Sure, power levels change as all things around the card change. Planeswalkers are specifically powerful cards which R&D, I believe, are likely to look at in great detail. In this way, in them removing the tools to kill Jace, such as Blightning and Pithing Needle, and all the rest you listed, they must have had some idea of what was going to happen. If not, they would add more cards to combat such a lineup, such as Volcanic Fallout to Faeries. This was apparently the goal to deal with Jace, judging from the quote in your signature.
If they are trying to lower down the power level of the game overall, and Jace was simply going to remain too strong, add strong tools against him. To not do that, in my eyes, says they lost control of the balance of Standard, and are using the ban as an "Oops".
It just makes me lose confidence in R&D. They have had Standard well in control since I started playing competitive. I started playing just as Time Spiral cycled out, I have not heard of any cards being banned from Lorwyn on in standard.
I fail to believe that after all this time, R&D feel Jace needed to be banned because of the card's power. A card as fundamental to a set as Jace was, and being a Planeswalker which is something significant to the game, they must have known the level of power they were producing. The power of the card was apparent last year, but it was not banned. Banned cards generally are those they probably did not look at for long enough, and result in being far more powerful than anticipated (like Stoneforge Mystic, or so many cards in the original Mirrodin block, lol). It is for that reason that I am very confused as to why Jace was banned. They had to know the level of power of that card when it was released, and if not then, then by last year's ban time.
The only reasoning I can see is that there is something in M12 that they really want to do, but would be made too insanely powerful by Jace, or they wanted to appease the masses of Anti-Jace players, by banning it 4 months before it rotates, as a marketing ploy, knowing people who like the card wouldn't care (as it cycles in 4 months...).
From the first link:
He adds that the subject pool is limited to "a handful of white subjects from Nebraska, ... but many great ideas start with a simple test."
Aye. It is for this reason that this data is rejectable. However, if it does find a correlation, it is not outright rejectable. No matter what, their data discovers that this correlation is true among the observed population. It could be expanded, easily, to a nation wide study. I presume that funding is an issue here.
From the second link:
"Historically speaking, politicians have appealed to the ‘be afraid’ response in the electorate in an attempt to mine votes," he said. "But in terms of going from campaigning to what we did in the laboratory, that’s a large leap."
Yes, they refer to far baser reactions, not to outright scare tactics of politics. They did not record "political fear", they measured "fear". They would have to replicate this study examining "political fear".
From the 3rd link:
"What is revolutionary about this paper is that it shows the path from genes to physiology to behavior," said James H. Fowler, a political-science professor at the University of California, San Diego, who was not involved in the research.
This, in no way, invalidates anything. A Political Scientist who reviewed the information, not associated with the paper, is praising the paper. It is one thing for me to write a paper and say "This is a revolutionary paper." It is another thing completely for the head of the Political Science department at my University to say my paper is revolutionary.
Not hooyey, but not scientific truth. It is a groundwork for further research.
For example, with my limited sample size and student body at my University, I discovered a correlation between moral reasoning (deontological/teleological) and political party identification. It can't be called a scientific theory yet, because it has not been replicated and expanded to a greater sample across a larger population.
Defending the Political Science aside, this is fairly old news. All 3 articles are dated to 2008, at the same time. It is well known there is relative amount of support for such a theory. There is also support for flexibility and routine nature, stating that conservatives are more stubborn/routine whereas liberals are more flexible (conservatives are more likely to sit through traffic, liberals are more likely to turn off and find another way to get home, etc).
Simply put, there has not been a study done with enough funding and interest to make a valid conclusion about the human population, and it has never been replicated enough in enough places to be considered a valid theory. Perhaps I am wrong, if someone can point me to such a study I would much appreciate it.
Media Liberal vs Conservative Bias: Most reporters are liberal, and most news network owners are conservative. Take your pick as to which represents a bias.
Most of the people who frequent the site are smart people, who are really just fooling around, and trying to get a good laugh.
In my case, the only one in which I can speak of, this quote is basically it. I consider myself a very emotionally attached, especially considering my aims as an Ethicist/Political Theorist, and yet, I still go to 4chan from time to time because the "You Laugh You Lose" threads are very funny. They may be darker humor, but dark humor has been around for a great period of time, in multiple forms. One can just look at the works of George Carlin to see some of the best. Ultimately, it comes down to what type of person the reader is. If the reader, the viewer, the individual takes those comedic things as a reality, it is not the fault on the part of the comedy, but of the person. I, personally, have a good idea of the line between my dark sense of humor and reality.
Edit: I will also add that among my group at school, I know 3 others who are aiming for PhDs, all of whom go to 4chan. Not to say that there is a positive correlation here, just that not everyone who goes to 4chan are the stereotype one would probably think.
Blutsau's list of silver bullets is solid, though I dont know if the Annul/Dispel/Envelop is really what you want to be paying 3 mana and losing a wish for. Evacuation and Consume the meek are if you're afraid of getting mobbed.
Its really a shame you're not running white. I run UWB teachings, and a huge asset to the deck are Esper Charm and Dromar's Charm. Plus you can always run Unmake and Celestial Purge for those pesky "on the field" problems. Unfortunately, the blue and black charms are all very blah.
Well, I decided to run a simple U/B rather than U/W/B, because I don't have too many reasons to want to run white. Black supplies enough board wipe with Damnation, that Esper Charm is the only reason I can think to put in white.
My main goal with the deck is not to make it Legacy winning, but casually very control feeling. Plus, to be honest, I must say that U/B Dual Lands have the prettiest pictures. Just look at Darkslick Shores, Sunken Ruins and the rest. They are awesome. ^.^
assuming you bring them in a binder and SB size does not matter, bringing more does not directy hurt you and it's just awesome to have a huge wishboard. I did it once and uhm, yeah, nothing like "Cast Wish, now lets see, what do we have to deal with this ..." browse 30+ cards and slap a pinpoint answer on the table.
So, here is what I am thinking:
1x Mindbreak Trap
1x Extirpate
1x Ravenous Trap
1x Slaughter Pact
1x Diabolic Edict
1x Stifle
1x Rend Flesh
1x Capsize
1x Consume the Meek
1x Pact of Negation
And then 5 slots to other things.
I am still kicking around a list, but I do like the idea of a Teachings build. It seems very interesting.
Beyond the sillyness of Wishing for an Annul - heck, put Nix in that list too - and casting it to meddle with your opponent, there is something, that one could call beauty I think, in finding the most simple of solutions in this overcomplicated way.
So true. Some of my favorite moments in Magic are when there is an extremely complex path to do something so very simple. For example, my buddy and I were playing a game of casual. He had out a Leyline of Anticipation, and played a Teferi. I tapped down to 3 mana to Force of Will (no counters left), he Fact or Fictions. He gets, and plays an Enter the Dungeon. We play our subgame. He proceeds to try and beat me to death early game with some beats, and I am forced to use my second Force of Will. He Extirpates it. I eventually pull through, and win the sub game on the back of Teferi. So, back in the first game, I get to tutor for 2 cards. I tutor for a Cunning Wish, and a Blue card. I Cunning Wish for an extirpated Force of Will, and Force of Will my buddies' Teferi.
I am working on a U/B list for casual play. In this list, I am running some Cunning Wishes. So, I am currently at a loss for whatever else to stick in my sideboard for the Wishes. I currently am considering Mindbreak Trap, Doomblade, Force of Will, Consume the Meek, and a Fact or Fiction. I need more ideas. Also, this is casual, so I don't really care for legality.
I am getting ready to quit Magic, due to Graduate School. However, I would like to, before that, create the best possible U/B list that can be done, in classic control style, short of going to crazy Vintage (Mox, Lotus, etc).
So, any recommendations on changes? My knowledge of past finishers are weak, so I put in Wurmcoils (Also make Innocent Blood lighter on your side).
I am interested in shifting this deck whatever way needed. I was considering the Countertop package, but decided not to since it greatly depends on a low mana costing metagame (Legacy/Vintage). Also considering 4x Hymn, 4x Counterspell, and 4x Isochron Scepter. So I am not stuck on this.
Here is a full list:
Ajani Goldmane
Ajani Vengeant
Chandra Naalar
Chandra Ablaze
Elspeth Tirel
Elspeth, Knight-Errant
Garruk Wildspeaker
Gideon Jura
Jace Beleren
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Koth of the Hammer
Liliana Vess
Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker
Nissa Revane
Sarkhan the Mad
Sarkhan Vol
Sorin Markov
Tezzeret, the Seeker
Venser, the Sojourner
As for my top 10:
1- Jace, the Mind Sculptor
2- Elspeth, Knight-Errant
3- Koth of the Hammer
4- Ajani Vengeant
5- Jace Beleren
6- Elspeth Tirel
7- Gideon Jura
8- Garruk Wildspeaker
9- Sorin Markov
10- Sarkhan the Mad
I don't believe I have asked this before, but any of you tried out Amnesia: The Dark Descent? It is a game on Steam for $20, and it is pure gold in terms of psychological survival horror.
Just to let you know you have a 80% chance of drawing a Jace by turn 6 assuming you drew no extra cards on the play.
(4 / 60) * (7 + 5)= 0.8 or 80%
If you drew any extra cards before the 6th turn then you are pretty much guaranteed to draw at least 1 if not 2 by turn 6. Most people play Preordain which greatly increases your chances and a lot of others play things like Sea Gate Oracle, etc.
I run 3 Jace, The Mind Sculptor and find I always have at least 1 or 2 in my hand at any point in the game. Man lands and little dudes like Sea Gate Oracle are just better at killing opposing Jace, The Mind Sculptor than sacrificing one of your own.
You gotta do some more complex math that I could not even begin to do, lol.
But according to it's chart, having 4x Bolt (or Jace), on turn 1, there is a 60.05% chance of NOT having it (39.95% of having it). Turn 6: 39.90% of Not having it, so 60.10% chance of having it. This source I have heard to be very reliable.
Also, sorry about the delay in response. I haven't been here in a while.
You know, I am not sure how great this deck is, or can be, but I must applaud you: This is one of the most interestingly creative decks I have seen... I am going to build something off of this.
I agree with above post. Permission style decks run 3 Jaces max. I run a more Tap out version and I run 3 Mindsculptors and 3 Beleren because I dont mind tapping out (duh) to play him. Control can almost never afford him turn 4 so by turn 6 where its safe to play him you will most likely have 1 or more in hand
The only issue I have with this is that even with 4 Jace, TMS in your deck, you have only a 60% chance of having drawn one by turn 6, all things constant. It would be even less with only a 3 of.
Also, Jace will be killed pretty quickly by Tar Pits in the match up. You want extra.
I got Jace, TMS when he first came out, and since that day, he has been a 4 of. The thread level of Jace, the Mind Sculptor is ridiculous. He has the power level of cards like Force of Will and Engineered Explosives, but he happens every turn (hence why he is viable in Legacy). It is not necessarily about "winning" the Jace War, but the most important thing is having a Jace when needed, which is whenever you don't have a Jace down.
With 3, you could go the first 10 turns without a Jace, The Mind Sculptor easily, and lose because of it. He is good against pretty much everything, and if you need to, you can always Brainstorm + Preordain away extra Jaces to the bottom (so you don't just shuffle them in to have a chance of redrawing them).
I love him as a 4 of, and I will always use him as such.
If they are trying to lower down the power level of the game overall, and Jace was simply going to remain too strong, add strong tools against him. To not do that, in my eyes, says they lost control of the balance of Standard, and are using the ban as an "Oops".
It just makes me lose confidence in R&D. They have had Standard well in control since I started playing competitive. I started playing just as Time Spiral cycled out, I have not heard of any cards being banned from Lorwyn on in standard.
The only reasoning I can see is that there is something in M12 that they really want to do, but would be made too insanely powerful by Jace, or they wanted to appease the masses of Anti-Jace players, by banning it 4 months before it rotates, as a marketing ploy, knowing people who like the card wouldn't care (as it cycles in 4 months...).
Aye. It is for this reason that this data is rejectable. However, if it does find a correlation, it is not outright rejectable. No matter what, their data discovers that this correlation is true among the observed population. It could be expanded, easily, to a nation wide study. I presume that funding is an issue here.
Yes, they refer to far baser reactions, not to outright scare tactics of politics. They did not record "political fear", they measured "fear". They would have to replicate this study examining "political fear".
Yup. Does not invalidate that which they said. Both sides may be more sensitive, but one side is even more sensitive than the other.
This, in no way, invalidates anything. A Political Scientist who reviewed the information, not associated with the paper, is praising the paper. It is one thing for me to write a paper and say "This is a revolutionary paper." It is another thing completely for the head of the Political Science department at my University to say my paper is revolutionary.
Not hooyey, but not scientific truth. It is a groundwork for further research.
For example, with my limited sample size and student body at my University, I discovered a correlation between moral reasoning (deontological/teleological) and political party identification. It can't be called a scientific theory yet, because it has not been replicated and expanded to a greater sample across a larger population.
Defending the Political Science aside, this is fairly old news. All 3 articles are dated to 2008, at the same time. It is well known there is relative amount of support for such a theory. There is also support for flexibility and routine nature, stating that conservatives are more stubborn/routine whereas liberals are more flexible (conservatives are more likely to sit through traffic, liberals are more likely to turn off and find another way to get home, etc).
Simply put, there has not been a study done with enough funding and interest to make a valid conclusion about the human population, and it has never been replicated enough in enough places to be considered a valid theory. Perhaps I am wrong, if someone can point me to such a study I would much appreciate it.
Oh, and Stephen Colbert is sheer awesome.
In my case, the only one in which I can speak of, this quote is basically it. I consider myself a very emotionally attached, especially considering my aims as an Ethicist/Political Theorist, and yet, I still go to 4chan from time to time because the "You Laugh You Lose" threads are very funny. They may be darker humor, but dark humor has been around for a great period of time, in multiple forms. One can just look at the works of George Carlin to see some of the best. Ultimately, it comes down to what type of person the reader is. If the reader, the viewer, the individual takes those comedic things as a reality, it is not the fault on the part of the comedy, but of the person. I, personally, have a good idea of the line between my dark sense of humor and reality.
Edit: I will also add that among my group at school, I know 3 others who are aiming for PhDs, all of whom go to 4chan. Not to say that there is a positive correlation here, just that not everyone who goes to 4chan are the stereotype one would probably think.
Well, I decided to run a simple U/B rather than U/W/B, because I don't have too many reasons to want to run white. Black supplies enough board wipe with Damnation, that Esper Charm is the only reason I can think to put in white.
My main goal with the deck is not to make it Legacy winning, but casually very control feeling. Plus, to be honest, I must say that U/B Dual Lands have the prettiest pictures. Just look at Darkslick Shores, Sunken Ruins and the rest. They are awesome. ^.^
Awesome.
So, here is what I am thinking:
1x Mindbreak Trap
1x Extirpate
1x Ravenous Trap
1x Slaughter Pact
1x Diabolic Edict
1x Stifle
1x Rend Flesh
1x Capsize
1x Consume the Meek
1x Pact of Negation
And then 5 slots to other things.
I am still kicking around a list, but I do like the idea of a Teachings build. It seems very interesting.
Thanks for the list!
So true. Some of my favorite moments in Magic are when there is an extremely complex path to do something so very simple. For example, my buddy and I were playing a game of casual. He had out a Leyline of Anticipation, and played a Teferi. I tapped down to 3 mana to Force of Will (no counters left), he Fact or Fictions. He gets, and plays an Enter the Dungeon. We play our subgame. He proceeds to try and beat me to death early game with some beats, and I am forced to use my second Force of Will. He Extirpates it. I eventually pull through, and win the sub game on the back of Teferi. So, back in the first game, I get to tutor for 2 cards. I tutor for a Cunning Wish, and a Blue card. I Cunning Wish for an extirpated Force of Will, and Force of Will my buddies' Teferi.
The greatest counter war I have been a party to.
I am working on a U/B list for casual play. In this list, I am running some Cunning Wishes. So, I am currently at a loss for whatever else to stick in my sideboard for the Wishes. I currently am considering Mindbreak Trap, Doomblade, Force of Will, Consume the Meek, and a Fact or Fiction. I need more ideas. Also, this is casual, so I don't really care for legality.
Anyone have any ideas?
I am getting ready to quit Magic, due to Graduate School. However, I would like to, before that, create the best possible U/B list that can be done, in classic control style, short of going to crazy Vintage (Mox, Lotus, etc).
So, any recommendations on changes? My knowledge of past finishers are weak, so I put in Wurmcoils (Also make Innocent Blood lighter on your side).
I am interested in shifting this deck whatever way needed. I was considering the Countertop package, but decided not to since it greatly depends on a low mana costing metagame (Legacy/Vintage). Also considering 4x Hymn, 4x Counterspell, and 4x Isochron Scepter. So I am not stuck on this.
1x Elixir of Immortality
Creatures: (2)
2x Wurmcoil Engine
Instants: (19)
4x Accumulated Knowledge
3x Grasp of Darkness
4x Counterspell
4x Cryptic Command
4x Force of Will
3x Damnation
2x Innocent Blood
1x Consuming Vapors
4x Preordain
Planeswalkers: (3)
3x Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Land: (23)
2x Polluted Delta
4x Watery Grave
4x Drowned Catacomb
4x Creeping Tar Pit
4x Wasteland
4x Sunken Ruins
3x Underground River
Thanks guys!
-Sage
Ajani Goldmane
Ajani Vengeant
Chandra Naalar
Chandra Ablaze
Elspeth Tirel
Elspeth, Knight-Errant
Garruk Wildspeaker
Gideon Jura
Jace Beleren
Jace, the Mind Sculptor
Koth of the Hammer
Liliana Vess
Nicol Bolas, Planeswalker
Nissa Revane
Sarkhan the Mad
Sarkhan Vol
Sorin Markov
Tezzeret, the Seeker
Venser, the Sojourner
As for my top 10:
1- Jace, the Mind Sculptor
2- Elspeth, Knight-Errant
3- Koth of the Hammer
4- Ajani Vengeant
5- Jace Beleren
6- Elspeth Tirel
7- Gideon Jura
8- Garruk Wildspeaker
9- Sorin Markov
10- Sarkhan the Mad
Here you go.
http://www.kibble.net/magic/magic10.php
You gotta do some more complex math that I could not even begin to do, lol.
But according to it's chart, having 4x Bolt (or Jace), on turn 1, there is a 60.05% chance of NOT having it (39.95% of having it). Turn 6: 39.90% of Not having it, so 60.10% chance of having it. This source I have heard to be very reliable.
Also, sorry about the delay in response. I haven't been here in a while.
Awesome.
The only issue I have with this is that even with 4 Jace, TMS in your deck, you have only a 60% chance of having drawn one by turn 6, all things constant. It would be even less with only a 3 of.
Also, Jace will be killed pretty quickly by Tar Pits in the match up. You want extra.
With 3, you could go the first 10 turns without a Jace, The Mind Sculptor easily, and lose because of it. He is good against pretty much everything, and if you need to, you can always Brainstorm + Preordain away extra Jaces to the bottom (so you don't just shuffle them in to have a chance of redrawing them).
I love him as a 4 of, and I will always use him as such.