surewhynot

296 Decks, 4,543 Comments, 1,812 Reputation

Obviously the two are not the same thing. I was merely making a humorous comparison. Are people honestly getting upset by my posts?

That's just plain goofy. =]

0
Posted 02 December 2010 at 21:53 in reply to #103127 on Please Read

Permalink

The irony here is remarkable. =]

1
Posted 02 December 2010 at 21:45 in reply to #102959 on Please Read

Permalink

Once you have Argentum Armor on something, it really doesn't matter what else you put on them. Psudo-annihilator and massive damage so early on is what I call "conditional" early wins. By that I mean, you haven't technically won yet, but there's really no way your opponent will recover from the situation.

As far as I see it, I wouldn't change anything with this short of breaking it out of the prison that is standard =]

0
Posted 02 December 2010 at 05:18 as a comment on WW Quest

Permalink

Hell yeah man! Cheatyface is the best damn sideboard card around! I seriously do have a little sideboard that I keep 15 of them in. When my opponent leaves to go to the bathroom or gets a call, etc. they very often come back to 15 2/2 flyers =]

-1
Posted 02 December 2010 at 02:58 in reply to #103277 on The Dirty Deck

Permalink

I like this guy. =]

0
Posted 02 December 2010 at 00:24 in reply to #44556 on Please Read

Permalink

<_<

Oh damn. Aside from my seething hatred of all things Myr, and the fact that this deck would get WHOMPED! by an extraction deck (all Wits decks do, extraction is their biggest weakness), this is probably one of the "better" Wits decks I've seen. It's easily the most creative.

0
Posted 02 December 2010 at 00:18 as a comment on Sire of wits

Permalink

Thank you dude. That just made my day =]

If my decks are inspiring other players, then that's a dream come true man.

-1
Posted 01 December 2010 at 22:40 in reply to #103196 on The Dirty Deck

Permalink

Hehehe, thanks. I'd like to point out though, that what I mostly do with Shahrazad is WAAAAAY more devious than just playing it.

See, I put it on Panoptic Mirror. This means that each of my upkeeps in the ORIGINAL game I'm creating MORE SUB-GAMES!

Oh, but it gets worse! By putting another Shahrazad on a Panoptic Mirror in one of the numerous sub-games, I begin to have sub-sub-games created at each of my upkeeps in that specific sub-game I choose!

Oh, but it gets worse STILL (and this scenario has happened before!)

While playing one of the sub-sub-games, I put yet ANOTHER Shahrazad on a Panoptic Mirror. So let's see if you can follow me on this one.

Every one of my upkeeps in the original game I create a sub-game. While I keep making these sub-games, one of the already created ones is creating sub-sub-games continuously. While that one sub-game among tons of sub-games creates sub-sub-games en masse, one of those sub-sub-games is creating...

Sub-sub-sub-games!

That's the true evil behind this deck...it CAN'T end.

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 21:49 in reply to #103180 on Are we ****ing DONE?!

Permalink

Wow, thanks man. That really means a lot. =]

Right now I have...5 decks on the top decks list, and I've HAD 6 on it in total. (My "I'd Tap That" deck got pushed off)

I'm actually taking a bit of a break from deck building for a while, sort of because of the above fact. I want other people's decks to get on the top decks list. Also, at the moment I'm crowding up the "upcoming" list too. I have 4 decks on it right now, but I've had like...8 or even 9 on it before...=/

I'm glad people like my decks, but I want to step away from the spotlight for a while, so to speak.

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 19:48 in reply to #103159 on The Dirty Deck

Permalink

I wish I had an idea in my mind, but my last deck (#75) was the last idea I've had since I posted it last night. -_-

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 18:05 as a comment on Punishing Flame

Permalink

Aw hell, I knocked this off the top. Sorry about that dude =/

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 17:53 as a comment on Aaboy66's 20th Deck Celebration

Permalink

I quite honestly couldn't care less about the illiteracy of other posters. I'm just letting them know that when making an argument, it's rather difficult for people to believe they know what they're actually talking about.

And if you're aware of something of that sort, why wouldn't you try to NOT do it? By that same logic, if you had a giant cut in your hand, you'd refuse to wrap it in bandages because "I'm in my room, not a hospital".

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 17:49 as a comment on Please Read

Permalink

Yep!

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 17:40 as a comment on WW Quest

Permalink

Wow, yeah thanks man I forgot about my Creakwoods. Those guys are definitely dirty. =]

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 17:25 in reply to #103091 on The Dirty Deck

Permalink

Hmmm. Well if it works for you...

Now, I'd take out the Bosk(s) and 2-3 forests for 4 Verdant Catacombs and 2-3 Swamps. =]

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 02:24 as a comment on fast Treefolk V3

Permalink

Thanks to unknownhunter763, I swapped out the Kederekt Creepers for Swans. =]

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 01:48 as a comment on Choke

Permalink

Green eh? Very nice...and maybe moldy? =P

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 01:37 as a comment on The Green cheese stands alone?

Permalink

Commented, assisted, and liked. BAM!

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 01:21 in reply to #102966 on Strandardized Sacrifice

Permalink

Awesome. =]

Care to take a look at my Dirty Deck? (damn that never comes out right)

http://www.mtgvault.com/ViewDeck.aspx?DeckID=117461

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 01:20 in reply to #102990 on Forced Dreams V2

Permalink

Wow, damn this is actually pretty good man. Lucky for you, I consider myself an expert on both sacrifice decks AND vampire decks.

So, from my experience, most sacrifice decks fall into one of two types: Aggro or "Control" ("control" is a loose term, it also means "other stuff that isn't full-blown aggro")

AND from my experience, most vampire decks fall into one of three types: Aggro creature swarm, Sacrifice, and Freakin' Awful.

So, lucky for you your deck is a nice choice of "Vampire --> Sacrifice | Sacrifice --> "Control"

These aren't my "cup-o-tea", but they're good all the same. And this one is honestly the best one of this type I've seen, and I'm not just being nice.

ONE tiny change I'd make is to lose 2 of your Blood Seeker(s) for 2 Viscera Seer(s). Not only are they another sacrifice mechanic, but they allow more consistent "control" and the change will give you a linear mana curve!

14-10-6-2 =]

0
Posted 01 December 2010 at 01:15 as a comment on Jinxed Idol and vamps

Permalink

4,161-4,180 of 4,539 items