Results 1 to 17 of 17

Thread: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

  1. #1

    [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    The top sixteen of SCG Boston was one of the sweetest I've seen in a long time, old favorites, updates and totally new decks going hand in hand. For those interested in the detailed scoop on those decks, give it a read:

    http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/l...t_Sixteen.html

    For those that can only think about New Phyrexia commentary, check out the bonus section.
    I don't have low self-esteem, I have low esteem for everyone else. -Daria

    Proud member of Team CAB
    High Priest of the Church of BLA

    CAB JaceTM

    My articles

  2. #2
    Force of Will is my bitch
    Finn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2004
    Location

    South Florida
    Posts

    2,979

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    I think the author should re-examine his definition of "truly new". There is absolutely nothing new about stifling Dreadnoughts in any color combination. There is nothing new or profound about swapping out Standstills for Jace.

    The red-white-black deck is new and somewhat refreshing. I would be very surprised if it stuck around though, since the biggest creatures it can field are a single Ranger of Eos and three Figures of Destiny. Seeing as how the deck has no Swords to Plowshares, if the opponent happens to land a Tarmogoyf (never happen, right?) Team Italia has to Vindicate it or fetch up the Basilisk Collar to handle it in some reasonably efficient fashion. Same for Knight of the Reliquary and anything bigger. It has no basic lands, yet much of the deck is mana-intensive. It has a singleton Divining Top with no way to tutor for it. It has a random assortment discard spells. The deck is not terrible, but there is a good reason nobody has been successful in those colors. There are some significant weaknesses that this one does not address.

    I like your analysis of Reid Duke's list. It is always fun to see someone's testing and thinking process brought to light. Does anyone know how many combo decks were actually in the tournament?
    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
    "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
    "Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
    "Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."

  3. #3
    Member

    Join Date

    Jan 2011
    Location

    providence, rhode island
    Posts

    43

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Actually the stiflenaught decks were quite inovative if you look at the lists. Also the "team italia" deck isnt new its an older deck if you put some research into what you post before you poopoo all over somes article. The deck has four swords in the side for mr goyf in case you missed that as well.

  4. #4
    Member
    Cenarius's Avatar
    Join Date

    Dec 2008
    Location

    Nijmegen
    Posts

    93

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Wow, this is actually a pretty good article.

    I'm very content I read some parts of the article, while skimming through others.
    Team Nijmegen

    Robbert Slavenburg
    DCI: 2069307189

  5. #5

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    @ Finn: There's nothing new about casting Tendrils for twenty yet ANT was something new when it first came out. There's nothing new about casting Natural Order yet Reid Duke's deck uses it in a way that is imo truly new. New doesn't mean a card/synergy hasn't been used before, it means it is being used in a way that is different from what came before it.
    Thing is, I don't think you understand those decks. The name given to them is actually a misnomer. Those decks aren't about Stifling the Nought, they're about disrupting the opponent to hell than drawing cards to keep 'em down. Dreadnought is just a convienient way to end it fast once you're in control. That's why these decks are new and why Dreadstill is something completely different. While Dreadstill could play that way, in many games its plan is for a fast Nought to get there. With a single 12/12 to Trinket up, how many games do you think these new decks are trying to win by dropping it early. Yeah, exactly.
    These decks are a new breed of true control more than something that resembles Dreadstill's combo-control approach. They just happen to be tempo-control and have a Dreadnought to end games fast. Your inability to grasp that is actually a sign how true the "truly new" moniker is.

    @warallthetime: Thanks for the support. As to Team Italia, from the coverage I gleaned that GFab built the deck all on his lonesome. As mentioned in the article, though, someone in my meta had essentially the same deck built for some time and it seems likely that he isn't the only one. Otoh nobody has done well with something like it on the big stage. That means the deck is both new and old, a pretty weird situation.

    @ Cenarius: Happy you liked it :) Why the skimming (just in case there's something I could do better)?
    I don't have low self-esteem, I have low esteem for everyone else. -Daria

    Proud member of Team CAB
    High Priest of the Church of BLA

    CAB JaceTM

    My articles

  6. #6
    Force of Will is my bitch
    Finn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2004
    Location

    South Florida
    Posts

    2,979

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    I love when Johnny-come-latelies just assume they are dealing with the same schmos they run into at events.

    @waraltermime, I have earned the right to say whatever I want about any article that any author links on this site. The fact that another person in some tournament somewhere in the world has piloted the same deck in no way diminishes anything I had to say about it.

    @Mon, I perfectly well understand what I am looking at. You said Dreadstill. I did not. In fact, those decks are very much the same repackaged deck that has been floated on these forums for years. When the removal of its errata was made public there were so many versions of these decks running around in every combination of colors that you needed only pick your favorite. Did you honestly think that nobody had thought to run this deck in a more controllish fashion in all that time? That a compact wincon like Stifling a Dreadnought only ever existed in a single shell? I can't believe the people SCG has writing articles.

    New doesn't mean a card/synergy hasn't been used before...
    To be clear, you said "Truly New". I refuse to enter into a debate on the meaning of the word "new". At any rate, if you have to use provisos of this sort, the word "truly" is an exceedingly poor choice for a heading.
    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
    "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
    "Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
    "Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."

  7. #7

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Enjoyed the article, nice breakdown/ deck analysis. I do agree with Finn's point though, that I think the Uwb Dreadnought/ Counterbalance lists fall more under "old ideas, new forms" than "truly new."

    Also enjoyed the small blurb on New Phyrexia; this really does look like it will be a pretty... um... bonkers set for Legacy. I think with all the hubbub that Mental Misstep is generating (which I think is only slightly overhyped), that there are other Legacy playables which aren't getting as much attention, such as Phyrexian Obliterator, Phyrexian Metamorph, Priest of Urabrask (maybe, imo Dragon Stompy still has problems), Batterskull, Hex Parasite (maybe, although imo Dark Depths has problems also), and Porcelain Legionnaire (maybe)... to name a few. Honestly, some of these cards are more exciting to me than Beast Within but I guess I just kinda like the creatures in this set.

    Anyhow, more importantly I agree this is a pretty exciting top 16, and I'm glad that there are a few decks closer to "pure control" which seem to be creeping back into the cracks of the metagame.
    Bless your heart, we must consider Blue/White Tempo's strategy and win percentages in an entirely different deck thread. -4eak

  8. #8
    It's Tricky

    Join Date

    Nov 2009
    Posts

    209

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Thing is, I don't think you understand those decks. The name given to them is actually a misnomer. Those decks aren't about Stifling the Nought, they're about disrupting the opponent to hell than drawing cards to keep 'em down. Dreadnought is just a convienient way to end it fast once you're in control. That's why these decks are new and why Dreadstill is something completely different. While Dreadstill could play that way, in many games its plan is for a fast Nought to get there.
    I disagree, the backup plan was the turn 2 Dreadnought, though in some matches was necessary. More often than not, from what I've seen playing against Dreadstill or watching it play out, it would play out exactly like this. The difference here is that there's less reliance on Dreadnought due to it being inconsistent, but as a tutorable 1-of it makes for a suitably powerful play.

    Of these decks, the only real innovations are the Team Italia and the NO RUG deck. Team Italia being just a BWR Junk deck, having a bunch of the best cards in those colors. NO RUG having four Vendilion Cliques for the turn one-just read your blurb underneath the list, it seems you wrote about it.

    But yeah, I really enjoyed the top 8. It was good seeing Merfolk again. And I expect to see Enlightned Tutor pick up steam for the Torpor Orb-Dreadnought play and the Stoneforge/Thopter decks.

    EDIT:
    Oh, speaking of which, Batterskull has a chance with Mystic. I can definitely see it in that deck. Instant speed semi-shroud Baneslayer with card advantage, nice!

  9. #9

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    The whole UB isn't new thing: The RUG deck and Team Italia are more of an innovation than UB in the sense that we had CounterTop control with Bob before (say Nassif's GP deck), Stifle-based tempo control (GerryT's variant of Team America without the Tombstalkers) and Dreadnought-based combo-control decks. I therefore fully understand that there's an argument for saying these aren't actually new decks.
    Nothing I've seen played with any success in the last three years played out the way the UB decks from Boston should, though. At that point, you could also say the RUG deck is nothing but a colorshifted update of AJ Sachers Bant deck - a ton of cards are the same. In both cases the fact is simply that the exact composition of these lists allows them to play in ways that are fundamentally different from what even similar-looking lists have been doing so far.
    I might be wrong and this direction might have been explored before. If so, it has been hiding reasonably well (I'm a rather voracious reader about all things Magic and reasonably sure if it had made a big splash before I'd have stumbled over a reference somewhere).
    I mean the idea to run a single Nought in decks that have both Trinket Mage and Stifle isn't that hard to come by (among the thousands of other players even I did have it before). The difference between having an idea and building a deck that puts it to work in a manner efficient enough to do well at tournaments is quite large, though.
    I have been playing Legacy as my main format for only about three years now admittedly, though I've been following the format somewhat for longer. In all that time I haven't seen a list played with any success that resembles these closely enough to be considered the same deck. I haven't even seen a thread on here or elsewhere that follows a deck similar to these, either. It's obviously still very possible I missed something somewhere, if that's the case if someone could do me the favor of pointing me to it, I'd appreciate it. Should be an interesting read, at the very least.

    @2Rach: I guess I worded that badly. Many might be putting it too strongly but from my experience and the DreadStill thread, fast Noughts are the plan most of the time against a large number of aggro-decks that are resilient to CB.

    @DukeDemonKn1ght: Happy you liked the article. As to the innovation-thing, see above.

    @Finn: I love it when people assume they're better than others just because they've been around for a long time (Or seem to have been. Fyi, I've probably been playing Eternal-formats longer than you have). To use your own terms, you actually seem much more like the schmos I run into on internet forums than those I meet at tournaments. The people I run into at tournaments usually retain the capacity to not insinuate that the person in front of them is an incapable idiot when they don't agree with their point of view (or even if the other person is actually unaware of some arcane years old knowledge). As far as having earned the right to be insulting and arrogant, I don't see how playing a cardgame for any length of time grants that kind of privilege. I can't believe the people they have posting on the internet these days.
    Even ignoring this weird need to make yourself feel better by saying things in ways that put other people down, a helpful comment would have been something along the lines of "man you suck, those decks aren't new - just look in thread X/top 8 thread X/top 8 X/any form of actual reference to somewhere this multitude of decks is even mentioned."
    If there are just some four year old theoretical decklists that look similar to what people have come up with in Boston, that wouldn't make the current lists not new. As long as a deck hasn't been played successfully, it doesn't really exist yet. If some jotted down decklists that never made it out of brainstorming counted as building decks, I could probably claim to have built half the decks in Vintage. That would obviously be ridiculous. A failed or unfinished experiment isn't the same thing as a new deck.
    Last edited by Mon,Goblin Chief; 04-29-2011 at 02:35 PM. Reason: spelling
    I don't have low self-esteem, I have low esteem for everyone else. -Daria

    Proud member of Team CAB
    High Priest of the Church of BLA

    CAB JaceTM

    My articles

  10. #10

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Quote Originally Posted by Mon,Goblin Chief View Post
    @Finn: I love it when people assume they're better than others just because they've been around for a long time (Or seem to have been. Fyi, I've probably been playing Eternal-formats longer than you have). To use your own terms, you actually seem much more like the schmos I run into on internet forums than those I meet at tournaments. The people I run into at tournaments usually retain the capacity to not insinuate that the person in front of them is an incapable idiot when they don't agree with their point of view (or even if the other person is actually unaware of some arcane years old knowledge). As far as having earned the right to be insulting and arrogant, I don't see how playing a cardgame for any length of time grants that kind of priviledge. I can't believe the people they have posting on the internet these days.
    What difference does it makes how long you've been playing in Eternal formats for? Just because Finn is aggressively attacking your stance on these issues doesn't give you the right to belittle his perspective on the issue by attacking his own personal credibility. He is using terms in a general sense (referring to the use of the term "schmo") and is dead-on about his diagnosis about the people currently writing on Star City's website as far as articles are concerned. It's not rocket-science that some of these people have been nurtured into this format by carry-overs from a section of history in this format that don't understand the intricacies as well as someone a little more well-versed on this particular subject would. Maintain your haste and you could learn something - no matter how long you've played for.

    The Source is no longer a place to realistically search for new and innovative ideas at face value, but I can tell you that some of the most heated debates forged in these forums have led to the creation and sustaining impact of some of the best decks Legacy once had to offer. Labeling people in these forums as inept from your biased perspective may seem contrived because of your resentment towards Finn and his ideology, but I can guarantee you being a very long time Legacy-Vintage-Classic what-have-you player and enthusiast that there are very few ideas being generated and put out for product that haven't already been seen in some form or another, so with that I do agree with you.

    It's also hard to obtain any credibility when you're trying to articulate your thoughts in a debate and cannot even spell correctly (while you're attacking us all as Source enthusiasts).

  11. #11
    Member

    Join Date

    Feb 2004
    Location

    Clifton Park, NY
    Posts

    2,690

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Quote Originally Posted by Hollywood View Post
    It's also hard to obtain any credibility when you're trying to articulate your thoughts in a debate and cannot even spell correctly (while you're attacking us all as Source enthusiasts).
    English is likely a second language of his, Mike, as he's from Europe. Even so, his spelling is still better than many American users of this site who you would think took English as a second language.
    Team Albany: What's Legacy?

    You cannot know the sweetness of Victory, without first dwelling in the agony of Defeat.

  12. #12

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Quote Originally Posted by Hollywood View Post
    What difference does it makes how long you've been playing in Eternal formats for? Just because Finn is aggressively attacking your stance on these issues doesn't give you the right to belittle his perspective on the issue by attacking his own personal credibility. He is using terms in a general sense (referring to the use of the term "schmo") and is dead-on about his diagnosis about the people currently writing on Star City's website as far as articles are concerned. It's not rocket-science that some of these people have been nurtured into this format by carry-overs from a section of history in this format that don't understand the intricacies as well as someone a little more well-versed on this particular subject would. Maintain your haste and you could learn something - no matter how long you've played for.

    The Source is no longer a place to realistically search for new and innovative ideas at face value, but I can tell you that some of the most heated debates forged in these forums have led to the creation and sustaining impact of some of the best decks Legacy once had to offer. Labeling people in these forums as inept from your biased perspective may seem contrived because of your resentment towards Finn and his ideology, but I can guarantee you being a very long time Legacy-Vintage-Classic what-have-you player and enthusiast that there are very few ideas being generated and put out for product that haven't already been seen in some form or another, so with that I do agree with you.

    It's also hard to obtain any credibility when you're trying to articulate your thoughts in a debate and cannot even spell correctly (while you're attacking us all as Source enthusiasts).
    Spelling corrected (I hope, if there are any mistakes left let me know). I should take the time to reread myself better before running off to take care of real life issues. English being my second language doesn't mean I don't need to spell correctly.

    I didn't intend to attack anybody as a Source enthusiast in any way shape or form. If that is what it sounded like, I'm sorry. I have no problem with the Source (on the contrary, I really like this place). If you considered "schmos I run into on internet forums" as a veiled attack on the Source and Sourcers in general, you misunderstood my intent. The Source and TMD are probably the places you meet these people the least.
    I actually didn't intend to attack Finn, either, just answer him the same way I felt he was talking to me.

    As far as my answer to Finn is concerned, you realize I was using exactly the same language he did? Some quotes:

    I love when Johnny-come-latelies just assume they are dealing with the same schmos they run into at events.
    This should explain why I mentioned that I've been playing Eternal for quite a while (I might not be one of the earliest Legacy players, but I'm definitely not that new, either), as well as my use of schmos. His sentence implies that somehow I (actually all of us) have an obligation to recognize him and give him preferential treatment. I don't see why that would be the case. If anybody talks to me, I'll answer him the same way I answer other people - that is to say in the way I'm spoken to.

    @Mon: .... I can't believe the people SCG has writing articles.
    Maybe I misunderstood. In that case my full apologies to Finn. Considering that he expressly adressed it to me, I had the impression that, even though he was using general terms, he wasn't criticizing general article quality but attacking me, personally. Or, as you formulated it, "attacking my own personal credibility."
    I didn't attack his credibility. I was calling him out for attacking me, not my stance on these issues. I might have overreacted by expressing myself in the same way he did.

    I'm fine with heated debates, I'm fine with being called out for being wrong, I'm also fine with being told that I don't understand what I'm talking about as long as there is an actual counterargument/explanation besides "you're wrong". What I'm not fine with is being belittled with the sole argument that I'm a Johnny-come-lately and the insinuation that I'm to thick to get it
    Did you honestly think that nobody had thought to run this deck in a more controllish fashion in all that time? That a compact wincon like Stifling a Dreadnought only ever existed in a single shell?
    I thought I was pretty clear on the fact that someone having thought about a synergy/an approach alone didn't disqualify that approach from being the foundation of a new deck, in my opinion, as there are very few viable new interactions but many new decks based on different uses of these interactions.

    Again, I'm sorry if it seemed like I was bashing the Source or attacking its members. That was not what I intended. I simply didn't enjoy being attacked personally because I happen to not share the point of view of someone who has been on the Source longer than I have. As I said, if his statement had been "you suck, these decks aren't new see (basically any evidence)" I would have found it more appropriate than what he actually did and reacted accordingly (pobably told him he might have been more polite but that he was right on the issue). As long as we're talking issues and arguing, I don't give a damn how you make your point. If your point doesn't have content other than "I'm right, you're wrong" I don't take arrogance or (insinutated) insults kindly, in which I'm not alone I think.
    I don't have low self-esteem, I have low esteem for everyone else. -Daria

    Proud member of Team CAB
    High Priest of the Church of BLA

    CAB JaceTM

    My articles

  13. #13
    Bands with Others
    menace13's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2009
    Location

    NY, NY
    Posts

    1,220

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    I love when Johnny-come-latelies just assume they are dealing with the same schmos they run into at events.
    Except that the schmoes at events can play magic and not just talk about it. And Bobby-been-here-forever-but-never-win-at-anything are somehow better than Johns?

    Quote Originally Posted by Finn View Post
    @waraltermime, I have earned the right to say whatever I want about any article that any author links on this site. The fact that another person in some tournament somewhere in the world has piloted the same deck in no way diminishes anything I had to say about it.
    What exactly have you ever won? Where was your last good article?
    Quote Originally Posted by Cavius The Great View Post
    Respect my shine bitch!

  14. #14
    Force of Will is my bitch
    Finn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2004
    Location

    South Florida
    Posts

    2,979

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Here, one of the many.
    http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...xia&highlight=
    From memory, the Australian Nationals 2007 was the first major win. The one you see by Hanni is the closest there to the one that I myself piloted to a win and a 5th (where my Volcanics were stolen) around that time. I had Counterbalance, extra Tops, and only 2 Dreadnoughts though. You can see for yourself that we are discussing the same deck. It is coming together haphazardly, but that is exactly the way just about every new deck in Legacy has come about. I figure that your e-peen is not going to permit you to just admit that you should have researched better. More likely you are going find some nitpicking difference between our designs and the modern ones and request that I furnish you with better evidence. Rest assured that I am done doing research just so you can dance around the facts again. You have been doing just that to qualify your words that should not need qualification. If "Truly New" is a concept that needs any interpretation that is not completely obvious to the reader, it is the wrong title heading. So either...

    1. You chose a very poor title for those decks, and as a writer, you need some practice.
    or
    2. You really did not know the truth and should have researched better.

    Fact is, I did not escalate this. I said that your definition of "truly new" needed re-examination. But instead of saying "oops" your pride had you pointing your finger at me right away. The words are still in this thread so feel free to look. You made it personal for some reason. If you were not prepared for criticism, why on earth did you post the link here? This site is and has always been the place where you swallow your pride. If you don't know what you are talking about, someone is going to call you on it. Pros defend their articles here the same as you. You want to know why I can say whatever I want? All of my articles have been subject to the same damned thing. So you get my honest opinion around here. If we were the types to pat you on the back after you just spread disinformation in an article on the most popular Magic article site on the web, this place would have never have become the premier spot for Legacy info that it is.

    Just take your lumps and be better for it.
    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
    "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
    "Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
    "Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."

  15. #15

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Here, one of the many.
    http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...xia&highlight=
    From memory, the Australian Nationals 2007 was the first major win. The one you see by Hanni is the closest there to the one that I myself piloted to a win and a 5th (where my Volcanics were stolen) around that time. I had Counterbalance, extra Tops, and only 2 Dreadnoughts though. You can see for yourself that we are discussing the same deck. It is coming together haphazardly, but that is exactly the way just about every new deck in Legacy has come about. I figure that your e-peen is not going to permit you to just admit that you should have researched better. More likely you are going find some nitpicking difference between our designs and the modern ones and request that I furnish you with better evidence. Rest assured that I am done doing research just so you can dance around the facts again. You have been doing just that to qualify your words that should not need qualification. If "Truly New" is a concept that needs any interpretation that is not completely obvious to the reader, it is the wrong title heading. So either...

    1. You chose a very poor title for those decks, and as a writer, you need some practice.
    or
    2. You really did not know the truth and should have researched better.
    Let me get this out of the way first: The decklist you describe having played to a win and a fifth sounds like something I'd consider the same as the Boston decks (essentially Hanni's list from your link minus Trickbinds and a Nought, adding CB Top instead). I was wrong and you were right. As such the header should have been different or rather the deck classed somewhere else.

    As far as faulty research is concerned, I guess I could have searched the whole of the Source for Phyrexian Dreadnought and checked every thread with a somewhat promising title... maybe I should have as that's what I just did (after writing the part that admits you were right anyway) and I found this:

    http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post162517

    jegger's list is basically the Boston-decks corrected for card-availability at the time (though he doesn't have Wastelands, which seems weird) and some of the lists following his post continue this trend. Most importantly, they were actually played in events successfully as jegger indicates and as such went further than just the drawing board.

    As such, let me repeat: I was wrong. Those decks were modernized versions of something pretty old. I didn't know and should probably have taken the time to do a thorough search through the forums. I didn't and it showed. I'll put a correction in my next article and if you let me know your name, I'll cite you as the person that made me realize my mistake (I can also use Finn or just leave you out of it, as you prefer).

    Having admitted I was wrong, I still wouldn't consider anything that runs a playset of Dreadnoughts or multiple Trickbinds (such as Hanni's list you linked to) the same as the Boston-decks as those aren't Stifle-Nought combo-decks. What is, no, what I thought was new about the Boston decks is that they are essentially TempoCounterbalance decks, not Dreadnought decks. Cutting the Nought wouldn't change these decks all that much. In this case a minor difference in cardchoices makes a major difference in how the deck is set up to play out.

    Fact is, I did not escalate this. I said that your definition of "truly new" needed re-examination. But instead of saying "oops" your pride had you pointing your finger at me right away. The words are still in this thread so feel free to look. You made it personal for some reason. If you were not prepared for criticism, why on earth did you post the link here? This site is and has always been the place where you swallow your pride. If you don't know what you are talking about, someone is going to call you on it. Pros defend their articles here the same as you. You want to know why I can say whatever I want? All of my articles have been subject to the same damned thing. So you get my honest opinion around here. If we were the types to pat you on the back after you just spread disinformation in an article on the most popular Magic article site on the web, this place would have never have become the premier spot for Legacy info that it is.
    If my first response offended you and lead to you posting the way you did in your second response (and that one at least felt to me like you were attacking me personally without giving any evidence) I apologize. That wasn't my intent. Your answer sounded as if in your opinion a deck focused on the fast 12/12 (a set of Noughts, additional Trickbinds) is the same thing as what was played in Boston (CounterTop Tempo with a "random" Dreadnought). I strongly disagree with that position and holding it would be a clear sign of not understanding those decks imo, that's all I wanted to convey. If my choice of words made it seem like a personal attack instead, that was unfortunate and not intentional.

    I'm happy about any form of constructive criticism and do my best to profit from it - as long as I recognize it as such. I'd be happy if you continue to give me hell whenever I'm wrong, though I'd be even happier if you kept it in the same tone and style as the post I'm answering to instead of how things went beforehand. I'll do the same and if something I answer seems like a purely personal attack, tell me and I'll correct it - because that is never what I intend to do unless I have the impression of being attacked personally myself.

    Can we agree to chalk this up to a misunderstanding of each others intentions and a natural tendency to be somewhat "snappy"?
    Last edited by Mon,Goblin Chief; 05-01-2011 at 07:29 AM.
    I don't have low self-esteem, I have low esteem for everyone else. -Daria

    Proud member of Team CAB
    High Priest of the Church of BLA

    CAB JaceTM

    My articles

  16. #16
    Force of Will is my bitch
    Finn's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2004
    Location

    South Florida
    Posts

    2,979

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    Well, I had a lengthy response but the forum crashed. The short answer is yes, all is well. Let's move on.
    "Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
    "Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
    "Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
    "Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."

  17. #17
    I like Tacos.
    dahcmai's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2006
    Location

    Traverse City, MI
    Posts

    2,202

    Re: [Article] Eternal on the other Side of the Ocean: Sweet Sixteen

    I hate that answer about "what events have you won". If an event came anywhere within a 7 hour drive of me, I would go. I'm older so I can't just pick up and travel with these shows like a circus. Top 32 at a legacy GP, won a block ptq, and a vintage ptq, but there's never been another tournament aside from the local ones come this way since 1995. A lot of us live no where near one of those tournaments. I have to settle for at least our well developed meta.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)