Interesting take on inflation and speculation. My own feeling is that Online cards tend to be overpriced in general if they are even remotely playable. There are alot of $2-10 cards imho that should be junk rares or perhaps 2 for 1 ticket. But because at some point in the distant past (Shadowmoor/Eventide: I am looking at your rares) these cards were somewhat (barely) played in a relevant tourney format they have not deflated. And they won't because low demand means no need to lower the price (ironically so. and this is because people fear a sudden surge in price that speculation on new decks can cause and thus won't deflate prices on unused cards that once were hot.) Plus many are "fun" cards usable mainly in niche formats so there is always some small smattering of buying going on.
As far as FOW/Duals etc, I consider their prices to be outrageous. Not because they are unfair (the fact is there is no such thing as an "unfair" price) but because they were NEVER affordable to me and other players like me. (Well that isn't entirely true, I got lucky in ME3 and cracked a Dual. But because it was the lone one, after several months I sold it so as to be able to afford a dozen cheaper cards which actually see play in my decks.)
Outrageous in the sense that when I think about them I know I will NEVER be able to gain entry to competitive Legacy or Classic tourneys (Not that Id want to, mind you...) and will always be severely disadvantaged in all eternal formats online. It kills me that I had something like 13 (after trading away tons) FOWs offline and they were worth maybe a buck back in the day. 13 FOWS online would finance a whole play set of everything else.
That shows exactly what has to have been demonstrated.
High price & speculation are everywhere and ever existed in the world of mtg since the beginning. It is logical to find this phenomen online and it even seems that the price inflation didnt reach eternal format that much before legacy was launched (read : http://puremtgo.com/articles/state-program-december-18th-2009 - the price of badlands was around 17 vs 34 today, savannah was around 13 vs 29 today whereas Legacy was already announced ...). As in every case where rarity is important,the moment to buy is very important, and when you dont follow it, it could be very frustating. Yes sometimes there were 'unexecptable' or 'flash' hype on cards (depth when hexmage was released, natural order when progenitus was released ...), but that was not the case for most of Legacy staples, all these value were expectable, and to buy theses cards instead of some extend/std staples was a choice (every player had the choice to buy his dual for an average 15 instead of his baneslayer for 35 ...).
Today, FoW price can be scary : 130 tix is a huge amount for 1 card. But that is the most expensive card of the entire card pool and this article shows very well that the most part of cards are following a completly inverse statement vs paper version. There are a so large quantity of different deck build in legacy (more than in any other format) that this card is not an absolut requirement to enter in the format.
All in all, to play legacy online is currently has a much better value for money rate than its paper version.
A proof ? sell your paper playsets of juzam, moat & tabernacle, then buy them online but with a playset of Fow + a playset of each dual and complete then your collection with many other staples ... All is a choice question.
First of all Kai welcome to Pure and excellent first article (that I've seen here anyway)! I am going to address your points as a list because even though you didn't number them, they do easily fit such.
1. I can't tell you how often I have told an opponent this (post match, after I questioned a weird/bad play/combo). Some people just don't get it. But it is really very true. Focus on the task at hand and don't multitask. Even if you are good enough. 100% agree.
2. I hate this one. I feel like it is being allowed to scout games irl, which when I played semi competitively was still very much not allowed. It happened but it also had an element of shadiness. Akin to trying to catch what cards your op is running as they shuffled. That said, since it is legit and encouraged, it makes perfect sense to do it. Not exactly nice to make your op wait but hey whatever it takes right? That said a key point of this you missed is note taking. You see something noteworthy, definitely write it down. This goes for when deciding how to sideboard. You should have some notes on their deck while you are playing. 65% agree.
3. This is a hard one to master. In limited you only have a tiny amount of time to adjust to each build and if you do enough drafts/sealeds in a row they can blend together real quick. One thing that works is to save your build and then load it in your editor. Then if you forget something you can check with a click. In constructed this is easier to master because you play the deck until it is committed to memory. Even so, if you did some last minute tweaks you should definitely load the deck in the editor. 100% agree.
4. Mastering the Mulligan goes hand in hand with knowing your deck and knowing your opponent's decks. What is a perfect keep against one deck may be trash against another. Some decks it doesn't even matter what you drew in particular as long as you have stable mana and something to play. Others as you say you might need that Fallout or Extirpate etc, to have a chance. 110% agree. :)
5. F6 is important. There is a reason people use it. But as you said if you are untapped and your op doesn't know what you have you can bluff removal/tricks or counters, even if you are holding two swamps and a forest.
On the other hand, online your time is important and managing it correctly is important. Knowing when to F6/F4 and when to F2 instead is definitely a skill. (and is part of #2-3). Also if you know you are prone to slip into Auto Pilot mode while hovering over the F6 button, don't hover. Make the decision to F6 or not consciously each time. 80% agree.
6. I've never had this situation. In real life the pros I knew (a lot from Neutral Ground, etc) were very reticent with giving advice (because who wants a pro telling their opponent how to play in a friendly match?). On modo, I have occasionally been the voice of reason in the background, not once the pilot. I am guessing this is common sense though. If you don't learn for yourself why some things are good/not good and situationally which play is the correct/incorrect one, no one can give that to you. Learning is almost always about experiencing at some point. But taking advice after questioning it isn't bad assuming you learn from it. (See? I told you to hold that Consume Strength to kill his battlemage in response to his attack, rather than do it on your turn and waste the surprise.) 100% agree.
7. Combat tricks are a sub game in them selves. Learning how to read them is important. Placing that Giant Growth in your opponent's hand is a skill. Heck I used to wonder how pros figured out my hand when I had no idea what was in theirs. It took me forever to ken to the tell of the board. On the other hand you are correct. Definitely knowing the information isn't enough if you don't properly perceive the best use for it. 90% agree.
8. Seeing the Alpha Strike is tricky when the board appears stalled. Also knowing what your opponent can do about it is equally tricky. If you finally top deck that Naya Charm and on your opponent's turn use it to tap their guys out during combat, you still may not be able to safely alpha attack fully if they are holding cards and have open mana. A fog or other trick that negates your own attack can set you up for nasty stuff later. As much as I hate fogs, creature stalled boards are definitely where they can shine. (To prevent your opponent from destabilizing them, or to reverse the effects of an alpha strike in their own favor.) 90% agree.
9. It is a failing of mine that I do go on tilt for at least a second or two after a really bad play or insanely good play on my opponent's part. Particularly when it swings the direction of the game totally around. That said I try to store my negative thoughts (Not an easy task) until later when nothing is on the line, and then let loose. Such a hard thing to do and I am 44.9. Some people just have trouble with this. Others however only play better after setbacks. I have tried to emulate those people with limited success. 100% agree.
By the way I totally get your opening statements about being in contention but never quite succeeding. Although it sounds like you have a lot more talent than I did when I was in full swing. I never quite got the PTQ level play down. There was always something holding me back. Perhaps if I knew then what I know now (when I have 0 interest in competitive play) I might have done better. Good luck with your endeavors online and off. Sounds like you have the potential.
I just botted (sold to bots) some extra karakas at 4.25 each, so that 3.00 price tag is out of date, not quite as ridic, but still a high ratio.
Also of note, Daze is common offline, but online was only available through a special starter deck set (jace vs chandra). Vampiric Tutor has had two printings plus a judge promo offline, whereas online it's only is the rare visions set.
Skred is better in the abstract because it scales and is an instant.
However, if creatures continue to be pushed and we see larger creatures on the early turns, Flame Slash might see play.
Example: Flame Slash can kill a Putrid Leech on turn 2. Skred cannot.
Yeah, watching eternal formats duke it out with the most powerful combos in the game is always fun. It also lets me learn a bit more of non-Pauper stuff bit by bit. I likely won't make a real attempt into non-pauper formats just because I don't want to spend more than $50 on a competitive deck (I'm a rogue Spike), but it still lets me pick up lessons.
All the time I had to write comments was consumed working out how to register. I'm really bad at those capcha things, always takes me about 10 goes. And I always left my name on my anonymous comments anyway. And have you noticed the volume of comments is way down?
I'm not much interested in the deck, as Alex says the power of husk was neutered when they took damage off the stack. As far as the article itself, well I think it stands as an example of good practice to anyone writing about magic. I used to think Alex came over a bit arrogant, but now he has grown into one of the most influential and interesting writers around. Good job.
glad to see you cared so much about this article as to completely ignore anything he had to say in order to start a discussion on something completely irrelevant...
That being said, I'm not a big pauper player, but it's good to see that someone has their eye to the future with BR because I always thought with Blightning being a common it should be a much stronger color choice for pauper
Especially for Mythics... which is partly to do with the first thing I mentioned... there's no penalty for buying and holding (nor should there be, IMHO)
In November of 2009 it was under 5 tickets and it climbed pretty steadily to 7.50 at which point the speculators got involved and it went a little crazy. In about two weeks it doubled up to 14.50. It's been slowly inching down since then.
The moral of the story is prices go up very quickly but down a lot slower.
I see in previous articles you've interviewed and have some contacts in the MTGO world that hold some clout.
Something i've brought up but haven't received a response from Wizards, is that why on earth when you have two queues such as;
4/3/2/2 12 tickets UZUZUZ
4/3/2/2 3 pax nix UZUZUZ
-They don't dump into the same pool for drafts to fire. Seems like this would be a simple programming fix. And for stuff like Tempest Exodus Stronghold would have helped many more drafts to fire (i.e. more $$$ for Wizards)
Interesting take on inflation and speculation. My own feeling is that Online cards tend to be overpriced in general if they are even remotely playable. There are alot of $2-10 cards imho that should be junk rares or perhaps 2 for 1 ticket. But because at some point in the distant past (Shadowmoor/Eventide: I am looking at your rares) these cards were somewhat (barely) played in a relevant tourney format they have not deflated. And they won't because low demand means no need to lower the price (ironically so. and this is because people fear a sudden surge in price that speculation on new decks can cause and thus won't deflate prices on unused cards that once were hot.) Plus many are "fun" cards usable mainly in niche formats so there is always some small smattering of buying going on.
As far as FOW/Duals etc, I consider their prices to be outrageous. Not because they are unfair (the fact is there is no such thing as an "unfair" price) but because they were NEVER affordable to me and other players like me. (Well that isn't entirely true, I got lucky in ME3 and cracked a Dual. But because it was the lone one, after several months I sold it so as to be able to afford a dozen cheaper cards which actually see play in my decks.)
Outrageous in the sense that when I think about them I know I will NEVER be able to gain entry to competitive Legacy or Classic tourneys (Not that Id want to, mind you...) and will always be severely disadvantaged in all eternal formats online. It kills me that I had something like 13 (after trading away tons) FOWs offline and they were worth maybe a buck back in the day. 13 FOWS online would finance a whole play set of everything else.
Great article Danger.
That shows exactly what has to have been demonstrated.
High price & speculation are everywhere and ever existed in the world of mtg since the beginning. It is logical to find this phenomen online and it even seems that the price inflation didnt reach eternal format that much before legacy was launched (read : http://puremtgo.com/articles/state-program-december-18th-2009 - the price of badlands was around 17 vs 34 today, savannah was around 13 vs 29 today whereas Legacy was already announced ...). As in every case where rarity is important,the moment to buy is very important, and when you dont follow it, it could be very frustating. Yes sometimes there were 'unexecptable' or 'flash' hype on cards (depth when hexmage was released, natural order when progenitus was released ...), but that was not the case for most of Legacy staples, all these value were expectable, and to buy theses cards instead of some extend/std staples was a choice (every player had the choice to buy his dual for an average 15 instead of his baneslayer for 35 ...).
Today, FoW price can be scary : 130 tix is a huge amount for 1 card. But that is the most expensive card of the entire card pool and this article shows very well that the most part of cards are following a completly inverse statement vs paper version. There are a so large quantity of different deck build in legacy (more than in any other format) that this card is not an absolut requirement to enter in the format.
All in all, to play legacy online is currently has a much better value for money rate than its paper version.
A proof ? sell your paper playsets of juzam, moat & tabernacle, then buy them online but with a playset of Fow + a playset of each dual and complete then your collection with many other staples ... All is a choice question.
First of all Kai welcome to Pure and excellent first article (that I've seen here anyway)! I am going to address your points as a list because even though you didn't number them, they do easily fit such.
1. I can't tell you how often I have told an opponent this (post match, after I questioned a weird/bad play/combo). Some people just don't get it. But it is really very true. Focus on the task at hand and don't multitask. Even if you are good enough. 100% agree.
2. I hate this one. I feel like it is being allowed to scout games irl, which when I played semi competitively was still very much not allowed. It happened but it also had an element of shadiness. Akin to trying to catch what cards your op is running as they shuffled. That said, since it is legit and encouraged, it makes perfect sense to do it. Not exactly nice to make your op wait but hey whatever it takes right? That said a key point of this you missed is note taking. You see something noteworthy, definitely write it down. This goes for when deciding how to sideboard. You should have some notes on their deck while you are playing. 65% agree.
3. This is a hard one to master. In limited you only have a tiny amount of time to adjust to each build and if you do enough drafts/sealeds in a row they can blend together real quick. One thing that works is to save your build and then load it in your editor. Then if you forget something you can check with a click. In constructed this is easier to master because you play the deck until it is committed to memory. Even so, if you did some last minute tweaks you should definitely load the deck in the editor. 100% agree.
4. Mastering the Mulligan goes hand in hand with knowing your deck and knowing your opponent's decks. What is a perfect keep against one deck may be trash against another. Some decks it doesn't even matter what you drew in particular as long as you have stable mana and something to play. Others as you say you might need that Fallout or Extirpate etc, to have a chance. 110% agree. :)
5. F6 is important. There is a reason people use it. But as you said if you are untapped and your op doesn't know what you have you can bluff removal/tricks or counters, even if you are holding two swamps and a forest.
On the other hand, online your time is important and managing it correctly is important. Knowing when to F6/F4 and when to F2 instead is definitely a skill. (and is part of #2-3). Also if you know you are prone to slip into Auto Pilot mode while hovering over the F6 button, don't hover. Make the decision to F6 or not consciously each time. 80% agree.
6. I've never had this situation. In real life the pros I knew (a lot from Neutral Ground, etc) were very reticent with giving advice (because who wants a pro telling their opponent how to play in a friendly match?). On modo, I have occasionally been the voice of reason in the background, not once the pilot. I am guessing this is common sense though. If you don't learn for yourself why some things are good/not good and situationally which play is the correct/incorrect one, no one can give that to you. Learning is almost always about experiencing at some point. But taking advice after questioning it isn't bad assuming you learn from it. (See? I told you to hold that Consume Strength to kill his battlemage in response to his attack, rather than do it on your turn and waste the surprise.) 100% agree.
7. Combat tricks are a sub game in them selves. Learning how to read them is important. Placing that Giant Growth in your opponent's hand is a skill. Heck I used to wonder how pros figured out my hand when I had no idea what was in theirs. It took me forever to ken to the tell of the board. On the other hand you are correct. Definitely knowing the information isn't enough if you don't properly perceive the best use for it. 90% agree.
8. Seeing the Alpha Strike is tricky when the board appears stalled. Also knowing what your opponent can do about it is equally tricky. If you finally top deck that Naya Charm and on your opponent's turn use it to tap their guys out during combat, you still may not be able to safely alpha attack fully if they are holding cards and have open mana. A fog or other trick that negates your own attack can set you up for nasty stuff later. As much as I hate fogs, creature stalled boards are definitely where they can shine. (To prevent your opponent from destabilizing them, or to reverse the effects of an alpha strike in their own favor.) 90% agree.
9. It is a failing of mine that I do go on tilt for at least a second or two after a really bad play or insanely good play on my opponent's part. Particularly when it swings the direction of the game totally around. That said I try to store my negative thoughts (Not an easy task) until later when nothing is on the line, and then let loose. Such a hard thing to do and I am 44.9. Some people just have trouble with this. Others however only play better after setbacks. I have tried to emulate those people with limited success. 100% agree.
By the way I totally get your opening statements about being in contention but never quite succeeding. Although it sounds like you have a lot more talent than I did when I was in full swing. I never quite got the PTQ level play down. There was always something holding me back. Perhaps if I knew then what I know now (when I have 0 interest in competitive play) I might have done better. Good luck with your endeavors online and off. Sounds like you have the potential.
I just botted (sold to bots) some extra karakas at 4.25 each, so that 3.00 price tag is out of date, not quite as ridic, but still a high ratio.
Also of note, Daze is common offline, but online was only available through a special starter deck set (jace vs chandra). Vampiric Tutor has had two printings plus a judge promo offline, whereas online it's only is the rare visions set.
wonder how long until the speculation buying begins on the cards you've listed
Double post, sorry
Skred is better in the abstract because it scales and is an instant.
However, if creatures continue to be pushed and we see larger creatures on the early turns, Flame Slash might see play.
Example: Flame Slash can kill a Putrid Leech on turn 2. Skred cannot.
-Alex
Yeah, watching eternal formats duke it out with the most powerful combos in the game is always fun. It also lets me learn a bit more of non-Pauper stuff bit by bit. I likely won't make a real attempt into non-pauper formats just because I don't want to spend more than $50 on a competitive deck (I'm a rogue Spike), but it still lets me pick up lessons.
No, because Skred is better.
Will Flame Slash have a place in Pauper? Seems good in a non-Burn type of deck like this.
All the time I had to write comments was consumed working out how to register. I'm really bad at those capcha things, always takes me about 10 goes. And I always left my name on my anonymous comments anyway. And have you noticed the volume of comments is way down?
I'm not much interested in the deck, as Alex says the power of husk was neutered when they took damage off the stack. As far as the article itself, well I think it stands as an example of good practice to anyone writing about magic. I used to think Alex came over a bit arrogant, but now he has grown into one of the most influential and interesting writers around. Good job.
Blightning is by far my favorite card in pauper.
i liked husk in red, but every time i ever tried it in pdc the meta was awful, or i was just a bad player
glad to see you cared so much about this article as to completely ignore anything he had to say in order to start a discussion on something completely irrelevant...
That being said, I'm not a big pauper player, but it's good to see that someone has their eye to the future with BR because I always thought with Blightning being a common it should be a much stronger color choice for pauper
Yes it is good they got rid of them, now if any douche bag wants to make a stupid comment they cant hide behind the anonymous alias.
they got rid of them thankfully
Where did anonymous comments go?
That has been pointed out to WoTC dozens of times. They'd like to have that, but 3.0 simply isn't programmed to handle multiple entry fees
Null Rod is played in some legacy sideboards to shut off Aether Vial and equipment.
Null Rod at $41. why? I don't even see it in sideboards. Is it for Vintage anticipation?
(i wants some :))
In November of 2009 it was under 5 tickets and it climbed pretty steadily to 7.50 at which point the speculators got involved and it went a little crazy. In about two weeks it doubled up to 14.50. It's been slowly inching down since then.
The moral of the story is prices go up very quickly but down a lot slower.
FoW in 90 days will hit $500.
Senor Ham,
I see in previous articles you've interviewed and have some contacts in the MTGO world that hold some clout.
Something i've brought up but haven't received a response from Wizards, is that why on earth when you have two queues such as;
4/3/2/2 12 tickets UZUZUZ
4/3/2/2 3 pax nix UZUZUZ
-They don't dump into the same pool for drafts to fire. Seems like this would be a simple programming fix. And for stuff like Tempest Exodus Stronghold would have helped many more drafts to fire (i.e. more $$$ for Wizards)
so, just curious as to where FOW is going to land, 200? is that even possible? is that crazy talk or just me?