I left MTG right after Fallen Empires and I've only just started playing again shortly after the start of Innistrad, so maybe I'm missing something obvious, but what is the reason for the Arid Mesas and Scalding Tarns in iammrjojo's Lava Spike deck?There are no Plains or Islands, even in his sideboard and I don't see any spells or effects that are activated off of him taking damage, so why not just play 20 Mountains instead of 12 Mountains and 4 each of the sac lands? At best he can confuse his opponent into *thinking* that he's playing off-color cards, but I doubt that's worth the 1 life, especially since they are unlikely to be fooled for long or change their own play much even if they are.So, am I missing something?
The most important reason is Grim Lavamancer. Paying 1 life is well worth being halfway towards 2 extra damage. A less important reason is deck thinning. Decks like that don't need more than 3 or so lands, so every land they draw afterwards is a dead card. By fetching another basic out of your deck, you very slightly decreased the chance of drawing a land on your subsequent draws.For bonus, there is Searing Blaze in his sideboard, which means you can get landfall on your opponent's turn.
I've seen almost every one of these combo decks on Magic Online (the exception being the Hive Mind deck, and I've only seen variations of the Martyr and kitchenfink decks). All the rest are copied by players looking to win really fast, and it's incredibly boring.One of the best parts of Magic is deck building. It's awesome to strategize how to accomplish something and then make it happen, but the other half of Magic is playing the game. There is an opponent sitting across from you wanting the same enjoyment out of the game that you do. While it's fun to laugh gleefully (occasionally, and maybe all the time for some) at playing a Pact and having your opponent be forced to copy it, inevitably losing the next turn, it makes that opponent question why they should bother playing. In other words, once I see a combo working and I have no answer (and most combos operate on the idea that there isn't an answer), my further actions are irrelevant.Imagine a game of baseball in which the team at bat always hit homeruns, and their opponents have no chance to catch the ball. Naturally, we have an answer to everything: just strike them out every time, then they can't hit a homerun. Unfortunately, in Magic, that usually means something out of the ordinary is going on, such as a person looking to pull off a combo not drawing the right cards, even on multiple mulligans. They just concede. I didn't really win though, I didn't even get to play. (The baseball equivalent there is that each player at bat is a new game. Sometimes you strike out, but when you don't, you hit a homerun, every time.)That's the flaw in "combo" decks or decks that want to end the game as quickly as possible (not all decks do). I suppose this might be more of an observation of online play than offline. People seem to think there is a scorecard somewhere, that winning as many games as possible in as quickest time as possible (no matter how) actually means something. It doesn't. These combo decks posted fall into that category. They teach players that they don't have to think: they just have to copy a deck and hopefully win in a few turns if the deck "works" as intended. I would argue that they are not even playing the game, let alone their opponent.
58086748 wrote:58335208 wrote:Disregard women acquire chase rares. There are a lot of dudes for whom this is not optional.
58335208 wrote:Disregard women acquire chase rares.
97820278 wrote:144532521 wrote:How;s a 2 drop 1/2, Flying broken? What am I missing? You're missing it because *turns Storm Crows sideways* all your base are belong to Chuck Norris and every other overused meme ever.
144532521 wrote:How;s a 2 drop 1/2, Flying broken? What am I missing?
I'm not seeing people's concern about decks that aren't interactive. Some decks are just like that, just as some control decks interact every turn by countering everything you play. On the opposite end of that spectrum, though, you have decks that do nothing no matter what you do until they piece thier combo together. While these two extremes do exist, I don't understand why so many people yearn to play all thier games of Magic with and against decks that lie in the middle ground. Is WotC in the business of helping people make friends? Is that what they get money for, or is it selling cards and at least providing cards to play with and an opportunity for competition by providing different formats and various ways for people to play? This is Magic, not eHarmony.com.Not that I'm all about playing decks that avoid interaction until my opponent suddenly loses, but I do appreciate those decks for what they are and I do enjoy playing with and/or against them here and there. They aren't something that everyone should hate and avoid, but rather a part of the game that should be appreciated like any other part of the game.