surrak and goliath are both cards i can pick up pretty easily! I will fix the rites to - there are a few guild cards I would like to add to balance the colors I just need to pick them up. I will check that thread right away, thanks for the help!
Thanks for the response! - We are both highschoolers, and only I have a job, so we can spend up to 10$ on a card max i would say. the cube We made is made from cards we had in binders or lying around, so it is by no means done. Thanks for the card ideas. white was the hardest for us to find noncreature spells that were good for. It might just be a lack of good ones that we owned, but it lead to some bad cards being put in, like zealous strike, and tandem tactics.
Hello all, A friend and I recently created a cube, and are in the process of trying to balance it. Through some testing and analysis, I feel that white and red are a little worse than the other three colors. They lack depth that the other colors have. through test drafting i have found with red and on a slightly lesser scale white that there are only a one or two decks you can successfully draft with either of those colors as a base. The main thing is that both colors consist of a lot of aggressive creatures. that is not necessarily a bad thing, but there are to many aggressive creatures, and it is hard to draft a deck with either of those colors as a base that is not aggro. Does anyone have any suggestions as to some budget cards we could add to give these colors some depth? and if you wanted to look at the other sections and give me some tips and suggestions as to what to cut and what to add, that would be greatly appreciated! Please keep in mind we are on a budget, and that this is our first cube! thanks so much, Emery
I wish it had a counterspell or draw mode - but I guess they want each charms effects to be unique and different, and both of those have been done in this cycle of charms before. I think they might be keeping the best for last..... abzan charm pleas be goood!!
The thing is, yes, If each effect was a different card for the same CMC then those cards would be bad. but since they are all on one card makes the card super flexible. Its not the individual parts of the card that define it - It is the sum of those parts. or something like that.
I understand peoples concern about this guy vs stormbreath , but to be realistic, how many decks will you play against that run stormbreath? maybe a quarter of your matchups ( if your only playing against T1 strategies) yes, thats a lot, but that also means 3/4 of the time you wont be playing against a stormbreath deck, and the card will be fine
I find that when an opponent flips through their hand really fast, riffles their deck randomly, and taps their fingers fast just annoys me. I have no idea why, it just does. Also when opponents take a while to get to the match - I have lost tournaments because my opponents were late for the match, so it annoys me when people are more than five minutes late after the timer starts.
I personally dislike Early combo decks. There is an animar deck in my VERY casual meta that consistently combos turn 4-5. I do like combos in EDH, and think they are perfectly fair and there are plenty of ways to beat them. That being said, the only combo deck I play is azami, which usually combos around turn 25-35, which is pretty fair I think, It is a relatively long and enjoyable game at that point. If you do run combos though, Don't play them in casual metas...
I'm not sure that the name of this thread is correct, but I dont know what the program is called, so it's the best I could come up with. Anyways, My LGS recently got sanctioned ( about 6 months ago) , and they received a computer program to figure out who plays who, and the overall rankings in events. I feel the program might have some issues. First off, several times at FNM I have clearly had a better record than someone, ( example: I went 4-0, they went 2-2) and they receive a higher score than me and therefore get more prize support. On other occasions, I beat a person 2-0, Then at the end of the night they rank higher than me. I have talked with the TO about these issues many times, and apparently it has something to do with win percentages ( I.E If i beat someone 2-0, then for they win the rest of the rounds against opponents who won their previous rounds, they get a better score. This somehow still feels a little weird to me, and if anyone who knows the program better than me can explain exactly how it works, and figures out the rankings, that'd be great.
I have recently been building a Vhati Il-Dal EDH deck, and have been using poison as a win condition. Some of my friends have been getting angry that I am one shotting them with Inkmoth nexus, and feel the Poison limit should be 15 rather than the standard 10. what are your thoughts on what it should be In EDH?
well, i played my Chainer Dementia master Re animator shell. I won the first round with an awesome rise of the dark realms getting a bunch of angels from a avacyn deck, and a keiga the tide star and a few other good creatures from from a black rose dethrone deck - the mayel player got mana screwed and only had white mana. the second round i was playing against an old esper dude whose P/T was the number of lands he controlled, ( forgot his name) mayel, and cromat. i had put a artisan of kozilek in the yard and passed the turn, when the cromat player beacon of unrest'd it. since i had some obvious removal up, i was not attacked by it, but since it got out so early, it made the mayel player sac all of their permanents. eventually i got it back, but the cromat player played pandemonium and everyone was hitting me for five or six a turn when their creatures entered. eventually, i had a sweet board position and had played whip of erebos so i got back to 35 life, when the cromat player ( who had a merari's wake out) one shotted me for 21 commander damage in the air.
except its not just casual - We are playing for prizes. people should be allowed to play decks they like to play that also can win. not either or. I personally am a very johnny player. I hate winning through attacking. its very boring. If you like creature based decks, and you have one that wins, then great! but I like to play combo's, and alternate win conditions. I personally hate turning creatures sideways every turn in EDH. the format has so much more potential than that.
no, I don't just want to win. I just have a problem with my LGS telling us that we cant use alternate win cons or infinite combo's to win in a competitive environment, in a format where combos and alternate win cons are just as common to see in decks as damage based win conditions are. I also just spent the past year trading for the cards i needed for this deck, and this past week spent over $80 on cards to finish a playable version of it. ( being a high school student that is a sizable amount of money) Then after winning a EDH game at the shop and a few players complained to the TO about me winning( they had killed a piece of my infinite mana combo, so someone else played the exact same card and i stole it with beguiler of wills, used it to generate infinite mana, then used the infinite mana to draw out my deck and win with lab maniac) and were butt hurt that i won "unfairly" because it wasn't a damage based win. so they banned alternate win cons and infinite combos. I had been hoping to have a deck that could do pretty well, and i could maybe win a few packs, only to have the core elements of the deck immediately banned after i won one game with a Test version of it.
[url=
http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/9496][/url]