|
Serperoth posted:Same thing, easier to cast I actually disagree than 1CC is easier to cast than 1CD - in any multicolor deck supporting CD(EFG) deck the 1CD deck is usually easier to cast than the 1CC because it allows you to properly diversify your mana over the first few turns. Attorney at Funk posted:With regard to the original duals vs. basics, it's also interesting to note that there wasn't any nonbasic land hate in ABUR. There were cards that hated on land types but those didn't really exert special pressure on the duals, they were color hosers. Blood Moon in The Dark was the first but past that I can't think of a card that punishes nonbasic lands before, like, Tempest block. They had to essentially print nonbasic land hosers in the same way that they had to print Rest in Peace or Stony Silence. There weren't non-basic land hosers but there were cards that blew up / punished every land type, plus stone rain and sinkhole, and a card that makes a land into a swamp, phantasmal terrain, and Armageddon in ABUR. There was a lot of land destruction in the early game. The reason non-basic hate became so important is that they finally had printed a critical mass of color fixing lands such that they needed to punish playing those lands without punishing playing all lands, and thus non-basic hate became the norm and we started seeing the slow shift away from tons of land destruction. Sigma-X fucked around with this message at 19:53 on Mar 25, 2015 |
#
¿
Mar 25, 2015 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
Is there any loving purpose to trying to argue some sort of vacuum-specific (and therefore always irrelevant) Master Card Evaluation Ruleset or whatever the gently caress the purpose of this thread is? It seems like comparing cards in a deck is strictly loving better than arguing about hypothetical cards
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 18:31
|
|
|
black potus posted:it's cool to talk about a cool game on a mechanical level. Yeah but the arguments seem to be focused around some sort of non-contextual vacuum in which important relationships are disregarded when that is disconnected from the actual mechanical design of the game so that we can champion a particular card as Objectively The Best despite context that would render that untrue. Like Judge's Familiar is objectively better than Cursecatcher in a vacuum except in most/all actual contexts Cursecatcher is better as the benefits that Familiar provides are typically overridden by the tribal benefits of being a merfolk.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 27, 2015 22:23
|
|
|
Being non-basic is a contextual drawback and not an intrinsic one, like Yavimaya Coast's pain. In our strictly better vacuum, or Hooverville as I'll refer to it, the original duals have no drawback. Outside of Hooverville, they are susceptible to all of the typed destruction in the original ABU (but this is moot because the only other lands that play those alternate colors also expose you to typed destruction). So the contextual drawback doesn't really exist until you evolve the format to the point where wasteland exists. At that point though, it's about a break-even (as evidenced by how they're played) or still net-positive typically, but anything with an additional (and intrinsic) drawback is no longer playable without having bigger upsides than just fixing mana.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 28, 2015 01:15
|
|
|
Heatwizard posted:Except for every deck that isn't interested in being a merfolk deck? Just because you acknowledge that one card is an upgrade over another doesn't mean you're obligated to burn all your copies of the other version and forever deny that it'll ever have a place anywhere. For any deck that doesn't get saved under the file name 'merfolk.dek' they'd sooner run Familiar over Cursecatcher, it's just that merfolk.dek is the only deck that ultimately decides it'll bother running that effect. Extrapolating from that that you can never ever compare two cards without having the entirety of Magic the Gathering open in front of you just seems like pointless hand-wringing. That's a pretty extreme response! You just said that only merfolk wants the effect because it isn't a powerful card on it's own. So you just argued that again, contextually familiar is not a more powerful card. You absolutely should be comparing cards to each other in the format. In fact when building a deck you should be comparing cards that are dissimilar too, to determine if card A or B is more powerful in your meta. Maybe you'll run a sweeper because. It's a heavy creature meta or maybe you'll run a counterspell. There is literally no value in declaring Judges Familiar as Strictly Better than Cursecatcher (except for all practical contexts which we will ignore). But I'm done I clearly don't get this thread at all.
|
|
#
¿
Mar 29, 2015 05:52
|
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:Yeah, that was part of my point - in an ideal scenario you would have zero dead cards. In reality, even with a great opening hand, the board can get gummed up (making more creatures useless), you've got 2-3 lands down already, etc. It seems like it's more likely that you will have dead cards in a matchup than an empty hand from playing everything. If you're playing a singleton bad card for topdecks play thunderous wrath because that is actually an amazing topdeck. We did the math already to shoot down sonic seizure and thunderous wrath in the legacy thread though.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 14, 2015 18:10
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ Apr 28, 2024 09:47 |
|
|
Emerson Cod posted:But then you could play Bump In The Night! Modern Burn is pretty much all on the white splash now because Lightning Helix shores up the Fetch->Shock life cost and Boros Charm is functional in all forms with a minimum of 4 damage off the dome-them ability.
|
|
#
¿
Apr 15, 2015 19:57
|
|