Posts made by pilsburydohboy42
posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

Losing to Krark's flip on your Flusterstorm seems like one of the better things you could do, I think I would start there. Also its worth mentioning that Ravenous Trap is unaffected assuming it's condition is met. Seems to me his largest downfalls are that you almost certainly won't be running the up-to-12 various Forces that are available and that he is miserable with a Sphere around, but those can be mitigated in deckbuilding. I'm assuming that anyone playing this card is accepting the addition of greater variance to a high-variance game and ignoring that argument.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@botvinik Interesting, I find it to be a disservice to discussion when somebody says something like "this card might be good, here are a few scenarios in which it has proven successful for me: {examples}." and almost immediately like 9 other people jump in with 1 line arguments about how this card totally sucks and could never work, it's impossible to play a 4 color card in vintage, you should just play Tezzeret, etc,. Especially within the context of a new card thread; we're not talking about a deck, a metagame - nothing other than "can this card be good?"

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

You should all drop whatever definitions you have about this game. There are more than 2 ways that shops can win. There is more than 1 way that you can win. There is more than 1 way to build any given deck. Very few cards are equal, most are incredibly abstract. Very few players are equal, most are incredibly eccentric. Even after you test comprehensively and define things to your own standards you should consider all other options. Each new card that exists has the potential to fundamentally change all other cards.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@botvinik Cool, in what context and in what ways?

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

@chubbyrain1 said in [ZRN] Omnath, Locus of Creation:

This thread...

Seriously. I'm confused why anybody has such an adamant stance that this card is bad. There is no point in the game where Omnath won't be functioning as you want it to and at the very worst it replaces itself. Also I can't imagine you want more than 2 in even the most dedicated of decks (even then 2 might be rough), so if you are a results-oriented person I'm not sure why singleton results don't count.

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

You guys are impossible......he just went seriously into depth about how 1 single card can't possibly replace it and do all that it does. Just because your deck is singleton doesn't mean it can play ANY 60 cards

posted in Xerox read more

@chubbyrain1 cool, good responses. Yeah, I got that, but also similar to Vault decks you aren't totally reliant on Uro+Gush, which is good, and also why I would consider Uro #3 a threat not a combo piece. Sometimes he will just take over. I suppose you have more hard mana than most that casting 4-5 mana forces is actually rather easy as well, and I wasn't considering the hard cast even if you cant find a 2nd green card.

posted in Xerox read more

@protoaddict true-name seems really, really bad for this deck. It isn't really interested in life totals, and sounds like it has all day to kill when it is working, which allows you time to set up the appropriate circumstances to avoid removal. I imagine a 3rd Uro or Brazen Borrower would be among the best options for an extra threat, or a Snapcaster (though it doesn't seem like he feels there is a need anyway).

@chubbyrain1 Loving the Misdirection, do you ever feel you want a 2nd? Is 12 green-count postboard enough for 3 Force of Vigor? And if not would the 3rd Nature's Claim be better/more reliable than the 3rd Force?

posted in Single-Card Discussion read more

I would imagine that deciding to play this card vs. Beast Within/Generous Gift comes down to how good your Bazaar matchup is

posted in Off-Topic read more

@desolutionist Yeah, you reminded me the other day of how much more I enjoyed the consistency of 4x Brainstorm vintage. I know that's not true for everyone though.

posted in Vintage Community read more

Ouch, swing and a miss in my eyes. I was looking forward to playing Lurrus without companion, really cool card.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@protoaddict said in [B&R Announcement - May 18, 2020]

What is the draw to the format if not for the restricted cards and the small subset that are not restricted here but banned in legacy? Remove those from the equation and the format is very close to just being legacy. You can't not have a restricted list and still have lotus, moxen, ancestral, etc not be banned, and if you ban them here they are officially unplayable everywhere. The whole point of the format is to be able to play cards you cannot play elsewhere.

You would still be able to play your power if they change the rules. If you are playing in paper, Vintage is about as sanctioned as Old School. Just do what you want, woo!

I feel like the best draw to a format would be a fun format, dunno how best to accomplish that, but I'm also not gonna expect Wizards to put a lot of effort into fixing a format they don't really think about. To say the rules can never change is very constraining to our common goal in having fun playing Magic, and it kinda surprises me that the Vintage B&R isn't community driven already. I feel like Wizards might embrace that change, they at least wouldn't have to hear us complain all day, and Vintage is moving further and further from their ability to contain without a mindful eye.

By the way, I'm not advocating to ban any cards, just suggesting to ban the companion mechanic. I almost love the design, and think they should try again with something similar but -1 card.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@protoaddict said in B&R Announcement - May 18, 2020:

The format NEEDS a restricted list and NEEDS to not have power level bans, because it is bluntly critical to the nature of the format, it just needs a better method and no matter what it's going to create a shake up to the format as we know it.

Is there a reason that you are so adamant about this?

posted in Vintage Community read more

@desolutionist cool! I really like the design space and think there would be a ton of potential for innovation and diversity, I think its just a shame that they are +1 card.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@desolutionist just curious, is this because of companion or because of Lurrus?

posted in Vintage Community read more

I find that precedent is an odd form of measurement, and in all metrics. The way that you feel today is not how you will feel tomorrow. If that is the case, I would challenge to you (in a non-threatening way) that if you feel the same tomorrow it is likely that you haven't learned enough today.

posted in Vintage Community read more

......but Force of Will is -1 card and Lurrus (not specifically) is +1 card.........

posted in Vintage Community read more

I'm just saying if you +1 starting hand size to half the decks in the format that the other half start looking like poor options to play. Yes, obviously the +1 card can't be trash (people playing 3/2 vigilance dude in a 0 creature deck), but if it's playable the advantage is huge and huge consistently.

Not totally vintage relevant, but it also really bothers me that Gyruda is one of like 3 cards that works through Leyline of the Void for no apparent reason.

@joshuabrooks said in B&R Announcement - May 18, 2020:

I think this printing will further magnify the schism between MTGO and paper and elite players and casual.

Lurrus games can be very deep and nuanced and engaging battles of attrition for elite players. They can also be mind-numbingly repetitive for casuals.

We're right back in the same conundrum that Mentor caused. Each individual game can be deep and awesome, but from an aerial view the format looks horrible. People quit then. They didn't come back. I know that's not a good reason to make decisions from, but it's definitely relevant.

This is a good point. I imagine Lurrus vs. Lurrus to be a really cool matchup and incredibly skill intensive, maybe some of the best Magic you could ever possibly play, but sooo damn polarizing that I'm forced to say "fuck that". I'd like to hurl the companion mechanic in a sack, and hurl that sack in a river, and hurl that river into space.

posted in Vintage Community read more

@protoaddict said in B&R Announcement - May 18, 2020:

I fail to see how this is true. All the cards in your deck are arguably there for synergistic reasons, companions are no different. To say that a companion stifles you because it places restrictions on you is completely contrary to all the magic design principals that Maro has constantly talked about, where restrictions and limitations breed creativity.
Saying the companions stifle creativity is like saying Lord of Atlantis stifles creativity because he is only used in a prescribed list and is totally linear.

I say this because companions and their +1 to starting hand size essentially invalidate any non-companion strategy. Card advantage is the name of the game and always has been. If they had to shuffle a card back to insert the companion into their hand I wouldn't care at all, and would then be excited for such design space.

posted in Vintage Community read more

Companions stifle creativity, not breed it. Just ban the mechanic, not the cards.