You aren't looking it at quite the way I was. I looked at that hand and saw if I kept it, I was essentially taking a mulligan to six, but at the same time, I had 4 island + Vapor Snare. Vapor Snare is the strongest card in my deck, and with that hand, I can use it as early as turn five.
If I took a mulligan to six, I was not likely not going to match a castable Vapor Snare, and I was likely to reduce the overall potential power of the hand. Diminishing returns.
Sure, not getting a swamp was annoying, but Hideous End would come online on turn six or seven, given the odds. What really killed me was the early tempo damage (in part because of his river boas). His replays did not show openings as good as he pulled against me.
However if you replace the Vapor Snare in that hand with any other card in the deck, yes, I would have mulliganed. In terms of power, Snare was my MVP. I wasn't willing to mull a hand with my MVP when I cost obviously cast it.
In round 10, I completely agree. I should have mulled that hand. I played terribly in r10. If I ever do a MOCS again with a sealed deck, I'll have energy drinks on hand for rounds 8+.
Thanks Raddman - all valid points :) Just wish there was a sarcastic font so folks didn't take things so seriously, I write like I type...and I'm sure my physical smirk and nudges would ease the language quite a bit in person...but I'll take note of it for the future.
Or better yet, just skip the entire deck because it sucks lol.
If you are going to spend 50 on this pile of trash, just stop being cheap and invest another 50 and buy yourself a Enchantress list. At least that requires some skill level to play and it isn't MonoGreen. Mono colored decks seem to get rocked by Iona, or so I've heard 80)~
Get that 2nd article out asap, all this fringe stuff is making me sick to my stomach lol!
I haven't always seen eye to eye with some of your articles (See your article regarding cheating). I will say however, this article I found very interesting. I really enjoyed the pictures, the Wheaties thing is classic. The pictures provide breaks in the content which makes it easier on my eyes.
I even found myself wanting to try a White Weenie list again.
It's easy for people to flame when you write an article focusing around your winning. No one wants to hear a tournament report about someone get owned, if they do I have plenty of articles to write.
I think the true problem is your history. Sometimes your articles do seem arrogant. Maybe its the comments you have made in the past or maybe it's people opinions that have been formed in the past.
I didn't have a huge problem with the article, I think having a little arrogance in this game isn't always a bad thing. You just need to know when to show your emotions and when to pull back a little bit.
Summary: If the point of the article was to say, "Hey, WW is pretty cool you should try it" then you accomplished that task with me.
If the environment were a tad slower Sens would be a perfectly fine control card. Nothing embarrassing about losing to it. Unless you feel all your games should end by turn 4.
Also if you were a dedicated Jund player you would probably thinking "why isn't this guy playing Jund instead???"
What I meant by this is that Sen Triplets is not a card which a serious constructed player would rate very highly (same with Battle of Wits). It is not efficiently costed for its size and its ability both makes it a removal magnet and is not very good, as there's no guarantee you have the mana to play your opponent's spells.
If I was playing Jund or what have you and lost to this deck, my thoughts would surely be along the lines of "I can't believe I lost to a deck built around Sen Triplets." Not necessarily embarrassed, but at least amused.
at first i wasnt sure if numidar was right...so i re-read the article since i only skimmed it this morning before class...it does come off as highly arrogant and conceited...
To respond to what you said above, no I don't care if you say things about goblins or any other deck. The only point I was making was that almost all of the article was just bragging without any actual content. I mean, cool you won an event. Grats. But it's pretty much like the whole article was written just to say "hey guys I won a premier event let me tell you how good I am and how good my deck is".
I should have been clearer, as this was my intention...to have a reference point for a few years to link to and modify for all WW players. Glad at least you liked it. Let me guess, you don't play goblins? ;) I think most the haters here (see also:99% of posts) have a crush on them.
I guess I could have used a few less adjectives like Smashing, Crushed,etc.., - but what else would you call 8-0 against goblins? Perhaps, since you were also running goblins, it stung a bit more than a casual readers take?
Icatian Javelineers are always decent. Like I wrote of Shelter, if I had a 100 card minimum, then for sure I'd be playing things like this and Knight of Sursi. Knowing goblins were on the upswing, the correct call is Soul Warden, as it also helps buy you a turn vs. storm, so long as you have a bodyguard nearby :)
I think the best way to approach reanimator in pauper is to make it a g/b rock deck that plays efficient cards. Krosan tusker cycles for value and is a great exhume target while wild mongrel would give a discard outlet that's powerful on its own. With this kind of deck, it would be easy to work exhume in without making any actual sacrifices in card power for it. Another option would be to just work exhume into the current g/b madness decks and play it alongside tortured existance.
So... this article kind of bugged me. I gave it a chance at first because I was thinking, ok, he's trying to establish himself as a good player. However, after that, almost the entire article was just you posting your numerous top 8s and how goblin decks just have no shot against you because you and your ww deck are just amazing. I mean, really, there wasn't any actual content in this article other than "I'm good and so is ww".
Idea for next article: explain all the reasons why that Exhume deck won't win a match. I think you could probably hit 1000 words. I think you could also build a better deck afterward, too!
The problem may be that currently Gatherling is set up to only show the most recent 20 results for any search. I had to be a bit clever. I searched deck name "Cloak" and card "Prismatic Strands" in order to find the TPDC 5.09 occurrence. I can't remember Nick####'s numbers, so that one comes from direct personal knowledge.
I wrote on top of the merged one, "WHAT A MESS!" - guess the point was missed. I also noted i didn't want to do a typical round/round breakdown (which seems tired and boring) especially considering so many games were against roughtly the same deck, I saw this as a neat way to blend the matches into a goblin stew. I'll make sure to stay clear of this in the future to avoid any visual confusion.
Two different decks can both be consistant. My point (however unclear and/or I missed) was that WW is very consistant over goblins...and plays good vs the rest of the field too.
You aren't looking it at quite the way I was. I looked at that hand and saw if I kept it, I was essentially taking a mulligan to six, but at the same time, I had 4 island + Vapor Snare. Vapor Snare is the strongest card in my deck, and with that hand, I can use it as early as turn five.
If I took a mulligan to six, I was not likely not going to match a castable Vapor Snare, and I was likely to reduce the overall potential power of the hand. Diminishing returns.
Sure, not getting a swamp was annoying, but Hideous End would come online on turn six or seven, given the odds. What really killed me was the early tempo damage (in part because of his river boas). His replays did not show openings as good as he pulled against me.
However if you replace the Vapor Snare in that hand with any other card in the deck, yes, I would have mulliganed. In terms of power, Snare was my MVP. I wasn't willing to mull a hand with my MVP when I cost obviously cast it.
In round 10, I completely agree. I should have mulled that hand. I played terribly in r10. If I ever do a MOCS again with a sealed deck, I'll have energy drinks on hand for rounds 8+.
Thanks Raddman - all valid points :) Just wish there was a sarcastic font so folks didn't take things so seriously, I write like I type...and I'm sure my physical smirk and nudges would ease the language quite a bit in person...but I'll take note of it for the future.
Or better yet, just skip the entire deck because it sucks lol.
If you are going to spend 50 on this pile of trash, just stop being cheap and invest another 50 and buy yourself a Enchantress list. At least that requires some skill level to play and it isn't MonoGreen. Mono colored decks seem to get rocked by Iona, or so I've heard 80)~
Get that 2nd article out asap, all this fringe stuff is making me sick to my stomach lol!
I haven't always seen eye to eye with some of your articles (See your article regarding cheating). I will say however, this article I found very interesting. I really enjoyed the pictures, the Wheaties thing is classic. The pictures provide breaks in the content which makes it easier on my eyes.
I even found myself wanting to try a White Weenie list again.
It's easy for people to flame when you write an article focusing around your winning. No one wants to hear a tournament report about someone get owned, if they do I have plenty of articles to write.
I think the true problem is your history. Sometimes your articles do seem arrogant. Maybe its the comments you have made in the past or maybe it's people opinions that have been formed in the past.
I didn't have a huge problem with the article, I think having a little arrogance in this game isn't always a bad thing. You just need to know when to show your emotions and when to pull back a little bit.
Summary: If the point of the article was to say, "Hey, WW is pretty cool you should try it" then you accomplished that task with me.
If the environment were a tad slower Sens would be a perfectly fine control card. Nothing embarrassing about losing to it. Unless you feel all your games should end by turn 4.
Also if you were a dedicated Jund player you would probably thinking "why isn't this guy playing Jund instead???"
I suspect Num would be fine with arrogant and conceited if the article had more of what he considers meat.
Thanks for the comment and criticism.
What I meant by this is that Sen Triplets is not a card which a serious constructed player would rate very highly (same with Battle of Wits). It is not efficiently costed for its size and its ability both makes it a removal magnet and is not very good, as there's no guarantee you have the mana to play your opponent's spells.
If I was playing Jund or what have you and lost to this deck, my thoughts would surely be along the lines of "I can't believe I lost to a deck built around Sen Triplets." Not necessarily embarrassed, but at least amused.
at first i wasnt sure if numidar was right...so i re-read the article since i only skimmed it this morning before class...it does come off as highly arrogant and conceited...
To respond to what you said above, no I don't care if you say things about goblins or any other deck. The only point I was making was that almost all of the article was just bragging without any actual content. I mean, cool you won an event. Grats. But it's pretty much like the whole article was written just to say "hey guys I won a premier event let me tell you how good I am and how good my deck is".
I like that you thank your editor. Very classy.
Wow, thanks. First positive comment!
I should have been clearer, as this was my intention...to have a reference point for a few years to link to and modify for all WW players. Glad at least you liked it. Let me guess, you don't play goblins? ;) I think most the haters here (see also:99% of posts) have a crush on them.
I guess I could have used a few less adjectives like Smashing, Crushed,etc.., - but what else would you call 8-0 against goblins? Perhaps, since you were also running goblins, it stung a bit more than a casual readers take?
Icatian Javelineers are always decent. Like I wrote of Shelter, if I had a 100 card minimum, then for sure I'd be playing things like this and Knight of Sursi. Knowing goblins were on the upswing, the correct call is Soul Warden, as it also helps buy you a turn vs. storm, so long as you have a bodyguard nearby :)
lol...sorry Numdiar - I can see it being seen that way, did you see the area I where I wrote about my loss? It had screengraps/pics.
I think the best way to approach reanimator in pauper is to make it a g/b rock deck that plays efficient cards. Krosan tusker cycles for value and is a great exhume target while wild mongrel would give a discard outlet that's powerful on its own. With this kind of deck, it would be easy to work exhume in without making any actual sacrifices in card power for it. Another option would be to just work exhume into the current g/b madness decks and play it alongside tortured existance.
arn't they decent vs. crypt rats? also i'm confused about the soul wardens, do you attack with them?
So... this article kind of bugged me. I gave it a chance at first because I was thinking, ok, he's trying to establish himself as a good player. However, after that, almost the entire article was just you posting your numerous top 8s and how goblin decks just have no shot against you because you and your ww deck are just amazing. I mean, really, there wasn't any actual content in this article other than "I'm good and so is ww".
Skip the rancors and the rangers and its even cheaper.
Idea for next article: explain all the reasons why that Exhume deck won't win a match. I think you could probably hit 1000 words. I think you could also build a better deck afterward, too!
The problem may be that currently Gatherling is set up to only show the most recent 20 results for any search. I had to be a bit clever. I searched deck name "Cloak" and card "Prismatic Strands" in order to find the TPDC 5.09 occurrence. I can't remember Nick####'s numbers, so that one comes from direct personal knowledge.
Awesome article about the WW archetype - I'll be bookmarking this for the future :)
RE: Shots
I wrote on top of the merged one, "WHAT A MESS!" - guess the point was missed. I also noted i didn't want to do a typical round/round breakdown (which seems tired and boring) especially considering so many games were against roughtly the same deck, I saw this as a neat way to blend the matches into a goblin stew. I'll make sure to stay clear of this in the future to avoid any visual confusion.
NP...mind sending the link to all the decks? I only have them until I started around November of 09'
Sorry Shard, just what I call that type of deck.
Two different decks can both be consistant. My point (however unclear and/or I missed) was that WW is very consistant over goblins...and plays good vs the rest of the field too.