In pauper on MTGO, people are playing these absurd elf decks, where every turn is 1) play forest 2) play elf. They just accumulate like 15 elves on the board and then start attacking.
To me, that is not "magic" as I know it. It takes no creativity or skill to pilot that type of deck.
ENTER: CRYPT RATS!
Without c-rats, these lame green decks can just play this absurd style. Nothing sucks more than when you know you've got better cards, you've got card advantage and board control -- but without any "wrath" effect, you've got nothing.
I play a UB aggro-control deck that is very successful against pretty much all the dominant pauper decks. I don't like maindecking crypt rats b/c it kills my mulldrifters, but they are a must-own on the SB for elves/goblins.
"If you are writing casual articles, please steer clear of tourney-level combos. Sure you'll get a 80%+ wins, there's a reason the combo top 8's in real life legacy events."
As a general question directed towards the readers when building casual decks do you pull in the top combos or do you use other cards to pull off the same effect to make your decks more interesting?
From my personal casual point of view I like to use cards that are not well known to give other players something to think about and build deck ideas from.
We don't need to rehash any discussion about what is casual lol. I gotta agree though that counterbalance has no place in the casual room, only because the majority of players there tend to find the card unfun.
This is the exact reason why I stopped playing in the casual room.
If I had one more person tell me what I can or can't play with using the cards I purchased, I might of grabbed my Monitor and kicked the dog with it.
I bought em, I can play with em......if they concede so what, move onto the other 500 casual games in the queue.
The reason why people think playing affinity is lame is the same reason people believe playing RDW is lame. It doesn't take all that much skill level to pilot. The article is trying to serve a purpose that has a great idea but it practically unobtainable.
Here is why. "That's just the way the casual room rolls though."
I guarantee you, if you run affinity in a tournament were there is any type of entry fee, your opponent will not concede for you playing that particular deck.
The logic that people concede because of affinity in the casual room is no different than why they concede because you play discard or blue counters or LD.
And so what if you get flamed for playing the deck. If you are in a tournament and they flame you, just put a smiley face in the chat box, say GG and know you just owned their face.
In classic, affinity has been almost non-existant, not because people got upset from other playing it, but because it just simply isn't good enough.
In pauper, affinity is hardly unbeatable and once you weather their early storm that rest of the game is usually smooth sailing from the non-affinity player.
You bought the cards, you have the right to play them.
I'm not ignoring it, but I've been through the fight about "what is casual?" in my article with a deck using planeswalkers that some anon. thought wasn't casual, I'm mearly trying to avoid an argument no one will win because everyone's definition of casual is different, what more can you ask? would you rather I restart the argument?
Ive played this deck before, back when arch druid first came out. SOOOOOO fun! Yeah, unles you draw archdruid you lose, but who cares! One card i might suggest for it, even though it has a high cc, primal command. Lets you search for archdruid, stops gy shenanigans, stops moat for a turn, gains you life. What more could you ask for?
I dont concede to affinity decks in casual room, but once they drop the cranial plating its over. Its like playing vs loxodon warhammer, dam near impossible to beat unless you have a hand full of answers. Almost all my decks play at least 6 pieces of art/enchant removal maindeck for the casual room though.
Every comment page where people dont agree with you is filled with insults and negative comments toward that person. In this comment section we have 3 different people who feel that countertop is not something to be used in the casual room, and we have shard fenix mocking them, paul leict calling them trolls, and justsin ignoring it.
You might want to rethink your attitudes towards the readers and other players.
Nice article man keep em coming and ill keep reading em.
Just a few suggestions:
maybe more and larger pictures of cards.
Like your humor, keep that up.
Nice and interesting tribe(druids)
IMO you NEED game reports, thats what keeps me reading, and if your article lacks those it just seems really short. And we really have no idea how this deck really plays in a real world environment.
You know, I used to think like this, and even though I got burned out of Magic probably because of Affinity, I just didn't really get sick of it. Everyone in my Meta was playing White Control during that standard season (So I'm kind of sick of Cycling and Exalted Angel to be honest.)
I played affinity because it was a competitive deck that you could build pretty much by buying 2 precons. (at least the pre-ravager affinity deck) Post-Ravager still wasn't that big of deal to acquire.. basically you just took out Broodstar and added Ravager and adjusted it a bit to get those Skullclamps in.
I won a lot of tournaments in that time because it basically combined all the elements that I loved about magic. It was a semi-combo aggressive deck that was super powerful if left unchecked and just had bomb draws. I don't know if there has been many decks like it since (I don't really keep up with competitive standard, was faeries even close?)
I have to say, I'm not sure Affinity is the be all end all deck it once was. It'd roll over to even vague control elements.
The affinity mechanic is not degenerate by itself, but the real mistake was to print the lands. AND in the common slot. So now every Affinity deck can have up to 24 uncounterable mini dark rituals here, with a drawback (play only one per turn) that won't matter after you flood your battlefield with artifacts.
Quote: "I have offered to buy for up to 7 a piece. No one is selling. I went up to 25 for Survival - nothing. I can't afford to pay more than that."
Right let's get this straight. You attempted to purchase Manabond and Survival at 80% and 60% respectively of their going market price. No one leapt forward in a glow of altruism to offer you this truely amazing deal, and you now conclude that no one is selling, the cards are unavailable, and it's not about price!!
Riiiiight.
P.S. If anyone is stupid enough to sell Manabond and Survival for 7 and 25, I'll take a playset of both too. In fact I'll go as far as 8 and 26.
Go ahead: Name names. I'm not in the least bit publicity shy, although recently I've been eschewing moat in favour of nonwhite tribes. I prefer to play a different deck every week, only some of which run moat, so that people need to be prepared to deal with it even when doing so slows them right down for no discernible gain.
nice article I do love affinity as well and have ran it without the expensive tourney pieces, but please a little centering goes a long way for formating :P
not to sound harsh, but of all the tribes that you could have looked at it had to be elves? im so tired of elves theres little "new" that can be done with em at this point
just a helpful tip for big imgs its (pic=Name) and for little (tmb=Name) also Lackey is currently banned for the PRE i believe
In pauper on MTGO, people are playing these absurd elf decks, where every turn is 1) play forest 2) play elf. They just accumulate like 15 elves on the board and then start attacking.
To me, that is not "magic" as I know it. It takes no creativity or skill to pilot that type of deck.
ENTER: CRYPT RATS!
Without c-rats, these lame green decks can just play this absurd style. Nothing sucks more than when you know you've got better cards, you've got card advantage and board control -- but without any "wrath" effect, you've got nothing.
I play a UB aggro-control deck that is very successful against pretty much all the dominant pauper decks. I don't like maindecking crypt rats b/c it kills my mulldrifters, but they are a must-own on the SB for elves/goblins.
I believe Anon has a very good point
"If you are writing casual articles, please steer clear of tourney-level combos. Sure you'll get a 80%+ wins, there's a reason the combo top 8's in real life legacy events."
As a general question directed towards the readers when building casual decks do you pull in the top combos or do you use other cards to pull off the same effect to make your decks more interesting?
From my personal casual point of view I like to use cards that are not well known to give other players something to think about and build deck ideas from.
You haven't seen boring until you've played a dozen UW control mirrors in Block.
We don't need to rehash any discussion about what is casual lol. I gotta agree though that counterbalance has no place in the casual room, only because the majority of players there tend to find the card unfun.
This is the exact reason why I stopped playing in the casual room.
If I had one more person tell me what I can or can't play with using the cards I purchased, I might of grabbed my Monitor and kicked the dog with it.
I bought em, I can play with em......if they concede so what, move onto the other 500 casual games in the queue.
The reason why people think playing affinity is lame is the same reason people believe playing RDW is lame. It doesn't take all that much skill level to pilot. The article is trying to serve a purpose that has a great idea but it practically unobtainable.
Here is why. "That's just the way the casual room rolls though."
I guarantee you, if you run affinity in a tournament were there is any type of entry fee, your opponent will not concede for you playing that particular deck.
The logic that people concede because of affinity in the casual room is no different than why they concede because you play discard or blue counters or LD.
And so what if you get flamed for playing the deck. If you are in a tournament and they flame you, just put a smiley face in the chat box, say GG and know you just owned their face.
In classic, affinity has been almost non-existant, not because people got upset from other playing it, but because it just simply isn't good enough.
In pauper, affinity is hardly unbeatable and once you weather their early storm that rest of the game is usually smooth sailing from the non-affinity player.
You bought the cards, you have the right to play them.
I'm not ignoring it, but I've been through the fight about "what is casual?" in my article with a deck using planeswalkers that some anon. thought wasn't casual, I'm mearly trying to avoid an argument no one will win because everyone's definition of casual is different, what more can you ask? would you rather I restart the argument?
Heh Primal Command is better vs moat than you might think since you can put it on their library and then shuffle their deck. :)
ummm Nantuko Vigilante IS a druid...an insect druid mutant, but a druid nonetheless
I think its more the boring part making players sleepy which causes them to play bad. A vicious cycle.
Ive played this deck before, back when arch druid first came out. SOOOOOO fun! Yeah, unles you draw archdruid you lose, but who cares! One card i might suggest for it, even though it has a high cc, primal command. Lets you search for archdruid, stops gy shenanigans, stops moat for a turn, gains you life. What more could you ask for?
I dont concede to affinity decks in casual room, but once they drop the cranial plating its over. Its like playing vs loxodon warhammer, dam near impossible to beat unless you have a hand full of answers. Almost all my decks play at least 6 pieces of art/enchant removal maindeck for the casual room though.
Every comment page where people dont agree with you is filled with insults and negative comments toward that person. In this comment section we have 3 different people who feel that countertop is not something to be used in the casual room, and we have shard fenix mocking them, paul leict calling them trolls, and justsin ignoring it.
You might want to rethink your attitudes towards the readers and other players.
Oh yeah, nice card :)
Nice article man keep em coming and ill keep reading em.
Just a few suggestions:
maybe more and larger pictures of cards.
Like your humor, keep that up.
Nice and interesting tribe(druids)
IMO you NEED game reports, thats what keeps me reading, and if your article lacks those it just seems really short. And we really have no idea how this deck really plays in a real world environment.
Pretty light on content.
are M:TG's Daleks. 'nuff said. :)
You know, I used to think like this, and even though I got burned out of Magic probably because of Affinity, I just didn't really get sick of it. Everyone in my Meta was playing White Control during that standard season (So I'm kind of sick of Cycling and Exalted Angel to be honest.)
I played affinity because it was a competitive deck that you could build pretty much by buying 2 precons. (at least the pre-ravager affinity deck) Post-Ravager still wasn't that big of deal to acquire.. basically you just took out Broodstar and added Ravager and adjusted it a bit to get those Skullclamps in.
I won a lot of tournaments in that time because it basically combined all the elements that I loved about magic. It was a semi-combo aggressive deck that was super powerful if left unchecked and just had bomb draws. I don't know if there has been many decks like it since (I don't really keep up with competitive standard, was faeries even close?)
I have to say, I'm not sure Affinity is the be all end all deck it once was. It'd roll over to even vague control elements.
oh well, nvm, Forsythe's article has already been linked.
The affinity mechanic is not degenerate by itself, but the real mistake was to print the lands. AND in the common slot. So now every Affinity deck can have up to 24 uncounterable mini dark rituals here, with a drawback (play only one per turn) that won't matter after you flood your battlefield with artifacts.
There are 2 Siege-Gang Commanders in the decklist. :)
Quote: "I have offered to buy for up to 7 a piece. No one is selling. I went up to 25 for Survival - nothing. I can't afford to pay more than that."
Right let's get this straight. You attempted to purchase Manabond and Survival at 80% and 60% respectively of their going market price. No one leapt forward in a glow of altruism to offer you this truely amazing deal, and you now conclude that no one is selling, the cards are unavailable, and it's not about price!!
Riiiiight.
P.S. If anyone is stupid enough to sell Manabond and Survival for 7 and 25, I'll take a playset of both too. In fact I'll go as far as 8 and 26.
yeah, either bad players play block constructed or it is so boring that people try random plays to make if more exciting
Go ahead: Name names. I'm not in the least bit publicity shy, although recently I've been eschewing moat in favour of nonwhite tribes. I prefer to play a different deck every week, only some of which run moat, so that people need to be prepared to deal with it even when doing so slows them right down for no discernible gain.
nice article I do love affinity as well and have ran it without the expensive tourney pieces, but please a little centering goes a long way for formating :P
not to sound harsh, but of all the tribes that you could have looked at it had to be elves? im so tired of elves theres little "new" that can be done with em at this point
just a helpful tip for big imgs its (pic=Name) and for little (tmb=Name) also Lackey is currently banned for the PRE i believe