On September 30 2013 21:12 Thereisnosaurus wrote:
I am pretty effing sure Hymn to tourach is not in modern.
I am pretty effing sure Hymn to tourach is not in modern.
You are correct, and i'm really tired haha
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On September 30 2013 21:12 Thereisnosaurus wrote: I am pretty effing sure Hymn to tourach is not in modern. You are correct, and i'm really tired haha | ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On September 30 2013 21:12 Thereisnosaurus wrote: I am pretty effing sure Hymn to tourach is not in modern. don't forget dudes like nezumi shortfang, ravenous rats & drainpipe vermin, all good cheap discard tools. I saw nezumi. I just have no idea how to slot him in. The other rats feel too ineffective. The card I'm most excited about is actually wistful thinking. If they are down to 2 cards in hand, its a blue mind rot that gives you 2 extra discard triggers! [edit] Adding Burning Inquiry to the list - a real reason to play red, thankfully it can be cast off of deathrite - which can hit their lands too that we made them discard holy shit the synergies... | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
| ||
|
iGrok
United States5142 Posts
On September 30 2013 22:10 deth2munkies wrote: Forgot Smallpox. I don't like smallpox here for a couple reasons. A) We need to run more lands to not screw ourselves. B) It has no synergy with Waste Not - it kills the zombie, and costs the card and mana. We do get land+creature kill, so its probably worth running some amount, but it really doesn't synergize well. On the other hand, I do like The Rack. Theres another wincon to look into. [edit] On the other hand... Running more lands and smallpox lets us retrace Raven's Crime more effectively... That could work well | ||
|
MCMcEmcee
United States1609 Posts
| ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
![]() | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On September 30 2013 11:56 DEN1ED wrote: Show nested quote + On September 30 2013 11:53 deth2munkies wrote: On September 30 2013 11:51 DEN1ED wrote: Read my update on the use of shortcuts. I'm just trying to warn you guys. If you play in a tournament and say "move to combat" or "declare attackers" or w/e you are now in beginning of combat phase. Not if your opponent says, "Wait, end of your main phase..." after you say that. Yes, sure. But no one says that since it is generally your INTENT to cast it during beginning of combat. There is actually zero situations i can think of where you would want to do that, which is why it doesn't happen. Opponent cannot cast spells until turn player passes priority. It is impossible for them to cast an instant during the new phase unless the turn players explicitly passes priority during that phase. If an instant is cast as the turn player is changing game phase, the assumption is that the phase has not changed yet otherwise the instant could not be legally cast. | ||
|
n0ise
3452 Posts
On October 01 2013 00:43 Thieving Magpie wrote: Show nested quote + On September 30 2013 11:56 DEN1ED wrote: On September 30 2013 11:53 deth2munkies wrote: On September 30 2013 11:51 DEN1ED wrote: Read my update on the use of shortcuts. I'm just trying to warn you guys. If you play in a tournament and say "move to combat" or "declare attackers" or w/e you are now in beginning of combat phase. Not if your opponent says, "Wait, end of your main phase..." after you say that. Yes, sure. But no one says that since it is generally your INTENT to cast it during beginning of combat. There is actually zero situations i can think of where you would want to do that, which is why it doesn't happen. Opponent cannot cast spells until turn player passes priority. It is impossible for them to cast an instant during the new phase unless the turn players explicitly passes priority during that phase. If an instant is cast as the turn player is changing game phase, the assumption is that the phase has not changed yet otherwise the instant could not be legally cast. Why are people giving this as argument when it's obvious the players involved aren't particularly familiar with the rules? Micronesia's opponent probably meant to cast beginning of combat (which in a friendly-environment would mean micronesia now can't cast a sorcery) while a judge would've probably ruled the wording implied it was main phase. Regardless, the conclusion to draw here is you should always be vocal about what/when/how you're playing, and do the same for your opponent when there's any doubt in it. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 01 2013 01:33 n0ise wrote: Show nested quote + On October 01 2013 00:43 Thieving Magpie wrote: On September 30 2013 11:56 DEN1ED wrote: On September 30 2013 11:53 deth2munkies wrote: On September 30 2013 11:51 DEN1ED wrote: Read my update on the use of shortcuts. I'm just trying to warn you guys. If you play in a tournament and say "move to combat" or "declare attackers" or w/e you are now in beginning of combat phase. Not if your opponent says, "Wait, end of your main phase..." after you say that. Yes, sure. But no one says that since it is generally your INTENT to cast it during beginning of combat. There is actually zero situations i can think of where you would want to do that, which is why it doesn't happen. Opponent cannot cast spells until turn player passes priority. It is impossible for them to cast an instant during the new phase unless the turn players explicitly passes priority during that phase. If an instant is cast as the turn player is changing game phase, the assumption is that the phase has not changed yet otherwise the instant could not be legally cast. Why are people giving this as argument when it's obvious the players involved aren't particularly familiar with the rules? Micronesia's opponent probably meant to cast beginning of combat (which in a friendly-environment would mean micronesia now can't cast a sorcery) while a judge would've probably ruled the wording implied it was main phase. Regardless, the conclusion to draw here is you should always be vocal about what/when/how you're playing, and do the same for your opponent when there's any doubt in it. Because Den1ed said "I'm just trying to warn you guys. If you play in a tournament" | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On October 01 2013 02:15 Thieving Magpie wrote: Show nested quote + On October 01 2013 01:33 n0ise wrote: On October 01 2013 00:43 Thieving Magpie wrote: On September 30 2013 11:56 DEN1ED wrote: On September 30 2013 11:53 deth2munkies wrote: On September 30 2013 11:51 DEN1ED wrote: Read my update on the use of shortcuts. I'm just trying to warn you guys. If you play in a tournament and say "move to combat" or "declare attackers" or w/e you are now in beginning of combat phase. Not if your opponent says, "Wait, end of your main phase..." after you say that. Yes, sure. But no one says that since it is generally your INTENT to cast it during beginning of combat. There is actually zero situations i can think of where you would want to do that, which is why it doesn't happen. Opponent cannot cast spells until turn player passes priority. It is impossible for them to cast an instant during the new phase unless the turn players explicitly passes priority during that phase. If an instant is cast as the turn player is changing game phase, the assumption is that the phase has not changed yet otherwise the instant could not be legally cast. Why are people giving this as argument when it's obvious the players involved aren't particularly familiar with the rules? Micronesia's opponent probably meant to cast beginning of combat (which in a friendly-environment would mean micronesia now can't cast a sorcery) while a judge would've probably ruled the wording implied it was main phase. Regardless, the conclusion to draw here is you should always be vocal about what/when/how you're playing, and do the same for your opponent when there's any doubt in it. Because Den1ed said "I'm just trying to warn you guys. If you play in a tournament" It all comes down to this: In a tournament, be very explicit and timely with what is happening and when. Follow that rule and you'll be fine when it comes to questions like that. | ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
Also, that SCG top 8 has to be the most boring top 8 ever. Hopefully the pros will shake things up at the PT because otherwise standard will be terrible. | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On October 01 2013 02:19 DEN1ED wrote: Ok, all of you are right, your knowledge of phases is too strong. Also, that SCG top 8 has to be the most boring top 8 ever. Hopefully the pros will shake things up at the PT because otherwise standard will be terrible. Mono Red/fast aggro always wins the first couple tournaments after rotation because the control/midrange decks are too durdly until they get some real hivemind going behind them. Everyone wants a list to start working off of, now they have them. Will probably change quickly. | ||
|
Shotcoder
United States2316 Posts
On October 01 2013 00:43 Judicator wrote: Didn't realize there was a standard event this weekend. UW beating Esper, it's not as lopsided as people think ![]() The decision making by the Esper player was pretty questionable. Like keeping a 2 lander on the play and running out a Jace/Elspeth/Aetherling(cant remember) into Tietze when he had all his mana open. | ||
|
Kommatiazo
United States579 Posts
Also, I haven't picked up on all the jargon yet, so please let me know if I'm misusing some term or whatever, and go easy on the acronyms for me, most times MtG speak is still foreign to me, but I'm getting there. Anyway, I had a question or ten for you knowledgeable TLers here about the differences in deck strategy pertaining to going from Sealed->Constructed specifically. I find that it's hard for me to separate what's good in what format and why. I mean, I understand that some card specific tactics can work well in constructed and awfully in sealed simply due to the ability to select virtually any card and vise versa, but mostly I'm getting confused when trying to ramp up my deck strategy to the 60 card format. In sealed its almost always going to be better to run 40 cards to be as focused and efficient as possible right? Does the same apply for 60 card format? Or is it more viable to run 70 or 80+ cards? I've been trying to make my deck work with as few cards as possible, as I think this fits my play style as well as my experience in various card games telling me that a slim deck is a good deck. Some more specific questions: In sealed I prefer to run 2 colors, max of 2+ a small splash, but in standard with a 60 card deck is 3 or more colors a better, or at least, a more viable option? Should it still be 2+splash? Or is 3+splash or even 2+2 splash more worth it? Am I going about this the wrong way? Lol About card strategies: are there any differences in what I should try as far as that goes? Like in sealed I feel it's a solid play style to just try to go for quick wins with either creatures or some combo or another, basically to just to focus on low cost/quality but high quantity and beat down your opponent. in constructed though, are quick wins (with the applicable color, red is the go to for fast and dirty right?) even viable? Or is it "standard" to shoot for the long game in that format? If you try and stick to a 60 card late game deck what mana cost is it best to focus on? I.e. do you just want to load up on strong 5 mana spells? Or 7+ bombs? I'm a complete noob in this format so I'm a little clueless. I doubt anyone wants to take me by the hand and answer all this in detail, so if you have a link to a helpful guide/article I'll definitely read it. I just haven't found answers to my specific questions in that vein yet, so I thought I'd ask here. So please don't take this as "I'm a noob, I'm unwilling to research on my own, please explain everything to me so I don't have to do any work." Thanks guys! Kommatiazo is also my name on mtgo if anyone wants to add me and play (I'm garbage so go easy! :p ) | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On October 01 2013 03:34 Kommatiazo wrote: Hey guys! So I played MtG once a long time ago (like 12 years ago...) with a friend's green deck at a FNM event, or something similar. Once. And now I am trying to get into the game a little more, easing in, as it were. I bought MtG:O and have been messing around with a buddy on there, and I think I want to join a Sealed league as that format appeals to my tastes and my wallet the most. Due to this most of my studying of magic literature has been geared towards learning sealed/limited deck strategy. Which is great, except that when I play my friends it's the standard game mode with a 60 card deck that's prepared ahead of time. I have thus read up on constructed and standard deck strategy a bit and I really like the Black/white deck I have despite it being made up of only new player pack cards. Also, I haven't picked up on all the jargon yet, so please let me know if I'm misusing some term or whatever, and go easy on the acronyms for me, most times MtG speak is still foreign to me, but I'm getting there. Anyway, I had a question or ten for you knowledgeable TLers here about the differences in deck strategy pertaining to going from Sealed->Constructed specifically. I find that it's hard for me to separate what's good in what format and why. I mean, I understand that some card specific tactics can work well in constructed and awfully in sealed simply due to the ability to select virtually any card and vise versa, but mostly I'm getting confused when trying to ramp up my deck strategy to the 60 card format. In sealed its almost always going to be better to run 40 cards to be as focused and efficient as possible right? Does the same apply for 60 card format? Or is it more viable to run 70 or 80+ cards? I've been trying to make my deck work with as few cards as possible, as I think this fits my play style as well as my experience in various card games telling me that a slim deck is a good deck. Some more specific questions: In sealed I prefer to run 2 colors, max of 2+ a small splash, but in standard with a 60 card deck is 3 or more colors a better, or at least, a more viable option? Should it still be 2+splash? Or is 3+splash or even 2+2 splash more worth it? Am I going about this the wrong way? Lol About card strategies: are there any differences in what I should try as far as that goes? Like in sealed I feel it's a solid play style to just try to go for quick wins with either creatures or some combo or another, basically to just to focus on low cost/quality but high quantity and beat down your opponent. in constructed though, are quick wins (with the applicable color, red is the go to for fast and dirty right?) even viable? Or is it "standard" to shoot for the long game in that format? If you try and stick to a 60 card late game deck what mana cost is it best to focus on? I.e. do you just want to load up on strong 5 mana spells? Or 7+ bombs? I'm a complete noob in this format so I'm a little clueless. I doubt anyone wants to take me by the hand and answer all this in detail, so if you have a link to a helpful guide/article I'll definitely read it. I just haven't found answers to my specific questions in that vein yet, so I thought I'd ask here. So please don't take this as "I'm a noob, I'm unwilling to research on my own, please explain everything to me so I don't have to do any work." Thanks guys! Kommatiazo is also my name on mtgo if anyone wants to add me and play (I'm garbage so go easy! :p ) If you want to know more about control/long game, then read Oscar Tan's Control Player's Bible Part 1-20 http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/archive.php?Article=Oscar Tan His other articles are also good and worth a read. Don't memorize card names or card interactions, listen to him talk about how a deck functions and how you can trust your deck functioning. | ||
|
Kommatiazo
United States579 Posts
On October 01 2013 03:45 Thieving Magpie wrote: Show nested quote + On October 01 2013 03:34 Kommatiazo wrote: Hey guys! So I played MtG once a long time ago (like 12 years ago...) with a friend's green deck at a FNM event, or something similar. Once. And now I am trying to get into the game a little more, easing in, as it were. I bought MtG:O and have been messing around with a buddy on there, and I think I want to join a Sealed league as that format appeals to my tastes and my wallet the most. Due to this most of my studying of magic literature has been geared towards learning sealed/limited deck strategy. Which is great, except that when I play my friends it's the standard game mode with a 60 card deck that's prepared ahead of time. I have thus read up on constructed and standard deck strategy a bit and I really like the Black/white deck I have despite it being made up of only new player pack cards. Also, I haven't picked up on all the jargon yet, so please let me know if I'm misusing some term or whatever, and go easy on the acronyms for me, most times MtG speak is still foreign to me, but I'm getting there. Anyway, I had a question or ten for you knowledgeable TLers here about the differences in deck strategy pertaining to going from Sealed->Constructed specifically. I find that it's hard for me to separate what's good in what format and why. I mean, I understand that some card specific tactics can work well in constructed and awfully in sealed simply due to the ability to select virtually any card and vise versa, but mostly I'm getting confused when trying to ramp up my deck strategy to the 60 card format. In sealed its almost always going to be better to run 40 cards to be as focused and efficient as possible right? Does the same apply for 60 card format? Or is it more viable to run 70 or 80+ cards? I've been trying to make my deck work with as few cards as possible, as I think this fits my play style as well as my experience in various card games telling me that a slim deck is a good deck. Some more specific questions: In sealed I prefer to run 2 colors, max of 2+ a small splash, but in standard with a 60 card deck is 3 or more colors a better, or at least, a more viable option? Should it still be 2+splash? Or is 3+splash or even 2+2 splash more worth it? Am I going about this the wrong way? Lol About card strategies: are there any differences in what I should try as far as that goes? Like in sealed I feel it's a solid play style to just try to go for quick wins with either creatures or some combo or another, basically to just to focus on low cost/quality but high quantity and beat down your opponent. in constructed though, are quick wins (with the applicable color, red is the go to for fast and dirty right?) even viable? Or is it "standard" to shoot for the long game in that format? If you try and stick to a 60 card late game deck what mana cost is it best to focus on? I.e. do you just want to load up on strong 5 mana spells? Or 7+ bombs? I'm a complete noob in this format so I'm a little clueless. I doubt anyone wants to take me by the hand and answer all this in detail, so if you have a link to a helpful guide/article I'll definitely read it. I just haven't found answers to my specific questions in that vein yet, so I thought I'd ask here. So please don't take this as "I'm a noob, I'm unwilling to research on my own, please explain everything to me so I don't have to do any work." Thanks guys! Kommatiazo is also my name on mtgo if anyone wants to add me and play (I'm garbage so go easy! :p ) If you want to know more about control/long game, then read Oscar Tan's Control Player's Bible Part 1-20 http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/archive.php?Article=Oscar Tan His other articles are also good and worth a read. Don't memorize card names or card interactions, listen to him talk about how a deck functions and how you can trust your deck functioning. That article series is intense! Just finished part 1, and it's helping me to understand the more complex strategic layering that can happen in structured play. Thanks for the link! And side note: "The Deck" is fucking insane. Those cards are ALL so goddamn powerful. That article was written in '01, so is that deck/are those cards still usable/in play today? Or are they all outdated or banned now? | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/1nfd1e/stats_on_scg_worcester_open_top_32_decklists/ Edit: Probably something along the lines of "A lot of good pieces don't necessarily make a good whole" | ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
On October 01 2013 05:33 Risen wrote: So looking at all the top cards played I'm wondering what happened to American Control at this SCG open. http://www.reddit.com/r/magicTCG/comments/1nfd1e/stats_on_scg_worcester_open_top_32_decklists/ Edit: Probably something along the lines of "A lot of good pieces don't necessarily make a good whole" Go blood barons go! Got my foil playset of them. I'm surprised there are so many syncopates. I've never loved that card and thought dissolve/essence scatter/negate would be used more. The difference in #'s between supreme verdict and azorious charm are also interesting. | ||
|
Risen
United States7927 Posts
| ||
|
MCMcEmcee
United States1609 Posts
| ||
| ||
StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War Dota 2 Counter-Strike Other Games FrodaN6976 summit1g4123 Grubby3667 Liquid`RaSZi2702 B2W.Neo828 crisheroes383 Liquid`Hasu337 Harstem319 ToD173 ArmadaUGS140 mouzStarbuck101 Mew2King19 Railgan3 Organizations Other Games StarCraft 2 StarCraft: Brood War
StarCraft 2 • HeavenSC StarCraft: Brood War• Reevou • Kozan • Laughngamez YouTube • sooper7s • AfreecaTV YouTube • intothetv • Migwel • IndyKCrew • LaughNgamezSOOP League of Legends Other Games |
|
BSL 21
Bonyth vs Sziky
Mihu vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs XuanXuan
eOnzErG vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs DuGu
Dewalt vs Bonyth
IPSL
Dewalt vs Sziky
Replay Cast
Wardi Open
Monday Night Weeklies
OSC
The PondCast
OSC
Big Brain Bouts
Serral vs TBD
BSL 21
[ Show More ] BSL 21
|
|
|