I love these singleton articles as they have helped me refine certain aspects of my decks. However, these articles are about the only internet sources I have seen for 100 card singleton.
EDH seems to be very big, and I have found a lot of active forums for deck critique and ideas people suggest that I would have never thought of, but I have not found the same thing for singleton.
I have found DoTw, but I don't necessarily want to just copy a t8 deck. Are there any communities out there for 100 card?
Can someone briefly recap how this week was a success?
9 packs opened for the price of 4 is nice. But considering you sold the money cards in order to enter the third draft, which was a bust, you basically spent close to $16 on a bunch of crap commons and uncommons that you could have just bought for way less than $5 from a bot.
Fun article, now I'm going to make a deck with every card you mentioned, because I'm like that.
Actually, the number one reason I get mad in commander is because I'm impatient, I'll admit to that. When it takes 10 minutes for my turn to come back around, and I have to spend every waking second clicking through triggers, I get cranky. But then, that's why I don't play commander XD. Don't get me wrong, I love the format and play paper EDH when I can, but the MTGO version just isn't for me.
Nice take on the subject. Basically a list of stuff that should be killed on sight. Funny that your article came out on the same day as Walkerdogs. Interesting that you only talked about permanents. What about spells?
You hit a whole lot of subjects in your article, but there are a few that I wanted to comment on.
I liked your threat assessment list. Who to go after first, Uril, Zur, etc. Many times I find that my assessment is constantly changing though. I know I have a hard time differentiating the short term threat from the long term one.
I know that I would have appreciated a list. You may find that entering 100 card lists is long (tell me something I don't know) but it is important to give players ideas and thoughts on new interactions. You do hit the highlights, which is nice, but you don't talk about how much artifact mana you have. Which is important when dealing with a deck that uses mass land destruction as one if its biggest weapons.
I played against you once recently, and I didn't think your deck was that horrible to play against. I remember that you tried to stay in the background and didn't seem too threatening until it was too late. If I recall right, there was someone else that seemed like a bigger threat for a while (someone using Sliver Queen maybe?) so I only hit you once with Rafiq (for something like 12) before my attention went elsewhere. This despite seeing that you were using GAAIV as your commander, a legend known for trying to make your opponents work harder to play their spells. And after seeing the deck in action, I'm not surprised you got the idea from SoManyTrolls. That guy loves his mana denial effects.
Essentially, your deck is made to attack the metagame. Commander and EDH are basically built around playing large haymakers that cost a bunch of mana. Therefore, no one holds their lands in hand, because you will usually need every bit of mana you can play every turn. As such, Commander decks are usually made in such a way that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to recover from a turn 10 Armageddon. At least you were kind enough to have a few threats out before you blew up the lands so that you could wipe things up quickly. Nothing sucks more than spending 50 minutes on a game before essentially having to completely start over.
Commander decks will always be vulnerable to land destruction. So do you make your deck resistant to Ravages of War, knowing that you will probably see it or some other form of mass land destruction only 1 game in 8 or so, if that? Or do you play to your big spells, which is essentially the draw of the format? Most people play to their big stuff, expecting that you will too. As such, they don't expect Armageddon, and as a result you will win most of your games. What will happen is that regular players will become aware of how you play though. But for the most part, you will rack up wins. Unless you start playing against people who know what to expect, and even then you will probably do all right.
I know that I don't really play to an opponent's Armageddon, and it usually shows in the decklists I post. Again, it's due to the rarity of playing against such cards. But Armageddon and Hokori are definitely cards you should worry about, especially when playing against GAAIV.
One last point. You mention that casual is often an excuse for bad. I don't really agree with this. I often find that casual means new players with limited cardpools. Or even experienced players with limited cardpools. Or people trying goofy, unusual stuff. Casual is a place where people think outside the box. Or course, some of this stuff is bad. But when I see a mono-black player play a spell I completely forgot about like Darkness, I feel a little happier inside knowing that I've learned something new. Even if Darkness isn't the best card ever.
I was just wondering. I see you online a lot, but I can only remember only seeing ever play like one or two games. I guess it's the timming of when we are on together.
If your ever up for a game of Commander, let me know and we can see about getting in together.
Sorry, I actually have had someone tell me they play with level whichever judge, sheldon m and that such and such is not in the spirit of the format. It was not you. They were not interested in discussing, they were raging about a 2-3 spell series that shut down their offense and swung the game back to a win for me.
I think, and I could be wrong, when Paul thought you were disrepecting me, he was refering to this statement:
"I've heard about how playing disruption is not in the spirit of the format from someone who "plays with Sheldon every night", how off-color Karoos (which I don't have, but probably should have) is not in the "spirit of the format because it should not allow us to include any off-commander mana symbols", and how I'm a jerk."
Most of the readers know I do play with Sheldon on occasions, not every night, so maybe that's where the link is. As far as off color Karoos, EDH rules specifically were designed not to have any cards with off mana mana symbols. The only reason they are legal in Commander is because it isn't possible to code it into current game. I personally don't have an issue with them. I don't remember calling anyone a jerk. I may of gave a situation where I think someone is acting like a jerk, but I don't think I named anyone specifically.
I understand that "my" ideal image of EDH and Commander is not everyone elses. I think we as players need to recognize that. I may not like the way Walkerdog plays, and he may not like the way I play, but we should respect each others views.
The format of EDH was designed with a specific vision. That doesn't mean however that everyone has to play by that vision. If Walker wants to play a more of a Spike form of EDH, then he is entitled to. Would I play like that? I could, but I don't like to. The part that brings us to a bad point is when we can't tell what kind of player we are going against in a pick up game. Unless someone specifically states something to the terms of "Social contract EDH" or "No mass LD or locks" then we are going into uncharted waters. In a way we should be expecting danger ahead even if we don't want it. The only way to avoid this to put a comment in the game we create (which not everyone follows) or freind ourselves with like minded players and only invite them to play with us.
As far as the casual playing of EDH being "stupid", well I would of probably picked a better way to say it, but the point is Walker doesn't like the way EDH was invisioned. Should there be competative EDH? The vision was not intended for it to be that way. Will there be competative EDH anyways? Probably. Do I like or want competative EDH? No.
If you pick away all the chafe, the article is just someone who has a different version of EDH then most.
This sort of perspective on magic speaks to anyone who has played for any length of time in any casual formats, and is even a great primer for new players that don't know the history and degeneracy of some of the cards and combos that are out there,
Also Jean-Luc Picard! nerdgasm heh. 2nd generation was by far my favorite of the formats.
pretty evil format, I really like these alternative formats that challenge you to think in new ways about magic, it's only too bad that we don't have some of the broken sets before INV to balance out the power creep that seems to have occurred since then in certain ways.
Pretty cool to see infect do so well with only one set of it out so far.
Really well done article in general as always, shows me how far I have to go from my skill at it so far.
For the record I know plenty of great spikes who are perfect specimens of humanity (as much as anyone can be perfect and still be alive and awake.) That said I also know plenty of Timmies and Johnnies who think nothing of disconnecting , shouting at opponents over perceived misplays etc. So don't take it into the psychographics realm. My comments about your article has nothing to do with your ability to win or how you play the game. Your tone in THIS article seemed to me to be disrespectful to casual players in general if unintentionally then perhaps because of your style of writing which tends to be a bit more moxy than clarity. (Moxy being both the compliment and hazard of having a bite.)
It's not criticism when you lump all of a group together. Instead just state instances and talk about those instances without biasing them for a clearer approach and you may even get some nodding bobble heads. (Mine included.)
I, myself, am a Hybrid (aka: abomination) of all the psychographics and where my Spikiness shows through is that I try to improve my plays by not making the same mistakes over and over. That said I know at least 3 spikes who have been to pro tours and still play like they are on their kitchen table and are watching TV while playing (even when they are fully located at a tourney.) So while sloppy play is bad play it isn't at all tied to even casual players.
Re: the Useless comments:
>>"I do get some rage while playing this deck. It beats up the 5C decks (most of the time) and the ramp decks while holding its own (and receiving less rage!) against the Zur-esque decks. I've heard about how playing disruption is not in the spirit of the format from someone who "plays with Sheldon every night", how off-color Karoos (which I don't have, but probably should have) is not in the "spirit of the format because it should not allow us to include any off-commander mana symbols", and how I'm a jerk."<<
This is where I got the reference to Lythand's articles. Since that is exactly his claim about playing with Menery though perhaps not every night afaik. Perhaps it is the unclearness of this paragraph that confuses me but it seems disrespectful as an allusion to Lythand. If not then I apologize for misreading it somehow.
Also for the record I don't feel victimized by your article. But I do think you could have done a far better job and I know you will in the future.
*shrugs* I can only tell you what I have experienced. Take from that what you will. It might be that because one player was defeated first and the other disconnected without quitting that we were in a weird situation where the client was too confused to operate properly (wouldn't be the first time.)
What a question! Rofl. Why would you assume that I would ever comment on a format I had not played in???...very odd and somewhat perplexing because I clearly have referenced several games and even talked to you about one of them. To answer your question, more than I care to remember and none pleasant enough to tell stories about. So far its been a stinking pile of "I QUIT!" or "COMBO-Infinity!!" or "SPOILER.DEC WRECKS J00!!" etc...I have had a few ok games so I do fib a little. Several games with AJ have been interesting, including our most recent one which I won playing a simple Ragnar deck. Also had a few interesting games with Leviathan. Nothing to write home (or here about).
I should have come up with a format, but I hate formatting EDH lists in general. Some graphic support was needed though.
Lythand's EDH articles are fine. He doesn't spend 1/4 of each time complaining about Land D/Discard/Whatever :) Also, his decks don't autolose to "play land for 10-15 turns, play an eldrazi or two, gg". They have a plan or interact with the enemy enough to not be auto-losses. His mindset is not the one I'm talking about.
I think you're overly sensitive. Tournament players are often (unfairly) ripped for "bad attitudes" or "winning at all costs", and while timmy and johnny, along with vorthos I guess, are looked at as nice kids, spike is the douchebag who should lay off the caffeine in a lot of peoples' minds. Why is it that being Spikey is bad, when being Timmy or Johnny or Vorthos is good?
Criticizing the lazy/"bad" (to me as a competitive person) parts of the casual mindset that has settled into MTGO isn't disrespectful, it's criticism. If your boss says, "Hey, you've had a bad week, let's try this and this to change it," or a co-worker suggests something to improve yourself, are they disrespectful for not remembering the big account you landed or big bug you fixed? No, they're looking to improve the workplace as a whole. That's why I understand when Scartore gives his complaints with the article, or you point out flaws, but when you're making up crap looking to play the victim (disrespect towards Lythand? really?), it goes beyond being useful, and approaches uselessness.
My main problem with your article was that you seemed to be looking down your nose at casual players in general and while I agree with some of your ideas I couldn't help but thinking how disrespectful it seemed. Particularly to Lythand and his series of EDH/Commander articles. I also was a little underwhelmed by the lack of graphics/formatting. I did read all the way through and had some not so nice things to say and then decided to hold off. Scartore really took the words out of my mouth though. Given your past articles I expect better from you.
I think you're right in your guess - unlike draft, where guys can get fooled into infect through chaff like Blackcleave Goblin or an unfocused Exoskeleton/Tainted Strike concoction, in sealed infect really has to be there for players to even consider it.
Obviously, you're going to try to play the Blight Dragon every time, but most infect decks I've seen in sealed either had the nut curve (multiple Stingers/Necropedes/Cystbearers plus Might) or the rares (Putrefax, Hand of the Praetors), and likely a little of both.
In my experience, very few people are running naked Putrefaxes, although I've seen some naked Tel-Jilad Fallen, Necropede and Ichor Myr. The Fallen and 'Pede are likely correct, too.
The mana-denial strats are fairly ignorable though. I've been hammered by the person who ran artifact mana, the person who had a swords for Hokori, or the person who (epic playyyyy), facing a huge board of my men, plus a ton of artifact mana, plus only one of his mana untatpped, used Commandeer (pitching), pyaing the one to dodge GAA4, and changed my... can't think of the card, but WW4: destroy all creatures or lands FROM creatures TO lands... I was toast after that!
I love these singleton articles as they have helped me refine certain aspects of my decks. However, these articles are about the only internet sources I have seen for 100 card singleton.
EDH seems to be very big, and I have found a lot of active forums for deck critique and ideas people suggest that I would have never thought of, but I have not found the same thing for singleton.
I have found DoTw, but I don't necessarily want to just copy a t8 deck. Are there any communities out there for 100 card?
Anything said with a little love is better percieved then bitterness. It's all on how you say it.
I was actually leaving spells for another article.
Can someone briefly recap how this week was a success?
9 packs opened for the price of 4 is nice. But considering you sold the money cards in order to enter the third draft, which was a bust, you basically spent close to $16 on a bunch of crap commons and uncommons that you could have just bought for way less than $5 from a bot.
And this is a good week?
Fun article, now I'm going to make a deck with every card you mentioned, because I'm like that.
Actually, the number one reason I get mad in commander is because I'm impatient, I'll admit to that. When it takes 10 minutes for my turn to come back around, and I have to spend every waking second clicking through triggers, I get cranky. But then, that's why I don't play commander XD. Don't get me wrong, I love the format and play paper EDH when I can, but the MTGO version just isn't for me.
Nice take on the subject. Basically a list of stuff that should be killed on sight. Funny that your article came out on the same day as Walkerdogs. Interesting that you only talked about permanents. What about spells?
You hit a whole lot of subjects in your article, but there are a few that I wanted to comment on.
I liked your threat assessment list. Who to go after first, Uril, Zur, etc. Many times I find that my assessment is constantly changing though. I know I have a hard time differentiating the short term threat from the long term one.
I know that I would have appreciated a list. You may find that entering 100 card lists is long (tell me something I don't know) but it is important to give players ideas and thoughts on new interactions. You do hit the highlights, which is nice, but you don't talk about how much artifact mana you have. Which is important when dealing with a deck that uses mass land destruction as one if its biggest weapons.
I played against you once recently, and I didn't think your deck was that horrible to play against. I remember that you tried to stay in the background and didn't seem too threatening until it was too late. If I recall right, there was someone else that seemed like a bigger threat for a while (someone using Sliver Queen maybe?) so I only hit you once with Rafiq (for something like 12) before my attention went elsewhere. This despite seeing that you were using GAAIV as your commander, a legend known for trying to make your opponents work harder to play their spells. And after seeing the deck in action, I'm not surprised you got the idea from SoManyTrolls. That guy loves his mana denial effects.
Essentially, your deck is made to attack the metagame. Commander and EDH are basically built around playing large haymakers that cost a bunch of mana. Therefore, no one holds their lands in hand, because you will usually need every bit of mana you can play every turn. As such, Commander decks are usually made in such a way that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to recover from a turn 10 Armageddon. At least you were kind enough to have a few threats out before you blew up the lands so that you could wipe things up quickly. Nothing sucks more than spending 50 minutes on a game before essentially having to completely start over.
Commander decks will always be vulnerable to land destruction. So do you make your deck resistant to Ravages of War, knowing that you will probably see it or some other form of mass land destruction only 1 game in 8 or so, if that? Or do you play to your big spells, which is essentially the draw of the format? Most people play to their big stuff, expecting that you will too. As such, they don't expect Armageddon, and as a result you will win most of your games. What will happen is that regular players will become aware of how you play though. But for the most part, you will rack up wins. Unless you start playing against people who know what to expect, and even then you will probably do all right.
I know that I don't really play to an opponent's Armageddon, and it usually shows in the decklists I post. Again, it's due to the rarity of playing against such cards. But Armageddon and Hokori are definitely cards you should worry about, especially when playing against GAAIV.
One last point. You mention that casual is often an excuse for bad. I don't really agree with this. I often find that casual means new players with limited cardpools. Or even experienced players with limited cardpools. Or people trying goofy, unusual stuff. Casual is a place where people think outside the box. Or course, some of this stuff is bad. But when I see a mono-black player play a spell I completely forgot about like Darkness, I feel a little happier inside knowing that I've learned something new. Even if Darkness isn't the best card ever.
I was just wondering. I see you online a lot, but I can only remember only seeing ever play like one or two games. I guess it's the timming of when we are on together.
If your ever up for a game of Commander, let me know and we can see about getting in together.
Maybe even a few other Pure players.
Sorry, I actually have had someone tell me they play with level whichever judge, sheldon m and that such and such is not in the spirit of the format. It was not you. They were not interested in discussing, they were raging about a 2-3 spell series that shut down their offense and swung the game back to a win for me.
You did a better job approaching the "not getting mad" aspect than I did. Paul seems dedicated to trolling the EDH today though.
I think, and I could be wrong, when Paul thought you were disrepecting me, he was refering to this statement:
"I've heard about how playing disruption is not in the spirit of the format from someone who "plays with Sheldon every night", how off-color Karoos (which I don't have, but probably should have) is not in the "spirit of the format because it should not allow us to include any off-commander mana symbols", and how I'm a jerk."
Most of the readers know I do play with Sheldon on occasions, not every night, so maybe that's where the link is. As far as off color Karoos, EDH rules specifically were designed not to have any cards with off mana mana symbols. The only reason they are legal in Commander is because it isn't possible to code it into current game. I personally don't have an issue with them. I don't remember calling anyone a jerk. I may of gave a situation where I think someone is acting like a jerk, but I don't think I named anyone specifically.
I understand that "my" ideal image of EDH and Commander is not everyone elses. I think we as players need to recognize that. I may not like the way Walkerdog plays, and he may not like the way I play, but we should respect each others views.
The format of EDH was designed with a specific vision. That doesn't mean however that everyone has to play by that vision. If Walker wants to play a more of a Spike form of EDH, then he is entitled to. Would I play like that? I could, but I don't like to. The part that brings us to a bad point is when we can't tell what kind of player we are going against in a pick up game. Unless someone specifically states something to the terms of "Social contract EDH" or "No mass LD or locks" then we are going into uncharted waters. In a way we should be expecting danger ahead even if we don't want it. The only way to avoid this to put a comment in the game we create (which not everyone follows) or freind ourselves with like minded players and only invite them to play with us.
As far as the casual playing of EDH being "stupid", well I would of probably picked a better way to say it, but the point is Walker doesn't like the way EDH was invisioned. Should there be competative EDH? The vision was not intended for it to be that way. Will there be competative EDH anyways? Probably. Do I like or want competative EDH? No.
If you pick away all the chafe, the article is just someone who has a different version of EDH then most.
No disrespect taken.
Great article Lythand,
This sort of perspective on magic speaks to anyone who has played for any length of time in any casual formats, and is even a great primer for new players that don't know the history and degeneracy of some of the cards and combos that are out there,
Also Jean-Luc Picard! nerdgasm heh. 2nd generation was by far my favorite of the formats.
X-
Our-Lord-Erman,
pretty evil format, I really like these alternative formats that challenge you to think in new ways about magic, it's only too bad that we don't have some of the broken sets before INV to balance out the power creep that seems to have occurred since then in certain ways.
Pretty cool to see infect do so well with only one set of it out so far.
Really well done article in general as always, shows me how far I have to go from my skill at it so far.
X-
For the record I know plenty of great spikes who are perfect specimens of humanity (as much as anyone can be perfect and still be alive and awake.) That said I also know plenty of Timmies and Johnnies who think nothing of disconnecting , shouting at opponents over perceived misplays etc. So don't take it into the psychographics realm. My comments about your article has nothing to do with your ability to win or how you play the game. Your tone in THIS article seemed to me to be disrespectful to casual players in general if unintentionally then perhaps because of your style of writing which tends to be a bit more moxy than clarity. (Moxy being both the compliment and hazard of having a bite.)
It's not criticism when you lump all of a group together. Instead just state instances and talk about those instances without biasing them for a clearer approach and you may even get some nodding bobble heads. (Mine included.)
I, myself, am a Hybrid (aka: abomination) of all the psychographics and where my Spikiness shows through is that I try to improve my plays by not making the same mistakes over and over. That said I know at least 3 spikes who have been to pro tours and still play like they are on their kitchen table and are watching TV while playing (even when they are fully located at a tourney.) So while sloppy play is bad play it isn't at all tied to even casual players.
Re: the Useless comments:
>>"I do get some rage while playing this deck. It beats up the 5C decks (most of the time) and the ramp decks while holding its own (and receiving less rage!) against the Zur-esque decks. I've heard about how playing disruption is not in the spirit of the format from someone who "plays with Sheldon every night", how off-color Karoos (which I don't have, but probably should have) is not in the "spirit of the format because it should not allow us to include any off-commander mana symbols", and how I'm a jerk."<<
This is where I got the reference to Lythand's articles. Since that is exactly his claim about playing with Menery though perhaps not every night afaik. Perhaps it is the unclearness of this paragraph that confuses me but it seems disrespectful as an allusion to Lythand. If not then I apologize for misreading it somehow.
Also for the record I don't feel victimized by your article. But I do think you could have done a far better job and I know you will in the future.
*shrugs* I can only tell you what I have experienced. Take from that what you will. It might be that because one player was defeated first and the other disconnected without quitting that we were in a weird situation where the client was too confused to operate properly (wouldn't be the first time.)
What a question! Rofl. Why would you assume that I would ever comment on a format I had not played in???...very odd and somewhat perplexing because I clearly have referenced several games and even talked to you about one of them. To answer your question, more than I care to remember and none pleasant enough to tell stories about. So far its been a stinking pile of "I QUIT!" or "COMBO-Infinity!!" or "SPOILER.DEC WRECKS J00!!" etc...I have had a few ok games so I do fib a little. Several games with AJ have been interesting, including our most recent one which I won playing a simple Ragnar deck. Also had a few interesting games with Leviathan. Nothing to write home (or here about).
Put lightning greaves on him and use near death experience.... still sucks.
Yea I haven't had any issues either. We had to eject a player the other day because his Combo was bugged and he just disconnected.
Just wondering, have you played any games Paul?
I should have come up with a format, but I hate formatting EDH lists in general. Some graphic support was needed though.
Lythand's EDH articles are fine. He doesn't spend 1/4 of each time complaining about Land D/Discard/Whatever :) Also, his decks don't autolose to "play land for 10-15 turns, play an eldrazi or two, gg". They have a plan or interact with the enemy enough to not be auto-losses. His mindset is not the one I'm talking about.
I think you're overly sensitive. Tournament players are often (unfairly) ripped for "bad attitudes" or "winning at all costs", and while timmy and johnny, along with vorthos I guess, are looked at as nice kids, spike is the douchebag who should lay off the caffeine in a lot of peoples' minds. Why is it that being Spikey is bad, when being Timmy or Johnny or Vorthos is good?
Criticizing the lazy/"bad" (to me as a competitive person) parts of the casual mindset that has settled into MTGO isn't disrespectful, it's criticism. If your boss says, "Hey, you've had a bad week, let's try this and this to change it," or a co-worker suggests something to improve yourself, are they disrespectful for not remembering the big account you landed or big bug you fixed? No, they're looking to improve the workplace as a whole. That's why I understand when Scartore gives his complaints with the article, or you point out flaws, but when you're making up crap looking to play the victim (disrespect towards Lythand? really?), it goes beyond being useful, and approaches uselessness.
Catastrophe
My main problem with your article was that you seemed to be looking down your nose at casual players in general and while I agree with some of your ideas I couldn't help but thinking how disrespectful it seemed. Particularly to Lythand and his series of EDH/Commander articles. I also was a little underwhelmed by the lack of graphics/formatting. I did read all the way through and had some not so nice things to say and then decided to hold off. Scartore really took the words out of my mouth though. Given your past articles I expect better from you.
I think you're right in your guess - unlike draft, where guys can get fooled into infect through chaff like Blackcleave Goblin or an unfocused Exoskeleton/Tainted Strike concoction, in sealed infect really has to be there for players to even consider it.
Obviously, you're going to try to play the Blight Dragon every time, but most infect decks I've seen in sealed either had the nut curve (multiple Stingers/Necropedes/Cystbearers plus Might) or the rares (Putrefax, Hand of the Praetors), and likely a little of both.
In my experience, very few people are running naked Putrefaxes, although I've seen some naked Tel-Jilad Fallen, Necropede and Ichor Myr. The Fallen and 'Pede are likely correct, too.
The mana-denial strats are fairly ignorable though. I've been hammered by the person who ran artifact mana, the person who had a swords for Hokori, or the person who (epic playyyyy), facing a huge board of my men, plus a ton of artifact mana, plus only one of his mana untatpped, used Commandeer (pitching), pyaing the one to dodge GAA4, and changed my... can't think of the card, but WW4: destroy all creatures or lands FROM creatures TO lands... I was toast after that!
Whoops, my reply below was supposed to be in reply to this and the snarkier (which I thought was just more passionate) reply! Sorry.