His first feedback was way too rude to be constructive; however, he came back and redid it the way I wanted to (but was too busy cubing, wooo cube). Set aside the fact that he was a jackass the first time for the fact that he took time to read your article, respond, REREAD and offer a ton of feedback on where you were going off-res, and post it (correcting his tone mostly too). Get past hurt feelings and learn what he has tried to teach (even if it took 2 tries, he put in basically an article of effort in giving you that feedback).
As a practicing composer, producer, and audio engineer I can tell you... If you're using the built in sound card on a generic brand PC you are losing a TON of sound fidelity. Also, the lack of any kind of power for a pre-amp (and therefore total lack of preamp altogether) actually makes a difference. Way back when I first started I even tried fancy consumer soundcards; they all pretty much suck too. But since USB can provide power, USB mics can actually have their own preamp built in. Now, if you own a separate preamp and own an adapter to plug into a 1/8 inch jack, you might get something half decent.
Also, as a software developer that licensed the Audacity recording engine and distributed recording software to hundreds/thousands of paying users for over 10 years, I can tell you that every single user that tried to use their built in sound card was unhappy with the results, and happy with a USB mic. But hey if you have something that works for you, more power to you!
Dude, I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you. I broke down your entire article line by line and gave you specific feedback. I gave you editorial feedback on how to write a better article, pointing out where your narrative was disjointed and nonsensical, where you had non-sequitors, where things were confusing for the reader. I pointed out specifically where you said things that were uninformed, misguided, or just plain wrong. I told you specifically which things don't belong in an article but perhaps in the comments. I gave you fairly specific advice on what kind of microphone to get and how to configure it. I can suggest a make and model if you need me to. I gave you links to specific other articles on this site you can reference for ideas, and I named a specific author who does excellent articles for you to reference. You cannot ask for more, unless you ask me to write an article for you.
I gave you harsh some harsh criticism, but you deserved it. I can't teach you all the ins and outs of Innistrad block limited; you'll have to read other people's articles and play more to figure that out, but you said a very large number of very ignorant things. You posted videos that are rife with poor play. That doesn't make you stupid and I never said you were, but you really don't know what you're talking about. Trust me, you will never, ever get this much detailed constructive criticism again unless you get a professional editor. So man up, own it, vow to do better next time.
As a practicing songwriter and musician I can tell you I have been using an old fashioned desk mic (mini rca plug) for years without any loss in sound fidelity. Anything more than that is just audiophile fussiness imho.
I would just add that USB or bluetooth is highly recommended (in other words, don't use the 1/8 inch jack into a generic sound card, ie the one that looks like a headphone jack but is for a microphone). We actually get quite good quality out of a variety of USB mikes that can be had for around $10 USD. So long as the sound is not coming out of the speaker while you're recording, you'll get no feedback. So if you find a headset uncomfortable, they aren't strictly necessary. However, if you get the headset, you may later prefer it for online voice-chat. Also, don't forget to adjust the audio recording level. You may be able to do this in your recording software, but you may need to adjust it from your OS preferences. In Windows, the control panel has a Sound applet where you can pick the default recording device and adjust Recording volume (it is near where you can adjust playback device/volume).
** Hmm can't get card links to work in the comments, tried both () and [card][/card] didn't work. Anybody know how to do this?
Ok, seeing as how this site doesn't provide any editorial feedback to its writers, and because I bashed this article, I thought I would give KaraZorEl the editorial feedback he should have gotten. Then maybe this article can serve a purpose as an example to others on what not to do and maybe how to fix it.
>>Okay, I'll admit it. Sometimes, I like to dabble in sealed.
You should establish your credentials as an author; starting say stating that you don't know much about the topic of your article is generally a bad idea.
>>I've been playing Scars block draft every Friday this past month and have gotten a
>>hang on how it works.
So after playing Scars drafts, your writing an article about Scars drafts right? Wait no? Innistrad block 4-pack sealed instead? This is a really confusing setup. Also, do you have ANY idea what you're talking about, or was this like literally your first time?
>> In sealed, you always want to play white (unless you draw absolutely nothing
>> of interest).
Ok, you have no idea what you're talking about. Check.
>>White gives you fliers for a low mana cast, some of whom have first strike.
aaaand why does the reader care? What is your point, what are you arguing for/against?
>>It also- on occasion in sealed- will give you lifegain, something that is very significant
>>when your opponent is stuck attacking with creatures like Fiend Hunter.
Ok this is one of the most specious arguments I've seen in a while. If your opponent is stuck attacking with nothing but a (Fiend Hunter) you're probably in good shape regardless. And while there isn't a lot of lifegain in Innistrad block, you fail pretty badly with the suggestion that life gain is a benefit to playing white. There is actually more life gain in black, and (Butcher's Cleaver) is an artifact (there are humans in every color).
>>As you might have guessed, when I looked through my pull to see what rares I had,
>>I noticed Geist of Saint Traft instantly.
No, I wouldn't have guessed. You need to show a picture of your pool. Even better is to have a video of your deck-building. Reference
to see an example of several screenshots of deck ideas as the author debates which build is the best.
>>So I knew I was playing Blue/White.
One card can never dictate your colors. Maybe a splash, like you almost always splash green for (Garruk Relentless).
>>When I saw Unburial Rites, I made up my mind to play Esper.
Probably the first reasonable thing you said all aritlce.
>>I did draw a Gravecrawler, but his downside of not being able to block left him out,
>>even though there were enough zombies in my pull for me to have a go at it.
Hmm, all I can really say here is you don't know what you're talking about. Dude, you have a (Butcher's Cleaver) and a (Runechanter's Pike). Do I have to spell it out?
>>I also drew the quixotic Runechanter's Pike, which does absolutely nothing in sealed
>>other than give a creature first strike.
Oh wait, you know you have a (Runchanter's Pike). Somehow you manage to put (Delver of Secrets) in the deck but leave Pike out. Come on dude, that's daft. Either you have enough instants/sorceries to make them both work or you don't.
>>Feed the Pack just didn't seem that good to me. It wants me to sacrifice creatures for
>>2/2 wolves on the ground. No thanks.
Ok, you've already told us you're gonna play blue/white, what's up with the commentary on this single green card? It can be an amazing card, but obviously not in UWb...
>>I went for Wolfhunter's Quiver, (Silent Depature) and Dead Weight for my removal.
Sigh, did you even proof read or spell check this at all??
>>I might have played werewolves if I'd gotten any good ones.
Wait, what?? What happened to UWb? If you want to discuss alternatives, you need to order your narrative so it flows. Start with the wolf discussion, eliminate it, then move on to explaining UWb. There needs to be some narrative trajectory and your discussion is disjointed and all over the place.
>>Immerwolf looks like a really good card for this format, but I couldn't justify playing
>>him with my other tribe support being Kessig Wolf, Afflicted Deserter and Villagers
>>of Estwald. All on the ground attackers, and no Pyreheart Wolf to help them out.
Um, what? RG decks don't tend to have a lot of fliers, no. You do understand that (Immerwolf) has evasion right? And you do have the cleaver... You do also understand that (Immerwolf) will pump up those wolf tokens from (Feed the Pack) right?
>>I did draw a foil Lost in the Mist...I love drawing foil commons in sealed, but at five
>>mana, this one didn't seem too good. Most sealed events require me to keep tapping
>>mana as I play creatures. I couldn't see this being a card I would play, unless
>>someone else drew a powerful mythic rare like I did.
It can be a great card when you're doing things like playing (Geist of Saint Traft) turn 3, playing and equipping (Runechanter's Pike) turn 4, and then just leaving mana open and beating face. But it's not like you had those cards...
>>Choosing three colors in sealed also has a benefit that isn't so obvious at first:
>>I can play a very large deck if I ever run into mill. I once played a 65-card deck
>>in sealed when someone put together a mill deck. I guess no one had done that
>> before, because it took them completely by surprise.
You almost said something relevant here. When people are playing 30-card decks, milling becomes more powerful than ever, so you tend to see a lot of it in 4-pack sealed. Why am I telling you this instead of you telling your readers?
>> (Bunch of links to movies without any sound)
Ok, you need to embed these movies. Linking to external sites sucks for the reader. You can copy and paste the HTML for this from like anywhere. C'mon dude, don't be lazy. Also, you need to re-record with sound. I could maybe let you get away with providing a game-by-game analysis, but really, readers want you to narrate the games. You're already recording off of MTGO replays; go back and redo them with narration.
>>Even though I didn't do so well, I thought I'd keep writing so that
>>I can evaluate my cards and my play.
Ok, great, you made a ton of play mistakes, if you do a good job of dissecting them, you can make a good article, bad plays and how to learn from them etc.
>>First of all, while Unburial Rites is by far the strongest card in my deck,
>>I only got to cast it once in seven games.
No, come on. You don't have the big scary fatties that make (Unburial Rites) the best card. Sure it's a good card, but when you have cards like (Bloodgift Demon), (Requiem Angel), (Mikaeus, the Unhallowed), (Flayer of the Hatebound) etc etc then (Unburial Rites) can be your best card.
>>I kept waiting to draw it with a ton of land at the end of game three, but I didn't.
>>Magic is like that sometimes: losses come by luck, no matter how skilled you are.
Dude, just don't even go there. When you made as many play mistakes as you did, just don't even mention luck. Your statement may be true, but it's tacky and sounds like you're whining.
>>Geist of Saint Traft, despite being an expensive mythic,
>>is just not very good in sealed.
Um what?? See, when I say you don't know what you're talking about, I do actually have a reason. It's not an insult. You just don't.
>>What makes him good is the cards around him in standard such as
>>Mana Leak and Dissipate. As long as you have enough control to keep your
>>opponent from having creatures, the Geist can serve you very well.
What's that? Having counterspells makes him better? And you didn't play your counterspell? What am I supposed to say here?
>>In a sealed environment where the board is cluttered with creatures
>>everywhere, he tends to sit back on defense.
Oh that's right, you didn't even play your cards that would give him first strike.
>>If I play sealed again and draw him, I likely won't play him again.
>>I believe my commitment to blue/white simply based on this one card
>>didn't pan out given the lack of power I saw from him.
Wait, what did I say about one card dictating your colors? You might want to go back and revise the first part of your article.
>>Ulvenwald Bear proved much more powerful in sealed than the Geist did.
Actually the two can work together very well, put the two +1/+1 counters on the Geist and whoa boy! Hmm maybe you should mention that to your readers.
>>I would have liked Silent Departure to be an instant, not a sorcery.
Thank you captain obvious. You don't play this format do you. You have no idea how broken that would be.
>>Or else I'd rather just have Unsummon.
Hmm, did you play M12 limited? Somehow methinks not.
>>Removal at sorcery speed doesn't agree with me, and it certainly
>>didn't agree with my strategy when my opponent plopped down
>>a (Village Bell Ringer) to untap all their creatures, killing my Geist.
Say what, (Village Bell-Ringer) is a good card? And come on proofread man!
>>Travel Preparations is a lot stronger than I thought, as is Feed the Pack.
Ok, so now you know a little more than nothing. Baby steps. Seriously, (Travel Preparations) is well known as one of the best cards from Innistrad limited, from months of drafting triple Innistrad before Dark Ascension came out.
>>Someone played a Feed the Pack deck with a lot of blue zombies who
>>all had high toughness. When I look back on my pull, I didn't have enough
>>creatures with big toughness numbers to justify playing it.
Um, you do understand that transforming one 2/2 creature into 2 2/2 creatures is usually a good thing? Or turning a 2/3 into 3 2/2s is probably worth it? Or how about using it on an undying guy?
>>The toughest creature I had was Armored Skaab, a card I will likely never play in sealed.
Says the man who has never played with/against (Spider Spawning) or (Kessig Cagebreakers).
>>Delver of Secrets turned out to be a big flop. He never once transformed for me.
Again thank you captain obvious. We've all known for MONTHS that you have to play lots of instants/sorceries to make him work, which you didn't do.
>>I keep hoping that I might find Unburial Rites or Reap the Seagraf
>>(another spell I never got to cast, not even once),
This sounds like you're making excuses. The parenthetical aside is not necessary and adds nothing but the a whiny tone to the article.
>>but it didn't happen. That's another card I would likely leave out next time.
Whaaa?? You never got to cast it, so you have no idea whether it's good or bad, but you'll leave it out next time?? Says the man who included it over (Moan of the Unhallowed) in the first place.
>>He does make a good target for (Elder Cathar's) ability and he can give you
>>lifelink with Butcher's Cleaver, but if you're looking for him to fly, good luck.
>>It probably won't happen, not if you play a bunch of creatures.
Ok, you deserve to get smacked down by a double delver deck, the kind the rest of us have seen many times. And can I say proofreading one more time? I feel like I'm repeating myself a lot (sadly for those counting at home, I'm not done repeating this mantra...).
>>Like most drafts,
Wait, wha?? This wasn't a draft. You're confusing me. If you want to do a compare and contrast between drafts and 4-pack sealed, by all means. But this sequence is nonsensical.
>>I didn't draw the white tap-down effects. I see Burden of Guilt
>>come in at least once an event against me, but I've never drawn it yet.
You mean to say you've never drafted it or never opened it in your sealed pool? Again, this just sounds whiny. What's your point? You lost to (Burden of Guilt)? Come on dude. You can complain about losing to (Invisible Stalker) + (Butcher's Cleaver) or shenanigans like that, but (Burden of Guilt)? Really?
>>Wolfhunter's Quiver was sadly useless, as I saw very little creatures
>>with 1 toughness and very few werewolves.
You mean in this particular event right? Hmm, might have been nice to hear (or read) a game by game breakdown. But the Quiver is NEVER useless (well I suppose if you are mana screwed and can't equip but that's a different discussion). You can always ping them for one. You know what else it works great with? First strike...
>>I suspect other players had the same problem I did:
>>there just weren't enough werewolves to go around.
Um, this wasn't a draft. You're never going to get more than a couple werewolves. You do understand how this works right? In 4-pack sealed, you open 4 packs. I can see how this is difficult, but each pack comes with 1 flip card (although DKA can also have foil flips so hypothetically I suppose you can technically get 6). You could maybe add some analysis here of the viability of Werewolves when you only open 4 flip cards (usually). The statement you included though is just daft.
>>I always get excited for Kruin Outlaw, but I didn't see her this time around.
Aaaaand this is relevant how?
>>Had my red pull been a bit stronger (ie, I don't like (Neardeath Stalker)),
(Nearheath Stalker)!! Proofread! Proofread! Proofread! God damn! Sigh. Oh, and why don't you like the stalker? This is an article, you should explain yourself, not just say random nonsensical ramblings.
>>I would have played (Rolling Tremblor).
GAAAHHH! (Rolling Temblor) .
>>There were a lot of times when this card might have helped me,
>>though it too is a sorcery. Can't everything just be an instant?
>>I miss Leyline of Anticipation.
Yes, thank you for your insight. Can I just beat you with a wet noodle now? God, instant speed sweepers. You know about magical christmas land right?
>>So I at least won something out of this event, other than Geist I pulled.
>>The good news: I made a profit of 10 tix through the event.
And here we see in a nutshell why magic is the way it is. Richard Garfield wanted a game with enough randomness that the lower skilled player could occasionally win against the higher skilled player. You could maybe make some interesting discussion around this point. You didn't understand the format, you did poorly on your deck building, you played badly, and yet you still turned a profit and will likely play again. This really shows WotC's genius. I'm actually serious here.
>>In sealed, sometimes it's luck and sometimes it's skill. If you have both,
>>you stand a good chance of winning. Until next time!
Dude, drop the pithy aphorisms. It's always a combination of luck and skill with this game, sealed or not. You've already whined enough, just cut out the whining. Add serious discussion. If you don't have anything interesting to say about the role of luck, please, just don't. And by interesting, you better back it up with some math. Statistics. That kind of thing.
You messed up like 5 freaking card links. You just didn't even try. You had a whiny tone, you didn't know much about your topic, you played badly, and you didn't even bother to proofread. Like I said, if the article was good, I wouldn't bust your balls over the links, but it seriously contributes to the whole lazy-credit-grab stink around this article. So for any good to come out of this, if anybody else reads this, take this away:
1) Please, know something about your topic. Don't netdeck, join a Modern queue, write an article on Modern without knowing anything about the format or the Meta. Same for block, standard, legacy, classic, pauper, etc. Don't join a limited event for a format that's been out for months that's had dozens, if not *hundreds* of articles done about it, and say a bunch of stuff that is completely wrong and act like you know something when you don't. If you're going to write an article, for the love of Magic, please have like a dozen events under your belt, a reasonable familiarity with the top deck archetypes, and in-depth experience with at least one of them. *Special exception for the first week or so after a new set releases. All kinds of smart people, good players, make all kinds of statements that turn out to be bogus when the formats settle.
2) Please, don't take a whiny tone and have a bad attitude and complain about luck. It's one thing to do it in the comments, but don't put it in an article. *Caveat: Unless somethings happens that is truly spectacularly bad luck. Then we'd love to see it! Still, that's not a cause to whine. Shake your fist at the heavens, cry, and laugh it off.
3) It is ok to be a bad player, if we're all supposed to be learning from your mistakes. Just be up front about it and dissect your plays afterwards. If you are going to post videos on a MTG related website and you play badly, expect to get called on it. It's better if you beat us to the punch and tell us that you've realized, in retrospect, that you made a bad play etc.
4) Proofread your article. Make sure the stupid card links work. Come on. That is just lazy to the nth degree. If you make a good article otherwise nobody will bust your balls over this, but when the rest of the article is sloppy and uninformed, well. But come on, other prominent MTG website will get you hammered from the mods for doing this in the comments much less an article.
Yes a microphone would work but a headset would be better. I would practice with it first using some audio recording software like Audacity (a free to download and use open source program).
Also embedding is something youtube makes very easy. They give you the html code you need to insert into the article and they even let you adjust it with their site.
1) copy the code from youtube after adjusting for your prefered size (Id say 600 width is probably right for these articles.
2)in the article underneath the rich text editor part there is a link that says "plain html text" click that or the button on the rte that says "source" when you hover over it.
3)paste the code in the section of the article you want it in. Viola! Easy peasy.
I was just pointing out the inconsistency in what you said. I wont pretend to be an expert on this but I do think pricing of rares vs mythics is not always predictable. Even with cards we know should be worthless the price can stay high for a long time because buyers don't care (some people will pay without asking) and sellers are aware of this.
And I should point out that if Snappy ever goes over $10 again I will be very very surprised.
Okay, thanks for your feedback. I haven't yet figured out how to make sound in the videos- I may need to buy a microphone? And I'm not sure how to embed them either. I tried based on the instructions I found in the forum, but it just gives me a blank spot in the page, which is worse.
Minus all of the negative speech on a personal level. I do have to agree with a couple of the points.
The videos should be embedded I think. It's more just a professionalism sort of thing. Forcing the reader to load the youtube page is just a pain and gives them incentive to skip the videos altogether. They do also need to have sound. Aside from missing out on any thought processes you might have gone through during the game it also makes the videos very boring to watch.
I don't see how grandpoobah was confused as to whether it was a draft or a sealed. Just looking at the deck for 2 seconds says its a sealed deck. Maybe he was referring to the sentence that talks about Scars block drafting? That I understand. It's a frivolous statement that only serves to confuse the reader. When I first read it I had to think to myself why the sentence was even there? I assume it was to establish how much experience you had with the format, but scars drafting is quite a bit different from ISD sealed.
As for the deck-tech, you did provide some of your thoughts in regard to what direction you were going with the deck so I won't say that the section was completely nonexistent, but I feel like it could have been deeper. It's something that is kind of hard to do efficiently with written text which is why I agree with the suggestion to record that segment as well.
As for your personal skill, I couldn't argue one way or another because I haven't really played the format all that much and sealed as a whole hasn't been my taste. With that said you clearly state you prefer constructed over limited so I guess there is that. With that said, regardless of how good or bad there is always value to someone else's point of view.
Again, I don't want you to take anything personally. I just wanted to offer my opinion in a somewhat more polite way than poobah's post.
I actually gave the most constructive criticism possible. I told him exactly what he needs to do to make his article not suck. I could've just told him that his article sucks and that he sucks at magic (both pretty much true). And no, I haven't contributed articles here because I actually have a pretty good idea of how much work goes into it, and unlike some, I'm not interested in abusing the low standards here for some easy credits. I could, however, actually provide some insight into the 4-pack sealed format, as I play it more than the other authors here who mainly do drafts.
Anyway defending bad articles is counterproductive, and if he doesn't have a thick skin, well, he shouldn't put out crap. It's not like there aren't literally dozens of other draft articles on here for him look at to get an idea of what makes a good article. Hell, there's multiple articles on the front page right now:
These were decent to good articles; maybe not up to WhiffyPenguin standards, but they certainly contributed something positive to the site. This article did not.
I was going to type out a really long post defending the article and the effort put into it, but I'm not going to validate his shitty post with that kind of a response.
The article definitely wasn't perfect, but it certainly belongs here and no one should be ashamed of it. GrandPoobah hasn't, to my knowledge, contributed an article to this community and has no idea the work behind it.
Don't be discouraged just because someone didn't like your article and couldn't give simple constructive criticism.
There is a flaw with MP: it was small-set (last set of three in fact), so being a rare in a small-set CAN be profitable. It's much harder in large-set rares, although the Mirrodin duals have held up nicely (supporting whoever was going to buy them for later, although I'm not sure they will do as well).
You forget with the torch, it's the torch itself that does damage, not the creature. So deathtouch/infect/wither etc don't affect anything. Also, it's colorless damage FWIW.
EDIT: Didn't read all the other comments below before posting.
The problem here is pretty clear: you're not very good at magic and you're not very good at article writing. Is this the absolute worst article I've ever seen on this site? No, there's been some truly awful Pauper articles, but this is probably the worst draft/sealed article I've seen. The saddest part is that the "editors" let this through; there should be some minimum standard! Anyway, if you want to do a draft/sealed article, here's a few things you need to do:
1) You actually need to be clear on whether it's draft or sealed. Many people are unfamiliar with the 4-pack sealed format and the 30-card deck meta-game.
2) If it's a draft, you need to show, by video or some other method, the drafting itself.
2) You need to have a deck-tech section where you explain how you put your deck together. If you're recording live, just talk us through as you make the deck.
3) Your videos need sound. We will accept not having sound on a video or two due to technical glitches, but you just being a lazy slob is not a good enough reason. It is ok to go back and record from the MTGO replay; sometimes that gives interesting perspective you didn't have when playing real-time. However, MTGO is a little iffy on whether it saves replays, so if you plan to make an article, just record it live and talk to us as you play. Saves you time, although you'll want to pause your recording when your opponent drops or doesn't show or just durdles for long periods.
4) Embed the videos in the freaking page man. I mean, seriously??
5) It helps if you know something about what you're talking about, so you should know something about the format. You obviously know nothing about this format and had absolutely nothing worthwhile to say. The fact that you referred to drafting when you didn't even draft makes you look like an idiot.
6) If you play magic as badly as you do, you might want to reconsider making videos and putting them on the internets for everyone to see.
7) And for gods sake, don't freaking say anything about luck. You are not allowed to complain about luck until you A) play really well, and B) lose to 1/1000 odds kind of things. Seeing noobs play badly and complain about luck is really REALLY annoying.
Go check out some of the great articles by WhiffyPenguin to see how to do it right. There are other good authors, but Whiffy's articles are consistently great and are a good model to follow.
Soft permission like Mana Leak is actually crucial in keeping a format balanced and is not the reason blue decks have performed well. Preordain was the critical card that pushed blue over the top of other decks last season, and Delver is quite clearly the card keeping blue on top for the moment.
With so many creatures with powerful ETB triggers, you need ways to keep them off the battlefield that are still fair. The new flagship mechanic, Hexproof, makes it so a whole host of creatures can only be interacted with on the stack. Undying adds another group of creatures that can't be dealt with effectively by 1-for-1 removal, or even sweepers.
It is generally better that answers be slightly too strong (Mana Leak, Dismember, Go for the Throat, Oblivion Ring) than threats (Delver). Answers don't end games.
His first feedback was way too rude to be constructive; however, he came back and redid it the way I wanted to (but was too busy cubing, wooo cube). Set aside the fact that he was a jackass the first time for the fact that he took time to read your article, respond, REREAD and offer a ton of feedback on where you were going off-res, and post it (correcting his tone mostly too). Get past hurt feelings and learn what he has tried to teach (even if it took 2 tries, he put in basically an article of effort in giving you that feedback).
As a practicing composer, producer, and audio engineer I can tell you... If you're using the built in sound card on a generic brand PC you are losing a TON of sound fidelity. Also, the lack of any kind of power for a pre-amp (and therefore total lack of preamp altogether) actually makes a difference. Way back when I first started I even tried fancy consumer soundcards; they all pretty much suck too. But since USB can provide power, USB mics can actually have their own preamp built in. Now, if you own a separate preamp and own an adapter to plug into a 1/8 inch jack, you might get something half decent.
Also, as a software developer that licensed the Audacity recording engine and distributed recording software to hundreds/thousands of paying users for over 10 years, I can tell you that every single user that tried to use their built in sound card was unhappy with the results, and happy with a USB mic. But hey if you have something that works for you, more power to you!
Dude, I'm not going to get into a pissing match with you. I broke down your entire article line by line and gave you specific feedback. I gave you editorial feedback on how to write a better article, pointing out where your narrative was disjointed and nonsensical, where you had non-sequitors, where things were confusing for the reader. I pointed out specifically where you said things that were uninformed, misguided, or just plain wrong. I told you specifically which things don't belong in an article but perhaps in the comments. I gave you fairly specific advice on what kind of microphone to get and how to configure it. I can suggest a make and model if you need me to. I gave you links to specific other articles on this site you can reference for ideas, and I named a specific author who does excellent articles for you to reference. You cannot ask for more, unless you ask me to write an article for you.
I gave you harsh some harsh criticism, but you deserved it. I can't teach you all the ins and outs of Innistrad block limited; you'll have to read other people's articles and play more to figure that out, but you said a very large number of very ignorant things. You posted videos that are rife with poor play. That doesn't make you stupid and I never said you were, but you really don't know what you're talking about. Trust me, you will never, ever get this much detailed constructive criticism again unless you get a professional editor. So man up, own it, vow to do better next time.
YW talk to me in game if you have any more questions.
As a practicing songwriter and musician I can tell you I have been using an old fashioned desk mic (mini rca plug) for years without any loss in sound fidelity. Anything more than that is just audiophile fussiness imho.
If you have something constructive to say, please let me know. Otherwise, I'm just going to ignore you.
I would just add that USB or bluetooth is highly recommended (in other words, don't use the 1/8 inch jack into a generic sound card, ie the one that looks like a headphone jack but is for a microphone). We actually get quite good quality out of a variety of USB mikes that can be had for around $10 USD. So long as the sound is not coming out of the speaker while you're recording, you'll get no feedback. So if you find a headset uncomfortable, they aren't strictly necessary. However, if you get the headset, you may later prefer it for online voice-chat. Also, don't forget to adjust the audio recording level. You may be able to do this in your recording software, but you may need to adjust it from your OS preferences. In Windows, the control panel has a Sound applet where you can pick the default recording device and adjust Recording volume (it is near where you can adjust playback device/volume).
** Hmm can't get card links to work in the comments, tried both () and [card][/card] didn't work. Anybody know how to do this?
Ok, seeing as how this site doesn't provide any editorial feedback to its writers, and because I bashed this article, I thought I would give KaraZorEl the editorial feedback he should have gotten. Then maybe this article can serve a purpose as an example to others on what not to do and maybe how to fix it.
************************************************************
>>Okay, I'll admit it. Sometimes, I like to dabble in sealed.
You should establish your credentials as an author; starting say stating that you don't know much about the topic of your article is generally a bad idea.
>>I've been playing Scars block draft every Friday this past month and have gotten a
>>hang on how it works.
So after playing Scars drafts, your writing an article about Scars drafts right? Wait no? Innistrad block 4-pack sealed instead? This is a really confusing setup. Also, do you have ANY idea what you're talking about, or was this like literally your first time?
>> In sealed, you always want to play white (unless you draw absolutely nothing
>> of interest).
Ok, you have no idea what you're talking about. Check.
>>White gives you fliers for a low mana cast, some of whom have first strike.
aaaand why does the reader care? What is your point, what are you arguing for/against?
>>It also- on occasion in sealed- will give you lifegain, something that is very significant
>>when your opponent is stuck attacking with creatures like Fiend Hunter.
Ok this is one of the most specious arguments I've seen in a while. If your opponent is stuck attacking with nothing but a (Fiend Hunter) you're probably in good shape regardless. And while there isn't a lot of lifegain in Innistrad block, you fail pretty badly with the suggestion that life gain is a benefit to playing white. There is actually more life gain in black, and (Butcher's Cleaver) is an artifact (there are humans in every color).
>>As you might have guessed, when I looked through my pull to see what rares I had,
>>I noticed Geist of Saint Traft instantly.
No, I wouldn't have guessed. You need to show a picture of your pool. Even better is to have a video of your deck-building. Reference
http://puremtgo.com/articles/view-your-own-risk-4-booster-sealed-3
to see an example of several screenshots of deck ideas as the author debates which build is the best.
>>So I knew I was playing Blue/White.
One card can never dictate your colors. Maybe a splash, like you almost always splash green for (Garruk Relentless).
>>When I saw Unburial Rites, I made up my mind to play Esper.
Probably the first reasonable thing you said all aritlce.
>>I did draw a Gravecrawler, but his downside of not being able to block left him out,
>>even though there were enough zombies in my pull for me to have a go at it.
Hmm, all I can really say here is you don't know what you're talking about. Dude, you have a (Butcher's Cleaver) and a (Runechanter's Pike). Do I have to spell it out?
>>I also drew the quixotic Runechanter's Pike, which does absolutely nothing in sealed
>>other than give a creature first strike.
Oh wait, you know you have a (Runchanter's Pike). Somehow you manage to put (Delver of Secrets) in the deck but leave Pike out. Come on dude, that's daft. Either you have enough instants/sorceries to make them both work or you don't.
>>Feed the Pack just didn't seem that good to me. It wants me to sacrifice creatures for
>>2/2 wolves on the ground. No thanks.
Ok, you've already told us you're gonna play blue/white, what's up with the commentary on this single green card? It can be an amazing card, but obviously not in UWb...
>>I went for Wolfhunter's Quiver, (Silent Depature) and Dead Weight for my removal.
Sigh, did you even proof read or spell check this at all??
>>I might have played werewolves if I'd gotten any good ones.
Wait, what?? What happened to UWb? If you want to discuss alternatives, you need to order your narrative so it flows. Start with the wolf discussion, eliminate it, then move on to explaining UWb. There needs to be some narrative trajectory and your discussion is disjointed and all over the place.
>>Immerwolf looks like a really good card for this format, but I couldn't justify playing
>>him with my other tribe support being Kessig Wolf, Afflicted Deserter and Villagers
>>of Estwald. All on the ground attackers, and no Pyreheart Wolf to help them out.
Um, what? RG decks don't tend to have a lot of fliers, no. You do understand that (Immerwolf) has evasion right? And you do have the cleaver... You do also understand that (Immerwolf) will pump up those wolf tokens from (Feed the Pack) right?
>>I did draw a foil Lost in the Mist...I love drawing foil commons in sealed, but at five
>>mana, this one didn't seem too good. Most sealed events require me to keep tapping
>>mana as I play creatures. I couldn't see this being a card I would play, unless
>>someone else drew a powerful mythic rare like I did.
It can be a great card when you're doing things like playing (Geist of Saint Traft) turn 3, playing and equipping (Runechanter's Pike) turn 4, and then just leaving mana open and beating face. But it's not like you had those cards...
>>Choosing three colors in sealed also has a benefit that isn't so obvious at first:
>>I can play a very large deck if I ever run into mill. I once played a 65-card deck
>>in sealed when someone put together a mill deck. I guess no one had done that
>> before, because it took them completely by surprise.
You almost said something relevant here. When people are playing 30-card decks, milling becomes more powerful than ever, so you tend to see a lot of it in 4-pack sealed. Why am I telling you this instead of you telling your readers?
>> (Bunch of links to movies without any sound)
Ok, you need to embed these movies. Linking to external sites sucks for the reader. You can copy and paste the HTML for this from like anywhere. C'mon dude, don't be lazy. Also, you need to re-record with sound. I could maybe let you get away with providing a game-by-game analysis, but really, readers want you to narrate the games. You're already recording off of MTGO replays; go back and redo them with narration.
>>Even though I didn't do so well, I thought I'd keep writing so that
>>I can evaluate my cards and my play.
Ok, great, you made a ton of play mistakes, if you do a good job of dissecting them, you can make a good article, bad plays and how to learn from them etc.
>>First of all, while Unburial Rites is by far the strongest card in my deck,
>>I only got to cast it once in seven games.
No, come on. You don't have the big scary fatties that make (Unburial Rites) the best card. Sure it's a good card, but when you have cards like (Bloodgift Demon), (Requiem Angel), (Mikaeus, the Unhallowed), (Flayer of the Hatebound) etc etc then (Unburial Rites) can be your best card.
>>I kept waiting to draw it with a ton of land at the end of game three, but I didn't.
>>Magic is like that sometimes: losses come by luck, no matter how skilled you are.
Dude, just don't even go there. When you made as many play mistakes as you did, just don't even mention luck. Your statement may be true, but it's tacky and sounds like you're whining.
>>Geist of Saint Traft, despite being an expensive mythic,
>>is just not very good in sealed.
Um what?? See, when I say you don't know what you're talking about, I do actually have a reason. It's not an insult. You just don't.
>>What makes him good is the cards around him in standard such as
>>Mana Leak and Dissipate. As long as you have enough control to keep your
>>opponent from having creatures, the Geist can serve you very well.
What's that? Having counterspells makes him better? And you didn't play your counterspell? What am I supposed to say here?
>>In a sealed environment where the board is cluttered with creatures
>>everywhere, he tends to sit back on defense.
Oh that's right, you didn't even play your cards that would give him first strike.
>>If I play sealed again and draw him, I likely won't play him again.
>>I believe my commitment to blue/white simply based on this one card
>>didn't pan out given the lack of power I saw from him.
Wait, what did I say about one card dictating your colors? You might want to go back and revise the first part of your article.
>>Ulvenwald Bear proved much more powerful in sealed than the Geist did.
Actually the two can work together very well, put the two +1/+1 counters on the Geist and whoa boy! Hmm maybe you should mention that to your readers.
>>I would have liked Silent Departure to be an instant, not a sorcery.
Thank you captain obvious. You don't play this format do you. You have no idea how broken that would be.
>>Or else I'd rather just have Unsummon.
Hmm, did you play M12 limited? Somehow methinks not.
>>Removal at sorcery speed doesn't agree with me, and it certainly
>>didn't agree with my strategy when my opponent plopped down
>>a (Village Bell Ringer) to untap all their creatures, killing my Geist.
Say what, (Village Bell-Ringer) is a good card? And come on proofread man!
>>Travel Preparations is a lot stronger than I thought, as is Feed the Pack.
Ok, so now you know a little more than nothing. Baby steps. Seriously, (Travel Preparations) is well known as one of the best cards from Innistrad limited, from months of drafting triple Innistrad before Dark Ascension came out.
>>Someone played a Feed the Pack deck with a lot of blue zombies who
>>all had high toughness. When I look back on my pull, I didn't have enough
>>creatures with big toughness numbers to justify playing it.
Um, you do understand that transforming one 2/2 creature into 2 2/2 creatures is usually a good thing? Or turning a 2/3 into 3 2/2s is probably worth it? Or how about using it on an undying guy?
>>The toughest creature I had was Armored Skaab, a card I will likely never play in sealed.
Says the man who has never played with/against (Spider Spawning) or (Kessig Cagebreakers).
>>Delver of Secrets turned out to be a big flop. He never once transformed for me.
Again thank you captain obvious. We've all known for MONTHS that you have to play lots of instants/sorceries to make him work, which you didn't do.
>>I keep hoping that I might find Unburial Rites or Reap the Seagraf
>>(another spell I never got to cast, not even once),
This sounds like you're making excuses. The parenthetical aside is not necessary and adds nothing but the a whiny tone to the article.
>>but it didn't happen. That's another card I would likely leave out next time.
Whaaa?? You never got to cast it, so you have no idea whether it's good or bad, but you'll leave it out next time?? Says the man who included it over (Moan of the Unhallowed) in the first place.
>>He does make a good target for (Elder Cathar's) ability and he can give you
>>lifelink with Butcher's Cleaver, but if you're looking for him to fly, good luck.
>>It probably won't happen, not if you play a bunch of creatures.
Ok, you deserve to get smacked down by a double delver deck, the kind the rest of us have seen many times. And can I say proofreading one more time? I feel like I'm repeating myself a lot (sadly for those counting at home, I'm not done repeating this mantra...).
>>Like most drafts,
Wait, wha?? This wasn't a draft. You're confusing me. If you want to do a compare and contrast between drafts and 4-pack sealed, by all means. But this sequence is nonsensical.
>>I didn't draw the white tap-down effects. I see Burden of Guilt
>>come in at least once an event against me, but I've never drawn it yet.
You mean to say you've never drafted it or never opened it in your sealed pool? Again, this just sounds whiny. What's your point? You lost to (Burden of Guilt)? Come on dude. You can complain about losing to (Invisible Stalker) + (Butcher's Cleaver) or shenanigans like that, but (Burden of Guilt)? Really?
>>Wolfhunter's Quiver was sadly useless, as I saw very little creatures
>>with 1 toughness and very few werewolves.
You mean in this particular event right? Hmm, might have been nice to hear (or read) a game by game breakdown. But the Quiver is NEVER useless (well I suppose if you are mana screwed and can't equip but that's a different discussion). You can always ping them for one. You know what else it works great with? First strike...
>>I suspect other players had the same problem I did:
>>there just weren't enough werewolves to go around.
Um, this wasn't a draft. You're never going to get more than a couple werewolves. You do understand how this works right? In 4-pack sealed, you open 4 packs. I can see how this is difficult, but each pack comes with 1 flip card (although DKA can also have foil flips so hypothetically I suppose you can technically get 6). You could maybe add some analysis here of the viability of Werewolves when you only open 4 flip cards (usually). The statement you included though is just daft.
>>I always get excited for Kruin Outlaw, but I didn't see her this time around.
Aaaaand this is relevant how?
>>Had my red pull been a bit stronger (ie, I don't like (Neardeath Stalker)),
(Nearheath Stalker)!! Proofread! Proofread! Proofread! God damn! Sigh. Oh, and why don't you like the stalker? This is an article, you should explain yourself, not just say random nonsensical ramblings.
>>I would have played (Rolling Tremblor).
GAAAHHH! (Rolling Temblor) .
>>There were a lot of times when this card might have helped me,
>>though it too is a sorcery. Can't everything just be an instant?
>>I miss Leyline of Anticipation.
Yes, thank you for your insight. Can I just beat you with a wet noodle now? God, instant speed sweepers. You know about magical christmas land right?
>>So I at least won something out of this event, other than Geist I pulled.
>>The good news: I made a profit of 10 tix through the event.
And here we see in a nutshell why magic is the way it is. Richard Garfield wanted a game with enough randomness that the lower skilled player could occasionally win against the higher skilled player. You could maybe make some interesting discussion around this point. You didn't understand the format, you did poorly on your deck building, you played badly, and yet you still turned a profit and will likely play again. This really shows WotC's genius. I'm actually serious here.
>>In sealed, sometimes it's luck and sometimes it's skill. If you have both,
>>you stand a good chance of winning. Until next time!
Dude, drop the pithy aphorisms. It's always a combination of luck and skill with this game, sealed or not. You've already whined enough, just cut out the whining. Add serious discussion. If you don't have anything interesting to say about the role of luck, please, just don't. And by interesting, you better back it up with some math. Statistics. That kind of thing.
You messed up like 5 freaking card links. You just didn't even try. You had a whiny tone, you didn't know much about your topic, you played badly, and you didn't even bother to proofread. Like I said, if the article was good, I wouldn't bust your balls over the links, but it seriously contributes to the whole lazy-credit-grab stink around this article. So for any good to come out of this, if anybody else reads this, take this away:
1) Please, know something about your topic. Don't netdeck, join a Modern queue, write an article on Modern without knowing anything about the format or the Meta. Same for block, standard, legacy, classic, pauper, etc. Don't join a limited event for a format that's been out for months that's had dozens, if not *hundreds* of articles done about it, and say a bunch of stuff that is completely wrong and act like you know something when you don't. If you're going to write an article, for the love of Magic, please have like a dozen events under your belt, a reasonable familiarity with the top deck archetypes, and in-depth experience with at least one of them. *Special exception for the first week or so after a new set releases. All kinds of smart people, good players, make all kinds of statements that turn out to be bogus when the formats settle.
2) Please, don't take a whiny tone and have a bad attitude and complain about luck. It's one thing to do it in the comments, but don't put it in an article. *Caveat: Unless somethings happens that is truly spectacularly bad luck. Then we'd love to see it! Still, that's not a cause to whine. Shake your fist at the heavens, cry, and laugh it off.
3) It is ok to be a bad player, if we're all supposed to be learning from your mistakes. Just be up front about it and dissect your plays afterwards. If you are going to post videos on a MTG related website and you play badly, expect to get called on it. It's better if you beat us to the punch and tell us that you've realized, in retrospect, that you made a bad play etc.
4) Proofread your article. Make sure the stupid card links work. Come on. That is just lazy to the nth degree. If you make a good article otherwise nobody will bust your balls over this, but when the rest of the article is sloppy and uninformed, well. But come on, other prominent MTG website will get you hammered from the mods for doing this in the comments much less an article.
That's awesome, thanks!
Yes a microphone would work but a headset would be better. I would practice with it first using some audio recording software like Audacity (a free to download and use open source program).
Also embedding is something youtube makes very easy. They give you the html code you need to insert into the article and they even let you adjust it with their site.
1) copy the code from youtube after adjusting for your prefered size (Id say 600 width is probably right for these articles.
2)in the article underneath the rich text editor part there is a link that says "plain html text" click that or the button on the rte that says "source" when you hover over it.
3)paste the code in the section of the article you want it in. Viola! Easy peasy.
I was just pointing out the inconsistency in what you said. I wont pretend to be an expert on this but I do think pricing of rares vs mythics is not always predictable. Even with cards we know should be worthless the price can stay high for a long time because buyers don't care (some people will pay without asking) and sellers are aware of this.
And I should point out that if Snappy ever goes over $10 again I will be very very surprised.
Okay, thanks for your feedback. I haven't yet figured out how to make sound in the videos- I may need to buy a microphone? And I'm not sure how to embed them either. I tried based on the instructions I found in the forum, but it just gives me a blank spot in the page, which is worse.
Minus all of the negative speech on a personal level. I do have to agree with a couple of the points.
The videos should be embedded I think. It's more just a professionalism sort of thing. Forcing the reader to load the youtube page is just a pain and gives them incentive to skip the videos altogether. They do also need to have sound. Aside from missing out on any thought processes you might have gone through during the game it also makes the videos very boring to watch.
I don't see how grandpoobah was confused as to whether it was a draft or a sealed. Just looking at the deck for 2 seconds says its a sealed deck. Maybe he was referring to the sentence that talks about Scars block drafting? That I understand. It's a frivolous statement that only serves to confuse the reader. When I first read it I had to think to myself why the sentence was even there? I assume it was to establish how much experience you had with the format, but scars drafting is quite a bit different from ISD sealed.
As for the deck-tech, you did provide some of your thoughts in regard to what direction you were going with the deck so I won't say that the section was completely nonexistent, but I feel like it could have been deeper. It's something that is kind of hard to do efficiently with written text which is why I agree with the suggestion to record that segment as well.
As for your personal skill, I couldn't argue one way or another because I haven't really played the format all that much and sealed as a whole hasn't been my taste. With that said you clearly state you prefer constructed over limited so I guess there is that. With that said, regardless of how good or bad there is always value to someone else's point of view.
Again, I don't want you to take anything personally. I just wanted to offer my opinion in a somewhat more polite way than poobah's post.
I really don't even know why you're online at this point.
I actually gave the most constructive criticism possible. I told him exactly what he needs to do to make his article not suck. I could've just told him that his article sucks and that he sucks at magic (both pretty much true). And no, I haven't contributed articles here because I actually have a pretty good idea of how much work goes into it, and unlike some, I'm not interested in abusing the low standards here for some easy credits. I could, however, actually provide some insight into the 4-pack sealed format, as I play it more than the other authors here who mainly do drafts.
Anyway defending bad articles is counterproductive, and if he doesn't have a thick skin, well, he shouldn't put out crap. It's not like there aren't literally dozens of other draft articles on here for him look at to get an idea of what makes a good article. Hell, there's multiple articles on the front page right now:
http://puremtgo.com/articles/most-powerful-deck-ever
http://puremtgo.com/articles/drafting-thatdude
http://puremtgo.com/articles/view-your-own-risk-4-booster-sealed-3
These were decent to good articles; maybe not up to WhiffyPenguin standards, but they certainly contributed something positive to the site. This article did not.
I was going to type out a really long post defending the article and the effort put into it, but I'm not going to validate his shitty post with that kind of a response.
The article definitely wasn't perfect, but it certainly belongs here and no one should be ashamed of it. GrandPoobah hasn't, to my knowledge, contributed an article to this community and has no idea the work behind it.
Don't be discouraged just because someone didn't like your article and couldn't give simple constructive criticism.
There is a flaw with MP: it was small-set (last set of three in fact), so being a rare in a small-set CAN be profitable. It's much harder in large-set rares, although the Mirrodin duals have held up nicely (supporting whoever was going to buy them for later, although I'm not sure they will do as well).
See, this is exactly the sort of thing that makes me hate playing magic.
You forget with the torch, it's the torch itself that does damage, not the creature. So deathtouch/infect/wither etc don't affect anything. Also, it's colorless damage FWIW.
EDIT: Didn't read all the other comments below before posting.
The problem here is pretty clear: you're not very good at magic and you're not very good at article writing. Is this the absolute worst article I've ever seen on this site? No, there's been some truly awful Pauper articles, but this is probably the worst draft/sealed article I've seen. The saddest part is that the "editors" let this through; there should be some minimum standard! Anyway, if you want to do a draft/sealed article, here's a few things you need to do:
1) You actually need to be clear on whether it's draft or sealed. Many people are unfamiliar with the 4-pack sealed format and the 30-card deck meta-game.
2) If it's a draft, you need to show, by video or some other method, the drafting itself.
2) You need to have a deck-tech section where you explain how you put your deck together. If you're recording live, just talk us through as you make the deck.
3) Your videos need sound. We will accept not having sound on a video or two due to technical glitches, but you just being a lazy slob is not a good enough reason. It is ok to go back and record from the MTGO replay; sometimes that gives interesting perspective you didn't have when playing real-time. However, MTGO is a little iffy on whether it saves replays, so if you plan to make an article, just record it live and talk to us as you play. Saves you time, although you'll want to pause your recording when your opponent drops or doesn't show or just durdles for long periods.
4) Embed the videos in the freaking page man. I mean, seriously??
5) It helps if you know something about what you're talking about, so you should know something about the format. You obviously know nothing about this format and had absolutely nothing worthwhile to say. The fact that you referred to drafting when you didn't even draft makes you look like an idiot.
6) If you play magic as badly as you do, you might want to reconsider making videos and putting them on the internets for everyone to see.
7) And for gods sake, don't freaking say anything about luck. You are not allowed to complain about luck until you A) play really well, and B) lose to 1/1000 odds kind of things. Seeing noobs play badly and complain about luck is really REALLY annoying.
Go check out some of the great articles by WhiffyPenguin to see how to do it right. There are other good authors, but Whiffy's articles are consistently great and are a good model to follow.
A reverse Moonmist could be an answer that fits the flavour of Restored.
Breaking Dawn
W
Instant
Transform target creature to its Human form.
I suggest buying some Wurmcoil Engines :)
Yes it did drop and then went back up again. And then dropped and went back up. This happened a few times after it was out of standard.
Soft permission like Mana Leak is actually crucial in keeping a format balanced and is not the reason blue decks have performed well. Preordain was the critical card that pushed blue over the top of other decks last season, and Delver is quite clearly the card keeping blue on top for the moment.
With so many creatures with powerful ETB triggers, you need ways to keep them off the battlefield that are still fair. The new flagship mechanic, Hexproof, makes it so a whole host of creatures can only be interacted with on the stack. Undying adds another group of creatures that can't be dealt with effectively by 1-for-1 removal, or even sweepers.
It is generally better that answers be slightly too strong (Mana Leak, Dismember, Go for the Throat, Oblivion Ring) than threats (Delver). Answers don't end games.
I don't have the price history to show it, but I distincly remember it being under 20 even towards the end of that standard season.