MTG Salvation

You could try fitting them inside a thick heavy book (e.g. Encylopedia). Close the book and then place the said book on a tightly packed bookshelf for a few days. That method worked better for me in flattening foils, instead of just putting something heavy on top of them.

Quote from Hinotama

I was thinking about ways wizards could implement a rule that would allow any deck to fight back against combo decks. Here is what I came up with:

Each player has "return 2 cards in your hand to the bottom of your library: counter target spell".

Quote from Hinotama

Another idea I had was called the 5-turn rule.

basically, neither player can lose the game until that player has had at least five turns.

What do you guys think of that?

I'm curious to know what kind of decks that you use.

@Calintares

Turn one wins have never happen yet in my experience. But I did get a few Turn two wins, approximately 5 or 6 times in 30+ games. Goes like T1= I play a sac land. Opponent takes his / her turn. T2= I combo. Please do note that I've done those wins against non-disruptive opponents (Elves, Burn, Tempered Steel aggro etc.). Getting to combo that early requires an opening hand of least one petal, one land, 2 rituals, 2 card draw, and of course, luck.

Long story short, my hardcore Christian conservative parents think Dungeons and Dragons and Magic: The Gathering is evil (on top of being "ridiculoudly expensive") and desire to see the cards.

I put important words in your post in bold. Overly religious people are a tough nut to crack, and sometimes you won't crack them at all. But times come when you just have to make a stand. Just a suggestion, you can start by showing them the rules of the game - hopefully that lets them know that you're only playing a card game, nothing more. Should at least give them peace of mind that the cards aren't tools for worshipping / doing rituals for / glorifying something unholy.

@Funeral of Gods

You're welcome. I do agree that 3 CMC of Lorescale can be a bit high since you have no mana producer. He can be pitched to Disrupting Shoal though, because he's also a blue card.

Disrupting Shoal used to be mere cents at Starcity Games, I bought mine at approximately .45 cents each a few months ago. Now, they're something like 4 dollars each. The price hike could mean that it's actually being useful to certain decks.


Suggested budget temporary replacements for Tarmogoyf:

Vinelasher Kudzu - same mana cost as goyf and becomes larger as you play each land. Playing a Misty Rainforest and then using it to find another land effectively gives him two +1/+1 counters.

Quirion Dryad - also the same mana cost as goyf. She has the potential to grow large due the amount of blue spells in the deck.

I suggest Lorescale Coatl as a potential replacement for Werebear, the coatl easily grows beyond 4/4 and could grow even quicker if you Brainstorm while it is in play.

It depends on your meta.. but if you often play with people whose cards have similar casting costs to the cards on your deck, then Disrupting Shoal is a possible replacement for Mana Leak. It could also take up the slots that's being used by Gush. Gush should be removed because it is banned in Legacy.

@D3@D

Merry Christmas to you too, and everyone at mtgsalvation Legacy forums.

May dear ol' mr. Santa bring you loads of Legacy staples and/or booster packs this year!

Used the money that I was saving to buy a Gaddock Teeg and Karakas.

Quote from Damnation13

I have come to realize that it seems like almost ALL posters on this forum tend to brag about their $500-$2000 deck. How does one come to grips with spending that amount of money on one deck, let alone able to afford it. Is everyone on this forum rich and can afford to drop thousands on a deck? I know i can't and ive been playing magic since 6th edition and have a huge collection of cards, but thats over like 10 years.

Never bragged that my Zoo deck cost this $$$ amount, not once.
How do I come to grips with spending that amount? Well, in Legacy dual lands are useful and don't drop in price, it's not like Standard where some expensive cards decrease in value.

All these decks people post saying "i run this" and its clearly a monster deck with tons of expensive cards, do they really own these cards? Or do they run proxies and just say its part of their deck so they can look "cool" that they own expensive cards?

I don't proxy. Got the duals from Starcity Games one at a time.
One dual land every end of the month.

Quote from grixis

This deck only exists because of those sac lands, if you try to play it without them, you'll eventually fail to storm 50%+ of the times since you'll not have enough mana to spend on spells. Yes, it has some Wasteland issues but if you play carefully you may get over it although i see this deck's two main problems being hand and land disruption.

Would have to say that in the time I played this deck, Wastelands are indeed a problem. But not that bad if there's no other disruption from the opponent. What I consider a real problem are permanents like Ethersworn Canonist and Null Rod that opponents bring in on Game 2.

As for your question about heavy discard affecting this deck, not much really, on my experience at least. Just try to go off as quickly as possible. Merfolk's counters worry me more.

Also, this is an budget deck, made to be fun to pilot and may win some matches and lose anothers and not the storm deck that just beat faces under most metagames if played correctly. If people here wanted to play that badass deck, they would be on the ANT thread. They're here because they liked the deck or they think this deck may have some potential under certain metas, of course, i plan on building this deck but i would never use it on an high end legacy tournament, for those tournaments i've got The Gate, which is a lot more focused on the currrent meta than this deck, to play with. But for an more undefined and less competitive meta like those from small anime events, i would surely take this deck just because it's cool and fun to pilot.

I hope you understand that not all the Legacy players are always wanting to win, sometimes they just want to play an cool deck that isn't so focused on the current metagame.

Speaking on the budget, it's really cheap to build. Cost only a small fraction of the money that I spent on my other Legacy decks. Probably won't be taking it to a legacy tournament, but it's a nice deck to take out of the box for a fun casual game with friends. It may not be on the same level as the combo decks in Established (TES) and Proven (ANT), but it's still a combo deck and it can surprise (T3 or T4 win) people who play aggro without counterspells.

Quote from TlbWars

Thx for your answers !

Its true that I played dredge for the last 2 years and i find it pretty boring today. Sure its nice to do 34 damages on turn 3 but when you have zero interaction with your oponent ... Its boring! Plus, when they bring hate cards on game 2-3 well ... You know

34 damages on turn 3?... hmm.. that's almost exactly what happen to me when I first encountered a Dredge deck, received 30+ damages on turn 3 from haste zombies. Not kidding. Even today, my Zoo deck has 4 pieces of grave removal in the sideaboard, plus a maindeck Scavenging Ooze (tutorable with GSZ) because Dredge decks are present in my meta. But I do understand your wish to have a different deck, variety is sometimes needed so things don't get boring.

Affinity is rather cheap to build and good to use against an unprepared meta. However, artifact hosers like Null Rod and Energy Flux can ruin your day pretty quickly, so it's better to have a sideboard prepared to deal with things like those.

Quote from zoadian

btw i wouldn't play more than 2 ravangers. you never want to have more than one. SFM is a good replacement

Personally, I go with 3 or 4 Ravagers or none at all. You won't reliably draw him if there's only two. He can enlarge Etched Champion at times when a plating is not available, as well as being a weapon against Dredge on game 1 (Ravager eating artifact creatures exiles their bridges).

SFM is a good card no doubt about that. But people have different preferences (some like her, while others prefer another strategy) which is why there are several versions of Affinity on the first post of this thread.

Quote from Danserious

Matchup analysis:
Basically any aggro (except classic affinity) is a great matchup. Zoo and merfolk don't stand a chance against this deck. Goblins is harder, but still I usually beat them although with goblin lackey and aether vial you really need to keep some blockers back.

On my experience, it's 50/50 vs Zoo without sideboarding. Have played Affinity for sometime in tournament in the past, switched over to Zoo just recently. Realized that it's hard to be on the receiving end of a Champion with Cranial Plating. It's because of the pro-all colors. A Vault Skirge or any evasive Afiinity creature with plating is dangerous, but I can bolt or Path to Exile them, unlike the champ. Without sideaboard, most of my losses against affinity are from early Champ with plating, while my wins are the times when I can Lavamancer away most of the smaller robots and destroy the plating with Pridemage.

5. the version without wish and with more black draw needs extra black mana - I don't understand why did you went for Ebon Stronghold, isn't Peat Bog better?

@The0retico

It's because I didn't know about Peat Bog. Suggestion taken.

It shouldn't be too bad. There are several accounts near the beginning of the thread about this deck just powering through permission. However, you do need lots of practice knowing when to play and what to play. This decks sheer redundancy and power level is what will get you through all those counters. If you're running into lots of wastelands, it might be smarter just to sculpt a hand of lotus petal and company, and then just power out with something like a gemstone mine instead. Mind you, this is theory craft, but looking at the lists, that has to be nearly how it plays.

@weltkrieg

On my experiences vs. Merfolk, the results are not good at all. They have opening hands that I simply cannot win through.
Even if I have 2 silence effects, 2 Duress and 2 Autumn's Veil, it's still hard.

PSI is Pact SI, the ultra-fast version with Summoner's Pact. It wins on turn 1 around 60% of the time on the draw, but is extremely unstable and fizzle-prone. Anyways, on topic: Is there a particular reason for using Sign in Blood over Night's Whisper which is easier to cast and also features a non-crappy art? Ancient Grudge may be worth considering over Recall unless there are Affinity, Stax, and/or Stompy decks in your meta (those are the only decks that play a lot of artifacts and thus get blown out by recall). Pyroblast or Pact of Negation may be useful if you have issues with countermagic (although Pact is expensive unfortunately, it would actually work in this deck due to the lack of Lion's Eye Diamond).

@Admiral Arzar

Don't have any Night's Whisper. Would have used it instead of Sign in Blood if I had some.
Used to have Ancient Grudge in the sideboard. Can get rid of a Canonist protected by a single Mother of Runes. I cast it on their end of turn, then flashback it on my turn = annoying Canonist removed. But I prefer Hurkyll's Recall because it gets rid of all troublesome articats in one go.

Pact of Negation is a card that I used to have 2 in the main deck. But later replaced them with Orim's Chant and Silence, because a silence effect if resolved allow me to continue casting without further harassment from counterspells. Also the same reason why I prefer Autumn's Veil over Pyroblast.. with Geothermal Crevice, Lotus Petals, Manamorphose and the mana fixing cards I don't find it difficult producing a single G.

Oh, and lastly. I have a bit more respect for combo players after experiencing to play this deck. Compared to my other legacy decks (which are mostly aggro or aggro control), I needed more practice before being able to play this deck correctly.