Well, I can see a point about the CC. Getting Brimaz in play with a vial on 3 seems easier than getting to 4 mana (and failing to continue a Port Lock), for sure.
Now, about substituting other cards, I think he is better than Crusader, but I wouldn't remove Serra Avenger for it... It seems to me like flying is just too valuable in this deck.
- Registered User
Member for 12 years, 5 months, and 18 days
Last active Mon, May, 23 2016 15:15:55
- 14 Followers
- 9,099 Total Posts
- 354 Thanks
Jan 31, 2014Posted in: ControlQuote from MaciusI think its the fact that
-if your opponent is AD'ing it, it means one less thing you have to worry about
- It sits at 3, which is a nice number to sit a vial at
-it passes the vanilla test and doing combat with it gets you more bodies, which with a good body, it will be doing combat quite a good amount....
Well, I'm the guy who played countertop in a sea of Decays with that reasoning (they have 4 decays tops, let's give them 12 targets to choose from and kill them with the ones they don't destroy) to some success. But here? We have an option to play a finisher that completely circumvents one of the top removal spells in the format. It cost 1 more mana than Brimaz, but it's also a much better card (when you're on the aggressive). I haven't really played this deck much, but how often do you see yourself dropping something like Brimaz and worrying about the damage race? Because that's the only advantage I see in playing him: he can attack and block every turn. Apart from that, Hero has a better ability and makes more guys that actually put pressure on your opponent.
Maybe it's just that I am giving the aggressive feature of Hero a bit too much importance and Brimaz' defensive aspect has more importance than I think.... That may be it...
Jan 31, 2014Posted in: ControlQuote from medeaI think the follow up question to the current discussion is: "Is a 1-of Jotun Grunt better or worse than a 1-of Brimaz?"
My gut says that the Brimaz would likely be better, as it can be protected with Karakas; however, with the increasing popularity of Loam based decks and Reanimator/Dredge, I could definitely see the other side of the argument. It's not like Grunt is usually hitting play on turn 2, and I think in the long grind, I'd rather have Brimaz.
I don't get why Brimaz is getting all this attention. With all these Abrupt Decays and Inquisition of Kozilek going around, I'd rather use Hero of the Bladehold (lucky 4 mana CMC). Sure, it cost one more mana, but that makes it evade a lot of the removal e some of the discard in the format. Other than that, it's a much better finisher.
Now, since no one uses Hero, why is everyone suddenly talking about a similar, but worst card?
Jan 27, 2014Posted in: SportsQuote from KahedronPoint After Touchdown.
Most of the time it is just a kick at goal (think conversion in Rugby) for a single point or you can run a normal play and attempt to get the ball across the goal line again for 2 points.
It has gotten to the stage that a kick at goal is pretty much automatic with the only uncertainty being when a team attempts to go for 2, which doesn't happen that much.
Oh, ok, Point After Touchdown... I wasn't familiar with that term (PAT), but I know what it is. And Goodell wants to get rid of that? That seems stupid to me...
Jan 24, 2014Posted in: ControlQuote from fatboyruleDrew Levin wrote an interesting article on SCG called "Spirit of the Labyrinth" (creative huh?) where he actually proposed cutting Thalia for Spirit in Death and Taxes and goes over the scenarios in which one is better than the other.
The idea itself is a hard one to swallow, but he does make some good points. Most notably how Thalia and Vial are kind of at odds with each other. If Revoker and Spirit are your dedicated "hatebears" then you're actually maximizing your Vial usage every game.
Yeah, on that note, I think Vial should also get cut. All those different casting costs on creatures are confusing...
Quote from coloTo me, that sounds like one of the worst ideas (in regard to MtG) ever published.
It probably is, and I've read some horrible ones. I don't think you'll be that upset to have a vial costing if that means you already played a Thalia and she stuck, but that's just my inexperienced, non pro-player take on things.
Jan 23, 2014Posted in: ControlQuote from Adam WThe other problem with 22 lands is that it weakens your Ports. You will find, over time, that you simply don't have the mana to sink into them anymore.
This is my main concern with playing with 22 lands. If I'm playing ports, I want to take advantage of them and with 22 lands I'm afraid of not having enough mana to do that most of the time.
Jan 23, 2014Hey guys.Posted in: Control
Since the spoil of SofL, I have rekindled my interest in this deck. It really seems to me that it's got extra tools (SofL and Brimaz) that make it more competitive (if it wasn't already) and it's a very fun deck to play. I see myself playing this to exhaustion after the new set comes out.
One of the things I'd like to ask (that I don't understand, probably because I never actually played this deck) is why you seem to give such an important role to Serra Avenger. It's doesn't seem like that great a card. Sure, it's big, but aren't we better off swapping the Avenger with Brimaz and having the new King be the Beater in the deck (thus freeing more slots for SotL and the current staples of the deck)?
I'm not saying this is the right move, I'm really asking why the Avenger is so important, as it seems to me we have better beaters now.
As for the land discussion, I don't think I'd be comfortable with going under 23. You have wastelands and ports. This is a really land hungry deck (not very mana hungry, but land hungry) and by cutting the land count to under 23, you're actually losing the effectiveness of your ports (which you will then have to tap for mana) and mana screw yourself in order to crack wastelands...
Again, this is me making assumptions, so take it with a grain of salt and do tell me if I'm wrong
Jan 17, 2014votan posted a message on Trying to make a necropotence land for my total rebootHonestly, I think you'd be better off with a Phyrexian Arena effect. I don't care about taking 19 damage to draw 19 cards if that means I can kill my opponent before he can remove my last point of life...Posted in: Custom Card Creation
Jan 15, 2014Posted in: SportsQuote from Whitemage57Clearly the Pats have the least talent of the four teams. However, as we have seen in the NFL the most talented team doesn't always win it all (This isn't the NBA in other words). I'd go as far as to say every team left has enough talent to win it all, but who has the most means nothing now. It'll come down to who can execute a gameplan and mental toughness. Things that the Patriots have hung their hat on for oh I don't know 12 years now and can't be discredited.
That's my hope. The other teams have more talent, but none have the deadly Brady-Belichick Combo
Jan 15, 2014Posted in: SportsQuote from qtiplordI'd root for a Superb Owl any day. I mean, it has to be better than a Super Pigeon, right?
Nothing is better than a Superb Pigeon
Still, I'm jumping on the idea that the Pats can win this whole thing. Yeah, they'll have to beat a strong(er?) Denver side and then, even if they do, they have to deal with a team that's even stronger (be it Seattle or San Francisco)... On the one side, I think the Pats are the worst team out of the four, but on the other side, I'm a Pats fan, so I'm celebrating already
Jan 13, 2014I'm going with Broncos vs Seahawks. They've been the best teams all year.Posted in: Sports
Now, as a Pats fan, I don't mind seeing the Pats upset the Broncos and heading to the Superbowl (:)) and I do think the 49ers deserve some love for what they've been doing. In sum, no matter who ends up playing in the SB, I'll enjoy the game
Jan 6, 2014I don't get what the Drama is. Peyton wasn't let go because he was worst than luck. He was let go because he'll be worst than luck in 5 or 6 years (maybe even less) and the Colts saw the chance of signing a QB for the Future. Sure they lost something in the short run (and it's very likely that Denver will have a better season than Indy), but they were aiming for the long run and, from that perspective, they made the right move. Everything else is just Colts' fans that are more worried about the past and getting even with Peyton than actually grabbing hold to the present/future and supporting Luck, their actual QB for years to come.Posted in: Sports
Jan 6, 2014Posted in: SportsQuote from Whitemage57Sweet, sounds like the Pats are underdogs according to this forum at least. Go Darkhorse Patriots!
Yeah, that confused me as well. Yeah, the Colts pulled off a nice win and all (kudos for that), but they're facing Brady and Belichick. As good as the Chiefs are, they don't have a QB like Brady or a coach like Belichick. Especially after a Bye, there's no way I'm betting against the Pats. They are a mediocre team made great by those 2 and they are even better after a bye (just look at their record after a bye week in the last few years).
I may be wrong. The Colts may turn out to crush the Pats, but my money is still on NE.
Dec 31, 2013Posted in: SportsQuote from Suntan Supermanone of my favorite ESPN misnomers/ESPNisms, is a team's need for a "franchise QB" As if having a good QB will magically every other lacklustre part of your team better. As the smart teams have found out, the great, franchise QBs are few and far between, and it's generally far better to spend average money on an average QB, because overall, they're easier to find, and generally(unless you're Buffalo) cheaper to come by. Note the teams that all buy into the QB hype, are the ones failing the most. QBs are almost single-handedly ruining any semblance of logic amongst GMs.
This actually makes a lot of sense, even for a newbie, like myself.
I mean, sure guys like Brady and Peyton can carry a team on their shoulders on route to a good season (although even they can't provide Championships on their own), but guys like these 2 don't come around very often. apart from them, no QB can be a team's only offensive weapon. A good team, a championship team, has to have a lot of stuff going for them and the QB is just a (small) part of that. A good QB helps, but I rather have a good O-line and Recieving staff than a good QB. What you need is a strong O-line and then some decent players to take advantage of that.
You can't convince me that Russel Wilson is better than Tom Brady... and yet, I feel Wilson will be lifting the SuperBowl (or close to it) on February 2nd, while Brady will probably have finished his season a few weeks back.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Feb 2, 2007The trick IMO is to associate your study with something nice. Do you know the Pavlov's Dog Experiment? Use that concept to your benefit. We usually make a connection between studying and bad feelings. So, instead of sitting in your room reading, try going to the beach (or to the country if the beach is too windy) and read there. The change of scenery is refreshing for most ppl. If you associate studying with the beach, you're bound to enjoy it a bit more.Posted in: Ugstal Urniancepter Doggienavicenewton Bobwebacks
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.