|
Count Bleck posted:Does anybody have the current Subsligh decklist? http://sales.starcitygames.com//deckdatabase/displaydeck.php?DeckID=74254
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 04:51 |
|
|
Entropic posted:The bottom line is don't be dink and try to rules lawyer, just cast your poo poo normally.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:25
|
|
|
The worst is when someone tries to angle shoot like that to game the rules and their opponent tries to do the same sort of thing in response and then a judge has to sort that bullshit out. If you opponent does something ambiguous, make them clarify.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:29
|
|
|
Entropic posted:The bottom line is don't be dink and try to rules lawyer, just cast your poo poo normally. It almost always makes more sense to wait until the stack is empty before taking another action, so requiring people to ask "response?" 4 times instead of just "cast 4 lightning bolts" so they don't get gotcha'd just needlessly extends games and therefore events.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:31
|
|
|
If they have no response it really doesn't take that long to go "Bolt? Bolt? Bolt? Bolt? GG." And honestly how often does four spells in a turn like that even come up?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:34
|
|
|
The solution is obviously to just make every paper magic player carry an "F6" card that they can flash.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:35
|
|
|
Entropic posted:If they have no response it really doesn't take that long to go "Bolt? Bolt? Bolt? Bolt? GG." And honestly how often does four spells in a turn like that even come up?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:40
|
|
|
Entropic posted:If they have no response it really doesn't take that long to go "Bolt? Bolt? Bolt? Bolt? GG." And honestly how often does four spells in a turn like that even come up? Not just spells, any time you want to do multiple things. That blog post gives some other good examples. They add up. Of course, there's nothing wrong with doing it that way, but you shouldn't be punished for trying to move the game along more quickly, and I'm glad the tournament rules are written that way.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:41
|
|
|
I like this version but Coordinated Assault is absurd and deserves more than a one-of IMO
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:47
|
|
|
Entropic posted:If you tap mana and put a card on the table you're going to have a hard time telling a judge you didn't actually cast it yet.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:53
|
|
|
Seriously though, just clarify what you're doing and ask your opponent to clarify what they're doing. If you wanna throw four bolts on the table, go for it, but at least say "I'm gonna cast these all in a row unless you have a response to any of them" or "I'm holding priority and putting these all on the stack" as you do it. And if your opponent throws four bolts on the table, ask them which it is.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 01:57
|
|
|
Wadjamaloo posted:It is something that is just sloppy play and poor form though. If you're playing storm and in the process of going off, it's pretty ok to flash your grapeshot and ask if they want to move to the next game or wait for you to finish winning.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:04
|
|
|
Seriously, just reveal the 4 bolts and say "I have 4 bolts, do you concede?" If they don't, cast them one at a time. There's absolutely no reason to actually put them all on the stack at once.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:12
|
|
|
ShadeofBlue posted:Seriously, just reveal the 4 bolts and say "I have 4 bolts, do you concede?" If they don't, cast them one at a time. There's absolutely no reason to actually put them all on the stack at once. playing around Extirpate
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:16
|
|
|
I would not hesitate to overload counter flux in response to anyone casting all 4 bolts at once. Play it right, the holding priority assumption for speedy is reasonable. Next time be patient.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:34
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:I would not hesitate to overload counter flux in response to anyone casting all 4 bolts at once. Play it right, the holding priority assumption for speedy is reasonable. Next time be patient. The actual tournament rules disagree: quote:Whenever a player adds an object to the stack, he or she is assumed to be passing priority unless he or she explicitly announces that he or she intends to retain it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:38
|
|
|
Nevermind, fixed.
AzureKing fucked around with this message at 02:47 on Oct 26, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:42
|
|
|
Yea, if they cast 4 bolts and you overload counterflux sorry, 3 of them resolve because you get priority after the first one unless you are "unsure of the board state." That's what I was getting at by saying you could bait out things like that. The blog even gives examples where you tap out to pay for things, then untap the mana and do something different. I know how I would do these things: if I want to hold priority I say "in response" between the spells, if not I ask "response?" but frankly if there's serious money on the line and I can trick someone into a misplay, or they can trick me, I'd like to know about it and think about how it would affect my plays.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 02:48
|
|
|
vOv posted:The actual tournament rules disagree: What's the matter here? They cast 4 copies of a spell on the stack and then passed priority to me. What other possibility is there if they didn't let me cast anything in between the 4 bolts? That is seriously looking like holding priority to me. If they intended to cast it one by one they would have done so. Or is this another one of those gotcha moments like the guy who claimed revenge vine trigger priority was passed after eye contact was made?
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:09
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:What's the matter here? They cast 4 copies of a spell on the stack and then passed priority to me. What other possibility is there if they didn't let me cast anything in between the 4 bolts? That is seriously looking like holding priority to me. If they intended to cast it one by one they would have done so. It gives players (e.g. newer players) the benefit of the doubt of free spells or other unknown ways the opponent could have interacted. The way you describe it were the rules like, a decade ago. It sucked that way. e.g. Opponent at 5 life, tapped out, new player pitches last 3 cards to Wild Mongrel and swings in for the win, gets blown out by Slaughter Pact. Old rules were "get hosed, newb". New rules are "yes, you accurately determined you have the win on board, here's a lesson about how to tactically take care of it more properly next time".
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:16
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:What's the matter here? They cast 4 copies of a spell on the stack and then passed priority to me. What other possibility is there if they didn't let me cast anything in between the 4 bolts? That is seriously looking like holding priority to me. If they intended to cast it one by one they would have done so. It's because there's literally one "correct" way to play it 99% of the time, everyone knows that, and forcing people to stop and ask for a response every time they want to cast multiple spells just slows down rounds for literally no benefit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:19
|
|
|
AnacondaHL posted:It gives players (e.g. newer players) the benefit of the doubt of free spells or other unknown ways the opponent could have interacted. how would the "updated" rules change this situation? Presumably the opponent wouldnt do anything until the mongrel was swinging for lethal e: oh right, the color thing
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:19
|
|
A big flaming stink posted:how would the "updated" rules change this situation? Presumably the opponent wouldnt do anything until the mongrel was swinging for lethal fake edit: yes, it's a nod to an old school tactic of always naming Black when activating Wild Mongrel's ability.
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:21
|
|
|
Has anyone else been getting the "deck submission error: log out and in again" bug since the update? Its happened both drafts I've done this weekend. The first time I was able to log in and make my deck in time, but the second I was stuck with 80 card decks r1. I filed for and got reimbursed both times, but still, annoying.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:40
|
|
|
Cactrot posted:If you're playing storm and in the process of going off, it's pretty ok to flash your grapeshot and ask if they want to move to the next game or wait for you to finish winning. Chill la Chill posted:I would not hesitate to overload counter flux in response to anyone casting all 4 bolts at once. Play it right, the holding priority assumption for speedy is reasonable. Next time be patient. You can argue all you want chill, but the rules flat out disagree with you.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 03:45
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:What's the matter here? They cast 4 copies of a spell on the stack and then passed priority to me. What other possibility is there if they didn't let me cast anything in between the 4 bolts? That is seriously looking like holding priority to me. If they intended to cast it one by one they would have done so. Structuring the rules in such a way that it's assumed that you've sequenced your play in what is usually the optimal manner seems like exactly the opposite of a "gotcha," honestly.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:04
|
|
|
What is this U/B helmerator deck on the CardTitan stream and where is a list for it? Looks kinda awesome and I want to see more of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:31
|
|
|
Its probably pretty close to this. 4 baleful strix 4 force of will 3 transmute artifact 2 tezzeret the seeker 4 leyline of the void 4 tezzeret, agent of bolas 1 sword of the meek 2 thopter foundry 2 ensnaring bridge 1 helm of obedience 1 trinisphere 4 talisman of dominance 4 chalice of the void 2 dimir signet 1 academy ruins 1 darkwater catacombs 1 island 1 seat of the synod 1 swamp 1 urborg, tomb of yawgmoth 2 darkslick shores 3 city of traitors 3 underground sea 4 ancient tomb 4 polluted delta 1 meekstone 1 pithing needle 4 toxic deluge 1 engineered explosives 2 flusterstorm 2 lodestone golem 2 trinisphere 1 batterskull 1 cursed totem That was posted on the source by someone that I think might be him.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:51
|
|
|
White/Black deck is starting to take shape. New additions: 2 x Elspeth, Sun's Champion 4 x Bloodsoaked Champion 4 x Hero's Downfall 3 x Wingmate Roc I'll post a deck list soon enough and see what my goon brothers think. Only been playing a couple weeks, but I've done pretty well against the standard stuff I've played so far. I have a single Sorin in there as well and I don't know if I should add another one or not 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 04:56
|
|
|
AnacondaHL posted:I've never seen a tournament that couldn't start 2 hours after it was supposed to. UGH It was horrible. Just got home and I live about 45 mins away. Sampatrick posted:They said there was a huge amount of traffic, and they decided to delay it to let everybody arrive on time. We got there in great time. No traffic at all. Someone was bullshitting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 06:03
|
|
|
Speaking of deck tweaks, working on a completely psychotic sideboard plan for Jeskai Ascendancy combo that involves 4 Bassara Tower Archers.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 07:28
|
|
|
Ugh, sudden changes like that just screw people over who have to make the long drive back or had other plans after the tournament.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 08:01
|
|
|
Seymour Butts posted:White/Black deck is starting to take shape. I am very skeptical that a deck exists which wants both big Elspeth and Champion, they just feel like they go in two completely different styles of deck
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 11:35
|
|
|
Maybe it's a bad strategy, but I figure Bloodsoaked Champion is a good 1 drop. Chief of the Edge as a 2 drop. She gives all warriors +1/+0. If I manage to play another Chief on turn 3 then I can immediately swing for 8 and then 12 on the next turn. I have two End Hostilities in case I get overwhelmed and some Rush to Battle and Take Up Arms. Like I said, I am essentially brand new and I pulled a Sorin so I went for white/black and this is where I am now.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 14:17
|
|
|
The problem is that your 1 and 2 drops are very aggressive, while your end hostilities and Elspeth are a lot slower cards (+ the wrath being a huge nonbo with your weenie beatdown). Having these cards in the same deck means that your aggro will be a lot worse, as you will draw these controll/late game cards early. While at the same time your late-game is a lot worse because you a have a lot of 1s and 2s in your deck. The result is a deck that is very conflicted in which role it wants to have, because of the non-synergy. You will have more success with a more focused strategy edit: deck tech from gp stockholm with bw http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/coverage/gpsto14/deck-tech-bw-aggro-martin-juza-2014-10-26
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 14:25
|
|
|
Seymour Butts posted:Maybe it's a bad strategy, but I figure Bloodsoaked Champion is a good 1 drop. Chief of the Edge as a 2 drop. She gives all warriors +1/+0. If I manage to play another Chief on turn 3 then I can immediately swing for 8 and then 12 on the next turn. I have two End Hostilities in case I get overwhelmed and some Rush to Battle and Take Up Arms. Like I said, I am essentially brand new and I pulled a Sorin so I went for white/black and this is where I am now. There's nothing wrong with the warriors plan but elspeth/end hostilities don't fit in there. They are good cards on their own and you can go a midrange route, but then the aggro cards won't work out well. Try to decide which angle you like best and focus on that. Sorin works out well no matter which way you go.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:02
|
|
|
Bylander better not win because I'd rather not have to deal with TWO control decks running around in standard. Even if there is no Rev.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 15:58
|
|
|
I wanted to see that third Elvish Mystic smashin so bad. He's reppin Your Mom's Basement, a cool little LGS in the area.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 16:35
|
|
|
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 04:51 |
|
|
God loving dammit.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2014 16:39
|
|