Big "Kiki-Chord doesn't play Kiki-Jiki" energy. I've won MTGO games on devoted druid combo by starting to make infinite mana without a win con in hand. You gotta make them show it to you.
Years ago, I made the top 8 in a big local tournament. I was playing burn and my opponent was playing Klark-clan Ironworks. Ironworks was a very new deck at the time and it was the first time I was playing against it. I took game 1 and my opponent took game 2. During game three, it appeared he got his combo just as I had him down to 1 life. He looks at me and says, "I got it. Wanna wait 15 for me to ping you down to zero?" I thought to myself, 'Why drag it out? If he's got, he's got it. May as well just concede." So, I shook his hand and conceded. As I was packing up, another player walked up to our table and asked my opponent to show the combo. After a bit of back-and-forth between the two, my opponent agreed. Turned out, his combo fizzled and he didn't actually 'have it'. But, since I conceded and packed up already, it was too late to go back. This is a classic example of why you should always wait to see if your opponent has the combo--especially if you're not certain with how the deck works. Not everyone in this game is honest and it's up to us honest players to keep the dishonest ones in check
The opposite. It wasn't a top level tournament, so the prizes weren't considered worth it to spend more time playing it out after an already long tournament.
yawgmoth's will was a game changer when it came out.. still one of the greatest cards of all time.. some say if there were a Power 10... yawgmoth's will
Always, always, always make your opponent play out their win. I can't count how many durdley control decks that try to annoy their opponents out of the game I've had to deal with that had NO other win condition. Even if they do have it, at the very least you get more information.
The greatest Bluff was Tiago Chan vs Frank Karsten in a Kamigawa 2005 Limited Pro tour. Frank Karsten was going to win, but Tiago Chan feigned he had miscounted his life, luring Karsten into getting greedy and making activations to win on that turn. Chan trapped him. Had a protection spell and swung himself for lethal the next turn. This wasn’t a bluff. This wasn’t a double bluff. It was actually a triple bluff. He get in the head of one of the greatest players the game has ever seen.
I just watched a video and swapped between every resolution from 720p, 1080p, 1440p and 4k, there was no visible difference, My question is, is it RU-vid or is the Content Creator able to "game" the system and list videos that are not actually 4k, etc...? This video is sharper at 1080p than the other video at 4k, something is up.
Can you point me to the video? Hard to tell exactly what is going on without seeing it, but there could be any number of reasons for that. It is possible to render a lower resolution video in a higher resolution then upload it, but there's no real point in doing that on purpose usually. Sometimes the bitrate can drop from for example snow or confetti, and darker video tends to look significantly worse than lighter video (tom scott has great explainer videos on both of these.) Or maybe the uploader just messed something up. It's surprisingly easy to fuck up video quality depending on what you are doing.
Watch the follow up video for my unscripted commentary on this video and the previous one: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-WLT4v1fl-2w.html
This kind of thing is part of why I never scoop. A friend tried bluffing me similarly back when I first started playing, I called his bluff, and I won as a result. The other reason is that I personally love seeing things play out, even if it means I lose. It's part of why I don't even like opponents scooping when I'm about to win. I want to see my combo play out! I do understand why people do it in tournaments, of course, I'm not saying anything against those that scoop
Yeah I totally get wanting to actually play out your winning combo or see someone else's, I think for most people who play with/against the same decks long enough it just gets old seeing/playing out the same sequences of cards (although with storm there are actual decisions to be made during the combo, so it's only boring for the opponent :p).
it might have even been LSV who wrote an article saying that you should always make the other player play out their combo for precisely this reason, a piece of advice i took to heart (also I copied this strategy and bluffed a win in a FNM game when I had all my win conditions cranially extracted from my deck). I think mike long did something similar back in the day with one of his combo decks. i forget the details, but i think he was forced to hard cast his wincon early to survive, and then later his combo went off and in the middle of playing it all out said something like "do i really need to go through all this?" and the other player said no and conceded, not knowing that the wincon was a one-off in the deck.
Loved your first video, was so excited to see what tou had up next and wasn't disappointed!! What a great moment and incredible breakdown. Excited for whatever else you have planned with this channel!
Join the Discord Server! - discord.gg/sRB54zg Follow me on Twitch - twitch.tv/that_ski_freak *_______Corrections:_______* The car of tomorrow is actually not the current nascar car, as of 2022 they use the "Next Gen" car. This naming is confusing and shitty, and I'm quite frustrated that I am stuck with the wrong name in the video now. This does not affect any of the information given in the voiceover, everything I said applies to the Next Gen car (the one ross was driving), and not necessarily the car of tomorrow. The next gen car is extremely durable as I described and is likely the first one to be able to survive the wall with this minimal amount of damage. Basically only the label is wrong, substitute the name and the video is fixed. "Oh what's the new nascar car?" "It's the Next Gen car." "Yes but what's the name?" "It's Next Gen." "..."
I would argue that it's actually a terrible bluff because he gained nothing by doing it and if his opponent was even slightly stubborn he would have lost. A good bluff is one that has a high chance of success and a good return on the risk of bluffing. MTG doesn't have much bluffing because there's few opportunities to waste resources to imply strength. I've really only seen it occur with players doing things like keeping mana open unnecessarily just to imply they have an instant in their hand. I don't know that I've ever seen this accomplish anything though. Similarly you can sideboard without changing your deck composition but in practice because there is no opportunity cost everyone does this so there isn't actually any real bluff. In fact I find Magic to be a very low-strategy low-skill game outside of deckbuilding generally so I was hoping this video would show me something impressive and clever and I was disappointed it was just some guy making a really really really fucking stupid mistake.
Yeah it's just a fun story, sorry! You're mostly correct in your analysis of mtg bluffing, especially with the point about few opportunities to waste resources to imply strength. I do think the dynamic of tapping out or not does accomplish something depending on the matchup and your opponent, but the amount of impact, as with most decisions in magic, is not very clear so it's hard to really get immediate feedback on whether you actually made the right decision. In my opinion the problem isn't really that magic has low strategy/skill, but that there is a lot of it but most of the time any given decision doesn't have a big enough impact on the game and wont always matter. I have my issues with mtg and I've talked extensively about those this year with friends, maybe I'll make it into a video at some point. I do think mtg isn't the optimal version of a [whatever genre name u give it, tcg ccg etc], there's a lot more that can be improved, but not many games really build off of it, only one I can really think of as being an improvement of the overall gameplay systems is LoR (most others were just different in ways that didn't make a big improvement or attempting to streamline the overall end-user experience for a digital platform rather than make a better competitive game). If you haven't played LoR, you should check it out, you'll probably like the way the priority system works, the pass button combined with spell mana creates a lot of depth in whether you want to just wait and do nothing, and you can create a lot more 'real' bluffing situations or more often just risk management. That is in my opinion the biggest difference in gameplay between lor and magic, in lor often you want to strategically do nothing, in mtg you almost always want to spend all of your mana in the most efficient way (outside of eternal formats like legacy, which I would argue is where magic's strengths shine the most). LoR not a perfect game either, not even close, but it gives me hope that eventually the genre will move forward. The thing is wotc just has so many resources and 30 years of the game's existence to build off of, it very quickly becomes obvious when you try that one person cannot make a ccg/tcg, and gl trying to monetize it in a way that will allow you to pay people to help out that isn't complete garbage (if it's a paper game at least). Maybe at some point someone will just make a kind of 'open source' paper card game and do away with the problems of card acquisition, that would open up the deckbuilding aspect a lot more to the average person. I think also that draft puts a lot of the strategy of deckbuilding into the gameplay/tournament itself, which I like (especially when it comes to cube), the problem is that often requires like 8 people which is... inconvenient. In any case, the base question is how do you create more meaningful decisions within the gameplay. I'm going to stop here before I go on and on about my thoughts on the game, I won't try to convince you that the game is great as a strategy/bluffing game, because I don't think it is either. You can find other bluffs that would probably align more with what you were expecting, for example the settle the wreckage one, but in the end it's all the exception rather than the rule. The original concept for this video was actually to talk about a number of bluffs, but I decided to narrow the scope so I would actually be able to finish the video, although I still like that kind of concept. Anyway obviously, lsv made a really really dumb mistake here, but that doesn't mean the bluff itself didn't have any potential gain or that it wasn't possibly the best decision in many of the matches. It's not the most technically impressive bluff in mtg, it's just the one I thought made for a fun video :) I would like to ask though, what games do you think are better in some aspects, in case I haven't seen them, or any ideas you may have for a game that you would like more?
I played a ton of simic nexus and they always made me play it all the way out, probably because you can mess that one up easily, but i loved taking 10 minute turns while my opponents descended into agony
Back in 5 color ante, there was a time that I used a tutor when my opponent was a 3 life. Before the tutor resolved I asked him if he had a counterspell to stop a bolt and he just conceded. He didn't know I only had one bolt in my deck and I already played it.
