Search options (Page 30 of 54)

Could you perhaps provide some added guidance with regard to the level of play they'll be seeing (casual, FNMs, etc) and the sort of budget you're looking at working with?  Additionally, it's typically best to provide at least a short writeup regarding how you expect/want each deck to perform.  So for instance, is your Boros deck aimed at simply dropping value creatures to take them out as quickly as possible (aka aggro), or do you have a slower play strategy that centers on some more expensive cards to cast like Assemble the Legion (aka mid-range)?  Remember, the more information you can provide to the community, the more likely they will be able to provide some meaningful insight (also, the more likely you will to get any feedback at all).

I could see where you're really going to want some more items to just stall out the game.  I'm thinking along the lines of Curse of Exhaustion, Supreme Verdict, Aetherize, Planar Cleansing, Riot Control, Downsize (nobody ever expects the overloaded version, but it buys you turns), Blustersquall (same story), Sleep, Cyclonic Rift, hell, even Sphere of Safety might work.

As a side note, if you want to ensure this thing works, Possibility Storm pairs with Curse of Exhaustion hilariously, as the opponent cannot cast another spell for the duration of the game.  Then you could take your sweet time assembling all the gates.

I know that I do my able best not to interfere with the BTRs as I know how much it would bother me if everyone else wanted to give their two cents on any dispute I would have.  I'll chime in if people need to post stuff that they've forgotten, but otherwise I try to mind my own business.

That aside, I'm curious whether there need to be restrictions regarding who can comment.  On the one hand, I can see where it would prevent situations from getting heated.  But on the other, perhaps someone, like HikingStick in the case that resulted in things being moved here, can offer some perspective that helps to resolve an issue or otherwise diffuse the situation.  Personally I think it should be limited in the sense that someone monitors the BTRs more closely to ensure that things don't get out of hand or stray too far off topic.

In that vein, given that Sebi and Catinca are doing ALL of the site's maintenance, updates, and the like, would it maybe make sense to name someone to be "in charge" of the BTRs?  I know that you guys do the best you can to handle things in a timely manner, but some of these things sit for a few days and tempers flare (the recent BTR between fairportmagic and NickTheSushi comes to mind as an example).  What are peoples' thoughts about a moderator or two being named "BTR Czars" or something like that to assist in managing/resolving the BTRs?  I feel like most of the BTRs we're seeing are pretty simple to resolve, as they require an e-mail to the offending party, a grace period for him/her to respond, and then some sort of punitive measure which would then be referred to the admins anyway.

Lastly, I have to really question our treatment of negative ratings in such a revered light.  I definitely understand how the tit-for-tat negative feedbacks would work, but why not simply prevent the feedback from showing to the other party until the entire trade is completed and feedback is left on both sides?  Personally, I've been fortunate not to have any real issues with negative feedback, but what is the point of negative feedback if you have to file a BTR and most of those end up with people being banned or listed as scammers?  I think the negative feedback should be, within reason, the slightly lesser punishment for a trade gone sour (whether the person is just being a dick, lies about card condition, etc).  Then people wouldn't simply abandon their accounts to create a new one in the event of negative feedback.  For instance, if someone says they're going to mail something but don't mail it until a week after promised.  They still upheld their end of the bargain, although at an inconvenience to their trade partner.  This should warrant a negative feedback point, but I don't think it needs everyone to get involved for a BTR.  If this is the case, we should REQUIRE that people provide a 2-3 sentence explanation for WHY they left negative feedback, which future traders can then see.  In extreme cases, these disputes could be taken to a BTR, but I think we've gone and complicated the system to the point that BTRs and negative feedback are increasingly difficult to separate.  Further, it's taking an increasing amount of time and effort to arbitrate all these disputes which I'm sure Sebi and Catinca would likely enjoy not reading transcripts and dealing with people arguing.

I believe the issue being raised is with the fact that Ordruun Veteran must have battalion trigger in order for it to be any better than just a Daring Skyjek... and considering that he's double the cost and wouldn't even have any evasion, I have to agree that he should likely come out.

So first off, when you add a card to a deck, it does not add it to your inventory.  It will cross-check with your inventory, but will list things that aren't present in your inventory as being missing and then calculate the cost of cards yet to be obtained (probably part of why it would take so long to load).  However, if you're going to be using the trading options on the site here, you have to list the cards in either your inventory or tradelist for it to even allow you to enter them into the trade field - otherwise it just doesn't find the cards.  So to that end, perhaps you could just work things out with your trading partners that they would receive a particular section of the decklist or an entire decklist worth of cards.  It would appear to be them trading for nothing to any outside observer, but a perusal of the chat box would reveal that you're giving a link and whatnot.

I realize this isn't an ideal solution; however, the site is free and you really should encourage your friends to just join on their own if they're looking to be moving a 3000-5000 card collection (I know I certainly wouldn't be THAT charitable to catalog, enter, and then trade something that substantial).  Otherwise, you could easily just create separate accounts for the inventories (which is what you're doing at the moment I assume from the two different SNs for the same person).  You would likely run into issues with not having enough rep to really do trades at that point, but then again, if you can link them to the accounts from your MAIN account that is accumulating rep, then I would imagine you can do something similar to what I suggest above with the decklists, which then leaves you in the exact same place.

Ultimately, I guess I could see the need for "multiple" inventories, but I would argue that the overwhelming majority of the users here would never use the function as they're not looking to move such large collections for friends or anything of that sort.

Given that you're looking at post-DGM stuff, why not the Zhur-taa Druids rather than Arbor Elf?  Sure it costs one more, but it's a guaranteed green mana AND it does pinging damage each time you tap it.  It's worth a shot.

As a SB card to consider, Burn at the Stake - given that you're going to be sitting on tons of tokens... why not add the option to put them to use, even if you're not sitting on any anthems?  Additionally, Boros Charm/Rootborn Defenses seem like must-haves to some degree.  And don't forget Sundering Growth for those pesky enchantments that hate on tokens.

If you're really shooting for an Aggro build, you'll need to work in some pieces on the lower end of the curve.  If anything, you should probably top out at four.  As an aggro build really doesn't want the game to stretch past turn 5 anyway - as such, you'd drop Thragtusk and Wolfir Silverheart.

So that raises the question, what do you slide in?  Well, cheaper stuff of course.  Lose Arbor Elf for Experiment One.  Other one drops should be in here too - Rakdos Cackler, Vexing Devil, or Stromkirk Noble are all great options.  Disciple of the Old Ways should be replaced by Mogg Flunkies and/or Flinthoof Boar (don't forget Lightning Mauler too).  Strangleroot Geist probably should be sitting in the mainboard too.

To be honest, I've never seen the need for more than 2x Domri Rade in a deck.  You'd also be well served to slide in some Searing Spears either to clear the way for your creatures, or to hit them for their remaining life.  Rancor can also go a fairly good way in the event they're sitting on a lot of blockers.

So, short answer after all of that being said, if you're going for R/G aggro, you should never even get to 5-CMC for Thundermaw to begin with.

So to clarify point-by-point,

First off, the benefits of Snapcaster Mage and Past in Flames is to open the door so that you CAN use spells that don't have flashback.  If you tie yourself only to items that already have flashback, that's REALLY limiting your options.  You said that you pulled Silent Departure for Cyclonic Rift because it's more effective, so why not do the same for some of the other cards given that you can now flash other things back?

Control WILL be a problem as they're going to be hitting you with counters that exile things - Dissipate and Syncopate are very much a thing.  You won't have any chance to get things back from the 'yard.  Further, if they're smart, they'll see what you're doing after game one and can just counter Burning Vengeance - this leaves you with ZERO options to win.

Aggro still is a problem, as a quality aggro build will kill you by turn four given your current lack of direct removal or blockers.  Yes, Burning Vengeance can target creatures, but it requires you to hit your three drop perfectly and then have more than one flashback spell in the yard already to be able to zap them with.  That's an awful lot you need to go right just to take out 2-3 creatures.  Also, keep in mind how haste will play into things - can you generate three damage at instant speed to deal with a Dreg Mangler?  Further, can you do so consistently?

If you're just looking to rip through cards, Reforge the Soul or Tibalt, the Fiend-Blooded are more consistent and cheaper options to cycle things into the yard.  Then you still have a hand AND can do things with flashback.

The lack of burn/removal I'm stating is the more direct variety that doesn't rely on you having Vengeance on the field.  Again, to manage that you need to have drawn vengeance, get it on the field, and THEN have a flashback spell ready to go... just to deal two damage.  Searing Spear requires two mana... that's it.

With regard to Arcane Melee and Devil's Play, if you reduce the colorless X cost by two, that means you can essentially cast it with an X of two for just one red mana.  So to that end, it would pump the X to four if you have a second one in play, but otherwise a second copy of Melee is a dead card.   It's the same as if you run Pearl Medallion and cast White Sun's Zenith or any other cost reducer like that.  In many regards, you'd be just as well off to try running Goblin Electromancer to see if you can get the same amount of use out of it.

Militant would be an easy target, again, assuming you have all the criteria for a vengeance burn to work... nevermind how many spells it might've exiled on your path to get there.  Again raising the question for more directed burn spells.

Silent Departure was simply something to work with flashback if you're intent on everything having it.  Cyclonic Rift is most definitely a more versatile card (but note the lack of flashback).

So your answer for Thragtusk is that you end up casting and wasting FOUR Vengeance shots?  Lest we not forget he produces the beast token when he dies.  So that's now shifted you to trading four-for-one.  In a world where competitive card advantage is kind of important, that's a trade you would NEVER want to make.  Nevermind that Restoration Angel is also a very real possibility, one that definitely doesn't get touched by Temblor.  Don't forget creatures with regeneration or that grow beyond immediate burn range like Champion of the Parish - which can easily be a 3/3 or 4/4 on turn 2.  Temblor is a good card, but keep in mind its limitations.  In my experience, it's a SB card.

For Naturalize - again, great card, but hardly worth splashing an entirely new color for just that.  If you were sitting on a full playset of the shocks to get green into the mix, that'd be one thing, but three guildgates just won't get you there.  Why not just splash some blue countermagic to deal with those possibilities?  Smelt deals with Grafdigger's Cage but beyond that, I think you might have to just acknowledge that Rest in Peace will totally hose your plan.

Again, playtesting will be the best measure, but I just don't see where a deck without any direct, immediate defenses will survive long.  It might be a blast to play casually, but in a competitive standard environment, you're going to be frustrated.

I'm a fan of pairing Braids, Conjurer Adept with Paradox Haze in EDH.  Then you're deterring the others from attacking you by giving them a way to drop their stuff for free while the Haze gives you two upkeeps, letting you build your advantage.

My only warning would be that you NEED to consistently place bigger, more powerful stuff than your opponents as Braids can easily backfire on you if they end up dropping Vorinclex, Voice of Hunger or something else like that which will totally screw you over for free.

Beyond that, what other color(s) are you running in said EDH deck?  As there are options for getting things out faster depending on your pairings.

Give the other trader a few days to respond.  I would suggest also sending him/her an e-mail via the message feature on their profile.  If they do not respond, follow the site's procedures for filing a bad trader report.  But I would imagine it's just a simple oversight and the person will resolve the issue.

Dah!  That's what I was referring to, not the comments.  Good catch wizard!

So you have a few options here. 

First, you can automatically have the card images by using the "spoiler view" in your decks.  This will display the cards without having to hover over their name(s).

Second, the system, to my understanding, is configured to show the most recent printing unless the edition is otherwise specified in your inventory/in the deck.  You can either designate the card details in your inventory/deck and it should provide the correct card image (at least I'm assuming this to be the case).

However, while I understand your concern that the image text might not always match your cards, I would suggest actually viewing the more recent printings as various components of the game have changed since revised and the newer versions will reflect these changes and will help you get up to speed with the current rules.  I can speak to this directly as I played during revised and then stepped away from the game for 15 years before getting back in about a year ago.  For example, in revised you had Terror which said to "bury" a creature, which is now corrected to say "destroy target creature.  It cannot be regenerated."  This is an important distinction, as creatures with indestructibility would not be able to be killed by terror, but if you don't have the more current wording, you might think bury works differently and believe it would work.  (Nevermind the whole dropping of interrupts as a card type).