This one is in the MTGS Ixalan spoiler, but doesn't have its own thread yet.
Looks like a guy connected to MTG-JP.com found this in a geocache.
Rough translation on the intarwebs at the moment is the following:
Pillars of Genesis - 2 (Uncommon)
Artifact
When Pillars of Genesis enters the battlefield, choose a creature type.
T: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. Use this only to play creature spells of the chosen type.
The days of 2 mana unconditional rocks are missed. Oh, how they are missed.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
.
Would you like to read Commander stories? Check my latest stories, coming from Lorwyn and Innistrad: Ghoulcaller Gisa and Doran, The Siege Tower! If you like my writing, ask me to write something for your commander as well!
This might be a good fit in my new The Ur-Dragon EDH deck. I can't see where I would use this outside of 5cc tribal though. Even then there's so many better options. This isn't getting me any closer to casting Cruel Ultimatum. Perhaps there will be some sort of Standard applications but I couldn't care less about that Garbage Fire of a format
Perhaps there will be some sort of Standard applications but I couldn't care less about that Garbage Fire of a format
Considering these sets are designed with Limited, Standard and (to an extent) Commander in mind, you might have a problem.
My only problem is mining these sets for suitable cube/modern/legacy/edh cards. I'll play Standard/retail limited once they put out a set worth playing again. Half of Modern is just Zendikar Standard. Magic has been pretty easy on my wallet the past few years since I decided I'm done wasting my money on worthless cardboard
This thread is full of idiots... Lightning Bolt is NOT being reprinted.
Many times has a writer in Wizards said so, because of the plain and simple fact that it's too powerful for what it costs. x/3 creatures shouldn't be able to die at instant speed for one mana without a signifigant drawback. (like PTE giving you a land)
I absolutely guarantee that LB will not be printed in M10, and you can quote me on that.
Perhaps there will be some sort of Standard applications but I couldn't care less about that Garbage Fire of a format
Considering these sets are designed with Limited, Standard and (to an extent) Commander in mind, you might have a problem.
My only problem is mining these sets for suitable cube/modern/legacy/edh cards. I'll play Standard/retail limited once they put out a set worth playing again. Half of Modern is just Zendikar Standard. Magic has been pretty easy on my wallet the past few years since I decided I'm done wasting my money on worthless cardboard
What would be your criteria for a "set worth playing"? This is a serious question.
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
Perhaps there will be some sort of Standard applications but I couldn't care less about that Garbage Fire of a format
Considering these sets are designed with Limited, Standard and (to an extent) Commander in mind, you might have a problem.
My only problem is mining these sets for suitable cube/modern/legacy/edh cards. I'll play Standard/retail limited once they put out a set worth playing again. Half of Modern is just Zendikar Standard. Magic has been pretty easy on my wallet the past few years since I decided I'm done wasting my money on worthless cardboard
What would be your criteria for a "set worth playing"? This is a serious question.
Look at Zendikar. The set is chock full of awesome powerful cards from mythic all the way down to common. The value of the set is spread across many cards and many of the less valuable cards would still be deemed waaay too powerful for today's Standard.
Nowadays you can just take a quick look at the spoiler to see which pushed version of Gideon you're going to be playing this standard season. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see which cards are pushed for standard and which cards are meant for draft/kindling. Doom Blade shouldn't be a 5 mana common or a 3 mana rare sorcery
I forgot about that land. Redundancy isn't necessarily a bad thing, and Dinos need the ramp, but I find it odd that a land in the same set outclasses this thing.
Look at Zendikar. The set is chock full of awesome powerful cards from mythic all the way down to common. The value of the set is spread across many cards and many of the less valuable cards would still be deemed waaay too powerful for today's Standard.
Nowadays you can just take a quick look at the spoiler to see which pushed version of Gideon you're going to be playing this standard season. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see which cards are pushed for standard and which cards are meant for draft/kindling. Doom Blade shouldn't be a 5 mana common or a 3 mana rare sorcery
Wasn't Zendikar above-average in terms of Standard set power level? If that's the case, isn't it a bit unfair to hold Standard sets as a whole to that benchmark?
Take a look at some of the standard decklists back then. "Above-average" is putting it lightly. Back then you could draft a deck that could beat today's most powerful standard decks. Cards that people scream about banning today would be considered janky build arounds back then. WotC has completely Nerfed this game in recent years. The reason why new players can't afford to get into Modern is because new sets only contain 0-2 cards that are specifically geared for the format. That just wasn't the case during Alara/Zendikar/Scars/Innistrad. So many cards were and still are playable today.
Wasn't Zendikar above-average in terms of Standard set power level? If that's the case, isn't it a bit unfair to hold Standard sets as a whole to that benchmark?
Unfortunately, a lot of Spikes tend to have more skewed priorities when it comes to format balance. Once they have a taste of Lightning Bolt, no reasonable burn spell will ever be good enough for them, no matter how Standard is balanced. Their attitude is "step up or step out", which is ironic seeing how much they complain when they're forced to "lower" themselves to the Timmies and Johnnies' levels with balanced Standards that are fun for players besides cutthroat Spikes.
In short, a lot of Spikes don't care about what's fair, especially for others, they care about stroking their own egos by playing at a "higher level" using undercosted cards.
MTGS Wikia Article about "New World Order"
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
PSA to everyone who keeps forgetting about the Reserved List:
You're on a website dedicated to talking about MtG. You're only a few keystrokes away from finding out what cards are on the Reserved List. You're also only a few keystrokes away from finding out why some cards on the Reserved List got foil printings in FtV, as Judge promos, or whatnot, as well as why that won't happen again. Stop doing this.
Wasn't Zendikar above-average in terms of Standard set power level? If that's the case, isn't it a bit unfair to hold Standard sets as a whole to that benchmark?
Unfortunately, a lot of Spikes tend to have more skewed priorities when it comes to format balance. Once they have a taste of Lightning Bolt, no reasonable burn spell will ever be good enough for them, no matter how Standard is balanced. Their attitude is "step up or step out", which is ironic seeing how much they complain when they're forced to "lower" themselves to the Timmies and Johnnies' levels with balanced Standards that are fun for players besides cutthroat Spikes.
In short, a lot of Spikes don't care about what's fair, especially for others, they care about stroking their own egos by playing at a "higher level" using undercosted cards.
Anyway, neat tribal rock is neat, will see lots of play in tribal decks.
I'm not a "Spike" by any stretch. I just like playing with cards that stand the test of time. Modern is chocked full of Zendikar/Scars block cards. Sets today contribute very little, if anything, to the Modern pool. Don't get me wrong, I would love to play with a deck full of Theros enchantment cards or Amonkhet desert cards in eternal formats but sadly they're just not good enough. Have you ever considered that you could "balance" everything out by upping the power level? It's your line of thinking that has turned game from an investment to a money pit. Once Standard rotates you're left with worthless cardboard. I've played for too many years and spent far too much money to waste it on cards that will be forgotten in a year.
Why are you playing a non-Eternal format if you 'like playing with cards that stand the test of time'? Isn't that what Legacy and Vintage are for?
Also, I might point out that the reason that those cards 'stand the test of time' is because they were more powerful than what came after them. By definition.
If WotC printed R Instant deal 4 damage to target creature or player, Lightning Bolt would become less prevalent and less 'able to stand the test of time'. It wouldn't be obsolete, but certainly it would displace a card or three from Burn decks. It would also completely reshape the playable creatures in every format in which it was legal.
Anyway, 'I like playing with cards that stand the test of time' in a game like this, in effect, means playing the strongest cards. Otherwise they wouldn't stand the test of time. Strong of course has many dimensions, but raw power tends to correlate the most.
Wasn't Zendikar above-average in terms of Standard set power level? If that's the case, isn't it a bit unfair to hold Standard sets as a whole to that benchmark?
Unfortunately, a lot of Spikes tend to have more skewed priorities when it comes to format balance. Once they have a taste of Lightning Bolt, no reasonable burn spell will ever be good enough for them, no matter how Standard is balanced. Their attitude is "step up or step out", which is ironic seeing how much they complain when they're forced to "lower" themselves to the Timmies and Johnnies' levels with balanced Standards that are fun for players besides cutthroat Spikes.
In short, a lot of Spikes don't care about what's fair, especially for others, they care about stroking their own egos by playing at a "higher level" using undercosted cards.
Anyway, neat tribal rock is neat, will see lots of play in tribal decks.
If anything is skewed I think it's your perception of spikes. Wizards classifies players into the three types of jonny timmy and spike. In general jonnies get excited about single cards. They have a favorite card with a splashy effect and they want to cast it. Timmies enjoy interactions between cards and the rules. They tend to gravitate towards things that feel "combo-y", but usually value uniqueness so they won't be caught playing splinter twin like combos. Spikes like interactions between players and competition. As magic is an interactive game this means they are going to gravitate towards decks like Jund where there are a lot of opportunities to interact. This being said everyone has their negative attributes. Jonny complains when you kill his beg dude or when he loses before casting it. In EDH he may get mad because you keep targeting him when he drops a praetor. Timmy complains about net decking and can be snobby to anyone that picks up a known archetype. He often is playing magic like it is solitaire and really just wants an opponent so they can marvel at his sweet deck. Spike gets mad if he feels like a game is one sided and he doesn't get to interact. This will lead him to be critical of casual players who don't put up a fight, or make him switch the new "best deck" if he is losing.
Not everyone falls into one category and not everyone has the negative characteristics of each. I for example am a Timmy-Spike, which is awkward because I have trouble finding decks that are interactive and competitive but not just a pile of random chase rares. I am having the most fun when I play competitively, but I often find the best decks boring to pilot either because they are too dominant or because they are too linear.
I am not a huge fan of this card for example because I don't like tapping out on turn 2 and would rather hold open removal, or I would prefer something had a less common ability. I'm not a huge fan of tap:add mana and especially when that mana can only go towards a fatty.
Edit: I got timmy and johnny backwards. That happens a lot so I'm not going to fix it. Just switch them in your head. If I can do it so can you. @SyrixLoremaster the only way to not netdeck is to actively play a horrible deck. Brewer's generally come to the same conclusion on optimal card choices and test out even the most bizarre archetypes within a week of spoilers. A few card choices change as the meta shifts and decks rise and fall, but with the internet everything gets shared quickly. The only decks that don't are the ones that suck. The "brewers" like saffron olive generally take decks that have already been tried and repost them with tweeks (aka "budget magic"). More experienced "brewers" already know if a card fits in an archetype or makes it's own with out playtesting it because they have a deep understanding of deckbuilding. Which leads to you not "brewing" but rather playing "against the odds" or you are purposefully making your deck worse to even the playing field. The netdeck meme is a fallacy. Most spikes actually change their lists to fit their playstyle or meta so it's not even netdecking using the original meaning.
I agree with your point that Spikes are often misunderstood, but I believe you're mixing up Timmy/Tammy and Johnny/Jenny. The former likes big, splashy effects and the latter enjoys unique card interactions.
Why are you playing a non-Eternal format if you 'like playing with cards that stand the test of time'? Isn't that what Legacy and Vintage are for?
Also, I might point out that the reason that those cards 'stand the test of time' is because they were more powerful than what came after them. By definition.
If WotC printed R Instant deal 4 damage to target creature or player, Lightning Bolt would become less prevalent and less 'able to stand the test of time'. It wouldn't be obsolete, but certainly it would displace a card or three from Burn decks. It would also completely reshape the playable creatures in every format in which it was legal.
Anyway, 'I like playing with cards that stand the test of time' in a game like this, in effect, means playing the strongest cards. Otherwise they wouldn't stand the test of time. Strong of course has many dimensions, but raw power tends to correlate the most.
My favorite eternal format is Kitchen Table Casual. I love adding new exciting cards to my existing decks. Too bad 99% of new cards are merely draft fodder and the entire value of a set is spread across 2-3 cards that were specifically pushed. It's why Zendikar boxes were going for $130 easily during it's time in standard and current boxes can be had for around $80... and good luck getting $80 worth of value out of a box of anything printed today. But hey, at least these new sets are "balanced", right?
If anything is skewed I think it's your perception of spikes. Wizards classifies players into the three types of jonny timmy and spike. In general jonnies get excited about single cards. They have a favorite card with a splashy effect and they want to cast it. Timmies enjoy interactions between cards and the rules. They tend to gravitate towards things that feel "combo-y", but usually value uniqueness so they won't be caught playing splinter twin like combos. Spikes like interactions between players and competition. As magic is an interactive game this means they are going to gravitate towards decks like Jund where there are a lot of opportunities to interact. This being said everyone has their negative attributes. Jonny complains when you kill his beg dude or when he loses before casting it. In EDH he may get mad because you keep targeting him when he drops a praetor. Timmy complains about net decking and can be snobby to anyone that picks up a known archetype. He often is playing magic like it is solitaire and really just wants an opponent so they can marvel at his sweet deck. Spike gets mad if he feels like a game is one sided and he doesn't get to interact. This will lead him to be critical of casual players who don't put up a fight, or make him switch the new "best deck" if he is losing.
Not everyone falls into one category and not everyone has the negative characteristics of each. I for example am a Timmy-Spike, which is awkward because I have trouble finding decks that are interactive and competitive but not just a pile of random chase rares. I am having the most fun when I play competitively, but I often find the best decks boring to pilot either because they are too dominant or because they are too linear.
I am not a huge fan of this card for example because I don't like tapping out on turn 2 and would rather hold open removal, or I would prefer something had a less common ability. I'm not a huge fan of tap:add mana and especially when that mana can only go towards a fatty.
Thank you very much for the laugh!
Now allow me to correct your skewed interpretation of Wizards' Psychographic profiles.
You have some of the basic parts there, but Timmy/Tammy is the Power Gamer which is drawn to large spells and big effects, cost-be-damned. They play 10 games of Magic, and lose 9 out of 10 but win the 10th game by landing and smashing with a Darksteel Colossus or Eternal Dominion. Timmy/Tammy is happy.
Johnny/Jenny is the Combo player. They aren't restricted to only "unique" 10+ card combos. They just like the intricacies of the game and how the pieces play together. Johnny/Jenny plays 10 games of Magic, loses 9 but wins the 10th by assembling his 3x Changeling Hero + Drowner of Secrets combo (true story, FNM 2008) he is happy (and indeed I was)
Spike is the tournament gamer. They value efficient cards that "stand the test of time" and are horribly competitive, even going so far as to borrow a deck or netdeck. They value the experience of playing (and often winning). Spike plays 10 games, wins 9 but lost the last one even though he feels that he should have won it with his superior deck, he is not happy.
And there you have it. My mini-seminar on Wizards' Psychographic profiles.
Disclaimer: these are the most BASIC of the profiles definitions, but in combining them and the other profiles (not Psychographic) Melvin and Vorthos, you have a varied player base that can encompass any and all interpretations of this wonderful game (and actually can be applied to a great many other products as well, besides.)
I am a Johnny/Spike/Vorthos/Melvin, and I approve this message.
My favorite eternal format is Kitchen Table Casual. I love adding new exciting cards to my existing decks. Too bad 99% of new cards are merely draft fodder and the entire value of a set is spread across 2-3 cards that were specifically pushed. It's why Zendikar boxes were going for $130 easily during it's time in standard and current boxes can be had for around $80... and good luck getting $80 worth of value out of a box of anything printed today. But hey, at least these new sets are "balanced", right?
Because Wizards have increased printing productions since RtR.
On topic, great rock for tribal, but I'm unsure if it'll be played in Standard. If Grixis Pirates is a thing, maybe.
Looks like a guy connected to MTG-JP.com found this in a geocache.
Rough translation on the intarwebs at the moment is the following:
Pillars of Genesis - 2 (Uncommon)
Artifact
When Pillars of Genesis enters the battlefield, choose a creature type.
T: Add one mana of any color to your mana pool. Use this only to play creature spells of the chosen type.
My Stupidly Large Number of Current Decks
PucaTrade with me!
The Multiplayer Power Rankings
Cube: the Gittening (My Multiplayer Cube) - MTGS Cube List | @ CubeTutor
The N00b Cube (Peasant cube for new players) - MTGS Cube List | @ CubeTutor
Read my other stories as well (some ongoing):
Reaper King (a horror story), Kaalia of the Vast (an origin story), Sequels for Innistrad (Alternative sequels for Inn), Grey Areas (Odric's fanfic), Royal Succession (goblins),The Tracker's Message (eldrazi on Innistrad) and Ugin and his Eye (the end of OGW).
What was the last 2-mana unconditional rock that tapped for any color?
For Reference:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/commander-edh/680767-mana-rocks-complete-list
Considering these sets are designed with Limited, Standard and (to an extent) Commander in mind, you might have a problem.
My only problem is mining these sets for suitable cube/modern/legacy/edh cards. I'll play Standard/retail limited once they put out a set worth playing again. Half of Modern is just Zendikar Standard. Magic has been pretty easy on my wallet the past few years since I decided I'm done wasting my money on worthless cardboard
“Homo homini lupus est.”
What would be your criteria for a "set worth playing"? This is a serious question.
The OP did say it's a rough translation, so it's probably an error there.
Because that's what Unclaimed Territory is for.
Between Unclaimed Territory and Pillars of Genesis, tribal colorfixing is looking pretty sweet.
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
Look at Zendikar. The set is chock full of awesome powerful cards from mythic all the way down to common. The value of the set is spread across many cards and many of the less valuable cards would still be deemed waaay too powerful for today's Standard.
Nowadays you can just take a quick look at the spoiler to see which pushed version of Gideon you're going to be playing this standard season. It doesn't take a rocket surgeon to see which cards are pushed for standard and which cards are meant for draft/kindling. Doom Blade shouldn't be a 5 mana common or a 3 mana rare sorcery
I forgot about that land. Redundancy isn't necessarily a bad thing, and Dinos need the ramp, but I find it odd that a land in the same set outclasses this thing.
Wasn't Zendikar above-average in terms of Standard set power level? If that's the case, isn't it a bit unfair to hold Standard sets as a whole to that benchmark?
Modern - Cheeri0s (building), Belcher (building), Lantern (building), UW Control (building)
RIP Magic Duels. Wizards will regret what they did to you.
T1: Steppe Lynx
T2: Khalni Heart Expedition
T3: Harrow ,pop expedition, attack for 10... In limited... using only commons
Unfortunately, a lot of Spikes tend to have more skewed priorities when it comes to format balance. Once they have a taste of Lightning Bolt, no reasonable burn spell will ever be good enough for them, no matter how Standard is balanced. Their attitude is "step up or step out", which is ironic seeing how much they complain when they're forced to "lower" themselves to the Timmies and Johnnies' levels with balanced Standards that are fun for players besides cutthroat Spikes.
In short, a lot of Spikes don't care about what's fair, especially for others, they care about stroking their own egos by playing at a "higher level" using undercosted cards.
At any rate, I don't hold Zendikar as a very good standard for anything; the world was neat, but the balance was out of whack and it had a dissapointing third act. That, combined with the problems in Scars block, makes the format one of my less favorite, which is saying something considering that it introduced two of my favorite strategies (UR Kiln Fiend and RW Equipment) and some of my favorite cards (Kemba, Kha Regent, Tempered Steel, Distortion Strike, Assault Strobe, Galvanic Blast, Goblin Gaveleer, Jor Kadeen, the Prevailer, Steel Hellkite). My favorite Standard so far has been the RTR-Theros, where I rocked some RW and URW decks with Elspeth, Sun's Champion, Jace, Architect of Thought, Anger of the Gods, Chandra, the Firebrand, Boros Charm, Supreme Verdict, Warleader's Helix, and Boros Reckoner.
Anyway, neat tribal rock is neat, will see lots of play in tribal decks.
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
I'm not a "Spike" by any stretch. I just like playing with cards that stand the test of time. Modern is chocked full of Zendikar/Scars block cards. Sets today contribute very little, if anything, to the Modern pool. Don't get me wrong, I would love to play with a deck full of Theros enchantment cards or Amonkhet desert cards in eternal formats but sadly they're just not good enough. Have you ever considered that you could "balance" everything out by upping the power level? It's your line of thinking that has turned game from an investment to a money pit. Once Standard rotates you're left with worthless cardboard. I've played for too many years and spent far too much money to waste it on cards that will be forgotten in a year.
Also, I might point out that the reason that those cards 'stand the test of time' is because they were more powerful than what came after them. By definition.
If WotC printed R Instant deal 4 damage to target creature or player, Lightning Bolt would become less prevalent and less 'able to stand the test of time'. It wouldn't be obsolete, but certainly it would displace a card or three from Burn decks. It would also completely reshape the playable creatures in every format in which it was legal.
Anyway, 'I like playing with cards that stand the test of time' in a game like this, in effect, means playing the strongest cards. Otherwise they wouldn't stand the test of time. Strong of course has many dimensions, but raw power tends to correlate the most.
If anything is skewed I think it's your perception of spikes. Wizards classifies players into the three types of jonny timmy and spike. In general jonnies get excited about single cards. They have a favorite card with a splashy effect and they want to cast it. Timmies enjoy interactions between cards and the rules. They tend to gravitate towards things that feel "combo-y", but usually value uniqueness so they won't be caught playing splinter twin like combos. Spikes like interactions between players and competition. As magic is an interactive game this means they are going to gravitate towards decks like Jund where there are a lot of opportunities to interact. This being said everyone has their negative attributes. Jonny complains when you kill his beg dude or when he loses before casting it. In EDH he may get mad because you keep targeting him when he drops a praetor. Timmy complains about net decking and can be snobby to anyone that picks up a known archetype. He often is playing magic like it is solitaire and really just wants an opponent so they can marvel at his sweet deck. Spike gets mad if he feels like a game is one sided and he doesn't get to interact. This will lead him to be critical of casual players who don't put up a fight, or make him switch the new "best deck" if he is losing.
Not everyone falls into one category and not everyone has the negative characteristics of each. I for example am a Timmy-Spike, which is awkward because I have trouble finding decks that are interactive and competitive but not just a pile of random chase rares. I am having the most fun when I play competitively, but I often find the best decks boring to pilot either because they are too dominant or because they are too linear.
I am not a huge fan of this card for example because I don't like tapping out on turn 2 and would rather hold open removal, or I would prefer something had a less common ability. I'm not a huge fan of tap:add mana and especially when that mana can only go towards a fatty.
Edit: I got timmy and johnny backwards. That happens a lot so I'm not going to fix it. Just switch them in your head. If I can do it so can you. @SyrixLoremaster the only way to not netdeck is to actively play a horrible deck. Brewer's generally come to the same conclusion on optimal card choices and test out even the most bizarre archetypes within a week of spoilers. A few card choices change as the meta shifts and decks rise and fall, but with the internet everything gets shared quickly. The only decks that don't are the ones that suck. The "brewers" like saffron olive generally take decks that have already been tried and repost them with tweeks (aka "budget magic"). More experienced "brewers" already know if a card fits in an archetype or makes it's own with out playtesting it because they have a deep understanding of deckbuilding. Which leads to you not "brewing" but rather playing "against the odds" or you are purposefully making your deck worse to even the playing field. The netdeck meme is a fallacy. Most spikes actually change their lists to fit their playstyle or meta so it's not even netdecking using the original meaning.
My favorite eternal format is Kitchen Table Casual. I love adding new exciting cards to my existing decks. Too bad 99% of new cards are merely draft fodder and the entire value of a set is spread across 2-3 cards that were specifically pushed. It's why Zendikar boxes were going for $130 easily during it's time in standard and current boxes can be had for around $80... and good luck getting $80 worth of value out of a box of anything printed today. But hey, at least these new sets are "balanced", right?
Thank you very much for the laugh!
Now allow me to correct your skewed interpretation of Wizards' Psychographic profiles.
You have some of the basic parts there, but Timmy/Tammy is the Power Gamer which is drawn to large spells and big effects, cost-be-damned. They play 10 games of Magic, and lose 9 out of 10 but win the 10th game by landing and smashing with a Darksteel Colossus or Eternal Dominion. Timmy/Tammy is happy.
Johnny/Jenny is the Combo player. They aren't restricted to only "unique" 10+ card combos. They just like the intricacies of the game and how the pieces play together. Johnny/Jenny plays 10 games of Magic, loses 9 but wins the 10th by assembling his 3x Changeling Hero + Drowner of Secrets combo (true story, FNM 2008) he is happy (and indeed I was)
Spike is the tournament gamer. They value efficient cards that "stand the test of time" and are horribly competitive, even going so far as to borrow a deck or netdeck. They value the experience of playing (and often winning). Spike plays 10 games, wins 9 but lost the last one even though he feels that he should have won it with his superior deck, he is not happy.
And there you have it. My mini-seminar on Wizards' Psychographic profiles.
Disclaimer: these are the most BASIC of the profiles definitions, but in combining them and the other profiles (not Psychographic) Melvin and Vorthos, you have a varied player base that can encompass any and all interpretations of this wonderful game (and actually can be applied to a great many other products as well, besides.)
I am a Johnny/Spike/Vorthos/Melvin, and I approve this message.
Because Wizards have increased printing productions since RtR.
On topic, great rock for tribal, but I'm unsure if it'll be played in Standard. If Grixis Pirates is a thing, maybe.
Standard: BG Golgari Midrange
Modern: U Merfolk GWUBR 5 Color Humans UBW Esper Gifts GW Bogles