Are your opponents wrong if they get upset by the fact that you don't concede, yet you still get mad that they have the win and don't just win? If you get upset with that kind of thing, just concede. Or don't get upset and hope for your opponent to have a misstep and pass through their attacks.
Either way, your opponent is just playing their game, as you are. If you think you are wasting your time, just concede.
BTW: I am almost sure that the loss of focus you have when you get upset with that kind of thing lowers your % more than the chance of your opponent have a brain fart AND you still win the game after that. And not to mention quality of life(!!). Getting salty is bad only for you. Relax, take it easy.
I remember when I first started MTGO playing pauper goblins, I lost some amount of games to clock. And it was monored aggro. So, my hint here is: learn the commands first. Be familiar with your hotkeys, because now they will save you from getting timed out and even in the future they will save you tons of time. And in your example, don't just drop leagues.
In the beginning you will probably not get positive EV out of leagues. So you are actually playing $25 to play 6 or 7 rounds (25 is the challenge on saturday, which I recommend you not to play in the beginning, as it takes a lot more of time because of rounds and you probably won't get positive EV in the beginning) or $12 to play 5 rounds (leagues). So if you drop, you will actually be paying $25 to play 3 games instead of 6.
PS.: Triggers you always have a chance to respond (unless they are split second, obv). The thing about stops, is that in certain stops you can play something proactively. When a trigger goes to stack, you will always have a chance to respond it. The usual stops to maximize your time are:
Opp: upkeep, beginning of combat (unless they are playing that goblin that creates a token at beginning of combat, then you would have to have at main), end step;
Yours: Main, attack, block, main (end step is usually depending on the situation).
My advice is: focus on learning the UI. MTGO doesn't look modern, or anything like that, but for me it's the perfect way: is simulates a MTG match, just like in paper. And though it has some bugs, they are usually minor ones.
It isn't easy to get some value out of it, but it isn't hard also. Using the EV calculator at Goatbots.com, with 52% win rate you already have positive EV out of leagues. The prizes for tournaments are pretty nice, you can play whenever you want, don't have to interact if you don't feel like it, don't have to travel, wait for rounds (unless on challenge - but then you can wait watching some nice stuff on your computer), etc. Every program has it's bugs, and I don't recall MTGO having any major bug ATM (the only one that freaks me out is mindbreak trap not showing what you already have selected, I once lost because I had a bad mouse).
I don't know if you will, but I love playing vintage on MTGO.
PS.: If you don't have decks yet, these are my recommendations to building:
Search for archetypes
Bot chain (the best by far IMO)
Bot chain - not as good but can have a better price
Site with prices for tons of bots - This one has lots of other features too
Rarely, but sometimes it's got the best price
Oh, and another thing I forgot is that when you buy/sell on paper, you have to either do tons of research, wait some time for the card to arrive, and sell only to players to don't lose a lot of value out of it. But when you are buying/selling online and search for a lot of bots, most of the cards' higher buy price (bot buying from you) is pretty close to the lowest selling price. So you usually don't lose a lot of value/time when you buy something, then realize you don't want it and sell it again.
Hey everyone! I'm kinda new to vintage, played legacy since 2013 and been playing vintage on MTGO since the VMA drafts made the P9 really cheap, so I guess my text will have some wrong ideas but I'd like some help to get to a new understanding of things here.
I got a concern about oath. Have you ever felt that griselbrand is no longer a good choice of creature for oath? I'm testing a 2 inferno titan 1 griselbrand build now with some conflicting results (been very good at challenges, but poor at leagues). Also, I've tested bryanpk's list on MTGO but got very poor results, probably because there's a lot more of complexity on it (specially for someone new to the format), and I really don't enjoy getting beaten out for 12 dollars each 5 games, so I decided to drop that and go to the more mainstream build of it.
I don't know how to list the deck here in a way that it stays organized, so I'll link the list I got kinda lucky last weekend with so that you have an idea what I've been working with: DECKLIST
One thing I noticed, is that post-board things usually go much slower for our opponents (hate in, business out usually), and oath end up becoming a really good tutor for our fatties with cage in play. I've been very lucky, on my probably 10 "caged oath" activations so far, I've always got to find what I needed (and could cast), the inferno titan. But that's a 33% chance of hitting griselbrand.
Other thing is that most of the times an inferno titan does the trick, and I'd even say that the % chance of winning with a inferno titan getting hit is higher than griselbrand. Maybe I'm taking too long and needing to get rid of the board when oath gets activated. I really don't have enough experience yet to say what's the matter here. But when I get griselbrand in hand that's pretty terrible. Except for the extra-long game or when you have 5 lands/moxen + lotus you just can't cast griselbrand, and it will always be a bad card to have in hand, as well as a bad card to discard to dack fayden (1 less target, as is inferno titan too). But inferno titan is ok to have in hand, because you can get to cast it a lot of times (most of the games, I'd say).
Maybe there's a better option (other creatures, or not doing this), but I guess I'll try dropping griselbrand for the 3rd inferno titan.
Other thing I've tried in the last challenge (which kinda worked out) was to drop the oaths against more controllish matchups. If we resolve a bomb, aka inferno titan or planeswalker, it's really hard to deal with, and sometimes oath does nothing with cage. Maybe it's better to make them have 4 dead cards (probably more, like nature's claim or whatever), and get to a more controlish "bomb-based" game. Maybe get more walkers and manarocks? Something in the sideboard? Have you ever dropped completely the oath plan for something else? Did that work out?
Other thing is, what do you think about punishing oath nowadays in vintage? It seems like a cool idea to get rid of aggro decks, planeswalkers, and to have some (very slow) inevitability, alongside it's card advantage engine with dack fayden and to kill excess of opponent's tokens or yours even when fighting against a oath deck to see who gets less creatures in play.
Sorry for the long and probably hard to understand text, but it's really hard to express myself when there are so many ideas combined with lack of knowledge about the format.
The deck is feeling pretty good. I started playing today and got 5-0, then got excited and played another league and... another 5-0!
2x Jeskai mentor
2x Show and Tell/Oath
1x blue belcher
1x monored moon (BM+magus)
Maindeck is feeling great, I lost only twice the first game, grudge is being awesome (being able to discard and costing 1 less is kinda 2 less cards to make it work when bazaaring, comparing to null rod). Pyroblast is also great, as people usually don't expect it and you use a 1 mana spell to protect a 2 mana spell or to stop your opponent to go off.
TL;DR: the red splash is really the way to go.
Seems like people aren't still understanding what ban/restriction is about. It's not about powerful cards. It's about the decks. It's always been.
Do anyone thing 'felidar guardian' was too strong for standard? The jeskai saheeli deck was.
Is paradoxical outcome too strong for the format? No, it's not.
Are decks that run gush and that would run more copies of gush balanced in the format? Yes, they are. Would they get opressive if gush was unbanned? Probably. The same goes to brainstorm. OH BUT MISSTEP... is usually run as a 4-of in those decks. Do you think those decks wouldn't run more copies of brainstorm? One of the closest card to recall to find relevant/strong cards.
Would you like to have jeskai mentor dominating the format again, or even other fair blue decks? I wouldn't. The format is each time more balanced in terms of numbers. We don't see any deck with more than 20% anymore, and if I'm not mistaken, when I started playing vintage (last year) it was 50% shops/jeskai. Now the 2 more dominant decks don't have 30% of the total results. And I think their win rate isn't as great as it was.
You ban/unban cards if you want to see the rise/fall (not the card) of decks. Sure, other decks can show up out of nowhere. But the least they have to do, is see what there is already. Bans should happen only when there's too much opression for a format. Unban should happen if you think no deck would become too unbalanced. There may be some cards worth unbanning, I don't know exactly all cards that are restricted/banned in the format to say "no card should be unbanned", but from those cards you are talking about, I don't see any that fit those requirements.
This deck is pretty good at changing gears. You usually go for the bazaar/survival hands, but depending on who you are facing, black lotus + vengevine turn 1 is enough having disruption in hand to stop what your opponent is doing.
If you got no cards in hand, bazaar on upkeep to mill yourself for 2 is usually worth doing. Also, if you have bazaar and have only 1 bad card for the turn, wait for the other turn to be able to activate bazaar and chose the best out of the 4 cards you will have at your disposal.
You have force of will and mental misstep, but you should use your forces will a lot of caution. By that I mean, try to analyze if the play you are trying to stop will make you lose the game, and what can happen if you let that one resolve. I say that because there are some counter-heavy decks that (almost) always want to counter good spells. But your forces are usually there for great spells.
Leovold is ridiculous. I've had some cases where it literally won the game by itself. Like, you're behind getting hit and then all of a sudden your opponents can't profitably cast spells. It's awesome against blue decks in general.
Think a lot about clock and disruption. All the time you have to calculate what is your clock against your opponent, and how your actions will change it. This is kinda basic with magic in general, but there are really relevant decisions on that matter with this deck than with any other I've played, so watch out for that. Things like, against PO or other blue combo deck you can deploy leovold and win in 2 turns after this or combo off and win in 1.
This deck is aggro-control-combo. Know your opponents and read the gamestate, so that you know how it's best to act against it.
You usually can't race combo decks. It's usually better to search for more disruptive hands than go with no disruption (leovold/lavinia are disruption). BUT you sometimes win on turn 2. If you have a hand like bazaar, hollow, rootwalue and 2 vengevine, you should obviously go for it. Even though vintage is busted, I think most of the times winning on turn 2 with no disruption is enough.
Also, this deck takes some time and effort until it brings you some results. It took me a lot of time to figure it out and start getting positive EV out of MTGO leagues, as I imagine that took other people here too. But the journey is pretty cool as well.
And most of all: don't get discouraged when you get "vintaged". Variance has a pretty big roll in vintage, and even though your skills will determine in the long run if you are successful, and decisions matter A LOT, sometimes your opponent will have turn 1 mentor with tons of stuff, or big outcomes, trinisphere, recall+snap+lotus+fow+waste+.... But it happens. And vintage has the best public I've seen on MTGO in regards of not getting salty against lucky opponents, because we can't blame people for how lucky they or we are.
In terms of quality from MTGO I think for a piece of software it's somewhere close to the best we can get at simulating a magic game. There are still some problems with the program itself but mostly with how much we can simulate a magic game with a software. I enjoy a lot it's interface, it's very easy, we have all the information we need, we can even buy more good-looking versions of cards if we want to. And considering the 'alternative' is MTGArena, sounds like MTGO is the best interface we will get and for me it's not a bad thing.
You said the things you lose on digital magic, but there are lots and lots of things we win. For me being able to play whenever I want and without losing time (a.k.a. playing 12 matches divided however you want in the same amount of time as a 4 rounds champs). But you guys are very different from me in terms of the paper magic feeling. Maybe because I couldn't afford vintage and the most iconic cards in magic, and even though we had FoW and dual lands I didn't have that feeling with my legacy decks (which I sold).
I, as someone who dropped paper magic to play only digital magic am probably very biased for it. But anyways, I enjoy a lot MTGO, and for me considering every aspect, even if we took the financial side out of the equation, the magic online experience for me is way better than paper magic. I've made a very big post not so long ago defending digital magic, and I don't want to repeat that as I know this is kind of different. But I just felt like MTGO deserved this defense.
Being able to go to your pc and play it when you don't have many other things to do and you are in the mood instead of having to play when you have lots of other things to do (FNMs, weekend champs) and you are not always on the mood. I mean... I rather play MTGO when I'm in good mood and want to, than play paper tournaments only when I'm able to.
I've played both approaches, fow and deafening silence. Silence seems better against combo, but having fow increases by a lot our blue matchup. Played the playoffs with BUG survival and got 4-2 (9th place -.-) , fow helped a lot more than FoV would have.
Seems like there are less combo out there and I don't think it's worth playing white for it. 4 Leovolds between maindeck and sb seemed pretty good too. Too much blue out there, and with fow leo is a house.
It's not worth it selling out and using rental, you will literally just lose money. Unless you want to try different decks every week.
It will probably take a lot of time until arena end up having all the cards pool. And I don't think they will shut down mtgo until there. They know there are A LOT of people that play different formats than standard and limited that would rather play anything else than waste time playing standard. I don't think arena needs the player base from mtgo. And honestly I think the 'profit per capita' of mtgo is bigger than arena's.
I've been impressed by this deck and by how slow blue decks (except for outcome and storm) are. It's pretty different being on this side of the table, and now I get why it was so hard to beat this deck when I was on URw mentor.
I'm usually on the mulligan until survival or bazaar. It's pretty hard to have a decent speed without them. Unless you know who you are playing against (g2/g3), then you can mulligan to some hate or insane explosiveness against outcome (thalia + chalice for 0 on turn 1 just won me a 6 turn game with no other disruption, sometimes it's enough), some roadblocks and/or castable survival against shops, and against normal blue decks I guess the same as before (survival or bazaar)
I've tried kaluma's list with birds, and I liked it a lot. There are only some cards I will change, I'm just not sure for what. Manglehorn sounds nicer than ingot chewer against PO but the 3 mana requirement really hurts. And I feel like outcome is already a favorable matchup since there are so many angles we attack from and the 1-ofs are usually to be tutored by survival, which would make them cost 2 and 4, and that's a huge difference. I also didn't like spell queller, as we usually can or are close to win the game with survival and 4 mana left, it was very clunky at times and sometimes it just died to removal. I also missed noble's exalted trigger a few times, and as the deck that have wasteland and we should bring lots of grudges against is a good matchup (shops), I think noble would be better.
Overall it's a pretty cool and good deck, went 3-2 and 5-0 in my first 2 attempts with it and had tons of fun, I'm looking forward to play more of it!
@spook Time walk is a funny card in this deck. It can be the best or the worst card in some situations. I for instance don't play it, so I'll tell you as one of those weird people that don't play this power card. Everything I'll say is from my experience (I didn't get any insights from other people to decide it) and as there are other few people that also don't run it, may be the right reasons.
The problem about timewalk is the beginning of the game with bazaar. It's a 2 mana card that doesn't do anything if not in the right conditions (with pressure or more mana/things to do in hand). Also, it doesn't do anything in the GY. And it's a 2 mana non-creature card.
When you are bazaaring, you are essentially losing card advantage. You lose at least a turn of land drop and some card advantage, which should be compensated with explosiveness. And sometimes, it's not. Sometimes it depends on leaving some creature in hand to trigger vengevine, and when you are on turn 2 or 3 with 2 mana available and still no vengevine triggered, you have to leave it to hardcast some creatures. And when you do that you will usually have 1, 2 or no card left in hand. In order to do that, you would need to discard time walk, which would have done nothing at all in the game.
In my experience, when you play non-creature 2 drops you expect it to have an immediate impact, most likely a very strong impact (such as stony silence, thorn, and obviously survival). When you are playing a deck with thalia, thorn, bazaar, 14 mana-producing lands (which in this spot start being played from turn 2), moxen and spirit guide, you should really only play non-creature expensive spells when it has a strong impact in the game. Obviously you play survival which fits in a "expensive non-creature spell", but that's a part of the game plan, the 5-8 slots for enabler in the deck. And even survival itself, when you start the game with bazaar, it's usually not really good, when you get to play it as you need some amount of green mana for it to be good and starting the game with bazaar usually leave you in a green-mana-shortage for the rest of the game.
Obviously, I may be wrong. But when I played time walk it was always bad (I played it for 2 or 3 leagues only, so I don't mean to say it's always bad). And when I stopped playing time walk, I sometimes missed it, but mostly for not drawing it in the late game when I had already some board presence. I never missed it on the early game, which IMO is the most sensitive part of the game, where you really define if you will or not win the game.
Looks like green is pretty expensable and the decklist leaned towards the red hatebears deck, which is kind of a natural course for this kind of deck IMO. I'd recommend to cut green entirely and play blood moon. It's really an insane card in vintage. It stops bazaar, blue decks usually play only 1 basic land (which won't do much on it's own without moxen), against shops it can slow down and hit the factories. It was always awful for me when people played blood moon against me in vintage, when playing BUG, URw and also with survival.
Chalice sounds great here, playing it for 0 on the play to prevent mana acceleration or for 1 against blue decks on the draw. And cavern of souls to prevent FoW on the hatebears sounds pretty legit too.
Also, I'd play at least black lotus for potential of an explosive turn 1. It can be awkward to draw it later in the game with null rod, which is the reason I wouldn't recommend moxen in general, but a turn 1 moon, or scab-clan, or eidolon + null rod, sounds pretty bad for vintage decks to deal with.
Sorry for my intrusion, but I really can't understand lists when they are not ordered, I think that'd help a lot for people to understand the deck. Here's my sugestion:
2 Snapcaster Mage
2 Niv-Mizzet, Parun
2 Young Pyromancer
OTHER SPELLS (5)
2 Blood Moon
1 Time Walk
2 Lightning Bolt
2 Mana Drain
1 Mindbreak Trap
2 Red Elemental Blast
4 Force of Will
3 Mental Misstep
DRAW ENGINE (12)
1 Ancestral Recall
1 Dig Through Time
1 Merchant Scroll
1 Gitaxian Probe
1 Treasure Cruise
2 Dack Fayden
1 Ral, Izzet Viceroy
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
MANA SOURCES (20)
1 Strip Mine
1 Library of Alexandria
4 Volcanic Island
3 Polluted Delta
3 Flooded Strand
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Black Lotus
2 Grafdigger's Cage
4 Tormod's Crypt
2 Shattering Spree
3 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Energy Flux
BTW: I think blood moon in vintage is hugely underrated. It's good against ALL the decks in the format (against some, it's insane). I've played against BM with survival and jeskai, and with both decks blood moon was a nightmare to face.
A huge threat like Niv-Mizzet (which to me sounds like a better version of sphinx) sounds pretty fun to play. I just don't think the manabase is well suited to play it. It's not only 4UU, but it's RRRUUU. And since you have only lotus and 2 moxen, I'm not sure it would come soon enough in most games.
I was going to do a long post, but JosefK's seems pretty spot on to me.
Sometimes I see myself being salty (internally, because I think it's extreme unpolite to complain to your enemies due to variance), and when I start getting salty I just go back to other formats I'm more excited about at the moment, because saltiness is like quicksand. The more salty you get, the worse you play, and the saltier you get. And when I switch formats (usually only deck doesn't make the cut) it's kind of a brand new start. And that works pretty well for me. Sometimes I go through several formats until I settle for some time somewhere. And I think sometimes people forget that saltiness is bad for everyone, and that when you get like that, you have to do something about it. Because it's just plain stupidity to not avoid saltiness.