Yeah, I wrote a nice long post on the MTGO forums about how KSCOPE should be killed. Not enough player fan base - particularly when they just artificially created the format and forced players to adapt to it.
Yeah, they announced the Zendikar full-framers a month or two after I picked up the Unhinged basics. I was annoyed at first because I'm actually a pretty big cheapskate too--online Unhinged lands are the only bling purchase I've ever made in my 14 years of Magic--but I got over it. Let everyone have access to cool full-frame lands!
Really interesting read. I hadn't really considered this format before now, but am certainly intrigued (and will dive in if my budget will allow it). I really like the look of the Devestating Winter deck especially.
can people in states like washington, for example(that are not eligable for prizes) qualify online? it's not a monetary prize so..
if not that seems pretty unfair to the players in those states.
I guess I'm guilty of playing high level decks in the casual room, but I only play Pauper. I've had maybe one or two people quit after seeing a counterspell but most of the time they only quit if they have no chance of winning. That's usually what makes me concede too, I have no hope of winning. It's more fulfilling to me to come back from one life, or beat a deck that has it's combo going.
So why don't I go to the tournament practice room? Because there are 800 people in casual and 11 there. It sometimes takes 10 minutes to find a pauper match in the casual room, almost impossible in tournament practice. Maybe they should consider splitting casual into new player, and then having a regular room.
Last but not least, I actually had someone concede a game the other night because I played an island on my first turn. They then went on a rant about "How come every one plays the same deck?" I guess if you quit after the first land goes down you will think people are playing the same deck. That's another reason they need to bring back ratings, to prevent quitting simply because you didn't get your half turn combo in your opening hand.
I was inspired by your bling to try to purchase the unhinged lands too, but then it struck me that Zendikar is just around the corner with full-art lands. And as I'm a cheapass, I think I'll wait and use those instead. Yay for saving!
I'd still like to see Build Your Own Standard, Build Your Own Block, or Block Wars offered. All of those have interesting deck building potential (maybe less so for block wars), but they always would be getting new decks and evolving. All of them also support classic set releases and allow under used cards to be played.
First, I would be in favor of some type of peasant variant. Pauper has proved that formats with relatively low costs to construct decks can be popular, so why not Peasant. I realize that Peasant would be difficult to code because of the 5 uncommons rule or however many it was. Maybe Wizards could change the meaning of peasant or pick a similar name for a format where only commons and uncommons are legal. For example:
-Standard Peasant
-Classic Singleton Peasant
Or we could always go with a more cerebral choice. Like the Dakkon Blackblade Avatar format, aka Duelmasters variant. It plays like any normal format except "You may play any colored card from your hand as a copy of a basic land card chosen at random that can produce mana of 1 of the card's colors." No more players complaining about not drawing enough lands or too many lands. This should be easy to code since the Dakkon Blackblade avatar is already coded. Of course since Avatars are kind of going away, this new format would not be connected to the avatar in any way.
That's the obvious end. No new cards in M10, no new cards in ZEN. I mean how can a format survive without new cards? All the good decks have been built and all the possibilities have been explored.
So yes, RIP Kaleidoscope, it was a nice ride and it was nice knowing you.
Oh and I too think that moving the podcast to Wednesday is a wise choice. This downtime for example was less boring because at least I was listening to you guys.
I appreciate all the criticism and suggestions for this deck, and if I ever decide to metaphorically sleeve it up again I will keep them in mind. Other than that I would like to just note a couple things:
1) I did not write this intending to build the next top tier pauper deck - I don't think that highly of my abilities as a deck builder.
2) This article was actually written and submitted over a month ago, at a time when Lorwyn block had more than a couple weeks left in standard, and was thus written for that format, which is why it has cards like Spell Syphon instead of Counterspell.
Disharmony is not a very good card because it is much more situational then most people initially think. First it only works as defensive card (which is not a good fit in an aggressive build), second it is only card advantage if you are able to kill two creatures with it (this requires two attackers that could block each other and kill each other in combat).
Regarding the correct ratio of removal, creatures, and lands - there is no right ratio! I know it sounds blunt but it really depends on your build.
Generally you want at least 13 creatures in an aggressive deck whereas a control style deck can work with 11. I would never play less than that in ME3.
Removal is obviously premium and in many cases you want as much as you can get (I doubt you will receive so much playworthy removal to interfere with the creature count).
The usual standard for lands in limited decks is 17 and in many cases you can follow that rule in ME3 drafts, too. I would only play 16 if I had a very low curve and/or artifact mana and green land tutors. I have never played more then 17 lands in ME3 and the fact that card draw is so limited makes it more likely you get flooded.
Hope that answers your question
Love the podcast on Wed since the downtime is right when I want to play so this tides me over until mtgo is back up.
Maybe its been covered already but I just noticed a post from this morning on MTGO Forum Group that not only are they pulling support of Standard w/Vangard but also Kaleidoscope. Also theres going to be a forum vote to determine which format will fill the 4th weekend spot after Pauper, 100Single and STD Single.
Thanks for the encouraging remarks, much appreciated.
Point taken on "combat trick" terminology. I would say that technically, a combat trick is anything that makes combat turn out differently than your opponent would expect based on the board, and produces a result that could not have occurred outside of combat (for example, on an otherwise empty board with both players at 20, bolting some 3/3 during combat instead of before or after doesn't make it a combat trick).
That being said, some tricks are obviously better than others, which would by my real takeaway from your observation: just because you have successfully changed the result of combat in a way your opponent didn't expect with some spell doesn't make it a good play or a good card.
I currently have Regenrate rated above the "pretty terrible" rating you are giving it, but it is certainly not great. Playing a deck with bomb creatures and no other means to recur or protect them, you could do a lot worse than Regenerate when up against red or black, which was why it narrowly made the cut in this deck. Still, it's basically filler, I recognize that.
Another reason my preference would be for replays to not be available until the end of the tournament. As long as they are, though, players looking to maximize their chances of winning need to use them.
I always scout ahead of time; I've only made an opponent wait when I was the last match to finish, and even then I have two solid minutes to bring up and cruise through replays.
You are doing a fantastic job with this column. You pick exactly the right moments to "pause" and ask the reader to think. You also manage to avoid pedantically stating the obvious, which is rampant behavior amongst draft walkthrough authors. There's just something so confident and unpretentious about your writing :) Keep it up.
From the article:
"I also think I should have sided out the Regenerate. It certainly has its uses against white and blue, but is really at its best against red and black, where it can be a combat trick *and* counter a lot of removal."
While I agree with the gist of your statement, I suggest a re-investigation of what "combat trick" really means. It's one of those terms I hate because, given a loose enough definition, it can actually do harm.
Let's say a trick is any instant that alters combat. I cast Regenerate after blocks, which alters the outcome of combat by leaving me with a creature in play which would otherwise not be there. You know what also does the same thing? Casting a creature. Would you consider it a trick to cast a creature after combat that, had you cast it before combat, would have influenced the opponent to block differently? No. That's just proper gameplay. Therefore, I consider Regenerate to be less of a combat trick and more of a conditional cheap creature. In that light, it's easy to see why the card is *nigh unplayable* against UW, and pretty terrible in general.
He mentioned this in a previous article, but it's fairly simple. You save the deck in the draft deck editor, open it up in the regular deck editor and replace your lands with the promo ones. Save that deck and then reopen it in the draft editor. It only works with lands I believe though, so you can't replace other cards with foil or promo versions.
I used the scouting trick for the first time in a draft I did last night. It does make the decisions of when to use removal or which combat tricks to look out for much easier.
I don't like it, I don't think it's fair and I wish it would be removed but as it's there, legal and others will use it against me then I have to use it myself or be at a disadvantage.
I thought this article was great.
Yeah, I wrote a nice long post on the MTGO forums about how KSCOPE should be killed. Not enough player fan base - particularly when they just artificially created the format and forced players to adapt to it.
Yeah, they announced the Zendikar full-framers a month or two after I picked up the Unhinged basics. I was annoyed at first because I'm actually a pretty big cheapskate too--online Unhinged lands are the only bling purchase I've ever made in my 14 years of Magic--but I got over it. Let everyone have access to cool full-frame lands!
(Mine will just be cooler.)
Really interesting read. I hadn't really considered this format before now, but am certainly intrigued (and will dive in if my budget will allow it). I really like the look of the Devestating Winter deck especially.
can people in states like washington, for example(that are not eligable for prizes) qualify online? it's not a monetary prize so..
if not that seems pretty unfair to the players in those states.
*bangs head* sorry clearly that isn't seize the day (Carpe Diem) ...geh...nevermind I guess I failed to remember "Buyer Beware"
Caveat Emptor? ("Seize the Day") did you mean something else?
I guess I'm guilty of playing high level decks in the casual room, but I only play Pauper. I've had maybe one or two people quit after seeing a counterspell but most of the time they only quit if they have no chance of winning. That's usually what makes me concede too, I have no hope of winning. It's more fulfilling to me to come back from one life, or beat a deck that has it's combo going.
So why don't I go to the tournament practice room? Because there are 800 people in casual and 11 there. It sometimes takes 10 minutes to find a pauper match in the casual room, almost impossible in tournament practice. Maybe they should consider splitting casual into new player, and then having a regular room.
Last but not least, I actually had someone concede a game the other night because I played an island on my first turn. They then went on a rant about "How come every one plays the same deck?" I guess if you quit after the first land goes down you will think people are playing the same deck. That's another reason they need to bring back ratings, to prevent quitting simply because you didn't get your half turn combo in your opening hand.
I was inspired by your bling to try to purchase the unhinged lands too, but then it struck me that Zendikar is just around the corner with full-art lands. And as I'm a cheapass, I think I'll wait and use those instead. Yay for saving!
I'd still like to see Build Your Own Standard, Build Your Own Block, or Block Wars offered. All of those have interesting deck building potential (maybe less so for block wars), but they always would be getting new decks and evolving. All of them also support classic set releases and allow under used cards to be played.
I always have a couple of ideas for a new format.
First, I would be in favor of some type of peasant variant. Pauper has proved that formats with relatively low costs to construct decks can be popular, so why not Peasant. I realize that Peasant would be difficult to code because of the 5 uncommons rule or however many it was. Maybe Wizards could change the meaning of peasant or pick a similar name for a format where only commons and uncommons are legal. For example:
-Standard Peasant
-Classic Singleton Peasant
Or we could always go with a more cerebral choice. Like the Dakkon Blackblade Avatar format, aka Duelmasters variant. It plays like any normal format except "You may play any colored card from your hand as a copy of a basic land card chosen at random that can produce mana of 1 of the card's colors." No more players complaining about not drawing enough lands or too many lands. This should be easy to code since the Dakkon Blackblade avatar is already coded. Of course since Avatars are kind of going away, this new format would not be connected to the avatar in any way.
That's the obvious end. No new cards in M10, no new cards in ZEN. I mean how can a format survive without new cards? All the good decks have been built and all the possibilities have been explored.
So yes, RIP Kaleidoscope, it was a nice ride and it was nice knowing you.
Oh and I too think that moving the podcast to Wednesday is a wise choice. This downtime for example was less boring because at least I was listening to you guys.
LE
I appreciate all the criticism and suggestions for this deck, and if I ever decide to metaphorically sleeve it up again I will keep them in mind. Other than that I would like to just note a couple things:
1) I did not write this intending to build the next top tier pauper deck - I don't think that highly of my abilities as a deck builder.
2) This article was actually written and submitted over a month ago, at a time when Lorwyn block had more than a couple weeks left in standard, and was thus written for that format, which is why it has cards like Spell Syphon instead of Counterspell.
Thanks again for the comments and criticism :)
Please WotC, fill the whole with a minimum 24 players classic premier event. The format needs something like that pretty much. Pretty, pretty much.
News to me, but frankly it had it coming: There's no real prospect of Kscope evolving. I'm really not sure where to place my vote.
Disharmony is not a very good card because it is much more situational then most people initially think. First it only works as defensive card (which is not a good fit in an aggressive build), second it is only card advantage if you are able to kill two creatures with it (this requires two attackers that could block each other and kill each other in combat).
Regarding the correct ratio of removal, creatures, and lands - there is no right ratio! I know it sounds blunt but it really depends on your build.
Generally you want at least 13 creatures in an aggressive deck whereas a control style deck can work with 11. I would never play less than that in ME3.
Removal is obviously premium and in many cases you want as much as you can get (I doubt you will receive so much playworthy removal to interfere with the creature count).
The usual standard for lands in limited decks is 17 and in many cases you can follow that rule in ME3 drafts, too. I would only play 16 if I had a very low curve and/or artifact mana and green land tutors. I have never played more then 17 lands in ME3 and the fact that card draw is so limited makes it more likely you get flooded.
Hope that answers your question
No one expects it?
Love the podcast on Wed since the downtime is right when I want to play so this tides me over until mtgo is back up.
Maybe its been covered already but I just noticed a post from this morning on MTGO Forum Group that not only are they pulling support of Standard w/Vangard but also Kaleidoscope. Also theres going to be a forum vote to determine which format will fill the 4th weekend spot after Pauper, 100Single and STD Single.
RagMan
Thanks for the encouraging remarks, much appreciated.
Point taken on "combat trick" terminology. I would say that technically, a combat trick is anything that makes combat turn out differently than your opponent would expect based on the board, and produces a result that could not have occurred outside of combat (for example, on an otherwise empty board with both players at 20, bolting some 3/3 during combat instead of before or after doesn't make it a combat trick).
That being said, some tricks are obviously better than others, which would by my real takeaway from your observation: just because you have successfully changed the result of combat in a way your opponent didn't expect with some spell doesn't make it a good play or a good card.
I currently have Regenrate rated above the "pretty terrible" rating you are giving it, but it is certainly not great. Playing a deck with bomb creatures and no other means to recur or protect them, you could do a lot worse than Regenerate when up against red or black, which was why it narrowly made the cut in this deck. Still, it's basically filler, I recognize that.
Another reason my preference would be for replays to not be available until the end of the tournament. As long as they are, though, players looking to maximize their chances of winning need to use them.
I always scout ahead of time; I've only made an opponent wait when I was the last match to finish, and even then I have two solid minutes to bring up and cruise through replays.
Ice Cage and Illusionary Servant beg to differ.
Also, being on the losing end of a Regenerate is a crappy feeling.
Finally, I like to compare Regeneration to The Spanish Inquisition.
You are doing a fantastic job with this column. You pick exactly the right moments to "pause" and ask the reader to think. You also manage to avoid pedantically stating the obvious, which is rampant behavior amongst draft walkthrough authors. There's just something so confident and unpretentious about your writing :) Keep it up.
From the article:
"I also think I should have sided out the Regenerate. It certainly has its uses against white and blue, but is really at its best against red and black, where it can be a combat trick *and* counter a lot of removal."
While I agree with the gist of your statement, I suggest a re-investigation of what "combat trick" really means. It's one of those terms I hate because, given a loose enough definition, it can actually do harm.
Let's say a trick is any instant that alters combat. I cast Regenerate after blocks, which alters the outcome of combat by leaving me with a creature in play which would otherwise not be there. You know what also does the same thing? Casting a creature. Would you consider it a trick to cast a creature after combat that, had you cast it before combat, would have influenced the opponent to block differently? No. That's just proper gameplay. Therefore, I consider Regenerate to be less of a combat trick and more of a conditional cheap creature. In that light, it's easy to see why the card is *nigh unplayable* against UW, and pretty terrible in general.
He mentioned this in a previous article, but it's fairly simple. You save the deck in the draft deck editor, open it up in the regular deck editor and replace your lands with the promo ones. Save that deck and then reopen it in the draft editor. It only works with lands I believe though, so you can't replace other cards with foil or promo versions.
I used the scouting trick for the first time in a draft I did last night. It does make the decisions of when to use removal or which combat tricks to look out for much easier.
I don't like it, I don't think it's fair and I wish it would be removed but as it's there, legal and others will use it against me then I have to use it myself or be at a disadvantage.
Godot,
How are you getting promo lands into your draft decks?