Messages

Really hard to decide, I vote for
A)

although I could accept B) as an alternative

I don't think we should split up the Highlander community on different servers. Let's stay with woogerworks, its not that stable but they work on it (if you can believe their statement)
It's already quite hard to find someone to play, no matter what time of the day...

Jitte and Acedemy on Watchlist? Are you mad?
Jitte wins games if not handled, naya would be so happy to play this thing, especially in combination with boros reconer, not to mention it is also incredibly stong the first time it connects it's close to gg.
Artifact Highlanders currently are everywhere on cockatrice, already quite strong, but giving them academy?
Both cards shouldn't be unbanned, and I hope it stays this way.

I'm really unhappy that you didn't ban oath. Hopefully the next GP shows you the strenghth of this card.

The sfm ban is ok, I didn't play him for 3 months, and see him rarer than before in online play.

but in tournaments I rarely see someone piling more than once, what is actually not quite enough for randomisation.
And it's not like you always spoil for more shuffle effects and if you fetch, you wont start piling your deck again, but riffle twice and give it to your opponent for a cut, which is enough for those actions.

what is not mentioned here:
If you cut the spoils mulligan, there won't be less shuffling.
You may add some lands to the decks, but never more than 2 or 3.
In case, the spoils mulligan saves shuffle-time, because ýou need to shuffle less than without it.
When you don't do it enough, the chance of being screwed or flooded is higher because the lands are not distributed well.
So when you are able to spoil, it doesn't matter if the deck is shuffled well or not. The chance of getting more lands in the mulligan is always higher than before.
So if I cant spoil, I will at least pile my deck three times and double the amount of riffle shuffles before each game (up from one pile and maybe 4 or 5 riffle-shuffles I usually do now) so I am sure to have the best possible distribution of cards.
Once, I played Super-Grow in Legacy, 6 or 7 years ago. The deck did only play 17-18 Lands so it was crucial to shuffle well. This will also apply for HL if you cut the spoils mulligan

Btw. is there another word for shuffle? If feel like I used the word in each sentence twice :p

it seems that the meta turned since january

8 players in a local tournament.
I dont think so.
Although some players go away from building midrange decks to one of the more extreme ends.
I find it quite interesting that RDW finished last place here, because it should have some edge on those control decks...

                 I  II IIIa IIIb IVa  IVb  V  VI
Ponder           1  2   2    2   2     3   3  4
Preordain        1  1   2    3   3     3   4  4
Serum Visions    1  2   3    3   4     4   4  4

Same Experiments as OP, VII is irrelevant, considered I a win win situation, so everyone gets a point

@Ball.Lightning I totally agree

Hmm sorry but your "experiment" doesn't work

I have redone this and added Serum Visions, although I split all combined experiments (III and IV) to evaluate the must draw in serum visions correctly, aaaand guess what? It's 3/3/3 Pon/Pre/SV.

Now one can argue that no one plays SV although it achieves the same value as the other cards did.

You could also consider Portent, which does the same as Ponder, draws the card later, but has the possibility to manipulate the opponents draws, what I think is really strong lategame if you are in a better position than you opponent or will be if he doesnt draw the answer for something.

Cyclonic Rift > Disperse
also a onesided sweeper possibility.

Phyrexian Metamorph and phantasmal image are must includes.
They are both on the curve, handle mean Legends (cant see this deck handle thrun for example) and if there's no target on the other side, pick one of yours

Looter il-Kor gives you Cardquality
Spiketail Hatchling strong as well.

Sword of Feast and Famine should find a spot in your deck, because you can either decide to play more creatures or to have a counterspell. With the sword you can do both.
Sword of Fire and Ice is just broken. It handles creatures with toughness 2 or less, else shoots in the face and it draws you a card, something you really need.

Maybe you should think about a more merfolk or faerie themed engine. Doesn't have to be a theme deck, but you could think of some good synergies.

TPS won the last GP, RDW before that and you still complain about Natural Order and Stoneforge, sad noobs.....

you know, there are other tournaments than gps.
If you can't express yourself without insulting everyone, better stop posting, ty.

Natural Order is a really strong card, that can win out of nowhere, but I think Tabris has quite a point in his statement (Thoughts about the Current HL-situation thread). It is not always autowin (of course Primeval Titan is a strong card and it is searched in about 90% of the cases) and it is conditional. A turn three sac mana-dude NO into titan or something else IS strong, but even with spoiler mulligan you have this in one of 10 games. I myself am quite neutral about this card. I don't mind if it stays and I'm not unhappy if it goes.
Oath on the other hand deserves a ban. The conditions are just too easy to achieve.
SFM: Again quite neutral, annoying creature, finds strong equipments, enables batterskull if not handled.
The Mirage Tutors are really strong, all but worldly tutor should stay or be banned (the enlightened tutor unban was a mistake imo)
Worldly mostly finds an answer or if played early SFM. Dont think he is too strong, because creatures are the type of cards that are handled the easiest.
Call is again a creature tutor, but one that cantrips. It is stronger than Worldly, but again, "only" finds a creature and most often an answer and not an additional threat.
Green Suns Zenith is fair imo, cause you have to pay quite a lot for stronger creatures. Again, mostly finds answers.
Demonic is quite often the only real argument to play black. Sorcery speed, but again cantrips. Finds combo pieces as well as answers and threats. Combo pieces here includes also a missing spell in a reanimator, not only something for "pure" combo decks. Not quite sure about this one, think the sorcery speed renders him fair.
Tainted Pact: Too situational, many decks that could play him don't it. Again fair imo.

woops, was kinda late editing my last post :p

@Musdam

thats not my name :p


I don't think rdw would need to replace spells. Maybe they have to lower the curve a bit, but if you compare it to 60 card formats, most aggro decks play less lands than control or midrange decks, which is only partiaclly true for HL. From 35 with maze to 33 is not that much difference in 100 cards, but from 24 to 21 or even less in 60 cards is quite a difference...

[because you need to build around them]

Hard counter:
Oath, tabernacle, black vise, b2b, blood moon, pop.

They strongly punish different archetypes. These cards are essential to keep the balance. All of these cards have hard disadvantages (because you need to build around them).

Oath is unlike Tabernacle no answer, but an enabler, which is much worse. It enables you either to have a giant monster with tentacles on your side of the board or your whole deck is in the gy, which is used like Druid as a combo enabler. It is just a control deck with 4 creatures and tons of tutors and disruption. The power of a turn 2 Oath cannot be denied. Else you could argue that NO does the same but worse because of 4 mana, you have to sac a creature which also has to be green and you are restricted to find green creatures. I think these conditions are much worse than just: The opponent has to have one creature on the board. If they dont have any creatures on the board, why should the oath player care? No pressure is always good. The only decks that don't have creatures is PW Staxx, Storm Combo and Oath itself (maybe I forgot one, but don't remember any else). Even "normal" control decks have some creatures that want to be on the board early.

ChristophO
Aggro decks don't need spoiler mulligan, because they are consistent. Midrange, Combo and Control Decks need the spoiler mulligan because they are less consistent/inconsisten (Depending on the deck itself). If the spoiler mulligan is removed, only aggro improves, so ask yourself: Does aggro really need improvement? The whole metagame is flooded with it aggrodecks or very agressive midrange decks like Naya, I really don't want to see a meta in which aggro is even more favored than now.
I think the spoiler mulligan enables a more diverse meta, because the consitency of many decks is increased, which would otherwise less or not be viable in this format.

I loled. I started the whole discussion about the mulligan because the aggro decks abuse it at most. Able to run 25-30 lands in 3-4c, something a control deck cannot.

yeah, they abuse it the most, but need it the least, read again, nothing else stated.

ChristophO
Aggro decks don't need spoiler mulligan, because they are consistent. Midrange, Combo and Control Decks need the spoiler mulligan because they are less consistent/inconsisten (Depending on the deck itself). If the spoiler mulligan is removed, only aggro improves, so ask yourself: Does aggro really need improvement? The whole metagame is flooded with it aggrodecks or very agressive midrange decks like Naya, I really don't want to see a meta in which aggro is even more favored than now.
I think the spoiler mulligan enables a more diverse meta, because the consitency of many decks is increased, which would otherwise less or not be viable in this format.

I like the idea of attacking the mana base with bannings, but I feel like it pushes mono red and mono white over the top. Of course you can still run UW Control, which is a really strong deck and is not hurt much with such bannings. In fact most 2 color control decks are not hurt much (this is what Deeamer stated previously I think). Those Fetchland banned tournaments are a quite interesting approach and I really like to see some more results before I am convinced about those bans.
The option, banning the old duals is also an interesting idea, but being dealt even more damage for mana fixing will only benefit mono red as well. Especially when the opponent is forced to play untapped lands to make a move against a deck this aggressive.