It feels Magic has generations, sets that feel like they have something different, sometimes by way or card art, or by changes in rules. Alpha through The Dark feel separate from Fallen Empires through Alliances, Mirage block to Rath cycle, and so forth, and so forth. Sometimes there seams to be a divide, found in power level, story, or card value.
For some reason, I just cannot shrug off the feeling that Return to Ravnica through Kaladesh was a really weak point, across the board. When I trade, I avoid most cards from those sets outside of rare & mythic non-basic lands and Planeswalkers.
As I look for collections to buy online or through sales apps, I avoid anything from late 2011 to 2016. Which is odd, as those are the sets that are usually being sold, like someone tried to get into Magic and decided to bail during the 2012 - 2016 years.
Is it just me, or am I onto something? Don't get me wrong, when those sets were released, I easily got the cards I wanted from trading, drafts, sealed events, and Puca Trade, but after that, no mas for me. Now when it comes ti Innistrad block (the original) or earlier, I'm down to keep getting those singles for either my own decks or Puca Trading.
So, who else feels the sentiments that those sets are old hat? And if so, do you feel that Amonkhet & Ixalan have breathed new life into Magic? And if you are still agreeing, wheat then sets them apart? What is the 2012 - 2016 sets lack that Amonkhet & Ixalan have?
Thanks for sharing your opinions, very curious to what others will say.
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I play my bomb. I win. No, you draw and play yours, now you win. No, I draw my Mythic next turn and now I win. Basically nearly unanswerable Mythics.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I play my bomb. I win. No, you draw and play yours, now you win. No, I draw my Mythic next turn and now I win. Basically nearly unanswerable Mythics.
Please dive deeper, how does this play style make the sets from 2011 to 2016 different? Many of the mythics & rares from said sets have a low value (as in monetary value), as well as playability. Look at Epic Experiment and Emmara Tandris as examples of bulk rares/mythics. What was going on during with R&D when they made these rares? Or look at the mythic creatures from Khans block, which are of interesting design, but now rarely come up in casual decks (I play w/ a large group of casual players & they rarely use cards from that period of time mentioned).
If you're skipping out on cards between 2011 and 2016, you're passing on most of what has shaped Modern and Legacy to be what they are in the interim.
But frankly, I've been playing Magic since Urza's Saga and don't exactly know what it is you think you're seeing. People selling a lot of cards between 2011 and 2016 makes sense, because those are most recent. Magic has grown by a LOT in popularity in between those years, meaning there is much more of it in supply and in the secondary market than at any time previously. The average life span of a Magic player before quitting (and potentially coming back) is around 7 years according to Mark Rosewater.
Are the cards as a whole weaker? Not really. We just had the most bans in Standard due to power level since Affinity rampaged through the format and many cards in the last few years made a big splash in non-rotating formats and even have some people wanting to pursue Frontier from Khans/Origins forward. Innistrad and many sets before then only have a small handful of cards that are played in anything in Modern or Legacy, and a few outliers that see play in Commander which is all over the map in terms of how powerful a card may be there as opposed to anywhere else. Ixalan and Amonkhet are no different than many sets that came before them. They haven't even hardly effected formats other than Standard, so this weird personal "feeling" you get about them seems a bit off (as does the suggestion that it's been Battlecruiser Magic this entire time - no, it hasn't).
I'm not sure I agree with your assessment entirely. Return to Ravnica, on the whole, was a pretty decent block. The set at least, was fantastic. At rare, even ignoring the lands, you've got cross-format powerhouses like Deathrite Shaman, Abrupt Decay, Supreme Verdict, Detention Sphere, etc. Gatecrash was a bit more of a letdown, and Dragon's Maze was a straight-up flop, but RtR the set was enough to hold up the entire block in my opinion.
Theros Block, I'm largely extremely down on. There was one solid mechanic (Devotion), and they basically abandoned it after the first set, and it was mostly just used to prop up two decks through the set's run in Standard.
BFZ I'm of a mixed mind about, but lean more positively than negatively. There's a lot of stuff with an interesting impact on older formats, but they pushed Eldrazi a touch too far in Modern and caused a big problem. Even still, lots of cool stuff, and even some uncommons (Stormchaser Mage for example).
Shadows Over Innistrad I really wanted to like, because Madness was one of my favorite mechanics, but they largely played it too safe. There's still a few decent cards throughout like Liliana, the Last Hope, Collective Brutality, Blessed Alliance, etc,
Amonkhet, I really didn't enjoy that much. It felt like they played it too safe. There's very little that actually seems like it could have an Eternal impact.
Ixalan, we still need to see the second set of, so I'd say it's too early to tell. We've got a few promising cards like Search for Azcanta, so with a little push the second set could manage something, but the weak tribal themes seem like they're going to push too much for standard and nothing else.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
I can tell you what changed in RTR and onwards! KEYWORDS!
Just look at this page that lists out all the changes and scroll down. Every single set post M2013 started adding new keyword abilities. We got so many set specific keyword abilities now it's kind of crazy.
Another major change: Refinement to creature design and power level vs rarity. Before RTR, it was a lot more common to find, well, a common that actually was pretty strong. Delver of Secrets, Thallid, Lightning Bolt, Llanowar Elves, Sakura-tribe elder, Wild nacatl, etc were all extremely strong commons and some have survived the passing of time as well. Now if a card has any umph behind it WoTC basically sticks it at uncommon or makes it a junk rare. Case in point Soul-scar mage. And before anyone brings it up, they downshifted Seeker of the Way so it doesn't count.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I'm not sure I agree with your assessment entirely. Return to Ravnica, on the whole, was a pretty decent block. The set at least, was fantastic. At rare, even ignoring the lands, you've got cross-format powerhouses like Deathrite Shaman, Abrupt Decay, Supreme Verdict, Detention Sphere, etc. Gatecrash was a bit more of a letdown, and Dragon's Maze was a straight-up flop, but RtR the set was enough to hold up the entire block in my opinion.
Theros Block, I'm largely extremely down on. There was one solid mechanic (Devotion), and they basically abandoned it after the first set, and it was mostly just used to prop up two decks through the set's run in Standard.
BFZ I'm of a mixed mind about, but lean more positively than negatively. There's a lot of stuff with an interesting impact on older formats, but they pushed Eldrazi a touch too far in Modern and caused a big problem. Even still, lots of cool stuff, and even some uncommons (Stormchaser Mage for example).
Shadows Over Innistrad I really wanted to like, because Madness was one of my favorite mechanics, but they largely played it too safe. There's still a few decent cards throughout like Liliana, the Last Hope, Collective Brutality, Blessed Alliance, etc,
Amonkhet, I really didn't enjoy that much. It felt like they played it too safe. There's very little that actually seems like it could have an Eternal impact.
Ixalan, we still need to see the second set of, so I'd say it's too early to tell. We've got a few promising cards like Search for Azcanta, so with a little push the second set could manage something, but the weak tribal themes seem like they're going to push too much for standard and nothing else.
You do make some good points, but I'm trying to look at a larger picture here. Some of the cards seam too safe, as just mentioned, and the rampant key-wording that doesn't come back in other sets. I guess when we come back to Ravnica again, I hope to see deeper interaction w/ guild keywords. But w/ RTR block, most of the strong cards come from RTR set. The following two were weak. Outside of standard (at the time) many cards dropped. I guess time will only tell once certain cards become harder to come by, but then that might take a decade and looking that far into the future is a smokey crystal ball (or a Magic Eight Ball that says "Check again later").
Looking back on it, maybe I feel they push the set themes too hard. BfZ had Eldrazi & Allies, and went a bit too heavy there. Maybe it's about building the balance between keyword heavy themes, creature types & mechanics. The OG Zendikar had traps, quests, leveling up creatures, and a whole lot more that gave the set diversity. Maybe it was just the let down that some of those themes weren't revisited.
I'm pretty certain that all the play it safe changes they are doing right now are probably tied into the fact they are making MTG Arena. They also seem averse to printing super versatile cards like they did in many prior sets. RTR and Kahns had some of the most versatile and useful pieces in our contemporary history. Instead they are opting for more intentional versatility via cards like Abrade, where they list out the exact uses the card has. At least that has been my feeling after going through the Collective series of cards from SoI and some of the newer multi-modal cards.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
You do make some good points, but I'm trying to look at a larger picture here. Some of the cards seam too safe, as just mentioned, and the rampant key-wording that doesn't come back in other sets. I guess when we come back to Ravnica again, I hope to see deeper interaction w/ guild keywords. But w/ RTR block, most of the strong cards come from RTR set. The following two were weak. Outside of standard (at the time) many cards dropped. I guess time will only tell once certain cards become harder to come by, but then that might take a decade and looking that far into the future is a smokey crystal ball (or a Magic Eight Ball that says "Check again later").
Looking back on it, maybe I feel they push the set themes too hard. BfZ had Eldrazi & Allies, and went a bit too heavy there. Maybe it's about building the balance between keyword heavy themes, creature types & mechanics. The OG Zendikar had traps, quests, leveling up creatures, and a whole lot more that gave the set diversity. Maybe it was just the let down that some of those themes weren't revisited.
I'm not sure "rampant keywords" is necessarily a bad thing. Some of my favorite sets had keyword counts that make a lot of stuff in the era we're discussing look positively tame. Time Spiral block in particular was egregious with them. A bigger problem may be keyword selection. Too many keywords from recent years (and this includes Amonkhet and Ixalan) are "limited" keywords that seemed designed to be drafted around, but without much playability potential in other formats. Basically everything besides Evolve in Gatecrash was crap. Theros block had the HUGE stinkers of Heroic, Bestow, and Tribute, the last of which was barely even limited playable. BFZ block was another really bad one for this - Devoid felt like it should never have been a mechanic to begin with, Converge was awful (despite having Painful Truths, which sees some play), Support was worthless, Cohort was abysmal, etc. Some of these, they could have made to be good enough if they pushed - Bestow, for example, if they hadn't played super crazy extremely safe with the bestow costs - but others like Support and Cohort are just meritless and without saving.
But again, I'm not sure the most recent few sets have been free of this. Exert (barring a pair of standard-playables) was underpushed and overall pretty lame. Embalm they played largely safe on, treating it as a bad creature flashback. Afflict was just awkward. Ixalan may have only two new named mechanics, but both are pretty mediocre.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
You do make some good points, but I'm trying to look at a larger picture here. Some of the cards seam too safe, as just mentioned, and the rampant key-wording that doesn't come back in other sets. I guess when we come back to Ravnica again, I hope to see deeper interaction w/ guild keywords. But w/ RTR block, most of the strong cards come from RTR set. The following two were weak. Outside of standard (at the time) many cards dropped. I guess time will only tell once certain cards become harder to come by, but then that might take a decade and looking that far into the future is a smokey crystal ball (or a Magic Eight Ball that says "Check again later").
Looking back on it, maybe I feel they push the set themes too hard. BfZ had Eldrazi & Allies, and went a bit too heavy there. Maybe it's about building the balance between keyword heavy themes, creature types & mechanics. The OG Zendikar had traps, quests, leveling up creatures, and a whole lot more that gave the set diversity. Maybe it was just the let down that some of those themes weren't revisited.
I'm not sure "rampant keywords" is necessarily a bad thing. Some of my favorite sets had keyword counts that make a lot of stuff in the era we're discussing look positively tame. Time Spiral block in particular was egregious with them. A bigger problem may be keyword selection. Too many keywords from recent years (and this includes Amonkhet and Ixalan) are "limited" keywords that seemed designed to be drafted around, but without much playability potential in other formats. Basically everything besides Evolve in Gatecrash was crap. Theros block had the HUGE stinkers of Heroic, Bestow, and Tribute, the last of which was barely even limited playable. BFZ block was another really bad one for this - Devoid felt like it should never have been a mechanic to begin with, Converge was awful (despite having Painful Truths, which sees some play), Support was worthless, Cohort was abysmal, etc. Some of these, they could have made to be good enough if they pushed - Bestow, for example, if they hadn't played super crazy extremely safe with the bestow costs - but others like Support and Cohort are just meritless and without saving.
But again, I'm not sure the most recent few sets have been free of this. Exert (barring a pair of standard-playables) was underpushed and overall pretty lame. Embalm they played largely safe on, treating it as a bad creature flashback. Afflict was just awkward. Ixalan may have only two new named mechanics, but both are pretty mediocre.
Did they ever explain why they overcosted Bestow like they did?
Well I guess each of these "eras" feel different because development, business practices, and art design was different. Early years they were pretty experimental, but also they were in turbulent times because TCG was still a new thing and they were basically the first in the market to try figuring out what works and what doesn't work. I won't touch any particular card design, mechanics, rule change. I just gonna generalize a lot.
Skipping all those old periods and talking about why a lot of other players (specially those who define themselves as old guard) may not like today's magic feeling as much, maybe it's because it feels samey. Art is very unified and for the most part it doesn't really have much room for individuality save some pieces or promos and game design which seems to be very focused and safe. Also, they are "copying" other TCGs in some aspects and the way they deal with their online platform feels like playing catch up with the competition and with the times.
Also, lately it seems that they are pushing the playerbase and big buyers too hard with constant new releases. Special products doesn't feel special anymore. Commander/Planeschase/Archenemy/Conspiracy were exciting the first time around, now it feels like something they are shoving in our throats. Master sets should be biannual products or at very least annual, but they found a way to charge more than $3 ~ 4 bucks MSRP for a booster with this line of product, so together with the low quality print runs, their unscrupulous greed may be sapping to the public perception. By pushing products so fast, design seems to be weaker as well. Having sudden changes to rotation didn't help either.
Personally I feel like Zendikar/SOM/INN blocks were the rapid expansion period, RTR/Theros/Khans blocks were the end of that expansion and consolidation period, and BFZ till now is the milking the consumer period. Will Dominaria be different, worse, or better? Who knows. I'd say some of past eras aren't always better than the present. After all, Fallen Empires, Homelands, Ice Age period was very weak even thou it's very nostalgic to a lot of people (including myself).
For my POV, Alliances was the end of that period. Literally it felt like the end of an icy period that MTG was stuck on. Alliances till Tempest was a very good period overall. Urza's to Mercadia was a weird time with a really OP block with a dismal weak block (also introducing stuff like fat packs and foils). I missed the blocks after Mercadia till the first Zendikar block, but it seems to be a pretty stable period with some ups and downs, but not as pronounced as in the past (maybe Mirrodin/Kamigawa had a higher fluctuation). Ignoring the ups and downs in design and powerlevel a bit, the NWO sets seem very samey, safe and uninspired, specially after BFZ. Lot of the "innovations" can be seem in other card games (for instance, the lottery cards). It just feels stagnant. Business practices seem something taken from EA or Activision as well. Still because of that it feels somewhat stable and safe experiences as well.
I came back to MTG around New Phyrexia so I could experience a bit of Zendikar. The best period for me was Innistrad. It felt they are really trying to push the game with the double faced cards and the horror theme. However, in hindsight maybe I was too awestruck for my rekindling of my MTG passion. RTR till Khans kind felt they are trying too hard to capture this magic via nostalgia in RTR, new theme with Theros, or just pure bribe with Khans (powerlevel and fetches). BFZ and now it feels like I'm playing CoD, Destiny, or SW Battlefront.
Who knows how people who started playing in those periods will feel about those times after a decade or so. I don't think it's wrong to feel one way or another. The concept of generations in MTG history isn't wrong. Just agreeing on what slice of the story correspond to whatever you wanna call each era. People do that all the time with comics, anime, manga, games, and so on.
I believe some time around RTR there was a development philosophy change? Don't know about that one, I only know from RTR forward they increased the number of printings for new sets. The two could be related.
I believe some time around RTR there was a development philosophy change? Don't know about that one, I only know from RTR forward they increased the number of printings for new sets. The two could be related.
The "Ages of Design" puts a break before Scars of Mirrodin and after Journey into Nyx. So I'm not sure this can explain it, unless you believe there's a several-year bleed-over from the transition of an age, because Scars is one of the best blocks in recent memory and Innistrad is largely positively received as well, and Khans, BFZ, and SOI should be about the same as Amonkhet and Ixalan.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My Moderator Helpdesk
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
I feel like one of the biggest changes for Magic was better-developed limited environments, the turning corner of which was Innistrad. Innistrad had a tapper. Return to Ravnica did not have a tapper, and the tapper on Theros was bad. Starting over this period, removal in limited got worse or was otherwise bumped in rarity. If your complaint is that commons aren't as strong as they used to be, I would certainly agree that common removal of today tends to not have the broad applications that Doom Blade once had and cards like Lightning Strike, while played in standard, aren't going to hold value. We're also just not going to see things like Snuff Out in modern sets, certainly not at common. Throttle is just not going to be sought after for Commander decks.
While I don't follow Standard, I think there was a point at which removal in standard had gotten a bit weak compared to the threats there, so it's possible this is also affecting value. I think they're also printing fewer catch-all answers nowadays. Suspension Field, Disdainful Stroke, and the like. This makes cards less broadly applicable which formats like Commander want. Though they've reprinted Nature's Claim in recent products that aren't standard-legal which I find notable.
They intentionally tried to power down the game, no lightning, no counterspell, no wraths and no weenies. At least not at the old costs. That's after RTR.
Then they started powering down the mechanics with all the "do minor thing if something happened this turn" or "pay 1 to activate the triggered effect". To stop combos and broken cards I assume.
The game I learned around Scars to Theros is now very different, it's worse for older players.
Yup, yup, and yup. When Lightning Bolt was brought back to Standard, things felt classic & fun. I never thought Lightning Bolt was overpowered. I also feel than weenie creatures balance out bombs. You need something that will get you to your goal.
I'm not finding too much of that in the time frames above (as a whole). I'm calling the above sets garbage, the Charms are very versatile & strong (I try to use most of them). But cards like Grisly Spectacle (outside of limited) are wasted paper. That card would be used waaayyy more if it's cost was 1BB. I see a lot of cards that costs should have been at least 1 less, making them more playable. They cards, as mentioned a few times (so far) in this thread, is that it all seams to be too safe, as if they knew certain cards were ONLY going to be played in limited or casual play groups. I have a black/blue mill deck, and if Grisly Spectacle costed what I had mentioned (cmc of 3), I would have put 4 copies of GS in the deck, as it would have been fast enough removal AND a way to mill.
Every time MTG has tried to tie a setting to a real world location its been garbage. MTG needs to focus on its on identity and not grab some rl stuff and add "Magic" to it and sell it as a set.
It feels Magic has generations, sets that feel like they have something different, sometimes by way or card art, or by changes in rules. Alpha through The Dark feel separate from Fallen Empires through Alliances, Mirage block to Rath cycle, and so forth, and so forth. Sometimes there seams to be a divide, found in power level, story, or card value.
For some reason, I just cannot shrug off the feeling that Return to Ravnica through Kaladesh was a really weak point, across the board. When I trade, I avoid most cards from those sets outside of rare & mythic non-basic lands and Planeswalkers.
As I look for collections to buy online or through sales apps, I avoid anything from late 2011 to 2016. Which is odd, as those are the sets that are usually being sold, like someone tried to get into Magic and decided to bail during the 2012 - 2016 years.
Is it just me, or am I onto something? Don't get me wrong, when those sets were released, I easily got the cards I wanted from trading, drafts, sealed events, and Puca Trade, but after that, no mas for me. Now when it comes ti Innistrad block (the original) or earlier, I'm down to keep getting those singles for either my own decks or Puca Trading.
So, who else feels the sentiments that those sets are old hat? And if so, do you feel that Amonkhet & Ixalan have breathed new life into Magic? And if you are still agreeing, wheat then sets them apart? What is the 2012 - 2016 sets lack that Amonkhet & Ixalan have?
Thanks for sharing your opinions, very curious to what others will say.
This is a good thread! I haven't seen a response to your post yet I don't agree with, but this is something I personally enjoy researching, and while the answers are many and complicated, the primary reason can be summed up thusly:
The shift of power from spells to creatures
The first, and strongest example of this is Baneslayer Angel (M10, M11) which is a little before RTR, but it's the granddaddy (grandmammy?) of current design. We've obviously seen creatures powering up as time went on, just look how Jackal Pup and Savannah Lions of old are considered draft chaff, at best, now. But Baneslayer Angel? This was monocle-popping when it was revealed. It looks relatively tame now, but it started the now hallowed tradition of creature combat as king. Serra Angel was considered broken in the earliest of times, but by Baneslayers day, not so much. This freaking angel was the a red-hot threat, and from it on to today, you can count most standard metas in terms of "the deck to beat helmed by X creature".
Today it's between Ramunap Red with Hazoret and every other deck using Scarab God. Before that it was nutty stuff like Thundermaw Hellkite, Angel of Serenity, and the (not blue) Titan Cycle. Exception here for Caw-Blade, since that was mostly Jace and the swords, but without Squadron Hawks (its namesake) and Stoneforge Mystic, would that deck have made us so miserable?
The other big change around this time is new world order. NWO gets blamed for a LOT of things, but the primary directive is how the game deals with commons, nothing more. However, the reach of NWO is vast, as Mark Rosewater (lead designer) says "if your mechanic isn't at common, it isn't your mechanic". Basically, something needs to be easy enough to grasp to be at common, or it won't make the cut. We can argue all day whether that's dumbing down the game or now, but it DOES tend to create mechanics without a lot of baggage and are easier to pick up (on average)
Combine this with the uptick in creature power and the shift of common design priority, and you have a huge paradigm shift in card design.
Let's consider RTR for a moment. Detain, Populate, Overload, Scavenge and Unleash. 4 of those are creature mechanics, and 1 (overload) is spell. This makes sense, as Blue and Red are allotted the smallest number of creatures. (White, green, black, red/blue, in order)
Let's sashay on down to gatecrash with Battalion, Bloodrush, Extort, Evolve, cipher. Again, 4 are creature mechanics (all but extort). Cipher is only on spells, BUT it requires a creature, and thus combat to use. Extort is mostly on creatures, but it's not dependent on them, so we'll consider a spell mechanic.
You can see this in most recent sets, the number of mechanics that require/encourage creatures/combat dwarfs that of spells. In fact, the most effective one (since it was granted evergreen) of them all, Prowess, although a spell mechanic in name, requires a creature.
I can name plenty more examples, but to keep my (not brief) argument somewhat more brief, let's look at black and red. Red's slice of the color pie has traditionally been Burn spells and weenies (mostly spells) but as others have mentioned, Bolt, being too powerful a spell these days, red has had to gain some of that power in its creatures. Thundermaw Hellkite, Monastery Swiftspear and Young Pyromancer are excellent examples of that shift in power. (I do believe all but thundermaw see play in modern/legacy, but please correct me if I'm wrong!) By yesteryears standards, these things would be considered ba-roken.
As for black, another powerful spell color, it's creatures usually had a trade. Juzan Djin is (was) huge, but it dealt damage to you. Carnophage was a 2/2 for 1, but again, damage to you. Basically you paid a heavy price for efficiency. Can you imagine how expensive Phyrexian Obliterator would have been in Alpha? Fallen Empires? It's just absurd. and it doesn't see much (if any) tournament play because it's still not good enough! Griselbrand? Where's the downside to that guy? Mana cost? That's nothing for the reanimator color.
But the most fun we can look at for both of these, and how much the game has changed, is their "grizzly bears".
In Innistrad, Black got Walking Corpse, a 2/2 for 2. As a common, this didn't create much hubbub except to us historians. This was HUGE. Green got this first, obviously, took a while for white and blue. But Black? They've had plenty of bears, but always with a can't block or some other kind of downside. No more. Gutterskulk came out soon after in GTR with 2 relevant types (zombie rat) and was followed soon after by even more...with upside! Dhund Operative, Olivia's Dragoon, Khenra Eternal are all black bears with an upside. Then red gets Falkenrath reaver in EMN, its first bear, preceded by the already wheel breaking falkenrath gorger and insolate neonate.
Why am I bringing up all these crappy cards that nobody uses or cares about? That's the problem. These things that break a fundamental "law" of old magic, creatures must be inneficient based on color, is are NO LONGER GOOD ENOUGH. We don't even notice it's a thing anymore. If your creature isn't absurdly costed with an ETB effect, it's not good enough.
And because this power goes into creatures, it has to come from somewhere; spells.
Bolt is too powerful. Counterspell is too powerful (hello cancel!) Land destruction is too powerful at 3, and is now much less common. Control decks need top-tier creatures to win, e.g. torrential gearhulk.
What you're seeing is very real, and does happen to start around (just a little before) 2011. I'm a Timmy, so this is a good change for me. Casting an Ancient Brontodon is what keeps me warm at night, but I feel for everyone who feels the game has moved from a place they love to something they don't. The first reply, increase in Battlecruiser Magic is very apt. Magic is now less chaining spells and combos and more turning sideways, and that is by design.
Whew that was longer than expected, but as you see, this is a topic I love to discuss
Thragtusk.
Analyze that card, it tells you everything about post-modern Magic.
Efficient body for its cost? Check
Stopgap against aggro? Check
Makes removal less valuable when used against it? Check
Rare? Check
Puts the opponent on a 4-turn clock by itself? Check
Is usually abused by other cards to gain more value off of its ETB/LTB effects? Check
Is a creature? Check
Very splashable for its mana requirements? Check
A playset of it was worth $100 or more in its hay day? Check
Every time MTG has tried to tie a setting to a real world location its been garbage. MTG needs to focus on its on identity and not grab some rl stuff and add "Magic" to it and sell it as a set.
You mean top-down sets in the vein of Amonkhet, Theros and Kamigawa?
I do think that bottom-up sets tend towards better gameplay since it isn't tied down with flavour obligations as much as top-down sets like the above mentioned are, but that doesn't apply to everything.
Every time MTG has tried to tie a setting to a real world location its been garbage. MTG needs to focus on its on identity and not grab some rl stuff and add "Magic" to it and sell it as a set.
You mean top-down sets in the vein of Amonkhet, Theros and Kamigawa?
I do think that bottom-up sets tend towards better gameplay since it isn't tied down with flavour obligations as much as top-down sets like the above mentioned are, but that doesn't apply to everything.
It is telling that neither of these sets really impacted Standard on their own. Amonkhet is completely overshadowed by Kaladesh and Ixalan save for The Scarab God and Ramunap Ruins, Kamigawa was an afterthought between Affinity and Zoo, and Theros was just "Gary and Master of Waves visit Ravnica".
The mechanics of these sets were largely irrelevant.
Every time MTG has tried to tie a setting to a real world location its been garbage. MTG needs to focus on its on identity and not grab some rl stuff and add "Magic" to it and sell it as a set.
You mean top-down sets in the vein of Amonkhet, Theros and Kamigawa?
I do think that bottom-up sets tend towards better gameplay since it isn't tied down with flavour obligations as much as top-down sets like the above mentioned are, but that doesn't apply to everything.
It is telling that neither of these sets really impacted Standard on their own. Amonkhet is completely overshadowed by Kaladesh and Ixalan save for The Scarab God and Ramunap Ruins, Kamigawa was an afterthought between Affinity and Zoo, and Theros was just "Gary and Master of Waves visit Ravnica".
The mechanics of these sets were largely irrelevant.
What about Hazoret and the other Amonkhet block red creatures like Earthshaker Khenra and Soul-Scar Mage that are used in Ramunap Red? Abrade is also a pretty good card in Standard.
Amonkhet may not be a particularly strong block, and you're right that Kaladesh does overshadow it, but it did contribute a fair bit to the current Standard.
Every time MTG has tried to tie a setting to a real world location its been garbage. MTG needs to focus on its on identity and not grab some rl stuff and add "Magic" to it and sell it as a set.
You mean top-down sets in the vein of Amonkhet, Theros and Kamigawa?
I do think that bottom-up sets tend towards better gameplay since it isn't tied down with flavour obligations as much as top-down sets like the above mentioned are, but that doesn't apply to everything.
It is telling that neither of these sets really impacted Standard on their own. Amonkhet is completely overshadowed by Kaladesh and Ixalan save for The Scarab God and Ramunap Ruins, Kamigawa was an afterthought between Affinity and Zoo, and Theros was just "Gary and Master of Waves visit Ravnica".
The mechanics of these sets were largely irrelevant.
What about Hazoret and the other Amonkhet block red creatures like Earthshaker Khenra and Soul-Scar Mage that are used in Ramunap Red? Abrade is also a pretty good card in Standard.
Amonkhet may not be a particularly strong block, and you're right that Kaladesh does overshadow it, but it did contribute a fair bit to the current Standard.
I'll concede Hazoret slipped my mind, but the red creatures and Abrade are bread and butter sligh spells that could have been in any set, Kenra's Eternalize is hardly ever used.
Ultimatedly these sets didn't bring anything all-their-own to the table like Kaladesh with Energy and Vehicles, Lorwyn with Tribal or Mirrodin with Affinity and Equip.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
For some reason, I just cannot shrug off the feeling that Return to Ravnica through Kaladesh was a really weak point, across the board. When I trade, I avoid most cards from those sets outside of rare & mythic non-basic lands and Planeswalkers.
As I look for collections to buy online or through sales apps, I avoid anything from late 2011 to 2016. Which is odd, as those are the sets that are usually being sold, like someone tried to get into Magic and decided to bail during the 2012 - 2016 years.
Is it just me, or am I onto something? Don't get me wrong, when those sets were released, I easily got the cards I wanted from trading, drafts, sealed events, and Puca Trade, but after that, no mas for me. Now when it comes ti Innistrad block (the original) or earlier, I'm down to keep getting those singles for either my own decks or Puca Trading.
So, who else feels the sentiments that those sets are old hat? And if so, do you feel that Amonkhet & Ixalan have breathed new life into Magic? And if you are still agreeing, wheat then sets them apart? What is the 2012 - 2016 sets lack that Amonkhet & Ixalan have?
Thanks for sharing your opinions, very curious to what others will say.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)What is that? Never heard of Battlecruiser Magic?
I play my bomb. I win. No, you draw and play yours, now you win. No, I draw my Mythic next turn and now I win. Basically nearly unanswerable Mythics.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)Please dive deeper, how does this play style make the sets from 2011 to 2016 different? Many of the mythics & rares from said sets have a low value (as in monetary value), as well as playability. Look at Epic Experiment and Emmara Tandris as examples of bulk rares/mythics. What was going on during with R&D when they made these rares? Or look at the mythic creatures from Khans block, which are of interesting design, but now rarely come up in casual decks (I play w/ a large group of casual players & they rarely use cards from that period of time mentioned).
But frankly, I've been playing Magic since Urza's Saga and don't exactly know what it is you think you're seeing. People selling a lot of cards between 2011 and 2016 makes sense, because those are most recent. Magic has grown by a LOT in popularity in between those years, meaning there is much more of it in supply and in the secondary market than at any time previously. The average life span of a Magic player before quitting (and potentially coming back) is around 7 years according to Mark Rosewater.
Are the cards as a whole weaker? Not really. We just had the most bans in Standard due to power level since Affinity rampaged through the format and many cards in the last few years made a big splash in non-rotating formats and even have some people wanting to pursue Frontier from Khans/Origins forward. Innistrad and many sets before then only have a small handful of cards that are played in anything in Modern or Legacy, and a few outliers that see play in Commander which is all over the map in terms of how powerful a card may be there as opposed to anywhere else. Ixalan and Amonkhet are no different than many sets that came before them. They haven't even hardly effected formats other than Standard, so this weird personal "feeling" you get about them seems a bit off (as does the suggestion that it's been Battlecruiser Magic this entire time - no, it hasn't).
(Also known as Xenphire)
Theros Block, I'm largely extremely down on. There was one solid mechanic (Devotion), and they basically abandoned it after the first set, and it was mostly just used to prop up two decks through the set's run in Standard.
Khans block, I liked a lot. Again, there's a ton of format-defining cards like Monastery Mentor, Ugin, the Spirit Dragon, Monastery Swiftspear, Siege Rhino, Gurmag Angler, Treasure Cruise, Dig Through Time, Kolaghan's Command, Collected Company, etc. Several of these are uncommon, and a few are even common!
BFZ I'm of a mixed mind about, but lean more positively than negatively. There's a lot of stuff with an interesting impact on older formats, but they pushed Eldrazi a touch too far in Modern and caused a big problem. Even still, lots of cool stuff, and even some uncommons (Stormchaser Mage for example).
Shadows Over Innistrad I really wanted to like, because Madness was one of my favorite mechanics, but they largely played it too safe. There's still a few decent cards throughout like Liliana, the Last Hope, Collective Brutality, Blessed Alliance, etc,
Amonkhet, I really didn't enjoy that much. It felt like they played it too safe. There's very little that actually seems like it could have an Eternal impact.
Ixalan, we still need to see the second set of, so I'd say it's too early to tell. We've got a few promising cards like Search for Azcanta, so with a little push the second set could manage something, but the weak tribal themes seem like they're going to push too much for standard and nothing else.
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Just look at this page that lists out all the changes and scroll down. Every single set post M2013 started adding new keyword abilities. We got so many set specific keyword abilities now it's kind of crazy.
Another major change: Refinement to creature design and power level vs rarity. Before RTR, it was a lot more common to find, well, a common that actually was pretty strong. Delver of Secrets, Thallid, Lightning Bolt, Llanowar Elves, Sakura-tribe elder, Wild nacatl, etc were all extremely strong commons and some have survived the passing of time as well. Now if a card has any umph behind it WoTC basically sticks it at uncommon or makes it a junk rare. Case in point Soul-scar mage. And before anyone brings it up, they downshifted Seeker of the Way so it doesn't count.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
You do make some good points, but I'm trying to look at a larger picture here. Some of the cards seam too safe, as just mentioned, and the rampant key-wording that doesn't come back in other sets. I guess when we come back to Ravnica again, I hope to see deeper interaction w/ guild keywords. But w/ RTR block, most of the strong cards come from RTR set. The following two were weak. Outside of standard (at the time) many cards dropped. I guess time will only tell once certain cards become harder to come by, but then that might take a decade and looking that far into the future is a smokey crystal ball (or a Magic Eight Ball that says "Check again later").
Looking back on it, maybe I feel they push the set themes too hard. BfZ had Eldrazi & Allies, and went a bit too heavy there. Maybe it's about building the balance between keyword heavy themes, creature types & mechanics. The OG Zendikar had traps, quests, leveling up creatures, and a whole lot more that gave the set diversity. Maybe it was just the let down that some of those themes weren't revisited.
Intersting how the above link mention: https://mtg.gamepedia.com/Rule_Changes_by_Set - are the sets/time perios mrntioned by me as a different era of Magic.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
RtR was *such* a good set though. And it's not like the other two are completely devoid of good cards - Enter the Infinite, Worldspine Wurm, Voice of Resurgence, Wear//Tear, and Thespians' Stage have all had impacts on Eternal formats, and some of them (Stage in particular) are profound impacts.
I'm not sure "rampant keywords" is necessarily a bad thing. Some of my favorite sets had keyword counts that make a lot of stuff in the era we're discussing look positively tame. Time Spiral block in particular was egregious with them. A bigger problem may be keyword selection. Too many keywords from recent years (and this includes Amonkhet and Ixalan) are "limited" keywords that seemed designed to be drafted around, but without much playability potential in other formats. Basically everything besides Evolve in Gatecrash was crap. Theros block had the HUGE stinkers of Heroic, Bestow, and Tribute, the last of which was barely even limited playable. BFZ block was another really bad one for this - Devoid felt like it should never have been a mechanic to begin with, Converge was awful (despite having Painful Truths, which sees some play), Support was worthless, Cohort was abysmal, etc. Some of these, they could have made to be good enough if they pushed - Bestow, for example, if they hadn't played super crazy extremely safe with the bestow costs - but others like Support and Cohort are just meritless and without saving.
But again, I'm not sure the most recent few sets have been free of this. Exert (barring a pair of standard-playables) was underpushed and overall pretty lame. Embalm they played largely safe on, treating it as a bad creature flashback. Afflict was just awkward. Ixalan may have only two new named mechanics, but both are pretty mediocre.
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Did they ever explain why they overcosted Bestow like they did?
Skipping all those old periods and talking about why a lot of other players (specially those who define themselves as old guard) may not like today's magic feeling as much, maybe it's because it feels samey. Art is very unified and for the most part it doesn't really have much room for individuality save some pieces or promos and game design which seems to be very focused and safe. Also, they are "copying" other TCGs in some aspects and the way they deal with their online platform feels like playing catch up with the competition and with the times.
Also, lately it seems that they are pushing the playerbase and big buyers too hard with constant new releases. Special products doesn't feel special anymore. Commander/Planeschase/Archenemy/Conspiracy were exciting the first time around, now it feels like something they are shoving in our throats. Master sets should be biannual products or at very least annual, but they found a way to charge more than $3 ~ 4 bucks MSRP for a booster with this line of product, so together with the low quality print runs, their unscrupulous greed may be sapping to the public perception. By pushing products so fast, design seems to be weaker as well. Having sudden changes to rotation didn't help either.
Personally I feel like Zendikar/SOM/INN blocks were the rapid expansion period, RTR/Theros/Khans blocks were the end of that expansion and consolidation period, and BFZ till now is the milking the consumer period. Will Dominaria be different, worse, or better? Who knows. I'd say some of past eras aren't always better than the present. After all, Fallen Empires, Homelands, Ice Age period was very weak even thou it's very nostalgic to a lot of people (including myself).
For my POV, Alliances was the end of that period. Literally it felt like the end of an icy period that MTG was stuck on. Alliances till Tempest was a very good period overall. Urza's to Mercadia was a weird time with a really OP block with a dismal weak block (also introducing stuff like fat packs and foils). I missed the blocks after Mercadia till the first Zendikar block, but it seems to be a pretty stable period with some ups and downs, but not as pronounced as in the past (maybe Mirrodin/Kamigawa had a higher fluctuation). Ignoring the ups and downs in design and powerlevel a bit, the NWO sets seem very samey, safe and uninspired, specially after BFZ. Lot of the "innovations" can be seem in other card games (for instance, the lottery cards). It just feels stagnant. Business practices seem something taken from EA or Activision as well. Still because of that it feels somewhat stable and safe experiences as well.
I came back to MTG around New Phyrexia so I could experience a bit of Zendikar. The best period for me was Innistrad. It felt they are really trying to push the game with the double faced cards and the horror theme. However, in hindsight maybe I was too awestruck for my rekindling of my MTG passion. RTR till Khans kind felt they are trying too hard to capture this magic via nostalgia in RTR, new theme with Theros, or just pure bribe with Khans (powerlevel and fetches). BFZ and now it feels like I'm playing CoD, Destiny, or SW Battlefront.
Who knows how people who started playing in those periods will feel about those times after a decade or so. I don't think it's wrong to feel one way or another. The concept of generations in MTG history isn't wrong. Just agreeing on what slice of the story correspond to whatever you wanna call each era. People do that all the time with comics, anime, manga, games, and so on.
Standard: BG Golgari Midrange
Modern: U Merfolk GWUBR 5 Color Humans UBW Esper Gifts GW Bogles
"Because it's card advantage" was the closest explanation they gave.
The "Ages of Design" puts a break before Scars of Mirrodin and after Journey into Nyx. So I'm not sure this can explain it, unless you believe there's a several-year bleed-over from the transition of an age, because Scars is one of the best blocks in recent memory and Innistrad is largely positively received as well, and Khans, BFZ, and SOI should be about the same as Amonkhet and Ixalan.
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
While I don't follow Standard, I think there was a point at which removal in standard had gotten a bit weak compared to the threats there, so it's possible this is also affecting value. I think they're also printing fewer catch-all answers nowadays. Suspension Field, Disdainful Stroke, and the like. This makes cards less broadly applicable which formats like Commander want. Though they've reprinted Nature's Claim in recent products that aren't standard-legal which I find notable.
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
Yup, yup, and yup. When Lightning Bolt was brought back to Standard, things felt classic & fun. I never thought Lightning Bolt was overpowered. I also feel than weenie creatures balance out bombs. You need something that will get you to your goal.
I'm not finding too much of that in the time frames above (as a whole). I'm calling the above sets garbage, the Charms are very versatile & strong (I try to use most of them). But cards like Grisly Spectacle (outside of limited) are wasted paper. That card would be used waaayyy more if it's cost was 1BB. I see a lot of cards that costs should have been at least 1 less, making them more playable. They cards, as mentioned a few times (so far) in this thread, is that it all seams to be too safe, as if they knew certain cards were ONLY going to be played in limited or casual play groups. I have a black/blue mill deck, and if Grisly Spectacle costed what I had mentioned (cmc of 3), I would have put 4 copies of GS in the deck, as it would have been fast enough removal AND a way to mill.
This is a good thread! I haven't seen a response to your post yet I don't agree with, but this is something I personally enjoy researching, and while the answers are many and complicated, the primary reason can be summed up thusly:
The shift of power from spells to creatures
The first, and strongest example of this is Baneslayer Angel (M10, M11) which is a little before RTR, but it's the granddaddy (grandmammy?) of current design. We've obviously seen creatures powering up as time went on, just look how Jackal Pup and Savannah Lions of old are considered draft chaff, at best, now. But Baneslayer Angel? This was monocle-popping when it was revealed. It looks relatively tame now, but it started the now hallowed tradition of creature combat as king. Serra Angel was considered broken in the earliest of times, but by Baneslayers day, not so much. This freaking angel was the a red-hot threat, and from it on to today, you can count most standard metas in terms of "the deck to beat helmed by X creature".
Today it's between Ramunap Red with Hazoret and every other deck using Scarab God. Before that it was nutty stuff like Thundermaw Hellkite, Angel of Serenity, and the (not blue) Titan Cycle. Exception here for Caw-Blade, since that was mostly Jace and the swords, but without Squadron Hawks (its namesake) and Stoneforge Mystic, would that deck have made us so miserable?
The other big change around this time is new world order. NWO gets blamed for a LOT of things, but the primary directive is how the game deals with commons, nothing more. However, the reach of NWO is vast, as Mark Rosewater (lead designer) says "if your mechanic isn't at common, it isn't your mechanic". Basically, something needs to be easy enough to grasp to be at common, or it won't make the cut. We can argue all day whether that's dumbing down the game or now, but it DOES tend to create mechanics without a lot of baggage and are easier to pick up (on average)
Combine this with the uptick in creature power and the shift of common design priority, and you have a huge paradigm shift in card design.
Let's consider RTR for a moment. Detain, Populate, Overload, Scavenge and Unleash. 4 of those are creature mechanics, and 1 (overload) is spell. This makes sense, as Blue and Red are allotted the smallest number of creatures. (White, green, black, red/blue, in order)
Let's sashay on down to gatecrash with Battalion, Bloodrush, Extort, Evolve, cipher. Again, 4 are creature mechanics (all but extort). Cipher is only on spells, BUT it requires a creature, and thus combat to use. Extort is mostly on creatures, but it's not dependent on them, so we'll consider a spell mechanic.
You can see this in most recent sets, the number of mechanics that require/encourage creatures/combat dwarfs that of spells. In fact, the most effective one (since it was granted evergreen) of them all, Prowess, although a spell mechanic in name, requires a creature.
I can name plenty more examples, but to keep my (not brief) argument somewhat more brief, let's look at black and red. Red's slice of the color pie has traditionally been Burn spells and weenies (mostly spells) but as others have mentioned, Bolt, being too powerful a spell these days, red has had to gain some of that power in its creatures. Thundermaw Hellkite, Monastery Swiftspear and Young Pyromancer are excellent examples of that shift in power. (I do believe all but thundermaw see play in modern/legacy, but please correct me if I'm wrong!) By yesteryears standards, these things would be considered ba-roken.
As for black, another powerful spell color, it's creatures usually had a trade. Juzan Djin is (was) huge, but it dealt damage to you. Carnophage was a 2/2 for 1, but again, damage to you. Basically you paid a heavy price for efficiency. Can you imagine how expensive Phyrexian Obliterator would have been in Alpha? Fallen Empires? It's just absurd. and it doesn't see much (if any) tournament play because it's still not good enough! Griselbrand? Where's the downside to that guy? Mana cost? That's nothing for the reanimator color.
But the most fun we can look at for both of these, and how much the game has changed, is their "grizzly bears".
In Innistrad, Black got Walking Corpse, a 2/2 for 2. As a common, this didn't create much hubbub except to us historians. This was HUGE. Green got this first, obviously, took a while for white and blue. But Black? They've had plenty of bears, but always with a can't block or some other kind of downside. No more. Gutterskulk came out soon after in GTR with 2 relevant types (zombie rat) and was followed soon after by even more...with upside! Dhund Operative, Olivia's Dragoon, Khenra Eternal are all black bears with an upside. Then red gets Falkenrath reaver in EMN, its first bear, preceded by the already wheel breaking falkenrath gorger and insolate neonate.
Why am I bringing up all these crappy cards that nobody uses or cares about? That's the problem. These things that break a fundamental "law" of old magic, creatures must be inneficient based on color, is are NO LONGER GOOD ENOUGH. We don't even notice it's a thing anymore. If your creature isn't absurdly costed with an ETB effect, it's not good enough.
And because this power goes into creatures, it has to come from somewhere; spells.
Bolt is too powerful. Counterspell is too powerful (hello cancel!) Land destruction is too powerful at 3, and is now much less common. Control decks need top-tier creatures to win, e.g. torrential gearhulk.
What you're seeing is very real, and does happen to start around (just a little before) 2011. I'm a Timmy, so this is a good change for me. Casting an Ancient Brontodon is what keeps me warm at night, but I feel for everyone who feels the game has moved from a place they love to something they don't. The first reply, increase in Battlecruiser Magic is very apt. Magic is now less chaining spells and combos and more turning sideways, and that is by design.
Whew that was longer than expected, but as you see, this is a topic I love to discuss
Analyze that card, it tells you everything about post-modern Magic.
Stopgap against aggro? Check
Makes removal less valuable when used against it? Check
Rare? Check
Puts the opponent on a 4-turn clock by itself? Check
Is usually abused by other cards to gain more value off of its ETB/LTB effects? Check
Is a creature? Check
Very splashable for its mana requirements? Check
A playset of it was worth $100 or more in its hay day? Check
You mean top-down sets in the vein of Amonkhet, Theros and Kamigawa?
I do think that bottom-up sets tend towards better gameplay since it isn't tied down with flavour obligations as much as top-down sets like the above mentioned are, but that doesn't apply to everything.
The mechanics of these sets were largely irrelevant.
What about Hazoret and the other Amonkhet block red creatures like Earthshaker Khenra and Soul-Scar Mage that are used in Ramunap Red? Abrade is also a pretty good card in Standard.
Amonkhet may not be a particularly strong block, and you're right that Kaladesh does overshadow it, but it did contribute a fair bit to the current Standard.
Ultimatedly these sets didn't bring anything all-their-own to the table like Kaladesh with Energy and Vehicles, Lorwyn with Tribal or Mirrodin with Affinity and Equip.