Fantastic article. I really like how you detailed the match-ups. I wish all deck articles took this primer-style approach. I look forward to future articles from you.
The only thing is that dredge isnt a "combo deck" to me, even if looks like a lot to a combo. What's the difference ? there is a debate. My definition of combo is : a deck based on a winning combinaison of cards, playable in 1 turn, which doesnt need to attack with creature to win (i hope my written english is not too bad). That being said, I am not sure to be correct, only my opinion.
In example, with flash, i know 3 diiferent build : disciple kill, carrion kill, sliver kill. To me, disciple & carrion are real combo deck, although sliver kill isnt really. It is more like a comboish aggro control deck. And dredge like a comboish aggro deck...
Should add though that the deck is a lot different from burn. Goblins plays and is disrupted like agro while burn is played and disrupted like combo. So I would say even though they both have a red base the deck's are pretty different.
"Classic in fact seen less atractive each day, on each new "MED", the amount you have to spend on a deck rises again"
I pretty disagree & i am not sure to follow this logical also.
Yes, the price to enter in classic is pretty high from scratch. And yes, if you want to get a FULL collection of classic cards, each med set increases the needed amount of bucks you have to pay. Are you obliged to get a FULL collection to enjoy classic ? No, i really dont think so. Plus i believe that the fact there are some high valuated cards allow you to switch from a deck to another one by selling/buying your cards if you want to change, at any moment.
If we compare classic to standard/extend, what do we observe ? It is pretty the same process, except, the amount you spend is almost totaly loosed once the set rotate : who want to pay 24 for bitterblossom today ? Who want to pay 30 for Figure ? Arent there some players to buy a Baneslayer Angel for 25 today ? And in which other format could you use it ? Maybe some guys will say "ok, i can sell them before the rotation". I will answer it involves 2 conditions : 1) to find player who would like to get them even if the rotation is imminent; 2) what's the difference with eternal format in this case ? You wont have a FULL collection neither ...
In classic, you can keep the staples you buy, because they will be ALMOST useful for ever, and you will very often find some players to buy these cards if you want to change of deck.
Btw , does someone could tell me if there was any set in std which contains more than 7 cards you can sell 20+ at the end of the draft like med is used to do ? I am not seing any other. This must be taken in consideration in the cost reasonning imho.
Yes i hate fat players also , but i do find midgets the worst KILL THEM ALL..
Anyway , i do think you had some good points , replaying can and will improve your game
Annoying players will cause you to do mistakes (some poker players use that also , and i find poker a lot like magic) , some players also have a natural way to be annoying and some use that as a tactic..
I really liked reading this. The presentation of the decks is particularly valuable to anyone interested in Pauper, or even in beating teachings. The key to beating a deck is to understand it. Good job!
Funny, I don't think my collection even comes into the 150 ticket value range (not counting the .05 or less cards) even with all my cards combined. I am certain my pauper collection isn't even close. Scary thought when a format purports to be for the $0 crowd but the MUST play cards cost in total between $100 and $150 (just based on your comment, no real data.) Spending that much on a single game is not for paupers. It might before economic minded individuals but certainly not for people like me. (Assuming that you MUST have the $1-$3 cards which I am dubious about.)
Thanks mate :) You are exactly the audience I was aiming for - more casual players than spikes.
BTW, I'm trying to form good testing group, because I need to play against better players with good builds to be able to write more accurate (spike :) ) article about a deck. My on-line nick is TheDwarf - please leave a message if you are interested.
This was a great read, as several others have stated. I can't say much about any of the lists you presented as I'm a very casual player, but I feel like I learned a lot despite how accurate any of them may or may not be.
You can't go infinite with draft mate :) This is only urban legend! 2 or 3 bad drafts in a row and you are as far as possible from infinite (and bad drafts are common even for pro players! ). So if you want to go infinite just play constructed and win more than 50% of the time.And if you want a cheap format try Pauper - after you buy 40 or 50 "expensive" cards (1-3 tixs), most of your collection will cost a 0,01-0,03 per card :)
Thanks for the comments. I realised that my goblin builld is not optimal the very next day that I submitted this articel (they raped me turn 4 several times in a row ). As for the WW - I really want to test against some optimal build and player, but that list was the best that I have faced. I also missed the match with The Blink deck :) I just forgot about that match.
Yes it is different because it is not KODAMA'S THUNDER deck :) The Thunder deck that I posted is a Rogue deck that abuses Tilling Treefolk, Cartographer and cards that sac lands. This deck is one of my favourites and because I noticed that most of you don't know it or think that it is suboptimal variant of KODAMA'S THUNDER I'll start testing extensively and I'll write an article about it in a week or two :) Maybe I'm wrong but I think that this exact build is almost perfect and only needs better SB plan and maximum 3-4 cards change in the Main.
Of a MTGO where I can sit down, log on, and opt to play real honest to god legacy. I'm not good at the format, but I enjoy it a lot.
I also hope that one day, WotC will find it fit to actually have power on MTGO to play Vintage with. I've only played the format twice, but it has a cost barrier (that can be debated, but since I no longer play paper magic it's moot in my book.) that is too great for me to enter.
I agree that wager set-up is not very likely to happen. I think it would be very helpful to the community in finding casual games against like-minded similar skill-level opponents.
As you said, wagering cards, even digital non-redeemable cards, might have legal implications that might kill the idea in Wizard's eyes. I'm not a lawyer, I don't know the issue well enough to say anything more than that. Still, I'd rather suggest a solution, even an unlikely solution, than stay silent about an issue that I believe deserves attention.
I think "Classic" packs has a much better chance of being implemented.
"Generic" packs are a bit different from "Classic" packs. If you can't buy the packs in the store, then your packs are not competing with the store.
If I win an Alara Block 2-man tourney and get a pack of Alara Reborn, Wizards wants me to buy a pack of Shards and Conflux so I can draft it again. That is all well and good, and if we made generic packs wizards wouldn't be able to sell us the missing pieces of our draft set. I understand this and accept it as a way Wizards wants to make money.
However....
If I win a pack of Tempest from a 100 singleton match, I CAN'T buy or WIN a pack of Stronghold to use it to draft with. My pack basically becomes a dead end, and that's not a good prize.
If I win two packs from a CBS nix tix draft I'm in even worse shape. I can't buy the third pack to draft it again because Wizards doesn't sell it, and after this week I can't draft CBS again for a couple of months until it's available again.
"Classic" packs solves both problems, and doesn't compete with packs Wizards wants to sell to us.
No offense, but im glad youre not the WOTC. Please try not being so repetitive on the next article.
Also, I see no reason to reprint again FOW, etc... Classic in fact seen less atractive each day, on each new "MED", the amount you have to spend on a deck rises again. I think it was cooler when it was a trully different format than legacy or vintage. If anyone of the real WOTC reads this, please keep classic apart from the paper eternal formats.
I don't think it is Ana the mancer. The word is anathema.
Fantastic article. I really like how you detailed the match-ups. I wish all deck articles took this primer-style approach. I look forward to future articles from you.
This will probably be said many times in the coming comments, but I really like the video format.
I like your videos. Somehow you make it sound like you already know what's happening, even though it really doesn't seem to look like a replay :)
Pretty clear explainations and a nice videos.
The only thing is that dredge isnt a "combo deck" to me, even if looks like a lot to a combo. What's the difference ? there is a debate. My definition of combo is : a deck based on a winning combinaison of cards, playable in 1 turn, which doesnt need to attack with creature to win (i hope my written english is not too bad). That being said, I am not sure to be correct, only my opinion.
In example, with flash, i know 3 diiferent build : disciple kill, carrion kill, sliver kill. To me, disciple & carrion are real combo deck, although sliver kill isnt really. It is more like a comboish aggro control deck. And dredge like a comboish aggro deck...
Once again, great article
Should add though that the deck is a lot different from burn. Goblins plays and is disrupted like agro while burn is played and disrupted like combo. So I would say even though they both have a red base the deck's are pretty different.
Cool :)
"Classic in fact seen less atractive each day, on each new "MED", the amount you have to spend on a deck rises again"
I pretty disagree & i am not sure to follow this logical also.
Yes, the price to enter in classic is pretty high from scratch. And yes, if you want to get a FULL collection of classic cards, each med set increases the needed amount of bucks you have to pay. Are you obliged to get a FULL collection to enjoy classic ? No, i really dont think so. Plus i believe that the fact there are some high valuated cards allow you to switch from a deck to another one by selling/buying your cards if you want to change, at any moment.
If we compare classic to standard/extend, what do we observe ? It is pretty the same process, except, the amount you spend is almost totaly loosed once the set rotate : who want to pay 24 for bitterblossom today ? Who want to pay 30 for Figure ? Arent there some players to buy a Baneslayer Angel for 25 today ? And in which other format could you use it ? Maybe some guys will say "ok, i can sell them before the rotation". I will answer it involves 2 conditions : 1) to find player who would like to get them even if the rotation is imminent; 2) what's the difference with eternal format in this case ? You wont have a FULL collection neither ...
In classic, you can keep the staples you buy, because they will be ALMOST useful for ever, and you will very often find some players to buy these cards if you want to change of deck.
Btw , does someone could tell me if there was any set in std which contains more than 7 cards you can sell 20+ at the end of the draft like med is used to do ? I am not seing any other. This must be taken in consideration in the cost reasonning imho.
Yes i hate fat players also , but i do find midgets the worst KILL THEM ALL..
Anyway , i do think you had some good points , replaying can and will improve your game
Annoying players will cause you to do mistakes (some poker players use that also , and i find poker a lot like magic) , some players also have a natural way to be annoying and some use that as a tactic..
Haha fatty dumb dumb, I like it!
I really liked reading this. The presentation of the decks is particularly valuable to anyone interested in Pauper, or even in beating teachings. The key to beating a deck is to understand it. Good job!
I've been interested in 100CS for a while now and this just might get me to take the plunge. Excellent article.
What did s/he win? :p
Funny, I don't think my collection even comes into the 150 ticket value range (not counting the .05 or less cards) even with all my cards combined. I am certain my pauper collection isn't even close. Scary thought when a format purports to be for the $0 crowd but the MUST play cards cost in total between $100 and $150 (just based on your comment, no real data.) Spending that much on a single game is not for paupers. It might before economic minded individuals but certainly not for people like me. (Assuming that you MUST have the $1-$3 cards which I am dubious about.)
Thanks mate :) You are exactly the audience I was aiming for - more casual players than spikes.
BTW, I'm trying to form good testing group, because I need to play against better players with good builds to be able to write more accurate (spike :) ) article about a deck. My on-line nick is TheDwarf - please leave a message if you are interested.
This was a great read, as several others have stated. I can't say much about any of the lists you presented as I'm a very casual player, but I feel like I learned a lot despite how accurate any of them may or may not be.
You can't go infinite with draft mate :) This is only urban legend! 2 or 3 bad drafts in a row and you are as far as possible from infinite (and bad drafts are common even for pro players! ). So if you want to go infinite just play constructed and win more than 50% of the time.And if you want a cheap format try Pauper - after you buy 40 or 50 "expensive" cards (1-3 tixs), most of your collection will cost a 0,01-0,03 per card :)
Thanks for the additional explanation on the classic pack idea. Agreed, that does seem like a reasonable option for both parties involved.
We have a winner!
Thanks for the comments. I realised that my goblin builld is not optimal the very next day that I submitted this articel (they raped me turn 4 several times in a row ). As for the WW - I really want to test against some optimal build and player, but that list was the best that I have faced. I also missed the match with The Blink deck :) I just forgot about that match.
Yes it is different because it is not KODAMA'S THUNDER deck :) The Thunder deck that I posted is a Rogue deck that abuses Tilling Treefolk, Cartographer and cards that sac lands. This deck is one of my favourites and because I noticed that most of you don't know it or think that it is suboptimal variant of KODAMA'S THUNDER I'll start testing extensively and I'll write an article about it in a week or two :) Maybe I'm wrong but I think that this exact build is almost perfect and only needs better SB plan and maximum 3-4 cards change in the Main.
I just really feel that the classic players are missing out on something much more exciting.
Of a MTGO where I can sit down, log on, and opt to play real honest to god legacy. I'm not good at the format, but I enjoy it a lot.
I also hope that one day, WotC will find it fit to actually have power on MTGO to play Vintage with. I've only played the format twice, but it has a cost barrier (that can be debated, but since I no longer play paper magic it's moot in my book.) that is too great for me to enter.
I agree that wager set-up is not very likely to happen. I think it would be very helpful to the community in finding casual games against like-minded similar skill-level opponents.
As you said, wagering cards, even digital non-redeemable cards, might have legal implications that might kill the idea in Wizard's eyes. I'm not a lawyer, I don't know the issue well enough to say anything more than that. Still, I'd rather suggest a solution, even an unlikely solution, than stay silent about an issue that I believe deserves attention.
I think "Classic" packs has a much better chance of being implemented.
"Generic" packs are a bit different from "Classic" packs. If you can't buy the packs in the store, then your packs are not competing with the store.
If I win an Alara Block 2-man tourney and get a pack of Alara Reborn, Wizards wants me to buy a pack of Shards and Conflux so I can draft it again. That is all well and good, and if we made generic packs wizards wouldn't be able to sell us the missing pieces of our draft set. I understand this and accept it as a way Wizards wants to make money.
However....
If I win a pack of Tempest from a 100 singleton match, I CAN'T buy or WIN a pack of Stronghold to use it to draft with. My pack basically becomes a dead end, and that's not a good prize.
If I win two packs from a CBS nix tix draft I'm in even worse shape. I can't buy the third pack to draft it again because Wizards doesn't sell it, and after this week I can't draft CBS again for a couple of months until it's available again.
"Classic" packs solves both problems, and doesn't compete with packs Wizards wants to sell to us.
No offense, but im glad youre not the WOTC. Please try not being so repetitive on the next article.
Also, I see no reason to reprint again FOW, etc... Classic in fact seen less atractive each day, on each new "MED", the amount you have to spend on a deck rises again. I think it was cooler when it was a trully different format than legacy or vintage. If anyone of the real WOTC reads this, please keep classic apart from the paper eternal formats.