This thread is for the discussion of my latest article, Scrubland: The Four Pillars. We would be grateful if you would let us know what you think, but please keep your comments on topic.
I enjoy aricles like these because its never a bad thing to go back over what very good players already know, plus its a good article for the new player. Heck even rehashing the infamous unsaid rules of 'never give up until you actually lose' attitude reminds us to be obstinant about handing our opponent the win because you just do not know what might happen if you play a game out to the bitter end.
We all at some point and time came to the point where it looks grim and you are 99% positive you will die next turn unless a miracle occurs and I should save time now and quit. But you do not because you somehow do not want to give your opponent the satisfaction of an easy win. Then low and behold you get that miracle top-deck or your opponent missplayed a spell on the wrong target. For example, they shrapnel blast a big creature when you were at 5 life, dont laugh... draft players sometimes seem more interested in board position than looking outside this paradox.
A quick note on familiarity. You stated in the part 'Edge on Deck': 'In recent times, the edge on deck has become more important than ever, because it’s seemingly impossible to find in today’s formats.' While this is not entirely true in standard and block but more true in extended! It seems as of late more pro-players are lamenting over the lack of there being a definative deck to play or play against. Many writters and tourney reporters are claiming that the extended playing field is too diverese to predict. Since the color pie shifted a bit and the addition of more than usual amount of playable cards in extended for this time of year might be the cause for all this. Irregardless, the field is so diverese that you cant possibly create and play a good majority of these decks; so you can play test them and become more 'familiar' with them and know how to play and sideboard against them.
Is this not also a part of familiarity? Is it not prudent to try to become familiar with, not only your own deck, but what your most likely going to run into at the local hobbystore tourney scene? Granted we cant build or play against most every archdecktype, but to find and play against most every top deck should be in order, no? That way you generally know what to expect, and otherwise unknown situations lead to showing you good plays and bad plays. This familiarity is the experience that guides you to wins.
I would also like you to remember that I played as if he would not draw the Champion, because if he did draw it, then there was no way I could win. The only scenario in which I could have won was if I played like he wouldn’t draw it. He didn’t draw it, so I won.
I think that was the best part. If there is no way to disrupt a combo or survive an aggro deck's alpha strike if the draw a pump card then the only answer is to go for the throat yourself or carry out with your own combo plans.
I think Magic is a game where its real easy to fake yourself out trying to hold back an answer for something or anticipate something when there is nothing you can do if it happens.
It makes more sense than just saying "We were in a race to see who would topdeck first."
I enjoy aricles like these because its never a bad thing to go back over what very good players already know, plus its a good article for the new player. Heck even rehashing the infamous unsaid rules of 'never give up until you actually lose' attitude reminds us to be obstinant about handing our opponent the win because you just do not know what might happen if you play a game out to the bitter end.
We all at some point and time came to the point where it looks grim and you are 99% positive you will die next turn unless a miracle occurs and I should save time now and quit. But you do not because you somehow do not want to give your opponent the satisfaction of an easy win. Then low and behold you get that miracle top-deck or your opponent missplayed a spell on the wrong target. For example, they shrapnel blast a big creature when you were at 5 life, dont laugh... draft players sometimes seem more interested in board position than looking outside this paradox.
A quick note on familiarity. You stated in the part 'Edge on Deck': 'In recent times, the edge on deck has become more important than ever, because it’s seemingly impossible to find in today’s formats.' While this is not entirely true in standard and block but more true in extended! It seems as of late more pro-players are lamenting over the lack of there being a definative deck to play or play against. Many writters and tourney reporters are claiming that the extended playing field is too diverese to predict. Since the color pie shifted a bit and the addition of more than usual amount of playable cards in extended for this time of year might be the cause for all this. Irregardless, the field is so diverese that you cant possibly create and play a good majority of these decks; so you can play test them and become more 'familiar' with them and know how to play and sideboard against them.
Is this not also a part of familiarity? Is it not prudent to try to become familiar with, not only your own deck, but what your most likely going to run into at the local hobbystore tourney scene? Granted we cant build or play against most every archdecktype, but to find and play against most every top deck should be in order, no? That way you generally know what to expect, and otherwise unknown situations lead to showing you good plays and bad plays. This familiarity is the experience that guides you to wins.
While determining Edge on Deck certainly has a great deal to do with Familiarity, having Edge on Deck itself has an impact on each individual game or tournament that the deck is played in. I felt it carried enough weight to warrant a separate Pillar, but some might disagree. As long as the core concepts are understood, the number of Pillars shouldn't matter.
But Project X's combo involves 2 creatures in play so you can disrupt it as long as you keep the other part of the combo off the board (Soul Warden, Tesya or whatever other card they plan to use for the kill).
But Project X's combo involves 2 creatures in play so you can disrupt it as long as you keep the other part of the combo off the board (Soul Warden, Tesya or whatever other card they plan to use for the kill).
That way Crypt Champion does nothing.
True. But he had a Saffi to save a combo piece, while I had a Hellkite and Firemane. My only removal was Wrath. In that scenario, I can't Wrath; the best option was to race, which I did, and I won.
True. But he had a Saffi to save a combo piece, while I had a Hellkite and Firemane. My only removal was Wrath. In that scenario, I can't Wrath; the best option was to race, which I did, and I won.
I'll have to go make Feyd fix the thread tagging. Thanks for the heads-up.
Makes sence, you mentioned dark confident was still alive so I suspected you were short on removal.
You are teaching an important lesson, I see poeple who are just starting to play aggro get stuck in the mindset of always trying to burn out blockers to get through damage, but once a control deck gets to a certain point (say 6 mana with 4-5 cards in hand) its time to start pointing burn at the head because even if you don't have enough in burn in your hand it is the only way you will kill them.
Game plans have to change when the gamestate does.
If it's fairly well known that without request you will split then you are much less likely to get into such a silly stale mate again, as the other person will concede safe in the knowlege that you are likely to split anyway (this is NOT agaisnt any rules).
If it's fairly well known that without request you will split then you are much less likely to get into such a silly stale mate again, as the other person will concede safe in the knowlege that you are likely to split anyway (this is NOT agaisnt any rules).
If the judge catches you splitting prizes after achieving them in this manner, he will punish you for Collusion (which may fall under Cheating, I'm not sure).
What you say has truth, but splitting the prizes like this carries a heavy penalty. Be extremely careful when treading this line.
I'm going to plead the Fifth, anyway. The focus shouldn't be on what I did with the prizes after the tournament, but how I won them. Ethics ain't what I'm here for, mate.
Not a problem. As a cannon fodder type player trying to move from the realm of suck to improvedopolis any little scrap of info that helps is a godsend.
Thanks for fixing.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
We all at some point and time came to the point where it looks grim and you are 99% positive you will die next turn unless a miracle occurs and I should save time now and quit. But you do not because you somehow do not want to give your opponent the satisfaction of an easy win. Then low and behold you get that miracle top-deck or your opponent missplayed a spell on the wrong target. For example, they shrapnel blast a big creature when you were at 5 life, dont laugh... draft players sometimes seem more interested in board position than looking outside this paradox.
A quick note on familiarity. You stated in the part 'Edge on Deck': 'In recent times, the edge on deck has become more important than ever, because it’s seemingly impossible to find in today’s formats.' While this is not entirely true in standard and block but more true in extended! It seems as of late more pro-players are lamenting over the lack of there being a definative deck to play or play against. Many writters and tourney reporters are claiming that the extended playing field is too diverese to predict. Since the color pie shifted a bit and the addition of more than usual amount of playable cards in extended for this time of year might be the cause for all this. Irregardless, the field is so diverese that you cant possibly create and play a good majority of these decks; so you can play test them and become more 'familiar' with them and know how to play and sideboard against them.
Is this not also a part of familiarity? Is it not prudent to try to become familiar with, not only your own deck, but what your most likely going to run into at the local hobbystore tourney scene? Granted we cant build or play against most every archdecktype, but to find and play against most every top deck should be in order, no? That way you generally know what to expect, and otherwise unknown situations lead to showing you good plays and bad plays. This familiarity is the experience that guides you to wins.
I think that was the best part. If there is no way to disrupt a combo or survive an aggro deck's alpha strike if the draw a pump card then the only answer is to go for the throat yourself or carry out with your own combo plans.
I think Magic is a game where its real easy to fake yourself out trying to hold back an answer for something or anticipate something when there is nothing you can do if it happens.
It makes more sense than just saying "We were in a race to see who would topdeck first."
Magic scoresheet for download
Turn reference chart for download
While determining Edge on Deck certainly has a great deal to do with Familiarity, having Edge on Deck itself has an impact on each individual game or tournament that the deck is played in. I felt it carried enough weight to warrant a separate Pillar, but some might disagree. As long as the core concepts are understood, the number of Pillars shouldn't matter.
Familiarity, not only in playing your deck but also in playing against another deck helps win games, no?
I was just trying to say there is a more important dynamic to familiarity than just having it with your own deck is all.
I thought I had said that, but I totally agree with you.
That way Crypt Champion does nothing.
True. But he had a Saffi to save a combo piece, while I had a Hellkite and Firemane. My only removal was Wrath. In that scenario, I can't Wrath; the best option was to race, which I did, and I won.
Try this: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=16790
I'll have to go make Feyd fix the thread tagging. Thanks for the heads-up.
Makes sence, you mentioned dark confident was still alive so I suspected you were short on removal.
You are teaching an important lesson, I see poeple who are just starting to play aggro get stuck in the mindset of always trying to burn out blockers to get through damage, but once a control deck gets to a certain point (say 6 mana with 4-5 cards in hand) its time to start pointing burn at the head because even if you don't have enough in burn in your hand it is the only way you will kill them.
Game plans have to change when the gamestate does.
If it's fairly well known that without request you will split then you are much less likely to get into such a silly stale mate again, as the other person will concede safe in the knowlege that you are likely to split anyway (this is NOT agaisnt any rules).
If the judge catches you splitting prizes after achieving them in this manner, he will punish you for Collusion (which may fall under Cheating, I'm not sure).
What you say has truth, but splitting the prizes like this carries a heavy penalty. Be extremely careful when treading this line.
I'm going to plead the Fifth, anyway. The focus shouldn't be on what I did with the prizes after the tournament, but how I won them. Ethics ain't what I'm here for, mate.
I'll have to go make Feyd fix the thread tagging. Thanks for the heads-up.>>
Not a problem. As a cannon fodder type player trying to move from the realm of suck to improvedopolis any little scrap of info that helps is a godsend.
Thanks for fixing.