Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
The only thing that bugs me about clover is that it copies the spell on cast not on resolution, so there is no interaction with it once it hits the board unless you have artifact removal, which most decks don’t.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
+3
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
This ban is a real boon to me because I already had Temur Adventures crafted, so all I had to do is craft some Pathways (which are "free" because they're rare lands) and four Omnaths (which is free because lmao) and I've got myself a Tier 0.5 deck.
Nope this is extremely boring. Back to Historic I go.
The only thing that bugs me about clover is that it copies the spell on cast not on resolution, so there is no interaction with it once it hits the board unless you have artifact removal, which most decks don’t.
The only thing that bugs me about clover is that it copies the spell on cast not on resolution, so there is no interaction with it once it hits the board unless you have artifact removal, which most decks don’t.
If the clover is powerful enough that people want to ban it maybe more decks should consider artifact removal?
Temur Adventures actually takes some skill to play well, so that's positive I guess...
Eh, I've honestly never played it before. Just ran from Mythic 85% to Mythic 95% with my only loss being to a Dimir Rogues deck that drew 4 lands, 3 of the 3/2 deathtouch guys, and nothing else but Drowns, Mystics, and Acts while milling away all my removal, and it was still really close.
Power > Skill methinks.
morgan_coke on
XBL: Morgan Coke Yes, there is a space, not an underscore. I'm old school like that.
Battle.net: morgancoke#1589
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
The only thing that bugs me about clover is that it copies the spell on cast not on resolution, so there is no interaction with it once it hits the board unless you have artifact removal, which most decks don’t.
If the clover is powerful enough that people want to ban it maybe more decks should consider artifact removal?
Because not many decks run artifacts, because it’s an enabler not a win-con, and because artifact removal is limited to color base
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
There isn't any that I could see that was decent in W (or aside Doom Foretold though.
There's banishing light too I guess, but it folds to Ugin.
There's that Rogue now I guess.
I've been running a couple Heliod's Intervention. It's slightly inefficient when only blowing up one thing but scales up nicely and worst-case scenario undoes a few hits you've taken.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
The only thing that bugs me about clover is that it copies the spell on cast not on resolution, so there is no interaction with it once it hits the board unless you have artifact removal, which most decks don’t.
If the clover is powerful enough that people want to ban it maybe more decks should consider artifact removal?
Single target removal is a limited mechanic. If you're answering your opponents threat and not gaining a mana or a card advantage, you're behind. You might be able to pick off a clover but if you disenchant it, you spent as many resources as they did playing it and they might have even gotten use out of it before you could draw/play your disenchant. The rest of their deck still works without clover and you now have a dead card in your hand when they don't draw it.
Best answer is probably Embereth Shield Breaker or Wilt which are going to be only awkward and not unplayable against the rest of the field.
The only thing that bugs me about clover is that it copies the spell on cast not on resolution, so there is no interaction with it once it hits the board unless you have artifact removal, which most decks don’t.
If the clover is powerful enough that people want to ban it maybe more decks should consider artifact removal?
Clover is powerful, but it's a powerful value-enabler in a deck that is based around value. The Adventures deck is based around getting consistent 2-3 for 1s, which Clover is one possible way to do. But Innkeeper, Omnath, a powerful wishboard, and the Adventures themselves are all other ways the deck generates value. You can't beat a deck based around generating that much value by trading 1-for-1.
Abrade would be great because it kills any of the three value engines the deck plays T1 or T2, so it's at least not a dead card in almost any matchup, but any artifact-only removal is super bad because it does nothing against an innkeeper/cobra start.
I ate an engineer
0
admanbunionize your workplaceSeattle, WARegistered Userregular
Yep. Which is part of the more general criticism leveled by Ari Lax: the answers in the format are so much worse than the threats.
He definitely deserved it, but he wasn't enough of an answer on his own.
I think the problem is that there is no way to turn value into pain in a useful way.
Some kind of horrible artifact like this perhaps.
(3) Circle of the Fair - Permanents and spells other than Circle of the Fair may not cause you to draw cards.
Each turn, if your opponent draws a second card. You draw two cards.
The first time your opponent copies a spell each turn, place two counters on Circle of the Fair
(1) - Remove a counter from circle of the fair, copy target spell. You may choose new targets for the copy. Copied permanent spells become Tokens.
Indestructible.
Effectively, its a 'I get all the value you get as well' artifact. It punishes opponents for excessive value finding play.
He definitely deserved it, but he wasn't enough of an answer on his own.
I think the problem is that there is no way to turn value into pain in a useful way.
Some kind of horrible artifact like this perhaps.
(3) Circle of the Fair - Permanents and spells other than Circle of the Fair may not cause you to draw cards.
Each turn, if your opponent draws a second card. You draw two cards.
The first time your opponent copies a spell each turn, place two counters on Circle of the Fair
(1) - Remove a counter from circle of the fair, copy target spell. You may choose new targets for the copy. Copied permanent spells become Tokens.
Indestructible.
Effectively, its a 'I get all the value you get as well' artifact. It punishes opponents for excessive value finding play.
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
Well, that was riveting. Draft game in which both of us played a first turn Ruin Crab and then a bunch of defensive creatures. Nobody attacked the entire game and I won by playing Lullmage's Domination to steal their Ruin Crab when we both had 5 or 6 cards left.
+3
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Well, that was riveting. Draft game in which both of us played a first turn Ruin Crab and then a bunch of defensive creatures. Nobody attacked the entire game and I won by playing Lullmage's Domination to steal their Ruin Crab when we both had 5 or 6 cards left.
He definitely deserved it, but he wasn't enough of an answer on his own.
I think the problem is that there is no way to turn value into pain in a useful way.
Some kind of horrible artifact like this perhaps.
(3) Circle of the Fair - Permanents and spells other than Circle of the Fair may not cause you to draw cards.
Each turn, if your opponent draws a second card. You draw two cards.
The first time your opponent copies a spell each turn, place two counters on Circle of the Fair
(1) - Remove a counter from circle of the fair, copy target spell. You may choose new targets for the copy. Copied permanent spells become Tokens.
Indestructible.
Effectively, its a 'I get all the value you get as well' artifact. It punishes opponents for excessive value finding play.
?
He's a creature and not indestructible. Unfortunately, he falls too easily to a wide variety of the removal that 'value' decks already run. You put him out, he's just going to die. He's a good card to be sure, and he's in my cleric deck, and he buffs it up nicely against quite a few decks, but not against the top tier ones which just obliterate him (and everything else I can put out)
If I can keep creatures on the board and life totals matter, I'm already winning. Its just that you can't do that against all the top tier stuff.
Oh, shall I tell you whats a very annoying new trend I've seen. The WINNING player starting to 'good game' me before I decide to concede. Err, shut the heck up you goof. You are winning, or at least you think you are. When you say 'Good Game' that means, "You have beaten me and I give up, I concede". You don't say it when you think you have won.
Oh, shall I tell you whats a very annoying new trend I've seen. The WINNING player starting to 'good game' me before I decide to concede. Err, shut the heck up you goof. You are winning, or at least you think you are. When you say 'Good Game' that means, "You have beaten me and I give up, I concede". You don't say it when you think you have won.
Oh that trend isn't new.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
Oh, shall I tell you whats a very annoying new trend I've seen. The WINNING player starting to 'good game' me before I decide to concede. Err, shut the heck up you goof. You are winning, or at least you think you are. When you say 'Good Game' that means, "You have beaten me and I give up, I concede". You don't say it when you think you have won.
Or, and hear me out, they think that the match was a fun experience and hope your enjoying it too... That or Settle the Wreckage is in rotation somehow.
I may be a bad person, but I will usually "good game" when I have lethal and an opponent is tapped out, as a proxy for not being able to reveal my hand and say "go to game 2?"
I may be a bad person, but I will usually "good game" when I have lethal and an opponent is tapped out, as a proxy for not being able to reveal my hand and say "go to game 2?"
If you are winning on board, your opinion on the quality of the game is not objective and it looks like rub-ins regardless of your intention. Let the person who is DOB initiate always.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
I may be a bad person, but I will usually "good game" when I have lethal and an opponent is tapped out, as a proxy for not being able to reveal my hand and say "go to game 2?"
If you are winning on board, your opinion on the quality of the game is not objective and it looks like rub-ins regardless of your intention. Let the person who is DOB initiate always.
Case in point: last time I had someone about to swing with 50 scute vs my 4 blockers. "Good game"
Pause for Reflection, crackback. Swings again. Pause for Reflection, make 90 scutes.
I may be a bad person, but I will usually "good game" when I have lethal and an opponent is tapped out, as a proxy for not being able to reveal my hand and say "go to game 2?"
If you are winning on board, your opinion on the quality of the game is not objective and it looks like rub-ins regardless of your intention. Let the person who is DOB initiate always.
Case in point: last time I had someone about to swing with 50 scute vs my 4 blockers. "Good game"
Pause for Reflection, crackback. Swings again. Pause for Reflection, make 90 scutes.
On a related note, why am I punished with a draw when my idiot opponent is the one generating so many Scutes that Arena overflows?
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
Resolving too many effects, like multiplying scute swarm: if it can't be sped up, substantially, it should only count against the owner's time and just cut off mid resolution and end their turn. If we're not down with that, then the current draw trigger should just be a concede for the person forcing that situation to happen.
I may be a bad person, but I will usually "good game" when I have lethal and an opponent is tapped out, as a proxy for not being able to reveal my hand and say "go to game 2?"
If you are winning on board, your opinion on the quality of the game is not objective and it looks like rub-ins regardless of your intention. Let the person who is DOB initiate always.
Nobody's opinion on the quality of the game is objective, and I'm not saying I do it when I have lethal on board; that's usually obvious. I will GG when I have lethal, i.e. when the cards in my hand guarantee a win, as a proxy to typical Magic play, where "I've got the win, roll onto the next game" is (IME) pretty normal unless you're in a format and matchup where you expect free counterspells.
You/Phoenix also seem to be projecting this onto me like... GGing when I'm attacking into open mana, which I never do. That's dumb. But unless I'm playing against a Historic ramp-deck, I can feel exceedingly confident when I have lethal against somebody with no open mana (alas, pact of negation exists now).
I'm not projecting anything on to you; using "you" in my post was lazy and I apologize for any unintended offense.
Anyway, I hold this opinion of anyone "gg"ing in a winning position and practice it myself. If the losing player doesn't initiate the gg(/offer the handshake if in person), the winner should not. It's just bad manners.
AC:NH Chris from Glosta SW-5173-3598-2899 DA-4749-1014-4697 @vyolynce@mastodon.social
Oh, shall I tell you whats a very annoying new trend I've seen. The WINNING player starting to 'good game' me before I decide to concede. Err, shut the heck up you goof. You are winning, or at least you think you are. When you say 'Good Game' that means, "You have beaten me and I give up, I concede". You don't say it when you think you have won.
Or, and hear me out, they think that the match was a fun experience and hope your enjoying it too... That or Settle the Wreckage is in rotation somehow.
There's a "Nice!" emote. People who are having fun say that. I like
I don't mind Good Game with lethal and I'm tapped out. What annoys me is when people are just doing well and then start good gaming when it's blatantly not over.
Posts
Steam ID: Obos Vent: Obos
Nope this is extremely boring. Back to Historic I go.
*sighs and reaches for Doom Foretold*
If the clover is powerful enough that people want to ban it maybe more decks should consider artifact removal?
There's banishing light too I guess, but it folds to Ugin.
There's that Rogue now I guess.
Eh, I've honestly never played it before. Just ran from Mythic 85% to Mythic 95% with my only loss being to a Dimir Rogues deck that drew 4 lands, 3 of the 3/2 deathtouch guys, and nothing else but Drowns, Mystics, and Acts while milling away all my removal, and it was still really close.
Power > Skill methinks.
Battle.net: morgancoke#1589
Titan's Creed: Jump first, don't ask questions, punch everything
Because not many decks run artifacts, because it’s an enabler not a win-con, and because artifact removal is limited to color base
I've been running a couple Heliod's Intervention. It's slightly inefficient when only blowing up one thing but scales up nicely and worst-case scenario undoes a few hits you've taken.
Single target removal is a limited mechanic. If you're answering your opponents threat and not gaining a mana or a card advantage, you're behind. You might be able to pick off a clover but if you disenchant it, you spent as many resources as they did playing it and they might have even gotten use out of it before you could draw/play your disenchant. The rest of their deck still works without clover and you now have a dead card in your hand when they don't draw it.
Best answer is probably Embereth Shield Breaker or Wilt which are going to be only awkward and not unplayable against the rest of the field.
Clover is powerful, but it's a powerful value-enabler in a deck that is based around value. The Adventures deck is based around getting consistent 2-3 for 1s, which Clover is one possible way to do. But Innkeeper, Omnath, a powerful wishboard, and the Adventures themselves are all other ways the deck generates value. You can't beat a deck based around generating that much value by trading 1-for-1.
I actually agree that Uro should have been banned but this is still funny
I think the problem is that there is no way to turn value into pain in a useful way.
Some kind of horrible artifact like this perhaps.
(3) Circle of the Fair - Permanents and spells other than Circle of the Fair may not cause you to draw cards.
Each turn, if your opponent draws a second card. You draw two cards.
The first time your opponent copies a spell each turn, place two counters on Circle of the Fair
(1) - Remove a counter from circle of the fair, copy target spell. You may choose new targets for the copy. Copied permanent spells become Tokens.
Indestructible.
Effectively, its a 'I get all the value you get as well' artifact. It punishes opponents for excessive value finding play.
?
Except that cleric decks are kinda low power in standard right now because of Omnath, sure.
Hell is Other Mill Crabs.
might even be better now that I don't have to worry about fueling Uro with the Mill
He's a creature and not indestructible. Unfortunately, he falls too easily to a wide variety of the removal that 'value' decks already run. You put him out, he's just going to die. He's a good card to be sure, and he's in my cleric deck, and he buffs it up nicely against quite a few decks, but not against the top tier ones which just obliterate him (and everything else I can put out)
If I can keep creatures on the board and life totals matter, I'm already winning. Its just that you can't do that against all the top tier stuff.
Oh that trend isn't new.
Or, and hear me out, they think that the match was a fun experience and hope your enjoying it too... That or Settle the Wreckage is in rotation somehow.
For all I know, people have been emoting at me since beta but I wouldn't know. Best decision I ever made in MTG.
If you are winning on board, your opinion on the quality of the game is not objective and it looks like rub-ins regardless of your intention. Let the person who is DOB initiate always.
Case in point: last time I had someone about to swing with 50 scute vs my 4 blockers. "Good game"
Pause for Reflection, crackback. Swings again. Pause for Reflection, make 90 scutes.
On a related note, why am I punished with a draw when my idiot opponent is the one generating so many Scutes that Arena overflows?
Nobody's opinion on the quality of the game is objective, and I'm not saying I do it when I have lethal on board; that's usually obvious. I will GG when I have lethal, i.e. when the cards in my hand guarantee a win, as a proxy to typical Magic play, where "I've got the win, roll onto the next game" is (IME) pretty normal unless you're in a format and matchup where you expect free counterspells.
You/Phoenix also seem to be projecting this onto me like... GGing when I'm attacking into open mana, which I never do. That's dumb. But unless I'm playing against a Historic ramp-deck, I can feel exceedingly confident when I have lethal against somebody with no open mana (alas, pact of negation exists now).
Anyway, I hold this opinion of anyone "gg"ing in a winning position and practice it myself. If the losing player doesn't initiate the gg(/offer the handshake if in person), the winner should not. It's just bad manners.
There's a "Nice!" emote. People who are having fun say that. I like
I don't mind Good Game with lethal and I'm tapped out. What annoys me is when people are just doing well and then start good gaming when it's blatantly not over.