And Josh sound like he is in a tunnel. Or maybe he is broadcasting from a submarine... :)
I think that the North America statement is a legal disclaimer to get around possible global taxes and gaming laws. Kind of like a warning on an electric kettle against heating flammable liquids.
I like the fact that they charge a fee for an account. With the open chat, it knocks out spammers from opening accounts. Hearthstone doesn't have any chat, so they don't worry about spammers.
Deck Challenge Idea for AJ: Outpost Siege anchored on Dragons with Norin the Wary.....
I don't think you needed to splash red. Your removal suite is already good enough without red, but if you want to play a slower game then splashing red is fine in the abstract. I would not have played Mardu Woe-Reaper at all. The odds of you having Plains + Woe-Reaper on turn 1 are very low and it's a very bad topdeck in the late game (which if you have tons of removal ideally means you're more likely to get to the late game).
I would have gone -1 Mardu Woe-Reaper, -1 Whisperer of the Wilds, +1 Forest, +1 Ainok Bond-Kin. With so much removal I want to consistently hit my land drops, and that's something 18 lands can do. Possibly -1 Burn Away, +1 Tusked Colossodon as a win condition if I wanted to cut on the red splash.
Modern Death and Taxes is a seriously underrated deck. My roommate plays it and he has a 70% winrate usually utilising the various splashes you can go for to counter the meta. Some of the splashes that I remember are: blue for Geist, red for main board Blood Moon, black for Tidehollow Sculler, Vault of the Archangel, green for a more hate-beary list. Apparently he is favouring a mono white approach for now as it smoothes the deck out. I think your list is lacking some Blade Splicers which are one of the best Flickerwisp/Resto targets, probably instead of Serra Avenger. This deck is the bane of my existence and one of the reasons I have a horrible winrate in paper right now. It is amazing though how you can fine tune this deck if you know the meta and just how effective it becomes.
As much as I despise this move in particular it is par for their course. They are very consistent about not tanking too hard cards that are big in the 2ndary market. Except of course when it suits their purposes (IE: The neutering of half the collections on MTGO via Old Extended vs New Extended (TM pending.))
You can find most of new promos as you described with adjusting qty to zero at collection. But, I saw these new promos in twitter and later in imgur (same alt art Rishadan Port, picture delated few days after).
After today's announcement for Tempest Remastered, I guess we might also see a Mercadian Masques Remastered product instead, which would be better in the long term to make more cards accessible.
I'm not enthusiastic about Tempest Remastered. The real reason anyone cares about these drafts is the important, hard to find, staple cards like Wasteland. And I bet they went and made it Mythic. Nice.
yeah, it's bad. I'd way rather have a Lotus myself.
At one point I thought about getting into vintage, but didn't think I could afford it, but looking at my wastelands, I think I could have gotten a big chunk of the power nine for that many tickets.
They are taking Tempest block and reducing it by half to make cards more accessible... and made some of the cards mythic rares. There were no mythic rares in Tempest block! Wizards takes a great idea and STILL finds a way to screw it up.
In this case I don't either. My assumption was that was how he "knows" but since port only shows as MM copies if you do this, he must be looking at something else. Perhaps the image files downloaded with the client on our machines. (Though if they are downloaded I don't see why they wouldn't show up.)
Take the quantity owned min and max to 0 then separate out by different variations. You will see every card available on the servers whether or not any of that printing is in circulation.
The podcast can be put up on iTunes separately from MTGCast, and should be easy since it's already hosted on PureMTGO, could be put under a PureMTGO banner instead.
For a while, during m15, I would go play three 2 mans, or maybe four if i lost one, take the three packs add two tix and draft them.
I was playing 8 4 drafts, because i was getting to the finals every time for a while. This wasn't going infinite, but I did not pay much if anything at most points. But i was selling my draft picks to get tix.
I'm not the best limited player, but I am pretty ok. And I can tell you that all it took was a string of bad drafts and I ate through all my extra packs. I was back to paying full price for drafts, and I lost my passion for it.
Even way better players than me have had a few bad drafts and lost a lot.
The most important thing to have an infinite supply of is fun.
The slow bleed is what I experience. I tricked myself into thinking that I was going infinite because I wasn't paying for drafta for a while. But I also bought a bunch more tix for some standard staple I wanted. Maybe if I was more patient I could earn enough tickets to get expensive singles, but I'm not.
Anyway, whatever people think about this article And The writer, i commend him for using his creativity and making content for people to read.
Infinite to some folks means "I get back what I paid to play". That's living on the edge of infinite. One week of bad beats and you're dropping $$ into the well again, then "Oh look I played for free for two weeks! I'm infinite again!" until the next week of bad beats.
Infinite means you consistently win (or $$ draft or combination of both) back your investment to join the event, plus gain a little on top. Can be .3 of a ticket as long as its consistent over a longer period of time and sets you up to play for free for as long as you like.
There's nothing wrong with going 'finite with very low cost'. I tend to make most of my money back on drafts and constructed. If I come out only losing 1 ticket net, I'm fine. That's 10 events for 10 dollars, plus I get cards I don't sell, some of which, although cheap, are still playable in constructed.
If you want to go infinite in limited, walk before you run. Get to as close to break even as possible and see if the effort is even worth it to you. My 2 cents.
As far as what's the best way, whatever works. If 20 people say method one works while 3 people say method 2 works, method one might be the best place to start. If that doesn't suit, try method two.
No big deal. And as for whether an article does harm, it is incumbent upon the reader to do thorough research. If I were to try to go infinite in limited, I sure as hell wouldn't read one article and say "GO!" I'm going to read everything I can find until my eyes bleed.
Here's how I've always viewed the difference between swiss and 4322.
There are 8 possible outcomes in playing a three round tournament: LLL, LLW, LWL, LWW, WLL, WLW, WWL and WWW. Obviously, in 4322 you don't always get to play all 3 rounds because the tourney ends for you once you lose.
Here are the payouts for each result in each tourney type.
LLL - 0 packs in both
LLW - 1 pack in swiss, 0 in 4322
LWL - 1 pack in swiss, 0 in 4322
LWW - 2 packs in swiss, 0 4322
WLL - 1 packs in swiss, 2 in 4322
WLW - 2 packs in both
WWL - 2 packs in swiss, 3 in 4322
WWW - 3 packs in swiss, 4 in 4322.
There are 2 payouts that are the same for both types (LLL, WLW), three payouts that are higher for swiss (LLW, LWL, LWW) and 2 payouts that are higher for 4322 (WLL, WWL, WWW). The dividing point between the two formats is whether or not you win the first round. If you feel confident about your ability to win in the first round on a consistent basis, 4322 might actually be better for you because getting past the first round means that the worst payout you can get would match the best swiss would pay for finishing with the same result.
Some people may look at the payouts and say that swiss has a payout that is 2 packs higher than 4322 (LWW) while 4322 will only ever win 1 more pack than swiss - and because of that, swiss is the better option. While I can't argue with anyone for thinking that way, that reasoning doesn't factor into which format I choose to play. Mainly because I don't draft much and when I do, I just pick whichever one will start soonest.
Saying that max EV is obtained by playing swiss or 84 is a dogma not a law of nature. Whenever you read a 'mathematical proof' that 4322 is inferior it relies on a range of assumptions. You are probably not even aware of the assumptions but be careful not to confuse these 'proofs' for a universal law.
Or please point me to what you believe is the definitive proof that max EV is obtained by playing 84 or swiss. Thx.
In terms of max EV, you should play 8-4 or Swiss depending on win percentage, but not 4-3-2-2 because at no point should playing a 4-3-2-2 be the correct option. However, just because you shouldn't play it doesn't everybody follows that rule. It's like saying you shouldn't eat junk food. People do it anyway even if they know it's bad for them, but it tastes good and makes them happy.
Saying people shouldn't play 4-3-2-2 while acknowledging that people do isn't self-contradicting, it's just being realistic.
The big problem with Norin the wary is he comes back at EOT.
What ever the pinging sound was, it was annoying.
And Josh sound like he is in a tunnel. Or maybe he is broadcasting from a submarine... :)
I think that the North America statement is a legal disclaimer to get around possible global taxes and gaming laws. Kind of like a warning on an electric kettle against heating flammable liquids.
I like the fact that they charge a fee for an account. With the open chat, it knocks out spammers from opening accounts. Hearthstone doesn't have any chat, so they don't worry about spammers.
Deck Challenge Idea for AJ: Outpost Siege anchored on Dragons with Norin the Wary.....
I don't think you needed to splash red. Your removal suite is already good enough without red, but if you want to play a slower game then splashing red is fine in the abstract. I would not have played Mardu Woe-Reaper at all. The odds of you having Plains + Woe-Reaper on turn 1 are very low and it's a very bad topdeck in the late game (which if you have tons of removal ideally means you're more likely to get to the late game).
I would have gone -1 Mardu Woe-Reaper, -1 Whisperer of the Wilds, +1 Forest, +1 Ainok Bond-Kin. With so much removal I want to consistently hit my land drops, and that's something 18 lands can do. Possibly -1 Burn Away, +1 Tusked Colossodon as a win condition if I wanted to cut on the red splash.
It's all part of the greater plan of me switching to BWr tokens ;)
Don't let out the secret Pier :)
Modern Death and Taxes is a seriously underrated deck. My roommate plays it and he has a 70% winrate usually utilising the various splashes you can go for to counter the meta. Some of the splashes that I remember are: blue for Geist, red for main board Blood Moon, black for Tidehollow Sculler, Vault of the Archangel, green for a more hate-beary list. Apparently he is favouring a mono white approach for now as it smoothes the deck out. I think your list is lacking some Blade Splicers which are one of the best Flickerwisp/Resto targets, probably instead of Serra Avenger. This deck is the bane of my existence and one of the reasons I have a horrible winrate in paper right now. It is amazing though how you can fine tune this deck if you know the meta and just how effective it becomes.
As much as I despise this move in particular it is par for their course. They are very consistent about not tanking too hard cards that are big in the 2ndary market. Except of course when it suits their purposes (IE: The neutering of half the collections on MTGO via Old Extended vs New Extended (TM pending.))
You can find most of new promos as you described with adjusting qty to zero at collection. But, I saw these new promos in twitter and later in imgur (same alt art Rishadan Port, picture delated few days after).
After today's announcement for Tempest Remastered, I guess we might also see a Mercadian Masques Remastered product instead, which would be better in the long term to make more cards accessible.
I'm not enthusiastic about Tempest Remastered. The real reason anyone cares about these drafts is the important, hard to find, staple cards like Wasteland. And I bet they went and made it Mythic. Nice.
yeah, it's bad. I'd way rather have a Lotus myself.
At one point I thought about getting into vintage, but didn't think I could afford it, but looking at my wastelands, I think I could have gotten a big chunk of the power nine for that many tickets.
I think I can build both of these decks right now. I'd like to try them, I love delver.
They are taking Tempest block and reducing it by half to make cards more accessible... and made some of the cards mythic rares. There were no mythic rares in Tempest block! Wizards takes a great idea and STILL finds a way to screw it up.
In this case I don't either. My assumption was that was how he "knows" but since port only shows as MM copies if you do this, he must be looking at something else. Perhaps the image files downloaded with the client on our machines. (Though if they are downloaded I don't see why they wouldn't show up.)
I still don't understand how to do that. that's cool though.
Take the quantity owned min and max to 0 then separate out by different variations. You will see every card available on the servers whether or not any of that printing is in circulation.
How do you know that? I'm not questioning the fact, I'm just curious how you came to know it. Like, is rishadan port in the legacy cube or something?
Why no Strategic Planning? Card seems nuts!
The podcast can be put up on iTunes separately from MTGCast, and should be easy since it's already hosted on PureMTGO, could be put under a PureMTGO banner instead.
For a while, during m15, I would go play three 2 mans, or maybe four if i lost one, take the three packs add two tix and draft them.
I was playing 8 4 drafts, because i was getting to the finals every time for a while. This wasn't going infinite, but I did not pay much if anything at most points. But i was selling my draft picks to get tix.
I'm not the best limited player, but I am pretty ok. And I can tell you that all it took was a string of bad drafts and I ate through all my extra packs. I was back to paying full price for drafts, and I lost my passion for it.
Even way better players than me have had a few bad drafts and lost a lot.
The most important thing to have an infinite supply of is fun.
The slow bleed is what I experience. I tricked myself into thinking that I was going infinite because I wasn't paying for drafta for a while. But I also bought a bunch more tix for some standard staple I wanted. Maybe if I was more patient I could earn enough tickets to get expensive singles, but I'm not.
Anyway, whatever people think about this article And The writer, i commend him for using his creativity and making content for people to read.
too bad, mtgotraders changed their price policy-that was really a ray of light in this bot world; I ll see whether there are possibilities
I'm going with this comment as the most sensible thing I've read in any of these comments.
Too true,
Infinite to some folks means "I get back what I paid to play". That's living on the edge of infinite. One week of bad beats and you're dropping $$ into the well again, then "Oh look I played for free for two weeks! I'm infinite again!" until the next week of bad beats.
Infinite means you consistently win (or $$ draft or combination of both) back your investment to join the event, plus gain a little on top. Can be .3 of a ticket as long as its consistent over a longer period of time and sets you up to play for free for as long as you like.
There's nothing wrong with going 'finite with very low cost'. I tend to make most of my money back on drafts and constructed. If I come out only losing 1 ticket net, I'm fine. That's 10 events for 10 dollars, plus I get cards I don't sell, some of which, although cheap, are still playable in constructed.
If you want to go infinite in limited, walk before you run. Get to as close to break even as possible and see if the effort is even worth it to you. My 2 cents.
As far as what's the best way, whatever works. If 20 people say method one works while 3 people say method 2 works, method one might be the best place to start. If that doesn't suit, try method two.
No big deal. And as for whether an article does harm, it is incumbent upon the reader to do thorough research. If I were to try to go infinite in limited, I sure as hell wouldn't read one article and say "GO!" I'm going to read everything I can find until my eyes bleed.
Here's how I've always viewed the difference between swiss and 4322.
There are 8 possible outcomes in playing a three round tournament: LLL, LLW, LWL, LWW, WLL, WLW, WWL and WWW. Obviously, in 4322 you don't always get to play all 3 rounds because the tourney ends for you once you lose.
Here are the payouts for each result in each tourney type.
LLL - 0 packs in both
LLW - 1 pack in swiss, 0 in 4322
LWL - 1 pack in swiss, 0 in 4322
LWW - 2 packs in swiss, 0 4322
WLL - 1 packs in swiss, 2 in 4322
WLW - 2 packs in both
WWL - 2 packs in swiss, 3 in 4322
WWW - 3 packs in swiss, 4 in 4322.
There are 2 payouts that are the same for both types (LLL, WLW), three payouts that are higher for swiss (LLW, LWL, LWW) and 2 payouts that are higher for 4322 (WLL, WWL, WWW). The dividing point between the two formats is whether or not you win the first round. If you feel confident about your ability to win in the first round on a consistent basis, 4322 might actually be better for you because getting past the first round means that the worst payout you can get would match the best swiss would pay for finishing with the same result.
Some people may look at the payouts and say that swiss has a payout that is 2 packs higher than 4322 (LWW) while 4322 will only ever win 1 more pack than swiss - and because of that, swiss is the better option. While I can't argue with anyone for thinking that way, that reasoning doesn't factor into which format I choose to play. Mainly because I don't draft much and when I do, I just pick whichever one will start soonest.
Saying that max EV is obtained by playing swiss or 84 is a dogma not a law of nature. Whenever you read a 'mathematical proof' that 4322 is inferior it relies on a range of assumptions. You are probably not even aware of the assumptions but be careful not to confuse these 'proofs' for a universal law.
Or please point me to what you believe is the definitive proof that max EV is obtained by playing 84 or swiss. Thx.
In terms of max EV, you should play 8-4 or Swiss depending on win percentage, but not 4-3-2-2 because at no point should playing a 4-3-2-2 be the correct option. However, just because you shouldn't play it doesn't everybody follows that rule. It's like saying you shouldn't eat junk food. People do it anyway even if they know it's bad for them, but it tastes good and makes them happy.
Saying people shouldn't play 4-3-2-2 while acknowledging that people do isn't self-contradicting, it's just being realistic.