|
2 years ago ::
Sep 24, 2011 - 4:12PM
#91
|
Date Joined:
Jul 23, 2011
|
Guys what cantrip options for my UWG aggro control deck now that we lost preordain. Could maybe run serum visions or gitaxian probe? Maybe a couple more counters like spell pierce currently running 4 cryptic command, 4 mana leak, 3 spell snare.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 25, 2011 - 8:03PM
#92
|
|
|
They already have a "fixed" version of GSZ in the format in the form of Chord which is in some ways actually better then GSZ. The only difference is that it does not allow for a super easy green splash as well, and it doesn't double up as a turn 1 mana accelerator.
Everyone should remeber if you are in green or red, and not running manamorphose you are not playing competitive magic.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 25, 2011 - 8:37PM
#93
|
Date Joined:
Nov 11, 2009
|
Zoo isn't competitive magic now?
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 25, 2011 - 8:40PM
#94
|
|
|
If its not running morphose its not an optimal build no. If you saw someone playing a 64 card zoo deck would you say they were playing at a competitive level? Not playing morphose is the same thing.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 25, 2011 - 8:47PM
#95
|
Date Joined:
Nov 18, 2003
|
They already have a "fixed" version of GSZ in the format in the form of Chord which is in some ways actually better then GSZ. The only difference is that it does not allow for a super easy green splash as well, and it doesn't double up as a turn 1 mana accelerator.
LOL, the funny thing is that Chord of Calling can be better in the deck that WotC was worried about GSZ being broken in. Chord is only good in creature based decks, and in creature light control and combo decks it may be prohibitively expensive. In Zoo Chord is great because a) it runs a lot of creatures, b) they are cheap to cast, c) it runs the most versatile mana base in the format. So while GSZ is better, in Zoo it is not better by a lot so Chord can add the same versatility that GSZ gave it.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 25, 2011 - 8:58PM
#96
|
|
|
Yeah I think the main problem with GSZ is that it doubled as a bird, and was splashable in pretty much any deck with even a small amount of green in it to the point that you would almost be silly not to play it in every deck possible. Chord requires at least a small amount of build around, so ya can't just throw it in a deck so that you can run 5 green utility creature 1 ofs, and arbor as the only green cards
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 25, 2011 - 9:00PM
#97
|
Date Joined:
Nov 18, 2003
|
If its not running morphose its not an optimal build no. If you saw someone playing a 64 card zoo deck would you say they were playing at a competitive level? Not playing morphose is the same thing.
I have NEVER played against a Zoo build that ran Manamorphose  (at least I did not see it played). I just went and looked at the Modern Daily Standings and could not find a top 8 Zoo deck with Manamorphose in it for the last week, so what you say has no evidence to support it.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 30, 2011 - 10:22AM
#98
|
|
|
I play a deck that wasn't affected at all by the bannings, and I think the choice of GSZ was borderline. I honestly think that it could stay or go, and create two very different formats that could be healthy, but it staying would be a near thing. So, rather than worry bout future card design interactions with GSZ, they took the easier route and banned it now so they could have more interactions in the future. As such, I am fine with it.
Preordain and Ponder are another borderline for me. I think one or the other should have been banned, but not both (to me, I'm leaning to Ponder being banned over Preordain).
As to someone mentioning MM and FoW in Legacy, MM is more powerful because life is a little less relevant than cards in hand. From what I understand of Legacy (admittedly not much), wins are set up in a single turn, making the amount of life you have irrelevant.
As long as it's random, I really can't see where's the problem. Anyway, there's already a few standard ways for doing this. We listed them in this thread. If someone does the bogey-bogey, eats the cards, waits until they come out, look out the approximate order, place replacements in the same order, calls the president to ask him to give him a string of numbers, puts the card in the given order, then pick the cards in the order given by taking the date of birth of his opponent, reversed, and taking only every other number, then a judge can clearly declare that he's random enough.
The beauty of sarcasm is that when the person using it is totally incorrect, you can just remove the sarcasm and end up with a post that is actually correct.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 30, 2011 - 2:42PM
#99
|
Date Joined:
Nov 11, 2009
|
I play a deck that wasn't affected at all by the bannings, and I think the choice of GSZ was borderline. I honestly think that it could stay or go, and create two very different formats that could be healthy, but it staying would be a near thing. So, rather than worry bout future card design interactions with GSZ, they took the easier route and banned it now so they could have more interactions in the future. As such, I am fine with it.
Preordain and Ponder are another borderline for me. I think one or the other should have been banned, but not both (to me, I'm leaning to Ponder being banned over Preordain).
As to someone mentioning MM and FoW in Legacy, MM is more powerful because life is a little less relevant than cards in hand. From what I understand of Legacy (admittedly not much), wins are set up in a single turn, making the amount of life you have irrelevant.
re: Green Sun's Zenith
They wanted to punch green's flexibility in the balls. I could almost guarantee the next format was going to be dominated by GSZ if it wasn't banned.
re: Legacy and Counterspells
I hate it when people misconcieve Legacy. Its a lot more interactive then people think. MM is powerful because it shuts down almost every turn 1 play in the book. FoW is inherently more powerful because its actually just a massive stop sign unless they have counters of their own. The only people that win in a single turn in Legacy is the combo decks, and thats because they either drew into gold, or Brainstormed their way into it.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Sep 30, 2011 - 5:40PM
#100
|
|
|
I play a deck that wasn't affected at all by the bannings, and I think the choice of GSZ was borderline. I honestly think that it could stay or go, and create two very different formats that could be healthy, but it staying would be a near thing. So, rather than worry bout future card design interactions with GSZ, they took the easier route and banned it now so they could have more interactions in the future. As such, I am fine with it.
Preordain and Ponder are another borderline for me. I think one or the other should have been banned, but not both (to me, I'm leaning to Ponder being banned over Preordain).
As to someone mentioning MM and FoW in Legacy, MM is more powerful because life is a little less relevant than cards in hand. From what I understand of Legacy (admittedly not much), wins are set up in a single turn, making the amount of life you have irrelevant.
re: Green Sun's Zenith
They wanted to punch green's flexibility in the balls. I could almost guarantee the next format was going to be dominated by GSZ if it wasn't banned.
re: Legacy and Counterspells
I hate it when people misconcieve Legacy. Its a lot more interactive then people think. MM is powerful because it shuts down almost every turn 1 play in the book. FoW is inherently more powerful because its actually just a massive stop sign unless they have counters of their own. The only people that win in a single turn in Legacy is the combo decks, and thats because they either drew into gold, or Brainstormed their way into it.
As I said, I knew I was probably misinterpreting Legacy and admitted as much. Anyways, more on topic, yes GSZ would probably dominate the new format, but it probably wouldn't be broken just yet. But, to keep it in line down the road, design would have to look at this interaction constantly. So yes, I agree that they were banning GSZ for future rather than now, but not completely agreeing because of the format right now (though it would certainly dominate for a while).
As long as it's random, I really can't see where's the problem. Anyway, there's already a few standard ways for doing this. We listed them in this thread. If someone does the bogey-bogey, eats the cards, waits until they come out, look out the approximate order, place replacements in the same order, calls the president to ask him to give him a string of numbers, puts the card in the given order, then pick the cards in the order given by taking the date of birth of his opponent, reversed, and taking only every other number, then a judge can clearly declare that he's random enough.
The beauty of sarcasm is that when the person using it is totally incorrect, you can just remove the sarcasm and end up with a post that is actually correct.
|
|
|
