This debate started when a user, who had never seen the list Finkel was playing, had his mind set on playing it.. without even seeing the deck.. or having any idea at all what changes were made yet. He had no idea what it was he wanted to play. All the info he had, was that Finkel was winning, and it was storm. To me that seems like netdecking. I called it out and you came to his defense. Which also sparked you to flame my deck.
Why does it matter if some player decided to netdeck the list, and why are you "calling out" inexperienced storm players for wanting to start with a pro's list? While I do not believe that players should blindly netdeck a pro's list, my opinion against that is based on my belief that any changes to the list should be made based on a player's experience and understanding of the deck, and I do not believe that a person new to the archetype is going to have the knowledge to make positive changes to the deck without first starting with a basic frame, in this case the latest PT/GP decklists. Everyone needs to start somewhere, and if we call out new players for starting with Finkel's list, all we will be doing is alienating them from playing the deck entirely, or creating an argument that will inevitably devolve into a series of personal attacks like we have seen in this thread many many times. That is not constructive. When you see someone new to the deck, help that person. Give him advice on how to play the deck better, and let his personal experiences with the deck guide his future decklist changes.
As for Gifts Ungiven, I am still in love with the card, but I don't believe that it is worth building the entire deck around, and I certainly don't believe its worth making the deck a full turn or two slower. I view gifts as a tutor, a way to set up a guaranteed loop that ensures victory, be it tutoring for cards to activate ascension or to tutor up and set up Past in Flames. This is the list I am currently playing:
As you can see, I cut down to 1 Gifts. I originally had 3, but the card is quite slow, and as izzetmage has pointed out, it doesn't win the game on its own. It is a card that wants to be cast mid-combo, and when you do, you find yourself with that guaranteed loop we both love so much. I am probably going to cut the 4th Electromancer as it rarely does anything for me (one of the benefits of only owning 3 foil Electromancers is that you always know which one is the 4th) in favor of another Shivan Reef, and I am still on the fence about the bolts and ravings. Bolt is very nice at dealing with opposing problem creatures, but I do find myself pitching it to Lootings more often than not, so Im not entirely sure if I want to continue having 2 in the main. Desperate Ravings, I just cant make up my mind about. The card advantage is nice, but I find myself discarding key cards a large amount of the time, and I always want to have a Looting immediately afterwards to clear out the jank that lady luck didn't want me to discard. I think im going to test it some more, but am probably going to cut the bolts and Ravings for another Looting and 3 Peer Through Depths
I'm not saying you're wrong about Ravings/Peer/See beyond/ etc. All i'm saying is arguing on the basis of "What the pros are playing" is an extremely weak and close minded argument.
Close minded yes, weak no. Blindly defending the latest Finkel version as optimal without consideration of other configurations is unproductive and close minded, but its no worse than someone playing a different configuration for the sake of being different. Until a new configuration puts up solid results somewhere credible, the latest "pro" version is going to be the stock list for the deck, and any changes to it must be made for some constructive purpose, such as improving a certain matchup or trying to make the deck faster. Any other changes to the deck without that goal in mind is counterproductive.
I played few times with and against this deck and I don't understand how it can win without its graveyard (besides empy the warren and swat). I am asking this because as soon as Tron has Relicm it seems impossible to win...
Relic of Progenitus does not stop Pyromancer Ascension from triggering, so unless they are able to correctly predict what cards to exile, we can just use our cantrips to get ascension active and go from there
Fair enough, like I said I am a legacy player so not having starting mana of 1-2 + rituals is something I think getting used to will be key. What turn generally will this deck be wanting to go off?
Like izzetmage said, this deck goes off consistently on turn 4, but can go off T3 and hypothetically on T2 as well.
A turn 3 win can be achieved with both Pyromancer Ascension and Goblin Electromancer. In both cases, in 99% of your games you will need to cast the enabler on T2 in order to have a t3 kill.
Pyromancer Ascension:
Option 1: Rituals
In this option, you get ascension active on t3 by having a hand full of rituals, saving your draw spells (primarily Manamorphose) until after you get the ascension active.
Option 2: Cantrips
In this option, you need to strategically use your cantrips to set up an active ascension. Usually this involves Gitaxian Probe + Serum Visions (most of the time in that order) on t1, then again (in reverse order if you dont have your third land) on t3, followed by a chain of rituals into morphose until your opponent dies. Or you can use a t1 cantrip, then cast a second copy before casting 2 copies of the same ritual.
Goblin Electromancer:
Option 1: The nuts
This is the option izzetmage mentioned above. You have an insane draw with all the gas you need and a way to kill them. The more blue mana you can save the better, as you generally do need to cast a couple cantrips or dig spells to get there.
Option 2: Dig Kill
This option is very similar to the other option, but differs in that it doesnt actually require you to have a wincon in hand prior to going off, and in some situations doesnt require you to have PiF either. You need to have a ton of mana, and then use that mana to power your dig spells until you hit your win con. Unless you are playing Gifts Ungiven, which both sets up and tutors for the kill all at once, I do not recommend you go for this kill unless you are 100% sure you will not have a better opportunity to win the game.
Hybrid:
There are occasional games where you will be trying to go off via Electromancer, only to draw an ascension mid-combo and switch plans. These combos usually also require PiF to get ascension online, as you often find yourself unable to get ascension active without recasting your already used rituals. Be sure that you carefully figure out the math before you commit to a line of play. This line can be tricky to pull off at times, so tread carefully.
Now about turn 2 kills. I have identified 2 lines of play that can hypothetically lead to a T2 kill with the deck, but after many many attempts have only successfully pulled it off once, and that was while goldfishing.
Line 1:
Necessary Hand: 2 Lands, 2 Desperate Ritual, 2 Pyretic Ritual, 1 Ascension. You need to draw a Manamorphose as well.
Cast 1 of each ritual, giving you 4 mana. Cast Ascension, then cast the other 2 rituals. This gives you an active ascension and 4 floating red. Cast Manamorphose, add 4 blue to the pool. Draw perfectly, chain together cantrips into more rituals and cantrips until your opponent loses.
Line 2:
Ive stumbled upon this potential kill a couple times in goldfish, but have never actually gotten there with it. The idea behind it is to get Electromancer into play on t2 with a red mana floating, and then try to combo off from there. I find this option intriguing, but you absolutely have to have 100% perfect draws. Every time ive tried goldfishing starting with what i feel is an ideal hand, if come up well short. It might work with Empty the Warrens, but it appears that going for a grapeshot kill this way is almost impossible.
Like with the Dig Kill i mentioned above, I do not recommend going for a turn 2 kill unless you are 100% sure you will not get a better opportunity to go for it.
I have been curious about this as well. Trying to figure out if a maindeck Empty is worth while. I know SPC was saying he was having success with it. It seems like it could be pretty awesome actually, but im not trying to get blown out by Pyroclasm and the like. Im trying to think of what decks run maindeck sweepers. I know Tron runs Pyroclasm, and i see alot of people have been playing Grixis Cruel Control on Cockatrice and they run a few sweepers as well. What else is there to be aware of?
There are Grapeshot Matchups, there are Warrens Matchups, and there are matchups where it doesnt matter what we kill with.
Warrens Matchups are the matchups where our opponents disruption makes it difficult to win via Grapeshot, yet the opponent likely has no way of winning against a horde of goblin tokens. Jund is a perfect example. Between its hand disruption and gy hate, it can often be difficult to hit a lethal storm count for Grapeshot. This is a perfect situation to win via Warrens, as Junds only MD way to beat warrens is to have Pulse, which many versions do not have MD if at all. As such, they can strip our hand down to 3-4 cards, only to be left in a horrible spot when we turn those 3-4 cards into 10+ goblins.
Grapeshot Matchups are ones where our opponent has the means to destroy a horde of goblins (or combo-kill us before the goblins kill them), but not the tools to stop us from hitting 20+ storm. An example of this is GR Tron. No interaction on the stack or to the hand outside Karn, so getting to 20 storm is simple, but they do have Pyroclasm, so go with grapeshot.
The last kind of matchups are the ones where it doesnt matter how we kill them. How we kill a zoo player doesnt matter, if we can answer their SB hate we can go big with either spell without having to worry about anything.
I've moved Moon in and out of my storm sideboards ever since Modern was announced for the community cup, but ever since Rite of Flame was banned I dont think its the auto-include in the storm SB that it used to be. There is a huge difference between dropping it into play on turn 1 vs t2.
If your meta has alot of Tron Scapeshift and/or Grixis Control decks, play Moon in the board. Resolving one in those matchups usually is more powerful than whatever they were trying to use to stop your combo.
If your meta doesnt have those decks, dont bother with Moon. Against decks with fetch-based manabases, its only good when your opponent isnt expecting it, and if they do suspect it they will just play around it, giving you 3 sb cards that do nothing.
I consider any instant or sorcery to be a useful spell, and any land/Mancer/PA to be junk.
I will eventually get around to testing Ravings in a similar fashion to how i did with Looting, but i strongly disagree with such a set-in-stone definition of what is and isnt useful. Such definitions completely ignore the context of why the cards were discarded.
Consider the following scenario. You have 10+ red mana floating, PiF and Ravings in hand, the ability to effortlessly hit a lethal storm count, but no access to blue or a wincon. Any Manamorphose or a storm spell ends the game. You cast Ravings and discard Serum Visions. Is that a bad discard?
That is a play i frequently make with Looting. In several of those situations during my 10-goldfish test, I cast looting with the sole purpose of digging as deep as possible for a kill or morphose to end the game. I would not consider any of the discards made during that sequence junk, and will not if i find myself in that position when testing Ravings. The prospect of digging for a kill was well worth the cost of discarding a bunch of cantrips that i could not cast.
How has Ignorant Bliss been working out for you? I played an 8rack deck in a few matches earlier against a really friendly player on cockatrice and the matches were pretty back and forth. That relentless discard can be hard to deal with. I usually found the win via Past in Flames. Gifts Ungiven was pretty awesome in that matchup, usually being able to find me some Rituals and Past in Flames to comeback from a stripped hand.
The most important card for that matchup is Pyromancer Ascension. If we get it, they die. If we dont, we have to hope they run out of discard long enough for us to reassemble a winning hand. I havent played against it too many times, but i still am yet to lose a match to it, and its all because of Ascension.
Ignorant Bliss still needs some testing, but it is primarily intended to combat Liliana of the Veil. Its cheaper than she is, so unless our opponent has a t2 Lil on the play, we can respond to her first activation, forcing them to discard while we have an eot cantrip. Ive been happy with it so far, though it is worth noting that most games with it tend to go long.
Amazing. Grapeshot is very much an all-or-nothing wincon. Either you get the lethal storm count or your left in an awkward position of trying to decide if you should aim all the copies at your opponent or his creatures. Plan A against any deck is to go for a lethal grapeshot, but when facing hand disruption, this can be difficult.
Warrens gets around all of that. A storm count of 7 with grapeshot is a failed effort, a storm count of 7 with warrens creates 14 creatures, something most decks have an issue beating.
Instants (17) 4 x Desperate Ritual 2 x Gifts Ungiven 4 x Manamorphose 3 x Peer Through Depths 4 x Pyretic Ritual
Sorceries (20) 1 x Empty the Warrens 4 x Faithless Looting 4 x Gitaxian Probe 1 x Grapeshot 2 x Past in Flames 4 x Serum Visions 4 x Sleight of Hand
Sideboard 3 x Echoing Truth 1 x Empty the Warrens 1 x Ignite Memories 3 x Ignorant Bliss 3 x Lightning Bolt 2 x Pact of Negation 2 x Shattering Spree
This is the list I played during the latest Lantern IQ. The Ignite Memories in the SB was something i was testing and simply forgot to take out when i registered the list, but i never needed to bring it in so no harm no foul.
Izzetmage, your idea intrigued me, so Ive decided to try it.
I decided to goldfish 10 games with the following rules:
1: Properly shuffle, only keep hands that you would keep in an actual game situation.
2: Play as though it were an actual game, not to highlight the power of any specific card. This is to prevent bias and show how a real game would proceed.
3: Assume every game we are on the play.
4: Every goldfish that doesn't result in a Lethal Grapeshot or Warrens that produces 20+ goblins is considered a failure, with the sole exception being a t2-t3 warrens that would produce enough goblins to kill t5.
5: Any unorthodox uses for Looting must be noted.
I have yet to try it with Ravings, but here is what 10 games with Looting resulted in:
Game 1:
Only cast 1 Looting, discarding 2 excess lands. T4 win.
Game 2:
First Looting discarded a land and Grapeshot.
Second Looting was a flashback with an active ascension after a poor draw off of [/c]Manamorphose[/c], discarding 2 ascensions 1 Goblin and a land. Turn 4 win
Game 3:
First Looting discarded an excess land and a Past In Flames.
Second Looting discarded a land an an extra ascension.
Third Looting was cast with an active ascension, discarding 3 lands and another ascension. Turn 4 win.
Game 4:
First Looting discarded 2 lands.
Second Looting was cast with an active ascension, 12 red mana floating, PiF in hand, but no Morphoses or kill spells in sight. Flashback Looting to self-mill, looking for a morphose or a kill spell, discarding 2 lands a Gifts Ungiven and a Goblin.
Third Looting was drawn off of second, again self-mill looking for morphose or a kill spell. Discard a goblin land ascension and second PiF.
Forth Looting was drawn off of third, again trying to self-mill into morphose or wincon with enough mana to flashback PiF and recast all my rituals. 1 card in hand before looting resolves, discard Warrens Ritual off of the first, Morphose with second on the stack, Peer with second on stack to grab 2 more rituals, discard 2 Probes to original Looting. T4 win.
Game 5:
First Looting was cast to boost storm count for the Warrens/PiF hand I naturally drew, discard Land and Looting.
Second Looting also cast simply to boost the storm count, discard Peer and Visions, make 48 goblins on t3
Game 6:
First discards land and Goblin
Second discards 2 lands, gets ascension active.
Third cast to boost storm for Warrens, morphose between Lootings, discard Warrens Visions Goblin Land. T4 win.
Game 7:
Only Looting discards an extra goblin and Grapeshot. T4 win.
Game 8:
Naturally drew into lethal Warrens hand, no lootings cast. T4 win.
Game 9:
First Looting to try setting up ascension, discard Grapeshot and Ritual.
Second Looting cast with an active ascension, discard 3 lands and an extra PiF
Third Looting cast to self-mill to power the PiF in hand, discard ascension land looting gifts. T4 win.
Game 10 (Mulligan to 5):
First Looting was cast to try to set up ascension as it was only out, discard Peer and Warrens.
Second Looting to get ascension active, leaving myself with 2 rituals in hand and 2 untapped lands, self-mill to try and find a PiF or Morphose. Discard Looting and PiF.
Third Looting cast with 10 red floating, Pif in gy but no wincon or morphose. Self-mill Looting Ritual Morphose and Gifts. T4 win
Ill let you guys decide which discards were bad and which weren't
Also, think twice is a little better against all the discard effects. Lilliana is quite a beating if you can't go off in a turn or two with no ca to counteract it.
I've been having alot of success with Ignorant Bliss in the sideboard to counteract Lil. When they +1 her, I respond with Bliss. The core of my hand stays safe, I get a new card, and my opponent still has to discard to Lil. It also is useful against Slaughter Games and late topdecked Thoughtsiezes and whatnot.
Also, I'm liking the warrens kill less and less as people seem to expect it. Postboard against uwr flash they had wrath of gods still. Agaisnt kiki they kept in slagstorms. I also lost a game to burn the other day due to rakdos charm(though they should bring that in anway for graveyard hate).
Empty the Warrens is best against discard-heavy decks like Junk or Jund. Grapeshot is very much an all-or-nothing wincon, yet against those decks we often are forced to combo off on a discard-reduced hand. Warrens on the other hand is twice as efficient at producing damage and has value even if you do not get to 20. MD, the only way they can beat a warrens is if they draw into Maelstrom Pulse, which many of them either do not have or only play 1 or 2. Ive found that making 12-14 goblins is usually enough to beat almost any board they have assembled.
Against UWR however, i dont see the appeal of the warrens kill, especially if you have Echoing Truth in the sideboard. The hardest part of beating UWR is usually finding a way to play through their countermagic before they kill us with Geist, not beating Leyline or RiP. I play Pact of Negation in my board, and having one in hand is usually enough to make it through their countermagic and kill them via grapeshot.
Can we please keep this Lootings vs Ravings discussion civil? I dont care if I agree with what your trying to say or not, if you say it with civility and respect, i will at the very least consider and respect your argument.
Im not trying to argue that Looting is better than Ravings, nor am i suggesting that everyone should automatically play 4. What i am suggesting is that people give it a fair test before jumping to conclusions about it. Ive played with looting for more than a year now, but in no way shape or form am i so attached to the card that i would be unwilling to cut it if i find a build that can work as efficiently without it.
If all you want to do is play Finkel's 75 without question, power to you, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Id rather see everyone play that than see storm become an extinct deck. But I cant just take his list and call it a day. I want to take storm to the extremes, test everything, see how far it can be pushed, to fully explore what is and isnt possible with the deck. Some of the changes are going to be amazing (MD Empty the Warrens how I love thee), some of them are going to be horrendous (Reforge the Soul why did you have to be so bad), but i will continue trying different ways to build the deck until they ban it to oblivion. All i ask is that everyone else on these forums keeps a similar open mind.
You have to pay attention to your storm count. Once you discard Past in Flames, it's going to be hard to win off just one Grapeshot (which may not even be in your hand - you have to go digging for it by flashing back cantrips). I find that I usually cast Past twice to win: the first time to build some storm count (Rituals > Past > flashback rituals), then I go Grapeshot > flashback Past > flashback Grapeshot. The exceptions are 1) I have an active Ascension, which allows me to build enough storm to win off just 1 Grapeshot, or 2) I get lucky and draw 2 Grapeshots.
Discarding Grapeshot hurts more than it seems. This WILL happen if your hand is empty and you're relying on Looting to draw into Grapeshot. Even if you find it, you won't be able to deal enough damage to win.
To elaborate: again, I win most of the time by Grapeshot > Past > Grapeshot. If you discard Grapeshot or flashed Past instead of casting it from hand, you only get to cast Grapeshot once. It's easy to say "yeah, big deal, I discarded Grapeshot, I can Past-flashback it". Yes, you can, except that instead of dealing 8+10 damage, you only deal 7 or 8 and fail to kill your opponent.
Looting's discard is not so easily brushed off as "Whatever, I have Past in Flames, I'll be fine". Sometimes, getting to cast 1 ritual instead of the same ritual twice, or 1 Grapeshot instead of the same Grapeshot twice, or even 1 Past instead of the same Past twice, can be the difference between victory and fizzling.
Let me make something clear: I will play whatever line of play gives me the best opportunity to win. I will not discard Grapeshot to Looting unless i am sure that whatever other cards i have in hand are strong enough to get me to lethal. If i need to go Grapeshot PiF Grapeshot, i will. Most of the time however, i dont need to do that, even in a version that only has 1 MD Grapeshot. The majority of the times where i do need to cast multiple PiFs are when its turn 3 and I want to maximize my Empty the Warrens.
Of course, Ravings suffers from the same problem, but in the long run, having to discard once outweighs having to discard twice, even if you get to choose which cards to discard in the latter scenario. Really, the only thing that matters is the number of useful cards in your hand, not the amount of junk you manage to clear. Looting being more useful "because you can pitch crap cards to it" is an illusion. If you discard 1 crap card and 1 ritual to it, versus if Ravings ends up discarding 1 ritual, in both cases you'd have the same number of useful cards.
Again, missing the point. With looting, you are 100% guaranteed to have the best post-discard hand looting can provide. With Ravings, not the case. Going back to your earlier example, yes, you might have a 40% chance of being in a stronger position with Ravings than you would with Looting, but that also indicates a 60% chance that you are in an inferior position.
Use Thought Scour instead. Having a spell that draws you a net 1 card is better than one which doesn't.
Currently im also playing Peer Through Depths and absolutely love it. It plays well with Goblin Electromancer, digs deeper than any of our cantrips can, and with an active ascension digs through a quarter (or more) of our deck (assuming we are mid combo). Im currently playing 2 PiF 1 Grapeshot 1 Warrens, and Peer (as well as gifts) are key reasons why i can get away with those numbers and still get there consistently
I have tested Faithless Looting, and I find that it is inferior to Desperate Ravings. I don't feel that any comparison between the two is inappropriate.
Im not trying to argue that Looting is a better card, im trying to argue that the two cards both are worth considering for this archetype
With Looting, you draw two and discard two; with Ravings, you draw two and discard one at random. Looting is only going to be better if you have two cards in your hand that you absolutely don't give a crap about tossing - lands for example. With Ravings, even if you do discard a card that is useful, most of the time you're still on par with Looting because you only discarded one card, not two.
Looting only needs 1 card you dont care about to be comparable. Having 1 card means that 50% of your drawback is accounted for and that you have a 100% chance of discarding the least valuable card remaining. Yes, sometimes you will draw 2 good spells and ravings will randomly take the 1 card, leaving you with a better hand. But do not underestimate the randomness, it can and will strip you of your best card, leading you towards inferior lines of play.
Simple example. It's the combo turn, you have an Electromancer, and you've already played a land this turn. You cast Looting, and before the discard, your hand is:
Island
Pyretic Ritual
Desperate Ritual
Past in Flames
So you discard Island and Pyretic Ritual, and you think, "wow, this is great, I managed to pitch 1 useless card. It sucks that I lost a ritual, but whatever, I can flash it back anyway".
Now imagine if that Looting was a Ravings. Would you care if you ended up discarding a Ritual instead of the Island instead? The only difference between the two is with Looting, the Island is in your graveyard, and with Ravings, the Island is in your hand...not a big difference, since you've already played a land this turn, so the Island is useless wherever it ends up!
Lets reevaluate that scenario for a second. Since we have an electromancer plus a land drop, we can assume that we have at least 3 lands, 1 of which was tapped for looting. In your scenario (assuming pyretic was discarded), we tap our second land for Desperate Ritual, cast Past in Flames, tap our third land to pay for rituals and proceed to combo off.
Or we could play that hand correctly. We discard Island and Past in Flames instead. Tap the second land to cast both rituals, 5 red floating, flashback PiF for 4 mana, leaving us with +1 red mana and an extra untapped land, which presumably would be able to tap for blue and thus let us flashback a cantrip if needed.
If you had two Islands, then yes, Looting is 100% risk free, you'll end up pitching completely useless cards. However, if you did have two Islands, the chance of Ravings hitting one of them is also higher - it's 40%, as opposed to 25%.
If you have enough mana to cast PiF and flashback a ritual with the remaining mana, then PiF is considered a "completely useless card." Yes ravings gives you a 40% chance of hitting one of the worthless cards in that scenario, but it also gives you a 60% chance of being forced into the inferior line of play.
The real fun begins when you start flashing back. Let's say you discarded two Islands, cast the rest of your hand, and are ready to flashback Looting for more cards. Whoops - you just cast everything, so your hand is empty. Better hope you had a Manamorphose + cantrip in your graveyard, or Looting simply becomes a mill spell. Initially, Looting clears out junk from your hand, but after you cast all your spells and are left with nothing in hand, you're forced to start pitching useful cards.
This is entirely correct, and i intentionally do this on a regular basis. Its a fantastic play. I've already cast all the rituals in my hand and any cantrips I can afford, does it really matter if the rest end up in the yard? All im going to be doing is casting PiF and recasting them, do they really need to be in my hand for that? Meanwhile Looting gives me 2-4 free cards. If they are worthless, fine, id rather mill them than draw them off of a manamorphose. If they are good spells, ill just recast them with PiF. No matter how i play it, its free profits. If i had any cards left in hand, Looting lets me replace them with any ritual i might draw, letting me go bigger. And if that ritual i draw happens to be manamorphose, it gets ridiculous very quickly.
Free monthly tournament for members of these forums. 12 monthly qualifiers leading up to a year-end tournament. We are currently in the last of the IQs for the season, but hopefully we will get next season started soon. You can find all the information here: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=425560
They are a ton of fun, you should play in the next one if you have the time.
Would you ever play Mystic Speculation or Index in this deck? If you wouldn't, Faithless Looting isn't too far off.
Anything that draws a net 0 cards is bad. Especially so with Ascension; 1 times 2 is 2, while 0 times 2 is still 0.
If we have Past in Flames and Grapeshot in our opening hand, do we need them? Unless we need to play around GY hate, in 99% of all games they will do exactly nothing until our combo turn. Do we need them in our opening hand? What good is the CA generated by Manamorphose if we draw nothing but excess lands? In both of these situations, Faithless Looting is technically going to net us 0 cards, but the quality of the cards in our hand is going to increase significantly. Is that bad? Test it and get back to me about it.
If you foresee yourself having trouble with Ravings' blue, then flash it back on turn 3.
Not the issue. The issue is when we are mid-combo and cant find Manamorphose or the ability to win via Past in Flames+Wincon, when we have all the red mana we need but haven't seen enough cards to quite get there. Looting lets us see at least another 2 cards, usually 4, digging us deeper and deeper until we hit the morphose needed to get there. Its another route to victory that I find myself missing when I test the list with 4 Ravings.
However, after reading your arguments in favor of Ravings I have started to test it again (I had stopped playing it because I somehow always end up discarding the absolutely worst card possible) and have to say that I don't hate it. Im currently testing a version with a combination of both lootings and ravings. If I find a version that I think is better than my current list, ill post it. Ill also post my current list as soon as this current Lantern IQ is over (im playing storm in it, don't want to let the 75 be known until its over)
Why does it matter if some player decided to netdeck the list, and why are you "calling out" inexperienced storm players for wanting to start with a pro's list? While I do not believe that players should blindly netdeck a pro's list, my opinion against that is based on my belief that any changes to the list should be made based on a player's experience and understanding of the deck, and I do not believe that a person new to the archetype is going to have the knowledge to make positive changes to the deck without first starting with a basic frame, in this case the latest PT/GP decklists. Everyone needs to start somewhere, and if we call out new players for starting with Finkel's list, all we will be doing is alienating them from playing the deck entirely, or creating an argument that will inevitably devolve into a series of personal attacks like we have seen in this thread many many times. That is not constructive. When you see someone new to the deck, help that person. Give him advice on how to play the deck better, and let his personal experiences with the deck guide his future decklist changes.
As for Gifts Ungiven, I am still in love with the card, but I don't believe that it is worth building the entire deck around, and I certainly don't believe its worth making the deck a full turn or two slower. I view gifts as a tutor, a way to set up a guaranteed loop that ensures victory, be it tutoring for cards to activate ascension or to tutor up and set up Past in Flames. This is the list I am currently playing:
3 Misty Rainforest
4 Scalding Tarn
1 Shivan Reef
3 Snow-Covered Island
1 Snow-Covered Mountain
4 Steam Vents
4 Goblin Electromancer
Enchantments (4)
4 Pyromancer Ascension
Instants (17)
2 Desperate Ravings
4 Desperate Ritual
1 Gifts Ungiven
2 Lightning Bolt
4 Manamorphose
4 Pyretic Ritual
2 Faithless Looting
4 Gitaxian Probe
3 Grapeshot
2 Past in Flames
4 Serum Visions
4 Sleight of Hand
As you can see, I cut down to 1 Gifts. I originally had 3, but the card is quite slow, and as izzetmage has pointed out, it doesn't win the game on its own. It is a card that wants to be cast mid-combo, and when you do, you find yourself with that guaranteed loop we both love so much. I am probably going to cut the 4th Electromancer as it rarely does anything for me (one of the benefits of only owning 3 foil Electromancers is that you always know which one is the 4th) in favor of another Shivan Reef, and I am still on the fence about the bolts and ravings. Bolt is very nice at dealing with opposing problem creatures, but I do find myself pitching it to Lootings more often than not, so Im not entirely sure if I want to continue having 2 in the main. Desperate Ravings, I just cant make up my mind about. The card advantage is nice, but I find myself discarding key cards a large amount of the time, and I always want to have a Looting immediately afterwards to clear out the jank that lady luck didn't want me to discard. I think im going to test it some more, but am probably going to cut the bolts and Ravings for another Looting and 3 Peer Through Depths
Close minded yes, weak no. Blindly defending the latest Finkel version as optimal without consideration of other configurations is unproductive and close minded, but its no worse than someone playing a different configuration for the sake of being different. Until a new configuration puts up solid results somewhere credible, the latest "pro" version is going to be the stock list for the deck, and any changes to it must be made for some constructive purpose, such as improving a certain matchup or trying to make the deck faster. Any other changes to the deck without that goal in mind is counterproductive.
Relic of Progenitus does not stop Pyromancer Ascension from triggering, so unless they are able to correctly predict what cards to exile, we can just use our cantrips to get ascension active and go from there
All foil, oldest possible foil printing.
Now to finish the sb...
Like izzetmage said, this deck goes off consistently on turn 4, but can go off T3 and hypothetically on T2 as well.
A turn 3 win can be achieved with both Pyromancer Ascension and Goblin Electromancer. In both cases, in 99% of your games you will need to cast the enabler on T2 in order to have a t3 kill.
Pyromancer Ascension:
Option 1: Rituals
In this option, you get ascension active on t3 by having a hand full of rituals, saving your draw spells (primarily Manamorphose) until after you get the ascension active.
Option 2: Cantrips
In this option, you need to strategically use your cantrips to set up an active ascension. Usually this involves Gitaxian Probe + Serum Visions (most of the time in that order) on t1, then again (in reverse order if you dont have your third land) on t3, followed by a chain of rituals into morphose until your opponent dies. Or you can use a t1 cantrip, then cast a second copy before casting 2 copies of the same ritual.
Goblin Electromancer:
Option 1: The nuts
This is the option izzetmage mentioned above. You have an insane draw with all the gas you need and a way to kill them. The more blue mana you can save the better, as you generally do need to cast a couple cantrips or dig spells to get there.
Option 2: Dig Kill
This option is very similar to the other option, but differs in that it doesnt actually require you to have a wincon in hand prior to going off, and in some situations doesnt require you to have PiF either. You need to have a ton of mana, and then use that mana to power your dig spells until you hit your win con. Unless you are playing Gifts Ungiven, which both sets up and tutors for the kill all at once, I do not recommend you go for this kill unless you are 100% sure you will not have a better opportunity to win the game.
Hybrid:
There are occasional games where you will be trying to go off via Electromancer, only to draw an ascension mid-combo and switch plans. These combos usually also require PiF to get ascension online, as you often find yourself unable to get ascension active without recasting your already used rituals. Be sure that you carefully figure out the math before you commit to a line of play. This line can be tricky to pull off at times, so tread carefully.
Now about turn 2 kills. I have identified 2 lines of play that can hypothetically lead to a T2 kill with the deck, but after many many attempts have only successfully pulled it off once, and that was while goldfishing.
Line 1:
Necessary Hand: 2 Lands, 2 Desperate Ritual, 2 Pyretic Ritual, 1 Ascension. You need to draw a Manamorphose as well.
Cast 1 of each ritual, giving you 4 mana. Cast Ascension, then cast the other 2 rituals. This gives you an active ascension and 4 floating red. Cast Manamorphose, add 4 blue to the pool. Draw perfectly, chain together cantrips into more rituals and cantrips until your opponent loses.
Line 2:
Ive stumbled upon this potential kill a couple times in goldfish, but have never actually gotten there with it. The idea behind it is to get Electromancer into play on t2 with a red mana floating, and then try to combo off from there. I find this option intriguing, but you absolutely have to have 100% perfect draws. Every time ive tried goldfishing starting with what i feel is an ideal hand, if come up well short. It might work with Empty the Warrens, but it appears that going for a grapeshot kill this way is almost impossible.
Like with the Dig Kill i mentioned above, I do not recommend going for a turn 2 kill unless you are 100% sure you will not get a better opportunity to go for it.
There are Grapeshot Matchups, there are Warrens Matchups, and there are matchups where it doesnt matter what we kill with.
Warrens Matchups are the matchups where our opponents disruption makes it difficult to win via Grapeshot, yet the opponent likely has no way of winning against a horde of goblin tokens. Jund is a perfect example. Between its hand disruption and gy hate, it can often be difficult to hit a lethal storm count for Grapeshot. This is a perfect situation to win via Warrens, as Junds only MD way to beat warrens is to have Pulse, which many versions do not have MD if at all. As such, they can strip our hand down to 3-4 cards, only to be left in a horrible spot when we turn those 3-4 cards into 10+ goblins.
Grapeshot Matchups are ones where our opponent has the means to destroy a horde of goblins (or combo-kill us before the goblins kill them), but not the tools to stop us from hitting 20+ storm. An example of this is GR Tron. No interaction on the stack or to the hand outside Karn, so getting to 20 storm is simple, but they do have Pyroclasm, so go with grapeshot.
The last kind of matchups are the ones where it doesnt matter how we kill them. How we kill a zoo player doesnt matter, if we can answer their SB hate we can go big with either spell without having to worry about anything.
I've moved Moon in and out of my storm sideboards ever since Modern was announced for the community cup, but ever since Rite of Flame was banned I dont think its the auto-include in the storm SB that it used to be. There is a huge difference between dropping it into play on turn 1 vs t2.
If your meta has alot of Tron Scapeshift and/or Grixis Control decks, play Moon in the board. Resolving one in those matchups usually is more powerful than whatever they were trying to use to stop your combo.
If your meta doesnt have those decks, dont bother with Moon. Against decks with fetch-based manabases, its only good when your opponent isnt expecting it, and if they do suspect it they will just play around it, giving you 3 sb cards that do nothing.
I will eventually get around to testing Ravings in a similar fashion to how i did with Looting, but i strongly disagree with such a set-in-stone definition of what is and isnt useful. Such definitions completely ignore the context of why the cards were discarded.
Consider the following scenario. You have 10+ red mana floating, PiF and Ravings in hand, the ability to effortlessly hit a lethal storm count, but no access to blue or a wincon. Any Manamorphose or a storm spell ends the game. You cast Ravings and discard Serum Visions. Is that a bad discard?
That is a play i frequently make with Looting. In several of those situations during my 10-goldfish test, I cast looting with the sole purpose of digging as deep as possible for a kill or morphose to end the game. I would not consider any of the discards made during that sequence junk, and will not if i find myself in that position when testing Ravings. The prospect of digging for a kill was well worth the cost of discarding a bunch of cantrips that i could not cast.
The most important card for that matchup is Pyromancer Ascension. If we get it, they die. If we dont, we have to hope they run out of discard long enough for us to reassemble a winning hand. I havent played against it too many times, but i still am yet to lose a match to it, and its all because of Ascension.
Ignorant Bliss still needs some testing, but it is primarily intended to combat Liliana of the Veil. Its cheaper than she is, so unless our opponent has a t2 Lil on the play, we can respond to her first activation, forcing them to discard while we have an eot cantrip. Ive been happy with it so far, though it is worth noting that most games with it tend to go long.
Amazing. Grapeshot is very much an all-or-nothing wincon. Either you get the lethal storm count or your left in an awkward position of trying to decide if you should aim all the copies at your opponent or his creatures. Plan A against any deck is to go for a lethal grapeshot, but when facing hand disruption, this can be difficult.
Warrens gets around all of that. A storm count of 7 with grapeshot is a failed effort, a storm count of 7 with warrens creates 14 creatures, something most decks have an issue beating.
I actually increased the count up to 4, cutting down to 1 Gifts. It digs deeper than any other card we play and also finds all of my SB cards.
1 x Arid Mesa
3 x Misty Rainforest
4 x Scalding Tarn
1 x Shivan Reef
2 x Snow-Covered Island
1 x Snow-Covered Mountain
4 x Steam Vents
Creatures (3)
3 x Goblin Electromancer
Enchantments (4)
4 x Pyromancer Ascension
Instants (17)
4 x Desperate Ritual
2 x Gifts Ungiven
4 x Manamorphose
3 x Peer Through Depths
4 x Pyretic Ritual
1 x Empty the Warrens
4 x Faithless Looting
4 x Gitaxian Probe
1 x Grapeshot
2 x Past in Flames
4 x Serum Visions
4 x Sleight of Hand
3 x Echoing Truth
1 x Empty the Warrens
1 x Ignite Memories
3 x Ignorant Bliss
3 x Lightning Bolt
2 x Pact of Negation
2 x Shattering Spree
This is the list I played during the latest Lantern IQ. The Ignite Memories in the SB was something i was testing and simply forgot to take out when i registered the list, but i never needed to bring it in so no harm no foul.
Izzetmage, your idea intrigued me, so Ive decided to try it.
I decided to goldfish 10 games with the following rules:
1: Properly shuffle, only keep hands that you would keep in an actual game situation.
2: Play as though it were an actual game, not to highlight the power of any specific card. This is to prevent bias and show how a real game would proceed.
3: Assume every game we are on the play.
4: Every goldfish that doesn't result in a Lethal Grapeshot or Warrens that produces 20+ goblins is considered a failure, with the sole exception being a t2-t3 warrens that would produce enough goblins to kill t5.
5: Any unorthodox uses for Looting must be noted.
I have yet to try it with Ravings, but here is what 10 games with Looting resulted in:
Game 1:
Only cast 1 Looting, discarding 2 excess lands. T4 win.
Game 2:
First Looting discarded a land and Grapeshot.
Second Looting was a flashback with an active ascension after a poor draw off of [/c]Manamorphose[/c], discarding 2 ascensions 1 Goblin and a land. Turn 4 win
Game 3:
First Looting discarded an excess land and a Past In Flames.
Second Looting discarded a land an an extra ascension.
Third Looting was cast with an active ascension, discarding 3 lands and another ascension. Turn 4 win.
Game 4:
First Looting discarded 2 lands.
Second Looting was cast with an active ascension, 12 red mana floating, PiF in hand, but no Morphoses or kill spells in sight. Flashback Looting to self-mill, looking for a morphose or a kill spell, discarding 2 lands a Gifts Ungiven and a Goblin.
Third Looting was drawn off of second, again self-mill looking for morphose or a kill spell. Discard a goblin land ascension and second PiF.
Forth Looting was drawn off of third, again trying to self-mill into morphose or wincon with enough mana to flashback PiF and recast all my rituals. 1 card in hand before looting resolves, discard Warrens Ritual off of the first, Morphose with second on the stack, Peer with second on stack to grab 2 more rituals, discard 2 Probes to original Looting. T4 win.
Game 5:
First Looting was cast to boost storm count for the Warrens/PiF hand I naturally drew, discard Land and Looting.
Second Looting also cast simply to boost the storm count, discard Peer and Visions, make 48 goblins on t3
Game 6:
First discards land and Goblin
Second discards 2 lands, gets ascension active.
Third cast to boost storm for Warrens, morphose between Lootings, discard Warrens Visions Goblin Land. T4 win.
Game 7:
Only Looting discards an extra goblin and Grapeshot. T4 win.
Game 8:
Naturally drew into lethal Warrens hand, no lootings cast. T4 win.
Game 9:
First Looting to try setting up ascension, discard Grapeshot and Ritual.
Second Looting cast with an active ascension, discard 3 lands and an extra PiF
Third Looting cast to self-mill to power the PiF in hand, discard ascension land looting gifts. T4 win.
Game 10 (Mulligan to 5):
First Looting was cast to try to set up ascension as it was only out, discard Peer and Warrens.
Second Looting to get ascension active, leaving myself with 2 rituals in hand and 2 untapped lands, self-mill to try and find a PiF or Morphose. Discard Looting and PiF.
Third Looting cast with 10 red floating, Pif in gy but no wincon or morphose. Self-mill Looting Ritual Morphose and Gifts. T4 win
Ill let you guys decide which discards were bad and which weren't
I've been having alot of success with Ignorant Bliss in the sideboard to counteract Lil. When they +1 her, I respond with Bliss. The core of my hand stays safe, I get a new card, and my opponent still has to discard to Lil. It also is useful against Slaughter Games and late topdecked Thoughtsiezes and whatnot.
Empty the Warrens is best against discard-heavy decks like Junk or Jund. Grapeshot is very much an all-or-nothing wincon, yet against those decks we often are forced to combo off on a discard-reduced hand. Warrens on the other hand is twice as efficient at producing damage and has value even if you do not get to 20. MD, the only way they can beat a warrens is if they draw into Maelstrom Pulse, which many of them either do not have or only play 1 or 2. Ive found that making 12-14 goblins is usually enough to beat almost any board they have assembled.
Against UWR however, i dont see the appeal of the warrens kill, especially if you have Echoing Truth in the sideboard. The hardest part of beating UWR is usually finding a way to play through their countermagic before they kill us with Geist, not beating Leyline or RiP. I play Pact of Negation in my board, and having one in hand is usually enough to make it through their countermagic and kill them via grapeshot.
Im not trying to argue that Looting is better than Ravings, nor am i suggesting that everyone should automatically play 4. What i am suggesting is that people give it a fair test before jumping to conclusions about it. Ive played with looting for more than a year now, but in no way shape or form am i so attached to the card that i would be unwilling to cut it if i find a build that can work as efficiently without it.
If all you want to do is play Finkel's 75 without question, power to you, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Id rather see everyone play that than see storm become an extinct deck. But I cant just take his list and call it a day. I want to take storm to the extremes, test everything, see how far it can be pushed, to fully explore what is and isnt possible with the deck. Some of the changes are going to be amazing (MD Empty the Warrens how I love thee), some of them are going to be horrendous (Reforge the Soul why did you have to be so bad), but i will continue trying different ways to build the deck until they ban it to oblivion. All i ask is that everyone else on these forums keeps a similar open mind.
Let me make something clear: I will play whatever line of play gives me the best opportunity to win. I will not discard Grapeshot to Looting unless i am sure that whatever other cards i have in hand are strong enough to get me to lethal. If i need to go Grapeshot PiF Grapeshot, i will. Most of the time however, i dont need to do that, even in a version that only has 1 MD Grapeshot. The majority of the times where i do need to cast multiple PiFs are when its turn 3 and I want to maximize my Empty the Warrens.
Again, missing the point. With looting, you are 100% guaranteed to have the best post-discard hand looting can provide. With Ravings, not the case. Going back to your earlier example, yes, you might have a 40% chance of being in a stronger position with Ravings than you would with Looting, but that also indicates a 60% chance that you are in an inferior position.
Currently im also playing Peer Through Depths and absolutely love it. It plays well with Goblin Electromancer, digs deeper than any of our cantrips can, and with an active ascension digs through a quarter (or more) of our deck (assuming we are mid combo). Im currently playing 2 PiF 1 Grapeshot 1 Warrens, and Peer (as well as gifts) are key reasons why i can get away with those numbers and still get there consistently
Im not trying to argue that Looting is a better card, im trying to argue that the two cards both are worth considering for this archetype
Looting only needs 1 card you dont care about to be comparable. Having 1 card means that 50% of your drawback is accounted for and that you have a 100% chance of discarding the least valuable card remaining. Yes, sometimes you will draw 2 good spells and ravings will randomly take the 1 card, leaving you with a better hand. But do not underestimate the randomness, it can and will strip you of your best card, leading you towards inferior lines of play.
Lets reevaluate that scenario for a second. Since we have an electromancer plus a land drop, we can assume that we have at least 3 lands, 1 of which was tapped for looting. In your scenario (assuming pyretic was discarded), we tap our second land for Desperate Ritual, cast Past in Flames, tap our third land to pay for rituals and proceed to combo off.
Or we could play that hand correctly. We discard Island and Past in Flames instead. Tap the second land to cast both rituals, 5 red floating, flashback PiF for 4 mana, leaving us with +1 red mana and an extra untapped land, which presumably would be able to tap for blue and thus let us flashback a cantrip if needed.
If you have enough mana to cast PiF and flashback a ritual with the remaining mana, then PiF is considered a "completely useless card." Yes ravings gives you a 40% chance of hitting one of the worthless cards in that scenario, but it also gives you a 60% chance of being forced into the inferior line of play.
This is entirely correct, and i intentionally do this on a regular basis. Its a fantastic play. I've already cast all the rituals in my hand and any cantrips I can afford, does it really matter if the rest end up in the yard? All im going to be doing is casting PiF and recasting them, do they really need to be in my hand for that? Meanwhile Looting gives me 2-4 free cards. If they are worthless, fine, id rather mill them than draw them off of a manamorphose. If they are good spells, ill just recast them with PiF. No matter how i play it, its free profits. If i had any cards left in hand, Looting lets me replace them with any ritual i might draw, letting me go bigger. And if that ritual i draw happens to be manamorphose, it gets ridiculous very quickly.
Free monthly tournament for members of these forums. 12 monthly qualifiers leading up to a year-end tournament. We are currently in the last of the IQs for the season, but hopefully we will get next season started soon. You can find all the information here: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=425560
They are a ton of fun, you should play in the next one if you have the time.
If we have Past in Flames and Grapeshot in our opening hand, do we need them? Unless we need to play around GY hate, in 99% of all games they will do exactly nothing until our combo turn. Do we need them in our opening hand? What good is the CA generated by Manamorphose if we draw nothing but excess lands? In both of these situations, Faithless Looting is technically going to net us 0 cards, but the quality of the cards in our hand is going to increase significantly. Is that bad? Test it and get back to me about it.
Not the issue. The issue is when we are mid-combo and cant find Manamorphose or the ability to win via Past in Flames+Wincon, when we have all the red mana we need but haven't seen enough cards to quite get there. Looting lets us see at least another 2 cards, usually 4, digging us deeper and deeper until we hit the morphose needed to get there. Its another route to victory that I find myself missing when I test the list with 4 Ravings.
However, after reading your arguments in favor of Ravings I have started to test it again (I had stopped playing it because I somehow always end up discarding the absolutely worst card possible) and have to say that I don't hate it. Im currently testing a version with a combination of both lootings and ravings. If I find a version that I think is better than my current list, ill post it. Ill also post my current list as soon as this current Lantern IQ is over (im playing storm in it, don't want to let the 75 be known until its over)