|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 4:08PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2008
|
This thread is for discussion of this week's Building on a Budget, which goes live Wednesday morning on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 9:36PM
#2
|
|
|
so 7 nettle sentinels? this deck would be great in a ptq. I mean who doesnt love a DQ....any idea what those extra 3 should actually be?
I like fun, but competitive decks. So I might not play what is optimal but they have normally been tested to have a 2/3 winrate.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 9:48PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Feb 16, 2010
|
Just wanted to say the deck is no good without Glimpse of Nature  , then saw it's banned in modern :'( Still... It's unplayable without Glimpse of Nature
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 9:57PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Feb 21, 2011
|
Genesis Wave  seems like a good replacement for Regal Force  , especially if you cast it for the same cost. Only downside I guess is that you couldn't Chord of Calling  for it.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 10:04PM
#5
|
- Warm, wet and squishy inside
|
so 7 nettle sentinels? this deck would be great in a ptq. I mean who doesnt love a DQ....any idea what those extra 3 should actually be?
My instinct was " Birchlore Rangers  ", but realized they're too old school for Modern when I looked on Gatherer. Wasn't there a very similar card printed in Lorwyn block (or somewhere near there) that let you get any color mana too, or am I remembering a card that doesn't exist?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 10:38PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Nov 21, 2011
|
I guess it is 3 copies of Melira?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 10:44PM
#7
|
|
|
I would guess it's actually 3 more copies of summoner's pact. In his analysis of the Jund matchup post-sideboard, Jacob talked of cutting summoner's pacts, plural, even though there's only one in the decklist.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 28, 2012 - 11:40PM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Oct 16, 2007
|
Does anyone play Grafdigger's Cage  as an answer to Pod? If so, this deck might take splash damage.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 29, 2012 - 5:41AM
#9
|
|
|
The errors in this article made it unreadable. 7 of one card, and a reference to multiple pacts make it impossible to know what deck I am supposed to be reading about. It is a real shame that this week started with an article about the editing staff and then the editing staff put this up. Can you please hire an editor that knows the rules of Magic deck construction? This is embarrasing.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Feb 29, 2012 - 5:53AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2008
|
The errors in this article made it unreadable. 7 of one card, and a reference to multiple pacts make it impossible to know what deck I am supposed to be reading about. It is a real shame that this week started with an article about the editing staff and then the editing staff put this up. Can you please hire an editor that knows the rules of Magic deck construction? This is embarrasing.
Chill out man, everyone makes mistakes every now and then. I feel like you yourself might have made an error or two in life. It happens.
I would be interested to know what those 3 slots were supposed to be for sure though. As someone who wants to play modern but is on a decided budget I would love to have this deck as an option. In the meantime I'll just have to make a best guess and do some testing :D
|
|
|
