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 

Essay on why Will of the Naga is better than Waterwhirl


Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Limited
Author Message
derflippi
Level 4 Judge


Joined: 19 Mar 2005
Posts: 1402
Location: Weiterstad

PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:18 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

If you're interested in writing articles for magic-league, bring this into a differnent format (an article instead of a table/brainstorm). Maybe there's more cards in KTK/FRF that deserve this comparison.
Back to top
Grok



Joined: 08 Feb 2015
Posts: 138

PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 1:51 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I covered some of this in my response to your last thread, but I disagree that Will of the Naga is superior to Waterwhirl, and aside from that I think some of your pros and cons are contradictory.

Rarity isn't really a con for any card. We're talking about the power level of the card and its ability to swing games; this is a completely irrelevant exercise if you don't assume it's already in your deck. When analyzing Wingmate Roc, do you list "mythic rare" as a con? Your logic just doesn't make sense.

Comparing Will of the Naga to Time Stretch is absurd. Tapping two creatures (especially when your opponent might have more than two creatures on the board) does not prevent them from taking their turn, playing more creatures, or killing your creatures (which would negate the tempo swing you gained from Will of the Naga).

Will of the Naga does not cost 2 mana. Especially not if you are picking 3-4 of them, as you suggest. Delve is a very real cost, only works in the late stages of the game when you probably already have 6 mana in play, and you can't afford more than one or two delve spells in your deck unless you want to pay full retail for everything after the first.

"Has to be used before attackers are declared so you might forget to use it." I don't understand why this is a con. It has nothing to do with the power level of the card. If we're comparing cards, we should assume the person using them is relatively competent.

That Will of the Naga doesn't affect creatures with hexproof is also moot, because the card we are comparing it to has the exact same shortcoming.

As for why I think Waterwhirl is more powerful: It has a bigger impact on the board by forcing your opponent to spend mana to replay their threats (preferably more mana than you spent bouncing them, the very definition of tempo). It can blow out combat tricks, provide a huge tempo swing if used in response to an unmorph, and it can even save your own creatures from removal. If you play Waterwhirl at the end of your opponent's turn, they can't attack with the creatures you bounce for the same number of turns they couldn't attack if you used Will of the Naga. There's no world in which the words printed on Will of the Naga are more powerful in a vacuum than the words printed on Waterwhirl; bouncing is better than tapping.

That being said, the argument should be whether you want the less powerful, but more flexible and cheaper spell (Will of the Naga, assuming you're only running one in your deck) or the more powerful, but more expensive spell (Waterwhirl). Some decks absolutely prefer Will of the Naga because they don't plan on getting 6 lands in play. Those would be aggressive tempo decks. Every other deck that can afford to pay for it wants Waterwhirl because it has a bigger impact on the game. However, if you already have a lot of 6 drops and are lacking removal, Will of the Naga might be considered over Waterwhirl.

Both cards are good, but neither are high picks in my estimation. Waterwhirl has the more immediate, powerful effect, but it appropriately costs more mana. Feel free to debate any of my points.
Back to top
GreenBear



Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 898

PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

You call that an essay I've read haku's that are longer. Hell grok response was longer and more logical than your 'essay'.

Now I've never even drafted this format but let me tell you some of the things this 'essay' is missing.

Which colour is the stronger, which colour is deeper, which goes into which strategies and what strategies are best in this format. Which goes into more winning archetype's. The list goes on and on.
Back to top
Grok



Joined: 08 Feb 2015
Posts: 138

PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 3:57 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I see now that I have been duped. Your exaggerated, ridiculous arguments are obviously just bait to get people to respond. I only realized this after I looked at some of your previous posts on this forum where you bragged about your skill with overt sarcasm and satire. Clearly this analysis was a continuation of that.

At least I can rest easy knowing that you did not make those points in earnest. I didn't think anyone could be that bad at drafting.
Back to top
xJudicatorx



Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Posts: 696

PostPosted: Tue Mar 10, 2015 7:02 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Yes, it was probably a tad satirical. But your response was quite good anyway Grok.
Back to top
GreenBear



Joined: 27 Jul 2010
Posts: 898

PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 11:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Why don't you record some drafts, to show everyone how the 'pro's' do it, and by the way when your arguing with someone in a proper critique you have to address all the points not just the one's you like. Did your ivy league education not teach you that?
Back to top
moscowdemon
Level 4 Judge


Joined: 18 Dec 2008
Posts: 297

PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 1:22 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I think I like this new nickname on you, SiegeRhino. It actually fits the personality you bring to the table now. I actually think it would be great to have you writing regularly for the site. We could use some articles and if you keep this up like you have been, you could outdo SarcasticRat.
Back to top
Grok



Joined: 08 Feb 2015
Posts: 138

PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 4:54 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

What was his nickname before? I'm new here, which is probably why I didn't pick up on the sarcasm at first.

Still, I don't think writing more articles is a good idea. If SiegeRhino continues to spread disinformation with somewhat serious arguments, I think that would hurt the community and misinform unknowing readers.

If you want to write comedy, try taking a different tact that isn't concealed as strategic advice.
Back to top
saurgoth



Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Wed Mar 11, 2015 9:42 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

My non-snarky, honest response, having read only the initial post:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Essay#Definitions
Back to top
xJudicatorx



Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Posts: 696

PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 5:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Grok wrote:
What was his nickname before? I'm new here, which is probably why I didn't pick up on the sarcasm at first.

Still, I don't think writing more articles is a good idea. If SiegeRhino continues to spread disinformation with somewhat serious arguments, I think that would hurt the community and misinform unknowing readers.

If you want to write comedy, try taking a different tact that isn't concealed as strategic advice.


Often reading a satirical article can teach you a lot just by forcing you to really think about your counterargument. You already knew of course that WotN costs more than "just 2 mana", but he made you spell out why.
Back to top
Grok



Joined: 08 Feb 2015
Posts: 138

PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 7:18 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

xJudicatorx wrote:
Often reading a satirical article can teach you a lot just by forcing you to really think about your counterargument. You already knew of course that WotN costs more than "just 2 mana", but he made you spell out why.


I knew the counterarguments from experience, but what if a new player looking for drafting advice sees it and takes it at face value? I think satire should either be slightly more obvious, or labeled as such (like The Mulligan on The Meadery). The problem in this case is that the post was poorly written satire because it was almost indistinguishable from other egotistical Magic advice on the internet. Perhaps SiegeRhino should brush up on Jonathan Swift or Stephen Colbert. It's not enough to just state the opposite of what you believe; you also need to subtly lead the reader to a realization by playing off their biased perspective.
Back to top
saurgoth



Joined: 21 Feb 2005
Posts: 267

PostPosted: Thu Mar 12, 2015 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

In other words, change your nick to SiegeRhOnion.
Back to top
Bigshow



Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Posts: 1374
Location: Igloo town

PostPosted: Fri Mar 13, 2015 8:04 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Wow, why are you nerds so butthurt over situational magic cards. I think all of you need to hit the showers and practice more.

Even SiegeRhino.
Back to top
Display posts from previous:   
Reply to topic    Magic-League.com Forum Index -> Limited All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 


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