Flame Dragon Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Seems pretty strong for Warrior tribal. Also interesting that she has Anafenza's title. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Mark says he's answering this card's relation to Anafenza in next Monday's column. I'd assume that Anafenza isn't in the set judging by the existence of this card or something along those lines.Cool card though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Abzan really sucks currently. This doesnt help much. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodrigo Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Abzan really sucks currently wat Abzan is the strongest color combination both on Standard and Modern (arguably) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Abzan really sucks currently. This doesnt help much.Wait, despite the fact that Abzan currently has the strongest card in Standard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Eh. I dont really know. Thing is, they seem to have really strong buffs etc But the cards themselves seem powerful but im not sure how well they synergise ealistically. Im probably wrong but i dont think they are THAT strong in standard ( I only talk about standard btw) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Eh.I dont really know.Thing is, they seem to have really strong buffs etcBut the cards themselves seem powerful but im not sure how well they synergise ealistically.Im probably wrong but i dont think they are THAT strong in standard ( I only talk about standard btw)Their synergy is vaguely less obvious than the ones in Jeskai and Sidisi Whip, but frankly, they have access to the best cards in Standard which kinda makes up for that. Playing a deck with lots of good matchups and very few really bad ones is in itself synergy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simping For Hina Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Eh. I dont really know. Thing is, they seem to have really strong buffs etc But the cards themselves seem powerful but im not sure how well they synergise ealistically. Im probably wrong but i dont think they are THAT strong in standard ( I only talk about standard btw) You realize the reason Abzan is good is because of the raw power in Standard just by the cards alone? There is no need for synergy when every card defines a game itself, really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/abzan-supremacy/ Just looked through a couple of lists and saw that they actually have alot of potential O.o Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simping For Hina Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 http://tappedout.net/mtg-decks/abzan-supremacy/ Just looked through a couple of lists and saw that they actually have alot of potential O.o You obviously DON'T play Standard. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 You obviously DON'T play Standard. And? I dont even play magic that much lol im not saying that the build was good, i was just looking at the card range they had reach of. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simping For Hina Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 And? I dont even play magic that much lol im not saying that the build was good, i was just looking at the card range they had reach of. Well, for one thing: You literally just said that Abzan was bad. And you said that the deck had potential. The build is probably better in the mirror than it is in the deck, but you're saying that this card is helpful in Abzan. This card is simply better in WB, without green. WB Warriors need this support, and Green is horrendous as an Aggro color for Warrior Tribal. And the experience matters, when identify the power level of cards because cards aren't defined by themselves. Cards themselves define games, but it is the power level of a collective deck that defines how strong it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Well, for one thing: You literally just said that Abzan was bad. And you said that the deck had potential. Yes, its called changing your mind and agreeing with people you idiot. The build is probably better in the mirror than it is in the deck, but you're saying that this card is helpful in Abzan. What card where? Please dont make weird arguments that i havent even said. This card is simply better in WB, without green. WB Warriors need this support, and Green is horrendous as an Aggro color for Warrior Tribal. I ever said otherwise? And the experience matters, when identify the power level of cards because cards aren't defined by themselves. Cards themselves define games, but it is the power level of a collective deck that defines how strong it is. Okay fair enough but i never said that experience didnt matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simping For Hina Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 You changed your mind, but you didn't agree with things. Using the word, "potential" is literally saying that the deck has the ability to become something. It is the format defining deck, I think it already is something. It doesn't care about the potential. ...The card that this topic is based on? Arashin Foremost? No, but you describe only one part of the card. Completely forgoing something else, and defining the card in a type of deck not suited for this card. You never did, but you came across as it did. There is nothing to go on here anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted March 5, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Mark says he's answering this card's relation to Anafenza in next Monday's column. I'd assume that Anafenza isn't in the set judging by the existence of this card or something along those lines. Cool card though. It would be weird to leave out 1 of the 5 Khans. Like, Zurgo's card feels very token, but it still there. This would have easily have been Anafenza and no one would have noticed. My guess is her role has changed. Wonder if BW Warriors will be good enough as a tier 2 deck in standard. This card shows they are trying, but I'm not sure of how close they are. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spinny Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 You changed your mind, but you didn't agree with things. Using the word, "potential" is literally saying that the deck has the ability to become something. It is the format defining deck, I think it already is something. It doesn't care about the potential. ...The card that this topic is based on? Arashin Foremost? No, but you describe only one part of the card. Completely forgoing something else, and defining the card in a type of deck not suited for this card. You never did, but you came across as it did. There is nothing to go on here anymore. 1. yes i said potential because i havent seen it for myself yet, so i cant automatically say "OMG THIS IS INSANE" and agree straight away. 2. You said "The build is probably better in the mirror than it is in the deck, but you're saying that this card is helpful in Abzan." I said that the card isnt that helpful, so what are you on about? 3. It is an Abzan card, I only really care about EDH and standard, and my intelligence on MTG doesnt expand to the far reaches that yours does, so how am i supposed to name every deck that every card goes in? You are getting angry for no reason. 4. How? Of course experience is important. I stated that i didnt have much and then explained on what i said. What are you on about. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LordCowCowCowCowCowCowCowCow Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 Time to take the dive into a new part of YCM. *ahem* Well all I can really say about this, is that Double Strike is a very strong ability, and Warriors are fairly prevelent so this seems to be a really good buff. Wish I could say more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simping For Hina Posted March 5, 2015 Report Share Posted March 5, 2015 1. yes i said potential because i havent seen it for myself yet, so i cant automatically say "OMG THIS IS INSANE" and agree straight away. 2. You said "The build is probably better in the mirror than it is in the deck, but you're saying that this card is helpful in Abzan." I said that the card isnt that helpful, so what are you on about? 3. It is an Abzan card, I only really care about EDH and standard, and my intelligence on MTG doesnt expand to the far reaches that yours does, so how am i supposed to name every deck that every card goes in? You are getting angry for no reason. 4. How? Of course experience is important. I stated that i didnt have much and then explained on what i said. What are you on about. 1. Saying that a deck has potential doesn't help anything, though. It is a blatant statement because it has nothing to back it up. Before you establish an argument about it having potential, you should look up the percentage because it will actually make your argument more concrete. By saying a deck has potential with no experience in a meta is never a statement that should be established or published. 2. You said the card won't help Abzan much. You never said it wasn't helpful. These are different sentences with different undergoing effects toward the ability of a card when predicting its usefulness. 3. I am not getting angry, I am trying to put you in the ability to understand a card since you are lacking the knowledge to identify a card in a certain archetype. I may be coming across as harsh because you don't have any experience to put forth saying that the card is either bad or good in a current standard environment because you do not know what the environment is. It is like being Ken Ham in an evolution debate. We all know how that was. 4. I am saying that your evaluation on a card is undeniably unhelpful and circumvented to the limited knowledge of how a card is in relativity to the format. I can't say that Tarmogoyf is a bad card because of how I see it if I don't know anything about the current environment it is in. Surely, Tarmogoyf looks like a shitty card that is weak, but there is more to the card than it being a 0/1 vanilla for two, and there is. What I am getting at is: You can't have an argument without background and you can't say anything about a card being good or bad in a format unless you know what the format consists of. Abzan is the strongest deck in Standard alongside RW Midrange/Control. This website might give you help to noting what the format has been for the past two months: http://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=ST . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bury the year Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 I'm just gonna ignore the crap above me, although you shouldn't knock the kid for not knowing Standard. Hell, I don't follow Standard either. (Although I do know through the grapevine how much Abzan's been wrecking.) Mark says he's answering this card's relation to Anafenza in next Monday's column. I'd assume that Anafenza isn't in the set judging by the existence of this card or something along those lines.Cool card though.Don't see how that disproves the existence of Anafenza or anything. Like Flame Dragon said, it'd be really weird to break the cycle of ex-khans. If R&D was going to do it anywhere, they'd do it with blue (leaving a blank spot for Narset), but I'm pretty sure Taigam's going to take her slot. Plus, this card's 003/264, which means Anafenza could easily slot in in front of her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 Don't see how that disproves the existence of Anafenza or anything. Like Flame Dragon said, it'd be really weird to break the cycle of ex-khans. If R&D was going to do it anywhere, they'd do it with blue (leaving a blank spot for Narset), but I'm pretty sure Taigam's going to take her slot. Plus, this card's 003/264, which means Anafenza could easily slot in in front of her. No, I'd find it weird if they broke the cycle as well, but they've certainly done similar (usually because of development issues) before and messed with our expectations. It's fairly likely that Anafenza is in the set than not, although it's clear that they're trying to be subversive in some manner here. It's a matter of seeing whether it's due to Development or Creative. Hopefully, Creative so we actually get an Anafenza card. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Simping For Hina Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 I am not trying to bash the kid. I am trying to tell him what is right. He said that he was referring to Standard went he said that Abzan sucks and that it had potential. If he was referring to Standard, his comment had no definition and was ambiguous. I was trying to say why. If I came across as mean or anything, it is because I don't take to being called a deranged idiot very well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gokai-Red Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 It would be weird to leave out 1 of the 5 Khans. Like, Zurgo's card feels very token, but it still there. This would have easily have been Anafenza and no one would have noticed. My guess is her role has changed. Wonder if BW Warriors will be good enough as a tier 2 deck in standard. This card shows they are trying, but I'm not sure of how close they are. Well to be fair Narset already broke the cycle...by being upgraded to a walker...and more than Anafenza, I wanna know what is Bear Puncher Daddy doing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flame Dragon Posted March 6, 2015 Author Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 Well to be fair Narset already broke the cycle...by being upgraded to a walker...and more than Anafenza, I wanna know what is Bear Puncher Daddy doing Narrates does make it a weird cycle, but I doubt they'd not show what happened to the former Khan to some capacity. One of the things they try to do is make people feel bad by their faction getting the short end of the stick. Having 1 of the former Khans not show up in Dragons would certainly be a big feel bad moment. They might not even punch bears anymore. We need to ask Doug whats happening with that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Rai Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 As it turns out, Anafenza is dead, so I was right on that one. On the other hand, she's now a Spirit. So, everybody wins!Oh, and Surrak punches dragons now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rodrigo Posted March 6, 2015 Report Share Posted March 6, 2015 Look at that flavor text. And people still wonder why I love this game so much. <3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.