What makes a type 2 deck

The same is true for Magic. As a professional player for almost fifteen years, who has played almost every type of deck, I still find myself considering difficulty in my deck selection.

For example, not that long ago, I was going to play a Legacy tournament, and I played a couple of games with Storm. There are many reasons why even an experienced player wants to consider deck difficulty. Maybe you decide to go to a tournament on a whim with a format you never play. Knowing deck difficulty is also important to understand how representative your testing is. Generally speaking, there are a lot of factors that can make a deck hard to play properly.

Here are some of them:. If a deck has multiple cards it can play in the same turn, then that increases dramatically the number of ways you can make a mistake. Take, for example, a Legacy Delver deck—you can play a Delver or a Brainstorm turn 1, then you can Daze their spell or not, then you can put one card back or another, and so on.

From turn 1, you have a lot of possible plays. The number of possible mistakes you can make is very relevant, but so is the degree. Now, if you take a deck like Storm or Hardened Scales, you can win or lose the game with one decision, which makes them harder decks in my book.

A deck can also be difficult because it requires a lot of brain power to operate. This is the case for Amulet or KCI. You can quickly identify them, which means that you can afford to spend time playing around, say, Surgical Extraction. This is what Cyrus Corman-Gill was mostly referring to. I don't remember the exact deck list, but it was pretty tight for a first tournament deck--it had 4 Lightning Bolts, 4 Erhnams, 4 Incinerates, 4 Tinder Walls, Ball Lightnings, and more.

He was so mad that I beat him. After I won he scolded me for my bad plays. As most players eventually learn, direct damage should be saved as removal and only used directly on the opponent if it will provide a finishing blow. Most beginners, like I was, just draw direct damage off the top of the deck and target their opponent with it.

This is what I did every game of our match and this was why he was so mad. In retrospect, it was probably the right play to just use the direct damage on him because his only creatues were a few Serra Angels and with all his counter magic I had already lost when that card saw play. I eventually went on to place third in the tournament, with my only loss coming to a Thalid deck a matchup where my misplay of direct damage would definitely hurt me.

This player lost in the finals to a Necro deck played by none other than Chris Pantages, a fairly infamous player from Northern California. It was so funny, when Alliances first came out, everyone was drooling over cards such as Balduvian Hordes, and Helm of Obedience.

But there was this older chinese man who used to play at Place to Play who told me that Thawing Glaciers was the best card in the set. I was sure glad I did when Thawing Glaciers got hot and they were needed for every single deck. This reminds of how much Magic has changed from these days of old to the modern science of deck building that surrounds us now.

Cards are rarely ever overlooked these days. During this time the most popular deck was of course the infamous Necro deck. Wizards of the Coast somehow made the mistake of restricting Land Tax a popular defense against Hymn to Tourach while given Necro even more weapons in Alliances most notably Contagion and Dystopia.

My setup uses a bias frequency of 85 kHz but I don't expect frequencies higher than 11 kHz to be recorded. Any XLII users can confirm this? My big question is Type I tape is readily available almost anywhere, dirt cheap. You can get it on eBay all day, sealed, for under 50 cents a tape. Just about any length is available too. So why bother trying to use something that's more expensive, harder to come by, and not designed for the machine you're using?

Just for fun? Have a surplus of Type II tapes? Arrange a trade. Lastly, the tape speed is determined by the unit. If one tape is actually running slower than the other, I would suspect super tight tape pack or bad lubrication. I have just tried recoding my first type II tape, it was a late 90's brand new sony tape, I tried it on an old early 80's deck set, turntable, radio and cassette; no special switches, just a pause button, haha!

I recorded on the same way I do it with my type I tapes, so what happened was that the sound was amazingly clear, no problems or anything! For someone who has grown up with cheap recorders, I have accustomed to their sound. Seriously, I could have just listened to CDs or MP3 to make my life real easy but you can't experiment with them much, perhaps look at this way - different cassette and recorder combinations create different "sounds", I'm trying to find the "sounds" that I like.

Point taken Velktron. If you record a type II cassette in a deck designed only for type I or in a manual deck set for type I you certainly will find the bass is reduced and the mid tones may be clearer.

If this is what you want, it's not necessarily a bad idea. I did this precisely once. I took a handheld cassette recorder to a medieval festival where I wanted to record a reenactment battle involving cannon, horses and soldiers with swords etc. I didn't want too much bass as I knew the cannon and the PA used by the commentator might actually end up sounding distorted. Instead, Kibler chooses to utilize large creatures, and plenty of them.

With no enchantments in his deck, Kibler leaves many of his opponents with dead cards in their deck game one. After sideboard, Kibler has been dominating the other Fires decks with his sideboard tech of Armadillo Cloak - an enchantment that not only makes his creature very difficult to stop, but also makes it impossible for an opponent to simply try and win the damage race.

Armageddon helps Kibler win the control matchups. The second most popular deck archetype in this Top 8 are the Rebel strategies. Played by Cornelissen and Budde, their two decks represent the two schools of thought behind designing a Rebel deck in this format. Most of the successful Rebel decks are splashing another color - not so much for the spells this additional color might provide, but to protect themselves from Flashfires, or even an early Massacre.

Most players opted to splash blue for this purpose. Budde's deck is somewhat less protected against Flashfires than similar versions, but it certainly has worked well for him. Kamiel Cornelissen is playing a much more controlling deck with fewer Rebels but a lot more countermagic. His deck is especially strong against blue-white control, an archetype that was extremely popular in this tournament but did not do particularly well.