It doesn't stop Spaghetti Monster. If you play it off a Show and Tell, they still get to swing and destroy it. Ensnaring bridge is more relevant even at a hand of 5 cards against most decks.
In builds that utilize fetchlands I would recommend 1-2 Lavamancers. They are very, very good in the elves match and against delver decks.
I am not sold on Shusher unless you have a meta filled with Miracles which I STILL honestly believe is winnable if you craft your plays better and get over the aggro mindset against them.
WoTC said on March 23rd (before the REL Change in July) that:
“It is important for us to maintain a courteous and respectful environment at all Magic events. Participants are expected to demonstrate appropriate conduct towards others, whether they are players, spectators, judges or tournament officials. Disrespectful, harassing or bullying behavior, whether onsite or online, is not welcome at Magic events and violates Magic tournament floor rules.”
Which is interesting. Obviously, without stepping to far outside of bounds, this is an immediate response to “crackgate” where someone posted pictures of exposed buttcracks at GP: Richmond. What I find interesting is that after a few months of reviews WoTC changed the REL to increase punishment for things like this. The big reason is that it shows that WoTC is showing an active interest in the magic community itself and trying to be more inclusive. That is a very positive and awesome step towards Magic: The Gathering’s immediate and not so immediate future. The updated rules clarify bullying as “A player takes action towards one or more individuals that could reasonably be expected to create a feeling of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked. …. It is possible for an offender to commit this infraction without intending malice or harm to the subject of the harassment.”
That means if you flip a finger at a red head and call them a Soulless Ginger who shouldn’t be in the game that you shouldn’t be upset when a Judge gives you a timeout for 50 minutes and to think about your actions.
Now, let’s take that upgrade and remind ourselves that we can’t do stuff like that online (think crackgate here). So, when we have an active member of the Community Cup calling players out for their top 4 performance at GP Boston as cheating (Over, Under that they cheated for all their games), I feel like this is a clear violation of the new standard WoTC is trying to push.
Sure, the guy, in his past cheated. And he isn’t making any friends by trying to turn it into a joke. To accuse that he cheated on ALL his games though sounds very, very close to the definition of harassment and bullying.
I’m probably a minority on this issue but I think it’s something that should be brought attention to because it’s comments like these coming from people we’ve elected into the Community Cup that makes me really question if we are moving on as a community or only finding corner case scenarios to scapegoat people that benefits us when we want. If we are willing to give a ban to someone for crackgate but not speak out about issue like this, then why bother?
Is this an unreasonable assumption from the community? What is everyone's thoughts?
For those of you not aware the policy changes can be found here: http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/2014/07/14/updating-unsporting-conduct-major/
And a picture of what I am talking about: http://imgur.com/rKAoyHZ
I think that after the recent quarterly reports about Hasbro doing well but magic on a slight decline means something rather imaginative and good is coming to the community. I think we might see the Reserved List abolished but I think we have a greater likely hood of them deciding to start functional reprints off the reserved list and Dual Lands being in the next commander set or something similar to VMA is coming.
I'd say that MaRo has ruled this out but he also said they'd never print Lands at Mythic and they did. So who knows. Although they better print BoP if they print Path...
That's kind of the point though Soldier. When you only have 3 downs to work with you have a unique disadvantage compared to the team using all 4 downs. The current system of pass on the first down, run on the second,and pass on 3rd and med/long or run on 3rd and short creates a process that is easy to exploit. Burn does the same thing by taking the standard evaluation of how to win and forcing you into racing when you'd rather be playing defense. We go on "4" with burn. We give up the ability to stabilize for extra offense that we can turn into enough damage for a win quicker than they can stablize off better field position (life total).
Blaze//Blood: There are a few things to consider. (1) delver decks are on the rise as is Death and Taxes and Elves. They have been for some time. Having access to "more" than 4 blood is almost needed right now because if they get to untap that mother of ruins or untap that delver with perice backup is bad. We need to be hitting these kind of spells on curve. (2) Landfall has never been a reliable mechanic even with fetchlands. We want to reliably be doing 2+ damage as the only creature of relevance that doesn't die to Blood in the meta is batterskull. Essentially Blaze is powerful but Blood is more consistent. (3) Surgical extraction is enough of a thing that it poses a positive benefit for us.
Ashen Rider: Technically speaking, 12 post also runs Show and Tell. I'd imagine it would be a very big surprise if they Show and Tell in a Titan and you showed up with Rider. Pretty sneaky, eh? In all reality, the Show and Tell matchup is not only bad enough but requires us to have a good enough answer that isn't ensnaring bridge. I've been using magister of worth because it gets around Emrakul but i'm fancy like that.
But i like pyrostatic pillar vs fair matchups, just not in aggro ones! If there wasnt so many turn 1 combo decks in the format i would for sure, run 6 pyrostatic pillar effects in the deck!!!
And it still has a terrible show and tell matchup, while getting a better one at everything else!
This seems diluted.
First, we shouldn't be running more than 3 DRS and probably are more likely to like 2. We have no swamps meaning that any activation will be tying up mana we should be using to push out bigger spells/overwhelm their mana. We should probably cut 2 of these.
Second, there has been more and more basics showing up in decks right now because of the influx of Burn and Blood Moon on top of Delver decks becoming increasingly more popular as well. Then there is the negative synergy we have when we have to splash colors. We should probably move 1 of those to the SB.
Third, Fireblast is probably the worst spell to have in multiples so we can probably cut 1 of those.
Fourth, you're running 20 lands which is a little high. We want to cut 1 or 2 of those. I'd probably go as low as 18 as we have an abundant access of fetchlands. -2 mountain.
Finally, with the cut of the lands we might want to cut a searing blaze and replace 1 with Searing blood.
So, in summary I would probably go:
-2 DRS
-1 PoP
-1 Fireblast
-2 Mountains
-2 Searing Blaze
We want to maximize our bolts and damage to mana ratio spells. I think it's a little too cute to have 4 Flame Rift/4 Choice but we need some number of them in our 60. We also HAVE to have an answer to DRS (Although we can kinda of do it with ours) as well as jitte/Batterskull which is why VOrtex has to be MD.
As for the SB I really do think that Destructive Revelery is bomb. It's a fantastic answer for our problem issues (including the influx of Leylines and Courser). Abrupt Decay would be better in not our deck. What does it really answer that Revelery doesn't? Thoughtseize just shouldn't be in the deck as it doesn't do anything positive for us (we take Show and Tell and they draw another one for example).
-2 Decay,
-4 Thoughtsize
-2 Vortex (since its Maindecked now)
I am not sold on Shusher unless you have a meta filled with Miracles which I STILL honestly believe is winnable if you craft your plays better and get over the aggro mindset against them.
Thoughts?
//edit// Posting his/her post.
WoTC said on March 23rd (before the REL Change in July) that:
“It is important for us to maintain a courteous and respectful environment at all Magic events. Participants are expected to demonstrate appropriate conduct towards others, whether they are players, spectators, judges or tournament officials. Disrespectful, harassing or bullying behavior, whether onsite or online, is not welcome at Magic events and violates Magic tournament floor rules.”
Which is interesting. Obviously, without stepping to far outside of bounds, this is an immediate response to “crackgate” where someone posted pictures of exposed buttcracks at GP: Richmond. What I find interesting is that after a few months of reviews WoTC changed the REL to increase punishment for things like this. The big reason is that it shows that WoTC is showing an active interest in the magic community itself and trying to be more inclusive. That is a very positive and awesome step towards Magic: The Gathering’s immediate and not so immediate future. The updated rules clarify bullying as “A player takes action towards one or more individuals that could reasonably be expected to create a feeling of being harassed, threatened, bullied, or stalked. …. It is possible for an offender to commit this infraction without intending malice or harm to the subject of the harassment.”
That means if you flip a finger at a red head and call them a Soulless Ginger who shouldn’t be in the game that you shouldn’t be upset when a Judge gives you a timeout for 50 minutes and to think about your actions.
Now, let’s take that upgrade and remind ourselves that we can’t do stuff like that online (think crackgate here). So, when we have an active member of the Community Cup calling players out for their top 4 performance at GP Boston as cheating (Over, Under that they cheated for all their games), I feel like this is a clear violation of the new standard WoTC is trying to push.
Sure, the guy, in his past cheated. And he isn’t making any friends by trying to turn it into a joke. To accuse that he cheated on ALL his games though sounds very, very close to the definition of harassment and bullying.
I’m probably a minority on this issue but I think it’s something that should be brought attention to because it’s comments like these coming from people we’ve elected into the Community Cup that makes me really question if we are moving on as a community or only finding corner case scenarios to scapegoat people that benefits us when we want. If we are willing to give a ban to someone for crackgate but not speak out about issue like this, then why bother?
Is this an unreasonable assumption from the community? What is everyone's thoughts?
For those of you not aware the policy changes can be found here: http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/2014/07/14/updating-unsporting-conduct-major/
And a picture of what I am talking about: http://imgur.com/rKAoyHZ
3 Searing Blaze
4 Scalding Tarn
4 Arid Mesa
4 Goblin Guide
4 Rift Bolt
4 Lava Spike
2 Sulfuric Vortex
12 Mountain
3 Flame Rift
4 Price of Progress
4 Fireblast
4 Chain Lightning
4 Lightning Bolt
1 Searing Blood
2 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Surgical Extraction
1 Searing Blaze
4 Smash to Smithereens
3 Faerie Macabre
1 Sulfuric Vortex
2 Pyrostatic Pillar
I like the additional Pillars in the SB. I think -1 Blaze, -1 Surgical, -1 Smash +3 Ensnaring Bridge?
Thanks for the props!
Two and a half yards.
And for reference here is Part 1: Burning it down in legacy
Super good in a Delver and Death and Taxes heavy meta
Ashen Rider: Technically speaking, 12 post also runs Show and Tell. I'd imagine it would be a very big surprise if they Show and Tell in a Titan and you showed up with Rider. Pretty sneaky, eh? In all reality, the Show and Tell matchup is not only bad enough but requires us to have a good enough answer that isn't ensnaring bridge. I've been using magister of worth because it gets around Emrakul but i'm fancy like that.
This seems diluted.
First, we shouldn't be running more than 3 DRS and probably are more likely to like 2. We have no swamps meaning that any activation will be tying up mana we should be using to push out bigger spells/overwhelm their mana. We should probably cut 2 of these.
Second, there has been more and more basics showing up in decks right now because of the influx of Burn and Blood Moon on top of Delver decks becoming increasingly more popular as well. Then there is the negative synergy we have when we have to splash colors. We should probably move 1 of those to the SB.
Third, Fireblast is probably the worst spell to have in multiples so we can probably cut 1 of those.
Fourth, you're running 20 lands which is a little high. We want to cut 1 or 2 of those. I'd probably go as low as 18 as we have an abundant access of fetchlands. -2 mountain.
Finally, with the cut of the lands we might want to cut a searing blaze and replace 1 with Searing blood.
So, in summary I would probably go:
-2 DRS
-1 PoP
-1 Fireblast
-2 Mountains
-2 Searing Blaze
+3 Lava Spike
+1 Searing Blood
+2 Rift Flame/Tyrants Choice
+2 Sulfuric Vortex
We want to maximize our bolts and damage to mana ratio spells. I think it's a little too cute to have 4 Flame Rift/4 Choice but we need some number of them in our 60. We also HAVE to have an answer to DRS (Although we can kinda of do it with ours) as well as jitte/Batterskull which is why VOrtex has to be MD.
As for the SB I really do think that Destructive Revelery is bomb. It's a fantastic answer for our problem issues (including the influx of Leylines and Courser). Abrupt Decay would be better in not our deck. What does it really answer that Revelery doesn't? Thoughtseize just shouldn't be in the deck as it doesn't do anything positive for us (we take Show and Tell and they draw another one for example).
-2 Decay,
-4 Thoughtsize
-2 Vortex (since its Maindecked now)
+ 1 Reverly
+ 3 Ashen Rider
+ 2 Rakdos Charm.
How is that feedback?