It was all about the mana. Heavy Arbalest is far more clunky than a 3-drop. Its a 3-drop that is slower than a 4-drop every turn that it is used. I had four actual five drops, but you might as well consider the arbalests five drops at least. Since these were the most integral parts of the deck, and since they were many, I wanted to keep the deck clear of the other high end spells. That is why the Lumingrid Gargoyle did not make the cut. The gargoyle is far better than the Gust-Skimmer, but I don't think it was the better card in this deck.
Quicksilver Geyser is a very easy cut. Why do I need a late game tempo swing when I have the Arbalest Deck? I'm sure you can think of reasons, but it is again, expensive, where I am looking for cheap.
Why two Heavy Arbalests and not three? I wondered the whole time what the deck was going to do if I had the third. The Copper Carapace would have come out for it. But again, I thought that mana was the issue, and that a third would have been too greedy. All of the quick drops plus the carapace got me to the midgame in good condition, then they fizzled out. The Arbalest is a better late game card, especially with the combos it works with. So, 2 of them in 26 cards, is pretty good odds that you will see one after turn 7. I like the thought of that instead of the odds that I have one in hand, and nothing to do with it early. I did lose the one game where the Arbalest was blown up, though.
I played 17 lands despite having two on-color mana myr and two 4-drops, four 5-drops and nothing higher.
All of these choices were centered around the Arbalest and its combos. The Gargoyle definitely could have made the deck, not the Geyser. I liked the Gust-Skimmer over the Gargoyle. I never felt like I needed to board in the Gargoyle, either. I was aware the entire time that I had the better card on the bench.
Why no discussion about Vivisection? I've played it. I'm not that impressed. And I don't agree that it is the 'much better' card. If I had a creature at the time that I wanted to sacrifice, then I would have considered it, likely taken it, and likely played it. Recall, this was my first Copper Carapace. Judging from doing many drafts, Copper Carapace used to go very early and now often wheels, so it has finally come down in value of other drafters closer to where it is in my own eyes. Vivisection started out as a card that usually wheeled when MBS released, and still remains there. It is a better card than that, but goes late because blue is still the most underdrafted color. I obviously like blue just fine since MBS released.
I don't see why you picked the carapace over vivisection without even discussing the (much better) blue card.
I agree with you though, that 3 solitons + 2 arbalast seems like a perfectly fine way to win a game. I would have definitely run all three arbalasts, as A) they're going to point their shatters at arbalast most of the time, and B) you also have 2 mirran spies. So you have plenty of guys who like arbalasting up.
Am I missing something obvious, or did you draft a lumengrid gargoyle which for some reason didn't make the cut? I think gust skimmer is absolutely fine in a control deck, but I would probably have dropped something for the gargoyle?
Sorry about the formating gremlin - The text part of what we do is really just gravy what we really deliver and take the time on is the podcast and the research going into it. Hope you listened and enjoyed.
Perhaps Josh or another editor can remove the duplication in the text if possible so we look more slick.
- Hammer
Can't wait for White Weenie in Pauper to get hold of Suture Priest. Imagine a bodyguard out (Grapeshot tricks), and the soft lock vs. traditional storm decks. "You want 20 goblin tokens? GG."
Be so nice if this was where the entry bar was for first-time articles. Thanks for not rushing something out. All cards are aesthetically appealing both in size and placement, good writing too...gotta love rogue. Keep it up!
Hey, just wanted to say that I 4-0ed a daily event (bluecrew on MODO) using your list. The only changes I made to the maindeck were to add a sunblast angel (wanted to try it out) and an extra red sun zenith in place of a tumble magnet and masticore. I've played the deck for the last few days, and it may have just been my matchups, but the masticores have underperformed for me. The red sun zenith's have been great, and I may add the fourth to the sideboard. The sunblast angel was mostly a dead card every time I drew it, since I either had the game locked up or I was dead by the time I was able to cast it. I may just up Thrun's in the maindeck to 3, since I haven't played many poison matchups lately.
I am still looking for ways to tweak the deck, but I have definitely been having success with it. Thanks again for sharing your list.
I've been messing with your black/green infect deck from last week. I put in tutors, Bob, Duress, and Thoughtsieze and took out some of the pump spells. It's not as fast and all-in, but it can interact more and come back from a counterspell. Fun to play in TP, still wins out of nowhere, but I wouldn't play it in an event. Hopefully NPH will have more infect guys to make it a real deck. Although a clannie told me there would be no infect in that set?? I don't know.
Wanderwine Hub definitely should have been in the list, I did not realize it was only 1.50. Mutavault and Daze would be included if I wanted to extend the price limit higher, which I am considering doing for future articles, since 20 dollars is not much. I am thinking of raising it to 30-45 dollars. Also, at the end of each article from now on, I will list the upgrades the deck could use to elevate it to tournament practice room level (in the case that I do a budget spin off of an established deck, I may not include this as the changes should be quite clear from a non-budget list, but I am working on building off the radar decks from now on, rather than highly played ones.
Raddman, you are correct, and budget means different things to different people. I don't think a deck could be built for less that I would feel comfortable running in a daily event. Dredge, Burn and Goblins are other reasonably cheap decks, although I would personally not run burn, ever.
I also think playing Merfolk without Mutavault is criminal, and playing terramorphic instead of Wanderwine Hub is a complete headscratcher. Playing Aether Vial without countermagic like Daze kind of defeats the point. I can see not including force, but Daze is at least somewhat reasonable. Obviously without wasteland it is worse, but just running Daze, and some number of Counterspell and Spell Pierce is decent for casual.
It's funny because taking good tournament played decks and replacing the expensive cards with budget replacements is what the main budget article on the main magic site does about 50% of the time....
It isn't just shatter, there's a ton of artifact removal at common and uncommon, assembling your 2 artifact combo by turn 6 and hoping it gets there seems unrealistic. Gust Skimmers indicate an aggro deck to me, if you want to draft control, I would suggest beefier creatures. You also generally want 2 good finishers in your control deck, Scrapdiver Serpent is good, Hexplate golem is acceptable.
Why were great control cars like Lumengrid Garoyle and Quicksilver Geyser left on the bench, while mediocre aggro cards like gust skimmer made your deck?
I do not think I am the one misconstruing things. In fact if I didn't know better Id think you were deliberately doing so to see if you could get a rise.
I agree that expensive cards (read: good playable cards) are a (necessary) part of the game but I do think there are more than a few levels of competitive play. Budget decks and articles about them are valid and perhaps this author needed to stretch a bit more but I don't think every writer needs to give content for the top tier players only. The fact is the author did not simply do as you say and slap a few cards on top of a prefab and call that an article. He provided a rationale for his changes. Even if you think the deck is weak sauce (because it is a budget variant of a known deck archetype) and not worth your time does not mean it is worth no one's time.
You don't have to do anything. But if you want your opinion to carry some weight you might want to contribute to the site rather than just knocking the content. Your complaint might very well be relevant. One reason I haven't written an article about magic in a while is I have not wanted to add to the glut of niche articles. But you seem to think you have some serious knowledge and perhaps you do. Why not share it instead of knocking authors for not giving you good free content?
I'm just saying: be a part of the solution. You have the skills. Show us what a good article for tech is like. Or are you too good for this site?
your formatting got messed up. or maybe its just messed up on mine, but it shows the spoiler twice and the deck twice.
the deck looks good. The annuls look out of place, spell pierce, preordain, brainstorm, ponder might be better? Annuls are an easy sb choice though. And there has got to be something better than phyrexian digester, that guy is jank jank jank. Of course that something might not be here until next set.
It does bring up a good point though and a question I have. In future articles I would like to include video replays of my games rather than wordy write-ups, and just touch on the hi-lights of the game rather than turn by turn. I think this would be more interesting and would eliminate sloppy errors on my part. Could someone e-mail me or post a way to include these videos in my articles? If so that would be great.
It was just a typo actually. The next statement was talking about Aether Vial and in a lapse of thought, thinking ahead to the next sentence, I typed Aether Vial rather than Jitte. I was doing this by MTGO game replay and made a mistake. I am trying to tighten up my technical aspects and words for later articles. Sorry for the mistake.
Now I have to publish tech articles here if I want to have an opinion. I would respond to each of your points, but they are so off-topic and misconstrued that I'm not even going to bother addressing them. I stand behind what I said. Expensive cards are part of this game whether you like it or not. If we're going to just start copying tournament lists and swapping the expensive cards for cheaper variants and claiming that provides decent value for an article...well then I don't really know what else to say.
Hmm, I hate to say it but statements like that (i.e. Stoneforge Mystic getting Aether Vial) sound off alarm bells regarding the veracity of the entire game synopsis. MTGO, unlike paper, does not allow for mistakes that are contrary to the rules. It may be that the author was going by memory instead of taking notes in game or watching a replay, but nevertheless, it does sound the BS alarm.
I agree with you that there are ways to be competitive at a lower financial rate. The deck you posted is around 200 I'd say and his deck was 40, so there is a big difference in the eyes of certain people.
Personally, I think if you are worried about spending 200 on a competitive magic deck for the main formats, you probably need to find a new hobby.
The cool thing is, your deck is less than the cost of 3 Force of Wills.
Yes I was stating my observed empyrical experiences and my responses to them. Thank you for clarifying that for anyone who might have been confused.
As for the criticism of the decklist, well obviously you would never play with it so it must not be playable. I am not sure that means it is worthless. In fact I bet there are some people who found decent value in this article aside from myself. At the very least it is a start.
Concerning the content management of this site: You have a beef with it? Talk to Josh. He's the one who decides what gets posted.
You're an adequate writer...where are your tech articles? Still waiting for another prismatic tourney to come up? Lets see more professional content from you if you think the site needs it. Otherwise your complaint is just whistling into the wind.
"So yea his header may say budget, but his intire article smacks of playing competitivly. maybe i should be able to read his mind? cause i walked away from the article confused. "
Clan, you seem confused that although he's made a budget deck he talks about playing competitively. Budget players can play competitively, can play at level of a competitive player; not likely to win with their budget deck but they can still compete and learn to play in a tournament style.
It was all about the mana. Heavy Arbalest is far more clunky than a 3-drop. Its a 3-drop that is slower than a 4-drop every turn that it is used. I had four actual five drops, but you might as well consider the arbalests five drops at least. Since these were the most integral parts of the deck, and since they were many, I wanted to keep the deck clear of the other high end spells. That is why the Lumingrid Gargoyle did not make the cut. The gargoyle is far better than the Gust-Skimmer, but I don't think it was the better card in this deck.
Quicksilver Geyser is a very easy cut. Why do I need a late game tempo swing when I have the Arbalest Deck? I'm sure you can think of reasons, but it is again, expensive, where I am looking for cheap.
Why two Heavy Arbalests and not three? I wondered the whole time what the deck was going to do if I had the third. The Copper Carapace would have come out for it. But again, I thought that mana was the issue, and that a third would have been too greedy. All of the quick drops plus the carapace got me to the midgame in good condition, then they fizzled out. The Arbalest is a better late game card, especially with the combos it works with. So, 2 of them in 26 cards, is pretty good odds that you will see one after turn 7. I like the thought of that instead of the odds that I have one in hand, and nothing to do with it early. I did lose the one game where the Arbalest was blown up, though.
I played 17 lands despite having two on-color mana myr and two 4-drops, four 5-drops and nothing higher.
All of these choices were centered around the Arbalest and its combos. The Gargoyle definitely could have made the deck, not the Geyser. I liked the Gust-Skimmer over the Gargoyle. I never felt like I needed to board in the Gargoyle, either. I was aware the entire time that I had the better card on the bench.
Why no discussion about Vivisection? I've played it. I'm not that impressed. And I don't agree that it is the 'much better' card. If I had a creature at the time that I wanted to sacrifice, then I would have considered it, likely taken it, and likely played it. Recall, this was my first Copper Carapace. Judging from doing many drafts, Copper Carapace used to go very early and now often wheels, so it has finally come down in value of other drafters closer to where it is in my own eyes. Vivisection started out as a card that usually wheeled when MBS released, and still remains there. It is a better card than that, but goes late because blue is still the most underdrafted color. I obviously like blue just fine since MBS released.
Yeah Zach's audio is weak we will have to look at this as it was working but now it's gone to pot!
The audio seems to be troubled as well. Zach's mic is way down, so whenever he talks all we can hear is someone toking. LOL
I don't see why you picked the carapace over vivisection without even discussing the (much better) blue card.
I agree with you though, that 3 solitons + 2 arbalast seems like a perfectly fine way to win a game. I would have definitely run all three arbalasts, as A) they're going to point their shatters at arbalast most of the time, and B) you also have 2 mirran spies. So you have plenty of guys who like arbalasting up.
Am I missing something obvious, or did you draft a lumengrid gargoyle which for some reason didn't make the cut? I think gust skimmer is absolutely fine in a control deck, but I would probably have dropped something for the gargoyle?
Sorry about the formating gremlin - The text part of what we do is really just gravy what we really deliver and take the time on is the podcast and the research going into it. Hope you listened and enjoyed.
Perhaps Josh or another editor can remove the duplication in the text if possible so we look more slick.
- Hammer
Can't wait for White Weenie in Pauper to get hold of Suture Priest. Imagine a bodyguard out (Grapeshot tricks), and the soft lock vs. traditional storm decks. "You want 20 goblin tokens? GG."
Be so nice if this was where the entry bar was for first-time articles. Thanks for not rushing something out. All cards are aesthetically appealing both in size and placement, good writing too...gotta love rogue. Keep it up!
Hey, just wanted to say that I 4-0ed a daily event (bluecrew on MODO) using your list. The only changes I made to the maindeck were to add a sunblast angel (wanted to try it out) and an extra red sun zenith in place of a tumble magnet and masticore. I've played the deck for the last few days, and it may have just been my matchups, but the masticores have underperformed for me. The red sun zenith's have been great, and I may add the fourth to the sideboard. The sunblast angel was mostly a dead card every time I drew it, since I either had the game locked up or I was dead by the time I was able to cast it. I may just up Thrun's in the maindeck to 3, since I haven't played many poison matchups lately.
I am still looking for ways to tweak the deck, but I have definitely been having success with it. Thanks again for sharing your list.
satisfated!!
I've been messing with your black/green infect deck from last week. I put in tutors, Bob, Duress, and Thoughtsieze and took out some of the pump spells. It's not as fast and all-in, but it can interact more and come back from a counterspell. Fun to play in TP, still wins out of nowhere, but I wouldn't play it in an event. Hopefully NPH will have more infect guys to make it a real deck. Although a clannie told me there would be no infect in that set?? I don't know.
Wanderwine Hub definitely should have been in the list, I did not realize it was only 1.50. Mutavault and Daze would be included if I wanted to extend the price limit higher, which I am considering doing for future articles, since 20 dollars is not much. I am thinking of raising it to 30-45 dollars. Also, at the end of each article from now on, I will list the upgrades the deck could use to elevate it to tournament practice room level (in the case that I do a budget spin off of an established deck, I may not include this as the changes should be quite clear from a non-budget list, but I am working on building off the radar decks from now on, rather than highly played ones.
Raddman, you are correct, and budget means different things to different people. I don't think a deck could be built for less that I would feel comfortable running in a daily event. Dredge, Burn and Goblins are other reasonably cheap decks, although I would personally not run burn, ever.
I also think playing Merfolk without Mutavault is criminal, and playing terramorphic instead of Wanderwine Hub is a complete headscratcher. Playing Aether Vial without countermagic like Daze kind of defeats the point. I can see not including force, but Daze is at least somewhat reasonable. Obviously without wasteland it is worse, but just running Daze, and some number of Counterspell and Spell Pierce is decent for casual.
It's funny because taking good tournament played decks and replacing the expensive cards with budget replacements is what the main budget article on the main magic site does about 50% of the time....
It isn't just shatter, there's a ton of artifact removal at common and uncommon, assembling your 2 artifact combo by turn 6 and hoping it gets there seems unrealistic. Gust Skimmers indicate an aggro deck to me, if you want to draft control, I would suggest beefier creatures. You also generally want 2 good finishers in your control deck, Scrapdiver Serpent is good, Hexplate golem is acceptable.
Why were great control cars like Lumengrid Garoyle and Quicksilver Geyser left on the bench, while mediocre aggro cards like gust skimmer made your deck?
Why are you playing Terramorphic Expanse in the mono-blue version?
Googling "recording games on mtgo" resulted in this link:
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=200974
I do not think I am the one misconstruing things. In fact if I didn't know better Id think you were deliberately doing so to see if you could get a rise.
I agree that expensive cards (read: good playable cards) are a (necessary) part of the game but I do think there are more than a few levels of competitive play. Budget decks and articles about them are valid and perhaps this author needed to stretch a bit more but I don't think every writer needs to give content for the top tier players only. The fact is the author did not simply do as you say and slap a few cards on top of a prefab and call that an article. He provided a rationale for his changes. Even if you think the deck is weak sauce (because it is a budget variant of a known deck archetype) and not worth your time does not mean it is worth no one's time.
You don't have to do anything. But if you want your opinion to carry some weight you might want to contribute to the site rather than just knocking the content. Your complaint might very well be relevant. One reason I haven't written an article about magic in a while is I have not wanted to add to the glut of niche articles. But you seem to think you have some serious knowledge and perhaps you do. Why not share it instead of knocking authors for not giving you good free content?
I'm just saying: be a part of the solution. You have the skills. Show us what a good article for tech is like. Or are you too good for this site?
your formatting got messed up. or maybe its just messed up on mine, but it shows the spoiler twice and the deck twice.
the deck looks good. The annuls look out of place, spell pierce, preordain, brainstorm, ponder might be better? Annuls are an easy sb choice though. And there has got to be something better than phyrexian digester, that guy is jank jank jank. Of course that something might not be here until next set.
It does bring up a good point though and a question I have. In future articles I would like to include video replays of my games rather than wordy write-ups, and just touch on the hi-lights of the game rather than turn by turn. I think this would be more interesting and would eliminate sloppy errors on my part. Could someone e-mail me or post a way to include these videos in my articles? If so that would be great.
It was just a typo actually. The next statement was talking about Aether Vial and in a lapse of thought, thinking ahead to the next sentence, I typed Aether Vial rather than Jitte. I was doing this by MTGO game replay and made a mistake. I am trying to tighten up my technical aspects and words for later articles. Sorry for the mistake.
Now I have to publish tech articles here if I want to have an opinion. I would respond to each of your points, but they are so off-topic and misconstrued that I'm not even going to bother addressing them. I stand behind what I said. Expensive cards are part of this game whether you like it or not. If we're going to just start copying tournament lists and swapping the expensive cards for cheaper variants and claiming that provides decent value for an article...well then I don't really know what else to say.
Hmm, I hate to say it but statements like that (i.e. Stoneforge Mystic getting Aether Vial) sound off alarm bells regarding the veracity of the entire game synopsis. MTGO, unlike paper, does not allow for mistakes that are contrary to the rules. It may be that the author was going by memory instead of taking notes in game or watching a replay, but nevertheless, it does sound the BS alarm.
I agree with you that there are ways to be competitive at a lower financial rate. The deck you posted is around 200 I'd say and his deck was 40, so there is a big difference in the eyes of certain people.
Personally, I think if you are worried about spending 200 on a competitive magic deck for the main formats, you probably need to find a new hobby.
The cool thing is, your deck is less than the cost of 3 Force of Wills.
Yes I was stating my observed empyrical experiences and my responses to them. Thank you for clarifying that for anyone who might have been confused.
As for the criticism of the decklist, well obviously you would never play with it so it must not be playable. I am not sure that means it is worthless. In fact I bet there are some people who found decent value in this article aside from myself. At the very least it is a start.
Concerning the content management of this site: You have a beef with it? Talk to Josh. He's the one who decides what gets posted.
You're an adequate writer...where are your tech articles? Still waiting for another prismatic tourney to come up? Lets see more professional content from you if you think the site needs it. Otherwise your complaint is just whistling into the wind.
"So yea his header may say budget, but his intire article smacks of playing competitivly. maybe i should be able to read his mind? cause i walked away from the article confused. "
Clan, you seem confused that although he's made a budget deck he talks about playing competitively. Budget players can play competitively, can play at level of a competitive player; not likely to win with their budget deck but they can still compete and learn to play in a tournament style.