fbpx

22 thoughts on “Channel LSV: M10 Draft #1 – Match 3, Game 3”

  1. Awesome draft, definitely helped me evaluate some cards. Also, thanks for removing the intro to the videos! The quite version is MUCH better. =)

  2. I love your draft videos not just for the picks, but for the verbal justification you make for most plays. You constantly give solid examples and usually have something to say out loud about each of your own and your opponents plays. For instance “I can keep playing out lands here because I have yet to see mind rot” This is the kind of advice that can help players take their games to the next level. Thanks.

  3. In the last video, you also said “If I had known he had windstorm, I would have put magebane armor on the drake” and you also said when sideboarding “Since I know he has fireball, I will sideboard negate” These are the kind of insights that I find extremely useful, and I thoroughly enjoy listening to you analyze an opponents strategy and effectively sideboard against it. Two thumbs and two big toes up.

  4. Wow. In that last game, when you ice caged his llanowar elves, you played around overrun, which is why I think he played multiple guys. You wouldve lost and I dont think you had the read during your commentary. Way to be a champ

  5. @ThePedestrian: Why *wouldn’t* he play multiple guys?
    I mean it’s possible he had overrun and I was thinking it was one of his possible outs too, but I definately don’t think multiple creatures = overrun in hand.
    He had nothing better to do but play creatures, so he had no reason to keep them in hand uselessly.

    @LSV: Thanks for posting up another draft video! It was great to see a new format being drafted and hearing you talk about your picks.
    I didn’t agree with you on all of them but I haven’t drafted M10 myself yet so my evaluations are probably off.
    I really liked the explanations in the draft, the games and the sideboarding.
    Can’t wait to see the next set of vids 😀

  6. Was this really an 8-4 que? the decks you are fighting seem to be really really sub-par (2 looming shades in a 3 color deck..?). I don’t mean to sound disrespectful here, and I fully appreciate the effort you’ve put into this video series. It just seems like your opponents didn’t belong in an 8-4 this time round.

  7. Isnt Llanowar elves not an activated ability but a mana source so ice cage wouldnt have prevented him to overrun??

  8. pretty sure ice cage stops it.

    and yeah, i thought he was awesomely (unaware?) playing around overrun too 🙂

    sooo happy to see this up. hope many many more follow.

  9. Ice Cage doesn’t stop Llanowar Elves from making G; mana ability, not activated.

    For the rest: stop keeping those 1 land hands and win.
    😉

    E.

  10. Mana abilities are actually activated abilities with a special role, as per the Comprehensive Rules, 605.1a – An activated ability without a target that could put mana into a player’s mana pool when it resolves is a mana ability.

    Because the Llanowar Elve’s mana ability is also an activated ability by definition, it will in fact be stopped by Ice Cage. If the Ice Cage were to specify that it does not affect mana abilities, then it wouldn’t prevent the elves from tapping for mana. This is not the case, however, so the elves remain frozen.

  11. @Amadeus: Nice, posting the Comp. Rules for the people that weren’t sure, with the friendly explanation and everything.

    @Rubdown: Way to chime in after Amadeus quotes the Comprehensive Rules so you don’t have to worry about possibly being wrong.
    +1 Internet Tough Guy Point!

  12. I believe that the ice cage should have been played on the runeclaw bears to avoid overrun. With a drawn forest and overrun in hand, the opponent wins.

  13. That “might as well play a land”-thinking was blatantly wrong. There is no downside in holding that land in your hand, except for the vague possibility of a Mind Shatter, or drawing another land from a topdecked Divination, and needing to play it. The odds of your opponent having an unseen Mind Rot are far higher than that. You have no need to have available mana for both the Safe Passage and Divine Verdict in case you draw another land.

  14. I dont understand the Verdict play. What was your thinking to get rid of a 2/1 over a potentially much bigger threat (sp? (no check!)) when your creatures are mostly fliers already, and not to mention you already had one on the board, albeit not atm due to Magebane, but none the less a flier either way. All Im saying is that you would still have to deal with another creature one way of the other, and racing a 2/1 with a 4/6 equals huge advantage in your favor, and racing an increasingly bigger and bigger dude with mana, seems much more risky to me. I cant say that it was a bad play, I just dont see your reasoning in it. Comments?

  15. I was also thinking overrun when he let it all through. If you ice cage the bears then even if he draws a forest it doesn’t go lethal (I’m assuming an ice caged elf can’t tap for mana, but I honestly don’t know). That might have been the better play, but then again you’ve seen windstorm already. If he was on overrun and you CAN tap ice caged elves for mana, that’s some bad beats for the other guy.

  16. The confusion with Ice Cage and mana abilities is coming from cards that *counter* activated abilities (like Stifle) rather than prevent them from being activated. The game has funny timing rules for mana abilities: you are allowed to use mana abilities in the middle of playing a spell to pay for it, so allowing such an ability to be countered would cause headaches.

    Another part of the confusion is that some cards (like Pithing Needle) prevent the activation of abilities from a whole group of cards. There is no rules justification for this — it would just lead to game play situations that were not fun if you could name Forest with Pithing Needle and completely shutdown a monogreen deck. Ice Cage doesn’t fall into this category though since it is an aura that only affects one permanent.

  17. Oops, in the second paragraph above, add the sentence “These cards specifically say that they do not prevent mana abilities.” before “There is no rules justification…”

Comments are closed.

Scroll to Top