 |
Magic-League.com Forums of Magic-League: Free Online Magic: the Gathering Play with Apprentice and Magic Workstation; casual or tournament play.
|
|
|
| So, what do you think? |
| Great deck, you are truly innovative! |
|
10% |
[ 1 ] |
| You're a tard and should be shot... |
|
40% |
[ 4 ] |
| Everyone who answered with the option above is precisely the kind of mindless wonder you mentioned in your rant, congrats for pinning it on them so accurately. |
|
30% |
[ 3 ] |
| I liek polls... lawl |
|
20% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 10 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Arch_Raziel
Joined: 06 Jul 2008 Posts: 26
|
Posted: Wed Jul 09, 2008 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Vedrfolner wrote: | Arch_Raziel... I have made more decks than your tiny mind can imagine. Most of them quite innovative. Looking at your posts so far, you have done nothing innovative at all.
A RG ramp deck that is worse than the already proven RG ramp deck. There is nothing innovative in this. Okay - if the deck is a year old, then yes it is innovative (TS standard), but I don't think it is that old. The RG manaramp type of deck did already exist when that deck was made.
A elf swarm deck using a 2-card enchantment combo to spawn lots of tokens. I haven't seen the combo before so yes, the combo is probably new. But the elf swarm archetype isn't new. And when you post a decklist on this forum, you will get advice on how to make it more _competitive_ , what other kind of advice do you think should be given? People try to help you make your deck better, not worse or more "innovative".
What is the purpose of innovation if it does not improve what already exists?
I have to remind you that the only impolite, juvenile, confrontational and arrogant poster on this forum right now... is you. If anyone sports a inferiority complex here it is you; both your angry/tough-on-the-internet tone and your focus on proving yourself through "innovative" deck designs shows that you are a loser in real life, trying to compensate on the internet.
My advice for the GR Hellkite deck wasn't about making it a netdeck; it was about putting better cards in it. How arrogant is it to assume that the "pros" are wrong and you are right; 19 lands is better than 23-24 in a big mana deck? Math is wrong and you are right? That the best cards are often used in netdecks isn't a reason to use weaker cards!
If you look at the sentences I used "phail" in, you will see that if I did replace it with "fail", the sentences wouldn't make sense. There is simply no such expression as "epic fail". |
Some of your arguement works out well, I'll admit. However, for the most part, it being aimed directly at me is a little off-shot.
Firstly, I didn't make r/g manaramp, so don't yell at me about the math debate. I was merely saying that the guy wanting 19 lands shouldn't be such a big friggin' deal, but everyone bitched about it constantly. (btw, I played with that guy vs his deck today, and he STILL got mana-swamped, just thought I'd let you know)
Secondly, my problem with the advice people give is that I asked specifically for advice to make it better toward it's ends. The person who said "scrap it, copy elfball" is just an **** who doesn't know how to build a deck without having someone else do it for him, or at least that is the kind of impression he gives. I'm not saying that having a deck that isn't the top one of its kind is better than that, obviously it isnt. but that doesnt mean you cant have a competative deck that runs a different way. so what if it doesnt take me to world champ? i just want to be able to play in tournaments WITH MY DECKBUILD and win modestly. that is what i'm looking for. not something else.
Thirdly, just because a deck does something similar does not mean it can't be innovative. i mean, by your logic there is no innovation in decks these days. "oh, that deck still plays lands, so it's not innovative.", "That deck plays spells, so it's just like every other.". Doing something similar in a new/different way is still innovative in its own right.
And I'm not trying to make up for anything I lack by posting this, I'm trying to make a statement to others on how pathetic, thick-headed, and assinine they can be. I will bet you I could play as good as them if I played the same deck they did, and if they want to argue that, then let them. I don't care if I'm being juvenile in ranting, but unfortunately people have a tendency to not listen when they aren't being ranted at (though I can't say as ranting really does much better, but it's fun none the less). And I must say, it really does brighten my day to rattle cages, which telling a person they're an **** tends to do.
As for the 'phail' comment. misspelling a word to make up for the fact that you can't think of a way (or are too lazy, perhaps) to make the words epic and fail come out in a manner that is grammatically correct is pathetic.
This deck is epic phail..? wtf?? you couldn't be bothered to say "this deck is an epic failure."? It's really that hard? Wow... I would certainly like to know how you could type that long response to this, yet you couldn't be bothered to use proper grammar then? Congratulations, you've stumped me. Do you want a cookie? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Vedrfolner
Joined: 04 Apr 2006 Posts: 1397
|
Posted: Thu Jul 10, 2008 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
Ok screw the epic phail comment.
The problem with the GR ramp deck is that big red/green creatures plus mana acceleration and creature removal are the exact same thing being played in every other GR ramp deck. While I always try to give advice within the deck's own premise, for example as shown in the Madness deck thread someone posted not long ago (I told him to use more Madness cards and discard enablers - or eventually forget about it altogether), I cannot do that when the premise of the deck is the exact same as a proven deck.
It is okay that he wants to use his 4 Bogardan Hellkites in a deck, and it is okay that the colours he wants to use are Green and Red. If you look at the deck proposal I posted in that thread, I have given advice for how to use Hellkite in a better deck. Everyone tells you guys that Hostility is not good, that Stuffy Doll is not good at the moment because of all the answers to him, that Grim Poppet isn't the best of creatures, that Molten Disaster is at best a sideboard card vs Merfolk because it hardly works vs anything else - and above all that 19 lands isn't enough! But instead of taking the advice and changing the deck so that it becomes better, you and your friend are completely disregarding all of these good points and on top of that attacking verbally those who try to help you.
Again, your friend can't be mana flooded (drawing as much or more land than other cards) very often with 19 lands. That is nearly impossible with a deck having a curve more or less starting at 4cc. So I suspect that your idea of what it means to be mana flooded is to run out of cards in hand and starting to topdeck lands. When I tested the deck in solitaire mode, I had a really hard time getting enough mana to even play Hellkite and Poppet by turn 8-10. How long are your games lasting? A full match of 2/3 should take maximum 50 minutes, that means about 15 minutes per game. It will be really hard to go beyond 15 turns per head - 30 seconds per turn on average, unless you expect to win both games. So you should really design the deck to win by your turn 10. To do that, you must ignore the ultra-late-game "oh noes, I topdeck another land!" problem and have enough lands in the deck to play Hellkite _earlier_ than it would have been if you just have 30 lands in there and play it turn 8 with 8 lands. That is the purpose of acceleration (not, as it seems you two believe, to replace lands).
If your friend experience often that he have no cards left and draw nothing useful off the top of the deck (every third card a land), it is in my opinion a sign of one of two things:
A. The cards he actually draw are inadequate
B. He is not using his resources right
... or a combination of those two. The fact that you believe that starting with only 1 mountain in hand if you have a Into the North/Wall of Roots - is no problem - suggests that B is the main problem. One should never keep a one-land hand, regardless of what is in the hand. The reason for this is that you need to be lucky and draw the land you need very early on, otherwise the cards in your hand will be of no use; even though you are lucky and topdeck a forest at first attempt, and get to play Into the North/Wall of Roots turn 2, that is still 5 mana short of a Hellkite, 4 mana short of a Grim Poppet, 2 mana short of a Stuffy Doll etc.
It is very important to be patient and not burn away creatures the moment they enter play, as all those sweepers will do the job and give card advantage some turns later. Remember that the reason you should play all that mana and all that mana acceleration, is that you play superior spells instead of relying on the early beatdown curve. When Bogardan Hellkite enters play in the opponent's attack phase in turn 5 while he taps out all his creatures for a big swing, burns 2-3 creatures and blocks to kill one - then the full potential of that dragon is being reached. The reason he is not being played nowadays is that he enters play too late. In your friend's GR ramp deck, he enters play waaaaay too late. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|