Comments on: Card games are overrated

By: RadioactivePhoenix

RadioactivePhoenix — Sun, 10 Sep 2006 05:12:29 +0000

Due to a complete lack of interest, this has now been cancelled. Evidentally card games ARE overrated. Enjoy your studies.

By: Sicopath

Sicopath — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 16:53:21 +0000

Also, I fail to see how transguild courier fits into the argument at all. You’re just being petty because you think I insulted you.

By: Sicopath

Sicopath — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 15:22:01 +0000

What i’m saying is that anyone expecting a game to last more than 3 turns should have 1 or 2 cards in their decks designed to break a stalemate. Cards such as http://www.wizards.com/global/images/magic/dissension/Nihilistic_Glee.jpg or even http://www.wizards.com/global/images/magic/guildpact/Orzhova_the_Church_of_Deals.jpg are good enough to bring a game to a conclusion.
And with the whole DIEDIEDIE concept, you may find it unamusing but at least those games have endings.

By: Rena

Rena — Sat, 26 Aug 2006 10:49:58 +0000

So what you\’re saying is that everyone is supposed to build a THG deck with a \”DIEDIEDIE\” condition to it? Awesome logic there… Those games aren\’t exciting either, like your BS Transguild Courier deck. It\’s funny the first time, then it just gets dry.

Draft is effective in that the decks can NEVER be BS strong. It\’s all about deck construction.

By: Sicopath

Sicopath — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 09:35:24 +0000

Pfft… That game was boring and drawn out because 3 of the 4 participants\’ decks don\’t have the DIEDIEDIE quality that incites furious laughter and mass WTF.

Seriously, mass defense/lifegain, flying weenie and Jeremy\’s random 90 card deck with no win condition != DIEDIEDIE.

By: Jeremy Read

Jeremy Read — Mon, 21 Aug 2006 05:50:47 +0000

Hey 3 hissing miasmas are exciting!

By: Rena

Rena — Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:00:18 +0000

Unfortunately, you misunderstood me. I was making a very valid point about constructed type-2 TWO HEADED GIANT. I have my reasons for that. Two points: If teams are premeditated, it doesn\’t matter if the decks are peasant (which is commons bar five uncommons only) or not. If teams are premeditated, it\’s very easy to build a team which focuses on being all rounded and where you play a very heavy game of tag-team, which is NOT how it should be. Two headed giant is really a multiplayer game which requires more skill, which is why in legal tournaments, two headed giant is sanctioned in LIMITED only. It\’s too easy to have long, boring and drawn out constructed type-2 two headed giant games, this has been demonstrated in the games we play at uni. (It\’s ENTIRELY possible to build a BS peasant deck - so I really don\’t see the difference, that\’s why I suggest that a draft be played for T.H.G)

By: Balinor

Balinor — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 00:11:48 +0000

How sad, a magic player that doesn’t like the idea of deck construction based on base (which is what I gather from the “It’s what the decks are constructed on that make it BS”. But you are right though rares/uncommons don’t necessarily make the game but when let you try a common aggro sligh decks vs stax. If however everyone is playing commons with no more than 2 rares then playing field is even and does make for quiet interesting games. Thing you have to be careful about is what card is common for which block, eg counterspell, and if non printed cards can be used anymore, eg sinkhole

By: Rena

Rena — Thu, 17 Aug 2006 10:10:41 +0000

Rares/Uncommons don’t necessarily make the game. It’s what the decks are constructed on that make it BS.

Simply said though: I’m out. Sorry.

By: RadioactivePhoenix

RadioactivePhoenix — Wed, 16 Aug 2006 08:07:26 +0000

What’s so BS about peasant 2-headed? it’s equally fair to everyone.
as to incentive, without knowing how many people are interested, and what they would be interested in, it’s hard to decide what prizes to offer (money from entry fees, cards, w/e).