Well I'm going to be honest with you, and frankly, mean. Until PureMTGO finds a better card linking source like Gatherer or MagicCardInfo... you're not getting decklists for sets that aren't online yet :)
That said I understand why they MTGOTraders, but, I'll forever stand by my argument.
oh man a spammer got through the system. This article should only have 1 comment. See now this is a slightly useful review in that it talks about new cards in relation to the format they will be affecting. However, where's the decklists man? I don't play block, but want to get into it. I don't know what the decks are, so having a decklist here would have been helpful. Way to drop the ball. :P But seriously, I'd like some decks.
Not trying to flame you. Just pointing out there is a difference between criticism and attacking someone. If you read the bottom half of my comment, I pointed out that I didn't feel he went in-depth enough and offered my thoughts on the article in a meaningful fashion. I like that you ask what his reasoning was for the article and wish you had done that the first time rather than attacking Rene. I will agree with you that there does seem to be a trend of uninformative articles being published, however, to single out just this one doesn't make much sense. PureMTGO is an open author site. The old joke of, what's great about it? Anyone can post an article. What's bad about it? ANYONE can post an article. I would also say that the level of quality here is no different than any other Magic related website. If you think the articles are "bad" here, check out StarCityGames where every author basically just copy and paste whatever the monday author writes. And they ONLY cover netdecks. I guess my main point is, and this goes for EVEYONE, if you don't like an article you just read, leave criticism that is useful and not attacks.
Before anyone posts it, yes I am aware of the irony of ME talking about other writers as being lazy.
@Blau - I know it, was just givin' you a hard time :p
In regards to "Don't like it don't read it", well, I don't much care for pauper so I ddin't necessarily get much out of this article, so really I'm indifferent. If I did have one thing to say, though, it would be that I'd have liked to see your match recaps be expanded exponentially. Regardless of the format I love reading up on matches, and that would have helped me appreciate the article more.
I feel bad implying that your article was "bad," which I don't believe it to be. I just felt bad for Rene getting blasted when I felt he didn't overly deserve it. Anyone that can manage to take a photo of himself with a cat on his head is ok in my book. :-) That kitten is TOO CUTE!!! I just wish people were a little bit more discriminating. If you don't like what someone writes, don't read it!
I think white sun's zenith might be a bit more playable than you're giving it credit for. I have no idea whethere a draw-go style control deck is likely to emerge at any point soon (probably not before jace rotates), but there are a fair few near-playable counters in standard at the moment and having an instant speed win condition/chumping-solution seems reasonable for such a deck. It would probably use jace's ingenuity just to be clear (I'm definitly not advocating blue sun's zenith!). It also has reasonable synergy with elspeth 2.0, for what it's worth.
I really don't see hero of bladehold getting played before jace rotates out, but after that I guess it could be good enough.
Also, I seriously believe that distant memories is the worst card to see print since one with nothing.
@Blau Just because there are other rubbish articles on the front page does not justify publishing this tosh!
@ this comment "This article offers what many articles will not, and that is a meta-analysis (even though it is not that deep) of a tournament format". There is no Meta-analysis in the article. Nothing about how this deck plays against goblins, familiar storm NOTHING of interest nothing of note!!
@ this comment "Just because Rene had the balls to say, "hey I netdecked this," that makes him a bad guy?" I did not say anything about him being a bad guy I just said the article was lame and lazy. If he netdecks entered a daily event and blogged about the event discussed relevant matchups (even if he lost) I would have prefered the article. This was like oh that deck looks good i will take it for a spin in the TP. Hmm well that was fun on to the next deck. Oh wait why dont I bang out some quick crappy article and get some credits so I can afford that familiar storm deck that is doing well in pauper at the moment.
@RCueva I know you defered to Blau's rebuttal but really I would love to hear your thoughts justification for this article. Why did you write it, what messages were you trying to convey, what did you expect the anticipated audience to like-dislike about the article?
Really articles like this are insult to the site and an insult to the hard work of decent writers. Just because other bad articles get published here that is no excuse. Sorry to single you out but the volume here has increased at the detriment of quality!
Scenario 1: let's assume these things first. I have 2 creatures in play, Okk and a Pest Token, I control Confusion. You have nothing in play.
You cast Guilded Drake and both effects trigger when it enters the battlefield. Confusion is my effect, so APNAP says you put the Guilded Drake Effect on first (picking Okk as the target), then I stack the Confusion. You pick a target for the Confusion (the Pest). Confusion resolves first, the Guilded, leaving me with the drake and you with both of my creatures. I assume you want to know if you can get the drake back, and the answer is no, since targets are declared when the ability is put on the stack. At no time would I ever have the Drake before you stacked the trigger.
Scenario 2: I have 2 creatures in play, Okk and a Pest Token, and I have some enchantment that used to be yours. You have the Confusion due to it triggering when it came into play.
You cast Guilded Drake. The Confusion is yours, so you get to pick the stack order. However, once again, you declare targets when the effect goes on the stack. Since both effects trigger at the same time, you get to pick which order they are stacked. Again, the result will be you end up with both of my creatures and I get the drake.
The problem here is that people forget how triggers work. The check for game state at the start and at the resolution of the effect. People thing there are ways around it and there just aren't. If I put the Confusion effect on the stack, and then you kill your own creature in response, nothing happens. The effect is countered due to lack of targets. I'll keep my creature and you get nothing. It's actually a good response for when I cast Rust Elemental. It sticks me with him and then he hits me for 4 damage a turn. If you look over at the discussion for Confusion, someone says he uses it with Meloku and Dryad Arbor. Play Dryad Arbor, with the Confusion effect on the stack, use Meloku to bounce the Arbor back to your hand. You get to keep their creature, right? No. That might work in real life, where people forget how the stack works, but in actuality, it doesn't work because the Confusion effect never resolves.
Under the hammer while I was planning on addressing your comment blau pretty much took the words out of my mouth (perhaps better then how I would have said it). Sorry you didn't like the article but thanks for your comment.
Blau I complete understand and will take your critism and apply it to my next article. As far as you suggestions I did think about plummet but just forgot to mention it. The reason I like Penumbra Spider it can work double rolls. It stalls flyers and can be brought in for match ups with a lot of removal since it replaces itself. Also having something come down early enough to block that doesn't have 0 power helps a bit in weenie match ups. I considered wall of tanglecord since I could simply switch it out with another defender and would still add to my mana thanks to Overgrown Battlement.
I disagree Under the Hammer. This is no more shameless or credit-seeking than any other article posted here. I think today's front page is evidence of that. Three articles giving reviews for a set that isn't even on MTGO yet, and some of them are even stretching it into multiple articles! This article is far more informative than Fill-in-the-blank's card reviews or of people explaining what they drafted. (P.S. I don't need to be told Mirran Cursader is good, I read the card) This article offers what many articles will not, and that is a meta-analysis (even though it is not that deep) of a tournament format. Just because Rene had the balls to say, "hey I netdecked this," that makes him a bad guy? If you're a tournament player, you probably have read winning decklists and maybe even, god forbid, copied one!!!! Oh my! I've seen plenty of articles written by people here that have been just an analysis of netdecks. The fact of the matter is, if Rene was a casual player, then yes, netdecking is not the way to go, but if he is preparing for a tournament, then this is the BEST strategy. Build a few winning decks, play them, see if you like them. If you're going to lecture people on articles that are lazy and point out the obvious, there were three other articles you could have posted on. Your response was a "shameless" attack on Rene and you should be embarrassed that you bothered to take the time to write it. If you didn't like it, you could have chosen to say nothing. There are plenty of "bad" articles on PureMTGO for which no one post a response to, which I always view as a sign of bad writing.
Rene,
I would have loved at little bit more of a review at the end of this article. I think this looks like a good deck for pauper tournament. Personally, I have been wanting to get back into tournament pauper, but all the decks I've built in the past have usually met with resounding failure. Your first match-up presented at fairly large flaw in the deck. Granted, I know online time is limited, but it would have been nice to see you address the issue with a deck change and then test it again. Fliers seem to be the problem, cards like Gloomwidow's Feast or Plummet might be good in the sideboard, or maybe even mainboard since the deck has such a problem with them. Hidden Spider is good, but only if you get it out quickly. I also like Slingbow Trap, but that is only good against black poison fliers. Just some suggestions. it would have been nice to see what your solution to that was. I don't like Wall of Tangleroot here because, while it blocks nicely, that's all it does and it requires open mana to activate. Penumbra Spider is nice too, but it just provides a stall against fliers. You need an answer.
Great article as always. You nailed the Jaya deck spot on. My version is control/burn. But you Forgot Stuffy Doll!!! He's great because you can always target him, just in case you can't target your opponent, plus he blocks pretty good.
Sorry but this is lame. NetDeck a pauper deck, play three uninteresting matchups in the tournament practice room and write an article. I can only assume you were in desperate need of credits and thought this was the laziest and quickest way to get them. Terrible you should be ashamed of this!
PiDave, the reason he didn't use Spell Pierce to counter Grave Titan was because he couldn't. Spell Pierce can only counter non-creature spells. If it could counter creature spells that would be too good lol.
Cryptoplasm, not Cytoplasm
weird that we both cover the same colors of besieged on the same day.
Well I'm going to be honest with you, and frankly, mean. Until PureMTGO finds a better card linking source like Gatherer or MagicCardInfo... you're not getting decklists for sets that aren't online yet :)
That said I understand why they MTGOTraders, but, I'll forever stand by my argument.
oh man a spammer got through the system. This article should only have 1 comment. See now this is a slightly useful review in that it talks about new cards in relation to the format they will be affecting. However, where's the decklists man? I don't play block, but want to get into it. I don't know what the decks are, so having a decklist here would have been helpful. Way to drop the ball. :P But seriously, I'd like some decks.
Well at least he gave me 5 fireballs!
online ordering system
online ordering for restaurants
Not trying to flame you. Just pointing out there is a difference between criticism and attacking someone. If you read the bottom half of my comment, I pointed out that I didn't feel he went in-depth enough and offered my thoughts on the article in a meaningful fashion. I like that you ask what his reasoning was for the article and wish you had done that the first time rather than attacking Rene. I will agree with you that there does seem to be a trend of uninformative articles being published, however, to single out just this one doesn't make much sense. PureMTGO is an open author site. The old joke of, what's great about it? Anyone can post an article. What's bad about it? ANYONE can post an article. I would also say that the level of quality here is no different than any other Magic related website. If you think the articles are "bad" here, check out StarCityGames where every author basically just copy and paste whatever the monday author writes. And they ONLY cover netdecks. I guess my main point is, and this goes for EVEYONE, if you don't like an article you just read, leave criticism that is useful and not attacks.
Before anyone posts it, yes I am aware of the irony of ME talking about other writers as being lazy.
As you read this page checking back for comments on your comment, flames leap from the monitor! Roll a reflex check.
@Blau - I know it, was just givin' you a hard time :p
In regards to "Don't like it don't read it", well, I don't much care for pauper so I ddin't necessarily get much out of this article, so really I'm indifferent. If I did have one thing to say, though, it would be that I'd have liked to see your match recaps be expanded exponentially. Regardless of the format I love reading up on matches, and that would have helped me appreciate the article more.
I feel bad implying that your article was "bad," which I don't believe it to be. I just felt bad for Rene getting blasted when I felt he didn't overly deserve it. Anyone that can manage to take a photo of himself with a cat on his head is ok in my book. :-) That kitten is TOO CUTE!!! I just wish people were a little bit more discriminating. If you don't like what someone writes, don't read it!
I think white sun's zenith might be a bit more playable than you're giving it credit for. I have no idea whethere a draw-go style control deck is likely to emerge at any point soon (probably not before jace rotates), but there are a fair few near-playable counters in standard at the moment and having an instant speed win condition/chumping-solution seems reasonable for such a deck. It would probably use jace's ingenuity just to be clear (I'm definitly not advocating blue sun's zenith!). It also has reasonable synergy with elspeth 2.0, for what it's worth.
I really don't see hero of bladehold getting played before jace rotates out, but after that I guess it could be good enough.
Also, I seriously believe that distant memories is the worst card to see print since one with nothing.
@Blau Just because there are other rubbish articles on the front page does not justify publishing this tosh!
@ this comment "This article offers what many articles will not, and that is a meta-analysis (even though it is not that deep) of a tournament format". There is no Meta-analysis in the article. Nothing about how this deck plays against goblins, familiar storm NOTHING of interest nothing of note!!
@ this comment "Just because Rene had the balls to say, "hey I netdecked this," that makes him a bad guy?" I did not say anything about him being a bad guy I just said the article was lame and lazy. If he netdecks entered a daily event and blogged about the event discussed relevant matchups (even if he lost) I would have prefered the article. This was like oh that deck looks good i will take it for a spin in the TP. Hmm well that was fun on to the next deck. Oh wait why dont I bang out some quick crappy article and get some credits so I can afford that familiar storm deck that is doing well in pauper at the moment.
@RCueva I know you defered to Blau's rebuttal but really I would love to hear your thoughts justification for this article. Why did you write it, what messages were you trying to convey, what did you expect the anticipated audience to like-dislike about the article?
Really articles like this are insult to the site and an insult to the hard work of decent writers. Just because other bad articles get published here that is no excuse. Sorry to single you out but the volume here has increased at the detriment of quality!
Rant Off -- Flame Me
Scenario 1: let's assume these things first. I have 2 creatures in play, Okk and a Pest Token, I control Confusion. You have nothing in play.
You cast Guilded Drake and both effects trigger when it enters the battlefield. Confusion is my effect, so APNAP says you put the Guilded Drake Effect on first (picking Okk as the target), then I stack the Confusion. You pick a target for the Confusion (the Pest). Confusion resolves first, the Guilded, leaving me with the drake and you with both of my creatures. I assume you want to know if you can get the drake back, and the answer is no, since targets are declared when the ability is put on the stack. At no time would I ever have the Drake before you stacked the trigger.
Scenario 2: I have 2 creatures in play, Okk and a Pest Token, and I have some enchantment that used to be yours. You have the Confusion due to it triggering when it came into play.
You cast Guilded Drake. The Confusion is yours, so you get to pick the stack order. However, once again, you declare targets when the effect goes on the stack. Since both effects trigger at the same time, you get to pick which order they are stacked. Again, the result will be you end up with both of my creatures and I get the drake.
The problem here is that people forget how triggers work. The check for game state at the start and at the resolution of the effect. People thing there are ways around it and there just aren't. If I put the Confusion effect on the stack, and then you kill your own creature in response, nothing happens. The effect is countered due to lack of targets. I'll keep my creature and you get nothing. It's actually a good response for when I cast Rust Elemental. It sticks me with him and then he hits me for 4 damage a turn. If you look over at the discussion for Confusion, someone says he uses it with Meloku and Dryad Arbor. Play Dryad Arbor, with the Confusion effect on the stack, use Meloku to bounce the Arbor back to your hand. You get to keep their creature, right? No. That might work in real life, where people forget how the stack works, but in actuality, it doesn't work because the Confusion effect never resolves.
Under the hammer while I was planning on addressing your comment blau pretty much took the words out of my mouth (perhaps better then how I would have said it). Sorry you didn't like the article but thanks for your comment.
Blau I complete understand and will take your critism and apply it to my next article. As far as you suggestions I did think about plummet but just forgot to mention it. The reason I like Penumbra Spider it can work double rolls. It stalls flyers and can be brought in for match ups with a lot of removal since it replaces itself. Also having something come down early enough to block that doesn't have 0 power helps a bit in weenie match ups. I considered wall of tanglecord since I could simply switch it out with another defender and would still add to my mana thanks to Overgrown Battlement.
Thanks to everyone for their comments.
Aw, that kinda stung a bit :)
I disagree Under the Hammer. This is no more shameless or credit-seeking than any other article posted here. I think today's front page is evidence of that. Three articles giving reviews for a set that isn't even on MTGO yet, and some of them are even stretching it into multiple articles! This article is far more informative than Fill-in-the-blank's card reviews or of people explaining what they drafted. (P.S. I don't need to be told Mirran Cursader is good, I read the card) This article offers what many articles will not, and that is a meta-analysis (even though it is not that deep) of a tournament format. Just because Rene had the balls to say, "hey I netdecked this," that makes him a bad guy? If you're a tournament player, you probably have read winning decklists and maybe even, god forbid, copied one!!!! Oh my! I've seen plenty of articles written by people here that have been just an analysis of netdecks. The fact of the matter is, if Rene was a casual player, then yes, netdecking is not the way to go, but if he is preparing for a tournament, then this is the BEST strategy. Build a few winning decks, play them, see if you like them. If you're going to lecture people on articles that are lazy and point out the obvious, there were three other articles you could have posted on. Your response was a "shameless" attack on Rene and you should be embarrassed that you bothered to take the time to write it. If you didn't like it, you could have chosen to say nothing. There are plenty of "bad" articles on PureMTGO for which no one post a response to, which I always view as a sign of bad writing.
Rene,
I would have loved at little bit more of a review at the end of this article. I think this looks like a good deck for pauper tournament. Personally, I have been wanting to get back into tournament pauper, but all the decks I've built in the past have usually met with resounding failure. Your first match-up presented at fairly large flaw in the deck. Granted, I know online time is limited, but it would have been nice to see you address the issue with a deck change and then test it again. Fliers seem to be the problem, cards like Gloomwidow's Feast or Plummet might be good in the sideboard, or maybe even mainboard since the deck has such a problem with them. Hidden Spider is good, but only if you get it out quickly. I also like Slingbow Trap, but that is only good against black poison fliers. Just some suggestions. it would have been nice to see what your solution to that was. I don't like Wall of Tangleroot here because, while it blocks nicely, that's all it does and it requires open mana to activate. Penumbra Spider is nice too, but it just provides a stall against fliers. You need an answer.
Great article as always. You nailed the Jaya deck spot on. My version is control/burn. But you Forgot Stuffy Doll!!! He's great because you can always target him, just in case you can't target your opponent, plus he blocks pretty good.
Sorry but this is lame. NetDeck a pauper deck, play three uninteresting matchups in the tournament practice room and write an article. I can only assume you were in desperate need of credits and thought this was the laziest and quickest way to get them. Terrible you should be ashamed of this!
Thanks for the reviews :D
Looking to put some more out this week.
I was getting ready to start purchasing FoW's at 80.00....nbut its going up...may have to just play non blue decks in legacy.
I think there is a bigger interest in legacy right now. I did pick up a pset of LED's for 64 a week ago. Now they are up to 73.00.
I wonder if FoW does hit 150$ will WOTC be forced to reprint it or just run more awesome payout MED1 drafts.
Depends on how you stacked them.
whats going on with force of will? 0 in stock and rising fast. will it climb back near $150 again. i only own 3. you snooze you lose i supose.
Honest rules question:
How would Confusion in the Ranks combine, if at all, with Gilded Drake?
Whoops. :D
PiDave, the reason he didn't use Spell Pierce to counter Grave Titan was because he couldn't. Spell Pierce can only counter non-creature spells. If it could counter creature spells that would be too good lol.