|
newtestleper posted:Does anyone know why there's never been a cycle of simple enter the board untapped, non-typed dual lands? they don't want to print lands that are better then basics, and just because they're untyped doesn't mean they aren't better then basics
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2015 23:59
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
newtestleper posted:Does anyone know why there's never been a cycle of simple enter the board untapped, non-typed dual lands? Because that is too good. Not as good as fetches/shocks, but still too good.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:04
|
|
|
forbidden lesbian posted:they don't want to print lands that are better then basics, and just because they're untyped doesn't mean they aren't better then basics There's an obvious solution to make the basic distinction important 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
Yeah the creature/burn mono-red deck feels pretty good now, the introduction of Wild Slash and the dash goblins was enough to put it over the top. Zurgo and Roast both seem like very good tools for the deck. I'm not 100% sure on Dragon Fodder, I might use it instead of Hordeling Outburst out of curve considerations but I feel like running both is just too bad against Bile Blight.qbert posted:Yeah the card's great and will definitely be the most played of the new Commands. I'm not entirely sold on playing it main, but there will definitely be multiples in my sideboard. It's pretty bad in control matchups of course, but that's true of any cheap creature removal and it's at least not completely dead there. I think it's so good at shoring up the matchup vs aggressive decks that it will allow Abzan to include more answers to control elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:08
|
|
|
newtestleper posted:Does anyone know why there's never been a cycle of simple enter the board untapped, non-typed dual lands? Because Wizards doesn't print cards that are strictly better than basic lands, which is why they stopped printing the ABU Duals in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:17
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Because Wizards doesn't print cards that are strictly better than basic lands, which is why they stopped printing the ABU Duals in the first place. And another dagger thrust sinks deep into the necrotic flesh of the phrase "strictly better"
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:20
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:And another dagger thrust sinks deep into the necrotic flesh of the phrase "strictly better" Second part of the argument is correct, ABU duals ARE strictly better than basics (excepting the obvious "can only have 4 of them"). The first one is arguable at least, since a land that can produce more than one colour of mana without an actual drawback (yes, they can't be fetched, that is a metagame thing and not applicable when comparing card-to-card) IS strictly better than a basic.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:27
|
|
|
Actually the original design of the ABU duals is that the typed line is the drawback! You get exposed to all sorts of nasty cards! I'm sure some other dinosaur will tell us a tale of how he got, I don't know, Acid Rain'd out of a game back in 1996 or something.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:29
|
|
|
Choke hits Tundra. Tundra is strictly worse than Plains.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:33
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:ABU duals ARE strictly better than basics (excepting the obvious "can only have 4 of them") Still wrong. Spiderdrake posted:Actually the original design of the ABU duals is that the typed line is the drawback! You get exposed to all sorts of nasty cards! Acid Rain might not be relevant anymore but Blood Moon, Wasteland etc. absolutely are. If ABUR duals were strictly better than there would be no reason whatsoever to ever fetch for a basic if there were duals left in your library, so the 'strictly better' claim is immediately falsified by the fact that players strategically do just that all the goddamn time. (Please note, I am still just being pedantic here because folks didn't want to just let my original joke lie, so please don't try to spin this into me saying that duals are worse than basics overall, or whatever.)
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:35
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:Still wrong. Pedantic is fine, but "strictly better" means that it is unhindered by metagame (which Blood Moon and Wasteland and whatnot are part of). I've been wanting to write a post about what would be STRICTLY better. Like Lightning Bolt/Shock/Searing Spear. Bolt is better than both, but the other two are not strictly better than worse than one another. Sorry for not getting your joke, by the way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:39
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:There's an obvious solution to make the basic distinction important they should have made relentless rats a basic creature
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:41
|
|
|
If you define "strictly better" in that way then you'll find that pretty much no card is strictly better than any other card and the term becomes worthless. Counterspell isn't strictly better than Cancel, Counterspell gets hit by Spell Snare! Lightning Bolt isn't strictly better than Lightning Strike, it can be hit by Mental Misstep! Mindslaver! Muraganda Petroglyphs! Chalice of the Void!
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:43
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:Pedantic is fine, but "strictly better" means that it is unhindered by metagame (which Blood Moon and Wasteland and whatnot are part of). I've been wanting to write a post about what would be STRICTLY better. Like Lightning Bolt/Shock/Searing Spear. Bolt is better than both, but the other two are not strictly better than worse than one another. Lightning bolt is countered by Chalice of the Void, which is a part of the metagame.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If you define "strictly better" in that way then you'll find that pretty much no card is strictly better than any other card and the term becomes worthless. Counterspell isn't strictly better than Cancel, Counterspell gets hit by Spell Snare! Lightning Bolt isn't strictly better than Lightning Strike, it can be hit by Mental Misstep! Mindslaver! Muraganda Petroglyphs! Chalice of the Void! One might conclude here that we should stop saying 'strictly better' when we mean 'better'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If you define "strictly better" in that way then you'll find that pretty much no card is strictly better than any other card and the term becomes worthless. Counterspell isn't strictly better than Cancel, Counterspell gets hit by Spell Snare! Lightning Bolt isn't strictly better than Lightning Strike, it can be hit by Mental Misstep! Mindslaver! Muraganda Petroglyphs! Chalice of the Void! Pretty much my point, thanks.  Actually, would there be interest in the "Strictly Better" post I mentioned? With examples, points of comparison, and so forth?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:45
|
|
|
Serperoth posted:Pedantic is fine, but "strictly better" means that it is unhindered by metagame (which Blood Moon and Wasteland and whatnot are part of). I've been wanting to write a post about what would be STRICTLY better. Like Lightning Bolt/Shock/Searing Spear. Bolt is better than both, but the other two are not strictly better than worse than one another. Lightning Bolt isn't strictly better than Shock because what if you have Hitedsugu's Second Rite in hand and your opponent has 12 life?  And don't get me started on Searing Spear. Ever heard of Mental Misstep? 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:46
|
|
|
It takes a lot of effort to find a case where you'd rather have cancel in your hand than stoic rebuttal that doesn't involve mindslaver shenanigans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:47
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:One might conclude here that we should stop saying 'strictly better' when we mean 'better'.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:48
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:It takes a lot of effort to find a case where you'd rather have cancel in your hand than stoic rebuttal that doesn't involve mindslaver shenanigans.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:57
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:It takes a lot of effort to find a case where you'd rather have cancel in your hand than stoic rebuttal that doesn't involve mindslaver shenanigans. Yeah, even if you can contrive those situations, there's definitely a difference between things that come up a nontrivial amount in actual play and therefore cause tension, vs. the (intentionally) absurd cases that are much closer to the level of pure hypotheticals.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 00:58
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:There's an obvious solution to make the basic distinction important Reprint Price of Progress
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 01:07
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:Yeah the creature/burn mono-red deck feels pretty good now, the introduction of Wild Slash and the dash goblins was enough to put it over the top. Zurgo and Roast both seem like very good tools for the deck. I'm not 100% sure on Dragon Fodder, I might use it instead of Hordeling Outburst out of curve considerations but I feel like running both is just too bad against Bile Blight. Outburst + Stoke is really good, too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 01:50
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Lightning Bolt isn't strictly better than Shock because what if you have Hitedsugu's Second Rite in hand and your opponent has 12 life? Oh, oh, oh! Can I say it again? I love doing this whenever this dumb topic comes up! Judge's Familiar is strictly better than Curse Catcher! gently caress you all, and
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:Oh, oh, oh! Can I say it again? I love doing this whenever this dumb topic comes up! Dies to Anarchy. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 01:58
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:Oh, oh, oh! Can I say it again? I love doing this whenever this dumb topic comes up! Nuh uh, gets hit by Combust and Glare of Heresy! And Leaf Arrow!
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 02:00
|
|
|
There's also the matter of creature types. Judge's Familiar doesn't get pumped by Master of the Pearl Trident nor does it play well with Azami, Lady of Scrolls. What I'm saying is strictly better isn't strictly defined.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 02:42
|
|
|
The formatting of the MODO Championships is hilarious. 3 rounds Vintage, 4 rounds Modern on Friday, 3 rounds DTK/DTK/FRF draft, 4 rounds Standard on Saturday, cut to top four, then Standard semifinals into a Vintage/Modern/Standard (if needed) finals. Holy poo poo that owns.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 02:45
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:If you define "strictly better" in that way then you'll find that pretty much no card is strictly better than any other card and the term becomes worthless. Counterspell isn't strictly better than Cancel, Counterspell gets hit by Spell Snare! Lightning Bolt isn't strictly better than Lightning Strike, it can be hit by Mental Misstep! Mindslaver! Muraganda Petroglyphs! Chalice of the Void! Meddling Mage. There.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 03:23
|
|
|
AlternateNu posted:Oh, oh, oh! Can I say it again? I love doing this whenever this dumb topic comes up! Merfolk rule, Birds drool.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 03:58
|
|
|
Islands are strictly better than Forests.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 04:07
|
|
|
I am glad I have sworn off trading in person. I don't have to lug my big binder around, have every person go "interested in your Dark Confidants" and hand me a binder full of garbage.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 04:26
|
|
|
qbert posted:Islands are strictly better than Forests. Which is strictly better? An Island or a theoretical red/green untyped untapped dual?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 04:33
|
|
|
Sotar posted:I am glad I have sworn off trading in person. I don't have to lug my big binder around, have every person go "interested in your Dark Confidants" and hand me a binder full of garbage. You should be playing your Dark Confidants! 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 04:38
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:You should be playing your Dark Confidants! No room in Junk.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Besides I am not going to trade them unless I get some good Legacy things.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 04:50
|
|
|
Sotar posted:I am glad I have sworn off trading in person. I don't have to lug my big binder around, have every person go "interested in your Dark Confidants" and hand me a binder full of garbage. Whoa there, you forgot the part where they look up every card on their phone one by one to make sure they're getting the better end of the deal. I mean, I get doing that when there's actually valuable cards involved, but when you're trying to evaluate me offering you an Agrus Kos for a Future Sight and you refuse because Agrus is 45 cents to Future Sight's 50 cents gently caress you with a thorny stick.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
Eric Froelich is cursed with his Dredge deck. He's sitting on a pretty easy T3 win and then his opponent has several bouts of great luck to assemble Gush Bond with Yawgmoth's Will active and gets tendriled out. Edit: After losing last week to LSV with what LSV declared a 0% chance to win match for him.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 05:14
|
|
|
newtestleper posted:Which is strictly better? An Island or a theoretical red/green untyped untapped dual? Well considering Island is better than any actual dual land that doesn't produce blue mana...Island.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 05:16
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 27, 2024 01:55 |
|
|
The Lord of Hats posted:Whoa there, you forgot the part where they look up every card on their phone one by one to make sure they're getting the better end of the deal. Oh my god that too. Basically I am done with trading that isn't on PucaTrade and occasionally the thread on here.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 05:19
|
|