I'm not sure. It seems like the strongest line of attack against you is actually just huge critters and Walking Ballista/Ravager effects. Some combination of protection from removal and Krenko is likely the way to go.
Thanks so much for the advice. I feel good cause I already have a couple of these done! I have a 500+ 100% positive rating on eBay from buying and selling mostly magic cards but they have been almost exclusively new cards where I didn't have to worry about fakes. I have only dealt with fakes twice. Once I got a fake Grove of the Burnwillows that was obviously fake. It just felt super wrong. Then one time I sold someone a Gideon planeswalker that they said was fake. I couldn't tell when I had gotten it that it was fake. My biggest concern was that I have never had those super old cards so I don't really know how to spot them unless they are really poorly done. That is why I am so grateful for your suggestions. I will definitely be purchasing a loup and some cheap cards from Unlimited. I won't have to worry about Alpha, Beta, or power that looks too good because I'll never be able to afford those :). Thanks for the suggestions on reputable sellers. I'll make sure to look those people up as possible ones to buy from. Thanks again!!!
Magus is for sure a non-bo with the mana bases of the best human decks from recent years (Storm's Humans that won in Spain spring to mind here.), but a couple questions spring to my mind at least.
Firstly, could you just jam a couple Magus into some version of Humans as a sort of uncounterable (off of Cavern), Armageddon-like effect to just end games where you have already played out a Thalia, into Mantis Rider, into Reflector Mage and then Magus is the cherry on top that never lets them replay the Smasher you just put back in their hand.... ? Maybe? I kinda doubt this would work myself... but maybe some slightly redder version of humans with Harsh Mentor is out there where Magus is a capstone sort of lock piece. The destroying your own manabase does seem like a problem though.
Assuming that Harsh Mentor is good, I actually think that something along these lines with 4 Magus, 4Harsh, and 2-4 Blood Moon might be pretty tough, since the opponent will be dealing with a Magus or a Harsh nearly all the time, and will be faces with crazy problems like having to try to remove Magus, so that a Flooded Strand can become not a Mountain, and instead become a fetchland that costs 3 life to use. If a second Harsh comes down, it now costs 5, and at that point shouldn't they just be in such an impossible situation that there is no getting out? I'm also optimistic about this angle, since Magus seems great against both Eldrazi (which I think is the worst matchup for Humans) and Mentor, while Harsh seems great against Shops. Now just add some number of Eidolons and you have multiple, on-color, mainboard answers for a huge chunk of the metagame. (56% of top 8 decks in the last year, going by mtgtop8)
@Islandswamp My wife points out that it might be even sicker tech in a white eldrazi deck that was running Karakas. Now you can bounce any creature on the board with an uncounterable tap? Now you can disappear the mentor if they drive up the prowess, or rip their hand apart turn after turn with a single TKS.
Not sure if there is as much room to jam it in to that deck though.
@Smmenen That's fair, I was unaware of the previous discussions and will do some reading in the linked thread.
Another way to read scenario 1i is that the format is Deck A vs Deck Anti-A (Z?) and they knocked themselves out of the tournament - it's a technically bad choice because of the over-representation, but it's also a bad format.
I recognize that we don't have hard data to pull from, but I think that the Top 8 is a much more limited pool and we ought to do what we can (redesign match slips or how things are reported) to have a full metagame report, but until those steps are taken, do some kind of poll or take into account people's feelings on the events. The feelings of the participants, not the sour grapes on losing but just the general sense of how the tournament felt, is valuable data in this entirely elective pursuit.
So if polling people gets a consensus, then we ought to take that consensus into account.
And maybe it's in the thread, but how do we weight the winner of the tournament? It's still got some amount of variance and is match up dependent and the tournament isn't round robin, etc. So if the winner doesn't get a weight, then it seems that the Top 8 is getting an undue weight in statistics.
But ultimately, if it's the only data we have then I guess we just use it as we can for now and work on changing other reporting solutions. It is unfortunate that WotC doesn't want to share as much of the data from MTGO with us.
I will say that highlander is a really fun format to play. I loved it when my friends and I played it before cube became popular (though to be honest, not a lot of difference between highlander and powered cube).
Highlander is less skill intensive I think (aside from deckbuilding) than Vintage, but such a deep card pool. Only issue I had was the lack of 4 wastelands makes LIbrary of Alexandria a little ridiculous.
If you're looking for a fun night, give it a try. Love the format!
Is there a way to not display the replys separately and maintain the threaded nature?
Like, I see
Post A-1 (reply to Post A)
and would like to have it display a bit more obviously that Post A-1 in the in-line view was a replay to Post A. And when I expand to see multiple replys to one post, then they're all posted again in the in-line section.
Is there a setting for that or I ought to just get used to it?
thanks! I do like a lot of how the site works, it's just my preference to not see the replys twice.