Magic the Gathering explained

[Mr. MR]

This is the first of many posts. If you have questions please comment.

The first thing you need to know about MTG is the five colors. Those colors are Green, White, Blue, Black, and Red. Each color is associated with certain elements and other things. For example Blue is associated with wind and water while red is associated with fire, lightning, and sometimes earth. And Green represents life while Black represents death. It is important to understand the nature of each color so you can better understand how to build your deck.

Each color is has a land. Lands are the most important cards in a deck as you have to use them to cast spells. There are five basic lands (one for each color). Those five are Forest, Plane, Island, Swamp, and Mountain. Each land produces a colored mana for what color it is associated with.
Forest = Green
Plains = White
Island = Blue
Swamp = Black
Mountain = Red

 

[Mush]

I used to LOVE MTG back in the turn of the century.

But then it just got silly, with powers of the cards spiralling with every new deck. and then the silly rules about cards that remain outside the board for certain time, untill triggered and so on.

So, the game is not fun anymore. Too complicated cards, and old decks are useless.

But I still play occasionally, using the old mercadian decks and the rules of that era. For nostalgia.

 

[Mr. MR]

I haven't played Magic in a long time. I also have a ton of cards from the mercadian era. The people I play with have no card restrictions and it's purely for fun. Everything from Alpha to whatever the new sets are called. You can get some ridiculous combos by having such a pool to draw from.

 

[Splash_King]

So, the game is not fun anymore. Too complicated cards, and old decks are useless.

That's just how all TCGs are. Things have t' grow, both card effects and ruling. Potential strategies and combos need to grow more potent, naturally replacing the old BnB top tier guff through the ol' law of "power creep".

... Though it certainly is not an inherently good thing. I know nothin' of MtG, but Yugioh's own power creep in recent year, combined with the neglect from Konami as a whole led to the downfall of the TCG IMO.

 

[Mush]

What I liked about the old decks, like Urza's Saga and Mercadia, is that they had a very strong narrative behind them. There was a great story and the cards were based on that story.

This made making decks and playing with them very satisfying, because you were playing the story.

In my opinion, they did not need to make cards more powerfull. They could just have made better stories, and based new decks to those stories. But, alas, today's MTG decks have really boring stories behind them...

I did not like tournament play. Because in torunaments, people would have killer decks that would play themselves, without the player having to think at all. Repetitive cards, backed by repetitive magic effects, that's a tournament deck all over.
In friendly games, you can build the deck around some story, and this makes it fun.

 

[Mr. MR]

I know what you mean.

Although the Urza block was one of the most overpowered series ever in MTG.

 

[Splash_King]

In my opinion, they did not need to make cards more powerfull.

Fact > opinion. A TCG has to grow by the law of power creep. If a deck based on the first expansion or two remains competitively viable many expansions later, that means newer cards are weaker or said early expansion(s) are retardedly broken. No one buys weaker cards. Ban lists exist for a reason. In particular I actually commend MtG's practice of always keepin' the format changing, banning previous sets. It is financially exhausting for the players, but it forces the card designers to create some real strategical depth and keep tabs on balance since they're constantly creating new formats... lest they let the TCG go to ****.

I did not like tournament play. Because in torunaments, people would have killer decks that would play themselves, without the player having to think at all. Repetitive cards, backed by repetitive magic effects, that's a tournament deck all over.

This is a common mentality amongst the casual, anti-tournament TCG players... and I wholly dislike it since it's disrespectful to tourneyplayers like myself... not to mention this pro-casual ideal holds absolutely zero merit. Skill defeats "autopilot" every single time. The most broken of decks, for example, Yugioh's "TeleDAD" can very much be copy-paste from player to player and require little skill to execute. But there's a difference between base execution and proper execution. A low-level player isn't gonna use the same deck against a tournament champion and have so much as a chance.

There's always a way to make a broken deck even moreso, and it's accomplished through two methods: building and execution. Thinking up even more obscure or complex, original strategies isn't done by an idiot or a scrub. Noobs don't discover broken things by accidents, pros "in the lab" do. As I mentioned with execution earlier, a pro will play their cards flawlessly and as efficiently as possible. An above average player might waste a single land here or there; that could literally be their downfall in high level play. Execution is everything, no matter how good your deck is. So-called autopilot decks always have a counterpick sort of deck, an anti-meta counter. If a player who doesn't deserve to win a tournament encounters a deck which has a favorable match-up, their autopilot strategies won't do **** for 'em. Whereas a pro might be able t' still swing the match in their favor if they play their cards right.

Furthermore, in a good TCG, flat-out broken decks that have no counterpick and are better than literally everythin' else available is very rare. After more than a decade, you can count these types of bullshit decks seen in competitive Yugioh on only one hand. All of which had their core combination banned forevermore within only a few months of the discovery. The first (legendary) broken combination was what brought about Yugioh's first ban list, actually.

 

[Mush]

YugiOh is not known to me. It's probably very different to play in tournaments than MTG.

So you cannot really criticise the field of MTG tournaments by your knowledge of YUgiOh tourneys.

In MTG, you can build decks that have monsters very similar to each other. Add spells that stranghten these monsters, and makes them attack more often, and thus you have a strong offensive deck that will do very well against most opponents. And you do not need to think while playing this deck, since the cards are rather obvious and you never have a card in your hand that cannot be put to table straight away.

Of course, most tournament players use such decks, or used to do so. This means that the plays would be very short, with one or the other player gaining the upper hand very soon, and sinking the other in short order.

I know the goal of TCG is to sell more cards, and thus the new decks are always a tad more powerfull than decks that came before. But to me, that is just cheap commercialism. The easy way to make money.

There have been card games that have not spiralled with new decks. In them, you could use old cards with new cards. They did this by introducing new armies and war machine types and so on on the new decks.

 

[Splash_King]

YugiOh is not known to me. It's probably very different to play in tournaments than MTG.

So you cannot really criticise the field of MTG tournaments by your knowledge of YUgiOh tourneys.

Incorrect. I'm talkin' 'bout TCGs in general, using Yugioh solely as examples to support my statements since it's the TCG I'm most versed in. I've extensively studied the Pokemon TCG's competitive scene way back in the day of haymakers 'n Blastoise abuse (a deck archetpye which has been revived as of late... oh, the nostalgia). Duel Masters also garnered my attention for a short while, though as it died competitively so too did my own interest. My claims and statements apply to TCGs as a whole and are very much valid to MtG. So yes, I can comment on competitive MtG accurately since my thoughts have been generalized to the competitive mechanics shared by essentially every single TCG.

Also, you said yourself ya weren't ever a tourneygoer. Your commentary on competitive MtG is less valid than mine, even.

In MTG, you can build decks that have monsters very similar to each other. Add spells that stranghten these monsters, and makes them attack more often, and thus you have a strong offensive deck that will do very well against most opponents. And you do not need to think while playing this deck, since the cards are rather obvious and you never have a card in your hand that cannot be put to table straight away.

Of course, most tournament players use such decks, or used to do so. This means that the plays would be very short, with one or the other player gaining the upper hand very soon, and sinking the other in short order.


Yugioh has been the same way since '09. Aggro has been champion for a very long time, and in just one turn victory can be established with a lockdown deck and a great initial draw. One Turn Kill decks (the namesake is an accurate depiction of their function) also crop up occasionally 'til the ban list kicks in. There's no TCG more offensively oriented than certain Yugioh formats, I know from personal experience.

That aside, any TCG with a relatively skewed offensive-defensive deck ratio towards the former is the same way. Ya don't get a large focus on one or the other unless one is more viable than the other. That means MtG archetypes built around offense are either more consistent or have more potential overall than defensive builds. Blame Wizards for not balancing defensive decks better, not the tournament players.

I know the goal of TCG is to sell more cards, and thus the new decks are always a tad more powerfull than decks that came before. But to me, that is just cheap commercialism. The easy way to make money.

It's the only way to make money. As I said previous, power creeps are a necessary evil in everything competitive, strategy games especially. When it comes to a TCG in particular, power creeps are akin to economical stimulus: if demand for the new grows stagnant due to a lack of usefulness, and there's no progress made in new things gettin' better, sales drop off. Demand for the old skyrockets, and you get a monopoly.

It's better to have new, overly powerful deck types than to use the same things for an eternity. You might not agree with me now, but play competitively for three years in that environment and ya assuredly will once things get mighty stale 'n boring.

There have been card games that have not spiralled with new decks. In them, you could use old cards with new cards. They did this by introducing new armies and war machine types and so on on the new decks.

Prove it. Links.

debatext

 

[Mush]

Never liked people who are obsessed about winning. I mean they just think about the winning so much, they are unable to enjoy the game.

Worst lot are those people who only play against weak players and beginners, just so they get easy win. And then they gloat, as if winning a noob is something to brag about... Sad people.

I rather lose than win. Especially against newcomers.
-You see, by letting the newcomer to get a win, I will make him happy, and hooked to the game.
But if I beat him in his first games, then he will be discouraged, and might never play the game again.

Of course, when you let a newcomer win, you have still make it hard battle. And you have to make it look as if he won by being better than you. Not easy!

But there are some easy tricks to do this:
1.do not use counter cards.
2.play with a commercial prebuild deck.
3.keep good cards in your hand and pretend you have nothing to play.

And in tabletop wargames:
-'forget' to use some of your artillery units. This happens anyway, to veterans, so it will not be suspicious.
-use only low lever spells.
-'forget' that your general has a sword of ultimate slaying.

There is nothing so satisfying as giving a good, but hard fought victory to a new player, in both card table, and in tabletop wargame. The newbie will glow for days!

 

[Splash_King]

Never liked people who are obsessed about winning. I mean they just think about the winning so much, they are unable to enjoy the game.

There's a difference between an obsession with winning, and an obsession with competition. Would you call a professional-anyone, regardless of their profession, a bigoted try-hard? I sincerely hope not, as that particular mindset is just as bigoted.

I can use myself as an example. Back when I played vBrawl and most-every Brawl player on Wiichat was an inferior player, I almost-never selected the characters I play. Instead, I'd pick some strange character I've no idea how t' properly play (ohai craptain failcon) and derp about t' have more fun than an easy three-stock victory.

In regards t' Yugioh, I myself was a huge user of Billy Decks when not playin' in a tournament. I had the nickname Kaiba for the longest time since, even after Blue-Eyes themed decks became utterly useless, I kept on usin' 'em. :lol:

Worst lot are those people who only play against weak players and beginners, just so they get easy win. And then they gloat, as if winning a noob is something to brag about... Sad people.

I concur. People that intentionally play with players who don't stand a chance (specifically in an online environment) are the reason why games die out and gain an elitist-focused community after said game has been out for awhile. When playin' online multiplayer for anythin', I actually put it on my schedule to stomp the newbie-stompers and put the jerks in their place. Make 'em rage quit (through fair play, mind you) 'n all that. Once they leave the scrubs alone, I'm soon to follow.

I rather lose than win. Especially against newcomers.
-You see, by letting the newcomer to get a win, I will make him happy, and hooked to the game.
But if I beat him in his first games, then he will be discouraged, and might never play the game again.

Ya can't baby someone 'less they're a kid... and outside of lettin' the youngin's win, I disagree with that. A lot of players who freak out when they lose will still play a game regardless; case in point, bad CoD players. Many more players don't care if they lose, 'specially to some player with a million prestiges next t' their name. Newbies aren't entitled to victories when playin' against experts. Any newbies which don't realize this are either a self-entitled brat or an idiot.

There is nothing so satisfying as giving a good, but hard fought victory to a new player, in both card table, and in tabletop wargame. The newbie will glow for days!

I disagree. For me, there's nothin' like an amazing back-and-forth best of five that goes down t' the wire, regardless of the victor.

... We can't agree on much, can we? :lol:

derptext

 

[Mush]

I am sorry, but your last post did not have a weblink in it. So I did not read it.

No weblink, no read.

I mean seriously, without a link, how can you prove you have actually played Yo-Gi-Doh!
eh? what? whatsaythee???

 

[Splash_King]

Opposition's immature retorts are the prerequisite for one's victory.

also "you-gay-hoes" is funnier

 

[Mush]

Opposition's immature retorts are the prerequisite for one's victory.

also "you-gay-hoes" is funnier

*witty retort*

 

[Splash_King]

That wasn't witty at all.

... Or on topic.