Oops, sorry! Wrong page

I already splash Blood Moon so it isn't that big of a deal, but I really do like the suggestion FAMOUSWATERMELON. Monastery Mentor is really fragile after all, so I could use something that is more consistent and not prone to having me die to Chalice of the Void.

Brainstorming time ...

For those curious about using Ghirapur AEther Grid.

FAMOUSWATERMELON:

Firstly, you significantly underestimate the amount hubs affect upvotes. While the things you mention are the main methods to increase the probability that a given person currently viewing the deck will upvote the deck, hubs are a major avenue of discovery for people browsing the site. As I mentioned, if I search for the hub storm, I will find this deck. If I search for affinity, I will find this deck. This goes for all of the tags (most of which are blatantly false). This allows for many, many more people to click on this deck under false pretenses. And as I mentioned, that isn't even the real problem. The problem is poor form, and clear lack of intelligence, both of which are qualities Femme_Fatale possesses.

Secondly, Lantern Control (or fateseal) was not CONSIDERED to be a competitive deck before its good performance at that tournament. This illustrates my point exactly. Nothing changed about the decklist BUT because it demonstrated it's good performance it is now considered competitive. This deck has not proved anything, therefore you cannot claim that the deck is competitive. It is that simple.

UrbanAnathema, personally, I find it hilarious that people who have contributed nothing to this conversation find it perfectly ok to lecture people who are calling out poor form on why they should not bring up legitimate arguments without refuting the other persons argument. Amazing work, UrbanAnathema. You have proven once again that idiocy truly knows no bounds.

I should've made popcorn

"Firstly, you significantly underestimate the amount hubs affect upvotes"

You want to put it to the test? Just ask any experienced user about when they give out upvotes, and you'll see what I'm talking about.

"[Lantern Control] has not proved anything, therefore you cannot claim that the deck is competitive"

So you don't consider Lantern Control to be a competitive deck? Yet following your definition:

"Competitive: As good as or better than others of the same kind : able to compete successfully with others."

Lantern Control successfully competed with others. Yes, the meta was in its favor, and yes, it had an excellent pilot, but the fact remains that the deck was Lantern Control, not Skred. So you've just contradicted yourself. Again. Maybe you should read over your point before typing?

But to be fair, you have proved one of your points. To quote precisely: "You have proven once again that idiocy truly knows no bounds". Very true, my friend, very true.

Nef:

Dude_3 LOL. I must have missed the swearing in ceremony where you were appointed the sole arbiter of "Calling out poor form" on this site. Literally not one other person has agreed with your point of view, and you have willfully ignored all alternative points of view but your own, including those of far more experience and reputation on this site than your own. Yet you just keep right on going "calling out bad form". If that's not idiocy, perhaps you should break out your trusty Merriam Websters again for the definition of insanity.

People need to get back on topic. If you're not here to discuss improvements on the deck, then get out.

has anyone thought about how bad the first 2 "dudes" had to have been for this one to be the keepable version?

You can check on how this deck has evolved over the past 2 years by looking at the updates DERPLINGSUPREME. This was one of my first decks I ever made on here, and it is probably the best method at looking at how I've progressed from being a newbie to the experience I have now.

So here's the enchantment heavy version of this deck: Enchanting Path

Hey look, I lowered the price down by $60.

FAMOUSWATERMELON, you seem to have some problems reading posts. I will try to simplify my sentence structure for you so you can observe what my post actually said.

First, you literally completely ignored what I was saying about hubs. You said to ask any experienced user about when they give out upvotes, yet that quite obviously implies (and that is not the situation we are discussing) that they are currently viewing the deck. My entire point on this subject was that, as I said in my post, the other things you mentioned increase the probability that a given person VIEWING THIS DECK will upvote it, HOWEVER, the hubs make it FAR MORE LIKELY that a person will FIND this deck (under clearly false pretenses, in this case. Nobody can kid themselves that this is affinity or storm). Your argument is invalid and quite stupid, for that matter. Reading the other persons argument may help you in attempting to refute it.

Secondly, you once again completely missed what I was saying in my post about lantern control. "Nothing changed about the decklist BUT because it demonstrated it's good performance it is now considered competitive." I DO consider lantern control to be a competitive deck, and it is largely considered to be competitive because of its good performance at that tournament. I then say that THIS DECK (not lantern control, as you quite obviously thought I was talking about, but "Path to Perfection" (Modern MTG Deck)) cannot be considered competitive BECAUSE it has not thus far "competed successfully with others", to quote your post. Maybe you learn how to read sentences in the English language before posting?

UrbanAnathema, one of the most deadly logical fallacies is assuming that because "everyone" (the 5-6 people participating in this conversation, not including myself) disagrees, then I must be wrong. This is one of the stupidest arguments and most obvious fallacies I have heard in my entire life. Not to mention that you have no proof or information as to "who has more experience on the site", so I would stfu before you make an even bigger fool of yourself in this conversation.

Dude_3 - Your user site says you've been here a year. UrbanAnathema has been here 2 years. Now excuse me while I dunk your argument through a basketball hoop.

Ok, so I see that a complex conversation is a bit too much for you. Let's go back to the basics. What are you upset about?

That there are too many hubs on this deck and that they do not correspond to the deck itself? As I'm typing this, there are 6 hubs: Artifact, Combo, Competitive, Tokens, Storm, and Voltron. Artifact is a correct hub, because this deck has a big artifact theme and they make up 1/4th of the main deck. Combo is a correct hub, because this is, at the base, a combo deck that uses the artifacts and Puresteel Paladin to cycle through the deck. I'll come back to the competitive hub later. Tokens is the one that you could dislike the most, because this is not a token deck, at least primarily. Femme chose to put this hub because she does have a slight token subtheme, and it's one of her main wincons. You can disagree with this, but it doesn't really matter, because it's her deck and in the opinion of many veteran users, it's a perfectly fine hub. Storm is a correct hub because this deck aims to cast a large amount of spells in a single turn to a certain outcome. Voltron is another arguable hub, but equipping up the Kitesail Apprentice and swinging in from there is a perfectly valid strategy and probably the deck's secondary win-condition, should the Storm plan fail. Again, you might not agree, but hey, at this point, who cares.

Now for the competitive. I'll try to make this short: on this site, developing competitive, Tier 1, and Tier 2 generally all fall under the same competitive hub. I know that on other sites (such as MTGS), there are separate categories for all of these, but not here. You can disagree all you want, but I doubt that anything serious changes about that attitude on TappedOut.

One last thing: don't attack people's understanding of language instead of their arguments. English was not my first language, so I'm very sorry if I don't understand some things that you might find obvious at first sight. If I start speaking to you in French or whatnot, you might have a harder time understanding too.

So in short: ferme-la et va te plaindre ailleurs mec.

To all others: I'm very sorry about this getting out of hand and clogging up the comments. This is my last comment on this subject, I've already said enough.

"Dude_3, champion of the silent majority, supreme arbiter of bad form."

Any other self appointments you've been granted in your delusion? You're arguing with people on this site who have admin privs about the purpose of hubs. The fact that you don't even know who you are arguing with proves my point, and also admittedly your own, about making a fool of yourself. I'm done now. Apologies to Femme for contributing to the back and forth.

@Femme_Fatale no, I wasn't criticising your deck!

and if I were I would never try to hide it from a pretty lady like you ;)

no, I was talking about Dude_3. the first 2 must've been terrible if this were the one that survived.

This gives my deck potential points to get into the top place (this deck never did get to be rank #1). So argue all you want, more comments means a greater chance to get up there!

FAMOUSWATERMELON, once again you demonstrate how little you grasp of this conversation.

Firstly, I was forced to attack your grasp of the language because your entire argument was based on something that I NEVER SAID (in fact, it was pretty much the opposite of what I said). Once again, if you read my post, you would understand that.

As to your analysis of the hubs, first of all, I never said anything about the artifact hub. I did complain about the affinity hub, which has now been removed and replaced with artifact. Storm is an incorrect hub because, not only does the deck not contain anything that rewards the player for casting large amounts of spells a turn (except maybe Monastery Mentor), even if the deck did, the curve of the equipment to compare to the mana generation is far too low for a pilot of this deck to ever reach a storm count high enough to make Grapeshot viable. The "combo" ("storm") is too weak and will not result in a kill that turn or in the next few turns, for that matter, so the combo hub is highly disputable, as well. I don't really care about the voltron hub, and the competitive hub is too vague to define concretely, so I will say no more about that. And why would I complain somewhere else when the problem is with this specific deck?

JWiley129, so account duration == experience? This is clearly not necessarily true. Note that I am not saying that I DO have more experience (I never did), but I am saying that there is no way of successfully claiming that I have less.

UrbanAnathema, are you related to FAMOUSWATERMELON? You seem to share a lot of the same qualities, such as ignoring everything I am saying and arguing against something completely unrelated. I never said I was the majority. I said that just because the majority disagrees that does not necessarily make them correct. It is a large fallacy that can be clearly observed as stupid and incorrect.

Dude_3 - While true, the longer your account has been active the more likely you are to have experience on the site. This is true for other arenas and occupations, so why isn't it true in this case? Also, the fact you're getting salty about this shows your inexperience with the site. Regardless of your account duration.

...the point of this deck is literally to cast the max amount of spells (in this case 0-mana equipments) in a turn and profit off Monastery Mentor/Myth Realized, drawing cards of Puresteel Paladin and Retract. I'm sorry to ask, but are you on the right deck? Because this is most certainly a Storm-style deck. Hence the Storm and Combo hubs. Why did you think that Femme put things like Accorder's Shield in? It doesn't really fit an aggressive voltron strategy.

Femme_Fatale Haha. When you put it that way then.. ;)

Dude_3 Your account duration and that fact that you clearly have no idea who you are arguing with demonstrates your limited experience with the site. Several of these people you have been arguing with have administrator privileges on the site. This means they have been empowered by the site owner himself, to maintain order here, maintain his vision for how the site should operate, and even contribute THEMSELVES some of their own. They are telling you that your perspective is incorrect as it pertains to how THIS site chooses to operate. This is more than enough information and proof of exactly what I said; your clear and obvious inexperience here.

That's fine. Being inexperienced isn't a crime, or even something to be ridiculed for. Your attitude and your insulting nature however? Not so much.

Dude_3 I think it's time we stop arguing about this. We've sunk this page down far enough already, so I'm just going to step away. If you want to tell me something, then go ahead and comment on my page, but it's pointless to keep arguing about something so small.

...So... Anyways. :P

Femme, Do yeh think this could be done almost pure mono white or micro blue splash?

(I dont have any white fetches and wont have budget for anything of the sort for a while..)

However, I do have a playset of puresteels and some of the necessary cards just rotting away.. Even got some Grapeshots for the red portion sitting in a weird paradise deck Ive long since given up on.

I would assume the deck can't really function without Retract.. Id bet I could get away with using City of Brass for budget.. maybe.

How well is Myth Realized performing since I played yeh the other day and got stomped to a multiple of 10?

(Noting that I recognize prowess doesn't gain anything from storm copies.. Sadly. That would be the dream, though. =n.n=)