Brilliant Gameologists Forum

Play Like You Have To! => Tabletop Talk-- Non RPGs => : BobismyRhino June 26, 2008, 06:07:35 AM

: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: BobismyRhino June 26, 2008, 06:07:35 AM
Today, while I was visiting my *favorite* gaming store, I somehow managed to get into a conversation with another gamer about Magic. He was going on and on about how the game was pretty pointless since you could spend a zillion dollars on the "best" cards to create an undefeatable, dirty deck. He also went on to tell me that I should just go online and find "premade" decks to beat other people with.

I tried to argue with him and tell him that doing those things somewhat ruined the game. I, personally, find it more fun to make up my own tactics and figure out how things work together.  I would get more satisfaction beating someone with a deck made of "mediocre" cards that I threw together than a premade, expensive, undefeatable deck.

I mean, half of the fun of Magic is trying to figure out how you're going to cover your ass. Your initial plan doesn't usually work (well, mine don't anyways), but it's those split second decisions and strategies you employ while playing that give the game excitement.

Playing an undefeatable deck is not only predictable, but it's boring. You KNOW what's going to happen in the end: you're going to win! I like winning as much as the next guy (well, probably a little bit more), but still, I don't think I'd feel quite as satisfied with a premade undefeatable deck.

Well, what do you all think? I'm still new into the whole Magic scene, so perhaps I'm missing something...
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Elephant Jack June 26, 2008, 07:00:17 AM
Pfrt, this is indeed an old hat.

I disagree in some points though: Even the best decks played by the best players don't win 100% of the time. Say 60-65% is realistic.

And: If it's fun for you to play with mediocre cards, that's cool! I prefer pauper (commons only) decks, usually with some more restrictions (pauper tribal, pauper block, whatever). Some player enjoy playing fat, ugly decks and are able and ready to pay for them (usually about 150+$ for a tier 1 standard deck). That's not the way I like playing magic, but hey! Who am I to dictate the way to play this game.

The problem usually begins if your local gaming group and you follow differing philosophies of gaming (similar to the "role-" vs. "roll"playing debate). We managed this problem by playing the occasional draft or sealed tournament; usually with new sets nobody knows that well so that chances of winning are equal.

And, you should'nt forget one thing: Netdecking (playing a premade, probably expensive deck, designed by a pro) doesn't require much time. Many people I know love the game but don't have the time to invent combos or strategies by themselves - me included! The times that I crawl through spoilers for hours is definitively over - there are more interesting and important things for me now. I always look for inspiration on deck databases when building new decks (can only recommend www.deckcheck.net, by the way).

So long,
EJ
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Callix June 26, 2008, 07:43:16 AM
I, for one, love making budget decks. I can't afford the $150+ price tags of the top tier decks, but by making a few simple replacements, you can produce a fun, clean deck that can handle a lot of play. Also, the nonstandard formats (Highlander, EDH, Chaos Multiplayer) and the Limited formats (draft, sealed deck) are much less "solvable" than the tournament constructed formats. They're a lot more random, and a lot more about making the best of what you have, as opposed to having the best to begin with.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Straw_Man June 26, 2008, 08:49:06 AM

No, you hit the nail on the head. It's strategy to build a deck, tactics to play it. And what a rush it is to win with intelligence instead of a bazillion dollars worth of cards.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Stratovarius June 26, 2008, 09:03:10 AM
I have decks from waaaaay back when people used to play with Ante, that were built around being common with a few uncommon cards, yet were still powerful enough that you could flatten most of the more expensive decks. Just because the cards are cheap doesn't mean they aren't useful.

However, these days what often happens is I'll pick up the premades. It's easier than thinking up new decks and going out and getting all the cards, or hunting through my old stacks to find card X, and the decks aren't all that bad, although the power level can fluctuate. I only play within my family, and we're all fairly relaxed about the game, and will sometimes just had each other decks for a match. 
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Nachofan99 June 26, 2008, 06:56:58 PM
The real problem is that they are on what, 11th edition?  Add in all the other sets and that's thousands upon thousands of cards.

No one has enough time to sit down and compose a deck with all the possible cards they could make, and those that try such things will try to make the best deck, not a decent one.

Why spend a ton of time trying to make a mediocre deck?  If you just want to throw something together we have a word for that, it's called building a bad deck.  If you spend some time and are a little choosier you're making a good deck, it doesn't have to be perfect.

To Bobismyrhino specifically: if you had an UBER pre-made deck with all the big 9 and all the other cool cards, trust me, you would have a blast.  The high-powered cards force you to make a lot of really strategic decisions to beat your opponent who we can only assume is using the same high powered cards.  Then there are the counter composition decks. The whole metagame at the top is incredible, you probably have not played long enough or versus enough people to appreciate it?
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Straw_Man June 26, 2008, 07:11:40 PM

Because in building a 'mediocre deck' you learn the art and the mechanics of building a deck. Premade decks are fun till you learn how to use them, then I have to customise them.

Even if it's better for me to use a clone of the last tournament winnig deck, I want to play my deck, as flawed as it might be. Though their rarely that flawed though  :)
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: TheChrisWaits June 26, 2008, 07:17:29 PM
It's all a matter of relative power. If you and your friends want to play cheap decks with fun cards, you'll have fun. If you want to spend the money on a good deck, you'll enjoy playing against other good decks. If you really want to be competitive, it's almost required to play what the pros are playing. They put hours and hours into coming up with ideas and trying them out so they don't suck. I could never work on a deck that much on my own.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Prime32 June 26, 2008, 07:18:51 PM
While I don't play Magic, I have plenty of experience in this from my Yu-Gi-Oh days. :rolleyes

Everyone uses the "cookie-cutter" deck in tournaments, this being the deck to beat the last "cookie-cutter". I never went to a tournament expecting to win (and I never did), but I would not find it fun to use someone else's deck. They actually emphasise this over and over in the show :smirk

(http://cover6.cduniverse.com/MuzeVideoArt/62/197062.jpg)
BELIEVE IN THE HEART OF THE CARDS!!!
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Nachofan99 June 26, 2008, 07:24:24 PM
Well a lot of the power in and behind specific cards only comes from using them against either specific decks or levels of play.

: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Talen Lee June 27, 2008, 12:57:34 AM
What you heard was a butthurt twit who had no idea how the game works, but was instead insistant on the impossibility of the game. Easier to curse the darkness than light a candle, you know?
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Runestar June 27, 2008, 02:33:21 AM
I don't think winning is as simply as simply downloading a champion decklist and copying it to the letter. You still need to learn how to play it properly, and I found that some decks are so challenging to play properly and so unforgiving of play mistakes that it is virtually impossible to master unless you have the original designer teach you. And tournament reports only hint at what the decks are capable of, but not how it should be played.

For example, Necropotence decks were the most dominant concept at one time, but I never did manage to learn how to play it properly. There are apparently tricks as to when you should play necropotence, how much you should necro for at any 1 time, when to disk etc. In the end, I gave up and went back to the weenie and control decks I was more comfortable with.

However, I do think it is worth searching for new deck archetypes, which you can then modify to your own preference. The exact deck makeup does not have to be copied card for card, so long as the underlying fundamentals remain sound. I never had the money to afford ball lightnings, cursed scrolls or hammers of bogarden for my sligh deck (red weenie+burn), so I subbed them out for commons like suq-ata lancers and cheaper direct damage spells like kindle and fireball.

It is ironic though, that my 2 favourite and most effective decks (the aforementioned red weenie and a blue forbidian deck) were also my cheapest, each costing under $10 to assemble. :P
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Elephant Jack June 27, 2008, 04:25:34 AM
It is ironic though, that my 2 favourite and most effective decks (the aforementioned red weenie and a blue forbidian deck) were also my cheapest, each costing under $10 to assemble. :P
While we're at this topic: Care to share your forbidian decklist ;)? Even if 10$ translates in 20-30€ (:sad) it's indeed quite cheap.

I made a big pause playing magic (from 1998-2004 or such); thereafter, this (http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/nh23) is where I started from again. I invested ~5€ in cards and scrounged the missing cards from my friends - hell this deck made 10-15 evolutionary steps, but it was always a blast to play, even against "cookie-cutter"-decks.

That said: Netdecking is a good way to get into magic; in fact it makes no big difference if you buy a precon or netdeck (ok, perhaps you'll invest more with netdecking :D). If you take a look at the current tournament environment, you'll see the evil-side of "not-lighting-the-candle" (quote: Talen Lee): Bitterblossoms and Tarmogoyfs everywhere :-/

EJ
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Runestar June 27, 2008, 07:33:39 AM
While we're at this topic: Care to share your forbidian decklist ? Even if 10$ translates in 20-30€ (:sad) it's indeed quite cheap.

I stopped collecting shortly after exodus, so it may seem primitive by today's standards. :D

4 counterspell
4 mana leak
2 dissipate
2 forbid

4 man-o-war
4 ophidian
1 air elemental
3 watersprout djinn
2 prodigal sorcerer (too cheapskate to spring for suq-ata firewalkers)  :blush

4 impulse
4 legacy's allure
2 capsize

4 ??? diamond <--- that mirage artifact which taps to give you 1 blue mana

16 island
4 quicksand

Diamonds, quicksand, allure and dissipate are all fairly inexpensive uncommons which can probably be had for 50 cents to 1 dollar each. The weird air elemental/watersprout djinn makeup is because that was what I had from the few boosters I bought (so they are interchangeable, for most part). The rest are commons you should have no problems finding in the discount bin for 10 cents each or getting your friends to give them to you for free. :P
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: BobismyRhino June 28, 2008, 12:54:19 AM
To Bobismyrhino specifically: if you had an UBER pre-made deck with all the big 9 and all the other cool cards, trust me, you would have a blast.  The high-powered cards force you to make a lot of really strategic decisions to beat your opponent who we can only assume is using the same high powered cards.  Then there are the counter composition decks. The whole metagame at the top is incredible, you probably have not played long enough or versus enough people to appreciate it?

Like you and a few other people have mentioned, even with a premade deck of win, you still need to know how to use it and know how things can work off of each other.
I suppose I've experienced this firsthand: my friend let me play his elf deck, and until he showed me how to use the deck(by kicking my ass with it), I had no idea how to use his cards (and subsequently lost many games with them).
His elf deck is dirty

I'm trying to build an elf deck too, but it's NO WHERE near as fast as his...

Anyways, I guess premade decks aren't all that bad since you still have to know how to use them. However, I still think it's taking the easy way out (you're skipping all the hard work and just cutting to the fun!). :P
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: PhoenixInferno July 01, 2008, 03:58:35 AM
While we're at this topic: Care to share your forbidian decklist ? Even if 10$ translates in 20-30€ (:sad) it's indeed quite cheap.

I stopped collecting shortly after exodus, so it may seem primitive by today's standards. :D

4 counterspell
4 mana leak
2 dissipate
2 forbid

4 man-o-war
4 ophidian
1 air elemental
3 watersprout djinn
2 prodigal sorcerer (too cheapskate to spring for suq-ata firewalkers)  :blush

4 impulse
4 legacy's allure
2 capsize

4 ??? diamond <--- that mirage artifact which taps to give you 1 blue mana

16 island
4 quicksand

Diamonds, quicksand, allure and dissipate are all fairly inexpensive uncommons which can probably be had for 50 cents to 1 dollar each. The weird air elemental/watersprout djinn makeup is because that was what I had from the few boosters I bought (so they are interchangeable, for most part). The rest are commons you should have no problems finding in the discount bin for 10 cents each or getting your friends to give them to you for free. :P
I'm pretty sure you mean Sapphire Diamond which reduces the colorless cost of your Blue spells by 1.  You're only allowed 1 Mox Sapphire (which does what you describe).

By the way, decks like those were one of the reasons why I quit M:tG.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Elephant Jack July 01, 2008, 05:03:25 AM
...or it could be http://magiccards.info/6e/en/310.html (http://magiccards.info/6e/en/310.html)Sky Diamond

: PhoenixInferno
By the way, decks like those were one of the reasons why I quit M:tG.
Mh... you quit M:tG because of control decks? Did you ever play against fast combo like "Gorger Dragon" or against lame "I-use-the-most-expensive-cards-in-a-deck-some-japanese-pro-designed"-Decks like "Solar Pox" or "Next level Blue"... those are really good reasons I could quit M:tG (and are indeed good reasons I don't play at big tournaments anymore).

EJ
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: PhoenixInferno July 01, 2008, 05:34:15 AM
: PhoenixInferno
By the way, decks like those were one of the reasons why I quit M:tG.
Mh... you quit M:tG because of control decks? Did you ever play against fast combo like "Gorger Dragon" or against lame "I-use-the-most-expensive-cards-in-a-deck-some-japanese-pro-designed"-Decks like "Solar Pox" or "Next level Blue"... those are really good reasons I could quit M:tG (and are indeed good reasons I don't play at big tournaments anymore).
1) Yeah.  So what? No need to insult my reasons for quitting M:tG. :fu
2) I wouldn't know what those decks are - I think they use post-Tempest stuff, which I know next-to-nothing about.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Peaboo July 01, 2008, 06:16:16 AM
I played against my brother a few times and never won. Then I bought a randomized starter deck, and finally beat him.

Only part of the winning aspect is owning the card. The other part, (the one that really counts, IMO) is actually drawing the cards you need and knowing the right time to play them.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Runestar July 01, 2008, 08:30:26 AM
I'm pretty sure you mean Sapphire Diamond which reduces the colorless cost of your Blue spells by 1.  You're only allowed 1 Mox Sapphire (which does what you describe).

By the way, decks like those were one of the reasons why I quit M:tG.

No, definitely not the medallions from tempest (which were too ex for me) nor the mox (come on, in a $10 deck?). Mirage had these artifacts which cost 2 colourless mana each, and came into play tapped. You could tap it to add one mana of the appropriate colour to your mana pool. I only recall the white version being called marble diamond.

I wouldn't rate my deck as being particularly strong (though it is fairly effective for the amount of money I spent on it). I found that it had problems with lightning fast decks like sligh and suicide black, since I can't do anything on the 1st round and tend to be defenseless on my 3rd round (when the temptation to tap out for an ophidian is very strong). Quicksand screws with you mana-wise, while allure is too slow vs weenies.

But if you could survive until the 5th or 6th round, things will generally get easier. And victory is more or less assured if you can get up to 12 mana (unless you are facing another counter heavy deck). Later on, you win by spamming capsize (lockdown is inevitable when you can capsize 2 land/round), while holding a fistful of counterspells (remember that forbid is a reusable counterspell) and beating down with a blue flier.

I have tried other playing styles, but finally decided that permission decks were the most enjoyable and fulfilling to play for me. Weenie/burn decks got boring quickly while combo/gimmick decks were too unpredictable (not that they were weak though). 

Other control decks I have tinkered with included propaganda-winter orb (but felt a little too metagamish, considering that a fair number of my friends liked to play with creature decks, and this deck made me feel like I was specifically exploiting their weakness, making victory feel less satisfying), 5-colour blue (too expensive overall, I had to proxy heavily, and a little overrated in my experience for all the hype surrounding it), marrogeddon, turbo-xerox (cycling through your library with 17 cantrips was fun, but overall not all that strong) and counter-burn (very slow, even moreso than a conventional blue deck).

What are all your favourite deck archetypes? :)
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: TheChrisWaits July 01, 2008, 12:32:54 PM
Favorite, as in most fun? Tooth and Nail was a lot of fun, especially in its early days before it got so refined that it pretty much won accidentally. Coming up with surprise sets of creatures to throw out (or just bashing face with 2 Darksteel Colossi) was a blast.

Favorite, as in most played/successful with? Goblins, from the time Onslaught was released to the rise of Affinity (and even fro a little while after), was my pet deck. I still play it in Legacy when I get around to playing Magic.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Callix July 01, 2008, 08:02:16 PM
I'm fairly new, but I love the U/W Millfolk archetype from Lorwyn. It's not very successful, but it's very, very fun... if you like milling your opponent while gaining 100 life. Still, it packs enough Merrow Reejereys (Merfolk lords) to turn a pretty sweet aggro curve, with lots of cost reduction and cantripping. Purely theoretically, you can mill someone out on your thrid turn, but it's never going to happen. Turn 6-7 is entirely realistic on a good draw.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Elephant Jack July 02, 2008, 08:11:07 AM
I totally dig my budget vintage Pox.dec (pimped now an then with new black cards).
Standard: Well my Giant.dec is casual, fun, and :o wins. I really dig my standard pauper decks (mono-U-beatz, sui-black...).
My all-time favorite is the aforementioned bauble-deck.

EJ
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Talen Lee July 02, 2008, 11:48:34 PM
I'm just quietly speechless.

It's a competitive game. It's an expandable game. These things are part of its design.

Don't get me wrong, I don't fault anyone for quitting. If you're not having fun, don't do it. But it's surreal to me to hear people whinging about Next Level Blue, or about decks made by Japanese Pros. As if somehow you had the time to have every good idea.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: mace_of_sauron July 14, 2008, 05:26:12 PM
I have a nasty Hellbent deck.
I like the over all feel of it (as far as flavor is concerned Rakdos was one of the better guilds). It started as a pre-made deck (rakdos bloodsport I believe) but has since evolved into one of my own design. I removed most of the red creatures, replacing them with Shadowmoore cinders.
In my personal opinion, pre-made decks offer excellent skeletons for your own decks, but they often can't compete with custom decks, nor feel as satisfying to play and win with.   
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: SixthDeclension July 14, 2008, 05:48:24 PM
I have a nasty Hellbent deck.
I like the over all feel of it (as far as flavor is concerned Rakdos was one of the better guilds). It started as a pre-made deck (rakdos bloodsport I believe) but has since evolved into one of my own design. I removed most of the red creatures, replacing them with Shadowmoore cinders.
In my personal opinion, pre-made decks offer excellent skeletons for your own decks, but they often can't compete with custom decks, nor feel as satisfying to play and win with.   

Except for the one I beat you with every time...

But you're right. Pre-made decks do make good starts, supplement them with your own cards and you can usually make something workable.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 16, 2008, 07:59:21 PM
Today, while I was visiting my *favorite* gaming store, I somehow managed to get into a conversation with another gamer about Magic. He was going on and on about how the game was pretty pointless since you could spend a zillion dollars on the "best" cards to create an undefeatable, dirty deck. He also went on to tell me that I should just go online and find "premade" decks to beat other people with.

I tried to argue with him and tell him that doing those things somewhat ruined the game. I, personally, find it more fun to make up my own tactics and figure out how things work together.  I would get more satisfaction beating someone with a deck made of "mediocre" cards that I threw together than a premade, expensive, undefeatable deck.

I mean, half of the fun of Magic is trying to figure out how you're going to cover your ass. Your initial plan doesn't usually work (well, mine don't anyways), but it's those split second decisions and strategies you employ while playing that give the game excitement.

Playing an undefeatable deck is not only predictable, but it's boring. You KNOW what's going to happen in the end: you're going to win! I like winning as much as the next guy (well, probably a little bit more), but still, I don't think I'd feel quite as satisfied with a premade undefeatable deck.

Well, what do you all think? I'm still new into the whole Magic scene, so perhaps I'm missing something...

*sighs*

Silly people wanting unbeatable decks...

You want to see a hilariously funny deck?

4x Extinction
4x Dark Ritual
4x Animate Land
4x Llanowar Elf
4x Skyshroud Elf
4x Land Grant
12x Swamp
12x Forest
10x land destruction (Creeping Mold is my personal favourite)
2x Fireball

Mix and match with Bayou, any other black/green land, Sol Ring, Black Lotus or other mana acceleration, etc., as needed.

Round 1: Forest, Elf
Round 2: Swamp, Dark Ritual, Animate Land his basic land (1G), Extinct his basic land (2B2Cless)
Round 3: Poke him to death with your lone Elf
Round 4: Profit

All can be done with common cards, although my deck had a bit more exotic stuff in it (Sol Ring and dual lands, mainly). It doesn't always work, but when it does, it is hilarious. Weenie and Blue decks can hose it.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Callix July 16, 2008, 08:13:34 PM
Terror or Eyeblight's Ending would be cheaper than Extinct.

No deck is undefeatable. It might just be outside your collection. For example, most MTG players have heard of ChannelBall. It predates the 60 card minimum, and looks like this:

2x Mountain
2x Black Lotus
2x Channel
2x Fireball

Of course, it loses badly to Force of Will, a staple in all vintage decks nowadays. The point is, nothing is unstoppable. If they're playing Vigor against your Pyrohemia/Deep-Slumber Titan deck, then stock up on Puncture Blast and Incinerate. If their deck is full of counterspells, get a Vexing Shusher.

The other factor with netdecks is a simple one: netdecks are tuned against other netdecks. You can look up how Faeries should be played against Lark and RDW. But that Handservant Warriors deck you just put together? They won't know what to counter, what to sideboard, whether tapping out for Mistbind Clique is necessary or walking into a Steam Blast...

They're called rogue decks. They show up all over the place, and a few of them do well. They have the advantage of information flow: they know their game against the netdecks, but the netdecks don't know what to do against them.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 16, 2008, 08:24:05 PM
Not really. The beauty of Extinct is that you search his library, hand and graveyard for the cards of the same type and *remove them from the game*. That means all his basic lands of that type is gone. If you go first and pull it off at Round 2, he will have no basic lands of that type left. After that, just destroy his other lands as they hit the table with your land destruction, or drop another Extinct on his other lands, and poke him to death with a single lone elf.

Mind you, I run with 20 lands and had 4x Pyroblast as staple in the deck as Blue is a massive hoser of this deck :P
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: TheChrisWaits July 17, 2008, 02:39:53 PM
Are you talking about Eradicate, maybe? Extinction just kills everything in play with a certain creature type.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 17, 2008, 05:47:52 PM
Hmm... Either or. I haven't played Magic in over 5 years :) It is the one that lets you search through everything and remove all of the same cards out of the game.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: BobismyRhino July 17, 2008, 09:19:21 PM
Not really. The beauty of Extinct is that you search his library, hand and graveyard for the cards of the same type and *remove them from the game*. That means all his basic lands of that type is gone. If you go first and pull it off at Round 2, he will have no basic lands of that type left. After that, just destroy his other lands as they hit the table with your land destruction, or drop another Extinct on his other lands, and poke him to death with a single lone elf.

Mind you, I run with 20 lands and had 4x Pyroblast as staple in the deck as Blue is a massive hoser of this deck :P

That is just not nice. I would be sooooo pissed if someone used that deck against me.   
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Callix July 17, 2008, 09:27:57 PM
That is just not nice. I would be sooooo pissed if someone used that deck against me.   
Then you probably wouldn't like playing UW Millfolk, either. Merrow Commerce + Surgespanner + Drowner of Secrets = bounce 2 lands a turn. Judge of Currents for lifegain, Fallowsage for card draw, and Stonybrook Banneret for dirt cheap spells. When it works, it works.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 17, 2008, 09:40:22 PM
That is just not nice. I would be sooooo pissed if someone used that deck against me.   
It's not meant to be nice :P I use it for fun, or against guys that annoys me too much.

If I want a fast kill, I'd play a BK deck (pure red burninator for that flame-grilled feeling) :D
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: BobismyRhino July 17, 2008, 09:45:25 PM
*growls*

I think my sole source of joy from Magic is that I make really annoying decks. I can drag out games really long (think: 45 minutes). I usually don't win... but that's fine. I annoy the shit out of my opponents, which to me, is winning. Plus, at that point, I can usually get out all of my big bad monsters that I like. Tis fun.  :D

Note to self: no playing AndyJames or Callix.  :P
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 17, 2008, 10:13:22 PM
*growls*

I think my sole source of joy from Magic is that I make really annoying decks. I can drag out games really long (think: 45 minutes). I usually don't win... but that's fine. I annoy the shit out of my opponents, which to me, is winning. Plus, at that point, I can usually get out all of my big bad monsters that I like. Tis fun.  :D

Note to self: no playing AndyJames or Callix.  :P
But the land-killer deck can take a long time. I can mill you into the ground one card at a time. Or it will take me about 20 turns to poke you to death with my little 1/1 elf ;)

I think it is the second most annoying deck that I have ever created.

The most annoying one? An anti-artifact deck. The key cards were Meltdown, Pyroblast and a Pyroblast clone, IIRC. You see, my group like to play Type 1 games, and most of them have the likes of Mox gems, Black Lotus, Sol Rings, etc. Really expensive, 0 casting cost mana acceleration. Their showcase decks are probably worth in the region of 5-10 grand each. So, they have all their expensive cards being showcased across the table, and I drop a Meltdown. You will get a flurry of Counterspells and stuff, but that is what the Pyroblasts are for.

The first time I played it, there was like a minute or two of stunned silence and then the swearing started. Amazing swearing vocabulary, my friends have. You never truly know how extensive, in depth and in how many languages a person can swear in until you drop a generally worthless Common and wipe a few grand worth of cards off the table.

One stunned witness had the comment: "I wouldn't feel so bad. This could have been an Iron Man game..."

I was practically on the floor throughout the silence and the entire tirade. It was also amazing that I didn't piss my pants laughing at the time :P
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Callix July 17, 2008, 11:55:24 PM
*growls*

I think my sole source of joy from Magic is that I make really annoying decks. I can drag out games really long (think: 45 minutes). I usually don't win... but that's fine. I annoy the shit out of my opponents, which to me, is winning. Plus, at that point, I can usually get out all of my big bad monsters that I like. Tis fun.  :D

Note to self: no playing AndyJames or Callix.  :P
It's not that bad. Millfolk is incredibly fragile. All my good effects apart from Merrow Commerce (Untap all merfolk at EOT) are on creatures, none of which have a toughness above 3. It's very disruptable, but if you don't...

Oh, and it runs four merfolk lords (Merrow Reejereys). Which can untap my lands when I play Merfolk spells. For one colored mana thanks to Bannerets. And untap my Fallowsage to draw more cards.

Once, I got to play merfolk spells for 0 mana (untapping the land) and drawing two cards. Since almost every spell in the deck was Merfolk, I got a lot on the board.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: katans July 18, 2008, 09:59:34 AM
I used to play it a lot, but I stopped shortly after 7th edition. My favorite game had turned into a commercial rush after the best card, and the extensions were made even more powerful everytime just to make sure your good ole deck could be crushed by a cheap combination from the most recent product. My financial resources were not limitless, and nobody in my town wanted to play Type 1 with me (maybe because they all were "new" players with practically no old cards), so I quit... Too bad, I had pretty good decks that were fun to play with.

My all-time favourite, a deck for very patient players: a Big Blue with like 24 counterspells (from plain old Counterspell to Force of Will to Rewind...), 4 Propaganda, 4 Capsize, 1 Feldon's Cane, 1 Palinchrome. Tactics: counter everything until round 6, that's when you start having enough mana to recall a Capsize. Use this Capsize to send your opponent's lands back into his hand (take that, Rishadan Port!). Keep countering, drop a few Propaganda for the occasional monster he'll manage to play, and once you've got 12 mana, you can Capsize two lands per round. Then relax and wait for your Palinchrome. If by bad luck your Palinchrone gets killed... well, there's still Feldon's cane and library death. :lol

Another I quite loved: a land-killer masochist deck, based on destroying enemy lands and mana-producing artifacts, and kill with the good old Mogg Maniac + Earthquake combination.

I also had a green weenie, extremely straightforward (round 1 Llanowar elves, round 2 vine treillis, round 3 mungha wurm with Rancor on it... good luck, pal), very cheap save for the few mungha wurms, and quite easy to play.

The day I discovered Draco I made a Pyromancy deck, but it never functioned quite well. Good idea, hard to get a good mana curve without getting heavy on expensive mana boosters.

Good times...
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 18, 2008, 10:10:59 AM
I hated counter decks. They are long and boring to play against. That is why you will find that my decks tend to be heavy on Blue hosers.

The tournament BK deck would nail you by round 4 even with counters (it had Mishra's Factories and Ghitu Encampments in it plus the requisite couple of pyroblasts).

The Land D deck would lock you by round 2. If that don't work, the elves would still beat you to death faster than you can bring out your Palinchron plus it had a couple of attack lands too, IIRC.

And Blue just dies to my White Weenie and Sligh decks. There is just no point in even playing. By turn 2, you are staring at a 2/2 or a 2/1 creature in the face or multiple 2/1 or 1/1 creatures. By turn 4, you are dead.

The guys with the showcase decks loved Blue Control and Blue/Black Control decks, the latter with Vampiric Tutor and Millstone and Morphling. I had to learn to cope against multi-thousand dollar decks with only hundred dollar decks at my disposal.

I think you would hate me very much, Katans, if we ever played :D And I would hate you if your decks managed to stop mine fast enough.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Runestar July 18, 2008, 10:58:03 AM
I don't believe the draw-go deck can't stand against your anti-counter decks. :P

18 islands
4  Quicksand
4  Stalking Stones

1  Rainbow Efreet

4  Counterspell
4  Dismiss
2  Dissipate
3  Forbid
4  Force Spike
3  Mana Leak
1  Memory Lapse

4  Impulse
4  Whispers of the Muse

4  Nevinyrral's Disk

: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: katans July 18, 2008, 01:33:55 PM
@andy: You know, I played this deck for a long, long time and fine-tuned it against a nice amount of various strategies. I don't say I could beat you for sure, but I say you shouldn't bet on beating me anytime. Propaganda can be a real pain in the back (two of them even more so...) against weenie games, and I have the counterspells to ensure the Propaganda will stay in play. Did I mention Wall of Tears?
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Eldariel July 18, 2008, 07:51:57 PM
@OP: The game has 5 official constructed formats. Not one of them contains some deck that's just categorically superior to every other, so the statement that you could "just spend a ton of money on expensive cards and win" is simply false and heavily misinformed. Further, all of the official formats (with the possible exception of Vintage and Block) have open enough cardpools that you can do well against established decks with your own creations as long as you know what you're doing.

The only effect internet had on the game is it rose the level of play; people play better decks and people play better technically. Also thanks to internet, the advancement of deck construction theories has been far more rapid than it would have otherwise been, resulting in people actually knowing how to build decks and thus having a real chance at succeeding with their own creations. Also, you can play online for free with programs if you don't feel like buying expensive cards. Also, you can win (just not have the absolute best win chance) perfectly well with budget creations poised to attack the metagame.


So:
-The internet improved the decks, the players and the game (and made it possible for the less skilled deckbuilders to both, get help with deck construction and to find decks others have perfected if they like the 'playing'-part more than the deck construction)

-You can succeed with your own creations even on international stages in any format.

-You don't need money to win, only to optimize the every last bit out of your chances. Also, thanks to people borrowing cards a lot and online leagues playing with software that doesn't require you to pay for cards, you can construct just about any deck in the more limited formats with relatively small costs as long as you actively strive for it.

-This all applies to casual playing too as long as you follow restrictions/bannings of some official format (there're lots of unofficial ones available too geared towards casual players looking for different game, including formats only allowing cheap cards (Pauper and Peasant)).
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 18, 2008, 10:28:36 PM
It can't because of mana efficiency and instants. I can cast my stuff at the end of your go, tap you out, untap, draw, and have a second go at you while you are still tapped.

Thing is, counterspells are good if the other guy can't kill you by round 3 or so. But Red burn would have done a massive amount of direct damage to you by then. It only needs a bit more to kill you outright. With untap-burn, don't forget that Red can also counter your Counterspells, and it only cost them a Red mana to do so over your 2 Blues. Draw-Go actually puts a Blue player at a disadvantage vs fast Burn Red as it fills the Red player's hand with instant, high efficiency burns that a Blue player would have a hard time countering all the time. That is, unless you somehow survive until the late game, when you have Islands to Africa. Then Blue just wins.

Blue Control would be very nasty vs Weenie decks. Of that I have no doubt. But it is not 100% effective against them, either. If your anti-creature defenses doesn't come out fast enough and in sufficient quantities, you will just be swarmed under by a lot of little guys. Trust me, I have played against a lot of Blue players (just practically everyone but me in my group of about 10 guys played Blue of one stripe or another). Counterpost, Draw-Go, Blue-Black Mill, Palinchron, Fire and Ice, Counter-Drain, you name it, I have run against it.

None of the decks are 100%, of course. No decks are as luck still has a big say in things. But Red burn and Sligh does have the best chance against all decks (like in tournament play). Their main weakness is against Life Drain decks, but even then, it is a case of quickdraw.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Eldariel July 18, 2008, 11:02:28 PM
Do you always want to beat mono-blue control? There's a tool for that: Reset High Tide. A combo-deck built around stack control, the Storm-mechanic and long game superiority, it's not going to lose to a control-deck ever. That simply doesn't happen (unless the pilot is dumb; I've beaten it twice with MUC simply because my opponent tried to win too soon). Also, since it's capable of winning by turn 4 while still playing Remand and Force of Will, it can deal with most aggro-decks as they simply don't tend to win fast enough through the disruption, and most combo-decks don't want to see the counters. The Achilles' Heel is of course Aggro/Control, which is able to establish a fast clock to force High Tide to try to win faster than it would want to, and then disrupt the combo-deck with a few counters; anything else tends to be a dog vs. Tide though. Here's a n example of the modern lists:

4 High Tide
2 Peek
2 Opt
4 Brainstorm
2 Brain Freeze
4 Reset
4 Impulse
4 Remand
1 Twincast
3 Cunning Wish
3 Meditate
3 Turnabout
4 Force of Will
2 Flash of Insight

3 Flooded Strand
3 Polluted Delta
12 Island

Sideboard
1 Stroke of Genius
1 Turnabout
1 Meditate
1 Twincast
1 Chain of Vapor
1 Echoing Truth
1 Evacuation
4 Hydroblast
4 Disrupt


Basically, against mono-blue control you play their game better than they do. At any end of turn, you can start to combo off, force the opponent to counter some spells, respond with more combo-spells and so on. And even if they do manage to counter everything you've got (which is unlikely since your hand consists of 7 threats and you've taken your time playing enough lands to not need mana acceleration), you simply cast Brain Freeze that copies itself for every spell (theirs and yours!) played this turn; even if they counter the original, they have all the copies to deal with. This mills most of their library. Then you just repeat the process if they didn't die the first time. Basically, it has absolute strategic superiority over all control-decks.


As for aggressive red having the best chance against all decks, that's not true; aggressive red loses to fast combo-decks every time. Decks that win 1-2 turns faster than the red deck are simply something the red deck cannot race and red doesn't offer effective disruption to slow the opposing decks down. Ultimately, the best choice to fight basically anything is an efficient aggro-control deck with heavy tempo- and mana denial tools. It has trumps against aggressive beatdown decks in large creatures (that red just can't burn away without wasting cards; heaven forbid the second burn-spell gets countered), removal and tempo counters (they force opponent to either play slower or to lose spells; either way they're on the losing end of the bargain), trumps against control in mana disruption and burn-spells, and trumps against combo in counters, fast clock and specific trump cards. In the mirror, the mana disruption keeps it at least even.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 19, 2008, 03:41:36 AM
Keep in mind that I only played until Invasion, so the more modern cards are unknowns to me. WotC could have come up with something that allowed the later decks to deal with Type I burn, but back in the days I played, fast burn is the only effective counter to Blue control (except for another Blue control). Like I said, when you are playing against guys with the complete set of top 10 Magic cards (Moxes, Black Lotus, etc.), chances are your control and combo decks won't get a chance to do off, and your big fatties won't make it. The only other one I can think of that would be effective is a big fatty deck utilising that Recurring Nightmare nonsense.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: BobismyRhino July 19, 2008, 03:54:45 AM
Ignoring all of your amazingly built decks... I want to make a horsey deck! I've got a Nightmare and 4 Timbermares...

I need more cards. Clearly, I'd get more Nightmares (although, if I'm using a multicolored deck, Nightmares wouldn't work so well for me since I'd naturally have less Swamps out-which determines their power and defense).

I'm going to get some Pegasuses? Pegasi? I hate english. I have no idea what the plural of that word is. But anyways... Do you guys know of any other horse-like cards?  :D
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 19, 2008, 04:10:06 AM
There is a Pegasus Mountaintop thing that allows you to put a 1/1 pegasus token into play. I can't remember exactly what it was called now.

If you like cute critters, take a look at the giant squirrel in Might of Oaks :D
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Runestar July 19, 2008, 05:58:04 AM
Horses....weatherlight has this thundermare - 6 mana, 5/5, haste, taps all creatures when it comes into play.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Eldariel July 19, 2008, 07:37:45 AM
You could make a Pegasus-deck, an Unicorn-deck or a Griffin-deck under those limitations. There's this Sacred Mesa that's a fairly awesome way to build and army of Pegasi. The card Andy is probably thinking is Pegasus Refuge; I personally prefer Mesa though. Then there's Pegasus Stampede, Plated Pegasus, Armored Pegasus, Pegasus Charger and Mesa Pegasus (with all the convoluted Banding-rules). Colours would be hard if you try to include all you want (Nightmare wants TONS of swamps, Timbermare costs GG and Pegasi want lots of white), but by limiting yourself to one part or the other of the idea, you could probably pull it off. One thing; all the mentioned tribes - Unicorns, Pegasi and Griffins - are mostly white.

@Andy: The biggest change in Vintage specifically is that they printed the Storm-mechanic I was talking about, which allows combo-decks to deal with pure control. That changed things a lot. Also, Fact or Fiction got restricted cutting MUC down in size, and there was a large number of unrestrictions (Mishra's Workshop, for example, spawning a whole slew of archetypes built around Artifact Lock Pieces). This was all 5 years ago or so. But yea, back when you played, the decks I saw used against MUC were Suicide Black (that turn 1 Hypno does kick MUC around the building if no Force is forthcoming), Green Stompy and indeed Sligh. Modern T1 meta is probably Oath of Druids, Workshop Control, Mana Drain-decks, Tendrils-combo and maybe some aggressive red decks built to destroy artifacts and screw manabases (Blood Moon)
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: BobismyRhino July 19, 2008, 07:48:14 AM
You could make a Pegasus-deck, an Unicorn-deck or a Griffin-deck under those limitations. There's this Sacred Mesa that's a fairly awesome way to build and army of Pegasi. The card Andy is probably thinking is Pegasus Refuge; I personally prefer Mesa though. Then there's Pegasus Stampede, Plated Pegasus, Armored Pegasus, Pegasus Charger and Mesa Pegasus (with all the convoluted Banding-rules). Colours would be hard if you try to include all you want (Nightmare wants TONS of swamps, Timbermare costs GG and Pegasi want lots of white), but by limiting yourself to one part or the other of the idea, you could probably pull it off. One thing; all the mentioned tribes - Unicorns, Pegasi and Griffins - are mostly white.

Yeah... I was thinking about that. I was wondering how the hell I'd pull off a deck like that... lots of black, white, and green...
I'd have a ton of different colored mana... But then I could add 4 Scuttlemutts, which give me any color of mana...
Bleh. I would have to cut it down to two colors (probably green and white) just so that my horses were, you know, formidable. A 1/1 Nightmare doesn't really do much for me. >.>;;   
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Eldariel July 19, 2008, 08:05:06 AM
You could build a 3-colour version of it, but that would require MONEY. There's this land called Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth that makes all lands in game count as Swamps; that allows everything to produce black AND keeps your Nightmare in full size (just get 3-4 of those). Then you could play some green cards that find non-basic lands (Sylvan Scrying, for example) to get the Urborg when you need it and things would work out just fine. Then some green/white duallands and you'd be producing all the colored mana you'd need. But as I said, it would be relatively expensive to try and pull that off as you would NEED to get some of the more powerful duallands to make it all work out and duallands are among the most expensive cards to buy from thirdparty vendors in Magic. So the base-white deck splashing quite a bit of green for Timbermare (and some other cards too; no point splashing just for one card) is probably your best bet.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames July 19, 2008, 08:24:58 AM
LoL! No way I am getting back into that game, Eladriel :P I actually made some money during the time I played it (tournaments and some of the cards went up in value, and others I got cheap). Besides, it is a WotC product, and WotC is high on my shitlist at the moment ;)

One thing I like about the little flying 1/1 White Pegasi is the fact that I can slap on Crusades, Angelic Hymns, Serra's Blessing and a couple of other global enchantments on them. Suddenly, that 1/1 flyer becomes a 5/5 first striking flyer that does not tap to attack plus other fun stuff :D
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Callix July 19, 2008, 11:28:46 AM
On modern Vintage: There's also a new kid on the block: Hulk Flash. It runs Flash and Protean Hulk, which lets you search out a bunch of small creatures from your deck. These are used to set up an infinite recursion combo with a CIP effect that either kills or mills your opponent. Also, since it's blue, it can run Force of Will and Remand. It's famous for its Turn-Zero win, comboing off at the beginning of its opponent's first upkeep while on the draw.

On the Pegasus Deck: It doesn't run Timbermare, but Sacred Mesa is a favoured finisher in a lot of Teferi's Moat control decks. Magus of the Moat can fill the same niche, stopping faster decks from squashing you while your pegasi run all over them in the air. Just pack a lot of protective spells.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Eldariel July 19, 2008, 06:23:25 PM
On modern Vintage: There's also a new kid on the block: Hulk Flash. It runs Flash and Protean Hulk, which lets you search out a bunch of small creatures from your deck. These are used to set up an infinite recursion combo with a CIP effect that either kills or mills your opponent. Also, since it's blue, it can run Force of Will and Remand. It's famous for its Turn-Zero win, comboing off at the beginning of its opponent's first upkeep while on the draw.

The competitive version doesn't play Gemstone Caverns though so it can't pull that off. The second counter is Pact of Negation actually; free counter with no drawbacks the turn you try to go off. However, Flash just got restricted to 1-of copy per deck, so Hulk Flash is effectively unplayable. Also, they restricted Brainstorm, Gush (after unrestricting it for 3 months, go figure), Ponder and so on, heavily neutering blue, so Vintage is probably more about Bazaars and Workshops now than blue spells Mana Drains. Even Mountains may win.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Judging Eagle October 26, 2008, 06:04:45 PM
Bobismyrhino,

When building decks, the best way to go about doing so is to find one card that you like and would want to win with.


Several years ago at a con I picked up a sealed box of Torment boosters for some price that seemed reasonable.

Aside from getting a lot of foils and all of the rares of the series, there was one rare that really stood out to me; Mortal Combat (honestly, I don't know if this is worth anything or not, the box only had one in all of the boosters that I opened, but it only had one of each of the other rares that I got from that box, so I'm sure that's standard).

I liked the card, I knew that it was awesome, then I built a deck that would make me win with it.

Most of the deck was made up of black Mercenary cards (where 'higher up' mercs could be tapped to bring more mercs with converted costs of 3 or 2 or less straight into play) and white Rebel cards (just like the mercs, only white) to get me both blockers and creatures to fill my graveyard.

The rest of the deck was made up of a few cards that would either 1) find Mortal combat, so that I could put it into play or 2) Keep me from losing it permanently (by digging through my graveyard for a card etc.).

That was one of the decks that that box let me build; the other was the Nightmare Horror deck that removed enemy things from play, an other was more of a way to use all of my previously owned Zombie cards (the Zombie "leader" card from Torment that let you give zombies swampwalk and make target lands into swamps); plus synergize with other cards that I had owned from before.

Net-decking is good, but people that only net deck will be at a loss when someone shows up with a deck that they don't know.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Talen Lee October 26, 2008, 10:14:03 PM
Net-decking is good, but people that only net deck will be at a loss when someone shows up with a deck that they don't know.
Nonsense.

Netdecking is a way to look at decks you didn't design yourself. Netdeckers by definition have the skills to deduce a deck by looking at it, and don't approach games the only way they themselves would approach them.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: BobismyRhino October 27, 2008, 02:09:12 AM
Yeah, one thing I've noticed as I've played more is that when you play against other people in a tournament, they already know you're next move after you've put down like, 2 cards. It's so damn annoying.
I do not have the drive nor do I have the attention span to sit down and figure out different types of decks and how to use them. I'd improve a ton if I did, but I've got other important things to do... Usually.

It makes the game entirely frustrating for lazy people like me who just want to fuck around with Creature-laden decks.

 

: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Callix October 27, 2008, 05:19:53 AM
Yeah, one thing I've noticed as I've played more is that when you play against other people in a tournament, they already know you're next move after you've put down like, 2 cards. It's so damn annoying.
I do not have the drive nor do I have the attention span to sit down and figure out different types of decks and how to use them. I'd improve a ton if I did, but I've got other important things to do... Usually.

It makes the game entirely frustrating for lazy people like me who just want to fuck around with Creature-laden decks.
You should have seen my Merfolk deck. I ran a total of about six noncreature spells, but it could come out of the blocks fast enough to put anyone on the defensive. For that matter, my Kithkin one only uses eight spelss that don't either make creatures or pump them. And there's always that great moment when your oddball card choices just win you the game. For example, I can't afford Mirrorwaeve for the deck, so I use a couple of Surge of Thoughtweft. It's a much worse card in general, but a lot of players dismiss a kithkin deck with two mana open, where they'd be wary of four. And sometimes, that lets you win games.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Talen Lee October 27, 2008, 10:35:27 AM
There's no harm in fucking around. I fuck around. I made a writing career of just fucking around. Casual players need to learn there's nothing wrong with someone else being better than you. What's more important, however, is for the pros to realise that casual players actually generate the money in Magic.

That said, don't go to tournaments. Get some friends and form a casual circle. Hell, I wish I could play modo with friends instead of with nobodies.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: AndyJames October 27, 2008, 07:58:28 PM
Magic is definitely more fun with friends than in tournament. You get a lot of nasty trashtalkers (as opposed to funny, just-for-kicks ones) in tournament play, at least around these parts, and you get people that will scream "ref!" at the drop of a hat hoping that they will somehow get an advantage over ths smallest of things. Bloody annoying.

With friends it I find that I tend to play the more "fun" decks as opposed to my "killer" decks that I use in tournament play. The Eradimate deck is a fun deck. Sure, it can go off in Round 2, but it requires 6 cards to do so (Eradicate, Dark Ritual, Elf or Sol Ring or some form of mana acceleration, Animate Land, Forest, Swamp). I have a bunch of other theme decks that saw play more regularly than the tournament decks. Weak as heck (including a White-Green pile-as-many-enchants-on-a-creature-as-you-can deck), but fun.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: woodenbandman January 17, 2009, 02:45:36 PM
I love control decks, but my friends hate when I use them. They're like, "Oh let's play magic" and then they get mad because they don't agree with the way that I win. And I'm not even that good, really.

My favorite deck is this one that uses a convoluted scheme that ends up with everything on your opponent's side of the field destroyed. It's basically a worldgorger/wrath of god combo, but I prefer to use worldslayer because it only costs like 50 cents and it's way funnier.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Talen Lee January 18, 2009, 06:38:33 AM
Up until Time Spiral rotated, I was giggling myself silly over Norin The Wary + Cream of the Crop.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: johnboy069 February 04, 2009, 09:58:35 PM
I don't believe in netdecking myself, being victim to several over the years. What I will do however is look up decks that run the same colors I want to run (typically red/black, black/blue or red/blue, although lately I have been experimenting with the new elves from Lorwyn block and mixing them with older classics like Llanowars and the one that allows you to put Llanowar elves tokens in play (from Time Spiral block)) and look at decks for inspiration and put my own twist to them. I have never been to a Magic tournament, but I have played at my local gaming shop. They freaked when I set down at the table and started using Pestilences and other old school cards from before Tempest, as 95% of the guys I played against have never seen cards from before the Urza's block.  :D

I do not buy many new cards (I have not bought a booster box since Onslaught, but I am looking at some of the new precon decks from Lorwyn=present, the black/red one particularly (I think it is Army of Darkness or something)), but when I do, I wait until the initial shock value comes down under $10 (I am still waiting for Twincast, Isochron Scepter, and Panoptic Mirror to come down so I can buy 4 of each for under $10 lol.), and I order them off the internet because I have terrible luck getting what I need from packs. :banghead

My most expensive deck cost me around $20. That is because I made a soldier deck using 4x Dariens, 4x Benalish Commanders and 2x Kjeldoran Outposts. The rest of the cards were given to me because they were white and the guy had no use for them lol. I also have a sliver/cleric deck that uses Rotlung Reanimator to regenerate them from the grave lol. That is a fun deck because it uses Mistform slivers so I can change them to clerics, sacrifice them to Cabal Archon, and they come back as zombies thanks to Rotlung. Will either deck win a tournament? Probably not, but they are fun to play and that is all that matters to me. My girlfriend hates both of them lol. She even hates my new elf deck that gains life without using wellwisher. (I told her that if she wants to beat my decks, she should modernize her decks while remaining true to her concept. She just rolls her eyes lol. She still beats me most of the time when we play the WOW card game though (thanks to a semipro giving her tips at a spectral tiger tournament on how to run her warlock deck). ???
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: SixthDeclension March 15, 2009, 08:39:09 PM
Here's some thread necromancy to tell people about an offer.

http://www.hereirule.com/

Fill this out and you get a couple of half decks (30 Cards) for free. What's not to love?
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: CYB3RPUNK May 20, 2010, 08:13:36 PM
Never understood how a human being with the capabilities of higher intelligence could ever play this game let alone a few other games ripped off from it like Pokemon and the yu'gi'oh or what ever it's called.

I would rather play a game of Rummy or strip poker with a couple of girls.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Agita May 20, 2010, 08:21:28 PM
Never understood how a human being with capabilities of higher intelligence could resurrect a months-old thread just to put down a hobby that rquires quite a bit of intelligence and memorization to master and state their preference for a game that requires little thought, is usually coupled with alcohol, and often carries sexist overtones (specifically, the 'a couple of girls' part).

To each his own, yeah?
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: CYB3RPUNK May 20, 2010, 08:23:57 PM
Never understood how a human being with capabilities of higher intelligence could resurrect a months-old thread just to put down a hobby that rquires quite a bit of intelligence and memorization to master and state their preference for a game that requires little thought, is usually coupled with alcohol, and often carries sexist overtones (specifically, the 'a couple of girls' part).

To each his own, yeah?

Agreed, but mine is more self pleasing then yours.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Agita May 20, 2010, 08:25:24 PM
Never understood how a human being with capabilities of higher intelligence could resurrect a months-old thread just to put down a hobby that rquires quite a bit of intelligence and memorization to master and state their preference for a game that requires little thought, is usually coupled with alcohol, and often carries sexist overtones (specifically, the 'a couple of girls' part).

To each his own, yeah?

Agreed, but mine is more self pleasing then yours.
Meh. There's lots of ways to see girls in underwear. :smirk
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: CYB3RPUNK May 20, 2010, 08:27:19 PM
True, but to play a game and win is a lot more fun then stalking them in the night shadow and standing outside their windows.

Also Porn is overly overrated and is only for those who don't know how to sweet talk women.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Sinfire Titan May 21, 2010, 04:16:19 PM
Also Porn is overly overrated and is only for those who don't know how to sweet talk women.

You really need to stop trolling. Just reading your past posts makes me want to put your skull in a vice. Seriously, you're barely a step above the spam bots we get here (at least they have the decency to shut up).
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: CYB3RPUNK May 21, 2010, 04:32:22 PM
Also Porn is overly overrated and is only for those who don't know how to sweet talk women.

You really need to stop trolling. Just reading your past posts makes me want to put your skull in a vice. Seriously, you're barely a step above the spam bots we get here (at least they have the decency to shut up).

Nah, if it is irritating then ignore me, if by some chance that does not work then I'm doing some thing right.

But back to what I was saying.

My friends play this game, I watch them all the time and have tried many times to get in to it. I just found it's not a game for me to play or understand.

: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: Sinfire Titan May 21, 2010, 04:44:03 PM
My friends play this game, I watch them all the time and have tried many times to get in to it. I just found it's not a game for me to play or understand.

Either download MTGO or get Duels of the Planeswalkers. Both of those follow the Comprehensive Rules to the letter, and the demo mode on MTGO can walk you through everything you need to get started. Its the complex things (like maintaining priority) that you'll have trouble with, but that won't matter until you want to go competitive.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: dither May 21, 2010, 04:50:22 PM
My friends play this game, I watch them all the time and have tried many times to get in to it. I just found it's not a game for me to play or understand.

I think someone needs to take his own advice.

Nah, if it is irritating then ignore me, if by some chance that does not work then I'm doing some thing right.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: CYB3RPUNK May 21, 2010, 05:08:53 PM
I think someone needs to take his own advice.


Yea I am, that should be obvious to even you at this point, don't you think?


Just because I'm not in to it does not mean I will talk about it and try to get a understanding of why people play it or like it.

By ignoring some thing another does is just a form of ignorance and I'm not in to that.
: Re: Magic the Gathering: Does this ruin the game?
: miz redavni July 13, 2011, 01:23:07 AM
Meh... to everyone his own.

I live in a town where I'm lucky enough to have 10 friends I play with. Everyone of us look at pro decks but not one of us copy those decks. We all are usually like :

"wait a sec.... wow that's an interesting combo but not the way I want to/would do it... ooohhh but I remember this one card that does it way better!"

I did end up making a deck that costed me $167 and is now worth $200. Its a mass agro vamp deck. Its so fun to play because whenever my friends realize what deck I'm playing they all are like:

"Oh crap he's playing his vamp deck!!!! All 4 or 6 or whatever have to target him or die!"

And I'm usually sitting there laughing killing them all off at once.

In the end I'm a strong believer that looking at pro made decks online is ok but put your own spin on it.