So I'm going back to college soon. Thus, I have to leave my precious magic buddies in my home state. Regrettable but I can't not go back to school because I'm happy where I play magic.
Anyways, I've been thinking of just avoiding my magic club entirely and just frequenting whatever LGS I can find to play Legacy, Limited, and maybe modern. In the past I've had issues with a decent amount of people in my Magic Club with things like giving nonconstructive criticism, not really feeling like a supportive community, sometimes disrespecting me as a player, and lack of ability of to have a civil conversation. There's also the fact that I've developed into a predominately spike player who plays Magic not just to win but for a skill intensive game, seeking the best plays at every juncture. The Magic Club at my school, on the other hand, is filled with a more casual crowd by comparison. Not to say there is anything wrong with being casual about Magic, but I just think this fundamental difference between myself and others in Magic Club can causes clashes of personality. I guess what I'm asking from others on here is advice on my situation and feedback on whether or not it's best for me to just avoid a scene I deem unhealthy for me.
Hey there LBS. I think I've played around you long enough to know what kind of decks you like. You seem to be mostly a combo player in legacy who likes control every once in a while but not every weekend. In terms of playing a Tier One Combo deck that's not so unforgiving, I agree with everyone else who has recommended Show and Tell Variants (Either Mono Blue or Sneak n' Show really) and/or Reanimator. I don't think you would enjoy playing Burn despite it being very linear and easy to play since I remember you calling it cheesy once lol.
Any midrange deck, while yeah they can be easy, will have you dealing with combat timing, board states, and a whole lot more information to keep track of.
What Alleyway Jack said is true. Don't be fooled into thinking that decks like Shardless BUG, Deathblade, or Maverick don't take much skill to play well. They are easy to play competently but hard to master. I can say that about Shardless BUG at least since I've been playing it for about 3 or 4 months now. The midrange deck with the least complex decision tree is probably Jund but even that takes some thinking when facing off against other midrange decks.
Hi there. I got back into Magic about a year ago. Since then I've played a lot of Standard, Modern, and Legacy. I haven't paid enough attention to limited so I want to get better at it. Also, I'm getting out of standard (mostly due to an issue of time and money) and I'm probably going to be playing mostly Legacy and limited when I get to play magic.
With all that said, I've been wanting to make a Peasant Cube for me and Magic buddies to draft and have fun with since none of use have cubes and it will help reduce cost since wouldn't have to do booster drafts as much. My question to the Pauper and Peasant forum is what's a good way to start building a Peasant Cube for someone who hasn't built a cube before???
So I wanted to get the communities input on this. Is anyone else play testing with four Jace, the Mindsculptor now? What are you finding?
For me it seems like three is still the best number.
Are you talking about playing four with the new rules in effect? Haven't tested it myself so I'd be interested to see what other people have to say in regards to this.
But my biggest concern is; is this still a control deck? When I started constructing decks in Legacy, I looked at the top tier decks to determine which decks are doing well overall. Also I wanted to construct very distinctive archetypes of decks, Esper Stoneblade being a control deck. The reason behind this is so I can switch up in the different paces of Legacy play and learn more to become a better player by learning how certain play styles are played.
In the end I decided not to change it yet; as I am fairly new to this deck anyway and still have to learn a lot on how to play it. The traditional Esper is by no means worse or bad.
I think adding Deathrite Shaman and Dark Confidant to the deck makes Esper Blade more of grindy midrange deck than a control deck since those cards shift the focus to being proactive, playing high-class threats, and grinding the opponent out through vast amounts of Card Advantage. To me, Deathrite Shaman has almost single handedly (I say almost because Abrupt Decay also helps) made midrange something to respect in Legacy.
However, whether or not Deathblade makes Esper a midrange deck or not, I think I'm still going to stick with classic Esper Stoneblade for a while still since the reactive play style of pre-deathblade builds is something I'm trying to get better at to grow as a player and because it's what made fall in love in the deck in the first place. I think to those who like the older builds better all I can say is just keep on playing and tweaking it just to get better with the deck. That's what I'm going to do for the time being at least. If there's anything important I've learned about legacy, it's that sometimes one person's skill with a deck can overcome hostile metagame conditions.
*BBD thinks Liliana isn't good for the deck for the same reason that Aenesidem said: It's opposed to what a brainstorm deck wants to do, which is keep your hand full of cards. He thinks that she should be replaced with Lingering Souls or Vendilion Clique. The choice of either is entirely meta-dependent.
*Traditional Stoneblade is a UW deck splashing black for discard and the backside of lingering souls while Esper Deathblade is more of a UB deck splashing white for Swords to Plowshares and Stoneforge Mystic.
Some people are playing them. Mostly the problem is the high number of high costed cards. We don't really have the slots for them and they eat removal.
I can see why the high number of high costed cards would be seem like a problem. In fact, that is the main reason I have dismissed other people's attempts to play him in Stoneblade. However, I think adding him in conjunction with Deathrite Shaman changes things. If you ever get too low on life you can just fetch up Tropical Island and start gaining life. In the mean time the Great Wizard will be just drowning your opponent in card advantage if they leave him unchecked for more than a turn or two.
As for good ol' Bob eating removal, I don't think this should be a reason not to play him since adding him and deathrite to the deck makes our threat density much higher. Assuming I have Deathrite, Stoneforge, and Dark Confidant in hand, if I go turn 1 Deathrite, Turn 2 Stoneforge to bait out removal, I'd be really surprised if they have another piece of removal for my turn 3 Bob since I'd assume they would try to kill or counter my Deathrite and Stoneforge.
Card advantage has become the name of the game for legacy fair decks and something that traditional Esper builds have been missing. Stoneblade has more card filtering and selection than card drawing power.. All the 'fair' bad match ups for esper are against decks with card advantage.
Shardless BUG
Goblins
Jund
Are all examples of decks that beat Esper Stoneblade through card advantage.
Baleful Strix and Dark Confidant are being played with success in various esper builds
I agree with this immensely, and I think that Esper's Stoneblade answer seems to be a kind of 'If you can't beat'em, join'em mentality' by adding cards like Deathrite Shaman, Dark Confidant, and Baleful Strix.
Granted I'm talking from a purely theory-craft perspective really in all of this, but the results of the most recent SCG Open is prompting me to try out Esper Deathblade this weekend when I go to play Legacy. I should be able to give a report on that sometime next week.
So I've been testing Esper Stoneblade for about a month now because I'm thinking about building it. Thankfully the place where I play Legacy allows ten proxies and has a generous community so I proxied most of the lands and borrowed whatever small stuff I didn't have. I went 2-1 in our three round swiss this recent weekend, beating Merfolk round one, losing to Balustrade Spy Combo round two due to a fatal misplay (Spell Pierced his first gitaxian probe when I should have waited to spell pierce his mox or a ritual), and won round three against burn.
I've been playing Vidi's GP winning list to learn how to play the deck. I only changed the sb by taking out zealous persecution for another supreme verdict since there is a guy playing merfolk at my store.
Anyways, what I really want to discuss is Esper Deathblade. There were three Esper Stoneblade lists in SCG Nashville's Legacy Top 8, two of which were Deathblade variants. My questions to fellow Stoneblade players: Is this the new face of Esper Stoneforge decks? What are the advantages and disadvantages of adding Deathrite and Bob to the Esper Stoneblade Shell? I know Esper Deathblade has been discussed a bit earlier in this thread, but I feel like it needs more attention now since it has had another good finish in a competitive legacy tournament.
Seems like I'll be grinding block then once my new laptop comes and I have $50 to burn to buy into the Mono-Red deck. I think I still would have chosen block over pauper even if the latter had better support from Wizards only because I'm ultimately looking to use MODO to grind standard. I may eventually look into grinding Modern as well, but that's not going to be for a good long time...
I've been thinking lately of working on building up a collection on MODO in order to have another outlet for competitive Magic. I've heard the most cost effective ways to build an collection on MODO - at least initially - is grinding pauper or block. Could the community weigh in on this by providing the pros and cons of using either format to grind for tickets in order to "go infinite"? Also, links to specific article with regards to using either format to get started on MODO would be appreciated.
Am I the only one who has no idea what's going on here?
What exactly is the OP referring to?
Also sucks that somebody got their cards stolen.
SCG was in NJ this recent weekend at Somerset. A dealer named Eli apparently brought $75K worth of cards that got stolen sometime during the weekend from his car. I hope he gets the cards back, but I have to question why he would bring that much product down when he's not able to openly conduct business at an SCG event anyways. Granted he was probably looking to make some value through trades as I got a Japanese Wooded Foothills and a Jitte trading him my extra Snapcasters, but I still wouldn't have brought THAT much value to an event where you can't openly sell cards.
I actually prefer the bans. If it was good enough to be banned in standard (the least banned of any format) it will be a staple in other formats. This will not effect it's price over a long period of time.
When we use WoTC's current system we end up with crap like thragtusk and cavern of souls. When I look at the hate cards made since I came back to magic during ZEN I keep seeing a common theme. The hate card's target rotates out but the hate card then becomes too strong because it was pushed too much.
Like Skylasher for instance. Would have been enough to shaft delver all by himself. No cavern or thragtusk needed. Instead we get him well over a year too late but will continue to shaft blue decks for the next year and a half.
At least with the bans the problem card is gone. We don't have hate cards that are extremely pushed lingering around well past their time.
Hmmm...you have a good point, but don't forget that Wizards is a business in the end. They will often make the decision that they think will be the most politically popular, even if it imbalances standard or another format (I'm thinking about what Deathrite Shaman and Abrupt Decay did to modern). Snapcaster probably wouldn't have dropped like a rock if he got banned in Standard, but he still would have experienced a sudden drop to $10 or $15 from the $20 to $25 range he's been in for a while, which still would have upset those who bought him for standard. I think Wizards will only ban cards in Standard when they can't release a new card to curb a deck that they deem to be too oppressive.
As for the skylasher issue, I don't see him really shafting Blue decks as long as they run non-blue removal. I think in general, after Caw Blade and then Delver, Wizards is on a trend of hating on blue pretty hard. Not sure how long this will last. I just hope that the recent design philosophies fade away within the next few years because I'd rather not have a choice only between aggro and midrange in Standard and Modern in terms of Tier 1 options.
I honestly don't know how people think that Caver of Souls was an answer to Snapcaster Mage. Wizards has stated when 1 Set is released the following is already printed and there is nothing that can be changed in the 3rd.
It's quite clear that Cavern was designed 'last minute' (by that I mean after Innistrad came out, at which point it was too late to take Snapcaster out) to curb Snapcaster decks in standard.
Honestly they should have just not printed either Cavern of Souls or Snapcaster. More so Snapcaster, but I feel it limits and defines the format too much.
Yeah, but what's done is done. I don't think they would have banned Snapcaster Mage unless Delver had approached Caw Blade proportions in terms of dominance, which might have happened if they HADN'T printed Cavern of Souls. Printing a counterbalance to the Snapcaster problem is just more politically popular than banning the overpowered Wizard in Standard since he's always been at least $15. Unfortunately, Control decks have to suffer splash damage for the sins of Delver
Anyways, I've been thinking of just avoiding my magic club entirely and just frequenting whatever LGS I can find to play Legacy, Limited, and maybe modern. In the past I've had issues with a decent amount of people in my Magic Club with things like giving nonconstructive criticism, not really feeling like a supportive community, sometimes disrespecting me as a player, and lack of ability of to have a civil conversation. There's also the fact that I've developed into a predominately spike player who plays Magic not just to win but for a skill intensive game, seeking the best plays at every juncture. The Magic Club at my school, on the other hand, is filled with a more casual crowd by comparison. Not to say there is anything wrong with being casual about Magic, but I just think this fundamental difference between myself and others in Magic Club can causes clashes of personality. I guess what I'm asking from others on here is advice on my situation and feedback on whether or not it's best for me to just avoid a scene I deem unhealthy for me.
What Alleyway Jack said is true. Don't be fooled into thinking that decks like Shardless BUG, Deathblade, or Maverick don't take much skill to play well. They are easy to play competently but hard to master. I can say that about Shardless BUG at least since I've been playing it for about 3 or 4 months now. The midrange deck with the least complex decision tree is probably Jund but even that takes some thinking when facing off against other midrange decks.
With all that said, I've been wanting to make a Peasant Cube for me and Magic buddies to draft and have fun with since none of use have cubes and it will help reduce cost since wouldn't have to do booster drafts as much. My question to the Pauper and Peasant forum is what's a good way to start building a Peasant Cube for someone who hasn't built a cube before???
Are you talking about playing four with the new rules in effect? Haven't tested it myself so I'd be interested to see what other people have to say in regards to this.
I think adding Deathrite Shaman and Dark Confidant to the deck makes Esper Blade more of grindy midrange deck than a control deck since those cards shift the focus to being proactive, playing high-class threats, and grinding the opponent out through vast amounts of Card Advantage. To me, Deathrite Shaman has almost single handedly (I say almost because Abrupt Decay also helps) made midrange something to respect in Legacy.
However, whether or not Deathblade makes Esper a midrange deck or not, I think I'm still going to stick with classic Esper Stoneblade for a while still since the reactive play style of pre-deathblade builds is something I'm trying to get better at to grow as a player and because it's what made fall in love in the deck in the first place. I think to those who like the older builds better all I can say is just keep on playing and tweaking it just to get better with the deck. That's what I'm going to do for the time being at least. If there's anything important I've learned about legacy, it's that sometimes one person's skill with a deck can overcome hostile metagame conditions.
A few of the major points that stood out for me:
*BBD thinks Liliana isn't good for the deck for the same reason that Aenesidem said: It's opposed to what a brainstorm deck wants to do, which is keep your hand full of cards. He thinks that she should be replaced with Lingering Souls or Vendilion Clique. The choice of either is entirely meta-dependent.
*Traditional Stoneblade is a UW deck splashing black for discard and the backside of lingering souls while Esper Deathblade is more of a UB deck splashing white for Swords to Plowshares and Stoneforge Mystic.
I can see why the high number of high costed cards would be seem like a problem. In fact, that is the main reason I have dismissed other people's attempts to play him in Stoneblade. However, I think adding him in conjunction with Deathrite Shaman changes things. If you ever get too low on life you can just fetch up Tropical Island and start gaining life. In the mean time the Great Wizard will be just drowning your opponent in card advantage if they leave him unchecked for more than a turn or two.
As for good ol' Bob eating removal, I don't think this should be a reason not to play him since adding him and deathrite to the deck makes our threat density much higher. Assuming I have Deathrite, Stoneforge, and Dark Confidant in hand, if I go turn 1 Deathrite, Turn 2 Stoneforge to bait out removal, I'd be really surprised if they have another piece of removal for my turn 3 Bob since I'd assume they would try to kill or counter my Deathrite and Stoneforge.
I agree with this immensely, and I think that Esper's Stoneblade answer seems to be a kind of 'If you can't beat'em, join'em mentality' by adding cards like Deathrite Shaman, Dark Confidant, and Baleful Strix.
Granted I'm talking from a purely theory-craft perspective really in all of this, but the results of the most recent SCG Open is prompting me to try out Esper Deathblade this weekend when I go to play Legacy. I should be able to give a report on that sometime next week.
I've been playing Vidi's GP winning list to learn how to play the deck. I only changed the sb by taking out zealous persecution for another supreme verdict since there is a guy playing merfolk at my store.
Anyways, what I really want to discuss is Esper Deathblade. There were three Esper Stoneblade lists in SCG Nashville's Legacy Top 8, two of which were Deathblade variants. My questions to fellow Stoneblade players: Is this the new face of Esper Stoneforge decks? What are the advantages and disadvantages of adding Deathrite and Bob to the Esper Stoneblade Shell? I know Esper Deathblade has been discussed a bit earlier in this thread, but I feel like it needs more attention now since it has had another good finish in a competitive legacy tournament.
SCG was in NJ this recent weekend at Somerset. A dealer named Eli apparently brought $75K worth of cards that got stolen sometime during the weekend from his car. I hope he gets the cards back, but I have to question why he would bring that much product down when he's not able to openly conduct business at an SCG event anyways. Granted he was probably looking to make some value through trades as I got a Japanese Wooded Foothills and a Jitte trading him my extra Snapcasters, but I still wouldn't have brought THAT much value to an event where you can't openly sell cards.
Yeah, I don't think anyone in Legacy wants their format to be a part of the Communist Experiment that Wizards already has Modern tied up in:p
Hmmm...you have a good point, but don't forget that Wizards is a business in the end. They will often make the decision that they think will be the most politically popular, even if it imbalances standard or another format (I'm thinking about what Deathrite Shaman and Abrupt Decay did to modern). Snapcaster probably wouldn't have dropped like a rock if he got banned in Standard, but he still would have experienced a sudden drop to $10 or $15 from the $20 to $25 range he's been in for a while, which still would have upset those who bought him for standard. I think Wizards will only ban cards in Standard when they can't release a new card to curb a deck that they deem to be too oppressive.
As for the skylasher issue, I don't see him really shafting Blue decks as long as they run non-blue removal. I think in general, after Caw Blade and then Delver, Wizards is on a trend of hating on blue pretty hard. Not sure how long this will last. I just hope that the recent design philosophies fade away within the next few years because I'd rather not have a choice only between aggro and midrange in Standard and Modern in terms of Tier 1 options.
You might want to read this: http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/ld/191
It's quite clear that Cavern was designed 'last minute' (by that I mean after Innistrad came out, at which point it was too late to take Snapcaster out) to curb Snapcaster decks in standard.
Yeah, but what's done is done. I don't think they would have banned Snapcaster Mage unless Delver had approached Caw Blade proportions in terms of dominance, which might have happened if they HADN'T printed Cavern of Souls. Printing a counterbalance to the Snapcaster problem is just more politically popular than banning the overpowered Wizard in Standard since he's always been at least $15. Unfortunately, Control decks have to suffer splash damage for the sins of Delver
God, I CANNOT WAIT TILL THAT CARD ROTATES.