2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • posted a message on [[Official]] What [deck] should I play/buy/get into thread
    Quote from DrakeArron »


    1.) I'm extremely empathetic. This means that I'm going to hate upsetting my opponents by playing my deck, and will want to avoid it if I can. Luckily from what I can tell this isn't *usually* a problem in legacy, however MonoB reanimator seems to be an exception because of the possibility of random turn 1 wins and Hymn.


    In Modern, it seemed like every deck I ever found that seemed both interesting and capable of winning also inspired blind rage from a meaningful number of people, whether it be Tron, Storm, Burn, Dredge, etc. (and other people liked Jeskai or UW, Bogles, whatever). In Legacy, the salt factor is way, way, lower.

    The only decks I would worry about any meaningful salt factor are RB Reanimator, Dredge (of any type), and maybe something like Belcher or Oops All Spells. Legacy players appreciate that their decisions matter in most games, but feel that these matchups in particular often come down to the luck of the draw and are uninteresting. That said, you still should generally expect the great majority of Legacy players to respect you and your deck choice, even if they don't particularly like it.

    IMO Mono Black Reanimator is probably not that likely to actually tilt anyone because it's much less all in than RB. Turn 1 Griselbrand is just a fact of life in Legacy, and that's not even plan A for Mono Black. The main question should just be, is it what you want to play now, and how does it get you to what you might want to play later?


    Just a hunch, but from how you describe yourself, you sound like someone who might want to play some sort of Veteran Explorer deck, like Nic Fit, Arena Rector, and the like. Just a suggestion.
    Posted in: Legacy (Type 1.5)
  • posted a message on Do you enjoy modern right now?
    I didn't vote, because none of the options are correct for me. Every option either says "I still play Modern" or "I hate Modern." I wouldn't say that I "hate" it, or that it's awful, but I've given up on playing it for now. I only ever played extreme aggro in Modern, and my introduction to the format was being told that it's a format where you have to goldfish at least a turn 4 win or not bother showing up. So I don't pine for an older, less degenerate Modern, because this is all I've ever known. And it's fine, I guess.

    I made my entry into Legacy late last year and I haven't looked back. I used to practice Modern and learn decks by goldfishing, and I quickly found that to be impractical for any Legacy deck, because no plan survives first contact with the enemy there. Occasionally I come back and play a few rounds of Modern online and get frustrated because I can't seem to do anything about what's happening on the other side of the table. And no, I don't play blue in Legacy.

    I'll keep an eye on Modern and play occasional matches to stay somewhat current, but for now I've mostly lost interest.
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion

    I was about to reply to a deck that scoops to a turn 3 Batterskull, but then this post did it just fine.

    Even Burn, a deck that can definitely get decimated by Batterskull has burn for the Mystic (Searing Blaze and more) or can even win without burning it by doing a pair of Skullcrack.


    Or Smash to Smithereens, or Destructive Revelry, or Wear//Tear, or Deflecting Palm, or kill your own chump blocker, or...
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    Quote from idSurge »


    Imagine a world where all the top cards like Liliana of the Veil, Noble Heirarch, Karn Liberated, etc, were no more than 30 each. We'd all have multiple modern decks and swap between them, plus if someone new came to the table we wouldn't feel weird saying "hey, want to join in?" and pass them a deck other than burn or boggles.


    What is being stated here, is that passing someone Burn, or Bogles, or Storm, is somehow 'lesser' than passing them Jund. First of all, its a false statement from a competitive basis, ans I would rate Burn, Bogles AND Storm as better than Jund (going from the Liliana of the Veil comment) and second, its implying a cheap option is inherently 'weird'.
    I'm not some filthy capitalist either, but Colt's implication that its 'weird' to pass someone a cheaper option instead of that deck costing more than my car, is the issue here.

    You seem to think the discussion was about keeping the cost's under some arbitrary number, but thats on you.


    Um, I understood the comment as meaning the exact opposite, namely, that passing someone new an expensive deck is "weird," whereas passing them a cheap deck doesn't feel weird. Colt can clarify the original intent if desired, but I can relate personally to the comment. Before getting (back) into Magic, I showed up at an LGS just to look around and talk to people, and someone said "we're about to play Modern, here, borrow this deck. Let me quickly show you how it works." I later realized how much it was worth and was flabbergasted. This was the first time I had ever seen a Tarmogoyf, or a fetchland... The idea that you would hand over a ~$1k deck of cards to a complete stranger like that felt, in retrospect, quite "weird." But fortunately, he didn't let that stop him from loaning the deck out, and the friendly gesture helped bring me into the game. FWIW, the deck he himself played: Storm.

    (What to conclude from this as far as what should happen in the world of reprints, etc.? I'm not sure, honestly.)
    Posted in: Modern
  • posted a message on Izzet Spells
    I would be wary of running 18 lands when you want to make 3-4 land drops for the Drakes (and maybe hardcasting a Phoenix), but the math actually doesn't look that bad, assuming I have half a clue what I'm doing (not guaranteed, btw). At 16 cantrips, 8 of which can dig 2 deep, you dig 1.5 deep per average cantrip. At 20 lands, lands are 1/3 of the deck, so at 18 lands two cantrips is equal to a bit less than 1 land (when you want to find a land, at least). Jump-start gives you a little bit more digging power than the numbers reflect, so call it even.

    That would suggest that the deck is fine for lands, since I just estimated 18+(16/2) = 26 land equivalents. You also need to get lands in your opener, and you need to hit two land drops before you can even start casting Radical Idea and Chart a Course. But Frank Karsten estimated that 18 lands gives you 97% probability of finding your first two land drops (with proper mulligan strategy and scry). Having 8 1-mana cantrips helps even more. Hitting the 3rd at 90% or more needs 22 lands (or 25 on the play) according to his calculations, but you should have all the cantrips online by turn two.

    So the question may be, are you OK with spending the first 2 turns digging for lands with cantrips? I suspect yes, since those cantrips feed the Drakes. How's it working in testing?

    https://www.channelfireball.com/articles/how-many-lands-do-you-need-to-consistently-hit-your-land-drops/
    Posted in: Deck Creation
  • posted a message on What Deck Should I Play Since I'm on a budget?
    For budget control playable at the LGS level, Mono Blue Tron is the best option I know of. My deck is supposedly worth about $175 right now, but I got a lot of pieces cheaper. It's infinitely customizable, can be upgraded one card at a time if you want, and has a super strong top end even in budget form. Academy Ruins is the only absolutely indispensable expensive card.
    Posted in: Budget (Modern)
  • posted a message on [GRN] UR Control
    I've been running 2 Dive Down main and 2 Siren Stormtamer SB for this very reason. Dive Down is great against Golgari because it answers any of Trophy, Vraska -3, and Chupacabra for one mana. I'm on the drake plan, and so it answers Find // Finality, too. Stormtamer answers most of these, but also is insurance against The Eldest Reborn and Plaguecrafter.

    Dive Down also is another answer against Boros when drakes go up against Aurelia or Lyra.

    My biggest concern is that the card isn't doing anything in my hand a lot of the time, so I'm still evaluating. But so far it's gotten me plenty of blowouts.
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Standard)
  • posted a message on MTG Goldfish 12 Bolt Deck - viable?
    Seth goes into the question of why Gut Shot a bit in his writeup, btw. To give a slightly longer answer based on my experience:

    1) Prowess. With Swiftspear and Soul-Scar, casting as many spells as possible in a single turn is a primary concern, and paying 0 helps this cause more than paying 1. And who wouldn't love to go t1 SSM, t2 tap out for swiftspear and be able to confidently attack into a pair of 2/2 Bridge From Below tokens, or maybe even a Steel Leaf Champion?
    2) Flame of Keld. Similarly to 1), each spell you hoard and unleash on Chapter III gets a bonus, so a zero-mana lightning bolt may be more useful than a one-mana burn spell you can't cast.
    3) Thalia. If you've ever killed Thalia with a Gut Shot when you have only one land in play, you should understand why this is important for when you're in a meta that has humans (or Hatebears, etc.).
    4) Insult // Injury. While Seth claims to have never cast Insult proper, I've used it plenty in Standard to do 20-30 damage in a turn out of nowhere. See 1) and 2) above.

    None of this is to say that Gut Shot is the nuts or irreplaceable, so don't be afraid to innovate.

    As for adding Lavamancers, they and Soul-Scar are the only creatures that never have haste, but SSM turns on wither once it lands. Since Grimmy quickly eats the yard, it's generally very bad in multiples. The presence of Faithless and Flame of Keld in this deck may fill the yard a bit faster though?

    As for Snapcasters, this is a hyper-aggro, super-low CMC mono-red deck, so it might take some tinkering to find a good way to cram him in there (and it could make the manabase a bit less budget if you start throwing in Scalding Tarns and the like, but the Lavaman might like that).
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    Ive always loathed the idea of planned obsolescence, and that’s the whole basis of standard. I’m not terribly attached to any standard deck because before even building it I’m thinking about it rotating and getting upset. Why even bother.

    It’s hard to make money off someone playing a RTR deck forever, of course and that needs to be considered. But if you take his deck away, does he happily buy a new one every few months? Or does he quit? Wouldn’t it be better to keep him in the game, maybe paying entry fees at an LGS, maybe getting exposed to new decks and new products that he might eventually want to try out? Worst case, maybe he helps LGS events fire?
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    Looking at the ban/unban poll, it’s notable that 100% of the potentially problematic cards there are either red or “colorless.” Stirrings is green of course, but it’s only powerful and controversial because it grabs colorless cards. The only other exception is bridge/vine—both of which only work in the deck in question as a result of Faithless Looting (a red card) and the colorless xx cost artifacts. (Neither bridge nor vine will EVER actually get cast for their listed mana costs.)
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on [POLL] What cards do you want banned or unbanned in the August 20, 2018 announcement?
    Quote from cfusionpm »
    I voted...

    Ban: I honestly don't really think anything needs to be banned, but I could do without Burning Inquiry creating awful, non-games. This is exemplified by having it cast against me 5 times (two of which were the opponent's turn 1 both games), making my hands essentially unplayable. Goblin Lore + Faithless Looting doesn't inadvertently screw me.


    After losing multiple matches in a row because of my opponent's unbeatable turn one play, I can still do the math and see that cards like Burning Inquiry might not make a deck unbeatable *on average*, but they do make me think about quitting Magic. Anything that removes all pretense of the game being decided based on my decisions and makes me (or my opponent) lose before I (or s/he) take(s) a turn makes for a pointless game.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    Quote from gkourou »
    Back to back Turn 3 kills from this BR Vengevine deck. This deck seems like the real deal. Stitcher's Supplier means there is a chance we might have past Dredge deck all over again.
    First game, he won via Stitcher's Supplier milling over Bridge from below, Bloodghast, Vengevine and having 12 power into the battlefield on turn 2.
    Second game, it wins on turn 3 through Rest in peace!!!!!

    Oh my God, those things should not be acceptable in Modern, especially through Rest in peace.

    Pros might have put Modern into the pithole again, needing multiple bans. Sad, sad, sad.


    And that's not the nut draw. The nut draw kills on turn 2. I ran into that at LGS Modern this week and scooped before my first turn when facing 6 2/2s (and a land plus Bushwhacker in hand, as it turned out). The guy I was playing immediately afterward said something like "I expect something in here will get banned eventually."
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • posted a message on Modern URx Wizards (Wizard Tribal)
    6th place at SCG event: http://www.starcitygames.com/decks/122704
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Modern)
  • posted a message on Burn
    Quote from BlueTronFTW »


    So for the sake of argument now since I have a month before the first PPTQ, are there any other major weird rules I should know? Honestly when I told my round two opponent he looked like I sprouted wings he was that confused, as were two other people nearby. At the very least, I learned to not assume and call a judge for any card interaction I have not seen before.


    Since you mention an example with Searing Blaze, also remember that it cannot kill a Death’s Shadow. If there are no instants in the yard, it will not kill a 3-toughness Tarmogoyf, either. (Similarly, opponent could save it by Fatal Pushing something else if there were no creatures in the gy.)
    Posted in: Aggro & Tempo
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.