<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Limited Resources: SOM 8-4 #2</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/</link>
	<description>The prime source for Magic the Gathering strategy</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2017 22:21:54 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
		<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.8.8</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Chippi</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3893</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Chippi]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 02 Dec 2010 17:15:46 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=10288#comment-3893</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I just watched the deck build and draft, but haven&#039;t gotten to watch the matches yet.  I&#039;m surprised no one mentioned it, but I would have played Furnace Celebration over probably dispense justice.  Seems like 3 spellbomb and 2 barrage ogre make it playable.  Also, you could have easily made more picks to support it instead of hiding it and forgetting about it.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I just watched the deck build and draft, but haven&#8217;t gotten to watch the matches yet.  I&#8217;m surprised no one mentioned it, but I would have played Furnace Celebration over probably dispense justice.  Seems like 3 spellbomb and 2 barrage ogre make it playable.  Also, you could have easily made more picks to support it instead of hiding it and forgetting about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: MightyMosy</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3628</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[MightyMosy]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 16 Nov 2010 22:33:32 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=10288#comment-3628</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[One comment on the draft section:
in Pack3 Pick 1, did you not see the Barrage Oger, or did you for some reason just discard it as an option? 
Because the way I followed your drafting, it would have seemed to me that in that specific spot it would have been the decision point you needed for your deck: Right at the end of Pack 2 you were still discussing whether you wanted to be red or black, and then you get this guy. Having two would give your deck a consistent strategy, which you could build upon with the rest of your picks (i.e. picking spellbombs even higher etc.). 
Whereas the Kemba Skyguard, at least in my limited opinion (tm) (ha, should make that a podcast :-P) is not at all thaaat impressive, and more importantly, can easily be replaced with Glint Hawks and Glint Hawk Idols which can be picked up later. 
So between an &quot;engine&quot; card that can really give your deck some late game power and just some evasive dude, I think I&#039;d take the Barrage Oger. 
What&#039;s your stance on that?

Anyway, I&#039;ll watch the rest of the video now, maybe you explain that later :-)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One comment on the draft section:<br />
in Pack3 Pick 1, did you not see the Barrage Oger, or did you for some reason just discard it as an option?<br />
Because the way I followed your drafting, it would have seemed to me that in that specific spot it would have been the decision point you needed for your deck: Right at the end of Pack 2 you were still discussing whether you wanted to be red or black, and then you get this guy. Having two would give your deck a consistent strategy, which you could build upon with the rest of your picks (i.e. picking spellbombs even higher etc.).<br />
Whereas the Kemba Skyguard, at least in my limited opinion &#8482; (ha, should make that a podcast :-P) is not at all thaaat impressive, and more importantly, can easily be replaced with Glint Hawks and Glint Hawk Idols which can be picked up later.<br />
So between an &#8220;engine&#8221; card that can really give your deck some late game power and just some evasive dude, I think I&#8217;d take the Barrage Oger.<br />
What&#8217;s your stance on that?</p>
<p>Anyway, I&#8217;ll watch the rest of the video now, maybe you explain that later <img src="http://www.mtgoacademy.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif" alt=":-)" class="wp-smiley" /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: disco_steve</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3617</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[disco_steve]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 22:50:05 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=10288#comment-3617</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Hey Marshall + Ryan, big fan of your show, too. You guys have to keep doing the videos together, Cameron is right. You guys do something that no one else does. When my group talk about cards, we disagree, we have different evaluations, you guys capture that brilliantly. Its great to see two top level players can disagree, be civil, and both make valid arguments. If I wanted to hear single commentary I could listen to the other 10 guys out there that do that (and I do), but I think it&#039;s both of your opinions that make Limited Resources special. Sure, it would be cool to see a draft with Ryan in the drivers seat, but I want Marshall there along for the ride too!]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey Marshall + Ryan, big fan of your show, too. You guys have to keep doing the videos together, Cameron is right. You guys do something that no one else does. When my group talk about cards, we disagree, we have different evaluations, you guys capture that brilliantly. Its great to see two top level players can disagree, be civil, and both make valid arguments. If I wanted to hear single commentary I could listen to the other 10 guys out there that do that (and I do), but I think it&#8217;s both of your opinions that make Limited Resources special. Sure, it would be cool to see a draft with Ryan in the drivers seat, but I want Marshall there along for the ride too!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Godot</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3615</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Godot]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 19:38:17 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=10288#comment-3615</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[@Eric: if you want to post/link some pro-level-winning, low-land decklists from the Mirrodin era (or the Scars of Mirrodin era for that matter), it would be interesting to explore why the low land count worked for those specific decks. 

I would bet that none of them were running four five drops, a six drop with a four-mana activation cost, an equipment with a four-mana equip cost that needs to be activated once a turn to not be awful, and a couple two drops that require a mana free beyond whatever artifact you are casting to be anything more than Goblin Pikers.

Beyond the curve issues, there is also the replacement issue. What card are you running over that 16th land? A warden? Seems awful to cut back to 15 lands so you can add another non-artifact metalcraft four drop. One of the suspect two drops in acolyte or sunchaser? a 1/5 for three? A Furnace Celebration that further wants you to have mana available?

Between the high curve, mana demands, and quality of the replacement options, 15 land (much less the 14 you also hinted at) just seems bad for this deck specifically, regardless of what you can say generally about mana bases in old or new Mirrodin.

Finally, I would note that in round 1, there was a point where we had five land and a myr, and I was *still* calling for an additional land because we needed it to be able to do everything we wanted to do. I recognize that it was &quot;just one game,&quot; but if your deck has six mana sources and you find yourself hoping to topdeck a seventh, it sure casts some doubt on the idea that cutting a land for a marginal spell is the right play.

Thanks for taking the time to comment and offer your perspective.

@fan: I don&#039;t remember forgetting about proliferation, but it&#039;s far from impossible, especially if we felt like we had the game in the bag. Would have to re-watch. What point in the video?

@thaen: We actually conceived of doing that initially with this series, but then fell back on the more traditional walkthrough approach. Stay tuned; we may be trying the &quot;review&quot; approach for one of our upcoming vids.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>@Eric: if you want to post/link some pro-level-winning, low-land decklists from the Mirrodin era (or the Scars of Mirrodin era for that matter), it would be interesting to explore why the low land count worked for those specific decks. </p>
<p>I would bet that none of them were running four five drops, a six drop with a four-mana activation cost, an equipment with a four-mana equip cost that needs to be activated once a turn to not be awful, and a couple two drops that require a mana free beyond whatever artifact you are casting to be anything more than Goblin Pikers.</p>
<p>Beyond the curve issues, there is also the replacement issue. What card are you running over that 16th land? A warden? Seems awful to cut back to 15 lands so you can add another non-artifact metalcraft four drop. One of the suspect two drops in acolyte or sunchaser? a 1/5 for three? A Furnace Celebration that further wants you to have mana available?</p>
<p>Between the high curve, mana demands, and quality of the replacement options, 15 land (much less the 14 you also hinted at) just seems bad for this deck specifically, regardless of what you can say generally about mana bases in old or new Mirrodin.</p>
<p>Finally, I would note that in round 1, there was a point where we had five land and a myr, and I was *still* calling for an additional land because we needed it to be able to do everything we wanted to do. I recognize that it was &#8220;just one game,&#8221; but if your deck has six mana sources and you find yourself hoping to topdeck a seventh, it sure casts some doubt on the idea that cutting a land for a marginal spell is the right play.</p>
<p>Thanks for taking the time to comment and offer your perspective.</p>
<p>@fan: I don&#8217;t remember forgetting about proliferation, but it&#8217;s far from impossible, especially if we felt like we had the game in the bag. Would have to re-watch. What point in the video?</p>
<p>@thaen: We actually conceived of doing that initially with this series, but then fell back on the more traditional walkthrough approach. Stay tuned; we may be trying the &#8220;review&#8221; approach for one of our upcoming vids.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: thaen</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3614</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[thaen]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 17:04:16 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=10288#comment-3614</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I know this would be more work for you guys, but I&#039;d love to see one person do the draft/matches, and have the other person evaluate decisions from their perspective. Kind of like how Ryan&#039;s articles at puremtgo were.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I know this would be more work for you guys, but I&#8217;d love to see one person do the draft/matches, and have the other person evaluate decisions from their perspective. Kind of like how Ryan&#8217;s articles at puremtgo were.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Norway</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3610</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Norway]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 01:26:58 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=10288#comment-3610</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[Great vid guys !]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great vid guys !</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: oma</title>
		<link>http://www.mtgoacademy.com/limited-resources-som-8-4-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3609</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[oma]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 15 Nov 2010 01:00:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.mtgoacademy.com/?p=10288#comment-3609</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The 3 land, no early play hand wasn&#039;t a snap keep but my thinking is that it&#039;s better than a new random 6.  And if I remember right, even if you didn&#039;t make a play till t4, your cards were good enough to keep the hand.   My thinking for mullies is &quot;obv&quot; 0-1 land hand, the 2 land with 5cc drops hand and the 3 land of one color and all spells of another color hand.  Your hand hand lands of both (I think) and good spells starting at 4cc.  

As far as the Skygaurd goes, my experience with it has been that if you&#039;re not ahead, the metalcraft deck will start dealing a lot more damage to you pretty quick.  And they just can&#039;t race the Infect deck at all.  The WW in the casting cost is a pain and I find that I want more arty critters if I&#039;m playing WR Metalcraft and the flying cats just take up too many spots.  I mean, I&#039;d play 2 but 3 starts taking up too many arty spots.  But I understand that UW flyers is quickly becoming very good in draft so 3+could be really good in a deck that doesn&#039;t care about metalcraft.  BTW, I&#039;m a big fan of the 2/2 metalcraft flyer.  But I like Metalcraft.

I really feel this format is a 16 land min format.  I was at the PTQ yesterday in Rockland Md and I played a terrible UB deck with 2xSilver, 1xIron, 1xGold Myr and I still played 16 lands.  2 of my 3 match losses (3-3 drop) was 1 land mullies, keep 2 land 1+myr hands, don&#039;t draw anymore lands.  However, I did have one game where I kept 2xSilver Myr, Grasp, 4 lands and drew 7 in a row...so...yea.  :(]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The 3 land, no early play hand wasn&#8217;t a snap keep but my thinking is that it&#8217;s better than a new random 6.  And if I remember right, even if you didn&#8217;t make a play till t4, your cards were good enough to keep the hand.   My thinking for mullies is &#8220;obv&#8221; 0-1 land hand, the 2 land with 5cc drops hand and the 3 land of one color and all spells of another color hand.  Your hand hand lands of both (I think) and good spells starting at 4cc.  </p>
<p>As far as the Skygaurd goes, my experience with it has been that if you&#8217;re not ahead, the metalcraft deck will start dealing a lot more damage to you pretty quick.  And they just can&#8217;t race the Infect deck at all.  The WW in the casting cost is a pain and I find that I want more arty critters if I&#8217;m playing WR Metalcraft and the flying cats just take up too many spots.  I mean, I&#8217;d play 2 but 3 starts taking up too many arty spots.  But I understand that UW flyers is quickly becoming very good in draft so 3+could be really good in a deck that doesn&#8217;t care about metalcraft.  BTW, I&#8217;m a big fan of the 2/2 metalcraft flyer.  But I like Metalcraft.</p>
<p>I really feel this format is a 16 land min format.  I was at the PTQ yesterday in Rockland Md and I played a terrible UB deck with 2xSilver, 1xIron, 1xGold Myr and I still played 16 lands.  2 of my 3 match losses (3-3 drop) was 1 land mullies, keep 2 land 1+myr hands, don&#8217;t draw anymore lands.  However, I did have one game where I kept 2xSilver Myr, Grasp, 4 lands and drew 7 in a row&#8230;so&#8230;yea.  <img src="http://www.mtgoacademy.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_sad.gif" alt=":(" class="wp-smiley" /> </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
