- Metagame accuracy (success should be evaluated after every competitive outing, also important to finding underplayed cards for a given metagame)
- Matchup understanding (knowing your favorables, role dynamics, key threats and how to compensate)
- Info and bias advantage (this includes bluffing, but is basically about understanding what your opponent is trying for and how your different perspectives on the game state can be played to your strategic advantage)
Vampiric Tutor is pretty awesome in this list. I use it to go down to 1x Grindstone.
I think conventional restricted blue + preordain are better than Bob, since you don't really want to play the long-damage game against the decks where Bob is good. Also you want to keep mana up for Blasts instead of tapping out. I'd cut at least 1x TFK to make room for a Paradoxical Outcome to scroll for. I also like Snap>JVP in order to use Blasts as counterspells the 2nd time.
But I'm not looking for most expensive/common/played.
I'm really looking for more granular price data for MTGO. Specifically, I'd like to have a list that has a large number of cards ever released in MTGO at price points below 0.25 tix. I'd like it in table form, so you can do querries on it, etc.
Thanks for your help
Sorry, more straw men; this isn't AJ's point.
Lastly, I seriously doubt that @THE ATOG LORD needs help in a competitive event
A non-trivial portion of Pro Tour winners have been found out as cheaters. What makes Rich so special?
Note here that I'm not saying his behavior is cheating. I just think it's clear that player quality, if you think Rich is a good player, is irrelevant to the evaluation.
Yeah, no rules since unenforceable, ethical guidelines only. I'll propose a few:...
Yeah, and if a frog had wings his ass wouldn’t bump the ground.
I think AJ's angst is misguided. But I'm equally surprised by the handwaving and straw men on the other side. All you need to say is, "Yes, I wanted help in a competitive event, but it's ok, because it's allowed."
Some of these are really beautiful. But for me the majority have a fatal flaw in that the style is too heavily a visual part of the entire line of artifacts. To me this makes it so it's both hard to easily identify artifacts from those that look kind of similar (the metal and aether is too consistently used throughout) and many of these don't do a very good job of illustrating what the actual card is. 2c
always in an equilibrium, but it shifts from one point to another
These things are literally antonyms. And I think the idea that aggro is ascendant speaks mostly to the diversity of the metagame, and not to an inherent competitive advantage of aggro strategies at the moment.