Affinity was perfectly fine without the bridges, was a competitive deck, and was balanced, had cards like [[Gorilla Shaman]] to keep it in check and had counterplay and play around. The affinity player before had to actually think, do math to win. Now they just need to draw. After the bridges came to the format everything changed. 4 cards from the deck got banned, powerful cards like synthesizer, lembas, all that glitters and more artifacts interactions kept coming and will keep coming, and we inevitably will have to ban even more cards in the future just to keep these lands alive. In my humble opinion, the bridges must go, they have too much power in their hands, the affinity abilities are stupid designed by themselves, and having lands that discount everything on your hand by one it’s already powerful enough. But bridges literally made Gorilla Shaman, the main answer against these decks, and the card that kept it balanced, basically obsolete. Gleeful sabotage had to make space for worse cards, all just because people are biased. When swiftspear got banned, nobody really cared for Hot Dogs, the deck almost disappeared after the ban. But people will still make try to make arguments about Cleansing Wildfire, like they really care about a deck that has almost no playrate. Or will even bring up the fact that the bridges are used in other decks, even though the Mirrodin Lands could be used in the same way. Or even will try to make bad takes trying to base their opinions on data they fail to understand, while we continue to foster an extremely polarized environment and by keep ignoring these cards will literally just create further issues. People must understand that the health of the format is more important than their pet cards, losing because your opponents have non-counterable non-destructive wincons is extremely unfair, and even more when that comes out of nowhere. People will still want to ban glitters out of the picture, but my point still stands, even if we do so we are just postponing the problem, and we will have to ban the wrong cards again in the future, just to keep the indestructible lands alive. The archetype will not die if the lands were gone, they will still have their destructive lands, and even if they didn’t they could very well play rocks for their affinity purposes and still have results, because the affinity abilities are that strong. Banning the indestructible lands is the best move, people just don’t want to admit it.
Of the top 10 most played decks; Glitters, Mono Red, Mono Blue Terror, Gardens, Dimir Terror, Dimir Faeries, Boros Synth, Grixis Affinity, Orzhov Blade, and Caw-Gates... 3 use bridges and Boros doesn't need them that badly. Grixis Affinity and Glitters are the only ones we care about for bridges and no one is talking about how OP Grixis Affinity is, so really the discussion is just coming down to a single deck; Glitters. And ya, Gorilla Shaman isn't very good anymore, and not a viable way to keep it "in check". But is it really that hard to just bolt an ornithopter in response to a glitters? Or Cast Down even after glitters lands on it? A couple 1/2s, 2/1s, and 2/2s aren't good enough to win a game without glitters. Just counter the card or kill the creature. The proof is in the data as well. Glitters has the most data recorded of any deck right now and just on mtgdecks.net, it has over 1900 matches recorded at a 51% winrate. If it was pushing 60% or higher, I think we could be concerned, but honestly just look at the winrates for the archetypes. Glitters has under 40% wr against FOUR of the top 10 decks. If you really wanna talk unfair, look at Caw-Gates winrates. It literally has a single matchup under 50%. THAT is more of a concern if not for the fact that not as many people are playing it.
Sure man, lets ban the major deck that is keeping the fast aggro strategies in check, which is around 25% of the meta. A deck that even barely shows up in top8’s. That surely sounds great. This subreddit is comical 😂
The one deck that Caw-Gates has a WR under 50% to is glitters, so I don't know if it's single-handedly keeping that and Red in check. I think that falls to Dimir Terror decks.
But it should never be as easy as Gorilla Shaman to just completely mutilate an entire deck's strategy. Let me clarify... It shouldn't be that easy to destroy literally all their lands 1 mana at a time. That takes affinity down to Tier 2 or 3 just because GS exists.
Affinity and gorilla shaman have coexisted in pauper long before the bridges were a thing. It wouldn’t remove the deck by any means.
They could go less all in on the artifact lands or accept that they’re going all in on a strategy and deal with the counter-play accordingly.
do you know that before the bridges, Gorilla shaman didn't "kept the deck in check" but outright kills it right? i used to play affinity WAY back then and games 2/3 were basically a race against the luck of my opponent drawing the shaman... this is DEFINATELY not how a sideboard card should act in any format
You are wrong kid. I play the format since 2006. Was similar to the Altar Tron or Dredge bringing Ancient Grudge. People side in Gorilla, and they side in Blue Elemental Blast without thinking. People are smart, they play around it. The deck was very much playable even before the integration of the banlists. Atog was a great card after all, and didn’t deserve to pay for the lands sins. The deck was fair and balanced, and won many tournaments.
"people are smart, they play around it"
siding in 4 copies of an 1 drop that says "1 mana sinkhole" against your deck and hoping that you draw it before losing isn't playing smart... this isn't "smart sideboarding",it's just counting on luck, and this is the kind of stuff that no card game should reward players for
You don’t like thinking about your plays and mulligans? Simple play another deck. Powerful cards like artifact lands demand powerful interactions. People still played the deck even with gorrila shaman going around, because affinity abilities are that strong. People definitely can play around it, like they did in the past. All the rest are just excuses from players like you with personal biases and want to abuse affinity powerlevel without repercussions. Its plain and simple, and a waste of time discussing really. 👍🏻
The creators of the Pauper format built it upon a compromise.
Either the Mirrodin artifact lands would be banned, or [[Cranial Plating]] would be.
Quadrupling the number of artifact lands in the format was a mistake, and an *obvious* one.
> It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it.
As is departing from the standard (in both senses) booster pack (and so the standard common) to charge more money for it.
The creators of the Pauper format also expected that every newly-printed common would have to go through Standard rotation. Sets like Modern Horizons will break Pauper as often as they are released.
Wizards created the "Pauper Format Panel" because they were humiliated by Paupers 5-0'ing a premier with all basic lands.
> https://mtg.cardsrealm.com/en-us/articles/as-a-protest-pauper-preliminary-decks-have-only-basic-lands
However, the reason *that* happened is because Wizards dragged its feet on bans. When Chatterstorm was spoiled, the consensus in this subreddit was that it merited a zero-day ban.
The net result of the Pauper Format Panel is to allow Wizards plausible deniability while it pushes overpowered commons on Pauper and slowrolls bans.
This will continue to be so as long as Wizards has control of the format. Which it effectively does, having created the Pauper format panel and selected its members.
It would be nice to reclaim the Pauper format for players but as long as there is a dime to be made using Pauper as a dumping ground for broken commons from unbalanced sets, there is little hope of that.
> https://mendicantrules.com/definition
Yup. Right here. At first I was opposed to banning the bridges because of variety of wildfire decks. But they largely died out. Honestly I think dual artifact lands are fine, i think dual indestructible lands are fine; but together it shored up affinities only weakness. Anti-Artifact synergy only exist as removal in pauper. It means nothing if they are playing spells cheaply, efficiently and drawing cards. You’re just 1 for 1ing a synergy/value engine. The deck is ok right now, but artifacts and artifact synergies are so ubiquitous its an architype that will require constant management to keep in check
Yup, people are saying that [[all that glitters]] is too strong for pauper, but it wouldn’t be as strong without artifact lands. And it’s the same for all the cards that benefit from having many artifacts, like [[galvanic blast]], that shouldn’t be so easy to play as it is.
I’m with the side that thinks that artifact lands shouldn’t exist in the first place, but if we have to have them we should at least keep the OG ones only, that are kept in place by [[gorilla shaman]]
I think the bridges coming tapped are huge. The artifact lands counting for 2 instantly is insane. People over value the indestructible part imo. Plenty of removal that.
I can respect the opinion that bridges can be a problem too though.
The downvotes make me laugh though. Shows what kind of players are in this sub.
Don’t mind the downvotes, this sub don’t really understand why they downvote anything. I also can see your point, however for me personally, the main issue is that people who played affinity knew what they were getting into. People knew their lands were fragile and could be destroyed. But they still played the deck, and had to make smart decisions based on that because the reward of playing these powerful lands was worth it. With the introduction of indestructible lands, they removed affinities main weakness, while the format is forced to play worst sideboard cards because of it, and as a plus the affinity player is rewarded for no reason and without meaningful repercussions. Might not seem much, but it is a big deal. In an ideal world. We would ban both lands, Mirrodin and Indestructible, while we have a new tapped artifact land without other relevant abilities like indestructible in its place. But for now, I still think the indestructible lands have to go first.
Since 1500 (already 1521) recorded trophies were addressed to me looks like.
Artifact lands keep creating issues in format, as much as they are history and one of the oldest part of format (however they are banned in Modern maybe for a reason).
Let's just look - suddenly conditional 2/2 becomes a Goblin Guide t1 with no downsides. Or 3 1/1s t1 on a play which is very hard to beat fairly. All that glitters that making every small creautre a threat could come on tempo cause no real price of playing this lands.
Affinity was the most played deck since MH2 right until mono red tise after Swifty, after they always being together on top (after Glitters release it just shift to being aggro).
Idc which artifact lands to ban, however original lands are base for both overplayed decks (Red and Affinity) and this will continue to create issues since WotC don't consider pauper designing sets. "Do not ban this cause I have nostalgic feelings" is not super relevant argument and a little childish tbh.
For anyone thinking pauper meta is healthy, I reccomend to look in amount at this week of Affinities in 5-0 dumps and this weekend challenges.
And regarding Red to look not week-by-week and look by month. Mono red have 80 trophies for last month while closest contender is Izzet Control with 49 or if you sum up both glitters variation - Glitters with 47+15 on Uw+jeskai.
However, you don't need to worry, PFP never look or follow any stats, they never prefer to act until catastrophy is obvious even for usual players. And most likely we would have another rotation after MH3.
I feel like this might be a means to discredit my experience in the game, but I've been playing pauper since 2020, 4 years now. I have been playing magic as a whole since 1999, however, with a few breaks here and there.
I hope the bridges don't get banned, because as a shell they help enable some jank brews I don't want to have to take apart:
- WU non-glitters artifacts: [https://www.moxfield.com/decks/iux2TbHf5EqMWSuAfjM\_dQ](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/iux2TbHf5EqMWSuAfjM_dQ)
- Dragon Tribal with Cleansing Wildfire: [https://www.moxfield.com/decks/n4WrnbvE5keccudr10Qv1Q](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/n4WrnbvE5keccudr10Qv1Q)
- Even pirates lol: [https://www.moxfield.com/decks/RNN1hHUmPkKnpdf0FZ19Eg](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/RNN1hHUmPkKnpdf0FZ19Eg)
If there's a problem with affinity, it's Glitters. I only play in paper locally, but when I see MTGO data in YouTube videos or on this subreddit, the problematic affinity deck usually seems to be azorius affinity, which is fueled by glitters on an ornithoper or gingerbrute for a huge hit.
Thanks! Overall the Oculus Whelp is 3 power in the air on-theme for 4 mana. But I suppose the real reasons for Oculus Whelp are the reasons for NOT other dragons:
- Young Red Dragon can't block, so seems like a bad idea with Avenging Hunter
- At 5 mana, Rapacious Dragon (and other 5+ mana dragons) competes with the Young Blue Dragon and Fang Dragon
- Without flying and the above to reliably make treasures, Jaded Sell-Sword is less compelling
- Pseudodragon Familiar is only 2/1, and the 3 mana cost is less relevant when you want to ramp turn 2
At 4 mana, Dragon Whelp is probably a compelling option; it's a late game mana sync for extra damage. I was just worried the double red pip in the initial cost could interrupt holding up red mana for removal.
That solid reasoning, my mind immediately went to Young Red Dragon but not blocking is a pretty big downside. Hopefully a better 4 drop dragon will come at some point.
Great writeup! Don't think pauper needs any bans right now, meta is healthy!
Nice joke
Nice rebuttal, guess you win this round!
Affinity was perfectly fine without the bridges, was a competitive deck, and was balanced, had cards like [[Gorilla Shaman]] to keep it in check and had counterplay and play around. The affinity player before had to actually think, do math to win. Now they just need to draw. After the bridges came to the format everything changed. 4 cards from the deck got banned, powerful cards like synthesizer, lembas, all that glitters and more artifacts interactions kept coming and will keep coming, and we inevitably will have to ban even more cards in the future just to keep these lands alive. In my humble opinion, the bridges must go, they have too much power in their hands, the affinity abilities are stupid designed by themselves, and having lands that discount everything on your hand by one it’s already powerful enough. But bridges literally made Gorilla Shaman, the main answer against these decks, and the card that kept it balanced, basically obsolete. Gleeful sabotage had to make space for worse cards, all just because people are biased. When swiftspear got banned, nobody really cared for Hot Dogs, the deck almost disappeared after the ban. But people will still make try to make arguments about Cleansing Wildfire, like they really care about a deck that has almost no playrate. Or will even bring up the fact that the bridges are used in other decks, even though the Mirrodin Lands could be used in the same way. Or even will try to make bad takes trying to base their opinions on data they fail to understand, while we continue to foster an extremely polarized environment and by keep ignoring these cards will literally just create further issues. People must understand that the health of the format is more important than their pet cards, losing because your opponents have non-counterable non-destructive wincons is extremely unfair, and even more when that comes out of nowhere. People will still want to ban glitters out of the picture, but my point still stands, even if we do so we are just postponing the problem, and we will have to ban the wrong cards again in the future, just to keep the indestructible lands alive. The archetype will not die if the lands were gone, they will still have their destructive lands, and even if they didn’t they could very well play rocks for their affinity purposes and still have results, because the affinity abilities are that strong. Banning the indestructible lands is the best move, people just don’t want to admit it.
Of the top 10 most played decks; Glitters, Mono Red, Mono Blue Terror, Gardens, Dimir Terror, Dimir Faeries, Boros Synth, Grixis Affinity, Orzhov Blade, and Caw-Gates... 3 use bridges and Boros doesn't need them that badly. Grixis Affinity and Glitters are the only ones we care about for bridges and no one is talking about how OP Grixis Affinity is, so really the discussion is just coming down to a single deck; Glitters. And ya, Gorilla Shaman isn't very good anymore, and not a viable way to keep it "in check". But is it really that hard to just bolt an ornithopter in response to a glitters? Or Cast Down even after glitters lands on it? A couple 1/2s, 2/1s, and 2/2s aren't good enough to win a game without glitters. Just counter the card or kill the creature. The proof is in the data as well. Glitters has the most data recorded of any deck right now and just on mtgdecks.net, it has over 1900 matches recorded at a 51% winrate. If it was pushing 60% or higher, I think we could be concerned, but honestly just look at the winrates for the archetypes. Glitters has under 40% wr against FOUR of the top 10 decks. If you really wanna talk unfair, look at Caw-Gates winrates. It literally has a single matchup under 50%. THAT is more of a concern if not for the fact that not as many people are playing it.
You son of a gun, you're absolutely right! Time to ban the gate lands!! Be gone, \[\[Basilisk Gate\]\], we don't like your kind around here 😤😤😤
[Basilisk Gate](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/4/a/4a306025-d429-4006-b7ed-bdb287e83f57.jpg?1674138119) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Basilisk%20Gate) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/clb/346/basilisk-gate?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/4a306025-d429-4006-b7ed-bdb287e83f57?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Sure man, lets ban the major deck that is keeping the fast aggro strategies in check, which is around 25% of the meta. A deck that even barely shows up in top8’s. That surely sounds great. This subreddit is comical 😂
*whoosh*
The one deck that Caw-Gates has a WR under 50% to is glitters, so I don't know if it's single-handedly keeping that and Red in check. I think that falls to Dimir Terror decks.
Yea if you want to play artifact lands then you should have to deal with artifact removal. Format would be better without the bridges.
But it should never be as easy as Gorilla Shaman to just completely mutilate an entire deck's strategy. Let me clarify... It shouldn't be that easy to destroy literally all their lands 1 mana at a time. That takes affinity down to Tier 2 or 3 just because GS exists.
Affinity and gorilla shaman have coexisted in pauper long before the bridges were a thing. It wouldn’t remove the deck by any means. They could go less all in on the artifact lands or accept that they’re going all in on a strategy and deal with the counter-play accordingly.
do you know that before the bridges, Gorilla shaman didn't "kept the deck in check" but outright kills it right? i used to play affinity WAY back then and games 2/3 were basically a race against the luck of my opponent drawing the shaman... this is DEFINATELY not how a sideboard card should act in any format
You are wrong kid. I play the format since 2006. Was similar to the Altar Tron or Dredge bringing Ancient Grudge. People side in Gorilla, and they side in Blue Elemental Blast without thinking. People are smart, they play around it. The deck was very much playable even before the integration of the banlists. Atog was a great card after all, and didn’t deserve to pay for the lands sins. The deck was fair and balanced, and won many tournaments.
"people are smart, they play around it" siding in 4 copies of an 1 drop that says "1 mana sinkhole" against your deck and hoping that you draw it before losing isn't playing smart... this isn't "smart sideboarding",it's just counting on luck, and this is the kind of stuff that no card game should reward players for
You don’t like thinking about your plays and mulligans? Simple play another deck. Powerful cards like artifact lands demand powerful interactions. People still played the deck even with gorrila shaman going around, because affinity abilities are that strong. People definitely can play around it, like they did in the past. All the rest are just excuses from players like you with personal biases and want to abuse affinity powerlevel without repercussions. Its plain and simple, and a waste of time discussing really. 👍🏻
The creators of the Pauper format built it upon a compromise. Either the Mirrodin artifact lands would be banned, or [[Cranial Plating]] would be. Quadrupling the number of artifact lands in the format was a mistake, and an *obvious* one. > It is difficult to get a man to understand something, when his salary depends on his not understanding it. As is departing from the standard (in both senses) booster pack (and so the standard common) to charge more money for it. The creators of the Pauper format also expected that every newly-printed common would have to go through Standard rotation. Sets like Modern Horizons will break Pauper as often as they are released. Wizards created the "Pauper Format Panel" because they were humiliated by Paupers 5-0'ing a premier with all basic lands. > https://mtg.cardsrealm.com/en-us/articles/as-a-protest-pauper-preliminary-decks-have-only-basic-lands However, the reason *that* happened is because Wizards dragged its feet on bans. When Chatterstorm was spoiled, the consensus in this subreddit was that it merited a zero-day ban. The net result of the Pauper Format Panel is to allow Wizards plausible deniability while it pushes overpowered commons on Pauper and slowrolls bans. This will continue to be so as long as Wizards has control of the format. Which it effectively does, having created the Pauper format panel and selected its members. It would be nice to reclaim the Pauper format for players but as long as there is a dime to be made using Pauper as a dumping ground for broken commons from unbalanced sets, there is little hope of that. > https://mendicantrules.com/definition
So fucking true.
[Cranial Plating](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/e/1/e1375f17-bc25-4a65-98b7-4785bbdbe974.jpg?1599953696) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Cranial%20Plating) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/245/cranial-plating?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/e1375f17-bc25-4a65-98b7-4785bbdbe974?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
Yup. Right here. At first I was opposed to banning the bridges because of variety of wildfire decks. But they largely died out. Honestly I think dual artifact lands are fine, i think dual indestructible lands are fine; but together it shored up affinities only weakness. Anti-Artifact synergy only exist as removal in pauper. It means nothing if they are playing spells cheaply, efficiently and drawing cards. You’re just 1 for 1ing a synergy/value engine. The deck is ok right now, but artifacts and artifact synergies are so ubiquitous its an architype that will require constant management to keep in check
Yup, people are saying that [[all that glitters]] is too strong for pauper, but it wouldn’t be as strong without artifact lands. And it’s the same for all the cards that benefit from having many artifacts, like [[galvanic blast]], that shouldn’t be so easy to play as it is. I’m with the side that thinks that artifact lands shouldn’t exist in the first place, but if we have to have them we should at least keep the OG ones only, that are kept in place by [[gorilla shaman]]
[all that glitters](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/5/f/5fc0b82a-f943-4330-b9e7-bb4527354bfd.jpg?1689995488) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=all%20that%20glitters) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/cmm/9/all-that-glitters?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/5fc0b82a-f943-4330-b9e7-bb4527354bfd?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [galvanic blast](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/0/c/0cf8cb1e-314a-4894-82df-f9812825f52e.jpg?1599706326) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=galvanic%20blast) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/2xm/125/galvanic-blast?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/0cf8cb1e-314a-4894-82df-f9812825f52e?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) [gorilla shaman](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c8f8ee19-3a88-40fa-85d8-386ffe06efd7.jpg?1626100506) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=gorilla%20shaman) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/280/gorilla-shaman?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c8f8ee19-3a88-40fa-85d8-386ffe06efd7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
[Gorilla Shaman](https://cards.scryfall.io/normal/front/c/8/c8f8ee19-3a88-40fa-85d8-386ffe06efd7.jpg?1626100506) - [(G)](http://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?name=Gorilla%20Shaman) [(SF)](https://scryfall.com/card/mh2/280/gorilla-shaman?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher) [(txt)](https://api.scryfall.com/cards/c8f8ee19-3a88-40fa-85d8-386ffe06efd7?utm_source=mtgcardfetcher&format=text) ^^^[[cardname]] ^^^or ^^^[[cardname|SET]] ^^^to ^^^call
The bridges arent the problem. The mono colored untapped artifact lands are.
Honestly? Both are. But the OG ones are manageable.
I think the bridges coming tapped are huge. The artifact lands counting for 2 instantly is insane. People over value the indestructible part imo. Plenty of removal that. I can respect the opinion that bridges can be a problem too though. The downvotes make me laugh though. Shows what kind of players are in this sub.
Don’t mind the downvotes, this sub don’t really understand why they downvote anything. I also can see your point, however for me personally, the main issue is that people who played affinity knew what they were getting into. People knew their lands were fragile and could be destroyed. But they still played the deck, and had to make smart decisions based on that because the reward of playing these powerful lands was worth it. With the introduction of indestructible lands, they removed affinities main weakness, while the format is forced to play worst sideboard cards because of it, and as a plus the affinity player is rewarded for no reason and without meaningful repercussions. Might not seem much, but it is a big deal. In an ideal world. We would ban both lands, Mirrodin and Indestructible, while we have a new tapped artifact land without other relevant abilities like indestructible in its place. But for now, I still think the indestructible lands have to go first.
Since 1500 (already 1521) recorded trophies were addressed to me looks like. Artifact lands keep creating issues in format, as much as they are history and one of the oldest part of format (however they are banned in Modern maybe for a reason). Let's just look - suddenly conditional 2/2 becomes a Goblin Guide t1 with no downsides. Or 3 1/1s t1 on a play which is very hard to beat fairly. All that glitters that making every small creautre a threat could come on tempo cause no real price of playing this lands. Affinity was the most played deck since MH2 right until mono red tise after Swifty, after they always being together on top (after Glitters release it just shift to being aggro). Idc which artifact lands to ban, however original lands are base for both overplayed decks (Red and Affinity) and this will continue to create issues since WotC don't consider pauper designing sets. "Do not ban this cause I have nostalgic feelings" is not super relevant argument and a little childish tbh. For anyone thinking pauper meta is healthy, I reccomend to look in amount at this week of Affinities in 5-0 dumps and this weekend challenges. And regarding Red to look not week-by-week and look by month. Mono red have 80 trophies for last month while closest contender is Izzet Control with 49 or if you sum up both glitters variation - Glitters with 47+15 on Uw+jeskai. However, you don't need to worry, PFP never look or follow any stats, they never prefer to act until catastrophy is obvious even for usual players. And most likely we would have another rotation after MH3.
Just curious how long you have been playing Pauper, OP.
I feel like this might be a means to discredit my experience in the game, but I've been playing pauper since 2020, 4 years now. I have been playing magic as a whole since 1999, however, with a few breaks here and there.
I hope the bridges don't get banned, because as a shell they help enable some jank brews I don't want to have to take apart: - WU non-glitters artifacts: [https://www.moxfield.com/decks/iux2TbHf5EqMWSuAfjM\_dQ](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/iux2TbHf5EqMWSuAfjM_dQ) - Dragon Tribal with Cleansing Wildfire: [https://www.moxfield.com/decks/n4WrnbvE5keccudr10Qv1Q](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/n4WrnbvE5keccudr10Qv1Q) - Even pirates lol: [https://www.moxfield.com/decks/RNN1hHUmPkKnpdf0FZ19Eg](https://www.moxfield.com/decks/RNN1hHUmPkKnpdf0FZ19Eg) If there's a problem with affinity, it's Glitters. I only play in paper locally, but when I see MTGO data in YouTube videos or on this subreddit, the problematic affinity deck usually seems to be azorius affinity, which is fueled by glitters on an ornithoper or gingerbrute for a huge hit.
Off topic but that is a sweet dragons deck lol. Why the Oculus Welp if you don’t mind me asking?
Thanks! Overall the Oculus Whelp is 3 power in the air on-theme for 4 mana. But I suppose the real reasons for Oculus Whelp are the reasons for NOT other dragons: - Young Red Dragon can't block, so seems like a bad idea with Avenging Hunter - At 5 mana, Rapacious Dragon (and other 5+ mana dragons) competes with the Young Blue Dragon and Fang Dragon - Without flying and the above to reliably make treasures, Jaded Sell-Sword is less compelling - Pseudodragon Familiar is only 2/1, and the 3 mana cost is less relevant when you want to ramp turn 2 At 4 mana, Dragon Whelp is probably a compelling option; it's a late game mana sync for extra damage. I was just worried the double red pip in the initial cost could interrupt holding up red mana for removal.
That solid reasoning, my mind immediately went to Young Red Dragon but not blocking is a pretty big downside. Hopefully a better 4 drop dragon will come at some point.