One strategy I like using from time to time is making hate cards into an upside for your deck. Say for example using Rest in Peace alongside Energy Field and Web of Inertia (For maximum shenanigans, I like running this in a base blue God deck) Grafdigger's Cage is harder, but Affinity/Improvise/Cranial Plating effects can make it count.
Well one of the charming things about TWL is the need to preboard against the meta because of a lack of sideboard. So you look for cards that have a broad effect. Now against Entomb/Exhume/Reanimate there isn't a lot that can be done besides hoping for a good draw of Grafdigger's Cage or Rest In Peace. But it is possible to just exile whatever threat comes up with STP and PTE among others.
There is no perfect answer because Reanimator can afford to put a toolbox of counter-answers in their deck just to fight this. And your deck needs to be resilient enough to deal with the other strategies you might face.
Superaggro strategies can possibly win before the Reanimator deck gets fully functional, especially if they fumble with their draws or land. Control is another possible answer. Or you could play a shoehorn combo other than Reanimator or possibly just Reanimator itself. Rest In Peace (or Leyline of the Void) plus helm of obedience wins nicely enough.
In all you should determine how likely it is you will be paired against a good version of this archetype and plan accordingly.
Can I ask your advice? How do most players tend to handle reanimator decks, with no sideboards? Throughout MTG's history, re-animator decks have always been balanced by sideboard hate options.
I have not had much success against the reanimator strategy in Tribal, because they tend to "go over the top" of whatever you're trying to do, with very little mana required and high consistency.
Does going aggressive tend to work against them, or does the aggro plan tend to fail due to re-animation of cards like Sphinx of Steel Wind, Griselbrand and the like? Has main-decking hate cards with some flexibility (eg. Relic of Progenitus) paid off for you?
(Thankfully Wizards have "helped" us fight re-animator strategies with the recent bug on Animate Dead, but this reprieve will not last forever. Note that Mishra's Workshop was bugged for a whole year before Wizards fixed this card despite it being a Vintage staple, so there is some hope that Animate Dead might also take a long time to be fixed).
While they perhaps could have worded it better, that clearly means "not cheat." They are saying that he had an obligation to inform his opponent of his mistake, not cover it up by relying on his opponent's misunderstanding of his actions. If you are going to attack Wizards, at least do so logically.
From your own quote of the WOTC statement: "This was observed by a judge, at which point the game was halted, and the judge staff investigated the situation. Because the misrepresentation of the game state benefited Parker, he had an obligation to inform his opponent that he had crewed his vehicle and dealt no damage."
Note the word: "Observe" which also means to see, hear and or otherwise witness.
Also instead of deciding on the spot what significance their observation had, they investigated. IE: Gathered evidence and proved their judgment. You could maybe argue that there is no way for us to know if they actually did investigate but if those who were there watched a summary judgment without evidence gathering or a fair understanding of events, they would most certainly have said something and this would be a top news story instead of the story being about a banning.
I recognize that you have it in for wizards. Maybe for valid reasons, I don't know. But your insistence on saying things that are not true despite the facts in front of everyone is just confounding.
Restricting Primeval Titan to his tribe effectively bans him in Regular since its tribe has an awful curve and is more centered in red/white.
Of the three, Natural Order is clearly the most problematic and powerful. But then you would have to ban reanimator spells as well.
http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptaer/disqualification-in-ro...
In Round 5 of Pro Tour Aether Revolt, competitor Brock Parker was disqualified from the tournament for intentionally misrepresenting the game state to his advantage. The head judge of the tournament has provided a statement:
"Brock Parker crewed a Heart of Kiran that had just come into play that turn, and attempted to attack with it, forgetting that he was unable to do so. Parker's opponent believed he was attacking with the creature that was used to crew the Heart of Kiran. When damage went to resolve, Parker wrote down the life total reflecting damage that was done by the Vehicle, while his opponent wrote down damage as though the crewing creature had attacked instead.
At that stage of the turn, rather than point out the discrepancy, Parker went along with his opponent's recognition of the game state as his opponent saw it. The game state as Parker intended in his actions was illegal. The game state as his opponent interpreted the actions was legal, but not the intended line of play. This was observed by a judge, at which point the game was halted, and the judge staff investigated the situation. Because the misrepresentation of the game state benefited Parker, he had an obligation to inform his opponent that he had crewed his vehicle and dealt no damage. He could not allow the opponent to take 3 damage. The penalty for not bringing attention to this error was disqualification from the event."
...
This is another one of wotc's bullshit articles, they cant prove any of it.
I remember they also used to write stuff like "Person/player turned away from the GP venue because he sold cards for money."
I need to point out before any discussion that Natural Order will never be banned in Tribal Apocalypse under my watch. It's not just that I don't think it's worth a ban, it's that it's a card that has a special emotional meaning for me, and I wouldn't touch it, ever.
This said, there's not a particular statistical incidence of Natural Order twisting events, nor a particular frequency of use. Some tribes like it, some tribes in Underdog survive thanks to it, but it's all right. Most reanimator decks laugh in the face of those NO builds, anyway.
What I want to regulate is the incidence of NO targets with the subset of them. I don't want for NO to only fetch one thing, and right now, that's Primeval Titan or to a lesser extent Dragonlord Atarka. The Dragon is actually just the best available bullet, the Titan is the endgame, and it turns a single tutoring into a triple tutoring. Primeval into Marit Lage is also something we don't want to see abused with other means, so I'd let it be a Giant specialty only.
I didn't say new players should open them, I said new players will open them--there's a key difference. And your second point is just wrong--they literally have no purpose in life but to be opened (and the move back to Play Points discourages bots from opening them). Again, it's like packs in real life: those need to be opened to get the singles into the system, and people/organizations that can mitigate the variance will open them.
I disagree that they are for new players. They are not given out as prizes for new player queues. But this seems to be going nowhere. I stand by what I said. No one should open treasure chests.
I love the flavor of using Wargate in a Wall deck.
Natural Order is an innocuous Legacy tribal card whose power level does not exceed other solid options. I don't want to see any restrictions of the card or its friends in Regular (except that I'm neutral on Progenitus). In Underdog, like most powerful spells, it's power vs. the 20 on-tribe creatures grows tremendously. It can lodge a claim for best card in the format (highly debatable, of course).
I'd be happy with restricting the obvious targets for NO to their tribes, including Sylvan Primordial with the two listed. But at some point we need to go 'How is this card being used? Is it being used in a way that adds value to the event or no? Do we want it to keep being used in this manner? How many other cards do we need to restrict to keep this card in the pool in a way that adds value to the event?'
Again, remember these are for newer players--they probably have much more use for standard uncommons than non-Standard bulk rares (and remember, when the crafting system is announced, all rares will probably be the same). Also, the pack comparison isn't that accurate: a lot of a pack's value is based on the ability to use it as an entry fee, while packs only exist to be opened.
Totes...until that feel bad moment of realizing you were absolutely robbed. And I don't think it is all that costly to not rob people with the Chests. All they have to do is take out the commons. Seriously, getting only commons from a pack sucks. At least if you get 3 junk rares you have "rares".
Agreed, Hearts' position does not seem tenable.
Only to yourself. No one else is buying it.
One strategy I like using from time to time is making hate cards into an upside for your deck. Say for example using Rest in Peace alongside Energy Field and Web of Inertia (For maximum shenanigans, I like running this in a base blue God deck) Grafdigger's Cage is harder, but Affinity/Improvise/Cranial Plating effects can make it count.
Well one of the charming things about TWL is the need to preboard against the meta because of a lack of sideboard. So you look for cards that have a broad effect. Now against Entomb/Exhume/Reanimate there isn't a lot that can be done besides hoping for a good draw of Grafdigger's Cage or Rest In Peace. But it is possible to just exile whatever threat comes up with STP and PTE among others.
There is no perfect answer because Reanimator can afford to put a toolbox of counter-answers in their deck just to fight this. And your deck needs to be resilient enough to deal with the other strategies you might face.
Superaggro strategies can possibly win before the Reanimator deck gets fully functional, especially if they fumble with their draws or land. Control is another possible answer. Or you could play a shoehorn combo other than Reanimator or possibly just Reanimator itself. Rest In Peace (or Leyline of the Void) plus helm of obedience wins nicely enough.
In all you should determine how likely it is you will be paired against a good version of this archetype and plan accordingly.
Can I ask your advice? How do most players tend to handle reanimator decks, with no sideboards? Throughout MTG's history, re-animator decks have always been balanced by sideboard hate options.
I have not had much success against the reanimator strategy in Tribal, because they tend to "go over the top" of whatever you're trying to do, with very little mana required and high consistency.
Does going aggressive tend to work against them, or does the aggro plan tend to fail due to re-animation of cards like Sphinx of Steel Wind, Griselbrand and the like? Has main-decking hate cards with some flexibility (eg. Relic of Progenitus) paid off for you?
(Thankfully Wizards have "helped" us fight re-animator strategies with the recent bug on Animate Dead, but this reprieve will not last forever. Note that Mishra's Workshop was bugged for a whole year before Wizards fixed this card despite it being a Vintage staple, so there is some hope that Animate Dead might also take a long time to be fixed).
I am proving that they are making up stories.
While they perhaps could have worded it better, that clearly means "not cheat." They are saying that he had an obligation to inform his opponent of his mistake, not cover it up by relying on his opponent's misunderstanding of his actions. If you are going to attack Wizards, at least do so logically.
They are shooting themselves in the foot when they write;
"Because the misrepresentation of the game state benefited Parker, he had an obligation to inform his opponent...".
Benefiting or not has no bearing whatsoever on any obligation to inform someone, opponent/judge or whoever.
Their logics are conflicting with every second article they write.
From your own quote of the WOTC statement: "This was observed by a judge, at which point the game was halted, and the judge staff investigated the situation. Because the misrepresentation of the game state benefited Parker, he had an obligation to inform his opponent that he had crewed his vehicle and dealt no damage."
Note the word: "Observe" which also means to see, hear and or otherwise witness.
Also instead of deciding on the spot what significance their observation had, they investigated. IE: Gathered evidence and proved their judgment. You could maybe argue that there is no way for us to know if they actually did investigate but if those who were there watched a summary judgment without evidence gathering or a fair understanding of events, they would most certainly have said something and this would be a top news story instead of the story being about a banning.
I recognize that you have it in for wizards. Maybe for valid reasons, I don't know. But your insistence on saying things that are not true despite the facts in front of everyone is just confounding.
A judge did not observe it, in fact 98 percent of game actions in mtg events are not observed by camera or judge(s).
Restricting Primeval Titan to his tribe effectively bans him in Regular since its tribe has an awful curve and is more centered in red/white.
Of the three, Natural Order is clearly the most problematic and powerful. But then you would have to ban reanimator spells as well.
A judge observed it, how else do you prove it?
http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/ptaer/disqualification-in-ro...
In Round 5 of Pro Tour Aether Revolt, competitor Brock Parker was disqualified from the tournament for intentionally misrepresenting the game state to his advantage. The head judge of the tournament has provided a statement:
"Brock Parker crewed a Heart of Kiran that had just come into play that turn, and attempted to attack with it, forgetting that he was unable to do so. Parker's opponent believed he was attacking with the creature that was used to crew the Heart of Kiran. When damage went to resolve, Parker wrote down the life total reflecting damage that was done by the Vehicle, while his opponent wrote down damage as though the crewing creature had attacked instead.
At that stage of the turn, rather than point out the discrepancy, Parker went along with his opponent's recognition of the game state as his opponent saw it. The game state as Parker intended in his actions was illegal. The game state as his opponent interpreted the actions was legal, but not the intended line of play. This was observed by a judge, at which point the game was halted, and the judge staff investigated the situation. Because the misrepresentation of the game state benefited Parker, he had an obligation to inform his opponent that he had crewed his vehicle and dealt no damage. He could not allow the opponent to take 3 damage. The penalty for not bringing attention to this error was disqualification from the event."
...
This is another one of wotc's bullshit articles, they cant prove any of it.
I remember they also used to write stuff like "Person/player turned away from the GP venue because he sold cards for money."
I need to point out before any discussion that Natural Order will never be banned in Tribal Apocalypse under my watch. It's not just that I don't think it's worth a ban, it's that it's a card that has a special emotional meaning for me, and I wouldn't touch it, ever.
This said, there's not a particular statistical incidence of Natural Order twisting events, nor a particular frequency of use. Some tribes like it, some tribes in Underdog survive thanks to it, but it's all right. Most reanimator decks laugh in the face of those NO builds, anyway.
What I want to regulate is the incidence of NO targets with the subset of them. I don't want for NO to only fetch one thing, and right now, that's Primeval Titan or to a lesser extent Dragonlord Atarka. The Dragon is actually just the best available bullet, the Titan is the endgame, and it turns a single tutoring into a triple tutoring. Primeval into Marit Lage is also something we don't want to see abused with other means, so I'd let it be a Giant specialty only.
Hot potato.
I didn't say new players should open them, I said new players will open them--there's a key difference. And your second point is just wrong--they literally have no purpose in life but to be opened (and the move back to Play Points discourages bots from opening them). Again, it's like packs in real life: those need to be opened to get the singles into the system, and people/organizations that can mitigate the variance will open them.
I disagree that they are for new players. They are not given out as prizes for new player queues. But this seems to be going nowhere. I stand by what I said. No one should open treasure chests.
I love the flavor of using Wargate in a Wall deck.
Natural Order is an innocuous Legacy tribal card whose power level does not exceed other solid options. I don't want to see any restrictions of the card or its friends in Regular (except that I'm neutral on Progenitus). In Underdog, like most powerful spells, it's power vs. the 20 on-tribe creatures grows tremendously. It can lodge a claim for best card in the format (highly debatable, of course).
Modern is likely declining because of Modern Masters 2017 on the horizon, as well as potential for more ban list shake ups.
I'd be happy with restricting the obvious targets for NO to their tribes, including Sylvan Primordial with the two listed. But at some point we need to go 'How is this card being used? Is it being used in a way that adds value to the event or no? Do we want it to keep being used in this manner? How many other cards do we need to restrict to keep this card in the pool in a way that adds value to the event?'
@Gustavo Woltmann: I did a search on SCG and it didn't show up that much.
Again, remember these are for newer players--they probably have much more use for standard uncommons than non-Standard bulk rares (and remember, when the crafting system is announced, all rares will probably be the same). Also, the pack comparison isn't that accurate: a lot of a pack's value is based on the ability to use it as an entry fee, while packs only exist to be opened.
@Gustavo Woltmann: Yes, he is a Vampire with a second type, just like Vampire Nighthawk is a Shaman and Viscera Seer is a Wizard.
OK I did not double click so I am guessing server hiccup. Please delete this.
Totes...until that feel bad moment of realizing you were absolutely robbed. And I don't think it is all that costly to not rob people with the Chests. All they have to do is take out the commons. Seriously, getting only commons from a pack sucks. At least if you get 3 junk rares you have "rares".