|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jul 16, 2008 9:01:07 GMT -4
I am ready.
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jul 12, 2008 13:54:47 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 30, 2008 17:00:03 GMT -4
so, how was that for Forum baiting... nice one! Btw there is a lot of junk in the articles you can see online. The so-called sideboard tech outlined in the article above is an example of what most people do: detailing their strategy but never actually criticizing objectively. Out of 8 match-ups he sides Slaughter Pact 6 times. Threaten is used in 50% of the matches (4 out of 8) but only 1 in SB? 1 Loxodon Warhammer and 1 Furystoke Giant in SB but what for? Hehe...for the match up when you want one of the 4 to resolve
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 29, 2008 13:13:46 GMT -4
thedailywtf.com/Articles/Do-You-Believe-In-Magic-Online.aspxGreat read, very honest about the current state of Magic Online and accurate in it's history. even better are the subsiduary reads..this one is amazing... virtudyne.com/read all 4 Virtudyne Articles in order...awesome Long winded but the best read i've had in ages...and it's true, even the companies name is changed .. that makes it even more unreal.. when you decide to dig a little deeped..i'll leave that for the interested though.
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 29, 2008 11:56:52 GMT -4
Personally I'd play Legacy but i think this would auot-lock alot of folk out... and even good STD decks have been known to be able to compete in EXT..so i'll choose EXT. I'd even go so far as to suggest our own format....kinda. I'd suggest we prepare for the rotation by starting the post rotation format now... 1) I doubt that many folk have lots of IPA or OTJ ( here in case your wondering ...so they both rotate soon..and no-oone will want to invest in cards for those. 2) We get a heads-up if we test rotated decks now for when it does rotate 3) As noted above.. a current STD deck beefed up with a bit of RGD will be very, very competetive so even those with only a few old cards can have a shot. >EXT for me...
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 29, 2008 11:48:25 GMT -4
so, how was that for Forum baiting... I CAN'T BELIEVE I GOT TROLLED BY TREVOR ...AND I BIT argghhhhhhhh hhhhhhHHHHH HHHHHHHHHH GGGGGGGGGG HHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHH HHHHHH!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 29, 2008 5:35:30 GMT -4
Maybe as you grew up you were the one that became irrelevant and arrogant? Food for thought... No, his writing was relevent for a time (to me anyway) but the more I read it now the less i find myself able too... don't get me wrong, he's a great writer, but i'd prefer to read someone else like Rizzo, Zvi or Chapin ... I also can't read The Da Vinci code but that doesn't make it anyless of a good book or a concept ...i just find Dan Brown an unreadable author. It's a matter of personl taste... i think Dan Brown writes at a level aged for 15 year olds. Just like the Belgariad was great when i was 15 .. i can't pick it up and read it now, i'd much rather read a David Gemmel book where the main character gets killed off in the first chapter. This does not make me arrogant, it makes me discerning ... i'm not knocking anyone else for reading Flores or for liking Flores.. i did too for a long time... if i knocked people for liking him..now that would be arrogant
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 25, 2008 7:39:50 GMT -4
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 23, 2008 7:35:28 GMT -4
Feature Article – Black/Red Tokens in Standard by Stuart Wright About Stuart Wright: Stuart is a mainstay on the Pro Tour, and one of the premier Constructed minds in the UK. Many of his decks have cut up the Pro Tour in the hands of high-profile players. He has numerous money finishes at both Pro Tour and Grand Prix level tournaments, and is regarded one of the strongest deckbuilders in the world. At Pro Tour: Hollywood, I played a Red/Black token deck of my own design. I placed 33rd. Before the PT, there were a number of such Black/Red token style decks floating around, mostly abusing Grave Pact. I managed a little playtesting with the deck before the Shadowmoor release, to get a basic feel for the strategy. It was fine but it needed something, and luckily they printed pretty much the perfect card in Furystoke Giant. It fills almost the same role as Grave Pact, but is still useful against low creature decks. More importantly, it makes your manabase so much better. Here’s what I played in the PT: Black/Red Tokens Suggested by Stuart Wright on 2008-06-29 as a potential deck for Standard As written about in www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/16050.htmlPrint this deck! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Maindeck: Creatures 3 Furystoke Giant 4 Greater Gargadon 3 Magus Of The Moon 4 Marsh Flitter 4 Mogg Fanatic 4 Mogg War Marshal 3 Nantuko Husk 4 Shadow Guildmage Instants 1 Slaughter Pact Tribal Enchantments 4 Bitterblossom Tribal Instants 2 Nameless Inversion Basic Lands 7 Mountain 7 Swamp Lands 4 Auntie's Hovel 4 Sulfurous Springs Legendary Lands 1 Kher Keep 1 Pendelhaven Sideboard: 4 Dragon's Claw 1 Loxodon Warhammer 1 Furystoke Giant 1 Magus Of The Moon 2 Extirpate 2 Slaughter Pact 4 Thoughtseize -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Download this deck in Apprentice format! Download this deck in Magic Online Text format! -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- I’m pretty happy with this list, and would only make a few slight changes. First, I’d cut the Slaughter Pact from the main and replace it with the fourth Furystoke Giant. Then I’d add an Extirpate and a Threaten to the sideboard, in place of the Furystoke and Loxodon Warhammer. The earlier builds of this deck had more goblins, such as Knucklebone Witch and Mad Auntie, but the problem with all of these cards was that if you cut any then they all grew weaker. In the end I decided that the overall goblin theme wasn’t really worth it, and went back to simply playing the most powerful cards (including the goblins that didn’t require help to be useful). This does mean that the goblin count for Auntie’s Hovel is a bit low, and I was forced to play Nameless Inversion over Terror to help with this problem. Once the goblin cards were cut we had a lot more space for metagame cards like Magus of the Moon and Shadow Guildmage, both of which are very powerful in the current format. People are playing a lot of non-basic lands even in their two color decks, due to Mutavault and Treetop Village. This means Magus has the potential to lock people out of playing any spells, and it still disrupts them in a worst-case scenario. Shadow Guildmage might not seem powerful, but in current Standard there are a lot of one-toughness creatures. In fact, almost all of the current top decks are creature based, which is certainly something to remember when building your own decks. In this case, killing off creatures like Llanowar Elves or Cursecatchers can be really powerful, helping you to gain board control. As this deck has four, it isn’t that rare for you to draw two or more, allowing you to utterly dominate any deck without removal, such as Merfolk. The other cards in the deck either produce tokens or provide some useful effect with tokens. I’ve had quite a few people ask me about the list and why cards are or aren’t in it so I’m going to go over the more common questions. 1) Why Furystoke Giant over Grave Pact? The simple answer is Giant is just better, as I mentioned earlier... he makes your manabase better and works if they don’t have creatures out. He allows for a much faster kill; shooting people for ten twice is very possible, and you can get a similar effect more than once. If the mana would support it properly I would include some number of Grave Pacts in my sideboard, but Magus of the Moon makes this really hard. 2) Why aren’t you playing different lands? (Mostly Mutavault or Graven Cairns) I feel that a lot of people don’t put enough thought into their manabase, when it is one of the most important parts of building a deck. First you need to see if you can support the spells you want at all with the lands you have available. Then, assuming you can, you need to work out which non-basic lands will help you the most. You can’t afford to run nothing but pain lands, for example, and often adding a good number of basic lands will help you the most as well as helping with things like Magus of the Moon. In this deck’s case, you can see that we have twelve on- drops and no cards that required RR or BB early on. Therefore Graven Cairns is useless for casting a large number of our early drops, and doesn’t help that much for casting other spells. It would also become a Mountain under Magus, making it even worse here. Mutavault, on the other hand, just doesn’t fit with the game plan. You are mostly the control deck and not the player attacking with your creatures. If I felt that this deck could support more colorless lands then I would add a 2nd Kher Keep and Pendelhaven before adding lands that don’t help with your basic game plan. The mana in this deck can be difficult, as you do want Black and Red available as soon as possible... taking damage off your lands as well as from Bitterblossom and Shadow Guildmage can soon add up. 3) Do I think this deck is still good? Yes, it is certainly still playable. You lose some of the surprise factor, but it is still powerful enough. The main problem is Reveillark, which is your worse matchup. If you think that deck is going to be very popular in your area, then you probably should find a different deck to play in place of this one. Normally there are lots of different decks, with no one deck too popular, and thus the matchup isn’t impossible to win. Final question... How do you sideboard with this deck? Faeries In: 2 Slaughter Pact, 1 Magus of the Moon, 4 Thoughtseize Out: 4 Mogg War Marshal, 1 Greater Gargadon, 1 Marsh Flitter, 1 Furystoke Giant Here you take out a few of the more expensive cards, along with defensive cards that don’t really help against flyers. You have Slaughter Pact to replace them, which is mostly to help fight Mistbind Clique and then play a spell while they are tapped out from it. Thoughtseize also helps you force spells through, and removing their Bitterblossom can be very powerful. They will probably bring in Slaughter Pacts to deal with your Magus and sometimes Thoughtseize. Overall this matchup is quite a bit in your favor, but it is certainly possible for them to overpower you with their best draws. Mono Red In 4 Dragon’s Claw, 2 Slaughter Pact, 1 Threaten Out: 3 Magus of the Moon, 4 Bitterblossom In this matchup, the early game is all about minimizing the damage they can deal to you with creatures, as in the long run your tokens are impossible for them to deal with in game 1. After sideboard they will probably have something like Sulfurous Blast, but you have Dragon’s Claw so they game will probably last quite a bit longer. This is still fine, as you have much better tools to win a long drawn-out game; just try not to overextend too much. Again, this matchup is in your favor, but you need to prevent as much early damage as possible then finish them quickly. GB Elves In: 2 Slaughter Pact, 1 Threaten Out: 3 Greater Gargadon Greater Gargadon is pretty weak in this matchup, as they have lots of blockers and cards like Wren’s Run Vanquishers that simply kill it. The Threaten is mostly because there is an empty sideboard slot, and it is useful to kill Chameleon Colossus by feeding it to Marsh Flitters as well as the normal sacrifice outlets. You are very much the defensive deck, trying to reduce damage and build up to a big Furystoke Giant, or to kill them with flying tokens. This means you don’t want to start racing, you just want to absorb damage and conserve creature. Try to keep yourself out of Profane Command range, but otherwise you need a critical mass of creatures. They will probably bring in Slaughter Pact against you. Overall, the matchup is slightly in your favor but you need to play correctly to win. Merfolk In: 2 Slaughter Pact, 1 Threaten Out: 3 Magus of the Moon Again, you have to play defensively and try and save your removal for their Lord of Atlantis and Merrow Reejerey. As they don’t have any removal, Shadow Guildmage often utterly crushes them, and if you draw two you will often have total control. They will probably bring in Sunlance to help a touch, but overall this matchup is very easy and they need a very good draw to beat you. Reveillark In: 3 Extirpate, 4 Thoughtseize, 1 Magus of the Moon, 1 Threaten Out: 2 Shadow Guildmage, 4 Mogg War Marshal, 2 Nameless Inversion This matchup is pretty bad for you, so you need to take more risks than normal. You have a reasonable amount of resistance to Wrath of God, but your clock isn’t fast enough to kill them before they can get set up. Your main plan is to do some damage early then finish them off with a Furystoke Giant… this deck doesn’t run many counters, so try and combo off before they can. After sideboard you have a lot more disruption and a better chance in the long game. However, they often have Crovax, Ascendant Hero, so it is often best to save your Thoughtseize until just before they get to six mana. Doran In: 1 Magus of the Moon, 1 Slaughter Pact Out: 2 Nameless Inversion Making a few large creatures isn’t really a very good game plan against a deck full of tokens, so this matchup is pretty easy for you. It plays much like elves, except they have fewer larger creatures which are much easier for you to deal with. Also, Magus of the Moon is rather good against them as you can easily kill mana creatures, leaving them with a board full of mountains. Now on to new matchups that only really popped up during the Pro Tour. I don’t really have that much play experience against these decks, so it will just have to be an educated guess on what to do. RG Ramp In: 4 Thoughtseize, 1 Slaughter Pact Out: 2 Nameless Inversion, 3 Magus of the Moon This is like Reveillark. It’s not quite as bad, but the matchups have similar types of games. They have a big sweeper and large powerful spell to which they ramp up. Try not to over extend too much. Quick n' Toast In: 4 Thoughtseize, 3 Extirpate, 1 Magus of the Moon Out: 2 Nameless Inversion, 2 Mogg War Marshal, 4 Shadow Guildmage I’m not sure if all the Extirpates is too many but you can at least use them with Thoughtseize to remove cards they draw two of if you have too many. Although the Slaughter Pacts do come in a lot, I still don’t think they are quite worth playing main deck. You have a number of cards that come out in the wrong matchups, and having more powerful narrow cards in the main deck seems like a better plan. Hopefully, I’ve addressed any issues people have with this deck, but feel free to ask about anything else in the forums. Overall, I’m very happy with this deck. I had a reasonable finish, and someone else who picked up the deck the night before the tournament also did well... better than me, of course! Good luck! Stuart
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 21, 2008 14:35:31 GMT -4
Sullivan Library - Examining Block Hybrids by Adrian Sullivan
About Adrian Sullivan: Adrian has spent years building a reputation for creative deckbuilding, and written for nearly every Magic magazine at one time or another. His decks have seen play in T8s all over the world, from Friday Night Magic to Pro Tours and the Magic World Championship. The first card I generally think of when I think about hybrid mana is usually Rakdos Guildmage. There’s just something awesome about that card. A 2/2 for two is just fine, but when you hit that four mana mark, suddenly you can have a guy that can just work overtime. The next hybrid card I generally think of is Selesnya Guildmage, if only because I’ve made so, so many decks with him. Of all of the Guildmages, I’d warrant that it is the best, though I’m not 100% sure that this is actually true.
In a lot of ways, the hybrid cards that really resonate from Ravnica are those in the cycle of Guildmages. All of them can easily be described by two parts: [Guildname] Guildmage. We know that we’re dealing with a 2/2 for two hybrid symbols, with activated abilities of some kind in each color. For me, these guys become a marking point when it came to actually describing how we cost spells.
How do you verbalize the casting cost of, say, Swans of Bryn Argoll? You could say, “Two and two of either White or Blue”, or “Two and Two Hybrid White/Blue”. These are shorter than some alternatives, but they still feel a bit clunky. I tend to say “Az/Az/Two” as shorthand for “Two and Two Azorius”. Az, Dim, Rak, Gru, Sel… all of these are things we’re going to have to go re-accustomed to seeing play. By the time Berlin rolls around, we’ll have to add in the others, Bor, Iz, Sim, Gol, and Orz.
In the meantime, whatever we call them, we’re still going to have to deal with the special problem of the hybrid card. When we look at these cards, we need to begin to realize that these aren’t cards that are, say for Selesnya, Green and White, but rather Green or White. Many of these cards are particularly powerful, and so we need to understand what it means that they are going to be powering up our environment.
One of the clearest questions that I think a lot of people have asked themselves about these cards can be seen in Kithkin, with the Lieges. Clearly, while you can use one Liege or the other, why is it that of the two White Lieges, it is the 1/3 that seems to be winning out over the 4/4? There are reasons, of course.
Mirrorweave: The Overrun that was Flametongue Kavu
Mirrorweave is a card that casts a deep shadow over this format. Think about what the card does: for any creature that you might consider running, you have to ask yourself, “What if they cast Mirrorweave with creature advantage?” Kithkin are liable to be running some combination of Spectral Procession, Cloudgoat Ranger, and Militia’s Pride, if not all three, and thus, it is quite likely that they might just have the creature edge on you. If they Mirrorweave your creature, are you just completely screwed?
This is, in many ways, a variant of the question that was asked by Flametongue Kavu. Is it really worth your time to cast a creature that could die to Flametongue? Tons of otherwise great cards simply could not be played because of the ubiquitous FTK. Serra Angel, Sengir Vampire, or even Tahngarth, Talruum Hero – all of these cards might have made a big splash in a world that didn’t include FTK, but they couldn’t really dent it, because the world did include it. In the case of FTK, the card was easily splashable, and could be seen in any number of decks. For Mirrorweave, the card isn’t spectacularly splashable, but it is a mainstay in Kithkin, the deck that probably manages to make a splash with at least 30%+ of the people that are in contention at any particular tourney at a time.
So, what if they do cast a Mirrorweave on your creature? You’re immune, clearly, with a Legend, but there really aren’t that many Legends around. Can you afford to cast that big creature? Chameleon Colossus is big, but at least it costs the same amount as a Mirrorweave, and not more. Even so, it can be a pretty big hit if they copy your Colossus. But what if it is worse? What if they copy a “god” of some kind, like your Deus of Calamity? I can tell you from experience, the likelihood is that you’ll lose that game. And to my mind, this makes Deus probably unplayable, at least in the maindeck.
Kithkin can so abuse it because of the abundance of creatures to which it can access. It is important to remember, though, that it is a Blue card too. This means that Merfolk (in as much as someone can make them work) could have access to the card. A Faerie player could have access to the card, if they so wanted. While I hesitate to imagine that they’d be able to make the card pack the same wallop, it is still worth remembering that they can be applied from this other color.
The question or problem posed by Mirrorweave is to the format at large: What are you going to do when you see me? And you’d better have your answer…
The Problem of Oversoul of Dusk
Ah, Oversoul of Dusk. This card remains one of my favorite cards that has seen print in a long time. I was always a fan of Sabretooth Nishoba, and this card does the Nishoba one better by adding in protection from yet another color. The Oversoul is even immune (uniquely among the Gods) to Mirrorweave (kind of)! Wow, who could ask for more!
The chief problem with the Oversoul is that he is a God. That means he is going to literally require twenty-five particularly-colored mana to consistently support. Sel/Sel/Sel/Sel/Sel is a lot of specific mana. We’re not talking about a format with much in the way of Birds of Paradise either. Even Jelger Wiegersma’s Kithkin, consider by many to be the gold standard, only runs twenty-four. You really have to be dedicated to decide to go to an Oversoul (or any God, for that matter).
But, then, when we come back to the issue of Kithkin, some problems start poking up their head. The Oversoul isn’t pro-White. This means that it is still able to be tapped down. This means it is still able to be chump-blocked by random White guys. This means that you’re still vulnerable to Oblivion Ring. And even if it can’t be the target of Mirrorweave, other cards still can, and he is thus easily killable by Mirrorweave (even if it does cause a two-for-one).
The appeal, of course, is in dealing with Faeries. What are they going to do to it? They can’t Sower it, they (mostly) can’t chump block it. Pretty much all that they’ve got is throwing Mutavaults in the way of it, or tapping it down with Cryptic Command. They’ve certainly got it a lot worse than Green, who can toss down a Cloudthresher in the way and take it out on merit.
The big problem for Oversoul in the Block format is environment. In Standard, Faeries is the clear favorite. But in Block, Faeries, while still very good, is an anemic cousin to its Standard counterpart, and Kithkin reign supreme. Cloudthresher is very much to be expected from a ton of decks. 5/5 is not necessarily going to be the be-all and end-all. While still potent, it is a fish out of water for Block.
The Hope of Fulminator Mage
I love Fulminator Mage. I’ve had it in a ton of decks already. But, I have to be honest – he hasn’t made the cut yet in most of them.
The real problem with Fulminator Mage is simple. Too often, it is just a bad Stone Rain. This is not particularly good.
What you often really want him to be is a reverse Sakura-Tribe Elder. He hops out there, and chumps (or maybe kills) an attacker, and then offs one of their lands. You get the whole deal, the two-for-one, and the mana advantage, and it is all wrapped up in a nice package… one that, if you draw it in the late game, you can actually use to kill someone.
That plan, however… it so rarely works.
As a three-drop, he will often arrive to the party after the Kithkin deck has already started messing you around with a much more aggressive curve. Far from trading, perhaps the Fulminator Mage can prevent three damage, and then, maybe, kill a land. The problem, though, is that these Kithkin decks routinely run 26 land, and if they’re not, they’re actually built to survive on low-land counts. Versus Faeries, the problem is much the same: he gets down on the table, but there is already a Bitterblossom going. If they really don’t like him, they often don’t mind losing a few Faerie Rogues to off him, and if you are sacking to kill a land, while it is certainly possible that you’re screwing them, sometimes it just feels so incredible underwhelming.
Versus the five-color decks, the Fulminator Mage is so much more exciting. You’re really messing with their colors! But if you think about it, one of the things that is really problematic about him is that in that matchup, he is “merely” a Stone Rain. That wouldn’t be so bad, but unless you’re working in some way to exploit that, it can be underwhelming.
How do you exploit Stone Rain? Well, you can exploit it like Sped Red did, and drop a bunch of men and have a Stone Rain be a (virtual) Time Walk. That is completely reasonable. Unfortunately, a cursory glance at the Red men that you have at your fingertips should make it clear just how unsatisfying that that is. Maybe the answer is to be closer to an Aggro-Black list with Rain of Tears? That certainly would be something that I imagine might be worth exploring…
What Kitchen Finks Poses
Kitchen Finks is not a problem for aggressive decks because it can gain 4 life. That would be a whoop-de-doo. It is a problem because if you don’t deal with it, it represents a substantial clock, with a tiny life swing. And if you do deal with it, Persist ensures that it isn’t gone yet, and there is still a reasonable clock to worry about (plus that final life swing).
Compare Kitchen Finks to Loxodon Hierarch. Hierarch guarantees the four life gain that Finks cannot. But, Hierarch, once eliminated, is gone. Finks takes two swings to take out. For aggressive decks, this is a pretty strong problem. Even for controlling decks, this is problematic. You cannot simply ignore Finks. They pack too much wallop. Killing them, though, is also aggravating, if only because the effort never seems to equal the returns. Yet you have to do it.
The real reason that we’re not seeing more out of Kitchen Finks is placement. What home do you put them in? They seem seriously unworthy of being placed into a Kithkin deck. While powerful, they are likely to actually represent a downturn in your power curve because of the ways that they don’t successfully synergize with the rest of your deck. They found a home in Bucher’s deck because of the double duty that they can pull against aggressive and controlling decks, but at the same time, it seems pretty clear that their entire purpose is to essentially be a speed-bump or a lightning rod. Is that good enough?
It might be. Slowing down Kithkin matters. We never saw it appear in the matchup versus Jelger Wiegersma, but likely its appearance might have made a difference. To make the Top 8, Bucher employed it to beat down Faeries in the final round of the Swiss. Other Green-based decks can use it for that exact same purpose, posing difficult questions for both kinds of decks.
The “Not-Quite” of Guttural Response
Guttural Response wants to be Pyroblast. But it isn’t. Even if another color has access to it, it is clearly a much, much less powerful version of the card. Pyroblast could blast any Blue spell out of the sky (or the stack, or in play), but Guttural Response isn’t just only usable on spells, it is only usable on instants.
This matters a lot. Spellstutter Sprite is as fine a counter as others, most of the time, but not being able to Response it means that you can’t even count on this otherwise fine card to help you out when you need it. Guttural Response still has its uses versus the five-color decks, to be sure, but you still can’t count on it to get your spell you want to resolve.
This is especially important when you look at two of the non-counter spells that the kind of decks that you might want to be Gutturally Responding to can pull: Mind Spring and Mind Shatter. Both of these cards are untouched by Guttural Response, and both of them can simply render your single Response almost laughable. Shatter is particularly awful, stripping away the offending Response, but even Spring can just overwhelm you enough to make you wish Bucher had included something else in his list.
For most purposes, if you’re going to be looking at a spell like response, it seems like the far more potent way to handle things is to dip into Blue yourself, for Negate. But, if you ask me, the more likely response is to merely try to overwhelm someone with cards in a rush (like Kithkin do), or in a gush (with Spring or Shatter).
Green and Red decks are largely going to be composed of one of two kinds: Red/Green attack decks, and multi-color monstrosities that can largely cast anything. So far, the Red/Green lists haven’t managed to make any kind of appreciable splash. The multi-color decks can do what they probably should, and step away from this kind of card, in an effort to address things from the side.
The Wilt-Leaf Remind Us
The final place that I feel bears some examination is the currently Selesnya Hybrid creatures. Most of us have seen the potent Green deck that ran an absolute metric ton of cards with the Sel symbol. It did pretty well at the Star City Games $2k, and made a bunch of money. Almost all of the cards that are in it are Shadowmoor cards, and even without their helper bees like Llanowar Elves, they still bear some noting.
What is the big fear of a Wilt-Leaf Liege? Well, it is pretty simple, really. A Wilt-Leaf Liege, like so much of the format, is a big liability if it gets Mirrorweaved aggressively. Whereas the Thistledown Liege can stay snugly in hand until you are ready for him to join the party, the Wilt-Leaf is ready and raring to go because it has to be, thus potentially putting it in Mirrorweave’s clutches.
Perhaps what you can compensate with is the ability to just beat the hell out of someone with Wilt-Leaf Cavalier, Kitchen Finks, and the rest of the Selesnya-colored family. This hybrid combination reminds us that we could be either a Green deck or a White deck, or both. It strikes me that you may want to actually head in the White direction, if only to get access to Spectral Procession, and keep up with those Kithkin players. But you really don’t have to.
The Wilt-Leaf example, much like the idea of Murderous Redcap powered up by Ashenmoor Liege, can serve to remind us that we aren’t tied to a singular color with our hybrid cards. Augury Adept might be a Blue card, if it so suits us. Demigod of Revenge might be a Black card. We just have to not get fooled into remembering Kitchen Finks as a Green card, lest we forget that it might have a home in our base-White list.
Hybrid colors are a challenge for the deckbuilder in that they give us so many more tools that are available to us, some of which aren’t the cards that we would traditionally associate with our colors. Giant Solifuge is untargettable, a thing that we don’t usually associate with a Red creature. By best remembering the flexibility that we are being handed by Wizards, we can make our decks and sideboards all the more effective.
Until next time!
Adrian Sullivan
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 21, 2008 7:28:03 GMT -4
RARRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR!!!
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 21, 2008 7:26:02 GMT -4
This is sick in all formats....
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 20, 2008 11:18:36 GMT -4
I used to be a huge fan of "the Flo" but i grew up and his writing became irrelevent and arrogant...but he still has some might in his pen it would seem... this is good article...
I'll post it because alot of us don't have premium.
Flores Friday – On Losing by Mike Flores The answer to the question, usually, is "It depends on how you want to lose."
Josh will sometimes become frustrated and say that he doesn't want to lose at all... But really, every deck can and will lose some of the time, and it is silly to expect otherwise, even when you are, say, packing Predator in a room full of Pickles.
The application of the sentence, historically, has been in reference to manabases. I come from a school largely advocated by Zvi, which is that when you have multiple deck choices offering at least what appear to be similar value in the metagame, the best choice is the deck with the fewest number of colors (and generally a larger percentage mana count). This is in direct opposition to the Brian Kibler school of thought from the same time period, which advocated flexibility and sheer card power (this way of thinking can be applied just as easily to Worth Wollpert, Lan D. Ho, and others depending on time period).
The reason that I, personally, have tended to go down the Zvi line with a more consistent manabase, if possible, is probably a product of the tournaments that I play in. A Pro Tour regular who is consistently surrounded by players with similar or greater skill level may not err in this direction, whereas a Pro Tour irregular who typically plays in local amateur or qualifying events where the average opponent does not typically have the edge in skill simply has one less thing to worry about; that is, you don't want to give away too many turns or tax your life total yourself overmuch if you can help it. With fewer colors and more consistent mana, you have more breathing room and will generally have more time and freedom to topdeck out of a bad draw, even in a game you are not "supposed" to win (recently, as we have been spending more time together, Josh has also told me that I use life gain too much as a crutch, and should just play tighter and I won't need it).
In any case, I have been thinking more and more recently about controlling how I lose. I had a couple of games at Regionals where I thought that I could have won, but I didn't; this stung a little more than usual, not just because I had made Top 8 last year (and I obviously wanted to improve my position by one), but because I think some of those games had gotten away from me.
If you go back and read the right tournament reports, or alternately listen to the right stories, you will sometimes encounter a player / storyteller / hero who talks about having to play a game "perfectly" - or at a minimum very tightly - over the course of several turns in order to win. This is the exact opposite of a general theme I have advocated in the past, namely playing a loose and deceptive game designed to misdirect the opponent into playing so far in the wrong direction that he simply cannot win. The "I have to play tight / perfectly" environment is one that we as tournament players have all experienced, namely we are losing and everything is against us, and we might possibly get lucky, but we have to do everything we possibly can right, under conditions that are dictated to us (rather than determined by us) in order to win.
The first time I really experienced this in a very specific way was at U.S. Nationals 1999. I had started the tournament off 5-0, and was playing for the Limited title in a U/W mirror boasting a deck with Morphling, Mother of Runes, Wizard Mentor, and Karmic Guide; sadly I lost in two to tight mana draws and being on the wrong end of a pair of Thornwind Faeries, but 5-1 was still an awesome opening.
I got two quick wins to start Day 2, winning the Hatred mirror easily due to superior Zombies management (trade my Carnophage for your Sarcomancy... think about it), then got the mighty Dave Humpherys in three, Hatred over Replenish. My next two matches were unlucky, but if I got both of the last two, I was still Top 8 material.
So it was Round 11.
In Game 1 I lost the flip. That was okay. My Ravenous Rats that no one else played were doing their job. Strip your future, chump block. Race. I was going to win the race. A turn or two out, he pulled out a notebook and started reading out loud.
"At the end of your turn, after 'at end of turn' effects have been put on the stack..."
Could he read from a notebook? I immediately called for the judge. He could.
I cursed myself.
This was my own fault, you know.
Me and my big mouth.
I had gotten Waylay tech from the Wisconsin guys and drafted it to win my first pod on Day 1. Few knew that Waylay was White Lightning. Few should have known. But predictably, I ran around telling everyone who would listen how awesome I was with my Waylay tech. This actually radically re-shaped the Day 2 metagame, littering it with White Weenie decks where previously there had been Survival decks.
Like this one.
My math was off [now].
d**n Waylay.
My own fault.
I would have won if I had won the flip, too.
Game 2 I got him quickly.
This is how I wrote about Game 3 in 1999:
I kept a one-Swamp hand. Though I didn't miss a single land drop, I was still stuck on one land on turn 6, and had not yet cast a Black spell. Koby had a Paladin and two Warrior en-Kors to my, um, two Cursed Scrolls... but I had many cards in hand.
There are times in this game where the only thing that will get you through is mental toughness. Sometimes you just have to refuse to lose. You need to get a little lucky, maybe, but you just do it. I lost my mental game in the last round at Grand Prix: Washington and let Jon Finkel take $500 away from me because I was so depressed that I didn't make Top 8. I decided that it didn't matter that I had cast no Black spells, or that I had so many cards in hand, or that those were en-Kors on the other side.
I wasn't going to lose my mental game.
I was going to win this game.
This was a really hard game to win because not only was I manascrewed through the mid-game, but my friends all walked away shaking their heads. "It was a good run." I found them, smiling, a few minutes later, having won, and no one believed it.
Going into Regionals this year, I wanted to try to harness that player, whom I had been nine years ago, if I ever got into trouble. There was a spark of Kai Budde in that player. I didn't have a huge percentage chance on the decisions I made, but I knew that I would have to do certain things in a certain order if I was going to win. I got rid of one en-Kor (land, Diabolic Edict, if I recall), then the other (land, lucky Cursed Scroll hit, I believe), then the Paladin (lucky Cursed Scroll again). I was probably pretty low at the end of the game. Did the other guy flood out? You bet he did! But I still had to win a very low percentage game.
In 2008 I realize that it wasn't so much mental toughness but slightly more forward thinking that got me out of that game and into a position for Top 8 with one round to go (in the unlikely case you didn't know the story, I actually won, got double jumped on breakers, and finished 9th). This is the problem I have, and the problem that I have been having pretty consistently, undiagnosed, for most of my career (and you probably have, too, I'd guess) that cost me some of those games that got away at Regionals, and probably countless more over the years...
Too slow.
Too tentative.
Too sit-there.
I am thinking in particular about a Game 3 where I lost to Gargadon beatdown with a Mannequin in hand, a Shriekmaw down, and the fortune of topdecking another Shriekmaw. That should just never happen!
Here is a balance:
One of the main ways that amateur players throw away cards / value / games is that they chump block too early. I know this as a general rule the same way that I know that "mana maximization is good" (it is usually good, but if you go back and read about some of my catastrophic tournament losses when I was ahead of the curve with a great deck, you know that slavish devotion to "mana maximization is good" is one of the main ways I toss 'em); so I have a little autopilot in my head that does the math and just doesn't make any decision until I am down to "lethal in one," or at least "lethal in two" going the wrong way.
I am certainly not advocating premature chump block (remember, "[o]ne of the main ways that amateur players throw away cards / value / games is that they chump block too early[!]")... However I don't do anything. I very often default to the "I'm not dead yet" switch and take however much I am getting attacked for. In the Gargadon game, I could probably have fought for a one-for-one that would have stunted his mana, tried to put out a Faerie Macabre to block his Faerie Conclave, Makeshifted a Shriekmaw to chump while eating his mid-combat Conclave, or at least run a low Mind Shatter that would have saved me from his Pact of Negation to protect the Garagadon beatdown. I was sculpting for a much later point in the game, not really thinking about the details for getting there, just what I was going to do, what my plan was, what I had to topdeck, etc. In fact, I actually got the Shriekmaw and I wasn't able to win with it because my mana was tight (could have unloaded spells earlier) and I didn't anticipate Pact of Negation (maybe could have gotten that one of those turns I wasn't doing anything).
My point is, I probably could have gotten that game if I had elected to act earlier in some way.
One of the things I do a lot, especially in Limited, is to "blow" a card in Phase One, or at least not get maximum value out of it because I am in a mana rut and I know that if I don't spend now, I am probably going to have to discard next turn if I don't draw a land. Do you ever do this? This has been medium-good to me over the years in recouping some small amount of value in manascrewed games... This kind of thinking can probably help in situations like I described, above, when I wasn't doing anything even though I had decent cards and I was on the defensive.
One of the things that I did right in the 1999 game against en-Kors and Paladins (what could be worse for Mono-Black?) was to recognize two things: 1) I was under a particular clock based on the threats he presented, and 2) that I had to execute a particular set of plays in a particular order if I was going to beat or extend that clock. I promise you that in the Regionals 2008 match against the Gargadons, I simply recoginized the suspended Gargadons as "potentially big and dangerous some time in the future" and made no attempt to keep myself at 10, 19, or some other number larger than 9 in order to steal a turn. I took Mutavault and Conclave damage I probably didn't have to take; perhaps worse, I didn't actually do the math on my own race back at him (something I was intimately aware of in the 1999 match, which allowed me to fight out of it before he could recover from his flood draw).
The last big problem was that I had no coherent plan to end the game favorably. If I wasn't going to end up making a big play, I probably should have just Mind Shattered him for however many cards he was holding (only 1-2); Mind Shatter was one of my bombs out of the board, and I drew it. It never got played and I lost 2-3 turns after ripping it. Would it have been right to go after his hand? I don't know! I didn't take the time to count the counters on his two suspended Gargadons or consider the consequences of his going after me that turn (I certainly had potential chump fodder). Furthermore, not only did I not properly respect the fact that he had two potential 9/7 creatures coming online, I had nothing of sufficient size in my deck capable of truly racing them if they had come online (just Black removal and potentially Finks for a few chumps).
Some fish (I should really write these down on Post-Its and carry them around with me so I don't forget):
1) If you anticipate mana will be tight later in the plan, it may be imperative to utilize even a strategic card at sub-optimal (literally, for once!) value in order to avoid discarding or just to get in a trade that you would not otherwise have an option for, simply because your card never gets played.
2) Even when you don't know you're racing, you're probably racing. When you are losing and you don't know why, or you feel like you don't know what to do, take a moment to figure out the terms of the race you are in, and how what the opponent is doing to you intersects with the problems that race represents.
3) If you are sculpting to win a race some number of turns in the future, it may be important to graph the number of turns the opponent needs to win the race versus how long it will take you to win the race so that you can strategically block / chump block in order to buy sufficient time to win.
4) Follow through all the way in your imagination. In a lot of the games you lose, you probably have a strategic vision that covers some of what has to be dealt with. When you lose, it will often be because you didn't reason far enough, you know, to the point where you actually have him filling in his name on the sheet on the loser line. How did / will you get him there?
5) (4a, really)... When you don't know what else to do, attack with everybody! Sitting still with no plan, never declaring a block, is just a tacit guarantee you are making with the universe that it will take longer for you to lose, but that you are fine losing... eventually. Attacking with all your guys is better than that. Why? Because the downsides (losing the game) are similar, but via the non-complete inaction strategy, you might actually get there. It's like this... When you are stranded in the middle of a forest, what do you do? Will you stay put (and probably die of starvation / bear bites sooner rather than later) or anything else? One great philosopher would tell you to pick a direction and start hiking. You might be going the wrong way, but hey, at least you're not stranded in the middle of the forest anymore! In fact, you might not know exactly where you've ended up, but if you walk hard and far enough, it's probably somewhere not in the forest at all.
6) The most important thing that will help you play out of a hole is to recognize that you are / are going to be in the hole and start taking actions that will delay the opposing forward activity when you still have enough time to act. If you are too sit-there / slow / tentative, you will often find yourself in a situation where you are looking at a hand full of blanks, but where if you had acted earlier, you would have been able to get some value out of your cards. This is a tricky problem because, from my experience anyway, I only realize I have erred in this particular way a turn or too after it is already too late. Like a mulligan algorithm, recognizing the behavior and sculpting to better play can only be accomplished with practice; hopefully a notice that you should be looking will be a leg up on improving this part of your game.
LOVE MIKE
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 19, 2008 7:14:14 GMT -4
Thatta boy, better tell your government to lower the torrorist warning then .. may as well tell your govn't to tell the Uk govm't to do the same as well lol
|
|
|
Post by CutToTheChase on Jun 19, 2008 4:02:58 GMT -4
|
|