ShardFenix's picture
By: ShardFenix, Thomas Rayne
Jul 01 2010 1:09am
Login to post comments

Tribal Apocalypse


Stealing From Sheldon


Welcome everyone to another week of Tribal Apocalypse on  Once again I am writing in between Religious Studies papers and Spanish assignments, but I am slightly looking forward to this article.  We had a decent sized group this week and ended up with 5 decks to look at, my "return" to actually winning at least one match, and the good old drama that always comes along with Tribal Apocalypse.  So since this may get lengthy let's get started with those decklists.


2-1 Decks


Good old fashioned White Weenie.  Fliebana showed up this week with a good strong creature base backed by plenty of removal.  I like the Day of Judgments just in case things go to hell for him early on, though I am wondering about the Emeria, the Sky Ruin...I know it's a good card I own some myself, but it seems like even if you hit the requisite numbers of plains the creatures aren't strong enough to face down some late game threats.  Maybe a Cloudgoat Ranger would be an awesome Emeria target.

Yes, yes that is the Rat King from Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles...pretty sweet if you ask me.  Well I'll be honest.  I have posted this deck before.  It's still a great deck.  I just don't have that much to say about it.  I mean its a great rat deck.  It has great removal.  OK, yeah its tough to continually talk about a deck unless I happen to play it that week.  Sorry James, you're a great player I'm just out of words. 

Beastly Beasts from Beastville
4 Cerodon Yearling
4 Woolly Thoctar
4 Cliffrunner Behemoth
4 Spellbreaker Behemoth
3 Meglonoth
3 Realm Razer
22 cards

Other Spells
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Oblivion Ring
4 Rampant Growth
3 Krosan Grip
14 cards
4 Jungle Shrine
3 Terramorphic Expanse
5 Plains
5 Mountain
7 Forest
24 cards
Cliffrunner Behemoth

Finally!  After roughly 3 weeks of going 0-2, I finally find something that got me some wins.  I tried to go with a slight curve starting with the smallest beasts I could find Cerodon Yearling and Woolly Thoctar.  Then I had always wanted to try out Cliffrunner Behemoth so with my first two creatures perfectly meeting it's "bonuses" I picked up a playset and went with it.  Spellbreaker Behemoth was better than expected when I went up against a mono-blue Merfolk deck one round and he was a nice bit of inevitability since bounce can only do so much.  Also Krosan Grip was included as an anti-enchantment/artifact (lets be honest anti-Moat) card.  Of course I saw nothing all event that required it's use which disappointed since I removed (Beastmaster's Ascension) for it.

3-0 Decks

This deck is pretty sweet.  And I think Endless will do a better job explaining the bits and pieces better than I will.  I build this deck to try and show a new style of play for tribal.  The deck has 3 real win conditions
1:  Garruk fueled overrun with lots of little elves, which can
actually work well being able to get garruk out on turn 3 usually.
2:  Natural order dropping progenitus onto the table and just
attacking for the win.  I also included terastodon to be able to
remove moats if any were played
3:  The very slow and grueling lockdown with winter orb, propaganda
and tabernacle effects.  Gaea's cradle allows me to pay my costs with
1 land and every creature i played from druids could pay his own
tabernacle costs.  Mana short worked as a wrath of god effect with
tabernacle on the board.

And from replays and what I heard he won every way possible throughout the event.

Well it's a vampire deck.  Kind of.  For everything I saw and heard I don't know if it ever once won with vampires.  Its pretty much this combo: with vampires shoved around it to be tribal legal. A.K.A you can basically win on turn 2 with your free Emrakul, the Aeons Torn.  No one agreed with this approach last week and the player certainly didn't help his case when he said "Everyone think's I am an asshole, so I might as well build a deck to live up to it."  This player's solution was banning combo pieces.  No one supported that.  Everyone was basically like you knew better, no one enjoys playing against those, don't be a DB.  Personally I have my own ideas as to situations like this.  Luckily EDH Rules Committee member and founder, Sheldon Menery, has the general opinion a I do. 

"Am I saying that it’s "right?*" No, I’m simply saying that it is, and it’s a sometimes somewhat unclear, unwritten code of behavior. The main point is that social contracts exist as part of the way human beings exist in societies. And "EDH players(Tribal Apocalypse)" is a society. If you’d like to be part of that society, great. If not, that’s okay too. No one is trying to force you to play a particular way, but they might be asking that don’t play a particular way as well.

I kind of liken ‘social’ versus ‘competitive’ EDH/Tribal to baseball with wooden versus aluminum bats. Sure aluminum bats are better. They help you hit the ball harder and farther, but purists think that wood is the way the game is intended to be played, so that’s what they’ll use. Aluminum bat guy has competitive advantage over wood bat guy. "I came to win" guy plays with aluminum. "I came to play baseball" guy goes with wood. It’s perfectly reasonable for the "I came to play baseball" guys to say "you’re welcome to play with us, but you have to use a wooden bat."

That may trigger the thought "well, you should just ban all the cards you hate," but that’s a path to failure (see the history of 5-color). For most of the cards that remain unbanned, there are colorful and interesting uses as well as powerful strategic ones. Some cards that can be used in mean-spirited ways also provide defense from some strategies getting out of hand. While Magister Sphinx might be nasty, it’s pretty good at keeping crazy life gain guy in check. Judicious application of such things is the secret to the balance."

Basically change all instances of EDH to Tribal.  And with the main prize being 3 tickets in this event it is certainly a social tournament and not a competitive one.  So yes, Thank you Mr. Menery for posting this on SCG the other day.  It does express my thoughts to a T.  So what about people who still insist on bringing decks that go against the grain?  There is no correct way to play Tribal. There is, however, a vision for how I would like to see Tribal Apocalypse played, and the majority of players seem to be with me.  It's not a cutthroat win-at-all-costs event.  Some people enjoy playing in a tournament where the main point is not the win but rather the overall since of fun that can come from the event.  I really hope you like it. If not, that’s fine, because there are a number of other great Magic formats for you to enjoy instead and we can still stay friends.


Now this is what gets me on by Flippers_Giraffe at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 02:39
Flippers_Giraffe's picture

Now this is what gets me on one hand you have a Progenitus/Natural Order combo and the other hand Doomsday/Shelldock Isle both of which are combo decks that can win very early on in the game. Yet one player is applauded for a good deck and the other scorned.

It doesn’t really make much sense as they are both combo decks which makes them way more competitive than the rest of the decks in the event.

You can't ok one and not the other.

I kind of agree. Also, this by StealthBadger at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 05:50
StealthBadger's picture

I kind of agree.

Also, this might be relevent as a sort of counterpoint to mr menery's stuff;

Good points but.... by Scartore at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 07:27
Scartore's picture

That article makes some good points but... His solutions only work at the kitchen table, where the rules in play actually are flexible. As we at the mercy of the program, we have no real way to enforce any bannings, or mana limits, or spells per turn limits etc. All we can do is ask politely that the participants in Shard's tournement understand the nature of the decks we expect to face. As I've said before, it's Shards event, he has every right to chastise people for bringing guns to his knife fights.

Yah, I just thought I'd pass by StealthBadger at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:26
StealthBadger's picture

Yah, I just thought I'd pass on some kind of counterpoint to the link in the article.

I'm always on the side of bannings! Ban, bannety-ban-ban.

Badger if you had any idea by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:54
Ranth's picture

Badger if you had any idea How anti-ban hammer of a guy i am you'd be truely amazed that im actually the one lobbying for them....Just ask Amar or Necrosavant about it lmao.

only no one complained about by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:13
ShardFenix's picture

only no one complained about the winter orb deck. It was not a consistent progenitus on turn 3 deck. He had a multitude on win coniditions and a deck that actually worked well around his tribe. ON the other hand the Shelldock Doomsday deck used vampires, but could have used faeire or wizards or surrakar. Basically any blue or black tribe and it wold not have mattered since they where chaff and unimportant to the deck as a whole.

Indeed, very double standard by Paul Leicht at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 09:00
Paul Leicht's picture

Indeed, very double standard and an issue that has kept me from wanting to even build for the event.

Natural order by endless at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 06:09
endless's picture

The difference is that my deck wasn't built around that combo working. Infact, with my deck going 6-1 I only resolved natural order twice. Of those two times only once did it go the distance for me. The deck was built as an absolutely brutal lockdown deck. The origional version was too good at that. Almost every game I played either ended up in someone decking themselves on turn 60, or running out of time. Natural order was added as a method to end the game before turn 60, or to get rid of moats or other troublesome pieces with terastodon. If my deck was a combo deck, don't you think I would have played a full set of natural order?

I ended up playing against by AJ_Impy at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 07:20
AJ_Impy's picture

I ended up playing against both 'combo decks' this week: I took a game vs the shelldock emrakul shoehorn thanks to speeding out an expensive permanent capable of dealing with the isle, but lost 0-2 to the lockdown deck. I always felt I had much more outs to the lockdown deck, which was very much built around its constituent parts, and definitely had the 'hard but fair' feel about it. The shoehorned doomsday deck is another matter. It didn't bother with the tribe at all. It was chaff. He could easily have played with 20 basic lands in those slots and it would have made absolutely no difference to any of the games: He just exiled them all anyway after mystical tutoring up the desired component.

As I've mentioned before in articles touching upon the elephant in the room, the inherent brokenness of tribal Classic is due to the classic card pool and no sideboards. You can shoehorn in a classic- or legacy- viable combo deck, take out most of the disruption and protection to run 20 random creatures and just win. This style of play is what gets frowned upon, brutally exploiting the flaws. If everyone did that, the format would be an unplayable, trunctated version of classic where combo was king because no-one can sideboard in hate for any deck, let alone any of the myriad exploitative ideas people have in the eternal formats.

We don't want it to degenerate into that. 90% of the player pool doesn't run that kind of exploitative deck, because if they did, there really wouldn't be a format worthy of the name. So we all dance around the elephant in the room, deliberately not poking it with pointy sticks, and trying to dissuade people who do try to get it to trample or gore everyone in pachydermic rage.

Is... by Scartore at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 07:33
Scartore's picture

Is the rumored to come "over-extended" a possible solution?

Also, has anybody bugged wotc about fixing the sideboard problem with tribal? As I see it the problem is keeping the deck tribal legal post sideboard, so why don't we get the program to doublecheck the tribal legality postsb? It already checks to make sure you have 60 cards, so how hard could that be?

If they wanted to make it by kalandine at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 07:42
kalandine's picture

If they wanted to make it easy, for classic tribal the could set the program to prevent sideboarding of creatures. Not perfect, but it would solve any legality issues for post-sideboard decks.

Tribe legality doesn't stop by AJ_Impy at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:16
AJ_Impy's picture

Tribe legality doesn't stop altering the nature of a tribe. With a few changelings or dual tribe members as a fulcrum, you could go from soldiers to angels or rats to ninja post-board.

Actually AJ If you prevent by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:21
Ranth's picture

Actually AJ If you prevent boarding creatures at all then it does prevent exactly that.

My reply was to Scartore's by AJ_Impy at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:35
AJ_Impy's picture

My reply was to Scartore's post rather than Kaladine's. However, preventing the boarding of a given type is even more unlikely than Wizards adding sideboards to the format. If we want to fix it, we cannot rely on the client, or on the honor system.

Aj in player run events the by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:51
Ranth's picture

Aj in player run events the honor system is all you have so either you believe that people aren't changing their decks in between matches or dont run a tournament.

Same could be said here run the games under the classic(or legacy) filter and allow sideboards if we really believe that to be the solution to this "un-repairable format"

But honestly i think the only true way to fix the format is to allow sideboards AND have a banned list that might need cards added due to the nature of the format.

I accept that is true for by AJ_Impy at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 10:57
AJ_Impy's picture

I accept that is true for PREs, and I recognise it is viable in that context. But in Tribal as a whole, out in the wilds of cas/cas, there is no way to uphold that. I'm not just interested in tribal as a PRE format but as a format in its totality. It is from this perspective that I say it is unrepairable: As with the principles of collectivism, fixes like these are absolutely fine on a family-size scale, a PRE scale, but try to expand them to cover everyone and you run into massive problems.

The problem here is that by kalandine at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 07:51
kalandine's picture

The problem here is that everyone's line in the sand is different. The Natural Order / Progenitus combo has happened in at least two other decks before, and one deck was tuned as best possible to pull it off by turn 3. Without an exhaustive banned list or a treatise that no one wants to read concerning the acceptable/unacceptable constraints on deck building, the differences of opinions will continue.

I love Tribal Classic and I applaud what Shard is trying to do, but I have gotten frustrated in various weeks where I bring a knife to a gun fight and the week I do win, I get blasted for my deck choice.

I plan to keep participating as time allows, but every week I plan to either (a) bring a deck to win regardless of other players' feelings about that deck, or (b) bringing a deck I want to play and not worry about my win-loss record.

red decks arent a by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:09
ShardFenix's picture

red decks arent a problem...that was an individuals immaturity. I dont think anyone has ever had any problems with your decks.

Red decks arent a problem? by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:16
Ranth's picture

Red decks arent a problem? Maybe u need to go back and look at the comments of your past few articles and refresh your memory of what people have got blasted for during the tournies.

Perfectly put and well said. by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:14
Ranth's picture

Perfectly put and well said.

This is a sponsored tournement

"No one is trying to force you to play a particular way, but they might be asking that don’t play a particular way as well."

This is more or less the same thing as making a tourney that reads. No Elves,Goblins,Faries,counters,LD,Eldrazi,2 card combo's, infinate combos,Burn,Dredge,Reanimation...Dual lands(yes we've had people made to feel bad because they had a better mana base then another player)

Um not sure what else off the top of my head but that was just the things i've seen people get blasted by the other players and HOST for playing and get called a DB for it.

Soooo basically play an aggro deck with spot removal only or be a personal friend of this tight knit group or risk getting blasted for playing anything that might be more then a 20$ casual deck.

If you guys wanna have casual games with insane amounts of rules fine do that, but at least keep the rules of what's acceptable consistant.

Also sorry to say Shard you claim you and others play for fun and think that I dont? Maybe you and the others haven't noticed but some people happen to enjoy doing broken things in games and you've known me long enough to know that I happen to be one of thoes people.

'Sponsored Tournament' isn't by AJ_Impy at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:26
AJ_Impy's picture

'Sponsored Tournament' isn't a valid argument, Ranth. To quote from the article about the legacy ban changes,

"Our research took another turn, however, when we investigated how Legacy is played in the real world. We discovered something rather interesting, and that is that Mystical Tutor decks were quite rare at Legacy tournaments that did not have tons of money on the line. At Grand Prix and other cash tournaments, people were happy to bust out their Mystical Tutors. However, in the comfort of their home stores they seemed to prefer doing other things that were more fun, if perhaps less powerful. This struck me as being a sort of gentleman's agreement; everyone knew what sick decks were out there, but they chose not to play them."

That's the situation here. We know you can break tribal wide open the way the doomsday shelldock deck does, or dredge does or any one of a dozen different ways. It's a flawed, broken format. My main argument against Wizards ever santioning it again is precisely because of the 'This is a sponsored tournament' attitude. The format cannot (and as a sanctioned format, didn't!) survive that.

If you're willing to accept that it's broken and not exploit the breaks, there's a hell of a lot of fun to be had. That's what the tournament aims for.

If your having fun with your by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:34
ShardFenix's picture

If your having fun with your deck and no one else is maybe you should look at an reconsider your deck.

I agree with Ranth I've been by Flippers_Giraffe at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:38
Flippers_Giraffe's picture

I agree with Ranth

I've been bashed for playing combo in all forms, dual lands and the price of my decks in the end I got fed up and stopped playing in the events and went off and found another event to play in.

I like Ranth enjoy playing broken decks but if there are no defined restrictions/banned list for the event then you have to expect these decks as not everyone wants to play 20 creatures 20 removal and 20 lands. You cant bash a player for playing a deck if you have no rules in place to restrict the types of cards/interactions you dont want to see.

actually i said i like by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:46
Ranth's picture

actually i said i like playing decks that can do broken things not exactly broken decks But i suppose the point is more or less the same in either case we enjoy doing things that we more likely then not cannot pull off on a daily basis.

I meant decks that can do by Flippers_Giraffe at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:59
Flippers_Giraffe's picture

I meant decks that can do broken things.

Is that really what you think? by Scartore at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 10:42
Scartore's picture

Do you really think that's all the thought we put into this Flip? You've set up a false dichotomy. The options aren't a) Play broken legacy tournament combo deck, or b) Play brain dead aggro deck. There are a wide variety of deck ideas out there that don't fit either category.

If we don't recognize the limits of the format and throw it open to whatever crazy classic legal 2 turn combo kill the classic players come up with wrapped up in an irrelevant tribal shell, then you're essentially telling me to not bother showing up with my bird or lizard deck because they can't possibly win. Heck they can't possibly even slow down those kinds of decks. If you've brought a deck that can consistently win on turn 2 or 3, then you probably won't even see wtf tribe I brought to the table!

Also, grow a thicker skin. It's not like we've brought your mother into it... yet... ;)

Lol I see you guys once again by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:47
Ranth's picture

Lol I see you guys once again would like to focus on only a small part of the subject i brought up but you know thats fine. I'll just remind you. Go back up to my comment and re-read the vast array of things that people have been blasted for in the past and feel free to re-comment.

Also the "this is a sponsoered tournament attitude" is just my simple way of saying keep the rules consistant and if a player has fun playing within the rules then as a host dont blast the player as they've done nothing wrong.

Its really not any diffrent then a judge blasting soemone because they have a red shirt on and they're on the rigth side of the room but if they were on the left side it's perfectly fine.

Im with you here I think. by Paul Leicht at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 09:05
Paul Leicht's picture

Im with you here I think. Play what you want, accept the hate and be cool with it.

see instead of just excepting by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 08:57
ShardFenix's picture

see instead of just excepting the general atmosphere of play style in the event you want to sit here and argue about it. You've played before you know what no one likes and chose to play it anyways. So deal with the consequences. If it had been your first event then it would not have been a problem. We have had people show up with goblins their first time and no one flipped out. In fact after seeing their opponents decks, they figured it out and showed up the next week with something inline with everyone else. If you want to run around and play broken decks i hear Dark Wars is starting back up. If you want to have fun and play tribal...actual tribal...not combo with 20 creatures stuck in then youre more than welcome too. So no matter how much you want too, the general opinion of people how play inthe events will remain the same. You can either agree to it, or not. Just dont ruin the events with decks you make to prove points. And no one called you a d-bag until youre statement of "Everyone thinks im an asshole, so I built a deck to prove them right." And yes that is a douchebag comment.

Ranth: Have you lost your by endless at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 09:32
endless's picture

Ranth: Have you lost your mind? Yah there's absolutely no difference between someone sitting on the left side of the room, or wearing a red shirt; and playing a TRIBAL deck where your decks goal is to dump every single vampire you have into your graveyard and combo out with 5 cards which share no tribe or even theme with your deck? Lets cut the sensationalism please.

Oh the Drama Time i think by bingobongo at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 10:08
bingobongo's picture

Oh the Drama

Time i think Shard for adding to your banning list (cards that is)

See thats the problem the by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 11:39
ShardFenix's picture

See thats the problem the occasional guy that wants to blow 3 hours out of his weekend ruining an event for everyone else shouldnt make those cards deserve a banning. There are always fun uses to some of these combo cards. I dont want to restrict creativity to combat douchebagginess.

@ Shard by Talyn781 at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 11:43
Talyn781's picture

On the subject of your deck, did you consider Slippery Bogle for another low cost beast (the cheapest I think) with trollshroud?

actually I did not for two by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 11:55
ShardFenix's picture

actually I did not for two reasons

One. I did not realize Slippery Bogle was a beast so that kinda hurt.
Two. With 7 cipt lands, I was really hoping on being able to play one of them first turn when I had no plays.

gotcha by Talyn781 at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 11:59
Talyn781's picture


Has there been one tribal pre by this isnt the n... at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 13:12
this isnt the name i chose's picture

Has there been one tribal pre that has ended without a bunch of complaining? Every single article is about how someone brought a hardcore deck that broke the spirit of the rules. Either change the rules (banhammer?), start blocking people from joining, or do nothing. Either way stop complaining about it every week, it makes people not want to join the pre.

I think we like to argue over by ArchGenius at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 14:13
ArchGenius's picture

I think we like to argue over and over again about the same issue with no resolution in sight.

In all seriousness, the problem is that the format restrictions (must have 20 creatures of the same type and no sideboards) combined with the classic card pool create a format where Combo is really really good. Add in to that the fact that tier 1 creature based strategies with disruption and control are discouraged. (Merfolk)

Do you really think that Shelldock/Doomsday Combo would be all that fearsome against a field of Merfolk decks using Force of Wills and other counterspells? Many of the problems people have with this format is that players can design a deck that can do something that gets them pretty close to winning on turn 2. Well, that's basically competitive classic without control decks.

It has been argued that the format wasn't designed to be combo oriented, and that the only "good" way to win is through creatures. I could also argue that Rise of the Eldrazi was designed to make a Defender deck playable in standard. That doesn't mean I'm going to be able to win any tournaments with that strategy.

So, what do you do now that the results (lots of combo decks and "degenerate" decks) don't match your goals (lots of variety, longer games, more "fun" games)? My solution, try to redefine the format with definitive specific rules that WILL encourage what you want rather than what you don't want. Can you make everyone happy? Of course not, but there is a lot of room for improvement. Here are a couple of my suggestions for a tribal format that actually works.

1. Ban noncreature cards that aren't Standard Legal + Every creature ever printed + 1/3 of deck must be of the same tribe. (New Banned List: Goblin Lackey)
2. Ban noncreature cards that aren't Extended Legal + Every creature every printed + 1/3 creatures (New Banned List: Goblin Lackey)
3. Restrict all noncreature cards, everything else remains the same.

Most of the problem combo cards exist because of noncreature spells. If we limit those kinds of cards, turn 2 combos are much harder to pull off. Sure, you can still find a way to sneak Emrakul or Iona into play, but it probably isn't going to happen on turn 2.

Sideboard Options
1. Sideboards must made up entirely of creatures
2. Can't sideboard out any creatures from your tribe (Honor System, and hard to program)

May I offer a completely by Odindusk at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 14:43
Odindusk's picture

May I offer a completely independent opinion of this situation? I've never played in these events.

My view is simple: unless this is a very tight-knit group of close friends who understand each other inside and out and share the same goals and expectations, you are going to constantly struggle with the discrepancies of "acceptable" week in and week out.

There aren't many decklist rules, and no allowed and disallowed lists to follow, etc. Thus, the competitive player will always seek to do what they can to win. It is encouraged because you allow it. And THAT just serves to penalize your players who are trying to keep things in the spirit of the format because they might have refrained from going combo-crazy in their deckbuilding, and they get beat by some crazy turn 2 combo who goes on to win first place. Which will sow the seeds of disinterest in the type of player you most want showing up at your tourneys.

so i'm confused. by rainin6 at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 15:26
rainin6's picture

what deck should i be playing in these tournaments?

a) Combo deck - will get ridiculed by some and not by other depending on what combo it is that I'm playing. stand a very good chance of going 3-0 because no one has any sideboards and difficult for aggro decks to determine the proper hate needed for my combo.

b) Aggro deck - lose to the combo decks even though I am playing this tournament to win, but at least people don't berate me.

so it turns out you either: WIN and people hate you, or LOSE and people like you. Off chance of winning and people liking you - but rare. sounds like a great tournament to me. kudos.

actually there are many weeks by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 16:03
ShardFenix's picture

actually there are many weeks people win with the combos and no one cares. If the Shelldock Doomsday deck had at least been all eldrazi and not vampires many said they would not have minded. And anyway you slice building a deck around a combo when you have no intention of using the creatures in your deck is a copout. For example Endless_Nameless has won a number of events with various "combo decks". One week he had an Oath of Druids deck based around spirits. But he could actually play out his creatures and still win. No one really cared. AJ has brought many mnay horribly strong decks and done well. Again no one cared. Because they at least used the creatures in their deck as more than just filler. Personally I didnt have a problem when Flippers ran dragon-based Hypergenesis. At least the main tribal part of his tribe was used. The funny thing is there are numerous weeks were no one brings anything overpowered. People got mad at red but thats because its all people were running for almost a month. Thats no different then when people were getting pissed in standard since all you saw was jund. Playing the same decks week in and week out gets annoying and sure tempers may flare. But knowingly bringing a deck that you KNOW goes against whats going on, is not cool. And if being able to dominate an event just so you can go 3-0 and win 3 tickets is kind of lame. It would be much easier for everyone else if you were doing the same thing in the 2-man queues. Its a simple level of respecting the type of play that this is for. Fun casual play with a chance to win a couple tickets.

fair enough! :D i can get the by rainin6 at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 17:38
rainin6's picture

fair enough! :D i can get the analogies to std. people will hate jund, etc. while jund with variations might not be so hated upon. etc etc. gotcha.

And if you don't agree no one by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 16:06
ShardFenix's picture

And if you don't agree no one is forcing to play. I could spend time going through the standard card pool and banning any card with any combo-potential but what would we be left with? I mean I could use Amulet of Vigor, Realm Razer, and Flickerform to generate infinite mana I'm pretty sure, but do I? No because I would rather not play a match solo and at least have some interaction outside of yeah I'm going to do this infinite combo and bam youre dead. Though I may go try this out just have some fun in the casual room now that I thought about it.

Actually the tournament is a by Cruel_Hellraiser at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 16:30
Cruel_Hellraiser's picture

Actually the tournament is a fun one to play. I havent been there for a while but I am one to follow the honor rule. I never bring top decks, I always make something for it. I have played chimeras, avatars, and eyes. I think that a lot of people who play are just so hellbent on winning that they dont care what is brought to the table.

Okay guys im sorry but lets by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 17:15
Ranth's picture

Okay guys im sorry but lets say you're right that the tribe is irrelevent to most combo decks.(not just this one)

Then that's why if you're going to raise hell on anyone running the cards that you should be uniformly fair and give everyone that same level of hate regardless how pretty you want to dress it up with the tribe. I've yet to see a compelling reason not to other then to allow "friends" to play their fun... or wait i thought it was unfun cards? Oh yep thats right they're friends and tried to "cleverly" hide the combo in plain sight so its okay right?

I still an baffled how you guys dont see that I dont care how casual you want the tourney to be as im completely cool with that idea and infact even encourage it (why else would I, mr i hate to ban anything!! Be the one suggesting to do exactly that??). HOWEVER what im saying is that you need to be uniform and fair to everyone.

Saying player A is allowed to play broken combo xyz but player B cannot isn't fair to anyone. I dont care what tourney it is or who you are or even in the casual room, doing things that way just aint right for anyone ESPICALLY in a tourney setting that a company has added their name to via their sponsorship.

It's okay though I realize by Ranth at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 17:19
Ranth's picture

It's okay though I realize it's just soo much easier to villlanize someone then to make any effort at all to fix things and then collect credits from bashing players in an article on a website that the sponsor of said tournament also runs.

I agree with Ranth on this no by Flippers_Giraffe at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 17:26
Flippers_Giraffe's picture

I agree with Ranth on this no one should ever bash a player in an article, its just wrong on so many levels.

i never actually bashed him. by ShardFenix at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 17:39
ShardFenix's picture

i never actually bashed him. I simply repeated in a brief summary the argument that happened after the fact. No one agreed with this approach last week and the player certainly didn't help his case when he said "Everyone think's I am an asshole, so I might as well build a deck to live up to it." This player's solution was banning combo pieces. No one supported that. Everyone was basically like you knew better, no one enjoys playing against those, don't be a DB. I dont count that as bashing. If I had been like ranth is a douchebag he sucks at tribal blah blah blah thats bashing. I harbor no ill will towards rnath he normally has interesting fair decks.

That makes 3 of us. That is by Paul Leicht at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 17:46
Paul Leicht's picture

That makes 3 of us. That is why I have refrained from doing so when sorely tempted several times. Also I don't see how Ranth did anything wrong.

I concur. I'm surprised some by StealthBadger at Fri, 07/02/2010 - 06:09
StealthBadger's picture

I concur. I'm surprised some of this stuff gets past the editors, to be honest.

@ Scartore Yes but here in by Flippers_Giraffe at Thu, 07/01/2010 - 17:16
Flippers_Giraffe's picture

@ Scartore

Yes but here in lies the problem if you bring combo you will win if your build is good enough which is a proven factor in tribal. If you play aggro you stand a chance at winning if there are no strong combo decks that week. If you bring anything interesting you lose its sad but true.

I played combo decks but not every week and won with them. When I played non combo decks I lost to combo, which tells me that the best meta to play currently is combo.

Something needs to be done to change this otherwise the event will lose players or more people will look to combo as the way forward which is against everything Shard is working towards.

I miss tribal as I had a lot of fun playing in the event and made lots of new friends but we need to stop the combo and tier one decks. The format needs to be shaken up to get rid of all the dead wood so to speak its a huge task but needs doing, Wizards didnt have an answer and stopped supporting it but I dont know the reasons for this as it was before my time but I'm sure AJ does.

Tribal needs some love it can be made into the format that Shard is pointing towards for the Apocalypse events, but it needs the help of the community which is YOU the readers to make the changes required to make this the fun event that you are all reaching for.