• posted a message on Question to the older players: What is your thoughts when WotC made drastic changes to the game?
    Quote from Pistallion »
    I'm a newer player but I want to make an analogy. So, im a pretty seasoned player of the video game League of Legends. I've been around since basically the beginning and it was the main game I played at the time. Throughout the years the game has went through many drastic changes, and its become a staple of the game that changes happen frequently and drastically. At the end of each season, they overhaul a certain aspect of the game, and everything changes, from what characters are good to the entire meta game.

    I was thinking about the history of the game, and was thinking about if it was similar to Magic. League isnt the game I once played, years ago, and it sometimes makes me sad. The game that I originally played is gone, and this new thing now exists.

    Because I wasnt around in magic during the early days, I was wondering if the same empty feeling occurs with the experience players

    Magic doesn't change the same way you talk about League of Legends changing. What you are talking about with changes every year is more analogous to Standard rotations every year or Modern bannings.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Usability of Morph in Standard
    Quote from twicky_kid »
    You will NEVER get to morph Rattleclaw. The reason it runs Elvish Mystic is the small chance of turn 2 Savage Knuckleblade or courser. The other reason is because when you have that ETB tapped land you can still cast Rattleclaw on turn 2 so your ramping into 4 drops on turn 3 uninterrupted.

    So again there are no 6 drops you care about ramping into with a mystic morph. On top of that you need a LOT of things to go right before that even happens. Like Rattleclaw not getting shot as soon as it is played. Hitting your land drop UNTAPPED.

    There are no 6 drops, but certainly there are 5 drops.

    Actually, I didn't consider comes into play tapped lands. Because if I have 3 lands and 1 comes into play tapped... I could see dropping the t1 dork, t2 rattleclaw face-up with the tap land, and then you still get to 5 mana on turn 3. Technically you are getting just as much mana turn 3 whether you play the tapped land turn 2 (and face up Rattleclaw) or 3 (and face down Rattleclaw). But playing it face-up lessens the blowout potential of a removal spell.

    Even back in Onslaught Morph was a limited mechanic. Willbender was saw play and it wasn't very good either.

    I don't think Willbender saw play. Exalted Angel saw play and somewhat saw play facedown against some matchups. I believe Exalted Angel was in the RW Astral Slide decks and there was some protection against removal with Slide in play playing it face down.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on HELP! I'm too serious and competetive for my friends...what do I do?
    It sounds like your friends are serious casual players. Obviously if you can get them closer to your level that's a good thing to do... but that seems like easier said than done. A few ideas (some of these might've already been mentioned):

    1. Try to get them to play EDH. Commander 2014 is coming out soon. So it's easy enough to start building a deck. EDH is really good about evening the playing field as long as no one is playing a completely busted deck.
    2. There are Dual Decks. It's 2 pre-built decks that I think cost like 50 bux combined and while the power level is nothing like affinity, it's certainly going to be better than your friend's 80 card mill deck.
    3. I think someone mentioned alternate rule set sorts of things like Planechase/Archenemy.
    4. You could make your own house rules designed to even up the game a little bit. You mentioned your friend getting mana screwed, you could play a game where both players have an Abundance in play the whole game. So upkeep, if they really need that 5th land drop, they can keep going till they hit a land.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Usability of Morph in Standard
    Quote from UltraLunch »
    This is wrong. You are not going to play them morphed 10%, or even 1% of the time in constructed. If you are you're not familiar enough with the cards to understand their uses.

    If we're talking about Rattleclaw Mystic only (I've been calling it Shaman this whole time for some reason), I don't see how you can say it's closer to 1% than 10%. Now, I'll admit that I haven't played in a major tournament since Khans rotated in, but I know how to look up deck-lists and see that Rattleclaw is played either in Temur beatdown decks or straight RG beatdown and in addition to that just use a little logic. In the lists I'm seeing, Rattleclaw Mystic is played a lot with Elvish Mystic. So that means any hand with Rattleclaw + Elvish Mystic... you are going to want to morph because you get to morph turn 2. And I can imagine specific starting hands that would favor morphing on turn 3: like 3 lands, Rattleclaw, Caryatid, Stormbreath, Lightning Strike or something like that.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on Usability of Morph in Standard
    Quote from twicky_kid »

    Morphing mystic disrupts your 4 drop that you would have accelerated into without the morph. If you do morph to get to your 6 drops there is even more incentive to shoot it. Either you are catching the mystic stalling the 6 drop or you hit the 6 drop you just morphed down. Either way it isn't good for you.

    Sagu Mauler is played for his big body, trample, and hexproof. The card might as well not even have morph on it. Same for rattleclaw as well. These are limited play angles not constructed.

    I agree. But I dispute the logic that either of them might as well not have morph. Certainly you are going to just play them face up the majority of the time, but to act like there won't be significant percentages (say around 10%) of the time where you want to play them face down.

    With Rattleclaw you lose the ability to play your 4 drop on turn 3. But maybe you don't have a 4 drop in your hand. Or maybe you are playing against aggro and you played another 2 CMC card on turn 2... on turn 3 your decision is either play Shaman for 2 or morph it for 3. Obviously against aggro in this scenario being able to block a 1/1 token and survive is relevant (while still leaving open the possibility to unflip it turn 4 and drop something for 6. I could see the majority of times you play him as a morph having more to do with the fact you have the 1 mana open anyway, so might as well play him face down.

    With Sagu Mauler playing him face down means he's an easy target to shoot down. So I actually don't you want to be morphing him turn 4 so that turn 5 you can flip him up so that he'd be in play a turn earlier. Seems like it's too risky just to walk into a removal spell when you don't have to. That being said, there are some matchups where that's a safe proposition. And there are some matchups where you just need dudes on the table. If it's turn 5, playing Shaman face up and Sagu Mauler face down is a play you might have to make if you are trying to stem the tide against aggro.

    This might all be a moot point because Mauler is looking like it's not making the cut in Temur anyways.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on Junk cards - do you throw them away?
    Quote from ShadowFenril »

    It's definitely worth it to me. I've already picked up two fetches and a handful of cards I need for EDH by trading rares, commons and uncommons that used to be junk but spiked because of Modern and EDH. :p But then again, as I said, I don't buy a ton of product anymore. I usually buy a box, a fat pack and a handful of boosters from each set while I wait for single prices to settle from prerelease hype. But I have several boxes full of cards from the pre-Lorwyn era when I used to buy a ton of Magic packs. I've long-since traded or sold most of the real value cards, but every now and then I discover some random card is now worth a few bucks so it's fun to "treasure hunt" and dig through the old boxes again just to see what I can find and see if I can dig up some random trade bait.

    I guess it depends on what cards we're talking about. Because there are rares and uncommons (and commons to a lesser extent) that are currently worth under a dollar that I could see jumping up to be worth more in certain situations (EDH, etc). A lot of the time you can kind of tell if a card has potential. But cards that are mostly limited fodder, especially at common... the risk-reward curve doesn't work in your favor with that one. Uncommons and rares are slightly different because they have a tendency to be more flashy cards which generally get some play in EDH.

    And especially if the question is whether or not to throw away junk commons from Khans boosters. Anything you open you would have to wait at least 7 years before you see the supply of said card start to dry up. Treasure Cruise is a common, and it's taking over basically every format in the game, to the point where it's getting serious ban talk... and it's a 50 cent card. Delver of Secrets has been a Legacy and Modern all-star for the past few years. Also a common... and it's a 1 dollar card. And those are cards that dominated formats since their printing. Not cards that didn't see Standard play at all.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Junk cards - do you throw them away?
    Quote from ShadowFenril »
    I don't throw out junk commons/uncommons thanks to random cards suddenly becoming valuable. I've been cashing in on a ton of cards that used to be junk or dirt cheap and are suddenly worth $1-$3. Stuff like Utopia Sprawl (which I've found about 20 copies of), Blackmail, Cerulean Wisps, Chromatic Star, Suppression Field, etc. There are a lot of cards that will obviously never be worth anything, but I don't buy anywhere near as much product as I used to so I don't have to worry too much about bulk cards piling up.

    I throw away junk cards. The best value you are going to get out of a card like Utopia Sprawl is 1-2 dollars, and it's maybe 1 out of thousands of commons that this happens to. Just seems like the 2 dollars you get to save by not having to buy the card isn't worth all the upkeep having to put up with all the potential commons.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Jeskai Ascendancy will/has warp(ed) the standard format completely.
    Is it possible that part of it's success was due to it being a rogue deck that no one was prepared to face? The deck can combo out with Ascendancy, but also aggro you out. But I feel like if the deck becomes more popular, people will figure out how to beat it. This deck reminds me a lot of what the original Aristocrats deck was that won the pro-tour.
    Posted in: Competitive
  • posted a message on Usability of Morph in Standard
    Quote from twicky_kid »
    Rattleclaw Mystic and Sagu Mauler are the only morph cars possible to see constructed play. It has nothing with either of them having morph either.

    Well, Sagu Mauler's morph potentially lets it come into play a turn earlier (you risk it getting hit by removal). Shaman's morph lets it accelerate an extra mana compared to playing it normally (but this would be on turn 4 you get the extra mana normally).
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • posted a message on Does Jeskai Ascendancy Need to be Banned?
    Quote from itachiitachi »
    Some corrections
    Quote from DarkRitual »

    Skullclamp: because it got to the point where Skullclamp was in every deck that T8'd a tournament, even though the format was actually somewhat diverse.
    Arcbound Ravager/Disciple of the Vault/Artifact lands: Because the Affinity deck once Ravager had been printed turned into a resilient combo that went off very fast. Format was largely skewed toward affinity.
    Stoneforge Mystic/Jace the Mind Sculptor: Again, the format was skewed heavily toward a deck that played both of these cards. Like... over 50% of the field. To the point where JTMS was a 100 dollar card. And it really only saw play in the one deck. The only card that has come close to that money value recently was Bonfire of the Damned at 50 dollars, but it was in multiple decks and it rose and fell out of popularity during it's reign in Standard. It's worth noting that in the case of Stoneforge Mystic and Jace, they waited until the two cards were a few months from rotating out anyway, and they waited until they could see a marked decrease in tournament attendence at GPs and other major tournaments.

    Skull clamp was actully only in 66% of top 8 decks lists.
    For comparison Ravanger was 44%.
    As for Jace he was actully in a variety of decks and reached Ravanger levels of top 8 even before jund roatated. Post rotation the decks started to tend towards caw blade decks and reached skull clamp levels of top 8's. After batterskull Jace (mostly caw blade) was 75% of the top 8.

    As for ascendancy prior to this weekend I would have said that this thread was an overreaction. This weekend the deck looked a tier above all the rest of the field. I'm not seeing any point in discussing it till we see what happens in the next few weeks.

    I believe your Ravager numbers. I'm a little confused as to how you came by the Skullclamp numbers. Clearly I didn't look at every T8 list, but I do remember an article that came up after or just before the ban where in the last tournament it was in all the T8 lists. And things like Elf and Nail became viable decks because they basically just piggy-backed on the strength of Skullclamp.

    This is just a guess from me, but I would think that at first the Skullclamp numbers were lower back when the format was Goblins, Affinity and control decks. Then when they figured out how degenerate the card could get you started to see it more. It's also worth mentioning to people that weren't around back then that there wasn't a major tournament every week so the metagame didn't change nearly as quickly as it did now.

    In any case we both agree that for a card to get banned in standard, it has to be really damaging. It can't just be in a deck that makes up 40% of the format.
    Posted in: Standard Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.