I want to applaud Motu for writing, specifically in the face of what he probably knew was coming. It took a ton of guts, more so than it does to put forth something uncontroversial, so he deserves recognition for that.
Writing for public consumption is not at all easy, and doing it against the wind of popular opinion is admirable. I want motu to keep writing because it will do him, his readers, and the community as a whole a world of good.
Thanks for the picks, I will say there were lots of picks where I should have taken a borderpost. The Anathemancer were taken for constructed purposes, and I obviously knew that was the incorrect pick. I do think that Jund Hackblade is stronger than the deathtouch grimblade, then again, it all depends on your deck.
PureMTGO neither demands or requests articles from me. I decided to write /submit this article on my own.
The two-top 5 pick Anathemancers are bad. However, I clearly knew that at the time, and mentioned that they were for constructed purposes as I was expecting to play in the MOCS II at this point. Even with all of the so-called mispicks, I was new to the format, haven't played another triple ARB since, and think that it can be useful to somebody to see the process to evaluate a new set in draft. I will say again, clearly, there were some bad picks, but I valued removal and evasion, and I think that helped me in the long run.
Exodus's comment is pretentious, useless, stupid and empty
thank you, now you can left the discussion, kid's time is over
Btw, open a dictionary to find the definition of humility & respect instead of consiering yourself as a god in mtg you are so SO far to be. Let us discuss, we dont need any rageous dog insulting readers. I hope you are not expecting to write article... because your legitimacy is gone.
you're the biggest d-bag I've seen on this site, and I don't see how you can get so butthurt over comments not even directed towards you. Most of these comments are not disparaging at all, they are questions or opinions for discussion
I might be insulted if you weren't both wrong and inarticulate. Suggesting that a creature that gives +2/+2 or +3/+3 to ALL of your creatures is bad because it can be removed is something a 1500 rating player would say
If you write an article you should expect to be criticized for some people. Reality check: people have different opinions. Most writers are mature enough to realize that it's part of the package. That's why the comments section exist, and why it's open to everyone and not just article writers. You don't need to write an article to have a different opinion or question on the article
Congratulation to have won the contest ! Your deck is a crazy good budget build, and it very deserves the victory.
If i well remember, i played vs you when you were testing it. I was running a really non-budget deck : my Krock deck (read Kscope rock) fully powered with some of the best removal of the format (pulse, putrefy ...) and some other good stuff like Doran in example ... and i was defeated 2-0 without any contest. I was surprised by the incredible synergy your deck was providing to you, and by the way your removed many of my threat really easly with some cards i didnt really considered as useful before.
I really enjoyed the way you were using some "lost" cards to make them really potent in your build. Plus you perfectly piloted it for the win.
good job, grats, and all that.
and this was a fun albeit short article and I thought that you were very humble and succeeded in not being arrogant or vain.
Basic land finished a few weeks ago. I've sat on it, not because I thought it was bad, or because I thought it needed work. That's pretty far off as I respect Drew a lot as a writer.
However, Because there are so many Basic Land articles in the queue, I've had to sit on them to make sure everyone A)gets a turn and b) does not get sick of Drew.
@ Basic Land: I'll take any draft walkthrough... I'm pretty much an addict. In the future though do try to write about triple small set drafts when they are fresh. This looks like a first day of RRR draft. Picking uncommons for standard play is well... I think this has been discussed above. The decision process you make on cards is interesting to see and I'm sure matches what goes through my head when drafting (especially week one of triple small set). So thank you for the article and your time.
@exodus: Congrats on being the best troll in this comment section(today anyway). Look at how well you have thrust yourself into the center of attention. I'm pretty sure I don't need to be Q'd for the PT to know... that was grade A garbage you just served.
I see flawed 4-3-2-2s as interesting, although of course the BEST draft 8-4s... the thing is, the average joe is going to play 4322s mostly, and as long as we can learn from it, it's valuable.
Sorry that I came across as so critical. The draft had some mispicks as you acknowledged but the game play was very solid. I do like the article, it just seems that most limited articles on this site are of 4322's where the person made a number of mispicks but still went on to win the draft. I do see the value of these articles as they are very informative especially when you pointed out the mispicks. Anyways I am looking forward to more articles from you. Just for reference I'm currently ranked at around 1750 and climbing back towards 1800 and I only play in 84's.
If this is aimed towards me, I would probably keep on playing your FNM's and trying to succeed at those rather than trying to attempt to be cool and aim retarded comments towards me.
You want my input? What makes you worth my while to associate my success with your attitude of wanting to learn, or looking big when in all reality your the smallest thing going probably.
I clearly love myself .... that's the key to success is loving yourself.
A couple comments from a fellow author that has been doing this for a long time:
1) Don't get bummed out by the feedback. Forum responses generally range from harsh to nitpicking to an empty page.
2) Playtest and tourney results - up to and including winning a Pro Tour - won't convince everyone, but they really help prove the point.
3) When you really need to write a rebuttal, write another article on a completely different topic in between. It seems to damp down the flames. I don't know why, but it does.
4) Keep writing. Don't let the response get to you.
All of that said - I'm in the camp that doubts Wild Mongrel and Gush are enough. Back in it's day, Mongrel was great - because of the uncommon Madness cards and because Wonder gave it evasion. Yes - Mongrel was an insane card when it was released - but that was literally 20 sets ago. The standard for creatures has increased. Wild Mongrel also lacks support in Pauper - no dual lands to Gush up, no Wonder, no Circular Logic. On the other hand, I do run it in my UGR Threshold Pauper deck, so maybe. Playtesting will tell.
On the contrary, I liked it a lot, liked the deck and the all magic nostalgia thing. I just said that the budget version is terrible, cause it plays a bad manabase to manage to get the "no lands on my side" situation, and then every aggro deck rolls over it (control decks have not any trouble, they just need some counter, but this is a trouble even the "expensive" deck could have).
I didn't say anything about your style, the article is good and well written, but for me it remains full of wrong things, even worse if you are in the budget perspective. C'mon, you're suggesting people on a budget to spend 4 bucks on the sigil guys? Think about it: you're a new player, you read this article and thinks "wow, these guys have been playing for a long time, I should try their decks" and spend 4 $ on shining cards that, when playing, reveals themselves as crap. What do you think after this? Don't you lose faith in the writer? don't you feel frustrated? I remember when I begun playing, readin all those nice articles on wiz that showed the power of miojins. Well, I sure trust those writers a lot less now, after the dollars wasted that way.
But not because miojins are bad, they're among my favoured cards even today, but because some "experienced" player tricked me into thinking I would have won, at least some game. And I'm talking about the casual room, not vintage tourneys...
And again, you clearly did not read my critiques, you just stated "show respect". Well, you should understand that it is a great sign of respect the fact that somebody uses his time commenting your article with long and articulated arguments, and not just saying "omfg good!". It that I like magic on a budget and budget deck ideas, and simply put myself in the shoes of new players.
Honestly I there is no interest into pursuing this question further in articles, Motu. This has degenerated into a forum post, and I really don't see what warrants making this into an article. Go to the pauper community forums, post the deck there, playtest and give some results and let's see what comes out of it. Nothing more will be gained by idle banter. Who knows, maybe you are on to something. This useless debating and restating of the same points is not, however, going to help your argument nearly as much as good, hard testing results will. Good luck with that.
i think the build is decent tho as it looks like a ta/gro hybrid,
the coatl is absurdly ridic. ive been testing a build with bstorm gush winds of change it is pretty good like you draw a bunch send lands into hand for a winds trade, berserk before or if reasonable after winds tho the latter depends on luck.
i have also seen a version of ta with stiflenought /painters stone ,lours is probably correct tho that sinkhole and all the free masques spells are needed. hey maybe well get stripmine in ftv.exiled , wont miss sinkhole as much
I want to applaud Motu for writing, specifically in the face of what he probably knew was coming. It took a ton of guts, more so than it does to put forth something uncontroversial, so he deserves recognition for that.
Writing for public consumption is not at all easy, and doing it against the wind of popular opinion is admirable. I want motu to keep writing because it will do him, his readers, and the community as a whole a world of good.
-Alex
Thanks for the picks, I will say there were lots of picks where I should have taken a borderpost. The Anathemancer were taken for constructed purposes, and I obviously knew that was the incorrect pick. I do think that Jund Hackblade is stronger than the deathtouch grimblade, then again, it all depends on your deck.
PureMTGO neither demands or requests articles from me. I decided to write /submit this article on my own.
The two-top 5 pick Anathemancers are bad. However, I clearly knew that at the time, and mentioned that they were for constructed purposes as I was expecting to play in the MOCS II at this point. Even with all of the so-called mispicks, I was new to the format, haven't played another triple ARB since, and think that it can be useful to somebody to see the process to evaluate a new set in draft. I will say again, clearly, there were some bad picks, but I valued removal and evasion, and I think that helped me in the long run.
Exodus's comment is pretentious, useless, stupid and empty
thank you, now you can left the discussion, kid's time is over
Btw, open a dictionary to find the definition of humility & respect instead of consiering yourself as a god in mtg you are so SO far to be. Let us discuss, we dont need any rageous dog insulting readers. I hope you are not expecting to write article... because your legitimacy is gone.
you're the biggest d-bag I've seen on this site, and I don't see how you can get so butthurt over comments not even directed towards you. Most of these comments are not disparaging at all, they are questions or opinions for discussion
I might be insulted if you weren't both wrong and inarticulate. Suggesting that a creature that gives +2/+2 or +3/+3 to ALL of your creatures is bad because it can be removed is something a 1500 rating player would say
If you write an article you should expect to be criticized for some people. Reality check: people have different opinions. Most writers are mature enough to realize that it's part of the package. That's why the comments section exist, and why it's open to everyone and not just article writers. You don't need to write an article to have a different opinion or question on the article
Congratulation to have won the contest ! Your deck is a crazy good budget build, and it very deserves the victory.
If i well remember, i played vs you when you were testing it. I was running a really non-budget deck : my Krock deck (read Kscope rock) fully powered with some of the best removal of the format (pulse, putrefy ...) and some other good stuff like Doran in example ... and i was defeated 2-0 without any contest. I was surprised by the incredible synergy your deck was providing to you, and by the way your removed many of my threat really easly with some cards i didnt really considered as useful before.
I really enjoyed the way you were using some "lost" cards to make them really potent in your build. Plus you perfectly piloted it for the win.
Once again, congratulation AJ !
Well I found (as many players) that you make some weird pick.
Knight of Alara for example (pick 2, bad start hehe even for terminate).
The anathemancer for way more powerfull card (Rox, borderpost...)
Pick 6, the cycling instead of the borderpost.
Pick 8, qasali still here, pretty amazing
Pack 2 pick 5 : you probably took one of the wrongest pick... you can have a deathtouch, flying killer/cycling/, the 3/2 /cycling 1 damage...
pick 7 : rox/borderpost may be?
pick 10 : counter pick the knight ?
pick 11 : leonin/sigil?
Pack 3 pick 2 : the beast kill crea/border post/deat thouch crea.
pick 4 : qasali, deatchtouch , flying killer
Sure it's a different pov of the draft, but I don't think I'm too wrong for the pick.
I have too say that the players next to you were possibly beginner and or happy hehe. Strange draft really, but you won, thats the main thing.
good job, grats, and all that.
and this was a fun albeit short article and I thought that you were very humble and succeeded in not being arrogant or vain.
Congrats on the win once again. It sure looks fun to play as well as fun to play against as you also said. Good job.
LE
Congratulations again on winning. Great deck too. I can still remember getting steam-rolled by Gilderbairn more times than I thought possible :P
Basic land finished a few weeks ago. I've sat on it, not because I thought it was bad, or because I thought it needed work. That's pretty far off as I respect Drew a lot as a writer.
However, Because there are so many Basic Land articles in the queue, I've had to sit on them to make sure everyone A)gets a turn and b) does not get sick of Drew.
That's why this looks so rough around the edges.
Hear hear!
@ Basic Land: I'll take any draft walkthrough... I'm pretty much an addict. In the future though do try to write about triple small set drafts when they are fresh. This looks like a first day of RRR draft. Picking uncommons for standard play is well... I think this has been discussed above. The decision process you make on cards is interesting to see and I'm sure matches what goes through my head when drafting (especially week one of triple small set). So thank you for the article and your time.
@exodus: Congrats on being the best troll in this comment section(today anyway). Look at how well you have thrust yourself into the center of attention. I'm pretty sure I don't need to be Q'd for the PT to know... that was grade A garbage you just served.
I see flawed 4-3-2-2s as interesting, although of course the BEST draft 8-4s... the thing is, the average joe is going to play 4322s mostly, and as long as we can learn from it, it's valuable.
Sorry that I came across as so critical. The draft had some mispicks as you acknowledged but the game play was very solid. I do like the article, it just seems that most limited articles on this site are of 4322's where the person made a number of mispicks but still went on to win the draft. I do see the value of these articles as they are very informative especially when you pointed out the mispicks. Anyways I am looking forward to more articles from you. Just for reference I'm currently ranked at around 1750 and climbing back towards 1800 and I only play in 84's.
If this is aimed towards me, I would probably keep on playing your FNM's and trying to succeed at those rather than trying to attempt to be cool and aim retarded comments towards me.
You want my input? What makes you worth my while to associate my success with your attitude of wanting to learn, or looking big when in all reality your the smallest thing going probably.
I clearly love myself .... that's the key to success is loving yourself.
Nice comment, newb!
"I'm sure 90% of you don't understand the logic behind a 1st time drafter in such a format and I'm sure your well under 1800 regardless."
"Your achievements being?"
"honestly I won't even comment on this although in all do respect what events do you consistently play in?"
"well if that is the case where is your current article on how to succeed at Ala/Con/Reb Sealed Deck or some relevant format?"
"Qualify For A Pro Tour! Then I Might Respect Your Bashing .... Otherwise Zip It!"
OMG, I feel so sorry for you: you must be really loving yourself huh?
I think this looks like a fun deck theme, but a little unusual. I would've liked to see how it plays maybe some casual games.
A couple comments from a fellow author that has been doing this for a long time:
1) Don't get bummed out by the feedback. Forum responses generally range from harsh to nitpicking to an empty page.
2) Playtest and tourney results - up to and including winning a Pro Tour - won't convince everyone, but they really help prove the point.
3) When you really need to write a rebuttal, write another article on a completely different topic in between. It seems to damp down the flames. I don't know why, but it does.
4) Keep writing. Don't let the response get to you.
All of that said - I'm in the camp that doubts Wild Mongrel and Gush are enough. Back in it's day, Mongrel was great - because of the uncommon Madness cards and because Wonder gave it evasion. Yes - Mongrel was an insane card when it was released - but that was literally 20 sets ago. The standard for creatures has increased. Wild Mongrel also lacks support in Pauper - no dual lands to Gush up, no Wonder, no Circular Logic. On the other hand, I do run it in my UGR Threshold Pauper deck, so maybe. Playtesting will tell.
On the contrary, I liked it a lot, liked the deck and the all magic nostalgia thing. I just said that the budget version is terrible, cause it plays a bad manabase to manage to get the "no lands on my side" situation, and then every aggro deck rolls over it (control decks have not any trouble, they just need some counter, but this is a trouble even the "expensive" deck could have).
I didn't say anything about your style, the article is good and well written, but for me it remains full of wrong things, even worse if you are in the budget perspective. C'mon, you're suggesting people on a budget to spend 4 bucks on the sigil guys? Think about it: you're a new player, you read this article and thinks "wow, these guys have been playing for a long time, I should try their decks" and spend 4 $ on shining cards that, when playing, reveals themselves as crap. What do you think after this? Don't you lose faith in the writer? don't you feel frustrated? I remember when I begun playing, readin all those nice articles on wiz that showed the power of miojins. Well, I sure trust those writers a lot less now, after the dollars wasted that way.
But not because miojins are bad, they're among my favoured cards even today, but because some "experienced" player tricked me into thinking I would have won, at least some game. And I'm talking about the casual room, not vintage tourneys...
And again, you clearly did not read my critiques, you just stated "show respect". Well, you should understand that it is a great sign of respect the fact that somebody uses his time commenting your article with long and articulated arguments, and not just saying "omfg good!". It that I like magic on a budget and budget deck ideas, and simply put myself in the shoes of new players.
you shoudl do an article called Welcome to 1998 =)
Honestly I there is no interest into pursuing this question further in articles, Motu. This has degenerated into a forum post, and I really don't see what warrants making this into an article. Go to the pauper community forums, post the deck there, playtest and give some results and let's see what comes out of it. Nothing more will be gained by idle banter. Who knows, maybe you are on to something. This useless debating and restating of the same points is not, however, going to help your argument nearly as much as good, hard testing results will. Good luck with that.
i think the build is decent tho as it looks like a ta/gro hybrid,
the coatl is absurdly ridic. ive been testing a build with bstorm gush winds of change it is pretty good like you draw a bunch send lands into hand for a winds trade, berserk before or if reasonable after winds tho the latter depends on luck.
i have also seen a version of ta with stiflenought /painters stone ,lours is probably correct tho that sinkhole and all the free masques spells are needed. hey maybe well get stripmine in ftv.exiled , wont miss sinkhole as much
What, you didn't like my Sandsipoise article? How did *I* get dragged into this?? =)