With Raka Sanctuary, you missed the nastiest trick of all: Swans of Bryn Argoll. That and things like Stuffy Doll, Spitemare and Boros Reckoner. The deck needs creatures that want to be damaged, and you're in exactly the right colours for that.
I dig. As the achievement sponsor, I hereby give this the go-ahead for the final quarter of this season. Congratulations, Comix, you just unlocked the 'create an achievement' achievement.
By the way, the image that for some reason doesn't show up, was just a map of the area of the U.S. with Springdale, Arkansas highlighted.
There, somehow it works here.
May I propose a new achievement, especially with Battle for Zendikar's new "Awaken" mechanic?
Deal 20 damage using lands. Typically, a forest doesn't kill an opponent, unless:
* it's a Dryad Arbor
* it's "Awaken"'d by a spell mechanic
* it's enchanted as a Genju
* etc.
Similarly, beyond the "Awaken" aspect, some cards BECOME creatures, even tribe-specific creatures. For example, Faerie Conclave can become a 2/1 Faerie with flying until the end of turn. Lands that martyr themselves for a different creature wouldn't count, because the land itself didn't deal the damage.
Otherwise, these lands could also act as a sacrifice:damage outlet, if land permanents could be used as artillery. Essentially, deal twenty damage (which could be combat damage or other damage) using lands. Other tribal members' damage is not calculated for this achievement, unless they activate a land for a damage-dealing purpose. Yes, I intentionally avoided "to opponent," because if you could deal and survive 20 damage to yourself using lands, then more power to ya!
What are your thoughts on this unnamed achievement? Thanks in advance
The comment about flavor judging bounced an idea into my head so thanks for that MMR. Good interview. It gives an insight into what makes those decks tick in your hands where we've seen them (or their ilk) in others hands and they haven't done as well. A belated congrats on the title.
I too love the Doors (though I am not a fanatic. I spread my love across most of the classic rock spectrum and somewhat into prog rock (Yes, Queen,ELP, Rush etc).
Hello, everyone. As a relative newcomer to the format, I'm seeing a lot of critiques of certain, often expensive, cards that help define not only a specific deck/tribe, but typical "hate" spells to play against other powerful decks.
We can debate the merits of Wasteland all day. I don't think many people would advise to include a full playset for typical play. However, fewer people would add it based on price, alone. At time of this writing, we see Wasteland for sale at MTGOTraders.com for $69.60 apiece.
To include this single card in any deck, we create a division. Maybe you don't want to hear about "Wasteland" prices anymore. Okay, insert one of the other expensive cards in this thread.
What do I mean by expensive? This variable is what I feel is causing the division and questions about playability. Let's agree that, by virtue of your ability to 1) read this discussion, 2) on the internet, we all have a certain level of privilege.
To this end, I offer some possible solutions, to discuss here.
1) Ban the cards if the decision is sound. Just do it. Set a timeline, and hack the offending card(s).
2) Remind people of the "Prince of Paupers" achievement to unlock. We can all agree that any deck can win on any given day, given just typical and expected delays in a super-deck being online and effective (ie: missed land drops, board-sweeping effects, etc.).
3) Offer a (quarterly?) deck challenge specifically designed to welcome new players (who may not have the resources to be immediately competitive in a new deck) and players without a lot of expendable cash to drop on a set of cards that lose to Wasteland, for example. The deck construction would follow the similar formulae used by WotC for their pre-constructed decks: two rares, a handful of uncommons, and the rest are commons, for about ~$20. We could suspend the format card pool from which these are drawn (pre-constructed decks typically pull from that block of standard format for some synergetic plays). Sure, some decks may be very expensive, like an "Affinity" deck. If we set the price of the decks to be comparable to a pre-constructed deck, then we could level the playing field in a new deckbuilding achievement.
4) Offer a Standard-format event. While people may still buy some expensive cards, this limits the possible card pool from which to deck build. We can lament the loss of Kavu in current Standard, but the format could put a lot of experienced players on their heels; who knows the possible interactions of cards from BfZ, for example? Plus, a player could reasonably see their investment of cards go farther- I'll make a Standard deck, a Standard Pauper deck, and a Tribal Wars deck- all using the most recent (and likely, most readily available and less expensive cards).
As a player, I disregard comments about any given card can be answered. Sure, Delver of Secrets dies to a bunch of common-rarity cards. Unsummon it. Aerial Volley it. Black cards have a ton of answers, too. Maybe even Swords to Plowshares the Delver of Secrets. Yup, that ends the threat. Unless, of course, we assume the pilot of a Delver deck is a complete moron, and only flipped the card due to a single copy of a blue instant/sorcery. Let's pretend that the pilot doesn't have counterspells in blue, or doesn't have a way to make this creature hexproof'd or unsummoned itself. Yeah, I could Pyroblast the Delver, if I want to spend ~$4/card for it. Yes, Pyroblast has a lot of utility, so the ~$4 may go a longer way, especially against a mono-blue deck. It comes down to a debate between the haves and have-nots. Rather than blame professional-caliber players for having good cards, let's focus on the strategy skills of making decks. C'mon, we've already swallowed that pill by forcing our decks to fit 20 tribal creatures- what's a little more constriction so more players can avoid discussions like this, which, really, is going to come down to a choice few voices willing to neuter their own winning decks. Do I think I have any influence in purifying All is Dust? I didn't even know the card existed until I read this thread.
These are my simple suggestions to force a decision about a longer debate.
I think MisterMojo is besides Bazaar of Baghdad the only active Tribal player where I think I will most likely lose going into the match - he plays strong decks, doesn't make any big mistakes, takes time to think complicated situations through, etc., so it's almost always an interesting and uphill battle.
I would never recommend running a geddon strategy in Tribal unless the person was playing something conducive to it (because a wrongly timed or well refuted armageddon can be gg for the caster). That is a problem with suggesting specific cards.
Yes there are answers to everything. But to include them so that you have a viable for almost any match up deck means building very strange builds sometimes. Not recommended. Wasteland is generic enough (as is GQ) that it doesn't require build-around-me levels of creativity.
As for the argument that the deck can still win without cloudpost? I think that makes the suggestion to ban it more interesting as the goal isn't to cripple but make less powerful.
Generally, unless you need untapped mana to play an Eldrazi spell that turn. Forcing an opponent to lose a key one-of land for a basic (And quite a few people do use things like Manlands, Kessig Wolf Run, Karakas and Maze of Ith) can change the face of a game. That, and some people make extremely heavy use of greedy manabases: I've usually gotten very good value out of Magus of the Moon, for example.
Also, that reminds me. I need to build a Stranglehold deck.
To be fair, Ghost Quarter isn't really "viable" unless 1/3 of the meta has a basic-less mana base. The others and their ilk take a certain deck construction or safety valves when dead cards (Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, etc.). Cloudpost is not broken when it taps for 2. Cloudpost is broken when it taps for 3+, as it often does, which is what makes it not remotely comparable to Eldrazi Temple. Even two Cloudpost are better than two Temples.
I had games during testing where the cloudposts were successfully hated out, but which still were wins due to Eldrazi Temple being a drawbackless 2 mana land. Cloudpost is a powerful, powerful engine, but given glimmerposts and Vesuvas (Vesuvae?) can provide one of the few answers to monored Aggro.
Wasteland is by no means the only answer. Cloudposts and Urzatron tend to run very, very light or empty on Basics, which makes the 4-cent Ghost Quarter very viable indeed if you are so inclined. You can get a play set of Armageddons for less than 2 tickets, Ravages of War for just over.n.
I admit. I loled at this. Yes I can see some people being upset but hey whats life without a few angry folks? Cloudpost banned in everything? I'd support that!
Cloudpost is clearly (to me) the most broken card in the deck. Taking out Cloudpost is certainly an idea worth a good deal of consideration, especially since a lot of us don't have Wastelands, and LD is less productive in an aggro meta especially when forced to use 20 slots on creatures (16 with red/black Elementals or Shamans since Fulminator Mage is perfectly respectable).
The negative is the fact that so many tribes rely on a Cloudpost engine for their strength: artifact tribes for sure; and I've used them with Hydra X-spells to good effect as well, and also Angels. I'm sure there are others. Forcing these decks to use Urza lands would be probably slightly less consistent and the decks wouldn't get the incidental life gain from Glimmerpost (and Vesuva copies, when needed), making them also more susceptible to the red decks (not that I want to overly defend red decks).
I will leave it to others to debate whether or not a card such as Cloudpost should be banned when a perfectly decent answer (Wasteland) exists but is simply too expensive.
Whatever the answer, I'd rather see a Cloudpost ban in Underdog than Pure, if I had to choose, but both or none may be more correct.
I'm tempted now that I have 4 Thalia to make a bears deck but I think I will hold off. I haven't been feeling vintage lately. The restricting of Chalice surprised me a little. (I half expected Lodestone to take the hit instead.) The many shops/mud decks I faced often didn't play a Chalice straight away or they hit one instead of zero. (Granted that was all in TP because I am not crazy about throwing away tickets in tourney. And I am not a gambler.) Even more to the point many of the robot style decks (aggro shops?) didn't run any taxes aside from thorn. So I suspect a good portion of shops players won't even care. Restricted Trinisphere would show up a lot in many of those decks. Perhaps now that it is restricted you will see the pair together more often.
Thirst for knowledge is an interesting card. I was seeing it as a 1 of in the myriad combo decks in TP (Particularly those running a 4 dig + cruise + Ancestral + Brainstorm package.) I wouldn't be surprised if Thirst just swaps places with dig in those decks. Of course it is better in Affinity style decks (like MUD) but really drawing 3 is still good at 3 mana EVEN if you have to discard 2 cards after.
With Raka Sanctuary, you missed the nastiest trick of all: Swans of Bryn Argoll. That and things like Stuffy Doll, Spitemare and Boros Reckoner. The deck needs creatures that want to be damaged, and you're in exactly the right colours for that.
As for my beta version done by appmerge.com My program works sufficiently for me needs.
I appreciate the feedback. I will be working on them :)
Good article! We need more like this.
Yay, Comix!
I'm a terrible player, at least in G/25 time controls. Setting your decks as the metagame standard, however, allows me at least to be competitive.
I dig. As the achievement sponsor, I hereby give this the go-ahead for the final quarter of this season. Congratulations, Comix, you just unlocked the 'create an achievement' achievement.
And now it shows up in the article, too. Mysteries of HTML.
By the way, the image that for some reason doesn't show up, was just a map of the area of the U.S. with Springdale, Arkansas highlighted.
There, somehow it works here.
May I propose a new achievement, especially with Battle for Zendikar's new "Awaken" mechanic?
Deal 20 damage using lands. Typically, a forest doesn't kill an opponent, unless:
* it's a Dryad Arbor
* it's "Awaken"'d by a spell mechanic
* it's enchanted as a Genju
* etc.
Similarly, beyond the "Awaken" aspect, some cards BECOME creatures, even tribe-specific creatures. For example, Faerie Conclave can become a 2/1 Faerie with flying until the end of turn. Lands that martyr themselves for a different creature wouldn't count, because the land itself didn't deal the damage.
Otherwise, these lands could also act as a sacrifice:damage outlet, if land permanents could be used as artillery. Essentially, deal twenty damage (which could be combat damage or other damage) using lands. Other tribal members' damage is not calculated for this achievement, unless they activate a land for a damage-dealing purpose. Yes, I intentionally avoided "to opponent," because if you could deal and survive 20 damage to yourself using lands, then more power to ya!
What are your thoughts on this unnamed achievement? Thanks in advance
The comment about flavor judging bounced an idea into my head so thanks for that MMR. Good interview. It gives an insight into what makes those decks tick in your hands where we've seen them (or their ilk) in others hands and they haven't done as well. A belated congrats on the title.
I too love the Doors (though I am not a fanatic. I spread my love across most of the classic rock spectrum and somewhat into prog rock (Yes, Queen,ELP, Rush etc).
Hello, everyone. As a relative newcomer to the format, I'm seeing a lot of critiques of certain, often expensive, cards that help define not only a specific deck/tribe, but typical "hate" spells to play against other powerful decks.
We can debate the merits of Wasteland all day. I don't think many people would advise to include a full playset for typical play. However, fewer people would add it based on price, alone. At time of this writing, we see Wasteland for sale at MTGOTraders.com for $69.60 apiece.
To include this single card in any deck, we create a division. Maybe you don't want to hear about "Wasteland" prices anymore. Okay, insert one of the other expensive cards in this thread.
What do I mean by expensive? This variable is what I feel is causing the division and questions about playability. Let's agree that, by virtue of your ability to 1) read this discussion, 2) on the internet, we all have a certain level of privilege.
To this end, I offer some possible solutions, to discuss here.
1) Ban the cards if the decision is sound. Just do it. Set a timeline, and hack the offending card(s).
2) Remind people of the "Prince of Paupers" achievement to unlock. We can all agree that any deck can win on any given day, given just typical and expected delays in a super-deck being online and effective (ie: missed land drops, board-sweeping effects, etc.).
3) Offer a (quarterly?) deck challenge specifically designed to welcome new players (who may not have the resources to be immediately competitive in a new deck) and players without a lot of expendable cash to drop on a set of cards that lose to Wasteland, for example. The deck construction would follow the similar formulae used by WotC for their pre-constructed decks: two rares, a handful of uncommons, and the rest are commons, for about ~$20. We could suspend the format card pool from which these are drawn (pre-constructed decks typically pull from that block of standard format for some synergetic plays). Sure, some decks may be very expensive, like an "Affinity" deck. If we set the price of the decks to be comparable to a pre-constructed deck, then we could level the playing field in a new deckbuilding achievement.
4) Offer a Standard-format event. While people may still buy some expensive cards, this limits the possible card pool from which to deck build. We can lament the loss of Kavu in current Standard, but the format could put a lot of experienced players on their heels; who knows the possible interactions of cards from BfZ, for example? Plus, a player could reasonably see their investment of cards go farther- I'll make a Standard deck, a Standard Pauper deck, and a Tribal Wars deck- all using the most recent (and likely, most readily available and less expensive cards).
As a player, I disregard comments about any given card can be answered. Sure, Delver of Secrets dies to a bunch of common-rarity cards. Unsummon it. Aerial Volley it. Black cards have a ton of answers, too. Maybe even Swords to Plowshares the Delver of Secrets. Yup, that ends the threat. Unless, of course, we assume the pilot of a Delver deck is a complete moron, and only flipped the card due to a single copy of a blue instant/sorcery. Let's pretend that the pilot doesn't have counterspells in blue, or doesn't have a way to make this creature hexproof'd or unsummoned itself. Yeah, I could Pyroblast the Delver, if I want to spend ~$4/card for it. Yes, Pyroblast has a lot of utility, so the ~$4 may go a longer way, especially against a mono-blue deck. It comes down to a debate between the haves and have-nots. Rather than blame professional-caliber players for having good cards, let's focus on the strategy skills of making decks. C'mon, we've already swallowed that pill by forcing our decks to fit 20 tribal creatures- what's a little more constriction so more players can avoid discussions like this, which, really, is going to come down to a choice few voices willing to neuter their own winning decks. Do I think I have any influence in purifying All is Dust? I didn't even know the card existed until I read this thread.
These are my simple suggestions to force a decision about a longer debate.
Cool interview, enjoyed reading it.
I think MisterMojo is besides Bazaar of Baghdad the only active Tribal player where I think I will most likely lose going into the match - he plays strong decks, doesn't make any big mistakes, takes time to think complicated situations through, etc., so it's almost always an interesting and uphill battle.
The Loci and Vesuva are a straight swap for the Urzatron. It remains strong, but gets weaker against burn owing to the loss of Glimmerposts.
I am amazed and astounded that the Titans and AID are all legal in the format. It sure has changed from when I played.
I would never recommend running a geddon strategy in Tribal unless the person was playing something conducive to it (because a wrongly timed or well refuted armageddon can be gg for the caster). That is a problem with suggesting specific cards.
Yes there are answers to everything. But to include them so that you have a viable for almost any match up deck means building very strange builds sometimes. Not recommended. Wasteland is generic enough (as is GQ) that it doesn't require build-around-me levels of creativity.
As for the argument that the deck can still win without cloudpost? I think that makes the suggestion to ban it more interesting as the goal isn't to cripple but make less powerful.
Generally, unless you need untapped mana to play an Eldrazi spell that turn. Forcing an opponent to lose a key one-of land for a basic (And quite a few people do use things like Manlands, Kessig Wolf Run, Karakas and Maze of Ith) can change the face of a game. That, and some people make extremely heavy use of greedy manabases: I've usually gotten very good value out of Magus of the Moon, for example.
Also, that reminds me. I need to build a Stranglehold deck.
It's interesting in that there are several cards in BfZ that stand out as possible inclusions in Pauper, but as you say, nothing overtly powerful.
Eldrazi Devastator seems like the most likely to fit that category if there is a reliable way to get him out.
There is some stuff going on with landfall, but I think it might be too slow in the format (needing to use Evolving Wilds for multiple triggers).
Also, Outnumber is going to do amazing things in Goblins decks to deal with Gurmag Angler.
To be fair, Ghost Quarter isn't really "viable" unless 1/3 of the meta has a basic-less mana base. The others and their ilk take a certain deck construction or safety valves when dead cards (Brainstorm, Chrome Mox, etc.). Cloudpost is not broken when it taps for 2. Cloudpost is broken when it taps for 3+, as it often does, which is what makes it not remotely comparable to Eldrazi Temple. Even two Cloudpost are better than two Temples.
I had games during testing where the cloudposts were successfully hated out, but which still were wins due to Eldrazi Temple being a drawbackless 2 mana land. Cloudpost is a powerful, powerful engine, but given glimmerposts and Vesuvas (Vesuvae?) can provide one of the few answers to monored Aggro.
Wasteland is by no means the only answer. Cloudposts and Urzatron tend to run very, very light or empty on Basics, which makes the 4-cent Ghost Quarter very viable indeed if you are so inclined. You can get a play set of Armageddons for less than 2 tickets, Ravages of War for just over.n.
I admit. I loled at this. Yes I can see some people being upset but hey whats life without a few angry folks? Cloudpost banned in everything? I'd support that!
Part of me wants to ban Cloudpost from the entire game. But people would probably be upset if that happened so I'll just grin and bear it.
Cloudpost is clearly (to me) the most broken card in the deck. Taking out Cloudpost is certainly an idea worth a good deal of consideration, especially since a lot of us don't have Wastelands, and LD is less productive in an aggro meta especially when forced to use 20 slots on creatures (16 with red/black Elementals or Shamans since Fulminator Mage is perfectly respectable).
The negative is the fact that so many tribes rely on a Cloudpost engine for their strength: artifact tribes for sure; and I've used them with Hydra X-spells to good effect as well, and also Angels. I'm sure there are others. Forcing these decks to use Urza lands would be probably slightly less consistent and the decks wouldn't get the incidental life gain from Glimmerpost (and Vesuva copies, when needed), making them also more susceptible to the red decks (not that I want to overly defend red decks).
I will leave it to others to debate whether or not a card such as Cloudpost should be banned when a perfectly decent answer (Wasteland) exists but is simply too expensive.
Whatever the answer, I'd rather see a Cloudpost ban in Underdog than Pure, if I had to choose, but both or none may be more correct.
I'm tempted now that I have 4 Thalia to make a bears deck but I think I will hold off. I haven't been feeling vintage lately. The restricting of Chalice surprised me a little. (I half expected Lodestone to take the hit instead.) The many shops/mud decks I faced often didn't play a Chalice straight away or they hit one instead of zero. (Granted that was all in TP because I am not crazy about throwing away tickets in tourney. And I am not a gambler.) Even more to the point many of the robot style decks (aggro shops?) didn't run any taxes aside from thorn. So I suspect a good portion of shops players won't even care. Restricted Trinisphere would show up a lot in many of those decks. Perhaps now that it is restricted you will see the pair together more often.
Thirst for knowledge is an interesting card. I was seeing it as a 1 of in the myriad combo decks in TP (Particularly those running a 4 dig + cruise + Ancestral + Brainstorm package.) I wouldn't be surprised if Thirst just swaps places with dig in those decks. Of course it is better in Affinity style decks (like MUD) but really drawing 3 is still good at 3 mana EVEN if you have to discard 2 cards after.
Well that's my 2 centavos anyway.
The one card that fuels all that is Cloudpost...