While I think you're overreacting with your "Magic is dying"
You're right, let me correct myself. Magic isn't dying. Magic is changing in a way that is not sustainable for the continued health of the game. You can only put out so much junk before even the most die hard fan walks away.
Wrong! scry lands aren't bad. guildgates aren't bad, it is just that they have given us so much awesome lands lately that it was too much easy to play 3 colors! i mean, i played 3 colors when we had scar fastlands and M10 and innistrad ones. it was ok. it worked. then they made it much easier, making 3 colors the norm. that is cool for some time, but i don't want to play 3 colors deck forever... now 2 and 1 color will play a little more, it seems.
"Hey Johnny, yeah, we're going to go ahead and give you a demotion and cut your salary by 50%. But don't worry, it's not bad, it's just that you had it too good before. Have a good weekend!"
That's what that argument sounds like. Bad cards aren't bad, because they cards we had before were too good? That's not how expectations and benchmarks work. Checklands have been pushed as the "default" level of effectiveness for rare dual lands for years and years now. Saying "Here's something way worse, and you should like it, cause you had it too good before" is insulting, and you don't grow a franchise by insulting the playerbase.
On the duals, I cant see them being played in standard until shocks rotate. Shocks are heads and shoulders above the new CITP tapped lands.
which one is better does not interfere in scry land's playability (thinking of being or not being playable, rather than in quantity). for example, a dimir control deck would use both.
an extrapolated example: bonkers RR sorcery: 10 damage to target player.
would you stop playing lightning bolts in burn because you have bonkers?
You're right, let me correct myself. Magic isn't dying. Magic is changing in a way that is not sustainable for the continued health of the game. You can only put out so much junk before even the most die hard fan walks away.
"Hey Johnny, yeah, we're going to go ahead and give you a demotion and cut your salary by 50%. But don't worry, it's not bad, it's just that you had it too good before. Have a good weekend!"
That's what that argument sounds like. Bad cards aren't bad, because they cards we had before were too good? That's not how expectations and benchmarks work. Checklands have been pushed as the "default" level of effectiveness for rare dual lands for years and years now. Saying "Here's something way worse, and you should like it, cause you had it too good before" is insulting, and you don't grow a franchise by insulting the playerbase.
personally, i like the change, i don1t think it is insulting and if i were in WotC i'd give you other powerful rares instead of those land and let you play the guildgates. i don't like your comparison with salaries because magic is a competition, and so it should be more like "you're not allowed to take those performance-improving substances anymore, but you can take those", in sports. you're not really hurt because everybody is, so it is indeed a question of change and personal preference
also, the default for dual lands were, someday, original duals. then, in onslaught / mirrodin standard, we had only fetch lands alone. the thing keeps changing and i'm glad it is that way.
Sorry for that, Valarin. You do have good points. I just get tired of the acidic nature of your posts.
Wizards is not perfect. They make mistakes and design decisions I don't agree with. I still like Magic overall, and I like parts of current sets, but I can't say I've been a fan of any of the last few sets as a whole.
Sorry for that, Valarin. You do have good points. I just get tired of the acidic nature of your posts.
Wizards is not perfect. They make mistakes and design decisions I don't agree with. I still like Magic overall, and I like parts of current sets, but I can't say I've been a fan of any of the last few sets as a whole.
All I ask is that you don't think I am complaining for complaining sakes. It's not that I dislike Magic, if I disliked Magic I wouldn't have put the time and energy into building cubes, building EDH decks, and playing as much as I do. I'm complaining because I see a bad job being done, when I know they can do better, because they have done better.
I'm not attacking people for liking Theros, people can like what they like. I see the game going down a pretty bad path, a path I have seen other games go down before the ultimately fail, and I'd much rather complain about Magic in the ridiculously vain hope it might make some difference then mourn Magic after it's been driven into the ground. All I ask is that you don't confuse passion for hatred. If I hated Magic, the last thing I would be doing is talking about it.
You're right, let me correct myself. Magic isn't dying. Magic is changing in a way that is not sustainable for the continued health of the game. You can only put out so much junk before even the most die hard fan walks away.
I think you're exaggerating and extrapolating a bit here: I know a lot of people I'd consider die hard fans who really like the way things are going.
A lot of them especially enjoy limited which is being pushed more than it used to: I'd agree that there is maybe an argument to be made that there is too much focus in design on limited play however.
Besides Modern Masters was awesome, it was really, really good and that was them trying to satisfy the hardcore audience (and push Modern but that's hardly a knock against what I felt was an excellent set) and, while it wasn't perfect, I think it's fair to say it was a good attempt and that we all hope they will follow it up. MaRo has said that MM has shown WotC that there is an audience for more complex product so I think we can say they are aware of a area they hadn't focued on that can help them grow as a business.
"Hey Johnny, yeah, we're going to go ahead and give you a demotion and cut your salary by 50%. But don't worry, it's not bad, it's just that you had it too good before. Have a good weekend!"
That's what that argument sounds like. Bad cards aren't bad, because they cards we had before were too good? That's not how expectations and benchmarks work. Checklands have been pushed as the "default" level of effectiveness for rare dual lands for years and years now. Saying "Here's something way worse, and you should like it, cause you had it too good before" is insulting, and you don't grow a franchise by insulting the playerbase.
I don't think I've ever seen you address this. What are your thoughts on powercreep: is it something you feel is maybe overstated? Does WotC worry about it too much?
Because I feel that the concept really hits the mark of what you seem to really dislike about how the game is going.
What are your thoughts on powercreep: is it something you feel is maybe overstated? Does WotC worry about it too much?
Power creep is a problem that can be addressed with a lot of levers. You can print answer cards that keep power creep in control. You can can level out the power creep by reprinting existing cards at existing power levels instead of replacing them with worse cards. You can change the balance of spells vs creatures to rebalance power between them. You can come up with new mechanics that invalidate older strategies, reducing power creep by making cards not as good as they used to be in a new environment.
Instead of looking at the problem in a nuanced way, MaRo and crew are taking a blunt object approach and just hitting everything with a hammer. "Lands are too good, print crap lands! Bolt is too good, make a new Searing Spear reprint! Games are too fast, add 3 to the mana cost of the sets new ability! By God, I will kill the power level of this game no matter how many times I need to bash it over the head and no matter how many garbage cards I need to put in the set! I am infallible!!"
All that ends up doing is turning players off, driving pack value into the ground (seriously, look at the rares in Theros, how many people are going to be happy spending $4 on a pack and opening any of the horrible rares in the set? Everytime someone hands over $4 and opens up a Domestication worth 25 cents, I literally see Magic dying a little bit right in front of me), and make Magic that much less exciting/enticing/interesting/enjoyable.
I'm not saying every new card needs to be the next TarmoJace, or every pack needs a $30 mythic in it, but there's a balance here, and WoTC is WAY to far on the side of printing garbage.
im just waiting for the stuff to use heroic with... i mean if we are getting only 5 actual aurus (the trials or whatever they are called) then idgi. im holding out but idk why they havent revealed the cycle or some other stuff earlier because it seems kidna important to, you know, one of the mechanics of the set. :/ i like the enchantment whatevers... kinda combining 2 cards into one but its kinda meh.
im excited and i hope this will be the first box of a set i will buy... but idk now.
Bah. This has turned (expectedly, I must unfortunately say) into yet another Valarin-centered thread. Has he ever said anything else but:
- I hate standard.
- Maro is an incompetent doofus.
- Magic is dying. Sales are only up because XBox game / momemtum / people are devoted idotic fans.
- They don't do ABU anymore.
Have I missed anything significant? It's not an "interesting dissenter with a fresh outlook." It's the same old same old spamming. Valarin has shown that he doesn't get it:
- ABU is done. We won't get instant-speed one-mana draw three anymore.
- 20 years of cards has mined a lot of design space. The easy tropes of ABU (bolt, fireball, time walk, giant growth, ...) are done. You can't magically create 250 entirely original cards anymore.
- Different things get pushed at different times. They *did* reprint lightning bolt for a while. Now it's not in print. We *did* get good dual lands for a while. Now we won't.
- Yes, limited and standard requirements are important factors in design. ABU couldn't be drafted nor played in sealed. ABU as a standard set would be broken with today's deck design knwoledge. Heck it was broken back then and new deck-building limits imposed back then.
- Once every few set back then would be widly unbalanced with simple two or three card combo or synergy dominating play for months at a time.
He claims to be quitting magic over every set. He's always back for more hate, though. It's not an interesting view point and derails every. single. set thread with the same spam. How can someone takes his opinion seriously when it never has changed an iota since I ever read his post here? You can copy paste his post from every set. In fact, I've seen the exact word-for-word paragraph from him many times! I guess he has a bag of already-written post snippet that he only copy/paste on demand.
His rants about his interview... God. CIP? Really? In a card design department in a game company? Yeah, let's throw out imagination, creativity and focus on metrics. That's how you create good games. Oh God.
All that ends up doing is turning players off, driving pack value into the ground (seriously, look at the rares in Theros, how many people are going to be happy spending $4 on a pack and opening any of the horrible rares in the set? Everytime someone hands over $4 and opens up a Domestication worth 25 cents, I literally see Magic dying a little bit right in front of me), and make Magic that much less exciting/enticing/interesting/enjoyable.
Why on earth would you ever buy a $4 pack just to open it and expect value? Of course you'll lose money! Or you might gain a lot if you're opening that foil Jace. That's the lottery ticket principle.
Even in your golden days of Magic, that was the same. Yes, I spent 3 euros on that booster and opened an Obelisk of Undoing or Farmstead. It's been like that for ages. Packs are meant to be played and that's it. If you're into constructed/EDH things go buy some singles and you'll be a richer man. I'm just back from an FNM where I had a good time. I paid for the M14 draft set, made my deck and went on with it. With my ~$15 investment, I made a prize finish, got another booster in which I opened a valuable rare. What else would you expect from Magic? Spending $15 and getting out with $40 every time?
His rants about his interview... God. CIP? Really? In a card design department in a game company? Yeah, let's throw out imagination, creativity and focus on metrics. That's how you create good games. Oh God.
That's uncalled for
Let the creative people do the creative stuff
Managing the business is another animal entirely
He says he applied for a position at WotC, not at MtG R&D
which one is better does not interfere in scry land's playability (thinking of being or not being playable, rather than in quantity). for example, a dimir control deck would use both.
an extrapolated example: bonkers RR sorcery: 10 damage to target player.
would you stop playing lightning bolts in burn because you have bonkers?
The problem with your thinking is playing lands you can not tap for mana that turn, no matter what effect they give you, will be rough on your tempo. You will find you are always behind to the guy playing basic lands they can use when they come in play. Which is bad.
Yes a couple decks may run them as a 1 or 2 of as a free scry effect, but do you really want to run slow lands so you can scry?
In all reality, these new duals are worse then the old pain lands.
Why on earth would you ever buy a $4 pack just to open it and expect value? Of course you'll lose money! Or you might gain a lot if you're opening that foil Jace. That's the lottery ticket principle.
Even in your golden days of Magic, that was the same. Yes, I spent 3 euros on that booster and opened an Obelisk of Undoing or Farmstead. It's been like that for ages. Packs are meant to be played and that's it. If you're into constructed/EDH things go buy some singles and you'll be a richer man. I'm just back from an FNM where I had a good time. I paid for the M14 draft set, made my deck and went on with it. With my ~$15 investment, I made a prize finish, got another booster in which I opened a valuable rare. What else would you expect from Magic? Spending $15 and getting out with $40 every time?
because pack sales determine nearly everything with regard to how much money wizards makes or doesn't make. (the goal of a international business - i can't believe i have to say these things.)
because pack sales determine nearly everything with regard to how much money wizards makes or doesn't make. (the goal of a international business - i can't believe i have to say these things.)
Thanks but you're entirely off-topic. I'm saying that it is wishful thinking to believe that you can have a positive ROI whenever you buy a pack. I buy pack to draft them and enjoy the experience, not just to open them and complain that I lost my money.
You're right, let me correct myself. Magic isn't dying. Magic is changing in a way that is not sustainable for the continued health of the game. You can only put out so much junk before even the most die hard fan walks away.
"Hey Johnny, yeah, we're going to go ahead and give you a demotion and cut your salary by 50%. But don't worry, it's not bad, it's just that you had it too good before. Have a good weekend!"
That's what that argument sounds like. Bad cards aren't bad, because they cards we had before were too good? That's not how expectations and benchmarks work. Checklands have been pushed as the "default" level of effectiveness for rare dual lands for years and years now. Saying "Here's something way worse, and you should like it, cause you had it too good before" is insulting, and you don't grow a franchise by insulting the playerbase.
which one is better does not interfere in scry land's playability (thinking of being or not being playable, rather than in quantity). for example, a dimir control deck would use both.
an extrapolated example: bonkers RR sorcery: 10 damage to target player.
would you stop playing lightning bolts in burn because you have bonkers?
personally, i like the change, i don1t think it is insulting and if i were in WotC i'd give you other powerful rares instead of those land and let you play the guildgates. i don't like your comparison with salaries because magic is a competition, and so it should be more like "you're not allowed to take those performance-improving substances anymore, but you can take those", in sports. you're not really hurt because everybody is, so it is indeed a question of change and personal preference
also, the default for dual lands were, someday, original duals. then, in onslaught / mirrodin standard, we had only fetch lands alone. the thing keeps changing and i'm glad it is that way.
Sorry for that, Valarin. You do have good points. I just get tired of the acidic nature of your posts.
Wizards is not perfect. They make mistakes and design decisions I don't agree with. I still like Magic overall, and I like parts of current sets, but I can't say I've been a fan of any of the last few sets as a whole.
All I ask is that you don't think I am complaining for complaining sakes. It's not that I dislike Magic, if I disliked Magic I wouldn't have put the time and energy into building cubes, building EDH decks, and playing as much as I do. I'm complaining because I see a bad job being done, when I know they can do better, because they have done better.
I'm not attacking people for liking Theros, people can like what they like. I see the game going down a pretty bad path, a path I have seen other games go down before the ultimately fail, and I'd much rather complain about Magic in the ridiculously vain hope it might make some difference then mourn Magic after it's been driven into the ground. All I ask is that you don't confuse passion for hatred. If I hated Magic, the last thing I would be doing is talking about it.
I think you're exaggerating and extrapolating a bit here: I know a lot of people I'd consider die hard fans who really like the way things are going.
A lot of them especially enjoy limited which is being pushed more than it used to: I'd agree that there is maybe an argument to be made that there is too much focus in design on limited play however.
Besides Modern Masters was awesome, it was really, really good and that was them trying to satisfy the hardcore audience (and push Modern but that's hardly a knock against what I felt was an excellent set) and, while it wasn't perfect, I think it's fair to say it was a good attempt and that we all hope they will follow it up. MaRo has said that MM has shown WotC that there is an audience for more complex product so I think we can say they are aware of a area they hadn't focued on that can help them grow as a business.
I don't think I've ever seen you address this. What are your thoughts on powercreep: is it something you feel is maybe overstated? Does WotC worry about it too much?
Because I feel that the concept really hits the mark of what you seem to really dislike about how the game is going.
Power creep is a problem that can be addressed with a lot of levers. You can print answer cards that keep power creep in control. You can can level out the power creep by reprinting existing cards at existing power levels instead of replacing them with worse cards. You can change the balance of spells vs creatures to rebalance power between them. You can come up with new mechanics that invalidate older strategies, reducing power creep by making cards not as good as they used to be in a new environment.
Instead of looking at the problem in a nuanced way, MaRo and crew are taking a blunt object approach and just hitting everything with a hammer. "Lands are too good, print crap lands! Bolt is too good, make a new Searing Spear reprint! Games are too fast, add 3 to the mana cost of the sets new ability! By God, I will kill the power level of this game no matter how many times I need to bash it over the head and no matter how many garbage cards I need to put in the set! I am infallible!!"
All that ends up doing is turning players off, driving pack value into the ground (seriously, look at the rares in Theros, how many people are going to be happy spending $4 on a pack and opening any of the horrible rares in the set? Everytime someone hands over $4 and opens up a Domestication worth 25 cents, I literally see Magic dying a little bit right in front of me), and make Magic that much less exciting/enticing/interesting/enjoyable.
I'm not saying every new card needs to be the next TarmoJace, or every pack needs a $30 mythic in it, but there's a balance here, and WoTC is WAY to far on the side of printing garbage.
im excited and i hope this will be the first box of a set i will buy... but idk now.
- I hate standard.
- Maro is an incompetent doofus.
- Magic is dying. Sales are only up because XBox game / momemtum / people are devoted idotic fans.
- They don't do ABU anymore.
Have I missed anything significant? It's not an "interesting dissenter with a fresh outlook." It's the same old same old spamming. Valarin has shown that he doesn't get it:
- ABU is done. We won't get instant-speed one-mana draw three anymore.
- 20 years of cards has mined a lot of design space. The easy tropes of ABU (bolt, fireball, time walk, giant growth, ...) are done. You can't magically create 250 entirely original cards anymore.
- Different things get pushed at different times. They *did* reprint lightning bolt for a while. Now it's not in print. We *did* get good dual lands for a while. Now we won't.
- Yes, limited and standard requirements are important factors in design. ABU couldn't be drafted nor played in sealed. ABU as a standard set would be broken with today's deck design knwoledge. Heck it was broken back then and new deck-building limits imposed back then.
- Once every few set back then would be widly unbalanced with simple two or three card combo or synergy dominating play for months at a time.
He claims to be quitting magic over every set. He's always back for more hate, though. It's not an interesting view point and derails every. single. set thread with the same spam. How can someone takes his opinion seriously when it never has changed an iota since I ever read his post here? You can copy paste his post from every set. In fact, I've seen the exact word-for-word paragraph from him many times! I guess he has a bag of already-written post snippet that he only copy/paste on demand.
His rants about his interview... God. CIP? Really? In a card design department in a game company? Yeah, let's throw out imagination, creativity and focus on metrics. That's how you create good games. Oh God.
Why on earth would you ever buy a $4 pack just to open it and expect value? Of course you'll lose money! Or you might gain a lot if you're opening that foil Jace. That's the lottery ticket principle.
Even in your golden days of Magic, that was the same. Yes, I spent 3 euros on that booster and opened an Obelisk of Undoing or Farmstead. It's been like that for ages. Packs are meant to be played and that's it. If you're into constructed/EDH things go buy some singles and you'll be a richer man. I'm just back from an FNM where I had a good time. I paid for the M14 draft set, made my deck and went on with it. With my ~$15 investment, I made a prize finish, got another booster in which I opened a valuable rare. What else would you expect from Magic? Spending $15 and getting out with $40 every time?
That's uncalled for
Let the creative people do the creative stuff
Managing the business is another animal entirely
He says he applied for a position at WotC, not at MtG R&D
The problem with your thinking is playing lands you can not tap for mana that turn, no matter what effect they give you, will be rough on your tempo. You will find you are always behind to the guy playing basic lands they can use when they come in play. Which is bad.
Yes a couple decks may run them as a 1 or 2 of as a free scry effect, but do you really want to run slow lands so you can scry?
In all reality, these new duals are worse then the old pain lands.
because pack sales determine nearly everything with regard to how much money wizards makes or doesn't make. (the goal of a international business - i can't believe i have to say these things.)
Thanks but you're entirely off-topic. I'm saying that it is wishful thinking to believe that you can have a positive ROI whenever you buy a pack. I buy pack to draft them and enjoy the experience, not just to open them and complain that I lost my money.
Theros isn't even half-spoiled and it's already "much worse" than Homelands? I'm an utterly gigantic fan of hyperbole, but this is too much!
Thread Closed.
(Also known as Xenphire)