PDA

View Full Version : Magic The Gathering Players Reveal Yourselves!!!


Verystrait42
12-10-2007, 12:26 AM
Who here plays MTG, and if you do, are u a competitive player?

Charbok
12-10-2007, 12:44 AM
I quit very recently, and am trying to sell my cards.
I just don't have enough money to keep it up.
Great game though.

Verystrait42
12-10-2007, 01:15 AM
it can get expensive, especially extended and type 1/1.5

karmachameleon
12-11-2007, 11:22 PM
About a year and a half ago I was obsessed with Magic, but I just lost interest and quit right around when Time Spiral came out. I'm kinda happy, because when I played it took up most of the money that I had. I used to play competitively, and my rating was less than 1600.... :redface:

MagmarMan
12-11-2007, 11:24 PM
My friend taught me how to play and I did for a little while... I just wasn't able to stay interested for too long. I might try to pick it up again if some of my friends still play, I don't even know... lol...

Verystrait42
12-11-2007, 11:32 PM
right now ive got 1 1670, and it used to be horrible. just find a local shop and beat up on some noobs in tournies :)

Kenny_C.002
12-12-2007, 04:46 AM
I'm more a theorist, since I'm actually pretty bad at playing. XD

Anyway, yeah I'm in the casual circles, and can pilot decks for playtesting for the most part. I'm still waiting to get my playset of underground seas and maybe a tropical island or two to complete dredge-atog, though. :-/

For T2, I'm going UB fae/Hakkon.

Neo Emolga
12-12-2007, 05:11 AM
I am a very old school Magic player. Almost all of my cards date back to the fourth and fifth edition era. I pretty much stopped playing actively years ago, though I still have my cards just sitting in a box.

Best moment was selling a Volcanic Island 3rd Edition card to some peep for $20. Seriously, I would never pay that much for a single card. I brought the cards to just enjoy the game with my brother, not go into a frenzy with valuing each card and all that junk.

Still, it brought many years of entertainment.

Verystrait42
12-12-2007, 11:56 AM
hakkon is easily one of my faves in T2. i think he is underused. and with your old dual lands, they now sell for 20-25 apiece

Kenny_C.002
12-13-2007, 06:44 AM
Old duals range from 25-40 bucks, depending if it contains blue or not.

Hakkon's so freaking overused it's not even funny. It seems kinda uncool nowadays to use Hakkon just because so many people caught onto the whole nameless inversion thing.

Jet
12-13-2007, 07:54 AM
I kinda stop, then go, then kinda stop again... aka didn't take mirrodin/kamigawa seriously, then got addicted to ravnica/time spiral... then kinda lost interest at Lorwyn haha...

for T2 I use mono-black control with a few twists of my own, as well as a Psionic Sliver otk. I had a BW version of that RW deck in Planar Chaos (where vanishing, then bounce with whitemane lion and similar cards) that used to beat almost every T2 deck known (cept for green beats and zoo)... but well, lorwyn's here... so its gone =/

currently making a March of Mishra deck... with still a lot missing =/

Verystrait42
12-13-2007, 08:42 PM
if u check the new T2 metagame, u won't see a hakkon in sight. I actually like Lorwyn

Kenny_C.002
12-16-2007, 03:44 AM
No, he's around still. He won't be 10 bucks if that wasn't the case. Of course, he's not like "everywhere in sight" like that strange 2-mana 0/1. >.>

Lorwyn's not bad at all. They made fae a tribe, and that made it cool. lol

Verystrait42
12-16-2007, 02:50 PM
i cant believe D-storm is back....i thought it dead :(

Kenny_C.002
12-17-2007, 02:31 AM
It uses Dstorm as a backup. This deck is based off perilious storm, NOT dragonstorm. Not that it matters, since the deck isn`t equipped to handle the big times.

Verystrait42
12-17-2007, 10:40 PM
i dont know, 2nd in worlds....and my favorite seems to be more dstorm based than p-storm. oh well, at least spinerock knoll is used

Kenny_C.002
12-22-2007, 04:52 AM
2nd in worlds only because it was equipped with the element of surprise and nobody could ever figure out how to board against it. The combo is easily disrupted by a single riftsweeper, and green is the most common colour in Standard right now. I do suppose that this is a strong metagame deck though. If you expect no riftsweepers due to waning popularity of the deck, this would be the one to get you to the top 8 (and then subsequently die to a deck that just happened to have riftsweepers on the board).

And yeah, the deck is based of perilous storm only because a majority of the cards are taken from that deck, including pyromancer's swarth, grapeshot, all the burn, etc. Dstorm, on the other hand, was about big mana, gigadrowse, and finishing with 20 to the head with dragons. It's minor differences between the two archetypes, but IMO that land which made it all possible was made more for perilous storm than dstorm, though I feel it's a minor thing to talk about anyway.

I find it very ironic that my GR snow control deck (green for acceleration and vipers, no tarmos since I don't have the money for them) consistently kills a considerably more expensive fae deck. DX

Dragonair_blizzard
01-02-2008, 11:13 PM
I just started to play so I only have a starter deck.

Near
01-05-2008, 04:58 PM
i absaloutly own at magic.

Kenny_C.002
01-06-2008, 03:42 PM
I just started to play so I only have a starter deck.

Ah. Keep striving then. What's your favourite colour?

Near
01-06-2008, 07:00 PM
i don't have a favorite coulour, i use artifacts p.s. can someone rate my deck?

Card game: MTG
Number of cards: 80
Number of lands: 41
8xplains
8xmountains
8xislands
8xswamps
8xforests
1xrakdos carnarium
Number of summons+artifact creatures:14
1xniv-mizzet, the firemind
2xrakdos ickspitter
1xskyreach manta
1x thermal navigator
1xferropede
1xsuntouched myr
1xmyr quadropad
1xiridescent drake
1xsawtooth thresher
1xrazorgrass screen
1xarcades sabboth
1xazorius first-wing
1xrubinia soulsinger
Number of non creature artifacts:17
1xpauper's cage
1xdoubling cube
1xdoor to nothingness
1xclearwater goblet
1xlich's tomb
1xsparring collar
1xsalvaging station
1xwayfarer's bauble
1xavarice totem
1xrelic barrier
1xpentad prism
1xconjurer's bauble
1xsimic signet
1xopaline bracers
1xhealer's headdress
1xinfused arrows
1xrakdos signet
number of other cards:12
4xdiabolic tutor
1xophidian eye
1xchannal the suns
1xcrime+punishment
1xdawn's reflection
1xfalse demise
1x goblin bombardment
1xdeath denied
1xvigean intuition

Kenny_C.002
01-06-2008, 08:06 PM
Not a big spender on mtg I see.

Anyway, most decks are 60 cards, with 24 lands as the land count. You want to modify your deck to follow that trend first. Next, I'd like to see your card pool, so we can decide on what we can do with your deck.

Anyway, i'll answer my own question: Blue.

Near
01-06-2008, 08:58 PM
Not a big spender on mtg I see.

Anyway, most decks are 60 cards, with 24 lands as the land count. You want to modify your deck to follow that trend first. Next, I'd like to see your card pool, so we can decide on what we can do with your deck.

Anyway, i'll answer my own question: Blue.

a good player could make a good deck out of what they have:tongue: and i'm a kid i can't really afford all those nice cards like the power of nine or black lotus.

ya and the only think i'm weak against are infinitate combos even if i have two in my deck.

Kenny_C.002
01-06-2008, 09:05 PM
You ARE talking to the original budget builder. The deck you posted was simply inefficient, so it would be wiser to see what you have before tweaking it.

Near
01-06-2008, 09:23 PM
even if it doasn't look good it's still good.

if you tell me the weak points of my deck i can fix them.

Kenny_C.002
01-07-2008, 03:48 AM
Guess I'll start by doing something similar to an analysis of the deck.

Card game: MTG
Number of cards: 80 80 cards is too much. You'll eventually be cutting down to 60 to be efficient. Why? Let's put it this way. Say you like Niv-Mizzet (which you and I both do), in an 80 card deck, you can draw him with a chance of 1:80. However, in a 60 card deck, that chance increases to 1:60. It's to your advantage to go with a 60 card deck this way.

Number of lands: 41 Most decks run 24 lands, some a bit more, some less. Professionals simply have worked out these efficient ratios for us to take. I don't see why you shouldn't follow either. For a different way of saying this, running less lands means more chances for you to draw a spell. Too little land and you can't play. Too much (like a 1:1 ratio you have), means you're going to be stuck with a lot of mana and no cards to spend it on.

8xplains
8xmountains
8xislands
8xswamps
8xforests
1xrakdos carnarium

A perfect rainbow doesn't work too well for any deck. The Rakdos Carnarium is a strange singleton, but is probably welcomed. From a brief look, you want mostly green and black, anyway.

I'm now going to organize your deck by mana cost. Inefficient cards will be marked with a *. Generally I say that cards aren't good if they can't help you WIN the game, or prevent you from losing the game. I've commented on what I think the cards are. You can take whatever you want from it.

1:
razorgrass screen* <-- Terrible as a blocker. Midrange-based decks like yours need things other than blockers that die after the first block. Steel walls would be a better investment.
wayfarer's bauble <-- I believe you want more of this. It's colourless fixing for just 1 more mana than rampant growth.
conjurer's bauble* <-- More often than not, the mana used to invest for this isn't going to pay off.
2:
azorius first-wing <-- While this is efficient, you also are running mana that isn't compatible with your GBr basis. It's fine to be 5-colour late game, but early game this isn't going to be played, even as is right now.
simic signet
healer's headdress* <-- Preventing damage doesn't help you win. It certainly doesn't help you not lose either, considering that its effect is small, and you don't have early creatures to take advantage of it.
rakdos signet
pentad prism
doubling cube* <-- The activation ability costs 3. You need at least 7 mana in your mana pool before it becomes profitable. You don't have cards (i.e. X-burn spells) that can take advantage of ridiculously large mana anyway.
sparring collar* <-- First strike doesn't help large creatures, which is mostly your basis.
relic barrier* <-- Tapping artifacts is nice and all, but unless your opponents are all playing a good number of artifacts, this isn't any good.
goblin bombardment* <-- You don't have creatures to sacrifice to it. While it does have interactions with death denied, you also won't be sacrificing any of your big guns.
3:
rakdos ickspitter <-- Good. But the red might be a problem in the early game. I've basically looked your deck as a G/B/r with uw splash, so you might have dificulty in getting the creature out on turn 3. You might want more if your environment has lots of little guys around.
rakdos ickspitter
thermal navigator* <-- It's 3 mana and its ability is underwhelming, as I don't see a disciple of the vault anywhere to begin with. 3 mana 2/2 is weak, and you're generally better off with something like a suntouched myr.
suntouched myr <-- With some more acceleration in the form of baubles and fertile grounds, this shouldn't be a problem in getting to that 3/3 state often.
ophidian eye* <-- I know it combos with Niv-Mizzet. I can't say this card is efficient, but it can be useful.
ferropede* <-- 1/1 for 3 is terrible, even if it's unblockable. Its ability is useless anyway. If you're using it only because it has evasion, get a better creature with evasion. If not, why even bother with it?
Paupers' Cage* <-- A weaker version than the rack. Doesn't fit in with the deck.
false demise* <-- You need to get the creature out first, and unless that creature is massively huge, this isn't going to help much.
4:
myr quadropad* <-- 1/4 for 4 that costs 6 to become a 4/4 is...well...embarassing.
channal the suns <-- Good for 5-colour decks, but in your deck, you might be better of with solid acceleration rather than transient aceleration.
dawn's reflection <-- Good for 5-colour decks.
diabolic tutor <-- It's the first playset I'm seeing, and a good playset to have.
diabolic tutor
diabolic tutor
diabolic tutor
opaline bracers <-- I actually find this to be pretty good if you put 3-4 counters on it. that means you need more solid acceleration to do it.
lich's tomb* <-- This card is absolutely terrible and should not be seen in decks. Ever. Unless that deck is designed to lose.
infused arrows <-- The first piece of true removal I've seen in the deck. It's half decent, but can't kill big stuff, which usually is the primary focus in casual.
iridescent drake* <-- 4 mana 2/2 flyers are weak. The only reason why I don't like him is because you don't have anything to abuse him with.
5:
skyreach manta <-- It's only any good if you sunburst with all 5 colours. To make sure you reach that mana, you need more solid acceleration like baubles.
crime+punishment <-- Great piece of removal, good reanimator. Not bad.
vigean intuition* <-- Just a terrible card overall.
clearwater goblet <-- Can help you last longer, but that's about it. It does NOT help you win, and it's too slow against aggro.
rubinia soulsinger <-- keep it if you're confident you have 5 colours by turn 4-5 more than 70% of the time. If not, you might not want her, even if she's good.
6:
sawtooth thresher <-- It's only any good if you sunburst with all 5 colours. To make sure you reach that mana, you need more solid acceleration like baubles.
niv-mizzet, the firemind <-- Good.
salvaging station <-- Combos with the baubles, I see. Wayfarer's bauble is great, but that's abotu it.
8:
arcades sabboth <-- I mean, in casual you can win with this elder dragon. Outside of that...nope.
9:
10:
avarice totem (that is, the card's useless until you're at the 10 mana range)* <-- You have few auras to take advantage of the totem. But you do have a bunch of weak creatures to trade. Not worthwhile for you since by the time you get to 10, your opponent would often have 5 mana open.
door to nothingness (I know it costs 5) <-- I've never actually played this card, as I never found it to be any good against most decks due to its speed. You can try it if you want.
X:
death denied <-- A pillar for your deck, anyway.

The good: The deck can work in a slow environment, as it has some acceleration to power out a number of fat cards.
The bad: Anything fast, and any control, will destroy it. Colour screw plagues this deck, without sufficient fixing. This deck lacks themes outside of a weak sunburst basis.

Further direction:
This deck is in the makings of a decent sunburst deck. Stronger acceleration in baubles, rampant growths, fertile grounds, and dawn's reflections (as well as select signets) will help. On the business end of the sunburst deck, more of those sunburst creatures that can smash face would help. The Niv combo can stay if you want. Consistency is the main problem. 4 ofs are needed.

Near
01-07-2008, 07:10 PM
well, i see your point for most of the stuff but i need a 1:1 ratio for this deck. i've tried with less i never get mana when i need it especcially at the beginning of the game.

also iredescent drake,false demise and goblin bombardment i will not get rid of i like the combo even iredescent drake and false demise make a good combo.

But i will change the rest. Well as much as i can.

Kenny_C.002
01-08-2008, 05:25 AM
That's fine. I only make suggestions. You can take whatever you want from it. But listening to me about mana issues is utmost important, as this will carry through in your mtg career. Hammer it into your head: default = 24 land in 60 card deck. Nothing more, nothing less.

Jack of Clovers
01-08-2008, 06:29 AM
What's your favourite colour?
Hmmm, depends what I'm in the mood to do. I like Red for it's Land and Direct damage. Blue for messing with the other player(s). White for it's protective ability which has saved me so many times. Green for it's interesting creatures and enchantments. Not a fan of Black though... or Artifacts. I guess my favorite color is green, since that's what I used mostly.

24 land seems like a lot. I'm sure all my decks have less than that and I never had a problem with mana. Most cases, I end up having too much and nothing to use it with.

Quick Count: Red/Blue 19land:63. Green 12land:63

lol. Haven't played for many years though.

~Jack~

Jet
01-08-2008, 10:40 AM
Don't listen to Kenny, he's evil =P XD

24 seems a lot... majority I think use 22 lands... if its all about basic lands yeah I agree with 24 lands, but if you use non-basic lands, I think 22 would suffice, heck 20 at times, some even run 18 (of course that would usually involve some freakish combo of some sort).

The number of lands actually depend on the average converted cost of your other cards in your deck. If most of the cards in your deck costs only 4 or less, then I doubt you'll run 24 lands... average converted cost would of course, consider the activation costs such as that Doubling Cube and such.

If you plan to make a Sunburst deck, buy THE Sunburst deck. Its got Joiner Adept; which would let any of your lands add any color.

If you don't though, think of some a color you like; Kenny placed that beginner's magic thing thread somewhere, I 4got where.


fav color is blue... least is white actually, but I know its power =P

Kenny_C.002
01-08-2008, 03:42 PM
Hmmm, depends what I'm in the mood to do. I like Red for it's Land and Direct damage. Blue for messing with the other player(s). White for it's protective ability which has saved me so many times. Green for it's interesting creatures and enchantments. Not a fan of Black though... or Artifacts. I guess my favorite color is green, since that's what I used mostly.

24 land seems like a lot. I'm sure all my decks have less than that and I never had a problem with mana. Most cases, I end up having too much and nothing to use it with.

Quick Count: Red/Blue 19land:63. Green 12land:63

lol. Haven't played for many years though.

~Jack~

24 is the standard basis in tournament-style decks. Modifications downwards are for decks with aggro basis. I didn't make this up, the professionals did. For me, I find 24/60 to be the perfect balance between mana screw/mana flood ratios, and applies best with midrange and control style decks that need a land drop up on every turn up to turn 5. Aggro decks drop to 20 at lowest, but run a huge risk of mana screw. Combo decks had "random" land counts depending on the combo, but the standard again is 24.

As a general rule, you default at 24, and for each 2 sources of acceleration you have, you drop the land count by 1, unless you play midrange, in which case, you don't drop. My elf deck runs 16 lands, but has a whopping 12 1-mana accelerators. That's fine for the elf deck, because it only needs to draw 1 land a game. Try that with a mono-blue control deck, and one would not be able to get anywhere with it. Aggro decks would be stuck at 1 until turn 3, in which case it might as well just fold. Heck, I wasn't crazy enough to drop my affinity land counts to anything lower than 19. And lower I wouldn't be drawing the crucial land #2 on turn 2 (cuz...you know, it kills on turn 2-3).

Don't get me wrong, I've only been continuously playing magic, and began with 20-land decks, until I decided the frustration of not getting the 4th land on turn 4 was too much to bare in my cleric deck. Yes, I played a cleric deck that ran guys like rotlungs. But without a doubtless one followup, the deck couldn't do too much.

Don't listen to Kenny, he's evil =P XD

Sure, bash the innocent ol' me. :3

24 seems a lot... majority I think use 22 lands... if its all about basic lands yeah I agree with 24 lands, but if you use non-basic lands, I think 22 would suffice, heck 20 at times, some even run 18 (of course that would usually involve some freakish combo of some sort).

The number of lands actually depend on the average converted cost of your other cards in your deck. If most of the cards in your deck costs only 4 or less, then I doubt you'll run 24 lands... average converted cost would of course, consider the activation costs such as that Doubling Cube and such.

If you plan to make a Sunburst deck, buy THE Sunburst deck. Its got Joiner Adept; which would let any of your lands add any color.

If you don't though, think of some a color you like; Kenny placed that beginner's magic thing thread somewhere, I 4got where.

fav color is blue... least is white actually, but I know its power =P

No, a sunburst deck is listed as a midrange deck (I know, I built a decent sunburst deck in my time), so the 24/60 rule applies at its fullest. Heck, the PRECONS have 24 lands (following the acceleration rule). That should be a strong indication of something, wouldn't it?

The thread is right above us, if you haven't noticed.

Besides that point, Jet, you don't play Paris mulligan. It doesn't matter nearly as much that you don't draw lands. You can free mull your way out.

Jack of Clovers
01-09-2008, 11:44 PM
Don't listen to Kenny, he's evil =P XD

24 seems a lot... majority I think use 22 lands... if its all about basic lands yeah I agree with 24 lands, but if you use non-basic lands, I think 22 would suffice, heck 20 at times, some even run 18 (of course that would usually involve some freakish combo of some sort).

The number of lands actually depend on the average converted cost of your other cards in your deck. If most of the cards in your deck costs only 4 or less, then I doubt you'll run 24 lands... average converted cost would of course, consider the activation costs such as that Doubling Cube and such.

I tend to use cards with the least amount of mana cost. My Green has 10 cards over 4 mana cost, with the majority costing 2. My favs are in the 2-3 range. I also have 8 different ways to gain land through various types of cards. Besides, all I own are 12 forest lands. :tongue: It worked as long as I drew the right cards early on.

Kenny- I think I know what you mean by that 4th turn and not having a land to play. I'm going to sit and look through my cards again, just for fun, and try to balance everything a bit more.

~Jack~

Verystrait42
01-10-2008, 01:00 AM
i dont know last u looked, but average meta runs 23. heavy control runs the 24+

Kenny_C.002
01-10-2008, 01:28 AM
i dont know last u looked, but average meta runs 23. heavy control runs the 24+
The meta is aggro-based, meaning that your point is a m00t one. :3