Welcome to Gaia! ::

and i am pink majestic and free.. o wait i mean red

Nothing wrong with Blue. I prefer Black and White myself though.

blue is tricky, master it and master the game....

EASIEST color(s) to run is either R or RB

It isn't accurate to talk in terms of easy and difficult colours. It's better to talk and think about easy and difficult strategies.

In general Aggro is easier to play than combo is easier to play than control.

You can build mono U aggro that plays pretty much straight up. You don't even have to run counter effects (though, the deck will probably be stronger with than without them).

In the same vein you can build mono G control that takes a larger than average degree of skill and paitence to run effectively.

Some colours do have a greater affinity for a strategy than others and some mechanics are more difficult to use properly than others meaning that the colours they correspond to will be more likely to produce difficult decks but this is not the same thing as saying "U decks are hard to play and R decks are easy."

For example, Project X is one of the more difficult decks in standard. It's G/B/W but the reason it's hard to play has little to do with its colours and more to do with its gameplan.

Project X is somthing of an aggro/combo hybrid. It's built around the infinite combo of saffi+crypt champion with teysa and essence wardens to produce infinite tokens or gain infinite life. However, it also contains the skeleton of a strong midrange/aggro deck and in some matchups will forgo trying to combo out completely in favour of winning via creature beats.

Because of the double edged gameplan as well as the tutor effect of chord of calling (tutors and wishes tend to have the highest learning curves since they require a detailed understanding of the deck as a whole rather than simply the current hand) and the fact that the integral combo is quite complex and requires an advanced understanding of timing rules simply to understand that it works Project X has a learning curve that is somewhat steeper than nearly every other standard deck despite having fairly simple component mechanics (mainly creatures, the easiest cards to use).

Well, two things.

First, I would disagree that B/R burn is easiest. Mono R burn is strictly simpler than R/B if only due to the simpler mana base.

Secondly, I disagree that R/B is significantly easier than... any other basic aggro strategy. Indeed, given that red and black lack inexpensive (IRL) drawing options and mana acceleration there is a case to be made that a more redundant strategy (IE: one using blue drawing or green mana fixing or drawing) would be significantly easier.

Thirdly, I disagree that a deck requiring "the least knowledge of the game" is the right deck to start with. I would prefer one with a greater emphasis on creature combat than most R/B decks tend to have specifically because the principles governing effective creature combat are the first really difficult things new players need to learn.



I think that the degree to which a player assimilates into the game and progresses effectively has far more to do with the player than the deck.

I would venture to say that had any of those 3 players started with R/G aggro, mono G aggro, white weenie aggro, R/W BDW, mono R sligh, Sui B, U/B fish, or U/R counterfire they would have assimilated equally well into the game.



Ultimately, (despite appearances) I don't think you're wrong in anything that you've said. My disagreements are all matters of degree. My comments weren't aimed at you (or anyone) specifically I just saw an opportunity for a rant on theory and decided to go ahead with it.

So, I wouldn't say your statement was particularly generalized or poorly backed. I do think we have a slight difference of philosophical opinion but it's probably not somthing that would even come up save for the wonders of message board communication.