Quote:
Originally Posted by
Metalwalker
Ok Bruizar, I usually respect you for your ideas and posts, but this post makes me wonder about your affluences with Vintage (I don't play Vintage as much as you do but some statements here referencing Vintage/Legacy just don't make any sense to me.
This is where I start doubting you play Vintage seriously. 1W SFM is far from a 2GG Natural Order that wins games in 2 turns, or a 2U Show and Tell that wins games in 2 turns, and you dare compare it to Tinker, which wins games in 1 turn as early as you can resolve it. The criticism/analogy you have here is in fact the 'sucks', because 5 mana is way too much mana if you cannot win games fast. All the comparisons you made win games in 2 turns and your opponents cannot do anything about it (much limited answers to Progenitus/Emrakul v.s. a 4/4 lifelink vigilance or an equipment, sigh bolt/plow equipped creature in response, grip the equipment block for a 2-1 etc etc).
I just tried to explain my analogies in my previous post. I hope you understand my point of view by now. Also, I've got nearly 1000 posts on TMD and have been playing this game since 1994. I expected some heated debate over this thread, because if it was too obvious, there would have already been a thread about this card. Opening threads about obvious cards like Mental Misstep is less interesting for me personally.
Quote:
I agree with this point to some extent. SFM is inherently a tempo-investment card. You have to invest at least 4 mana and possibly 2 turns to get a card e.g. Jitte that recoups the initial tempo loss invested. However, all the current SFM targets SoFI/SoLS/Jitte have very lower mana cost which is why the SFM strategy is fairly successful. In all honesty, it is only successful because the meta itself is prone to cards like Jitte/SoFI, but not really to a 4/4 vigilance lifelinker for 2WW and involving 1-2 passing the turns.
Glad we agree on something :-)
Quote:
Disagree that SFM is one of the most powerful creature cards in magic. Bob, Knights, Goyfs, Lackey still easily trump it. Why? Because these creatures are very efficient and cost efficient, and that's what makes it count the most in this format.
Batterskullīs living weapon ability makes it the cheapest equipment that we have available, not counting non SFM equipments. If they answer it, who cares, move onto a new plan. If equipment is too slow anyway, just try to sneak in your living weapon for a mere 1W and see how far you can get. Paying 2WW over 2 turns to get 2 guys out of 1 card is not a bad deal at all. Especially considering what kind of creatures they are.
Quote:
Don't forget that with Batterskull, you are inherently playing a 4/4 lifelink vigilance for 2W and passing 1-2 turns. This seems very bad for me. If you do intend to equip to another creature, then i would strongly advise you to rethink about paying 5 mana to equip to a dude that is likely to get removed in response.
I think that there will be games that will benefit from equipping Batterskull to a goyf or a Knight. Games that are at a standstill, or when you need to gain a large chunk of life in 1 go. 5 Mana is not always the end of the game. Jace comes down at 4 mana and takes another aeon-and-a-half to kill. That means that the game goes until far beyond the 5th turn, even though the fundamental turn may have already occured.
Quote:
no, it's 2WW involving passing the turn. It is also situational when you pass the turn (assuming they don't plow your Mystic EOT). In this case if they plowed your Mystic, you would have wished you fetched a Jitte that you can cast/equip much easier. Some will argue that an unsituational 1G 4/5 or 5/6 is still better than a 2WW situational4/4 lifelink vigilance body.
I donīt have a good rebuttal against this. Yes, Jitte is affordable to cast. Yes, itīs not that nice to have a Batterskull clogging your hands. On the other hand, itīs 1 StP less. Batterskull makes SFM a bomb that must be answered. The inclusion of 1 card turns 4 cards into bombs. I donīt see that as something bad.
Quote:
Also, after this analogy, all I gathered is that the reusing of battleskull is entirely dependent on SFM being in play, and having 5 mana open in Legacy?
Yes, that is correct. Batterskull will not be your routine go-to-equipment. Itīs situational the same way Sword of Light and Shadow is situational. You only bring those out for the protection and sometimes for the abilities. Same can be said about Sword of Fire and Ice. Thatīs why a lot of decks are running 2 Swords.. To cover most of the situations, even though they are both situationally awesome.
Quote:
Yeah all I see here is StP to SFM parity. If you draw the 2nd SFM, I have the same chance to draw the 2nd StP, except that 1 mana v.s. 1W mana wins in all the situation,
This part I can agree on. You have to consider though, that StP is a reactive card. If you DONīT have StP in hand, you are in trouble and I am not. If I donīt have SFM in hand, I am not in trouble. If I can trade my SFMīs for your StPs I am doing a good job even though Iīm investing one more mana to do so per StP. My other threats will be in the clear.
Quote:
and at the same time you are investing 1W to playing
Squire while I'm investing my mana to play dudes to beat your face.
This part I canīt agree on. While you are busy StPíng my SFMīs, I still have my 4 StPs to throw at your goyfs and knights. My own goyfs and Knights are still unmolested. I have the most threats, thus I will win.
Quote:
Too much Vintage analogy here again? Sorry, but I can tell you that I'm least worried about Batterskull v.s. something like Jitte.
Batterskull is not in any sense comparable to Jitte. Itīs not even comparable to Sword of Fire and Ice. Itīs a BODY, not an EQUIPMENT. The living weapon ability makes a world of difference!
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Quote:
You maybe right, but I think the judgement you're passing here in this [SCD] is way too premature, which is why people are attacking your arguments. I don't think Batterskull is bad in Legacy, I just disagree that it is as game-changing the way you put it, and you are one-sidedly proclaiming how SFM strategies are super efficient in Legacy when I have a different story to tell from playing against SFM decks.
I am not trying to overhype the card. I think it definitely has its place in legacy and the absence of any SCD thread felt strange in my opinion, because I think it's a very relevant printing that gives SFM players a new tool.