[Article] Sucking At Legacy: Good Decks You Aren't Playing

[Firebrothers]

link (http://mtgsalvation.com/555-sucking-at-legacy-good-decks-you-arent-playing.html)
Found this article on mtg salvation, thought others would want to see it.

Ok guys rip this article apart.

[Peter_Rotten]

Wow, what bad decks. Especially the one made by that guy named Diablos. WTF is up with that? Who the hell does he think he is?

Anyway, more Legacy articles is a good thing. Exposing underplayed viable decks can't be bad either.

I neglect to flame.

[Pinder]

Threshold can't beat a resolved Glacial Chasm, end of story.


Good thing it's not that hard to 'resolve' a land :laugh:.

It was reasonably well written, and definitely shined a light on some good archetypes other than the 'Big 3'.


No mention of MeatHooks, though. Why won't anyone ever write about MeatHooks? It mentions "Burn, Angel Stompy, Faerie Stompy, Deadguy, and IGGy Pop", but nary a sliver in sight. Oh well. :rolleyes:

[Volt]

No mention of MeatHooks, though. Why won't anyone ever write about MeatHooks? It mentions "Burn, Angel Stompy, Faerie Stompy, Deadguy, and IGGy Pop", but nary a sliver in sight. Oh well. :rolleyes:

Actually, slivers did get a mention in another MtgSalvation article. (http://mtgsalvation.com/537-planar-chaos-in-legacy.html)

[Pinder]

Actually, slivers did get a mention in another MtgSalvation article. (http://mtgsalvation.com/537-planar-chaos-in-legacy.html)

Hrm. Okay, no more whining from me.

[Cait_Sith]

Exposing underplayed viable decks can't be bad either.

Is that a Burning Tog plug I see? Also, the more viable decks people play, the harder it is for me to sideboard against them all.

Also, the dude spoke highly of MWS. He forgot to mention the dumb people.

[Di]

Wow, what bad decks. Especially the one made by that guy named Diablos. WTF is up with that? Who the hell does he think he is?

Yeah, who does he think he is?

You know, when I first heard my name was mentioned, I was expecting EATS to be the list named. I was rather surprised when that wasn't the deck in question, but still happy to see it there. It's also the second time that deck has been mentioned in an article, which is cool. Except the Volcanic Islands in the deck are Taigas. I've never run Volcanic in the deck, so I'm not sure where that's come from.

That B/G Survival list though is balls slow. We tested it out. It looks terrific on paper, but when you're actually playing it it's a lot different. It's like, turn 4-5 you have a small army of 1/1s. After that, you churn out a 4/4 like once a turn. It's just really slow. It's not bad by any means, but it takes forever to do stuff.


Also Peter_Rotten, I will gladly play against your silly Burning Tog with my own. And let's see your Dr. Teeth chatter when you lose to a freaking land. A land.

[Peter_Rotten]

Bah! I Burning Wish for Sowing Salt.

[Tacosnape]

Holy fuck on a stick. People actually pay attention to me.

Twilight, which is basically Zenigata II, will be posted sometime before Tuesday. (And If Zenigata is balls slow, Twilight is balls Fast.)

[hi-val]

It peeves me when people expect other folks to write about pet decks. If you think the deck is strong, write an article about it and put it on MTGS or even post it here. Put up results, write tournament reports, testing matches, stuff like that. But being like "wah, nobody writes about my deck" is beyond pitiful to me.

Selling someone on a deck is hard enough already, so if you're interested, self-promote instead of expecting other people to do the work!

Now, on the article : )

I thought it was well-written and exposed that there really is a variety of stuff in the format that's definitely playable. There's the widest cardpool imaginable to use, so I like to see people profiling decks with janky Ice Age Lands : D