EPTMagic: The Gathering - Page 49
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Mattchew
United States5684 Posts
| ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
My last win was off of a Warstorm Surge and Overrun cards I drafted. I was R G with a lot of 4-7 drops. Scary as hell in the first few turns(had few creatures to trade), but then as soon as turn 5 hit it was usually over with the heavy hitters comming out. edit: oops didn't think of DCI points my bad. | ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
| ||
|
slyboogie
United States3423 Posts
On September 07 2011 05:11 Cixah wrote: His deck is just as stagnant is the rest of the format. Find 3 cards win game. The only difference is that even with dudes in play he still wins. Modern will be this way just like Legacy was before people realized that had to hate dredge or they lost to it (oh wait). Edit: If we unban jace or stoneforge then what was the point of this last PT? They were banned because the card pool they were in would have led to such a firm grip of top 8 that it's unreal. Stoneforge has too many good targets to let it just sit around. If anything, jitte needs an unbanning. Stoneforge, I'll admit, is probably a good banning. That's why I italicized "mayyyybeee," but Jace? He's very very powerful but in Modern he isn't completely overwhelming. The nature of his card advantage takes time(or turns) and a reasonable investment in mana. | ||
|
Kralic
Canada2628 Posts
| ||
|
Drium
United States888 Posts
| ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
I also wouldn't be surprised if Storm hate will start coming in most decks. Mindbreak Trap does a good job of shutting those decks down. I also think it'd be damn hilarious for someone to GSZ a Suture Priest in against twin  Also: I found out through the Planeswalker points thingy that I'd been using the wrong DCI number. I lost my card and the judge at the event gave me some other guy with a similar name's number, so I found that I'd apparently played in the Torment prerelease back in '97 despite never having heard of the game before <_< So I'm not sure where I'm supposed to be, we'll see. On September 07 2011 06:39 Drium wrote: I am not very knowledgeable about magic, but how much would unbanning jace really help when most of these combos happen before turn 4? It seems like mental misstep would help the most out of the banned cards. Blue decks could stock up on 9 bazillion counterspells and use Jace to sift through their deck till the found either the next counter they needed or a win condition. | ||
|
Rygar
Sweden28 Posts
On September 07 2011 05:15 DEN1ED wrote: So I'm a lvl 34 invoker... Hopefully they keep regular ratings on mtgo. 39 Sorcerer. I realize that they wanted to change the rating system, but "Sorcerer"/"Invoker", really? | ||
|
MCMcEmcee
United States1609 Posts
On September 07 2011 05:11 Cixah wrote: His deck is just as stagnant is the rest of the format. Find 3 cards win game. The only difference is that even with dudes in play he still wins. Modern will be this way just like Legacy was before people realized that had to hate dredge or they lost to it (oh wait). Edit: If we unban jace or stoneforge then what was the point of this last PT? They were banned because the card pool they were in would have led to such a firm grip of top 8 that it's unreal. Stoneforge has too many good targets to let it just sit around. If anything, jitte needs an unbanning. Turn 2 Stoneforge turn 3 watch your opponent kill you doesn't sound particularly threatening. I sincerely doubt Wizards was like "we playtested this format for months and could not beat UBW Bitterblossom Stoneforge Jace Blade." There wasn't even really a thorough effort to make sure their "prevent turn 3 combo format" plan actually worked. It's pretty obvious that they had no idea what would actually be good, so they just banned what they feared would be too good; even if they weren't guaranteed to be good, Wizards couldn't afford the possibility of Valakut, Faeries, Stoneforge, and/or Jace decks being dominant at this Pro Tour. Unban Sensei's Divining Top imoimoimo | ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
Yes, counter-top, just what we need. Not gonna happen. Hopefully they unban mental misstep, jace, bitterblossom, and ancestral visions though. | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On September 07 2011 08:12 MCMcEmcee wrote: Turn 2 Stoneforge turn 3 watch your opponent kill you doesn't sound particularly threatening. I sincerely doubt Wizards was like "we playtested this format for months and could not beat UBW Bitterblossom Stoneforge Jace Blade." There wasn't even really a thorough effort to make sure their "prevent turn 3 combo format" plan actually worked. It's pretty obvious that they had no idea what would actually be good, so they just banned what they feared would be too good; even if they weren't guaranteed to be good, Wizards couldn't afford the possibility of Valakut, Faeries, Stoneforge, and/or Jace decks being dominant at this Pro Tour. Unban Sensei's Divining Top imoimoimo No, what they did was look at the top 10 Extended decks and banned a card from each, then banned Legacy staples in the format. I'm not convinced that Storm/Twin/Poison are unbeatable. They seem fairly easy to disrupt, the only problem being that you lose to Zoo (normally) if you build a deck that can disrupt them with any sort of consistency. I don't think 1 PT demonstrates a huge problem with the format, especially the first one. Seeing the kinds of decks being played will spur deckbuilders to think of decks to beat those decks, and that's how a metagame evolves. Give it time before calling for unbannings and saying it's a bad format. Like I said, there are cards that beat the combos...I wish we'd see more sideboard Mindbreak Traps, Surgical Extractions, hand disruption spells, etc | ||
|
nalgene
Canada2153 Posts
On September 07 2011 06:45 deth2munkies wrote: The only unbannings that I could possibly see are Mental Misstep and Ancestral Vision because blue needs love. I also wouldn't be surprised if Storm hate will start coming in most decks. Mindbreak Trap does a good job of shutting those decks down. I also think it'd be damn hilarious for someone to GSZ a Suture Priest in against twin Also: I found out through the Planeswalker points thingy that I'd been using the wrong DCI number. I lost my card and the judge at the event gave me some other guy with a similar name's number, so I found that I'd apparently played in the Torment prerelease back in '97 despite never having heard of the game before <_< So I'm not sure where I'm supposed to be, we'll see. Blue decks could stock up on 9 bazillion counterspells and use Jace to sift through their deck till the found either the next counter they needed or a win condition. Is this for Tier 1 or so? There are some cards that have alternative costs to counter target spell, but they cost another card to do so. The art had some dude with a hammer. | ||
|
MCMcEmcee
United States1609 Posts
If for some reason I didn't want to play combo in an upcoming Modern event, I would probably begin with Bant colors for access to (GSZ for) Gaddock Teeg, Qasali Pridemage, Flashfreeze + other counters (Bant Charm?), and possibly Ethersworn Canonist if I expect a lot of storm/elves. The Naya+blue Zoo deck that Kibler and CFB were running is probably a good place to start. Also you can't GSZ for Suture Priest, unless you also have Painter's Servant set to green, which is a combo of sorts~ Since I do want to keep playing combo, I'll just keep maindecking bolts to kill Canonist, Gaddock Teeg and Nacatl, and just realize that I have to play around Bant Charm as well as conditional counterspells (maybe people will start running Deprive?). Or run Shining Shoal pitching Progenitus or Reaper King as tech in the infect combo mirror, huehuehue (plz don't do this) | ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
| ||
|
Cel.erity
United States4890 Posts
On September 07 2011 06:56 Rygar wrote: 39 Sorcerer. I realize that they wanted to change the rating system, but "Sorcerer"/"Invoker", really? Yup, same here. Seems like kind of a ridiculous system. A point-based rating system feels a lot more hollow to me than an Elo system, since it means nothing to say that I am lv40 vs your lv5, but it means a lot to say that I am 2050 and you are 1500. Also I hate that I will basically have no shot at rating invites anymore unless I grind meaningless FNMs. They should have just kept the system and implemented point decay as a solution to this problem, like any sensible person would. | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On September 07 2011 18:55 Cel.erity wrote: Yup, same here. Seems like kind of a ridiculous system. A point-based rating system feels a lot more hollow to me than an Elo system, since it means nothing to say that I am lv40 vs your lv5, but it means a lot to say that I am 2050 and you are 1500. Also I hate that I will basically have no shot at rating invites anymore unless I grind meaningless FNMs. They should have just kept the system and implemented point decay as a solution to this problem, like any sensible person would. That'd make sense, but this way is part of a larger movement towards positive reinforcement in ratings system. The conception that "having your rating go down is not fun" is something that is beginning to be used in education as an incentive to help children learn, and it's being applied here. I personally have no problems with the cumulative approach, but I do kinda have problems with how they weight FNMs, while they are the "established" weekly Magic event, it seems weird to weight them more than the big events like prereleases and the like. While in theory, this would let people that relentlessly grind games be higher ranked than people that don't, I doubt that enough people would actually do that and get to such a level where it becomes a problem. Not to mention, the vast majority of games have about a 30% luck aspect. It doesn't help if you're more skilled and draw 8 land in a row. Being punished for being unlucky is always annoying, and this rating system doesn't necessarily do that. Also, don't forget, if you qualify on points for a PT or GP, you actually get the plane tickets now. | ||
|
Orpheos
United States1663 Posts
| ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
On September 08 2011 01:00 Orpheos wrote: they really needed to find a better way to balance the grinding aspect and skill aspect because right now you essentially HAVE to play every week to even have a shot at getting Qed Or you could, ya know, go to a ptq. | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
Precisely. Previously, if you won 3 FNMs a month or so, you might get qualified on points after a few years. Whereas you can win 1 tournament and be qualified instantly. The average still hasn't changed very much, as you have to realize that EVERYONE, not just the grinders is getting more points. | ||
|
Orpheos
United States1663 Posts
meh true story. w/e Im not terribly pissed since I dont really care either way. it just seems so stupid to award countless grinding. but then again I guess its a good marketing decision because it gets people out there playing. | ||
| ||
