Dies to Removal

It would help if they reprinted fetches in M15

*fingers crossed*

If I were to put up the cash needed to build my pauper burn on MTGO how am I positioned in the meta?

For rerference

It would help if they reprinted fetches in M15

*fingers crossed*

Maybe in the next block, but I doubt they'd want shocks AND fetches in standard together, even if it's only for a couple months. Seriously, imagine the manabases with shocks, fetches, and scrylands?

Interesting though: if they reprinted the onslaught fetches instead of the zendikar fetches, would the price of zendikar fetches go down? And what would happen if they reprinted both?

Also note that reprinting fetches will probably raise the cost of them in the short term, any fall in price will likely happen after they rotate out of standard.

Also note that reprinting fetches will probably raise the cost of them in the short term, any fall in price will likely happen after they rotate out of standard.

I doubt it. The shocklands certainly dropped in price immediately, and they still haven't rotated out.

Burn isn't a real deck in pauper, same as any other eternal format. The power level of the creatures is too high.

Burn isn't a real deck in pauper, same as any other eternal format. The power level of the creatures is too high.

So being undefeated in paper pauper is a fluke?

I actually mean that as a question and not as a sarcastic, rhetorical jab (though I was tempted to mean it that way).

Burn isn't a real deck in pauper, same as any other eternal format. The power level of the creatures is too high.

So being undefeated in paper pauper is a fluke?

I actually mean that as a question and not as a sarcastic, rhetorical jab (though I was tempted to mean it that way).

How many matches have you played?

How many archetypes are out there? How many games against each have you played?

How many matches have you played?

How many archetypes are out there? How many games against each have you played?

8 tourneys at 3 rounds per, comes to 24 actual competitive matches, plus testing with friends (my test gauntlet was MBC, MUC, Affinity, tribal faeries, and mono green infect. Mostly because those decks were available).

In actual competitive play I've faced MBC 8 times, MUC 4, GU infect 2, stompy 2, esper flicker 3, BW rebels 1, affinity 1, boroskitty 2, and mono green infect 1. My game losses have be been 2 esper flicker, 1 boros kitty, 1MBC, 1 stompy, with zero match losses.

UR Delver? I must be behind, I thought the Delver list was mono U. What's the UR list?

Modern sucks now. Play standard (which also sucks, but sucks less).

Modern > Standard

Constructed sucks, play more limited (now with more voltron). If you insist on building decks, then play commander.

I had an amusing idea about reprints and card value. Nothing in portal: three kingdoms is officially on the reserved list, yet they are some of the rarest most expensive cards.

I kinda wanna see a full reprint of portal: three kingdoms with modern frames (still only legacy legal of course). Would go a long way towards dropping prices on some of the most expensive cards, and wouldn't break the reserve list.

(Of course, I would love to see the reserve list go boom for the most part, and to have a proper modern masters done, as well as have the legacy version from mtgo done in paper too)

So affinity was everywhere in Richmond. Note to self, the Master of Etherium version is a lot better than the Steel Overseer version.

How many matches have you played?

How many archetypes are out there? How many games against each have you played?

8 tourneys at 3 rounds per, comes to 24 actual competitive matches, plus testing with friends (my test gauntlet was MBC, MUC, Affinity, tribal faeries, and mono green infect. Mostly because those decks were available).

In actual competitive play I've faced MBC 8 times, MUC 4, GU infect 2, stompy 2, esper flicker 3, BW rebels 1, affinity 1, boroskitty 2, and mono green infect 1. My game losses have be been 2 esper flicker, 1 boros kitty, 1MBC, 1 stompy, with zero
match losses.

Yeah, 24 matches is by no means a statistically significant number of matches. It's not a fluke, it's just a minor series of events that are bound to happen when enough people are playing enough Magic. Burn works. Even if all of its matchups were 35%, being undefeated beats the expected odds if you're only looking at your 24 matches, but realize there are thousands of games being played per day. Someone has to win with it; it just happens to be you.

Also some of those decks aren't real decks.

Also you're not playing online against vicious players. My online win rate is nearly 15% lower than my paper one.

Also some of those decks aren't real decks.

you have a lot of balls to say this, i respect that

Also you're not playing online against vicious players. My online win rate is nearly 15% lower than my paper one.

15% is a little ambiguous. Do you mean fifteen percentage points lower or fifteen percent lower?

i.e.,
65% win rate in paper, 50% win rate online: Percentage points.
65% win rate in paper, 55.25% win rate online: Percent.

Careful there Dechs, you're starting to catch onto the political pundit's tricks.
You know what happens when you ask too many questions...

You know what happens when you ask too many questions...

Yeah, people stop being able to answer them so they tell you to ask the Pastor.

A lot more questions later and you're an atheist who your family doesn't want to deal with anymore.

Also you're not playing online against vicious players. My online win rate is nearly 15% lower than my paper one.

15% is a little ambiguous. Do you mean fifteen percentage points lower or fifteen percent lower?

i.e.,
65% win rate in paper, 50% win rate online: Percentage points.
65% win rate in paper, 55.25% win rate online: Percent.

Sorry. First one. I'm about 63% on mtgo and 78% in paper.

I was shocked at how bad the competition at day 1 of the GP was, I played two real matches.

I had guessed as much. Percentage points is typically what people are using so long as it's a small number (<20) and it's not a politician or news reporter. Especially when they're talking about something being X% less than something else.

78% win rate in paper tells me that you've got a limited group of people to play with and they're all pretty terrible and groan when you sit down across from them.

63% win rate online is actually pretty damned impressive when you realize that a lot of this game is luck.

I only play paper for invitationals, 1Ks, gpts, ptqs and GPs. I regularly lose to the very best, I'm not at their kevel, but I run through anybody else. I'm hoping to make the leap from gatekeeper to contender this year.

So I play live 2 maybe three times a year haha.

eh, im close to quitting wholesale myself

Just don't sell off all your cards. Because you'll want them back in a year or two when you decide you didn't really want to quit.

I much prefer online play. I don't do well with people.

I'd have never guessed.

Literally never.

Also some of those decks aren't real decks.

you have a lot of balls to say this, i respect that

Pauper is just such a small format in terms of how much room there is in tier 1. There are only like 3 good decks, the rest are pretty mediocre if not just awful.

Also MTGO has done a good job of showing us which Pauper decks are "real" decks. We have the sample size required to draw a conclusion thanks to it.

i dont have the money nor the time for mtg, right now

I'd have never guessed.

Literally never.

It's adorable how you like to deconstruct my posts. I hope being so nitpicky brings you happiness.

Is it really suprising that pod did so well? In a tournament where randomness is exacerbated by the sheer size of the field, the deck with a toolbox is my pick.

It's adorable how you like to deconstruct my posts. I hope being so nitpicky brings you happiness.

It's moments like this that I live for.

I'm glad we could share in it together then.

Zem, you complete me.

No homo.

Sorry I'm already part of a vash / legato / knives triumvirate.

Also, how do you pronounce your name?

I always see it as: ZEE man jaski

You're like Jaski, one of the X-men, except with a Z.