Yes, some of the inexpensive decks can win. These happen during Underdog events, most often.

I'm specifically targeting the Regular and Pure events, for cost evaluation. What were the costs of today's winning decks? How many of them sport expensive dual lands? How expensive was their NON-tribal cards? I think it's odd that I can't play Knights as effectively because their leader was purified, but how many winning decks have Loci in play? How many non-tribal cards cost close or above 10 tickets? Is it tribal, or a bunch a tribal creatures that abuse dual lands, artifacts, or other expensive cards?

When soldiers swing with a neat sword,
...and merfolk swing with that same neat sword,
...and zombies attack with that same sword,
...and spirits hack with that same sword,
...while their controller drops Wasteland -

let's stop pretending this is about tribes: it's more about who can equip said sword first for what-was-my-tribe-again? Can "Wastelanders" or "Swordsmen" be new tribes, because that's what I've been seeing. Again, this is just my casual observations. I'm not asking for the format to change; it's my choice to join or not, and again, everyone has been pretty cool with my ramblings and respect. My comments are just my observations about the cost of the format, and an indictment that tribal wars in regular or pure events is less about a tribe, and more about how a few select, repeated, and relatively expensive cards rule the format, with like-colored creatures asked to perfect the use of said select power cards.

Would anyone be willing to post a competitive vanilla deck that would have hung with today's matches? How about a 1CMC deck to play against today's challengers? Face it- they wouldn't stand a chance. When this happens, for me at least, this game becomes about getting super-expensive cards, but tribes are an afterthought.

Seriously, though, what cards constitute a shell? If I sport a white deck without a Swords to Plowshares, or a non-Lightning Bolt red deck, do I have a prayer? Given all of the non-basic lands, be sure to add a playset of Wastelands, too, since they're what all the cool kids use.

We talk about the impact of All is Dust, and here it is again. We question the use of Cloudposts, yet here they are again. When a card is a staple in the format, but isn't part of thee format theme, it seems like an odd inclusion. Sure, Cloudposts are "only" a nickel at MTGOTraders.com, but those of you familiar with Standard Pauper will remember that Delver of Secrets was either the deck you played or the deck to whom you lost. I'd hate to think of Tribal Wars as a shell game of certain core cards flung at an opponent's head, while some critters of inconsequential value also run around on the board just to use those certain specific cards.

Yes, I can spend less than 2 tickets to sport a competitive deck. Yes, a simple Naturalize - a common and inexpensive card - could easily destroy a Sword, for example. There's always an answer to any given card. Without sideboards, player's would have to pack hate for a very select choice of common targets, thus thinning their tribe. In contrast, the Sword player needs only to worry about their swords being equipped, thus gaining card advantage and using the sword to handle whatever else their opponent's play.

TBH, I think your perspective on Tribal is quite inaccurate. I would advise you to play in some events to get a better feel for what gets played, what is overpowered etc. Today I played against a Sword, but before that I don't remember when was the last time I did. It is banned in most of events anyway (and in my opinion it is not a particularly problematic card anyway - it costs you 5 mana before it *potentially* does something)

My comment about price also stands for regular and pure. Actually, I think if anything underdog is a format that comparatively requires higher investment to get higher winning percentage, because non-tribal cards are more important in a format with weaker creatures.

Have things changed in 9 years since this was written by Jay Moldenhauer-Salazar?

"Suddenly, Spikes and prize-sharks swooped onto the Tribal scene. You know what they realized besides the fact that [edit: certain block sets' tribes, like Onslaught] were the most competitive?

They realized that you could actually use twenty creatures as a necessary evil to win in non-creature ways.

Tooth and Nail became a Tribal staple as did Goblin Charbelcher, Isochron Scepter and Lion’s Eye Diamond’s ability to feed Auriok Salvagers.

Tribal decks seemed to be winning tournaments without any real focus on creature combat or creature-type themes. To me this simply wasn’t the point of Tribal Wars."

Have things changed? Since you were even named in the article (here: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/multiplayer/12117_Blog_Elemental_A_Tr...), I'd love to hear your thoughts on the evolution of the game, Bazaar of Baghdad. How many Isochron Scepters did you see today?

Let's assume that JMS' advice was headed, and that none of the top qualifying decks sleeved-up copies of Scepters or Charbelchers (but I already know this to be untrue; humor me) or their ilk.

Let's say I wanted to try Soldiers as a tribe. Soldiers are an ALPHA tribe, meaning they have quality cards to support them. Let's try the Vanilla achievement, trying to field a tribe without any additional qualities beyond power/toughness. Maybe CMC could be an advantage in some way. Some easy grabs may include Valiant Guard and Elite Vanguard.

Tell me an Alpha-worthy tribe, such as vanilla soldiers, would be competitive without Wrath of God, Wastelands, Swords, Scepters, etc. In no way would the soldiers' other spells be enough to compensate. Tell me that my non-tribal cards - cards that have absolutely zero affiliation with my tribe - won't cost more than my entire tribe. Tell me that Legacy Tribal Wars has headed JMS's suggestions about his observations of the format that artificially restrict entry by new players. Tell me that the playing field is balanced in favor of tribes, not bomb rare non-tribal cards who whore themselves to the weakest tribe at a pretty penny cost.

If the point of Tribal Wars is to use the best non-tribal cards by whatever tribe I can afford, I think to focus of "tribal" wars seems misleading. When suggestions about a deck improvements offer more non-tribal support than in-tribe support, either the tribe is less playable than anticipated, or the format bows to a select few special universal cards that are not only cost-prohibitive to new players, but dilutes the spirit of tribes in the 1st place.

The discussion here has been going on for the beginning of this event

People are different, we all see things differently, so the spirit of the event is different to different people

IMO what i can't understand is why the format has not changed to Modern
yeah you lose a lot of power cards but these tend to be non creatures

Why not changed from legacy?

If you're playing to win then you bring cards that can do the job, which is the case for any tournament.

You don't need to spend a fortune to have a good deck, you need to have a deck that is flexible enough to deal with artifacts and enchantments etc. If you build a deck with an extra Legacy combo built in, sure it means some games you can combo off but in others you may find you play someone who can counteract your combo and you didn't have enough space left in your deck to deal with it.

Playing different formats helps shake things up every now and then, we could have Modern which would drop a lot of the big combo decks, Pauper, Standard even is possible but is limited depending where in the block cycle you are.

If a certain card is deemed as too powerful and is used in a lot of decks that win then it goes onto the banned list.

The deck that took first place only contained one Isochron Scepter, imagine if he used four with four copies of Orim's Chant

Got it loud and clear:

I. No millionaires.

II. Best ways to win:
A) Play.
B) Build a card pool over decades of play.
C) Build a non-traditional deck to confound the typical meta-game answers, especially knowing no sideboard substituted answers to a non-traditional threat.

III.. Achievements don't mean as much to some players, based on how they define fun.

I also apologize, because I think some replies seem angry. When I got married, I knew I'd be a step-parent to a child with some special needs. These challenges can interfere with every aspect of life, including basic self-care, and can consume a lot of time. This weekend, I wasn't as free as I had planned, and thus missed this week's Tribal Wars and Sunday's Standard Pauper dance.

I hoped to play a Leviathan deck on Saturday. Here are my thoughts about this deck:

1) I have a disposable $10 budget for a deck. This seemed the common price range for competitive decks, by suggestions.
2) I wanted non-land, non-creature spells to reflect my devotion to the creature type.
3) I will need a way to play very mana-intensive creatures, some of whom cost 9cmc.

My deck:
Grab 20 leviathans. There are few of them, and they seem to offer no synergy outside of having a large cmc, but one leviathan offers to go fetch other 9cmc critters. Inn a way, it offers me card draw.
Outside of 20 creatures, and a default of 24 lands, this gave me 16 spots to fill, or 4 four-ofs. High Tide makes sense, to ramp mana. Whelming Wave is a one-sided board sweeper, although at sorcery speed. At "U", Quest for Ula's Temple should help grab a leviathan, and help me field these large creatures quickly. If I chose "Kraken," instead, I'd at least have a solid chump blocker on Turn One, a suspended creature, and could look into Clockspinning to target the suspension or the counters on the enchantment. I am not sure why I went with Leviathans over Kraken, but it's moot. To finish the deck, and knowing that some of my leviathans need islandwalk or flying to connect damage, I added four copies of Sea's Claim. Additionally, targeting a non-basic land of my opponent is preferable, and shuts down that land until otherwise solved.

Then, I looked at some matches. Granted, I wasn't watching matches very long. Based on what I saw, I don't think my leviathans would have ever hit the field. Do leviathans stink (they may, being more than a little "fishy")? Is the format skewed too hard against leviathans? No, I think they are slower, so anyone wanting to field bigger creatures has alternative means to get them into play; I have eight cards that help me cheat a leviathan into play.

To me, although leviathans may be a poor choice to play at any Tribal Wars event, this is the kind of deck I would want to play. I don't know if this makes me a "Johnny," or "Spike" or "Doubting Thomas;" just like some players don't care about Achievements, I don't care about what labels others may give my style. I tried to field 20 creatures that would mount a threat, with support cards that directly acknowledge their creature type or otherwise support what the creatures want to do. To me, suggestions about aggressive decks being the best threats, or a need for control spells, or a splash into another color to take advantage of XYZ off-color power spells, is less than what I hope for from Tribal Wars. Sure, I'd want to win. With a leviathan deck as outlined, I don't think I'd win one match, but probably have a lot of fun TRYING to win. What I'd dislike is playing against a goblin deck that burned me with lightning bolts, not goblin grenades. Goblin Grenades, I'd expect, and suits the purpose of a goblin-themed deck. Nobody would doubt the power of Lightning Bolt, but I challenge the aesthetics of using it over Goblin Grenade when fielding...I dunno..."goblins," maybe. Now, if Goblin Grenade were priced at an obscene amount, I could still encourage an expensive deck that used it, because of the flavor.

Does this make sense? Thanks in advance...

Thanks, Mihahitlor -

Yup, Krakens, Leviathans, etc. are going to be a pain to make competitive. We can agree that cards like Whelming Wave and Quest for Ula's Temple "help" their creature types, are specifically designed to help these decks be more competitive, but fall short in smaller ways. Yes, one Celestial Flare wrecks the deck, because I doubt 1) the balance of card tempo suits this slower blue deck; one big creature is going to come, in some way, and will be the only target of as much hate as my opponent sat on for X number of turns without my creatures in play; and 2) I have very little in the way of defense, save adding the blue common tap land that locks down an already-tapped critter. Icy Blast may also be neat.

This deck rolls in at under budget at about $6, so other change is possible. I was asked what kind of decks I thought could be fun to play, as a benchmark to my play style, budget, and then the metagame in hindsight.

With an eye to TWO achievements, I crafted this Satyr deck. I would hope to unlock the achievements about low-cost deck building and having twenty enchantments. Thankfully, two satyrs are ALSO enchantments with Bestow.

3x Boon Satyr...bestow and flash...he's an enchantment, too
4x Nyxborn Rollicker...bestow...he's an enchantment, too
2x Reckless Reveler...vs artifacts
4x Satyr Hoplite...Heroic counters grow it
3x Satyr Rambler...TRAMPLE!
4x Setessan Oathsworn...Heroic counters grow it

Enchantment (16)
4x Beastmaster's Magemark...Takes advantage of how bestowed creatures work
4x Call of the Full Moon...weak for its drawback, but a faster enchantment only needs to work spot-duty
4x Infectious Bloodlust...thins my deck and adds haste
4x Madcap Skills...another enchantment, and messes with blocker strategy

Sorcery (3)
3x Barrage of Boulders...clears smaller token armies and later, helps make my satyrs unblockable

Land (20)
8x Forest
4x Looming Spires...adding 1st strike to the deck is great! Most casting costs are sufficiently low-enough to have 4x tapped lands
8x Mountain

Instant (1)
1x Feed the Clan...backup lifegain outlet if poor draws or against aggressive decks. Good, with the option of being better in time.

This is a tribe that I'd really like to play. The deck 1) takes advantage of recent standard card pools, making these cards easy to obtain at lower prices; 2) really uses satyrs in ways a lot of other creature types don't have access to doing (bestow), but 3) I really dislike the enchantments I have available. Obviously, cards like beastmaster's magemark is there only because some of my creatures may be bestowed, so it takes advantage of a game condition: creatures who are enchanted. Infectious Bloodlust is there, as an enchantment, because it replaces itself in an odd fashion, thereby thinning my deck for better draws. Madcap Skills and Call of the Full Moon really have very little theme elemements, although the trample ability is nice and underutilized in the metagame, I suspect. Adding "trample" would be my surprise element, and since at least one satyr already has trample, support cards help make it nice. Would 1st strike enchantments be better than additional trample? Would it be better to use my budget to net more enchantments, or is throwing everything to enchantments/bestow a poor strategy? How much anti-enchantment hate is going on in main boards? Can a typical deck handle 23 enchantments? Even owning that 7 of those enchantments are also creatures, even a well-placed Wrath of God will still see my bestowed creatures survive to attack the next turn, too.

I welcome suggestions about
1) If the current satyrs are well balanced for their tribe
2) If the enchantments listed are the best to take advantage of the bestow mechanic AND the enchantment (note: not "aura") achievement
3) Keeping this deck below a $2 limit, but would entertain extraordinary ideas that still keeps things below $10 for the deck.
4) Keeping a theme, or showing said theme more prominently. For example, is this enchantment deck showing off a good selection of enchantments for the satyr tribe? Yes, Spirits and Nymphs also have easy access to bestow, but has anyone done much with satyrs in this way? Go big or go home, right?

Odd question:

If I add, I dunno, 4 copies of an enchantment creature (say, Boon Satyr, for example), does my deck now have:

A) +4 creatures of the "Satyr" tribal type,
B) +4 enchantments, since I can cast "bestow" because of them, and its card type is also "enchantment"
C) BOTH A & B
D) Only A
E) Only B

Thanks in advance!