Need advice - OBC UG deck
Gustavo Fischer
the World Championship decks, but I lost horribly (1-5). The metagame is
70% UG, 20% monoblack and 10% W/G and R/G, and I lost all mirror
matches. Now I´m trying more of a toolbox version.
//NAME: Netdecks suck.dec
// Creatures (15)
4 Basking Rootwalla
4 Wild Mongrel
2 Aquamoeba
3 Arrogant Wurm
2 Wonder
// Spells (22)
3 Careful Study
2 Quiet Speculation
2 Standstill
4 Æther Burst
1 Krosan Reclamation
2 Living Wish
4 Circular Logic
1 Deep Analysis
3 Roar of the Wurm
// Land (23)
1 Tarnished Citadel
2 Centaur Garden
8 Forest
12 Island
Sideboard:
1 Wonder
1 Genesis
1 Krosan Beast
1 Centaur Chieftain
1 Nantuko Tracer
3 Catalyst Stone
3 Envelop
2 Divert
1 Krosan Reclamation
1 Sylvan Safekeeper
Please tell me what you think.
Thanks in advance,
--
Gustavo Fischer - g...@montevideo.com.uy
David Chapman
> This is the deck I´m planning to take to PTQ Houston. I tried some of
> the World Championship decks, but I lost horribly (1-5). The metagame
> is 70% UG, 20% monoblack and 10% W/G and R/G, and I lost all mirror
> matches.
What form of U/G is being played? There are three, and
it's vital to know which one. If Quiet Roar is the biggie,
play UZI - it twats QR all day long. Otherwise, the best
results come from U/B Braids.
--
How am I supposed to keep a low profile when
Godzilla with a white-man's Afro is on the back
porch!
Gustavo Fischer
> The seas boiled, the skies fell, and Gustavo Fischer said:
>
>> the World Championship decks, but I lost horribly (1-5). The metagame
>> is 70% UG, 20% monoblack and 10% W/G and R/G, and I lost all mirror
>> matches.
>
> What form of U/G is being played? There are three, and
> it's vital to know which one. If Quiet Roar is the biggie,
> play UZI - it twats QR all day long. Otherwise, the best
> results come from U/B Braids.
Unfortunately our Worlds contestants made the Threshold and Madness
variants very popular, and I don愒 have any Braids, so I惴 stuck with
U/G or Psychatog. Thanks for the advice.
Gustavo Fischer
> This is the deck I´m planning to take to PTQ Houston. I tried some
> of the World Championship decks, but I lost horribly (1-5). The
> metagame is 70% UG, 20% monoblack and 10% W/G and R/G,
> and I lost all mirror matches. Now I´m trying more of a toolbox
> version.
There´ll be all kinds of UG decks, with at least some
threshold/standstill and lots of madness, with some Quiet Speculation
thrown in.
> //NAME: Netdecks suck.dec
> // Creatures (15)
> 4 Basking Rootwalla
> 4 Wild Mongrel
> 2 Aquamoeba
> 3 Arrogant Wurm
> 2 Wonder (* Now 3 *)
> // Spells (22)
> 3 Careful Study (*Now 4 *)
> 2 Quiet Speculation
> 2 Standstill (* Out *)
> 4 Æther Burst
> 1 Krosan Reclamation
> 2 Living Wish
> 4 Circular Logic
> 1 Deep Analysis (* Replaced with 1 Flash of Insight. I haven´t
been able to test it, though. But the 3 life hurt too much in this
version*)
> 3 Roar of the Wurm
> // Land (23)
> 1 Tarnished Citadel
> 2 Centaur Garden
> 8 Forest
> 12 Island (* Now 11. I hope all those Careful Studies will fix
my mana. And I left the Citadel as well *)
>
> Sideboard:
>
> 1 Wonder (* If I can get one, else 1 Upheaval *)
> 1 Genesis
> 1 Krosan Beast
> 1 Centaur Chieftain
> 1 Nantuko Tracer
> 3 Catalyst Stone
> 3 Envelop
> 2 Divert (* Out *)
> 1 Krosan Reclamation (* Out *)
> 1 Sylvan Safekeeper
Added 1 Cephalid Coliseum, 1 Druid Lyrist, 1 Moment´s Peace
> Please tell me what you think.
> Thanks in advance,
--
Gustavo Fischer - g...@montevideo.com.uy
"36 power. 36 toughness. One card. What more needs to be said?"
- From Judgment's Player´s Guide
CapnShiner
"Gustavo Fischer" <g...@montevideo.com.uy> wrote in message
news:akp69j$1kh3k7$1...@ID-57982.news.dfncis.de...
You know, I'm starting to get sick of people who don't think outside the
box. There are tons of possible decks out there just waiting to be
constructed, not just Braids, Psychatog, etc. Why doesn't someone have an
original thought for once?
Erich Leibrock
news:IW0d9.51994$Fb.21...@news1.west.cox.net...
>
> You know, I'm starting to get sick of people who don't think outside the
> box. There are tons of possible decks out there just waiting to be
> constructed, not just Braids, Psychatog, etc. Why doesn't someone have an
> original thought for once?
Because the Net-decks beat out most originally-designed decks. My friend Jay
has a Tim deck (think Prodigal Sorcerer, Chainflinger, Quicksilver Dagger,
Immobilizing Ink, and the like), and Quiet Roar (Quiet Speculation + Roar of
the Wurm combo) will eat it alive. Any time someone tries to come up with a
new deck, they get tested and beat out by Net-decks. We're pretty much
stuck. And those that DO get somewhere? BECOME Net-Decks.
Erich
Totally Geek, LLC
Leibrock" <elei...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
I would recommend people play Type I, then. Most of the big decks have
cards out of reach for most people, so the "net deck" idea goes out the
window with the more than 9,000 cards to make choices from.
Here are some other great rules to check out for fun play. My friends
and I do this for some variety.
All creatures become legendary (so, there can only be one of each named
creature in play).
All enchantments become Enchant World (you aren't the only beneficiary
and another enchantment coming into play puts the other enchantment into
the graveyard).
No creatures with power over 3, or not creatures with power-pump
abilities.
All lands have phasing.
Etc.
We do these rules because many of us have Power 9 cards and other cards
to build the Type I "net decks". It becomes no fun to play Magic when
there are 40 Force of Will cards in the circle. If everyone is playing
Keeper or Black Destruct it beomes unruly in a hurry.
Peasant magic is another alternative as well.
Enjoy,
Sean
--
-!-
$10 for a Black Lotus? http://www.totallygeek.com/magic/
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Gustavo Fischer
I don愒 think of myself as a net-decker. I扉e been playing with U/G
since Odyssey came out (if you don愒 believe me check with Google for a
post asking for help with my Draino). And my versions were just strictly
inferior to the netdecks. So I started testing ideas from the net, and
some worked, some didn愒. As long as you don愒 play them without knowing
what the cards are there for... I did just that with the World
Championships decks, and did very badly.
Testing netdecks actually can make you a better deckbuilder. What I惴
doing right now is testing my more wacky deck ideas in the Arena league,
and play more standard decks in PTQ愀 unless I惴 pretty confident my
version is better.
Right now I have a Mortal Combat deck, a G/R beatdown, and a Birds U/W
deck with Looters, Careful Study, Spirit Cairn and Opposition. I don愒
think any of them are traditional. I惻l probably post them here and see
what kind of help I get. To those who ask why play netdecks, I悲 like
them to post their decks, and see if they beat the netdecks.
ka...@ecn.ab.ca
<g...@montevideo.com.uy> wrote:
>Erich Leibrock wrote:
>> "CapnShiner" <CapnS...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>> news:IW0d9.51994$Fb.21...@news1.west.cox.net...
>>>
>>> You know, I'm starting to get sick of people who don't think outside
>>> the box. There are tons of possible decks out there just waiting to
>>> be constructed, not just Braids, Psychatog, etc. Why doesn't
>>> someone have an original thought for once?
While there are "tons of possible decks out there," not all of them
are 'good.' Some enviroments leave room for many 'good' decks, some
only have room for a few. The mere existence of the internet allows
us to very quickly discover the 'good' decks - regardless of how many
there are - and elevates them into netdecks.
>I don愒 think of myself as a net-decker. I扉e been playing with U/G
>since Odyssey came out (if you don愒 believe me check with Google for a
>post asking for help with my Draino). And my versions were just strictly
>inferior to the netdecks.
Heh. That's where I once was, quite literally; I would design a deck,
and find out that it was nothing more than an inferior verson of a
netdeck. At that point I would have the choice of either 'fixing' it
by turning it into the netdeck it was mimicking or starting from
scratch.
Fshrly834
>> box. There are tons of possible decks out there just waiting to be
>> constructed, not just Braids, Psychatog, etc. Why doesn't someone have an
>> original thought for once?
>
>Because the Net-decks beat out most originally-designed decks. My friend Jay
>has a Tim deck (think Prodigal Sorcerer, Chainflinger, Quicksilver Dagger,
>Immobilizing Ink, and the like), and Quiet Roar (Quiet Speculation + Roar of
>the Wurm combo) will eat it alive. Any time someone tries to come up with a
>new deck, they get tested and beat out by Net-decks. We're pretty much
>stuck. And those that DO get somewhere? BECOME Net-Decks.
>
>Erich
It all comes down to a lack of skill at building decks. I used to play at a
store in Virginia where we built our own decks. Everyone at the table had a
home-cooked deck except for one new guy. He was running the Wildfire deck with
Covetous Dragon and artifact mana. I said something to him about him being the
only one there with a net deck. His protest was, "I changed two cards." As
far as he was concerned, changing two cards meant it was no longer a net deck.
I see the same thing now at Friday Night Magic. People copy decklists and
change one or two cards so they can claim to build their own. Interestingly
enough, these are the same people who won't come within a mile of the place
when they run booster draft and sealed deck tournaments. After all, there are
no decklists available for a booster draft.
David Chapman
> It all comes down to a lack of skill at building decks. I used to
> play at a store in Virginia where we built our own decks. Everyone
> at the table had a home-cooked deck except for one new guy. He was
> running the Wildfire deck with Covetous Dragon and artifact mana. I
> said something to him about him being the only one there with a net
> deck. His protest was, "I changed two cards." As far as he was
> concerned, changing two cards meant it was no longer a net deck. I
> see the same thing now at Friday Night Magic. People copy decklists
> and change one or two cards so they can claim to build their own.
> Interestingly enough, these are the same people who won't come within
> a mile of the place when they run booster draft and sealed deck
> tournaments. After all, there are no decklists available for a
> booster draft.
You've still got to be able to play them, though. I'll be
netdecking it at a double-header PTQ next weekend,
probably without changing even a card from the
sideboard, but I'll still be putting in 4 hours of testing a
day to prepare. Bring on the shit bastards who think a
good deck is all they need.
Rune Schmidt Rasmussen
I know this probably is a no-brainer, but I havn't been playing Magic for
several years now, so here goes;
What is a "Netdeck"?
Simple as that :-)
Regards
Rune
Lee Sharpe
"Rune Schmidt Rasmussen" <pisf...@ostenfeld.dk> wrote in message
news:ale41l$1q3$1...@eising.k-net.dk...
> Hi
>
> I know this probably is a no-brainer, but I havn't been playing Magic for
> several years now, so here goes;
>
> What is a "Netdeck"?
A "netdeck" is a deck that one decides to play based upon seeing it on a
Magic website on the Internet. This is often frowned upon because of its
un-originality, and *can* (but doesn't by definition) shows a lack of
deck-building skills. Other players make rogue decks, which the players
generally designed themselves. Aside from getting credit for originality,
opponents often aren't expecting them and thus have few cards to sideboard
against it. Unfortunately, rogue decks often are simply just not as good as
netdecks.
-- Lee Sharpe
David DeLaney
>I know this probably is a no-brainer, but I havn't been playing Magic for
>several years now, so here goes;
>
>What is a "Netdeck"?
One that's being discussed extensively in various Internet forums - newsgroup,
webpage, IRC, etc. - that's gotten extensive fine-tuning as a result and
tends to stomp the crap out of many other decks because of all the time
and effort that's gone into tuning it. (Yes, this can happen with a deck
without the Internet involved - but if it does and it wins a tournament
somewhere, presto, it BECOMES one because of the Internet discussions about
that surprise deck at that tournament, how can we improve it, like this maybe!,
etc.)
Dave
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Rune Schmidt Rasmussen
(you are pretty lost when you havn't been playing for years :-))
Regards
Rune.
"Lee Sharpe" <sha...@uiuc.edu> wrote in message
news:fhxe9.18038$m7.1...@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu...
Chris Manrique
> It all comes down to a lack of skill at building decks. I used to play
at a
> store in Virginia where we built our own decks. Everyone at the table had
a
> home-cooked deck except for one new guy. He was running the Wildfire deck
with
> Covetous Dragon and artifact mana. I said something to him about him
being the
> only one there with a net deck. His protest was, "I changed two cards."
As
> far as he was concerned, changing two cards meant it was no longer a net
deck.
> I see the same thing now at Friday Night Magic. People copy decklists
and
> change one or two cards so they can claim to build their own.
Interestingly
> enough, these are the same people who won't come within a mile of the
place
> when they run booster draft and sealed deck tournaments. After all, there
are
> no decklists available for a booster draft.
I completely disagree. I regularly build my own decks and play rogue
(showing up at a tournament without a net-deck). I split about half and
half between net decks and rogue decks. I do about equally well at the
tournaments with either. I enjoy playing my own deck for the surprise
factor, but I also enjoy playing net decks. Why? Because they are generally
a very well constructed, finely tuned deck that doesn't have a lot of holes
in either the mana base, or the mana curve. They have answers to most of
the important threats. And changing 2 cards in say Carlos Romao's Worlds
build can entirely change the deck.
Yes, I do show up at booster drafts. I love drafting. I regularly win our
Friday Night Magic drafts. Playing a net-deck is no reflection on deck
building skill.
Why do I play deck X? Because I like to win.
Why don't I play deck Y? Because it will get crushed by X,Z,A,B,....
Classes of Decks:
Net-Deck - Finely tuned deck, played in Tier 1 tournaments.
Rogue Deck - Deck of unknown quality.
Rogue Deck that consistantly wins becomes a net-deck.
Here is how I rate playing.
Play with a Net-Deck and Win - you have demonstrated that you can play well.
(You can make a good product with the right tools.)
Play with a Net-Deck and Lose - you have demonstrated that you can't even
win with a good deck. (You can't make a decent product, even given good
tools.)
Play with a Rogue Deck and Win - you have demonstrated that you can play
well and build well. (You can make a good product even given crappy tools.)
Play with a Rogue Deck and Lose - you have demonstrated that you are willing
to experiment, and there is no shame in losing. (You had crappy tools, and
did the best you could.)
Given that Tier 1 Magic is more a test of playing skill than building skill,
playing a net-deck is similar to a Race-of-Champions were all competitiors
are given identitical vehicles and they compete on playing skill, versus
budget/engineering skill.
Sorry for the stream of consciousness aspect.
Chris
Rolf Kreuzer
<snip>
> Classes of Decks:
>
> Net-Deck - Finely tuned deck, played in Tier 1 tournaments.
> Rogue Deck - Deck of unknown quality.
> Rogue Deck that consistantly wins becomes a net-deck.
>
<snip>
I would like to add another "Deck-Class":
Modified Net-Deck
- If someone just hasn't all the cards to build the netdeck he needs
to replace some of the cards with either inferior or completly other
cards (4 rares of a kind are not always easily obtained). This isn't
quite the same as the "But I changed two cards!" argument from above.
- Some decktypes build themselves. Sometimes someone who hasn't even
netaccess will come to a tourney with a "netdeck", just because it's
obvious to build (e.g. Desolation Angel). It won't be exactly the
fine-tuned netdeck, but it isn't a Rouge-Deck either.
Rolf
--
What nature makes, magic can modify.
Chris Manrique
"Rolf Kreuzer" <kre...@net4you.at> wrote in message
news:a445b4a9.02090...@posting.google.com...
I like the Modified Net-Deck category. It says, yes, this may be a
net-deck, but I have made changes to it that I think are relevant to the
current metagame.
Some decks do build themselves. Look at UG Madness. Gee what are the
obvious cards.
Wild Mongrel - Discard to pump
Aquamoeba - Discard to pump
Basking Rootwalla - Cast by discard
Roar of the Worm - Discard, then cast
Wonder - Discard then everyone flies
Circular Logic - Discard to counter
Arrogant Worm - Discard to cast
Merfolk Looter (if Type 2, or Compulsion if OBC) - Card cycling, discarding
Island - Duh
Forest - Duh
Yavamaya Coast (if Type 2) - Duh
Look! a net-deck. Built out of completely obvious cards for exploiting the
madness mechanic.
ka...@ecn.ab.ca
<manr...@isgs.uiuc.edu> wrote:
>Some decks do build themselves. Look at UG Madness. Gee what are the
>obvious cards.
>Wild Mongrel - Discard to pump
>Aquamoeba - Discard to pump
>Basking Rootwalla - Cast by discard
>Roar of the Worm - Discard, then cast
>Wonder - Discard then everyone flies
>Circular Logic - Discard to counter
>Arrogant Worm - Discard to cast
>Merfolk Looter (if Type 2, or Compulsion if OBC) - Card cycling, discarding
>Island - Duh
>Forest - Duh
>Yavamaya Coast (if Type 2) - Duh
>
>Look! a net-deck. Built out of completely obvious cards for exploiting the
>madness mechanic.
Yes, but can you get the numbers right?
Fshrly834
Wrong. People who can build decks, do. People who can't build decks, copy.
ka...@ecn.ab.ca
>>I completely disagree. I regularly build my own decks and play rogue
>>(showing up at a tournament without a net-deck). I split about half and
>>half between net decks and rogue decks. I do about equally well at the
>>tournaments with either. I enjoy playing my own deck for the surprise
>>factor, but I also enjoy playing net decks. Why? Because they are generally
>>a very well constructed, finely tuned deck that doesn't have a lot of holes
>>in either the mana base, or the mana curve. They have answers to most of
>>the important threats. And changing 2 cards in say Carlos Romao's Worlds
>>build can entirely change the deck.
>>
>>Yes, I do show up at booster drafts. I love drafting. I regularly win our
>>Friday Night Magic drafts. Playing a net-deck is no reflection on deck
>>building skill.
>
> Wrong. People who can build decks, do. People who can't build decks, copy.
That gets skewed when there's money on the line.
Morgan Vening
Also, it tends to get skewed as a way to avoid/promote elitism in some
ways. Whenever I read a tournament report, notably featuring (but not
isolated to) Kai Budde, it typically mentions that he is using a deck
not of his own creation.
It's only natural that the top builders and the top players gravitate
towards each other. But without the addition of NetDecks as a
fundamental building block AFTER a tournament, 'super secret tech'
would create an extended gap between the 'haves' and the 'have nots'.
As it stands, Net Decks have a fundamental flaw attached to them. The
people who build them, and the people who developed them, know how
they work. The people who clone them, don't. Not to the same level.
Without 'Net Decks', published and open for the world to see, there
would be an underground 'movement' of sorts, trafikking in copied
DeckLists from Tournaments, intrusive spectating, and the like. As
Kaos said, when money is on the line, people will resort to any sneaky
advantage. So I'd rather it be open and clear.
granted, this is the perspective of someone who never really played
Tournament level, and who hasn't played a Constructed or Limited game
in ooh, four years. I use ONLY World Champ Black/Golds, and Expansion
Preconstructeds. So in essence, ALL of my decks are 'Net Decks'.
Morgan Vening
Fshrly834
I was only referring to my local Friday Night Magic tournaments in my
original post and I stand by what I wrote. I know the competition on Friday
nights and there are people who like to consider themselves well-rounded
players (although admittedly not world class by any means). That is, they like
to build their own constructed decks and they like to draft and play sealed
deck. There is no big money on the line, so if they play something they
created themselves and lose with it, there is no big loss and no sad plane ride
home. However, if they win (which is often), the thrill of playing their own
creation to a tournament win is a big rush.
There are other players, however, who only play decks which won the previous
weekend's large events. They cannot build a deck unless they have the list in
hand and trade or buy the necessary cards. These same people (and they know
who they are) will not come anywhere near the store on nights when sealed deck
or booster drafts are held.
On those nights, the people who enjoy deckbuilding come out. There are no
decklists for booster draft or sealed. A player has to have skills other than
reading and copying.
If someone wants to argue that a netdeck is the way to go for a PTQ, I can't
argue with that logic. After all, those decks have been honed and tuned by the
best players in the world.
But local tournaments? The netdeckers never last. They might win a time or
two, but sooner or later they get tired of losing with their netdecks and can't
figure out why "the metagame" beats their deck that won the world championship.
When that happens, they quit. What they don't realize is that part of the fun
is creating something that you can call your own.