Oh, and another thing... Development only has so much time to do Constructed testing. Often enough cards get cut or changed late in development; often, cards are overcosted to fill a hole without impacting the Constructed power level of a set.
Also: If you couldn't print cards that are strictly worse than other cards in the same set, then Wizards might as well stop printing vanilla creatures entirely.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On average, Magic players are worse at new card evaluation than almost every other skill, except perhaps sideboarding.
Oh, and another thing... Development only has so much time to do Constructed testing. Often enough cards get cut or changed late in development; often, cards are overcosted to fill a hole without impacting the Constructed power level of a set.
Also: If you couldn't print cards that are strictly worse than other cards in the same set, then Wizards might as well stop printing vanilla creatures entirely.
Sounds more like Wizards might want to stop overprinting cards. Maybe it is okay to do smaller sets or {gasp!} print sets less frequently. Updating the CORE every 2 years and increasing the overall number of reprints would be a good start.
Need to fill an empty slot but don't have time for a lot of testing? Why not at least grab a known "filler" or "jank" from a prior set and give us a reprint instead of inventing something that is intentionally garbage. Recycle, at least.
It was made for casual players, or people playing cute formats like "terrible pauper". I remember the time my mates and I all built awful tribal decks. One guy had every variant of grizzly bear ever printed. I was running wurms. Most of the cards I'd never consider running again, but in that format, they were houses.
The point of cards like Search the City is exactly that they're bad. Building a deck that makes good use of them is supposed to be a challenge.
As for other cards... not every card has to be the most powerful version of any given effect (Again, that just leads to power creep). If Emmara Tandris cost one less, you'd be saying 'Why couldn't it cost five and be a 5/5?' Development isn't perfect at gauging the power level of cards and sometimes they will just price something way over what it 'should' be for safety, or simply because Development can't win; no matter how you cost a card, unless the card is aggressively pushed for Constructed, players will complain that it's 'jank'.
I think the points is If you had changed the cards so that they had a shoot at being sideboardable how would that have had a negative impact on limited.
A 40 dollar mythic rare would constitute a must have 4 of that goes in many decks.
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled. I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
Sounds more like Wizards might want to stop overprinting cards. Maybe it is okay to do smaller sets or {gasp!} print sets less frequently. Updating the CORE every 2 years and increasing the overall number of reprints would be a good start.
Will you marry me? (I'm only partially joking)
Need to fill an empty slot but don't have time for a lot of testing? Why not at least grab a known "filler" or "jank" from a prior set and give us a reprint instead of inventing something that is intentionally garbage. Recycle, at least.
Now I'm not even partially joking!
Smaller sets with better cards, use reprints to fill the gaps needed for limited, core sets every two years. Amen.
Wizards likes putting out the same number of products every year for business reasons. Core set every two years is not going to happen.
Filling the gaps needed for Limited is done better with new cards than reprints. I don't think Limited players would appreciate it if they had to play with a hodgepodge of reprinted vanilla creatures from expansions past instead of vanilla creatures tailored to the environment (One of the most interesting commons in Innistrad limited was Rotting Fensnake...). Also, it would be a giant step back in terms of flavor, unless you mean functional reprints... in which case, uh, you might want to look in actual sets and note that most vanilla creatures are functional reprints of something.
I do think Wizards printed a few too many cards this past year (There are four large sets in Standard right now), but I don't see how printing less cards than two regular blocks + a core set every year would help... anything?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On average, Magic players are worse at new card evaluation than almost every other skill, except perhaps sideboarding.
Filling the gaps needed for Limited is done better with new cards than reprints. I don't think Limited players would appreciate it if they had to play with a hodgepodge of reprinted vanilla creatures from expansions past
Well, we're talking gap fillers, not 100% reprints. You don't think limited players might enjoy getting a chance to play with cards from set 10-15 years ago? Most people probably didn't play during that time, and so it would be new to them. Those who did? Nostalgia love.
Wizards reprints cards when they fit the needs of the set. The needs of the set, however, trump some arbitrary desire to print less new cards. The point is, cards that are specifically tailored for a given Limited environment - yes, this includes vanilla creatures - make for a better experience than a mass of random reprints, which is why core set Limited was awful before M10. I wouldn't want Wizards to arbitrarily start reprinting more cards to the detriment of Limited play.
Also, getting some random common from Prophecy instead of a card with flavour that matches the current set would ALSO be a blow to the quality of the overall experience.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On average, Magic players are worse at new card evaluation than almost every other skill, except perhaps sideboarding.
basically it's the opposite of a Vocal Minority. Kitchen Table magic is mostly very casual. We don't go on the internet, because we don't need to search up optimization. So you don't hear us very often, but that doesn't mean that we aren't there, or that we don't have incredible numbers. The truth is that we probably outnumber competitive magic players out there.
also just because we aren't competitive or on the internet, it doesn't mean that Wizards can't make a few cards for us. We want some love too.
And would kitchen tables still not have fun with those cards if they sucked less?
well... uh, yeah, kinda.
I mean, what use is a 'Pure Jank' deck without cards that are hilariously bad. Some times it's not about having a card that's incredibly powerful or being able to make the most optimized deck to win. Sometimes it's about a puzzle. For a puzzle to be fun and interesting we need it to be tough to crack. If the card were easy to break, like the suggestion to reduce the number of cards removed with Search the City to 3, then it would lose some of what makes the card great.
Part of what makes the cards great for Kitchen Table magic is the fact that they are more easily accessible. A lot of this can be done by having constructed players not be interested in playing with it. It might seem small, but I know a lot of people who would not buy a card if it cost even $2 a card. When your trying to build a deck for $10-20, you have to spend that money wisely.
...
That said, I can't even defend Emmara Tandris. Not even my Kitchen Table group wants to go anywhere near that turd.
Well, we're talking gap fillers, not 100% reprints. You don't think limited players might enjoy getting a chance to play with cards from set 10-15 years ago? Most people probably didn't play during that time, and so it would be new to them. Those who did? Nostalgia love.
realize this:
they wouldnt be reprinting "power" which means you would end up reprinting: cheap stuff
now realize this: there is so much of that cheap stuff you can just buy it now for less than it costs to buy new cards. so those players that want nostalgia or a chance to see old cards, that cheap stuff is everywhere for less than the cost of new cards
you know how i know first hand?
i buy old collections all the time for pennies on the dollar; you know what i do with most of it? i sell it on ebay as repacks (my descriptions are honest about what is in them)
Do you know who i sell most of those repacks to? people who like to draft at home and dont want to pay full price for new packs (yes i actually put 15 cards into a little sealed "team bag")
i sell anywhere from 200 to 400 repacks a month and those new players get to "taste" cards from 15 to 20 years ago at about $2 a pack. if wizards reprinted them as you suggest, they would be paying $4 a pack and actually driving down the value of cards that are already worth very little
i get reorders from players all over the world for 100 packs at a time every few months (my bags are resealable they could just be reusing the same mixed set of old stuff but they like the random chance of getting new "good" cards) and i do throw in semi valuable stuff from time to time (i packed and shipped a few moxes (chrome, diamond, opal) and various other $10 to $40 cards) this month alone, and just today I tossed in a force of will into a repack)
I guarantee anything wizards reprinted (as you suggest) wont be as good as force of will (unless its in a high end from the vault type of product) and it will cost more than just buying those old cards that already exist since there is so much of it
Legitimate repack sellers offer a huge value to anyone that wants that type of nostalgia, and while I know some of them are scammers, a few of them are very real about what they offer: I buy some myself just to sample the price ranges and I've pulled some mint condition arabian nights (a beautiful example of a Junún Efreet), which sure it's only worth a few dollars but I love Christopher Rush artwork and the thrill of finding something that old in perfect condition was totally worth it. Plus I was able to give it to someone that was putting together an arabian set and it was a huge upgrade to the one he had (that was dog chewed)
anyway, i don't care on a personal level if they reprint stuff like that, but the reality is there is already enough of the junk to meet demands, if there wasn't there wouldn't be cards valued at 2 to 20 cents from sets 15 to 20 years old
heck you can find the bulk of the rares from revised onwards for 50 cents or less
how many thousands of cards would you like for nostalgia? i can ship you about 100,000 for a pretty decent price and im just one old nostalgia player who didnt play for 15 years and only started buying cards again last year. i can show you guys with a million cards (and thats not a joke)
Hahahahahahahahaha.
Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh harder.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Sorry friend, but more magic is played casually then there will ever be competitively.
Maybe you should laugh at your failed attempt at reading.
Playing causal does not equal playing "terrible pauper"( A format that not only have I never seen played but this is the first time I've ever even heard of it)
I mean, what use is a 'Pure Jank' deck without cards that are hilariously bad. Some times it's not about having a card that's incredibly powerful or being able to make the most optimized deck to win. Sometimes it's about a puzzle. For a puzzle to be fun and interesting we need it to be tough to crack. If the card were easy to break, like the suggestion to reduce the number of cards removed with Search the City to 3, then it would lose some of what makes the card great.
Even if search the city was better it would still be a build around me card it's not like the puzzle would be any different. It would just be better when solved.
Also considering some of the most popular causal cards, Emerakul, planeswalkers, the swords, O-ring, ect... I highly doubt their is a coloration between suckness and fun.
If they design cards to be causal all stars(doubling season, chromatic latern, big mill spells ect...) that's one thing. But most trash rares are not.
Part of what makes the cards great for Kitchen Table magic is the fact that they are more easily accessible. A lot of this can be done by having constructed players not be interested in playing with it. It might seem small, but I know a lot of people who would not buy a card if it cost even $2 a card. When your trying to build a deck for $10-20, you have to spend that money wisely.[/QUOTE]
You can still get trading post, Zealous Conscripts, Ratchet Bomb ect.... can all be had for $1. Making a rare not useless doesn't mean it's going to have to cost alot.
Back to the point nobody bothered to address, how would making search the city or Emmara Tandris being at least usable make limited worse.
A 40 dollar mythic rare would constitute a must have 4 of that goes in many decks.
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled. I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
Back to the point nobody bothered to address, how would making search the city or Emmara Tandris being at least usable make limited worse.
Alot of junk cards like Emmara Tandris or Search the City are made that way because Development is too scared to print something that may be good, but they aren't sure if it is.
For a card like Abrupt Decay, they knew it was good. They spent time on it, considered Eternal formats, and made sure it was an attractive rare that you would want to pull. For Emmara Tandris, they ran out of time, made some last minute changes, and that turd was the result. 90% of enchantments at rare are like this. They don't quite know how to price it, so they make it cost way over what is reasonable.
I think that their mind set is:
"We would rather print 15 crappy cards instead of 1 broken card."
I understand that, but it sure does lead to a butt load of trash rares.
I'm not going to read through nine pages when the answer to this should be obvious.
If every rare was good, then drafting would be too easy. Just pick two colors and start taking cards. You don't have to worry about making hard decisions or reading signals because your packs are overflowing with quality picks for you.
I'm not going to read through nine pages when the answer to this should be obvious.
If every rare was good, then drafting would be too easy. Just pick two colors and start taking cards. You don't have to worry about making hard decisions or reading signals because your packs are overflowing with quality picks for you.
It's not any more complicated than that.
It's apparently not that obvious, because most people have been arguing that drafting would be too difficult if all the cards were good
Sounds more like Wizards might want to stop overprinting cards. Maybe it is okay to do smaller sets or {gasp!} print sets less frequently. Updating the CORE every 2 years and increasing the overall number of reprints would be a good start.
They did that. It was terrible, and not even fun to draft. The main player base ignored core sets until M10.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"If you don't wear your seatbelt, the police will shoot you in the head."
- To my youngest sister when she was 6.
Everyone knows that good luck and good game are such insincere terms that any man who does not connect his right hook with the offender's jaw on the very utterance of such a phrase is no man I would consider as such.
Like most of you, I'd love to have less limited chaff running about.
But, for the sake of discussion:
If a much higher percentage of cards in a set were constructed playable, Limited would start to feel more like constructed. It's sometimes nice getting to play with different cards, even though those cards are under-powered.
I do think there could be much less overcosted, undepowered jank, though. I'd love to see what would happen if some of the "limited-only bombs" were replaced by small utility creatures. I think maybe we'd have much more nuanced games instead of games that go "slam my bomb, win."
Because power creep. If every card was a Baneslayer Angel, then every format would be as fast as legacy, or even vintage. I'm not saying legacy is a bad format, but if every format was legacy speed then the game would be awful.
Like most of you, I'd love to have less limited chaff running about.
But, for the sake of discussion:
If a much higher percentage of cards in a set were constructed playable, Limited would start to feel more like constructed. It's sometimes nice getting to play with different cards, even though those cards are under-powered.
I do think there could be much less overcosted, undepowered jank, though. I'd love to see what would happen if some of the "limited-only bombs" were replaced by small utility creatures. I think maybe we'd have much more nuanced games instead of games that go "slam my bomb, win."
Haven't you ever drafted a cube? most if not all of those cards are constructed playable in some form or another.
But it still manages to feel like limited, because you can't just run 4 of every essential card.
having "bad" cards in a set makes for interesting plays. for example, someone would almost never block a goblin piker with their young pyromancer, but 9 times out of ten a player would not think twice about blocking that pyromancer with their goblin. i have also seen decks that play "no jank" lose to cards such as seraph of the sword. i can tell when a card is better than another (eg fauna shaman and runeclaw bear) but those "bad" cards exist to make the game more fun and more skill intensive. if there wasnt any vanilla or bad creatures, i would always aim my removal cards at the first thing they played instead of taking a bit of damage to save the removal card for the better card they played after attacks. also 99% of "bad" cards fit in somewhere and can be situationally better than the "good" cards.
Haven't you ever drafted a cube? most if not all of those cards are constructed playable in some form or another.
But it still manages to feel like limited, because you can't just run 4 of every essential card.
Of course I've drafted cube.
In the MTGO cube, there are a lot of cards that are constructed playable, but there are also a lot of cards that are no longer played in formats outside of casual and cube (Here is a list. You can't tell me that most of those cards are still played in Legacy). And cube is drawing from a GIGANTIC card pool, so no, it isn't going to feel like you're playing Legacy. But drafting a Standard-legal set with a flat power curve might start to feel like playing Standard after a while because the card pool is much smaller.
However, if more cards were playable, we'd have a bigger card pool to work with, so maybe it would all balance out.
And again, this was just for the sake of discussion.
Because power creep. If every card was a Baneslayer Angel, then every format would be as fast as legacy, or even vintage. I'm not saying legacy is a bad format, but if every format was legacy speed then the game would be awful.
I can tell you as a Legacy/Vintage player if every formate was as fast and thought provoking as my preferred formats, AND all three deck types were present (a real combo, a real agro and a real control) It would make a standard player out of me......
I can tell you as a Legacy/Vintage player if every formate was as fast and thought provoking as my preferred formats, AND all three deck types were present (a real combo, a real agro and a real control) It would make a standard player out of me......
But that comes from an experienced player, not a "newb" just learning the game.
I was playtesting Legacy last night and ran into exactly this interaction. A friend who hasn't been playing Magic that long wanted to join in (the rest of us are/were very experienced) and of course I let him. I gave him Painted Stone to try out, while I was practicing with TES. First game I kill him on turn 2 after ~5 minutes of durdling out the combo...and I could tell he was bored/annoyed. 2nd game goes similarly. After that I mix it up, but it definitely showed me how a newer player could be turned off by Legacy style play VERY quickly. And that comes from someone who really likes the format.
Back to the point nobody bothered to address, how would making search the city or Emmara Tandris being at least usable make limited worse.
But you are only thinking about limited, and not giving any thought to the other formats. People like those "Build Around Me' Combo cards and those cards aren't always great in limited. Cards like Near-Death Experience and Barren Glory, or Door to Nothingness are never going to be good in Limited... or probably constructed, haha. But Mtg needs them because there is a sect of players who adores cards like these.
So mtg requires these type of cards. Would you rather have these cards in your Uncommon slots so you see them multiple times per draft? This is ignoring the fact that many of these cards are too complicated for Uncommon slots. Being Rare is just where they have to be.
That said, I can't even defend Emmara Tandris. Not even my Kitchen Table group wants to go anywhere near that turd.
Late changes in the process have a way of making that happen.
Something breaks and either becomes overly good or just terrible.
I'm pretty sure noone would really be complaining about Emmara Tandris if it kept it's original ability... making the X/X token that Voice of Resurgence stole.
(Because all Maze-Runners had to be the same rarity, so she couldn't be a mythic, couldn't get her token, and just got saddled with a really weak ability).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Also: If you couldn't print cards that are strictly worse than other cards in the same set, then Wizards might as well stop printing vanilla creatures entirely.
Sounds more like Wizards might want to stop overprinting cards. Maybe it is okay to do smaller sets or {gasp!} print sets less frequently. Updating the CORE every 2 years and increasing the overall number of reprints would be a good start.
Need to fill an empty slot but don't have time for a lot of testing? Why not at least grab a known "filler" or "jank" from a prior set and give us a reprint instead of inventing something that is intentionally garbage. Recycle, at least.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
So it's made for less than 00.1% of players.
Here's another axiom one option should not always be better than another option.
I think the points is If you had changed the cards so that they had a shoot at being sideboardable how would that have had a negative impact on limited.
And would kitchen tables still not have fun with those cards if they sucked less?
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled.
I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
Will you marry me? (I'm only partially joking)
Now I'm not even partially joking!
Smaller sets with better cards, use reprints to fill the gaps needed for limited, core sets every two years. Amen.
Filling the gaps needed for Limited is done better with new cards than reprints. I don't think Limited players would appreciate it if they had to play with a hodgepodge of reprinted vanilla creatures from expansions past instead of vanilla creatures tailored to the environment (One of the most interesting commons in Innistrad limited was Rotting Fensnake...). Also, it would be a giant step back in terms of flavor, unless you mean functional reprints... in which case, uh, you might want to look in actual sets and note that most vanilla creatures are functional reprints of something.
I do think Wizards printed a few too many cards this past year (There are four large sets in Standard right now), but I don't see how printing less cards than two regular blocks + a core set every year would help... anything?
Hahahahahahahahaha.
Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh harder.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha
Sorry friend, but more magic is played casually then there will ever be competitively.
Well, we're talking gap fillers, not 100% reprints. You don't think limited players might enjoy getting a chance to play with cards from set 10-15 years ago? Most people probably didn't play during that time, and so it would be new to them. Those who did? Nostalgia love.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
Also, getting some random common from Prophecy instead of a card with flavour that matches the current set would ALSO be a blow to the quality of the overall experience.
basically it's the opposite of a Vocal Minority. Kitchen Table magic is mostly very casual. We don't go on the internet, because we don't need to search up optimization. So you don't hear us very often, but that doesn't mean that we aren't there, or that we don't have incredible numbers. The truth is that we probably outnumber competitive magic players out there.
also just because we aren't competitive or on the internet, it doesn't mean that Wizards can't make a few cards for us. We want some love too.
well... uh, yeah, kinda.
I mean, what use is a 'Pure Jank' deck without cards that are hilariously bad. Some times it's not about having a card that's incredibly powerful or being able to make the most optimized deck to win. Sometimes it's about a puzzle. For a puzzle to be fun and interesting we need it to be tough to crack. If the card were easy to break, like the suggestion to reduce the number of cards removed with Search the City to 3, then it would lose some of what makes the card great.
Part of what makes the cards great for Kitchen Table magic is the fact that they are more easily accessible. A lot of this can be done by having constructed players not be interested in playing with it. It might seem small, but I know a lot of people who would not buy a card if it cost even $2 a card. When your trying to build a deck for $10-20, you have to spend that money wisely.
...
That said, I can't even defend Emmara Tandris. Not even my Kitchen Table group wants to go anywhere near that turd.
realize this:
they wouldnt be reprinting "power" which means you would end up reprinting: cheap stuff
now realize this: there is so much of that cheap stuff you can just buy it now for less than it costs to buy new cards. so those players that want nostalgia or a chance to see old cards, that cheap stuff is everywhere for less than the cost of new cards
you know how i know first hand?
i buy old collections all the time for pennies on the dollar; you know what i do with most of it? i sell it on ebay as repacks (my descriptions are honest about what is in them)
Do you know who i sell most of those repacks to? people who like to draft at home and dont want to pay full price for new packs (yes i actually put 15 cards into a little sealed "team bag")
i sell anywhere from 200 to 400 repacks a month and those new players get to "taste" cards from 15 to 20 years ago at about $2 a pack. if wizards reprinted them as you suggest, they would be paying $4 a pack and actually driving down the value of cards that are already worth very little
i get reorders from players all over the world for 100 packs at a time every few months (my bags are resealable they could just be reusing the same mixed set of old stuff but they like the random chance of getting new "good" cards) and i do throw in semi valuable stuff from time to time (i packed and shipped a few moxes (chrome, diamond, opal) and various other $10 to $40 cards) this month alone, and just today I tossed in a force of will into a repack)
I guarantee anything wizards reprinted (as you suggest) wont be as good as force of will (unless its in a high end from the vault type of product) and it will cost more than just buying those old cards that already exist since there is so much of it
Legitimate repack sellers offer a huge value to anyone that wants that type of nostalgia, and while I know some of them are scammers, a few of them are very real about what they offer: I buy some myself just to sample the price ranges and I've pulled some mint condition arabian nights (a beautiful example of a Junún Efreet), which sure it's only worth a few dollars but I love Christopher Rush artwork and the thrill of finding something that old in perfect condition was totally worth it. Plus I was able to give it to someone that was putting together an arabian set and it was a huge upgrade to the one he had (that was dog chewed)
anyway, i don't care on a personal level if they reprint stuff like that, but the reality is there is already enough of the junk to meet demands, if there wasn't there wouldn't be cards valued at 2 to 20 cents from sets 15 to 20 years old
heck you can find the bulk of the rares from revised onwards for 50 cents or less
how many thousands of cards would you like for nostalgia? i can ship you about 100,000 for a pretty decent price and im just one old nostalgia player who didnt play for 15 years and only started buying cards again last year. i can show you guys with a million cards (and thats not a joke)
Maybe you should laugh at your failed attempt at reading.
Playing causal does not equal playing "terrible pauper"( A format that not only have I never seen played but this is the first time I've ever even heard of it)
Even if search the city was better it would still be a build around me card it's not like the puzzle would be any different. It would just be better when solved.
Also considering some of the most popular causal cards, Emerakul, planeswalkers, the swords, O-ring, ect... I highly doubt their is a coloration between suckness and fun.
If they design cards to be causal all stars(doubling season, chromatic latern, big mill spells ect...) that's one thing. But most trash rares are not.
Part of what makes the cards great for Kitchen Table magic is the fact that they are more easily accessible. A lot of this can be done by having constructed players not be interested in playing with it. It might seem small, but I know a lot of people who would not buy a card if it cost even $2 a card. When your trying to build a deck for $10-20, you have to spend that money wisely.[/QUOTE]
You can still get trading post, Zealous Conscripts, Ratchet Bomb ect.... can all be had for $1. Making a rare not useless doesn't mean it's going to have to cost alot.
Back to the point nobody bothered to address, how would making search the city or Emmara Tandris being at least usable make limited worse.
Stats About Mythics
-Mythics are on average 40% rarer than pre-mythic rares
(old blocks about 200 rares, Mythic blocks 35+ mythics)
-They are printing more new cards a year not less
(about 665 now vs. 630 in most pre-mythic block)
-To drop the value of a rare by $1 a mythic must go up $2
-In a 3 year time span deck prices doubled.
I am petitioning for the removal of mythic rarity. Sig this to join the cause.
Not even casual players enjoy garbage-tier garbage over good/interesting cards.
Most casual players accept the bad cards because they don't have other options
Alot of junk cards like Emmara Tandris or Search the City are made that way because Development is too scared to print something that may be good, but they aren't sure if it is.
For a card like Abrupt Decay, they knew it was good. They spent time on it, considered Eternal formats, and made sure it was an attractive rare that you would want to pull. For Emmara Tandris, they ran out of time, made some last minute changes, and that turd was the result. 90% of enchantments at rare are like this. They don't quite know how to price it, so they make it cost way over what is reasonable.
I think that their mind set is:
"We would rather print 15 crappy cards instead of 1 broken card."
I understand that, but it sure does lead to a butt load of trash rares.
PucaTrade Invite. Sign up and enjoy the first 500 points ($5) free!
If every rare was good, then drafting would be too easy. Just pick two colors and start taking cards. You don't have to worry about making hard decisions or reading signals because your packs are overflowing with quality picks for you.
It's not any more complicated than that.
It's apparently not that obvious, because most people have been arguing that drafting would be too difficult if all the cards were good
They did that. It was terrible, and not even fun to draft. The main player base ignored core sets until M10.
- To my youngest sister when she was 6.
But, for the sake of discussion:
If a much higher percentage of cards in a set were constructed playable, Limited would start to feel more like constructed. It's sometimes nice getting to play with different cards, even though those cards are under-powered.
I do think there could be much less overcosted, undepowered jank, though. I'd love to see what would happen if some of the "limited-only bombs" were replaced by small utility creatures. I think maybe we'd have much more nuanced games instead of games that go "slam my bomb, win."
Haven't you ever drafted a cube? most if not all of those cards are constructed playable in some form or another.
But it still manages to feel like limited, because you can't just run 4 of every essential card.
Of course I've drafted cube.
In the MTGO cube, there are a lot of cards that are constructed playable, but there are also a lot of cards that are no longer played in formats outside of casual and cube (Here is a list. You can't tell me that most of those cards are still played in Legacy). And cube is drawing from a GIGANTIC card pool, so no, it isn't going to feel like you're playing Legacy. But drafting a Standard-legal set with a flat power curve might start to feel like playing Standard after a while because the card pool is much smaller.
However, if more cards were playable, we'd have a bigger card pool to work with, so maybe it would all balance out.
And again, this was just for the sake of discussion.
I can tell you as a Legacy/Vintage player if every formate was as fast and thought provoking as my preferred formats, AND all three deck types were present (a real combo, a real agro and a real control) It would make a standard player out of me......
But that comes from an experienced player, not a "newb" just learning the game.
I was playtesting Legacy last night and ran into exactly this interaction. A friend who hasn't been playing Magic that long wanted to join in (the rest of us are/were very experienced) and of course I let him. I gave him Painted Stone to try out, while I was practicing with TES. First game I kill him on turn 2 after ~5 minutes of durdling out the combo...and I could tell he was bored/annoyed. 2nd game goes similarly. After that I mix it up, but it definitely showed me how a newer player could be turned off by Legacy style play VERY quickly. And that comes from someone who really likes the format.
But you are only thinking about limited, and not giving any thought to the other formats. People like those "Build Around Me' Combo cards and those cards aren't always great in limited. Cards like Near-Death Experience and Barren Glory, or Door to Nothingness are never going to be good in Limited... or probably constructed, haha. But Mtg needs them because there is a sect of players who adores cards like these.
So mtg requires these type of cards. Would you rather have these cards in your Uncommon slots so you see them multiple times per draft? This is ignoring the fact that many of these cards are too complicated for Uncommon slots. Being Rare is just where they have to be.
Late changes in the process have a way of making that happen.
Something breaks and either becomes overly good or just terrible.
I'm pretty sure noone would really be complaining about Emmara Tandris if it kept it's original ability... making the X/X token that Voice of Resurgence stole.
(Because all Maze-Runners had to be the same rarity, so she couldn't be a mythic, couldn't get her token, and just got saddled with a really weak ability).