I changed the flavor text.  Also, about the game text, I think the drawback should be changed so as to be shorter.  I am just not sure how.  Any suggestions?

Where should I put that reminder text?  I am not sure what placement of it would be the proper one.  Before any of the actual rules text? Or what?

What kind of reminder text?  It's just a colorless enchantment, what is there to remind?

Any other thoughts?

It isn't part of the odyssey X-mage cycle.  I am not really sure of any "guildmage" cycle.  Could you say a bit more about what you think?

I am going to start the 24 hour clock... Any other thoughts before this is final?

Updated: Decided on a suitable drawback for the card.


So what do you guys think?

Well Ive been looking over your suggestions now and thinking.

For one, I think it is appropriate as blue.  Blue has had several enchantments over the years that penalize players for going into multiple colors, B2B and the one that makes all lands produce mana of the enemy colors (it is blue isn't it?).  Plus Blue is a color of the prodigal and powerful color wise, so they would want to maintain their borders and force others to do the same.

I really like the idea of it being X colorless but they need to use X of the same color to cast it.  The only problem is the cost has to be bumped up if you make it a a colorless enchantment.  The thing is, it definetly isn't an artifact because it is an idea, not a tangible thing.

By switching it to the colorless enchantment template, we need to create a suitable drawback.  Should I raise the cost, add an upkeep cost, or make something like "When Isolationist Theory comes into play choose a basic land type.  Then sacrifice all nonbasic lands and basic lands not of the chosen type.  You can only play lands of the chosen type."  I worded that as such that so that it kills duals when it comes into play.

I need feedback, can't wait to hear from you guys.

And you can just call me "Doug" or "Fresh" for the sake of having to type out FreshIsOuttaTurn everytime you want to refer to me.

My only problem is how powerful the effect is on the game that if you dont make it either color intensive or extremely expensive it would destroy multicolored decks easily.

Anyone have any thoughts or concerns?

Isolationist Theory UUU
Enchantment
Mana costs of colored spells may only be paid with mana of  the cards colors.
(For example, a 2U spell must be paid with UUU.  A 1WB spell may be paid with either WWB or WBB.)
I'm not prejudiced against any group, I hate everyone equally.

This card just kinda hit me as a cool idea relatively recently.  Thought I'd put it out there.  I actually made the card based on the flavor text, a quote from myself during a debate on the ethics of modern civil movements.  What do you guys think?  I am not sure about the mana cost, i think it would be better as maybe 1UU or something, not really sure though.

Thoughts?

CURRENT WORDING

Isolationist Theory 3
Enchantment
(This card is an Enchantment)
You may only cast Isolationist Theory using mana of the same color.  Isolationist Theory is the color of the mana used to cast it.
At the beginning of your upkeep, discard a card that shares a color with Isolationist Theory unless you sacrifice it.
Mana costs of colored spells may only be paid with mana of the card's colors.
(For example, a 2U spell must be paid with UUU.  A 1WB spell may be paid with either WWB or WBB.)
I'm not prejudiced. I hate everyone equally.

I just checked it out with a MTG card formatter thingy I use, it would fit if you just separate each of the phrases with semicolons, but just barely.  If they can fit flip cards onto 1 card, they could fit this no problem.  Look at Time Stop for gods sakes, that thing has 7 lines of rules text.

Anyways, does anyone have any final points to make or is this good?  Unless someone presents a very good arguement I dont see any real changes that need to be made.

"Hey look over there!"
"What? Where? I didn't see anything"
"Oh you missed it."
"Why are my clothes on the oven?"

Seems like a nice theme to the card.

Any thoughts?

Fine card but the wording is still wrong.

"When CARDNAME comes into play, choose a color.  Spells of the chosen color cost 1 less mana of that color to play. If CARDNAME would reduce the cost of the spell to less than 1, the spell costs 1."

"This does nothing" is umm... how should I put it... not even close to legimate rules text.

I can understand that, I am going to change it to remove him from combat, I forgot about that.

Is that Rishadan guy an actual card?  I never knew it if he was.  In any case, my logic behind the 1/2 P/T was "Lava Dart effects are "A Bad Thing"(tm)"(tm).

Do you think it really is that important to make him a 1/1 to balance him out?

And also, should I use "fist" or "hand" for the flavor text?  I switched it but I think fist sounds better.  Thoughts?

Enlightened Guildmage
1UW
Creature- Human Wizard
Protection from Creatures
If Enlightened Guildmage is attacking and unblocked you may pay U, if you do, return target creature to its owner's hand.
1/2
His fist promised freedom of the shackles
His eyes promised freedom of the mind
His words promised freedom of the spirit


My first card here, it pretty strong, I think.  I always felt UW Control needed a strong 2 or 3 drop to help fight off the incoming swarms, or UW aggro in any form could use an efficient tempo ihibiter for opposing aggro.  I want it to be very strong, not broken, but hopefully around Meddling Mage caliber, or the like.  The idea is pretty obvious I think, a wise old dude who "saves" creatures from their master, so to speak.  Its reminiscent of Finkel, ignoring the W and lack of B.


CURRENT WORDING

Enlightened Archmage
1UW
Creature- Human Wizard
1/2
Protection from Creatures
If Enlightened Guildmage is attacking and unblocked you may pay U, if you do, return target creature to its owner's hand and Enlightened Guildmage deals no combat damage this turn.
His hand promised freedom of the shackles; his eyes promised freedom of the mind; his words promised freedom of the spirit

24 Hour Clock Started

One of the comments I have heard time and time again is, "Why run [insert card]?  It only helps my already good matchups."  So my question is, what do people consider there good match ups?

I expect such a diverse set of responses.  And I ask everyone to say the name for each individual deck they know is good, bad, or a coinflip and (preferrably) why, don't just say "Control" because there are large variations between each control deck.

Example

BAD
-Belcher, you have only 8 real ways of stopping there combo and 4 of them only work if you go first, or they don't explode on Turn 1.
-DeathLong, again, very little way of stopping them and they are extremely resilent to Duress and extremely fast
-etc...



Your turn

I cant honestly believe that any enchantment that doesn't start with "N" and end with "ecropotence" or has a different name than "Yawgmoth's Bargain" can be playable in any speed based deck.

If I ever have 5 mana open, 3 of which is blue, well then I am gonna have some Fact or Fictioning or Gifts Ungiven fun into Recall.  For one, there isn't the space in the deck to run a card that COULD be good IF you have good cards already stacked in your deck.  For two, it costs 5 mana.  For three, it's from Onslaught and isn't a fetchland.  For four, it costs 5 mana.  For five, it has UUU in its casting cost.

Anyways, back to my sideboarding question...

@Thug about Hydroblasts
Since when is blood moon a problem for this deck?  I run 5 basics and I immediately get them with my fetches unless Im sure im not facing wastelands, b2bs, or blood moons.  It seems like Hydroblast just clogs up the sideboard a bit, cuz they are nice to wish for once in a while, but I stand by wishing for  Echoing Truth and then just going off.

@Everyone
Has anyone noticed that by boarding more than 1 or 2 cards tops in, your deck has to lose a big kick?  So whats the point of having 3 Claws of Gix or 2 Energy Flux if you slow yourself down to a point where you are a turn 6 combo deck.  I think sideboarding is a delicate process with a combo deck, but sideboarding with this deck isn't very well documented.

If one of the more experienced players could give a rundown of their sideboarding strategy, id be grateful.

I just wanted to put out a request to MaxxMat or any Italian speaking person to translate a copy of MaxxMat's mini-primer found in the link on page 3 (i believe) because Im sure he has a good bit to add beyond just the revamped decklist.

As far as the sideboard goes...  I love my lone Cranial Extraction like a West Virginian loves his little sister (no offense, its only a little illegal).  I find that having the Extraction means I can play Turbo-Extraction.dec against other Combo and some variants of Oath.

I would like someone to explain the purpose of MisD in the sideboard to me.  I honestly don't understand its application and where it would be more useful than lets say... Duress because having 2 MisDs implies siding 1 or both in, and Im not sure when or why you'd use that.

Even against any random deck with Welders I never really feel the need to side in the Hydroblasts.  For the most part, the deck can just outrace Workshop.dec and I didnt think it was worth it to water down the maindeck with the blasts.

Should they come in for Duresses?  I always thought that the power of duressing away a turn 1 3sphere was more important the risk of hitting a good artifact when a welder is out because you can always just not cast the duress until you are just making sure its safe to go off.  Also, most Stax variant decks run a relatively high number of draw spells and artifact mana sources, so its not too much of a risk early on to fear giving your opponent some sort of advantage, I figured.

Whats everyone else's opinions?

I dont understand some of the things you say... You make the bold statements about what should be done, but you don't make suggestions or ideas as to how to do them.  It would be nice if you'd contribute to instead of demanding others to do it for you.

But with that said, you want us to make a rock solid mana base more solid? Wtf?  I dont think anyone here has a problem with the mana base in the least.

We need more threats/bombs?  Every card in the deck either makes mana to casts bombs and threats, gets bombs and threats, or is a bomb and threat, and of the 3 categories, there are mostly bombs and threats after mana sources.

A wish is 1 slot... Tinker & Colossus are 2.  Colossus is slow.  Turn 3 kill at the earliest with a turn 1 tinker.  Tinker -> Jar turn 1 is gonna be a turn 2 kill more often that not, turn 3 at the slowest.  Colossus can be dealt with or raced, its harder to stop a tendrils with a storm count of 15.

Windfall and Diminishing Returns are miserably bad in this deck.  Why fill up both player's hands when you could just fill up yours?  Windfall is the weakest draw7 next to Returns, and many people don't even play Time Spiral or Memory Jar in this deck, both of which are considerably stronger than Windfall or Returns in this deck.  I thought it was decided that draw7s that are either symmetrical (Windfall) or slightly worse for you (Returns) or even better for you, merely expensive (Spiral) are not what this deck wants.

I dont think you have extensively tested Gifts because if you did, you are often setting up Yawgmoth's Win into a gigantic Tendrils.  Most of the time you are not going for Bargain or Necro.  The Will is sooo much better than both, you rarely would ever want to get either of the others.  Gifts just enables you to get Will or whatever spells you need to explode in a flurry of card drawing, mana sources, and high storm counts.

Since when is tutoring bad?  Gifts is when Demonic Tutor meets Fact or Fiction.  Whats not to absolutely love?

I would like to understand where you are coming from better, but it seems like you didn't really explain your arguements in any amount of depth.  If you could take the time to put up your arguements, preferably with some good backing and proof, it would be much more productive I think.  (Not flaming, just a bit confused)

Ummm... we are just gonna ignore that fact that both Rebuild and H.Recall/Chain of Vapor is already in the deck.

Cunning Wishes are there because they are bounce spells number 3 and 4 (Echoing Truth, Chain of Vapor), counterspells 5 & 6 (Daze, MisD), extra draw spells (Meditate, FoF/Gifts), they can to kill welders (BEB/HBlast), stop Dragon/Rector/Welder Recursion (Funeral Charm), get Brain Freeze to kill if you lack Tendrils or anything else you need/want.  Its just a nice bit of versatility.  I particularly dont think its needed to run more than 1, so I just run the lone Wish, and fetch it if I need it.

Its very possible that Wishes just get in the way, but for now, they work well at what they do and so I, and many others, choose to use 1 or 2 as we see the need.

If you could propose a better alternative Im sure people would look into using it.

Checking back in here...

Its official... The Italians went and broke the deck in half.  I have two versions right now, my last version before going to the full Italian version, and the full Italian version.  Of the two, I think the Italian build has a slight edge in power however the deck is much harder to run properly because of the lack of cards that just say "Hahah, gg BOYZ!".  Their version is a bit more skill intensive, just proving once more, us Americans are fat, lazy, and dumb... Ignoring Meandeck.

If given the choice between running either build, Id probably go with my last one, which is merely 3 cards different from the Italians list.

-1 Deep Analysis
-1 Cunning Wish
-1 Underground Sea
+1 Tinker
+1 Memory Jar
+1 Island

The only reason for these changes are that Tinker-> Jar has a lot of raw power that just win if you do it first/second turn and Im not used to playing around 4 mana instants just yet.  The Island over the Sea is cuz I have The Fear of getting my ass wastelanded out of a game, and Id rather make sure I can get all the basics I need on the table.

Id advise a few more people to try to understand the Italians move to a more instant based deck, less b0rken, more inevitable deck.  All the one sided insanely powerful cards mean there isnt the problem with Stax or other control going "Hey look at this double FoW hand with 2 random blue cards, sucks for you TPS player!".  I really think any people who doubt the power of their version should play it a bunch and realize that it has less raw power, but with a bit of good playskill, the deck is a lot more resilent, a nice trait in such an extremely volatile environment.

Good job to MaxxMat and any other Italians for rebreaking TPS.  (Which Id really wish was called Office Space... you know, TPS reports, heh, I thought it was funny)

I glanced at this thread a few times and after reading it I quickly changed my deck around to include a Gifts in place of Windfall (the weakest, in my opinion, of the draw 7s).

I goldfished it maybe 5 times to remember the proper way to play it before I took it up against Oath.  Wow... first 5 matches, all 2-0 TPS wins easily except 1 where a Desire for 10 turned up 5 lands 3 Moxen 1 Mana Crypt and a duress.

Gifts is such a bomb its not even funny.  It has the most versatility of any card in the deck (Cunning Wish included) and just breaks the game wide open.  I have used it to set up Will.win (3 tutors + recall as targets) on my opponents turn 2 end step, to get moxen to pump the storm count on both Desires and Tendrils, to get bounce to pop 3sphere, to get a few draw 7s, you name it, ive pretty much Gifted for it.  I need to fit Deep Analysis in there somewhere for some added b0rkenness.

I dont think you can really argue the inclusion of gifts... Its strict card advantageous targetted tutoring (CATT) like no other spell.  Id play another if I could find space.

I think just adding gifts instead of Red and WoF is sooo much better because a 1 card splash is rarely a "Good Plan"(tm).  You cant just ignore the large numbers of wastelands popping up everywhere, and every nonbasic hurts nowadays.

Library is just too underpowered for this deck I think.  I go for turn 2 or turn 3 wins everytime and its just not worth the possible bomb factor to slow me down so much.  I play 28 mana sources now and changed the LoA into Colossus, who is also a beating.

Platz vs Colossus?  I think stopping other combo is a lot easier by just killing them dead.  I tried both and found Colossus is better because the Oath I play against has Control Magic to get around Platz' ability.  If they control magic a colossus, who cares?  But if they control a Platz it forces you to grab a bounce spell.  Plus DC has 3 11s on it and so I can't not play a card with that many double digit figures on it.

My list (for reference) is

//NAME: Office Space
SB:  3 Claws of Gix
SB:  1 Cranial Extraction
SB:  1 Ebony Charm
SB:  2 Chain of Vapor
SB:  1 Echoing Truth
SB:  1 Brain Freeze
SB:  1 Stifle
SB:  1 Meditate
SB:  2 Hurkyl's Recall
SB:  2 Hydroblast
        2 Tendrils of Agony
        4 Force of Will
        4 Duress
        4 Brainstorm
        1 Darksteel Colossus
        1 Hurkyl's Recall
        1 Timetwister
        1 Time Walk
        1 Time Spiral
        1 Rebuild
        1 Mystical Tutor
        1 Mind's Desire
        1 Gifts Ungiven
        1 Cunning Wish
        1 Ancestral Recall
        1 Yawgmoth's Bargain
        1 Yawgmoth's Will
        1 Vampiric Tutor
        1 Necropotence
        1 Demonic Tutor
        1 Tinker
        1 Memory Jar
        1 Tolarian Academy
        3 Underground Sea
        2 Swamp
        3 Island
        4 Polluted Delta
        1 Flooded Strand
        4 Dark Ritual
        1 Sol Ring
        1 Mox Sapphire
        1 Mox Ruby
        1 Mox Pearl
        1 Mox Jet
        1 Mox Emerald
        1 Mana Vault
        1 Mana Crypt
        1 Lotus Petal
        1 Black Lotus

I understand quite how bad it is to show your hand.  But the idea is that you have to choices: 1 is to run the risk of root maze + fetches or 2 is to just run the gauntlet.  Now it takes a bit of skill to play land grants in the right way so as to minimize the draw back.  But the idea is that with the land you get you will over power them to a point where they cant stop everything you cast.  Same idea as Belcher but on a lesser scale of brokenness.

EDIT: Completely forgot most of this deck's disruption is 1 mana, i was thinking it was a different RG variant based around SotF.  So maybe Lay of the Land isnt such a good plan.  But then again maybe it is with Elvish Spirit Guides and such.  Ill try it at least


I think there was a lot more than one person guilty of this if you would go back and look at what people are saying.  Im tryin to move the rest of the thread, who are a bit behind, along.



Thats not true, check your inbox in a day, ill PM you a list of answers once i scrounge them up from the clutter of my desk which you can choose to share or not to.



Game 3?  well thats where your Crucibles come in (you should be running a few crucibles, or at least 1).  With wastelands you should have the CoWs each game, so their wastelands wont matter, or will matter less.  If they try to be tricky, save your own wasteland to wasteland theirs and then bring back the maze.  GG?

I did not think of lay of the land... but that could be a damn good idea.  Well done.  Id take that over Land Grant, cuz you wont be keepin any no land, land grant hands anyways.  We should throw in Fires of Yavimaya and Blasterderms while were at it to bring back the full IBC feel .  No really, i never would have thought of that, so cheers.

I am so confused...  So apparently if you try to attack their creatures they have this wall of counters but they dont if you try to attack their Oathes?  And Australia is like, "WTF? mate".  Seriously... I cant follow the logic involved there.

So Oath runs 2 Wasteland and a Strip, you decide to run 4 Maze of Ith after boarding... Nope, dont see a problem with that... your land base is mostly basics, odds would suggest they would side out dead cards like Wasteland (siding out lands!?!?! yes it happens a bit).  Also, there are other ways of dealing with creatures.  Oath doesnt have a bajillion counters... it has.. what... 11? 12?  14 if you include MisD.  I dont give control decks that much counter credibility anymore after playing Tog and other control so long.  If you are so worried about their counter power, cast Overmaster, then any random spell or Insist followed by a dude.  If they have 2 counters and such, then drop Maze of Ith and smile.  The wave to beat control is just to hit them again, and again, and again, and again, ad nauseum.  As soon as you have The Fear they win.

In any case, skullclamp seems like "A Bad Idea"(tm) with only 11 creatures.  So do cards like Kird Ape, Incinerate, Cursed Scroll, and Call of the Herd.  This deck doesnt have THAT much disruption is can waste spots on subpar cards.  Im sorry but 2/3s for R have been outdated since the 90s, as well as 3 damage to 1 target for 3 mana.  If you would spend those spots on the aforementioned Root Maze, Blood Moon, Null Rod, etc... youd have a much stronger game.  I wouldnt worry about other aggro stuff.  Id worry about beating Workshop, Drain-based control (which are always around), Oath, and Combo.

You guys keep going back to old R/G ideas.  Anyone notice that things change a bit?  Look at every deck that stays in power, they all have changed to adept.  R/G is based dorks and burn.  Its on to slowing crap down and blowing crap up.  Winning is something that happens once you manage the first things.

On a note to Phoenix... Land Grants are das Sheissnit.  Who cares if they see your hand?  They allow you to ensure 2 land drop if you have land, land grant in your hand to start.  Good times.  Dont start this screw fetches go basics! thing either.  Thats a good way to draw dead turn after turn.  Land grant is good.  Ask JP Meyer sometime.

So what happens when you just dont draw threats?  Seeing as you have a whopping 8, its more than likely you will just lose to a random dork.  You either need to increase your threat count while maintaining your disruption (Lavamancer for Lightning bolt/Lava Dart) or a draw engine (mask of memory, sword of fire and ice).

Honestly, you NEED root maze maindeck to slow down both Combo and Workshop... If you agree to play that deck in its current form, ill gladly play you with a workshop based deck.  Im not worried about you getting to 4!!!! mana and casting baloth... and Ascetic isnt so hot vs the Bus.  Right now you are too reactive, root maze just shuts down the 3sphere-> win plan as well as turn 1/2 Drain (if you go first).

Viridian Zealot is just bad... 4 mana to destroy an artifact/enchantment?  so 5 mana under the 3sphere you cant stop?  Id rather have a more aggressive beater there to smash face.  Even now your chances against Oath are pretty slim.  So personally Id rather give up my preboard game vs Oath to crush anything Control or Shop and go 50/50 or 40/60 against combo and try to use the SB to fix those matches.

Combo is easy enough remedied.. Pillar + Root Maze + random REB's can win easily enough if you play control.  Against Oath, another naturalize, maybe some spawning pits, and some SSAOT can fix that match.

Good idea, but there are some glaring holes in the plan.  Mainly the "no draw engine to speak of" one.

EDIT: SSAOT is short for Super Secret Anti Oath tech... I actually have nothin particular in mind, but you need some kinda answer... id look at attacking their creatures more than their Oathes.  Oathes are any good if their creatures die.

Im glad to see someone else has looked at his list.  I have actually been tweaking something similar to his, though not exactly the same.

I think you are making a big mistake in choosing Blood Moon over Back to Basics.  The simple fact is that, while Blood Moon can cause problems, B2B is just svger.  Mountains still produce mana while B2B is along the idea that "Opponents lands producing mana more than once is a bad thing, mmkay?" (10 points for anyone who catches the Magic reference).  I think that right there puts Back to Basics way over the top of Blood Moon.

Also, Null Rod seems like a poor choice to me.  Null Rod used to just devastate everyone, especially combo.  Nowadays, not so much a problem.  I think better cards can fill its spot.  I really like Call of the Herd because it 2 for 1s against control, takes out Juggs, and also is really aggressively costed for its size.

Brainstorm is much better in this deck that curiosity, in my opinion.  Jacob also had this point as you can see from his build.  Fetchlands + Brainstorm = good times (I am sure you are all shocked).  Curiosity is a poor choice with all the random Swords running around the format.

Instead of your 4 slots split between MisD, Stifle and Daze, id make it 2 Stifle, 1 MisD, 1 Artifact Mutation. Mutation is das Sheissnit against Workshop.dec.

I also found that the crucible can push this deck over the top by replaying a few random lands (not necessarily fetch) against any other deck.  I run 1 in my build because it just wins randomly.  It also can get you back the land advantage and card advantage (through fetches and wastes) needed to fight back any long drawn out games, and this can often happen I have found.

Sideboard wise...  Id do somethin like this...

Sideboard
2 Mutation
2 Waterfront Bouncer
3 Energy Flux
3 Fire/Ice
3 Null Rod
2 Stifle

That is for a more diverse metagame, but you can just tune that for what you specifically have problems with.  Fluxes and Mutations make short work of artifacts, Null Rod shuts down combo a bit, Stifle as well, plus doing double duty as LD and anti Oath t3chz0rz.  The extra bouncers are there to shore up the Oath game.  I wouldnt actually advise bringin in the Stifles against Oath, but ya know, its just an added plus if you think its good.

I am gonna try to get this a bit back on topic after some poor flaming and bad spelling.

@Morphling8

Yawg's Win is insane, probably the most singly powerful spell ever.  However, some decks dont abuse it like others can.  In this deck most everyone has noticed how when you cast the Win you immediately lose use of your disciples and clamps, which are both key to the decks strategy.  So the simple answer, free up the space.

@ Everyone else

I think we should look at either turning Affinity of any kind into an aggro possibly workshop beating machine that can just outrace other decks or turn it into a strict combo deck.  The only places it shoudl be in between are Disciples and Ravagers seeing as they can just do that beatz thang randomly even in combo.

So with that said... Why not turn the deck into a Draw7ish type deck?  You can play all your standard artifact lands and acceleration, but for creatures have Disciples, Ravagers, Moonvessels, and maybe Frogmite or the like.  Everything needs to be cheap/free.  Throw in a healthy dash of the aforementioned draw7s (maybe returns, maybe not) and a nice tendrils or two.  Its really nice how with Disciple you can just combo out FOR a Ravager to win or vice versa instead of Tendrils as necessary.

The way I see it, the most effective hate in the format (3Sphere, Wastes) are a problem to every single combo deck out there.  Just because this one runs more artifacts doesnt immediately make it anymore vulnerable.  Null Rod is almost nonexistant seeing as Fish is overripe/dead (for now).  Energy Flux? If Canali can do it in Extended with a much less powerful card base, I think we could pull it here with the b0rken factor of Storm and Draw7s.  B2B? *Shrugs* i dont think that will matter as much as it seems because Ravager and Disciple are cheap and Froggie is free.  Angels? No dont get how that should ever happen.  Oath?  If they play Oath and you have a disciple and/or Ravager I cant seem to find a problem.  You dont need to attack to kill anyways.

Why does Affinity rule T2 and Extended?  1 for 1 hate isnt good enough.  Raffinity is the defining tempo deck in 2 formats, I dont think any single cards like Swords or Seal of Cleansing are worth even worrying about.  Just kill them dead some other way.  

So if anyone wants to experiment and PM me with some results, Ill share my own with you.  Dont bother if you are tryin to play a budget version or lack the playskill required for combo.

Hey kiddies,

While I don't consider myself the best player out there (or anything near it) I think I can pick up many decks and become good relatively quickly... And wow... this deck is insane.  I have just been goldfishing hand after hand, not mulliganing except when i have to (no land, all land kinda thing) just to see how this thing works.  I think I killed by turn 4 no matter what kind of hand I started with.  This deck has a lot of raw potential and power I think, but it is probably a bit untuned right now.

I took the list posted at the top of this topic and just cut Fastbond for Candelabra and an AI because of how bad multiples are and started golfishing.  I haven't tested extensively, but I have really mixed feelings about this deck.

For one, AIs are either so good they make you cry with joy or just bad.  They tutor for clamp when you have small dudes and small dudes when you have clamp.  If you lack both then you get to sit there and spend UU to tutor up both clamp and a dude then pay at least 3 to draw 2 cards.  I am not sure about this but 3UU for 2 cards seems bad... The only time I have made them really broken is when I had a tutor and just chocked my graveyard full of broken artifact mana and then Will'd it all back and cast tendrils.  I think if we could somehow move the deck in that direction tendrils-i win direction it would be a lot more consistent.

My main problem is in the Ravagers I think.  I have found that they seem to slow this deck down more than speed it up.  I am probably wrong but here is what I see.  Anytime you have a Ravager that you can grow up to big#/big# by turn 1/2 so you can turn 2/3 beats, Walk or some combination, you probably could have used all that broken stuff to just cast Desire, Will, Spiral, whatever your b0rken spell of choice is.  I think that if AI slows the deck down a little Ravager can slow the deck down a lot more if you dont have disciple or Will + Tendrils (sac artifact mana, will, replay, tendrils, just so ya know what i mean).

I really think Tolarian Academy in this deck is just so obscene that it must easily be responsible for a large number of wins this deck will pull off.  I personally think deck needs even faster mana if its going to run through the field of hate.  I am not sure what exactly now, but stuff like Rituals and ESGs could make it much easier to abuse the Clamp faster and be able to go nuts, this is assumin you are using Tendrils for the win.

I hope I can get some feedback on these ideas because I lack the deckbuilding skills had by many of the people here.

Danke

Yeah, Id like to give my congrats to the almighty Smmenen for being able to dominate yet again.  It seems like this tournament was another real test of some of the sheer broken factor many Meandeck produced decks seem to pack.

Im really interested in hearing about your quarters match, Stephen (reportedly against one Clarence Li). Clarence used to live way back here in VA before moving out to Wisconsin or the like and was always a horrible player and rather neurotic so Im really shocked, and quite congradulatory to him, on his apparent approvement and great finish.

I have been playing both DoomsdayDevice and ShortBusDoomsday and I prefer the random broken factor that Meandeck's build has to offer.  The shortbus one seems better at being able to win for sure but to get there it needs the upperhand and the cards in the first place.  I have had much more success with the build I got from here but I think it might be a lil weak against 3Sphere, le Resistance, and the like.  I think Hurkyl's or rebuild needs a place in the MD.

On a side note, ever notice how MeanDeck and Main deck are both MD while Short Bus and Sideboard are both SB?  Does it mean that Meandeck will always be the focus and heart of Vintage while Shortbus will be relegated to doing somethin important every now and then?  Are the mice really studying us?  Just because you arent paranoid doesnt mean they arent actually out to get you.

Cant wait to see the reports for this one.

I think that may be the very first attempt by anyone in this thread to add new possibly better cards to an already good deck.  I was hoping the discussion would head in that direction naturally, but all's well that ends well.

The idea of Oaths SB is a pretty strong plan, though testing may or may not support this idea.  Against some decks, namely the other Oath decks, you could trick them into activating their own oath for you with Orchard of your own and possibly get out the goodness that is your own Colossus.

I have already modified my own DeathLong to include 3 orchards because they often generate free colored mana at no pain because I just cast Tendrils for a bazillion but the idea of possibly abusing Oath completely slipped under my radar.  I have a feeling that a SB that featured 4 Oath, 1 DC (if you dont already run one MD or like 2) and then your other normal toolbox could really bring up some surprising turn of events on decks such as Stax that expect you to be stopped relatively well by one or two cards.  If you lose game 1 due to the whole random Turn 1 Trinisphere + Turn 2 lock components, their turn 1 trinisphere might not look so good when you drop a first turn oath.

Id advocate testing the semi tranformational SB and looking into abusing the brokenness of Long's speed and Oath's "Haha free fat wins" factor.  It may not be as fast as Long but if you can put a clock on an opponent one way with a fast DC and then while they answer that you can set up your combo kill by usual means with your Oath enchanced graveyard and a juicy Will.

Just a few things to think about.

Hey kiddies,

Nice little conversation you got going here and I just wanted to make a few points...

For one, I like how you are trying to innovate for Tendrils builds in an attempt to make them more b0rken but I think you are going about it the wrong way.  I encourage all of you playing currently to take a version of DeathLong, TPS, or Draw7 and play it.  A lot.  Get so used to it you dream about it.  Learn why it wins, and how and I don't mean, I cast tendrils for a gagillion (we know that).  I mean, what is the right order of cards to cast for maximum abuse.  If you can actually break playing any of the 3 deck (preferrably Long, though) down to a science where you know what the right plays are then you have the basis for retooling it.

As of now it seems that you are more blindly trying new things or trying to change something for the "better" and not realizing how much worse it is actually becoming.  Try to step back and compare your results to the given results for the most similar of the three established combo decks.  I am relatively sure yours will be worse.  The point is, you need to accept if your ideas aren't working and try something else.

So back to my first point... Once you can establish exactly why and how Long is so good and resilent, try to find answers to the weaknesses that can fufill the role of a similar, less ideal card.  This means really testing, but not big changes.  Just small stuff like Hurkyl's Recall vs. Rebuild (for example) or the proper number of Elvish Spirit Guides.  The best way to go about this perfection is probably to start off with the best version out there and make it better.  Starting at the back just makes you have to run that much more to get first.


With that said... I disagree strongly with Gandalf's above statement about reactive disruption being superior to reactive.  I am not sure how you reached this statement but I feel this is largely wrong.  If you look at the issue from a strictly theoretical standpoint, yes FoW is the nuts while Duress is the nut low (relatively speaking).  But because FoW is completely reactive in nature, it sits dead until an opponent does something, something quite contrary to the popular science of combo.  I am in no way saying FoW is not a great card or isn't good BUT in a deck like Belcher or Long or Draw7 where you are trying to outrace, outdraw, and outb0rken your opponent, Duress will ALWAYS be better.  Duress is proactive, therefore you cast it once and it doesn't matter what your opponent does.  Given it cannot stop topdecks, but I'll live with that.  Why is Duress so devastating against Control and Combo? Because it hits them first.  FoW can easily be played around.  Duress must be countered or Brainstormed around.  In either case, Ill be happy.  If they countered my Duress they probably are screwed when i drop Necro, and if they don't Brainstorm, ill nail any counter they have and still crush them.

In closing, make sure to stick to the established big guns and work from there, and secondly, Duress IS a threat against most decks nowadays, not just disruption.  Either they open up the door for GG or they just stopped your plan before it got started.