2/24/2010 BoaB: "Kicking it in Standard"

60 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is for discussion of this week's Building on a Budget, which goes live Wednesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
When playing 5 color creature, his header states game 2 twice (once for game 2, another time for game 3)

There actually are a lot of mistakes in this.  Opponent plays a BBelf on turn 3 and doesn't attack, even though JVL has no blockers.  The opponent also manages to cast a Sedraxis Specter with an Ancient Ziggurat, Noble Heirarch, and Island.  I do not think that he actually played these games.
Everflowing Chalice's synergy with Martial Coup is something I was looking into as well.

Assuming you don't miss any land drops, a Chalice kicked twice on turn four allows for X=5 on turn five as opposed to turn seven. Not bad at all.
yeah so out fo curiosity, whatever happened to the BUDGET part of Building on a Budget.  It used to be 30 tickets on MTGO was the price guideline
Let's see how far off we are

Monogreen: Total=$65.42  So about 35.00 more than the previous BUDGET everyone else before you used(and this isnt even counting a majority of the spells like harrow and the expedition)

Blue/White: Total=$40.42 About 10.00 of the BUDGET of ALL the previous guys. (Again not counting the bulk zendikar commons)

So yeah...way to stay on budget


Oh the really bad part is i didnt even bother looking up the sideboards...so awesome.  I have $100.00 lying around to build these decks.
I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.
Yeah, i wonder if this website even has any editor or quality control. This was always my favorite article on the site because a) im not very good at building my own decks, and b) im poor. With previous authors i could look forward to some new interesting deck idea that i could play in the casual room for cheap, but not this section is kinda meh.

My main complaint is that he just seems to ignore all feedback and just do his own thing. This site is about us dude, not you. Please listen to us.
yeah so out fo curiosity, whatever happened to the BUDGET part of Building on a Budget.  It used to be 30 tickets on MTGO was the price guideline
Let's see how far off we are

Monogreen: Total=$65.42  So about 35.00 more than the previous BUDGET everyone else before you used(and this isnt even counting a majority of the spells like harrow and the expedition)

Blue/White: Total=$40.42 About 10.00 of the BUDGET of ALL the previous guys. (Again not counting the bulk zendikar commons)

So yeah...way to stay on budget


Oh the really bad part is i didnt even bother looking up the sideboards...so awesome.  I have $100.00 lying around to build these decks.



MTGO must be a rip off because I'm getting $33.18 for the mono-green deck (paper magic). This is including all the spells.
Prices can vary depending on where you get the cards and how good you are at bargain shopping.

Regardless, a deck where 10/60 cards are mythic rares is generally pretty much out of contention for the "budget deck" title.
I think most of this is a miscommunication about what we mean by "budget." If "budget" is what ShardFenix says, at 30 tix a deck, then clearly, these decks are not budget. I think it is safe to say, however, that Mr. Van Lunen's idea of "budget" is not 30 tix. In fact, judging by his articles, his idea of "budget" is fairly loose, as he has covered everything from pauper (which were 5-10 tix, at most) to standard decks like these which are upwards of 60 tix for the main deck.

It seems these dictionary difficulties are at the root of the frustration, but if we stop and think a moment, it becomes pretty absurd to assume that Mr. Van Lunen should stick to other author's definition of budget since he is, by definition, a different person with different goals. Based on what I have read of his articles, it becomes clear he is not creating decks for the casual room, but perhaps for the player looking to move from said room into the tournement scene without breaking the bank on Baneslayer Angels which, according to Marlonbot, run upwards of 140 tix for a playset.

However, this is me putting words into the author's mouth. Mr. Lunen, I don't know if you read any of the feed back on the forums, but if I may be so bold, perhaps a great degree of the vitriol seen in the past couple of weeks could be cleared away if you simply state, in a few sentences, what your goals are and what you mean by a "budget," and then stick to it. Then, your readers know what to expect, and if they don't like it, they can find another article which fits their needs or expectations.

God, I'm wordy. Hopefully this gets through to somebody. Regardless, I'm going to continue enjoying the articles as I always have.

Prices can vary depending on where you get the cards and how good you are at bargain shopping.

Regardless, a deck where 10/60 cards are mythic rares is generally pretty much out of contention for the "budget deck" title.



How is it out of contention if it is only 3 dollars over what some see as "budget"? Making a deck with 10 mythics in it doesn't matter if the overall price is under $35. It's like saying Ben Bleiweiss' final articles that contain all rares are out of contention because that's basically all that they had in them. Instead of Bulk Rares these are just cast-off mythics.

I have little pity for those who complain about prices and don't bargain shop.
I was using 30 tickets since that has been the benchmark since this series has been around.  Nate Heiss used 30 as a limit as well as JMS and Ben Bleiweiss.  That was the main thing that basically separeated this from everything else was that you knew the price range you were getting into.  Now we have Jacob who uses whatever arbitrary price he believes is acceptable whenever he wants; there is no consistency. One week, the decks are cheap, and the next, well not so much.  It's about as bad as the Dave Meeson guy on the other site who thinks $150 is a budget deck.    I'm just saying this is a budget article series.  Heck it took the guy months to realize not everyone could afford $3.00/piece Path to Exile's.
I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.
Prices can vary depending on where you get the cards and how good you are at bargain shopping.

Regardless, a deck where 10/60 cards are mythic rares is generally pretty much out of contention for the "budget deck" title.



How is it out of contention if it is only 3 dollars over what some see as "budget"? Making a deck with 10 mythics in it doesn't matter if the overall price is under $35. It's like saying Ben Bleiweiss' final articles that contain all rares are out of contention because that's basically all that they had in them. Instead of Bulk Rares these are just cast-off mythics.

I have little pity for those who complain about prices and don't bargain shop.



as far as pricing i went with the prices used to by the three main bot chains online who pretty much set the pricing standards.  Unless you want to spend hours on end trading with real people online(which is a slow suicide) these are in general the prices you would pay.  And people dont charge much less you may save 5 bucks for 3 hours of trading
I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.
@ ShardFenix:

Yes, but I'm saying it doesn't matter because he isn't Nate Heiss, JMS, or Ben Bleiweiss. There's clearly a mis-alignment between what he considers budget and what everybody else's expectations for said budget. It's obvious he doesn't constrain himself to 30 tix for a budget, but I don't think he's ever made clear what he considers a budget. Maybe he, isn't clear on what he, himself, considers a budget, I don't know.

For me, I don't expect the rules to hold from author to author, which is probably why I'm mostly fine with his series. In fact, the only thing I don't like is his lack of definition. It could be "Build tournament competitive decks for less than $75," which, for the current standard environment, is pretty budget, considering it's a whole deck for half the price of a Bankslayer Angel playset online. This is very clearly different from "Build a cool casual deck that's fun and wins it's fair share of games for less than 30 tix." Using your example, Path to Exile is very clearly budget under the first definition (taking up 15% of the budget for a playset, which is a good chunk, but leaves a lot of room for other cool cards) and not under the second (taking up a whopping 40% of the budget for just one playset).

So I guess we're actually concerned about the same thing: the budget defines what is possible, but Mr. Lunen has never clearly stated what he considers a budget, and so we get a really wide variance. I personally don't think it has to be 30 tix per deck, especially if his goal is to be tournament competitive, but something should be set, if only to know why he feels ok picking the cards he does.
I think there is a lot of debate over what is budget.  Generally I don't mind when it goes over slightly.  I think the reader can make substitutions when they see fit.  Don't have path to exile (it is a uncommon, if you draft ever it isn't that difficult to pick up 4)?  Use journey to nowhere.

As for his decks, a few of them look like they are budgetized versions of decks that have made some appearance in some tournament or  another before.  I don't much care for those articles, most people can make the connection that if you want to play a budget monogreen stompy deck (kind of like the one that was written about today) you take out the garruk and noble hierarch.

I do thoroughly enjoy it when he makes a crazy deck that I haven't seen before (like the hivemind deck or the open the vault deck).

I think what made ben a great boab writer wasn't that he could create tournament functioning decks (sometimes he did) but that he was willing to outright fail to do something miraculous.

Well, keep up the effort jake.  I'm still rooting for you.  I think your readerbase has more johnnys and timmys than actual spikes.

I wouldn't mind seeing a Allies deck, the cards themselves are very inexpensive at the moment.
wow. There are so many people up in arms about the pricing, but what about two weeks ago, when Jake made that really cool Esper Beatdown deck? there was a playset of master of etherium, and according to my research a set costs between five dollars and six fifty. that's betewwn twenty and twenty six dollars.

 when I started reading this column Jacob was already writing it, but I still went back and read some of the other articles. Jacob is trying to bring us competitive budget decks, a feat tha is challenging, but he still does, and it's not just MTGO tix. I own a mac, so I appreciate that he looks at what's paper budget as well as tix budget. In one of the earlier columnists, they were talking about a Giant build, and I wanted to try it. He mentioned that you could get a set of ancient ampatheater for just two tix. I went to my shop and had to get mine for eight dollars. I don't know how dollars to tix works out, but it sure as hell ins't 4:1.

The point is, Jake knows that not everybody has MTGO(Seriously wizards, when you gonna hook a brother up?) and not everyone, specifically people who read his column for the competitive side, don't mind paying a little extra if it means doing well at your next FNM.

Jake has turned this into a competitive budget column. That may make some of you who play for fun mad, but the column is for all of us. For all we know Jake just gets bombarded by E-mails asking him to loosen the budget and make more competitive decks. He himself stated that a lot of people have been asking him about non budget versions of his decks. maybe that signifys a switch in reader density that want less budget decks?

 you want budget in a very expensive format so he gives it to you, but he also has to try to make it competitive. this means he places his price cieling higher. $65 for a deck? that ain't bad, espescially with all the persecutors, Angels, Jaces and pulses running around. if any of you can build a deck under thirty tix that can stand up to the current standard or extended metagame, send it to him and he will most definitely run it. If you wanna play competitively, but don't have the money, start a card pool. This is where you and a couple other players pool your cards together so you all can run competitive decks while not shelling out a whole lot for them.
 
That's my rant, Jake, I love the articles. I sleeved up your goats deck(with a few alterations for the meta) and took fourth in my FNM, so you are gold in my eyes. Hope to see more, and maybe with some better analysis of the matches I think?
I would have killed, literally ended someones life, to NOT have Arrogant Bloodlord riding a giant ant... Good times:
Show
but where DID the other fork come from?
Show
Lord_Zed: I was at my friends house when this happened. He's married and his wife was an excellent baker. She had baked a homemade apple pie the night before. I was hungry, and my friend convinced me to try those low carb monster drinks. Before this day, I had never triend energy drinks before. Boy was I in for a treat. When I tried that first monster, I really enjoyed the flavor, but the taste that it left in my mouth wasn't so good. What was my solution? Drink another! before I could finish drinking that 2nd monster, I felt it already kicking in(these drinks were not very far apart, we're talking minutes here) my friend decided that it was a good idea to whip out that fresh pie his wife made the night before. I didn't know what to do, since I felt incredibly invigorated, and at the same time, freaked out by the rush I was feeling, but I was also hungry, and my friend have me an entire plate with a fork and said "help yourself." He extended his saucer to me, and I cut him a piece of the pie and handed it to him, then I looked at the pie, noticed that the pie was in an aluminum holder, and dumped the entire pie onto my plate and started eating it with 2 forks. I don't know where I found that other fork, it probably came from my friend. Anyhow, his wife wasn't happy, and I was already in magical christmas land. 2 days later, I was in my friends bed and I slept for 14 hours. His wife outlawed my from having any of her baked goods for a while(which sucked because I could just show up at there house, steal some sweets, and leave) and said I couldn't have any energy drinks at her house, unless under close watch. My friend, on the other hand, had to take me out to a steak dinner, because apparently I won a bet where I climbed a tree and didn't die.
The great land debate:
Show
97563441 wrote:
Zendikar had fetchlands, and Worldwake had manlands. What are the new Scars duals called?
61325265 wrote:
Explosive Peanut Lightning lands. Well, that's just what I call them.
61325265 wrote:
58232598 wrote:
i'm just trying to figure out what the point of saying this is. it's just really random.
And so the pot met the kettle.
ShardFenix:

Almost all of the cost of the mono-green deck (I didn't check the other one) comes from WorldWake cards.  My suspicions are that the costs of WWK cards are pretty terribly inflated online at the moment due to the set just being released there, and will drop a fair amount of price in the next few days/couple of weeks (e.g. how Master of Etherium is down to 1.3 tickets or less online now). 





Since I have seen this complaint here before and I remembered Jacob addressing this issue one's I thought it might be a good idea to see if I could find the article:

www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.a...

(just in case the link doesn't work: title: second second sunrise, date: 6 nov 2008)

So according to him a deck list is on budget if it is reasonably priced for a given metagame but still competitive within that metagame.

Since I am a casual (paper magic) player I would prefer a different definition but I can understand that other players prefer Jacob’s version, so as long as he is the writer of this column I'm fine with getting some interesting deck idea's and simply try to find budget replacements if I want to play one of his decks. 

Quote from the article.
"My opponent cast Noble Hierarch off an Ancient Ziggurat and passed the turn. I drew an Explore, played a land, and passed the turn. My opponent played a Misty Rainforest, fetched up an Island, and cast Sedraxis Specter."

See anything wrong with this?  What I see is the ability for his opponent to only make 1 black or 1 red on turn two, not both.  Noble Hierarch and Island make neither black nor red.  Am I missing something?
I really enjoyed this article on multikicker.

I didn't realise multikicker was so abusable and playable.

I think all the compaints so far are unfounded.

If the deck is out of your budget then replace some of the expensive cards with cheaper ones. also it might be worth getting playsets of the more important cards because you will need them in other decks too (ie. Path to Exile).

I don't mind the mistakes, I'd never be able to recite every move taken in a game of magic. I appreciate the technical detail, most game reports just mention the board affecting spells and which player is on the attack.

I already have most of the cards to build both of these decks, I cant wait to show my friends.

Thanks Jacob!!!

PS: why not use Spell Contortion instead of Cancel?
I think most of this is a miscommunication about what we mean by "budget." If "budget" is what ShardFenix says, at 30 tix a deck, then clearly, these decks are not budget. I think it is safe to say, however, that Mr. Van Lunen's idea of "budget" is not 30 tix. In fact, judging by his articles, his idea of "budget" is fairly loose, as he has covered everything from pauper (which were 5-10 tix, at most) to standard decks like these which are upwards of 60 tix for the main deck.

It seems these dictionary difficulties are at the root of the frustration, but if we stop and think a moment, it becomes pretty absurd to assume that Mr. Van Lunen should stick to other author's definition of budget since he is, by definition, a different person with different goals. Based on what I have read of his articles, it becomes clear he is not creating decks for the casual room, but perhaps for the player looking to move from said room into the tournement scene without breaking the bank on Baneslayer Angels which, according to Marlonbot, run upwards of 140 tix for a playset.

However, this is me putting words into the author's mouth. Mr. Lunen, I don't know if you read any of the feed back on the forums, but if I may be so bold, perhaps a great degree of the vitriol seen in the past couple of weeks could be cleared away if you simply state, in a few sentences, what your goals are and what you mean by a "budget," and then stick to it. Then, your readers know what to expect, and if they don't like it, they can find another article which fits their needs or expectations.

God, I'm wordy. Hopefully this gets through to somebody. Regardless, I'm going to continue enjoying the articles as I always have.




I agree on all counts. I play paper Magic only and the mono-green deck will only cost me a few bucks. Try to take into account also the fact that you can trade. You don't have to pay for all of this crap; most people will be glad to trade these rares because these decks see Standard from a different view, the one that money junkies can't fathom. They don't really use archetype-worthy cards. They pretty much always focus on taking down the current archetype . So quit whining! You don't have to build/pay for these decks. If it's such a problem, you're more than welcome to be original. Yes, he can be ignorant and unresponsive, but get off Van Lunen's back.

It's my sig in a box! -RP Jesus
Show
I... need a filing cabinet. -Quagmire I think I saw Emrakul in a cartoon with Japanese schoolgirls once. It didn't end well. -Qmark Edit: Couldn't find a cookie, so here's an octopus. Enjoy. -Zigeif777
57718868 wrote:
58844013 wrote:
grandma pumps the threat she ramps.
If you believe in Jesus and love him and aren't afraid to admit it, put this in your sig. Jun 30, 2010 -- 1:35AM, S1AL wrote: Playing a bad deck in order to be original is like using crappy tools to build something. Not only does it look bad in the end, but nobody really thinks that you're cool for being unwilling to do things the way a professional would.
Look at the card. Now back to Jace. Now back to that card, now back to Jace! Sadly, it isn't Jace, but if it stopped being a junk rare and became relevant, it could act like it's Jace. Crack some Worldwake. What do you have? You have a Jace, the card you wish this card could be like. Look again. THE CARD IS NOW A $75 BILL. Anything possible when you play Magic with Jace and not junk rares.
I saw many  mistakes in this article as well, as well as a few plays that seemed illegal (Mainly the Sedraxis one.) Many typos, but that is not entirely Jacob's fault, the editor's should have fixed those.
As for the decks, they seem out of budget at the moment because of the relatively new set. Some cards are up in price simply because they are new, they should be dropping soon, or even may have dropped by now, seeing as these are written in advance of publishing.
I have enjoyed his decks so far, keep up the good work.
MTG Rules Advisor Autocarding helps a lot -> [c]Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas[/c] = Tezzeret, Agent of Bolas "But keep in mind when the internet dies with the electrical system in 2012, you can still play paper magic, while digital cards will have gone the way of the dodo. In the post apocalyptic world, magic cards will be our currency!" - Samot, explaining to someone the ramifications of switching to MTGO!
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
I am Blue/Black
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I'm both selfish and rational. I'm scheming, secretive and manipulative; I use knowledge as a tool for personal gain, and in turn obtaining more knowledge. At best, I am mysterious and stealthy; at worst, I am distrustful and opportunistic.
Heh, if anything, I'm losing money by building these decks almost every week! I make my own, of course, but if I see a good idea I'm gonna try it.
It's my sig in a box! -RP Jesus
Show
I... need a filing cabinet. -Quagmire I think I saw Emrakul in a cartoon with Japanese schoolgirls once. It didn't end well. -Qmark Edit: Couldn't find a cookie, so here's an octopus. Enjoy. -Zigeif777
57718868 wrote:
58844013 wrote:
grandma pumps the threat she ramps.
If you believe in Jesus and love him and aren't afraid to admit it, put this in your sig. Jun 30, 2010 -- 1:35AM, S1AL wrote: Playing a bad deck in order to be original is like using crappy tools to build something. Not only does it look bad in the end, but nobody really thinks that you're cool for being unwilling to do things the way a professional would.
Look at the card. Now back to Jace. Now back to that card, now back to Jace! Sadly, it isn't Jace, but if it stopped being a junk rare and became relevant, it could act like it's Jace. Crack some Worldwake. What do you have? You have a Jace, the card you wish this card could be like. Look again. THE CARD IS NOW A $75 BILL. Anything possible when you play Magic with Jace and not junk rares.
hopefully you mean trading in paper.  Trading in MTGO is only proof that you that you hate yourself.  Really there is no reason to go throw the hassle of trading online it makes about as much sense as a solar-powered flashlight.

I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.
lol yeah paper
It's my sig in a box! -RP Jesus
Show
I... need a filing cabinet. -Quagmire I think I saw Emrakul in a cartoon with Japanese schoolgirls once. It didn't end well. -Qmark Edit: Couldn't find a cookie, so here's an octopus. Enjoy. -Zigeif777
57718868 wrote:
58844013 wrote:
grandma pumps the threat she ramps.
If you believe in Jesus and love him and aren't afraid to admit it, put this in your sig. Jun 30, 2010 -- 1:35AM, S1AL wrote: Playing a bad deck in order to be original is like using crappy tools to build something. Not only does it look bad in the end, but nobody really thinks that you're cool for being unwilling to do things the way a professional would.
Look at the card. Now back to Jace. Now back to that card, now back to Jace! Sadly, it isn't Jace, but if it stopped being a junk rare and became relevant, it could act like it's Jace. Crack some Worldwake. What do you have? You have a Jace, the card you wish this card could be like. Look again. THE CARD IS NOW A $75 BILL. Anything possible when you play Magic with Jace and not junk rares.
See anything wrong with this?  What I see is the ability for his opponent to only make 1 black or 1 red on turn two, not both.  Noble Hierarch and Island make neither black nor red.  Am I missing something?



Mysterious impossible plays haunt these articles. There was one deck a while back that cast a Cyrptic Command, despite the decklist posted mere inches above having 0 in it. 
Comics Magic #$%! - a sfw blog (at least, there's no nudity!) The blazekite is a simple concept, really - just a vehicular application of dragscoop ionics and electropropulsion magnetronics. Idiot.
Well, another disappointing week for BoaB!

1. Yeah for "budget"

2. The decks design is pretty poor imho, and after all, it's not so flavourful in respect of the "multikicker week" (no, just adding 4 overflowing chalice in a decklist isn't really enough i believe). In addition, i don't see how a severely multikicked overflowing chalice can help cast a big multikicked Wolfbriar elemental, remember that the multikick is colored, and its base mana cost contains only 2 colorless..

3. It's a tradition now that there are several "strange plays" or "played spells that are not in the given decklist", and it brings the question of the very existence of those "test matches".

4. It's been said before, but really, JVL is ignoring the feedback so much it's getting disgusting...


This, too, have been said before, but: I really, really miss Ben Bleiwess...


It's too bad, as i had kinda appreciated "cruelty on a budget", but since then...
very true his play mistakes are glaringly bad, which is probably proof he just phones these in.  Pick random constructed archetype and budget it or follow the theme week to the most logical conclusion.  Its very unprofessional for a website of wizards quality to have such a lack of effort applied to the point he cant properly record game states and the like.  I mean look on other big sites.  People write tourney reports all the time, and they arent this bad.
I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.

BOAB is easily the most time intensive article series on this website. 


1.  He has to create at least one interesting, competitive, budget deck every week. 
2.  He has to test that deck against a variety of other decks. 
3.  He has to keep track of how the games progress and the end result.
4.  He has to write an article explaining how the deck was built, how it works, and describe the game state. 
5.  He has to do this every week.


Add into these difficulties a theme week that forces him to build the deck focusing on multikicker cards.  And don't forget that Worldwake only recently came out online.  Doing the building and playing online makes it much easier: building, testing and tracking the games. 


If any one of these requirements is weak, his article for the week appears questionable and suddenly becomes open to attack on the forums. 


BOAB is not going to be great every week, but overall JVL does a good job of providing interesting ideas in an entertaining article.

Is Honor of the Pure budget?
What about Captain of the Watch?

Now, I know that you shouldn't be a slave to a theme, but it seems like you could nearly win outright the turn after you Coup with one of these around.

I don't see why every one is so annoyed over the budget. BoaB was the first wizards article I read and then JVL was writing it. I thought and still think it's great. Keep it up JVL!

yeah so out fo curiosity, whatever happened to the BUDGET part of Building on a Budget.  It used to be 30 tickets on MTGO was the price guideline
Let's see how far off we are

Monogreen: Total=$65.42  So about 35.00 more than the previous BUDGET everyone else before you used(and this isnt even counting a majority of the spells like harrow and the expedition)

Blue/White: Total=$40.42 About 10.00 of the BUDGET of ALL the previous guys. (Again not counting the bulk zendikar commons)

So yeah...way to stay on budget


Oh the really bad part is i didnt even bother looking up the sideboards...so awesome.  I have $100.00 lying around to build these decks.



Why is it that before I opened up this thread, I knew you'd be saying something smarmy about this article? It's cool that you want to criticize every mention of Jake. Not just his columns; numerous mentions of the Sliver Kids have gotten an "ugh, can we get over this?" response from you. You're entitled to your opinion, but can't you... not do this? Criticize constructively.
Nice! 3 deck ideas in one article. I really like the blue-white chalice deck. It has a nice controllish ring to it. The Mind Sludge-Mind Spring-Mind Sludge-Mind Spring exchange was pretty funny.
Manaug.gif | Manawu.gif | Manau.gif | Manaub.gif | Manaur.gif
Bruce: Given that your average work week is 40 hours, i believe he has ample time to accomplish steps 1-5. You would think that it would be faster to just play some matches than to try to make some up with no mistakes.

Since I have seen this complaint here before and I remembered Jacob addressing this issue one's I thought it might be a good idea to see if I could find the article:

www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.a...

(just in case the link doesn't work: title: second second sunrise, date: 6 nov 2008)

So according to him a deck list is on budget if it is reasonably priced for a given metagame but still competitive within that metagame.

Since I am a casual (paper magic) player I would prefer a different definition but I can understand that other players prefer Jacob’s version, so as long as he is the writer of this column I'm fine with getting some interesting deck idea's and simply try to find budget replacements if I want to play one of his decks. 




Wow, I totally missed that article. It pretty well fits with what I thought he was doing, too. What little concern I had for the article is hereby banished. Thanks for the good stuff, Mr. Lunen!

yeah so out fo curiosity, whatever happened to the BUDGET part of Building on a Budget.  It used to be 30 tickets on MTGO was the price guideline
Let's see how far off we are

Monogreen: Total=$65.42  So about 35.00 more than the previous BUDGET everyone else before you used(and this isnt even counting a majority of the spells like harrow and the expedition)

Blue/White: Total=$40.42 About 10.00 of the BUDGET of ALL the previous guys. (Again not counting the bulk zendikar commons)

So yeah...way to stay on budget


Oh the really bad part is i didnt even bother looking up the sideboards...so awesome.  I have $100.00 lying around to build these decks.



Why is it that before I opened up this thread, I knew you'd be saying something smarmy about this article? It's cool that you want to criticize every mention of Jake. Not just his columns; numerous mentions of the Sliver Kids have gotten an "ugh, can we get over this?" response from you. You're entitled to your opinion, but can't you... not do this? Criticize constructively.



1.  JVL is not that great of a budget writer.  Ill say.  Look around.  Many have criticized his budgets in the past, not just me. 
2.  The guy is getting paid to write about magic, yet he cant even produce a game write-up without glaring inconsistencies?  This has also occured MULTIPLE weeks.
3.  The only complaint I made over th sliver kids as a whole was when the deck of the day was a 3 year old Pro Tour draft deck....really, like who does that help?  What part of TSP Block has not been explored enough?
4.  And I'm sorry you don't like it, but can't you... not read this?  Read constructively.
I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.

If I understand the article correctly (although it doesn't say explicitly) then he played these matches with paper cards and not on MTGO. Therefore the sedraxis mistake could have been overlooked by both players. (I don't play online but I assume MTGO won't let you do this) I know it has happened to me in the past, I think this is far more likely then making up complete matches, but if I am wrong and he did make them up,...... I applaud him fir making as few mistakes as he didTongue out

First forum post. The commentary here irritated me.

Using the online prices on MtGO is more than a bit silly when worldwake has only just come out on there (I doubt he even built or costed these decks on there; remember the deadline is a good length of time before the article).  We haven't even had the release events online yet, which means noone is drafting in worldwake yet. Remember; draft provides the majority of supply of cards on MtGO. In its absence, prices are much higher.  In paper, the prices seem to work out ok.

Otherwise, it seems that the online players complaining are just really bad shoppers; I saw one poster complaining about a playset of master of etherium, costing 5$ each. On MtGO, its less that 2 tix each, so its not exactly going to break the bank, or the 30 tix limit. There is a huge variation in bot prices online, and using the 'main chains' who 'set the prices' is actually going to get you gouged on every card worth less than about 3 tix. Hint: use the MtGO prices wiki for speed (look it up in google).

I haven't done the math for mono-green as too many of the important cards like wolfbriar elemental are worldwake, hence what the price will become online I have no idea. In paper, another posted has already costed it at 33$. Given 30 tics is actually 34.5$ (people always seem to forget the 15% tax), that's pretty much exactly right.

However, in the U/W version:

The only money cards in the U/W deck are martial coup and knight of the white orchid. Playsets costing around 13 and 11 tics respectively. Leaving 6 tix for bulk common and uncommon buying, if you don't have cards like ponder already. Mind spring is a cheap rare and just a two-of. How that deck will be significantly over 30 when prices for things like everflowing chalice and kor firewalker stabilise is beyond me. I can see the firewalker holding at 2 for a while though, so that's bringing it up to 32, but the poster above said he excluded sideboards anyway; that's not in the quoted 40$ figure.

Keep going Jacob. This is easily the most useful article on the site week by week, and at least some of your readers appreciate the effort you put in.
The Worldwake MTGO online prices for Zendikar mythics is higher than paper because MTGO hasn't had nearly the exposure of the paper game. Expect a lot more packs to be cracked, and for Avenger to slowly but surely go down in price to the point of being like Nemesis of Reason. Much hyped cards that go down dramatically in price after that new card smell so to speak fades.

But, I do have issue with "budget" here! He ought to at least list how he much you would typically spend on these decks given MTGO prices in tickets and from vendors and on paper magic, or at least try. That first deck is cutting it close, and its not even close to being the most expensive "budget" deck.

Older article writers had a guideline they held themselves to with respect to price. They would say something like Nate Heiss or Moldenhauer-Salazar said, 25 tickets with rares and uncommons to a minimum. Or Bleiweiss, who said 30 to 35 tickets but had no rarity restrictions.

I don't see how a 8 mythic rare, 6 rare, 16 uncommon main decks can be honestly called "budget". I think the deck would cost about 40 bucks to make online, which isn't all that bad.
Bruce: Given that your average work week is 40 hours, i believe he has ample time to accomplish steps 1-5. You would think that it would be faster to just play some matches than to try to make some up with no mistakes.



If I thought JVL was getting paid the equivalent of a 40-hour workweek for each weekly article, then I would be screaming about shoddy work too.  Since I know Rosewater has a full-time job making Magic cards, BDM and Flores both do other things, and I suspect every other writer on the site has another job, I think it is safe to say that Wizards doesn't pay a yearly salary for the weekly articles. 

I wrote a few Magic articles years ago.  All I had to do was keep track of what was happening in my multiplayer games and offer some advice based out of those games.  Those articles took hours each week and most times were not weekly.  I think of the work JVL has to put in to produce his articles and I think it is a wonder that he continues to provide us with interesting deck ideas and articles each week. 
Thank you for more game reports Jacob. You made me happy and probably a bunch of other people that don't say anything when they are happy.
OMG click HERE! OMG! How to autocard and use decklist format
--->
For autocarding, write [c][/c] with the name of the card inside it. [c]Island[/c] = Island For linking a card to Gatherer without writting the name of said card for readers, use the autocard brackets together with and equal sign and right the name of the real card. Then put the message you want inside the tags, like you would do with autocarding. Like this: [c=Curse of the Cabal]Captain Never-resolves[/c] = Captain Never-resolves For using the decklist format, follow this: [deck] 4* Terramorphic Expanse 4* Evolving Wilds ... [/deck] It equals:
Real signature, Sblocked for space:
57817638 wrote:
I like storm crow because I really like crows in real life, as an animal, and the card isn't terribly stupid, but packs a good deal of nostalgia and also a chunck of the game's history. So it's perhaps one of the cards I have most affection to, but not because "lol storm crow is bad hurr hurr durr".
Listen to my SoundCloud while you read my signature. The Island, Come And See, The Landlord's Daughter, You'll Not Feel The Drowning - The Decemberists by vimschy IMAGE(http://dragcave.net/image/rkvR.gif)IMAGE(http://dragcave.net/image/L3es.gif) IMAGE(http://dragcave.net/image/m71H.gif)
Quotes
56747598 wrote:
57295478 wrote:
Although I do assume you deliberately refer to them (DCI) as The Grand Imperial Convocation of Evil just for the purposes of making them sound like an ancient and terrible conspiracy.
Now, now. 1994 doesn't quite qualify as "ancient".
56734518 wrote:
Oh, it's a brilliant plan. You see, Bolas was travelling through shadowmoor, causing trouble, when he saw a Wickerbough Elder with its stylin' dead scarecrow hat. Now, Bolas being Bolas took the awesome hat and he put it on his head, but even with all his titanic powers of magic he couldn't make it fit. He grabbed some more scarecrows, but then a little kithkin girl asked if he was trying to build a toupee. "BY ALL THE POWERS IN THE MULTIVERSE!" he roared, "I WILL HAVE A HAT WORTHY OF MY GLORY." and so he went through his Dark Lore of Doom (tm) looking for something he could make into a hat that would look as stylish on him as a scarecrow does on a treefolk. He thought about the Phyrexians, but they were covered in goopy oil that would make his nonexistant hair greasy. He Tried out angels for a while but they didn't sit quite right. Then, he looked under "e" (because in the Elder Draconic alphabet, "e" for Eldrazi is right next to "h" for Hat) in his Dark Lore of Doom and saw depictions of the Eldrazi, and all their forms. "THIS SHALL BE MY HAT!" he declared, poking a picture of Emrakul, "AND WITH IT I WILL USHER IN A NEW AGE OF DARKNESS -- ER, I MEAN A NEW AGE OF FASHION!" And so Nicol Bolas masterminded the release of the Eldrazi.
57864098 wrote:
Rhox War Monk just flips pancakes, and if games have told us anything, it's that food = life.
56747598 wrote:
76973988 wrote:
This thread has gotten creepy. XP
Really? Really? The last couple days have been roughly every perverse fetish imaginable, but it only got "creepy" when speculation on Mother of Runes's mob affiliation came up?
76672808 wrote:
57864098 wrote:
57531048 wrote:
Nice mana base. Not really.
Yeah, really. If my deck was going to cost $1000+, I'd at least make it good.
99812049 wrote:
I like to think up what I consider clever names for my decks, only later to be laughed at by my wife. It kills me a little on the inside, but thats what marriage is about.
56816728 wrote:
56854588 wrote:
Of course, the best use [of tolaria west] is transmuting for the real Tolaria. ;)
Absolutely. I used to loose to my buddy's Banding deck for ages, it was then that I found out about Tolaria, and I was finally able win my first game.
70246459 wrote:
WOAH wait wait wait
56957928 wrote:
You know, being shallow and jusdgmental aside, "I later found out that Jon infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates with at least two other people"
56957928 wrote:
"I later found out that Jon infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates with at least two other people"
56957928 wrote:
Jon infiltrated his way into OKCupid dates
56957928 wrote:
OH MY GOD
109874309 wrote:
The only way I'd cast this card is into a bonfire.
82032421 wrote:
The short answer is that there's no rule barring annoying people from posting, but there a rule barring us from harassing them about it.
56747598 wrote:
Browbeat is a card that is an appropriate deck choice when there's no better idea available. "No better idea available" was pretty much the running theme of Odyssey era.
56874518 wrote:
Or perhaps it was a more straightforward comment indicating a wish for you to be bitten (Perhaps repeatedly) by a small yet highly venomous arachnid.
70246459 wrote:
58280208 wrote:
You're an idiot, and I'm in no mood for silliness.
57817638 wrote:
57145078 wrote:
You just... Vektor it.
That's the answer to everything.
70246459 wrote:
58347268 wrote:
I think the problem is that you don't exist.
This would sound great out of context!
56965458 wrote:
Modern is like playing a new tournament every time : you build a deck, you win with it, don't bother keeping it. Just build another, its key pieces will get banned.
57864098 wrote:
57309598 wrote:
I specifically remember posting a thread when I was just a witty bitty noob.
You make it sound like that's still not the case.
58325628 wrote:
Rap is what happens when the c from crap is taken away.
Doug Beyer:
But sometimes it's also challenging. Because sometimes OH MY GOD, WHAT THE HELL IS THIS THING?
141434757 wrote:
Flashforward five thousand years (Click for atmosphere) :
57927608 wrote:
to paraphrase Jeff Goldblum, Vektor finds a way.
58347268 wrote:
when in rome **** AND PILLAGE
143229641 wrote:
I always find it helpful when im angry to dress up in an owl costume and rub pennies all over my body in front of a full body mirror next to the window.
Dymecoar:
Playing Magic without Blue is like sleeping without any sheets or blankets. You can do it...but why?
Omega137:
Me: "I love the moment when a control deck stabilizes. It feels so... right." Omega137: "I like the life drop part until you get there, it's the MtG variant of bungee jumping"
Zigeif777:
Just do it like Yu-Gi-Oh or monkeys: throw all the crap you got at them and hope it works or else the by-standers (or opponents) just get dirty and pissed.
57471038 wrote:
58258708 wrote:
It's true that Alpha and Beta didn't contain any cards like Tarmogoyf, Darksteel Colossus, or Platinum Angel. It just contained weak, insignificant cards like Black Lotus, Mox Sapphire, and Time Walk.
Normally it's difficult to pick up on your jokes/sarcasm. But this one's pretty much out there. Good progress. You have moved up to Humanoid. You'll be Human in no time.
91893448 wrote:
94618431 wrote:
I didn't know Samurai were known to be able to cut down whole armies...
They can when they're using lightsabers!
57129358 wrote:
97980259 wrote:
My wife brought home a baby black squirrel they found on a horse track and cared for it for a few days. We named it Grixis, but it died.
Unearth it!
70246459 wrote:
[/spoiler] And I'm on Magic Arcana. How about you? Oh, by the way, I'm also on From the Lab now. Twice, actually. And now with my own submited decklist!
really enjoyed the monogreen A LOT. very cool deck. i enjoyed using the chalice in limited, even though it has dubious value there. i'm not sure wolfbriar is quite up to broodmate standards, though.

i won't comment much on the continuing saga of useless trolls that infest these threads.
yeah so out fo curiosity, whatever happened to the BUDGET part of Building on a Budget.  It used to be 30 tickets on MTGO was the price guideline
Let's see how far off we are

Monogreen: Total=$65.42  So about 35.00 more than the previous BUDGET everyone else before you used(and this isnt even counting a majority of the spells like harrow and the expedition)

Blue/White: Total=$40.42 About 10.00 of the BUDGET of ALL the previous guys. (Again not counting the bulk zendikar commons)

So yeah...way to stay on budget


Oh the really bad part is i didnt even bother looking up the sideboards...so awesome.  I have $100.00 lying around to build these decks.

Every week all you do is complain about his articles.  even when you think his deck was within your budget and good, you still complain about how another of of his articles suck.  Yikes guy why so harsh.  If you don't enjoy them at much stop reading them yo.

FUN FACT: more people are playing magic now which raises the prices on singles, supply and demand ^_^

All of you make valid points though...  budgeting is different for all different people and perhaps he doesn't hit your budget.

All in all his decks are pretty fun to play the 1st one i made was the The Specter of Change which took me to 2nd place at FNM.  than I made his I Lost My Alara deck which took me to 1st at FNM.  I mad made some other too like the mill ones and the ruin flare one.  Every time I play with the decks people always comment about how interesting and fun of a deck is was to play against and how much fun it would be to play with it.
I enjoy it when JVL give non-budget versions too.  JVL keep up the good work.

about the mono-green deck why no Bestial Menace? and Leatherback Baloth in the side board and not main deck /sadface!  I get the whole multikicker thing but not putting baloth main deck is a sin in a non-elf mono green deck.