When I was playing mono-green my go to was Hall of Gemstone. Shuts counters down completely, and almost always shuts down any spells on your turn. The only downside is it removes almost everyone's ability to respond to anything, and locks out multi-colored Commanders.
After Fell Shepherd deals damage and his ability goes on the stack, can I sacrifice him in response to the trigger, with say Altar of Dementia, to have him return himself? I know from the rulings that he will return himself if he deals damage with trample and in the process takes lethal, however will it work in the previous example as well. Not sure if valid creatures is somehow determined when the ability goes on the stack.
You don't have to pay a subscription rate on PucaTrade if that's your impression. Other then MTGSalvation, its the only reliable site I have found myself, and great since its indirect trading.
Actually its very relevant, it proves that stores are not selling the cards, and are not lowering their price. If the demand existed to drive the price up to double what it was a year ago, and was maintained, then the cards would still be selling very quickly. However after the fake demand increase, yes I said fake, we know buyouts are fake demand, the price rose and has not dropped. Why should it?
No, it's not relevant, for many reasons:
1. The number of TCG store listings above the market price is small. Your theory requires a much larger supply to be "hoarded" by sellers, and that simply is not the case. The larger supply is hoarded by non-sellers, and often non-buyers as well.
2. Demand does not solely exist at a fixed price point but a range. A smaller percentage of buyers are willing to pay more; pricing your stock to satisfy those buyers makes total sense when supply is limited. (If I have 1000 Mistys I'll sell at $90; if I have $10 I'm better off trying to sell those at $100).
3. There are other value-adds that explain price differentiation - shipping policies, packaging safety, grading reliability, customer loyalty, etc. Magic cards are not *entirely* a commodity, although they are close.
There is another issue here, and its the buylist. Most mom and pop shops buylist at 50% or so, so if a fetch goes up to 100$, then I as a possible seller have to agree to lose 50$, why would I do this? The higher the price of a card, I would argue, the less likely its going to be turned into a store for cash, and more likely it would just be traded away, continuing to leave less stock in the stores, artificial scarcity, 100 of a card on tcgplayer vs the millions printed being used to gauge its price.
This "isn't an issue"; there are other markets at which this is also true. Why you would sell is because that's your preferred way to sell; you don't want to take the time and hassle to sell on eBay or TCG or MKM. But, if you do want to maximize your value, you absolutely can become a seller; no one is barring you from the market. So buylist prices don't explain why you're holding the card instead of selling it. In any case, the scarcity isn't the fault of the major sellers (whom you're blaming); it's the fault of the many smaller card holders not selling. If you think the major sellers are gouging by keeping buylist prices too low, then you are free to create a business with better buylist prices, but keeping the same selling prices, thus cornering the market with a smaller profit margin. Good luck with that.
The way a real market works is that the product is freely available, you don't have that situation here. With MTG cards some people just do not sell at the listed value, do not trade at the listed value, some do not want to sell at all and all the stock is not available to gauge its worth. Its almost foolish to treat it like a real market with basic supply vs demand because the supply is not available and the demand is actually unknown. Making the assumption that I only have 20 fetches because I only listed listed 20 of my 100 fetches in my store is absurd, especially when the ones listed the supply are the ones who need to maintain the value. The only way real supply vs demand works is if the stores had full access to as much product as they wanted, and had a need to sell quickly, like the product could naturally depreciate in value or spoil. Even more importantly, since its not the only product they sell, they sell thousands of different cards, there is no imperative to care if the fetches are sitting longer, selling 1 a week instead of attempting to sell them all out.
This simply isn't true; these sorts of things are true of some other markets as well. I think what you're trying to say is that it's not a *perfect market*, which is true but irrelevant, as no market is perfect. Even a commodity market isn't perfect.
As for your contention that a seller can hold some cards at a higher price point in exchange for a lower velocity of sales, while still hoping to maintain cash flow from other sales, that's true, and something even I as a small seller have done. But that doesn't give me magic pricing power; when my Infernal Tutors and Bitterblossoms didn't sell at the price I was asking, I had to lower my ask. When people started buying Dark Confidants at a price higher than I was asking for a playset, I rose the price of my playset before it could be snapped up at a bargain. But if I actually had 1000 Bitterblossoms I was sitting on you can bet I'd be selling them at a lower price. Heck, I've personally undercut the prices of vendors of slower-moving cards on eBay only to see them respond by undercutting my prices in turn, so it's just not true that they set artificially prices and then sit on them.
1. You don't actually know this, you making an assumption. But not only are you making an assumption, your assumption takes into account the ammount of product listed as available is all the product that is available. They sellers are not hoarding, they just have no imperative to lower prices on a few cards, even if there is barely anyone buying at that price, because they have thousands of other cards to sell. They are simply choosing not reveal all of their stock, or not to drive prices down on their own which they are not required to do, nor need to do. Because this isn't a real market.
2. Your attempting to use supply and demand again, but its not a real market. If a store only sold Mistys they would be likely to adjust the price of Mistys according to the number of Misty's they are selling on average, but they actually have no need to. In fact if all MTG card stores only sold Mistys then you would see price variation and lowering prices because they would be competiting to sell the same product, but they are not because the entire market is not Misty Rainforest, instead they leave the price where it is, hope one sells once in a blue and sell all the other cards instead. This is why its not a real market, there is too many items being sold, there isnt an ultra specific market for each card all following normal supply and demand.
3. Possibly, but this doesn't really count when looking at TCGPlayer, this only works when comparing TCG to StarCity. Sure it can be a factor but we don't know how much because we don't know the true stock of every store or how much they are selling each day, like you would know in a true market.
I am not blaming anyone for "scarcity" I am arguing that we don't actually know if there is scarcity because we do not know true stock, we have no clue if person X purchased 50,000 Misty Rainforests off the market. You look at a website and make an assumption that all the stock listed on the sites is all the stock that exists. My argument is that its foolish to do that. It doesn't have to be a perfect market, red herring, but its not a market if you have no information that you can list as 100% true, and instead are basing the market on everyone elses private or volunteered information. Thats not a market, if you don't know how much the actual supply is, or the actual demand, you have no market based on either.
As for your Bitterblossom argument, anecdotes do not make facts, but even worse I am sure you wouldn't care if you just had 5 Bitterblossoms, then you probably wouldn't get into a price war to sell them, which is an issue.
In a price equilibrium, supply would equal demand. We'd see cards leaving TCGplayer as fast as they're listed. The truth is that many of the cards on there have been there for a long time until the price is jacked up again.
Perhaps, but irrelevant to anything I said.
Actually its very relevant, it proves that stores are not selling the cards, and are not lowering their price. If the demand existed to drive the price up to double what it was a year ago, and was maintained, then the cards would still be selling very quickly. However after the fake demand increase, yes I said fake, we know buyouts are fake demand, the price rose and has not dropped. Why should it? There is another issue here, and its the buylist. Most mom and pop shops buylist at 50% or so, so if a fetch goes up to 100$, then I as a possible seller have to agree to lose 50$, why would I do this? The higher the price of a card, I would argue, the less likely its going to be turned into a store for cash, and more likely it would just be traded away, continuing to leave less stock in the stores, artificial scarcity, 100 of a card on tcgplayer vs the millions printed being used to gauge its price.
The way a real market works is that the product is freely available, you don't have that situation here. With MTG cards some people just do not sell at the listed value, do not trade at the listed value, some do not want to sell at all and all the stock is not available to gauge its worth. Its almost foolish to treat it like a real market with basic supply vs demand because the supply is not available and the demand is actually unknown. Making the assumption that I only have 20 fetches because I only listed listed 20 of my 100 fetches in my store is absurd, especially when the ones listed the supply are the ones who need to maintain the value. The only way real supply vs demand works is if the stores had full access to as much product as they wanted, and had a need to sell quickly, like the product could naturally depreciate in value or spoil. Even more importantly, since its not the only product they sell, they sell thousands of different cards, there is no imperative to care if the fetches are sitting longer, selling 1 a week instead of attempting to sell them all out.
This isn't a real market. Stop treating it like it is.
After reading up on Stax decks and how they work, I think I have been playing draw triggers all wrong. I had a Nekusar, the Mindrazer deck with multiple draw triggers, for instance Teferi's Puzzle Box and Anvil of Bogardan. Do I get to stack these in the order I want on my opponents turn? I was always under the impression that your opponent stacks triggers from your cards how they want on their draw and or upkeep steps.
I think the issue is just that he is the best Bant general for a blink deck, and happens to blink himself. You can run Rubinia, most Roon decks were probably Rubinia decks first, but unless Wizards goes back to creating those types of blinks, you will often be holding the wrong blink to continue stealing with Rubinia. Roon does just become another blink source, but sometimes all you need is another threat of a blink to hold off an attack or someone even trying to effect your board.
Are there any renders of the following? Or are the renders compiled in any one place where I can check. It's hard to page through all 200 pages to find out!
Its a nice place, I purchased a few board games from there, but the MTG stock was just whatever was out at the moment, minus whatever was hot. The people who run the place were top notch, knew the board games I was look for (Munchkins) and were very polite.
The story doesn't make any sense on the delay between printing and shipping. We already know it was shut down, if it wasn't shut down completely, chatting on the internet / phone about how your still doing it doesn't make sense either. Also neither of those countries seem like they would be the first buyers of massive shipments of cards either.
I think an angry printer is playing someone and everyone else is more the fool for it.
If you were printing illegal goods would you announce your shipment days and destinations? Be real folks.
I would go with a storm deck, that way you don't have to go infinite and can still wipe everyone out. I have to say Storm decks get boring real fast normally. Especially if you know how to stack it and will often just be staffing into a win.
Seriously people are adding a few infect cards to a regular deck?
If you want to go the infect route with quick kills then go all the way and make it the focus of the deck. Add infect creatures and proliferate artifacts to finish the job Nekusar starts.
I think it would be fun and work well.
Going the "tossed in" infect route; what do you do once you hit people with a draw and hopefully a wheel before he dies? Try to use the few cards in your library to get a another couple poison counters on their draw step? You just waited 9 damage on nothing.
I wish I could play in your metas where a Nekusar with infect will live more than a few turns.
The earlier posts highlight that that is exactly what they are not hoping for. A wheel with a way to copy it + infect is a table kill. Attempting to ping poison turn after turn is not the plan, its to turn 14 damage (2 wheels) into a kill in 1 turn.
I don't run my deck as control, but I do run it with tons of life gain creatures and boosts. I have necro's for a bunch knowing I would get most of the life back just by playing a few 1-2 drop creatures and making some tokens.
Oloro is a fun deck, sure you can make it a boring combo deck, but it really all depends on the pilot. The mechanic is fun, and refreshing.
This. The only infect card worth running is tainted strike plus a wheel or two(get to 10). Maybe the enchantment as well, but the equipment is too telegraphed and will get your stuff nuked or knocked out of the game.
To some of the posters here: I want to play in these metas where your friends let you keep your general around for more than a turn or two. Must be nice, not having to worry about board wipes, targeted removal, tucks, etc.
The whole idea would be Wheel + copy + Tainted Strike. I wouldn't play Tainted Strike hoping the 2 damage a turn would add up. This is the same risk however if you were planning to drop 14 damage in a turn, or play Yawgmoth's Will with a wheel in the GY or mana ramp, why would your opponent allow it? If they have removal they shut it down, if they don't, you win.
I actually just removed the two I did have though, had to make room for some new toys and people in my meta people wouldn't take too kindly to infect wins.
1. You don't actually know this, you making an assumption. But not only are you making an assumption, your assumption takes into account the ammount of product listed as available is all the product that is available. They sellers are not hoarding, they just have no imperative to lower prices on a few cards, even if there is barely anyone buying at that price, because they have thousands of other cards to sell. They are simply choosing not reveal all of their stock, or not to drive prices down on their own which they are not required to do, nor need to do. Because this isn't a real market.
2. Your attempting to use supply and demand again, but its not a real market. If a store only sold Mistys they would be likely to adjust the price of Mistys according to the number of Misty's they are selling on average, but they actually have no need to. In fact if all MTG card stores only sold Mistys then you would see price variation and lowering prices because they would be competiting to sell the same product, but they are not because the entire market is not Misty Rainforest, instead they leave the price where it is, hope one sells once in a blue and sell all the other cards instead. This is why its not a real market, there is too many items being sold, there isnt an ultra specific market for each card all following normal supply and demand.
3. Possibly, but this doesn't really count when looking at TCGPlayer, this only works when comparing TCG to StarCity. Sure it can be a factor but we don't know how much because we don't know the true stock of every store or how much they are selling each day, like you would know in a true market.
I am not blaming anyone for "scarcity" I am arguing that we don't actually know if there is scarcity because we do not know true stock, we have no clue if person X purchased 50,000 Misty Rainforests off the market. You look at a website and make an assumption that all the stock listed on the sites is all the stock that exists. My argument is that its foolish to do that. It doesn't have to be a perfect market, red herring, but its not a market if you have no information that you can list as 100% true, and instead are basing the market on everyone elses private or volunteered information. Thats not a market, if you don't know how much the actual supply is, or the actual demand, you have no market based on either.
As for your Bitterblossom argument, anecdotes do not make facts, but even worse I am sure you wouldn't care if you just had 5 Bitterblossoms, then you probably wouldn't get into a price war to sell them, which is an issue.
Actually its very relevant, it proves that stores are not selling the cards, and are not lowering their price. If the demand existed to drive the price up to double what it was a year ago, and was maintained, then the cards would still be selling very quickly. However after the fake demand increase, yes I said fake, we know buyouts are fake demand, the price rose and has not dropped. Why should it? There is another issue here, and its the buylist. Most mom and pop shops buylist at 50% or so, so if a fetch goes up to 100$, then I as a possible seller have to agree to lose 50$, why would I do this? The higher the price of a card, I would argue, the less likely its going to be turned into a store for cash, and more likely it would just be traded away, continuing to leave less stock in the stores, artificial scarcity, 100 of a card on tcgplayer vs the millions printed being used to gauge its price.
The way a real market works is that the product is freely available, you don't have that situation here. With MTG cards some people just do not sell at the listed value, do not trade at the listed value, some do not want to sell at all and all the stock is not available to gauge its worth. Its almost foolish to treat it like a real market with basic supply vs demand because the supply is not available and the demand is actually unknown. Making the assumption that I only have 20 fetches because I only listed listed 20 of my 100 fetches in my store is absurd, especially when the ones listed the supply are the ones who need to maintain the value. The only way real supply vs demand works is if the stores had full access to as much product as they wanted, and had a need to sell quickly, like the product could naturally depreciate in value or spoil. Even more importantly, since its not the only product they sell, they sell thousands of different cards, there is no imperative to care if the fetches are sitting longer, selling 1 a week instead of attempting to sell them all out.
This isn't a real market. Stop treating it like it is.
There is a "Search This Thread" feature.
I wonder if much EDH is going on down there.
I think an angry printer is playing someone and everyone else is more the fool for it.
If you were printing illegal goods would you announce your shipment days and destinations? Be real folks.
The earlier posts highlight that that is exactly what they are not hoping for. A wheel with a way to copy it + infect is a table kill. Attempting to ping poison turn after turn is not the plan, its to turn 14 damage (2 wheels) into a kill in 1 turn.
Oloro is a fun deck, sure you can make it a boring combo deck, but it really all depends on the pilot. The mechanic is fun, and refreshing.
The whole idea would be Wheel + copy + Tainted Strike. I wouldn't play Tainted Strike hoping the 2 damage a turn would add up. This is the same risk however if you were planning to drop 14 damage in a turn, or play Yawgmoth's Will with a wheel in the GY or mana ramp, why would your opponent allow it? If they have removal they shut it down, if they don't, you win.
I actually just removed the two I did have though, had to make room for some new toys and people in my meta people wouldn't take too kindly to infect wins.