Unacceptable.Who was he playtesting against? A literal goldfish?
Can we have Ben Bleweiss back please?
This article erroneously lists Ponder as a legal card in the Modern format. I cannot excuse this oversight during editing and due to its core nature for the deck discussed below it cannot be easily corrected. This sort of error should not happen and will not happpen again. -- Trick Jarrett, Editor-in-Chief of DailyMTG.com
due to its core nature for the deck
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
This is outrageous.I thought you really tested your decks on MOL, but since ponder is banned, seems pretty clear now you dont.Iam feeling cheated, you articles are a fraud, your decks are bad, and you are a terrible professional.I remember you put a firespout on a alara-zendikar standard deck once, so this is not the first time you do this kind of terrible mistake.I wish we could have Ben Bleweiss back too...
I'm going to second everyone's words in here. Ponder? Telling us he playtested? I always thought his playtestings where a little absurd, maybe a tad exaggerating when he playtested but come on. That was ridiculous. Now we know why his opponents never really seem experienced, skilled or real.But I want to mention the othe side of the coin. I'm not a Modern expert or anything, I'm neutral about this format, but the deck seemed to have potential. I really want to build my own version of this, playtest it, also take care of the sideboard and go to a tournament with it. Just for fun of course. No Ponders.
It's more than a mistake. It's evidence of complete fakery. He built a half-arsed deck (which in and of itself would have been pathetic, but exusable) and then instead of actually playtesting it he just made up some games to make it sound halfway decent and called it a day. It demonstrates a complete lack of respect for his readership or for his job. It's proof positive that he isn't doing the job he's being paid to do, and trying to pass off a work of fiction as an informative article. And it's not even well-done fiction!
You people are extrapolating to a huge degree. Many people like to do their testing with physical cards. You really don't have to fire up magic online to test you know, some people have friends with which to play they game. It's very strange that nobody noticed that he played an illegal card while testing, but to err is human.
"I untapped and showed my opponent Wildfire. My opponent conceded."
There's no way Jacob has falsified testing for this or any other article. Indeed, I can't help suspecting that it's the need to carry out tests every week that means he sometimes ends up playing paper games against non-expert opponents instead of building the deck on MtGO and giving it a ten match workout.
76125763 wrote:Zindaras' meta is like a fossil, ancient and its secrets yet to be uncovered. Only men of yore, long dead, knew of it.
Before making accusations, you guys might want to remember that BoaB is no longer an MTGO-specific column. Pieces of cardboard don't check for format legality every time you try to shuffle them.
Can we now please wish Jacob well in his future endeavors and brink back the magic online focused, multiple weeks per deck column? His effort to build bad tournament decks are just embarrassing by now. There are times that is possible to build budget decks that can beat your local sanctioned metagame. But they are the exception, no the rule. This guy has to come week after week with new tournament "worthy" decks, with no real time to test(testing online is just faster).If ate least posted the FNM that he goes with this decks, it would be more believable. But it's just sad.
I've said this before about BoaB and I will say it again. Why does this article feel the need to be competitive? I think the mass majority of your players are not competitive Magic players. I would be surprised if more than half had ever been to a FNM, much less competed or WON. My closest gamestore is over an hour away so I have no intention of attempting FNM. My playgroup is 5 guys max on any given night. I read BoaB because I want to beat my 5 buddies who are playing, literally, at my kitchen table. $80 is not budget. For me, $50 is not really budget. If a deck has a 4 count of any card over 5 dollars it's immediately out of my budget. The need for this article to be competitive is going to be it's downfall. Put together fun, interesting decks that fulfill my desire to build something new without breaking the bank. Screw formats and ban lists. You have the entire history of Magic cards at your disposal. Use them.