So I recently got Necropotence and Yawgmoth's Will for my black decks (a single copy of an MTGO card can be used in any number of decks), thinking that using them would be a no-brainer. After all, everyone knows how powerful they are, right?
Well, it turns out that there is indeed some skill required to use them. Necro, for example, is best used when you have few cards left in hand. Whenever I could, I would ritual into Necro on turn 1, thinking that I'd win using massive card advantage. What ended up happening was that I'd lose much more life than I had to. Had I waited a few turns later, I'd be able to replenish my hand AND still get to draw a card for the first few turns without paying life.
When I told my friends that I ran Necro in my black decks, they assumed that it was a no-brainer and that each black deck would have one. At $6 a piece and only needing one copy because it's restricted in Classic, Necro is an amazing bargain.
Many don't understand that skill plays a bigger factor in competitive Magic than money. When everyone at the top has nigh-unlimited funds, skill becomes the measure of success. I learned that it takes much more than adding money to a deck to increase its chances of winning.
What other myths about Magic skill need to be dispelled?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The drums! The drums! The drums! The neverending drumbeat! Open me, you human fool! Open the light and summon me and receive my majesty!
Skill is always important, even with the most expensive and powerful cards. A poor player can pilot even the best deck into the ground. Having better cards does offer a little more room for error, though. Unless both players are playing equally powerful decks.
Myth 1: All competent players have reached the maximum level of skill that is possible in this game. When two competent players face each other, it's all about the luck of the draw and deck choice, because they're both playing perfectly (or near-perfectly).
Truth: Even the best players don't play anywhere close to perfectly.
Myth 2: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on which cards you open than on skill.
Truth: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on skill than on which cards you open, though the latter does matter, of course.
Myth 3: Aggro decks require no skill.
Truth: Most aggro decks require a lot of skill. Even though there are fewer choices to make than in the typical control deck, the choices are just as important, and no more obvious.
Myth 4: Control decks require no skill.
Truth: Most control decks require a lot of skill. Even though you play powerful cards and answers, you have to decide how to use those tools properly, and a single mistake is often fatal.
The people who complain that the game takes no skill are usually the people i see losing. The best players in the game (CFB, most hall-of-famers) freely admit that they make many mistakes that cost them games. There's a reason the same players win a lot.
Myth 1: All competent players have reached the maximum level of skill that is possible in this game. When two competent players face each other, it's all about the luck of the draw and deck choice, because they're both playing perfectly (or near-perfectly).
Truth: Even the best players don't play anywhere close to perfectly.
Myth 2: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on which cards you open than on skill.
Truth: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on skill than on which cards you open, though the latter does matter, of course.
Myth 3: Aggro decks require no skill.
Truth: Most aggro decks require a lot of skill. Even though there are fewer choices to make than in the typical control deck, the choices are just as important, and no more obvious.
Myth 4: Control decks require no skill.
Truth: Most control decks require a lot of skill. Even though you play powerful cards and answers, you have to decide how to use those tools properly, and a single mistake is often fatal.
This was actually an incredibly helpful analysis for me. I was going to stop in and simply say something to the effect of, "The more Magic I've played, the more I've become aware of the massive impact of skill on a game's outcome." This was better
When players start, they generally pick up an aggro deck, or a big dumb dudes deck. Playing creatures, then turning them sideways is easy. After a while, and when a player's skill set starts to evolve, they start picking up control decks and piloting them with good success. They might dabble with combo decks too.
But to me, generally speaking of course, the hardest deck to pilot PROPERLY is an aggro deck. Aggro decks are easy to pick up and play, but they can be freaking HARD to play properly. A control deck wins because it has so many options, and through the sheer strength that offers... you can misplay and recover from it with relative ease. You misplay an aggro deck, you often just punt the game. Of course, this is generally speaking... not talking certain matchups where the opposite is true.
There is no question that magic requires a lot of skill or I'd be a lot better than I am after 18 years.
Magic is also a game of luck and I have seen more than my share of good and bad in that time. I've seen card combos come out that the odds against were astronomical.
In fact, just this last Friday, my friend mulligans down to THREE cards. They were all lands.
Ready for this?
Turn 1 - Land
Turn 2 - Land, Thalia (must have drawn it on turn 2 as he was on the play)
Turn 3 - Land, Mirran Crusader (must have drawn it turn 3)
Turn 4 - Land (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 5 - Hero of Bladehold (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 6 - Sword of War and Peace (must have draw it that turn)
He ended up winning that game (had he not conceded before playing it out just for fun) with a 3 card, 3 land hand to start.
I don't know what the odds of that draw happening are. I do know that in 18 years of Magic I have never seen anybody come back from a 3 card mulligan.
I'm just glad he conceded after the 4 card draw (he drew 3 just to see what would have happened) or I would have been in a state of shock and out of the top 8. In the meantime, I am sure he was kicking himself for conceding. I felt really bad for him. He's a good friend of mine.
Point is, the luck factor is there in spades. Make no mistake about it. No matter how good you are, you're going to lose games like that. Conversely, no matter how bad you are, you're going to win games like that too.
Pros have playlets of every standard, modern, and legacy staples.
Truth, maybe for standard they do but most pros have to beg and borrow to throw together modern and legacy decks (they aren't uber rich guys with libraries of cards worth 100k)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Current Decks
Standard BEtched Champion/InfectB WSoilders/knightsW WUVenser SplicerWU RRDWR GFeed the Pack comboG WUPool of ExhaustionWU
EDH GEzuri, Elf OverrunG BGeth, GraverobberB UThada Adel, ThiefU RUrabrask, Big RedR WElesh Norn, CrusadeW WUGAngus Makenzie, Bant ControlWUG
There is no question that magic requires a lot of skill or I'd be a lot better than I am after 18 years.
Magic is also a game of luck and I have seen more than my share of good and bad in that time. I've seen card combos come out that the odds against were astronomical.
In fact, just this last Friday, my friend mulligans down to THREE cards. They were all lands.
Ready for this?
Turn 1 - Land
Turn 2 - Land, Thalia (must have drawn it on turn 2 as he was on the play)
Turn 3 - Land, Mirran Crusader (must have drawn it turn 3)
Turn 4 - Land (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 5 - Hero of Bladehold (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 6 - Sword of War and Peace (must have draw it that turn)
He ended up winning that game (had he not conceded before playing it out just for fun) with a 3 card, 3 land hand to start.
I don't know what the odds of that draw happening are. I do know that in 18 years of Magic I have never seen anybody come back from a 3 card mulligan.
I'm just glad he conceded after the 4 card draw (he drew 3 just to see what would have happened) or I would have been in a state of shock and out of the top 8. In the meantime, I am sure he was kicking himself for conceding. I felt really bad for him. He's a good friend of mine.
Point is, the luck factor is there in spades. Make no mistake about it. No matter how good you are, you're going to lose games like that. Conversely, no matter how bad you are, you're going to win games like that too.
How often? THAT is where skill comes in.
I disagree completely. There's times when luck is an enormous factor in the game, but you shouldn't confuse intensity of the factor with frequency or impact.
Are there games where you just get 15 lands in a row handed to you and nothing you can do will help you to win? Sure. Are there games where the very gods of probability smile upon you and hand you exactly what you need, when you need it, and your opponent won't stand a chance? Probably.
Thing is, those are the absolute extremes of luck. That's not the norm, that's not the standard, that's extreme edge-cases where you draw the nuts. In nine out of ten games, you're going to be getting luck somewhere between 'cannot possibly win' and 'cannot possibly lose', more than likely along the axis of 'relatively normal'. And it'll be skill that decides it. Yes, luck is a factor of the game, and yes no matter how hard you try, sometimes it's just lucksack, but part of the game's skill is to minimize how much of an impact luck will have on your game, and to make it as infrequent a factor as possible. You COULD just throw however many lands you want into a deck, but proper skill in building your curve and your deck and your land count will help to make it so that you tend to get the right amount of mana in the right colors at the right time, consistently. The whole POINT of that is to minimize the amount of times that luck costs you games because you drew 15 lands, or went 12 turns without hitting a third land drop.
Skill is always important, even with the most expensive and powerful cards. A poor player can pilot even the best deck into the ground. Having better cards does offer a little more room for error, though. Unless both players are playing equally powerful decks.
Jace 2.0 could be a very hard card to play right. FOW doesn't play itself. I don't understand this dispelling but yeah skill makes up a large portion of a players success. There is a reason pro's get multiple top 8's.
The money issue can be taken into account on how much a player wins. The average player can only play the deck they can afford. Limited is a great format where ones wealth can be factored out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The king of Yavimaya's waters pays constant attention to his subjects . . . and thrives on their adulation.
I disagree completely. There's times when luck is an enormous factor in the game, but you shouldn't confuse intensity of the factor with frequency or impact.
Are there games where you just get 15 lands in a row handed to you and nothing you can do will help you to win? Sure. Are there games where the very gods of probability smile upon you and hand you exactly what you need, when you need it, and your opponent won't stand a chance? Probably.
Thing is, those are the absolute extremes of luck. That's not the norm, that's not the standard, that's extreme edge-cases where you draw the nuts. In nine out of ten games, you're going to be getting luck somewhere between 'cannot possibly win' and 'cannot possibly lose', more than likely along the axis of 'relatively normal'. And it'll be skill that decides it. Yes, luck is a factor of the game, and yes no matter how hard you try, sometimes it's just lucksack, but part of the game's skill is to minimize how much of an impact luck will have on your game, and to make it as infrequent a factor as possible. You COULD just throw however many lands you want into a deck, but proper skill in building your curve and your deck and your land count will help to make it so that you tend to get the right amount of mana in the right colors at the right time, consistently. The whole POINT of that is to minimize the amount of times that luck costs you games because you drew 15 lands, or went 12 turns without hitting a third land drop.
I'm glad you completely disagreed with everything I said even though I started out by saying that...
There is no question that magic requires a lot of skill or I'd be a lot better than I am after 18 years.
Some of the people in this forum drive me absolutely crazy.
In fact, just this last Friday, my friend mulligans down to THREE cards. They were all lands.
Ready for this?
Turn 1 - Land
Turn 2 - Land, Thalia (must have drawn it on turn 2 as he was on the play)
Turn 3 - Land, Mirran Crusader (must have drawn it turn 3)
Turn 4 - Land (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 5 - Hero of Bladehold (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 6 - Sword of War and Peace (must have draw it that turn)
He ended up winning that game (had he not conceded before playing it out just for fun) with a 3 card, 3 land hand to start.
I don't know what the odds of that draw happening are. I do know that in 18 years of Magic I have never seen anybody come back from a 3 card mulligan.
I'm just glad he conceded after the 4 card draw (he drew 3 just to see what would have happened) or I would have been in a state of shock and out of the top 8. In the meantime, I am sure he was kicking himself for conceding. I felt really bad for him. He's a good friend of mine..
That should serve as a lesson to your friend that you should always play it out, because you never know what's going to happen. Maybe he only wins that 1 out of 100 games where he mulls to 3 but unless you're in a hurry and have to leave or something there's really no reason not to roll the dice. A 1% chance at winning is better than a 0% chance if you snap-concede.
I have come to the conclusion that Magic has two axes of success, similar to the two axes of alignment in D&D. There's the Budget Axis, which is most visible, and there's the Skill Axis, which is more subtle.
1. High Budget, High Skill
2. Medium Budget, High Skill
3. Low Budget, High Skill
4. High Budget, Medium Skill
5. Medium Budget, Medium Skill
6. Low Budget, Medium Skill
7. High Budget, Low Skill
8. Medium Budget, Low Skill
9. Low Budget, Low Skill
A lot of newbies confuse Budget with Skill and vice-versa. What do you think?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The drums! The drums! The drums! The neverending drumbeat! Open me, you human fool! Open the light and summon me and receive my majesty!
The game is a balance between luck and skill. Sometimes skill cant beat luck, other times the luckiest player cant beat the most skillful plays. Everyone looks at a match or a tourny and says this was luck or skill but in reality you are looking at too small of a sample size to decide if it was luck or skill. In the end a skillful player, will beat a lucky player 9 out of 10 times. Thats why you see the same names in the top 8s, 16s, and 32s for bigger tournies.
Myth 2: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on which cards you open than on skill.
Truth: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on skill than on which cards you open, though the latter does matter, of course.
Limited formats have so much going on a solid to top level limited player has to be thinking about the build AS they are drafting. One of the most important part of limited is deck building. Whether it be sealed or draft, the person who knows to put which 23rd card in normally win the most. I am always amazed at how many high level constructed players that are really bad at limited.
I have come to the conclusion that Magic has two axes of success, similar to the two axes of alignment in D&D. There's the Budget Axis, which is most visible, and there's the Skill Axis, which is more subtle.
1. High Budget, High Skill
2. Medium Budget, High Skill
3. Low Budget, High Skill
4. High Budget, Medium Skill
5. Medium Budget, Medium Skill
6. Low Budget, Medium Skill
7. High Budget, Low Skill
8. Medium Budget, Low Skill
9. Low Budget, Low Skill
A lot of newbies confuse Budget with Skill and vice-versa. What do you think?
There is deck building also. Budget plays a role. Skill plays a role to a point. I have seen a guy pilot a combo deck almost flawlessly, and cant play aggro or control. The decision process is just so different to play well. But I also know amazing deck builders that cant pilot their own decks to a win, but in the hands of a skilled pilot it can win big tournies.
The issue most people don't see is it takes skill to get to the part of a match where luck can help to win.
1. The Deck. How did you get your deck? Limited, did you build or draft correctly? Do you have the right land mix? Constructed, did you make your own deck or did you just copy your deck. Even if your coping someone else's list it takes skill to know what you should or shouldn't change based on your own meta-game. If you copy a pro deck that didn't enter the field until round 3-5, you might be using a useless sideboard for your FNM. When I was grinding back in the day, some cards became main deck cause of the field I knew I was playing, so I had an advantage in game 1 against my poor match ups. Again all due to skill.
2. Your opening hand, now when I was grinding we didn't have the current mulligan rules, we had zero lands or all lands to a mulligan and I think that version was better, instead of mulligans to four just to get your combo. But today you need skill to know when to keep and when to dump. This changes on the play and draw and what your match up is.
3. Playing, sure that top deck won you the game, but what got you to that point? What plays or non play did both players make to get to that point where that one card won the game.
4. Mana flood/screw, this is about the only area where I can say LUCK is maybe, and maybe only involved. No matter what this is a game that need lands to play most spells and need spells to put a board together. You may have the right ratio, the right build, the right side board, but somehow your lands are clumped. Clumped lands is about the only thing LUCK has to do with magic, cause no matter what if your opening hand is a keep and you draw 11 straight lands your most likely not going to win. If your hand was a 3 land keep and you fail to make another land drop/mana source drop for the next 11 turns, you may not win depending on your deck.
Over all skill versus luck doesn't help players to get better. Sure it hurts to loose to conditions beyond your control. It hurts to loose when your not actively playing. It hurts when you know you have 15 cards left and 8 of them are removal and all you need is one to turn the game around and you don't draw it. There is a ram don factor to magic that helps to level the field, but Luck is what you make it. Better players will have a better win avg and they also will loose too games that they shouldn't. I remember in a draft having a great if not awesome deck and I lost to a kid with 4 silent departures. I lost in the finals of a sealed to kid that didn't know what his cards did, but his sealed pool was just that much better, and I wasn't going to lie or cheat him out of a victory. Yeah it sucked to lose to someone like that, but I also like my integrity. The better you are with dealing with loses and learning from them, the better you'll become.
The issue most people don't see is it takes skill to get to the part of a match where luck can help to win.
1. The Deck. How did you get your deck? Limited, did you build or draft correctly? Do you have the right land mix? Constructed, did you make your own deck or did you just copy your deck. Even if your coping someone else's list it takes skill to know what you should or shouldn't change based on your own meta-game. If you copy a pro deck that didn't enter the field until round 3-5, you might be using a useless sideboard for your FNM. When I was grinding back in the day, some cards became main deck cause of the field I knew I was playing, so I had an advantage in game 1 against my poor match ups. Again all due to skill.
2. Your opening hand, now when I was grinding we didn't have the current mulligan rules, we had zero lands or all lands to a mulligan and I think that version was better, instead of mulligans to four just to get your combo. But today you need skill to know when to keep and when to dump. This changes on the play and draw and what your match up is.
3. Playing, sure that top deck won you the game, but what got you to that point? What plays or non play did both players make to get to that point where that one card won the game.
4. Mana flood/screw, this is about the only area where I can say LUCK is maybe, and maybe only involved. No matter what this is a game that need lands to play most spells and need spells to put a board together. You may have the right ratio, the right build, the right side board, but somehow your lands are clumped. Clumped lands is about the only thing LUCK has to do with magic, cause no matter what if your opening hand is a keep and you draw 11 straight lands your most likely not going to win. If your hand was a 3 land keep and you fail to make another land drop/mana source drop for the next 11 turns, you may not win depending on your deck.
Over all skill versus luck doesn't help players to get better. Sure it hurts to loose to conditions beyond your control. It hurts to loose when your not actively playing. It hurts when you know you have 15 cards left and 8 of them are removal and all you need is one to turn the game around and you don't draw it. There is a ram don factor to magic that helps to level the field, but Luck is what you make it. Better players will have a better win avg and they also will loose too games that they shouldn't. I remember in a draft having a great if not awesome deck and I lost to a kid with 4 silent departures. I lost in the finals of a sealed to kid that didn't know what his cards did, but his sealed pool was just that much better, and I wasn't going to lie or cheat him out of a victory. Yeah it sucked to lose to someone like that, but I also like my integrity. The better you are with dealing with loses and learning from them, the better you'll become.
^^^ This. Well said. Agree 100%. I only do as well as I do because of the skill I've acquired. Maybe someday I'll be good enough to actually be good.
Myth 1: All competent players have reached the maximum level of skill that is possible in this game. When two competent players face each other, it's all about the luck of the draw and deck choice, because they're both playing perfectly (or near-perfectly).
Truth: Even the best players don't play anywhere close to perfectly.
Myth 2: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on which cards you open than on skill.
Truth: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on skill than on which cards you open, though the latter does matter, of course.
Myth 3: Aggro decks require no skill.
Truth: Most aggro decks require a lot of skill. Even though there are fewer choices to make than in the typical control deck, the choices are just as important, and no more obvious.
Myth 4: Control decks require no skill.
Truth: Most control decks require a lot of skill. Even though you play powerful cards and answers, you have to decide how to use those tools properly, and a single mistake is often fatal.
I agree with all of these. I think you're a little too light on the aggro though. I think a part of my reasoning for that is how much people really believe that myth though. Too many people really believe that more than they should. Control requires skill, but it's interesting that there are a lot more successful control players than Aggro players. The reason being that there are 2 skill-sets in a game of magic: Deck Building and Play Skill. The emphasis in a control deck is slightly more reliant on the build than the play. A well built control deck offers you multiple options as outs, some are better than others at different points, but they are often easy to differentiate. With Aggro, Deck Building is also very important, but, when playing aggro, you have to make just as many choices as the control player, but in a more condensed time-frame. Also, the decisions tend to be much less cut-and-dry than with control, but more game impacting. It's easy to see when a control player missed a trigger or a leak that cost the game. It's a little harder to see if the aggro player's Lightning Bolt 2 turns ago hit the right target or should have been held for something else and that cost the game. Mastering aggro actually requires a deeper understanding of timing rules and interactions than most control decks. You can copy someone else's build and negate some of the skill in deck building, but you really can't fake play skill.
I think the biggest myth about "skill" in Magic is that it refers only to reading the board and making the best play, and that it's something that people are born with. "Skill" encompasses a number of different aspects from building/developing/tuning your deck and sideboard to mulligan decisions to general in-game strategy (i.e. "having a plan" for the matchup or knowing the lines) to understanding rules interactions on the fly. It's something that is developed over time and honed by grinding matchups until you understand them backwards and forwards.
I have come to the conclusion that Magic has two axes of success, similar to the two axes of alignment in D&D. There's the Budget Axis, which is most visible, and there's the Skill Axis, which is more subtle.
1. High Budget, High Skill
2. Medium Budget, High Skill
3. Low Budget, High Skill
4. High Budget, Medium Skill
5. Medium Budget, Medium Skill
6. Low Budget, Medium Skill
7. High Budget, Low Skill
8. Medium Budget, Low Skill
9. Low Budget, Low Skill
A lot of newbies confuse Budget with Skill and vice-versa. What do you think?
I would more-or-less agree with this if you're talking about the FNM/local Saturday tournament level of competition. Budget is almost certainly not a factor at larger events like GPs or SCG Opens (although more generally "card availability" could be) and definitely not a factor at the PTQ/PT level.
I have heard vague rumors of a moustache-dispensing vending machine in a distant laundromat, across the street from a tattoo parlor. However, this information is shaky, and time is of the essence.
No disagreement here about how important skill is to competitive play, but one massive element of luck that I feel hasn't been addressed here is the coin flip for play/draw. Being on the play for game 1 of a set against an unknown deck is almost always a giant advantage. When aggro/tempo decks are a big part of the format you're playing this gets magnified in my opinion.
I won a game where I mulliganed to 3 and the hand had 2 land and Stoneforge Mystic to tutor up Batterskull and drop it without my opponent having removal in hand.
It doesn't happen often, but conceding before playing out all your options is just stupid.
Do you add special rules to discourage 53-land combo decks, or does the metagame correct for them automatically?
He means that you separate your land into one pile and your spells into another to start the game, and then you get to choose which pile to draw from every time you would draw a card.
I have heard vague rumors of a moustache-dispensing vending machine in a distant laundromat, across the street from a tattoo parlor. However, this information is shaky, and time is of the essence.
Myth: A player can never win a game if they mulligan down to zero cards.
Truth: Not the case. If they restart the game with Karn Liberated and the only permanent previously exiled with him is Barren Glory they'll win at the beginning of their very first upkeep.
Anyhow, the best I can come up with myself is a game in the top 8 of a PTQ back during Urza block in which we were starting game 3 with time already expired, so the tiebreaker rule was that whoever had more life after 3 turns would win. And I lost to... healing salve.
Myth: A player can never win a game if they mulligan down to zero cards.
Truth: Not the case. If they restart the game with Karn Liberated and the only permanent previously exiled with him is Barren Glory they'll win at the beginning of their very first upkeep.
Or if they're Vintage Dredge and their topdeck is Bazaar of Baghdad.
I have heard vague rumors of a moustache-dispensing vending machine in a distant laundromat, across the street from a tattoo parlor. However, this information is shaky, and time is of the essence.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Well, it turns out that there is indeed some skill required to use them. Necro, for example, is best used when you have few cards left in hand. Whenever I could, I would ritual into Necro on turn 1, thinking that I'd win using massive card advantage. What ended up happening was that I'd lose much more life than I had to. Had I waited a few turns later, I'd be able to replenish my hand AND still get to draw a card for the first few turns without paying life.
When I told my friends that I ran Necro in my black decks, they assumed that it was a no-brainer and that each black deck would have one. At $6 a piece and only needing one copy because it's restricted in Classic, Necro is an amazing bargain.
Many don't understand that skill plays a bigger factor in competitive Magic than money. When everyone at the top has nigh-unlimited funds, skill becomes the measure of success. I learned that it takes much more than adding money to a deck to increase its chances of winning.
What other myths about Magic skill need to be dispelled?
Truth: Even the best players don't play anywhere close to perfectly.
Myth 2: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on which cards you open than on skill.
Truth: Outcomes in Limited formats are more based on skill than on which cards you open, though the latter does matter, of course.
Myth 3: Aggro decks require no skill.
Truth: Most aggro decks require a lot of skill. Even though there are fewer choices to make than in the typical control deck, the choices are just as important, and no more obvious.
Myth 4: Control decks require no skill.
Truth: Most control decks require a lot of skill. Even though you play powerful cards and answers, you have to decide how to use those tools properly, and a single mistake is often fatal.
This was actually an incredibly helpful analysis for me. I was going to stop in and simply say something to the effect of, "The more Magic I've played, the more I've become aware of the massive impact of skill on a game's outcome." This was better
R.I.P. Sundering Titan (6/20/12) and Braids, Cabal Minion (9/12/14)
When players start, they generally pick up an aggro deck, or a big dumb dudes deck. Playing creatures, then turning them sideways is easy. After a while, and when a player's skill set starts to evolve, they start picking up control decks and piloting them with good success. They might dabble with combo decks too.
But to me, generally speaking of course, the hardest deck to pilot PROPERLY is an aggro deck. Aggro decks are easy to pick up and play, but they can be freaking HARD to play properly. A control deck wins because it has so many options, and through the sheer strength that offers... you can misplay and recover from it with relative ease. You misplay an aggro deck, you often just punt the game. Of course, this is generally speaking... not talking certain matchups where the opposite is true.
Magic is also a game of luck and I have seen more than my share of good and bad in that time. I've seen card combos come out that the odds against were astronomical.
In fact, just this last Friday, my friend mulligans down to THREE cards. They were all lands.
Ready for this?
Turn 1 - Land
Turn 2 - Land, Thalia (must have drawn it on turn 2 as he was on the play)
Turn 3 - Land, Mirran Crusader (must have drawn it turn 3)
Turn 4 - Land (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 5 - Hero of Bladehold (must have drawn it that turn)
Turn 6 - Sword of War and Peace (must have draw it that turn)
He ended up winning that game (had he not conceded before playing it out just for fun) with a 3 card, 3 land hand to start.
I don't know what the odds of that draw happening are. I do know that in 18 years of Magic I have never seen anybody come back from a 3 card mulligan.
I'm just glad he conceded after the 4 card draw (he drew 3 just to see what would have happened) or I would have been in a state of shock and out of the top 8. In the meantime, I am sure he was kicking himself for conceding. I felt really bad for him. He's a good friend of mine.
Point is, the luck factor is there in spades. Make no mistake about it. No matter how good you are, you're going to lose games like that. Conversely, no matter how bad you are, you're going to win games like that too.
How often? THAT is where skill comes in.
Truth, maybe for standard they do but most pros have to beg and borrow to throw together modern and legacy decks (they aren't uber rich guys with libraries of cards worth 100k)
BEtched Champion/InfectB
WSoilders/knightsW
WUVenser SplicerWU
RRDWR
GFeed the Pack comboG
WUPool of ExhaustionWU
EDH
GEzuri, Elf OverrunG
BGeth, GraverobberB
UThada Adel, ThiefU
RUrabrask, Big RedR
WElesh Norn, CrusadeW
WUGAngus Makenzie, Bant ControlWUG
Extended
WGElvesWG
Legacy
RGoblinsR
UBGFariesUBG
UBGRaffinityUBG
I disagree completely. There's times when luck is an enormous factor in the game, but you shouldn't confuse intensity of the factor with frequency or impact.
Are there games where you just get 15 lands in a row handed to you and nothing you can do will help you to win? Sure. Are there games where the very gods of probability smile upon you and hand you exactly what you need, when you need it, and your opponent won't stand a chance? Probably.
Thing is, those are the absolute extremes of luck. That's not the norm, that's not the standard, that's extreme edge-cases where you draw the nuts. In nine out of ten games, you're going to be getting luck somewhere between 'cannot possibly win' and 'cannot possibly lose', more than likely along the axis of 'relatively normal'. And it'll be skill that decides it. Yes, luck is a factor of the game, and yes no matter how hard you try, sometimes it's just lucksack, but part of the game's skill is to minimize how much of an impact luck will have on your game, and to make it as infrequent a factor as possible. You COULD just throw however many lands you want into a deck, but proper skill in building your curve and your deck and your land count will help to make it so that you tend to get the right amount of mana in the right colors at the right time, consistently. The whole POINT of that is to minimize the amount of times that luck costs you games because you drew 15 lands, or went 12 turns without hitting a third land drop.
The latest Comprehensive Rules are also good, and can be found here.
Jace 2.0 could be a very hard card to play right. FOW doesn't play itself. I don't understand this dispelling but yeah skill makes up a large portion of a players success. There is a reason pro's get multiple top 8's.
The money issue can be taken into account on how much a player wins. The average player can only play the deck they can afford. Limited is a great format where ones wealth can be factored out.
I'm glad you completely disagreed with everything I said even though I started out by saying that...
Some of the people in this forum drive me absolutely crazy.
That should serve as a lesson to your friend that you should always play it out, because you never know what's going to happen. Maybe he only wins that 1 out of 100 games where he mulls to 3 but unless you're in a hurry and have to leave or something there's really no reason not to roll the dice. A 1% chance at winning is better than a 0% chance if you snap-concede.
1. High Budget, High Skill
2. Medium Budget, High Skill
3. Low Budget, High Skill
4. High Budget, Medium Skill
5. Medium Budget, Medium Skill
6. Low Budget, Medium Skill
7. High Budget, Low Skill
8. Medium Budget, Low Skill
9. Low Budget, Low Skill
A lot of newbies confuse Budget with Skill and vice-versa. What do you think?
Limited formats have so much going on a solid to top level limited player has to be thinking about the build AS they are drafting. One of the most important part of limited is deck building. Whether it be sealed or draft, the person who knows to put which 23rd card in normally win the most. I am always amazed at how many high level constructed players that are really bad at limited.
There is deck building also. Budget plays a role. Skill plays a role to a point. I have seen a guy pilot a combo deck almost flawlessly, and cant play aggro or control. The decision process is just so different to play well. But I also know amazing deck builders that cant pilot their own decks to a win, but in the hands of a skilled pilot it can win big tournies.
1. The Deck. How did you get your deck? Limited, did you build or draft correctly? Do you have the right land mix? Constructed, did you make your own deck or did you just copy your deck. Even if your coping someone else's list it takes skill to know what you should or shouldn't change based on your own meta-game. If you copy a pro deck that didn't enter the field until round 3-5, you might be using a useless sideboard for your FNM. When I was grinding back in the day, some cards became main deck cause of the field I knew I was playing, so I had an advantage in game 1 against my poor match ups. Again all due to skill.
2. Your opening hand, now when I was grinding we didn't have the current mulligan rules, we had zero lands or all lands to a mulligan and I think that version was better, instead of mulligans to four just to get your combo. But today you need skill to know when to keep and when to dump. This changes on the play and draw and what your match up is.
3. Playing, sure that top deck won you the game, but what got you to that point? What plays or non play did both players make to get to that point where that one card won the game.
4. Mana flood/screw, this is about the only area where I can say LUCK is maybe, and maybe only involved. No matter what this is a game that need lands to play most spells and need spells to put a board together. You may have the right ratio, the right build, the right side board, but somehow your lands are clumped. Clumped lands is about the only thing LUCK has to do with magic, cause no matter what if your opening hand is a keep and you draw 11 straight lands your most likely not going to win. If your hand was a 3 land keep and you fail to make another land drop/mana source drop for the next 11 turns, you may not win depending on your deck.
Over all skill versus luck doesn't help players to get better. Sure it hurts to loose to conditions beyond your control. It hurts to loose when your not actively playing. It hurts when you know you have 15 cards left and 8 of them are removal and all you need is one to turn the game around and you don't draw it. There is a ram don factor to magic that helps to level the field, but Luck is what you make it. Better players will have a better win avg and they also will loose too games that they shouldn't. I remember in a draft having a great if not awesome deck and I lost to a kid with 4 silent departures. I lost in the finals of a sealed to kid that didn't know what his cards did, but his sealed pool was just that much better, and I wasn't going to lie or cheat him out of a victory. Yeah it sucked to lose to someone like that, but I also like my integrity. The better you are with dealing with loses and learning from them, the better you'll become.
^^^ This. Well said. Agree 100%. I only do as well as I do because of the skill I've acquired. Maybe someday I'll be good enough to actually be good.
I agree with all of these. I think you're a little too light on the aggro though. I think a part of my reasoning for that is how much people really believe that myth though. Too many people really believe that more than they should. Control requires skill, but it's interesting that there are a lot more successful control players than Aggro players. The reason being that there are 2 skill-sets in a game of magic: Deck Building and Play Skill. The emphasis in a control deck is slightly more reliant on the build than the play. A well built control deck offers you multiple options as outs, some are better than others at different points, but they are often easy to differentiate. With Aggro, Deck Building is also very important, but, when playing aggro, you have to make just as many choices as the control player, but in a more condensed time-frame. Also, the decisions tend to be much less cut-and-dry than with control, but more game impacting. It's easy to see when a control player missed a trigger or a leak that cost the game. It's a little harder to see if the aggro player's Lightning Bolt 2 turns ago hit the right target or should have been held for something else and that cost the game. Mastering aggro actually requires a deeper understanding of timing rules and interactions than most control decks. You can copy someone else's build and negate some of the skill in deck building, but you really can't fake play skill.
If you hate the deck, I'm probably playing it!
I would more-or-less agree with this if you're talking about the FNM/local Saturday tournament level of competition. Budget is almost certainly not a factor at larger events like GPs or SCG Opens (although more generally "card availability" could be) and definitely not a factor at the PTQ/PT level.
Do you add special rules to discourage 53-land combo decks, or does the metagame correct for them automatically?
It doesn't happen often, but conceding before playing out all your options is just stupid.
He means that you separate your land into one pile and your spells into another to start the game, and then you get to choose which pile to draw from every time you would draw a card.
Truth: Not the case. If they restart the game with Karn Liberated and the only permanent previously exiled with him is Barren Glory they'll win at the beginning of their very first upkeep.
Or if they're Vintage Dredge and their topdeck is Bazaar of Baghdad.