Brainstorm
Force of Will
Lion's Eye Diamond
Counterbalance
Sensei's Divining Top
Tarmogoyf
Phyrexian Dreadnaught
Goblin Lackey
Standstill
Natural Order
New players will struggle with it more if they call a FOUR Color deck a three Color specific name, especially when they start calling different archetypes the same way (Maverick and Zoo for example). It is more confusing then the original fucking names they give it here. Have you even seen Grixis control been called Bant???!!! Or ANT been called Doomsday while the fucking card ain't even in it????!!!!
Verstuurd vanaf mijn SM-G935F met Tapatalk
It's Green Sun's Mardu, actually.
That’s what makes it punishing man
You don’t remember when the days of dark Jeskai being commonly used do you?
Btw, I think you misunderstood me, I think the insistence of clan names being used (mostly at the expense RUG, BUG and Junk) is stupid as well.
The top lands deck was in 10th and didn't include any Chalices. One of the three Lands decks ran Chalice as far as my memory goes, and even then it only had one in the side. The Depths deck didn't run blue at all, and the reanimator decks were both black/red. I believe one had green in it out of the side. Are we even talking about the same tournament?
Guys, guys, we're getting way off topic.
We all know that if it ran Brainstorm, 4c Aggro Punishing Abzan Loam Junk would be called High Tide.
All Spells Primer under construction: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e...Tl7utWpLo0/pub
PM me if you want to contribute!
Despite closer analysis fixing that number to 8 decks and not just 1 (facts are fun), the point is that Legacy is strategically diverse.
We see this even in just the top 8. If you think, eg, Miracles, Delver, and Storm are not collectively a diverse range of decks, maybe you ought to be sharing some of that patented Morgan brand Coke? Same with Eldarzi and Loam. These decks all attack the meta from different angles, have different strengths and weaknesses (and MUs), and are totally different from one another to play against. If you refuse to see that, it's on you bud.
Many Lands builds don't these days. But note how Lands is essentially the same deck with CotV or without. Exactly why we should be looking to strategic diversity rather than card diversity.
It's as though you think that Lands adds diversity to the format only if it doesn't run a copy of Chalice in the board. I hope you can see how ridiculous that is.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
Abzan? Pshaw. I still call it Rock.
I know that this idea has been proposed before but what do people think about banning rite of flame. I got to see first hand yesterday how strong this card was and imo it's a very bannable card. It was capable of producing 2 mana on the first, 3 on the 2nd, and so on.
The really oppressive card in that cycle is Rune Snag. It's a counterspell that gets better each time you play it!!1!!
All Spells Primer under construction: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e...Tl7utWpLo0/pub
PM me if you want to contribute!
I've been assuming the Rite of Flame posts are mostly just jokes.
There are currently 1613 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1613 guests)