Thisismich's picture
By: Thisismich, Michele Furno
Sep 07 2011 12:12pm
4.666665
Login or register to post comments
7673 views


 Hi guys, if someone would have told me, a month ago or so, that I would work harder in august than in the previous months I would have laughed at him (ok, maybe not face to face but internally I would have)... Yet here I am, mentally tired like you have no idea but still willing to indulge in the best hobby of the world!!!

Anyway, while I was gouging my eyes off breaking lines of code written by someone else that went on vacation, modern was announced and became MODO's new toy; ever since I first heard of it (the Community Cup) I got this idea that it would be a fun and cheaper format to play... Where this last bit came from I actually have no clue but still...

So, being mentally tired as I still am and not having an extensive knowledge on all those modern sets that I didn't play with, I did not have a real will to brew blindly so I just skimmed through the daily events to see what decks were being brewed by people far better than I am and if I could afford buying the cards.

I am an aggro player at heart and this is the main reason why I didn't like much Standard's metagame (except Valakut and Eldrazi Green) so I thought Zoo could be the deck but then I noticed it needed 4x Tarmogoyf and someone even added Dark Confidant so I quickly dismissed it (and started to question my initial, silly, thought), then 12post caught my eye until I saw the price of Vesuva.

THEN, as I was just starting to re-think about finally joining constructed play, I came across THIS decklist in the 4-0 slot in one of the first dailies:


As I was sifting through the cards I started seeing the great synergy of the deck and, unfortunately, its weaknesses but overall I really loved this deck; next I checked the total price of this deck, I laughed at the extremely light budget and immediately began building it.

THE DECKTECH:

Well, as for the decktech, this deck is pretty straightforward, the main point of it is to cast an endless stream of shamans, ideally starting with a Bosk Banneret to reduce the cost of further shamans, then drop a couple of Rage Forgers, pump all the other shamans and dealing a ton of collateral damage, enough to kill your opponent even if many of your creatures don't connect.

Flamekin Harbinger is a great way to find your forger in case you don't have one or your second in case you already have and both Bloodbraid Elf and Elvish Visionary are here to complete the tutor effect while playing dudes. With a banneret in play, you can do the above mentioned play (with the visionary) as soon as 4th turn.

That is really the core of the deck, arguably one could add the Wolf-Skull Shaman too because it's one of the shamans with the best power/casting cost ratio, but, in my opinion, it serves a slightly different purpose and you don't necessarily need it in play like, say, a forger.

Still, as I said, is one of the best 2 drop you can have in play when you finally start pumping everything up with forgers so I will put it very close to the core of the deck and will consider it very hard to cut.

Fauna Shaman is the other shaman with the best power/casting cost ratio and it also tutors but it's also the only card with downsides of the whole deck, I will get to that in a minute.

The rest of the deck is pretty self-explanatory; the Vithian Renegades and Viridian Shamans are here for artifact/affinity hate, the Goblin Ruinblasters are here for 12post hate and, well, burn is burn.

Playing alone you will consistently win on turn 5 (well, not with this version but with my last version, continue reading to find it out), even without bannerets.

THE TESTS:

After buying pretty much all the cards I needed except the SOM and SHM dual lands and the baloths because they were the big part of the total price of this deck and didn't want to overcommit while the metagame was still figuring out itself, I started testing.

I immediately saw that the deck needed some work as I was having a hard time against some rogue decks (interestingly enough I wasn't able to play against many of the most common decks in the TP room and was keeping getting paired with "rogue" decks), so I had to make some adjustments.

First of all I didn't like very much the inclusion of:
Lead the Stampede
Sure, this deck is mostly made of pure business but:

A) When I drew it, 90% I wish I drew a dude.

B) Since modern is fairly fast, when I used it, it was like turn 4-5 and after I paid for it I didn't have that much mana left to play what I tutored with it.

C) Land Land Burn Dude Dude draws were not that uncommon and putting burn on the bottom of the deck was not exactly ideal.

I had thought of some big turns where I could refill my hand and set up for explosive follow-ups like Flamekin Harbinger for Rage Forger then Elvish Visionary, play the Forger and swing or Bloodbraid Elf instead of the visionary and swing for even more damage but the truth is: it almost never worked that way for me. I ended up drawing more lands/spells than dudes and my "set up" turns ended up in pseudo-time walks for my opponent in a format where a single meh turn can turn into your defeat.

Another card I wasn't exactly satisfied with, even if it fared better than the stampede was:
Fauna Shaman
Now, don't get me wrong, it's a very nice card but the downside, in a deck with so much synergy between creatures, makes it difficult to abuse (and sometimes even use) the ability. Tutoring for a forger discarding a shaman in the process is the exact opposite of what this deck is trying to achieve, plus, if you don't start with it in hand, there are good chances that your hand is already empty of creatures by the time you draw her because the main point of the deck, as said, is dumping as many shamans as possible on the board to pump them collectively with a forger and possibly getting another one for the following turn.

That said, I would definitely be glad to dump a harbinger, a visionary or even an extra banneret to get the forger in hand (and maybe even play it) but only IF I already have a decent amount of shamans on the board.

While testing, this card ended up being a 2/2 vanilla for 2 (which isn't terrible anyway) more often than not, so I temporarily decided to replace it, exploring other territories.

The last card that, surprisingly, ended up lying in my hand most of the time was:
Burst Lightning
I'm frankly surprised about it, but really, most of the times I drew it, I definitely wished it was a bolt as 2 damage were not enough to do anything except against merfolks, or another shaman to build the critical mass.

It was clearly better when it was in the starting hand as it could take care of early Zoo plays (nacatl mostly), Bob, and occasionally a Blinkmoth/Inkmoth nexus but, as said, most of the times I needed to deal at least 3 damages and by the time I could play it with kicker I was either mostly dead or winner.

Also, in the first version of the deck, a third of the cards (not counting lands) of the deck were spells and that reduced significantly the kinship hit-rate of my Wolf-Skull Shamans.

What do I substituted those cards with? Well, first of all, I did a little research for viable shamans and made a great discovery: As I thought, this card was a shaman:
Skinshifter
This card is so better Fauna Shaman on so many levels that I snap-replaced it without even thinking twice. Even though it's just a 1/1, the ability to transform (since first turn) onto different shapes is priceless, especially against Zoo. Before that I would quickly die to a Knight of the Reliquary or a Tarmogoyf played when they were already out of bolt's reach; now I can hold off until they reach 8 strength and by that time I should be able to find rage forgers that will push this limit higher and higher.

Also, this is the only shaman that I know of that can have evasion.

Speaking of creatures that can get big, here's another one:
Mul Daya Channelers
The more I play with this card, the more I like it, due to the fact that I only left 4 bolts in my deck as spells, this card will always hit either being a mana accelerant or a big creature that's difficult to deal with, especially with the help of a forger.

Following some threads in famous Magic forums I added to the sideboard 2 copies of Eyes of the Wisent, a very nice tutorable tribal spell that will keep control from blowing you totally out of the game (if they don't counter it, that is).

I also made the following minor changes to the manabase of the deck:

- added a Pendelhaven instead of a forest

- maindecked 3 Tectonic Edges +1 in the SB because I noticed it will be rarely a blank and it will shine against 12post

I considered adding Ghost Quarter instead, but against 12post I don't like the idea of giving them a basic land anyway.

CARDS I TRIED BUT DIDN'T PASS THE TESTS:

Inner-Flame Acolyte: giving a creature (or itself) +2/+0 and haste is nice in an all-in aggro deck but, while tutorable, this card is situational at best and most of the times you would tutor a forger anyway.

Teetering Peaks: after testing the acolyte, I thought that I could achieve the same goal by using 2 copies of this card but all I got was messing with my mana base. The ETB tapped clause slowed the deck down considerably and led to some mana screwage.

Violent Outburst: this was the most successful card of the lot; still, adding 3x of this card brought the number of spells back to the uncomfortable level. Also, there were a lot of 3cmc cards that I would hate to see going on the bottom of the deck, some of which were non tutorables.

Yet this card got me out of certain situations letting me attack while playing another dude out of the cascade, this is why this card is still lingering in my SB against slightly slower decks.

FINAL VERSION OF THE DECK:

Let's wrap it up here, will ya?

Here is the final version of the deck I'm actually running. I apologize for the sideboard as I'm still debating on what to include:


CARDS I PLAN TO PLAYTEST WITH:

Burning-Tree Shaman: possibly the best power/toughness/casting cost ratio of shamans under 4cmc

Eternal Witness: slightly less budget card but can return our precious bolts and forgers to hand.

Fire Juggler: being able to see or change what's on the top of my deck is nice and possibly dealing 4 damage is just icing on the cake.

Oracle of Mul Daya: not sure about this one but the synergy with the channelers is interesting.

Leaf-Crowned Elder: I personally think it's too slow, but I remember it being mentioned in a forum and I've seen some playtest videos that had this card.

Fulminator Mage: Possible against 12post but I'm not sure I want to run it maindeck

Sakura-Tribe Elder Sakura-Tribe Scout: I don't think I need so badly mana accelerants like these but I'm willing to try them

Tattermunge Witch: This card was mentioned in a forum... I kinda agree to the reasoning that any damage counts but I'm not thrilled about it. Also the double colored cost for the ability is not the best.

Troll Ascetic: Regenerate is nice, especially since normally a Pyroclasm blows me out but on the other hand, I'm often tapped out so it's probably not the best.

NON BUDGET POSSIBLE CARDS:

Thrun, the Last Troll Mutavault

While I think that Thrun risks of being too slow, just like the Leaf-Crowned Elder, I believe Mutavault would be an awesome card in this deck but I'm definitely not willing to spend like a hundred bucks for this deck, so if someone is willing to playtest with it, let me know the results.

MATCHUPS:

As I said, I seem to find rogue decks more often than not in the TP room in the time-zone I usually playtest, so I don't have that many data against the current tier 1 decks, sorry about that. Anyway:

12Post: I beat mono-G and mono-U both once and got beaten once by each, so at the time I'm writing this we're currently even. It's not an impossible matchup and with the right amount of land disruption they can be outraced. Goblin Ruinblaster is a king in this matchup.

Affinity: definitely a bad matchup but the one time I played against it, it was a closer match that I thought it would be. Again, the key is to flood the board and hope for the help of the deck in finding a Vithian Renegades when needed.

Warrior Elves: as long as you can keep them out of their infinite mana/draw plans, you're ok; your creatures will be bigger and in order not to take too much damage they have to block. Once it happens they don't usually have many profitable blocks.

Dragonstorm: Unless I played against a slow version of this deck, it takes a bit for them to assemble their combo. If I weren't badly mana screwed at the time I could have won.

Merfolk: it's the only deck I have played a bit and have yet to lose to it. If you manage to kill their lords, you should be fine, again when you attack your creatures are going to be bigger and they will have to block.

Combo / Living End / Infect Shoal: Auto-Concede, I guess?

Splinter Twin: sorry, never played against it yet :(

CONCLUSION:

This is clearly a borderline T2/T1.5 deck but yet, I spent less than 10 bucks on it and I still managed to get my fair share of wins (and fast at that) so I am moderately optimistic it can do nicely in constructed events even if I'd be surprised to see it duel for the first places as it did in the first events.

I will try and enter some events since they seem quite cheap themselves and will post the results (by the time I'm writing I already did, but I'd like to play a bit more before posting the results).

If you're willing to play against this deck, feel free to PM me while I'm online. I will be more than happy to playtest.

Till next time folks, I hope you enjoyed the read.
--
Michele.
Thisismich on MODO, signing out.

42 Comments

Embarassing grammar error in by Thisismich at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 12:38
Thisismich's picture

Embarassing grammar error in the title... most cheap = cheapest... I "MAY" have submitted the version of the article BEFORE I ran it through the spellchecker (or I forgot to save).
Sorry guys ;__;

heyhellowhatsnew's picture

I include that card in my Shaman deck... want to give it a test spin?

RE: Master of the Wild Hunt by heyhellowhatsnew at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 13:46
heyhellowhatsnew's picture

The extra wolves you get from the MotWH and Wolf-Skull Shamans synergize so you can use them to take down any of their creatures to clear the way for the rest of your dudes

I considered this dude too by Thisismich at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 14:29
Thisismich's picture

I considered this dude too but, as I said for other 4cmc shamans, I believe it's too slow. It does nothing until turn 5, which is the turn you ideally want to go off by, and you can't use it to deal damage to the dome.

Also it synergize with a very secondary aspect of the deck; first it's not granted you will have other wolf tokens on the battlefield by then and on its own, MotWH is the equivalent of a turn 5 un-kicked burst lightning that only targets a creature (and will probably result in the death of your token).
Second, the wolves are merely an added bonus of another card and most of the times are to be used as chump/block material since you don't want to block with your shamans.

I think I'd rather play a Leaf-Crowned Elder or Thrun rather than a MotWH if I had to play another 4cmc shaman.

That said it's not a bad card and if you're willing to share some game experiences where it has been relevant, you're more than welcomed and encouraged to do so.

With the banneret by heyhellowhatsnew at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 15:43
heyhellowhatsnew's picture

he's a lot cheaper. I dunno. Give it a try at least ._.

So is Leaf-Crowned Elder; as by Thisismich at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:33
Thisismich's picture

So is Leaf-Crowned Elder; as said I think the possibility to play 2+ shamans on turn 4/5 is a lot better than dealing 2+ to a creature that may not even be there or may not die even if it is.

Having to tap both him and ALL your tokens is a big hit that will leave you without blockers unless you want to block with your shamans and if you don't tap them why did you play the card at all?

Consider this:

Zoo will run you over by the turn you have the master active and even if you're still alive you can only target one creature out of the 3/4 they will have in play by then.

Infect Shoal has already won twice by turn 5

Combo is not best known to have creatures, and when they have it's either Terastodon, Emrakul, 4x Hellkite or 3x Hellkite + 1x the other dragon I forgot the name of.

Since those are among the biggest threats of this deck I don't really see what this card will do for the deck so, since I don't have one, I'm not interested to make the purchase.

That said, I may be wrong and I will be more than willing to admit it and give the right credit for if proven to be.

Very interested to hear the by midi2304 at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 16:17
midi2304's picture

Very interested to hear the results of your testing and if you take her into daily queues. This deck has definitely piqued my interest. I do suspect you are cold to Splinter Twin / Shoal Infect with only 4 Bolts as your outs.

Will do, but probably I have by Thisismich at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 18:10
Thisismich's picture

Will do, but probably I have to wait until the Ravnica Block queues are over since I plan to do one queue a day and that's about all the spare time (and money) I have right now.
Sorry about that but my Magic time is limited by my job :(

Anyway, as I said in the matchup section I don't think I have outs to Shoal. Depending on the meta, I will probably add more burn to the sideboard (probably taking out the outbursts) in case I will find more and more shoal decks.

As for splinter twin I honestly don't know as I have yet to find someone that played it against me. Anyway I watched my fellow countryman (gogo Italy :) ) pilot it at PT Philly and it didn't seem to be THAT fast, if that's the case I think it's possible to outrace it.

Just my 2c tho.

The shaman deck peaked my by this isnt the n... at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:08
this isnt the name i chose's picture

The shaman deck peaked my interest too, until i realized that modern is a combo format and shamans are not fast enough and have no way to stop any combos.

This deck cant beat - Splinter twin, pyromancers ascencion, shoal infect.
It has a maybe 50% matchup vs 12post, but most likely much worse vs the red green post decks that run removal and through the breach.

So what can it beat?
Zoo sometimes, rogue decks sometimes.

Why play this deck over a deck that can win? Because this deck is actually fun!

I think you're a bit by Thisismich at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:56
Thisismich's picture

I think you're a bit (slightly, alas) too pessimistic about the chances of this deck but I mostly agree on your matchup analysis.

Our only hope against combo is to kill them before they combo out. It is possible under the right circumstance, my match against dragonstorm was about to prove it. I almost made it (as in: if I could attack one more turn) with 2 (TWO) mana on the board.

As for post, with a finely tuned SB/MD hate I thing our chances are higher than you said. 4x Tec Edges and 4x Ruinblasters can be a real beating, that said BreachPost will probably laugh at us.

"Why play this deck over a deck that can win? Because this deck is actually fun!"

I TOTALLY agree on that. This deck is fun as hell to play and even when you lose, most of the times you will feel it was a close match anyway and that's an incentive to play more.

Also, don't forget it's CHEAP as hell too ;)

Why is it the majority of by greyes3 at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 17:42
greyes3's picture

Why is it the majority of writers on this site can't afford to build tier 1 decks?

What has this comment to do by Thisismich at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 18:08
Thisismich's picture

What has this comment to do with the article?

Anyway, I can't speak for other people but as for me is that I don't WANT to build tier 1 decks for multiple reasons:

a) I'm not into constructed and don't plan to jump into it. I am a limited player and the amount of money I dump into it is enough for me; yet sometimes I'd like to have fun with something different but I'm not willing to spend much. If I can make a cheap semi-competitive deck, fine, I'll do it, otherwise I'll spend that money to do a couple more drafts.
b) My family is not rich, nor I would expect them to fund me when I'm well and able to find a job and make a living out of it.
c) after I pay the rent, the bills, the food, the clothes and the quote of the loan I made to pay for university, what's left isn't that much.
d) Magic is great, but it's a GAME; I'm not willing to spend more than I already do on it. If I'd spend more I would regret it the moment I need it because my car broke down or I have to pay for something else that I can't do without. Magic I can do without and did in the past.

Interesting. I was always of by gamemaster32 at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 19:15
gamemaster32's picture

Interesting. I was always of the opinion that people wouldn't be interested in articles about tier 1 decks because:

1. the audience is more casual overall

2. For more popular formats, you can probably find articles written by better players (I could write articles about tier 1 std decks that I have, but wouldn't you rather read one by LSV?)

I thought this too by apaulogy at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 19:46
apaulogy's picture

Apparently, the perception is that because we are writing that we are pros with endless Magic income.

Which explains a lot, in terms of the content on the comment threads here.

I like the content that this site provides. The writers are not part of some cabal of esoteric "pro/elites", yet they have good insight, have fun (most important IMO), AND are good at playing this game. That is why I come/write here. Community.

Actually, since you are by Paul Leicht at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 03:06
Paul Leicht's picture

Actually, since you are somewhat new here I will clue you in. Greyes is a bit of a troll and is also more interested in pure spike articles being posted here. Something of a campaign as I understand it.

Standard is actually dirt by char49d at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 19:49
char49d's picture

Standard is actually dirt cheap at the moment, at least compared to Alara-Zen standard and beyond. I can't remember the last time decks have been so cheap to assemble, most of the expensive cards like Lotus Cobra are hardly format staples.

I think people incorrectly assumed Modern would be cheap, which was never going to be the case, at least not initially. With the obvious exception of Pauper, the older the cards, the more expensive, so Block will almost always be cheaper than standard, which will be cheaper than Modern, all the way to Legacy.

Modern isn't really accessible at the moment due to rampant speculation and temporary demand due to the Pro Tour, but I hope once things shake out and a few reprints are made, and some banned cards are shifted around, the format stabilizes and we get a non-rotating format that can support a growing player base.

I kind of like that tier 1 by grapplingfarang at Wed, 09/07/2011 - 22:30
grapplingfarang's picture
4

I kind of like that tier 1 decks are not the ones being used on this website. However, I would like to see how the deck does against them atleast. When I see,
"Combo / Living End / Infect Shoal: Auto-Concede, I guess?

Splinter Twin: sorry, never played against it yet :("

I feel like that is not the best insight. Those decks make up most of what I have played against in tournament. If this deck is for casual play, that is fine. It does look like a lot of fun to play. From what However, getting it from a 4-0 daily list and talking about being hopeful it can do well in constructed point to it not being casual. I'd just like to see how it does against most of the decks people are actually playing in tournaments.

Thank you for the comment. I by Thisismich at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 02:48
Thisismich's picture

Thank you for the comment. I actually wasn't going to add a matchup section to the article because in my initial thoughts about the article the first part was to be about the "brewing" and testing part, therefore, I would have shared the thoughts that led me to a certain solution instead of another and so on.
Then I thought I could at least share what my feelings about the most common matchups were.
Then again, I realized that I was going to test out those solutions anyway and might as well use those pieces of information to give better info until I was able to share some "real" matches info.

As for the "Combo / Living End / Infect Shoal: Auto-Concede, I guess?" I'm sorry, here in Italy there is a saying: "I laugh not to cry" (that means that the situation is desperate, better take it with a laugh because crying over it won't make the situation better) I was trying to be a little funny but it didn't turn out that well. What I really meant was: I don't have any out to this (or hardly any as burn can qualify against shoal).

As for the hope this deck could do nice in constructed play has much to do with the format of the current online dailies. The format is swiss so even if you take a R1 loss to one of the decks you have no outs to, you still have the chance to get to the prizes anyway and overall to have fun.

Also, consider that the building process took place when the format was still figuring out itself and well before PT Philly, so If I had the time to hit the TP room now I may find a totally different meta there and, frankly, that was what I was hoping for my upcoming article.
I may find out that this deck is not even T2 anymore but what can I do? That's Magic :)

Good stuff, Mich! I also put by PiDave at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 02:50
PiDave's picture
5

Good stuff, Mich! I also put together something very similar for Heirloom a few months ago, it's good to see it can also do nicely in Modern. :)

Thanks for the comment by Thisismich at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 08:04
Thisismich's picture

Thanks for the comment :)
Yeah, this deck is the paradise of the aggro player. If only I could fine tune it as to minimize the decks it dies against I would be very happy.

Burning-tree shaman not only by StealthBadger at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 06:08
StealthBadger's picture

Burning-tree shaman not only has the best power/toughness:casting cost ratio, it also turns off splinter-twin combo when it's on the board.

Definitely definitely worth testing, I would think.

Good point! That alone should by PiDave at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 06:20
PiDave's picture

Good point! That alone should earn him a 4x in the sideboard. At the very least.

Well, it does not exactly by Thisismich at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 08:09
Thisismich's picture

Well, it does not exactly stop it, but it's still a good hit to the combo.
I Will try adding it to the SB as soon as I resume playtest it (most likely the weekend or after the RGD nixpax).

You know what also shut twin decks off? Torpor Orb. Too bad it won't fit in this kind of deck :/

Or, at least, I'm not able to make it fit.

As long as your life total is by StealthBadger at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 11:43
StealthBadger's picture

As long as your life total is higher than theirs (you are playing aggro, they are playing combo - so it better be!) it does stop it. They take 1 damage each time they activate the splinter twin ability.

Uhm, I was thinking: how by PiDave at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 12:23
PiDave's picture
5

Uhm, I was thinking: how about Tajuru Preserver to stop Living End?

Yeah, it can work, I'll try by Thisismich at Thu, 09/08/2011 - 15:52
Thisismich's picture

Yeah, it can work, I'll try that too, thanks for the suggestion. :)

I feel like responding to by greyes3 at Fri, 09/09/2011 - 21:24
greyes3's picture

I feel like responding to some of these comments. I wish there was a better way to quote people here so I could respond to each part individually...but alas there is not.

"What has this comment to do with the article?"

As I understood it, one of the main reasons you built this deck was because you couldn't afford any of the big money cards in the format. Do i need to quote specific examples or can you find them yourself?

"Anyway, I can't speak for other people but as for me is that I don't WANT to build tier 1 decks for multiple reasons:"

Where did I, or anyone else for that matter, ask anything about what you WANT to build? My question stemmed from your blatant dismissal of good cards because of budgetary concerns, which is fine, it just doesn't address what I asked. Again, if you would like specific examples, I'll quote them for you.

Your lettered points are more along the lines of what I was curious about. Yes, I realize you can't speak for other writers however, examples like yours are a good starting point for growth.

A) You are writing about constructed on this site. You posted a constructed decklist you took the time to do research on. You have practiced matchups and evaluated a number of card choices. You even boasted about your fair share of wins. I think it is safe to assume you are "into playing constructed".
B) Does your family have to be rich to own/play with a tier 1 deck?
C) A lot of competitive players don't have expenses too?
D) You may need to pay for something else...don't we all?

Excuse me if I'm just tired of writers here going through the winning Daily Events decks, picking out the cheapest deck, and tossing together a half ass deck, and then writing about it. It isn't everyone, but it has been done here to death. I think I am afforded the right to have the opinion that I would prefer a writer who maybe has saved their limited money for months, and built something that actually competes with a field.

"Interesting. I was always of the opinion that people wouldn't be interested in articles about tier 1 decks because:

1. the audience is more casual overall

2. For more popular formats, you can probably find articles written by better players (I could write articles about tier 1 std decks that I have, but wouldn't you rather read one by LSV?)"

1. Do you have statistics to verify this? Assuming you did, would that even be a legitimate excuse? Perhaps more competitive articles might attract a new audience?
2. Because LSV writes good T1 articles is that a reason for everyone else to not write about T1 decks? Augur writes great T1/DE articles here, I thought.

"Apparently, the perception is that because we are writing that we are pros with endless Magic income."

Please use specific quotes. Nobody said anything of the sort.

"I like the content that this site provides. The writers are not part of some cabal of esoteric "pro/elites", yet they have good insight, have fun (most important IMO), AND are good at playing this game. That is why I come/write here. Community."

I enjoy a lot of the content as well. Thanks for the rambling.

"Actually, since you are somewhat new here I will clue you in. Greyes is a bit of a troll and is also more interested in pure spike articles being posted here. Something of a campaign as I understand it."

I am interested in quality content being posted here. I don't know what pure spike articles even means, nor any campaign nonsense. However, I do find some entertainment in correcting your mistakes, misconceptions, and logical fallacies.

OH! My apologies... You by Paul Leicht at Fri, 09/09/2011 - 21:44
Paul Leicht's picture

OH! My apologies... You weren't being unnecessarily antagonistic and provocative. Maya Culpa.

"As I understood it, one of by Thisismich at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 03:27
Thisismich's picture

"As I understood it, one of the main reasons you built this deck was because you couldn't afford any of the big money cards in the format"

As I said in my other comment, I can afford them but don't want to because Magic is a game; we agree that is a great one, but still a game so I don't feel like spending more for it than I do to eat. I have a budget reserved for Magic and try to do the best with it.
And since you are at it, I used the word "afford" once in the entire article and then always said I'm not WILLING to spend that much, so if you want to quote me at least do it right, thanks.

"Where did I, or anyone else for that matter, ask anything about what you WANT to build?"

Your question implied that I couldn't afford tier 1 cards so I corrected you.

"You even boasted about your fair share of wins. I think it is safe to assume you are "into playing constructed"

Wrong twice again; first of all I did not boast, I just stated it because it's just true (and I remember even implying that I myself was surprised about it).
Second, enjoying constructed play and getting excited about constructed at some points does not mean I'm into it. Sometimes the easiest explanation is the correct one, which is: sometimes I enjoy playing constructed.

"B) Does your family have to be rich to own/play with a tier 1 deck?
C) A lot of competitive players don't have expenses too?
D) You may need to pay for something else...don't we all?"

Although retorical, I will answer anyway.
No, yes, yes.
The difference is that other people devote to Magic a budget bigger than I do. If I would and then something happened in my real life so that I had to spend a consistent sum of money I would be forced to ask my parents for help (even if temporary) and I don't want to. Hence the comment about them.

"Excuse me if I'm just tired of writers here going through the winning Daily Events decks, picking out the cheapest deck, and tossing together a half ass deck, and then writing about it. It isn't everyone, but it has been done here to death. I think I am afforded the right to have the opinion that I would prefer a writer who maybe has saved their limited money for months, and built something that actually competes with a field."

First of all, I write about Magic because I like Magic and if puremtgo (who "pays" me for it) would deem my articles not worth publishing because I'm too inexperienced, they have all the rights not to (they did in the past and was totally fine with it), so if they publish me they think it's worthy of their credit.
Second, there is a weapon against what you describe, it's called constructive criticism.
Posts like your first one, just qualifies the writer as troll.

logical fallacies by apaulogy at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 12:28
apaulogy's picture

"However, I do find some entertainment in correcting your mistakes, misconceptions, and logical fallacies"

okay then...

"Apparently, the perception is that because we are writing that we are pros with endless Magic income."

you responded

"Please use specific quotes. Nobody said anything of the sort."

I never even implied anything like this was said. "Apparently" and "perception" refer to inferences that I made based on your original post, which said this:

"Why is it the majority of writers on this site can't afford to build tier 1 decks?"

I made the only logical inference from this very judgmental post, in my opinion.

So there you go, I used specific quotes. Thanks for inviting me to this "tod did" consortium...

A little unrelated, but what by char49d at Sat, 09/10/2011 - 04:16
char49d's picture

A little unrelated, but what is the deal with the terms "Spike, Johnny and Timmy"? I've deduced from context Spike is a competitive player, but when did these become widespread psychographic terms?

These sound like marketing research terms, and I have no idea why magic players refer to themselves, often proudly, by these terms, since I've never seen that in any other subculture.

Spike, Johnny, and Timmy are by Scartore at Sat, 09/10/2011 - 12:50
Scartore's picture

Spike, Johnny, and Timmy are psychographic profiles created for WotC to describe the 3 major types of deck builders. The community itself has adopted them as shorthand for competitive players (spikes), rogue deckbuilders (johnny's) and casual players (timmy's). We do mangle wotc's intent when we use them.

Great Job by Roman at Sat, 09/10/2011 - 08:13
Roman's picture
5

I'm a big fan of this deck in Modern and I think your analysis and the article in general is very very good. Thank you, sir!

Thank you for the comment :) by Thisismich at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 03:25
Thisismich's picture

Thank you for the comment :)

Thank you for the comment :) by Thisismich at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 03:25
Thisismich's picture

EDIT: sorry for double post.

Ahoy-hoy. I have been playing by StealthBadger at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 11:22
StealthBadger's picture

Ahoy-hoy. I have been playing with this deck quite a bit on MODO over the last week or so (I had most of the cards lying around from an old block deck), and feel like I can offer a couple of neat ideas which have tested well for me in the TP room (I don't have my decklist on me, but I might post it up later).

Firstly; I've also cut the fauna shamans, and as a result, I like a singleton spitebellows in the maindeck. It's not a good card, but allowing flamekin harbinger to tutor up a removal spell has been really useful for me, and I feel like this is better than adding black for shriekmaw.

Secondly; I have 3 vithian renegades and one ingot chewer in the sideboard. The renegades obviously have better synergy with the deck as a whole, but again, harbinger's tutoring feels like something we can take more advantage of than just mindlessly getting rage-forger every time.

Thirdly; for the same reasons, I'm going to try 1 fulminator mage and 3 goblin ruinblasters.

Fourthly; I'm convinced that burning-tree shaman is pretty nuts. It's awesome against splinter twin, surprisingly good against affinity, and a big body for it's cost. Notably, it's the only shaman naturally bigger than a wild nacatl.

Fifthly; seal of fire out of the sideboard is very good against the infect shoal decks, 'though I still don't feel like we're winning many against that deck. Dismember might be worth testing, as it's good against twin and shoal-infect.

Sixthly; I have you to thank for the idea of running skinshifter in this deck. I am beginning to think that it is actually the best card in the deck, and I've won plenty of games through it. I've beaten shoal-infect a couple of times through pilots failing to notice my shifter could turn into a bird!

Seventhly; I was very dubious of your running Elvish visionary, but once you play this deck for a while, you realise that the win condition is more of a rage-forger combo-kill than anything, and the visionary is actually perfect for that.

Eighthly; I wish I could afford raging ravines!

That ended up longer than I intended....

I wholeheartedly agree on by Thisismich at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 14:41
Thisismich's picture

I wholeheartedly agree on your singletons. I will try them out as soon as RGD drafts are over.

BTW. Yeah, Skinshifters saved my life on a ton of occasions too.

Missing the fun here lol. Try by Sebastian Gua at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 14:03
Sebastian Gua's picture

Missing the fun here lol. Try Sudden Shock for sb.

Thank you for your by Thisismich at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 14:38
Thisismich's picture

Thank you for your suggestion, I do believe though, that it won't be much different than Lightning Burst. Every time I drew one I wished it could deal 1 more dam.

Anyway, I don't remember if I mentioned in the article but I think I'll try running Shattering Spree in the SB should I see much affinity in the TP room after the RGD drafts are out.

The difference is Split by Sebastian Gua at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 15:14
Sebastian Gua's picture

The difference is Split Second. Against Infect is 1 for 3 in Blighted Agent, Blazing Shoal, and the card pitched to Shoal, unless it is turn 1 Inkmoth Nexus. If your opponent does not have Shoal on turn 3 keep your mana open if you have Sudden Shock. Ok to take a few hits. If you do not have it don't try to bluff, just try to expand your mana and build your board.

Will try it out, thanks. by Thisismich at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 15:55
Thisismich's picture

Will try it out, thanks.

Np. Have fun! (^^) by Sebastian Gua at Mon, 09/12/2011 - 16:05
Sebastian Gua's picture

Np. Have fun! (^^)