Alas no comments? Good work as always fellas. Helps to wake me up listening to you guys chat on tuesdays. :) I will note that while AJ was undoubtedly first in our PRE I did go 3-0 with a bye so happy times for me too. I have yet to play vs the Bazaar Trader deck...can't say I'm looking forward to it. :/...
"Swiss drafts are simply not teaching anything except how to beat up weaker opponents."
I'm sorry Valakut, but that's utter nonsense. The main benefit of my articles over most walkthrough writers out there is that I walk through each step of each game, breaking down all the major decisions, where other writers just summarize the matches. I'm less of a draft-walkthrough writer than I am a play-decision writer. Interesting play decisions and important takeaways are found in *every* draft queue, and that is my primary trade. This article is not "How to beat up on a Swiss queue," it is, "How to be self-critical and analytical about your game decisions in the eternal quest for perfect play."
If you think this article has nothing to get you thinking and nothing to learn from because it was a Swiss, then you are being close-minded to your own detriment, as evidenced by your telling me it has no value without even reading it. Figuring out the correct play for a tough, complex game state is daunting, difficult, and interesting regardless of the opponent or draft format.
Also, I didn't say, "It's my first ZZW and I don't feel confident going to 84 yet" because that's simply not true. I do about half Swiss and half 84 in my drafting, with no 43s, and I choose by picking whichever is closest to firing, or based on whether I'm in the mood for high-variance (84) or low variance (Swiss) in my attempt to expend as few resources as possible.
Thanks for taking the time to comment, and you can certainly read what you will, but saying, "This is Swiss and therefore useless to me" is entirely missing the point of my walkthrough efforts. If you ever read an article of mine and come away thinking, "These games had no tricky decisions, and were therefore useless to me," then I will feel I have failed in my goals for the column.
I really like your writing style and your explanations but after realizing that you are in a Swiss draft I just cannot make myself read the thing. Your argument that the Swiss draft was at 7 and you jumped in because of this is rather weak considering that it takes less then 3 minutes for an 8 4 to fill.
Rather just make clear that it's the first ZZW for you and you don't feel confident to go 84 yet so people know immediately what to expect.
I hope this doesn't sound harsher then it's ment to be as I really like your writing but Swiss drafts are simply not teaching anything except how to beat up weaker opponents. I hope to see more 8 4 material from you in the future.
I think the vast majority of what's needed to make MED sets fun enough for people to bother playing them is more commons from later sets. If they left the rares and uncommons totally, or mostly, consisting of "never before seen old cards" that'd be fine. I don't expect them to jam in enough modern commons to make it feel like drafting one of the sets from recent years, just keep it from being the kind of yawn-fest that MED drafting has been for most players so far.
I suppose maybe you guys are right and MED3 was a little less yawn-inducing than the first two? I was so burned out from them that I only tried MED3 maybe twice.
My experience to date has been that limited play in everything pre-Invasion they've released was pretty dull up until Tempest block, which surprised me by being fun even in sealed. My sealed pool for Mirage/Visions had all the good creatures at 4, where "good creature" was a 2/2 flying griffon for 4. My mana curve looked like a spike more than anything- only way to make it anything else would have been to swap out playables for amazing crap. I guess Tempest is where they learned how to make the game have a decent, non-yawn-inducing pace where tons of creature stalls weren't always the rule of the day.
At the time Oath was a huge deck in Classic and Legacy had not yet been announced. I really just researched Oath for my own personal reasons.
First, I wanted to compare Oath lists to Legacy lists to see what cards were played in both areas. I wanted to see if it would be worth the investment in Oath lists (Cards outside of Oath which is obv banned in Legacy) going forward for Legacy.
Once I realized that Oath wasn't the deck for classic I wished to play, I pretty much abandoned my research for those purposes and really just focused on finishing the research related to the article.
After many hours researching, I finally figured out Legacy was the direction I wanted to take my collection long term as opposed to vintage.......Luckily I invested a significant amount of money right before the announcement. For instance, I got 4x Plateau at 10,10,11,11 ......now they sell for 16 and rising.
Yeah so far black allies have certainly gotten the short end of the stick in the previous two sets. Though hopefully RoE brings something to even the colors out.
Thanks for the comment. For this week I chose a "more strategy and less action" style. The weeks before this one the articles were full with action. A balanced "some strategy and some action" style is something I may try in the future.
Hi Steve. When a land enters the battlefield tapped, two amulets both trigger and they both go to the stack. After the first trigger untaps the land, you tap it and the second trigger untaps it again and you tap it again.
So basically with two amulets on table, you get two mana from an "enters the battlefield tapped" land the turn you play it, whereas you get none normally. Put a Ruin Ghost into the whole mix and things really get sick.
I'm working on a Grixis allies deck with Fervor, Sea Gate Loremaster, Kazuul, etc. Trying to figure if I should cut it down to UR or keep the Black doofs in. Thinking maybe moving into green for the druid + the trampler. That would make a Kazuul sort of like the limited M10 "Overrun.. k gg."
I think I am completely missing something here, and I just can't see it. How does having more than one Amulet of Vigor matter??
"Of course with two Amulet of Vigors on table, things even get more sicker."
Doesn't the first one trigger for everything, making the second Amulet just a dead card? I know you still need to run 4 to get one for turn 2 in your opening, but why do things get sicker?
not to be picky but wasn't one of the Vorthos reqs "only one of legends" lol
other then that I liked this article... what I've noticed is that sometimes it does get a bit tiresome with all the match report, but I also like seeing how a deck performed. Perhaps in combination with this great explanations of the deck a simple record could be shown and a little something said about playability
Hyppie, Time Warp, Clone, etc. are all good cards, but not great. I'm sure I would take a Fireball or even something like Serra Angel over any of them (although monetary considerations might make me take the Time Warp.)
Let's look at the Hyppie. It was great when it landed turn one via Dark Ritual or Lotus, back in the day when it was hard to kill. In M10, though, it is not that hard to kill or negate - every color has at least two commons and at least one uncommon that get rid of it.
As for raging goblin - for every time it gets in one turn one, there are three games where you draw it turn 8 and it is worse than a land.
I was merely pointing out that he is another tapper to take advantage of any global hasting. I agree that he isn't a bomb, but I do think he is opportunistically good, and probably is bolt bait for the reason your op doesn't want you permanently getting a hold of their discards/dead guys.
In your play at R2G2 #5, I wonder if you could have had a decent enough shot at the kill if you'd left the adventuring gear on the Lynx, so you have one more mana available to throw Slavering Nulls out there as insurance? That way if his topdeck is another pump spell, your chump block means you survive another turn, presuming he wasn't sandbagging a land drop. He can't cast double vines to pump the drake to 10 without another forest, and a topdecked Primal Bellow or Groundswell only let the drake attack for 9 or 8 respectively, in either case being able to block the Survivalist is relevant with you on 10 life.
I presume if you left the gear on Lynx he's going to make the same chump block, he just gets to have 2 more life left. But it gives you 2 more power + 1 more attacker when you need to get in for 4 instead of 2 on the following turn. Is it worth it for the added safety during his turn? Since he did manage to get out one more blocker plus vines mana up, I think in either scenario you need two more turns to win. If he didn't have another creature either play gives you the win next turn. And if he'd had to tap down low enough that he couldn't keep Vines mana up, I think his blocking options are pretty abysmally bad in either case.
So what do you think? Is going for the nulls as an insurance blocker a solid play?
I thought I saw a clever play on turn 5 of R2G1, where you lay a land and swing in with a 3 power Geopede, hoping to get the Baloths to block so you can Spire Barrage + first strike to take them out with the "bad" removal spell and save the good one for a rainy day. But then I rememebered Spire Barrage is a sorcery, not an instant. D'oh!
I assume you're talking about Sejiri Steppe in a control deck on its own, in the absence of Ruin Ghost. With the ghost I'd leave up a white mana to dodge all their targeted creature removal spells all day. I made the mistake of not running my Ruin Ghost at my release event, I'm eager to try him out when I get the time to do some ZZW drafting myself.
There are number of online lotteries but my hot favorite is mega millions. I know winning a lottery is not guaranteed and is a matter of luck, but the chances of within with this lottery are comparatively better.
Ive drafted the Specter several times and whenever it hits the board it either is dead on the spot or an opposing creature can block it. Its not close to being bomb status.
i think part of it is the fact its only a 2/2...while its a great creature it just seems there are less ways to protect it in limited where as in constructed a dedicated discard deck can take much better advantage of it by clearing removal from an opponents hand first.
no because attacking a planeswalker doesnt do damage so much as it removes loyalty counters. You have to remember planeswalker do not function the same as creatures. Though it is easy to see where this idea can come from.
I will have to respectfully disagree with you on the agadeem occultist. In my opinion he takes too much work and things to go right. First off your opponent has to have targets in the yard and secondly you have to have allies greater than or equal to the CMC. In fringe situations it can be great but otherwise im not sold on it.
Alas no comments? Good work as always fellas. Helps to wake me up listening to you guys chat on tuesdays. :) I will note that while AJ was undoubtedly first in our PRE I did go 3-0 with a bye so happy times for me too. I have yet to play vs the Bazaar Trader deck...can't say I'm looking forward to it. :/...
Good cast as always.
"Swiss drafts are simply not teaching anything except how to beat up weaker opponents."
I'm sorry Valakut, but that's utter nonsense. The main benefit of my articles over most walkthrough writers out there is that I walk through each step of each game, breaking down all the major decisions, where other writers just summarize the matches. I'm less of a draft-walkthrough writer than I am a play-decision writer. Interesting play decisions and important takeaways are found in *every* draft queue, and that is my primary trade. This article is not "How to beat up on a Swiss queue," it is, "How to be self-critical and analytical about your game decisions in the eternal quest for perfect play."
If you think this article has nothing to get you thinking and nothing to learn from because it was a Swiss, then you are being close-minded to your own detriment, as evidenced by your telling me it has no value without even reading it. Figuring out the correct play for a tough, complex game state is daunting, difficult, and interesting regardless of the opponent or draft format.
Also, I didn't say, "It's my first ZZW and I don't feel confident going to 84 yet" because that's simply not true. I do about half Swiss and half 84 in my drafting, with no 43s, and I choose by picking whichever is closest to firing, or based on whether I'm in the mood for high-variance (84) or low variance (Swiss) in my attempt to expend as few resources as possible.
Thanks for taking the time to comment, and you can certainly read what you will, but saying, "This is Swiss and therefore useless to me" is entirely missing the point of my walkthrough efforts. If you ever read an article of mine and come away thinking, "These games had no tricky decisions, and were therefore useless to me," then I will feel I have failed in my goals for the column.
Good article, but kinda confusing layout. Id make that last deck except its pretty expensive. Nice work.
Hello Godot,
I really like your writing style and your explanations but after realizing that you are in a Swiss draft I just cannot make myself read the thing. Your argument that the Swiss draft was at 7 and you jumped in because of this is rather weak considering that it takes less then 3 minutes for an 8 4 to fill.
Rather just make clear that it's the first ZZW for you and you don't feel confident to go 84 yet so people know immediately what to expect.
I hope this doesn't sound harsher then it's ment to be as I really like your writing but Swiss drafts are simply not teaching anything except how to beat up weaker opponents. I hope to see more 8 4 material from you in the future.
I think the vast majority of what's needed to make MED sets fun enough for people to bother playing them is more commons from later sets. If they left the rares and uncommons totally, or mostly, consisting of "never before seen old cards" that'd be fine. I don't expect them to jam in enough modern commons to make it feel like drafting one of the sets from recent years, just keep it from being the kind of yawn-fest that MED drafting has been for most players so far.
I suppose maybe you guys are right and MED3 was a little less yawn-inducing than the first two? I was so burned out from them that I only tried MED3 maybe twice.
My experience to date has been that limited play in everything pre-Invasion they've released was pretty dull up until Tempest block, which surprised me by being fun even in sealed. My sealed pool for Mirage/Visions had all the good creatures at 4, where "good creature" was a 2/2 flying griffon for 4. My mana curve looked like a spike more than anything- only way to make it anything else would have been to swap out playables for amazing crap. I guess Tempest is where they learned how to make the game have a decent, non-yawn-inducing pace where tons of creature stalls weren't always the rule of the day.
At the time Oath was a huge deck in Classic and Legacy had not yet been announced. I really just researched Oath for my own personal reasons.
First, I wanted to compare Oath lists to Legacy lists to see what cards were played in both areas. I wanted to see if it would be worth the investment in Oath lists (Cards outside of Oath which is obv banned in Legacy) going forward for Legacy.
Once I realized that Oath wasn't the deck for classic I wished to play, I pretty much abandoned my research for those purposes and really just focused on finishing the research related to the article.
After many hours researching, I finally figured out Legacy was the direction I wanted to take my collection long term as opposed to vintage.......Luckily I invested a significant amount of money right before the announcement. For instance, I got 4x Plateau at 10,10,11,11 ......now they sell for 16 and rising.
Yeah so far black allies have certainly gotten the short end of the stick in the previous two sets. Though hopefully RoE brings something to even the colors out.
Thanks for the comment. For this week I chose a "more strategy and less action" style. The weeks before this one the articles were full with action. A balanced "some strategy and some action" style is something I may try in the future.
Thanks again for the comment.
LE
Hi Steve. When a land enters the battlefield tapped, two amulets both trigger and they both go to the stack. After the first trigger untaps the land, you tap it and the second trigger untaps it again and you tap it again.
So basically with two amulets on table, you get two mana from an "enters the battlefield tapped" land the turn you play it, whereas you get none normally. Put a Ruin Ghost into the whole mix and things really get sick.
That's what I ment in the article.
Thanks for the comment.
LE
I'm working on a Grixis allies deck with Fervor, Sea Gate Loremaster, Kazuul, etc. Trying to figure if I should cut it down to UR or keep the Black doofs in. Thinking maybe moving into green for the druid + the trampler. That would make a Kazuul sort of like the limited M10 "Overrun.. k gg."
I think I am completely missing something here, and I just can't see it. How does having more than one Amulet of Vigor matter??
"Of course with two Amulet of Vigors on table, things even get more sicker."
Doesn't the first one trigger for everything, making the second Amulet just a dead card? I know you still need to run 4 to get one for turn 2 in your opening, but why do things get sicker?
not to be picky but wasn't one of the Vorthos reqs "only one of legends" lol
other then that I liked this article... what I've noticed is that sometimes it does get a bit tiresome with all the match report, but I also like seeing how a deck performed. Perhaps in combination with this great explanations of the deck a simple record could be shown and a little something said about playability
yea, i liek to have a hyppie, but never in my exp has it delivered the bomb that a hoped for.
Hyppie, Time Warp, Clone, etc. are all good cards, but not great. I'm sure I would take a Fireball or even something like Serra Angel over any of them (although monetary considerations might make me take the Time Warp.)
Let's look at the Hyppie. It was great when it landed turn one via Dark Ritual or Lotus, back in the day when it was hard to kill. In M10, though, it is not that hard to kill or negate - every color has at least two commons and at least one uncommon that get rid of it.
As for raging goblin - for every time it gets in one turn one, there are three games where you draw it turn 8 and it is worse than a land.
Great article, Ryan. Red/White is certainly a brilliant archetype in ZZW, and searing blaze is arguably the best common in the set.
I was merely pointing out that he is another tapper to take advantage of any global hasting. I agree that he isn't a bomb, but I do think he is opportunistically good, and probably is bolt bait for the reason your op doesn't want you permanently getting a hold of their discards/dead guys.
I'd like to know what he thinks about time warp and clone..
In your play at R2G2 #5, I wonder if you could have had a decent enough shot at the kill if you'd left the adventuring gear on the Lynx, so you have one more mana available to throw Slavering Nulls out there as insurance? That way if his topdeck is another pump spell, your chump block means you survive another turn, presuming he wasn't sandbagging a land drop. He can't cast double vines to pump the drake to 10 without another forest, and a topdecked Primal Bellow or Groundswell only let the drake attack for 9 or 8 respectively, in either case being able to block the Survivalist is relevant with you on 10 life.
I presume if you left the gear on Lynx he's going to make the same chump block, he just gets to have 2 more life left. But it gives you 2 more power + 1 more attacker when you need to get in for 4 instead of 2 on the following turn. Is it worth it for the added safety during his turn? Since he did manage to get out one more blocker plus vines mana up, I think in either scenario you need two more turns to win. If he didn't have another creature either play gives you the win next turn. And if he'd had to tap down low enough that he couldn't keep Vines mana up, I think his blocking options are pretty abysmally bad in either case.
So what do you think? Is going for the nulls as an insurance blocker a solid play?
I thought I saw a clever play on turn 5 of R2G1, where you lay a land and swing in with a 3 power Geopede, hoping to get the Baloths to block so you can Spire Barrage + first strike to take them out with the "bad" removal spell and save the good one for a rainy day. But then I rememebered Spire Barrage is a sorcery, not an instant. D'oh!
I assume you're talking about Sejiri Steppe in a control deck on its own, in the absence of Ruin Ghost. With the ghost I'd leave up a white mana to dodge all their targeted creature removal spells all day. I made the mistake of not running my Ruin Ghost at my release event, I'm eager to try him out when I get the time to do some ZZW drafting myself.
Thanks for another great walkthrough!
There are number of online lotteries but my hot favorite is mega millions. I know winning a lottery is not guaranteed and is a matter of luck, but the chances of within with this lottery are comparatively better.
Ive drafted the Specter several times and whenever it hits the board it either is dead on the spot or an opposing creature can block it. Its not close to being bomb status.
i think part of it is the fact its only a 2/2...while its a great creature it just seems there are less ways to protect it in limited where as in constructed a dedicated discard deck can take much better advantage of it by clearing removal from an opponents hand first.
no because attacking a planeswalker doesnt do damage so much as it removes loyalty counters. You have to remember planeswalker do not function the same as creatures. Though it is easy to see where this idea can come from.
Sorry, but im a terrible deckmaker, can anyone help me turn the angels deck into ext?
Since when is Hypnotic Specter not considered a bomb anymore?
I will have to respectfully disagree with you on the agadeem occultist. In my opinion he takes too much work and things to go right. First off your opponent has to have targets in the yard and secondly you have to have allies greater than or equal to the CMC. In fringe situations it can be great but otherwise im not sold on it.