I used MWS for about a year back during the eldrazi block. I really enjoyed using the program. I also used Cockatrice during the Innistrad block all the way into parts of the RTR block.
I quit using Cockatrice when there were the legal issues. I couldn't access any servers. Around the same time, I also quit MTG in real life and sold my cards.
Now I'm just interested in seeing what Theros has to offer, and I want to enter into standard play. My question: Which is currently more widely used, MWS or Cockatrice? Also, how do I get the whole card database with pictures onto each? It's such a hassle doing it, and I can't figure it out.
Is it weird that I view card sleeves not as a utility or tool... but something that can be exciting? I hate the idea of buying sleeves as disposal things. I like picking up sleeves that excite me (and not particularly for the picture). I like having sleeves that feel nice in my hand when I shuffle through them. For me, that has definitely been Dragonshields. However, I haven't gotten to try anything but Dragonshield and Pro sleeves... I do want to pick up KMC's before I go out and buy 800 more Dragonshields for a cube.
Speaking of angling, is there a way to unbend cards bent by angling? As much as I love my white dragon shields, they do bend my cards ever so slightly :/
Only method I know of would be to put the card(s) in a heavy flat book and let them stay there for a length of time. A warm but dry environment could help. Bending by hand can help if you're careful but I wouldn't recommend it normally... You'll weaken the integrity of the card usually, and just have a wavy looking card.
I've considered testing methods such as light ironing through a cloth, keeping the card in a transparent thin sleeve... And quick dry blowing it... But I haven't cared to really test that stuff out since I don't have any ruined cards lol. Moisture would be an issue (perma ruin the card) but at the same time could be useful in a controlled environment in highly minimal amounts (primarily to raise humidity levels slightly). I'm sure there's methods out there.
So I picked up six boxes of blue Dragonshield sleeves. They're very different from the black Dragonshields I picked up a few months back. They feel slightly thinner, the cards don't contour to the sleeves (so they don't bend the card) since they're not as thick as the previous black ones, and the edges aren't angled as much so corner shuffling is more difficult. There's no break-in period with these, whereas a lot of Dragonshield owners have said there is a breakin period (again, coming back to the point about these being produced slightly differently?). Functionally they seem inferior to the black ones, but they still seem good. Time will tell if they last well. I can say I'm slightly disappointed that they don't seem as thick... it seems like they updated their manufacturing process. I can't say whether it's a worse product or not since I haven't gotten to use it for enough time to see how they last.
The bonus is that they're all 100% cut uniformly. My previous black dragonshields were all cut at varying lengths (out of the 100 they were practically all different lengths), and they were all cut way too short. These ones are cut perfectly and seem quite good.
So... 600 sleeves later... I hope these things last! I hope I didn't jump on the bandwagon with a new manufacturing process!!!
I'm looking for advice on buying card sleeves. I've done a fair bit of googling and reading around, and it's really difficult to find concise and detailed information.
I'm looking to purchase 500-600 of identical sleeves so I can sleeve up all of my decks, sideboarded cards, etc that I use in standard.
Here are my questions:
1) I'm primarily looking at Dragonshield sleeves. However, I've heard good things about KMC. I've never seen KMC sleeves before, and I don't quite understand what the difference is between the two. I know dragonshields are a little rough around the edges, corner shuffle into each other really easily, etc... but what makes KMC sleeves stand out? To me, lasting means the edges don't bend and the sleeves don't break, even with corner shuffles.
2) Card sleeves often differ in strength based on materials that go into them. Mono-color basic ultra pro sleeves come in different colors (green/white/black... etc). The green ones are notorious for breaking more easily than orange or white, for example. Are dragonshield sleeves like this in any way? Do different colors feel or age differently at all? Or is the general make-up of the plastic material pretty much the same no matter what the color?
I bought 100 black dragonshield sleeves a couple months back only to be disappointed. They came mis-cut too short, so all my cards would pop out of the top by a slight bit... rendering them unplayable. Luckily about 44 of the sleeves were cut slightly long enough, so I use that bunch for drafts. I have them in black, and like them, though I do want to go with another color if I buy more. I'm a tad bit worried if I buy 500-600 that I'll have to ensure I get them from the same batch, so their cut-lengths are acceptable... which leaves me wondering also where to buy from (Canada).
Note: (This thread is for the discussion of Huntmaster of the Fells in junk reanimator, since there's very little to discuss about him in human reanimator.)
This card has seen great success in a lot of decks. Reanimator just before Gatecrash was divided primarily into two categories: with red, or without red. A lot of decks found success through consistently bashing their way through with craterhoof behemoths, and that seemed to lead players to remove the red from their decks and carry forward that way. Very few junk reanimator lists are running red nowadays, however I'm finding it to be quite effective. For me, the red splash is just for huntmaster of the fells, faithless looting, and sideboard options. For me, that's enough reason.
Huntmaster of the Fells plays out excellently against aggro rush decks, which comprise a large amount of the competitive meta currently. He puts on pressure against other decks as well, forcing them to remove him quite quickly. In a reanimator deck, that means forcing a removal spell from your opponent, which helps protect whatever you're bringing back. I've had many games where I'll bring out huntmaster against an aggro deck, block it out, then reanimate him due to a bad hand. I will then block it out again. Then, another reanimate. With just unburial rites and huntmaster, I can get 6 creatures, 6 life, and make a lot of great trades... and I don't even need to have a great hand.
Another thing to note about running mainboard huntmasters is that he allows you to run a much more versatile sideboard. I like to be able to remove my mulches and turn my reanimate deck into a mid-range jundy deck. That means subbing out 4 mulch, 2 faithless looting, and 1-2 unburial rites, and any craterhoofs, and tossing in liliana of the veil (x2-3), dreadbores, an olivia or two, and some other useful cards.
To me, junk reanimator has always been one of the most versatile deck choices. A lot of players consider grave-hate to be the bane of junk reanimator, but that's not the way I play it. However, the one and only card that makes the way I play junk reanimator possible is huntmaster of the fells: without him, there wouldn't be enough of an excuse to splash red, and as a result my sideboard and mainboard would look at lot more like a craterhoof reanimator.
I can't think of a matchup against the top tier meta decks that I wouldn't want to run 4 huntmasters mainboard.
Honestly it's for these reasons I hardly ever browse this forum anymore. I used to come here for some deck ideas, but now I feel like the "competitive" forum is just a hub for clowns to post terrible ideas.
There is absolutely no difference between the "developing" and the "competitive" area of the forum. Both are strewn with the same "do you think this could work?" type threads. I see threads where people boast about their 4-1 where they "stomped the best of the best" with their decklist that looks like an eight-year-old brewed up.
Coming up with new ideas is great... but that should be in the "developing" area. If someone has a new idea, they should be certain of its competitiveness before asking questions like "do you think this could be good?" in the competitive area.
Unfortunately I avoid these forums and stick to viewing tournament finish-lists, and doing my own brewing... it saves me the trouble of viewing some very bad discussions. That's not to say some good thoughts pop up around here... but getting a good idea ends up being a needle-in-a-haystack type of situation most of the time.
I dropped the green because really this deck is nothing without rites-ing the angel. Any other gameplay is sub-par compared to whatever everyone else is running.
deck has a super consistent game 1, usually getting angels out with an alfa strike turn 4-5.
I've found that the deck's only really good to steal a win from time to time, take down a tournament when there's little/no GY hate floating around, then die away when people bring in the GY hate for the next time.
I really have no idea how to build the deck to have a consistent/powerful gameplan other than rites-ing the angel.
You should be keeping a similar amount of grave-tossing cards.
So you should be using thought scours in the place of mulches.
Since you're dropping out mulch, you may have to go with 24 land for consistent play, but not sure.
Without peddler & izzet staticaster... deck just sucks imo. Has no play to it.
After the latest metagame shift over the last few weeks are we able to survive?
With like 63% Zombies in the top 16 of SCGO Balt, is that just not a metagame for frites? Is the highest place rites list was 24th, and the only one in the top 32 because of this shift or have people just not adapted well enough?
I'm thinking about switching decks, and it really makes me sad. Do I have to? Do we all?
Zombies & rush decks aren't an issue if you play a well thought-out frites list. I have one which consistently wins versus rush decks, American control, etc. By "consistent", I mean I'm generally above the 50% win ratio against an equally well-thought out deck. I've won every single FNM with my frites deck that I've taken it to (I've used it three times), and every time I play against at least two tier-1 decks. It's gone up against esper control, bant control, American midrange, junk tokens, etc. No problems.
I'm just mindful of how I set the deck up. Three huntmasters has been a staple, four angels of serenity have been staples (I'd like to run 3 since it can be a very dead card, but it's just too important), craterhoof has always been a one-of staple mainboard, etc.
What I cut down on is going with too many four-ofs. I run three mulch, two farseek, two faithless looting, and two lingering souls (I also have the staple four-of grisly salvage). This mix improves game consistency, since I'm not hitting too many faithless lootings, farseeks, or mulches... but I've got the chance of hitting any of them, which is nice.
Cavern of souls is an automatic three-of in the mainboard, alongside I believe I run three loxodon smiters mainboard (might be two). That brings my centaur healer count down to 1 in the mainboard. Loxodon smiter is great in too many situations: against zombies, if they waste a dreadbore, he has already served his purpose; if they swing, let him block, then kill him with a burn, then he has also already served his purpose. Against American Control, he is a good blocking body that deals with Geist, and doesn't require cavern to be used up. Etc, etc.
Anyway, I won't go over the whole deck... but the main point I'm getting at is that too many faithless rites decks are aiming for extreme consistency. By putting in too many 4-ofs, though, you end up becoming susceptible to dead draws more often (ex. too many farseeks, too many mulches, etc), and you end up becoming predictable.
You can still maintain an equal level of consistency with a more varied deck (as I've begun to describe above) while also keeping away from 4-ofs of some things. I still play 4-ofs on unburial rites, angel of serenity, thragtusk, etc... but there's certain cards (which I already mentioned above) which can be cut down on. This helps keep your deck a little less predictable, and it gives it a more organic flow which brings its overall competitiveness up when thrown into any scenario.
I've liked running my lists with 2 farseeks. I'd even be willing to go as strange as running it as a 1-of.
You want to see your thragtusk on turn 3 or 4, and if you're running a version with huntmaster, you want to bring him out on turn 3. So farseek allows you to do this.
I've found that lists running 4 farseeks can work, but they often become a little less consistent. You end up relying more on the top-decks, since you usually don't end up with as much power to rummage through the top of your library.
By running 2 farseeks, you usually only see 1 in a game. This is huge. You don't need to consistently reach a farseek, but if you do, it can be very beneficial. If you hit two farseeks during a game... it's like hitting a dead card, and often a passed turn (due to not having enough remaining available mana)...
So try a list with 1-2 farseeks and see how you like it. Most people like playing 4-ofs when it comes to these sorts of things... in my opinion, it's a card which in frites can be run as a 2-of and still make a lot of sense.
Have you playtested this deck yet? I really wouldn't recommend posting a primer without having tested the theme at all. The decklist just doesn't work in any sort of competitive scenario whatsoever :-(
Your only win conditions are swinging through with the 9 creatures you have in the deck. You run 23 land, and you threw in an army of the damned for some reason.
The biggest and first problem is this: the deck does not have a win condition that can be remotely counted on.
Won at FNM again last night, using the list I posted earlier in the thread.
I learned that Craterhoof Behemoth seems like a must have in these lists, Griselbrand and Angel of Serenity are good but can lead to some grindy situations where they can't break through or do enough
Like 4-5 times I just did a little math played Craterhoof and told my opponent they were dead, without Elesh Norn this deck needs a card that can close really fast and I feel Craterhoof really does that
No, the deck doesn't need a card that can close really fast. There are different ways to play it entirely. I play without any craterhoofs and do quite well.
I decided I'm going to have 7 mb win conditions.
3 entreats
2 niv mizzets
2 thundermaw hellkites
as well as tamiyo emblem/pillar
Im not sure if anyone has done testing with thundermaw, but it sounds really good vs other control in theory. Can kill any planeswalker the turn after they are played, can get damage in before their sorcery speed removal stops them, getting rid of a sphere with your sphere allows him to hit that turn. Im not sure if its a good move, but i wanted more threats vs other control decks, so i think he might work out. Most of my cards are geared towards aggro anyways, and i might jsut try to run 0 counters mainboard, but 7-8 sb (dissipate and essence scatter). Alongside 3 jace 3.0s, i think we just auto win vs aggro mb and go 2-1 vs every control deck, losing the first one. I have found essence scatter to be very good as a sb card as it deals with any control deck running thrag (they dont run cavern) and almost any midrange deck. Only thing it is bad against is zombies, and maybe mono red/rakdos on the draw.
Thoughts on Thundermaw Hellkite? Better than drogskol? better than a 3rd niv?
I was looking at Thundermaw and considering him as a possibility. I could see him as a 2-of card.
Drogskol Reaver really isn't good in my opinion... he's a neat card, but he's only a stall at best -- and stall cards need to be reliable. He's not reliable.
I quit using Cockatrice when there were the legal issues. I couldn't access any servers. Around the same time, I also quit MTG in real life and sold my cards.
Now I'm just interested in seeing what Theros has to offer, and I want to enter into standard play. My question: Which is currently more widely used, MWS or Cockatrice? Also, how do I get the whole card database with pictures onto each? It's such a hassle doing it, and I can't figure it out.
Only method I know of would be to put the card(s) in a heavy flat book and let them stay there for a length of time. A warm but dry environment could help. Bending by hand can help if you're careful but I wouldn't recommend it normally... You'll weaken the integrity of the card usually, and just have a wavy looking card.
I've considered testing methods such as light ironing through a cloth, keeping the card in a transparent thin sleeve... And quick dry blowing it... But I haven't cared to really test that stuff out since I don't have any ruined cards lol. Moisture would be an issue (perma ruin the card) but at the same time could be useful in a controlled environment in highly minimal amounts (primarily to raise humidity levels slightly). I'm sure there's methods out there.
The bonus is that they're all 100% cut uniformly. My previous black dragonshields were all cut at varying lengths (out of the 100 they were practically all different lengths), and they were all cut way too short. These ones are cut perfectly and seem quite good.
So... 600 sleeves later... I hope these things last! I hope I didn't jump on the bandwagon with a new manufacturing process!!!
I'm looking to purchase 500-600 of identical sleeves so I can sleeve up all of my decks, sideboarded cards, etc that I use in standard.
Here are my questions:
1) I'm primarily looking at Dragonshield sleeves. However, I've heard good things about KMC. I've never seen KMC sleeves before, and I don't quite understand what the difference is between the two. I know dragonshields are a little rough around the edges, corner shuffle into each other really easily, etc... but what makes KMC sleeves stand out? To me, lasting means the edges don't bend and the sleeves don't break, even with corner shuffles.
2) Card sleeves often differ in strength based on materials that go into them. Mono-color basic ultra pro sleeves come in different colors (green/white/black... etc). The green ones are notorious for breaking more easily than orange or white, for example. Are dragonshield sleeves like this in any way? Do different colors feel or age differently at all? Or is the general make-up of the plastic material pretty much the same no matter what the color?
I bought 100 black dragonshield sleeves a couple months back only to be disappointed. They came mis-cut too short, so all my cards would pop out of the top by a slight bit... rendering them unplayable. Luckily about 44 of the sleeves were cut slightly long enough, so I use that bunch for drafts. I have them in black, and like them, though I do want to go with another color if I buy more. I'm a tad bit worried if I buy 500-600 that I'll have to ensure I get them from the same batch, so their cut-lengths are acceptable... which leaves me wondering also where to buy from (Canada).
This card has seen great success in a lot of decks. Reanimator just before Gatecrash was divided primarily into two categories: with red, or without red. A lot of decks found success through consistently bashing their way through with craterhoof behemoths, and that seemed to lead players to remove the red from their decks and carry forward that way. Very few junk reanimator lists are running red nowadays, however I'm finding it to be quite effective. For me, the red splash is just for huntmaster of the fells, faithless looting, and sideboard options. For me, that's enough reason.
Huntmaster of the Fells plays out excellently against aggro rush decks, which comprise a large amount of the competitive meta currently. He puts on pressure against other decks as well, forcing them to remove him quite quickly. In a reanimator deck, that means forcing a removal spell from your opponent, which helps protect whatever you're bringing back. I've had many games where I'll bring out huntmaster against an aggro deck, block it out, then reanimate him due to a bad hand. I will then block it out again. Then, another reanimate. With just unburial rites and huntmaster, I can get 6 creatures, 6 life, and make a lot of great trades... and I don't even need to have a great hand.
Another thing to note about running mainboard huntmasters is that he allows you to run a much more versatile sideboard. I like to be able to remove my mulches and turn my reanimate deck into a mid-range jundy deck. That means subbing out 4 mulch, 2 faithless looting, and 1-2 unburial rites, and any craterhoofs, and tossing in liliana of the veil (x2-3), dreadbores, an olivia or two, and some other useful cards.
To me, junk reanimator has always been one of the most versatile deck choices. A lot of players consider grave-hate to be the bane of junk reanimator, but that's not the way I play it. However, the one and only card that makes the way I play junk reanimator possible is huntmaster of the fells: without him, there wouldn't be enough of an excuse to splash red, and as a result my sideboard and mainboard would look at lot more like a craterhoof reanimator.
I can't think of a matchup against the top tier meta decks that I wouldn't want to run 4 huntmasters mainboard.
There is absolutely no difference between the "developing" and the "competitive" area of the forum. Both are strewn with the same "do you think this could work?" type threads. I see threads where people boast about their 4-1 where they "stomped the best of the best" with their decklist that looks like an eight-year-old brewed up.
Coming up with new ideas is great... but that should be in the "developing" area. If someone has a new idea, they should be certain of its competitiveness before asking questions like "do you think this could be good?" in the competitive area.
Unfortunately I avoid these forums and stick to viewing tournament finish-lists, and doing my own brewing... it saves me the trouble of viewing some very bad discussions. That's not to say some good thoughts pop up around here... but getting a good idea ends up being a needle-in-a-haystack type of situation most of the time.
You should be keeping a similar amount of grave-tossing cards.
So you should be using thought scours in the place of mulches.
Since you're dropping out mulch, you may have to go with 24 land for consistent play, but not sure.
Without peddler & izzet staticaster... deck just sucks imo. Has no play to it.
Zombies & rush decks aren't an issue if you play a well thought-out frites list. I have one which consistently wins versus rush decks, American control, etc. By "consistent", I mean I'm generally above the 50% win ratio against an equally well-thought out deck. I've won every single FNM with my frites deck that I've taken it to (I've used it three times), and every time I play against at least two tier-1 decks. It's gone up against esper control, bant control, American midrange, junk tokens, etc. No problems.
I'm just mindful of how I set the deck up. Three huntmasters has been a staple, four angels of serenity have been staples (I'd like to run 3 since it can be a very dead card, but it's just too important), craterhoof has always been a one-of staple mainboard, etc.
What I cut down on is going with too many four-ofs. I run three mulch, two farseek, two faithless looting, and two lingering souls (I also have the staple four-of grisly salvage). This mix improves game consistency, since I'm not hitting too many faithless lootings, farseeks, or mulches... but I've got the chance of hitting any of them, which is nice.
Cavern of souls is an automatic three-of in the mainboard, alongside I believe I run three loxodon smiters mainboard (might be two). That brings my centaur healer count down to 1 in the mainboard. Loxodon smiter is great in too many situations: against zombies, if they waste a dreadbore, he has already served his purpose; if they swing, let him block, then kill him with a burn, then he has also already served his purpose. Against American Control, he is a good blocking body that deals with Geist, and doesn't require cavern to be used up. Etc, etc.
Anyway, I won't go over the whole deck... but the main point I'm getting at is that too many faithless rites decks are aiming for extreme consistency. By putting in too many 4-ofs, though, you end up becoming susceptible to dead draws more often (ex. too many farseeks, too many mulches, etc), and you end up becoming predictable.
You can still maintain an equal level of consistency with a more varied deck (as I've begun to describe above) while also keeping away from 4-ofs of some things. I still play 4-ofs on unburial rites, angel of serenity, thragtusk, etc... but there's certain cards (which I already mentioned above) which can be cut down on. This helps keep your deck a little less predictable, and it gives it a more organic flow which brings its overall competitiveness up when thrown into any scenario.
You want to see your thragtusk on turn 3 or 4, and if you're running a version with huntmaster, you want to bring him out on turn 3. So farseek allows you to do this.
I've found that lists running 4 farseeks can work, but they often become a little less consistent. You end up relying more on the top-decks, since you usually don't end up with as much power to rummage through the top of your library.
By running 2 farseeks, you usually only see 1 in a game. This is huge. You don't need to consistently reach a farseek, but if you do, it can be very beneficial. If you hit two farseeks during a game... it's like hitting a dead card, and often a passed turn (due to not having enough remaining available mana)...
So try a list with 1-2 farseeks and see how you like it. Most people like playing 4-ofs when it comes to these sorts of things... in my opinion, it's a card which in frites can be run as a 2-of and still make a lot of sense.
Your only win conditions are swinging through with the 9 creatures you have in the deck. You run 23 land, and you threw in an army of the damned for some reason.
The biggest and first problem is this: the deck does not have a win condition that can be remotely counted on.
No, the deck doesn't need a card that can close really fast. There are different ways to play it entirely. I play without any craterhoofs and do quite well.
She will have a place as more sets are released though.
I was looking at Thundermaw and considering him as a possibility. I could see him as a 2-of card.
Drogskol Reaver really isn't good in my opinion... he's a neat card, but he's only a stall at best -- and stall cards need to be reliable. He's not reliable.