Steven's statistical breakdown is more useful than anecdotal evidence for having an informed opinion, but for an interesting example of a turn-one crab failing to win despite Harrow and Living Tsunami, check out this post:
Actually, 'same card multiple times' can be useful for those of us who just want a playset. It can be quite surprising as to which version is cheaper sometimes.
Now that your percentages are proper, let's wage another battle shall we?
I'm talking about those card repeat due to multiple version of the card existing. Garruk / Garruk? Jace / Jace? Come on! If they reprint counterspell in Worldwake, what would it be? Counterspell / Counterspell / Counterspell / Counterspell? Eitehr use the average, the top, or list them together by separating each version with a slash.
We want more info on more cards, not the same card multiple times.
I was hoping Steven would chime in so I wouldn't have to do math! Thanks.
A random singleton crab in a deck that has no means to trigger landfall other than drawing and playing lands is definitely not good. I remain unconvinced of its worth in decks with multiple landfall enablers as well.
Some people treat the crab as though its rules text reads, "If you play Hedron Crab on turn one, you win the game." If that's what it did, I would run it in any blue deck, but that's not the case. Even when you do drop it on turn one and begin abusing it with landfall enablers, it's likely to draw removal against red and black (which, while good, is hardly "you win"), and when not removed, it's still not guaranteed to go the distance.
Is there some threshold of landfall abuse at which point a singleton crab becomes playable? Probably, but it would have to be a deck built around landfall to begin with, and I think you will be way more likely to just win with your huge eels and baloths than with the crab.
hi guys anyone know where to get a trading bot?? i got so many pages of cards to manage i would like a tradebot to do all the job in the market. if anyone gets it for me ill give a tip :) my email is masterskualo@gmail.com thanx to all and happy killing.
Godot and I have been talking a bit about Hedron Crab lately (I was, in fact, considering using it as an example in my next article), and I think the jury's still out. Here's the thing: those limited games are generally going to last about 8-10 turns, meaning 40-(7+8) = 25ish cards left in the opponent's library. (For instance, if you look at Godot's library in the examples this round, you can see he has roughly 25-26 cards left in virtually every game). That means that if you want to mill your opponent out with Crab, you have to hit probably 8 land drops after playing Crab. That means it's a bit of a crapshoot even on turn 1, and almost certainly dead after turn 2-3. That isn't to say that Crab can't work; with a decent-looking U/G shell (for instance, my current league pool at work has Harrow, Khalni Heart, Frontier Guide, Misty Rainforest and Oracle of Mul Daya!) then the chances of Crab being effective go up substantially, and with more than one things start to look much better on two fronts — your odds of hitting one early virtually double and you suddenly have the distinct possibility of drawing both and dropping that landfall number from 8 to 4, so if you see a late one in pack one of a draft and you're in U/G you can pick it up and start looking more actively for others. At that point, though, you have to start looking at building your deck around Crab, crafting more of a defensive structure to try and draw the game out longer. The main reason to do it when you do have the shell is that as a non-combat win condition it's that much harder for your opponent to interact with; normally-solid cards like the White traps and Giant Scorpion are just never going to touch it outside of exceptional circumstances. But I would be really leery of just trying to run the singleton Miser's Crab and hoping to win off of it.
I would tend to agree that the Scope varies in value based on what you have in your deck.
It's very often a "win more" card. If you've got a creature that can safely attack, then it gives you a free 35%-40% chance at another land that comes into play.
The problem is how often are you going to have an attacker that can safely attack?
I've seen the scope lead to some one-sided victories. I've also seen it lay dormant for the whole game because the first two creatures that were played met with removal before they could use the scope. And even worse, I've seen players attack with a 1/1 Geopede hoping to get a land, and then end up throwing the creature away to a blocker when the land doesn't show up.
If effects like Sensei's Divining Top were around, then we could talk about how good the scope is... Until then, it's situational at best.
Even hedron crab? I'm a bit on the fence for it but will usually run it. It won't draw me into playing blue, but if I'm already blue it will usually make the deck (especially with other enables like the living tsunami and green landfall).
I dunno, I think I would rate it as filler for most decks. It's one of those cards that's on a sliding scale, though, depending on what you play. Where it really shines is in decks with lots of aggressive landfall guys like Steppe Lynx and Geopede.
Similar to something like Murasa Pyromancer. In a lot of pools, this guy is almost unplayable jank. In heavy ally pools, he's a downright bomb.
I take it back about the Arrow Volley Trap. We know he doesn't have it for the same reason that we know he doesn't have Pitfall Trap or Into the Roil. Swing for the fences!
R2G1#1: As a few others have posted, my instinct is to play the War Paint on the Bloodghast, which you didn't even list as an option! This play not only does more damage immediately, but also sets up your next turn much better in the case that you don't draw a land (which should really be your greatest concern right now).
R2G1#2: You could actually lose this game if he has Arrow Volley Trap, so I would just attack with the Intimidate guys. (You mentioned Pitfall Trap and Into the Roil but he doesn't have either one of these. You know this because he clearly drew Expedition Map last turn, and chose to cast Khalni Heart Expedition the turn before. He would have cast either removal spell that turn instead.)
R2G2#3: Vines of Vastwood (or Primal Bellow) is going to be tragic for you no matter when he plays it this game. However, you gave him the most value for it (Kazuul Warlord AND Shortcutter's trigger) when you attacked instead of attempting to Spire Barrage the Gladehart first. Also, ideally, you'd want to have that Gravelord in play before you cast the Shortcutter.
R2G2#4: Shoot him to 9, which activates your Guul Draz. Attack for 6, which means you can kill him next turn even without drawing a land.
R3G2#1: It is absolutely correct to cast War Paint now. Of course, it really shouldn't be in your deck in the first place since you noticed last game that he had a ton of removal. At any rate, the War Paint has virtually no value in the hand you drew. When are you planning to cast it? Turn Eleventy? On the other hand, casting it now could easily mean 2 damage if his only removal is Journey to Nowhere; even more if he decides to drop a 4cc creature instead; more still if he has no removal at all, or if he topdecks Burst Lightning or Seismic Shudder as his only removal. On that note, what about the Seismic Shudder in YOUR hand? It's uncastable while the Marauder stays in play without War Paint.
R3G3#0: I'd keep that hand. It's not great, but you are on the play (thus 6 cards are riskier) and your draw steps will be mostly good to you. Only basic Mountains are dead draws. Additionally, Mind Sludge should be excellent against his removal. You only have 1 Swamp now, but you'll have drawn 4 more cards before you can even cast the Sludge (or more if you wait, of course).
IIRC, Wizards mentioned multiple reasons supporting Top's banning. Time issues were one, but it's not the only reason they mentioned. It's not worth arguing about this or that specific combo piece, though, at least right now.
actually extended is not a bad idea...i have preferred the extended based on the lack of obscene combos like classic but the much greater card pool. Thanks for the suggestion extended is definitely a consideration. I does not kill many tribes and at most only requires reworkings of the creature bases
Luck-based losses don't really bug me at all at this point, which I think is what Paul was getting at, but mistake-based losses really bug me. Try posting them for the internet to see afterwards... :/
The last subgroup has moved beyond decklists and metagames. Nuts & Bolts Spike focuses his energies in perfecting his own gameplay. He believes that the ultimate key to victory is flawless play. As such, Nuts & Bolts Spike spends his energy looking within. He tries to understand his own internal flaws and works to improve them.
Because of this focus, Nuts & Bolts Spike tends to spend more of his time on Limited formats, as it allows the most opportunities to improve his general skills. (This by the way, is mostly due to the fact that Limited has more variety and a wider level of power variance.) Some Nuts & Bolts Spikes do focus on constructed but it is the minority of this subgroup.
The most important thing to understand about Spikes is this. To them Magic is a means to test themselves. As such, their enjoyment comes from marking their own progress. While that often means winning, there are Spikes who measure their success in other ways. For example, some Spikes measure themselves not against winning or losing but by how perfect their play was.
Another play I should have at least considered (I'm responding from the bottom up, the first one is down there somewhere). I think I disliked the idea of paint on the bloodghast *because* it's a creature that I want to be fairly suicidal with, and I really like it on geopede, but I think the bloodghast/paint play is an option there.
You gotta do what you gotta do in a sealed pool, but I'm not ever going to be happy about running it with fewer than 10 Swamps in my deck. More than that, and it's a game-breaker played on turn five or six.
I'll try to be more deliberate about describing my mana base process, but it's a meaty topic probably worthy of a full article some week where I want to take a break from the walkthrough thing. It's also a topic on the list for the Limited Resources podcast, so keep an eye out for it there.
Interesting line, certainly seems defensible, it's going to win the game on the next turn *without* needing an out like I did, unless Villain deals with one of the intimidators and plays a land.
I tend to think board control with my burn unless I can get the kill, but I should have at least considered that play. I didn't even see it.
Steven's statistical breakdown is more useful than anecdotal evidence for having an informed opinion, but for an interesting example of a turn-one crab failing to win despite Harrow and Living Tsunami, check out this post:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=4537139#post4537139
I was just wondering if anyone found the video of the finals for MTGO Live Series from Austin?
Actually, 'same card multiple times' can be useful for those of us who just want a playset. It can be quite surprising as to which version is cheaper sometimes.
Now that your percentages are proper, let's wage another battle shall we?
I'm talking about those card repeat due to multiple version of the card existing. Garruk / Garruk? Jace / Jace? Come on! If they reprint counterspell in Worldwake, what would it be? Counterspell / Counterspell / Counterspell / Counterspell? Eitehr use the average, the top, or list them together by separating each version with a slash.
We want more info on more cards, not the same card multiple times.
I just read 21 pages of forum posts and I have 0 idea of what is going on with millibot.
I was hoping Steven would chime in so I wouldn't have to do math! Thanks.
A random singleton crab in a deck that has no means to trigger landfall other than drawing and playing lands is definitely not good. I remain unconvinced of its worth in decks with multiple landfall enablers as well.
Some people treat the crab as though its rules text reads, "If you play Hedron Crab on turn one, you win the game." If that's what it did, I would run it in any blue deck, but that's not the case. Even when you do drop it on turn one and begin abusing it with landfall enablers, it's likely to draw removal against red and black (which, while good, is hardly "you win"), and when not removed, it's still not guaranteed to go the distance.
Is there some threshold of landfall abuse at which point a singleton crab becomes playable? Probably, but it would have to be a deck built around landfall to begin with, and I think you will be way more likely to just win with your huge eels and baloths than with the crab.
hi guys anyone know where to get a trading bot?? i got so many pages of cards to manage i would like a tradebot to do all the job in the market. if anyone gets it for me ill give a tip :) my email is masterskualo@gmail.com thanx to all and happy killing.
Godot and I have been talking a bit about Hedron Crab lately (I was, in fact, considering using it as an example in my next article), and I think the jury's still out. Here's the thing: those limited games are generally going to last about 8-10 turns, meaning 40-(7+8) = 25ish cards left in the opponent's library. (For instance, if you look at Godot's library in the examples this round, you can see he has roughly 25-26 cards left in virtually every game). That means that if you want to mill your opponent out with Crab, you have to hit probably 8 land drops after playing Crab. That means it's a bit of a crapshoot even on turn 1, and almost certainly dead after turn 2-3. That isn't to say that Crab can't work; with a decent-looking U/G shell (for instance, my current league pool at work has Harrow, Khalni Heart, Frontier Guide, Misty Rainforest and Oracle of Mul Daya!) then the chances of Crab being effective go up substantially, and with more than one things start to look much better on two fronts — your odds of hitting one early virtually double and you suddenly have the distinct possibility of drawing both and dropping that landfall number from 8 to 4, so if you see a late one in pack one of a draft and you're in U/G you can pick it up and start looking more actively for others. At that point, though, you have to start looking at building your deck around Crab, crafting more of a defensive structure to try and draw the game out longer. The main reason to do it when you do have the shell is that as a non-combat win condition it's that much harder for your opponent to interact with; normally-solid cards like the White traps and Giant Scorpion are just never going to touch it outside of exceptional circumstances. But I would be really leery of just trying to run the singleton Miser's Crab and hoping to win off of it.
I would tend to agree that the Scope varies in value based on what you have in your deck.
It's very often a "win more" card. If you've got a creature that can safely attack, then it gives you a free 35%-40% chance at another land that comes into play.
The problem is how often are you going to have an attacker that can safely attack?
I've seen the scope lead to some one-sided victories. I've also seen it lay dormant for the whole game because the first two creatures that were played met with removal before they could use the scope. And even worse, I've seen players attack with a 1/1 Geopede hoping to get a land, and then end up throwing the creature away to a blocker when the land doesn't show up.
If effects like Sensei's Divining Top were around, then we could talk about how good the scope is... Until then, it's situational at best.
Even hedron crab? I'm a bit on the fence for it but will usually run it. It won't draw me into playing blue, but if I'm already blue it will usually make the deck (especially with other enables like the living tsunami and green landfall).
As a sad note we will not be having the tourney this weekend due to family issues. Youmay see me online but probably not til saturday night
I dunno, I think I would rate it as filler for most decks. It's one of those cards that's on a sliding scale, though, depending on what you play. Where it really shines is in decks with lots of aggressive landfall guys like Steppe Lynx and Geopede.
Similar to something like Murasa Pyromancer. In a lot of pools, this guy is almost unplayable jank. In heavy ally pools, he's a downright bomb.
EXT would still give us Hypergenesis
And various others ,,, Dark Depths
restricting enmass nontribal cards has some interesting consequences:
1) it brings the format more inline with Singleton which has plenty of broken interactions anyway and
2) moves tribal away from what it is.
I am not saying this is a bad thing but it is a definite and very strong change not to be taken lightly.
I take it back about the Arrow Volley Trap. We know he doesn't have it for the same reason that we know he doesn't have Pitfall Trap or Into the Roil. Swing for the fences!
R2G1#1: As a few others have posted, my instinct is to play the War Paint on the Bloodghast, which you didn't even list as an option! This play not only does more damage immediately, but also sets up your next turn much better in the case that you don't draw a land (which should really be your greatest concern right now).
R2G1#2: You could actually lose this game if he has Arrow Volley Trap, so I would just attack with the Intimidate guys. (You mentioned Pitfall Trap and Into the Roil but he doesn't have either one of these. You know this because he clearly drew Expedition Map last turn, and chose to cast Khalni Heart Expedition the turn before. He would have cast either removal spell that turn instead.)
R2G2#3: Vines of Vastwood (or Primal Bellow) is going to be tragic for you no matter when he plays it this game. However, you gave him the most value for it (Kazuul Warlord AND Shortcutter's trigger) when you attacked instead of attempting to Spire Barrage the Gladehart first. Also, ideally, you'd want to have that Gravelord in play before you cast the Shortcutter.
R2G2#4: Shoot him to 9, which activates your Guul Draz. Attack for 6, which means you can kill him next turn even without drawing a land.
R3G2#1: It is absolutely correct to cast War Paint now. Of course, it really shouldn't be in your deck in the first place since you noticed last game that he had a ton of removal. At any rate, the War Paint has virtually no value in the hand you drew. When are you planning to cast it? Turn Eleventy? On the other hand, casting it now could easily mean 2 damage if his only removal is Journey to Nowhere; even more if he decides to drop a 4cc creature instead; more still if he has no removal at all, or if he topdecks Burst Lightning or Seismic Shudder as his only removal. On that note, what about the Seismic Shudder in YOUR hand? It's uncastable while the Marauder stays in play without War Paint.
R3G3#0: I'd keep that hand. It's not great, but you are on the play (thus 6 cards are riskier) and your draw steps will be mostly good to you. Only basic Mountains are dead draws. Additionally, Mind Sludge should be excellent against his removal. You only have 1 Swamp now, but you'll have drawn 4 more cards before you can even cast the Sludge (or more if you wait, of course).
Thanks again for a great walkthrough!
explorers scope is no filler ! i havent read any of the comments ,but maybe someone pointed this fact already out.
To be clear: My strong preferences are for either
(1) Do nothing; the format's fine.
or
(2) Restrict all off-tribe cards.
Either way, stay with Classic.
IIRC, Wizards mentioned multiple reasons supporting Top's banning. Time issues were one, but it's not the only reason they mentioned. It's not worth arguing about this or that specific combo piece, though, at least right now.
actually extended is not a bad idea...i have preferred the extended based on the lack of obscene combos like classic but the much greater card pool. Thanks for the suggestion extended is definitely a consideration. I does not kill many tribes and at most only requires reworkings of the creature bases
Luck-based losses don't really bug me at all at this point, which I think is what Paul was getting at, but mistake-based losses really bug me. Try posting them for the internet to see afterwards... :/
That's going to be the case for any pure Nuts & Bolts Spike. To quote Mark Rosewater (from http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr258):
The last subgroup has moved beyond decklists and metagames. Nuts & Bolts Spike focuses his energies in perfecting his own gameplay. He believes that the ultimate key to victory is flawless play. As such, Nuts & Bolts Spike spends his energy looking within. He tries to understand his own internal flaws and works to improve them.
Because of this focus, Nuts & Bolts Spike tends to spend more of his time on Limited formats, as it allows the most opportunities to improve his general skills. (This by the way, is mostly due to the fact that Limited has more variety and a wider level of power variance.) Some Nuts & Bolts Spikes do focus on constructed but it is the minority of this subgroup.
The most important thing to understand about Spikes is this. To them Magic is a means to test themselves. As such, their enjoyment comes from marking their own progress. While that often means winning, there are Spikes who measure their success in other ways. For example, some Spikes measure themselves not against winning or losing but by how perfect their play was.
------------------------------
Ryan again. That last sentence? Yeah.
Another play I should have at least considered (I'm responding from the bottom up, the first one is down there somewhere). I think I disliked the idea of paint on the bloodghast *because* it's a creature that I want to be fairly suicidal with, and I really like it on geopede, but I think the bloodghast/paint play is an option there.
You gotta do what you gotta do in a sealed pool, but I'm not ever going to be happy about running it with fewer than 10 Swamps in my deck. More than that, and it's a game-breaker played on turn five or six.
I'll try to be more deliberate about describing my mana base process, but it's a meaty topic probably worthy of a full article some week where I want to take a break from the walkthrough thing. It's also a topic on the list for the Limited Resources podcast, so keep an eye out for it there.
Interesting line, certainly seems defensible, it's going to win the game on the next turn *without* needing an out like I did, unless Villain deals with one of the intimidators and plays a land.
I tend to think board control with my burn unless I can get the kill, but I should have at least considered that play. I didn't even see it.