We're not in a contest among writers for the "most views" or "most comments" Most of our feedback comes from Reddit, Facebook, or Twitter now.
We are providing a platform for their voice. That's what we do.
Pete is not part of the magic Illuminati, what you think is collusion is actually not collusion, and I think it's best if we all just move on from this.
This is a deck which my Bogles deck hopes to be paired against. The RG Tokens deck does not seem to have any good answers to a large, trampling, lifelinking, first-striking, hexproof creature. If both the Bogles player and the RG Tokens player are successfully implementing their game plans, the Bogles player will win. The RG Tokens player must therefore hope that the Bogles player stumbles AND the RG Tokens deck does not stumble.
You have Electrickery and Moment's Peace and Gleeful Sabotage in the board to combat Bogles, however adding all these cards will dilute your deck to the extent that you may struggle to implement your own game plan. And if you remove your Spidersilk Armors post-board, then I will blow you out with my own Electrickeries.
No I can't prove the opposite, but I'm not the one that is making the claim that collusion happened.
Also, as the content manager of PureMtgo.com I can say this with honesty, at no point in the past nearly ten years I have been here, has anyone from WotC approached me or Heath in regards to "publishing a message" or "getting their information out" We are not a propaganda arm of Wizards of the Coast, and have always operated as a community site.
We do work with WotC, we ran contests in the pasts for theme decks and get preview cards, but if you've read anything I've written, or others on the site, that working relationship is not compliant of us not voicing criticisms of the company or the client. We're not tools of WotC in any way.
One of the things that Pete f.ex wrote was this, but he didnt know it was wrong when he wrote it (probably because wotc said it was good stuff and that Pete would be a nice person to write/say it for them);
Lisa plays mtg (swiss part/many matches/players) against Jacob.
Jacob asks if Lisa wants to concede to him. They talk and think and then Lisa concedes to Jacob. Later that night Jacob goes over to Lisa and gives her some boosters. lalala....
This is not collusion (Pete Jahn wrote).
...
We all know that one should not write like this, and we know that Pete wrote it without thinking, wotc deceived him to do it.
Well, I mean I obviously follow them. :D I'm just trying to figure out why recently. Hearts has been ok for the most part. Just a turn recently is all :/
If you have followed recent State of the Program comments, Hearts has had similar nonsensical rantings. At this point it would probably just be best to ignore.
Last development now is that Pete Jahn has contacted wotc about the collusion and bribery rules/politics. Rules are horribly wrong Pete says/said, and he says wotc has used him to legitimize the rules and judge practices for years without him being aware of how wrong that was.
In addition Pete now says he will also look back at things he has said about gambling and wotc/mtg/tournament scenes.
- it has dawned on me lately that wotc lies through their teeth on any occasion that that they have used volunteer affiliates on a grand scale to convey/carry through their lies.
I figure Counterspell was among the T9 just to hit blue some more, but it's not that groundbreaking threat, I don't think. I mean, is it even played much in Regular? Plenty of other countermagic options these days, some faster, some more tactical, some more easily played in multicolored decks.
Yeah, Scapeshift was from your list, Priest of Titania too; I just listed the new additions overall, not just the ones by me. Actually, I missed some that I didn't even realize were new: Delver, Gatekeeper, Symbiote.
That is not such a terrible idea. Player base is really split on the subject, though. Some fear the Swords a lot, some think they're not even that good.
Counterspell will be interesting, and I don't disagree with it coming off the Pure lists. I'm pretty sure I had Scapeshift though. Monks are at least one card short of regular tier 1 I feel, and probably a better bet at tier 2. I knew that going in, but I had made the list to play in the Underdog, only to find out last moment that Romellos had to go get them banned from Underdog even before their Mentor came around. I thought I would give them a shot anyway, for kicks.
Talked with Pete Jahn on the street the other day and he said he agreed the combat shortcut straight to opponent having priority before declare attackers is wrong and that the mtr is in conflict with the cr on this. And since the cr has higher authority than the mtr the pro tour judges were wrong in Dublin two weeks ago.
"(a thought: banning them everywhere? Just for the sheer elegance of not putting them here randomly. They're currently allowed only in Regular, and I don't think they're played much anyway)"
It seems like the more elegant solution would be to unban them everywhere.
...
Uh...I have too? It's quite valid.
We're not in a contest among writers for the "most views" or "most comments" Most of our feedback comes from Reddit, Facebook, or Twitter now.
We are providing a platform for their voice. That's what we do.
Pete is not part of the magic Illuminati, what you think is collusion is actually not collusion, and I think it's best if we all just move on from this.
Comparing Pete Jahn to other writers on PureMTGO is ... non valid.
Pete Jahn has been a Judge and Mtg writer since mid 90s, and rather high profile at that.
Other articles at Puremtgo are barely read or commented, much lower attendance.
Can confirm, I have been critical of WotC in past articles and have not been told to stop or shut up about it.
While you are not wrong that your build would give GR Tokens a very hard time. I don't think Manamorphos and Electrickery are popular on bogles:)
I could easily be wrong. If that was the case, I would quickly add Serene Heart.
Nice article.
This is a deck which my Bogles deck hopes to be paired against. The RG Tokens deck does not seem to have any good answers to a large, trampling, lifelinking, first-striking, hexproof creature. If both the Bogles player and the RG Tokens player are successfully implementing their game plans, the Bogles player will win. The RG Tokens player must therefore hope that the Bogles player stumbles AND the RG Tokens deck does not stumble.
You have Electrickery and Moment's Peace and Gleeful Sabotage in the board to combat Bogles, however adding all these cards will dilute your deck to the extent that you may struggle to implement your own game plan. And if you remove your Spidersilk Armors post-board, then I will blow you out with my own Electrickeries.
Here is the deck list, very sorry I forgot to put it in.
3 Spidersilk Armor
3 Dynacharge
2 Gruul Turf
4 Khalni Garden
4 Flame Slash
3 Raid Bombardment
2 Might of the Masses
4 Mogg War Marshal
5 Mountain
4 Nest Invader
4 Nettle Sentinel
4 Forest
4 Sprout Swarm
4 Thermo-Alchemist
2 Young Wolf
4 Rugged Highlands
4 Scatter the Seeds
2 Moment's Peace
3 Electrickery
4 Essence Warden
3 Gleeful Sabotage
3 Pyroblast
No I can't prove the opposite, but I'm not the one that is making the claim that collusion happened.
Also, as the content manager of PureMtgo.com I can say this with honesty, at no point in the past nearly ten years I have been here, has anyone from WotC approached me or Heath in regards to "publishing a message" or "getting their information out" We are not a propaganda arm of Wizards of the Coast, and have always operated as a community site.
We do work with WotC, we ran contests in the pasts for theme decks and get preview cards, but if you've read anything I've written, or others on the site, that working relationship is not compliant of us not voicing criticisms of the company or the client. We're not tools of WotC in any way.
Can you prove the opposite ?
What is the concept with stories with random persons/names ?
But can you prove that it is collusion? Because without knowing the details of said conversation, it's not collusion?
One of the things that Pete f.ex wrote was this, but he didnt know it was wrong when he wrote it (probably because wotc said it was good stuff and that Pete would be a nice person to write/say it for them);
Lisa plays mtg (swiss part/many matches/players) against Jacob.
Jacob asks if Lisa wants to concede to him. They talk and think and then Lisa concedes to Jacob. Later that night Jacob goes over to Lisa and gives her some boosters. lalala....
This is not collusion (Pete Jahn wrote).
...
We all know that one should not write like this, and we know that Pete wrote it without thinking, wotc deceived him to do it.
Well, I mean I obviously follow them. :D I'm just trying to figure out why recently. Hearts has been ok for the most part. Just a turn recently is all :/
If you have followed recent State of the Program comments, Hearts has had similar nonsensical rantings. At this point it would probably just be best to ignore.
What are you going on about?
Last development now is that Pete Jahn has contacted wotc about the collusion and bribery rules/politics. Rules are horribly wrong Pete says/said, and he says wotc has used him to legitimize the rules and judge practices for years without him being aware of how wrong that was.
In addition Pete now says he will also look back at things he has said about gambling and wotc/mtg/tournament scenes.
- it has dawned on me lately that wotc lies through their teeth on any occasion that that they have used volunteer affiliates on a grand scale to convey/carry through their lies.
Turns is great.
I figure Counterspell was among the T9 just to hit blue some more, but it's not that groundbreaking threat, I don't think. I mean, is it even played much in Regular? Plenty of other countermagic options these days, some faster, some more tactical, some more easily played in multicolored decks.
Yeah, Scapeshift was from your list, Priest of Titania too; I just listed the new additions overall, not just the ones by me. Actually, I missed some that I didn't even realize were new: Delver, Gatekeeper, Symbiote.
That is not such a terrible idea. Player base is really split on the subject, though. Some fear the Swords a lot, some think they're not even that good.
In re: modern decks, not sure if it is a REAL deck but Turns is a deck that's been around for a bit.
Counterspell will be interesting, and I don't disagree with it coming off the Pure lists. I'm pretty sure I had Scapeshift though. Monks are at least one card short of regular tier 1 I feel, and probably a better bet at tier 2. I knew that going in, but I had made the list to play in the Underdog, only to find out last moment that Romellos had to go get them banned from Underdog even before their Mentor came around. I thought I would give them a shot anyway, for kicks.
Fake News or Alternative Facts? Maybe both?
Talked with Pete Jahn on the street the other day and he said he agreed the combat shortcut straight to opponent having priority before declare attackers is wrong and that the mtr is in conflict with the cr on this. And since the cr has higher authority than the mtr the pro tour judges were wrong in Dublin two weeks ago.
"(a thought: banning them everywhere? Just for the sheer elegance of not putting them here randomly. They're currently allowed only in Regular, and I don't think they're played much anyway)"
It seems like the more elegant solution would be to unban them everywhere.
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/magic-online/magic-online-...
No word on fixing Dance of the Dead, so we'll need to test that. No word on Magmasaur.
EDIT: We have now tested Dance of the Dead, it is also fixed.
I defer to that reasoning.