Entries Tagged 'Reviews' ↓

Is this card for real? Here comes Alara Reborn rare, Thought Hemorrhage!

Aesthetics:
I had to read this one about twenty times.

Then I went back and looked up Cranial Extraction to make sure I was reading it right. In fact for a Resident Genius I can be a little slow on the uptake; that is, this is what my computer screen looked like at one point:

So yes, this is basically a Cranial Extraction that can potentially ka-blammo the opponent, a kind of a not-great Blood Oath grafted onto essentially the classic Cranial Extraction.

Longtime readers know that when Cranial Extraction was legal in Standard I played it very heavily; to be fair, I played it so commonly in both Standard and Extended that Two-Headed Giant teammate Steve Sadin used to express concern whenever I didn’t have three Cranial Extractions in a presented deck list. Some of my best decks including Kuroda-style Red and Jushi Blue packed three Cranial Extractions in the sideboard each.

Thought Hemorrhage, when it hits, is at least potentially more powerful than Cranial Extraction. It is essentially Cranial Extraction plus. So why will Thought Hemorrhage have such a less dramatic effect on the Standard metagame when it hits?

Let’s go back to those two decks we mentioned a moment ago…

Kuroda-style Red, played by Josh Ravitz; Top 8 2005 US National Championship

4 Sensei’s Divining Top
4 Solemn Simulacrum
4 Wayfarer’s Bauble

4 Arc-Slogger
3 Beacon of Destruction
4 Magma Jet
4 Molten Rain
4 Pulse of the Forge
4 Shrapnel Blast
1 Sowing Salt

4 Blinkmoth Nexus
15 Mountain
1 Swamp
4 Tendo Ice Bridge

sideboard:
4 Culling Scales
3 Cranial Extraction
4 Fireball
1 Sowing Salt
3 Boseiju, Who Shelters All

Jushi Blue, played by Julian Levin; 2005 New York State Champion

4 Boomerang
3 Disrupting Shoal
4 Hinder
4 Jushi Apprentice
3 Keiga, the Tide Star
4 Mana Leak
3 Meloku the Clouded Mirror
4 Remand
2 Rewind
4 Threads of Disloyalty

2 Dimir Aqueduct
10 Island
1 Mikokoro, Center of the Sea
1 Minamo, School at Water’s Edge
1 Miren, the Moaning Well
1 Oboro, Palace in the Clouds
4 Quicksand
1 Shizo, Death’s Storehouse
4 Watery Grave

sideboard:
3 Cranial Extraction
2 Dimir Aqueduct
4 Drift of Phantasms
4 Execute
2 Rewind

In both cases Cranial Extraction was a Black splash in an otherwise monochromatic deck. Cranial Extraction — especially when it first hit the scene — had a very dramatic effect on the metagame, prompting Psychatog players to touch Morphling for instance, due to not just its ability to wipe out all of a control deck’s win conditions, but the ease of splashing the card.

Forget about Extended for a moment (where we have essentially a Negate / Countersquall situation); where in the modern Standard do we have a deck like a Kuroda-style Red or a Jushi Blue that can slide the Extraction into place? Surely Reflecting Pool Control can make use of this as one of many different available “powerful spells” in a deck that can play all the powerful spells in every color… But that is not the same thing as Cranial Extraction version one point oh, where the addition of a Swamp and some Tendo Ice Bridges could lopside a deck’s iffy (and most popular) pairing, or where some Watery Graves could justify tapping out one turn earlier in the mirror.

Still a card that prompted several double-takes and one trip to Gatherer… Just not the kind of card that will give every deck designer in the room pause, as did the original.

Where can I see this fitting in?
The most obvious home for Thought Hemorrhage is a multicolored control deck such as Standard Quick’N’Toast / Reflecting Pool Control, or what we typically see in Alara Block one-on-ones. Consider…

Scepter of Fugue / Resounding Wave that; untap, Thought Hemorrahage your Scepters. You might be down a card or two, but you’ve changed the tenor of a game where Scepter of Fugue is probably one of the defining threats (or pre-emptive counter-threats to be somewhat more accurate and / or chatty).

Snap Judgment Rating: Role-player (high)

LOVE
MIKE

P.S. For everyone who wants to step back in time to read about the development of great decks with three Cranial Extractions such as Playing Fair, Kuroda-style Red, Jushi Blue and others… Those and numerous other triumphs of the pre-Clark Flores Apprentice Program can be found in Deckade, triumphantly back in print over at Top8Magic!

All Alara Reborn

A reaction to Alara Reborn uncommon, Bituminous Blast.

Hey ho friends, frolickers, and followers*!

As you’ve probably noticed both Brian David-Marshall and I have been hammering out one-of card reactions and reviews on some of the gas being leaked on the Alara Reborn Visual Spoiler, Brian on Top8Magic and me here… and on Top8Magic (if you don’t check out both blogs, here is a link to my take on Soulquake).

So this one, like Jund Hackblade earlier in the week, is going to be a double-up.

Brian mentioned in his review of Bituminous Blast that “[i]n Limited it will usually result in a free creature…” but I don’t see that as being necessarily limited to — pardon the French — Limited. I am notoriously not greedy when it comes to two-for-ones (maybe to my detriment… I just like any two-for-one). I don’t see any problem with hammering out a Bituminous Blast and turning over a creature.

For example, mid-combat you might get the holy grail of a full-on three-for-one! He is crashing with two bad guys, one big, one little. You Blast the big one Bituminous-style and flip over a medium-sized monster. I rarely block, but as a fan of two-for-ones, I will gladly take the free card and eat his little with my medium.

Et.

Cetera.

Aesthetics:
One thing I would point out is that they slapped the Cascade keyword onto this card, which implies that there are going to be more Cascade cards like Bituminous Blast (otherwise why not just explain the cool ability on the card sans keyword explanation?).

Why might this matter?

Well Bituminous Blast is probably going to be Constructed quality in the — to borrow an analogy from Brian — vein of a Prophetic Bolt, the possibility of going linear with Cascade cards is really quite amazing! Flip FLIP FLIP!

That is where I want my Blast to take me.

As Brian mentioned Liliana Vess makes for an interesting companion to Bituminous Blast (or any Cascade spell), but per usual I would think twice about playing too many fives.

Where can I see this fitting in?
Two places, and I already touched on both: 1) Any old deck that is willing to invest another two or three mana to get back another two or three mana plus a card in Cascade value; that is, many decks. 2) A Cascade linear deck (imagining of course)… But we’ll have to see about card availability. This will not sheck the foundations of Dominaria as a Tarmogoyf, but it is certaining interesting and should make for some cascades of incremental fun in fun formats.

Stap Judgment Rating: Role Player

LOVE
MIKE

* If you don’t know what I mean by “followers” check out http://www.twitter.com/FiveWithFlores and get in on the party!

All Alara Reborn

A king in Jund, a serf in Esper, a review of Alara Reborn Rare Spellbound Dragon.

Aesthetics:
First of all let’s look at that flavor text…

“A king in Jund, a serf in Esper.”

I love that flavor text!

Most of you don’t know this about me but I actively avoided drafting Black and to a lesser degree Red in Planeshift simply because I didn’t like the art (Bob Maher used to ask me if I had actually read what the Black and Red cards did); my favorite card flavor-wise is Form of the Dragon. I have always thought they did a fantabulous job of making you feel like you had transformed yourself into a dragon* (plus a good card).

Looping back to this card’s flavor text, you can see how a flyer like this one (which is obviously native to Grixis) might rule the sky in Jund… But is kind of a mope holding the bag in Esper where everyone is drawing cards, returing cards, and, you know, keeping ’em.

Okay. Game play. So how is this supposed to work?

Red for Dragon, Blue for Looter.

From the Dragon side, it isn’t much of a stretch for this to be 5/5 or better. After all you are playing cards like Spellbound Dragon, so 8/5 or so on offense is not much of a stretch.

The potentially counterproductive side is that typically “Looter” effects are meant to improve your hand… When you are chucking spells for damage, you are probably doing the opposite (you have already demonstrated five or more mana so what you are looking for is probably more action, not hoarding extra lands which is what is inevitably going to happen when you start chucking your Cryptic Commands to get in for seven). Then again, how long is the game going to last when you’re clocking with such a Dragon? The notion of relative hand improvement might therefore intersect with our as-yet unfinished explorations of How Card Advantage Works due to the opponent being up against a clock.

Interesting thing is that you of course have options. No reason (other than flash, flair, and probably clock) that you can’t call the Spellbound Dragon your lead and use the Looter half to hold said lead… Just that most of the time that is going to be at odds with the desire for damage.

All in all I really like this card…

But I’m not sure what deck I would play it in.

Where can I see this fitting in?
Well I kind of just said… I don’t know who wants a Spellbound Dragon. There is no present Standard deck that can cast it that would really want it. Interestingly this card defends pretty well against the Standard-standard Broodmate Dragon, but on balance can’t really attack into one unless you are willing to pitch a five (or you have say a Cryptic Command you plan to resolve).

Aesthetically I think the card is built for sky racing (think tap out Blue)… I think it could be reasonable in that kind of a deck but for the fact that that kind of deck is so clearly out-classed at this stage by Quick’N’Toast style Reflecting Pool Control.

One thing I didn’t mention that is quite obvious is that if you can toss cards like Reckless Wurm and Fiery Temper you look like a rock star and bonk like a porn star… But I doubt that is any kind of a real deck.

Hell of a first pick though… But that should be obvious from the intersection of card type and rarity.

Snap Judgment Rating: It’s not Constructed Unplayable, won’t be a Staple or any kind of a format defining card, so I guess that leaves Role Player. I would be very interested to see Spellbound Dragon producing maybe a year from now when the Quick’N’Toast / Reflecting Pool Control competition dies down. Seems like it would be good friends with Volcanic Fallout (provided control decks still want to play that in a post-Faeries format).

LOVE
MIKE

 
* This is basically 100% random but the idea of turning yourself into a dragon reminded me of this Troy Denning book I read back in high school. When I was in high school — close to 20 years ago — I was a big time dice-thrower (you know, before Magic: The Gathering I played me some Advanced Dungeons & Dragons). So I was all into the novels for some of their product releases.

The book I remembered involved some sorcerer-transforming-himself-into-a-dragon action and I recall it being pretty compelling (especially for the genre).

It is by Troy Denning who is actually an excellent writer, one of the best who puts out Star Wars and other licensed properties paperbacks. I did some digging and if you are in the market for some paperback Dungeons & Dragons-style SiFi / Fantasy, I remember enjoying The Verdant Passage.

Update!
I did some digging on ye ole Amazon.com and found Verdant Passage for a penny plus shipping

The Verdant Passage, new & used

So if you can afford, um, a penny, I think you’d enjoy the book (provided you like, you know, dragons).

Have fun everyone gaming on tomorrow! (Unfortunately I have to miss… again 🙁 )

All Alara Reborn

Just a quickie on Alara Reborn common, Jund Hackblade.

Aesthetics:
Jund Hackblade is a hard working little fellow, and one of the more interesting cards that has been spoiled so far.

On its lonesome, Jund Hackblade is relatively uninteresting, a 2/1 for either BR or GR (and speaking of aesthetics, did anyone else notice the relative size difference of the Golgari v. Red mana symbols?)… But if you play a multicolored permanent on the first turn and follow up with this guy, you have a nice 3/2 haste for either BR or GR. Saucy.

The question is, what are you going to use to set him up?

My personal opionion is that Tattermunge Maniac is probably the best option; you can play it for either G or R on turn one, and you actually need G on the second turn even in a primarily Red deck (assuming you are the G side of course), so that makes things smoother.

Brian David-Marshall told me he really likes Figure of Destiny but I think that might be a little bit awkward due to the (I assume) forced Black mana on turn two… But that is probably resolvable by dual land in Blightning Beatdown. Figure of Destiny being a card you might actually want to play, of course.

There is also the possibility of just playing Jund Hackblade on the bonus… That is you don’t optimize to play him out of the gates on turn two… You just run him over (or alongside, actually) Goblin Deathraiders and he becomes a much better mid-game topdeck in a Blightning build with Boggart Ram-Gang and Ashenmoor Gouger.

Where Can I See This Fitting In?
This is a really cool card. It is obviously at its maximum when you can follow up a first turn Figure of Destiny or some such, rocking a Ram-Gang essentially, but I think that was the trap I fell into when initially evaluating it: Thinking only in terms of how good it can be on turn two. Remember that it can be regular on turn two and then you can just play a Ram-Gang the next turn and come in for six anyway; or you can play a Deathraiders on turn two and this plus Tarfire to get in the following turn for six anyway.

Basically you are going to want to play this in a beatdown deck that can support multicolored spells; you don’t just through it into a straight Red version and cross your fingers on the mana; that requires some amount of deck customization, but I don’t think it will be overly difficult. Green with Maniacs, but more likely some evolved take on Blightning. 

Snap Judgment Rating: If there were such a thing as a “defining” Role-Player, this would be it. Not a staple, but also not played “interchangeably” as many and most Role Players.

For a much more extensive discussion of Jund Hackblade and the cards you might want to play alongside it to set up, you might want to check out Brian David-Marshall’s take on Top8Magic.com.

While you’re over there, mise well be a pal and pick up a copy of Deckade, amiright?

Deckade – For those of you who have always dreamed of waking up next to my smiling (or in this case grumpy) face… You can buy one and plop it down onto the nightstand (Jon Finkel does this).

LOVE
MIKE

All Alara Reborn

In the spirit of Taunting Jon Becker, we bring you Alara Reborn common, Pale Recluse.

Aesthetics:
To really understand Pale Recluse, I have to reference a similar (and I use the word “similar” loosely) card, Traumatic Visions. Traumatic Visions is a Conflux common. For five mana it can Counter target spell, and has Basic landcycling for 1U.

Jon Finkel has said that this card lets him do basically “everything he could ever want to do” … Counter spells, draw cards, and ultimately play lands. Brian David-Marshall actually argued that this is a poential in Legacy (on top of your deck it can counter Force of Will with Counterbalance).

Let’s dial it back to Alara Reborn.

You see Pale Recluse can do everything Jon Becker wants to do.

Here is a card that can block flying creatures without itself having flying OR dig up for a Forest or Plains. Five mana would be too much for a 4/5 Reach, but we think Becker would certainly play with it on six in forties if not sixties (sixty-ones).

Where can I see this fitting in?
Limited only.

Snap Judgment Rating: Constructed Unplayable… probably.

LOVE
MIKE

All Alara Reborn

So based on a couple of reader requests (I’m looking at you, CMH2003 and thewachman), plus an absolutely glowing testimonial from Rich Hagon “the best thing that happened to Magic writing in the last year was Zac falling off the train and going to Malaysia” I went back and looked at Interaction Advantage (or Card Advantage Is Wrong, Kinda) and Applied Interaction Advantage, its sequel from this week.

My general impression is that there isn’t really anything wrong with Zac’s theory… only that it isn’t new.

A lot of you probably didn’t have Brainburst Premium when I was writing for that site (which was around the heyday of Who’s the Beatdown II: Multitasking and some other fine articles from Zvi), but to me, this is fairly settled stuff.

Hill attempts in his Interaction Advantage to “reconcile the competing existing concepts of Card Advantage and Card Quality with one another in a coherent fashion, while incorporating the reality that certain effects have an impact on the board that far exceeds the expected interaction value of your average ‘card,’ but aren’t easily measured by the other ‘cards’ they destroy, negate, or generate.” This is in large part a reaction to Stephen Menendian’s claim that “In fact, within the game of Magic, there are only interactions. There is no such thing as a ‘Magic card’. This is a difficult ontological reality for many Magic players to accept.”

I suppose in order to properly address Zac’s article I will have to get Stephen’s statement out of the way first.

It’s asinine.

Okay, that’s probably a little harsh.

There are obviouslycards. In fact, the cards say “cards” all over them (look at any “discard” card). There have to be cards. It’s silly to pretend that there aren’t cards, because even if you agree with Stephen’s ultimate claim, the physical cards themselves have tremendous value “within [a] game of Magic.” If nothing else, cards give you something to bluff with. They give you something to look at when assessing if your opponent “has it” or not. They give you something to draw extra of if you are a cheater, or to watch that your opponent isn’t drawing extra of if you suspect him of being a cheater. They give you something to draw extra of if you are not a cheater but don’t know what else to do with the five Blue mana staring at you. The physicality, the reality, of the cards is essential to interactive Magic and to pretend that they don’t exist is to remove from the game that single solitary thing that differentiates the very good players from the absolute masters of the game. I can tell you that Jon Finkel walked by a playtest session once and ordered us to stop. We were playing poker deck with a Survival of the Fittest list. Jon insisted that what we were doing was actually hurtingus, and that there was no reason to test a Survival deck with proxies. “You just don’t have the right feel for the cards, and never will.”

Jon at the time had numerous Grand Prix wins and Pro Tour Top 8s on the back of his unparalleled skill with Survival of the Fittest, and to this day claims the absolute mastery of Survival of the Fittest among his proudest capabilities as the game’s greatest technician. If there was any one person’s opinion that absolutely mattered on this topic, it was his, irrevocably.

And he believed in cards.

But that probably wasn’t what Stephen was about in his statement.

He was really just being over dramatic about card counting, and I suppose that is forgivable insofar as what he was “getting at” (I assume) is essentially true from a pure counting perspective. It was true the last time I said it, and when edt told it to me, too. Just not new. I stress that this is accurate only from a counting perspective, that is, the recording of exchanges, and not true in any other sense.

In the early to mid 2000s I was obsessed with counting and argued that all card advantage is ultimately virtual. From the perspective of instantaneous utility there is no difference between playing Keiga, the Tide Star scaring off three attackers and playing Wrath of God to kill three attackers. You might be shaking your head at this because in one case there are still potential attackers on the board and in the latter case there aren’t. It is ultimately futile to argue the point because I can just pretend they will never attack and therefore never have utility (what if I play Windborn Muse and the opponent chooses never to attack with them due to mana constraints?) … Or what if the opponent plays Living Death and gets them all back? We can really only look at things at a given instant because the idea of long-term card counting really comes down to where you stick the words THE END … It’s the difference between comedy and tragedy and all the difference in a game of Magic.

Have you ever played ninety-nine one hundredths of a perfect game of Magic? Your back to the wall the whole time, mana flooded, desperately chump blocking, holding on until you weasel into a topdeck, then still have to juke it perfectly for three turns, pray he doesn’t realize you’re bluffing (there are those cards again) until you pull again… Only to mis-click on the last turn (real-life mis-click counts too)? Congratulations. Ninety-nine out of one hundred. Wasn’t good enough.

Okay, back to Zac…

Not a bad set of articles. I’m sure many readers benefitted from reading these, and that is all we can ask of ourselves as writers. Not bad; simply not new.

In my mind Card Advantage and this nebulous idea of “Card Quality” don’t have to be reconciled.

Correctly counted, all card advantage is virtual, cardboard or no.

The easiest way to describe it is this:

Turn one of a Standard game, summer of 1999.

Your opponent plays Swamp, Blood Pet. The table popped up before he even played his Swamp, and he can’t possibly contain his excitement or disguise his grin.

Okay, you think.

Seven cards, not one of them a Mogg Fanatic. For the sake of this example, you have four Mogg Fanatics in your deck, but anything else, you’re dead.

You have 53 cards in the stack in front of you, or put more simply, a 75% chance of losing on the spot.

You pull “a card” … that is, a piece of cardboard (it exists). It is not, however, a Mogg Fanatic.

For sake of counting — real honest to goodness counting — you pulled nothing. You pulled a blank. It’s as if you didn’t draw at all.

If your are reading my blog, I am fairly sure you understand this example. Now I am going to make you a better Magic player. For reals.

EVERY SINGLE PULL YOU MAKE OPERATES THE EXACT SAME WAY.

All the counting in Magic is instantaneous. There is no difference between being too scared to set off a Veiled Serpent and simply not having any hand at all from being Mind Sludged beyond the option of someday NOT being too scared of setting off a Veiled Serpent and manning up (or bluffing that you might someday similarly man up). Player behavior dictates everything. It always has.

Here is the important reiteration: EVERY SINGLE PULL YOU MAKE OPERATES THE EXACT SAME WAY.

You understood the summer of 1999 example because of the virtual boner the opponent showed you, your knowledge of your four Mogg Fanatic deck (probably Counter-Phoenix), and the fact that you realized that you were staring at a textbook Hatred kill. Now even with these parameters filled, it would have been up to player behavior. Maybe you could bluff a Shock or a Force Spike. Maybe the opponent doesn’t know that you have no out there. But you, the guy reading this blog, understood from the example that the in-game utility you got from a non-Mogg Fanatic pull was zero.

The difference between you before you read this post and you after reading the next paragraph is that you will understand that the lesson of Bob Maher is that you should always assess your cards as if you are under the exact same kind of pressure.

The value of card drawing is tied directly to probability. More cards give you more chances at relevant pulls. Playing “as if you are under pressure” leads to crafting a strategy that will necessarily conform to the threats and interactions that your opponent can present within the appropriate time frame. This is actually quite simple if you think about it.

We often go back to the timeless Finkel message “Focus only on what matters.” Certain pundits have complained on occasion that they don’t know what matters. It may be simpler to think of the relevant interactions. You all understood the relevance of the Mogg Fanatic versus Blood Pet scenario. Every Magic interaction making up every Magic game can be broken down into similar buckets of relevance and probability, which in turn fit into larger buckets that make up the Stage superstructure that describes every Magic game.

For example take MWC v. Zoo in Extended:

MWC will win essentially every game that is allowed to go to Stage Three. How MWC wins is more-or-less irrelevant because there is almost no play that is bad enough that Zoo would be able to come back and win if it gets that far (I like making the opponent die to his stupid Dark Confidant, personally).

MWC has a suprising Stage One. Not good, but surprising (you are surprised when you lose to Mana Tithe, and also surprised when you lose to Lightning Helix).

Zoo crosses Stage One superbly, and acheives Stage Two within two turns most games. Zoo has to try to win in Stage Two. This statement is the entire framework of the strategy that guides both decks.

When players say they don’t know what is relevant — at least if they were playing one of the two decks described here — it is possible they are failing in the basic identification of strategy.

Zoo can only win one way: Kill the opponent before he acheives Stage Three, likely with a combination of beatdown and burn spells. One of my favorite things when I was actively playing the MWC deck was when my Zoo opponent would play Umezawa’s Jitte, typically in an attempt to not play into a big old Wrath of God. I liked this because I never lost a game when the opponent went Jitte. He would cede time by not killing me. I would react with Lightning Helix or Unmake (or sometimes Condemn) and buy a precious turn that brought me closer to Stage Three.

There are two cards that are sometimes played in Zoo that could complicate issues for MWC. Both Tidehollow Sculler and Gaddock Teeg could remove MWC’s ability to interact in Stage Two (typically pre-empting or removing Wrath of God); without such ability to interact, MWC would die before Stage Three (obviously losing in the process).

Naya Burn and the Lightning Bolt Deck have different ways of interacting with MWC than Zoo.

Naya Burn can play Molten Rain — especially on a Mistveil Plains or Temple of the False God — which restricts MWC in Stage Two (or even shanks MWC back to a manascrewed Stage One in some cases); either deck can play Sulfurous Vortex, which can not only kill MWC when MWC should be trumping in Stage Three (and certainly Stage Two), but can undermine the active dictation of Stage Three (whereas Zoo would always lose in Stage Three).

You will notice that the evaluation statement that describes both decks’ strategies differs when MWC is playing against Naya Burn (which looks like Zoo). If the MWC player assumes “[this deck] has to try to win in Stage Two” MWC may fail. MWC may in fact inevitably fail. In fact, this may be tantamount to a mis-assignment of role! What does it mean if Naya Burn can violate Stage Three airspace? We are in a very different world than “MWC will win essentially every game that is allowed to go to Stage Three,” aren’t we? It sounds almost like racing (God forbid) could be a relevant if not necessary option in our bundle of sticks, an arrow in our quiver we just might have to string up.

Think about what is necessary to identify the necessity of racing in the MWC v. Naya Burn fight. At the micro level, you have to figure out which if any of your cards is appropriate for racing and how and when to play them. At a slightly wider level you have to identify how to either find cards to race or how to prevent Naya Burn from racing you (or perhaps if you are very spoiled) how to make the game no longer about racing. But at an even wider level, you have to have correctly assessed that the paradigm of the game is a little bit different than playing against Zoo. When you are very good, the appearance of a Sulfurous Vortex will begin a domino cascade in your mind that will inform your next five turns’ of tactics. A lesser player will simply lose and not realize how he lost, having drawn all his best cards “against Zoo.”

Those of you who followed me on MTGO when I was actively playing MWC know that I was sideboarding as many as four copies of Kataki, War’s Wage, not for Affinity, but primarily for the Lightning Bolt Deck. Kataki did several things in the Lightning Bolt matchup, over and over, even when it didn’t seem to make a lot of sense. Kataki was always a lightning rod. Or when he wasn’t, the opponent didn’t realize what was going on. Often, he would buy Shrapnel Blast! You see, the Lightning Bolt deck is full of Darksteel Citadels and Great Furnaces and really doesn’t have enough operating mana to let you run all over them with Kataki forever. Secondly, Kataki almost guaranteed that Mana Tithe was good. Especially once I had removed Oblivion Ring from my deck (Unmake was basically always better), I actually had to gamble on Mana Tithe being able to stop Sulfuric Vortex. Finally, Kataki gave me a little racing game. You’d be surprised! He’d get in for six or eight. He never killed the other guy, but the other guy was often so cavalier about his life total he didn’t realize he was in a race. Therefore he would have fewer turns than expected to draw his 20th point of burn and I could shave a turn or two off of my normally glacial Decree kill.

Last thing. This is super important!

Zac — we have to get back to Zac, Zac inspired this post — says in the second of his two referenced articles that he is not trying to describe a kind of “option advantage” with his theory. That is fine; what he is describing is his to describe. However remember that good Magic play is about the preservation of options. When you are presented with two similar plays, typically the one that leaves you more options is superior. This is the root of our theories on mana efficient play, card advantage, life total preservation… everything we think of as “clean” technical play is actually about generating and preserving our options.

And because bluffing is an option… You already knew there was such a thing as a card so I won’t bother repeating that.

LOVE
MIKE

P.S. I realize there are infinite difficult concepts in this post, and I will be happy to follow up more specifically on any topic any of you want me to in the comments.

P.P.S.

Example Zoo
Example Lightning Bolt Deck
Example Naya Burn
Example MWC (I’ll write a separate update on this before the 21st… Might play it!)

Just a quick fake-update corolla-RE: to yesterday’s Five by Flores (which talked about my five favorite Star City articles last year penned by YT)…

Dictating the Field of Battle

I said Spencer’s forum post was my favorite but I actually forgot about this one, which actually touched what passes for my soul:

oldbsturgeon
i just want to say that this article was very inspiring to me for maybe a very strange reason.
i work as a therapist in substance abuse and i sometimes have clients that have codependency issues with another person.
today we were discussing this persons relationship and how the other person is currently dictating the field of battle and that the client is agreeing to her strategy and will continue to stay with her. by eliminating interaction, such as dredge’s strategy, she can focus on her goal of bettering herself, and when her partner trys to interact in will not matter and she will ultimately lose. either her partner must accept the new terms or will fall further trying to pursue her faulty goals.
thanks mike

I was reminded of this because of an email this morning (which has transformed itself into a Star City forum post also) by Anthony LaCassa, or Ath0919 here and on Star City.

Anth0919
Mike,

So I just read this article and all I have to say is holy crap!

I feel kind of stupid for being blown away by the article, since it’s pretty much based on simple math and I’m an accountant. I guess this is something I feel that I should have been able to realize on my own without having it explained. That being said, I’ve just begun venturing into competitive Magic over the past few months.

Thanks for this article… it’s the best I’ve read regarding theory on choosing a deck.

(Anthony’s was RE: The Basic Test of Metagaming Competence)

Which just goes to show: It’s not just for teenie weenie kids any more. Grown ups with jobs love michaelj too!

yes Yes YES
I will go over the deck that prompted young Zack Hall to proclaim “you should go into sales” to me yesterday. Maybe later today depending on Lost, Top Chef, etc.

LOVE
MIKE

I was reading Star City Games this week and until I saw a poll for most popular articles by some author or other, I totally forgot they had end-of-the-year awards.

What do you think the chances are that this two-time Writer of the Year gets a nod now that he is no longer in the weeklies? Winky-wink.

Anyway, I decided go go over my eight or so months at Star City in 2008 and pluck my favorite articles. I am pretty sure they are all non-Premium now for those of you who don’t have that service.

Dictating the Field of Battle

michaelj sez:
This article is superbly written. Ego, yes; but still a fact. That is, it is a good read and would have been the kind of article I would have liked to have read had I not written it (actually I liked re-reading it, so I guess it has nothing to do with whether or not I had written it). This article features Dune battle strategy, lightsaber duels, basically everything awesome including passably awesome Magic strategy.

My favorite forum post:

SRmogg
Just wanted to say that as of now this is currently my favorite magic article ever. Like, it was pretty unreal. I’ve read every enderverse novel many times, and I also really like Kurt Vonnegut. I alreayd knew most the startegic content, but if someone didn’t and was looking for a new way to attack a wide open format with many powerful linears like extended, it’s pretty excellent. 

[Had to get a shout out to my man Spencer!] 

Never Settle

michaelj sez:
Just a fair number of good ideas in this one, including getting the pat on the head from Pat, actually learning something while I was working on it, and answering a request by Adam Prosak. Just a pretty good article. I had actually forgotten doing the Wrath of God math; at the time (“that” time, actually) I was playing at my absolute best (this was right before Charleston and my States win)… I think combined with my The Touch tee shirt, GerryT’s mulligan advice, and remembering to do the math when I am pressed with a difficult decision, I will probably knock off a Honolulu PTQ win in one try. On that note…

My favorite forum post:

qwertius 
this article helped me a great deal. 

I see myself as a talented player that never reached his potential for several reasons. Flores points to several directions I should look upon to improve.

Modeling Grand Prix Excellence

michaelj sez:
I had just come back from meeting millionaire copywriter Dr. Harlan Kilstein the first time, and I had inadvertently invented a sub-array of NLP theory, and was all excited about learning how to do modeling correctly. I actually want to do more modeling exercises in my writing in the future (in fact I have been thinking of creating a mulligans model inspired by GerryT’s post in The Hidden Value of MTGO Ringers; I don’t know if you noticed but I am pretty excited about that one. Just a great contribution to the site by Gerry). Also this one has a maddening amount of hand-written sections from The Confusion as well as the best opening page of any novel: madness and goodness both.

My favorite forum post:

Anselm
And then there’s Thomas Pynchon, who does (almost) everything Stephenson does, but better.

[Actually this is like my least favorite forum post of all time. Ravitz and I went out and bought Gravity’s Rainbow after this forum post and it’s been close to a year and neither of us has finished it yet.]

The Basic Test of Metagaming Competence

michaelj sez:
I actually forgot that I wrote this one. This was both one of the best articles I ever published and not as good as it should have been (I had been keeping it under my hat for about three years to be honest, and didn’t get to flesh out everything I wanted to in one article… It was meant to be a video series). This article lays out the advanced rock-paper-scissors theory I use (or more aptly, “used” when I was really good at that kind of thing during Kamigawa- and Ravnica-era Standard formats) to pick the right deck consistently. Certainly my favorite of the five, and a short list contender for Article of the Year (provided anyone remembers I wrote it… Like I said I didn’t).

My favorite forum post:

ThePChapin
Flores! I knew you still had it in you! 
This article hit home with me like no other article since that fateful “How to win a PTQ” last year…” 
Grand Slam. Not close.

A Case for Scissors, and Building the Anti-Deck

michaelj sez:
“What’s a girl to do?”

My favorite forum post:

center425
Man I love the people flaming the advice on sideboards. Honestly, I bet everyone one of you played cards that were awful in your bad matchups for no reason.

So I hope you like reading or re-reading some of 2008’s best stuff, from me, on Star City. Hopefully I will continue to be able to produce passably awesome content now and forever. Hopefully.

LOVE
MIKE

PS In case you haven’t noticed (and I think I mentioned it roughly DI times in this article, you should read GerryT’s comment in The Hidden Value of MTGO Ringers. Like right now!).

PPS Follow me on Twitter. Please! I want to feel loved.

A quick review on Conflux rare, Knight of the Reliquary.

Aesthetics:

My friend Luis Neiman (aka Luis Not Vargas) asked me last week what I thought of this card, but I hadn’t seen it yet. He described it as a 2/2 for three mana (which it is); to which I said, unexciting. Then he explained how Knight of the Reliquary is basically a progressive Tarmogoyf (or Countryside Crusher) while fixing mana, thinning out lands, or even drawing extra cards!

Here are some things to keep in mind:

1. You can only sacrifice a Forest or Plains, but you can get any kind of land you want. So for instance in Extended you can get a Flagstones of Trokair and then another Flagstones of Trokair and they can kill one another, netting you both more lands, and more lands in the graveyard.
2. You can tutor up specialty lands, such as Academy Ruins, Ghost Quarters, Riptide Laboratories, or even Urza’s parts (though I have doubts about those in any deck that would be willing to play a 2/2 like this one)
3. Knight of the Reliquary hasn’t got vigilance; so if you want to play searcher, you are either playing defense or simply forgoing your Red Zone rights. It’s not just a free giant monster on the cheap; on the other hand…
4. In a format like Extended, you might have a gaggle of lands in the graveyard anyway, charging up Knight of the Reliquary from the get-go.

Where do I see this fitting in?

This card can go in a couple of places. First of all, it can be incorporated into any creature deck that can play it. It’s just a good card. Worst case scenario, it should be a serviceable Gnarled Mass, that is, an automatic PTQ winner 🙂

Secondly, Knight of the Reliquary can go into a specific creature deck with a bunch of Forests and Plains and specialty lands, serving much the same function as “any creature deck” but with a more specialized function. It can beat. It can be good. But it can also perform surgery. It can be Dwarven Blastminer, grabbing Ghost Quarters to kill the opponent’s special lands. It can be a slow and inexorable Demonfire, finding Vitu-Ghazi, the City-Tree, eventually killing the control opponent… but it might take a while. It can even be a kind of Platinum Angel, finding Prahv, Spires of Order to force the opponent to commit more and more resources to the board even as it grows out of easy control.

Then there are the “Karoo” interactions, where Knight of the Reliquary is a kind of Benalish Heralds.

And of course the process of putting lands into the graveyard can give it a synergy with Life from the Loam or Crucible of Worlds (in this case you can call it a Terravore in a pinch).

Finally — that is “finally” in the context of things that I have thought of off the top of my head — Knight of the Reliquary can be a specific puzzle piece that finishes a deck strategy. Maybe it fills the role of a flexible Reap and Sow in a deck that needs to stick two or three different kinds of lands together like Legos.

Snap Judgment Rating: Role Player (high) to Staple (low-medium)

LOVE
MIKE

All Conflux

P.S. While you’re here, in case you haven’t read the previous post The Hidden Value of MTGO Ringers, check it out. The comments section is one of the most awesomest ones in the short history of this site, and includes an opening line by GerryT that is the equal of any strategy article that has been written this year. Do yourself a favor and check it out 🙂

A quick review on Conflux rare, Martial Coup.

Aesthetics:

So this is obviously my favorite card in the set.

I mean… It’s almost like a Decree of Justice stapled onto an Akroma’s Vengeance! It’s like my dream card!

(Sad as that is to say).

Martial Coup is even super expensive, like cycling a Decree for a million guys, or, um, playing Akroma’s Vengeance. Incidentally how much does it suck that Akroma’s Vengeance is going to rotate in Extended after this year? Man! 

Okay, back to Martial Coup…

Basically…

• At two mana it’s nothing.
• At three mana it’s sub-Squire.
• At four mana it’s barely playable in Limited.
• At five mana it would be pretty good in Limited, if the creatures had flying.
• At six mana it’s sadly Pro Tour Top 8 caliber… Yes, in Constructed*
• At seven mana… OH MY GOD HAVE YOU READ THIS CARD?

Okay, so the question is, what kinds of decks can make the seven mana required to kick butt with Martial Coup?

Where do I see this fitting in?

In Standard, the obvious answer is Reflecting Pool Control. That deck already plays sevens like Cruel Ultimatum. This isn’t as powerful as Cruel Ultimatum (even at seven) but it is so much easier to play. I was thinking of a U/r/W version (only three colors) for Pro Tour Kyoto and this might be a good option.

Over on Twitter** zeichen95 / Mark Ian suggested playing it as a one-of in Kithkin. That’s a pretty interesting idea, and a nice way to break open the mirror, especially for a beatdown deck that plays a million lands.

In Extended BDM thinks this is a card that can put U/W UrzaTron back into the mix. It is certainly quite powerful if you are playing it for seven or more, and ‘Tron is the kind of deck that can make seven or more.

The reservations I have about this card — and again I am very excited by it — are based on the fact that it does nothing until you hit a gigantic mana count (I cycle my Akroma’s Vengeances at least one third of the time by the way). That probably keeps Martial Coup out of four-of candidacy in most strategies that might be willing to play it.

Snap Judgment Rating: Role Player

LOVE
MIKE

* Bonus points if you know what I am talking about.
** To follow me on Twitter: Twitter.com/fivewithflores

All Conflux