Turn Off Ads?
Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 47

Thread: Magic: The Gathering

  1. #16
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,365

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool View Post
    Yes, always 2 colors. One-color decks can be negated with just a few cards. Three-color decks are too unwieldy -- you never seem to get the right colors in your hand.
    Noooo...

    I've won a State Championship with a mono-colored deck (Academy), have two other top 4 finishes with mono-colored decks (Goblins, Rogue Black), and a top 8 Pro Tour qualifier finish with a pure-black Necropotence creation. And I finished second in 2006 States with a three-color deck (Solar Peace), losing two games to one in the final. During Grand Prix Minneapolis, mono-color White Weenie dominated the format. For a newer player, mono-color decks are actually a good thing because they eliminate the need for expensive multi-colored land and they can actually be more consistent and faster than a two-color deck.

    You'll just have to trust me on this one, but multiple Pro-Tour qualifiers, Grand Prix's, Nationals, and even World Championships have been won using mono-color and 3-color or 4-color decks.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  2. Turn Off Ads?
  3. #17
    Vampire Weekend @Bernie's camisadelgolf's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Cincinnati, OH
    Posts
    11,434

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    I played for a few years in junior high, but it wasn't worth the money it took to stay the best, so I stopped playing. I still have hundreds of cards ordered alphabetically, but I figure I'll just set them aside, let them collect value, and then sell them on eBay in a few decades.

  4. #18
    I'm toolsy.
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Just South of Louisville
    Posts
    334

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    I was a player from around 93 to around 05. I thought the game became stale when they starting sanctioning events and limiting the cards that you could play with. I never played the sanctioned tourneys because I liked my "old" cards and the market was getting saturated with new sets that were being forced on players if they wanted to be active on the tournament scene. My favorite deck of all time was a mono black discard and land descruction deck (hymns, spectors, sink holes). I sold out on ebay a couple years ago for around $1000.

  5. #19
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,793

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelSD View Post
    Johnny is giving you good feedback, except that a tourney-legal deck is a minumum of 60 cards.
    Yeah, my memory is fuzzy. I thought it was a 40 card minimum.

    Still, you want to be as close to the minimum as possible. The more cards you use, the greater the chance that the one card you really need won't come up.

    Quote Originally Posted by SteelSD View Post
    Noooo...

    I've won a State Championship with a mono-colored deck (Academy), have two other top 4 finishes with mono-colored decks (Goblins, Rogue Black), and a top 8 Pro Tour qualifier finish with a pure-black Necropotence creation. And I finished second in 2006 States with a three-color deck (Solar Peace), losing two games to one in the final. During Grand Prix Minneapolis, mono-color White Weenie dominated the format. For a newer player, mono-color decks are actually a good thing because they eliminate the need for expensive multi-colored land and they can actually be more consistent and faster than a two-color deck.

    You'll just have to trust me on this one, but multiple Pro-Tour qualifiers, Grand Prix's, Nationals, and even World Championships have been won using mono-color and 3-color or 4-color decks.
    I believe you about tournament play, where card cost and card scarcity are not issues. I'm thinking more along the lines of recreational play, with decks build from common cards found in foil packs.

    I played a couple of small tournaments and did well (2nd and 3rd). I gave up the game when I realized the game was less about creativity and more about economics. Building a deck from limited resources is a challenge and a lot of fun. Building a deck of "perfect" cards is a different game.
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  6. #20
    Vavasor TRF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Amarillo, TX
    Posts
    13,447

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    my god you guys need to get out more.

    kidding. I played a bit when most of you were in middle school (I was in college). It's fun but IMO requires a lot of time and devotion. Maybe requires is not the right word. the game can suck you in real quick, causing you to lose track of time.
    Suck it up cupcake.

  7. #21
    Member SteelSD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    9,365

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by Johnny Footstool View Post
    Yeah, my memory is fuzzy. I thought it was a 40 card minimum.

    Still, you want to be as close to the minimum as possible. The more cards you use, the greater the chance that the one card you really need won't come up.
    40-card minimum is for sealed deck or booster draft tournament play. And you're 100% accurate about wanting to keep it at the minimum number in order to maximize card drawing probability.

    I believe you about tournament play, where card cost and card scarcity are not issues. I'm thinking more along the lines of recreational play, with decks build from common cards found in foil packs.
    Ok. Sure. You're right there, although there are cheap options for mono-Red (weenies/burn), mono-White (White Weenie/Kithkin) and mono-Green (mana acceleration into fat creatures) even in casual play.

    I played a couple of small tournaments and did well (2nd and 3rd). I gave up the game when I realized the game was less about creativity and more about economics. Building a deck from limited resources is a challenge and a lot of fun. Building a deck of "perfect" cards is a different game.
    It's an investment, that's for sure. I've played tourneys with decks worth well over $500.00. But I've also done quite well at tourneys with decks worth less than $50.00 and with almost no rares. Early versions of mono-Red "Sligh" (named for it's creator) used zero Rares and a very low mana-curve to dominate the tournament scene for quite a while. "Red Deck Wins" was a huge cheap uppercut to the MTG tourney scene when it won Pro Tour LA a few years ago. A cheap White Weenie deck with four (IIRC) cheap rares took a World Championship quite a few years back. I've made States top 8 with a mono-Red Goblin deck using exactly four Rares cards in the main deck.

    Unfortunately, things have gone in the other direction more recently.

    I think you'd really like the sealed Two Headed Giant format. That's a blast as you and a partner build two decks out of sealed product and then play collaboratively against another team. Unfortunately, it appears that format had a very short run (two years) as a sanctioned "State" tournament, but it's still pretty popular for weekend tourneys.
    "The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer

    "The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
    --Ted Williams

  8. #22
    Stat Wanker Hodiernus RedsManRick's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    Guelph, ON
    Posts
    16,027

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    I played back during 4th edition and ice age -- mid 90's, middle school -- the heyday apparently. I always like my green/white deck because it felt more strategic, but it took forever to develop (green creatures tend to be bigger and more expensive) and I often got killed before I got anything rolling due to land problems. Always had problems finding the right balance. My brother was almost always Red and/or Black, focused on quicker, often direct damage with a wall off tinier creatures (damn you Will o' the Wisp!) to stop my green brute offense. I was never a big fan of blue, which seemed to me like a meta-game.

    In the later sets, they started introducing more mechanics which complicated strategy and I got bored with it. I never really embraced my nerdom either, and Magic wasn't too popular with the athletic types. I never really played it competitively and ended up giving all my good cards to my brother for Christmas one year.

    Fun stuff though. My only advice is to think simple and think synergy. Sort of like baseball, designing your offense around a string of unlikely events is a poor strategy. Get 'em on, get 'em in, and prevent your opponent from doing the same.
    Last edited by RedsManRick; 03-05-2008 at 03:39 PM.
    Games are won on run differential -- scoring more than your opponent. Runs are runs, scored or prevented they all count the same. Worry about scoring more and allowing fewer, not which positions contribute to which side of the equation or how "consistent" you are at your current level of performance.

  9. #23
    Start the Reactor! *BaseClogger*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    6,429

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by RedsManRick View Post
    I played back during 4th edition and ice age -- mid 90's, middle school -- the heyday apparently. I always like my green/white deck because it felt more strategic, but it took forever to develop (green creatures tend to be bigger and more expensive) and I often got killed before I got anything rolling due to land problems. Always had problems finding the right balance. My brother was almost always Red and/or Black, focused on quicker, often direct damage with a wall off tinier creatures (damn you Will o' the Wisp!) to stop my green brute offense. I was never a big fan of blue, which seemed to me like a meta-game.

    In the later sets, they started introducing more mechanics which complicated strategy and I got bored with it. I never really embraced my nerdom either, and Magic wasn't too popular with the athletic types. I never really played it competitively and ended up giving all my good cards to my brother for Christmas one year.

    Fun stuff though. My only advice is to think simple and think synergy. Sort of like baseball, designing your offense around a string of unlikely events is a poor strategy. Get 'em on, get 'em in, and prevent your opponent from doing the same.
    Yeah, I certainly won't be buying any of the new sets. I prefer looking/using the old cards. I wish I could find a bunch of cards from the 90's for cheap.
    Anyways, I checked and I've got cards from the sixth, seventh, and eight core sets. I like the idea of a red deck with goblins and spells that directly inflict damage on an opponent. So far, I'm looking at a deck of cheap goblins, Goblin King, Trained Org, an array of Lava Axes/Lightning Blasts/Shocks, and about 20 mana. How does that sound?
    Also, what is a "mana curve"?
    And, I read on a site that Blue is considered the strongest color. Is that true?
    "On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that great to me."

  10. #24
    Tired of talk. Win! Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Commonwealth
    Posts
    8,370

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Any of you cats nerdy enough to have played the Star Wars CCG Decipher put out back in the early/mid 90s?

    For the record, I was, so I'm not pointing fingers.

    Championships for MY teams in my lifetime:
    Cincinnati Reds - 75, 76, 90
    Chicago Blackhawks - 10, 13
    University of Kentucky - 78, 96, 98, 12
    Cincinnati Bengals - None
    Chicago Bulls - 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, 98

  11. #25
    Start the Reactor! *BaseClogger*'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Indianapolis
    Posts
    6,429

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph View Post
    Any of you cats nerdy enough to have played the Star Wars CCG Decipher put out back in the early/mid 90s?

    For the record, I was, so I'm not pointing fingers.
    I see... hide your shame in my thread!
    "On-base percentage is great if you can score runs and do something with that on-base percentage," Baker said. "Clogging up the bases isn't that great to me."

  12. #26
    Tired of talk. Win! Joseph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    The Commonwealth
    Posts
    8,370

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Its easier than taking all the shame into its own thread.

    Championships for MY teams in my lifetime:
    Cincinnati Reds - 75, 76, 90
    Chicago Blackhawks - 10, 13
    University of Kentucky - 78, 96, 98, 12
    Cincinnati Bengals - None
    Chicago Bulls - 91, 92, 93, 96, 97, 98

  13. #27
    Something clever pahster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2005
    Location
    Columbia, MO
    Posts
    1,908

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph View Post
    Any of you cats nerdy enough to have played the Star Wars CCG Decipher put out back in the early/mid 90s?

    For the record, I was, so I'm not pointing fingers.
    Yep. Also the Star Trek CCG.

  14. #28
    Churlish Johnny Footstool's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Location
    Olathe, KS
    Posts
    13,793

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by pahster View Post
    Yep. Also the Star Trek CCG.
    I own a few of those cards, given to me by a friend who wanted me to play him.

    I think I played it twice.
    "I prefer books and movies where the conflict isn't of the extreme cannibal apocalypse variety I guess." Redsfaithful

  15. #29
    Potential Lunch Winner Dom Heffner's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    6,071

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    I've won a State Championship with a mono-colored deck (Academy), have two other top 4 finishes with mono-colored decks (Goblins, Rogue Black), and a top 8 Pro Tour qualifier finish with a pure-black Necropotence creation. And I finished second in 2006 States with a three-color deck (Solar Peace), losing two games to one in the final. During Grand Prix Minneapolis, mono-color White Weenie dominated the format. For a newer player, mono-color decks are actually a good thing because they eliminate the need for expensive multi-colored land and they can actually be more consistent and faster than a two-color deck.
    Steel, I'll bet you a beer at the next Redszone gathering that savafan breathed a sigh of relief in regards to you hitting on his soon to be wife when he read the above.


  16. #30
    Titanic Struggles Caveat Emperor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2004
    Location
    The 513
    Posts
    12,642

    Re: Magic: The Gathering

    Quote Originally Posted by Joseph View Post
    Any of you cats nerdy enough to have played the Star Wars CCG Decipher put out back in the early/mid 90s?
    I had a couple decks of that when I was in middle school / freshman year. I collected more for the sake of collecting all things Star Wars. I think I've played a grand total of 3 games of that in my life.

    As to Magic cards -- are the older ones from the 90's worth anything at this point? I had a ton of the regular white-border cards from c1994-1995. I think they're still in the basement somewhere.
    Championships Matter.
    23 Years and Counting...


Turn Off Ads?

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please.

Thank you, and most importantly, enjoy yourselves!


RedsZone.com is a privately owned website and is not affiliated with the Cincinnati Reds or Major League Baseball


Contact us: Boss | GIK | BCubb2003 | dabvu2498 | Gallen5862 | LexRedsFan | Plus Plus | RedlegJake | redsfan1995 | The Operator | Tommyjohn25