Magic-League.com Forum Index Magic-League.com
Forums of Magic-League: Free Online tcg playing; casual or tournament play.
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   RegisterRegister 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

EsperGhast


Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
 
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Standard (T2) Decks
Author Message
Tao



Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 864

PostPosted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:10 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'd rather be cascading into Blightning or Spreading Seas.
Back to top
Edowardo



Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 55

PostPosted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 1:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I guess he's trying to help by saying play blightning or spreading seas
Back to top
Tao



Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 864

PostPosted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 2:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I hate being the person to say you're just playing a worse version of existing decks, but I don't see how this deck is any better than Jund or Spread 'Em. Bloodghast is nowhere near game-breaking enough for me to want to see any many as I possibly can every game, and the plan to bounce your opponent's stuff followed up with Identity Crisis is a really slow backup plan.
Back to top
OldBear



Joined: 12 Apr 2005
Posts: 1840

PostPosted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 2:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Do u have bloodghast and tarmogoyf confused or something?
Back to top
Tao



Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 864

PostPosted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 3:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Quote:
I guess he's trying to help by saying play blightning or spreading seas


I was trying to sarcastically say play Jund or Spread 'Em, which obviously didn't get through very well.

Quote:
No joking, i just beat spread'em without a problem...

This is a worse version of what? Seriously....what decks are similar?

You would be much more helpful if you let me know what these decks are, so that i might improve on my idea....meaning an esper cascade deck, some other bloodghast deck, or a bounce deck

Honestly, I don't think they exist. Feel free to prove me wrong!

Your deck is similar to Spread 'Em in that you want to consistently cascade into a specific card or cards. However, I think a strategy of denying your opponent access to more than one color of mana is stronger than trying to bounce your opponents creatures (remember how Jund can get two cards out of one with cascade?) while getting a few Bloodghasts in play.
Back to top
Bantos86



Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 209

PostPosted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 4:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Here's why this deck is bad:

1) Bloodghast alone is your win con. It's too slow against RDW/Boros, and against anything with white in it, it'll just get Path'd.

2) Bouncing + Identity Crisis does not a win con make. It simply stalls until they draw a new threat. Which you would respond to with more bounce. Which doesn't answer the threat, it just delays. Again.

You need a better gameplan. Bloodghast is not Ichorid.

Also, beating Spread 'Em with a deck that runs blue is not that much of an accomplishment. Spread 'Em was designed almost exclusively to deal with the beast known as Jund.
Back to top
JacobMatthew



Joined: 16 Dec 2009
Posts: 131

PostPosted: Wed Jan 13, 2010 9:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Unfortunately, everyone who's saying this deck is bad, is correct.

I've tried making a strictly bloodghast control deck in t2 with a shit ton of removal, it was esper as well, when i built it i looked at bloodghast and rememberedf the old Nether Spirit UWB control in Mercadian Masques type 2 (which was actually pretty strong if anyone recalls), there just aren't strong enough cards in esper colors in type two right now, if you plan on running mass removal like doj and a bunch of bounce like ppl said tier decks will just draw into more and more threats and yr kinda fucked, other colors have just too many strong cards , you either run blightning or you run baneslayer angel most other things are kind of just... well......

Unfortunately, everyone who's saying this deck is bad, is correct.
Back to top
jordman2



Joined: 26 Oct 2008
Posts: 79

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 1:50 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

play Hedron Crab then you have 2 win cons Very Happy
Back to top
kaamos



Joined: 08 Nov 2006
Posts: 320

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:43 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Heres my advice, playtest-playtest, and calculate odds of draw, tune the deck to make your tech work as much as possible, then test it against the worst situations (ie best odds in jund/tier1 decks favor)

Then post it somewhere else, these guys dont know how to test new tech. I posted a series of "Flood" titled decks using cascade and spreadingseas/mirage

and guess what, they told me to play netdecks

So, in conclusion, you can either try to be original and have some integrity in the game, or you can believe the MTG pro thinktanks have created all of the good decks already.

The latter will lead you to seeing your tech in a tier deck later, like "Spreadem" using spreading seas and cascade.

I stopped "Trolling" here because these guys dont want anything but DCI points and wins. They dont calculate, strategize, or care.

They take decks other people design and change two cards, and then roflstomp people learning to play online.


Thats my first and only attempt to troll.
Back to top
Vedrfolner



Joined: 04 Apr 2006
Posts: 2325

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 4:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I understand the idea, to cascade into bounce in the form of Into the Roil.

But why Bloodghast?

I don't understand that card choice. It makes you cascade into a win condition that is difficult to deal with, granted, but which is very likely not enough to win the game on its own - instead of cascading into Into the Roil.

Wouldn't it be better to run win conditions with a higher casting cost than 2?

So that you either cascade into bounce or Esper Charm. THEN, when you have stalled the opponent, play a powerful win condition like Baneslayer Angel or Sphinx of Jwar Isle to finish the game while you have the advantage.

Everyone who have commented on your deck says that it has a similar gameplan to Spread 'em and that is true. You try to accomplish the same thing: slowing the opponent down, stopping his game plan while drawing cards. This doesn't mean that it has to become Spread 'em. That deck doesn't stall the opponent by playing bounce, you do.
Back to top
Bantos86



Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 209

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:08 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

kaamos wrote:
Heres my advice, playtest-playtest, and calculate odds of draw, tune the deck to make your tech work as much as possible, then test it against the worst situations (ie best odds in jund/tier1 decks favor)

Then post it somewhere else, these guys dont know how to test new tech. I posted a series of "Flood" titled decks using cascade and spreadingseas/mirage

and guess what, they told me to play netdecks

So, in conclusion, you can either try to be original and have some integrity in the game, or you can believe the MTG pro thinktanks have created all of the good decks already.

The latter will lead you to seeing your tech in a tier deck later, like "Spreadem" using spreading seas and cascade.

I stopped "Trolling" here because these guys dont want anything but DCI points and wins. They dont calculate, strategize, or care.

They take decks other people design and change two cards, and then roflstomp people learning to play online.


Thats my first and only attempt to troll.


ITT: kaamos being butthurt.

I've seen alot of the things you posted. Alot of those were only half-decks and you repeatedly posting to your own thread, talking to yourself, wondering what to put in.

I finally decided to try to find these posts where you claim to have invented Spread 'Em. So far I've found 4. Not one of them is even remotely as good as Spread 'Em. Spread 'Em uses good cards that do what's needed, like Bloodbraid Elf and Ajani V, cards that you are mostly unable to include in your decks because the vast majority of them that I saw are wasting the Elf spots for Kathari Remnant. Basically, you post a deck, then get butthurt when people tell you the truth, because YOU think it's so great and can't understand why people would EVER even CONSIDER your idea to be bad.

Also, just because you posted the idea first here doesn't mean jack crap. You thought of it, somebody else perfected it. Learn to deal with it, and stop holding a grudge.
Back to top
GaryOak



Joined: 20 May 2009
Posts: 20

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 7:28 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Respect to Kaamos. Ty for your openmindedness dude Smile
Back to top
Tao



Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 864

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 11:02 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm so fucking sick of Kaamos's whining.
Back to top
Bantos86



Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 209

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 11:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

jonproject wrote:
I'm so fucking sick of Kaamos's whining.


Seconded. Let me just add something before he start's whining about me now that I've openly spoken out against him.

He complains in his post about the "MTG pro thinktanks". The "elites" of MTG if you will. This argument reminds me of my Guild Wars days.

For those who play Guild Wars, skip down farther. You'll probably be reading things you already know. Kaamos, whether you play it or not, read.

The argument about the "elite" of any game is an old and tired one. Yes, some people are going to shoot down ideas not from the Elites, simply out of either tiredness of hearing/seeing crappy ideas from those not in the Elite, or because they have an automatic bias against them because they are Elite, and you are not. Whether it's right or wrong, it happens. Learn to deal with it.

Now, I bring up Guild Wars in the first place because creating a character build is alot like building an MTG deck. A few things are different: You're limited to 8 skills, not 60 cards; There are no banned skills (with exceptions...skills marked PvE only are, obviously, banned in PvP); and an individual build may be pure crap alone, but be amazing when part of a team, or vice versa, while MTG is pretty much entirely a 1v1 game. Within Guild Wars, there are good builds, and bad builds, each build being rated for it's effectiveness in all possible formats. For the most part, individual builds are made to be as robust as possible, fitting as many formats as possible, while team builds are made only for whatever format they're going to participate in.

And that's where the Elites come in. Many sites where builds are posted have rules about how to vet builds. Most require a person to test the build in the game before rating it. Many of the Elite don't. Why? Because they can look at a build, and tell whether it's pure crap, pure genius, or something that has potential but needs improvement. They've been in the game long enough to know, and are overwhelmingly likely to still be active. If you have a build with skills that are either crap entirely, or crap until an unlikely situation is met, it doesn't matter that when it works, it blows everything away. It's the fact that it's inconsistant, and worse, most times useless. You don't plan for the unlikely events. You plan for the expected.

So too do these Elites exist in MTG. So too will they tell you that your deck is crap if they can look at it and see glaring problems. It happens. So what if a deck idea you "created" appeared in a PTQ? Did it win? I don't know if you noticed, but for all your claiming of rights on Spread 'Em, the deck is really kinda crappy. It beats Jund, and everyone acknowledges this. It loses to most everything else, and everyone acknowledges this. The entire justification of it's existence is that it beats Jund, exactly as it was designed to do. So for all your whining about how you get no credit for it, your "legacy" is this deck that was made to defeat one specific type of deck. Not something to be especially proud of, or something that should be fought so hard for.

As for this deck, I'm sorry, but yes, it's similar to Spread 'Em, yet inferior. A simple Deft Duelist would slowly rape you, while a bigger beast like Sphinx of Jwar Isle would make the rape quicker, but more painful. Spread 'Em simply has more (and better) control elements than this one.
Back to top
Bantos86



Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 209

PostPosted: Thu Jan 14, 2010 12:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

tbone wrote:
I just don't understand why people complain about someone posting a deck that isn't currently tier 1. I mean isn't the point of posting a deck is trying to develop it. Current tier 1 decks are already developed, everyone knows what the best cards to play are. If i wanted to play a deck that is currently tier 1 deck why would i ever bother posting it at all when i could look at 1,000 pages on 100s of forums already on the deck.

Personally, I never play current tier 1 decks because I don't find it fun at all. I don't play magic to win. I prefer building creative decks and seeing how it fares in the meta.

I understand that most of the magic community is a bunch of insecure rich kids who only play magic to win, just to stroke their tiny egos. So I'm not surprised when most people post a deck and it is met by a bunch of tier 1 trolls.

All in All, I really don't care what most of you say. I think it is pathetic when people take the time basically say nothing at all.

Back to the deck..
I was think about putting in Eldrazi Mon and some token cards like emeria angel and conquers pledge...it would work with DOJ and bloodghast... i could bounce it if i needed to too...still might be a little slow

sb:
+deft duelists for boros/rdw
-PTE

Thoughts on that?


In addition to the Elites in games, there are also always those who declare themselves to be above those who would criticize their ideas by declaring they don't intend to make builds/decks/whatever to win, but because they like that aspect. Which is fine. But it begs the question of "Why are you playing a competitive game to not be competitive?". You say you enjoy making creative decks, but seem to be at a loss to understand that creative =/= good. Your creative idea has been declared inferior to other similar decks, but instead of going back to the drawing board and trying to find another way, you stubbornly insist on keeping the path in order to, apparently, prove your naysayers wrong.

Seriously, if you post a deck in the Competitive T2 section, and people tell you it's bad, either rework the deck, or take the flawed design somewhere else.

Insanity can be defined by doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result. Continuing to post about it here with cries of how you are right and everyone else is wrong is indeed such.

Also, railing on your naysayers here as "insecure rich kids" trying to stroke their egos smacks of arrogance of your own.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Standard (T2) Decks All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3  Next
Page 1 of 3

 


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group

All content on this page may not be reproduced without consent of Magic-League Directors.
Magic the Gathering is TM and copyright Wizards of the Coast, Inc, a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc. All rights reserved.


About Us | Contact Us | Privacy Policy