Here's the official Moderator statement on this:
There is a rule in the competitive forum that we shouldn't be making the discussion about budget. Mostly that is to avoid people from asking "I need a replacement for X card because it's too expensive" from derailing a discussion. He was asked why his list wasn't playing Mutavault, and he just gave the answer. I think for the purpose of discussing the deck we should probably assume that he's playing Mutavaults and move on from there.
- 3/8/2014 10:43:41 PM Posted in: Established (Standard)
3/6/2014 10:10:55 PM
Posted in: Magic GeneralQuote from munkmetal1Quote from zemogFCI don't know what Sunbound is but a 4 card combo that doesn't instant win the game won't excite anyone.
I think the deck you're looking for is Bant Enchantments. Notice the hexproof...
No offense, but I'm not talking from a Pro Tour mindset... ain't got hundreds to dump into a single deck. And that's definitely not anywhere near what I was "looking for". But thanks for the useful words. I feel smarter now.
That Bant Hexproof deck you could make a decent budget version (probably cutting out green or blue and making it two color). I highly recommend going this route if you are going to try playing an enchantment deck.
3/5/2014 10:47:37 PM
There's this commander deck I've been playing and the following situations have come up:Posted in: Magic Rulings
1. I have a Duplicant and Cloudstone Curio in play, I play Phyrexian Metamorph trying to clone Duplicant. Cloudstone Curio triggers and I choose to return the same Duplicant back to my hand. Is this possible or is Duplicant somehow no longer a legal target?
2. Cloudstone Curio and Trinket Mage in play (no other creatures). I cast Prime Speaker Zegana, and Curio trigger returns Trinket Mage. Does Zegana have 2 counters or 0?
My instinct is telling me that in both cases I would get the desired situation, but I want to be able to explain why to other people. I imagine it has something to do with the relevant abilities not being ETB triggers.
On a side note, is there a type of card where that interaction doesn't work?
3/4/2014 6:13:58 PM
The shocklands were the exception rather than the rule. Virtually every "dual" printed over the course of magic's history has not had the double basic land type. It's purely a design thing. The shock lands you can search with fetch lands and things like Farseek, the other lands you can't. If all lands had the double basic land type, then modern would be absurd with the ability to search for multiple types of duals with fetch-lands.Posted in: Standard (Type 2)
3/1/2014 1:27:31 AM
I think he was on Mono-Blue before the rotation just because it looked like the best deck in the format. But it doesn't seem to be dominating as much as it used to. I've seen him mess around with some R/x list trying to abuse Saytr Firedancer. Not sure if that's the list he'll end up using at the GP, but I wouldn't be surprised.Posted in: Standard (Type 2)
2/26/2014 12:00:02 AM
I've updated the primer on the first page with the primer Elder_MMHS made. Sucks that I can't move posts within a thread around, but this will have to work while I find someone that can do that.Posted in: UW/x Control
2/22/2014 1:03:04 AM
The topic of "X format is way too expensive" is a common issue. Draft is too expensive because you have to spend money on packs and you don't make that money back with the cards you draft. Standard is too expensive because you can drop 100s of dollars on cards and have a deck for a year, then half your deck rotates and the value of those cards go from 20 to 0 pretty fast. Legacy doesn't have the rotation issue, but has a very high barrier of entry. And Modern is kind of a mix of the two in terms of cost issues.Posted in: Legacy (Type 1.5)
I don't understand why if cost is a factor... Commander seems like the perfect game. There's no rotation to deal with, so you can play your Green Sun Zeniths and Kessig Wolf Runs to your hearts content. It's competitive enough that your tuned Azusa deck should be able to trample over some random guy with a budget dragon deck. The barrier to entry is relatively low. You can get away with not playing the full suite of non-basics and not get completely crushed. At the same time, it's not the worst thing in the world to drop 500 bucks and really pimp out a commander deck. Because presuming that you drop the 30 bucks on Chord of Calling and 40 on some sac lands and another 30 on some Eldrazi creatures... those cards are in your collection forever now and you can use them in any commander deck you want. Once you've purchased a lot of the staples in the 2-3 colors you like playing, all the other cards are usually cheap so switching from one strategy to another might cost 10 dollars total.
2/11/2014 8:30:47 PM
Posted in: Magic GeneralQuote from w_u_b_r_gSo only the person who loses gets to announce that he/she perceived the game as being "good?" I will never understand this argument.
The only issue I can foresee is that the phrase "good game" is pretty vague and leaves a lot room for unspoken subtext. So don't be a D when you say it and hopefully your opponent (whom you just had upwards of fifty minutes to get to know and to judge whether or not they're stable) won't be a D either.
I suggest that you try to get a read on someone before deciding whether to extend your hand or just let them pack up their stuff for two minutes of awkward silence. You don't want to get bitten!
I think the average person is not going to react badly if you say something like "good game". But there certainly is a non-zero number of people that WILL sulk in some way after a loss, enough to make you consider how you act after a game because you don't want to deal with people like that.
There really isn't a good answer to how to deal with someone that is a sore loser. The easy answer is to just shrug it off or confront them about it, because after all THEY are the ones being jerks here. But that still doesn't help the fact that they are trying to make you feel bad because you won.
2/11/2014 9:53:02 AM
Regarding multiple games at once, they would have separate commentators for each game. Again, at Starcraft events they'll have 6-8 commentators. So its something that can be done.Posted in: Submit News
2/10/2014 11:48:10 PM
I have to say, in general I'm a little underwhelmed by SCG's production/coverage of their own Magic tournaments. They have a real shot at taking over the market when it comes to Magic the Gathering tournament coverage because they are really the only player in the game right now, and if they keep resting on their laurels, someone is eventually going to figure out there is potentially money in tournament coverage.Posted in: Submit News
Someone got me into watching Starcraft tournaments, enough to know that that eSport completely outclasses Magic when the two games are actually pretty similar in regards to the tournament scene, game history and the production issues they would have to solve:
-Both games started at about the same time if you count Starcraft 1, and both are now even more popular
-Both have the same level of tournament support in America/Europe. Different websites hold different events and they usually provide their own coverage.
-They both are games that are played at a casual level and professional level
-In terms of production, even though Starcraft 2 is played over a computer and magic is in real life... the same amount of work is required. In Starcraft 2 tournaments, you need an "observer" for every game to click on different areas of the map and show people what's going on. In Magic, ideally you want a similar thing but you could probably actually get away with less.
The two advantages that Starcraft has over Magic... one being that tournaments tend to be less than 40 people so they can feasibly show you every match. The other advantage is Starcraft can get away with playing only 2-3 matches at a time because they don't have everyone playing in a round at the same time. That being said, that shouldn't be the difference between the quality production of these Starcraft tournaments and the relatively sub par production of SCG. There's no reason they can't have 4-5 separate streams. When it gets to the point in the tournament where it's the last couple of rounds and there are really only 20 players playing for the top 8 spots... they could stagger those matches so that they can catch all of those matches on stream. And catch all of the matches in the top 8 as well. Also... I don't see why they can't edit individual games and post them on their website so that someone can go back and watch all of the matches if they wanted.
Obviously this would cost a lot of money to produce, but SCG is already in good position to pull this off. They already have premium membership that lets you look at all the articles. They could just make this a separate premium package. Charge something like 5 bucks a month, maybe have a free version that gives you access to one of the five streams. In addition to that is the ad revenue they probably would be bringing in. I know I would pay 5-10 bucks a month just to have access to the back catalog of games. And maybe if a new deck came out and suddenly gained popularity, I could go back to that tournament and watch all the VODs with that deck featured instead of having to watch the tournament live and hope they show the deck I want to see being played.
And the thing is... once they spend the money and hire the people and get everything organized, they would already be set to cover other card games or other types of events. I feel like eventually someone is going to figure out that you can make the production much bigger and bring more attention to the tournament scene. I'm surprised WotC isn't trying to help make this happen to be honest.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.