That it is a little muddy. I also think that the word block is the supposed to be the word black.
So if you cast the wisps, targeting the Rats, it's a blue creature, than activate the rats, instead of black rats dealing damage to pro black guys (which can not be done.) it's blue rats dealing damage to pro black guys, which would kill the pro black guys.
I feel that over covered would be an article every day.
However, when you get an article from 4 people that you respect a lot as writers and players, and in my mind have different voices, you make the hard decision to run them all.
This is not up for debate. I felt as if all the articles were different enough to run them.
I will not be running any more exiled articles, again, something that is not up for debate.
I do appreciate everyone who has chimed in, I feel a lot of good discussion has happened across the articles, and thank you all for reading and leaving your comments.
Implying that the site is over-filled with articles on the same topic IS constructive criticism, and is not bashing you, IMHO. Granted, it's not something that you, as a writer, control, but that particular anonymous comment is something that could be passed on to editors, etc, to try and avoid the same thing happening again.
I was simply suggesting that an argumentative response, and a snide comment doesn't really help anybody, and doesn't seem to follow from your writing style, which seems very professional in the articles.
I enjoyed the article personally, but i do agree with the anon, that it has been over-covered on this site.
This is an interesting draft - congrats on the win, but it's definitely something we can discuss in the format's infancy . . . some salient points:
-Sage Owl, while not terrible, is really only worthwhile in two scenarios: 1) the draft is wrecked and you need filler or 2) you have bombs you'd like to "filter" into. It's certainly worse than Razorfoot Griffin (which answers the overwhelming majority of fliers and many ground-pounders too), and the Rod of Ruin is always welcome in a W/x deck (you simply don't have access to that effect, and other decks can hide behind a Horned Turtle/Centaur Courser/etc and Loot you forever, for example, with no real response).
-The 1-drops (Zephyr Sprite and, to a lesser extent, Elite Vanguard) range from mediocre to unplayable, depending on the deck. Your deck isn't aggro (13 creatures; your 2-drops are mostly 1/1s) enough to really benefit from the unanswered 4-6 damages and/or tempo-oriented trading. In fact, the Razorfoot Griffin you passed basically ends your day, save for Harm's Way.
-While this isn't unilaterally true, Earthquake is generally better than Goblin Artillery, mostly because you can scale the effect and play around it to maximum effect. The Artillery can simply dominate games, but getting 3-for-1 or even burning someone out with the Quake is devastating, and the risk of Cancel/Negate/Safe Passage can be handled much more easily than the dangers posed to a creature. Especially as you're leaning between W/u or W/b, taking the single-R casting cost seems academic - you mentioned this, but it seemed like something worth noting further.
-It's certainly worth looking at the first 8 picks of the second pack and the white cards available to you there - it looks like passing the Pacifism (clearly one of the 2 or 3 best cards in the pack) put someone downstream in white. For that reason (in a general sense), it's worth considering the Looter p1p1 - granted, signaling isn't strong at the 4322 level, and the Looter inexplicably tabled, but it's at least worth the thought experiment.
Yes, his opponent did misplay by not sacrificing the Bodyguard to Shield the Squire. This would have let him do 3 damage instead of 2. Which would have won the GW player the game as Motu finished with 1 life. Unfortunate mistake on the GW player's part.
Let me start by saying, great article. I really love to read these types of articles as it gives those of us with less experience with a particular online format some perspective as 'new' cards enter the format. I would never criticize the number of perspective articles that we get! That said, I think we need to use lots and lots of information and real data or data extrapolation (from paper formats) to make individual card judgements for restriction/bannings.
In my opinion (and experience), Strip Mine is no where near as dominating as folks are making it out to be. Is it good (or borderline broken like black tutors, necro, and other restricted cards - both online and in paper)? Yes, obviously, which is why it probably deserves a restriction in Classic. But I've played with it and against it in paper Vintage. I have two comments: (1) Everything you said is true. Strip Mine recursion is NO fun for the player getting stripped. (I love Stax, so it's a play I've made. What can I say ;)?) (2) The number of times you set yourself up to take advantage of Strip Mine recursion or Tutor for an early Mine in 'good', tuned decks, is few and far between or they are the random cases where it is your 'win condition'(you know you can cut someone off a color/mana, etc. for long enough to get the concession/find a win). Does it happen? Yes. Do you typically 'try' to make it happen? No, not in paper Vintage. It's quite simply the wrong decision to be making because you 'should' be trying to win the game - which Strip Mine recursion doesn't do. [Please don't argue that sometimes it's the 'right' decision, because sometimes if you have board control, it is. But you are 'winning' with board control, not Strip Mine recursion]
Can you design a deck to take advantage of it? Yes, of course. Will it be good? Maybe until people learn to beat it (which is probably possible). Remember, several of the top decks in Vintage do not run Mine (because colored mana is more important to their winning strategy). These same decks do not often run off-color Moxen. Coming up with the most powerful way to use/abuse a card can often make that card/strategy look more powerful because of the context it is presented within. While a powerful technique in debate, it becomes very misleading in these discussions.
I believe that Strip Mine should be restricted to begin with and then evaluated from there. If somebody puts together a consistent Loam/Crucible/Mine deck that dominates everything, then get out the ban hammer. Until then, let everyone play their singleton and move on. Banning a card pre-emptively because it is 'not fun' to play against is a poor rationale in the 'most powerful' online format. [Personally, I think playing against several combo decks that run around online is 'unfun', but it doesn't necessary to ban any of the components]
well, i didnt say it was fine. just better. Is it so wrong to take offence at being bashed anon or no? I still wont take much if any comments seriously w/ out an idenity but there is a huge difference between people posting xy and z reasons your article sucks and another xy and z about constructive critisim and or a pat on the back.
Sue me. I like to have my ego inflated. I am a Leo and I am the center of the world, so its nice when i am indulged.
Combo decks are a casualty of the general dislike of countermagic, discard and LD. They're frowned upon, because all of the sensible ways to stop them beating you are also frowned upon.
I'm aware that I'm not explaining myself very clearly, but I do think that these rules about what is "casual" and isn't, stop a lot of decks from being playable, even if they don't run any of the non-casual-trinity.
Whilst LD isn't technically banned in the casual multiplayer room, it will usually draw immediate concessions or at least a torrent of abuse in the chat window. Basically, I think the rule concerning combo decks seems to be that if it isn't very good, it's acceptable. Big-mana multiple-turn decks don't seem to get classified as combo though, and tend to define every single game of extended or classic 2hg. I usually play extended, and it used to always be either cloudpost/vesuva or mirari's wake, but nowadays there's only cloudpost/vesuva, making up ~1/4of decks in the 2hg games.
Obviously it's something that's impossible to regulate, as LD isn't technically banned, but I do think it artificially generates a very warped meta-game. In that the big-mana decks are totally dominant, and while the tools are there to beat them up, it's completely frowned upon to actually play them.
So this kind of post is fine because it's anonymous, and says "your article is good". The others weren't because they're anonymous and say "your article is bad"?
I'm no fan of anonymous posting but at least be less transparent in your motivations here.
I played with Pox deck against my friend's persist deck and learned that Diabolic Edict and Innocent blood are very annoying against those sort of creatures as you have to spend 2 spells getting one creature. Safehold Elite seems to be an obvious choice.
I don't want to steal your spot light and i know how hard qping can be but i would just like to say that m10 sealed is a great place to get your 15, if your halfway decent at sealed. I was able to grab all 15 on accident because i ground out 16 sealed decks last week trying to complete my 4 of tourny cards for zendikar standard.
I still stand bye the fact that if you have something to say that you should post your idenity but this kind of post is better then the random "wah im a crybaby, stop whining" crap or attacks on peoples awesome hats. thx for the time.
I agree, but you're still playing the game at least in that instance. Once they've activated their infinite combo then it's just a case of gg and concede - no point sitting through the clickfest. I don't see that as the same as conceding as soon as someone plays a (Cancel).
On the other hand, I wouldn't concede as soon as I recognise that my opponent is trying to assemble their combo. Then it's just a race against time, and I want to see if my deck / skills are up to it.
Again, I think it comes down to 'Is it a tier one deck'? If yes, then chances are they'll combo off before you've had a chance to do anything much, and that's not fun. If not, then you've got as much of a chance of winning as they have (give or take).
call it fight or flight. Since that is the result. I think it isn't always about demoralization though. Sometime it is the principle of it that ticks players off. If someone comes into a game with the express purpose of making it not fun well someone who is playing purely for that purpose might feel that they should concede and move on rather than deal with the not fun player. This is perfectly legitimate and I have done it myself when I have lacked the patience to deal with certain deck styles. I think I have mentioned I abhor dedicated combo decks in the casual environment because infinite engines and the like are only fun for the person who discovers them (or copies them) and I think that sort of thing should be reserved for tourney or at least by invite. If I run into a deck like that I will likely concede before it goes infinite. I just don't have the patience any time to sit through a solitaire game.
Another sideboard card I like for BU vs GW is Coral Net. However I do not see where to fit it into the sideboard of your current BU build.
As for Red instead of Blue, with how fast most pauper decks are if you dont have the card drawing of blue you lose too much (if you look at the deck, blue is almost pretty much only in the deck for the card drawing, well and a 2/2 beater to go against pro black critters) and I think you don't gain enough through red to make up for the loss of card advantage. And I think that BR would loose to the BU semi-mirror match. BR would also just seem to run out of gas too quickly and then you and your oppoenent are both sitting there wishing to get the better top deck draw.
I still say that as long as a deck isn't tier one, it's fine for casual. When I first started playing, I also hated playing against counters. It was so demoralising seeing spell after spell fizzle that I played badly, waited when I should have been dropping threats, dropped threats when I should have held on etc.
At that point (the way I see it), casual Magic players diverge. You get one group (and let's not cast any judgements, so we'll just label them 'Winners') who decide to grit their teeth, play through it and maybe improve their game. Then there's the other group (who we'll call 'Others') who decide counters aren't casual, and resolve to quit every time they see them.
From my own experience, I found that hanging in there and doing my best enabled me to win some tough games, and taught me new skills. Yes, I lost some games too (in about the same frequency as I lose to every other archetype), but finding that you can beat a strategy, or rise to a new challenge is surely one of THE reasons to play any game in the first place.
The same goes for LD. Casual LD decks are janky as hell, play through the pain and be doubly satisfied when you crush them.
I may be anonymous, but I nevertheless want to thank you for a great article. Though I have already read the other FtV:E preview articles on PureMTGO, it is always good to get several opinions on the subject!
nice touch with the videos.
That it is a little muddy. I also think that the word block is the supposed to be the word black.
So if you cast the wisps, targeting the Rats, it's a blue creature, than activate the rats, instead of black rats dealing damage to pro black guys (which can not be done.) it's blue rats dealing damage to pro black guys, which would kill the pro black guys.
I think that is what he was trying to say.
I'm extremely confused by this comment
I feel that over covered would be an article every day.
However, when you get an article from 4 people that you respect a lot as writers and players, and in my mind have different voices, you make the hard decision to run them all.
This is not up for debate. I felt as if all the articles were different enough to run them.
I will not be running any more exiled articles, again, something that is not up for debate.
I do appreciate everyone who has chimed in, I feel a lot of good discussion has happened across the articles, and thank you all for reading and leaving your comments.
Implying that the site is over-filled with articles on the same topic IS constructive criticism, and is not bashing you, IMHO. Granted, it's not something that you, as a writer, control, but that particular anonymous comment is something that could be passed on to editors, etc, to try and avoid the same thing happening again.
I was simply suggesting that an argumentative response, and a snide comment doesn't really help anybody, and doesn't seem to follow from your writing style, which seems very professional in the articles.
I enjoyed the article personally, but i do agree with the anon, that it has been over-covered on this site.
turns out i read the card wrong (i thought it searched your own deck) not so good now :(
This is an interesting draft - congrats on the win, but it's definitely something we can discuss in the format's infancy . . . some salient points:
-Sage Owl, while not terrible, is really only worthwhile in two scenarios: 1) the draft is wrecked and you need filler or 2) you have bombs you'd like to "filter" into. It's certainly worse than Razorfoot Griffin (which answers the overwhelming majority of fliers and many ground-pounders too), and the Rod of Ruin is always welcome in a W/x deck (you simply don't have access to that effect, and other decks can hide behind a Horned Turtle/Centaur Courser/etc and Loot you forever, for example, with no real response).
-The 1-drops (Zephyr Sprite and, to a lesser extent, Elite Vanguard) range from mediocre to unplayable, depending on the deck. Your deck isn't aggro (13 creatures; your 2-drops are mostly 1/1s) enough to really benefit from the unanswered 4-6 damages and/or tempo-oriented trading. In fact, the Razorfoot Griffin you passed basically ends your day, save for Harm's Way.
-While this isn't unilaterally true, Earthquake is generally better than Goblin Artillery, mostly because you can scale the effect and play around it to maximum effect. The Artillery can simply dominate games, but getting 3-for-1 or even burning someone out with the Quake is devastating, and the risk of Cancel/Negate/Safe Passage can be handled much more easily than the dangers posed to a creature. Especially as you're leaning between W/u or W/b, taking the single-R casting cost seems academic - you mentioned this, but it seemed like something worth noting further.
-It's certainly worth looking at the first 8 picks of the second pack and the white cards available to you there - it looks like passing the Pacifism (clearly one of the 2 or 3 best cards in the pack) put someone downstream in white. For that reason (in a general sense), it's worth considering the Looter p1p1 - granted, signaling isn't strong at the 4322 level, and the Looter inexplicably tabled, but it's at least worth the thought experiment.
Yes, his opponent did misplay by not sacrificing the Bodyguard to Shield the Squire. This would have let him do 3 damage instead of 2. Which would have won the GW player the game as Motu finished with 1 life. Unfortunate mistake on the GW player's part.
That sounds like alot of fun for us. Please make a nice report when you play the event :)
Let me start by saying, great article. I really love to read these types of articles as it gives those of us with less experience with a particular online format some perspective as 'new' cards enter the format. I would never criticize the number of perspective articles that we get! That said, I think we need to use lots and lots of information and real data or data extrapolation (from paper formats) to make individual card judgements for restriction/bannings.
In my opinion (and experience), Strip Mine is no where near as dominating as folks are making it out to be. Is it good (or borderline broken like black tutors, necro, and other restricted cards - both online and in paper)? Yes, obviously, which is why it probably deserves a restriction in Classic. But I've played with it and against it in paper Vintage. I have two comments: (1) Everything you said is true. Strip Mine recursion is NO fun for the player getting stripped. (I love Stax, so it's a play I've made. What can I say ;)?) (2) The number of times you set yourself up to take advantage of Strip Mine recursion or Tutor for an early Mine in 'good', tuned decks, is few and far between or they are the random cases where it is your 'win condition'(you know you can cut someone off a color/mana, etc. for long enough to get the concession/find a win). Does it happen? Yes. Do you typically 'try' to make it happen? No, not in paper Vintage. It's quite simply the wrong decision to be making because you 'should' be trying to win the game - which Strip Mine recursion doesn't do. [Please don't argue that sometimes it's the 'right' decision, because sometimes if you have board control, it is. But you are 'winning' with board control, not Strip Mine recursion]
Can you design a deck to take advantage of it? Yes, of course. Will it be good? Maybe until people learn to beat it (which is probably possible). Remember, several of the top decks in Vintage do not run Mine (because colored mana is more important to their winning strategy). These same decks do not often run off-color Moxen. Coming up with the most powerful way to use/abuse a card can often make that card/strategy look more powerful because of the context it is presented within. While a powerful technique in debate, it becomes very misleading in these discussions.
I believe that Strip Mine should be restricted to begin with and then evaluated from there. If somebody puts together a consistent Loam/Crucible/Mine deck that dominates everything, then get out the ban hammer. Until then, let everyone play their singleton and move on. Banning a card pre-emptively because it is 'not fun' to play against is a poor rationale in the 'most powerful' online format. [Personally, I think playing against several combo decks that run around online is 'unfun', but it doesn't necessary to ban any of the components]
Just one man's humble opinion,
-FB...
well, i didnt say it was fine. just better. Is it so wrong to take offence at being bashed anon or no? I still wont take much if any comments seriously w/ out an idenity but there is a huge difference between people posting xy and z reasons your article sucks and another xy and z about constructive critisim and or a pat on the back.
Sue me. I like to have my ego inflated. I am a Leo and I am the center of the world, so its nice when i am indulged.
Thanks for the time.
Combo decks are a casualty of the general dislike of countermagic, discard and LD. They're frowned upon, because all of the sensible ways to stop them beating you are also frowned upon.
I'm aware that I'm not explaining myself very clearly, but I do think that these rules about what is "casual" and isn't, stop a lot of decks from being playable, even if they don't run any of the non-casual-trinity.
Whilst LD isn't technically banned in the casual multiplayer room, it will usually draw immediate concessions or at least a torrent of abuse in the chat window. Basically, I think the rule concerning combo decks seems to be that if it isn't very good, it's acceptable. Big-mana multiple-turn decks don't seem to get classified as combo though, and tend to define every single game of extended or classic 2hg. I usually play extended, and it used to always be either cloudpost/vesuva or mirari's wake, but nowadays there's only cloudpost/vesuva, making up ~1/4of decks in the 2hg games.
Obviously it's something that's impossible to regulate, as LD isn't technically banned, but I do think it artificially generates a very warped meta-game. In that the big-mana decks are totally dominant, and while the tools are there to beat them up, it's completely frowned upon to actually play them.
So this kind of post is fine because it's anonymous, and says "your article is good". The others weren't because they're anonymous and say "your article is bad"?
I'm no fan of anonymous posting but at least be less transparent in your motivations here.
I'm not saying it's the best answer in general play, but playing Cerulean Wisp on your Crypt Rats lays waste to the block protection.
I played with Pox deck against my friend's persist deck and learned that Diabolic Edict and Innocent blood are very annoying against those sort of creatures as you have to spend 2 spells getting one creature. Safehold Elite seems to be an obvious choice.
I don't want to steal your spot light and i know how hard qping can be but i would just like to say that m10 sealed is a great place to get your 15, if your halfway decent at sealed. I was able to grab all 15 on accident because i ground out 16 sealed decks last week trying to complete my 4 of tourny cards for zendikar standard.
Game one didn't the opponent mess up when he dropped the shield on Akrasan Squire he should've saved it by sacrificing one bodyguard imo.
I still stand bye the fact that if you have something to say that you should post your idenity but this kind of post is better then the random "wah im a crybaby, stop whining" crap or attacks on peoples awesome hats. thx for the time.
I agree, but you're still playing the game at least in that instance. Once they've activated their infinite combo then it's just a case of gg and concede - no point sitting through the clickfest. I don't see that as the same as conceding as soon as someone plays a (Cancel).
On the other hand, I wouldn't concede as soon as I recognise that my opponent is trying to assemble their combo. Then it's just a race against time, and I want to see if my deck / skills are up to it.
Again, I think it comes down to 'Is it a tier one deck'? If yes, then chances are they'll combo off before you've had a chance to do anything much, and that's not fun. If not, then you've got as much of a chance of winning as they have (give or take).
Now that alternative Necro card is well nice, thanks for fixing the images jamuraa.
call it fight or flight. Since that is the result. I think it isn't always about demoralization though. Sometime it is the principle of it that ticks players off. If someone comes into a game with the express purpose of making it not fun well someone who is playing purely for that purpose might feel that they should concede and move on rather than deal with the not fun player. This is perfectly legitimate and I have done it myself when I have lacked the patience to deal with certain deck styles. I think I have mentioned I abhor dedicated combo decks in the casual environment because infinite engines and the like are only fun for the person who discovers them (or copies them) and I think that sort of thing should be reserved for tourney or at least by invite. If I run into a deck like that I will likely concede before it goes infinite. I just don't have the patience any time to sit through a solitaire game.
Another sideboard card I like for BU vs GW is Coral Net. However I do not see where to fit it into the sideboard of your current BU build.
As for Red instead of Blue, with how fast most pauper decks are if you dont have the card drawing of blue you lose too much (if you look at the deck, blue is almost pretty much only in the deck for the card drawing, well and a 2/2 beater to go against pro black critters) and I think you don't gain enough through red to make up for the loss of card advantage. And I think that BR would loose to the BU semi-mirror match. BR would also just seem to run out of gas too quickly and then you and your oppoenent are both sitting there wishing to get the better top deck draw.
RagMan
I still say that as long as a deck isn't tier one, it's fine for casual. When I first started playing, I also hated playing against counters. It was so demoralising seeing spell after spell fizzle that I played badly, waited when I should have been dropping threats, dropped threats when I should have held on etc.
At that point (the way I see it), casual Magic players diverge. You get one group (and let's not cast any judgements, so we'll just label them 'Winners') who decide to grit their teeth, play through it and maybe improve their game. Then there's the other group (who we'll call 'Others') who decide counters aren't casual, and resolve to quit every time they see them.
From my own experience, I found that hanging in there and doing my best enabled me to win some tough games, and taught me new skills. Yes, I lost some games too (in about the same frequency as I lose to every other archetype), but finding that you can beat a strategy, or rise to a new challenge is surely one of THE reasons to play any game in the first place.
The same goes for LD. Casual LD decks are janky as hell, play through the pain and be doubly satisfied when you crush them.
I may be anonymous, but I nevertheless want to thank you for a great article. Though I have already read the other FtV:E preview articles on PureMTGO, it is always good to get several opinions on the subject!
Rock on.