Team Meandeck, Team Serious
@Sovarius You can consider that, but its objectively misleading and false. The rules explicitly DO allow me to concede to someone to propel them into the top 8, or ID with someone to put us both in (at the expense of another player). The black-and-white rules-oriented approach leaves no question: Matt was 100% within his rights, full stop.
Saying that the rules do not work the way you'd like is fair. That's an opinion you can have. Most of your arguments are more along the lines of what you consider ethical within an event, not about how the rules work.
@spook You should probably send a PM if only he is allowed to answer. When you post it in public, everyone can see it and respond.
Also, he doesn't owe you anything; he can legally concede if he wants. If those other people are mad, they should have played better and lost less matches.
My list was pretty similar to Sam's, except strictly better because I cut his bad cards for good ones. List here:
3 Ancient Tomb
1 Cavern of Souls
4 Flooded Strand
1 Library of Alexandria
1 Polluted Delta
1 Tolarian Academy
1 Ancestral Recall
3 Auriok Salvagers
1 Black Lotus
1 Dig Through Time
1 Engineered Explosives
4 Force of Will
1 Hope of Ghirapur
2 Jace, the Mind Sculptor
1 Mana Crypt
3 Mental Misstep
1 Mox Emerald
1 Mox Jet
1 Mox Pearl
1 Mox Ruby
1 Mox Sapphire
1 Snapcaster Mage
1 Sol Ring
3 Swords to Plowshares
2 Thirst for Knowledge
1 Time Walk
4 Trinket Mage
4 Walking Ballista
2 Containment Priest
1 Ethersworn Canonist
1 Grafdigger's Cage
1 Honor the Fallen
2 Hurkyl's Recall
2 Mindbreak Trap
1 Pithing Needle
1 Ravenous Trap
1 Tormod's Crypt
Andy's right, of course. And I don't just say that because this is his site and he can edit my post to agree with him!
You don't have to be friends with everyone here, but being civil is a good thing. There's no reason to insult someone when you disagree with them; that's not edgy or correct or the only way to get a point across. In fact, it's probably the least convincing way to get a point across.
Whenever you want to complain about being "politically correct" or whatever, try this mental exercise: replace those words with "being respectful and considerate". I think you'll have a harder time arguing that sort of behavior is reasonable if you ask yourself that before you make a post calling players names.
Anything Andy does to keep TMD from being like twitter, or the comments section of your local newspaper, or 4chan, or any other part of the vast cesspool of internet discussion that exists, is a noble cause and should be encouraged.
Hey, here's the BUG deck Josh played. He and I built it at Nat's table the night before. It's based on my Champs deck from last year, which in turn was heavily based on Justin Becker's list from (I think?) NYSE that year:
Creatures (12)3x Deathrite Shaman 3x Snapcaster Mage 2x Trygon Predator 2x Baleful Strix 2x Gurmag Angler
Control Package (16)4x Force of Will 3x Mental Misstep 1x flusterstorm 2x Cabal Therapy 1x Null Rod 1x Dismember 3x Abrupt Decay 1x Crucible of Worlds
Draw Package (10)1x Ancestral Recall 1x Brainstorm 1x Dig Through Time 1x Ponder 1x Treasure Cruise 1x Time Walk 2x Painful Truths 1x Demonic Tutor 1x Jace TMS
Mana (22)4x Verdant Catacombs 1x Misty Rainforest 1x Polluted Delta 3x Underground Sea 2x Tropical Island 1x Bayou 1x Swamp 4x Wasteland 1x Stripmine 1x Mox Emerald 1x Mox Jet 1x Mox Sapphire 1x Black Lotus
Sideboard3x Grafdigger’s Cage 2x Nature’s Claim 1x Engineered Explosives 1x Virulent Plague 1x Dread of Night 1x Tormod’s Crypt 1x Forest 1x Ravenous Trap 1x Abrupt Decay 1x Dismember 1x Murderous Cut 1x Null Rod
I watched most of his games and we talked about the deck after. We agreed therapy was bad and would cut it. I'd like to see a third Strix, that card is great right now. JTMS was also an underperformer. I might try -2 therapy, -1 JTMS, +1 strix, +2 thoughtseize right now and see how that plays. I'd also like to play a Malicious Affliction, maybe in the sideboard over the murderous cut. Snuff out would also be fine there. I think Josh just found a Cut first so that was that.
They will never test it, but if the community tests it and it turns out fine (which is what the Commander Rules Committee does!) they might respect our testing.
God I hope not. Commander is a complete joke of a format; I don't know why anyone would want vintage to aspire to that.
I posted in the other thread, but basically: you can't make me read things I don't want to read. You can try to force my by not building features, but then I'll either skip over stuff manually, or I'll make a chrome extensions or something to delete the text. Either way, there is no world where I have to engage with people I don't want to engage with.