Looking for tough cards. Simply frightening or game-changning cards.
Modern forum
Posted on Aug. 17, 2014, 8:49 p.m. by nickiru
I am looking for cards that simply hold their own, self efficient in some manner, hard to kill, efficient,....
basically frightening.
Like Phyrexian Obliterator . He hits the field and it's like "ahh crap." You touch em you screw yourself, but you gotta block or otherwise your dead.
Or Boros Reckoner . He doesn't mow down permanents, but he can kill players and/or creatures; or put a hualt to an enemy assault. You don't just swing with a 10/10 at the opponent anymore if he just put out reckoner. (nor would you if it were Phyrexian Obliterator lol.)
I don't know that many cards and it's hard to card search for something that I don't know key words for. So if you can give me a list of beasty game-changing cards, that would be much appreciated. I don't care too much if the card requires a lot of different colors or it is intensive to one color, as long as it is a reasonable mana quantity cost; like less than 6 or so; 10 tops. (we all know Emrakul, the Aeons Torn is a game changer.)
The less the mana cost the better. (obviously lol)
GlistenerAgent says... #2
Wrote that purposefully, just in case you think I didn't. Dragons are big, impressive things. Baneslayer Angel is such a thing.
August 30, 2014 7:03 p.m.
Tarmogoyf better than Scavenging Ooze .....................................(sigh)...................................nickiru............that comment convinced me these people aren't intelligent.
August 30, 2014 8:33 p.m.
thispersonisagenius: May I come across with an educated tone in my argument.
My friend kylothian reading over my shoulder calls you a fucktard. Holy shot!!
Ok, 1: are you so impulsive as to say that Tarmogoyf is better merely because he starts off a bit bigger?!?! Scavenging Ooze is instant speed graveyard control, lifegain, and he can grow vastly more powerful than goyf mid-late game. He counters 'off' decks like mill and fights off control decks because I get a load of critters in my grave and tackles unburial and living-end decks' graves. goyf, is 'only' a medium sized critter, and how often does he reach 5/6? not often, usually he gets to 3/4 and stops which is only good in my eyes because he can't be Lightning Bolt ed. That's it, woop-de-doo.
It seems to me that you are an aggressive player, am I right? All you seem to consider as a better or more efficient card are ones that are purely offensive and when they are being used to their fullest. Thundermaw Hellkite is efficient somewhat, I partially admit, but as far as offense. 'guaranteed five damage'? In modern, nothing is guaranteed. Removal is so prevalent, Path to Exile , forget it. I might as well have Ethersworn Adjudicator . Same amount of mana, 5, less color intensive, and can rape creatures and enchantments.
Let's run a small scenario, I'll try not to be one sided: I play ethersworn, you play hellkit and swing, however I path it to exile, (er sorry, wrong scenario).
I play ethersworn, you play hellkite and hit me for 5 cause he taps my dude. ouch, but next turn I pay and destroy your kite, untap, and then attack dealing 4 damage. ouch.
I know my guy is just as vulnerable to removal as kite, but while you stick your neck out on the offense, I am going to prefer artillery that can remove threats for good and then strike when the coast is clear. Also, ethersworn removes super combos like Kiki-Jiki, Mirror Breaker isnant speed, hellkite does not.
Efficiency, lets put removal aside and look at what keeps you alive; which is pretty efficient I would say.
You put hellkite down and do 5 damage to the enemy, cool, another turn you do another 5, pretty nice. The enemy kiki-jiki loops and wins. :p
I have ethersworn come down. He defends me from the enemy because he doesn't tap to attack. my turn I attack and do 4, cool. The enemy begins the kiki-jiki loop, I respond by untapping and destroying jiki with ethersworn; which costs 6 mana which is easy when i already had 5 to cast him. my turn, since I live, I do 4 damage, pretty cool, and so on. I may further damage the opponents' infrastructure and kill with him.
Abyssal Persecutor vs Ethersworn Adjudicator : same argument as hellkite...
Efficiency goes beyond just attack power. Efficiency is the card's power 'coupled with' (key words) utility abilities such as: mana ramp, lifegain, graveyard control, card draw, and so on. Hellkite only attacks and has no synergy with any other cards worth trash; not efficient. Knight of the Reliquary is queen of utility; she mana ramps, searches for colors as well as 'any' land you want like Slayers' Stronghold or Urborg, Tomb of Yawgmoth , gets more powerful than goyf easy, and with a little adjustment with the mana base you can access Sejiri Steppe for instant speed protection for itself or another critter of yours. In the end, this 3 cost creature can be a 7/7 avg who allowed you to get more creatures down and protect them. That is efficiency. power 'with' utility. Far superior to hellkite.
You say I don't understand the meaning of utility and efficiency. Another card I say is the next ambassador of efficiency is Mul Daya Channelers . it is either a 5/5 beast for 3 mana, which is as strong as hellkite and on par with goyf, or she is amazing mana ramp. She also gives room for a bit of top deck control. If you run fetch lands, every competitive deck does almost, and the top card is something you don't want, fetch and shuffle it away. Furthermore this allows you to control what mul daya can be. If you want to be offensive, (you may like this,) shuffle the land away from the top and odds are she becomes a 5/5 and can attack. Otherwise she is a mana producer that can cast more of your cards. She is synergic, strong, and mana ramps: that is an efficient utility. I'll take her over hellkite ANY day because she is equivalent power (5/5) with mana production and top deck control capability.
"You would rather use Drogskol Reaver than Baneslayer Angel ? Are you stupid?" end quote.
I am xD
again your extremely narrow minded. Offense seems to be all you care about. Did you even compare these 2 cards anyways?! Angel has first strike, reaver has doublestrike, they both have lifelink, revear has you draw 2 cards on the attack and any other life gain (like Scavenging Ooze ) gets you more cards. The 'only' advantage angel has is that it costs 5 mana, not 7. Also, the protection is useless, competitive decks never have dragons, and the demons are far and few between.
Think outside the box. Look beyond what a card can do. The issue with cards like hellkite, is that all it does is all it does (if that makes sense.) Knight of the Reliquary does what it does, but if you build a deck with certain cards like Sejiri Steppe , her value increases further.
I think that ought to inspire aggressive argument ey? haha I hope your having fun too.
APPLE01DOJ: I agree, my deck is open for combo decks, I'm working on it. However, it annihilates control decks because each piece is threatening. They cannot counter everything, especially when I have about 26+ creatures. Often what gets them is I get ooze down after they counter a reliquary or something and he feeds of what was countered, gains me life, can't be burned, and swings big.back at thispersonisagenius, ooze annihilates control, goyf does not....vampirelazarus, lol, your funny. 'grabs popcorn.'
August 30, 2014 8:40 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #5
Scooze is worse.
He only gets the counters and life if you get rid of a creature. Sure, he can get bigger than Goyf, but its negligible.
Go ahead and control my graveyard with your scooze. Oh, whats that I drew? Supreme Verdict . Oh, and look, I play my Goyf.
Also, we understand synergy and combos. No need to explain to us why KotR is good. We get it.
August 30, 2014 8:46 p.m.
Well, the other guy was saying I didn't understand efficiency so I was just saying that about KotR, lol knights of the old republic, knight of the reliquary, same letters.
Let me continue your scenario, you chuck out your goyf, I chuck out my ooze and consume what was nuked and your goyf goes down by one because I took the creatures away from the grave and my ooze is bigger and gained me life. Then I attack and if you block to stay alive, I consume it and gain another life and ooze gets better... He still better...
August 30, 2014 9 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #7
Or, since Im obviously playing control, I cryptic your ooze.
August 30, 2014 9:03 p.m.
Do you understand that his deck runs around 30 creatures does your deck have 30 counters in it or 30 removal.....no? so something will get through. just by sheer mass and his deck runs card advantage.
August 30, 2014 9:10 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #10
Oh lord, not a lot of creatures, however will I overcome?
Oh yeah, Cryptic Command . Oh yeah, board wipes.
August 30, 2014 9:43 p.m.
HorrorAvengers says... #11
We can have this debate back and forth and we won't get anywhere.
The reason baneslayer sees more play the reaver is 5 drop is significantly less than 7. They fit on different parts of the curve, and so few competitive decks get up to 7. However, in casual formats where decks regularly get up to 7 (Edh I'm looking at you) I would rather have the reaver for the double strike and card draw.
Against aggro I would rather have the scooze. Tarmogoyf gets firefist striker'd too easily against them (Relevent in my meta), at least scooze put up life. It's also better against pod, it helps so much. Against midrange, I want a creature that stands toe to toe with their creatures without investment, I want the goyf. Against control, I don't wanna invest mana and life doesn't matter. Gofy please. However, if one person has a goyf, the other a scooze, I want the scooze. Plus, scooze doesn't cost 20 bajilion and a half bucks.
Adjuncator... EDH it's a powerhouse. But it doesn't compare to the raw efficiency of persecutor or hellkite.
August 30, 2014 11:21 p.m.
vampirelazarus, does your deck run around 30 counters, removal, and nukes? That is how many creatures are in my deck right now. minus about 6, you better nuke every single one because just 1 of my creatures getting by is nasty. Pick one, I can tell you why you must respond to it. Also, Cryptic Command my dude, ok I put out another, I doubt you have as many counters and removal as I do creatures. Bring it on ahhahaa!! No control deck has beaten this deck simply because all my pieces are self-sufficiently nasty. We can rant about responding to each others junk but really, look at my draw ratios and compare to yours, I can bet I got plenty-o'-creatures :D
PLUS, I have cards that can help me draw more, Domri Rade , Courser of Kruphix , better counter those, o wait, what about Mul Daya Channelers , she can bust your cap or produce mana and help me cast multiples. Knight of the Reliquary ... uh oh.. mana ramp, land search, powers up more than mul daya, and can get Sejiri Steppe to protect any other critters that get down from targeted removal. better counter that, and Phyrexian Obliterator , and Ob Nixilis, the Fallen who will annihilate your life, and bla bla, look, 24 right there, shall I continue? Mass, counter them all, and then I would question if you can kill me.
HorrorAvengers: Yes, oooze and goyf have their different purposes. One who prefers to not invest would take goyf for early game, and more mid-late game players will prefer ooze. Which I prefer ooze, personal preference.
HorrorAvengers "We can have this debate back and forth and we won't get anywhere," end quote. ...... Buh, but... it fun..... Plus these debates shows how the common folk think. from what I have gathered from this forum and other heated debates I have hosted, (lol), Most people seem to care about immediate results and short-term games. Also people are sensitive about multicolored cards or just color intensive cards. Like Phyrexian Obliterator , ppsh, no prob in my opinion, he only costs 4 mana to me; with an eldrazi-like ability as a 5/5 tramp, what a deal! Also from what I have gathered, people net deck and only care about what worked the last big tournament and are narrow minded and non-creative. Which at that point the game is a lottery, make your own darn decks; or at least stop shooting down other people's decks simply because they have a different mana base than usual to accomidate for a lone quad black in their 5 color creature heavy deck that actually does really good. But I am going off topic a wee bit :D (taunt, taunt, tug aggressively,... making comments that people will respond to, lol.)
Common, am I the only one having fun here? or are people truly getting pissed off?
August 31, 2014 1:21 a.m.
vampirelazarus says... #13
Cryptic stops you by tapping all your guys before you can attack.
August 31, 2014 10:01 a.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #14
Your deck may have thirty creatures, but will you draw them all? Control only needs to answer each creature that you draw, which is pretty easy to do with Snapcaster Mage and counterspells.
I don't think you're going to realize that you're hopelessly wrong. Go ahead, play your cards, but if you think Ob Nixilis, the Fallen is even remotely playable I don't know what to say.
Don't try and be creative just for the sake of being creative. There's a reason people play the decks they do, and it's because they are good. I don't appreciate you calling people who clearly know more than you do "common folk". Try to learn from people, instead of stubbornly defending your own ideas.
Here's an idea: Play Jund for a little while. See how the cards in that deck are efficient. Dark Confidant is better than every card in your deck, and it's not even particularly close. I will comment on your deck, and I will explain how you can make it better.
And no, I am not having fun talking to someone who does not understand basic deckbuilding ideas and stubbornly defends them without being willing to have a reasonable discussion.
August 31, 2014 10:12 a.m.
UrbanAnathema says... #15
I took a look at this deck, and look believe me I am all for home brews and taking a different approach than the standard meta. But this deck isn't competitive by any stretch of the imagination. You're incapable of responding to anything your opponent does, and outside of a wonderful hand, you're way too slow. There are some cool ideas here, and the synergies are cool, but if you think this would be competitive in a tournament I think you would be sorely mistaken, its just too slow and considering you are relying on being able to go off before your opponent does, that lack of speed is a fatal flaw.
August 31, 2014 12:36 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #16
A deck is not efficient overall just because every card in it is efficient. You have no instant speed removal, and the only removal you have is Domri Rade . Your deck folds very easily to all manner of combo decks, and I imagine it having a very hard time against Affinity. You need removal spells, and that means you have to cut some of the terrible cards that are in your deck.
August 31, 2014 12:40 p.m.
thispersonisagenius: You said That I "...stubbornly defends them without being willing to have a reasonable discussion', how am I not being reasonable? The issue is that we both have a different point of view based on different experiences and knowledge; and I believe we both have logical arguments for both. It comes down to personal preference. You prefer playing decks that other people made and I prefer my own decks.
I am refuting your points not because I simply don't think they work, it's because I refuse to be like everyone else. If I altered my deck like what everyone said here, I don't know what deck it would be, but it would be dull and average. I want something different. Instead of trying to conform me, how about chucking random theories at me and we can discuss improvements and weird ideas, rather than tare downs and simplifications.
And if you not having fun, .... can you try? at least I am lol
"Your deck may have thirty creatures, but will you draw them all?" end quote. Words cannot describe my shock-an-awe at this comment. Of course I am not going to draw them all, and the argument can be thrown directly back at you: are you going to draw all your removal/counters? If I have 30 creatures and you have 20 counters/removal, when we both draw 7 cards the odds are that I am going to have an extra creature or 2 to your removal/counter ratio. Thus, I come out on top because of mass by default.
You did an indirect attack on my credibility by saying my arguments are unreasonable. In an argument, explain why you think so. A reasonable discussion is not me conforming and agreeing to what you say; thus discussion.
Now about Ob Nixilis, the Fallen , he is absolutely amazing. let me enlighten you... He is an efficient offensive card to me and here is how: (I will compare to Thundermaw Hellkite )
kellkite hits the field, taps flyers and does 5 damage, cool. But no synergy.
Ob nix hits the field, and I throw down a fetch land, (1,) then I fetch, (2,) and then I Knight of the Reliquary for a fetch, (3,) and then fetch, (4,) and total ob nix does 4x3 damage to the enemy upon entry which is 12 damage. more than double what hellkite can do. Then he is a 15/15 creature that can block for this turn and then next turn I can attack and they better block; o crap I reliquary a Sejiri Steppe and give him protection from bla making him unblockable and winning. or I just landfall the enemy to death. I played against a merfolk deck and I had 3 life. Ob nix was already down a turn, the next turn when the enemy hit me with an army of merfolk dropping me to 3, (and he had full 20 health,) I fetch and fetch and junk and do 12 damage and then swing 15. I win. If he had a card in hand I would have not fetched through reliquary and done 6 damage to him and swung 9 so that reliquary could protect from removal, but since that wasn't the case I just fetched and finished him off. If ob nix can drop someone from full 20 health to 0 in a turn for 5 mana, I believe he is vastly more superior to hellkite.
That is my reasonable argument. I made a claim, backed it with an example and compared stats (numbers) with the opposing card.
________-
UrbanAnathema: um... so? this deck is not complete. It has been created recently and a deck made without heavy revisions is not going to be competitive. so, yes your right.
How come my deck keeps getting targeted. I am just wanting to know of some multitasking efficient cards and my deck gets dragged in here. ? Obviously my deck is going to be shot, I am testing ideas.
August 31, 2014 4:05 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #18
To your claim that the control deck won't draw all it's removal spells: They have more ways to draw cards than you do. You have Domri Rade , but that eats a counterspell. The control deck always beats the aggro deck because they have better forms of card advantage, and in Modern the removal spells are good enough that you will not beat them. Trust me when I say this. You are assuming that control is also drawing one card per turn when in fact they are not. Your argument of ratios is wrong in that when they simply have more cards, they will win the game.
OK. If you think Ob Nixilis, the Fallen is simply amazing, I will do nothing to stop you. You can play him all you want. I will point out that Thundermaw Hellkite is five haste damage that kills Lingering Souls , Pestermite and Birds of Paradise (all of which see heavy play in Modern), that usually kills everything that can block it and will attack until it is removed. Ob Nixilis, the Fallen doesn't have trample, meaning that even if he is 60/60 he can be chump-blocked for eternity.
Your Merfolk opponent was an idiot for not leaving up a blocker, but that's beside the point. Ob Nixilis is a 5 mana 3/3 that will be killed in response to your landfall trigger, and he does not affect the board otherwise. I am not going to argue with you any more about which is the better card, because I and everybody else already know the answer.
Your example of having four landfall triggers in a turn for Ob Nixilis is unreasonable in that you cannot assume all the things you do will be unanswered. Your KotR will get removed. You will draw lands that are not fetchlands. Even in your dream scenario, Thundermaw performs better.
We are suggesting cards that are efficient. You seem to be wanting to play all the cards, and we simply are suggesting that you not be greedy with four colors and a quad black spell (I know your answer to this, please spare me). There are thousands of cards in print, and picking a real focus and cutting the suboptimal cards (of which there are a few in your deck) will go a long way. We are trying to teach you something. Try and learn it.
August 31, 2014 4:19 p.m.
I know right, it is full of information. But i don't think the others are having as much fun or aren't absorbing as much as I am... O well.
August 31, 2014 4:46 p.m.
I think you need to do a bit more listening, and a bit less typing.
August 31, 2014 4:49 p.m.
lol, maybe. The reason though my texts tend to be larger is because i defend my self from their claim, make my claim, and back it up with example or math or crud... they just make an attacking claim which can be short.
August 31, 2014 5:02 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #23
Note that all your math has been bullshit. 61 cards is not justifiable. I don't think playing quad-black in a Naya deck is mathematically justifiable either, no matter how much of a "manabase master" you happen to be. I also find that to be incredibly conceited of you, considering you also think that 61 card decks are fine and do not seem to have any good professional tournament finishes.
Every post I have made includes more than just a statement attacking your theories. Read them carefully.
August 31, 2014 5:06 p.m.
They sure do. I guess a forum is as good a place as any to try and back up your own points but sometimes you just have to accept that your wrong. Sometimes, not often.
I don't know.
How much modern have you actually played? In terms of months?
August 31, 2014 5:08 p.m.
I have accepted that I was wrong; I know when I am wrong when evidence slaps me in the face. Post : 7 on page 5 of this forum. I said "Now THAT was a good read. I am agreeing with being religious about having a 60 card deck. I ran math calculations and such and I am parallel with the guy who wrote the article. I guess I lose this debate, lol. That's why I love this site, you guys just chuck me all kinds of good information."
I was convinced. With the otehr arguments, I am not yet convinced. Do better :D
August 31, 2014 5:28 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #26
Would you like me to ask my friend Patrick Chapin to write you another article?
August 31, 2014 5:31 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #28
"Let's just throw away the last twenty years of basic Magic theory."
I'm done with this thread.
Oh, before I go, being different for the sake of being different is not a good reason too be different. Besides, taking all the "best" stuff and throwing it into a deck has been done before, it's called "junk"
August 31, 2014 7:12 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #30
Except for when the best stuff isn't the best stuff.
August 31, 2014 7:13 p.m.
vampirelazarus says... #32
Oh, one last thing, the reason we've been "attacking" you, is because you're attitude has been pretty arrogant since the beginning.
I go back to my original stance:
August 31, 2014 7:16 p.m.
UrbanAnathema says... #34
It's not even attacking. It's pointing out that the accumulated knowledge of 20 years of play and the millions of players that have contributed to Magic deck building theory actually holds more weight than your "I know better, I'm a jet master of magic" cavalier attitude.
There is plenty of room for new ideas and different approaches to formats. It's how the meta grows. However, your tone like your schooling everyone else when you are clearly pretty ignorant of the competitive landscape is going to leave you wide open to being put in your place, so to speak.
You might wanna try a bit more humility and open mindedness in the future, if you want to reap the rewards of the Tappedout.net community.
Just a thought.
September 1, 2014 1:22 a.m.
VampireArmy says... #35
Are people still arguing here? I saw this argument at 3pm yesterday
September 1, 2014 1:29 a.m.
I guess so. I put out my points and they put out theirs and we can't come to an agreement so now that the argument about the cards way back when has dissipated they are attacking me directly while trying to protect their credibility by saying how their information has been around for long time and is better than mine; rather than, counter arguing my point about Ob Nixilis, the Fallen being absolutely superior to Thundermaw Hellkite .
Honestly, I don't care about how long the common folk have been collectively gathering information; whether 20 or 1000 years. If everyone is doing the same thing, than it is a lottery to win if I begin doing the same thing as well. The only way that a person will get an edge over the current meta is if they make something new. That new strategy will either be annihilated, or it will annihilate. rather than buying the latest pod deck because it's tear 1 and everyone says it works. Lame...
How about you guys ignore the '20' years of magic crap and make your own decks. Unless your creativity has been sapped away by the years of net decking and doing what everyone else says!
September 1, 2014 12:17 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #37
Okay my opinion then, ignoring everything that's been said.
Ob Nixilis, the Fallen : Turn 5, play him, wait an entire turn unless you have ways of playing several land per turn. (easily Bolt-able)
Thundermaw Hellkite
: Turn 5, lay him down, prevent blockers, turn sideways on the spot. Not bolt-able, heavy body.
That's why thundermaw is better....Ob requires some set up, thundermaw doesn't. He's a for sure turn sideways and punch in the face card. Ob is a 3/3 that sometimes does more....sometimes.
September 1, 2014 12:28 p.m.
wait a sec nickiru.........GlistenerAgent formerly known as this person is a genius is glistener agent.................from untap.in........... I've had multiple games where i beat his face in with my home brews I've created, and hes in highschool. I'm in college I've been arguing with a twerp I've crushed in game. He is trying to lecture us..............heck you graduated from high school a year early and are triple majoring in engineering. He is lecturing us.......................they aren't worth our time.
September 1, 2014 12:40 p.m.
VampireArmy says... #39
Whoa, that was unnecessary. GlistenerAgent has been a really cool dude to me and has even helped me out in the past....consider me done here...
September 1, 2014 12:42 p.m.
kylothian except that multiple people can have the same name on different websites and that intellectual experience means very little in magic.
I graduated from one of the best higher education institutions in the entire world, with one of the highest marks in my year - and I still get magic wrong sometimes. Being good at maths or engineering or whatever the fuck it isn't doesnt make you a good player.
This thread.
September 1, 2014 12:49 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #41
Have you heard of variance? Beating me once or twice doesn't mean anything.
Age is not even close to a reasonable measure of skill in anything except perhaps life wisdom. You being in college does not affect your knowledge of the game.
nickiru, I congratulate you on your intelligence. However, you if anybody should be able to understand that you can learn from other people. I am going to stop posting on your decks and on this thread because I feel that neither you nor your friend are making any attempt to understand the ideas of others, who clearly know more than you do about the game. I may not be one of them, but there are certainly others who have tried to convince you to change things to make your deck better who have walked into unreasonable stubbornness.
Also, tell your friend (who really should know better) to stop being a conceited jerk.
September 1, 2014 12:57 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #42
Have you heard of variance? Beating me once or twice doesn't mean anything.
Age is not even close to a reasonable measure of skill in anything except perhaps life wisdom. You being in college does not affect your knowledge of the game.
nickiru, I congratulate you on your intelligence. However, you if anybody should be able to understand that you can learn from other people. I am going to stop posting on your decks and on this thread because I feel that neither you nor your friend are making any attempt to understand the ideas of others, who clearly know more than you do about the game. I may not be one of them, but there are certainly others who have tried to convince you to change things to make your deck better who have walked into unreasonable stubbornness.
Also, tell your friend (who really should know better) to stop being a conceited jerk.
September 1, 2014 12:57 p.m.
GlistenerAgent says... #45
I swear I didn't do that on purpose. If you could quote multiple posts, i think that was worth fluffybunnypants wall. :)
September 1, 2014 12:59 p.m.
"I feel that neither you nor your friend are making any attempt to understand the ideas of others, who clearly know more than you do about the game." end quote.
Really? so what makes you qualified to state that 'you' are the one who 'clearly' knows more than I do? I can state that I know more than you just as bluntly and it caries no weight. You are on equal footing with me as far as I am concerned.
Besides, the point of me making this forum was to get ideas from others and more primarily to get specific cards. I got them, and disagreed with most of them and I gave good explanations as to why I did, but I came out profiting with a few good suggestions. I tried to maintain a friendly tone and debate our differences; however, let the records show that you struck first and insulted my intelligence.
Page 5 verse 15 of this forum. You said twice to me ..."are you stupid?" due to my card preferences. My post before hand was me stating in a reasonable and debatable manner why I prefer ooze and adjudicator and such over thundermaw and baneslayer. Then I said, again in a debatable manner, how I prefer ooze over goyf. which is when you said I was stupid the second time.
You started it my good sir. So please do not insult my intelligence and state that you are the one who knows more instantly claiming the higher ground. Again I say, we are on equal footing.
So, while I was minding my own business and was trying to start a debate so one of us may convince the other or come to an agreement, you insulted me. Thus me and my friend then later retaliated.
And please don't use the 'band wagon' fallacy. Just because the masses play a certain way doesn't mean that that 'is' the best way to play.
and furthermore; I'm fine if you choose not to post any more. You aren't beneficial to me anymore seeing as how you refuse to discuss card interaction.
September 1, 2014 4:17 p.m.
UrbanAnathema says... #47
Your preferences are one thing, however your preferences vs what is "strictly better" in the game and in any particular format are two different things.
Any player can make something inferior have a unique interaction in any given deck to make it a better choice than something else, that's what Magic is about. Creativity isn't lacking here. I have one of the highest rated Modern decks on this site, (For what that's worth.) and it is a total home brew. But
Your attitude is what has rubbed everyone the wrong way, that and your inability to accept any arguments other than your own.
You think you know better, and the millions of players who have been playing for two decades are the "common folk" (ROTFLMAO) by all means kid, enjoy your education.
I'm done with this thread, but its been a good laugh.
September 1, 2014 4:47 p.m.
True, i wouldn't have chimed in with insulting remarks if he hadn't started throwing insults that were uncalled for. I don't start fights ,but i sure do finish them.
beside that point i really don't think you are stupid GlistenerAgent. You should just realize that you were on a high horse as well. Even if you were backed by more people you shouldn't be insulting someone's intelligence for disagreeing with you. If they don't take your advice move on or explain your view point don't start hurling insults.
You also beat my face in in at untap btw. I still won most of the games,but you weren't playing badly and i thought your deck was one of the better infect decks i've seen. That last comment was just an effort to knock you off your high horse and make you realize we aren't stupid. I'm sorry if i came across a bit harsh so you can take that apology for what it is just be more civil when people differ in opinion.
September 1, 2014 5:07 p.m.
Dear UrbanAnathema:
Yah, that's one thing I got from this too; a good laugh. lol
'preferences' to 'strictly better?' than you proceed to say 'Any player can make something inferior have a unique interaction in any given deck to make it a better choice than something else' ? But these two contradict each other. eh whatever, this forum has been drained from anything valuable long ago. I'm gonna make a new forum and hope to get different people.
Besides, I was not unable to accept anything. I already mentioned this a handful of posts back that I accepted that 60 cards is superior to 61+ cards in a deck. GlistenerAgent showed me an article and I was convinced. Please do not say that I am unwilling to accept something that is not mine.
Oh PLEASE don't make me puke. How dare you say "You think you know better" to me. Have you seen what GlistenerAgent has said? over and over he keeps stating that he 'clearly' knows better and claims the high ground over me. I merely state my specific skills and do not relate my state to my opponent. I say I am good with mana. people say 'no your stupid' and proceed to say that they no better. Really?
(sigh) I'm making a new forum soon. I may still respond to anyone if they wish to continue to argue but I have burned enough energy here.
September 1, 2014 5:22 p.m.
It's called a 'thread' not a 'forum'. A forum is what you post in, a thread is what you post.
Blizzicane says... #1
"Baneslayer is another peak efficiency card, and is one of the best dragons out there. "
I always knew Baneslayer was a dragon... :S
August 30, 2014 4:22 p.m.