Community

Every limited format will have a plurality of wins and loses decided by Rare [Bombs], Mana Issues and Muligans, but it seems that Innistrad is particularly bad in this regard. In fact, I can't even remember the last Innistrad limited match where at least one game wasn't decided by one of these three things. My most recent tournament game wins/loses were as follows:

Round 1
Won based on first turn Stormkirk Noble, second turn Spectral Flight
Won based on fourth turn Stormgeist, no answer from my opponent

Round 2
Loss due to Gavony Township
Loss due to Gavony Township

Round 3
Win due to Charmbreaker / Galvanic Volley combo
Win due to my opponent getting stuck on 2 lands until turn 6

Certainly some of these games might have worked out the same way if they weren't decided by rares or mana issues, but every single one was decided primarily by rares or mana issues. The first Gavony Township game I was in a great position to win, but that Township completely turned the game around for my opponent. If I had to estimate, I'd put mana, muligans and rares as the deciding factors in at least 60% of games.

So what you're saying is that Magic is a game that has elements of luck to it.  Why hasn't anyone else noticed this?!

I rarely get beaten by bombs or mana issues, unless it's an absolute monster of a bomb like Olivia or Stalker + Cleaver.  I think as long as you play with the good removal that is in the set (not so much in DKA though) and don't try to be too greedy with your mana base, you don't have these problems.

Jan 27, 2012 -- 10:51AM, CommanderGreven wrote:

I wouldn't consider this set dominated by rares at all.  Invisible Stalker , Spider Spawning , Burning Vengeance , Fiend Hunter .  Truthfully, I think the uncommons dominate more.

Not to be picky but I think you forgot the two best uncommons of them all Slayer of the Wicked and Falkenrath Noble

Hand of god, I was actually able to win the entire Ravnica draft, a set which I have never drafted before or even seen the cardlist, with this deck:

1 Agent of Masks 1 Angel of Despair 2 Boros Signet 1 Castigate 1 Enemy of the Guildpact 2 Ghost Warden 2 Gobhobbler Rats 1 Grifter's Blade 1 Hellhole Rats 1 Jagged Poppet 5 Mountain 1 Nettling Curse 2 Orzhov Euthanist 1 Orzhov Guildmage 1 Orzhova, the Church of Deals 4 Plains 1 Psychotic Fury 1 Seal of Doom 1 Smash 7 Swamp 1 Thundersong Trumpeter 1 Veteran Armorer 1 Wojek Embermage

The only loss, this: (Shoot, I lost the picture before copying it from my clipboard.) Anyway, it was a loss due to drawing 10 lands and 6 spells over the course of a game, when 1 of my 'spells' was a Boris Signet. My final two wins both involved the Angel of Despair and my record with that card is: 'never lost after playing this card'

Jan 27, 2012 -- 2:35PM, razorborne wrote:

yes, you win if you resolve angel of despair. but acting like the rest of your deck didn't do anything is ignoring the fact that, you know, angel of despair costs 7. the rest of your deck was able to maneuver you into a position where angel won. you're just looking at what you won with, not how you actually won.

 

I didn't need the Angel to win every game, but it won every game where it was played. In some of these games, it was the only card out of the entire deck that would have allowed me to win, in others it is was just the nail in my opponent's coffin, because killing off an opponent's 3/3 and replacing it with a flying 5/5 on my side is a pretty big swing. My point in bringing this up, is that the rare was involved with 3 out of 6 wins and never once removed. Which means that for my opponents, a rare bomb was involved in 3 of their loses. In my only loss I got mana flooded, and two of my opponents mana flooded for loses as well. So now we're looking at 6 out of 7 loses that involve either an unremoved bomb, muligans or mana issues. Including the first set of Innistrad games, we are now up to 12 out of 13.

Which reinforces my central point that the majority of loses involve either mana, muligans or unremoved rare/mythic bombs. Although now that I think about it "The three M's" sounds catchier. Just keep a log of your loses and it will become as clear to you as it is to me. Wins are a little tougher, because you won't always know if one of the three conditions are met, but you could keep a record of those too.