| |
| Author |
Message |
Rate this article!
| 5 (Best) |
| [ 2 ] 40% |
| |
| 4 |
| [ 2 ] 40% |
| |
| 3 |
| [ 1 ] 20% |
| |
| 2 |
| [ 0 ] 0% |
| |
| 1 (Worst) |
| [ 0 ] 0% |
| |
Total Votes : 5 |
|
| inresponse |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:26 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 162
Location:
|
| see, this is what an article is supposed to be like. Physco takes a format and describes it to his readers, exploring different ideas within the format and even providing decklists in case someone gets involved. Pretty much what others should be trying to write, but haven’t accomplished yet. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Felipe Musco |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 5:58 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 2434
Location: Florianópolis, SC, Brasil
|
I don’t think it’s "what others should be trying to write". It IS, indeed, a great article, and a nice one to have in the database. However, you must understand that different players have different tastes, and may not appreciate if all we did was write articles on formats. So, I think that right now we’ve reached a nice mix. This month we have physco’s format article; 2 decks of mine discussing strategy for both casual and more competitive play; Grail’s article on cards and how to spot good cards, for that matter; and bubble king’s article solely on strategy, breaking down a card he liked. I think that we have articles to serve a lot of different tastes this month, and THAT’S what counts. Yes, physco’s article was supreme, but you must admit that it IS an easier topic to "get supreme" ( ). I just hope he wins this month, so he keeps his promise and writes one for each of the other formats, as well. You have to broaden you horizons, so you can appreciate different ideas in different ways. For instance, La_Sin_Grail plays Standard, but I bet this didn’t stop him from enjoying this article as much as I did (maybe less than I did, ok, but still). |
| I don't like YOU. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| inresponse |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 6:14 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 162
Location:
|
| Obv not everyone should write on formats. everyone should look for new areas to cover, and write articles on that. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| physcosick |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 7:06 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 229
Location:
|
r2d2quino wrote: You see, when you started giving decklists, that’s for newbies, so explain why those decks ae good. Since you suggest they netdeck some of’em, teach’em how to play with them! Go deeper in the analysis, I mean, the article is already big anyway, might as well cover the whole thing.
I wrote 2 paragraphs (one at the top of the deck and one at the bottom of the deck) explaining the deck and how to play it. I could have gone into a lot bigger detail; however, this article is about the format and not specifically about the decks. I was supposed to write an extended article for the extended deck clinics. So if you want to learn more about the deck and critique/discuss it, thats what the deck clinic is for.
r2d2quino wrote: For the experienced players, you say there is a huge card pool to choose from (and that’s true), so show’em! Take the best Standard builds, and show how to make’em stronger with the cards available in Extended!
I don’t want to hand you guys everything on a shiny platter. Part of the skills/challenges of playing magic is being able to build a deck. Again, this is for extended and any deck adjustments belong in either the deck clinic or another type of article... my article is neither.
r2d2quino wrote: Also, talk about Extended tournaments.
I had a whole section on it.
r2d2quino wrote: Why are some cards banned in Extended?
Did you even read my article or were you not paying any attention while your eyes moved from word to word? I, again, had a whole section on it and I even wrote a few sentences explaining the power of each of those cards.
I understand that my article is quite large but missing some areas while reading shouldn’t take away from my vote or your opinion. I’m assuming you were the one who gave me a 4/5. Thank you, but next time read the article in full, understand it, make an intelligent response, than wait for me to counter it to see if you have any new understanding of the article in case you missed something.
Sorry if I was rude, but if people are going to be voting for the article, I’d appreciate it if they read it or atleast appeared as if he read it. I’m doing this for both of us so hopefully you will become a better poster... mutually beneficial. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| r2d2quino |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:22 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 29 Aug 2006
Posts: 49
Location:
|
Ouch! But ok, seeing your article is very nice, I’ll "learn the lesson". You see, I was trying to say "add more" to the texts’ body, not that you missed areas completely (I may have mixed up some things, you know, I read about 20-25 articles from the whole site today, to get the hang of it, very sorry). But then I went through some other articles on the site, and I realized you did the right thing, I actually saw readers complain because of a big article. At least I’m not that newbie, heh? But still, don’t worry, I am a fair judge, I haven’t been unfair on my grade, I think.
Oh, I posted an extended deck, could you help me with it? The idea is very nice! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| physcosick |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:24 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 229
Location:
|
r2d2quino wrote: (I may have mixed up some things, you know, I read about 20-25 articles from the whole site today, to get the hang of it, very sorry)
I’ll check out the deck clinic. I’m not promising anything special, but I’ll try. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| mojo |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 10:50 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 09 Aug 2006
Posts: 32
Location: your mom
|
| great article bro, i’ll give you a 5 because it was amzingly insightful....not to mention you added some great examples of decks...gonna write any follow up articles any new up and coming decks? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| physcosick |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:06 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 229
Location:
|
| I don’t like writting on decks that are already mainstream... but that’s future-physcosick’s problem. I suppose I might have to write some more format articles for Cobra. But I would like to do some other things that I have been pondering over for quite some time. I would really like to delve deeper into other non-popular formats that don’t get a lot of attention but are a lot of fun. Hopefully I can do this in the future so you guys can learn about other formats out there that are a lot of fun. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
| Felipe Musco |
![]() Posted: Thu Aug 31, 2006 11:20 pm |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 May 2006
Posts: 2434
Location: Florianópolis, SC, Brasil
|
YEY!!!! It’s past midnight on the site!!! I bow to this month’s well deserved winner (and my bet from day one) on the Article Contest (finally, since he was runner-up the last time): physcosick! 
Proud to have you as a member of our subgroup, bro! Oh, yeah, inresponse, mojo, you guys take a look at our "little group", tell me what you think about the idea (I’m not asking for members, you know, just opinions are nice enough), we may be starting to pull out something pioneer ’round here!
Physco, well done again! Write an Article on Legacy, PLEASE!!!! And one on Two-Headed Giant, where even MOXES are legal!!! Heck, I’m writing one on that myself! Nah, you do it, you’re better anyway.
EDIT: Wow, unless I get really underrated from now on, am I runner-up? To physco’s article?  Man, I’m proud! Hope it stays that way! |
| I don't like YOU. |
|
| Back to top |
|
| physcosick |
![]() Posted: Fri Sep 01, 2006 1:01 am |
|
|
|
Joined: 18 Oct 2005
Posts: 229
Location:
|
| Who gave me a 3? I don’t see any replies! Who gave me a 3 and y? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
All times are UTC - 4
|
|
Forum index » Magic: The Gathering » MTG Strategy Article Contest
