Mana Mastery and Rogues Gallery deck previews - Top 10 cards from new DLC decks by WiNGSPANTT

60 posts / 0 new
Last post
Deck lists go up in 7 minutes. And lol at the Bof woes. Why should burn have lifegain? Bof is super strong against tons of decks already

WiNGSPANTT is the 4th best commentator on YouTube and editor in chief of Top Tier Tactics.

I never said it was a bad deck, and if you aint play the first game, ALL decks had a way to gain life.  AND why shouldnt the burn deck have at least ONE way to gain some type of life, when theres a lot of cards in its own deck that damage ITSELF taking its OWN LIFE.

Yeah makes a lot of sense.  Have a burn deck burn yourself, while other decks can gain life but you cant.  Smart... real smart...

And this is coming from someone who plays the burn deck a lot.  Just sucks when your own creatures/spells are hurting yourself trying to hurt others, yet they can gain life in some type of way and you have NOT ONE way to gain yourself.


Welcome to mono-red. That's how it rolls.

Seriously. My mono-red burn deck had a backup plan, for when I couldn't win. Most of the time, if I couldn't win, I could "explode" and kill myself and my opponent at the same time, causing a draw. That's just how red works. All aggression with no regard for self-preservation. Lifegain is basically a waste of time for red.

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

I usually laugh at people bringing BoF into a 4pffa. they are usually the 1st one out of the game.. generally CL in a 4pffa game lasts longer than BoF ;)
I am Blue/Green
I am Blue/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both rational and instinctive. I value self-knowledge and understanding of the world; my ultimate goal is self-improvement and improvement of the world around me. At best, I am focused and methodical; at worst, I am obsessive and amoral.
Deck lists go up in 7 minutes. And lol at the Bof woes. Why should burn have lifegain? Bof is super strong against tons of decks already



...cannot wait!!
I never said it was a bad deck,



And I never said you said that. You're the one complaining the decks/game is horribly unbalanced because a mono-red burn deck doesn't have life gain.

and if you aint play the first game, ALL decks had a way to gain life. 



So what? Those crappy artifacts like Angel's Feather were auto-exclude cards anyways. You have yet to demonstrate how D13 is completely unbalanced just because not every deck can gain life. Every deck doesn't have sweepers, counters, discard, pump spells, tutors, etc., but that doesn't make the game unbalanced.

AND why shouldnt the burn deck have at least ONE way to gain some type of life, when theres a lot of cards in its own deck that damage ITSELF taking its OWN LIFE.

Yeah makes a lot of sense.  Have a burn deck burn yourself, while other decks can gain life but you cant.  Smart... real smart...

And this is coming from someone who plays the burn deck a lot.  Just sucks when your own creatures/spells are hurting yourself trying to hurt others, yet they can gain life in some type of way and you have NOT ONE way to gain yourself.



It sounds like you're not playing the deck right. You don't cast Flamebreak in order to kill all your own creatures. And if you're playing the deck decently, you should win the game long before you kill youself with your own Flamebreak, unless you start throwing Searing Spears at your own face.

Duels of the Planeswalkers deck builds and analysis: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/dotp

 

Another one of my websites: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/rationalchristianity/

 

I am Blue/White

I never said it was a bad deck, and if you aint play the first game, ALL decks had a way to gain life.  AND why shouldnt the burn deck have at least ONE way to gain some type of life, when theres a lot of cards in its own deck that damage ITSELF taking its OWN LIFE.

Yeah makes a lot of sense.  Have a burn deck burn yourself, while other decks can gain life but you cant.  Smart... real smart...

And this is coming from someone who plays the burn deck a lot.  Just sucks when your own creatures/spells are hurting yourself trying to hurt others, yet they can gain life in some type of way and you have NOT ONE way to gain yourself.


Welcome to mono-red. That's how it rolls.

Seriously. My mono-red burn deck had a backup plan, for when I couldn't win. Most of the time, if I couldn't win, I could "explode" and kill myself and my opponent at the same time, causing a draw. That's just how red works. All aggression with no regard for self-preservation. Lifegain is basically a waste of time for red.



Srry this isnt real life Magic.  This is DotP where cards like that rarely exsist, let alone come up enough of the time to have an impact.

And if Red isnt supposed to have any life gain at all, then they should have NEVER made a way for red to gain life period.

Srry if im just tired of these ppl always screwing these deck packs where they either for the most part are underpowered or overpowered.

Trinity....   Bekinghted.....
I never said it was a bad deck,



And I never said you said that. You're the one complaining the decks/game is horribly unbalanced because a mono-red burn deck doesn't have life gain.

and if you aint play the first game, ALL decks had a way to gain life. 



So what? Those crappy artifacts like Angel's Feather were auto-exclude cards anyways. You have yet to demonstrate how D13 is completely unbalanced just because not every deck can gain life. Every deck doesn't have sweepers, counters, discard, pump spells, tutors, etc., but that doesn't make the game unbalanced.

AND why shouldnt the burn deck have at least ONE way to gain some type of life, when theres a lot of cards in its own deck that damage ITSELF taking its OWN LIFE.

Yeah makes a lot of sense.  Have a burn deck burn yourself, while other decks can gain life but you cant.  Smart... real smart...

And this is coming from someone who plays the burn deck a lot.  Just sucks when your own creatures/spells are hurting yourself trying to hurt others, yet they can gain life in some type of way and you have NOT ONE way to gain yourself.



It sounds like you're not playing the deck right. You don't cast Flamebreak in order to kill all your own creatures. And if you're playing the deck decently, you should win the game long before you kill youself with your own Flamebreak, unless you start throwing Searing Spears at your own face.



Again i DONT play 1v1.  I play 4FFA.  Sorry i dont have the time to sit there are redo decks over and over to be switching back and forth between 1v1 and FFA.

Im glad you think i dont know how to play the deck.  Good for you.  Keep thinking you know all....
If you only play 4FFA why do you need to switch back and forth between that and 1vs1?

Also, some decks are made for 1 vs 1 (bof, GG) other decks are better at 4ffa (CW/OD). Playing 4FFA with a burn deck is...insanity 

Again i DONT play 1v1.  I play 4FFA.  Sorry i dont have the time to sit there are redo decks over and over to be switching back and forth between 1v1 and FFA.

Im glad you think i dont know how to play the deck.  Good for you.  Keep thinking you know all....



So now the game is unbalanced because you choose to play BoF in 4 player FFA? In other news, Mindstorms works better in 2HG than in 1v1. Therefore, this game must be horribly unbalanced and terrible.

Duels of the Planeswalkers deck builds and analysis: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/dotp

 

Another one of my websites: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/rationalchristianity/

 

I am Blue/White

If you only play 4FFA why do you need to switch back and forth between that and 1vs1?



How dare you ask logical questions to the irrational.

Duels of the Planeswalkers deck builds and analysis: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/dotp

 

Another one of my websites: http://megamaster125.angelfire.com/rationalchristianity/

 

I am Blue/White

Srry this isnt real life Magic.  This is DotP where cards like that rarely exsist, let alone come up enough of the time to have an impact.


Cards like what?
And if Red isnt supposed to have any life gain at all, then they should have NEVER made a way for red to gain life period.


Can you defend this position with facts?

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

If you only play 4FFA why do you need to switch back and forth between that and 1vs1?

Also, some decks are made for 1 vs 1 (bof, GG) other decks are better at 4ffa (CW/OD). Playing 4FFA with a burn deck is...insanity 



Because cards you would play in 4FFA you might not play in 1v1 cuz in 1v1 the games dont last as long.

And if playing Burn in a 4FFA is insanity then yeah thats smart....  have an option in the game but yet make it so some of the decks are useless (acording to your comment of insanity) for that game mode.
Srry this isnt real life Magic.  This is DotP where cards like that rarely exsist, let alone come up enough of the time to have an impact.


Cards like what?
And if Red isnt supposed to have any life gain at all, then they should have NEVER made a way for red to gain life period.


Can you defend this position with facts?



Cards like what?  Seriously?  What cards are in current real life Magic that arent even in DotP?  Srry not going to spend time looking up what all the cards are that real magic has that arent in DotP (prob cuz they to hard to program for acording to their little interviews)

Lets not forget how (for example the burn deck) have been using a lot of the same cards since the very first game.  Way to go for showing diversity Magic...

And as far as defending that statment with facts....  im going by what YOU are claiming.  Red isnt supposed to have life gain so therefore why make lifegain for red
If you only play 4FFA why do you need to switch back and forth between that and 1vs1?



How dare you ask logical questions to the irrational.



Sorry for having an OPINON about a game that doesnt coinside with the "general" status quo
Srry this isnt real life Magic.  This is DotP where cards like that rarely exsist, let alone come up enough of the time to have an impact.


Cards like what?
And if Red isnt supposed to have any life gain at all, then they should have NEVER made a way for red to gain life period.


Can you defend this position with facts?



Cards like what?  Seriously?  What cards are in current real life Magic that arent even in DotP?  Srry not going to spend time looking up what all the cards are that real magic has that arent in DotP (prob cuz they to hard to program for acording to their little interviews)


I asked, because I don't know what category of cards you're talking about. You mentioned "cards like that" with no context for what sorts of card you're talking about, or how it relates to the point I was trying to make.

Standard Answer to all 5E rules questions: "Ask your DM."

Burn is and always has been bad in FFA. that's just a fact of Magic.

WiNGSPANTT is the 4th best commentator on YouTube and editor in chief of Top Tier Tactics.

And if playing Burn in a 4FFA is insanity then yeah thats smart....  have an option in the game but yet make it so some of the decks are useless (acording to your comment of insanity) for that game mode.



This is a game where some colours and some decks are better in some situations than others. That's part of the beauty of it. You might take up Chess if that's a problem for you.

Red's general goal is to do 20 damage as quickly as possible with no thought of a long game or any defence. It cares about winning, and winning quickly. If you look from a long term perspective, creatures are almost always going to be better than burn. Lightning Bolt does three damage, once. Goblin Guide is going to do two damage every turn until it dies. It only needs to live two turns to be better than the Bolt.

So 4 player FFA, which involves removing 60 life instead of 20, is naturally going to be problematic for Red. Red has historically been the weakest colour in multiplayer for exactly this reason. They've done a lot to boost it in the last five years. It used to be a long time ago that Pyroclasm was about the only viable sweeper Red had, and even that has its limits. It and Rolling Thunder were both huge leaps for Red. Red ten years ago would never have dreamed of Chain Reaction, which makes it much more multiplayer viable than before.

What you are doing by taking a mono-Red deck into an FFA in DotP is like grabbing a tennis racquet out of a locker full of sports gear and trying to go play baseball. You're intentionally (or perhaps unwittingly) handicapping yourself, and then complaining about your ability to win. It's fine that you like burn, and it's fine that you like FFAs, but the two don't mix well. Pick a second deck to like and play in FFAs and play the burn in 1 vs. 1 or 2HG where it will do much better.

I'll even go you one further; later on today or some time tomorrow, in the Duels 2014 Deck Requests thread, I'm going to make a Black/Red deck focused on burn and preventing lifegain (partially to appease you, and partially because three or four of the decks I've designed can gain dozens of life.) 

Wizards: If it isn't game design, we can't do it right. Frankly, we're kind of shaky on the game design sometimes too.

And if playing Burn in a 4FFA is insanity then yeah thats smart....  have an option in the game but yet make it so some of the decks are useless (acording to your comment of insanity) for that game mode.



This is a game where some colours and some decks are better in some situations than others. That's part of the beauty of it. You might take up Chess if that's a problem for you.

Red's general goal is to do 20 damage as quickly as possible with no thought of a long game or any defence. It cares about winning, and winning quickly. If you look from a long term perspective, creatures are almost always going to be better than burn. Lightning Bolt does three damage, once. Goblin Guide is going to do two damage every turn until it dies. It only needs to live two turns to be better than the Bolt.

So 4 player FFA, which involves removing 60 life instead of 20, is naturally going to be problematic for Red. Red has historically been the weakest colour in multiplayer for exactly this reason. They've done a lot to boost it in the last five years. It used to be a long time ago that Pyroclasm was about the only viable sweeper Red had, and even that has its limits. It and Rolling Thunder were both huge leaps for Red. Red ten years ago would never have dreamed of Chain Reaction, which makes it much more multiplayer viable than before.

What you are doing by taking a mono-Red deck into an FFA in DotP is like grabbing a tennis racquet out of a locker full of sports gear and trying to go play baseball. You're intentionally (or perhaps unwittingly) handicapping yourself, and then complaining about your ability to win. It's fine that you like burn, and it's fine that you like FFAs, but the two don't mix well. Pick a second deck to like and play in FFAs and play the burn in 1 vs. 1 or 2HG where it will do much better.

I'll even go you one further; later on today or some time tomorrow, in the Duels 2014 Deck Requests thread, I'm going to make a Black/Red deck focused on burn and preventing lifegain (partially to appease you, and partially because three or four of the decks I've designed can gain dozens of life.) 



I understand all of what you said.  And i know that burn is at a disadvantage in 4FFA, yet i have won maybe 4 out of the 10 times i would play it in 4FFA (just a guess cuz i know i dont lose everytime but im also NOT always the first out like some want to claim on here that burn would be in FFA).

I guess im just tired of them doing this same crap they been pulling now with these deck packs.  Either put little to no thought into them and just throwing random lets make this deck overpower almost everything, and this deck will just be underpowered to almost everything.

Again this is my take as someone who, for the most part, only plays 4FFA and not 1v1.