• 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Next
  • 0

    posted a message on Hanweir Militia Captain and Vehicles
    You could exile your own Chancellor of the Spires to Tawnos's Coffin, let the coffin untap and release the Chancellor, then target a Start your Engines in your opponent's graveyard with the trigger, animating your three Demolition Stompers in time for Hanweir Militia Captain's trigger to acknowledge them as creatures. Right?
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • 0

    posted a message on The Gitrog Hub (Jund/Delirium/Energy Variants)
    You don't have a single card in your sixty that lines up decently against Fleetwheel Cruiser
    Posted in: Deck Creation (Standard)
  • 0

    posted a message on Kaladesh is terrible
    A three mana 3/4 with "the first creature spell you cast each turn gains haste" is pretty hard to race yeah.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Does Wizards kill formats for casual play?
    This is casual vs. competitive stuff and doesn't really have to do with Modern.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Kaladesh is terrible
    Quote from Puddle Jumper »
    It's a fast format. That by itself is going to make a lot of people hate it. Fast formats tend to punish people more for having mana problems or failing to pick up enough low drops in the draft, which are largely outside of the players' control.


    This is a great post, but I'd like to take a moment to point out that I think Kaladesh does a much more generous job of providing players with low drop options compared to other formats. It seems to me like you had to do a pretty bad job reading signals to truly get screwed out of your low drops in this format. Enough so that mana problems or poor draws would outshadow the actual opportunities presented by the draft.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Kaladesh is terrible
    Quote from FTW1987 »
    By far the stupidest thing about this format is that someone can completely blank all your blockers and sorcery speed removal going turn 2 Smuggler's Copter into turn 3 Sword of Fire and Ice into turn 4 bear, crew, equip, smash you for 5 flying on turn 4, draw 2 and discard 1, and nuke your 2-drop. What is this, Cube?
    I hope this was a joke


    I'm pretty sure it is, it's not written that well though.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Experimental Aviator
    Quote from zenbitz »
    Played against this in Pre-release. It's SUPER stabilizing if you are trying to close the game out, with say a Sky Skiff.
    It seems it's pretty bad against giant green tramplers.


    Sky skiff is garbage, and this kind of flawed initial view of the format is the reason anyone thinks this 0/3 is passable.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Introducing the new invention: ” the real casual standard format”
    I enjoyed reading the opening post
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Random Card of the Day for 10/13: Engineered Might
    Lots of cards make me speculate on whether they were better when the tokens were thopters. I think this is one such card.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Random Card of the Day for 10/13: Engineered Might
    I pulled 3 copies in prerelease sealed, and since it lined up with the mythic 6/6 vanilla first strike (not a fan of the card...), I was able to maindeck them. I don't think they can ever move to the sideboard, but they are not as great as they might initially seem due to the sets P/T spread. There's very little that is getting sweet-spotted by 3 damage. I went through the whole prerelease having pretty poor luck with targets, so I'm gonna do a headcount in gatherer here to confirm I'm not crazy... Maulfist Squad fabricated, Spontaneous Artist, Propeller Pioneer fabricated and Weldfast Wingsmith are the only 3 commons I see where you can expect to reliably trade upwards mana. While I would expect the sight of a mountain to cause those two to usually get +1'd, you might see servo occasionally produced if they have a reason not to play around the Twin Bolt functional repreint and you'll drop to even less upside. Using a removal spell on a card of equal or lesser cost isn't awful, of course, but some of those lesser costing cards have drawbacks as a target too, like Glint Sleeve Artisan, anything that ETB'd energy and hasn't attacked yet, and creatures that already crewed a vehicle before you even got priority for removal and are instead making you wish drafted blockers instead of removal you'd be forced to throw at a card type that is practically an umbra.

    It felt different from the time I drafted a pile of Bathe in Dragonfire and just always found a sweet target, I can say that.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Random Card of the Day for 10/13: Engineered Might
    Choosing to put this in your deck instead of Wretched Gryff is kind of like putting a one mana Savor the Moment into your deck, right? Which is good.



    But I guess that's skipping flash and all the possible two for ones shared by Drownyard Behemoth
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Aethertorch Renegade
    I think he's really good in Sealed where he's going to give all your creatures +1/+0 in practice with threat of activation. But I think draft might turn out so aggressive in Kaladesh that a pinger is not quite good enough. Although there's lots of servos, there's not many tempting creatures to play upside down, especially when you consider the an X/1 Fabricate should probably be used for counters if that player has seen any mountains.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Planeswalker Deck Lists
    I really really really want them to move the planeswalkers to "strong if they costed 1 less but weaker than every normal CMC" instead of "if they were to cost 2 less CMC still questionable". I think they are extremely concerned about volatile brick and mortar inventory and people getting excited about the planeswalkers in fits and starts for EDH or constructed Standard decks that focus on planeswalkers in order to blank creature removal. The CMCs are so excessively exaggerated.


    The other thing that stands out is that Nissa's 4 mana rampant growth isn't ramping into anything besides Nissa herself and the singleton Aethersquall Ancient(becoming able to play a 4 drop and 2 drop in the same turn because you passed up your opportunity to play a 4 drop definitely doesn't count). It seems like a design flaw for the planeswalker tutor to focus only/almost only on the planeswalker itself. In this case, the answer was so obvious and easy, to make it an energy gaining card.

    Given no other redesigning and no other reworking, it seems like you could knock 1CMC off Chandra and still have 100% faith and confidence that Flame Lash is more of the exclusive power and empty shelfing risk than Chandra.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on "Trying to" get back into MTG "alone"
    Magic is one of the best activities in terms of allowing or disallowing as much social interaction as you want. If you try to give off the vibe that you're not in a chatty mood, you'll just get your attack declarations and priority passes. But if you try to strike up a conversation and your opponent is also willing you can have that too.



    I think might be particularly true for formal events (of any magnitude), since playing to meet people and playing for the prize packs are both valid interpretations of your motivation. At total zero stakes casual, I suspect people might try to engage you more frequently and persistently. I don't play lots of casual, but in the little that I played it's what I experienced and what seems logical.

    Magic seems like a way better platform for opt-in opt-out social interaction than, like, ballroom dancing. And definitely way ahead of zero/might as well be zero social interaction games like playing overwatch pubs from the couch or whatever.

    Of course, definitely try to drill down to your own motivations for playing and make sure you have enough interest to fully sustain that even if you don't make new friends playing the game. You very well might, but you might go also while without clicking with anyone, just like it's possible to draw a 7 land hand! Don't make a financial investment that might backfire. I am in a somewhat similar boat in uncertainty about whether my return to the game will turn out well, and am planning to make sure I start out with something like budget RDW and make sure I am smiling when I drive home from FNMs before bumping up my investment level. Fortunately for me, if that's your plan, Kaladesh is very much there for you.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 1

    posted a message on Current Modern Banlist Discussion (9/26/2016 update - No changes!)
    Man, having a 0 mana answer to any one thing that doesn't lose you the game seems so healthy for a format, can they not just come up with a 0 mana counter that could make it through Standard without wrecking standard?
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • 0

    posted a message on Deadlock Trap
    Facepalm
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 2

    posted a message on Deadlock Trap
    Quote from kermass »
    Better, by a good margin.

    First, you can target Planeswalkers


    This is the Limited subforum.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Aetherflux Reservoir
    Quote from TetzaHexloq »
    Cloudstone Curio is a masterpiece so its there just very unlikely
    Oh, lol, went right over my head!
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Current Modern Banlist Discussion (9/26/2016 update - No changes!)
    Should they really fix a strong pump/creatures that double the effect of pump problem by banning all the pump that's any good? It seems to remove any hope of the fun limited combat tricks and combat math popping into constructed sometimes.
    Why not just ban the infect creatures? I mean, really having even fewer infect creatures is in keeping with their design and the idea that they are rare and special, and building a deck of them that is cohesive is more difficult in that way. They'd just become even more rare and special. The drawback of pump isn't supposed to be that there will never be enough functional reprints of pump, pump is evergreen.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • 0

    posted a message on Three more vehicles
    I wish I could stop comparing 5/4's to Woolly Thoctar Frown
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on Aetherflux Reservoir
    That's not in the format, but Aviary Mechanic is.



    You'd want to be looping 2 Aviary Mechanics off of eachother and it'd still be slow and sketchy and bad. But yeah drafting 6 Aviary Mechanics is going to be where you want to be.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Perfect Hand Magic League 47:01 - 2+1 Infinite Shadows over Innistrad - Hands posted, score your row now
    I calculated my win on the play being based on additional copy of Vampire Cutthroat being in my opening hand. I thought that was how this worked. My deck is reaaaally bad if it can't do that haha, and pretty likely doesn't win on the play even against Bronyaur without it.

    Posted in: Forum Magic
  • 1

    posted a message on Eldritch moon over/underperformers
    Anything involving double strike or first strike is pretty strong in this format because most boards naturally tend towards double block solutions with the P/T spreads.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Is EMN a Fast or Slow Format?
    Seems like with all the acceptable aggressive creatures available at 2-3 cmc, everyone will have access to an early board state. Seems like the BEST thing to do with that is use the nice, various falter and evasion options, but then some minority of pools and strategies will be using that to play the stall into bomb game.



    Based on spoilers to me it looks like a format where you want to be the curving out into a falter or charge, but you might get disappointed out of that and end up building a deck that triple blocks with 3 pikers so it can survive to rule the board with a 5/7 instead.



    I'm a below average player that hasn't played the proxy games yet.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Emerge viability in limited?
    Quote from DirkGently »
    Quote from NFLed »
    Most of the emerge cards seem very good to me, with the exception of the commons. Sacrificing a generic 3-drop to get just a bigger creature is similar to putting an enchantment on the 3-drop, which opens up to a 2-for-1, so I do not like that. However, the non-common ones have other effects which are much more than just making a big creature and those effects plus the big creature make emerge worth it if you are playing the color(s) for the card.
    Well, out of the uncommons, abundant maw seems simply horrible, the etb is so lame and the body is so easy to block well for the cost, I don't think I would ever want to play it. drownyard behemoth is probably my favorite, it should be pretty easy to set it up as removal and should get value pretty easily. If you sac a 3 drop you're paying 4 to either get a 5/7 and probably trade 3-ish mana creatures, and possibly better. Lashweed lurker also seems pretty decent, easier to set up but generally less powerful in effect imo, however being both colors makes it more niche. mockery of nature seems sideboard at best, it's so overcosted and if there's no artifacts or enchantments to blow up, you get absolutely wrecked. vexing scuttler could be good in the right deck, although considering the body you really have to be getting pretty good value of it I think for it to be great. If you have a good removal spell or something to get back, say murder, then that's pretty sweet, but if you only have a few, and especially ones that are easier to play around, then it might not be good.

    So overall, imo:
    abundant maw: D- I would never want to play this card.
    decimator of the provinces: C seems kinda niche, you basically need to win the game when this enters or it's not worth the games you'll never be able to cast it. Could be very good in the right deck, but totally unplayable in others.
    distended mindbender: B- In the situation where you play a 3 drop into this, it seems pretty insane. When everyone's in topdeck mode, it's pretty meh. Overall I think it'll be good.
    drownyard behemoth: B- Needs a little setup to be good, but for a defensive deck it should get value pretty easily.
    elder deep-fiend: C+ Everyone else seems to love this guy, but personally I'm not that impressed. Tapping down 4 permanents is neat, but sacking a creature is going to make it harder to get lethal, and it could also be a total whiff in terms of CA. You can still flash for blocking value, but you might just get blown out by removal.
    it of the horrid swarm: D+ Doesn't seem like enough value to want to play it. No matter what you're sacking, unless it's an enabler or a pacified creature, I don't think you can reasonably be worth it.
    lashweed lurker: C+ The body itself is merely decent, but the effect is pretty powerful. Minus points for being 2 colors.
    Mockery of nature: sideboard I don't ever want to mainboard this, it's just too awful if your opponent isn't playing artifacts or enchantments. Remember getting a 4/4 for 5 with the same effect, without sacking anything? Yeah, this card sucks.
    Vexing scuttler: C+ If you've got enough powerful instants or sorceries, this could pretty easily be quite powerful. On the other hand, some decks won't really be able to use it reliably, since it's super awful without getting something good back.
    Wretched Griff: C- One of my friends suggested a way of thinking of this card that I like: it's a split card between angelic gift and an overcosted cantrip flyer. My problem with this is that the latter is frequently going to be unplayable, and the former is only possible in the right circumstances. The other problem is the usual comparison of auras, namely that these creatures can't attack right away.

    So that's where I'm at right now. None of them seem super awesome, and a lot of them seem pretty bad, but there are a few decent ones.


    Abundant Maw is actually one of my favorites BECAUSE I think the mechanic is so bad. Seems like the only time I'd be willing to two for one myself is for the sake of playing a really bad Lava Axe, since Lava Axes are something you 2 for 1 CA yourself with anyway.



    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Emerge viability in limited?
    The arguments to make these emerge guys sound ok sound like "you either take 1 of these inconsistent emerge fatties, or you have no way to come out ahead on a stalled small creature board state ever."



    Isn't there plenty of answers in the set that can solve that problem more reliably? Savage Alliance, Vildin Pack Outcast, hard removal, Shrill Howler, Ulvenwald Captive... etc. There's 5 and six butts in the set that don't totally blow up in your face. I'm sure the emerge archetype will work if you get enough of the pieces, just like anything works if it is underdrafted enough at the table, but "take one of these for your normal deck" seems like a pretty hard sell to me for all but the highest quality emergers, if that.
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on A Clear House Rule for Those Who Like Casual
    Beginning of game, both players get to kick a free sadistic sacrament on eachother. They must preserve its original land-nonland ratio, rounded up.

    I think it'd be fun.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Is there a point for Legacy decks to be used for casual anymore?
    I second the folks who said, encourage proxies. A lot of EDH is about accessibility. Maybe even print out alpha duals and hand them out to encourage people to build a cool legacy deck.
    Posted in: Legacy (Type 1.5)
  • 0

    posted a message on What is "JOU"
    I googled it. I think they don't want to give the "Jin chess client" the free publicity. Can't have all the MtG players finding out about that new fangled chess game the kids are playing every Friday night these days.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone Discussion Thread
    Quote from Derpa
    Lock HP is not the strongest by a longshot, its one of the best but others are stronger overall.

    Also its not sign in blood, since you only draw one card.


    It's Sign in Blood. You pay two mana, lose two life, and your handsize increases by one.

    Warlock hero power is the strongest. If you watch a high level aggro warlock fight a high level anything, the Warlock is going to use his hero power more times.

    The other hero powers shine a lot more in arena, because you don't have high quality cards to draw. It's like Ponder being banned in Vintage but a late pick in draft.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone Discussion Thread
    Quote from Rodyle
    My point is more that I think that the sets of class-unique basics you unlock up to level 10 with each class is, as far as I see, somewhat unbalanced. For priests, for example, I cannot think of any card which is useless, apart from perhaps mind blast. Other classes however, for example warlocks, cannot really make a consistent deck easily using only their cards of up to level 10.


    Warlock is actually one of the more powerful classes using basic cards.

    The reason the level 1-10 cards for Warlock seem weaker than the average card is because the average Warlock card is weaker than the average card, by design.
    Warlock is the class with the strongest hero power, by a longshot. You get to Sign in Blood whenever the heck you want. Drawing cards is weaker in Hearthstone than it is in MTG, but that's still nuts. The way Warlocks are balanced with the other 8 classes with weaker hero powers is by giving the other 8 lots of powerful class specific cards, and keeping most of the Warlock specific cards on the weak side.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Dealing with playing against cards you behate
    Quote from Jermo48
    That has always been the way they were. Original Jace was almost completely unbeatable in limited in any game that wasn't a complete blowout and I've seen the first Gideon act as an eight turn fog+repeated removal in games that were already lost without topdecking him, even if they're less blatantly powerful in limited than Elspeth or Memory Adept. Mythics were never, ever an even remotely logical idea for limited. They should have been like tip cards/tokens. Extras that sometimes appear, but always with an actual rare, that you just keep if you open and can't play in limited (unless house rules want to let you).


    Jace Beleren was a completely unbeatable blowout in limited but Ajani Vengeant isn't worth mentioning?
    Posted in: Limited (Sealed, Draft)
  • 0

    posted a message on Is regeneration and/or protection too complicated?
    These mechanics are definitely overly confusing outliers. I would want to add auras to the list though. Doom Blade in response to Flight of Fancy is pretty unintuitive.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on MTG and Tobacco
    I really hate it when the smokers are clumped so close to the door you practically have to knock them out of the way to go in and out of the building. I think good LGS's should require smokers to go out into the parking lot a decent distance so that you can get in and out of the building without exposing yourself to secondhand smoke.

    My rights begin where yours end, but I think the way society works right now tends to be tilted in favor of allowing smokers to infringe on the rights of nonsmokers. My right to use a public sidewalk without exposing myself to secondhand smoke supersedes your right to smoke in the particular spot. And my right to get a fair amount of break time at work whether or not I smoke.. don't get me started on that <expletive>
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone Discussion Thread
    Quote from Catmurderer
    Well. Im addicted to this.

    Any guides on how to make decks inexpensively and amass wealth?


    I saw one once, I forgot where it was.

    If you want to earn gold quickly, then you should play an extremely aggressive deck. It doesn't even have to be good, because you'll win roughly 50% of the time no matter what, the queue uses an elo based MMR. (you might lose a few at first until your MMR drops to the aggro deck's level. Or you might win a few at first.)
    You want it to win fast and lose fast too, at least, reach points where you can comfortably concede in a clear way. That lets you get the most games in to earn lots of gold.
    Best bet is Warlock Aggro, with Soulfire, the three 1 mana demons, and stuff it with all the little creatures you have. (Well, not too little, don't run more than 8 or 9 one drops).
    That's how I built my collection up quickly. It helps keep you in arena mode a greater %age of the time, which helps you focus on your arena skills and improve them.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on The end of physical mtg..
    What a sexist/agist remark in the OP

    Spam warning issued. -Xen
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone Discussion Thread
    Sun cleric and Defender of Argus are saturating because they counter Hunter Combo, a very central deck in the meta. Without them any X/2 creature becomes worthless against Explosive Trap. With them, you can beat Hunters mass swarms since Explosive Trap is the only up-to-7 AoE they have.
    Amani Beserker and Raging Worgen have become very popular because they can attack into Explosive Trap and become enraged.
    This has less to do with structural flaws than an overly centralized meta that is probably changing soon.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone Discussion Thread
    Quote from magac
    Well, I feel like I want to ask this.....

    Do any of you feel any case of rarity creep in Hearthstone? I know it feels somewhat redundant to ask that seeing that rarity creep is such a common happening in TCGs, including the previous WoW TCG, Magic, Yu-Gi-Oh, probably Vanguard etc, but I just want to know if you find any case where rarer cards are obviously better than common cards.

    Well, admittedly, balancing in online games should be easy to do, even it will bring out the torches and pitchforks, but eh, I'm waiting for reply here Smile

    Prophet Velen is strictly better than War Golem, and is the only card I've found in the whole game that is strictly better than another card. For a decent definition of strictly better.

    Bloodmage Thalos is legendary, and it bugs me that he is. He's a loot hoarder that has one less attack to get spell damage+1 instead, which is a very good exchange. He's miles better than Kobold Geomancer in any realistic spell damage deck.

    But, as a whole, Hearthstone is miles and miles less "rare creep"y than MtG. You're only allowed to have one copy of any legendary card, which balances out their low accessibility. In contrast, Magic the Gathering printed Vengevine at their highest rarity even though (or because?) it is stronger in multiples.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone in beta - a golden age for CCGs?
    Quote from Tom the Scud
    Been playing it the last few days (BTW, there's now a Mac client); for my money, the best card in the game is the Priest 1-drop that draws you a card every time a minion is healed; very easy to draw cards off of it right away and force your opponent to drop removal on your 1-mana creature or else just get buried in card advantage.

    Managed to get my first 9-win result in the arena off of a Priest deck that had two of those little guys.

    I think Northshire Cleric is kind of like Jayemdae Tome or Azure Mage, not an unstoppable force in constructed but in limited repeated card advantage is really huge.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone in beta - a golden age for CCGs?
    Quote from Dio
    I would suggest reading this arena guide.
    http://us.battle.net/hearthstone/en/forum/topic/9742094161
    One thing I don't like about the arena is that it's a booster draft but you don't keep the cards you draft. It would be really nice if we could keep them, because then we could disenchant them for dust.

    Also, I went 3-3 on my third arena playthrough, was really hoping to get three packs but it looks like you just get one pack, and gold and dust depending on how many wins you have.


    Not sure how this doesn't boil down to "Gimme more free stuff". The game is already a lot cheaper than MTG.

    After a lot of practice at arena I've been going infinite for a couple days (like, 9 runs). A large portion of the people in the arena are goofing off, so if you badly want cards, you can go spike and do pretty well.

    I speculate they'll up gold rewards on arena just a teensy bit more at open beta or release, but they've struck a pretty good balance right now. There has to be an incentive to shell out two dollars.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone in beta - a golden age for CCGs?
    I've thought about that issue, my initial feeling is that you should get more info on what you're going to wheel. I think being forced to incorporate one of the worst three cards in the block in your deck is a cool element that makes it unique from Magic, you have to figure out how to mitigate the suckitude of the card as best you can.

    Some system where maybe you get X number of "skip and come back to it"s or you can view all 30 choices simultaneously and make your picks in any order would be more skill intensive, and allow you the opportunity to go for a tribal deck occasionally.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Mana Flooding/Scarcity: A solution?
    The mana system can't be changed because card design is totally based around mana screw and flood.

    Whether you think it improves the game or not is kind of irrelevant.

    The only situation where it could be modified is in a closed environment like a limited format or block format, but then, why not just use commonly appearing cards and mechanics within that set that mitigate mana screw? Perhaps making scry easy and accessible for a block. Something crazy like that.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone in beta - a golden age for CCGs?
    Quote from magac
    By the way, although I haven't got the chance to actually play it, I saw someone else playing it, and while people say it's simpler than the WoW TCG, it certainly feels very similar; The mana system, the Ally, relatively similar cost-Attack/Health ratio... I'd reckon due to the similarities, it should be easy for me to pick up. Well, yeah, sure, WoW TCG itself is similar to Magic, so yeah, Magic players should find this game pretty easy.

    Kinda miss the Instants though; simple is fine, but being able to react on an opponent's turn was such an integral part of several card games I've played that not seeing it seems.... weird.


    Thing is, a game of magic has instants, so a single game of magic will have more tactics and strategy than a single game of hearthstone.

    But since you can play a game of hearthstone with as few as 8 priority passes, you can play 3 games in the time it takes you to play 1 game of magic. Adopting the fast pace isn't ideal for paper tcgs because shuffling is a significant amount of setup, once you've already manually shuffled decks you might as well play an intricate game with lots of back and forth. But with a split second shuffler, it's better to go for fast games with large sample size.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone in beta - a golden age for CCGs?
    Quote from magac
    I realize they're currently still PC-only, yes? I wish they'll start with other platforms too if the open Beta's coming soon Smile


    The other platforms shouldn't take too long. You can tell from playing the game that the development team is adopting tons of really responsible programming practices. For example, after the last patch the biggest bug is that when you Unsummon an opponent's creature, the card flips over and moves an inch towards his hand, but just stays there, face down, floating near where it was. When your opponent plays that particular card, it doesn't crash, the card just moves to where it should be and flips over. Very robust, a poorer implementation would probably crash when you tried to play the card.

    There's other things like that too where even though a bug happens, the game has enough built in resilience to keep things playable. Should allow them to launch on all platforms soon with only aesthetic bugs, and no crashes.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Hearthstone in beta - a golden age for CCGs?
    Open beta could be in like a month. I don't think it's officially announced, but things are getting increasingly polished. I haven't found too many concerning bugs since the last patch cleaned a bunch of them.
    Posted in: Other Card Games
  • 0

    posted a message on [[Official]] Current Modern Banned List Discussion (Next Announcement: 1/27/14)
    Quote from purklefluff
    not true.

    but it happens a lot. sure, you can list a few decks that don't run tarmogoyf. that's not hard. but the problem is still there - people have this opinion of 'goyf that is weirdly separate from everything else.

    and in response to the other comment, i suppose you could, on the face of it, make a comparison to lightning bolt. but in an in-depth discussion, the clear differences between the two cards and their situations would come out.


    I'd like it if both were banned. To me it seems like deckbuilding is more strategic if after picking colors you had to choose 60 cards for your deck, rather than 56 if you're playing red or green.
    It's such an autoinclude.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 0

    posted a message on How to play with mismatched power/toughness (2/1)
    Quote from dwillmer
    As I've been playing more and more magic, I am still often confused on how to handle creatures with mismatched power and toughness like a 2/1.

    For example, should I be cautious with my 2/1 since they are fragile or just recklessly make use of the extra power for generally a low mana cost? Should I only play something like a 2/1 when it has utility or evasion since my opponents 1/1 can just trade for it any time they want?

    Has anyone found any good discussions (article/podcast) on how to look at creatures' power and toughness and how to use them in combat
    (ignoring other abilities).


    If your 2/1 trades with a 1/1, the 1/1 probably has utility, otherwise it wouldn't be on the field. If it is among a bunch of 1/1 tokens, then since it's a token deck the 1/1s are probably going to get buffed soon, so it should still be a good trade.

    I think maybe the idea you're toying with is holding back a 2/1 or 3/1 waiting for that "perfect" 2/2, 3/3, or 8/2 to show up. Often when it shows up, it has evasion, your 2/1 was removed while you waited, or maybe it never shows up. If you don't have a plan for improving the staredown between you 2/1 and two 1/1s, it's better to trade material in the general case, because having a creature alive on your side gives your opponent removal options, and leaving the 1/1 alive on your opponent's side gives them buffing options. Unless you are looking to buff or remove yourself, it's best to simplify.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on YMTC 22: Arbiter of Moments
    I'm missing how this is broken.
    Vintage: Vintage is a ridiculous format that wallows in its own brokenness. Maybe this card would be restricted, like, y'know that broken card Ponder, that is so fine.
    Legacy counters: Since when is it super duper easy to resolve 4 drops against a counter deck? If you put cards in your deck that rely on interaction with the Golem, you're going to lose when the Golem is what gets FoW'ed.
    Legacy Combo: Most combos have an Achille's heel for less CMC.

    Aggro getting out aggro'ed by this because of the delays? It's really not that different from Standstill guys. Standstill, 2 mana 0/0 creature that locks both players down from casting spells. Golem, 4 mana 3/3 creature that locks down both players from playing spells. 2 mana for 3 power is not a bargain in legacy, if you can drop this guy and have a better board, it's your opponent's fault. I guess both cards are a bitch if you're on the draw, but card design isn't responsible for reverting first turn advantage.

    And there's nothing wrong with a card like this being colorless, it doesn't fit into every deck.

    That's all assuming decks don't change their mainboards at all to handle the guy. Bloodbraid Elf into Lightning Helix is absolutely hilarious, the Helix kills the Golem immediately, the Bloodbraid comes back next turn with a new Cascade. Ancient Grudge from the yard ignores the effect and removes him.
    It has an interesting interaction with some borderline playable cards that get a lot better if you just suspect your opponent might drop a golem. Augur of Skulls gets pretty interesting, for one.
    Posted in: Card of the Month
  • 0

    posted a message on how big a threat is hearthstone
    Quote from MisterMind
    None shall defeat Magic. WotC crushes all on comers!

    Seriously though, Yugioh probably has a better chance of hurting Magic and Yugioh sucks. (note this is not only my opinion but the opinion of some of my customers who play the game)

    Magic doesn't have to worry about new games stealing its thunder at this point. Only a few games really last at all (although I thought the real WoW game was one of them, guess not). Magic is still the best of these and won't be bothered by some copy that won't make it 3 years.

    What people don't seem to get it Magic is 20 years old for a reason. If some noobie game could walk in and hurt it there's no way it would have lasted this long. Especially since it was such a pioneer to the genre and didn't have the luxury of following the trails of other successful games. Magic coexists well with its competition (Pokemon, Yugioh, a few others to a lesser extent) at this stage but isn't in any danger of losing its current position.

    I hadn't even heard of this game until now and I will probably forget about it during my Pre-release that starts soon.


    1. Pokemon TCG is made by Wizards of the Coast. It's not competition, it's specifically set up in such a way to have as little target demograph overlap with Magic as possible.
    2. Yu Gi Oh is more like a set of figurines celebrating an anime than a TCG, never really tried to be as deep as magic.
    3. You haven't heard about Hearthstone because it's currently in -closed beta-. You hadn't heard about League of Legends when it was in beta, I would wager, but you've heard about it now.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Why are all the good knights girls?
    Quote from Retra
    It's like having your grandmother die and asking "why is the world so terrible?"

    Some of the responses will be "that's just the way it is," and others will say "it's not, you just aren't accounting for the inadequacies of your own ability to discover the truth."

    This is really a loaded question -- a classic "when did you stop beating your wife." If you think all good knights are female, then you're picking good knights from a dishonest pool. If you think there are more females than males, you aren't bothering to collect data.

    "Why are all the good goblins male?" "Is Wort, Boggart Auntie not a good goblin?"

    I mean, you can't honestly say "according to my subjective arbitrary criteria, there are too many good female knights" without sounding like you've got a problem with women. Adjust your criteria. Look at some actual data. Don't sit around asserting controversial things that aren't true, because that definitely starts sounding like an agenda.

    I'm really assuming it's not, but then it's just a poor question.

    I dunno, I think if you checked every occurence of all knights on deckcheck.net, they would come up pretty female.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Why are all the good knights girls?
    I have a fourth theory: Mechanics that the artist associates with being feminine have a tendency to be mechanics that are constructed playable.

    White Knight: protection from black, perserverance, more manly thing.

    Knight of Meadowgrain: gaining life, nurturing, womanly thing.


    "perseverance", as it turns out, is not an important quality for low CMC creatures, and knights are generally low CMC. "Nurturing", as it turns out, plays a supportive role, and low CMC creatures are often best in a supportive role. (it might not be totally obvious how it is supportive, but the life gain from Knight of Meadowgrain allows Bitterblossom to do its thing without killing you, or allows a bigger creature to turn sideways instead of needing to do boring blocks.)
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Serum Powder in a Leyline combo deck
    Quote from corncob
    It's actually worse than a mulligan at fixing your hand, since you're more likely than not to draw a Powder and a combo piece.


    You are allowed to take a normal mulligan if you want, though. If you have a hand with Serum Powder and 6 cards that have to be in there because you must have a 60 card deck, then it's a very good thing.
    Posted in: Miscellaneous Decks
  • 0

    posted a message on A rule that's surprisingly hard to accept
    You know, I think the issue here actually stems from a deeper problem, which is how a player declaring a creature attacking is called attacking, and a creature turning sideways and becoming an attacker is also called attacking.

    Angelic Arbiter is a good example of this strange ambiguity. If I attack with Jackal Pup, I'm "attacking with a creature". I do the attacking, I use a creature to do it. If you look at it that way, Jackal Pup's restriction makes no sense. Of course Jackal Pup can't attack alone. He doesn't have any creatures to attack with, because he's not a player. What a redundant ability.

    There's some wording imperfections going on. The way things probably should have been from the start is following Angelic Arbiter's style. "You can't attack or block with Jackal Familiar and no other creatures". "You must attack with this creature if able". That makes the interaction more clear.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Chosen by Heliod ruling
    Aura spells target without using the word "target" because the rules regarding auras in comprehensive rules explain that they "target". I wish they would move it to rules text on cards, because it might be the most common rules issue I encounter.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings Archives
  • 0

    posted a message on Is black having problems?
    Do colors that aren't red frequently get lots of multicolor decks in standard? Maybe I'm just out of the loop, but it's not obvious to me that monoblack is the least played monocolor deck across standard formats.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Is black having problems?
    Quote from Xenphire
    Except, Mono-Black hasn't really flourished since Vampires were viable in Zendikar, and then the last time was far, far, farrrr before that. The only mono-black presence since the Black Summer have ended up being fringe decks that barely rank or see competitive play. Zombies was almost never played over Goblin Bidding or other decks during Odyssey/Onslaught; There weren't any actual mono-black viable decks from then clear up to Zendikar for Vampires; Then, after all that time, Vampires was short lived and was pushed out by the likes of Valakut Ramp and Cawblade; After Innistrad came out, there were fringe mono-black decks that almost never topped, and the most recent incarnation of Mono-Black was Zombies early on when Dark Ascension released, but that quickly went over to multicolor variants and didn't last.

    Not that anyone would want to play mono-colored decks as opposed to cutting chaff and playing multicolor decks, anyway, when dual lands and mana fixing have been constant. Zendikar had fetchlands, Scars of Mirrodin had speedlands, Innistrad had enemy checklands, now we have all 10 shocklands and every Core Set in between has had the original checklands. But even with having a good reason not to play mono-color decks, Black has still been terrible since Necropotence put the fear of Black into Wizards.

    What about Alara Standard, though? You were playing UB Faeries, or BW tokens, or Jund, or 5 color control, which has black, but I guess technically doesn't count for or against anyone.
    The only nonblack decks I remember from that time were Boat Brew and UW Reveillark. But Esper Reveillark variants were really good too, it was a matter of taste whether to add black to that.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on [[M14]] Garruk, Caller of Beasts
    Do we know if Deadly Recluse would be available? That could enable an ultimate based strategy, maybe.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on [[M14]] Garruk, Caller of Beasts
    There's no obvious build-itself deck that makes this new walker powerful, but a little creativity from some brewers might yield some Unexpected Results..
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 1

    posted a message on [SCQD] Sin Collector
    Pokemon Trading Card game is extremely focused on noncreature cards.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Sleeping Giant and Quakemare
    Quakemare compares pretty fairly to Novablast Wurm. Which doesn't see play.
    Posted in: Custom Card Creation
  • 0

    posted a message on Nearly worthless one mana rares?
    I hope you can do better with trait doctoring. It could have its day somewhere somehow. If WotC just releases a little white creature with "Protection from white, plainswalk. When this creature ETBs, target opponent replaces all instances of a color word or land type with a chosen color word or land type", then it could get some use. Maybe maybe maybe.

    Alabaster Leech is pretty darn bad, but theoretically useful in some sort of deck where you don't cast any white spells and just want to cheat him out on the basis of him having CMC=1.

    Oh, I found Mana Clash. That doesn't even have the niche sideboard use one with nothing has. You just can't use Mana clash with anything Wizards currently has legal, really.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Tap...Tap...Tap...Tapping Wrong?
    Quote from CommanderPlayer
    Just as long as it's side-ways, I could care less which way they are. However, what bugs me is when people pile their lands on top of each other. I like to be able to count how many lands are tapped or untapped by glancing, not having to ask the person "how many untapped?" and then watch them count. ugh.


    Oh my goodness, yes! I always like to spread out my lands as much as I can. I have the space, why not use it? My friends always tell me "Dude stack your lands", especially if I'm borrowing a deck, and it gets super annoying. I don't want to stack them, I don't want you to stack them.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Game 1 of a tournament. Your opponent lays a Vexing Devil. What do you do?
    Quote from YamahaR1
    Oh no no - I'm not disagreeing about taking the 4 flat out.

    Just the people who say "life doesn't matter" or maybe "it only matters if its the last four" or "life is a resouce that I don't care about"

    Then, they are dead. Life total did matter.

    Or even the people who claim that its the same as your opponent starting with 6 cards, and you with 16 life. By that logic, please trade all 20 life for 5 cards and concede.

    Thank you drive through.

    So yes, the decision to take the 4 may be correct, but theyre reason to do so is completely skewed. Being dead set on "Im a good magic player so I know life total is irrelevant" is audacious when having 0 life loses the game.


    "It only matters if it's the last four" is an ok paradigm in a lot of formats and matchups. If rdw is involved though, it's not a good paradigm at all. And Vexing Devil should always be appearing in rdw.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Legacy Analysis: Two Rings to Rule Them All
    Quote from Morningstar81
    How's that?

    T4 cast Jace - Jacestorm
    T5 Jacestorm, cast Jace, Jacestorm
    Your board was a Jace @3 loyalty before casting the second Jace and is a Jace @3 loyalty afterwards. Your 4 mana have netted you one Jacestorm and zero loyalty.
    T4 cast Jace - Unsummon
    T5 Unsummon, cast Jace, Jacestorm
    Here your 4 mana do net you one Jacestorm and 2 loyalty, but this is one scenario, not every time.

    T3 cast Liliana - Edict; T4 Discard, cast Liliana, Edict
    or
    T3 Discard, T4 Edict, Edict
    or
    T3 Discard, T4 Discard, Discard
    In all 3 scenarios your 3 mana net you an Edict or a Discard, but at the cost of 1 loyalty, as your second Liliana will end up with one counter less than your first.
    You do gain 2 loyalty by going T3 Discard, T4 Edict, Discard, but again that is one scenario, not every time.

    Sure, there are other scenarios where you can end up with more loyalty than what you started with. But since there is no general rule, I thought it best not to overcomplicate the analysis.

    In any case, thanks for your feedback. Smile


    Yeah, my post originally said "up to", but I kept modifying it sentence structure and stuff and qualifier got left out.

    Redirecting damage to the walkers would be the most common way of getting extra loyalty.
    Posted in: Articles
  • 0

    posted a message on [[M14]] Kit received in store
    Whenever I see a card like Lay of the Land, I think, "Man, that would have been a cool Phyrexian mana one drop".
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on Legacy Analysis: Two Rings to Rule Them All
    The "split card" comparison is not entirely accurate, because it doesn't consider that you gain 2 loyalty every time you play one of your "split cards". 3 mana Cruel Edict with double proliferate on it starts to get kind of attractive.

    Maybe he skips that bit since damage often comes in multiples of threes in legacy? But it still seems relevant.

    Just a small thing really there's lots of other keen observations. I like his skepticism regarding ultimates.
    Posted in: Articles
  • 0

    posted a message on Legendary, Planeswalker Uniqueness, and Sideboarding Rules Changed
    On paper, I think this is an improved legend rule, and i think it always should have been this way ever since the keyword was invented.

    In practice, WotC is constantly pushing the envelope until it bends on planeswalker power, so I'm a bit peeved that you can use a mini planeswalker to kill a larger, OP one.

    And allowinig players to shift between planeswalkers like this will be a big buff to cards that were already too strong.

    But I mean. Most of my frustration is that those cards are also expensive so I don't have equal access to them. After my disappointment with Modern masters it's unlikely I'm actually buying into MtG again.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on [[MM]] Dark Confidant
    I would really like it if WotC would just finally let everyone have a manabase. Force them to build funky decks with janky replacements for the chase rares if you must, but at least let them unlock the gate and walk into the scene by giving them access to a competitive manabase.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on Dealing with Stroke of Genius effects
    Abundance

    The misdirection effects are only technically not counters, but Obstinate Familiar and Abundance seem more in the spirit of things. Shrouding yourself is a good idea too.


    EDIT: Sages of the Anima, Parallel Thoughts and Pursuit of Knowledge turn up after searching the gatherer for "if you would draw a card". Tomorrow, Azami's Familiar lets you Enter the Infinite, which would be rather hilarious if you can flash it in just in time.



    This raises an interesting question. What if, in a tournament, your opponent hits you with an infinite mana Stroke of Genius. You ask him to name a finite value for X, he says "A trillion". Then, since you have Teferi, Mage of Zhalfir on board, you flash in a Sages of the Anima. You definitely draw all your creatures, but what happens to the other cards is more difficult. If the number of noncreature cards is not divisible by three, then, correct me if I'm wrong, the arbitrary number of reorderings allows the victim of the Stroke to order the deck in any possible ordering he wants (I think, I could be totally wrong). What makes this even more difficult is that the cards are revealed off the top, but the order they are returned to the bottom does not have to be revealed to the opponent. So the opponent would get some sort of partial information about the final reordering of the deck, but not complete information.

    When the noncreature cards are divisible by three, that's also interesting. You actually have to find what trio of cards ought to be on top based on the remainder of dividing the trillion. And actually, if the player with the Stroke deck was, like, totally ready for that flashed Sages of the Anima tech, he could select an arbitrary number that ensures the bottom three noncreatures cards of the deck become the top 3, which would be a strong play if the Sages of the Anima are going to get destroyed or sacrificed later and the bottom cards of the deck have poor quality due to earlier Preordain effects.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Would you buy alpha cards at a garage sale?
    The cards are worth what someone is willing to pay for them. At the moment, that's ten dollars. Will it be ten dollars tomorrow? Probably not. But it could get close. It could drop rapidly if WotC hit some strange corporate legal scandal, or abolished the reserve list unexpectedly, or perhaps Hearthstone turns out to be so incredibly well designed everyone quits MtG. You don't know.

    But yeah, I think lots of people recognize that it is not actually immoral to accept a trade that someone has offered you.

    That said, my conscience would feel super guilty, and after buying the cards (and driving them home, and putting them in a safe) I would come back and buy everything he had at asking price.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on [[MM]] Æther Spellbomb
    This is not much information so far. One thing I'm making a mental note on, the spellbomb is at common. Tarmogoyf was announced at mythic rare, which is an upgrade from rare, but mythic didn't exist when goyf was first printed and it's still more or less a rare. I'd be pretty pleased if cards maintained their previous rarity, with the exception of some rares printed before mythic rarity upgraded to mythic.
    If even this set intended to make Magic more affordable is filled with cashgrabs, (Like a mythic (Moneyseize Thoughtseize), that'd be quite a middle finger), I'm much less likely to try to get back into magic.
    Posted in: The Rumor Mill
  • 0

    posted a message on Maze's End, what do you think?
    So, it's easy to come in and bash the card. But let's try to think, how could this card maybe somehow become useful somewhere some day? One with Nothing saw play after all.

    Maze's End is unique in that it lets you get a "You win the game effect" without casting a spell. That means it can't be countered except by Stifle effects.

    This is what I see as the most likely scenario that Maze's End ever sees the light of day.

    1.) The block after this one enables a lifegain archetype that finds a place in standard. Bonus points if it doesn't have access to anything that can deal with lands.
    2.) Some sort of deck has a pretty bad matchup against this deck. Bonus points if it can justify Gatekeeper Vine or something and save sideboard space by putting a gate or two maindeck.
    3.) That deck sets aside over half the sideboard for Maze's End and all the gates it needs to win. It wins against lifegain all the time after swapping the cards in, because the lifegain can't counter the wincon, and they can't pack much Land D, and you can counter what little Land D they have. That's what makes Maze's End better than a different wincon, like, a planeswalker ult.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • 0

    posted a message on Wait for Heartstone Beta or Put together a patch compatible with MWS and play now?
    Well, I'm disappointed you haven't had more interest than this..
    I'm pretty interested in Hearthstone.
    Posted in: Video Games
  • 0

    posted a message on Wait for Heartstone Beta or Put together a patch compatible with MWS and play now?
    Quote from MaximumSquid
    Heartstone is an online CCG that Blizzard has recently released

    A list of spoiled cards is available along with 90% of the rules

    I've put together patch text files before; it's really not that hard
    This thread is mainly to feel out the community to see if this is worth perusing


    I also can't get into the beta, and am interested in the game. Consider me a potential opponent, if you're worried about having people to play.

    I prefer Cockatrice, but Cockatrice seems WAY harder to make a custom set on.
    Posted in: Video Games
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.