MTG thread

Punko

Punko

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
7,924
12,576
Kuro_sl said:
I know I fuck up draft/sealed picks/builds way less on MTGO than I do in live events. Having the entire pack/pool laid out in front of you during the decision making process, with easy filtering/manipulation, really helps with visualizing.
Click to expand...
lets not forget the automatic land balancing either, or that you can't miss your own triggers or your opponents, which IRL usually leads to a loss of position / warning

I learned a bit from MTGO since it forces you to stack things properly, but playing IRL is a lot harder

Further it really sucks that MTGO is so slow. You have to be a real pro to handle playing countertop or any similar combo since you will lose copious amount of time doing obvious things. I think I fetch faster IRL then on MTGO, and I 100% top twice as fast if not more.
 
Punko

Punko

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
7,924
12,576
Luminati_sl said:
It's actually really bad if you don't play live magic very often like me. I hadn't played live in years and went to a GP in Atlantic City and since I'm so used to having everything automated I forgot a ton of triggers and one actually caused me to lose a game where I had lethal next turn :/
Click to expand...
At least you won't forget about that. If you do, magic ain't for you
tongue.png
 
Punko

Punko

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
7,924
12,576
btw i've played magic since 1994, back then, and ever since I played with my lands out front, rest behind them. Thanks to the new rules change I've decided to 100% play RG lands in legacy.

Fuck that rule, enjoy seeing my exploration clearly though.

Had to get that rant out, pretty rustled
 
Kuro

Kuro

Naxxramas 1.0 Raider
8,420
21,453
The rule is only for on-camera matches. Outside of feature matches, you can arrange your lands in a pentagram and sacrifice baby hamsters before your draw step if you want.
 
Punko

Punko

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
7,924
12,576
Kuro_sl said:
The rule is only for on-camera matches. Outside of feature matches, you can arrange your lands in a pentagram and sacrifice baby hamsters before your draw step if you want.
Click to expand...
this isn't how i interpreted it

still looking forward to have 1 exploration / manabond / mox in sight and 20 lands stacked behind it
tongue.png


Lands is awesome btw, i think its the best legacy deck available. Having loams & dark depths surgically extracted, only to punishing fire your opponent to death with 6 groves in play is hilarious.
 
Heylel

Heylel

Trakanon Raider
3,602
429
Kuro is correct. The rule about lands in front only applies to on-camera matches and is designed to aid viewers of coverage at home. It has little to do with the preferences of your opponent.

You can check the MTR if you want. The section on how you arrange your cards is even listed under Section 2.13 - Video Coverage, and is quite clear that it applies to Professional REL events (Pro Tours and GP Day 2s, basically) played on camera. TOs are also allowed to make adjustments at their discretion, which is why you see GP Day 1s, SCG Opens, etc. using the same format on camera.

And yes, Lands is awesome. I've been on it since summer and I enjoy it quite a bit, though I tend to splash black for sideboard cards. Dark Confidant swaps perfectly for Punishing Fire in matchups where I want to overload their removal and they're likely to bring in Rest in Peace.
 
Sterling

Sterling

El Presidente
13,028
7,945
Derpa_sl said:
Any word on the wastes land yet? if snow land or colorless?
Click to expand...
It's not snow. It doesn't have a supertype. It will just be a basic land that produces colorless mana. There will be cards that cost specifically colorless mana instead of generic mana for parts of their costs. Painlands in Standard get a little more interesting.
 
rad

rad

Lord of Guk
1,141
2,504
Punko_sl said:
btw i've played magic since 1994, back then, and ever since I played with my lands out front, rest behind them. Thanks to the new rules change I've decided to 100% play RG lands in legacy.

Fuck that rule, enjoy seeing my exploration clearly though.

Had to get that rant out, pretty rustled
Click to expand...
I sort of get control, you're not really creating a board. But with any other style of deck WHY THE FUCK would you play that way.

God damn you.
 
Ratina

Ratina

Bronze Knight of the Realm
243
79
Sterling_sl said:
It's not snow. It doesn't have a supertype. It will just be a basic land that produces colorless mana. There will be cards that cost specifically colorless mana instead of generic mana for parts of their costs. Painlands in Standard get a little more interesting.
Click to expand...
Is that confirmed? I know a lot of people think/want it this way but I thought it was still up in the air?
 
Enzee

Enzee

Trakanon Raider
2,197
715
makes the most sense, considering how it's in the casting cost of Kozilek alongside colorless mana as well. But, no, it's not technically confirmed by wizards yet.
 
Heylel

Heylel

Trakanon Raider
3,602
429
So I bought a Library of Alexandria from a local shop that had a large, old collection sold to it. At the shop it looked fine, but when I got it home something looked a tad off. I'm probably just being paranoid because I didn't buy it from a large vendor, but I showed it to the local vintage guys anyway. There's a corner that might indicate it's a really good scan, but it otherwise holds up under high magnification and feels right. It's a little glossy, but no more than a new card. It just looks like it sat in a sleeve for 20 years. The vintage guys were 95% sure it was real, but that last 5% is bothering me.
 
Heylel

Heylel

Trakanon Raider
3,602
429
Haven't had a chance yet. I don't have another Arabian card handy to do a proper comparison. If I use something newer it's very likely to give a false positive. I did get a chance to compare it side by side with a loupe to an authentic Library and the dot pattern + color were right. There's one little corner that the guy noticed might be off before we magnified it, but afterwards he thought it was probably fine. I just want to be sure considering I paid cash for it.

I notified the vendor, and I'm pretty sure they'll be responsible about it since they know me (I've worked PPTQs for them and am scheduled to do another in January). I'll take it next weekend to the judge conference and get a second opinion from our RC. He's had a lot of practice spotting fakes.

Honestly, this is why I usually just buy from Star City. I *know* the cards I get are beyond reproach, even if the peace of mind costs me a little extra.
 
Xalara

Xalara

Golden Squire
826
81
If I recall correctly, yes. When we last did it, it was through a local card shop so it was a bulk order of sorts. However it shouldn't be too expensive.
 
Punko

Punko

Macho Ma'am
<Gold Donor>
7,924
12,576
Heylel_sl said:
So I bought a Library of Alexandria from a local shop that had a large, old collection sold to it. At the shop it looked fine, but when I got it home something looked a tad off. I'm probably just being paranoid because I didn't buy it from a large vendor, but I showed it to the local vintage guys anyway. There's a corner that might indicate it's a really good scan, but it otherwise holds up under high magnification and feels right. It's a little glossy, but no more than a new card. It just looks like it sat in a sleeve for 20 years. The vintage guys were 95% sure it was real, but that last 5% is bothering me.
Click to expand...
i ordered some fake betas online, the only way to see they were fake were the obvious printing mistake (lacking the small white corners within the black border), and tearing the card up

bend test, water test, magnifying glass, all passed

this was perhaps 2 years ago
 
You must log in or register to reply here.