Modern is cool now, we have Eldrazi edition
Reposting, I wrote a few lengthy posts about my thoughts on the deck and the key card Fold Into Aether here:
Considering making a UR decklist with two Gut Shots in it for surprisingly usable removal and turn 4 instant emmy into untap on turn 5.
>Of course, Twin has a large advantage over both in that it outside of these interactions it is an on the spot win.
No, Twin has an advantage because it has a wincon that doesn't revolve around putting a flying fatty on the board and praying for no removal.
Your wincon is literally cheat out Emrakul and just hope you win from there. You have literally no other plan if that doesn't work. That isn't a combo, thats just Timmy. At least Goryo can win the turn Emmy goes down
>Fold into Aether doesn't say counter target creature spell
Holy shit, I've been reading this card wrong the entire time.
It's suddenly so much better when you don't need to play loads of cheap useless creatures in your deck.
>No, Twin has an advantage because it has a wincon that doesn't revolve around putting a flying fatty on the board and praying for no removal.
Really now? The only 'Alternate Wincon' in a twin list is beatdowns with 1 to 3 power creatures and the good old 'Bolt Snap Bolt'.
If you run the deck as just UR twin with a slightly slower, more resilient combo then you see that Fold is really more of a sidegrade to twin lists for use in slower, more hate heavy metas.
Show me all the spells used in modern that effecively deal with a creature that has "Protection from colored spells".
The Emrakul is honestly a placeholder card of "Any big resilient and game winning fatty of your choice". Stick in Progenitus, Stick in Iona, fucking jam a Grislebrand there if you love cards. Point is that Fold is comparable to twin in that it's a turn 4+ combo piece that gets gamewinning advantage.
>Your wincon is literally cheat out Emrakul and just hope you win from there.
The decklist I posted is just my first thoughts on a more all-in style use of the card. It can fit easily in a huge variety of builds.
And returning to this point for some memetext
>>Twin has an advantage because it has a wincon that doesn't revolve around putting a flying fatty on the board and praying for no removal.
>>doesn't revolve around putting a flyer on the board and praying for no removal.
>Not EXACTLY putting a creature and enchantment on the board and hoping for no removal.
Consider Peek. It's a non-free Gitaxian Probe, but it is instant speed. Sure, it is one turn slower, but it enables a more reliable EOT 5 "flash" Emrakul.
It does however suffer from being far less reliable than twin in its current iteration.
Twin runs 4-6 of one combo piece (untap creatures), and 3-4 (mostly 4) of the second.
This one runs 2 emrakuls and 4 of the fold.
The deck has an advantage when it comes to losing to removal (in that it flat out doesn't), but it's also far weaker to counterspells (having your original spell countered when you try to fold it.) Also, twin never really has to go all in, and can sit back with their creatures.
>Really now? The only 'Alternate Wincon' in a twin list is beatdowns with 1 to 3 power creatures and the good old 'Bolt Snap Bolt
What are you talking about? Twin wins without combo all the time, and sides out the combo in around half of it's matchups. Your deck has literally none of those alternate conditions or even the means to defend itself let alone win when you can't get Emrakul in hand.
Saying that this deck has anything to do with UR Twin just shows you don't understand how UR Twin plays beyond yolo Twining T4. Fold doesn't create a winnable game or even an advantage any more than Living End does, and requires insane amounts of hand sculpting. You literally have no way to win the game if you can't straight up draw Emrakul and perfectly execute your sculpted hand with zero disruption.
Jamming Twin down on T4 with a prayer for no removal is how Twin LOSES. The combo is essentially delayed past T5-T6 just to ensure you're packing enough defense to secure Splinter Twin.
Think for a second.
Take UR Twin.
Swap Twin cards for 4 Fold, 2 Emmy.
Add some more removal or goodstuff.
Oh hey look it's ALMOST EXACTLY LIKE TWIN, WIN WITH OR WITHOUT COMBO AND ALL.
The Esper decklist was just an experiment because Fold doesn't require red AT ALL. You can run it with red, you can run it fucking bant if you want, the only requirement is that you have blue mana, fold, any spell and a creature you want to crap on the field for cheap.
>Saying that this deck has anything to do with UR Twin just shows you don't understand how UR Twin plays beyond yolo Twining T4.
Anon, he's saying that you can build the decks so similarly that the only comparison needed between the two is the actual combo itself, the rest can be the same UR list you already know, love and win with.
Swap 6 cards with tapdown that swing and block Zoo all-stars for a dead fatty in your hand/deck. And an enchantment that accelerates a beatdown battle/makes Snaps go crazy for a counterspell that actively helps your opponent when you cast it. Swap out the control sideboard for a pile of random hate. True genius there. The twin combo pieces are so resilient because they are either easily sided out, or actively help with the alternate wincons. The Fold "pieces" do literally nothing outside of getting the combo off.
>An AT LEAST 7 mana, sorcery speed interaction that requires you to run no other creatures but your fatties and to not draw them is better than a 4/5 mana instant speed interaction that lets you still run good stuff like Snapcasters.
Dude c'mon, stop shitposting.
>Swap out the control sideboard for a pile of random hate.
Then run a better sideboard?
A deck list isn't gospel anon, you can always change it to what you need or how you think a deck should be made. Just because his deck wasn't 100% perfectly tuned doesn't mean that Fold ISN'T a card that can slip incredibly easily into most shells that the Twin combo also fits in. The objective fact here doesn't change. Fold is a Twin alternative for when you want to be less fucked by potential removal.
>>The twin combo pieces are so resilient because they are either easily sided out, or actively help with the alternate wincons.
Except Twin has to wait to Twin later in the game for backup so they don't get hit my a counterspell, creature removal OR enchantment removal. The actual COMBO of those two cards can be ruined by three avenues of hate.
>or actively help with the alternate wincons.
That's a fair point, but that anon did actually point that out in >>44685564 just after he said Splinter Twin was somewhat 'useless'.
>The Fold "pieces" do literally nothing outside of getting the combo off.
Except that's wrong? One of the three pieces can be almost any spell in the game and Fold is actually a (although overcosted and with a downside) hard counterspell, making Emmy (Or any dumb fatty you want) the only dead draw in the deck.
>The actual COMBO of those two cards can be ruined by three avenues of hate
This is just getting sad. With a Fold "combo," a single Dispel or Negate on anything you play literally removes your ability to win the game, the combo going off doesn't actively win you the game, and there is literally no way to win if you don't happen to have all of your combo pieces in hand at the same time.
>Fold is actually a (although overcosted and with a downside) hard counterspell
If you're casting Fold as a counterspell against a pilot with half a brain, you are instead actively accelerating their board and clock rather than hindering it. At least Splinter Twin doesn't help your opponent win by keeping it in.
>This is just getting sad. With a Fold "combo," a single Dispel or Negate on anything you play literally removes your ability to win the game,
Unless you had a deck built like UR twin perhaps, that can also win without ever casting it's combo.
You're right, it's sad how you don't understand that your own complaints of the deck having no other wins cons are mute if you played a version of the list built around winning a more fair way.
Fold combo is 6 cards. Not even 6, that's just what I thought might be fine. Stick it in any deck you want that has flex slots and would benefit from it. That's the point I wanted to make. Not that my exact deck is good, but that Fold is a card with a lot of potential.
Yes, it has issues with the fact you will most likely run a creature you can't cast most of the time to combo with it. It also has only two weaknesses: counterspells (of which not every deck runs and you can also run because you're in blue already) and sacrifice removal (which makes up a small section of the removal used in modern).
Twin, as a two card combo, NOT a deck, is even more vulnerable to counters, vulnerable to more creature removal and also vulnerable to enchantment hate.
Twin as a full deck is irrelevant for the argument here, you can run nearly the same deck with Fold but with a few more spots for cards you may have wanted to run in Twin but didn't because you wanted to fit 10 combo pieces.
Fold (the combo) is a resilient twin substitute, play it like one.
And as a final point
>If you're casting Fold as a counterspell against a pilot with half a brain, you are instead actively accelerating their board and clock rather than hindering it. At least Splinter Twin doesn't help your opponent win by keeping it in.
I didn't know that countering spells cast by decks that don't run value creatures/don't run creatures at all because they're combo somehow gave them a free Progenitus to slap down.
Yeah, countering enemy spells with Fold isn't pretty, but it can be a much better draw in some situations than any of the Twin combo against decks like Scapeshift or Ad Nauseum.
You keep ignoring the fact that Pestermite and Exarch actively support the control wincon against all matchups, whereas Fatty and Fold are either dead or help your opponent win. Twin "as a full deck" works "as a full deck" because it has combo pieces that help the control side. You can't just slot those out for garbage and say it'll play the same.
If you're honestly trying to tell me Fold is a better play than an instant speed tapdown, Im going to just have to assume you don't know how Twin plays outside the combo.
Tapping down a land or a utility piece can be game ending, countering something just to give them anything else (or spending mana inefficiently against a race combo deck) is just a waste of cards.
Bruh, Fold is a smaller combo package. You can play 4 Exarchs for all I fucking care with the little bit more room you get by only running 6 combo cards over the normal 10. Also no need to play cards Twin sometimes mainboard like Twisted Images because shit like Spellskite won't fuck you.
I get that the Twin pieces are good for supporting the control wincon. With Fold you can run cards that are even BETTER at supporting the control wincon. You have more room to run cards, and you can run more colours because the only mandatory colour is blue.
Certified 7/2 Twin sideboard, 9 slots for you to fill (I couldn't think of what fits here off the top of my head), adjust lands all you like. Give me a legitimate reason you can't put 8-9 strong UR cards in those slots and be playing twin with a more resilient combo and a higher quality of live draws. Pester and Exarch are nice cards, but I'm sure you can find something better.
With the way prices are going, you'll be better off stripping one of these on as a backpack.
And what cards would those be? Keep in mind you have 6-10 dead cards in your deck for anything but combo, rather than essentially zero.
Im convinced you're just trolling at this point. Look at the first line of that decklist. 2 Emrakul. If 1/30th of your deck doesn't turn up in your hand alongside a copy of a playlet of a dead card, you lose.
Add in the fact that a single Thoughtseize on Fold either removes your ability to win the game, or signals that you have multiple dead cards in your hand.
>And what cards would those be?
I asked you that, I'm not an expert on the modern card pool but you certainly act like you are.
>Keep in mind you have 6-10 dead cards
6, and 4 are counterspells.
>rather than essentially zero.
Of which, I am assuming, there are better cards in modern, even in UR as well, that serve their secondary tapdown/disruption and blocking purposes.
>Im convinced you're just trolling at this point. Look at the first line of that decklist. 2 Emrakul.
You mean "2 Placeholder card for your choice of wincon creature".
>If 1/30th of your deck doesn't turn up in your hand alongside a copy of a playset of a dead card, you lose.
No, you play Twin without the Twin combo in it, which you previously stated is very capable of winning.
>Add in the fact that a single Thoughtseize on Fold either removes your ability to win the game, or signals that you have multiple dead cards in your hand.
If they Thoughtseize Fold and take it they have taken your combo card, but not your win. I literally copied 90% of a twin deck for that list, minus twin combo. You are contradicting yourself (>>44686131 "Twin wins without combo all the time, and sides out the combo in around half of it's matchups.") saying this deck can't win otherwise Twin would never win after side-boarding out combo. They are almost the exact same deck, but this one has 2 combo-only pieces and 4 sub-par but usable counters that can also be sided out.
It's fucking Bizzaro-Twin.
>being intentionally dense
Twin is 10 cards
Fold is 6
From the lists I saw they had a few twin-support cards too like Twisted images
You have 4-6 card slots where you don't have to play pester/exarch now
You can put creatures there
Creatures that can attack even!
>being intentionally dense
Twin has 4 cards that can't attack
Fold has 6
Also Splintertwin has alot of value even outside of the combo like on a snap or on a spellskite and that utility comes out more than you might think where the 6 cards in fold are dead outside of the combo.
Not only do they attack, they tapdown, wall Junk/Zoo stars, and most importantly: DONT CAUSE YOUR OPPONENT TO WIN THE GAME WHEN YOU CAST THEM OUTSIDE OF THE COMBO.
>4 are counter spells.
You keep saying that, and Im convinced you just don't understand how counterintuitive spending 4 mana to give your opponent free creatures on the board is. The resolution of a Fold is more often then not going to lead to significantly more assrape than if you hadn't countered in the first place.
>Of which, I am assuming, there are better cards in modern, even in UR as well, that serve their secondary tapdown/disruption and blocking purposes.
You're seriously underestimating how consistent the 6-4 spread is, and how efficient the Twin cards are.
>No, you play Twin without the Twin combo in it, which you previously stated is very capable of winning
Except for the part where you don't have the creatures, tap control, or inevitability.
>If they Thoughtseize Fold and take it they have taken your combo card, but not your win
Im not even going to try to beat this in anymore, Im just going to have to assume you've never seen Twin play the control game and win the game through life total with Snap, Exarch, and Pestermite on the board.
Exarch can effectively stall or even win games when played independently, Fatty de jour sits in your hand as a dead draw outside of the combo.
Splinter Twin can aid in the beatdown or buy you a Snap, Fold literally just makes you lose for 4cmc if you aren't "winning" with it.
Im just going to add in the hilarious fact that getting the Fold combo off doesn't actually win the game, and your opponent has an entire turn to kill you while Fatty sits there looking pretty. Fold "going off" essentially loses to Twin going off in response.
That's not the point, the point is you can play better value/attackers when running fold.
Fold puts in 4+ more higher quality attackers than exarch/pester
>You keep saying that, and Im convinced you just don't understand how counterintuitive spending 4 mana to give your opponent free creatures on the board is.
Not every deck runs creatures.
How do you win if you're hellbent? Twin does this easily, topdeck a creature then topdeck twin. Your shitty deck requires you to draw Fold, draw Emrakul, and then also draw a third spell for you to counter, and you still haven't won the game.
>Fold "going off" essentially loses to Twin going off in response.
>Tapping out against Twin is a loss
Tell me something new, Einstein.
Fine /tg/, I'm sorry that I tried a small innovation on the modern meta and I hope you can let me repent for my heresy.
Or you topdeck lands over and over. Poor argument.
But if you're planning to win by folding in an emrakul why do you want better value attackers? Why are you so desperate to play this obviously subpar deck and convince us it's better than the most played deck in modern right now? Sure it isn't shit, but Twin combo wins the game on the spot. Fold relies on a full turn at least before it wins. The deck is slower, and it's combo pieces don't have any real application outside of the combo? You're never going to cast Emrakul, your cantrip is just that, a shitty cantrip, and fold is a trashy ass counterspell. Twin gets extra beatdown and more snaps, Exarch/pester can play the controlly beatdown game pretty well.
Exactly, why bring up an argument of such a niche situation?
>But if you're planning to win by folding in an emrakul why do you want better value attackers?
Because that was anon's complaint you retard. Read the thread.
>Why are you so desperate to play this obviously subpar deck and convince us it's better than the most played deck in modern right now?
I'm not playing it, I was simply THEORIZING on cards and real applications for them. Y'know, the thing that the top meta players do. The thing that any good player does. Thinks of new decks to see what might be viable. Lantern Control came from thinking of new uses for old cards. So did Amulet Bloom, the new cancer.
>Fold puts in 4+ more higher quality attackers than exarch/pester
So does TarmoTwin. It still runs Exarch to actually win the game though.
>Not every deck runs creatures
Spending 4cmc to do nothing but counter a spell essentially means that either Ad Naus and Scapeshift have already won, or you have so much mana and such a slow opponent that the Twin package could have gone off by then.
>Or you topdeck lands over and over. Poor argument.
The argument isn't "what if Im flooded or starved" it's "I have zero ways of winning the game outside of pulling 1/30th of my deck with zero tutors." And the dead Fold, and an enabler. Then you have to have the mana for both the same turn and neither can be countered or you lose.
A good tip for combo decks: when the Thoughtseize decision making is along the lines of "what discard fucks him over" rather than "what can't I deal with." Your combo likely isn't secure. Even Scapeshit suffers some bad matchups due to this.
You are making a mistake in assuming you are a good player with good ideas concerning the modern meta.
Good deckbuilders make good decks, which is what they are known for, unlike you, who is trying to convince players that your silly idea is worth mulling over.
So well done, you've theorised a little bit and have worked out you could make a combo deck. Good job, plenty of people have done it before. You've decided to compare it against other, competitive decks. Good idea, it can help you see how good the deck is. Then you decide to go into the Modern general, and talk about your deck. You see you've hit a little speedbump now, because this is a competitive modern general, dedicated to discussing the current state of the meta, not your jank ass shitbrew, you fucking moron. You've managed to completely derail this thread, and don't seem to understand your deck is so, so much worse than twin with this misguided idea that Twin can't play the beatdown game and needs to dedicate a few slots to some better beatdown creatures by running a completely different combo which doesn't even win on the spot. You want to beat someone down when playing Twin or a twin-esque deck? Play fucking tarmo twin and fuck off about this stupid ass t3 combo deck.
I love how whenever someone comes up with an idea and posts it in these threads it's met with ferocious rejection and scorn because it's not already tested and proven
I bet it's also the same people who complain about modern being a solved format
>because it's not already tested and proven
Nigga fold.dec is older than you are, hell it even got like a single result 2 years ago that nobody expected.
Go meme somewhere else kid.
I don't complain about ideas. I like ideas. What I don't like is the brewers who think they're hot shit and don't understand and refuse to listen to any criticism, brushing it all off, using niche situations and deliberately making shit up about other decks to somehow prove their brew is good.
And don't try and tell me fold in aether combo hasn't been tried before, it's been around for literally years and still makes the rounds in the casual scene.
Imagine the first eldrazi poster.
That being said, criticism is good. You need to refine your idea, and then test it.
My worry with your idea is that six combo pieces, 2 of which are actually dead if you don't have one of the other 4 is both too much dead cards, and too little resiliency.
I foresee really bad matchups against any deck that can get set up fast, such as Affinity or even Lantern (though G1 you'll usually beat lantern, I don't see you beating them G2 or G3).
Burn is gonna hurt you too.
And with bad matchups against burn and affinity, you'll have serious trouble in this meta.
Isn't that too slow to actually be consistent?
You have two Emmys, which are your only wincon, and then you need to wait until you draw into one and also have fold into Aether in hand, and then have at least 5 mana for a combo.
You've been arguing your point of view for hours and you still don't get it. Don't you see the flaws in your game plan? You can't use Fold as a counterspell, or you can't win and if you are using it to counter something, you've already lost. You have no real way to dig well apart from Visions and Remand, which will hardly draw you Emmy, and if it did, it'll be a dead card until you can use Fold on one of your own spells.
The deck idea doesn't work, don't delude yourself into thinking it can if you fine tuned it more. I honestly think you're a troll, and I guess you won, since we all responded.
Your curve doesn't have enough 3 drops to really get value from CoCo AND it's a nombo with Thalia, vial would be alot better.
Troll isn't really a good card and when it is good it's on the defence but that isn't your gameplan
Wilt-Leaf Liege would be bomb since you lack reach and something to help you alpha strike and break stalemates but you can't CoCo it.
Also Aven Mindsensor is a must as is I believe an extra copy of Thalia.
1 or 2 tec edge, 1 or 2 Stirring Wildwood would also be good. Also fetchlands, what the balls? Or are you going to tell me that you can afford 4 Nobles and 4 Voices but not the cheapest fetch on the market?
These eldrazi decks are gonna be the shit. The absolute, top of the format shit. They're already competing with other decks, and everyone is just playing blind. Now they've gotten a whole shit ton of staple quality cards printed that slot in perfectly with their decks, and after a month of experimentation with the new eldrazi, a single archetype is going to emerge and punch tron's shit in.
Yeah I really don't see the point of not reprinting this desu senpai.
Combo decks would still run Remand over it anyway, hard 2 mana counters would help keep a lot of nasty stuff in check.
Silumgar's Scorn, the new Surge counter, I hope they're considering it at least.
Fetches + 4 mainboard Leonin Arbiters is kind of a no go. No Hatebears list ever runs fetches. I do kind of agree with you on the topic of Trolls and Mindcensors though. I used to have this as an Aether Vial based deck and I didn't like it.
Fuck, this is too many cards to start investing in.
Should've bought Heartless summoning earlier now it just went up.
Is this guy seeing play yet? Because I'm thinking of buying a shitton of them just in case.
Wait, people have trouble playing lantern control? The decision trees are obvious 99.9999% of the time. There are only a few niche situations where you have to think anything beyond "well, is this a land or a non land?"
Fuck, I was literally minutes away from adding them to my cart
That'll teach you to act now rather than later
Seize the moment
Does devoid function outside the game as well?
Can you glittering wish for a brutal expulsion?
I hate this deck, but only because I've had terrible luck playing it when I was testing it out.
Thanks. That's what I figured, but it just seemed odd that an ability would function outside the game.
Outside the game I guess is actually still in the game.
I miss the days when wishes could get exiled things.
This. Ideas are fine. But you need to be open to the possibility that your idea is bad.
I'm looking at the list in >>44686023 and I see a deck that just dies, just completely hopelessly dies, if it doesn't draw an Emrakul, and has no way to tutor them, and still only runs two copies. There is no planet where that's a good plan. And please stop pretending Fold doubles as a counterspell, I'm pretty sure judges are trained to interpret a player using Fold to counter an opponent's spell as a concession.
speaking of ideas, heres mine!
The idea is basicly to control the game long enough to drop a fatty with Trash for Treasure, sacrificing a Wellspring or in need a Citadel.
Ive been actually playtesting this, and the main problems are that its just a worse twin and kind of looses to GY hate, altough you still can drop Titans, Leviathans and Wurmcoils its not very good if your yard gets hated.
I've been thinking about splashing green for Bring To Light and also one or two huntmasters in the sideboard to support keranos as an alternate wincon.
If I refuse to copy paste top8 should I stop playing modern? Serious question.
It's okay to brew if you happen to be among the 20 best deckbuilders in the world. If you're not, don't bother unless you really like losing.
Netdecks are like chess openings: not using the tried and true is not creative, it's just incorrect. You want to flex your creativity, play cube draft or something.
I'm a contrarian or something, I don't know. When I recognize something as overpowered or the flavor of the month, the same shit everyone is doing, I try to beat it with something "worse". Logically it makes no sense, but it's what I do.
My shitbrew hasn't done explicitly horrible at my local meta but last FNM was disappointing enough for me to forego the tournament series today.
I just don't feel that I could do too much to improve it without changing colors and I'd just be playing Jund or Grixis at that point.
If there are decks that can reasonably be expected to kill on turn 2, shouldn't a reasonable counterspell or response be printed?
UU: Counter Target Spell
Would solve the amulet bloom problem.
It wouldn't solve it, but it wouldn't really power any other decks up. Twin would be on the fence about running Counterspell because it's "hard" to cast on turn 2 and doesn't do much more than Mana Leak until later in the game, and Twin doesn't really want to be there anyway. Control, however, would fucking LOVE a 2 mana counterspell.
Returning from exile will trigger "enters the battlefield" type abilities.
Returning from exile will not trigger "when you cast X" abilities.
Casting a spell from exile will trigger "when you cast X" abilities.
Casting a spell from exile will not trigger "when you cast X from hand" abilities.
Just read the card.
>Mono W D&T
You realise that this is as redundant as the flavour text on Ancient Grudge right?
"In this world, nothing is certain but death and taxes. Oh, and some fucking dumbshit trying to force white weenie in every format."
- Oscar Wilde
Brew UW tempo. Geist of Big Shaft, Clique, Snapcaster, Remand, Judge's Familiar, Ojutai's Command/Cryptic Command,
Lyev Skyknight. The only problem is lacking the reach that Bolt gives you.
Adding the real Counterspell to Modern would likely make Modern more boring. Its power level is fine for the format, but since it's completely unconditional, there's no real way to play around it.
>there's no real way to play around it
Seriously? Do you think that Modern decks are currently playing around each other? Affinity, Burn, Infect, Scapeshift, Twin, Tron, Living End. These aren't decks that want to interact; they just want to run people over while screaming LALALA NOT LISTENING with their fingers in their ears. Counterspell promotes interacting with your opponent and making decisions as to whether you want to let that spell resolve or whether you want to be greedy. My god I wish I could play control in modern.
If a card is exiled, counters will fall off it and disappear, unless otherwise stated (see skullbriar). The card that comes back from exile is treated as an entirely different object from the card that left to exile.
The best modern decks are completely uninteractive piles of cards though.
Modern needs low CMC fast answers to diversify it. BFZ and Oath are going to help a little bit with this, since devoid helps to get around protection, and thus can help against affinity.
But we also need a good counterspell, and an okay cantrip that doesn't promote combo too much.
I'd also like to see some cheap nonbasic land hate. We need more ghost quarter type cards.
And finally, they need to reprint cabal therapy and innocent blood.
Tron, Scapeshift, and Amulet Bloom are all the reason that WotC's policy of not letting people interact with lands cheaply is retarded.
At least let us have some cheap nonbasic land hate.
A slaughter games at 2 mana that can only name nonbasic land cards.
There. Affinity, Tron, Amulet Bloom, and Scapeshift all brought down to acceptable levels.
Tron is literally the least satisfying way to lose in MtG. At least with affinity/twin, etc, I feel like the opponent had to work for it. Tron just sits there until they get it online and then casts karn and wins.
>A slaughter games at 2 mana that can only name nonbasic land cards.
>Tron can't cast wurm until t6, karn until t7, ulamog until t10
>most likely not even as fast as that since his deck now contains only 15 lands
Are you fucking serious?
>check out the stream
>UR twin v. BW tokens
>check 20 minutes later
>same match different players
>twin v. _____
>_____ v. tokens
I'd rather watch and Ad Nauseam mirror than see either of these decks again.
Slaughter games isn't even interactive man. You're effectively ignoring your opponent and gutting their deck. It's about as interactive as plopping a stony silence on the field.
Stop beating around the bush and just say you want the tron lands banned. That's a perfectly respectable opinion to have.
Path to Exile
Amulet of Vigor
What happens to Modern?
What I really want in Modern is some kind of a one-mana Ruination that singlehandedly makes nonbasic lands completely unplayable.
You're probably right.
a 2 mana thought hemorrhage then. Here's how I'd word it:
Name a card.
Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If any of the named card are there, exile them, and deal 3 damage to that player for each of the named card exiled this way. If any cards are exiled this way, tSearch that player's graveyard and library for all cards with that name and exile them. Then that player shuffles his or her library.
That way you still have to guess which of the tron lands are in his hand, there's some interaction.
Then reprint brainstorm, to make it even more fun of a mini game.
Oh, and give it Flashback---Sacrifice a creature.
This is my containment thread.
Bitter complaints about the state of modern belong in modern general.
There needs to be stronger nonbasic hate in the meta to control decks like tron and amulet bloom
>Goyf, Bolt, Snap and Path gets banned
Literally 90% of Modern players switch to legacy
The converted mana cost (commonly abbreviated CMC) of an object is an integer equal to or greater than zero. It is determined by converting each colored mana symbol in the spell's cost to 1 (unless it is one of the hybrid mana symbols Mana2w.pngMana2u.pngMana2b.pngMana2r.pngMana2g.png, each of which converts to 2), then adding the results to the colorless mana cost of the spell. (For example, spells with mana costs of Mana 2.pngGreen mana.png and Mana 1.pngGreen mana.pngGreen mana.png both have a converted mana cost of 3.)
The only case in which a spell's converted mana cost can ever vary is for spells with Mana X.png in the mana cost. When an object with X in the mana cost is on the stack, X equals whatever value was chosen for it when it was put on the stack. In any other location, X equals 0.
So 7. Thank you. I would have guessed 2, since I thought the X would only effect it if the X was actually paid for with mana.
I've considered D&T, but I didn't think it had good matchups. How do you do against the big 3 (twin, tron, affinity)?
Depends on when you started. If you have some vintage playables, try moderately competitive EDH. It has a good community, is eternal, and is a lot of fun.
If you don't have vintage staples, and aren't willing to sell 2d8 organs to buy into vintage, you're stuck with modern or standard.
Modern will cost you 1d4 organs to buy into, but if you buy something like affinity, the upkeep will be very little.
Standard will cost you 1 organ per year for the rest of your life to buy into and maintain.
And then finally, there's the lowest tier of play, casual EDH. It costs about 1000-10000 dollars to buy into, almost all of which is spent exclusively on commissioning furry porn alters of varying playability.
I hate this shit, youre happy for your pet deck but youre also unhappy because the prices gonna spike like fuck. Am I misremembering something or wasnt this the case half a year ago?
I'm a MTG noob, how does this card actually work?
I'm confused, because when I asked the card shop owner about it in rl he gave me a weird answer that I feel is wrong.
Basically, what he told me, is that when it comes into play tapped that you immediately get the "Add [a] Planes to your mana pool" is given to you for free. That it's basically a free +1/+1 Vigilance for that turn AND a Planes land all in one. That sounds too good to be true to me.
How are you supposed to use the Planes tap effect anyways? Is the card itself just a Planes outside of the buff or do I have to use a token of some kind to represent the Planes?
You could use blue bolt if you want
it's a land with an etb effect. It buffs the turn it comes in. It comes in tapped so you can not tap it for mana the first turn it enters as it is already tapped. You can tap it for W once it's untapped.
>buy up all the Heartless Summonings in the bargain binder
>sell them for 10x what you bought them for
>heartless summoning 6 buxx
It doesn't create a Plains card. It just taps for white mana, just like a Plains card would.
All basic lands have and "invisible" ability that says "Tap this card and you get a mana of this color". They are not mana themselves, they just can give you mana. Mixing the two is a common mistake for newbies, especially since Duels gives confusing tooltips that claim lands are mana (they're not, mana is an entirely separate thing that lands just give).
Everyone is hoarding whatever new tech is found for the Eldrazi meme hoping that version will become the best
Personally I got my Eyes and Temples and most of the OGW Eldrazi preordered so Imma chill
Thanks, the more I think about this the more this makes sense to me.
Yeah, so I bought this White/Red starter deck and at the same time the store owner gave me this black deck box for free with two 30 card decks (one White, one Red) as well. It was pretty nice.
Today I took them apart and made two complete 60 card decks. One mono-white and one mono-red.
This really clears things up nicely.
These last few days have made me really hate WOTC, this economy is out of control
In legacy I can be fairly sure my expensive cards will be playable for years but in modern, the banlist is so erratic I don't think anything is safe
The other part I really don't like it's how lately no cards are just gaining value normally but spiking hard through panic buyouts and staying there
It goes to show how desperate people are to get into modern, they pray with all their might the deck will become good and they won't have to spend 1000 bucks to play competitive Magic
I'm one of them
>Duels gives confusing tooltips
The simplified rules also give misleading answers as they claim that lands add mana when they become tapped, rather than them adding mana to your pool by tapping.
The problem is that there isn't really an economy in Magic. In the real world, supply rises to meet demand and keep prices in equilibrium. But in Magic, supply CAN'T rise to meet demand, meaning that for equilibrium to be found, demand must fall. The anger people are feeling towards Wizards over this shit situation is an aspect of that forcibly falling demand. People are being forced out of Magic by money.
I gave up on hoping WotC would try to explain the complexities of MtG to newbies rather than dumbing down the game for everyone else when Rosewater said the stack was a mistake on his blog
Oh look. Its UR twin v. BW tokens. AGAIN.
Jesus, these two decks are boring as fuck.
Less boring than Bloom Titan matches at least.
What's the most YuGiOh deck, past or present, in Magic?
By "YuGiOh," I mean decks with extreme deck-search and draw power and big sicknasty plays you can make early on. Does such a thing even exist?
I'm trying to imagine how it would look in my head. Perhaps there could be a card that bypasses your restriction of playing one Land per turn, Creatures who search for more creatures when played, and then winning the game with some insane 10+ damage combo.
No one knows. It boggles the mind honestly. They could release FTV: Sorry About That with one of each dual land, one of each fetchland, a Goyf, Snapcaster, Lilly, and Force of Will in it for $500, and absolutely destroy the bank with the amount of money they try to deposit into it.
$15 MSRP for a booster, in a format where all the cards in it are actually played in Modern and Legacy, printed at their original rarities.
Don't tell me that wouldn't be like selling cheap cocaine in a prison.
So is this card supposed to be CMC 4 colorless, or is colorless now a specific color that specific lands and artifacts generate and then the (3) is just whatever 3 random mana you want rather than being generic colorless mana?
(1) in a spell or ability's cost is generic mana that can be paid with anything
(c) or "diamond mana" is colorless that requires colorless mana. from now on lands and artifacts that produce colorless will read T: add <> to your mana pool. everything is still the same as it was before, they just made a visual change.
>So is this card supposed to be CMC 4 colorless
yes, it is CMC 4, and effects that look for color will note that it is "colorless"
can interact with etched champion, will duck Ultimate Price, etc
>or is colorless now a specific color that specific lands and artifacts generate
>the (3) is just whatever 3 random mana you want
Wizards: Counterspells and land hate aren't "fun" for new players, let's make them less powerful!
Wizards: W..w..why is this h..h.happening to our f...f..format BAN BAN BAN BAN BAN
Wal-Mart, Target, Barnes and Noble, and Amazon wouldn't give a fuck. Local shops that don't resell singles, which is really less of a thing than people seem to assume based on examples like SCG and other retailers, wouldn't give a fuck.
Wizards doesn't need secondary sellers. I just wish they'd start acting like they realize it.
(1), (2), (3), (X), etc = Generic cost. This can be paid with any type of mana of the appropriate amount. (The types of mana are white, blue, black, red, green, and colorless.)
(<>) = Colorless mana. Anything that adds colorless mana to your mana pool adds that much (<>) to your mana pool. In a cost, (<>) means that you have to use specifically colorless mana to pay it (just like (w) means you have to use white mana).
So, a cost of (3)(<>) means "Pay three mana of any type plus one mana that is specifically colorless".
Colorless mana works the same as always (Sol Ring still taps for two colorless mana), it's just being represented with a new symbol (so Sol Ring now reads that it adds (<>)(<>) rather than (2) mana).
Good. Hoogland lives in a shit town.
I live there too.
>Wizards doesn't need secondary sellers. I just wish they'd start acting like they realize it.
Is there some secret cabal of secondary sellers that has some fucking dirt on Wizards? I honestly don't understand how Wizards keeps bending over backwards to please secondary sellers at the expense of their player base, especially since Wizards doesn't actually profit from the secondary market.
But anon! Double faced cards are beloved! They're the biggest innovation in Magic's history! Why, if it was logistically affordable, every set should have lots of double faced cards!
You need infrastructure to hop into the secondary market. Also user trust.
I think wizards would actually lose money if they got into the secondary market. Nobody would trust that the latest mythic rare modern format instant staple wasn't deliberately designed to be over powered.
Right now we can just assume wizards is incompetent.
Bloomingon-Normal, Illinois. He never comes to either of the local shops, only ever grinds on modo. If he ever did go to local shops he'd be up against Zoo and Tron: the shop, or G/B/X and Tron: the shop.
I exclusivly play at the GBX shop and build Memedrazi so I could eat everyone alive.
Jund's gunna lose to Tokens. I think Jund's time is gone for now qq
Alesha is cuter desu
Oh man that got me good
>Dredge has to attack with creatures to win the game
Manaless never attacks. It wins through Dread Returning a Flayer of the Hatebound, then Dread Returning a Grave Troll for the Flayer trigger.
>Wizards doesn't actually profit from the secondary market.
They profit indirectly, or do think that every article that comes out during spoiler from SCG and CFB praising the new set and hyping every new piece of shit on a cardboard are honest to god reviews and not ploys to move prouduct?
Plus SCG plans events that both
a) Have better coverage than official Wizards streams
b) Gain more viewers than them.
Some of them were pretty cool concepts, like the artifact that flips to a demon creature. It was a much more satisfying feeling than saccing an artifact to produce an 'unstoppable' demon token that then proceeds to be flickered or unsummoned, because at least with the dual-sided you get something back.
Isn't scuffing something that just naturally happens with sleeves?
I may as well call out every player when I go to a PTQ on marked sleeves and win without playing my deck once.
You're almost better off picking Khans than Dragons because Dragons literally only stops stuff for a turn, it's fucking stupid unless you want to waste their mana.
Not really, on black sleeves and cheaper sleeves they get scuffed a lot more and whiter. I have 5 year old sleeves with no visible markings
I came here to make people confused and upset
>top 4 and no B/W tokens
so guessing whoever bought out all those Auriok Champions is boned
rate first alter pls.
ignore the right side, I know I fucked that up.
Gladly this is almost not noticable when in a sleeve
It's so much more satisfying than poking someone to death with spellbombs
I mean, that fact seems to make people more upset than having to deal with eggs happening, so either way I win
>ad nauseam mirror
>watch two people attack with three mana 2/2s
>until the round goes to time because of how many angel graces and phyrexian unlifes are in the deck
It can't be THAT bad.
So you built a deck around a card that can kill your deck?