EPTMagic: The Gathering - Page 545
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
Audemed
United States893 Posts
| ||
|
Meta
United States6225 Posts
http://www.starcitygames.com/article/28741_A-Dream-Comes-True.html | ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
It has always been as long as the meta isn't prepared. If monoB sideboards arbor Pharika's Cure, the deck it toast. If not, it's a guaranteed 4/0. | ||
|
FuRRie
Belgium815 Posts
I must say I'm very rusty, having to read up on very basic effects :p. | ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On June 23 2014 21:08 mr_tolkien wrote: You make it sound like there never was a competitive RDW deck. It has always been as long as the meta isn't prepared. If monoB sideboards arbor Pharika's Cure, the deck it toast. If not, it's a guaranteed 4/0. I think that's a fallacy. Monoblack can be tuned to beat RDW, but that's at the cost of your other match ups. RDW is definitely the boogeyman in the room but to say other decks can beat RDW just by packing a few cards is a bit of an overstatement since RDW punishes multi-color decks in this format (aside: given the mana base centers around shocklands, confluence, and temples, these all play into Red's advantage). So it doesn't mean you just pack a few cards and win the match up comfortably, it means that if the deck prevalent enough, then you NEED to change your build completely since your mana base determine your match up more than the sideboard. The problem wasn't monoblack, the problem was that monoblack had shifted to G/B. There were a lot of decks tuned to beat aggro strategies at this past SCG, none of it mattered since the deck still did its job. It's not just a sideboard tax, you need a very consistent and "quick" mana base as well. The UW players packing the life gain ram made me cringe. UB Pristine Talisman control in standard a few cycles back barely kept up the life against the aggro decks and red decks (with shrines) at the time, and that was a much better deck since it was trading 1 for 1s on top of a black wrath. I don't know why people think a 2 mana 1 life per turn was somehow going to cut it against a turn 5-6 deck. If you want to beat the deck, just sell out and beat it. At least Last Breath has play elsewhere and its not like the life gain matters. Edit: As someone mentioned before me, Magic Duels of the Planeswalkers is on sale for Steam. This is a great way to get people into Magic and arguably the best way. It keeps all of the information, that we as adults and/or seasoned players take for granted, in a very learn-able manner. My gf was wanting to get into Magic and holy shit I couldn't for the life of me teach her without overwhelming her. This is coming from someone who had a job as a college tutor for 4 years. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
| ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
On June 24 2014 16:52 Thieving Magpie wrote: How does one tell what the price of altered cards are? Depends on the alter. It can actually drive the price down sometimes. Regarding RDW decks, I'm sorry but you're wrong. It's just a good metagame call for when the meta shifted toward slow and controlling decks meaning they pack cards for each other and just forget about you. A GB deck can choose to just win against RDW from its choice of 75. It's not new, there is always a good RDW build ready to take advantage of the meta. You just need to bust it at the right time. | ||
micronesia
United States24740 Posts
| ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
| ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On June 24 2014 18:27 mr_tolkien wrote: Depends on the alter. It can actually drive the price down sometimes. Thanks a bunches! Feline Longmore traded me a playset of her altered path to exiles for my junk rares. I was just wondering how to do it. | ||
|
DEN1ED
United States1087 Posts
| ||
|
Shotcoder
United States2316 Posts
On June 24 2014 18:27 mr_tolkien wrote: Depends on the alter. It can actually drive the price down sometimes. Regarding RDW decks, I'm sorry but you're wrong. It's just a good metagame call for when the meta shifted toward slow and controlling decks meaning they pack cards for each other and just forget about you. A GB deck can choose to just win against RDW from its choice of 75. It's not new, there is always a good RDW build ready to take advantage of the meta. You just need to bust it at the right time. You can't just "choose" to beat RDW. There's a lot more than sideboarding 2-3 Cure's or whatever. And I can't remember the last time a RDW deck was $20 and competitive. Last time I played RDW in standard it was goblins, and goblin guides themselves were $60. | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On June 25 2014 02:59 Shotcoder wrote: You can't just "choose" to beat RDW. There's a lot more than sideboarding 2-3 Cure's or whatever. And I can't remember the last time a RDW deck was $20 and competitive. Last time I played RDW in standard it was goblins, and goblin guides themselves were $60. Travis Woo's $20 deck before Thundermaw was more than $2 was definitely competitive. | ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
On June 25 2014 07:27 deth2munkies wrote: Travis Woo's $20 deck before Thundermaw was more than $2 was definitely competitive. Thundermaws never dropped below 10. He had another build that didn't run them. (Edit: I can't read, but I don't think that deck was competitive, I played a fair amount of games against that deck and it just had no play until he added the Thundermaws to it). @mr_tolkien You are misinterpreting my point, any deck can beat any deck if it chooses to (Dredge in Legacy is the biggest example of this). The problem is the opportunity cost. UW can never ever drop the RDW match up if it chooses to, but does it want to overtuned for the one match up. The same is true for other decks. You aren't playing 1 match, but closer to 10. You are also overlooking the mana base for this particular standard cycle, shock lands and temples playing into RDW's game plan so well. So its not like GB can't beat RDW, but if you get hands with Overgrown Tomb and Temple, you're going to play into RDW. | ||
|
deth2munkies
United States4051 Posts
On June 25 2014 12:23 Judicator wrote: Thundermaws never dropped below 10. He had another build that didn't run them. (Edit: I can't read, but I don't think that deck was competitive, I played a fair amount of games against that deck and it just had no play until he added the Thundermaws to it). @mr_tolkien You are misinterpreting my point, any deck can beat any deck if it chooses to (Dredge in Legacy is the biggest example of this). The problem is the opportunity cost. UW can never ever drop the RDW match up if it chooses to, but does it want to overtuned for the one match up. The same is true for other decks. You aren't playing 1 match, but closer to 10. You are also overlooking the mana base for this particular standard cycle, shock lands and temples playing into RDW's game plan so well. So its not like GB can't beat RDW, but if you get hands with Overgrown Tomb and Temple, you're going to play into RDW. I was exaggerating with the $2, but Thundermaw came out at around $20, dropped to $5, then went back up to $25-30 when RDW started winning tournaments. | ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
I still think that was an incredibly good call from Tom Ross (who... would have played it anyway) but not much more. By itself the deck is not especially competitive. Ask Tom himself and you'll see, it's merely the product of what the other are playing. If anything, I think the best positionned deck atm is monoU devotion. It tackles the same problems than the monoR list but does it with more consistence and reach. And my dear DEN1ED, there has rarely been a standard as open as this one. But yes, in a top 8, you can only see 8 archetypes at most... Too bad Tier 1 decks also include burn, GB graveyard, WW, B aggro, R devotion, GW aggro, Naya auras, ... | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On June 25 2014 16:51 mr_tolkien wrote: Red decks usually spike in price and playability post-rotation then are forgotten for ~10 months. But this time it made a breakthrough mid-flight because people stopped taking it into account. I still think that was an incredibly good call from Tom Ross (who... would have played it anyway) but not much more. By itself the deck is not especially competitive. Ask Tom himself and you'll see, it's merely the product of what the other are playing. If anything, I think the best positionned deck atm is monoU devotion. It tackles the same problems than the monoR list but does it with more consistence and reach. And my dear DEN1ED, there has rarely been a standard as open as this one. But yes, in a top 8, you can only see 8 archetypes at most... Too bad Tier 1 decks also include burn, GB graveyard, WW, B aggro, R devotion, GW aggro, Naya auras, ... "Burn" Decks will always be viable in all formats due to the nature of its design. Cheap Dudes + Burn Spells will get lucky wins against anyone at anytime. Its highly consistent and its very very punishing to mistakes. The problem being that if it faces against something that is also consistent then it loses 50% of its advantage against more complex decks. Until Wizards of the Coasts decides that red shouldn't have cheap creatures and shouldnt have burn spells, the RDW, Slight, etc... will always be viable in all formats. | ||
|
mr_tolkien
France8631 Posts
First of all, burn and RDW are entirely different decks : Burn needs high burn density, self-damage, and high main deck removal (that you make useless) to shine in a format. RDW needs high 1 and 2 drops density, slow/bad blockers, and either an open format or an established slow one. Secondly, they're anything but consistent. They have poor mulligans and B plan. They are designed around getting where you need to be in a few turns, without any way to ensure that. That doesn't mean they're bad. That's quite the opposite, seeing they can win tournaments WHILE being extremely inconsistent. So, sometimes the card pool won't allow a good deck of those types to work, sometimes it will be the format/metagame. If by viable you mean "it can win games", well, a deck with 1 Llanowar Elf and 59 forests can win against T1 decks if they draw 20 lands in a row. But that doesn't mean it's viable. A deck being viable is only the product of available card pool and meta-game, and that's it. There have been many times when those decks were terrible in a format. | ||
|
Thieving Magpie
United States6752 Posts
On June 26 2014 02:30 mr_tolkien wrote: That's outright false, sorry. First of all, burn and RDW are entirely different decks : Burn needs high burn density, self-damage, and high main deck removal (that you make useless) to shine in a format. RDW needs high 1 and 2 drops density, slow/bad blockers, and either an open format or an established slow one. Secondly, they're anything but consistent. They have poor mulligans and B plan. They are designed around getting where you need to be in a few turns, without any way to ensure that. That doesn't mean they're bad. That's quite the opposite, seeing they can win tournaments WHILE being extremely inconsistent. So, sometimes the card pool won't allow a good deck of those types to work, sometimes it will be the format/metagame. If by viable you mean "it can win games", well, a deck with 1 Llanowar Elf and 59 forests can win against T1 decks if they draw 20 lands in a row. But that doesn't mean it's viable. A deck being viable is only the product of available card pool and meta-game, and that's it. There have been many times when those decks were terrible in a format. Sligh Decks have been around since ironclaw orcs and is where burn, rdw, ponza, goblins, etc... all gets their trademark design. Cheap creatures + Burn. Some decks have more burn than creatures, some decks have more creatures than burn. The reason it works is that its consistent. Its consistent because cheap creatures are redundant and cheap burn is redundant. Its about 40ish redundant spells that all do about the same things as each other. You're misconstruing winrate with resilience. Most burn decks and RDW decks lose because they can't recover from strategies that stop their assault. They can't recover from wraths, or life gain, sturdy blockers, etc... But you let a burn deck or a RDW deck goldfish and he'll kill the opponent in 4-6 turn VERY VERY consistently. They quickly become the initial benchmark in which control decks set themselves to before a metagame develops. As metagames move forward, those defensive benchmarks get moved to stop "top tier" aggressive decks, in doing so a burn deck pops up and people go back to the previous benchmarks. Tempest Block was when this was most intense, but it doesn't really matter which ratio is which. | ||
|
Cixah
United States11285 Posts
I think it is a bad Jace. | ||
| ||
