I think Risk Factor was a pretty good card right up until they printed Narset. Now it's traaaaaaaaaash.Anyone that actually plays Risk Factor probably doesn't know how to read and that's why they put that garbage into their deck.
I think Risk Factor was a pretty good card right up until they printed Narset. Now it's traaaaaaaaaash.Anyone that actually plays Risk Factor probably doesn't know how to read and that's why they put that garbage into their deck.
I think Risk Factor was a pretty good card right up until they printed Narset. Now it's traaaaaaaaaash.
I don't think it was ever very good. You'd see it a lot in the lower ranks, but non of the red decks in Diamond/Mythic ever ran it. Punisher mechanic cards that give your opponent options are very rarely good.
Sure and looking at paper results seem to show that versions without it seem to have been doing better in major events than versions with it on the whole, but that's not analytical at all. Relatively small samples, no underlying data and all that, and you'd have to break down how many of each version were played to what sort of average win rates and all that and I doubt that data is readily available. Still doesn't change the fact that giving your opponent the choice generally makes the card weaker than either option would be on their own, often by substantial margins if the choices are significantly different.I never base deck tech on MTGA, it was played in paper often.
Sure and looking at paper results seem to show that versions without it seem to have been doing better in major events than versions with it on the whole, but that's not analytical at all. Relatively small samples, no underlying data and all that, and you'd have to break down how many of each version were played to what sort of average win rates and all that and I doubt that data is readily available. Still doesn't change the fact that giving your opponent the choice generally makes the card weaker than either option would be on their own, often by substantial margins if the choices are significantly different.
err.. the order you do them in can have profound effects on your winrate. Activating kasmina's -2 before teferi, time reveler's -3 might lose you a key card you have to loot away now. Or, choosing not to use Davriel for a turn because you think your opponent sandbagged an extra land.
There's hardly any planeswalker in this set, that is good enough to see play, that you should just be activating automatically without a moment to consider the line you are taking. There can even be borderline scenarios where you don't activate an 'all upside' ability to save their loyalty because you have extensive proliferate effects, and don't want it dropping in range of a burn spell to remove it. I'm splitting hairs on that one, you'd still likely just activate it, but things are rarely so clear cut as to be automatic decisions.
Yep! Also, sometimes you just kill the god EoT, let them put it into deck, then play your thief of sanity. You'll grab it the turn before they draw it. Did that against a U/G deck that I knew had no removal in hand, and very little in deck.Just realized Esper Midrange has my favorite answer to God-Eternals.
Bounce them to the opponent's deck with 5-mana Teferi then swing with Thief of Sanity to steal it for yourself
I suck at deck creation. What list are you running? I have run an Orhoz deck with moderate success but Bo1 can be a bitch.My Orhoz list got me to diamond today. First month I've only played a handful of mono red the entire ladder and I did it in just about the same amount of games as when I go turbonerd RDW. B01 scrub of course =O
I suck at deck creation. What list are you running? I have run an Orhoz deck with moderate success but Bo1 can be a bitch.