Magic: The Gathering: The Megathread: Tenth Edition

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Traditional Games > Magic: The Gathering: The Megathread: Tenth Edition

Devor: Nov 30, 2004; Lurking more.

Whoever was bitching about the difficulty jump in Magic Forge, jesus christ you were right. On Easy I was winning pretty much every game. The AI isn't super effective at using some of the techy combos, but sometimes it used it pretty effectively. I still won most of my games, and the ones I lost were at least a little close.

Jumped up to medium, and immediately got annihilated by two decks with idiot-proof game plans of "drop lands, count the lands, it means bad things for you". Which is just un-fun to play against with my limited deck. Limited vs Constructed is just a huge bummer.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 6, 2024 16:57

dokomoy: May 21, 2004

Aluren player wins by beatdown after getting his Aluren Surgical Extracion'd. I love seeing weird crap like that in legacy.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:38

standard.deviant: May 17, 2012; Globally Indigent

After the Delver thing, what is the recommendation for people with maybe "not opaque enough" sleeves? Do I have to find checklist cards?

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:42

Korak: Nov 29, 2007; TV FACIST

standard.deviant posted:

After the Delver thing, what is the recommendation for people with maybe "not opaque enough" sleeves? Do I have to find checklist cards?

Its not about the checklist specifically, its about not using sleeves that a Judge would say is too see through.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:43

PrinnySquadron: Dec 8, 2009

Devor posted:

Whoever was bitching about the difficulty jump in Magic Forge, jesus christ you were right. On Easy I was winning pretty much every game. The AI isn't super effective at using some of the techy combos, but sometimes it used it pretty effectively. I still won most of my games, and the ones I lost were at least a little close.

Jumped up to medium, and immediately got annihilated by two decks with idiot-proof game plans of "drop lands, count the lands, it means bad things for you". Which is just un-fun to play against with my limited deck. Limited vs Constructed is just a huge bummer.

It sinkholed me turns 2 and 3 once. I lost that match.

EDIT: I've also seen it go: Land, Mox, Mox, end turn.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:48

Jabor: Jul 16, 2010; #1 Loser at SpaceChem

Devor posted:

Whoever was bitching about the difficulty jump in Magic Forge, jesus christ you were right. On Easy I was winning pretty much every game. The AI isn't super effective at using some of the techy combos, but sometimes it used it pretty effectively. I still won most of my games, and the ones I lost were at least a little close.

Jumped up to medium, and immediately got annihilated by two decks with idiot-proof game plans of "drop lands, count the lands, it means bad things for you". Which is just un-fun to play against with my limited deck. Limited vs Constructed is just a huge bummer.

It's quite an obnoxious jump, yes. On the other hand, the AI is still completely incompetent (one example: it will attack a 2/2 into a pair of 1/3s every time. But it will never attack a 2/2 into something that would trade with it, even when the trade is favourable), so all you really need is some Limited-grade removal and solid creatures to grind out wins. It also doesn't understand creature abilities - it will block a Festering Newt with a 2-toughness creature, and will never sacrifice anything to Desecration Demon even when you're swinging for lethal. Even with all the power the AI has access to, a typical Standard deck would just walk all over it.

And as much fun as getting old cards is, you're much better off opening Standard packs for getting power creatures and the like.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:49

Dungeon Ecology: Feb 9, 2011

To a person who doesn't play in serious tournaments, taking a game loss for not-opaque-enough sleeves seems pretty arbitrary. I'm going to assume that it's me not connecting the dots, and not some draconian punishment.
I have clear sleeves for some of my decks -- I can't see how that gives me an unfair advantage. Would anyone care to enlighten me?

e: is it because some cards appear more tattered than others (moderately played/ heavily played) than others, and that it could be considered 'marked' cards?

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:49

vOv: Feb 8, 2014

Dungeon Ecology posted:

To a person who doesn't play in serious tournaments, taking a game loss for not-opaque-enough sleeves seems pretty arbitrary. I'm going to assume that it's me not connecting the dots, and not some draconian punishment.
I have clear sleeves for some of my decks -- I can't see how that gives me an unfair advantage. Would anyone care to enlighten me?

e: nevermind, I was wrong

vOv fucked around with this message at 02:02 on Mar 17, 2014

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:51

Saeku: Sep 22, 2010

dokomoy posted:

Aluren player wins by beatdown after getting his Aluren Surgical Extracion'd. I love seeing weird crap like that in legacy.

That's the main advantage Aluren has over other combo decks. It's built to have a plan B.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:52

PrinnySquadron: Dec 8, 2009

Jabor posted:

It's quite an obnoxious jump, yes. On the other hand, the AI is still completely incompetent (one example: it will attack a 2/2 into a pair of 1/3s every time. But it will never attack a 2/2 into something that would trade with it, even when the trade is favourable), so all you really need is some Limited-grade removal and solid creatures to grind out wins. It also doesn't understand creature abilities - it will block a Festering Newt with a 2-toughness creature, and will never sacrifice anything to Desecration Demon even when you're swinging for lethal. Even with all the power the AI has access to, a typical Standard deck would just walk all over it.

And as much fun as getting old cards is, you're much better off opening Standard packs for getting power creatures and the like.

Yeah It behaves oddly sometimes: it didn't attack for ages despite outnumbering me with Persist creatures because I had a Black Knight with a sword of light and shadow equipped.

Also I just got to Beacon of Unrest this GB Mortivore decks Geth, and then used the geth to get a 32/32 Lord of Extinction :allears:

EDIT: For removal, check the Ravinca spell shop often: you get the chance to see stuff like Ultimate Price, Putrefy and Mortify.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:55

Korak: Nov 29, 2007; TV FACIST

vOv posted:

Delver is a double-faced card, so if you could see the backs of your cards you'd have a massive advantage. If you're not running double-faced cards, or if you're using the checklist card which has a normal back, it doesn't matter how opaque your sleeves are.

It unfortunately does. Reposting from the tournament report. He did put them in upside down but he wouldn't have suffered a game loss if no one had seen. TLDR: You can receive a game loss for your sleeves.

quote:

Thoughts after the Event

By now, many of you will know that I started the tournament with a perfect Day One record of 9-0, only to come up short on Day Two and finish 11-4. Unfortunately, a game down but in a winning position in game two of my round 10 feature match, I received a game loss for incorrectly shuffling my deck in a way that could have given me an advantage. Rather than give my account of these events, Mackenzie Stratford, the judge who issued me the loss, has been kind enough to comment on the situation:

�I was the table judge for the video feature match during round ten of Grand Prix Melbourne. A few turns into game two, I noticed that some of James� cards were orientated differently to others in his deck. At this stage I paused the game to have a quick look at his deck, and there were seven cards upside down, four Firedrinker Satyr, and three Viashino Firstblade. I quickly brought this to the attention to the Head Judge, Level 4, Chris Richter. Chris and I had a chat with James about the upside down cards, and it turned out that he had shuffled these cards into his sideboard the incorrect way. Unfortunately for him, his sleeves were not fully opaque, so we could see the orientation of the top card of the library at any given time.

The head judge and I don�t believe that James had done this intentionally, or was cheating in any way. However, due to the potential for advantage to be gained, the penalty associated with a marked cards infraction with a pattern in the cards that are marked, is a game loss. As James was a game down in the match, this penalty ended the match.�

-Mackenzie Stratford, Sydney L2

After the game loss (again, which resulted in me losing the match) live on stream at the start of Day Two and following an undefeated run the prior day, I was heartbroken. I very rarely play live, and honestly, I�ve only now begun to realize how ignorant I am of the subtleties and nuances of offline play. To give an example, my round one opponent helped talk me through shuffling a sleeved deck, something I had never done before. Frustration over the game loss affected me throughout the day, and I quickly fell to 9-3. Most of my opponents were extremely understanding and supportive, trying their best to give me the time to get my head back into the game. One opponent even took me to a local cafe for a coffee after our match. Subsequently I was able to somewhat right the ship and win enough games for a respectable finish, but it really stung to be a single win outside of the Top 8. It�s going to take some time to shake that one off. Still, I cannot speak highly enough of the players and judges at the event and I still look forward to playing live again.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:57

hey mom its 420: May 12, 2007

haha I don't know if it's just me today or is Patrick Chapin really funny once again. He's talking about vietnam and KFC and whatever and I'm just cracking up

# ? Mar 17, 2014 01:59

Dungeon Ecology: Feb 9, 2011

Yeah that makes sense -- I hadn't really thought of double-faced cards. I guess you just run the goofy double-faced card insert and just have your Delvers locked-and-loaded on the side, or you just run sleeves you can't even remotely see through.
I wonder if he bought the sleeves the day-of, or whether he's been testing the deck using them.

e: n/m the above post makes the situation clear.

Dungeon Ecology fucked around with this message at 02:04 on Mar 17, 2014

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:02

standard.deviant: May 17, 2012; Globally Indigent

Korak posted:

Its not about the checklist specifically, its about not using sleeves that a Judge would say is too see through.

I use KMC matte blue sleeves, and I think they're good, but it seems like a dumb reason to catch a game loss. Are other proxy options allowed, or does it need to be the checklists?

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:02

Pussy Snorkel: Sep 12, 2008; With the Pussy Snorkel, any man can be a dive master.

standard.deviant posted:

I use KMC matte blue sleeves, and I think they're good, but it seems like a dumb reason to catch a game loss. Are other proxy options allowed, or does it need to be the checklists?

It absolutely has to be the checklist.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:03

meanolmrcloud: Apr 5, 2004; rock out with your stock out

Bonus posted:

haha I don't know if it's just me today or is Patrick Chapin really funny once again. He's talking about vietnam and KFC and whatever and I'm just cracking up

I'll still randomly think of him saying 'scryed it to the bottom now we're here' and curse the fact i'll never be able to explain or use that line in any real life context and have it be as funny as it should be.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:06

hey mom its 420: May 12, 2007

yeah, same, that was the best thing to me at GP Richmond.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:08

Korak: Nov 29, 2007; TV FACIST

GFab finished 2-0 to go to the Finals before the other semi final game had finished 1 match. That has to be scary for those guys, who both drafted a bit durdly decks.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:13

Johnny Five-Jaces: Jan 21, 2009

Ohhhh friends. We are in for a treat. Feline Longmore on stream against some nerd playing a deck with no Force of Wills.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:18

Grouchy Smurf: Mar 12, 2012; "Interesting Quote"
-Interesting guy

AgentSythe posted:

Ohhhh friends. We are in for a treat. Feline Longmore on stream against some nerd playing a deck with no Force of Wills.

And the game loss for drawing extra cards incoming!

Edit: In case you are wondering, no, it won't happen.

Editedit: They actually awarded a Drawing extra cards. God, the judge forums will explode with debates.

Grouchy Smurf fucked around with this message at 02:43 on Mar 17, 2014

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:40

hey mom its 420: May 12, 2007

Why? What's controversial about this? Isn't it routine practice that if you draw extra cards and put them into your hand, you get a game loss

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:44

Korak: Nov 29, 2007; TV FACIST

^^^ She's like known for the deck. She knows every good build of High Tide there currently is and plays enough paper that its a bit shocking.

Grouchy Smurf posted:

And the game loss for drawing extra cards incoming!

Edit: In case you are wondering, no, it won't happen.

Editedit: They actually awarded a Drawing extra cards. God, the judge forums will explode with debates.

Feline got a game loss for drawing extra? She plays the deck so much that's hard to believe.

Oh she drew too many off against a Spirit of the Labyrinth? fuuuuuuck.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:44

hey mom its 420: May 12, 2007

Korak posted:

Feline got a game loss for drawing extra? She plays the deck so much that's hard to believe.

It wasn't the deck, it was the Spirit of the Labyrinth, which her opponent had on the board

edit: do people usually match the colors of their shirts to the colors of mana they run?
edit2: minus points for not wearing blue pants though

hey mom its 420 fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Mar 17, 2014

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:46

Korak: Nov 29, 2007; TV FACIST

Haha GFab drafted his WR 13-15 land deck? This poo poo is over, wrap it up.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:47

mandatory lesbian: Dec 18, 2012

You know, high tide is fun and all, but man is it slow as hell.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:51

Grouchy Smurf: Mar 12, 2012; "Interesting Quote"
-Interesting guy

Bonus posted:

Why? What's controversial about this? Isn't it routine practice that if you draw extra cards and put them into your hand, you get a game loss

The ruling was correct. She draw an extra card, that wasn't due to another illegal action (for example casting a spell that she couldn't normally cast).
The IPG, however, states that if all cards in the player's hard are known, you can fix the problem and downgrade the penalty to a warning.

Her hand was known, due to the inquisition the turn before. She had 3 lands in hard, drew the cantrip and played the cantrip. I can see an argument that this downgrade should be used since a) it technically applies b) the game is live on camera and c) the Spirit of the Labyrinth is a new card that players might not be used to. I can only really disagree with the last point, since it is a competitive rules enforcement tournament.

Ultimately, it's up to the head judge, so the ruling was correct. The debate is if we could be "more correct".

Edit: I can't recall the cantrip she used. The above is only a debate if the spell played was one of those "reveal the card before drawing it".

Grouchy Smurf fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Mar 17, 2014

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:55

Korak: Nov 29, 2007; TV FACIST

^^^ She used ponder.

GP Montreal just lost power to the camera/lights for about a minute. Everything is breaking in MTG land today!

Korak fucked around with this message at 03:09 on Mar 17, 2014

# ? Mar 17, 2014 02:57

CountFosco: Jan 9, 2012; Welcome back to the Liturgigoon thread, friend.

So I just got back from GP Montreal. 3-3, drop. I actually got passed the pool Kenji Tsumura opened, and it was the sickest blue/white heroic build imaginable. I lost a close one in the first four rounds against nessian asp with fall of the hammer to be 3-1 going into round 4, who do I play against? Jon Stern, champion of GP atlantic city. I was still feeling good though, the deck was insane. He proceeds to rip against me: asphyxiate, divine verdict, excoriate, divine verdict, revoke existence, keepsake gorgon. Then round six I draw lands and just lose, once again against nessian asp.

And that's how you scrub out with an insane pool. A couple of small play mistakes but man, randomness can be so harsh sometimes.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:18

Devor: Nov 30, 2004; Lurking more.

On GP Montreal is sounds like the judge is spending a lot of time loving up a ruling.

Fall of hammer targeting the opponent's Battlewise Hoplite. In response, the hoplite's controller casts God's Willing. Asks the judge if he names red, what happens. Judge is saying the damage would still happen, to the bewilderment of the hosts.

They are also saying white would be better regardless, because the creature who would be dealing the damage is white, and there is other white mana still available.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:26

Korak: Nov 29, 2007; TV FACIST

Devor posted:

On GP Montreal is sounds like the judge is spending a lot of time loving up a ruling.

Fall of hammer targeting the opponent's Battlewise Hoplite. In response, the hoplite's controller casts God's Willing. Asks the judge if he names red, what happens. Judge is saying the damage would still happen, to the bewilderment of the hosts.

They are also saying white would be better regardless, because the creature who would be dealing the damage is white, and there is other white mana still available.

I think he wants to name red but if he does the damage on his 3/3 hoplite dies. If he names white his other card fizzles? Like the Judge can't tell him "Just name white."

edit: OH I see, the hammer can't do its thing anyway if he names red.

Korak fucked around with this message at 03:33 on Mar 17, 2014

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:30

taladel: Jun 3, 2011; Fezzin' the days away...

Korak posted:

I think he wants to name red but if he does the damage on his 3/3 hoplite dies. If he names white his other card fizzles? Like the Judge can't tell him "Just name white."

But it doesn't die. First gatherer ruling (c/o magiccards.info):

1/1/2014: As Fall of the Hammer tries to resolve, if only one of the targets is legal, Fall of the Hammer will still resolve but will have no effect: If the first target creature is illegal, it can�t deal damage to anything. If the second target creature is illegal, it can�t be dealt damage.

This was almost ruled in the opposite fashion. By the head judge of the event. Jesus loving christ.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:33

Mulletstation: May 9, 2004; mo' mullets mo' problems

http://www.starcitygames.com/events/coverage/deck_tech_basic_blue_with_henr.html

4x Counterspell

It's like it's 1999 and I'm watching Randy Buehler play, and loving it.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:36

Kabanaw: Jan 27, 2012; The real Pokemon begins here

You'd think they would have figured this out years ago considering fight works the same way and is a keyword that shows up in the core set.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:36

Myriad Truths: Oct 13, 2012

On the one hand, in the end it actually didn't matter even if he had to name white.

On the other, this is super awkward for Wizards, especially since Gatherer is also down.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:37

clamiam45: Sep 10, 2005; HIGH FIVE! I'M GAY TOO!!!!!!

Devor posted:

On GP Montreal is sounds like the judge is spending a lot of time loving up a ruling.

Fall of hammer targeting the opponent's Battlewise Hoplite. In response, the hoplite's controller casts God's Willing. Asks the judge if he names red, what happens. Judge is saying the damage would still happen, to the bewilderment of the hosts.

They are also saying white would be better regardless, because the creature who would be dealing the damage is white, and there is other white mana still available.

The last judge to speak said "If you name red, you'll still receive damage from the white source," which was the blocking creature. Judge could have been talking about combat damage.

Edit:

Mulletstation posted:

http://www.starcitygames.com/events/coverage/deck_tech_basic_blue_with_henr.html

4x Counterspell

It's like it's 1999 and I'm watching Randy Buehler play, and loving it.

I think Miracles has played 4x counterspell for a long time.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:40

Pussy Snorkel: Sep 12, 2008; With the Pussy Snorkel, any man can be a dive master.

clamiam45 posted:

I think Miracles has played 4x counterspell for a long time.

Not four. Never four.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:42

Elysiume: Aug 13, 2009; Alone, she fights.

Myriad Truths posted:

On the one hand, in the end it actually didn't matter even if he had to name white.

On the other, this is super awkward for Wizards, especially since Gatherer is also down.

Magiccards.info is infinitely better than Gatherer for quick checks anyway. It's way faster.

# ? Mar 17, 2014 03:45