Hi, been away from the scene for a while. I'm looking to sell some cards in my collection, which includes some Modern staples. I hear that Modern season is coming up -- when does it start and when do you think is the best time to sell Modern cards? Thanks.
The TL;DR version of the summary: Chance of cards with more colored mana?
Summary, the TL;DR version: Will there ever be a shift back to mono- and two-color decks, starring cards that are undercosted and powerful but requiring a lot of colored mana?
Phyrexian Obliterator is a card that could have been absolutely insane, but didn't end up seeing much play because its cost was prohibitive. Not prohibitive in the sense that it was "too expensive" -- 4cc for a 5/5 with its abilities is way, way undercosted. The problem was that there haven't been many incentives to playing a mono- or nearly-mono colored deck (except green, and that advance has been recent) in recent standard formats. The way Magic was structured was that more powerful cards would have more restrictive costs, whether that be through higher CC or more colored mana necessary.
Most of the relevant/chase (and by that, I mean most heavily played) cards now are those that are easily splashable rather than the most "powerful": Restoration Angel, Snapcaster Mage, Birthing Pod, Bonfire of the Damned. The overall card power has increased such that cards with restrictive colored mana costs aren't really worth playing (again, notable exceptions tend to be in green, i.e. Strangleroot Geist).
Combine this with an abundance of dual lands with minimal drawbacks, and you get decks that can play 3 colors easily. These decks generally combine cards that are both powerful and easily splashable, which are by themselves less powerful than cards with restrictive costs, but together easily make for a more resilient deck that wins against a greater range of other decks.
How playable is Restoration Angel if it is 2WW instead of 3W? How about 1WWW? How about Geist of Saint Traft if it is UUW or UWW instead of 1UW? Bonfire of the Damned at XXRR (XRR miracle)? (The previous iteration of this was Flame Wave, which really shows how much colored mana has been cut out of the game.)
Easily splashable, powerful cards also take away from color identities. It used to be that decks strongly resembled MtG's color identities: Draw-go definitely emphasized card advantage and control. UB decks based around Urza's Guilt strongly embraced blue and black's identities: discard, bounce and loss of life. Some decks nowadays still abide to the original color identities: Carrie's mono-green deck and RG beats are examples. Strong decks now can easily be 3 colors and usually share the identity of being tempo-based or card advantage-based, but hard to clearly see the identity of each color in it. These tempo-based decks are due to an abundance splashable cards with 1-colored mana casting costs, then jamming them into decks.
Multi-color is not bad - I think much of alara and ravnica blocks did a good job. This is the right way to design 3 color in my opinion: make powerful cards like Sprouting Thrinax or the charms that force all three of the colors in the cost, rather than many different cards that are easily splashable. Bloodbraid Elf was a problem not because it didn't cost enough, it's that its cost wasn't specific enough. 1RRG or 1RGG significantly reduces the brokenness while keeping it playable.
Examples of poorly costed planeswalkers: 3G Garruk that flips, Chandra, the Firebrand, Jace, the Mind Sculptor (more balanced as 1UUU, but still arguably too powerful. Perhaps 2UUU)
This also encourages reprinting of cards such as Dark Ritual -- reward players for using BBB and fewer choices to use 3 colorless or 2B in a broken manner.
Bad card example from M13: Thragtusk. This card is likely poised to be a chase card due to its splashability. Better costed at 3GG or 2GGG, especially considering this as a nearly strict upgrade to Obstinate Baloth, which had a double green cc.
So, what do you think? Good/bad idea? Any chance of a shift back to more colored mana in costs and fewer powerful splashable cards that become the basis of many current decks? Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere recently, and that this is so long.
Test Subject is good, and I would definitely play it if I had it and was in blue.
Invisible Stalker seems good enough to play with the flights for sure. a 3/3 unblockable hexproof attacking on turn 3 seems good to me and not that unlikely since you have 2 of each.
The problem I see with this deck is that I'm not clear what the plan is. Do you want to go aggro and beatdown with strangleroot geist and stalker? Do you want to play the long game with essence and test subject? Especially in ISD, I think it's better to have a synergistic deck than a 'good stuff' deck, and so it helps to have a plan from the very beginning.
I read that 4 pack evaluation shifts to READ, or removal, evasion, awesomes (bombs), dudes. That said, I felt blue needed to be played for the fliers. The problem with green is that it has a bunch of ramp into nothing and not much of a gameplan. However, maybe the play was UGb, with the gameplan being to gum the ground/ramp with green into blue fliers. The white splash is questionable, but thought that timely aided me in reaching the late game. Perhaps I should have just acceletated to the end game instead.
As for the event, round 1 I lost 0-2 to a deck featuring serra angel, angelic destiny and foil sun titan. Game 2 was pretty close but angelic destiny prevented me from winning. Round 2 I lost to an aggressive br deck. Game 1 I kept a 2 lander on the play (probably shouldnt have) and by the time I got to my third land i was effectively dead. Game 2 I lost being a controlling deck vs an aggro deck. Probably siding non-pacifism white out for 2 ghouls or playing GBu would have helped here. Round 3 I had the bye.
I've been on a terrible losing streak on m12 4 pack sealed lately. I feel like my decks are fine, but I want to optimize my deck building. Here's a picture of my pool and what I built:
It seems to me that the only way to interact with blue, is to be blue or one of its sister colours. Whenever i play against a blue deck, i have little options to interact with them, i have to power on through them. I feel as though i am playing a game of tag. In this game if i touch player A i win. Meanwhile player C tries to slow me down by calling me names or throwing socks. Yet i can't fight back against C i just have to keep on running.
Example
Innistrad Spoiler !!
Invisible Stalker 1u
hexproof
unblockable
1/1
The only way to defeat this blue creature is mass removal(readily found in white and black) or countermagic(readily found in blue).
I don't understand why red and green(the rival colours of blue) can not
'counter' blue as effectively as blue counters them. Mechanics Blue can use in defense against red. Counter, Target removal, Redirect, hexproof (stops all red burn). Mechanics Red can use against blue...haste? Reds boardwipes are null since blue rarely swarms with multiple creatures. As a Red/Green player i wish there was more interactivity i could use against blue. I don't want red/green to become 'control' archetypes i just wish i could fight back in the game of tag.
Why do you have to worry about a 1/1 unblockable hexproof blue creature? Blue tends to be controlling and doesn't have pump effects. Auras or equipment placed on this creature can be eliminated via Naturalize or similar effects (green has MANY of these effects).
Blue is controlling and tends to have a good end game. The key to beating blue is to not let it get to the end game. There are ways to go about this:
1) Play aggressively. Blue decks have trouble against burn, goblin and elf decks (when paired with white, it is harder since they have cards like Day of Judgment and Timely Reinforcements. The strategy of a deck like this is to beat the blue deck before it can stabilize.
2) Play cards that blue have a hard time dealing with. 1/1 unblockable shroud? Try Thrun, the Last Troll. He was my favorite card during the days of caw-blade dominance. Troublesome blue creature? Try Combust. Thrun + Sword of War and Peace is generally scoop for a blue deck (since they tend to have more cards in their hands than other players).
3) If they play the waiting game, you can play it too. They do have to WIN somehow, by the way. You can either wait for them to tap out for something, or try to get them to tap out by playing moderate threats to 'bait' their counterspells so you can play your big threats. Being in red, you can wait for them to tap out for some creature in the mid-game, and then remove it at the end of turn with direct damage, then play something big on your turn.
This is all coming from someone who has piloted several different red-green brews throughout the last few months in standard and faced a LOT of blue decks (albeit they were UW or UB - nobody ever plays straight blue these days). Flashfreeze is quite annoying but still beatable. I would highly recommend using Thrun - they always groan in response to that card.
I read every post in this thread. Interesting conversation. I appreciate stratgen's 'challenge', and think that he was the one who was the most constructive in the whole thread.
That being said, my question for metamorph is this: What is your point in making this thread? (Don't pull punches; I don't expect you to)
Do you really want to help people out? Did you just want to share your opinion? Just got frustrated and wanted to rant?
If you really want to help people out, then I would say your post is not as successful as it could be. I would say that walkman's response to the challenge is better than what you currently have.
Why? Put yourself in the shoes of a magic player who came to this forum for the first time, is about to post about his/her deck and wants some feedback. The first thread they read is yours (I do think the title is good for getting attention). Some people may like your approach, but I have a feeling a lot of them would just close the window because they would get a bad impression about a) you, b) mtgsalvation forums, c) perhaps magic players in general.
It's like someone who is at a fnm for the first time and is playing a bad deck. If I want to help the person, then I'm tactful. I don't say 'this deck is awful, I know you are definitely not serious'. In the least, that will leave a bad taste in their mouth. In the worst, well, black eye? If you want them to consider your suggestions and for them to potentially actually change, then the approach needs to be friendlier. You're right in that not everyone knows how to make a good deck. But you also need to consider that everyone has an opinion and feelings. Apparently by some responses on this thread (it is not just 1 or 2 people - you just think it is 1 or 2 because they are the ones that stick out), people could potentially just have a very negative reaction to this.
If your point was to just make these people leave (new people, bad deckbuilders), then I think you do a good job of that. Actually want to help them? Not the worst job, since you do give them some good information. You're just a bad seller, so to a lot of people that you could potentially help, your information goes to waste due to a tone they don't like.
I like walkman's post in the sense that it's informational, but I admit that I got a little bored reading it. The problem is that more people SHOULD be reading walkman's post due to the informational and pleasant tone, but read yours due to your writing style. There are merits in both; neither are optimal (I would say that walkman's is closer to the optimal, but that's just my opinion).
In the style of the user 'stratgen', I propose a challenge also:
To metamorph and walkman, I challenge them to JOINTLY make a guide that would be (a) helpful to new players/bad deckbuilders, (b) have a good shot at being read by said players and (c) not offend them.
IMO I'd consider metamorph to have the strength in (b) to get people to read the article, walkman to have the strength in (c), and both to have the strength in (a).
Some options:
1. Put it into a Soul Sisters shell so that Manabarbs is fine without the Sanctuary.
2. Make a 'remove everything' deck, with Divine Offering, Leyline of Sanctity for red strategies, Day of Judgment and Pyroclasm for aggro creature decks, Oblivion Ring for everything else. Sun Titan and Inferno Titan are your finishers. Sun Titan is probably the MVP of this deck since it can get back O-ring, Personal Sanctuary, etc. You can even run Silence as a stall.
Were there a lot of planeswalkers pulled at your stores? They had a little poster prize that was given out if you pulled a planeswalker. I think there were 10 or so posters... I did not get a poster because I didn't open my packs fast enough. It seemed everybody was saying "Garruk!" "Chandra!" "Gideon!"... it was madness. I'd probably say about 10-12 planeswalkers were pulled between 25 or so people. I don't think anybody got a Jace or Sorin, though.
I had a lot of fun at the prerelease. Had a tough pool to construct - I had Gideon and Angelic Destiny, but very few other white cards. I ended up going G/U and splashing for the two white bombs and a couple other white bombs (seems bad, might have been... but had rampant growth to help me out with fixing). Had Arachnus Spider along with a Giant Spider and an Arachnus Web, which was great synergy. Garruk's Horde was good but I didn't get to cast it much. Angelic Destiny on a hexproof creature was a beating, and Gideon may be the best card in the format.
I lost the first round to an insane mono-red deck (hell of a pool to be able to go mono-color and he didn't seem to be playing too much chaff) that had 2 goblin fireslinger along with 2 of that 2cc bloodthirster and Chandra. I won the other 3 rounds 2-0.
Would you say the same of non-blue fetches? I have 10 ZEN fetches (some blue, some not) and wondering whether to sell now or a little later.
Summary, the TL;DR version: Will there ever be a shift back to mono- and two-color decks, starring cards that are undercosted and powerful but requiring a lot of colored mana?
Phyrexian Obliterator is a card that could have been absolutely insane, but didn't end up seeing much play because its cost was prohibitive. Not prohibitive in the sense that it was "too expensive" -- 4cc for a 5/5 with its abilities is way, way undercosted. The problem was that there haven't been many incentives to playing a mono- or nearly-mono colored deck (except green, and that advance has been recent) in recent standard formats. The way Magic was structured was that more powerful cards would have more restrictive costs, whether that be through higher CC or more colored mana necessary.
Most of the relevant/chase (and by that, I mean most heavily played) cards now are those that are easily splashable rather than the most "powerful": Restoration Angel, Snapcaster Mage, Birthing Pod, Bonfire of the Damned. The overall card power has increased such that cards with restrictive colored mana costs aren't really worth playing (again, notable exceptions tend to be in green, i.e. Strangleroot Geist).
Combine this with an abundance of dual lands with minimal drawbacks, and you get decks that can play 3 colors easily. These decks generally combine cards that are both powerful and easily splashable, which are by themselves less powerful than cards with restrictive costs, but together easily make for a more resilient deck that wins against a greater range of other decks.
How playable is Restoration Angel if it is 2WW instead of 3W? How about 1WWW? How about Geist of Saint Traft if it is UUW or UWW instead of 1UW? Bonfire of the Damned at XXRR (XRR miracle)? (The previous iteration of this was Flame Wave, which really shows how much colored mana has been cut out of the game.)
Easily splashable, powerful cards also take away from color identities. It used to be that decks strongly resembled MtG's color identities: Draw-go definitely emphasized card advantage and control. UB decks based around Urza's Guilt strongly embraced blue and black's identities: discard, bounce and loss of life. Some decks nowadays still abide to the original color identities: Carrie's mono-green deck and RG beats are examples. Strong decks now can easily be 3 colors and usually share the identity of being tempo-based or card advantage-based, but hard to clearly see the identity of each color in it. These tempo-based decks are due to an abundance splashable cards with 1-colored mana casting costs, then jamming them into decks.
Multi-color is not bad - I think much of alara and ravnica blocks did a good job. This is the right way to design 3 color in my opinion: make powerful cards like Sprouting Thrinax or the charms that force all three of the colors in the cost, rather than many different cards that are easily splashable. Bloodbraid Elf was a problem not because it didn't cost enough, it's that its cost wasn't specific enough. 1RRG or 1RGG significantly reduces the brokenness while keeping it playable.
Counterspells with good design that embrace color identity: Undermine, Absorb, Cryptic Command
Powerful creatures that also punish rather than reward splashing (mono): Phyrexian Obliterator, Primordial Ooze, Ball Lightning
Powerful multicolored creatures that encourage committing to colors: Sprouting Thrinax, Lightning Angel
Examples of planeswalkers that have a color identity and are costed accordingly: Tibalt, Liliana Vess, Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker, Garruk, Primal Hunter
Examples of poorly costed planeswalkers: 3G Garruk that flips, Chandra, the Firebrand, Jace, the Mind Sculptor (more balanced as 1UUU, but still arguably too powerful. Perhaps 2UUU)
This also encourages reprinting of cards such as Dark Ritual -- reward players for using BBB and fewer choices to use 3 colorless or 2B in a broken manner.
Bad card example from M13: Thragtusk. This card is likely poised to be a chase card due to its splashability. Better costed at 3GG or 2GGG, especially considering this as a nearly strict upgrade to Obstinate Baloth, which had a double green cc.
So, what do you think? Good/bad idea? Any chance of a shift back to more colored mana in costs and fewer powerful splashable cards that become the basis of many current decks? Sorry if this has been discussed elsewhere recently, and that this is so long.
In terms of strategy, if you want to win, anything with 'gotcha' is extremely strong (especially in multiplayer) and unfun.
Test Subject is good, and I would definitely play it if I had it and was in blue.
Invisible Stalker seems good enough to play with the flights for sure. a 3/3 unblockable hexproof attacking on turn 3 seems good to me and not that unlikely since you have 2 of each.
The problem I see with this deck is that I'm not clear what the plan is. Do you want to go aggro and beatdown with strangleroot geist and stalker? Do you want to play the long game with essence and test subject? Especially in ISD, I think it's better to have a synergistic deck than a 'good stuff' deck, and so it helps to have a plan from the very beginning.
As for the event, round 1 I lost 0-2 to a deck featuring serra angel, angelic destiny and foil sun titan. Game 2 was pretty close but angelic destiny prevented me from winning. Round 2 I lost to an aggressive br deck. Game 1 I kept a 2 lander on the play (probably shouldnt have) and by the time I got to my third land i was effectively dead. Game 2 I lost being a controlling deck vs an aggro deck. Probably siding non-pacifism white out for 2 ghouls or playing GBu would have helped here. Round 3 I had the bye.
How could I have built the deck better?
Why do you have to worry about a 1/1 unblockable hexproof blue creature? Blue tends to be controlling and doesn't have pump effects. Auras or equipment placed on this creature can be eliminated via Naturalize or similar effects (green has MANY of these effects).
Blue is controlling and tends to have a good end game. The key to beating blue is to not let it get to the end game. There are ways to go about this:
1) Play aggressively. Blue decks have trouble against burn, goblin and elf decks (when paired with white, it is harder since they have cards like Day of Judgment and Timely Reinforcements. The strategy of a deck like this is to beat the blue deck before it can stabilize.
2) Play cards that blue have a hard time dealing with. 1/1 unblockable shroud? Try Thrun, the Last Troll. He was my favorite card during the days of caw-blade dominance. Troublesome blue creature? Try Combust. Thrun + Sword of War and Peace is generally scoop for a blue deck (since they tend to have more cards in their hands than other players).
3) If they play the waiting game, you can play it too. They do have to WIN somehow, by the way. You can either wait for them to tap out for something, or try to get them to tap out by playing moderate threats to 'bait' their counterspells so you can play your big threats. Being in red, you can wait for them to tap out for some creature in the mid-game, and then remove it at the end of turn with direct damage, then play something big on your turn.
This is all coming from someone who has piloted several different red-green brews throughout the last few months in standard and faced a LOT of blue decks (albeit they were UW or UB - nobody ever plays straight blue these days). Flashfreeze is quite annoying but still beatable. I would highly recommend using Thrun - they always groan in response to that card.
That being said, my question for metamorph is this: What is your point in making this thread? (Don't pull punches; I don't expect you to)
Do you really want to help people out? Did you just want to share your opinion? Just got frustrated and wanted to rant?
If you really want to help people out, then I would say your post is not as successful as it could be. I would say that walkman's response to the challenge is better than what you currently have.
Why? Put yourself in the shoes of a magic player who came to this forum for the first time, is about to post about his/her deck and wants some feedback. The first thread they read is yours (I do think the title is good for getting attention). Some people may like your approach, but I have a feeling a lot of them would just close the window because they would get a bad impression about a) you, b) mtgsalvation forums, c) perhaps magic players in general.
It's like someone who is at a fnm for the first time and is playing a bad deck. If I want to help the person, then I'm tactful. I don't say 'this deck is awful, I know you are definitely not serious'. In the least, that will leave a bad taste in their mouth. In the worst, well, black eye? If you want them to consider your suggestions and for them to potentially actually change, then the approach needs to be friendlier. You're right in that not everyone knows how to make a good deck. But you also need to consider that everyone has an opinion and feelings. Apparently by some responses on this thread (it is not just 1 or 2 people - you just think it is 1 or 2 because they are the ones that stick out), people could potentially just have a very negative reaction to this.
If your point was to just make these people leave (new people, bad deckbuilders), then I think you do a good job of that. Actually want to help them? Not the worst job, since you do give them some good information. You're just a bad seller, so to a lot of people that you could potentially help, your information goes to waste due to a tone they don't like.
I like walkman's post in the sense that it's informational, but I admit that I got a little bored reading it. The problem is that more people SHOULD be reading walkman's post due to the informational and pleasant tone, but read yours due to your writing style. There are merits in both; neither are optimal (I would say that walkman's is closer to the optimal, but that's just my opinion).
In the style of the user 'stratgen', I propose a challenge also:
To metamorph and walkman, I challenge them to JOINTLY make a guide that would be (a) helpful to new players/bad deckbuilders, (b) have a good shot at being read by said players and (c) not offend them.
IMO I'd consider metamorph to have the strength in (b) to get people to read the article, walkman to have the strength in (c), and both to have the strength in (a).
1. Put it into a Soul Sisters shell so that Manabarbs is fine without the Sanctuary.
2. Make a 'remove everything' deck, with Divine Offering, Leyline of Sanctity for red strategies, Day of Judgment and Pyroclasm for aggro creature decks, Oblivion Ring for everything else. Sun Titan and Inferno Titan are your finishers. Sun Titan is probably the MVP of this deck since it can get back O-ring, Personal Sanctuary, etc. You can even run Silence as a stall.
For situation 1, you can try Brittle Effigy on the Lich.
Green would have a tough time getting rid of the Darksteel Relic though (but if you deal with the Lich, why would you need to?)
I had a lot of fun at the prerelease. Had a tough pool to construct - I had Gideon and Angelic Destiny, but very few other white cards. I ended up going G/U and splashing for the two white bombs and a couple other white bombs (seems bad, might have been... but had rampant growth to help me out with fixing). Had Arachnus Spider along with a Giant Spider and an Arachnus Web, which was great synergy. Garruk's Horde was good but I didn't get to cast it much. Angelic Destiny on a hexproof creature was a beating, and Gideon may be the best card in the format.
I lost the first round to an insane mono-red deck (hell of a pool to be able to go mono-color and he didn't seem to be playing too much chaff) that had 2 goblin fireslinger along with 2 of that 2cc bloodthirster and Chandra. I won the other 3 rounds 2-0.