What if you copy her with Clone, I know for cards that have cast triggers it doesn't work because at the time of casting its not that card. But would it work in this case since at the time of ETB it is a Jeleva?
Here's me, once again needing to quote you in order to remind you that you said something you're now claming you didn't. This is you on page #2:
You're saying that people who try to win shouldn't feel rewarded because they have no skill. Apparently to you, "skill" is something else other than trying to win. The good old "takes no skill to play good cards" canard. The "everyone should play exactly like me" argument. The "I'm the only one who understands what fun is" line.
Honestly, I could not even read these threads and still know what to say, those lines are so tired.
This is why I don't play online, people are only interested in winning because there is no actual conversation and enjoyment to be had, so you play to win, then stumble into the next group and repeat.
I don't mind a well tuned deck, or even a deck with some game winning combo's. However if your goal is to win on turn 4 so you can go play another game, then you may as well skip the game I am in. I rather go play magic, have some fun talking to friends / acquaintances, etc.
Also the really sad thing is that people net deck these awesome quick wins and its like ... well anyone can play that deck and win the same way. You didn't even have to make a decision, its not really skillful to have just played the first 3 cards off the top of the deck, so not only is not creative, or interesting to the others players, its not really skillful either.
Don't you ever see any interesting general and want to see the person's deck play out? I would keep someone alive for a few turns if they sat down with a non storm Melek deck, or Talrand, or most of the older generals.
Also this thread was clearly created as a lazy ego stroke, but I don't mind jacking it for a better topic.
Womp womp, quoting failure. You should have at least cut out the "Also" if you didn't want it to be obvious that the comment was an aside to the main point, which was about social, which you seem to have not understood and so you grasped at the one thing you can argue, which had no basis. Keep arguing the deck required skill when even the person piloting it said other wise. Its easier then addressing the social issue. This is reminding me of when Leonard tries to teach Sheldon something about social interaction and he just grasps on to something related, but not the main point.
Even worse I repeatedly said, even if we say it took immense skill, that mono-green was the most skill intensive deck, it would not change the fact that other people did not find it fun, nor him fun, so they kicked him.
Number of paragraphs is irrelevant. If you can't express something simply you shouldn't try at all (within reason because this is the internet and people are going to come up with stupid and inane examples of why this statement is true 100% of the time).
When people write 10 paragraphs I tend to ignore them unless I know that it's worth reading. I'm sure others care far less than that.
Don't waste your time. Make your point.
Even after being off topic page after page, you still need the last word. Even after the side you were defending folded under you, even though it was never the topic, when the person you were defending disagreed with you. Perhaps "social" is beyond your understanding, perhaps defending the "skill" required to play the deck is just something easier for you to argue, even though it has no basis on the actual OP. You are even now looking to engage on a whole new topic about the size of posts and its relative value?!?! Its almost comical if it wasn't sad.
Luckily Roon has some loops like Karmic Guide / Reveillark + Acidic Slime or some other nice 2/2. You can also run Sylvan Primordial + Deadeye Navigator to end a game typically.
As for how to find your win conditions. Most decks I build with a theme, Rubinia was my blink deck before Roon came out. I looked at what was in there and asked if any of those cards could form a win condition / combo with perhaps another card or two. Then test it out, sometimes a single card added to help get to a win condition can help enable other avenues of attack.
Hey, maybe the reason why people write 10 paragraphs is so that they're understood on the content of what they say. This, I don't understand it at all because you're not saying anything.
So 10 paragraphs, every word well spent. 2 paragraphs, utter waste of time.
What a shock, you wrote so much and have no clue what the topic was ever about. News flash, it was never about skill.
Justice1337, the guy piloting the deck said it takes no skill to do. You got all caught up defending a troll and instead of realizing that you wrote a book I am not even going to read. This was never a debate about skill, its about being social. He was kicked not because a lack or abundance of skill, but because he couldn't grasp a social concept. You can write 10 paragraphs about off topic stuff and it won't change those facts.
And hopefully you don't take this wrong, but your attempts to dodge around that issue, or your inability to grasp it, probably speak volumes on why you think its a defensible position at all, even after the person you are defending proves you wrong.
Yeah, hyperbole is an argumentative technique, sorry to break it to you. If you want me to diagram my logic, I'm afraid it's going to be very boring for the rest of the audience. But here's the meat of it. If you automatically take being "teamed on first" while playing Arcum as some sort of evidence that other players don't want to play with you, then really, you've invented very nebulous rules about when it's "ok" to compete against someone and what the social significance of attacking or using answers are. Others play the game whose rules and objectives are laid out plainly, and attacking the other players to 0 life while killing enough of their stuff to survive is the game's objective. I find it impossible to justify social loathing of someone on the basis of them doing that.
And yeah, I'm saying that it takes skill to net deck a ramp deck. How are you going to do this with absolutely no skill in Magic? How is it that you'll distinguish a tribal Wurms deck from an effective example of a Mono-G ramp deck? Skill, that's how. It may not take as much skill as actually authoring a deck, tweaking it, providing matchup analysis, anticipating its weaknesses, and so forth, but it does take skill. It really is that simple. Skill isn't tying your hands behind your back to prove to people you can still beat them. Skill in Magic is very simple. If you don't like that it's that simple, then hey, maybe you need to start strategizing into different levels of the game.
Because what's absolutely no indication of skill is the ability to feel out other players expectations of what they might "fun", then sabotage yourself accordingly, if necessary. Whether you have skill is inconclusive because you're not competing on the basis of that skill. You're catering to other people as priority #1, allowing yourself to play under the rules of the game only if it doesn't interfere with anyone's private rules. It's actually the antithesis of skill. It's textbook scrub mentality to invent fictitious sets of rules that prevent you from strategizing into unexplored territory of the game.
I can't even take this seriously, because once again your being hyperbolic and just silly. If you really thought I meant you don't need to know how to play Magic, to be the same as, net decks take no skill, then you are either trolling or just being silly. This is a forum for magic players, I thought I was talking to magic players. When I work in IT and make a statement that resetting an AD password takes no skill, I don't mean it to be that a 2 year old child with no concept of computers can do it. But I would think this would all be self-evident, apparently not when you are grasping at straws to make an argument.
If you automatically take being "teamed on first" while playing Arcum as some sort of evidence that other players don't want to play with you, then really, you've invented very nebulous rules about when it's "ok" to compete against someone and what the social significance of attacking or using answers are.
More absurd hyperbole. I never said that either. Its not even related to the topic largely, it seems you missed the idea of social interaction, which is not a surprise I guess.
Because what's absolutely no indication of skill is the ability to feel out other players expectations of what they might "fun", then sabotage yourself accordingly, if necessary.
I get invited to play softball with some friends at work, largely friendly game, all the Yankee fans vs the Mets fans. I say hey, winning team gets lunch paid for them where ever they want. I then show up with the current Mets roster and smash the guys at my job and then force them to take us to Peter Luger for lunch. Within the rules, sure. Fun for everyone ... no. There is winning and there is winning in a way no one else enjoyed the game. I think that is what people here are not grasping. Should you tank every game? No, but there is a reason you all aren't playing 5 color hermit druid, because winning isn't the whole pie. Because as much hyperbolic arguments as you throw out, you realize there is something more to a game, and that after a couple of games with that deck, no one will want to play with you anymore, because its not fun.
If all you are is concerned with your own fun ever, you will probably be very lonely, unless you play with other similarly minded people. However for some, apparently Player 1, he really wants to have fun, its why he plays Magic, and when your not fun to play with, you get kicked. Be fun to play with, or don't complain when people find you unfun and kick you.
And just to add, your combo decks are far from unexplored Magic territory.
You seem to be resting a lot on the assumption that Turn 4 wins are what people don't like. Sure, Turn 4 shows up in the OP's example, but the larger issue shows that it's definitely not winning on Turn 4, it's really just winning of any kind. Because the deck that the OP's playing will rarely, rarely resolve a board state before turn 5 that can't be dealt with by a sweeper or some removal. They still rage on it when it does win. Likewise, someone plays Mind Over Matter in Azami, and it doesn't really matter if they go off on Turn 4 or on Turn 12 after countering 3 other people's game-breakers. That player is going to get raged on and booted.
What's incomprehensible is that there's an equal amount of rage for stuff that basically has to happen on Turn 4-5 for it to have any chance of getting there. Just like in the OP's example. If a combination of 3 powerful ramp cards show up in an opener unanswered, that's what happens.
That's not to mention that you can't ever just conclude out of thin air that Turn 4 wins are de facto unfun. No matter how many reams of justification is written on it, you're making an assumption that other people might not share. I, for one, would never expect someone to sandbag a nut draw, and would probably get irritated at them doing so if I found out, whether I decide to say anything or not. You've got a Vintage-minus format, and so some number of nut draws are expected. I'm not entitled to not have to play against them, and just the opposite, I could make an argument that adults all sitting down to compete at a game implies that they have a duty to give their best effort without any ulterior motive. If people can't handle that one game can be decided before Turn 5, then they really need to step up, acknowledge the element of randomness in this game, and play a different one if they can't deal with it.
If you're playing that Arcum deck or a Sek'Kuar combo deck and the whole table is attacking you, how about this, maybe they're not seething to the core at what you're playing. Maybe they're attacking you because they know what your deck's strategy is, and attacking you to death is the most effective way they have left of interacting with it. Why do you have to take it personally that someone would attack you? Where is it written that attacking is impolite? Somehow we all sat down at a game whose objective we all understood, but the minute someone takes overt action to achieve those objectives, it's out of mean-spiritedness and an over-competitive mentality. Next, people be expected to use removal on their own creatures to keep the "fun" game state going. Honestly.
And that cloud of insanity isn't nearly as nebulous as that amounts to "skill" in the minds of these players. Does it take skill to draw Rofellos, Joraga and Clex? No, those events happen randomly. But how is it not skillful to include Rofl and Joraga into a ramp deck over Spoils of Victory? Honestly, is it really skillful to sandbag your deck with awful cards and scratch out a win? It's the exact opposite of skillful, it's bad deck building. Making things arbitrarily harder for you to win doesn't showcase skill, it shows that you've put something in your mind to screw with yourself. If you're going to show skill, do it by winning so that I can maybe shuffle up a different deck, learn something, or just move on. Don't try to spin it as "skill" by putting on kid-gloves and experimenting with how badly you can sabotage yourself and still be able to play.
I appreciate the time it took you to write such a long response, but I addressed numerous of these points already. I already stated he could always play with people that are fine with early wins, so I admit there are people who enjoy this.
I make the opposite assumption you make, since I am not personal friends with Player 1, neither of us know what he is really thinking, you would think this would be self-evident, but in case it wasn't previously known, I do not know the anonymous Player 1, and so I am obviously? not speaking from a place of factual knowledge, as I assume you are not friends with him and speaking of factual knowledge when you say he doesn't mine turn 4 wins ... better?
That's not to mention that you can't ever just conclude out of thin air that Turn 4 wins are de facto unfun.
I never actually said this, and imply others may enjoy it.
If a combination of 3 powerful ramp cards show up in an opener unanswered, that's what happens.
Already said this, and said what I would do, but thats just me, but I am not the one getting kicked out of games either ...
Why do you have to take it personally that someone would attack you?
I didn't, but it seems you missed the point if that is what you took away from it. In fact I play with largely the same group of people till today, it was completely impersonal, which is also how these people are treating him, as a stranger who they simply did not have fun with, and such, removed him from their games.
Where is it written that attacking is impolite?
I am only going to address the first part of your hyperbolic rant the rest of this paragraph started as, by simply noting hyperbole is not a form of argument.
Don't try to spin it as "skill" by putting on kid-gloves and experimenting with how badly you can sabotage yourself and still be able to play.
Who said this either? There is no skill in net decking a ramp deck. Are you really arguing there is skill in net decking a ramp deck? You can be the best magic player in the world, but that game clearly did not take skill to do. Also its not about sabotaging yourself, its about playing a game everyone would enjoy, which clearly they did not, and who knows how many other groups that have kicked him out of enough games to illicit him to post on Salvation.
But clearly its everyone else's issue, everyone else is wrong for finding him unfun to the point they kick him out of their games.
My guess? They were playing decks that revolved around some zany combo or interaction that takes half a year to assemble and rage quit when the OP wasn't obliging enough to sit back and let it happen.
...except the deck didn't *win* on turn 4, it cast Genesis Wave. Any board wipe by the other players would have likely had catastrophic results for the OP. Sometimes casual players with casually strong cards get great draws. In a mostly durdly blue deck I once drew Sol Ring, Grim Monolith, Ulamog, Tezzeret the Seeker, and 2 Islands on my opening hand, and topdecked Mana Vault on my second. That's a turn 2 hard cast Ulamog. The deck wasn't really very good, but I had a nuts draw. It happens.
But what is your point? I agree it happens, and when it happens with people who do not know your deck, who only seen 5 cards from your deck, how do you think they will respond the next game? Its all about perception. If you want to win turn 3 then fine, but what do you really get out of that? Just annoy some fellow players? You get the win and the prize? Sense of self?
I think if you just play Magic to win, if you are one of those people who only play online or don't talk to the people you are playing with, or get to know anyone your playing with, you probably have a different magic outlook. OR! if you play with other people who are trying to turn 4 win, then you are in good company and everyone else throws their combo's on the table talking about how they were going to win next turn.
I have to ask - how is that a bad analogy? The pitcher's trying to get 3 strikes (drop people's life to 0). The batter takes no actions to prevent him from doing that (playing any kind of removal spells whatsoever). Maybe it's just me, but that seems pretty dead on.
But to the point - the OP did not play an overpowered deck (that we saw). He drew a couple of extremely strong cards (when they aren't answered), and nobody else in the game was packing any way to deal with them. As has been stated before, killing off Vorinclex or Roflstomp with something as simple as a Doom Blade would have changed that game drastically.
First, its a bad analogy because a pitcher can strike someone out without them swinging because they thought every pitch was a ball, but it was instead just in the box.
You "but to the point," but the point is not the skill level of the deck. Its the enjoyment the other people get out of playing with you. If they get none, and do not think they will get any, they are less likely to play with you. Now you can attribute that to your super skillful deck besting everyone, your broken deck making everyone cry, etc. The end result is still getting kicked out of enough games to find yourself posting here about. Self-Evaluation may help you come to an understanding that will find you getting kicked out of less games, or you can keep notching up your awesome win count and making posts on mtgsalvation highlighting your super awesome turn 4 win and wondering why you got kicked out another game.
There is always an answer. There are few things in this game that could not be answered in fact, so the issue is not that it couldn't be stopped. Just those guys, however wrong you think they are, clearly did not want to play against a turn 4 win deck. If you think that means you should play 2/2 bears now on, ok ... that's one way of looking at it, but its a little hyperbolic.
Cap75 is right - we have no idea if his deck required skill to pilot, because his opponents chose not to do anything to require him to do anything particularly skillful. It's like trying to decide how good a pitcher is against a batter that never swings.
Thats a bad analogy. But the skill level of the deck was never an issue, which is why I even conceded that it might be the most skillful deck ever.
I'd say you actually didn't address my point. You have no idea how much skill would be needed to pilot his deck because the two people playing against him let him do exactly what he wanted. If they would have actually responded to his plays it would have been a whole different story.
I'm not sure what people expect. Games called no inf/no MLD/no combo/no ramp/no counters/no removal/no scary creatures/just let me win?
This is more hyperbole. If you think the alternate to the OP's situation is no one playing any cards, then its no reason you can't see why he gets kicked out of enough games to be posting on here.
Just more hyperbole. If you see these as the only 2 options, we can see where the problem lies.
So now EDH is a format where your deck must take skill to play every single game; yet is incapable of preforming well when given ideal draws/scenarios/lack of interaction? Sounds like bears.format to me.
This is why I don't play online, people are only interested in winning because there is no actual conversation and enjoyment to be had, so you play to win, then stumble into the next group and repeat.
I don't mind a well tuned deck, or even a deck with some game winning combo's. However if your goal is to win on turn 4 so you can go play another game, then you may as well skip the game I am in. I rather go play magic, have some fun talking to friends / acquaintances, etc.
Also the really sad thing is that people net deck these awesome quick wins and its like ... well anyone can play that deck and win the same way. You didn't even have to make a decision, its not really skillful to have just played the first 3 cards off the top of the deck, so not only is not creative, or interesting to the others players, its not really skillful either.
Don't you ever see any interesting general and want to see the person's deck play out? I would keep someone alive for a few turns if they sat down with a non storm Melek deck, or Talrand, or most of the older generals.
Also this thread was clearly created as a lazy ego stroke, but I don't mind jacking it for a better topic.
Womp womp, quoting failure. You should have at least cut out the "Also" if you didn't want it to be obvious that the comment was an aside to the main point, which was about social, which you seem to have not understood and so you grasped at the one thing you can argue, which had no basis. Keep arguing the deck required skill when even the person piloting it said other wise. Its easier then addressing the social issue. This is reminding me of when Leonard tries to teach Sheldon something about social interaction and he just grasps on to something related, but not the main point.
Even worse I repeatedly said, even if we say it took immense skill, that mono-green was the most skill intensive deck, it would not change the fact that other people did not find it fun, nor him fun, so they kicked him.
Even after being off topic page after page, you still need the last word. Even after the side you were defending folded under you, even though it was never the topic, when the person you were defending disagreed with you. Perhaps "social" is beyond your understanding, perhaps defending the "skill" required to play the deck is just something easier for you to argue, even though it has no basis on the actual OP. You are even now looking to engage on a whole new topic about the size of posts and its relative value?!?! Its almost comical if it wasn't sad.
As for how to find your win conditions. Most decks I build with a theme, Rubinia was my blink deck before Roon came out. I looked at what was in there and asked if any of those cards could form a win condition / combo with perhaps another card or two. Then test it out, sometimes a single card added to help get to a win condition can help enable other avenues of attack.
What a shock, you wrote so much and have no clue what the topic was ever about. News flash, it was never about skill.
And hopefully you don't take this wrong, but your attempts to dodge around that issue, or your inability to grasp it, probably speak volumes on why you think its a defensible position at all, even after the person you are defending proves you wrong.
I can't even take this seriously, because once again your being hyperbolic and just silly. If you really thought I meant you don't need to know how to play Magic, to be the same as, net decks take no skill, then you are either trolling or just being silly. This is a forum for magic players, I thought I was talking to magic players. When I work in IT and make a statement that resetting an AD password takes no skill, I don't mean it to be that a 2 year old child with no concept of computers can do it. But I would think this would all be self-evident, apparently not when you are grasping at straws to make an argument.
More absurd hyperbole. I never said that either. Its not even related to the topic largely, it seems you missed the idea of social interaction, which is not a surprise I guess.
I get invited to play softball with some friends at work, largely friendly game, all the Yankee fans vs the Mets fans. I say hey, winning team gets lunch paid for them where ever they want. I then show up with the current Mets roster and smash the guys at my job and then force them to take us to Peter Luger for lunch. Within the rules, sure. Fun for everyone ... no. There is winning and there is winning in a way no one else enjoyed the game. I think that is what people here are not grasping. Should you tank every game? No, but there is a reason you all aren't playing 5 color hermit druid, because winning isn't the whole pie. Because as much hyperbolic arguments as you throw out, you realize there is something more to a game, and that after a couple of games with that deck, no one will want to play with you anymore, because its not fun.
If all you are is concerned with your own fun ever, you will probably be very lonely, unless you play with other similarly minded people. However for some, apparently Player 1, he really wants to have fun, its why he plays Magic, and when your not fun to play with, you get kicked. Be fun to play with, or don't complain when people find you unfun and kick you.
And just to add, your combo decks are far from unexplored Magic territory.
I appreciate the time it took you to write such a long response, but I addressed numerous of these points already. I already stated he could always play with people that are fine with early wins, so I admit there are people who enjoy this.
I make the opposite assumption you make, since I am not personal friends with Player 1, neither of us know what he is really thinking, you would think this would be self-evident, but in case it wasn't previously known, I do not know the anonymous Player 1, and so I am obviously? not speaking from a place of factual knowledge, as I assume you are not friends with him and speaking of factual knowledge when you say he doesn't mine turn 4 wins ... better?
I never actually said this, and imply others may enjoy it.
Already said this, and said what I would do, but thats just me, but I am not the one getting kicked out of games either ...
I didn't, but it seems you missed the point if that is what you took away from it. In fact I play with largely the same group of people till today, it was completely impersonal, which is also how these people are treating him, as a stranger who they simply did not have fun with, and such, removed him from their games.
I am only going to address the first part of your hyperbolic rant the rest of this paragraph started as, by simply noting hyperbole is not a form of argument.
Who said this either? There is no skill in net decking a ramp deck. Are you really arguing there is skill in net decking a ramp deck? You can be the best magic player in the world, but that game clearly did not take skill to do. Also its not about sabotaging yourself, its about playing a game everyone would enjoy, which clearly they did not, and who knows how many other groups that have kicked him out of enough games to illicit him to post on Salvation.
But clearly its everyone else's issue, everyone else is wrong for finding him unfun to the point they kick him out of their games.
Clearly that is what happened ... .... .. .
But what is your point? I agree it happens, and when it happens with people who do not know your deck, who only seen 5 cards from your deck, how do you think they will respond the next game? Its all about perception. If you want to win turn 3 then fine, but what do you really get out of that? Just annoy some fellow players? You get the win and the prize? Sense of self?
I think if you just play Magic to win, if you are one of those people who only play online or don't talk to the people you are playing with, or get to know anyone your playing with, you probably have a different magic outlook. OR! if you play with other people who are trying to turn 4 win, then you are in good company and everyone else throws their combo's on the table talking about how they were going to win next turn.
First, its a bad analogy because a pitcher can strike someone out without them swinging because they thought every pitch was a ball, but it was instead just in the box.
You "but to the point," but the point is not the skill level of the deck. Its the enjoyment the other people get out of playing with you. If they get none, and do not think they will get any, they are less likely to play with you. Now you can attribute that to your super skillful deck besting everyone, your broken deck making everyone cry, etc. The end result is still getting kicked out of enough games to find yourself posting here about. Self-Evaluation may help you come to an understanding that will find you getting kicked out of less games, or you can keep notching up your awesome win count and making posts on mtgsalvation highlighting your super awesome turn 4 win and wondering why you got kicked out another game.
There is always an answer. There are few things in this game that could not be answered in fact, so the issue is not that it couldn't be stopped. Just those guys, however wrong you think they are, clearly did not want to play against a turn 4 win deck. If you think that means you should play 2/2 bears now on, ok ... that's one way of looking at it, but its a little hyperbolic.
Thats a bad analogy. But the skill level of the deck was never an issue, which is why I even conceded that it might be the most skillful deck ever.
This is more hyperbole. If you think the alternate to the OP's situation is no one playing any cards, then its no reason you can't see why he gets kicked out of enough games to be posting on here.
Just more hyperbole. If you see these as the only 2 options, we can see where the problem lies.
I agree, amazing people the subject of that nerd rage constantly never get the picture either. Something is clearly wrong with the system.
Hyperbole isn't a form of argument.