10/29/2009 TD: "Love"

16 posts / 0 new
Last post

This thread is for discussion of this week's Top Decks, which goes live Thursday morning on magicthegathering.com.

What the hell?


An article mentioning land destruction without apologizing?
...and this same article extolls the virtues of Moat without calling it "overpowered" and presenting the latest castrated variant?
...and this same article openly says "yeah, play those Wraths right alongside DoJ"?
...and this same article posts up two brutal control decks without condemning the strategy as "unfun" and comparing it to Hitler?
...and this same article encourages decks that are "hard to play"?


Who are you, and what have you done with MTG.com? - and by that I mean "Bravo! Encore! Encore!"

actually, he seems to be suggesting that land destruction isn't that great, or is at least somewhat primitive compared to a control deck. what i took away was that prior to his exposure to "the deck" he thought ld was the bee's knees, but afterward it wasn't as impressive as it used to be. he's not exactly shouting its greatness from the rooftops.


enjoyed the article. extended is a very different place than standard. there's a lot going on to make johnny happy. Smile


 

WITNESS!


One of the few cards that looks good AND is powerful.


I'm happy to see her again.  Though she isn't going ANYWHERE for a LONG, LONG time.


(I'd love to see a pro's and con's from Mike about Crystal Witness.  Still viable?)

I love reading decklists for "Gifts Control" variants.  They amaze me at their complexity and yet simplicity at the same time.  I don't think on that level, so I could never effectively put together such an impressive 60-count.  But at the same time, it makes perfect sense.   Why not have two different, yet mostly equal, board sweepers?  Why not go after the plains and Life from the Loam.  Either they give you want you want, or you spend a turn getting it.


But, to put Witness and Mannequin in the same deck?  Genius, yet at the same time, obvious.


Of course Yosei works even better with a mannequin counter.  Duh, and yet, how did we not see it before?


You put all those pieces together and it becomes a deadly combination of "of course!". 

Well, good article and all, but reading it sure doesn't explain it's name.

It is entirely unclear to me:


1) Why Flores has this position


2) If his editor plays MTG


3) Why he constantly and consistently writes about irrelevant topics


As to #1 - as far as I know the guy has not played in a Pro Tour this season, and maybe played in one last season.  This is a tournament magic article written by a guy who is not capable enough of qualifying for magic tournaments.  


As to #2 and #3 - I'm not sure why an editor would allow 75% of what Flores says to be published.  It is nonsensical dribble with a bunch of fancy words (ostensibly, anyone?) thrown in.  To spend 80% of an article writing about a deck that is 15 years old and which Flores has written on a dozen other occasions is just beyond me.  Pro Tour Austin was less than two weeks ago and we get an extended diatribe on "Moat."  


At least Steve Sadin is competent.  


 


 


It is entirely unclear to me:


1) Why Flores has this position


2) If his editor plays MTG


3) Why he constantly and consistently writes about irrelevant topics


As to #1 - as far as I know the guy has not played in a Pro Tour this season, and maybe played in one last season.  This is a tournament magic article written by a guy who is not capable enough of qualifying for magic tournaments.  


As to #2 and #3 - I'm not sure why an editor would allow 75% of what Flores says to be published.  It is nonsensical dribble with a bunch of fancy words (ostensibly, anyone?) thrown in.  To spend 80% of an article writing about a deck that is 15 years old and which Flores has written on a dozen other occasions is just beyond me.  Pro Tour Austin was less than two weeks ago and we get an extended diatribe on "Moat."  


At least Steve Sadin is competent.  


 


 




Hi troll. While Flores' PT success is what it is, his articles and decks are still highly valued by many pros.


Saying he isn't qualified to write about magic, is like saying only the top sports athletes are qualified to write about their sport.

For the basic forest, sbing one isn't too hard...

Great article.  Sadly, only a few of us know what the dark ages of magic actually felt like.  These kids don't know about local magic theory before the internet changed everything.


I hope to see the Sligh version of this article very soon.  To me, the "discovery" of Sligh was far more crucial, as the pieces of control slowly trickled into our consciousness as we continued to play them, but Sligh was something the could not be continuously transformed to... you had to have the strategy in your head before you even picked the first card for the deck.


Great article.  Sadly, only a few of us know what the dark ages of magic actually felt like.  These kids don't know about local magic theory before the internet changed everything.





I am an old enough old duffer to remember pre-internet magic. Far from being the dark ages, I regard it as the golden era of rogue decks.

I can remember playing with a "mostly 1-drop" scryb sprites and main deck crumbles (because people ran moxes, ivory towers, zuran orbs and the like) and beating the tar out of the prevalent control decks. I think the deck looked something like this


4 x Kird Ape


4 x Llanowar Elf


4 x Scryb Sprites


2 x Atog


14 creatures


4 x Lightning Bolt


4 x Chain Lightning


4 x Giant Growth


4 x Crumble



1 x Fork*


1 x Beserk*


1 x Wheel of Fortune*


19 spells



2 x Howling Mine


2 x Ankh of Mishra


2 x Winter Orb


1 x Stormbind


1 x Black Vise*


8 artifacts / enchantments


19 land  (including 2 x Taiga, 4 x strip mine)


 


ahhh... the good ol' days.....


What the hell?


An article mentioning land destruction without apologizing?
...and this same article extolls the virtues of Moat without calling it "overpowered" and presenting the latest castrated variant?
...and this same article openly says "yeah, play those Wraths right alongside DoJ"?
...and this same article posts up two brutal control decks without condemning the strategy as "unfun" and comparing it to Hitler?
...and this same article encourages decks that are "hard to play"?


Who are you, and what have you done with MTG.com? - and by that I mean "Bravo! Encore! Encore!"




It is nice to read an article that actually talks about interesting decks and cards without a reference to the term "griefer." Sooner or later one of these was bound to happen. It's too bad the good decks are in Extended now because I can't catch very many replays of that format online. But this is the Standard they wanted, and this is what they are getting.

I am a confused newbie looking for clarification around how the Makeshift Mannequin / Eternal Witness combo works.


When first reading this through I was confused at how Eternal Witness could target Makeshift Mannequin. I was thinking:


If I cast Makeshift Mannequin, doesn't it go to the graveyard as the last step of it's resolution - i.e. after Eternal Witness has come into play (608.2k) - making it impossible for Eternal Witness's triggered effect to target it?


Then I read 112.3c and 115.2a which made me think the text of Eternal Witness is a triggered ability that isn't put on the stack until after Makeshift Mannekin resolves. 115.2a says:


 "... However, nothing actually happens at the time an ability triggers. Each time a player would receive priority, each ability that has triggered but hasn't yet been put on the stack is put on the stack."


Is this a correct understanding of how this combo works?


Cheers,


Whirly.


I am a confused newbie looking for clarification around how the Makeshift Mannequin / Eternal Witness combo works.


When first reading this through I was confused at how Eternal Witness could target Makeshift Mannequin. I was thinking:


If I cast Makeshift Mannequin, doesn't it go to the graveyard as the last step of it's resolution - i.e. after Eternal Witness has come into play (608.2k) - making it impossible for Eternal Witness's triggered effect to target it?


Then I read 112.3c and 115.2a which made me think the text of Eternal Witness is a triggered ability that isn't put on the stack until after Makeshift Mannekin resolves. 115.2a says:


 "... However, nothing actually happens at the time an ability triggers. Each time a player would receive priority, each ability that has triggered but hasn't yet been put on the stack is put on the stack."


Is this a correct understanding of how this combo works?


Cheers,


Whirly.




Yes, you got it.  You complete all of the MM's spell parts before you actually start dealing with the triggered ability of the Eternal Witness.

Excellent article!


I am a noob to MTG as well. However I played Vs System for all 5 years of its existence & I have always preferred control decks.


Interestingly the most amazing thing to me about MTG is how deep it really is. Vs really didn't have very flushed out Mill & Discard strategies. There were no characterless (creatureless) decks either.


I have been wanting to get a copy of Yosei the morning star & this article has totally soldified that decision.


Hey I gotta question:


At the prerelease I was taught that for Emeria, the Sky Ruin to work you had to have 7 actual plains on the field. Then after looking @ the "Shouta Yasooka's Gifts Control"  deckllist I noticed there were only four basic plains. So how does Emeria actually work?


So would Sejiri Refuge count as a plains? What em I not seeing?


 

I am Blue/White
I am Blue/White
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both orderly and rational. I value control, information, and order. I love structure and hierarchy, and will actively use whatever power or knowledge I have to maintain it. At best, I am lawful and insightful; at worst, I am bureaucratic and tyrannical.

Sejeri Refuge wouldn't, but all the Ravnica block shocklands would. Read their typelines.

Jeff Heikkinen DCI Rules Advisor since Dec 25, 2011