I was going through starcity when I noticed that there was this article about type 1. I think you'd like to read it...
http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/expandsub.php?Article=1453
This article must have only seen print to raise an uproar (as the Ferret notes in an editorial comment). Some general comments about the article:
1 No research done on the current T1 enviroment.
Parfait? AccBlue? Pox? ThreeDeuce? SBR? AzhreiSligh? All chock full of P9 
2 Poor writing. The long boring pseudo-story in the middle of the article meandered here and there and nearly put me to sleep.
I would hope that a person would atleast bother to research their topic before writing an article. But then that would clearly be too much to ask for some people.
As Sssmvc noticed as well, the article is all about type 1 seen through the eyes of a person who doesn't know squat about it. Come on, like we have a lot of decks that kill 1st turn. Academy perhaps, Trix perhaps, maybe Channel/Fireball with a god draw.
Quote: "We can tell Type One players how to make a deck: Throw together the power nine, all the restricted cards and some Counterspells — voila!"
From this article we can make up that he believes all T1 decks are 1st turn killers, all of us play with the whole restricted list(Hurkyll's Recall anybody??) and all of us are ppl who own the whole P9 cause otherwise we're not playing competative. Come on...give me a break.
At the last T1 tourney I went too like 4 ppl were playing with P9 cards and the tourney was won by an elfball dec sporting Wheel of Fortune. Not 1 P9 card in the whole deck. This guy must have never even been to a T1 tourney
Greetz from a , kinda frustated by this article, but otherwise completely satisfied T1 player who like T1 fine the way it is.
I like his note at the Beginning. He knows us too well
I hope that a whole bunch of people from here send rebuttles, I've already written. I'm so sick of people who know nothing about our beloved format going up on a big forum like *C, and trying to rip it apart. They are insulting all Type I players with their garbage.
I USED to respect the Ferret, no longer my friends, no longer. This article is a disgrace and basically sums up the ignorance that keeps T1 from growing and reaching newer players. I could write a five page retort completely humiliating the Ferret and proving every single one of his assertions wrong... but who has that kind of time?? If someone else has time to spare and a handy list of synonims for dumb@$$, i encourage you to take up the challenge.
All i can say is this; count the no. of viable decks in T2-Fires, Rebels, U/W and maybe Skies. Now count the no. of viable decks in T1-MonoBlue, Keeper, Oath, ButterKnives, Pox, Fleshreaver, Sligh, WW, Parfait, Zoo, ThreeDeuce... and i KNOW im forgetting some, not to mention the endless no. of tier 2 decks ppl play.
T1 is by far the most competitive and diverse format one can play, no matter if you have P9 or not there are viable decks for everyones tastes. The Myth of turn one kills is ridiculous, i have been playing T1 for several months and i have NEVER been killded in the first 3 turns, and thats a fact. Hopefully not too many ppl will be influenced by the Ferret's rantings and will give T1 a chance because the format cannot continue to grow without new players and it is important that all magic players know the truth about T1. Peace.
That guy was the Ferret? Who is the Ferret anyway...?
Either way, I just started this thread so as to encourage more people to reply back to that stupid article. I've made it before starting this thread.
Ferrett didn't write that article. He added that blurb in the beginning knowing that we'd retort. :P
I'm on it.
I knew Azhrei couldnt pass up a chance to stick it to the man! I was sure it was the Ferret, but i guess that shows how interested i was in the article, still he should have never allowed such drivel to be posted on his site.
I was actually discussing the idea of just posting a link to this thread or another one that we start to Star City as a kind of group rebuttal to the points raised in the article. I was actually tempted to break my tagline and talk for once and post an article myself. There doesn't seem to be any viable way to remove the mass ignorance about type 1 though, other than good old fashioned Money. If more events were held in the format with amazing prize support, more people would try to play... almost anyone would take a shot at a type 1 event if it had a large cash prize.
I wrote Ferrett, and he responded with what can only be interpretted as a plea for good type I writing to be submitted to *C. Pretty much he just says that he wants to post more good Type I stuff, but there aren't that many worthy submissions. He also said that other than the misbeliefs of Type I magic, the rest of the article was pretty good in his eyes.
a/x
My buddy wrote that article guys. Trust me, he's an avid T1 fan. He was trying to write a metaphorical story about how many of us (himself included) started playing T1 before "T1" even existed, fell out of magic because of cheese and fewer players, then came back to magic because of the new theories, new playing styles, etc. Despite what the surface says, the meaning of the article is how T1 will never be the same as it was back in the old days, now it's just "classic".
then your buddy really needs to take a writing class.
Amen.
I must say that his article could have used a good editing, although I think the BD members should be a little more open to other opinions. Just because you believe or know that someone is wrong doesn't mean you have to shout that fact in their face. People are wrong every day, and BD members are no exception. Perhaps the world would be a better place if we spent less time bitching about other people's bitching and more time setting a good example.
-Ted
it was an article, put in the public view. responses are not only natural, but should be encouraged, though it's pretty obvious people didn't read it that carefully. although it's a pretty poor attempt at a backhanded compliment of type 1, it came off very badly.
last sentence was redundant. blah.
s/pretty poor/well meaning
its sad to see how some people really don't know something too well but talk about it like they know everything.
tedv, I suggested the writing class because if he truly meant what Travis suggested he did, then he expressed himself very poorly (actually he did whether that's what he meant or not).
But he also served to reinforce commonly held misconceptions about type 1 that keep other people from trying it out. Half of the people that complain about or make fun of type one have never even played it, and these types of articles are an annoyance, because they make the problem worse.
I enjoy T1 (duh, why else am I on BDominia), and dare I say also enjoyed this article... I wonder if maybe the blaring "Type 1 Sucks" in the title didn't immediately put some of us off so much as to not give the rest of the article a fair read. Okay, the article seems kind of schizophrenic... On one hand, author says that T1 is all about the P9, it's stagnant, and elitist. And then he turns around and says that it's not the cards, it's the player's knowledge and skill; it's about neutralizing someone's broken killer combo with solid, accessible staples like Force of Will. Maybe the negative remarks were satirical? Hmmmm...
Admittedly, the whole warrior clan analogy section which comprised the bulk of the article may have gotten a little long-winded, but I don't think that it was all that poorly written. Maybe it's because I can identify or sympathize with the guy's chronology of his magic experience. I too remember the times before the PT was around (or at least that big in my area). Before T2 was the big game in town, when people would play in a weekend tournament in a residence hall for an Ali from Cairo. I still remember that tourney from ... 3-4 years ago? Pox won, if I recall... Pox! What a concept...
Wow! That's creepy!
I just wrote an article recently for my groups site, called Why Type 2 Sucks. I think i'm going to send it in.
I thought it was amusing, (did ya get the part about the Colossus and two Brass Man?) I think it was a very dry attempt to show the gaps between old school T1 and the new age T1. It was a lot of fun before FOW and Necro came out, before "THE DECK". There wasn't one or two dominating decks. The article is making fun of WOTC too. Whoever wrote it is a talented writer, (you have to read between the lines), and I'd bet he/ she loves T1. Ferret prolly posted it knowing we'd all go look at it, prolly got 1000+ hits just for today. I wonder if he's in marketing?
Hey, buddy. Go play Type 2. Hey, look! 3 playable Archetypes! Yay!
Wait, so you don't play T1, because of powerful cards? How much fun is it to see the look on your opponants face after a well timed Balance, or the screams of agony from the control player after a 1st turn Vise? Seeing as how I don't own any of the "reasons" that he doesn't play T1 (except 4 Channels, hurray!), I don't know. But I'm sure it's gotta be cool).
Saltz
If he likes type 1 so much, then he should be carefull at what he writes. Starting from the title to all type of stereotyped sentences about type 1, it's obvious that he does need some writing classes... or a psychiatrist.
If he's being satyrical, then he shouldn't have been so "subtle" as he was about what he wrote in the article. If he likes type 1 that much he should have read VERY WELL what he wrote...
I've read satyrical comments before, and those definitly don't seem like it. If they were, they were at such a level that would surpass... well, just about anybody!! If he likes type 1. IF he really likes this format, then he would have been more carefull about what he wrote, because what he's writing about gives exactly the opposite image.
I see. Read the last paragraph, it shows what he really means.
I think he's trying to give out a message that most people won't pick up from the article. (that Type 1 started magic, and that it isn't the stereotypical "Channel Ball" meta game)
Good writing, bad common sense. The majority of the people are looking for facts and fun, not this sarcastic, deeper view on magic.
GOD!
i don't care what he meant...what i care about si what people understand, and, i'm telling you, the writer must be the only one to see what he wrote that way, or almost.
"For this reason, I play Type One. I abhor it like many of you, but it’s a curse I have to deal with every day. Some of us aren’t so lucky. Just remember me when you sit down to play your "Type Two" or your "Extended". Remember the sacrifices some of us have made. Don’t look back, you… Tourists."
he abhors it, and it's a curse...I'm sorry,b ut that kind fo sarcasm doesn't work too much 8) Plus, when he jsut wrote like 3 pages long to sayt hat T1 stinks bc a draw that happens like...
(gets calculator out) less than .019% of the time?? 8)
ROTFLOL
Ok, so i think i'll post a point by point rebuttal to his arguments(not too long, i think 8), and maybe some example of decks that are only possible in T1, and very good...
sorry, it's actually less than .095% of the time 8)
(calculated as though fireball was restricted)
That was poorly written...
This article is probably meant to be saying that the idea that everyone who plays t1 plays the same deck and nothing changes is not true.
But dang, it's badly written. Such is life, I guess.
Here's something to consider: regardless of what that guy means, he is *not* a good writer by any stretch of the imagination. The whole point to any written or spoken communication is to convey ideas clearly to an audience-- something which he clearly did not do effectively. Using "big words" or formal speech does not make someone a good writer, and upon inspection that article does not do either well.
I personally am still not sold on this being a "pro-Type One" article in disguise, as what it most *obviously* conveys is a dislike and disrespect for the format and its players. If that is not what he meant, then it *is* a terribly written article. That kind of psuedo-intellenctual posturing is best left for freshman-year English majors who have yet to learn how to write clearly and concisely.
Eschew obfuscation, people. Really. Eschew it but good.
very true! (nor does going to the other extreme and falling into vulgarity, though)
anyway, what's "eschew"? 8)
hey, wanna do a critique of his writing to boot? 8)
No thanks, I'm not ridiculous. :P
www.dictionary.com: the definitive source on what words mean. ;)
LOL...
i didn't wanna go there(too lazy to even go to a website... that's a record 8); guess i'll have to
When I first read the article it left me confused -- was this against or pro Type 1? I couldn't tell. One reason was that english is not my native language, but that can't be the only reason. The whole warrior analogy was cute but confusing and unsuited for an article written under Issues and Opinions header. Maybe if it was under Casual Play header or something... Still poor judgement on his part
~Tenebrion
In case there was any confusion engendered by what I wrote, i agree totally with Azheri - it doesn't read like a por-type one article (well, a few bits of it maybe do) and reguardless, the writting was appalingly bad. I'd fail that.
I honestly couldn't understand what he was really saying underneath all that flowery sounding gibberish, so didn't really bother to try hard.
I'm not sure but I think the whole point of the thing with "The Warrior" and "The other Warriors" was telling people to quit complaining about 1st turn wins because they are easy to stop.
Maybe I'm wrong (it's not logical to write in a page what I just said in a sentance) but that's how I interpreted it.
He needs to convey his real intent better. We really shouldn't be having a discussion trying to figure out what he's trying to say.
I did, however, like the thing about the Colosus of Sardia and the two Brass Men. Rather clever way to have a phone number brought to you
this article is fuxin hilarious, how could u be indignant and all this shiat. it doesn't matter what he was saying, it was all pure jokes.
So the kettle is boiling, no? Good. I think that this discussion, this heated debate over why Type one isn't a dead format, is exactly what he was trying to accomplish. Of course we're going to take arms over the title, but someone who doesn't play the format might say, "Is what he's saying true?"
This will plant a questioning seed in their mind...Is type one all combo? Certainly not, and they may find this out if they probe further.
I find it disturbing that so many of you call this writing bad. If you overcome your initial reaction to the title and actually LOOK at the article, you might find a different story.
I'd be on the lookout for this guys next article on the subject.
I think that article helped highlight a fairly disturbing fact. I havent baan playing magic for too long,for about a yearreally. The whole magic scene in malta is very very small. Anyway, till Around 2 months ago (when i first started reading bdomina) i was linving under the impression that type 1 was all about turn one killing all the time. Now i realize how foolish i was however that is still a very prevalent opinion amongs people, and articles like that one only help propagate this ridiculous concept. I say someone hires a hitman and makes him pay
however the real problem, is that more articles of that kind get posted than real type 1 articles on any other site but bdomina. If many paople have bad ideas about type 1, its mostly due to lack of information about type1.
Actually was it really that flowery? I didn't think it sounded pretentious at all. The problem wasn't the style of language, but his word choices -- he didn't make clear what his point was.
As for having to avoid pretentious language, Azhrei, I have to disagree. It utterly depends upon who your communicating *with* and the underlying intentions.
Stephen Menendian
I never said that-- there is a marked difference between using formal and eloquent speech and speaking in such a way as to obscure your meaning from *any* audience. My term papers at college read as easily as a physics textbook for all the terminology and the sort of language I write it, but it's clear to my audience: English professors. That's a word choice and diction issue, whereas what I am decrying is destroying clarity to even those who *can* read at highly complex and formal levels by being unnecessarily unclear.
But I think Physics testbooks 1are very clear!
I think the guy needs to write a follow-up just to clear this up. Personally, I think that the anecdote and the "warrior" story were both pretty bad.
Saltz
But I think Physics testbooks 1are very clear!
I think the guy needs to write a follow-up just to clear this up. Personally, I think that the anecdote and the "warrior" story were both pretty bad.
Saltz
"That's a word choice and diction issue, whereas what I am decrying is destroying clarity to even those who *can* read at highly complex and formal levels by being unnecessarily unclear."
--> You summed up my thoughts nicely!
And clearly, too! ;)
Physics is easy for *you*, but I'm willing to be that several pages on parataxis and anaphora in poetry would lose your attention fairly quickly. :P
I can't remember the last time I heard anyone say "eschew obfuscation". Strunk and White would be proud of you, Azhrei.
"whereas what I am decrying is destroying clarity to even those who *can* read at highly complex and formal levels by being unnecessarily unclear. "
But I understood what he was saying and I thought while it was clumsy writing, it wasn't unclear.
Stephen Menendian
Wow. Just finished reading the article. I'd have to agree with the rantings here. Though I'm not sure the article is well written enough to change anybody's opinions one way or the other, it does reinforce some stereotypes (especially if you only read the beginning of the article, and fall asleep bored with the warrior story). The writer seems to me to be a fan of type one who has realized that type one is not about power cards, yet still bitter about his lack of power cards. That is an odd paradox. And perhaps, giving him more credit than he deserves, this confusion of his is exactly why he can't make his point clear. In addition to better writing skills, he needs to sit down and contemplate his own opinion before spouting it off.
SMM, you *think* you understand him, as do I. The problem: we understand different things completely. Thus, unclear writing.
You guys sure don't want to let this drop. ;)
I wouldn't be bored reading about parataxis and anaphora. You could throw in some polyptoton and a bash of antimetabole too while you're at it.
type 1 sucks!
( did i grab attention? )
good.. now that i did, and as a reaction of you guys beating me down i say something instantly without any interrupts i hope
i personally dont play type 1.. at least not really. i cant afford most type 1 cards.
however my friend plays type 1. the only p9 card he owns is a lotus. he also has a library.
and so far that i played with him all the games have been fun. indeed it is true that most people use some staple cards in all decks, but that doesnt mean that if you throw in the power 9 and a bunch of counterspells you get any type 1 deck.
why the decks my friend constructs have been played and tested and they beat many of the p9 using things. i enjoy magic very much, it makes me sad that i dont have enough money to meddle too much in type 1, but i enjoy it still. Whenever an Abyss or a Nethere Void hits the table i go ooouu ahhhhh or whenever someone Mana Drains my thundermare or corrupt i go ouuhh aahhh.
type 1 is the most fun of all formats for that reason.
Combo decks are also nice, for a few times at least. I dont mind someone killing me first turn, as long as after a few games he changes his deck. After all we are playing for fun and i dont mind being fried to a crisp by a Kaerveks torch for 240 damage.
Ok now resolution time.. you can beat me
Well, I haven't been following the whole thread but as a response to Paladin. I agree to some degree, Type One is lot's of fun but ithas to be balanced, if both players have all the power stuff and are both good deck builders it can be quite interesting. Though if either one of the players doesn't have the Power cards and isn't pkaying a hate deck, it tends to get boring... Type 1 fun decks are cool, because You can actually cast those Dragon Legends etc etc...
I'm at this point looking into Eureka, which opens some nice opportunites, maybe not for a tournament deck but atleast it will be fun to play...
I honestly think that there isn't a lot of difference in the FUN factor of Type 1, Type 2 or Extended TOURNAMENT decks, they all have one goal :
Destroy your opponent ASAP.
But if you want to design a fun deck, which format gives you the possibilities that Type 1 does ?
Just some thoughts,
Goldfish