You're right, I did omit some details (Tocasia dying between Urza and Mishra NOT being one of them) but the real goal with these first few articles is to act as a crash course to get us up to current events. That said, I will be spending more time in the future talking about Phyrexia, namely the next article where I'll need to if I'm going to talk about the Rathi Overlay... which I'm going to.
I have recently given 100cs a go - maybe 10 games so far and the players are good, friendly and some of the games are the best I ever had this month (poss year).
Highly recommend it for something different. It inspired me to build a 60 card std singleton deck also - and that is hella fun
I agree, you shouldn't take Arbalests out because Copperhorn Scout is bad. (Which it is.) Infect decks even solve the difficulty of shooting a creature that's 3/3 or bigger, since you can just shrink it by two for value & finish it off later, taking less beatings from it in the meantime. Arbalest rocks!
In fact, Arbalest rocks so hard it is bad for most people because of being Too Cool, so you should all pass them around the table to me and just let me pick 'em. ;)
Oh also, typical infect decks don't need mana myr at all. Though Tyrannax decks do.
to clarify... sometimes you pass the arrest and end up with a deck with 3+ grasp of darkness'
there's really no hurry to choose your colors. no reason to dive in on the first date because white is showing you a bit of interest
the difference between good cards early and good cards late is good cards early come about as a result of luck and good cards late come about because no one wants them. also, there's a definite 'good things' gradient, with arrest half way up, and hoard smelter 'all the way there'
couple of things i would have done differently during the draft
also, arbalest is fine... gives infect a late game. copperhorn scouts though... less good...
p7p1 - wall of tangelchord is better in infect than t-rex and probably better everywhere else as well. it's an underated card.
p2p2 - while you may not run infect you also dont' have a compelling reason to run black... i'd take the myr
p2p3 - i like carrion call here. that card is pretty sweet and is okay even if you're not infect
p2p4 - tough. i'd consider heavy arbalest though. if you're 'control infect' it's better. painsmith is sick though
p2p8 - nihil spellbombs are fine. they shut down opposing corpse curr and work with painsmith. either way. not sure you'd run hopper
p3p2 - sick. double smith is... as said... sick
p3p6 - phew. memnite isn't playable in your deck...
Not really a fan of this type of drafting. Its so contradictory to do the "stay open" thing in order to try to get better cards later, when you could just take some insane cards early instead (arrest, hyppogriff).
It feels like its moreso your playskill keeping you afloat rather than drafting skill.
I was inspired by the time when everybody at puremtgo.com decided to wear pirate hats as a sign of solidarity. I'm not much of a pirate guy, but I do like hats and 1920s style gangster costumes.
It's been my Halloween costume for a couple of years now.
On MtgoAcademy.com Zimbardo has recently posted a fairly complete listing of all of the major articles and videos about 100cs from mtgoacademy.com and puremtgo.com
Im interested in this format. Where can a new 100cs find some decks for inspiration...I really would like to run black or blue. Maybe a combination of both.
Good start. I have to say you left out a LOT of details. Such as Urza being nearly killed by Radiant, there is no mention at all about Ashnod, and how Urza and Mishra killed Tocasia fighting with the power stones.
I also would like to see, for other readers since I read all the books up to just before the Mirrodin cycle, how and where Phyrxia came from, and who Yawgmoth is.
I'm actually fine with banning Loyal Retainers over Survival of the Fittest.
Loyal Retainers is pretty much the EASY BUTTON for Survival decks. I've used it with Survival and I've used other cards with Survival such as Titans and Vengevine. I think those other cards are much more interesting to play with than the silly Loyal Retainers combo, even if the Retainers combo is strictly speaking more powerful. (Howevever it does require you to put creatures in your deck that you can't play from your hand.)
Time Vault is basically an "I win" card. There are plenty of other "I win" combos that I don't see why we need this one around. Especially because this "I win" combo actually requires you to find another win condition with your infinite turns. So if you're low on time, your opponent might just try to let you play it out. It's not fun, it can come out of nowhere, and it's difficult to protect yourself against it. I like Painter/Grindstone much better than I like Time Vault/anything that untaps artifacts.
well drafted. myr over arrest? you manimal. can't say i disagree with it, i've just never had the courage to pass the p1p1 arrest. what are your top common artifacts? would you take tumble magnet over arrest?
"I disagree with Orgion (and ArchGenius)and I'd say this is a good shot at trying to evaluate some cards."
lol, I've always been my own worst critic. It comes with being a perfectionist.
I basically deeply regret that my disclaimer led my readers to believe that this is an unbiased article that wasn't based on my opinions on the matter. I wanted that disclaimer to convey the message that this is an opinion piece and it is going to be biased, I will try to limit my biases, but in the end you can and will disagree with me on a few points, and that's fine. My disclaimer reached too far. It is an opinion piece, and I can't escape it. I tried to look at the issue from multiple angles but in the end, I wrote the article and it's written from my perspective.
It made me feel like I was like Fox News stating that "we're fair and balanced" and that made me feel very sick.
By the way, I could go either way on Survival. I was initially horrified by that banning, but after considering it carefully I can see the logic of either side of that question.
I disagree with Orgion (and ArchGenius), and I'd say this is a good shot at trying to evaluate some cards. Obviously there are some cards that I would evaluate differently along the scales that ArchGenius is using, but I think this is a nice attempt to look at cards without relying purely on emotions. It's impossible to be unbiased about cards in a format that we care about, so the best we can do is to recognize some arguments for and against each card and try to see how they balance out. That's what we see here, and it is healthy to debate some of these cards. If somebody disagrees with the assessment of a particular card, let's hear the other side of the issue. Nothing scandalous about that process.
Anyway, I'm glad to see some analysis of the banned list (biased or not).
This is not my best work. In retrospect, the only way to get a balanced opinion on bannings is to conduct interviews with several players and try to avoid stating too much of my own opinion. Make no mistake, this is an editorial on the issue, and it reflects my opinion on the matter. My main method of getting information was to condense the message board postings on the matter and add my thoughts and feelings. Those thoughts and feelings are as biased as anyone else's opinions and that is what I meant to convey with the disclaimer.
This article reflects my thoughts and feelings on the bannings. I originally wrote this article the day after Thanksgiving as a way to voice my confusion on the newly banned cards and to add to the discussion going on at that point in time. It was done hastily, and at this point in time I thought it wasn't going to be published. I'm halfway through a rewrite of this article that focused on what impact the bannings will have rather than whether they are right or wrong. That is where I believe that I can better contribute to the community.
The "categories" were designed to be a "cute" way to discuss the cards. I think a lot of players want cards banned because they are annoying or unfun or a lot of other factors that really have little to do with their being over-powered. It seems to me to be a popularity contest more than it should be. This was a hasty effort of expressing that thought.
Orgion, I'm sorry I disappointed you. I've never had much luck with strict opinion pieces (editorials) because I struggle with trying to make it balanced while at the same time presenting my thoughts on an issue I feel strongly about in a clear and concise way. This effort was muddled and confusing, but hopefully it can still be useful as a discussion point.
The disclaimer was a bad idea. It should have read: This is an opinion piece. I will be sharing quotes from others as well to illustrate that I'm not the only one out there discussing the issues, but when it comes right down to it, this is an opinion piece.
I don't think I've ever been so disappointed by an article as I was with this one. I normally really look forward to your articles. They are generally reasoned and informative, often thought provoking and usually enthuse me to play whatever format you're discussing. But this article was just atrocious!
Here are my main gipes:
The arguments are disconnected, brief, poorly thought out and explained, and in a number of cases largely irrelevant.
The article starts with a disclaimer about trying not to be biased then immediately biases itself with the categories it uses to analyse the cards with. Categories like "Angry player factor" and "Necessary evil", I mean I ask you. What were you thinking!
It tries to be unbiased by utilising other player's view points but in the end only uses 7 comments, never more than 3 to a given card, often none at all, and in the case of the new bannings uses 1 almost exclusively. I really value Zimbardo's opinions but you can hardly claim to be unbiased when the only example of comments you give mirror your own opinions!
For my sake as a player who enjoys the 100CS format a lot, who is fairly confused from the arbitrary nature of the bannings, and who considers you to be one of the best writers on the format, please, please, please go away and try again! Include more reasoning in your jugdements, make sure you're consistent all the way through, choose better categories and explain what they mean properly (what does "over-all power factor" actually mean anyway?), consider the strategic effect of the cards on the game, try discussing what the point of the format is for you and other people, and consider why WoC ban cards in the first place! Get more opinions, do more research. This really feels like it was too hasty.
I'd like to chime in on your opinion on Survival and how you think it should be legal, and toss in my two cents on some of the others:
"Survival of the Fittest makes cards like Anger, Basking Rootwalla, and Loyal Retainers playable."
I'd like to say that firstly, Anger is not the worst on it's own, it holds equipment just fine and blocks quite well, since you want it to die. And there are plenty of other ways to get it in your graveyard. Basking Rootwalla however, I don't think is even that great WITH survival, it's not that great an attacker or blocker, and if value is what you want, Squee is your man.
Loyal Retainers, I would argue, is only used as a combo-enabler. The only thing people realistically use this card for is reanimating Iona or Emrakul. (competitively, anyway)
If you think Retainers should be playable, how can you think Time Vault should be banned? Both enable degenerate combos that almost assuredly end the game, and both are bad on their own. (Time Vault only being good with Voltaic Key, Tezzeret, etc.) If anything, time vault is worse than retainers on it's own. Granted, the Vault combo is much more assuredly game ending since it's easier to answer an Emrakul/Iona than it is infinite turns, but still.
Oh, and on Mind Twist in general, how can anyone think this card should be legal? Lol there is a reason it's been banned in constructed basically forever. If you resolve one for even X=3 early on, it provides such a HUGE swing that coming back from it is practically impossible (like, 90%). That and being SUPER easy to cast/splash just seems wrong.
I can see both sides of the arguement on whether Sensei's Top should be legal. The deckbuilder in me does not like a format where every deck HAS to play something, since that just limits creativity and possible deck design. The poster who said it makes it 99-card singleton said that best. But the player in me feels that Top isn't inherently broken or WAY too powerful, it's just very good. Same as Wasteland. I mean, I like Top but one of the fun and unique things about 100 CS to me is the more random nature of the format than say, Legacy. Yes there is redundancy but when 1 card makes it so easy to get what you want, repeatably and cheaply, it's a game changer. For good or bad? That seems up to personal preference. I'd just play Legacy if I wanted that, though.
You're right, I did omit some details (Tocasia dying between Urza and Mishra NOT being one of them) but the real goal with these first few articles is to act as a crash course to get us up to current events. That said, I will be spending more time in the future talking about Phyrexia, namely the next article where I'll need to if I'm going to talk about the Rathi Overlay... which I'm going to.
I have recently given 100cs a go - maybe 10 games so far and the players are good, friendly and some of the games are the best I ever had this month (poss year).
Highly recommend it for something different. It inspired me to build a 60 card std singleton deck also - and that is hella fun
I agree, you shouldn't take Arbalests out because Copperhorn Scout is bad. (Which it is.) Infect decks even solve the difficulty of shooting a creature that's 3/3 or bigger, since you can just shrink it by two for value & finish it off later, taking less beatings from it in the meantime. Arbalest rocks!
In fact, Arbalest rocks so hard it is bad for most people because of being Too Cool, so you should all pass them around the table to me and just let me pick 'em. ;)
Oh also, typical infect decks don't need mana myr at all. Though Tyrannax decks do.
to clarify... sometimes you pass the arrest and end up with a deck with 3+ grasp of darkness'
there's really no hurry to choose your colors. no reason to dive in on the first date because white is showing you a bit of interest
the difference between good cards early and good cards late is good cards early come about as a result of luck and good cards late come about because no one wants them. also, there's a definite 'good things' gradient, with arrest half way up, and hoard smelter 'all the way there'
couple of things i would have done differently during the draft
also, arbalest is fine... gives infect a late game. copperhorn scouts though... less good...
p7p1 - wall of tangelchord is better in infect than t-rex and probably better everywhere else as well. it's an underated card.
p2p2 - while you may not run infect you also dont' have a compelling reason to run black... i'd take the myr
p2p3 - i like carrion call here. that card is pretty sweet and is okay even if you're not infect
p2p4 - tough. i'd consider heavy arbalest though. if you're 'control infect' it's better. painsmith is sick though
p2p8 - nihil spellbombs are fine. they shut down opposing corpse curr and work with painsmith. either way. not sure you'd run hopper
p3p2 - sick. double smith is... as said... sick
p3p6 - phew. memnite isn't playable in your deck...
Not really a fan of this type of drafting. Its so contradictory to do the "stay open" thing in order to try to get better cards later, when you could just take some insane cards early instead (arrest, hyppogriff).
It feels like its moreso your playskill keeping you afloat rather than drafting skill.
excellent article. would be good to get your take on rather virgin extended
I was inspired by the time when everybody at puremtgo.com decided to wear pirate hats as a sign of solidarity. I'm not much of a pirate guy, but I do like hats and 1920s style gangster costumes.
It's been my Halloween costume for a couple of years now.
rust tick over chrome steed, come on man
Thank you very much. Your picture is very original gangsterish
On MtgoAcademy.com Zimbardo has recently posted a fairly complete listing of all of the major articles and videos about 100cs from mtgoacademy.com and puremtgo.com
Here is the link... http://www.mtgoacademy.com/100cs-resources-link/
Good read.....Alot of work went into this.
Im interested in this format. Where can a new 100cs find some decks for inspiration...I really would like to run black or blue. Maybe a combination of both.
Thanks
Good start. I have to say you left out a LOT of details. Such as Urza being nearly killed by Radiant, there is no mention at all about Ashnod, and how Urza and Mishra killed Tocasia fighting with the power stones.
I also would like to see, for other readers since I read all the books up to just before the Mirrodin cycle, how and where Phyrxia came from, and who Yawgmoth is.
Nice to get a refresher though.
Oh, and Tawnos survived the Cylex Blast as well.
I'm actually fine with banning Loyal Retainers over Survival of the Fittest.
Loyal Retainers is pretty much the EASY BUTTON for Survival decks. I've used it with Survival and I've used other cards with Survival such as Titans and Vengevine. I think those other cards are much more interesting to play with than the silly Loyal Retainers combo, even if the Retainers combo is strictly speaking more powerful. (Howevever it does require you to put creatures in your deck that you can't play from your hand.)
Time Vault is basically an "I win" card. There are plenty of other "I win" combos that I don't see why we need this one around. Especially because this "I win" combo actually requires you to find another win condition with your infinite turns. So if you're low on time, your opponent might just try to let you play it out. It's not fun, it can come out of nowhere, and it's difficult to protect yourself against it. I like Painter/Grindstone much better than I like Time Vault/anything that untaps artifacts.
my plan is working. mwha ha ha...
well drafted. myr over arrest? you manimal. can't say i disagree with it, i've just never had the courage to pass the p1p1 arrest. what are your top common artifacts? would you take tumble magnet over arrest?
"I disagree with Orgion (and ArchGenius)and I'd say this is a good shot at trying to evaluate some cards."
lol, I've always been my own worst critic. It comes with being a perfectionist.
I basically deeply regret that my disclaimer led my readers to believe that this is an unbiased article that wasn't based on my opinions on the matter. I wanted that disclaimer to convey the message that this is an opinion piece and it is going to be biased, I will try to limit my biases, but in the end you can and will disagree with me on a few points, and that's fine. My disclaimer reached too far. It is an opinion piece, and I can't escape it. I tried to look at the issue from multiple angles but in the end, I wrote the article and it's written from my perspective.
It made me feel like I was like Fox News stating that "we're fair and balanced" and that made me feel very sick.
By the way, I could go either way on Survival. I was initially horrified by that banning, but after considering it carefully I can see the logic of either side of that question.
I disagree with Orgion (and ArchGenius), and I'd say this is a good shot at trying to evaluate some cards. Obviously there are some cards that I would evaluate differently along the scales that ArchGenius is using, but I think this is a nice attempt to look at cards without relying purely on emotions. It's impossible to be unbiased about cards in a format that we care about, so the best we can do is to recognize some arguments for and against each card and try to see how they balance out. That's what we see here, and it is healthy to debate some of these cards. If somebody disagrees with the assessment of a particular card, let's hear the other side of the issue. Nothing scandalous about that process.
Anyway, I'm glad to see some analysis of the banned list (biased or not).
You're right!
This is not my best work. In retrospect, the only way to get a balanced opinion on bannings is to conduct interviews with several players and try to avoid stating too much of my own opinion. Make no mistake, this is an editorial on the issue, and it reflects my opinion on the matter. My main method of getting information was to condense the message board postings on the matter and add my thoughts and feelings. Those thoughts and feelings are as biased as anyone else's opinions and that is what I meant to convey with the disclaimer.
This article reflects my thoughts and feelings on the bannings. I originally wrote this article the day after Thanksgiving as a way to voice my confusion on the newly banned cards and to add to the discussion going on at that point in time. It was done hastily, and at this point in time I thought it wasn't going to be published. I'm halfway through a rewrite of this article that focused on what impact the bannings will have rather than whether they are right or wrong. That is where I believe that I can better contribute to the community.
The "categories" were designed to be a "cute" way to discuss the cards. I think a lot of players want cards banned because they are annoying or unfun or a lot of other factors that really have little to do with their being over-powered. It seems to me to be a popularity contest more than it should be. This was a hasty effort of expressing that thought.
Orgion, I'm sorry I disappointed you. I've never had much luck with strict opinion pieces (editorials) because I struggle with trying to make it balanced while at the same time presenting my thoughts on an issue I feel strongly about in a clear and concise way. This effort was muddled and confusing, but hopefully it can still be useful as a discussion point.
The disclaimer was a bad idea. It should have read: This is an opinion piece. I will be sharing quotes from others as well to illustrate that I'm not the only one out there discussing the issues, but when it comes right down to it, this is an opinion piece.
Please if don't already know, go to http://www.mtgoacademy.com/100-card-singleton-banned-list-survey/ and share your opinion on the matter. Zimbardo and Platipus10 are gathering players opinions on the matter to present to WotC.
I don't think I've ever been so disappointed by an article as I was with this one. I normally really look forward to your articles. They are generally reasoned and informative, often thought provoking and usually enthuse me to play whatever format you're discussing. But this article was just atrocious!
Here are my main gipes:
For my sake as a player who enjoys the 100CS format a lot, who is fairly confused from the arbitrary nature of the bannings, and who considers you to be one of the best writers on the format, please, please, please go away and try again! Include more reasoning in your jugdements, make sure you're consistent all the way through, choose better categories and explain what they mean properly (what does "over-all power factor" actually mean anyway?), consider the strategic effect of the cards on the game, try discussing what the point of the format is for you and other people, and consider why WoC ban cards in the first place! Get more opinions, do more research. This really feels like it was too hasty.
As a Timmy/Johnny I am definitely going to build a deck with Alpha Tyrranax as its main beater... ;)
Top being banned will save hours of my life.
I'd like to chime in on your opinion on Survival and how you think it should be legal, and toss in my two cents on some of the others:
"Survival of the Fittest makes cards like Anger, Basking Rootwalla, and Loyal Retainers playable."
I'd like to say that firstly, Anger is not the worst on it's own, it holds equipment just fine and blocks quite well, since you want it to die. And there are plenty of other ways to get it in your graveyard. Basking Rootwalla however, I don't think is even that great WITH survival, it's not that great an attacker or blocker, and if value is what you want, Squee is your man.
Loyal Retainers, I would argue, is only used as a combo-enabler. The only thing people realistically use this card for is reanimating Iona or Emrakul. (competitively, anyway)
If you think Retainers should be playable, how can you think Time Vault should be banned? Both enable degenerate combos that almost assuredly end the game, and both are bad on their own. (Time Vault only being good with Voltaic Key, Tezzeret, etc.) If anything, time vault is worse than retainers on it's own. Granted, the Vault combo is much more assuredly game ending since it's easier to answer an Emrakul/Iona than it is infinite turns, but still.
Oh, and on Mind Twist in general, how can anyone think this card should be legal? Lol there is a reason it's been banned in constructed basically forever. If you resolve one for even X=3 early on, it provides such a HUGE swing that coming back from it is practically impossible (like, 90%). That and being SUPER easy to cast/splash just seems wrong.
I can see both sides of the arguement on whether Sensei's Top should be legal. The deckbuilder in me does not like a format where every deck HAS to play something, since that just limits creativity and possible deck design. The poster who said it makes it 99-card singleton said that best. But the player in me feels that Top isn't inherently broken or WAY too powerful, it's just very good. Same as Wasteland. I mean, I like Top but one of the fun and unique things about 100 CS to me is the more random nature of the format than say, Legacy. Yes there is redundancy but when 1 card makes it so easy to get what you want, repeatably and cheaply, it's a game changer. For good or bad? That seems up to personal preference. I'd just play Legacy if I wanted that, though.