Changes in the Paradigm

This blog post is a short one, but I have to post this still;

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/mm/metamorphosis

If you haven't read the article linked above, please do take your time to read it! It's going to affect the way how Magic: The Gathering will be like after this year!

Before going further, please please read the article! It's important that you do before you join the discussion!

Read? Okay, let's begin!

In summary, 

• Core set 2016 is the last core set of MTG 
• Khans of Tarkir will be the last 3-expansion block of MTG Starting 2015; All expansions will be in 2-blocks (Large-Small). 
• The First Set of Each Block (the Fall and Spring Sets) will cause a rotation in standard format. But, Standard format will be 3 blocks instead of 2 blocks.

Thoughts?

Personally, I think this is a rather interesting change for MTG for 2 reasons. 

• Standard is getting stale!!!!

Yes, you heard me right! Standard is getting very stale with the long wait before a new set is introduced or rotation. Right now as we speak, the rotation happens once per year and by the time, a lot of things may happen, have already happened! Cards that was good or are good, will see their prices fixed until post-rotation or when the new set is introduced. At that point of time and in my opinion, it's a very boring and long wait for the next expansion.

Core Sets are meant for beginners to jump in, but in the more recent sets, I realize that the power level of these cards are not really meant for beginners. The mechanics re-introduced may be simple, but the synergy and the level of play needed to pilot the decks are not exactly beginner-friendly. Just look at the more recent sets' combat trick mechanics and/or abilities. It's not really something that I'll know if I were to just start MTG.

Now, back to point, if Core Sets are really for beginners, then what about more experienced players? They would want to see more new cards and recurring mechanics/cards to see more "action" in the constructed scene. Assuming Core Sets are bust for them, They're gonna be waiting from March to September (~7 months!) just to see new cards that suits their taste of play. 

Now I'm not saying that Core Sets are bad, I loved Core Sets 2010, 2012, 2013 and 2015. It's just that I know some people who don't share my views and disregarded core sets entirely and also, if we were to look at it in another way, most Core Sets actually have some of the best rares and mythics across the expansions. (Titans Cycle anyone? Mutavault? Oh wait.... that's a reprint). However, where are the even better rares and power cards come from? The Expansion Blocks! Now if we are concerned about power cards, then it would make more sense to see more Expansion blocks per year, right? In actual fact, if we are concerned about getting beginners a level to pick-up MTG, then the core set won't need to be as powerful as what the more recent Core Sets are giving, and hence, we have a paradox isn't it?

• Curbing the price hike

Look at the "Return to:" Expansions. Scars of Mirrodin gave us more Artifact love, Ravnica gave us back our valued Shocklands! (Modern players REJOICE!) Also, Innistrad Block gave us some of the most powerful cards ever printed.

Wurmcoil Engine: Destroying decks since 2012

But, let's think about this for a minute. If a card is that great, surely the price will match the demand, right? If that's the case, what are the options to curb the price of the card? Banning it won't help as it means a group won't use it, it's defeating its purpose isn't it? Alternatively, it means it must see reprint sometime in the future. But, time is limited and so is the window to introduce new cards/reprints. 

Sure, we can do things like Modern Masters, Vintage Masters or even Commander's Arsenal as premium products, but realistically speaking, it actually won't help much to reduce the price if the print is so limited. If we were to open the floodgates to be introduced for mass print, then the price will plummet faster than expects. A good example? Look at Elspeth, Knight Errant. After being reprinted in the Modern Event Deck, her price plummet from $30 a piece to about half that price now. Well, I mean that if price isn't what of concerned, sure, that's my point isn't it?

In relation to the first point, if we see more new cards, there will be bound to have replacement cards or the rise of new archetypes. This will make Standard format faster-paced than it is now, and with the introduction of new cards and a slightly faster rate, reprints will make a run very soon. Sheesh... I sure hope to pick up some modern staples soon.... 

As said, this post is a rather short one, but please do leave comments below whether you agree with me that the re-vamp of the Expansion cycles and standard format is a good refresh. If not, why not? 

Modern Gameplay Review: 19 August 2014

Back with another gameplay coverage! 

Deck: 5C Ally Reanimator
Same deck, just that I made some adjustments to the sideboard. I also changed a few stuff around to give the deck more flexibility to survive against more decks.

Changes to the deck:
+4x Spell Pierce
+1x Ondu Cleric
+1x Island
+1x Swamp

-1x Blood Crypt
-1x Watery Grave
-3x Path to Exile
-1x Angel of Glory's Rise

Boseiju, Who Shelters All (Relegated to SB)
+1x Pithing Needle
+1x Sowing Salt
+1x Stony Silence
+2x Wear // Tear

-1x Aven Mindcensor
-2x Choke
-1x Engineered Explosives
-2x Kitchen Finks

Reason for the changes is simple; I'm playing combo and my priority is to protect my combo. Spell Pierce does the job well and really hits anything and everything. Except creatures of course, which well my allies are there to block.

Ondu Cleric is there to to help sustain the life count if the game goes too aggressive against my favor. Also, it hits burn decks. Any amount of life-gain foils their plans, really. 

Also, since I'm playing 1x Ondu Cleric, Kitchen Finks may not really be needed in the sideboard against burn/RDW match-ups. 

From the previous game experiences, my other sideboard cards like Choke and Engineered Explosives has very limited uses or restricted uses. Hence, they are replaced by more versatile cards like Pithing Needle and Stony Silence.

Boseiju, Who Shelters All was relegated to the sideboard as I didn't want too many tapped mana source when it comes into play. Also, it's irrelevant in many match-ups outside control matches.

Okay, so the deck is set, let's go! Let's see how I fare this time round!

Round 1: Melira Pod (0-2)

Game 1:

The first game is quick. I lost to the deck due to an early game disruption by Scavenging Ooze. It kept feeding on my graveyard, pumping itself and also, no combo pieces are drawn. Basically I have unlocked a new definition of "feeding" my opponent... The game actually ended up with my opponent having more life than what he started out with while wiping my board clean.

Game 2:

The second game saw more action; I went aggressive with the deck, managing to set up the combo pieces. However, the oppoent managed to activated the Redcap/Melira combo, giving him the win to the game and match. It was 1 more turn to activate my combo and no sideboard cards are coming out. to help disrupt the deck. Double whammy!

Round 2: Jund (1-2)

Game 1: 

Took the game by managing to pull off combo once, milling the opponent 42 cards (6 x7 triggers). He had Tarmogoyf and a few other creatures like Dark Confidant to put pressure on me. My creatures held back the attacks for awhile, sacrificing a few. 

Eventually, I manage to reanimate Angel of Glory's Rise, bringing back 6 Allies with her, triggering the finisher. If the mill doesn't kill the opponent, the next combat step would kill him.

Game 2:

Having a rich graveyard is not the best idea against any deck running Tarmogoyf... My opponent grew a 6/7 Goyf and that is a lot of pressure just by one card! 

Now, imagine being mana-jammed with only 1 vivid meadow. no shocks, reflecting pool or fetchlands to help filter the colours for 3 turns, while the opponent just landed threat after threat.. 

My hand had Spell Pierce and Rakdos Charm, which the latter could be used as a last-minute act of sacrifice to reduce the P/T of Tarmagoyf! Too bad for land and mana-jamming took the game down to the opponent's favour.

Game 3:

I had an aggressive start, but I eventually lost steam when the opponent's Tarmogoyf has gotten too big (5/6 - 6/7 again!). I managed to pull off the combo, but I did not win because there are no Halimar Excavators; hence, no milling win con. 

The beatdown strategy with Angel of Glory's Rise managed to reduce the opponent's life to 4. On his upkeep, Dark Confidant revealed an Abrupt Decay to reduced his life total to 2 life. However, the Abrupt Decay was drawn in time as that card and 2 other bolts removed off most of my bigger creatures and Chandra, Pyromaster stopped my blockers from blocking for that turn (My Spellskite was removed by a bolt after redirecting Pyromaster's ability in an earlier stage of the game). I was in the red zone at about 5 life or less at that point of time. So the last hit determined the victor. Unfortunately, not this time round.

Round 3: RUG Twin (2-1)

Game 1: 

Game 1 was rather fast. I combo-ed off at around turn 5-6. Also, I have to say it. Spell Pierce saved the day! It never felt so good to actually counter Splinter Twin on turn 4, which prevented the twin combo. It was because of the timely Spell Pierce, that I won this game.

(Note: I clearly remembered reanimating Angel of Glory's Rise twice in a single game, which led me to victory due to board dominance. I cannot exactly remember which round I pulled that off, but I assumed to be for this round. If I got my facts wrong, the explanation for Round 2: Jund, Game 1 is a direct exchange for this game. Other facts as mentioned are as far as possible, accurate to what/how was played.)

Game 2: 

For some reason, my deck decided to play aggressive this time round (for the 3rd-4th time alr!) In the end, I got played out by the opponent's beat down strategy with Huntmaster of the Fells, Deceiver Exarch, and Pestermite. Most of my creatures were either removed from battlefield by Huntmaster of the Fells or tapped out by Deceiver Exarch or Pestermite.  I had 1 or 2 combo pieces out but I wasn't ready to pull the combo to turn the tide.

Game 3:

This game saw my deck in a very defensive play. I started and tried to hold on to Spell Pierce on my opening hand as an immediate answer against Splintered Twin. In the end I used it against a Flame Slash, targeting my Spellskite but opponent paid the penalty cost. But at that point, we were at turn 5, so for the first 4 turns, I had Spellskite and 1 or 2 creatures which went for the beat-down option. Eventually I took the risk and combo-ed off 2 turns later, gaining the board advantage and mill win con when he tapped out for something (can't remember what he tried to do, but he tapped out on his turn, giving me an open play). It turns out he didn't draw the Splinter Twin combo.

Bounty loot: Engineered Explosives! 

 A few pointers for this week;

• The deck can go aggressive when the card odds permit. Most of the time I rather play the combo route, but needed, I have to practice on playing the aggressive beatdown.
• Reworked sideboard seems great! More testing with the current sideboard.
• 4x Spell Pierce mainboard is the perfect addition. That meant cutting back 1 Angel of Glory's Rise.
• Ghost Quarters became my pseudo-fetchlands, allowing me to fix colour and thin out my deck. The bare minimum is to have 4 mana to combo off. Any more is in excess and I don't mind losing land drops after 6 mana to thin out for my combo.

Modern Gameplay Review: 14 August 2014

This will be a new one; Game Coverage! Unfortunately I'm unable to do filming cos I didn't have the preparation time and all. I kind of decided last minute to just jump in and play this event. If this coverage is by video, I could do so much more! 

Nevertheless, I'll do a quick run-through on the event. I pay $10, face 3 opponents, and for every 1 match win entitles me to have a bounty roll with 2 20-sided dices. The prices varies with the numbers so, you can imgaine that numbers 2 and 40 have really good loots! (Misty Rainforest and Tarmogoyf specifically....)

Deck: 5C Ally Reanimator
It's a home-brewed deck. Basically, it is based off the idea of reanimating Angel of Gloy's Rise to bring back Human Ally creatures, triggering their ETB effects and mill the person to win.

I seriously have a lot of fun in my first games for all the matches. I totally caught them (the opponents) by surprise as they have never encounter such decks before. Great! Until they sideboard in the hates, which then the games start to become not funny anymore.

Round 1: UR Control (1-2)

Game 1 started off with me facing an opponent who is playing U/R. On top of my head I was guessing a couple of decks which I could be facing:

• UR Delver (Dead deck to be honest... dies to everything)
• Twin Exarch (Holy.....)
• UR Control (Have such, but never see before)

So I was working my plan based on the assumption that it is a Control/Midrange deck. I was looking for clues; the spells he cast, the creatures he play (He didn't have any!) And what sort of tricks he have. 

In the first 3-4 turns, I set up my combo pieces, throwing everything I have into the grave with 2-3 Allies on board. He resolved an Anger of the Gods, exiling the creatures and got me down to almost 10+ life. Basically from there, I find myself racing to establish a win con quickly as I was fearing he was playing Twin Exarch. So for the next ~2 turns is basically dredging with Stinkweed Imp and dumping more stuff into the graveyard until I have my combo in place.

I manage to resolve a flashback - Unburial Rites, targeting Angel of Glory's Rise, and reanimated her and about another 4 other Allies including my alternate win con card, Mirror Entity. It was roughly into late game then and I have about 6-7 mana. I declared an all out attack, and awaiting for declare blocker step. When the opponent declared no blockers, I sinked 6 mana to pump everyone to have a base stats of 6/6, dealing lethal damage.

Rounds 2 and 3 basically are the same thing with a few minor differences. In both games, he mange to cast a hate card on me; Blood Moon. Technically speaking, I can function with just 1 source of white mana, but I didn't have it in the timely manner.

In the second round, I was anticipating the hate card from him, but I got greedy and cast a creature card. I could have waited and resolve it later or I could have cracked my fetchland for a basic land instead. I had a removal (Wear // Tear. It replaced Aven Mindcensor as a last minute change) on hand to answer Blood Moon, but that mistake costed me the game. (And Keranos, God of Storms resolved. So each turn I'll take 3 or give him a card draw. I conceded both matches after 2 turns upon resolution of Keranos.)

Third round was worse. We mulligan down to 5 cards each but he manage to get the same hate card. On the other hand, I land-jammed with no answers... so I basically conceded one Keranos resolved.

Round 2: RG Tron (1-2)

RG Tron is the WORST match up for me for 2 reasons;

1. Any Eldrazi Lords will negate my milling win con
2. Their creatures are so much BIGGER!

So when I started off the game, I almost wanted to immediately concede as it's almost impossible for me to win this match. But, well, I stayed on and played the game. (Sportsmanship!)

Similar to the first round, I started by setting up my combo. I knew the Eldrazi will cause a huge problem for me, but I was hoping to win by dealing lethal as how I did in the first game. The first game ended rather quickly. I slowed my opponent down by destroying his land with my Ghost Quarter, and managed to drop about 4 allies along with Halimar Excavator and I have another on board. I pulled off the Combo of at around turn 5-6. The total combined ETB trigger had my opponent milled 48 cards in total. Surprisingly, the opponent proceeded to mill ALL 48 cards from library and dropped into the graveyard. He conceded immediately after that, revealing that he had Emrakul on the hand, which cost him the game. So basically luck is on my side on the first game.

Post Side-boarding for game 2, that's where it's hell. I managed to stop him slightly in the early 2 turns with a Pithing Needle, but I lost to the tempo of the R/G TRON and got mauled by Karn Liberated and Wurmcoil Engine. One exiles my permanent, the other beats for 6 and allows the opponent to gain 6 life per hit. It's an ugly match. In that game, I didn't manage to draw out any of my combo pieces and the set-up was too slow to make any impact.

In the third game, I sprung to quickly set up the combo, hoping to out-race him. However, just before I could activate the combo, He managed to cast a Relic of Progenitus to exile my graveyard. He later on cast Karn liberated to slowly remove my lands. In the last attempt, I cast Gifts Ungiven to search out all the different hate cards and try to shut him down. However, he managed to shut me down further by disabling my mana colours and I basically just draw-go for the next few turns, chump-blocked the Wurmcoil Engine to try to stay alive, hoping if there are some sort of miracle that I can turn the game in some way or another. But, I know I can't as this is really a bad match-up for my deck. I basically hanged around until he finally cast Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, which then I conceded the match.

Round 3: Jund (-Dropped- )

Didn't play the last game as I'm facing my friend. No point playing. But had I played that match, my prediction would be 1-2 to his favor. We agreed to drop the match with a 1-1-1 draw game.

Bounty loot: Loxodon Smiter 

(No meaning.... The shop thought it's a $4 card still. But, it's still a really good modern card. I give that to them.)

Whole in all, I enjoyed playing the event. Best take-away is the expressions of the people who faced me, unknowing what my deck does until I reveal the combo pieces. The unexpected surprise is something refreshing to the meta and as a rouge player, I prefer playing such decks. It keeps the game interesting and fun. Rather than facing the same old decks over and over, it becomes stale after awhile.

 A few pointers as a "Note to Self:" kind of thing;

• I'm running an aggro/combo deck. I should be more patient with my casting. Do not over-commit the board
• Sideboard requires some rework; some cards are greatly needed more than others.
• I think I have to play more hate-removals rather than general creature removals. 1 piece of general removal and 2 pieces of counter may work out better as this allows me to stop their tempo.

I'm making plans to play the event more frequently; as sort of like a break between my studies. I'll put on hold when my exams are nearing so keep in view. Meantime, stay-tuned! I have drafted quite a number of posts due for posting soon already!

Doom Spells... FTV: Annihilation [First Look!]

They're fun to play with, but extremely annoying when facing against them. As a creature-based player, it would be fun to see your army build up, making my opponent cower in fear from attacking my mass army! I'd grin widely when they try to tilt the cards sideways and later decided not to. Then, they tilt 4 lands, declaring 4 mana into their mana pool, and they dropped this:

Surprise!

If anyone is in my shoe when this happen, regardless how experienced you are, that grin on your face will definitely turn 180 degrees. In a single swoop, the army I have painstakingly build up is gone. Smashed. Bitten the dust. Whatever, the game goes on. 

Wrath spells like Wrath of God is a classic in MTG. The appeal factor comes in both the flavour of the card and also the power of it. Mass removals have also become a staple for many formats and it's often still game-turning whenever a spell like this is played.

When Wizards first announced FTV: Annihilation, I think it's really awesome! Just get that set, open them up and slot all them into whatever EDH or eternal decks and start playing! Well, that's still the thought I have. It'll be fun to nuke the field every few turns, but I think that's pretty much your life-span after the game for the level of trolling...

Now, a full list have been spoilt, I still find them awesome. This "First Look" will be a bit different; Since they all are nukes, No point talking about power level. I'm going to focus more about the art, and flavour instead.

The foremost classic. Destroy all lands for 4 mana, it can really break games! Okay, I'm not talking about the power level here! Alright, back to focus. The new art seems plain at first, but look at the flavour text! Now back to the art! Now back to the text! Did you see what they did! A plain art, but well described by the flavour text that it's because the world is destroyed, it's precisely why it's plain. Thanks to the art designer for not having to see a nuke on every artwork. 

Apart from Vintage Masters, we last see this card in Portal: 3 Kingdoms. An expansion that is based on the historical plot of the Romance of the 3 Kingdom. This card is inspired by an actual story plot. As rough summary, Xinye is a small town that was under the governing of Liu Biao (劉表). The main character, Liu Bei (劉备) (they are not related!) sought refuge from him after an attack by a warlord named Cao Cao (曹操). Initially welcoming the refugee, Liu Biao put Liu Bei in charge of Xinye. But, later grew suspicious. He eventually sent Liu Bei to defend against an invasion by Cao Cao in Bowang. As an attempt to ambush his invaders, Liu Bei set fire to his own base and feigned a retreat. He eventually lost the base to Cao Cao and the plot continues later on to the more famous battle: The Battle of the Red Cliffs.

The point is, do you see how much flavour is there is this card? From the art depicting a traditional general in the ancient chinese military escaping the fiery base, to the effect of the card. Burning the ground is bound to damage the ground and as well as anyone unfortunate enough to be trapped in the fire. In short, I love the flavour of this card and as well as the old art being printed for this FTV.

Extremely powerful in the flavour text. In the event of any disaster, the text is true; take whatever you really need. The rest can be found, built or taken back. The art also sticks very well to the definition; "A large-scale and violent event in the natural world."

I actually cannot comprehend the art and flavour text. I just started MTG back then and I honestly have no clue as to what is the storyline. But that alone, I know that based on the art, effect and flavour text, I can guess that if the Child avatar dies, everything perishes with it. Hmm... pretty cool uh if I'm right uh.

This is a nuke at best. Really just exile everything. Nothing else, just destroy lands and laugh at your opponents. It's something that I feel that Red has the advantage in land destruction over the other colours in EDH. Other colours do remove the creatures, artifacts or enchantments well, but they remove by a specific type. Red cards doesn't care. They just remove everything.

Potentially I'm casting a Lightning Bolt on every creature. It's seeing more play in Modern rather than in EDH formats. For the latter, though there are better mass removals in the format, this still does a fine job in removing quite a number of staples and minimizing board presence. Honestly if you ask me, I like the new art more than the old art; for the fact that it better reflects on what the ability does.

Sideboard card for some modern decks. A powerful hate against any decks running heavy artifact or enchantments. Well, the flavour text does give some sort of flavour to the name and effect, but... the art.. Are they really relics? Looks like scarecrows to me... 

Kinda reminds me of Living End huh. But, looking at art-wise it is spot-on in the raise from the grave theme. Though I have to say it's really being an oxymoron to say the living death. Any case, this card hits hard; Indestructibility won't help due to its phrasing plus side, a removal with mass reanimating, it's awesome in EDH!

Yea... a coup. We just need 5 soldiers to stage a coup that will render enemies useless (destroy them)... Wait is it really a coup? It looks like a behemoth in the picture! Actually, now that I think about it, remember the show 300? (THIS IS SPARTA!) Hey, when did I last see this card.. Conflux right? Wow... Time sure have past quickly.

Another card from the Portal 3 Kingdoms. Neat art and all, but I thought earthquake will just deal damage to anything? How does horsemanship help? Oh... wait... Another plot device. It's rather fictional in this part, but technically speaking, you can avoid the earthquake damage if you ride off fast enough from the collateral damage zones..

See!! Pollution will cause destruction to our homes! The more polluted the world is, the more we suffer! But, really, cumulative strength of this card is not to be trifled with. Note it states permanents!

All else fails, I want everything back underneath! I love this card. Really. The miracle effect gives a huge bonus to the flavour and the feel to the artwork altogether. 

Not really annihilation in the direct sense, but think about it. I cast this, return EVERYTHING back to you. Thanos wanted to destroy everything for death so in relative perspective, I'm still kind enough to return to you... Don't hate me for it.

Oh... so now we are playing with colours... you colourist.... Well, white mana is a symbol directly representing virtue, so there we go! The art and text doesn't seem to correlate well actually in my opinion. The destruction seen is only an empty armour, the town seems.. fine... The art seems to have something in the black stuff... But what is ruined? I don't get the art actually. The text is a meaningful text but it doesn't relate well to the art or effect overall. Yes, as I mentioned earlier that virtue is represented by the white mana... but i think it's a little bit too literal isn't it?

I don't know about for this art... It is awesome to actually see an actual God in the art, representing his wrath, but... Heliod looks kind of an angry shepherd here.. or actually an angry noble Satyr... The destruction art is cool with people flying and knock-backed from the impact of the spear. But... Heliod... why?! You look so cool in your original art....

Wait... No Damnation? Damn it! Well, obviously there are some better or preferred annihilation spells that we would want. I'm personally rooting for Damnation, Supreme Verdict or Merciless Eviction to see print in this over some of the cards here. Nevertheless, I personally feel that if your decklist do need some of these cards, they are pretty decent cards in EDH and specifically one or two for Modern formats. Actually, most are really good mass removals in such multiplayer format. The ones that see Modern play is because of their effectiveness against the deck types available in the meta. 

In summary, it's a good FTV if you look at it from the point that it's usable and foiled. But getting it any more than the MSRP is a warning sign to watch out. I personally won't get them if it's anything more than $40.00. Meantime, once you get them, crack them up and slot into your EDH decks! Your opponents will feel the wrath of you!

The Glimmerpost of Zer0

This post won't really be about MTG in any way. I'm doing this relatively short post as compared to the rest as a review on what I have covered so far in my topics and where the direction of my blogging is heading to in the next month or so. Go ahead to read below to find out what is up for the next month or so!

Glimmervoid. Look far. I may get something eventually.

Just in a short term of 4 months, I have achieved close to 2000 views! It's quite an achievement for the fact that this is my first public blog don't you think? Yes, there are some things here and there I have not done up properly, like my profile.

I haven't had time to do a full profile on my blogger profile, so I'll share a little about me.

• Name: Daryl
• Location: Singapore
• Birth Year: 1991 (I'm 22 as of writing, going 23 this year!)
• Gender: Male
• Occupation: Student. I've mentioned several times that I'm a student, but I have yet to mention that I am pursuing a degree in Chemical Engineering.
• Hobbies: MTG (duh...), Gaming (PC, PS3), Freestyle Inline Skater (Specifically a Slider)

So if you didn't know, I started out this blog as an online journal to keep track on the things I have learnt on MTG which can be applied to life and in my other areas. For instance, I started talking about goal setting and how I want to get there; I also did mention about investment and card trading which is actually a stepping stone for me to get up to the stock market some day. But, note that while the trade system is similar, stock market is completely different from MTG trading. I can get the basics of understanding speculation and how demand and supply affects the prices, but nowhere near to the actual investment in the stock Markets.)

I also tend to explore some other aspects of MTG like mindsets of mass booster opening, include analysis of particular aspects using outside fields like psychology and maths (I took a short module in psychology, which got me covered the very basics but enough for me to pull out some analysis in layman's terms.)

TL;DR.

I basically aim to provide a different approach in the analysis of various aspects of MTG, in and out of the game.

I am covering the following aspects in the past 4 months:

• Expansion Reviews (Analysis of the expansion. Notable cards in constructed and in limited.)
• Gameplay and finance analysis
  (I haven't really cover gameplay analysis due to my lack of commitment to play in more events. I'd love to do more coverage and analysis in the modern Meta, but time does not permit.)

It'll be better to have lesser focus so I can take more time to do better posts. If I were to have a wide range of scope, I cannot specialize in giving more unique or creative content.

Well, I also did a quick review to see what post yield the best response to better improve my content and gear towards what the post have a more positive reach.

Highlighted in blue boxes are the posts that have achieved over 100 views. Most do have +1's but assuming they are more or less unique views, M15: First look and the next post, where I did a top 10 pick on what got me interested in the set gained the most views. Another post that gained a good amount of attention is my discussion that there are some monetary value in common and uncommons. 

I have other posts which gained a fair amount of views (like... 50-70 views) which those includes other analysis posts but those were in much earlier months when I didn't have much reach with Google+  and Facebook. But, with analysis posts like "Khans of Tarkir, A new something?", "Breaking Doors" and well, M15: First look gaining close or more than 100 views, which it's a good reap!

Financial posts don't usually gain much attention as well... I'm in direct competition with every OTHER websites which does their finance updates by daily! I do read them and analyze, but I don't do daily updates. It doesn't make sense for me as a blogger.

Review posts for Born of the Gods, Journey into Nyx, Conspiracy and M15 Core Set expansions gained rather mediocre views and as I did mention, the amount of work and effort to generate a full review is too much! The amount of research, analysis and writing has eaten too much time. Take the M15 expansion for example; I didn't have time to do a full review in a single post, so I ended up splitting into 3 different posts which the latter 2, the reviews for common and uncommon is very low. Not very worth the time to do such posts if I am not going to attract you readers isn't it? (Put the ratio concept into practice! Do you think it's worth it? Side track, "Ratio" also achieved about 100 views!)   

"Prep for Modern Madness" is a series which I explored various contents to see what suited to my writing style and what gained your attention. That didn't really do well but it gave me an idea on what to gear my content towards. 

So why am I so keen in generating views? For a couple of reasons which includes Adsense or other monetary programs for blog (irrelevant for now!). However, my bigger objective for the blog is to generate reach to embark on the Project: Zer0 with me! Secondly, I'm in the Science field and writing will become part and parcel of anything I do. I am using this as practice to create content which is both intriguing as well as to bring my arguments across to the readers. Third, as I am already playing for around 3-4 years, I'm not keen in the professional levels of competition, and I am also not well funded to open a card shop, so what better way to make a result out from my learning experiences in MTG and gain more exposure and learning from it?

I average about 4-5 posts per month, which roughly translates to 1 post per week. To get a good reach, my targeted average per month view should increase by 400 - 500 views. No, my own page views do not count. I removed them from the counter so whatever views I'm looking at for each post is by a unique visitor or a recurring subscriber. In addition, irregardless on the number of times I share the post. If the content isn't interesting enough, the views wouldn't increase.

Now that I have looked at the response and views, It becomes quite clear in what kind of posts I should gear towards for the coming months. I'll gear towards more analysis-based contents and avoid doing expansion reviews altogether. Doing something similar like discussing what cards are interesting, etc is fine, but a full review will be avoided. In fact, Many websites are doing it, so why am I joining them? If my content is to be unique, I have to explore new grounds to talk about or grounds that exist but taking a unique or new point of views to discuss. Finance-based contents will be kept to the minimum as my opportunities to trade has decreased in the next few months. (I didn't have much chance to trade this year to begin with!)

The past 4 months have been really interesting for me. What's even more exciting is what will the coming months bring.

Oh! Lastly, I have a special point to mention. I'm trying out coverage for card shops to bring more exposure and advertising. What I aim to cover is basically 3 things;

1. Shop location and size
2. Event schedules
3. Why should a player visit your shop?

I have a shop that has agreed to allow me to try out the coverage, so stay tuned! I hope it will be a good coverage for the shops and for the people outside Singapore who are planning to come by for a trip and wanting to find card shops.

(If any local card shops are interested to allow me to try this out for you guys, contact me via this email for details: sng.daryl@gmail.com)

Ratio

Okay, I'm finally through with review posts. It's exciting at first to do reviews, like to type down my thoughts and how I feel the card is going to impact the meta, etc. It's kind of fun and rewarding if your predictions are right! But, as I hit into the commons and uncommons, I'm tired out by the overwhelming amount of cards to review. Core Sets are not small sets and regardless, I'm not going to do the reviews in that manner for the commons and uncommons for future expansions (also due to the responses). Restructuring the post will benefit in terms of my effort to create a good post and the content being created to the amount of time put in to slowly research and think on what to write in.

For now I want to discuss something which struck my mind when I am doing the reviews of the commons and uncommons. This topic also rose when I was walking home with a friend of mine and we were chatting about the effectiveness and efficiency of cards to their casting cost. In other words, ratio.  By now I assume that the following 5 points below are rather familiar right? I have used them in the discussion of commons and uncommons' values, as well as I have used them as a guideline to review the recent core set. 

If I were to discuss this with in relation to the 5 points of guidelines, I will not just zoom into point 3, but all 5 as they do have a role in determining whether the card is good or not. In essence, the ratio of the converted mana cost of a card to the ability (point 3) is actually both very specific, yet broad at the same time; I'm being an oxymoron here, yes, but hear me out! Specificity of the point relates to the literal, cost to ability ratio, while in broad terms, the ratio is a comparison; a relationship between the 2 parts. In simple terms, I'm not just comparing the cards' ratio in the cmc to ability alone. I have to compare it with other similar cards to have a ground base to work on to say which is good and which is bad.

1. Is the card mainly for flavour or ability? 
2. Is the card ability good?
3. Cost to ability ratio? 
4. Has the card been reprinted? If yes, value of the card prior reprint?
5. Demand and supply of card?

1 mana, 3 damage. 4 mana, 12 damage.

Now, to start off, I would like to direct your attention to a classic staple card: Lightning Bolt. Many people say it's the best burn spell in MTG. But, why? Or for another instance, Tarmagoyf is regarded as the best creature the Modern and Legacy format. Why? The answer to both is that they are simply very cost-effective for they do.
For the example of Lightning Bolt, 1 red source to deal 3 damage is really good! But, if you actually wonder how good or effective this is, The explanation is two-fold; take a look to compare the other similar cards that have the same casting cost to it. 

Now if you notice, most of the other cards are not really as good as lightning bolt for the matter of comparison. The closest is being Shock and Chain Lightning as the easiest examples for the sake of shortening a detailed explanation. Yes, given different circumstances, the different effects by other cards may be better (includes the ones I filtered on the gather website on the 2 links above) but given realistically when you want to cast this off from your hand, you won't think so much as to whether the bonus conditions are met. You'll want to just cast this to deal the damage to the opponents, right? And to that point, if the card is more flexible and has lesser restrictions, you welcome more copies on your hand and it will be easier for you to use these as answers or removals.

For the case of Lightning Bolt, here is the breakdown of the 5 guidelines of analysis of the card:

1. Is the card mainly for flavour or ability?
   Ability. The card is usually printed in core sets, which the flavour is not really of importance.
2. Is the card ability good?
   Yes. Deals 3 damage to creature or player at instant speed.
3. Cost to ability ratio?
   1 mana for 3 damage.
4. Has the card been reprinted? If yes, value of the card prior reprint?
   Yes, reprinted and at common rarity; the value stands and differs in the different prints
5. Demand and supply of card?
   Relatively high demand.

Looking at the analysis, it's easy to see why the more recent prints are around $2 - $2.50 per copy. But, hey! $2.50 for a common! That price easily beats a lot of rares and mythic rares by the bulk boxes!

Okay, another example; 

Every card you throw, the Tarmogoyf will eat and grow...

Every deck that plays green will run this guy. Why?

1. Is the card mainly for flavour or ability?
   Flavour & Ability. The card's ability is exactly translated to its flavour text.
2. Is the card ability good?
   Yes. Every card discarded into any graveyard buffs it by +1/+1
3. Cost to ability ratio?
   2 mana for 0/1 at minimum. 2 mana for 7/8 in ideal (7 different types of magic cards). Average it's a 3/4 or 4/5 for 2 mana. (No legend rule, means possible for multiple copies, this means more powerful board presence.)
4. Has the card been reprinted? If yes, value of the card prior reprint?
   Yes, reprinted once with both rarities at rare and mythic rare. Value is incredibly high at $200/pc as of analysis
5. Demand and supply of card?
   Relatively low demand.

And that, is why it's 200 bucks a piece. 

No. Literally. A new phone or a playset of killer cards. I think I know what I want for my Birthday.

But, look closer; what or how have I analyzed? In actual fact, I am talking mostly about ratio. Yes; regardless on how you look at it, be it financial or raw ability of the card, I'm analyzing the card by that as the most important aspect of the card that determines if it is valuable or bulk. There may be better ways to analyze the card like meta compatibility, usage and flexiblity which will be incoporated later, but really, think about it, the bottomline is still a ratio; a comparison in mathematical form. If we translate everything to a number and associate the comparison of these numbers, we basically get a ratio. It is easy to understand and show this concept if we are simply looking at factual numbers like cards with raw vanilla power. But, because magic is stupidly (and amazingly) complicated, I'll dumb it down first before going up the ladder. Let's use a simple example first before moving up the notch.

As we go towards the end, you'll realize that the "ratio" term has basically been replaced by effectiveness, because abilities are in lingual text and it is hard to base a factual number on it. Any number placed would be by instinct instead. Like for example, how do you rate that Doom Blade or Go for the Throat is better in numbers? We can't, so we normally talk about how effective the cards are, or how impactful the cards are against the meta, format or decks, etc... the term for comparing efficiency basically if we give a number representation, we can compare it like a ratio. But, in real life, the gut instinct of everyone is different, so it wouldn't be accurate to give an exact figure. In any case, we (or the majority) would agree that X spell is better than Y spell because of certain reasons.

To start off, let's talk about numbers first.

Effect : Card casting cost  (Abilities)
Maximum damage output : Card casting cost  (Creatures, Damage spells)

If you think about how effective Lightning Bolt is by itself, without comparison, it's actually a very good card by itself. the ratio output is actually very high; 3:1 or 3 in fraction terms. This is also why people takes this as a benchmark to decide if other cards are worthy in Modern or Legacy formats.

Now, what about Shock? In the same comparison, the ratio output is actually 2:1 or 2. It's 1 point lower than Lightning Bolt itself. Hence, it's not as good if compared.

Chain Lightning achieves the same efficiency ratio as Lightning bolt, but loses out due to its casting speed. For general purposes, I'd say instant speed is generally better and preferred to than sorcery speed due to its flexibility. 

"Lightning Strike has an efficiency of 1.5 due to the fact that it is 3 damage for 2 mana. But, it's likely to be preferred over shock."  I know there will be bound to have counter-arguments like this, but bear in mind that on the curve, they sit on different slots. Yes, despite the efficiency of the card is, 3 damage still trumps (triumphs) 2 damage upon resolution. For that matter, it's still 3 damage if you can cast it. But, what I'm discussing here, mind you it's the efficiency of the cards itself; how effective is the card's ability or damage output to its casting cost and not about the effect of damage. 

Now, let's bring up a notch, what about creatures? It's more complicated than just a burn spell; P/T ratio plays an important role on the creature survival, damage output, and defense capabilities. The combined stats or individual P/T stats to its casting cost is also another factor. To me, the general rule of the thumb for a decent card can be broken down to the following:

• Combined stats points > casting cost
• Combined stats : casting cost ratio 
• The P/T stats match the casting cost
• Are there any combat abilities?
• Are there any activated or triggered abilities?

For the first two point, if the combined stats is below casting cost for some reason, then you ought to be better looking out as to why are you even playing this card or even using it. If there are abilities, determine the ability's effect to casting cost ratio (discussed more later). If we take take apart the combined stats and individually see the ratios, we usually won't get an ideal match of the P/T stats to casting cost; we usually may get much lower or occasionally, we do get higher P/T stats to the casting cost, but may be more difficult to cast due to the nature of the colour or ability restrictions. In that case, these factors are also taken into account as an overall casting cost. Like a 3-coloured source for a tri-colour deck is definitely not efficient in the colour management in the mana base. These are also factors that determines the cards' efficiency in casting and being cast.

A basic example:

If it is basic vanilla creature, it will be easy to tell which card is good or bad. Actual fact in limited, all 3 have their uses in both offense and defence, but preference to pick in my opinion is as shown in that order. I would rather have creatures survive longer than being able to just deal out damage and die next turn with no board establishment. I won't apply the ratio here, but you can work them out yourself easily for vanilla creatures. But, let's say a creature with abilities. How do we determine if it's a good card or not? Let's take for instance:

I solemnly swear that I am up to no good :)

For the case of Solemn Simulacrum, if I take the closest 2 cards to his ability and combine them, he's pretty much an awesome break down of 4 mana for the 2 abilies with a free 2/2 body. Or, 2 mana for 2/2 and 1 mana respectively for the ramp and draw. But, come on, 1 mana to draw 1 card is actually quite overpowered if you ask me, so let's stick to the former as an ideal breakdown of the mana cost.

2 mana for tutor, 5 mana for a 6/6 flyer. It's a good deal!

Now, it also doesn't mean that a high mana cost creature with a sick ability slapped onto it will mean it's efficient in the casting cost. Also, it doesn't mean that a low mana creature with either vanilla (no) stats or some small stats will mean it is a definite high efficiency creature. It really depends on what format you play, how effective the creatures or spells are in the meta, and also, your deck variant. A good example is that if you are facing a bunch of creatures of with 3 toughness, a Pyroclasm or Volcanic fallout won't be of use. Instead, Anger of the Gods would be better isn't it?

Also, how the card impacts the board affects the efficiency in casting. For example, Hornet Queen. It may initially see as a 6 mana for a 2/2 flyer and deathtouch. By itself, it doesn't seem very efficient but let's look at the ability. Flying, Deathtouch and 4 OTHER insect tokens also with Flying and Deathtouch! This effectively makes it as 6 mana 6/6 flyer and deathtouch! By just itself it's actually quite effective, but look at the mana needed. Three green sources means that decks heavy on multi-colours are going to find it a hard time to cast this as compared to other creatures. It is outclassed by more effective or more powerful creatures at the 6 mana slot in the curve. The impact it has for constructed format is not great enough to create a dent as compared to other cards. However, that said, the effect is really powerful for limited formats.

What about this? 3 mana 2/1 flying is okay, but what really makes the card shine is that it may be cast at instant speed (Flash). Also, remember the annoying orb? Yes... for an additional white mana, it's on a flying creature with flash... The effectiveness of the card and ease of casting it makes it a very efficient card.

Get the point?


But, let's bring back to what we know and realize. By the time we hit to effects and abilities on creatures and essentially on any other type of MTG card, how do we know that the effectiveness is that high or that low? Remember about me saying about gut instinct and how we just have to give a number in order to compare as a ratio? Well, I have an example to discuss on the point;

Look at the 3 cards above. They essentially do the same thing right? "Search your library for a card and put it into your hand." But, how do we know which is a better card? We obviously know that Demonic Tutor is the best right? But, what does this represent in mathematical ratio?

We assume that if any effect is 1 point, the casting cost is X and we take a comparison, Demonic Tutor will be a ratio of 1/2 or 0.5 points, while Diabolic Tutor is 1/4 or 0.25 points. In fact, regardless the points, it doesn't really matter, what matters more in the end is the comparison between the 2 imaginary numbers you obtained from such a comparison. And for that, In my own EDH, I actually ran Increasing Ambition over Diabolic Tutor. Reason is because Increasing Ambition has a ratio point of 0.2 for its first ability, 0.25 (2 cards for 8 mana so it/s 2/8) for its flashback ability and an overall ratio point of 0.25. This matches the same efficiency as Diabolic Tutor, but for the 1 card, I actually get to tutor out 3 cards instead of one!

Allies on your side, foes on your enemies'

What about planeswalkers? Because the activated ability is kind of free; just in the sense that you add or remove loyalty counters, so apart from the casting cost, you don't really need to sink in additional mana for them already. But, to analyze a good planeswalker, we can use the following 3 points as guidelines.

• Mana cost and Starting loyalty?
• Can it protect itself?
• Relevance of the ability(s).
  - Does the effects establish or aids in board presence?
  - Any form of advantage to gives you to gain the upperhand?

From the analysis, A good planeswalker like Elspeth, Knight Errant, Liliana of the Veil, Karn Liberated and Jace, the Mind Sculptor (Honarable Mention; Garruk(s)) all have some sort of abilities that will protect them from combat damage in a way of disruption, spawning tokens or removals.

Also, their casting cost to their starting loyalty counters are reasonably close, like a ratio point of 1 or close to 1 on average. This means that they either have a higher chance of survival rate upon resolution, or upon activating their ability, they evade most direct damage effects. For the matter, the argument here would be to escape "bolt rage". Basically evading the 3 damage from Lightning Bolt itself. My third point, similar to creature or effect spells, the abilities does matter as to whether the planeswalkers are worth casting. If the abilities are bad or doesn't suit your strategy, then what's the point of playing it? If the abilities are also not impactful enough for you to gain any advantage, then is it worth casting or playing it in the first place?

In summary, when it comes to the underlying comparison of almost everything in MTG can be thought as a ratio with some being a literal comparison by numbers, others by imaginary. You have to do the comparison and decide for yourself if it's worth playing at that cost or go for something that requires the additional cost, that gives bonus effects on top of the desired effect. Then, it really depends on what do you want to use and your reasoning of your preference.