I agree entirely, hence my earlier 'I'd set a minimum of 3 genuine tribe members per brink of extinction tribe, as any fewer and you're just building changeling.dek with this week's special guest star.'
Themes are strictly voluntary. This week for instance I went 1-2 only beating a fellow theme player. I brought a horrible (no pun intended) horror deck with the underworld dreams/burning inquiry/molten psyche combo but it was just slaughtered by sub par draws and aggro opponents including a first round "goblins yet again" deck. My other loss by the way was to a fairly bad mostly commons deck lol. So just to show how bad the horrors deck was. Changelings would not have made a difference at all in that deck. Not even a little bit.
yeah I understand, I'm just saying from the PoV for a theme week that using a tribe of 1-2 members turns your deck into changeling tribal which doesn't really fit the theme
'Really good' doesn't really apply to Changelings. You have the three main legitimate threats, namely Chameleon Collossus, Taurean Mauler and Mirror Entity. The former requires a heavy green commitment and the latter requires a large force of cheap creatures. The other two rare changelings need a lot of work to be effective, either in providing a copy target for Shapesharer or filling the graveyard with interesting abilities for Cairn Wanderer. You then have the three 'Champions', namely Changeling Titan, Changeling Berserker and Changeling Hero, which need a substantial board presence lest they be a recipe for getting two-for-onned. Beyond that, the remaining changelings are pretty much below par for their color and price. (Let's not forget Mistform Ultimus, if you're running blue and want a legendary hill giant.)
what I'm referring to is this.. if you have an event where the idea is to run really small tribes and don't limit it to a minimum of five non-changeling creatures then people can run the really good changelings in a crappy tribe and dominate those who don't do the same
I love looking at that Jace chart and knowing that I bought my Jaces at that low point of 25 or 27ish during release. All the pros and speculators were talking about him and worldwake being a set that would be opened less than most etc etc and so I just watched his price momentum closely and scooped a playset when I thought he had bottomed out.
This almost takes away the bitterness of the new extended format being announce while I was on vacation this summer. I got into ptqing seriously last extended season when they started holding events online and had to buy a lot of tournament staples in the forms of pain-duels/tarmogoyfs and whatnot. It seemed like an okay investment because I assumed I would be using them for at least a couple of years. Nope! My collection's overall value took a huge hit.
If Jace actually soars during the next standard season like some say he might, I will sell mine. A card at that kind of value is so fragile. All it takes is a shake-up to the meta or some answer being printed and he will plummet.
Interesting stuff. =) You're probably right in that no *one* demographic is to blame for that kind of mindset, but of the three base demographics, I figured Timmy fit best. =)
That'll be funny. It was interesting to see that in Aaron Forsythe's deck (you posted in a previous article) had Armageddon effects. =/ Seems like the lines are always blurry.
Two suggestions. 1) you can use some kind of small icon to give the cards ratings of annoyance, like with movies that have star ratings. 2) Try to formulate some general categories of things that are frowned upon, that way Commander players will have the tools to assess cards not discussed.
Personally, I never saw the difference between Hindering a creature or immediately Condemning it, but for some reason the latter is more acceptable. Just seems hypocritical.
I already submitted my next article (Numot based on a comment by Flippers_Giraffe) but I am going to be preparing another article going over cards people hate. I'm going to try not to pass personal judgment on stuff, but it will be hard not to do so.
As a quasi Timmy I object to placing the blame on our demographic. It is the players who don't know where they stand that come up with the weird double standards.
I really don't mind playing by a social contract, but when people start complaining about things as relatively tame as a non-general Teferi, it makes me MORE inclined to just say screw it and go for a full mono blue control counter suite. If you're gonna get tarred and feathered ya might as well make it worth it. ;)
Glad you liked it Xao. I was looking for something different. I recently read an article by Ted Knutson were he interviewed Mark Rosewater. Mark talkes about how he would like to see more writers include more about thier life and go outside the box of normal journalism. I am trying to go outside the box here.
I like the Holiday theme, especially since you executed the article really well.
Also the non-mtg background with the nzambi tribe is uncharacteristic of Puremtgo articles, and something that should appear more often (non-mtg edukational material), great job splicing the encyclopedia strain into what is usually just digital cardboard expultations.
I disagree. I find it's really easy in Esper control colours to tutor up an Ichor Rats and then a Contagion Engine and proliferate away! You could even get into Tezzeret nonsense and use artifact mana to abuse Engine more than once per turn. By choosing this route, it's possible that people would never suspect it until it's too late. Also, by relying on tutors for your poison silver bullets, you free up the rest of your deck to function as a control deck should. =) That's all speculation, of course, but that's the kind of win condition I was thinking of for control.
At its greatest extreme, 59 cards in your deck being changelings, lands or support cards. You can switch out the last card to make it whatever tribe you like, but most games you'll just be playing changeling.dek.
thanks for the videos, i only just found them. you put my skills to shame :P
-Sarah "jump higher" Phillips
I agree entirely, hence my earlier 'I'd set a minimum of 3 genuine tribe members per brink of extinction tribe, as any fewer and you're just building changeling.dek with this week's special guest star.'
Themes are strictly voluntary. This week for instance I went 1-2 only beating a fellow theme player. I brought a horrible (no pun intended) horror deck with the underworld dreams/burning inquiry/molten psyche combo but it was just slaughtered by sub par draws and aggro opponents including a first round "goblins yet again" deck. My other loss by the way was to a fairly bad mostly commons deck lol. So just to show how bad the horrors deck was. Changelings would not have made a difference at all in that deck. Not even a little bit.
yeah I understand, I'm just saying from the PoV for a theme week that using a tribe of 1-2 members turns your deck into changeling tribal which doesn't really fit the theme
'Really good' doesn't really apply to Changelings. You have the three main legitimate threats, namely Chameleon Collossus, Taurean Mauler and Mirror Entity. The former requires a heavy green commitment and the latter requires a large force of cheap creatures. The other two rare changelings need a lot of work to be effective, either in providing a copy target for Shapesharer or filling the graveyard with interesting abilities for Cairn Wanderer. You then have the three 'Champions', namely Changeling Titan, Changeling Berserker and Changeling Hero, which need a substantial board presence lest they be a recipe for getting two-for-onned. Beyond that, the remaining changelings are pretty much below par for their color and price. (Let's not forget Mistform Ultimus, if you're running blue and want a legendary hill giant.)
what I'm referring to is this.. if you have an event where the idea is to run really small tribes and don't limit it to a minimum of five non-changeling creatures then people can run the really good changelings in a crappy tribe and dominate those who don't do the same
I love looking at that Jace chart and knowing that I bought my Jaces at that low point of 25 or 27ish during release. All the pros and speculators were talking about him and worldwake being a set that would be opened less than most etc etc and so I just watched his price momentum closely and scooped a playset when I thought he had bottomed out.
This almost takes away the bitterness of the new extended format being announce while I was on vacation this summer. I got into ptqing seriously last extended season when they started holding events online and had to buy a lot of tournament staples in the forms of pain-duels/tarmogoyfs and whatnot. It seemed like an okay investment because I assumed I would be using them for at least a couple of years. Nope! My collection's overall value took a huge hit.
If Jace actually soars during the next standard season like some say he might, I will sell mine. A card at that kind of value is so fragile. All it takes is a shake-up to the meta or some answer being printed and he will plummet.
=) Interesting additions to the types. I think it really just shows how diverse some of the reasons are for people involved in this game.
Hey spam filter fuck you. stupid feature is blocking me from extending my reply.
http://puremtgo.com/articles/magic-archetypes-evolution-magic-persona yes I think I am familiar with the different types. :D
heh heh I too am quasi-Timmy, but I can't see a Spike or a Johnny objecting to Teferi as denial.
Also, I think you're forgetting that there are different types of Timmys, not just one. Have you read this:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr258
Interesting stuff. =) You're probably right in that no *one* demographic is to blame for that kind of mindset, but of the three base demographics, I figured Timmy fit best. =)
That'll be funny. It was interesting to see that in Aaron Forsythe's deck (you posted in a previous article) had Armageddon effects. =/ Seems like the lines are always blurry.
Two suggestions. 1) you can use some kind of small icon to give the cards ratings of annoyance, like with movies that have star ratings. 2) Try to formulate some general categories of things that are frowned upon, that way Commander players will have the tools to assess cards not discussed.
Personally, I never saw the difference between Hindering a creature or immediately Condemning it, but for some reason the latter is more acceptable. Just seems hypocritical.
Why not? the point of punditry is to give your opinion.
I already submitted my next article (Numot based on a comment by Flippers_Giraffe) but I am going to be preparing another article going over cards people hate. I'm going to try not to pass personal judgment on stuff, but it will be hard not to do so.
As a quasi Timmy I object to placing the blame on our demographic. It is the players who don't know where they stand that come up with the weird double standards.
Sweet, so it wasn't just my perception. =)
I really don't mind playing by a social contract, but when people start complaining about things as relatively tame as a non-general Teferi, it makes me MORE inclined to just say screw it and go for a full mono blue control counter suite. If you're gonna get tarred and feathered ya might as well make it worth it. ;)
I was in that game too and I remember that he had pretty dubious viewpoint about what "denial" is, so don't scratch your head too hard. :)
Glad you liked it Xao. I was looking for something different. I recently read an article by Ted Knutson were he interviewed Mark Rosewater. Mark talkes about how he would like to see more writers include more about thier life and go outside the box of normal journalism. I am trying to go outside the box here.
I like the Holiday theme, especially since you executed the article really well.
Also the non-mtg background with the nzambi tribe is uncharacteristic of Puremtgo articles, and something that should appear more often (non-mtg edukational material), great job splicing the encyclopedia strain into what is usually just digital cardboard expultations.
X-
That's true :) But going 4-0 anyway is always nice. Also I sold the Koth for 34 tix as it was in the first day of releases!
Yeah, I'm not enamoured of the term, but I comprehend the concept Just is trying to describe.
Just to have the list I would love a copy of it.
I disagree. I find it's really easy in Esper control colours to tutor up an Ichor Rats and then a Contagion Engine and proliferate away! You could even get into Tezzeret nonsense and use artifact mana to abuse Engine more than once per turn. By choosing this route, it's possible that people would never suspect it until it's too late. Also, by relying on tutors for your poison silver bullets, you free up the rest of your deck to function as a control deck should. =) That's all speculation, of course, but that's the kind of win condition I was thinking of for control.
Not sure I agree with the term "corruption". There is no such thing as a pure tribal deck so corruption seems a misuse (or abuse) of the language.
At its greatest extreme, 59 cards in your deck being changelings, lands or support cards. You can switch out the last card to make it whatever tribe you like, but most games you'll just be playing changeling.dek.