A round of Primer updates! I am happy to bring you a few improvements to the primer. The dreaded section that tells people the truth about Pack Rat and Smallpox has been removed and I want to talk a little bit about why. I'll put it in a spoiler below to not distract the majority who don't give a damn and wouldn't read it anyway. Other than that, the "community spotlight" section got updated with new decklists. This time around I am featuring Timba's XMage Jesus deck (if there are any updates to the list please let me know) and FearDReaper's Mentor list. I'm going to put his/Memory's Myth decks there too, but I want a little more other than first impressions. Meanwhile, the removed section of the forum has been replaced by a new piece called "Card evaluation theory". It's oriented towards new players and is highly experimental at this stage, but basically it's a card rating model. I was planning on running an entire 8Rack build through it as an example, but I got lazy (raise the pitchforks!) and just did the core + the racks as a counterpoint. I know it's not a perfect model (yet), but do let me know what you think.
Next up is the poll. With a lot more votes than anticipated and the community's choice being one I like, I will be closing the poll and starting right away with updating each decklist with it's own visual spoiler. I'll put another feedback poll on those after they've been made, but because each one requires some editing and fiddling to turn into the picture you see, this feature will arrive late Monday/early Tuesday (european time). Even without the poll being up, don't hesitate to leave feedback on the existing one - do you even want that at all, is it too big, too small, etc. Along with the visual spoilers, the decklists withing the Primer will be updated too. A lot of people don't understand that there is a lot of experimental stuff there. I have cleaned them up and will ship the updates rather soon. Whether you like it or not, the BR (Mardu!) list is going to stay as I still haven't had more success with any other version. After that's done I will be moving to another experimental project - BG 8Rack and most of my playtesting is going to be concentrated there.
Alright, now let's address something at peace. The section about Pack Rat and Smallpox has always been intended as a section dedicated to help players who are new to the game or strategy and aid them in the deckbuilding process. A lot of people are salty that cards they like and think are good were put there as examples of how to not build a deck, but at the end of the day that's the truth and I don't feel bad about it. Communicating that in a clear way, on the other hand, was a problem. Since a lot of the newcomers are either from Rob's YouTube channel or had their first exposure to the deck at the hands of Tom Ross, they come in and think that because they play them they shouldn't be there. Which, objectively, is not the case at all. Tom Ross was playing Sceptre of Fugue, too, so that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
The real problem I had with that piece is that it wasn't well written. I would never take something down because of a few cancerous comments or because a couple of people didn't like it. After all, that type of content is something I want to eventually have on the Primer. But now that I have a better idea that still accomplishes the goal of aiding new players, I am gladly taking it down for something that I'm more excited for. It will make it's way back into the primer but in a better way. When it's a completed product I'm sure this content will fit nicely somewhere, but now was not the time and that was not the place for it. What keeps me reassured is that I've already given Smallpox a separate space and that no real Modern player who picks up 8Rack is going to say "hey look, let me see if Pack Rat, of all things, works in here". That's just not a thing people do in Modern. All in all I'm personally happy with the change and am looking forward to refining the card rating system and posting a more complete version of it in the near future.
Ok ive been playing with Myth Realized nonstop and I'm past the first impressions phase.
Conclusions:
It's an absolute home run for 8Rack.
Pros
-The casting cost
-It's an enchantment, it can be played early with perfect safety
-Multiple's stack perfectly
-Is disgusting with Raven's Crime
-We grow our Myths faster than jund grows its goyfs
Cons
-It lacks the staggering inevitability of top decked Pack Rat
-Future Myths need to be regrown unlike Goyf (its kind of a cross between goyf and scooze)
Don't put my myth deck list up in the primer just yet. I need to work on some things. Path and Smallpox are a nonbo and its been an issue. I'm currently testing 2x Dismember to over inflate the critter removal package. The only reason I think Dismember is better than GFtT here is the 1cc option. With Myth Realized some of the biggest plays occur when I attack with it and remove a critter so I want I low cc removal option to support that.
A round of Primer updates! I am happy to bring you a few improvements to the primer. The dreaded section that tells people the truth about Pack Rat and Smallpox has been removed and I want to talk a little bit about why. I'll put it in a spoiler below to not distract the majority who don't give a damn and wouldn't read it anyway. Other than that, the "community spotlight" section got updated with new decklists. This time around I am featuring Timba's XMage Jesus deck (if there are any updates to the list please let me know) and FearDReaper's Mentor list. I'm going to put his/Memory's Myth decks there too, but I want a little more other than first impressions. Meanwhile, the removed section of the forum has been replaced by a new piece called "Card evaluation theory". It's oriented towards new players and is highly experimental at this stage, but basically it's a card rating model. I was planning on running an entire 8Rack build through it as an example, but I got lazy (raise the pitchforks!) and just did the core + the racks as a counterpoint. I know it's not a perfect model (yet), but do let me know what you think.
Next up is the poll. With a lot more votes than anticipated and the community's choice being one I like, I will be closing the poll and starting right away with updating each decklist with it's own visual spoiler. I'll put another feedback poll on those after they've been made, but because each one requires some editing and fiddling to turn into the picture you see, this feature will arrive late Monday/early Tuesday (european time). Even without the poll being up, don't hesitate to leave feedback on the existing one - do you even want that at all, is it too big, too small, etc. Along with the visual spoilers, the decklists withing the Primer will be updated too. A lot of people don't understand that there is a lot of experimental stuff there. I have cleaned them up and will ship the updates rather soon. Whether you like it or not, the BR (Mardu!) list is going to stay as I still haven't had more success with any other version. After that's done I will be moving to another experimental project - BG 8Rack and most of my playtesting is going to be concentrated there.
Alright, now let's address something at peace. The section about Pack Rat and Smallpox has always been intended as a section dedicated to help players who are new to the game or strategy and aid them in the deckbuilding process. A lot of people are salty that cards they like and think are good were put there as examples of how to not build a deck, but at the end of the day that's the truth and I don't feel bad about it. Communicating that in a clear way, on the other hand, was a problem. Since a lot of the newcomers are either from Rob's YouTube channel or had their first exposure to the deck at the hands of Tom Ross, they come in and think that because they play them they shouldn't be there. Which, objectively, is not the case at all. Tom Ross was playing Sceptre of Fugue, too, so that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
The real problem I had with that piece is that it wasn't well written. I would never take something down because of a few cancerous comments or because a couple of people didn't like it. After all, that type of content is something I want to eventually have on the Primer. But now that I have a better idea that still accomplishes the goal of aiding new players, I am gladly taking it down for something that I'm more excited for. It will make it's way back into the primer but in a better way. When it's a completed product I'm sure this content will fit nicely somewhere, but now was not the time and that was not the place for it. What keeps me reassured is that I've already given Smallpox a separate space and that no real Modern player who picks up 8Rack is going to say "hey look, let me see if Pack Rat, of all things, works in here". That's just not a thing people do in Modern. All in all I'm personally happy with the change and am looking forward to refining the card rating system and posting a more complete version of it in the near future.
Current primer issues:
Exemplary decklist has an error
Sideboard guide is for a missing list with Pack Rats and Bridges
Lists with big results dont support 'Core postulate'
No results mentioned for exemplary lists. In my opinion they have a lot of issues. I wrote my commentary on mardu list as example but I forgot to mention it also lacked mana sinks
Sideboard examples. Going to hate specific matchups and forget about others is not a good strategy. Thats my opinion and PVDR's as he recently wrote in his series of articles about sideboarding. Transformational sideboarding is changing your game strategy or wincons. Siding in specific hate is not a transformational sideboarding.
Card evaluation theory is .. subjective and not helpful. Power level depends on number of copies I play? If I want to get power level of Funeral Charm for example, where do I get numbers? Call you?)
Missing parts
Ari Lax made a video, not an article
Super IQ win is missing in results section. This deck doesnt have many big finishes (2), why not post all of them?
Btw in my opinion having 1-2 Flaying Tendrils in the sideboard is very important for non-red variants, it is not mentioned in the primer
Took me quite a while to see what you mean because of course why would you mention what the error is, right? Awesome feedback. Regardless, I see what you mean and all I'm going to say is that it's a mistake when copying the decklist but definitely not an error. I'll give some thought on how to move forward with this, thanks for bringing it to my attention (sort of).
Sideboard examples. Going to hate specific matchups and forget about others is not a good strategy. Thats my opinion and PVDR's as he recently wrote in his series of articles about sideboarding. Transformational sideboarding is changing your game strategy or wincons. Siding in specific hate is not a transformational sideboarding.
I'm sorry that you don't really understand that the example for a transformational sideboard is correct. Guess what, there can be (and are) other opinions than PVDR's. Hating on some matchups and "forgetting" about others is very good under the right circumstances and it's not strictly a bad strategy. As have many winning decks over the years shown time and again.
Super IQ win is missing in results section. This deck doesnt have many big finishes (2), why not post all of them?
Once again, thanks for not linking to what you are talking about, makes it really helpful. Everything that I'm aware of is in there if you bothered to look.
flaying tendrils incorrect? it solves a lot of big cards against the deck: voice of resurgence, kitchen finks, lingering souls, etc
not playing 4 thoughtseize its not an error, your conclusion comes from being on the play. while the conclusion to not playing 4 comes from being on the draw
saying that being on the draw its a mistake its also wrong, i played countless games against the fast decks trying to prove that statment wrong, and found that except affinity i had a higher win% against everything else by being on the draw. the most shocking thing was that burn became a lot easyer, they run out of cards so fast by following their gameplan that they either outrace themselves or just dont cast spells and lose to our "value" cards like wrench mind, lili, etc. the collected brutality out of the sideboard its also gamebreking
this is more of an anecdotal evidence but in half the matches that i played in day 2 at gp bologna my oponents puted me on the play in sideboard games, agaisnt 2 of them i lost the dice roll so they didnt even know that i wanted to be on the draw
i can see why people discard being on the draw after the first impresion because some things they learned doesnt apply anymore (thoughtseize gets worse for example) but in change the 8 racks get better. by being on the draw they have 1 card less and you have one card more wich translates in them having 2 cards less, but they are also a full turn ahead of you wich also translates in 2 cards less (landrop + spell), thats why target discard gets worse (they have fewer cards in hand and can miss), removal becomes more necessay, and the racks go online faster and its a race that the deck its very well equiped to win (painless mana + muta helps to)
flaying tendrils incorrect? it solves a lot of big cards against the deck: voice of resurgence, kitchen finks, lingering souls, etc
not playing 4 thoughtseize its not an error, your conclusion comes from being on the play. while the conclusion to not playing 4 comes from being on the draw
saying that being on the draw its a mistake its also wrong, i played countless games against the fast decks trying to prove that statment wrong, and found that except affinity i had a higher win% against everything else by being on the draw. the most shocking thing was that burn became a lot easyer, they run out of cards so fast by following their gameplan that they either outrace themselves or just dont cast spells and lose to our "value" cards like wrench mind, lili, etc. the collected brutality out of the sideboard its also gamebreking
this is more of an anecdotal evidence but in half the matches that i played in day 2 at gp bologna my oponents puted me on the play in sideboard games, agaisnt 2 of them i lost the dice roll so they didnt even know that i wanted to be on the draw
i can see why people discard being on the draw after the first impresion because some things they learned doesnt apply anymore (thoughtseize gets worse for example) but in change the 8 racks get better. by being on the draw they have 1 card less and you have one card more wich translates in them having 2 cards less, but they are also a full turn ahead of you wich also translates in 2 cards less (landrop + spell), thats why target discard gets worse (they have fewer cards in hand and can miss), removal becomes more necessay, and the racks go online faster and its a race that the deck its very well equiped to win (painless mana + muta helps to)
No I cannot agree to all of this. Being on the draw vs today's burn is not the way to go. A turn 1 goblin guide or swiftspear ends the game for 8Rack. Same with Glistner elf. Now if it was 2 years ago and burn lists were actually burn and not Red (naya) Deck Wins then your statement makes more sense.
Going 2nd is a tool in your tool box to be used surgically. It's not the default way to play the deck. Tom Ross does it and that impresses you, I get it. Tom Ross is just an 8Rack player. He plays he ways because it gives him consistent results that he can live with. That does not mean it's the best way to play, it just means his way of playing is good enough for him. There is no hidden tech or secret that only he knows. It took him 2 years to come to the conclusion that the 8Rack core that we have been using since day 1 is nigh immutable. 2 years guys. Now I completely respect that he is the type of guy who must figure things out for himself, but are you guys gonna wait another 2 years for him to figure out its not smart to always go on the draw before you realize it too?
As my final point on Tom Ross' strats / secret tech I submit the following for your consideration:
He made it to day 2 with that card mainboard. What does that tell you about him and what does that tell you about the power of the 8rack?
When did he do that? Is there link or video footage?
Card wise I dont think its that bad
It is slow
But thats a card advantage every turn
A very powerful effect
Mana costs are on par with our mana curve
It can be a sideboard option for control matchups
And thus can be maindecked as a meta call
This primer post is HILARIOUS. The primer writer is handing out "correct", "incorrect", "wrong" like he's the leading authority, the top player, the know it all of the deck.
Every other post he makes is telling somebody they're wrong. And of course, every card he posts is correct, its the best. But it went to whole other level with the reply:
Lists with big results dont support 'Core postulate'
Imagine how much better they would've done if they did.
What? WHAT?! So lists that put up results could have done better if they'd used your core, let m-let me get this right. And the reason your cards haven't put up results? I'm guessing just because nobody's tried them yet? Or nobody knows how to use them but you?
Passing off opinion as fact again in your "real talk" spoiler, and here I thought we'd made progress towards an objective and factual primer, but nope: "truth", "how not to build a deck", you claim the issue here isn't that you placed an _opinion_ inside a primer piece, but how you "communicated a fact". Let me make this point clear once and for all to all 8rack players Esperino's saying that smallpox and pack rat are "bad cards" is an OPINION. That Tom Ross would have done better if he had played Esperino's list is an OPINION. That Tom Ross put up results with a smallpox list is FACT. That Pack Rat can single handedly win topdeck games is also a FACT.
What's most ironic is that fact-based postulations are written off by the primer writer as "cancerous". No, statements that pass off one's OPINION as FACT to put down other perspectives and worse, suppress discussion that falls outside of Esperino's perspective is the real cancer.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
Just curious, but is anyone else using my particular brand of side boarding strategy? I.e. the deck doping method
I tend to do it if I have alot of things I want to bring in. If I have say 64 cards after yanking what's bad and adding what's good, I'll usually try to identify 2 or 3 cards that arnt super critical to the Matchup and shave 1 of each but I'm not afraid to go in at 61 or 62 cards if I feal the extras are powerful in the matchup.
I know it's not statisticaly correct or "optimal" as in theory is alwase better to have a slightly better chance of drawing your 1st-60th best card than have the 61st best in there, but there's a difference between theory and the real world. I want all 3 dark blasts and my second ratchet bomb vs affinity, plus my 2 pith in needles, what other than 4 wrench mind do I take out? I sure are hell arnt cutting Crimes or removal.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Of course you should fight fire with fire. You should fight everything with fire." —Jaya Ballard, task mage
This primer post is HILARIOUS. The primer writer is handing out "correct", "incorrect", "wrong" like he's the leading authority, the top player, the know it all of the deck.
Every other post he makes is telling somebody they're wrong. And of course, every card he posts is correct, its the best. But it went to whole other level with the reply:
Lists with big results dont support 'Core postulate'
Imagine how much better they would've done if they did.
What? WHAT?! So lists that put up results could have done better if they'd used your core, let m-let me get this right. And the reason your cards haven't put up results? I'm guessing just because nobody's tried them yet? Or nobody knows how to use them but you?
Passing off opinion as fact again in your "real talk" spoiler, and here I thought we'd made progress towards an objective and factual primer, but nope: "truth", "how not to build a deck", you claim the issue here isn't that you placed an _opinion_ inside a primer piece, but how you "communicated a fact". Let me make this point clear once and for all to all 8rack players Esperino's saying that smallpox and pack rat are "bad cards" is an OPINION. That Tom Ross would have done better if he had played Esperino's list is an OPINION. That Tom Ross put up results with a smallpox list is FACT. That Pack Rat can single handedly win topdeck games is also a FACT.
What's most ironic is that fact-based postulations are written off by the primer writer as "cancerous". No, statements that pass off one's OPINION as FACT to put down other perspectives and worse, suppress discussion that falls outside of Esperino's perspective is the real cancer.
I have to agree. "You were the most sucessfull ever with this deck, imagine how well you could have done if you did it like me" is a blatantly illogical statement.
I definately feal sorry for ya esperino for the chaos that has accompanied the new thread, and I know you have strong opinions on the deck, but this is the only primer of the several I follow where the OP is so pointedly against a number of lists and specific cards which see widespread play within the 8rack community.
The Primer should be a general tutorial of the deck, with sections dedicated to taking a more detailed look at its aspects individualy. It should be a collection of the general accumulated knowledge and experience of the MTGS 8-rack community, not a long winded lecture on deck building theory. In other primers, when an OP has negative fealing about a card that sees common play they simply talk about its advantages and disadvantages and then say they personaly don't like it.
On the Burn primer the arguments over Wild Nacatl make the ones over pack rat here seem remarkably civil, but you don't see the OP there saying "if you run Nacatl your playing zoo" or "anyone not playing the cat is throwing percentage points away".
If the Primer needs to be striped down to the bare minimum and built back up from there so be it. It isn't scripture.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Of course you should fight fire with fire. You should fight everything with fire." —Jaya Ballard, task mage
This primer post is HILARIOUS. The primer writer is handing out "correct", "incorrect", "wrong" like he's the leading authority, the top player, the know it all of the deck.
Every other post he makes is telling somebody they're wrong. And of course, every card he posts is correct, its the best. But it went to whole other level with the reply:
Lists with big results dont support 'Core postulate'
Imagine how much better they would've done if they did.
What? WHAT?! So lists that put up results could have done better if they'd used your core, let m-let me get this right. And the reason your cards haven't put up results? I'm guessing just because nobody's tried them yet? Or nobody knows how to use them but you?
Passing off opinion as fact again in your "real talk" spoiler, and here I thought we'd made progress towards an objective and factual primer, but nope: "truth", "how not to build a deck", you claim the issue here isn't that you placed an _opinion_ inside a primer piece, but how you "communicated a fact". Let me make this point clear once and for all to all 8rack players Esperino's saying that smallpox and pack rat are "bad cards" is an OPINION. That Tom Ross would have done better if he had played Esperino's list is an OPINION. That Tom Ross put up results with a smallpox list is FACT. That Pack Rat can single handedly win topdeck games is also a FACT.
What's most ironic is that fact-based postulations are written off by the primer writer as "cancerous". No, statements that pass off one's OPINION as FACT to put down other perspectives and worse, suppress discussion that falls outside of Esperino's perspective is the real cancer.
I only reply that way to people who act like that themselves. @Timba likes to say "well this is that" without any real argumentation other than "that other thing is true" and quotes things he doesn't provide links to. So, to him (and you, and so on) I will reply like that because this is the language you understand. To people who want to have a real discussion with points, counterpoints, examples, argumentation, stats and explanation I will never say "you are wrong", because then it wouldn't be a waste of my time.
The mere fact that you don't understand what you are talking about means I can't take you seriously. One person decided to pilot a deck he thought was good and had some form of success. Does that mean he would've done better piloting a list that follows "the core"? We don't and we can't know. I claim he would've had more success. That might not be necessarily true, but claiming he wouldn't have as much or more success is just a stupid statement. You are trying to pass that off as a fact (FACT!) but the truth is that this is just ignorant. We simply can't know. That doesn't prevent me from postulating something I think is true. Look that up in a dictionary.
No, something you *think* is true does not become truth. It is still an opinion, and will continue to be until proven otherwise. I stated *facts*. Tom Ross put up results with an 8rack list, that is *fact*. No amount of posturing you do will change this *fact*.
Your condescension makes no sense whatsoever. "The language we understand?" Pardon but I believe we are both speaking english. The difference here is, I'm calling you out for your faecal matter and you are of course defending your opinion. What makes it neverending is you think your opinion is "truth". To make things worse, you've taken up the mantle of "primer author" and insist that these opinions be communicated within the primer as "truths". Did I not elaborate enough before to not be a "waste" of your time? Au contraire, when I've made my point clearly, objectively and in great detail 7 pages back, I'd think I wouldn't need to spell everything out again. But here we are.
That's what this is all about and as much as I'd love to keep conversation on the cards, you are making that nigh impossible by straight-out condemning cards that put up results in your primer and every other post you make. If you haven't noticed by now, the entire community is either ignoring, objecting to, or expressing disapproval of your posts against certain cards you don't like.
*Not* because they want you to change your mind.
*Not* because they think you aren't allowed to express an opinion.
*Not* because there is no substance behind your opinion.
*BUT* because you pass off your opinion as fact. <- This here is the key issue.
Now on to your statement:
The mere fact that you don't understand what you are talking about means I can't take you seriously. One person decided to pilot a deck he thought was good and had some form of success. Does that mean he would've done better piloting a list that follows "the core"? We don't and we can't know.
The burden of proof of whether your core would have done better is *NOT* on Tom Ross, Esperino. Its on *YOU*. The burden of proof that your list is better is ON YOU. So yes, we *can* know, all you have to do is prove your list is better by sleeving it up, taking it to a Modern Open, and going above 7th place.
That's all. Because Tom isn't going to sleeve up what you *say* is good. He's going to sleeve up whats works for him in his testing and guess what? This method took him to 7th.
So you don't come in with your blueprint for a rocket and say "Tom Ross made it to the Moon, but if he'd used my rocket he'd have made it further. We never will really know." Crap nuggets. Your rocket is better? Get in it and blast off, Esperino. Do it. Show us your list is better than smallpox. Read the meta better than Tom Ross, who beat a aggro meta with greedy landbases using maindeck land destruction. Do it. Don't stand here posting opinions like "smallpox isn't how you build 8rack and its the truth" because over there, Tom Ross is doing it and making 7th, and that's an *actual truth*.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
Wow forget 8rack this is trump rack, just grab them by their discard. Great thing about community is taking info from a mass of people. If ya don't want imput don't post on social media. And yeah I know this is off topic so I'm sure it will be reported.
A round of Primer updates! I am happy to bring you a few improvements to the primer. The dreaded section that tells people the truth about Pack Rat and Smallpox has been removed and I want to talk a little bit about why. I'll put it in a spoiler below to not distract the majority who don't give a damn and wouldn't read it anyway. Other than that, the "community spotlight" section got updated with new decklists. This time around I am featuring Timba's XMage Jesus deck (if there are any updates to the list please let me know) and FearDReaper's Mentor list. I'm going to put his/Memory's Myth decks there too, but I want a little more other than first impressions. Meanwhile, the removed section of the forum has been replaced by a new piece called "Card evaluation theory". It's oriented towards new players and is highly experimental at this stage, but basically it's a card rating model. I was planning on running an entire 8Rack build through it as an example, but I got lazy (raise the pitchforks!) and just did the core + the racks as a counterpoint. I know it's not a perfect model (yet), but do let me know what you think.
Next up is the poll. With a lot more votes than anticipated and the community's choice being one I like, I will be closing the poll and starting right away with updating each decklist with it's own visual spoiler. I'll put another feedback poll on those after they've been made, but because each one requires some editing and fiddling to turn into the picture you see, this feature will arrive late Monday/early Tuesday (european time). Even without the poll being up, don't hesitate to leave feedback on the existing one - do you even want that at all, is it too big, too small, etc. Along with the visual spoilers, the decklists withing the Primer will be updated too. A lot of people don't understand that there is a lot of experimental stuff there. I have cleaned them up and will ship the updates rather soon. Whether you like it or not, the BR (Mardu!) list is going to stay as I still haven't had more success with any other version. After that's done I will be moving to another experimental project - BG 8Rack and most of my playtesting is going to be concentrated there.
Alright, now let's address something at peace. The section about Pack Rat and Smallpox has always been intended as a section dedicated to help players who are new to the game or strategy and aid them in the deckbuilding process. A lot of people are salty that cards they like and think are good were put there as examples of how to not build a deck, but at the end of the day that's the truth and I don't feel bad about it. Communicating that in a clear way, on the other hand, was a problem. Since a lot of the newcomers are either from Rob's YouTube channel or had their first exposure to the deck at the hands of Tom Ross, they come in and think that because they play them they shouldn't be there. Which, objectively, is not the case at all. Tom Ross was playing Sceptre of Fugue, too, so that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
The real problem I had with that piece is that it wasn't well written. I would never take something down because of a few cancerous comments or because a couple of people didn't like it. After all, that type of content is something I want to eventually have on the Primer. But now that I have a better idea that still accomplishes the goal of aiding new players, I am gladly taking it down for something that I'm more excited for. It will make it's way back into the primer but in a better way. When it's a completed product I'm sure this content will fit nicely somewhere, but now was not the time and that was not the place for it. What keeps me reassured is that I've already given Smallpox a separate space and that no real Modern player who picks up 8Rack is going to say "hey look, let me see if Pack Rat, of all things, works in here". That's just not a thing people do in Modern. All in all I'm personally happy with the change and am looking forward to refining the card rating system and posting a more complete version of it in the near future.
People are pissed at you for good reasons, basically whatever opinions which go against you are cancerous. Sorry i don't think you are fit enough to be the author of this primer. You are too opinionated, you have an ego issue. I don't know what is your issue with smallpox and pack rats, they have proven to be decent. Tom Ross put up results with a smallpox variant, its good i tested it, but i prefer the bridge version, but i won't be nasty and tell new players that pack rats and smallpoxes are bad even after removing the section you are still bitter about it. Anyway what happened to memory lapse's stock list?
When you write a primer its not about your opinion only. It's about putting in what had been proven to work. Deck lists that put up results, past/stock deck list which performed, the real core deck which play bridges and another core variant which plays smallpox, new cards to consider etc, not do things like put some blue splash which you replace the stock list with and promote your BR list. You always feel that things that you can't agree with is always wrong and cancerous that you are always right? How are you suppose to write a primer with these kind of mindset? Shouldn't name this 8rack primer an 8rack primer, should name it Esprino's rack primer, because its all about your opinion pushing and promoting your BR version, while you unwillingly succumb to putting Tom Ross's list or any thing which you can't accept after people have to tell you repeatedly with pitch forks.
If i have friends/family who are interested in building 8rack. I'll ask them to refer to tom ross's lists or the old primer. Anyway there isn't even a budget decklist for new players, maybe you should create a section for that instead of promoting your opinions which pisses people off.
The burden of proof of whether your core would have done better is *NOT* on Tom Ross, Esperino. Its on *YOU*. The burden of proof that your list is better is ON YOU. So yes, we *can* know, all you have to do is prove your list is better by sleeving it up, taking it to a Modern Open, and going above 7th place.
Do it. Don't stand here posting opinions like "smallpox isn't how you build 8rack and its the truth" because over there, Tom Ross is doing it and making 7th, and that's an *actual truth*.
That's easy for you to say. Do you know where I live? In Bulgaria. Do you know how many Modern Opens there are here? None. I have to go to Greece to participate in more than the 1 pPTQ we get per year. Even our PTQs are there (and a small part of those are Modern, mind you). You want me to fly to the States just to prove a point? As much as I'd like that, this cannot happen. I have a full-time job and I'm involved with our national Magic team enough that when I go to events I can't play 8Rack, provided I wanted to. My job doesn't support a leave of absence like that.
What I can and do is play at local events. Every Saturday and Sunday at the LGS there are between 30 and 40 people on a regular basis, sometimes up to 80, playing Modern and it's a rare occurrence that I don't make top 8. A lot of the time this consists of piloting various 8Rack builds. I'd say that this is more than enough to form opinions and make statements, considering the majority of people play far less Magic than me and speak about what is "correct" with a lot less (sometimes close to nonexistent and often times highly irrelevant) playtesting. I might be nowhere near Tom Ross but I've had my fair share of competitive Magic experience. I'd love to go to a Modern Open and do better than Ross with a better list, but that's not a realistic option for me. Not to mention I am way more passionate about other decks and 8Rack wouldn't be what I'd play if I were to go to one. I freely share the insight I've generated over the years playing the deck with everyone. Don't want it, don't care, don't agree, don't like it? Don't listen to it. I'm really sorry that you like Pack Rat and think it's good. But for Modern - it's not and likely never will be. It's my opinion that it's a fact that Pack Rat is a ***** Modern card. Feel free to not agree with it, go and play and win big with a Pack Rat-based strategy and prove me wrong.
Edit regarding budget: This is not a Budget thread. There is a link to that in the Primer, although it has been neglected by it's author for a long time now. Personally, because there is no actual place for that discussion, I allow it here, but do note that technically it is against the forum rules and I can't speak for the mods who may decide that type of discussion does not belong in a non-budget Primer.
Fair enough, Esperino. Doesn't have to be something geographically impossible; you have MTGO (one 5-0 is shady but 4 or 5 consecutives like Wafo Tapa would more than prove a point).
My point is that *even* the guy that pilots smallpox doesn't put down other strategies. You'll admit that you're nowhere near him (even i wouldn't go that far, man, I'm not a mean person and I'm sure you have some skill), but you don't seem to respect the card choices he made. That's very curious because isn't deck building one of the fundamental aspects of a player? You paint the picture like Tom Ross is an incredible driver who's chosen a less than perfect car. But here's the thing; in this game we build our cars from the ground up. Every bolt and nut is there because we chose it.
You've got passion and experience, *people can respect that*. What we're harping on today isn't that, brother! What we're harping on is your attitude towards the other people here, their card choices, their opinions. I don't know if its just the regular way you express yourself, but you need more of "my opinion is that this is better because xxxx." and less of "this isn't how you build a deck" or "this list is wrong and mine is better".
You'd be making so much contribution to this community by being less venomous on what you dislike, and focus more words, more effort, more voice on cards you are trying to push to the next level. In the meantime, there is no value add for you to put down proven (yes, pack rat and smallpox are proven, not by me but by far better players than you or me) cards. They just need to be in the primer so players can objectively assess, test and experiment for themselves. Maybe they'll reach the same conclusion as you. Maybe they'll reach the same conclusion as Tom Ross. That's the point of the primer: tell them all the ways to build the rocket ship, not to tell them this rocket ship that made it to the moon is bad.
Anyway, I speak mostly from experience *opposite* pack rat, but of course I need to present something of substance. Here's a 6th place finish in March at a 72 player event: http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=11932&d=268302&f=MO
About this, though:
Not to mention I am way more passionate about other decks and 8Rack wouldn't be what I'd play if I were to go to one. I freely share the insight I've generated over the years playing the deck with everyone. Don't want it, don't care, don't agree, don't like it? Don't listen to it.
What business do you have writing an 8rack primer? If this isn't your pet deck or the one you're most passionate about, if you're not interested in any other opinion but your own, if you mentality is that anyone who disagrees shouldn't read it, then...
You aren't fit to be this primer's author. Not because of a lack of skill, or knowledge. Just attitude.
The sooner someone who actually mains 8rack and isn't a know-it-all takes over or simply writes a proper primer, the better for the community.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
Took me quite a while to see what you mean because of course why would you mention what the error is, right? Awesome feedback. Regardless, I see what you mean and all I'm going to say is that it's a mistake when copying the decklist but definitely not an error. I'll give some thought on how to move forward with this, thanks for bringing it to my attention (sort of).
Super IQ win is missing in results section. This deck doesnt have many big finishes (2), why not post all of them?
Once again, thanks for not linking to what you are talking about, makes it really helpful. Everything that I'm aware of is in there if you bothered to look.
Btw in my opinion having 1-2 Flaying Tendrils in the sideboard is very important for non-red variants, it is not mentioned in the primer
You opinion is noted. It's incorrect, but still I will think about adding a word or two about Tendrils just to be thorough.
Same as previous. Why do you act like youre a hall of famer giving master classes in elementary school? I bet you can't even post a medium finish for any of the exemplary lists you put in the primer (not 'spotlights' deep in the primer). Prove Flaying Tendrils is incorrect. Yes, you can't.
Sideboard examples. Going to hate specific matchups and forget about others is not a good strategy. Thats my opinion and PVDR's as he recently wrote in his series of articles about sideboarding. Transformational sideboarding is changing your game strategy or wincons. Siding in specific hate is not a transformational sideboarding.
I'm sorry that you don't really understand that the example for a transformational sideboard is correct. Guess what, there can be (and are) other opinions than PVDR's. Hating on some matchups and "forgetting" about others is very good under the right circumstances and it's not strictly a bad strategy. As have many winning decks over the years shown time and again.
Yes I dont understand how siding in 3 Night of Souls' Betrayals is transformational. You just side in hate. Thats regular sideboarding.
While writing this a had a special olympics jpg in my head. Really why do I have to tell you facts you failed to see even after I point at issues. It is ok to have a friendly conversation about our disagreementы, but this attitude 'I right, you wrong' while making statements that can be proven wrong in 30 secs nonstop is just a facepalm.
Next up is the poll. With a lot more votes than anticipated and the community's choice being one I like, I will be closing the poll and starting right away with updating each decklist with it's own visual spoiler. I'll put another feedback poll on those after they've been made, but because each one requires some editing and fiddling to turn into the picture you see, this feature will arrive late Monday/early Tuesday (european time). Even without the poll being up, don't hesitate to leave feedback on the existing one - do you even want that at all, is it too big, too small, etc. Along with the visual spoilers, the decklists withing the Primer will be updated too. A lot of people don't understand that there is a lot of experimental stuff there. I have cleaned them up and will ship the updates rather soon. Whether you like it or not, the BR (Mardu!) list is going to stay as I still haven't had more success with any other version. After that's done I will be moving to another experimental project - BG 8Rack and most of my playtesting is going to be concentrated there.
The real problem I had with that piece is that it wasn't well written. I would never take something down because of a few cancerous comments or because a couple of people didn't like it. After all, that type of content is something I want to eventually have on the Primer. But now that I have a better idea that still accomplishes the goal of aiding new players, I am gladly taking it down for something that I'm more excited for. It will make it's way back into the primer but in a better way. When it's a completed product I'm sure this content will fit nicely somewhere, but now was not the time and that was not the place for it. What keeps me reassured is that I've already given Smallpox a separate space and that no real Modern player who picks up 8Rack is going to say "hey look, let me see if Pack Rat, of all things, works in here". That's just not a thing people do in Modern. All in all I'm personally happy with the change and am looking forward to refining the card rating system and posting a more complete version of it in the near future.
Conclusions:
It's an absolute home run for 8Rack.
Pros
-The casting cost
-It's an enchantment, it can be played early with perfect safety
-Multiple's stack perfectly
-Is disgusting with Raven's Crime
-We grow our Myths faster than jund grows its goyfs
Cons
-It lacks the staggering inevitability of top decked Pack Rat
-Future Myths need to be regrown unlike Goyf (its kind of a cross between goyf and scooze)
Don't put my myth deck list up in the primer just yet. I need to work on some things. Path and Smallpox are a nonbo and its been an issue. I'm currently testing 2x Dismember to over inflate the critter removal package. The only reason I think Dismember is better than GFtT here is the 1cc option. With Myth Realized some of the biggest plays occur when I attack with it and remove a critter so I want I low cc removal option to support that.
BChainer, Dementia Master(Big Mana/Reanimator)
BRRakdos, The Showstopper (Mass Life Loss/Ramp)
BUThe Scarab God (Zombie Tribal/Control)
BWKarlov of the Ghost Council (Life Gain)
BGJarad, Golgari Lich Lord (Stompy/Dredge)
BRGProssh, Skyraider of Kher (Tokens/Non-infinite Combo)
I recommend 4 IOK 3 TS 3 WM 4 SP 23 lands
G Green Stompy
RG Shamans
UB Mill
UG Infect
WUBRG Slivers!
Exemplary decklist has an error
Sideboard guide is for a missing list with Pack Rats and Bridges
Lists with big results dont support 'Core postulate'
No results mentioned for exemplary lists. In my opinion they have a lot of issues. I wrote my commentary on mardu list as example but I forgot to mention it also lacked mana sinks
Sideboard examples. Going to hate specific matchups and forget about others is not a good strategy. Thats my opinion and PVDR's as he recently wrote in his series of articles about sideboarding. Transformational sideboarding is changing your game strategy or wincons. Siding in specific hate is not a transformational sideboarding.
Card evaluation theory is .. subjective and not helpful. Power level depends on number of copies I play? If I want to get power level of Funeral Charm for example, where do I get numbers? Call you?)
Missing parts
Ari Lax made a video, not an article
Super IQ win is missing in results section. This deck doesnt have many big finishes (2), why not post all of them?
Btw in my opinion having 1-2 Flaying Tendrils in the sideboard is very important for non-red variants, it is not mentioned in the primer
G Green Stompy
RG Shamans
UB Mill
UG Infect
WUBRG Slivers!
That's just plain wrong. On many different levels.
Took me quite a while to see what you mean because of course why would you mention what the error is, right? Awesome feedback. Regardless, I see what you mean and all I'm going to say is that it's a mistake when copying the decklist but definitely not an error. I'll give some thought on how to move forward with this, thanks for bringing it to my attention (sort of).
That doesn't make any sense. The sideboards are taken from decks you can see literally a couple of paragraphs above.
Imagine how much better they would've done if they did.
I'm sorry that you don't really understand that the example for a transformational sideboard is correct. Guess what, there can be (and are) other opinions than PVDR's. Hating on some matchups and "forgetting" about others is very good under the right circumstances and it's not strictly a bad strategy. As have many winning decks over the years shown time and again.
Once again, thanks for not linking to what you are talking about, makes it really helpful. Everything that I'm aware of is in there if you bothered to look.
You opinion is noted. It's incorrect, but still I will think about adding a word or two about Tendrils just to be thorough.
not playing 4 thoughtseize its not an error, your conclusion comes from being on the play. while the conclusion to not playing 4 comes from being on the draw
saying that being on the draw its a mistake its also wrong, i played countless games against the fast decks trying to prove that statment wrong, and found that except affinity i had a higher win% against everything else by being on the draw. the most shocking thing was that burn became a lot easyer, they run out of cards so fast by following their gameplan that they either outrace themselves or just dont cast spells and lose to our "value" cards like wrench mind, lili, etc. the collected brutality out of the sideboard its also gamebreking
this is more of an anecdotal evidence but in half the matches that i played in day 2 at gp bologna my oponents puted me on the play in sideboard games, agaisnt 2 of them i lost the dice roll so they didnt even know that i wanted to be on the draw
i can see why people discard being on the draw after the first impresion because some things they learned doesnt apply anymore (thoughtseize gets worse for example) but in change the 8 racks get better. by being on the draw they have 1 card less and you have one card more wich translates in them having 2 cards less, but they are also a full turn ahead of you wich also translates in 2 cards less (landrop + spell), thats why target discard gets worse (they have fewer cards in hand and can miss), removal becomes more necessay, and the racks go online faster and its a race that the deck its very well equiped to win (painless mana + muta helps to)
No I cannot agree to all of this. Being on the draw vs today's burn is not the way to go. A turn 1 goblin guide or swiftspear ends the game for 8Rack. Same with Glistner elf. Now if it was 2 years ago and burn lists were actually burn and not Red (naya) Deck Wins then your statement makes more sense.
Going 2nd is a tool in your tool box to be used surgically. It's not the default way to play the deck. Tom Ross does it and that impresses you, I get it. Tom Ross is just an 8Rack player. He plays he ways because it gives him consistent results that he can live with. That does not mean it's the best way to play, it just means his way of playing is good enough for him. There is no hidden tech or secret that only he knows. It took him 2 years to come to the conclusion that the 8Rack core that we have been using since day 1 is nigh immutable. 2 years guys. Now I completely respect that he is the type of guy who must figure things out for himself, but are you guys gonna wait another 2 years for him to figure out its not smart to always go on the draw before you realize it too?
As my final point on Tom Ross' strats / secret tech I submit the following for your consideration:
Scepter of Fugue
He made it to day 2 with that card mainboard. What does that tell you about him and what does that tell you about the power of the 8rack?
Card wise I dont think its that bad
It is slow
But thats a card advantage every turn
A very powerful effect
Mana costs are on par with our mana curve
It can be a sideboard option for control matchups
And thus can be maindecked as a meta call
G Green Stompy
RG Shamans
UB Mill
UG Infect
WUBRG Slivers!
Every other post he makes is telling somebody they're wrong. And of course, every card he posts is correct, its the best. But it went to whole other level with the reply:
What? WHAT?! So lists that put up results could have done better if they'd used your core, let m-let me get this right. And the reason your cards haven't put up results? I'm guessing just because nobody's tried them yet? Or nobody knows how to use them but you?
Passing off opinion as fact again in your "real talk" spoiler, and here I thought we'd made progress towards an objective and factual primer, but nope: "truth", "how not to build a deck", you claim the issue here isn't that you placed an _opinion_ inside a primer piece, but how you "communicated a fact". Let me make this point clear once and for all to all 8rack players Esperino's saying that smallpox and pack rat are "bad cards" is an OPINION. That Tom Ross would have done better if he had played Esperino's list is an OPINION. That Tom Ross put up results with a smallpox list is FACT. That Pack Rat can single handedly win topdeck games is also a FACT.
What's most ironic is that fact-based postulations are written off by the primer writer as "cancerous". No, statements that pass off one's OPINION as FACT to put down other perspectives and worse, suppress discussion that falls outside of Esperino's perspective is the real cancer.
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
I know it's not statisticaly correct or "optimal" as in theory is alwase better to have a slightly better chance of drawing your 1st-60th best card than have the 61st best in there, but there's a difference between theory and the real world. I want all 3 dark blasts and my second ratchet bomb vs affinity, plus my 2 pith in needles, what other than 4 wrench mind do I take out? I sure are hell arnt cutting Crimes or removal.
I have to agree. "You were the most sucessfull ever with this deck, imagine how well you could have done if you did it like me" is a blatantly illogical statement.
I definately feal sorry for ya esperino for the chaos that has accompanied the new thread, and I know you have strong opinions on the deck, but this is the only primer of the several I follow where the OP is so pointedly against a number of lists and specific cards which see widespread play within the 8rack community.
The Primer should be a general tutorial of the deck, with sections dedicated to taking a more detailed look at its aspects individualy. It should be a collection of the general accumulated knowledge and experience of the MTGS 8-rack community, not a long winded lecture on deck building theory. In other primers, when an OP has negative fealing about a card that sees common play they simply talk about its advantages and disadvantages and then say they personaly don't like it.
On the Burn primer the arguments over Wild Nacatl make the ones over pack rat here seem remarkably civil, but you don't see the OP there saying "if you run Nacatl your playing zoo" or "anyone not playing the cat is throwing percentage points away".
If the Primer needs to be striped down to the bare minimum and built back up from there so be it. It isn't scripture.
I only reply that way to people who act like that themselves. @Timba likes to say "well this is that" without any real argumentation other than "that other thing is true" and quotes things he doesn't provide links to. So, to him (and you, and so on) I will reply like that because this is the language you understand. To people who want to have a real discussion with points, counterpoints, examples, argumentation, stats and explanation I will never say "you are wrong", because then it wouldn't be a waste of my time.
The mere fact that you don't understand what you are talking about means I can't take you seriously. One person decided to pilot a deck he thought was good and had some form of success. Does that mean he would've done better piloting a list that follows "the core"? We don't and we can't know. I claim he would've had more success. That might not be necessarily true, but claiming he wouldn't have as much or more success is just a stupid statement. You are trying to pass that off as a fact (FACT!) but the truth is that this is just ignorant. We simply can't know. That doesn't prevent me from postulating something I think is true. Look that up in a dictionary.
Your condescension makes no sense whatsoever. "The language we understand?" Pardon but I believe we are both speaking english. The difference here is, I'm calling you out for your faecal matter and you are of course defending your opinion. What makes it neverending is you think your opinion is "truth". To make things worse, you've taken up the mantle of "primer author" and insist that these opinions be communicated within the primer as "truths". Did I not elaborate enough before to not be a "waste" of your time? Au contraire, when I've made my point clearly, objectively and in great detail 7 pages back, I'd think I wouldn't need to spell everything out again. But here we are.
That's what this is all about and as much as I'd love to keep conversation on the cards, you are making that nigh impossible by straight-out condemning cards that put up results in your primer and every other post you make. If you haven't noticed by now, the entire community is either ignoring, objecting to, or expressing disapproval of your posts against certain cards you don't like.
*Not* because they want you to change your mind.
*Not* because they think you aren't allowed to express an opinion.
*Not* because there is no substance behind your opinion.
*BUT* because you pass off your opinion as fact. <- This here is the key issue.
Now on to your statement:
The burden of proof of whether your core would have done better is *NOT* on Tom Ross, Esperino. Its on *YOU*. The burden of proof that your list is better is ON YOU. So yes, we *can* know, all you have to do is prove your list is better by sleeving it up, taking it to a Modern Open, and going above 7th place.
That's all. Because Tom isn't going to sleeve up what you *say* is good. He's going to sleeve up whats works for him in his testing and guess what? This method took him to 7th.
So you don't come in with your blueprint for a rocket and say "Tom Ross made it to the Moon, but if he'd used my rocket he'd have made it further. We never will really know." Crap nuggets. Your rocket is better? Get in it and blast off, Esperino. Do it. Show us your list is better than smallpox. Read the meta better than Tom Ross, who beat a aggro meta with greedy landbases using maindeck land destruction. Do it. Don't stand here posting opinions like "smallpox isn't how you build 8rack and its the truth" because over there, Tom Ross is doing it and making 7th, and that's an *actual truth*.
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
People are pissed at you for good reasons, basically whatever opinions which go against you are cancerous. Sorry i don't think you are fit enough to be the author of this primer. You are too opinionated, you have an ego issue. I don't know what is your issue with smallpox and pack rats, they have proven to be decent. Tom Ross put up results with a smallpox variant, its good i tested it, but i prefer the bridge version, but i won't be nasty and tell new players that pack rats and smallpoxes are bad even after removing the section you are still bitter about it. Anyway what happened to memory lapse's stock list?
When you write a primer its not about your opinion only. It's about putting in what had been proven to work. Deck lists that put up results, past/stock deck list which performed, the real core deck which play bridges and another core variant which plays smallpox, new cards to consider etc, not do things like put some blue splash which you replace the stock list with and promote your BR list. You always feel that things that you can't agree with is always wrong and cancerous that you are always right? How are you suppose to write a primer with these kind of mindset? Shouldn't name this 8rack primer an 8rack primer, should name it Esprino's rack primer, because its all about your opinion pushing and promoting your BR version, while you unwillingly succumb to putting Tom Ross's list or any thing which you can't accept after people have to tell you repeatedly with pitch forks.
If i have friends/family who are interested in building 8rack. I'll ask them to refer to tom ross's lists or the old primer. Anyway there isn't even a budget decklist for new players, maybe you should create a section for that instead of promoting your opinions which pisses people off.
That's easy for you to say. Do you know where I live? In Bulgaria. Do you know how many Modern Opens there are here? None. I have to go to Greece to participate in more than the 1 pPTQ we get per year. Even our PTQs are there (and a small part of those are Modern, mind you). You want me to fly to the States just to prove a point? As much as I'd like that, this cannot happen. I have a full-time job and I'm involved with our national Magic team enough that when I go to events I can't play 8Rack, provided I wanted to. My job doesn't support a leave of absence like that.
What I can and do is play at local events. Every Saturday and Sunday at the LGS there are between 30 and 40 people on a regular basis, sometimes up to 80, playing Modern and it's a rare occurrence that I don't make top 8. A lot of the time this consists of piloting various 8Rack builds. I'd say that this is more than enough to form opinions and make statements, considering the majority of people play far less Magic than me and speak about what is "correct" with a lot less (sometimes close to nonexistent and often times highly irrelevant) playtesting. I might be nowhere near Tom Ross but I've had my fair share of competitive Magic experience. I'd love to go to a Modern Open and do better than Ross with a better list, but that's not a realistic option for me. Not to mention I am way more passionate about other decks and 8Rack wouldn't be what I'd play if I were to go to one. I freely share the insight I've generated over the years playing the deck with everyone. Don't want it, don't care, don't agree, don't like it? Don't listen to it. I'm really sorry that you like Pack Rat and think it's good. But for Modern - it's not and likely never will be. It's my opinion that it's a fact that Pack Rat is a ***** Modern card. Feel free to not agree with it, go and play and win big with a Pack Rat-based strategy and prove me wrong.
Edit regarding budget: This is not a Budget thread. There is a link to that in the Primer, although it has been neglected by it's author for a long time now. Personally, because there is no actual place for that discussion, I allow it here, but do note that technically it is against the forum rules and I can't speak for the mods who may decide that type of discussion does not belong in a non-budget Primer.
My point is that *even* the guy that pilots smallpox doesn't put down other strategies. You'll admit that you're nowhere near him (even i wouldn't go that far, man, I'm not a mean person and I'm sure you have some skill), but you don't seem to respect the card choices he made. That's very curious because isn't deck building one of the fundamental aspects of a player? You paint the picture like Tom Ross is an incredible driver who's chosen a less than perfect car. But here's the thing; in this game we build our cars from the ground up. Every bolt and nut is there because we chose it.
You've got passion and experience, *people can respect that*. What we're harping on today isn't that, brother! What we're harping on is your attitude towards the other people here, their card choices, their opinions. I don't know if its just the regular way you express yourself, but you need more of "my opinion is that this is better because xxxx." and less of "this isn't how you build a deck" or "this list is wrong and mine is better".
You'd be making so much contribution to this community by being less venomous on what you dislike, and focus more words, more effort, more voice on cards you are trying to push to the next level. In the meantime, there is no value add for you to put down proven (yes, pack rat and smallpox are proven, not by me but by far better players than you or me) cards. They just need to be in the primer so players can objectively assess, test and experiment for themselves. Maybe they'll reach the same conclusion as you. Maybe they'll reach the same conclusion as Tom Ross. That's the point of the primer: tell them all the ways to build the rocket ship, not to tell them this rocket ship that made it to the moon is bad.
Anyway, I speak mostly from experience *opposite* pack rat, but of course I need to present something of substance. Here's a 6th place finish in March at a 72 player event: http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=11932&d=268302&f=MO
About this, though:
What business do you have writing an 8rack primer? If this isn't your pet deck or the one you're most passionate about, if you're not interested in any other opinion but your own, if you mentality is that anyone who disagrees shouldn't read it, then...
You aren't fit to be this primer's author. Not because of a lack of skill, or knowledge. Just attitude.
The sooner someone who actually mains 8rack and isn't a know-it-all takes over or simply writes a proper primer, the better for the community.
BGW Elves BGW|BW Tokens BW|WBR Sword&ShieldWBR|BUG DelverBUG|UWR Kiki UWR | UR Storm UR
Same as previous, I mentioned that finish http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/developing-competitive-modern/757958-8rack?comment=18. I dont believe you are not aware of it. If you are not then maybe you should resign as primer author, it was a sole big finish for whole 8Rack history before Tom Ross top8ed an SCG Open a month ago.
There is no decklist with Pack Rat main.
Categorical statement. Can you prove it? I know, you can't.
Same as previous. Why do you act like youre a hall of famer giving master classes in elementary school? I bet you can't even post a medium finish for any of the exemplary lists you put in the primer (not 'spotlights' deep in the primer). Prove Flaying Tendrils is incorrect. Yes, you can't.
Yes I dont understand how siding in 3 Night of Souls' Betrayals is transformational. You just side in hate. Thats regular sideboarding.
While writing this a had a special olympics jpg in my head. Really why do I have to tell you facts you failed to see even after I point at issues. It is ok to have a friendly conversation about our disagreementы, but this attitude 'I right, you wrong' while making statements that can be proven wrong in 30 secs nonstop is just a facepalm.
G Green Stompy
RG Shamans
UB Mill
UG Infect
WUBRG Slivers!