|
4 months ago ::
Feb 04, 2013 - 9:47AM
#181
|
Date Joined:
Jul 13, 2012
|
Dude, I'm just using the same way of thinking you are using. You are comparing cards that are not meant to be compared, because their colors do not have the same strength, or because the cards don't have the same costs, or because you compare a two card combo against one single card, or even because you are comparing a card that is meant to fight it well. "(...)and blue's less dependant on creatures" And green's less dependant on removal. Silly comparisons are silly comparisons. Let's look at the latest draft top 8's I can find on WotC: "Pro Tour Gatecrash Qualifier Season" Worcester Massachussets (173 players): 1st WBG, playing Towering Indrik  and Trestle Troll  in main. 3rd Selesnya, playing Aerial Predation  in main. 4th Bant, playing Towering Indrik in main. 5th WBG, playing Aerial Predation in side. 7th Golgari, playing Trestle Troll in main and Aerial Predation in side. South Bend, Indiana (128 players): 1st Bant-ish Selesnya. 5th Selesnya, with Trestle Troll in side. 8th WBG, with 2 Trestle Troll in main and Aerial Predation in side. What kind of better proof than ACTUAL RESULTS do you want? I can also find among the 3-1 or better standard decklists from 2012 world cup: 1 Ezuri's Archers  in side. 1 Stingerfling Spider  < /a>  in side.
1 Crushing Vines  < /a> in side.
1 Crushing Vines in side. 1 Daybreak Ranger  < /a> in main and 1 Crushing Vines in side. 2 Crushing Vines in side. etc...
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 05, 2013 - 1:42PM
#182
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2010
|
Dude, I'm just using the same way of thinking you are using. You are comparing cards that are not meant to be compared, because their colors do not have the same strength, or because the cards don't have the same costs, or because you compare a two card combo against one single card, or even because you are comparing a card that is meant to fight it well.
Except that it's rock breaks scissors, scissors cuts paper, paper...You want to cover the rock? LOL That's not going to hurt the rock.
Actually, it's rock ties with scissors and paper does what exactly?
A better comparison there would be Beastbreaker of Bala Ged  with Knight of Cliffhaven  , and that's more complicated.
Let's look at the latest draft top 8's I can find on WotC:
"Pro Tour Gatecrash Qualifier Season"
Worcester Massachussets (173 players):
1st WBG, playing Towering Indrik and Trestle Troll in main.
3rd Selesnya, playing Aerial Predation in main.
4th Bant, playing Towering Indrik in main.
5th WBG, playing Aerial Predation in side.
7th Golgari, playing Trestle Troll in main and Aerial Predation in side.
Funny, in my personal experience, removing those cards altogether is better.
Plus, um, "your sideboard" in limited includes "everything you consider worthless". For instance, during NPH, I was playing Team America, and I had Dementia Bat  in my sideboard. I didn't have any plan to actually use it (even if I had been playing black).
South Bend, Indiana (128 players):
1st Bant-ish Selesnya.
5th Selesnya, with Trestle Troll in side.
8th WBG, with 2 Trestle Troll in main and Aerial Predation in side.
So, all you've proven is what? That a couple cards in limited don't affect it much? We know that. But that doesn't mean I want those couple cards to show up in my deck. Every last one of those cases, if you examine the matches, you will find that if they were drawn, a basic land would've been better.
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
----
Autocard is your friend.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] = Lightning Bolt 
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 05, 2013 - 2:23PM
#183
|
|
|
See, this is why it's impossible to believe you play limited. Trestle Troll is easily one of the most annoying creatures in RtR drafts. His 4 toughness makes most creatures at 3 or even 4 cmc unable to kill him and very little of the set's removal can deal with him either, if you aren't packing Stab Wound  or Auger Spree  he's going to give you a headache. His reach makes attacking with flyers about as useless as you think the ability is. Defender enables Axebane Guardian  and, to a leser extent, Doorkeeper  . Oh, and to top it all off he can regenerate so when your opponent finally gets something on the field able to kill him he can still block it all day. What's bad about him again?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 05, 2013 - 3:32PM
#184
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2009
|
Funny, in my personal experience, removing those cards altogether is better.
And in their experiences, they weren't.
Every last one of those cases, if you examine the matches, you will find that if they were drawn, a basic land would've been better.
I have nothing snarky to say, so I'll just repeat what you typed
Every last one of those cases, if you examine the matches, you will find that if they were drawn, a basic land would've been better.
I think this speaks for itself.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 05, 2013 - 3:42PM
#185
|
Date Joined:
Oct 18, 2009
|
Apparently, Bay is a better at drafting and deck building than those people getting top-8 at tournaments with over 100 players. It's funny, indeed. At the very least, PurpleFive data disproves Bay's previous claim that no ones drafts green. It's being drafted and it's winning.
[<o>]
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 06, 2013 - 7:11AM
#186
|
Date Joined:
Dec 27, 2009
|
I shall almost certainly regret this, but... Maro has admitted on his blog that flying hate is coming from a mechanical space rather than a flavorful one.Spoiler:
Show
Mark Rosewater: The flying hate comes more from a mechanically need than a flavor one There. Can we go home now?
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 06, 2013 - 1:31PM
#187
|
|
|
So, all you've proven is what? That a couple cards in limited don't affect it much? We know that. But that doesn't mean I want those couple cards to show up in my deck. Every last one of those cases, if you examine the matches, you will find that if they were drawn, a basic land would've been better.
You're funny.
And so people say to me, "How do I know if a word is real?" You know, anyone who's read a children's book knows that love makes things real. If you love a word, use it! That makes it real. Being in the dictionary is an artificial distinction; it doesn't make the word any more real than any other word. If you love a word, it becomes real.
--Erin McKean, Redefining the Dictionary
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 3:53PM
#188
|
Date Joined:
Oct 12, 2010
|
See, this is why it's impossible to believe you play limited. Trestle Troll is easily one of the most annoying creatures in RtR drafts. His 4 toughness makes most creatures at 3 or even 4 cmc unable to kill him and very little of the set's removal can deal with him either, if you aren't packing Stab Wound or Auger Spree he's going to give you a headache. His reach makes attacking with flyers about as useless as you think the ability is. Defender enables Axebane Guardian and, to a leser extent, Doorkeeper . Oh, and to top it all off he can regenerate so when your opponent finally gets something on the field able to kill him he can still block it all day. What's bad about him again?
And you can just play another creature. I had no idea exalted was an RTR mechanic.
And you're really going for...parasitic off two cards, one of which is in a third color? Seriously? Sorry, but I think you've just jumped the shark, sage.
I shall almost certainly regret this, but...
Maro has admitted on his blog that flying hate is coming from a mechanical space rather than a flavorful one.
Spoiler:
Show
Mark Rosewater: The flying hate comes more from a mechanically need than a flavor one
There.
Can we go home now?
When Maro admits it has no mechanical value to speak of, we can go home. Seriously, just...with fight existing, flying hate has no reason to exist. (And going to green's flavor, something so pointless should've died off years ago.)
Clever deduction Watson! Maybe you can explain why Supergirl is trying to kill me.
----
Autocard is your friend.
[c]Lightning Bolt[/c] = Lightning Bolt
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 07, 2013 - 5:17PM
#189
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2012
|
Or you can not be a smeghead and play it because IT'S THE BEST BLOCKER IN THE SET. If you're in G/B and not playing balls to the wall aggro, it's an INCREDIBLY effective creature for buying time and makes it INCREDIBLY difficult for your opponent to attack profitably. I don't know where the crap you were going with exalted. It isn't parasitic, it has synergy with two all ready good cards that happen to be even better with other defenders. None of the cards I named need to be played together to be good, that they get better when played together is just icing.
|
|
|
|
4 months ago ::
Feb 08, 2013 - 7:51AM
#190
|
Date Joined:
Jul 13, 2012
|
What possible kind of argument would you accept?
All the people that answered to this thread told you that flying-hate is useful. You refuse it because a few cards are resilient to it or protect from it.
We try to explain to you that those cards are just as resilient to this kind of hate as they are to any other kind of hate. You keep your stance, complaining that all flying creatures you always see are always resilient to flying-hate (which means they are also resilient to any other kind of hate) and other creatures are too.
We show you actual results from tournaments, not tiny ones of course. You refuse the data, claiming that those were bad decisions.
What is this, some kind of new dogma that we cannot argue against, a religious belief?
All hail to the new god, who hates anti-flying!!!
|
|
|
~ 
~ 
~ 
~ 
