like. While this might prevent them from using it on Oath, I think Thoughtseize is better in this situation, since it lets you see if the coast is clear to cast Oath, but also lets you strip countermagic if you don't currently have an Oath.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 [7] 8
  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 0.309 seconds with 19 queries.