|
I traded for four at .60 each on Puca 2 months ago.
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
Rinkles posted:What are you going to do with them? Is a store going to buy them? Well I'm probably going to try to move them via pucatrade. The price isn't updated their yet, but when it does I'd like to ship them off.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:43
|
|
|
I'm really curious how Puca pulls prices because it usually takes a few days for movements to happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 21:49
|
|
|
Not to be a hater but cvm and boswell are not very accurate about board states / rules interactions as commentators. This is way less appealing than cedric + craig was. Some gems like saying a guy IoK's a land as the guy is literally discarding path to inquisition, languish would kill a goyf with 0 sorceries in either yard, etc. Zoness fucked around with this message at 23:32 on Jan 10, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:29
|
|
|
Here we go now... HOOGS drama!!!!! https://twitter.com/JeffHoogland/status/686297549507006464 It appears it was because the maindeck sleeves were more worn than the sideboard. Hoogs states the sleeves were brand new before the 15 rounds and he is being screwed by the sleeves makers and the judge.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
If I ever go to an event like that and make day 2, I'm probably putting on new sleeves for Sunday.
|
|
#
?
Jan 10, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Molybdenum posted:If I ever go to an event like that and make day 2, I'm probably putting on new sleeves for Sunday. That's the exact opposite strategy for Andrew Boswell 
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:06
|
|
|
Oh jeez he named Borborygmos instead of Boborygmos Enraged.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:07
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Oh jeez he named Borborygmos instead of Boborygmos Enraged. Laffo
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:08
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Oh jeez he named Borborygmos instead of Boborygmos Enraged. I feel like its lame rules lawyering in small way. I am not great with remembering names of cards perfectly and i could see myself loving it up.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Oh jeez he named Borborygmos instead of Boborygmos Enraged. You know Bob's done that before. To even think of that scenario means he's used it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:09
|
|
|
I'm kind of okay with it because there's a lot you can say that clarifies it to enraged like "land throwing guy" or whatever. Plus y'know, having access to the opponent's decklist. Mostly it's just funny though. EDIT: also flavor appropriate really. Zoness fucked around with this message at 00:19 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:14
|
|
|
I know Soul Sisters is technically a modern netdeck but does it have realistic game against anything other than burn and maybe twin?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
No Eldrazi decks in the top 32 at the Charlotte Open http://www.starcitygames.com/events/coverage/3676_top_32_modern_open_decklists.html EDIT: Also Harlan Firer was wearing a "let Zach play" shirt at the IQ I was at two weeks ago, so gently caress that guy forever
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:35
|
|
|
Boco_T posted:No Eldrazi decks in the top 32 at the Charlotte Open http://www.starcitygames.com/events/coverage/3676_top_32_modern_open_decklists.html Obviously this mean its under the radar BUY EVERYTHING IN THE DECK
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:52
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:I know Soul Sisters is technically a modern netdeck but does it have realistic game against anything other than burn and maybe twin? Jund/k and presumably Grixis along with it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
Goryo's Vengeance in charge of making waves and still not winning a major tournament.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:00
|
|
|
Jund supremacy.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:18
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:I know Soul Sisters is technically a modern netdeck but does it have realistic game against anything other than burn and maybe twin? It has game against decks that can't handle big fat dudes in the air and is decent against affinity as token makers with buffs match up well with dorky dudes but not quite as good as b/w tokens. I haven't had the budget to play with archangel of thune or Auriok champion but I hear they are p hot sauce as champ blocks almost all the things from goblin guide to banana man and the angel makes everyone a pride mate.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Only one Bloom deck too in the top 32. Still means it's eating a ban and my poor deck gets turned into EDH scrap and trade fodder.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 01:58
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:I know Soul Sisters is technically a modern netdeck but does it have realistic game against anything other than burn and maybe twin? Yes? I mean it's a Tier 2 deck, so you get what you get. But It can play a 6/6 lifelink flier on turn 2, and plays enough tokens to clog up the board. It's best matchup is obviously burn. My guess is that it's worst matchup is Tron or Infect. But most decks have to respect the 2 turn 6/6 lifelink flier. Ajani's Pridemate can go toe to toe with a Goyf so Jund isn't completely awful. Twin isn't actually a great matchup, sense most twin players aren't gonna try to combo off if you have a sister in play, and you need 2 if they go the pestermite route. Snapcasting a Bolt to kill your sister isn't too hard of a prequisite, and your deck runs out of gas mighty quick.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
Any deck that can get its threats pathed but that also doesn't get any use out of the land, will always be really susceptible.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
End of Life Guy posted:You know Bob's done that before. To even think of that scenario means he's used it. Bob didn't do anything. His opponent read his decklist and still managed to name the wrong card.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:22
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:Bob didn't do anything. His opponent read his decklist and still managed to name the wrong card. Yeah, naming the wrong card is a total fuckup on the player. You don't even need the exact name, as long as you name a uniquely identifiable card that's legal in the format. Even "that legendary guy with the discard a land ability" would probably have been fine, or just needed a Judge to clarify at worst. But not JUST "Borborygmos", cause that's also a legal card in the format.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:Yeah, naming the wrong card is a total fuckup on the player. You don't even need the exact name, as long as you name a uniquely identifiable card that's legal in the format. Even "that legendary guy with the discard a land ability" would probably have been fine, or just needed a Judge to clarify at worst. But not JUST "Borborygmos", cause that's also a legal card in the format. Eh, both players knew which card he was referring to and only one of them knew the angle to exploit. Its legal and a little scummy all at the same time. I don't know if I could let myself play that angle just to win. To each their own. Its like the cedric phillips thing where he rules lawyered an esper charm. technically correct and douchebagery all at the same time. Sickening fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Jan 11, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Its like the cedric phillips thing where he rules lawyered an esper charm. technically correct and douchebagery all at the same time. What happened there exactly?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Its like the cedric phillips thing where he rules lawyered an esper charm. technically correct and douchebagery all at the same time. I don't think I've heard this story.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:49
|
|
|
Ramos posted:What happened there exactly? Opponent plays Esper Charm and says "targeting me". When he goes to draw cards, Ced stops him and calls a judge, because the only mode that targets a player is the discard mode.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:50
|
|
|
Ramos posted:What happened there exactly? Cedric Phillips posted:
Probably the only negative thing I have ever heard about the guy. http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc/19643_Insider_Information_The_Scumbag_Dilemma.html To save you some time on the article its basically "If doing anything to win is scumbaggery, fine, I am a scumbag."
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
actually, he was needling his opponent's rumbling gut. try activating some beano you gassy rear end mother fucker
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
Brownhat posted:Opponent plays Esper Charm and says "targeting me". When he goes to draw cards, Ced stops him and calls a judge, because the only mode that targets a player is the discard mode. Rofl that owns get wrecked idiot
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Read-the-card.txt
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:54
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Eh, both players knew which card he was referring to and only one of them knew the angle to exploit. Its legal and a little scummy all at the same time. I don't know if I could let myself play that angle just to win. To each their own. It's slightly scummy, maybe, but it's still more of a misplay on his opponent's part. No reason he couldn't take 5 seconds and make sure he had it right before finalizing. And the Phillips story is even less scummy. He gave his opponent at least three opportunities to re-read his card and check what he was trying to do, even called a Judge. How much more do you need to make you think "Hmmm, I might be loving up here".
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 02:57
|
|
|
Bread Set Jettison posted:Read-the-card.txt cedric practically told him "hey you dont know what your card does" and the thread still wants to call him out for punishing bad play lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
hey all, get this, on MTGO if you target yourself with Esper Charm or name the wrong card, you get owned. playing for money is the same way, if you don't like it stay at FNM
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:01
|
|
|
If nothing else, it's always better to say what the card will be doing, not where it's going. Saying "Draw mode" works far better.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
I don't think you could realistically make either of those mistakes on MTGO.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:02
|
|
|
lol at everyone saying that it's scummy to not play your opponent's deck for them when there is thousands of dollars at stake
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
Ramos posted:If nothing else, it's always better to say what the card will be doing, not where it's going. Saying "Draw mode" works far better. Unless my 3am brain is being weird, "draw mode" is the correct one, since you choose modes before targets, and draw mode requires no target. Irony Be My Shield posted:I don't think you could realistically make either of those mistakes on MTGO. Pretty sure you can't make the wrong mode error on MTGO, for the reason I wrote above. You still can name the wrong card I guess?
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 17, 2024 17:33 |
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:I don't think you could realistically make either of those mistakes on MTGO. You can't, it gives you a drop down menu of every possible mode and then individually says "pick player to discard" or something.
|
|
#
?
Jan 11, 2016 03:05
|
|