Did you realize that the Palace Guard is also a "soldier" that would benefit from your other 6 soldier pumpers? I understand it's a "horned turtle" but it seems like it would have been a fair replacement for the Silvercoat Lion without destroying your curve.
Sorry that chart is so big, lol - can'g get photobucket/ms-paint to shrink it. Also, please note the date of the article - late July; some commentary is a bit out of date accordingly plus not much MedIII/Exiled commentary which will obsolete large swaths of the decklists.
A very nice article, its great to see all these decks listed in one place. I can now see what cards need replacing in some of my decks to make them better.
This was simply E-X-C-E-L-L-E-N-T. Well done. 6 out of 5 fireballs! Bookmarking the article for future reference even though I don't play Classic(you never know!).
Fantastic there mr ben. very good tool for players of all skill levels and interest in the format. my one quam though is that bearnamedsnuffy outright won a half dozen pes with bomberman and i won the eternal strugle special chalenge wit it as well. i kinda feel like one of those lists would have been better then a legacy build as it was a proven winning list in the format that the article is representing.
Lots of great decks listed here. I personally like the last one listed (Toolbox Zoo).
I'm strictly a Classic player, and by no master deck builder. It's enjoyable for me personally to get ideas and see what components/mechanics competitive deck builders use.
While I appreciate the effort to try something new, I think the main thing this format does for me is make it take more time and effort to read the articles (which I look forward to each friday, btw!)
Try this. Go to Price Tables, or anything else that has card links you might want to click on. Click on a card you aren't familiar with, or want to see if its price on MTGOTraders has gone up/down even more since the article was posted, etc. etc. Look at the card. Now click the Back button in your browser. Surprise surprise, you're on Introduction again and have to click the tab of whatever you were in the middle of to get back to where you were, and maybe scroll down as well!
Having the tab you're currently on clickable, but doing absolutely nothing when you clicked on it, is bad interface design. I clicked "Introduction" 5 times and thought "the tabs don't work for my browser" and tried another browser before I figured I had to start with the SECOND blue tempt-you-to-click-me-to-see-stuff link at the top, not the first.
And of course, every time you finish a section in the old version, you would just - scroll down some more. Now it's scroll all the way to the top, click something, and start heading down again. More work, more time consuming, and what did I gain out of it as a reader? Nothing that I can perceive as mattering to me at all.
Those who leave anonymous hate messages are just hungry for attention and bored stiff. Whatever validity their comments might have had (in this case none) get lost in the noise anyway so in a sense they cancel themselves out.
Yes it is a specialty niche. No, not everyone cares about Vanguard even a little bit. Yes there other formats that might deserve attention but if someone puts their time and energy into attempting to make a format more appealing I say the effort is not wasted.
I find it somehow fitting that the same week that WOTC reveals the downgraded forums hammy reveals the downgraded SotP. Yes, the tabs seem like cool features at first (just as the MTGO groups/wiki/etc. seem cool), but the reality is that this requires more work by the user with not much gain. Tabs at the bottom would help, but the only way I would be really happy would be a default to the original format - the navigation tabs could be left as a bonus option for those who want to use them. Bet if you do this you will find the tabs used by only a small percentage of readers.
Now a tab that links back to the previous SotP, for when I've missed a week or just want to look back for whatever reason, that would be truly added functionality that I could get behind.
People write informally the way they speak. Spoken idiom is not confined to the strictest rules of grammar in normal society. Some people may break rules that make you wince but just be glad you do not do the same thing. :) I mean we aren't writing great literature on these posts. (No offense to anyone who thinks otherwise :p)
Persomally, I like the new layout (except the need for buttons at the bottom).
What about this? Leave the article the way it was, but use the buttons to jump in the text to the other sections? Sort of a compromise....and leave the spoilers hidden under the last tab like you have it now.
Not really sure what your 'anonymous' problem is with this article. Are you upset because, in your opinion, nobody plays Vanguard? Is it because the articles title somehow didn't clue you in that this article was about Vanguard? Is it because, for some reason I can't quite understand you somehow feel cheated that a site paid an author for his hard work over a format you don't like?
Sorry but I'm really not understanding your issue here. You've taken the time to respond but not the time to respond with any meaningful information about your dislike of the article.
If you can't be a little more informative or at least bother to tag your comment with a name then what was the point?
Did you realize that the Palace Guard is also a "soldier" that would benefit from your other 6 soldier pumpers? I understand it's a "horned turtle" but it seems like it would have been a fair replacement for the Silvercoat Lion without destroying your curve.
Sorry that chart is so big, lol - can'g get photobucket/ms-paint to shrink it. Also, please note the date of the article - late July; some commentary is a bit out of date accordingly plus not much MedIII/Exiled commentary which will obsolete large swaths of the decklists.
is it just me or do the deck links not go anywhere?
The article is straight ballin!
"World" is a supertype, not a subtype.
That said, good article. Nice approach.
A very nice article, its great to see all these decks listed in one place. I can now see what cards need replacing in some of my decks to make them better.
This was simply E-X-C-E-L-L-E-N-T. Well done. 6 out of 5 fireballs! Bookmarking the article for future reference even though I don't play Classic(you never know!).
LE
WOW this article will be refrenced for a long time. great work BOB thank you!
Fantastic there mr ben. very good tool for players of all skill levels and interest in the format. my one quam though is that bearnamedsnuffy outright won a half dozen pes with bomberman and i won the eternal strugle special chalenge wit it as well. i kinda feel like one of those lists would have been better then a legacy build as it was a proven winning list in the format that the article is representing.
Lots of great decks listed here. I personally like the last one listed (Toolbox Zoo).
I'm strictly a Classic player, and by no master deck builder. It's enjoyable for me personally to get ideas and see what components/mechanics competitive deck builders use.
I must admit, very comprehensive. Thank you :)
Impressive work, wow. Congratulation for this AWESOME article. Definitly a *must to be rade*
ty and hf + gl
While I appreciate the effort to try something new, I think the main thing this format does for me is make it take more time and effort to read the articles (which I look forward to each friday, btw!)
Try this. Go to Price Tables, or anything else that has card links you might want to click on. Click on a card you aren't familiar with, or want to see if its price on MTGOTraders has gone up/down even more since the article was posted, etc. etc. Look at the card. Now click the Back button in your browser. Surprise surprise, you're on Introduction again and have to click the tab of whatever you were in the middle of to get back to where you were, and maybe scroll down as well!
Having the tab you're currently on clickable, but doing absolutely nothing when you clicked on it, is bad interface design. I clicked "Introduction" 5 times and thought "the tabs don't work for my browser" and tried another browser before I figured I had to start with the SECOND blue tempt-you-to-click-me-to-see-stuff link at the top, not the first.
And of course, every time you finish a section in the old version, you would just - scroll down some more. Now it's scroll all the way to the top, click something, and start heading down again. More work, more time consuming, and what did I gain out of it as a reader? Nothing that I can perceive as mattering to me at all.
I like the new format.
Those who leave anonymous hate messages are just hungry for attention and bored stiff. Whatever validity their comments might have had (in this case none) get lost in the noise anyway so in a sense they cancel themselves out.
Yes it is a specialty niche. No, not everyone cares about Vanguard even a little bit. Yes there other formats that might deserve attention but if someone puts their time and energy into attempting to make a format more appealing I say the effort is not wasted.
Keep them coming Cotton and ignore the trolls.
I find it somehow fitting that the same week that WOTC reveals the downgraded forums hammy reveals the downgraded SotP. Yes, the tabs seem like cool features at first (just as the MTGO groups/wiki/etc. seem cool), but the reality is that this requires more work by the user with not much gain. Tabs at the bottom would help, but the only way I would be really happy would be a default to the original format - the navigation tabs could be left as a bonus option for those who want to use them. Bet if you do this you will find the tabs used by only a small percentage of readers.
Now a tab that links back to the previous SotP, for when I've missed a week or just want to look back for whatever reason, that would be truly added functionality that I could get behind.
I choose C!
Anons usually hate that authors are paid for articles, especially when they can't write one themselves.
RagMan
People write informally the way they speak. Spoken idiom is not confined to the strictest rules of grammar in normal society. Some people may break rules that make you wince but just be glad you do not do the same thing. :) I mean we aren't writing great literature on these posts. (No offense to anyone who thinks otherwise :p)
Spellbook over Kindled fury?
That card is so huge in M10 drafts, especially with all those soldiers
If you plan on keeping with the new format I'm strongly voting for this implementation.
Maybe I paid attention in middle school English, but everytime I see someone type "personally, I feel" a little part of me dies inside.
Persomally, I like the new layout (except the need for buttons at the bottom).
What about this? Leave the article the way it was, but use the buttons to jump in the text to the other sections? Sort of a compromise....and leave the spoilers hidden under the last tab like you have it now.
Not really sure what your 'anonymous' problem is with this article. Are you upset because, in your opinion, nobody plays Vanguard? Is it because the articles title somehow didn't clue you in that this article was about Vanguard? Is it because, for some reason I can't quite understand you somehow feel cheated that a site paid an author for his hard work over a format you don't like?
Sorry but I'm really not understanding your issue here. You've taken the time to respond but not the time to respond with any meaningful information about your dislike of the article.
If you can't be a little more informative or at least bother to tag your comment with a name then what was the point?
No one plays casual vanguard, stop writing these articles to collect your writing compensation.