http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f4B-r8KJhlE

I want you to remember this video whenever you utter the words "I can't".

She doesn't have any legs either, Anusien.

I would further like to reply with: what the fuck? I never imagined it possible, but apparently it's nowadays possible to wake up in a hospital without your limbs. Oh, and:

Look son, no hands!

...

I'll be joining Anusien in hell.

I'm not an Apple missionary myself, you know me better, but it's impossible to deny the influence the iPod and Store have had in the past few years. You may dispute the reasons, but it's clear that their product and marketing was one never seen before. It had a near 80% marketshare in 2004, sure it dropped like brick; it was still a very innovative product.

The problem with the current iPod is that it scratches and gets greasy way too easily. However, MS fixed that with the Zune. That shouldn't be a problem for the iPhone anymore either. I've heard that the flash memory will only have 8GB thoughs, that's a lot for a phone but I can't ever get my music collection on that.

Who does not own an iPod?

Precisely. Apple has announced the iPhone today, check it out here. http://www.apple.com/iphone/

Now, the only thought coming to mind right now is: 'why did I get a 2 year subscription for a Cybershot?'

Edit: oh, hi! too, long time no seen.

Another scrub bites the dust. Hands down.

From wikipedia.org:


Apparently, this got changed. I won't dispute the reasons for this, but it's interesting in the discussion of a 2party system. Since one can choose to vote for senators from the 'ruling party' or from the opposition, the outcome of this vote will be that the 'ruling party' will either have an easier or harder time doing their job. I'm sure the senate has other duties as well, but I do think that most people in America vote for the ruling party if the government is doing their job well, simply for aforementioned reasons in the thread: lack of interest.

But wait! Why would you need to vote for the senate if the choice is based on the same arguments used for voting on a party in the elections for the government? You, as the voter, have given your faith in the government. Why would you want to cast your vote again before the term is over when you had faith in the government just a few years earlier? I honestly don't understand that: is 4 years such a long term that people have the need to show their faith, or sudden lack of, before the end of that? And wouldn't you end up in a downward spiral then? If you have lost faith in the government before those 4 years are over, who is to decide voting again because people might have lost faith in the government for the second time?

In Holland, we have a system of many parties: hell, even persons form parties. By voting for the Dutch equivalent of the House of Commons (I suppose that's easiest to imagine), you directly choose who gets to rule the country because the parties will make coalitions. Hence, the ruling parties also have the majority in the House of Commons. Pretty much the same result, except that you get to vote once every 4 years instead of two times.

Now on the subject of multiple party system: it's fairly clear that the coalition will be formed by the major parties. But that doesn't mean that the minor parties don't have any power in parliament, not at all: they can still perform their controlling role very well.

In summary:

Can someone in America please explain why they vote twice for the ruling party, or not, but then the ruling party won't be quite as ruling anymore. Why not just give up trust in the government so new votes can be cast? That's how it works in La Hollanda.

That's an interesting debate; 1 T-Rex vs. 40 Raptors..

The possibilties with a german Duress are endless.

Zwang!

Hail to the king, baby!

So, like, hi. Haven't touched a card in a few years, but I'm being mentioned.


Suppose you were right on Confidant. Would that have made the deck successful? No, it would have to take another direction; one that wasn't taken during that entire discussion.


I still think Confidant is sub-optimal in control. Such a shame that control, as used in my deck, is sub-optimal. If there's anything you've proven, then it's that pure control isn't viable.


I'll stand up and say: yes, my decks posted on TMD were bad. It has been mentioned though: the only way to prove a deck is good, is by winning a tournament. However, the only way to explain why a deck is good is by theory. These 2 are intertwined because you have nothing to look for here if you can't do either: your theory has to be from experience in tournaments. (or extensive testing)

If you support your theory with other theory, then the chance of it being flawed is larger. My arguments were flawed because I did (don't) not have the chance to test or go to tournaments. Were they untrue? I doubt that, but much easier to counter nonetheless.

The truth shall deliver you!

Could you please explain how this combo is superior to Belcher + Mana Severance? The mana cost to get it into play is the same; sure, the activation cost is more expensive mana-wise, but if you have 6 mana the first turn, then it won't be too hard to get another 3 on the second. It doesn't require any other splashes.

The only advantage as I see it is that it is more resistant (that is, resistant at all) to Null Rod, but that's often run by aggro decks where DSC is probably a better answer anyway, and searching for that Lava Dart.. you could just as easily just have searched for a bouncespell.

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great combo: but I don't really see yet how it's better than Belcher+Severance.

If a deck playing 4 Force of Will and 1 or more Misdirections cannot beat Grim Long on a regular basis, coupled with the fact that Grim Long can get turn 1 kills on a fairly (I won't get into percentages) regular basis; how can a deck with less Force of Wills have a 100% chance to win? How can a deck have a 100% to win, when judging from the other percentages (91%, 79%, 73%) 100 games have been played against every deck? Did it get a god-draw and Grim Long a suck-draw every time of those 100 times?

I could quote him endless times where he is totally wrong on vintage, but that's not worth my time. If this is supposed to be the level of writing expected to win 30 dollar, I'll get to writing soon.

19/09/2006 (European sequence!)

I suppose I can call myself a member of the TMD law club now; I'm currently in my first year at lawschool in La Hollanda. I'm not allowed nor knowledgeable to give you any professional advice, but if you want to know something about basic Dutch law (like history, the way our government works, etc.) I suppose I can help you out.

I've finished high school with grades I suppose to be equivalent to an A in America in German, French and English. Again, that's just basic knowledge though. I know a fair bit of maths and I've written an essay on Hypercubes and Codetheory (note, not cryptography). So if you need any help with high school stuff, I think I can help you out.

Finally, I think I know World of Warcraft inside out, including all theorycraft.

Have you considered Opera?

I'm still using Firefox myself, and I'm not having any problems.. What exactly is yours?

Things like the Eiffeltower are obvious, perhaps a few not so obvious things:

-Montmartre, and especially the Sacre Coeur (the white church thingy). Definitely a landmark you ought to see! Close to the building is a 'marketplace' with lots of artists and restaurants. Overall, the place is pretty much my best memory from Paris. Beware though! Besides all these cool things, there are also a few things to note when going to Montmartre:
*It's basically in the center of the Paris red light district. Could be an advantage if you're planning on going to the Moulin Rouge, but also has the disadvantages of such a place.
*WARNING: pickpockets. If there's a place you should be careful of how you carry your purse, it's here. It's a very good idea to get one of those wallets you can carry around your neck, under your clothes and put the cards/expensive stuff in that and have a some cash in your pocket.
*The artists in entire Paris will ask for way too much; it's common to get a huge sum off that price; sometimes even as much as 75%!
*There will be VERY annoying Africans at the stairs of Montmartre; they'll try to put rope bracelets around your wrists (pretending not to speak any English) and then insist that you buy it.. for 5 euros. Walk through them with the coolest look you can conjure and decline right away, unless you want one of them bracelets of course. I can imagine you don't.

-If you plan to go shopping, I can really recommend the La Fayette building and around it; I spent an entire day there, the view on top of it is very cool.

-If you're planning on visiting any churches as a tourist, remember that you're required to be dressed decent. Seen a lot of my classmates with.. not so much on not being able to enter them.


I suppose these were a few things you wouldn't find in a guide that soon, recommendations to visit the Louvre and the Notre Dame are obvious.

I agree with most of the points put forward by Limbo, but I think that the answer to your question is really a lot simpler: English, German, French and Dutch have a lot in common due to the ancestry. Japanese, Chinese and English.. don't.

A deck with more lifeloss, no lifegain and a slower win condition than the already outdated 4cc seems interesting yet not interesting enough, yet, for me to test it right away. Moreover, I would expect the OP who has been playing the deck for a lot longer than me to give his insights rather than me testing the deck wrong.


You seem to misunderstand mine and Dozer's arguments entirely;

My point was that bargain does NOT kill the opponent, ever. He puts you at an advantage, that's ALL. Stop with that argument because it's going to kill this good topic. You'll ALWAYS need something to kill the opponent. As Dozer mentioned, an advantage of Niv (and Morphling, Ex. Angel, etc.) is that it requires you to play but one card to actually kill the opponent instead of 2. (Tinker+DSC) This ALONE is not good enough to play Niv over anything else, but it is definitely something to consider.

I'm not convinced either GI, but your summary of arguments lacks:

-1 card to kill, compared to 3 (Recoup, etc.)
-It actually does kill. I've seen suggestions of Future Sight and Y. Bargain, but they don't KILL. They give you an advantage, but neither say '0: ~this~ deals 1 damage to target player.'

Nonetheless, I am partially convinced on Niv but I'm really not that impressed with the deck: old 4cc could afford the lifeloss because of the killcondition, Exalted Angel. Am I wrong to see your changes as the following?

-Exalted Angel
+More expensive killcondition you can't cast off Drain
+Lifeloss
While nothing has changed with the fundamental idea behind such decks: controlling and slowly killing the opponent.

Sure, it looks pretty fun; but how does it REALLY increase your chances against aggro (your lifeloss + the occasional attacker WILL kill you over time) and combo (same, less life = less storm = less spells = easier).
I can see how your chances against current day's 'DSC' control are increased, but I don't see how you can justify that, in my opinion, marginal difference when looking at the other matchups that have not increased at all.

As said, I'm not convinced.

One midget is going to push a 1600kg meatball? This is an excellent example of the bad arguments the midget<3ers give; just give it up already! Seriously, midgetninjas? Why the hell no lionninja then?!?

The lion will win.

I've always wondered how that pimp downstairs handled time-zones..

Funny how you mention those 2 Harlequin; while I indeed agree that Voldo is really strong, he also requires a huge amount of skill to be used perfectly well as where Raphael is SO easy to master and REALLY good too. And I wtfpwn a friend who is really good with Voldo with Necro.

Balancing a game with so many characters and skills is impossible, I think SC2 is still one of the best jobs at doing so. Besides, the learning curve is very low while still maintaining a vast difference between a pro and a beginner, and again: the amount of available combo's is HUGE.

I'd go for the turn 2 kill, option 3.

Every turn you give him gives him more chance to get a Therapy, Chain and a superior Board position: he'll just Therapy whatever you have in his second turn, and since he got that extra turn he'll most likely have found that Chain too + a lot of scary creatures in the graveyard.

A turn 1 Bazaar going off for an additional turn is a risk I would not be willing to take.

Why is there no mention of Soul Calibur 2? The best fighting game! And Mortal Kombat if you're into insane combos.

I'm sorry, but that's just wrong. You are setting 'drawing cards' as your goal; but drawing cards won't win you the game. The cards you draw with it will make you win, but the caliber of the cards you can draw in a Doomsday deck are of such mediocre quality that drawing cards is not a good idea.

Both with Meandeck Tendrils and your deck, the ultimate goal is to cast Doomsday and go off with it. But look at what you really want to achieve with both decks:

1) BBB + UB
2) Safety when going off
3) A way of drawing the next card, be it via the next turn or something like Brainstorm.

Both decks can get the BBB, and both decks have ways to draw that first essential card. The problem however, lies in the safety your deck is trying to accomplish as opposed to the way MD tries: Misd. Vs. Unmask. Unmask gives you the certainty whether you can go off or not, that is fundamental for the second step.

My point is that 'just drawing cards' is a fundamentally wrong strategy. It has been summed up by Jacob Orlove very well in his article Putting it All Together and the Danger of Cool Things by Chad Allis, I suggest you read them.

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/10512.html
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/3689.html


I could reply on your statements, but I honestly believe that this deck concept is flawed.

Sadly, winning with something does not mean it's a good deck let alone the best version. With regards to the sideboard:

1) The mainboard of Meandeck Tendrils is already set up so that you can play through any card.
2) You have to rely on your luck and skills to play through certain combinations of cards.

Due to 1), you should look at your sideboard even closer than you would with a regular deck: as where decks such as fish have inherent bad matchups, this deck only has up to a certain degree, it's the situation you're in that matters. And as such, fish can just add the standard cards in an arbitrary random fashion: rock, paper, scissors. Defining which situations are worst for the deck's performance is vital during the finetuning of the sideboard, see 2).

I must confess that even my experience with the deck is too limited to say which situation is worse than the other, mandating more sideboard slots. Finally:

3) The number of cards you can sideboard out is perhaps 10 at all times (probably max 5 per matchup), this allows for less impact of the sideboarded cards yet on the other hand also means that you can broaden your options.


My suggestion would be the following:

4 Energy Flux
3 Chain of Vapor
2 Rebuild
1 Tinker
1 Darksteel Colossus
3 Grim Tutor
1 Imperial Seal

Again, I am by far not experienced enough with the deck (though countless hours have been spent on it) to give any advice on the sideboard, all I can say is that I'm fairly confident in the Drain matchup but that Workshop and random/unexpected decks can cause problems.

Nonetheless, perhaps it's better to start an entirely new thread for the sideboard.

Oh but that depends on the region you're in BigMac; while I have heard that guys indeed don't dance in the southern parts of La Hollandia, this is definitely the opposite in the northern parts. I can't comment on regions such as Amsterdam which he most likely will be visiting, but I do think that there is a healthy blend of both and that it depends on the place you're at.

Nonetheless, the part about aggressive boyfriends is definitely true.

I've been down this road to: and trust me when I say it does not lead to a better deck. The best advice I can give is just to run Meandeck Tendrils and think about the sideboard and the 2 metagame slots. Nonetheless:



Unmask was there because you don't want to cast Doomsday blindly: while it would be great if you have FoW + random blue card, he could have an extra counter you don't know about and you're fucked. At the moment, you run 16 blue cards of which you can remove 14 at all for FoW/Misd, and most of the time that number is.. 7. The advantage of Unmask is that it lets you get rid of the Doomsdays and Rituals, which can in fact be redundant as opposed to all the blue cards in the deck.

Echoing Truth is entirely suboptimal compared to Chain of Vapor; you will not have any permanents at all except for Moxen you can cast anyway. Moreover, while the bounce slot is a metagame choice: most metagames still require Rebuild or Hurkyl's Recall in that slot.


I cannot fathom how you think that even more lifeloss would increase the deck's viability; especially when taking the argument used to dismiss Vampiric Tutor into account. Doomsday is the heart of the deck, why are you running a mere 3 copies? Removing Tendrils of Agony and Necropotence is a mistake, not more than that. I fail to see how Infernal Contract can be any better than Timetwister.


Where is your Lion's Eye Diamond? 4 Cabal Ritual is too much.


In summary:

+3 Misdirection
+2 Cruel Bargain
+3 Infernal Contract
+1 Chromatic Sphere
+1 Personal Tutor
+2 Cabal Ritual
+2 Swamp

-4 Unmask
-1 Lim-Dûl's Vault
-1 Timetwister
-1 Necropotence
-1 Tendrils of Agony
-1 Lion's Eye Diamond
-1 Underground Sea
-1 Island
-1 Doomsday
-1 Vampiric Tutor
-1 Time Walk (debeteable / metagame choice)

01 Echoing Truth (metagame choice, Chain of Vapor, Rebuild and Hurkyl's Recall are the 3 options, Truth is not.)


In all honesty, I think you need to realize that Doomsday is unlike any other deck in the format. Moreover, you seem to misunderstand the entire idea of the deck by removing Tendrils of Agony.

I suggest you take a look at the following links:

[Discussion]Dr. Doom by Kasuras: (discussion/article)
http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=26214.0

Rehearsing the Doomsday Scenario: Learning How to Build Optimal Doomsday Piles by Stephen Menendian: (article)
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/9361.html

The Doomsday Device: The Coolest Win Condition In Magic by Stephen Menendian: (primer/article)
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/8410.html

Papal Bull: Doomsday’s Back—and in Non-hoax Form! By JP Meyer: (primer/article)
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/8372.html

Hero ’t Mannetje’s deck played to a 2nd place finish in the November Eindhoven tournament:
http://www.themanadrain.com/forums/index.php?topic=25714.0


I can only applaud work on this deck (it seemed I was the only one left still playing it), but this is not the way you should be going.

Why are you thinking about any future profit? Even for a Mana Drain it sounds like a good deal of money for you to spend, and I don't know anyone for who can just spend 100 dollar on their hobbies: are you really sure you want to buy those cards? If you do, then you should buy them because you love MTG.

Just think a while before you buy those cards; it's a lot of money if you're not entirely certain on this case.