So if you read blogatog and some of the articles on other sites Unstable is a giant hit. On sales figures alone, the 4th Unset is probably a when and not an if. Maro's mission accomplished.
I wonder however, how much of this is because of the actual silverbordered cards and how much this is because of the goodies - which in this case means the foil tokens but most importantly - the full art basics. Looking at the current prices on magiccardmarket.com, the price of an unstable booster starts at €2,15 whereas the single prices for the full art basics range from €1,60 - €2,85, which means an average of €2,23 - more than the price of a booster! So it seems that the price of a pack is roughly equivalent to the expected value of the full art basic in there (a little lower because sometimes you pull a steamflogger boss) and the rest is just the toilet paper that comes with it.
Now as someone who finds silver bordered only slightly amusing to see and would never spend any real money on it this is understandable. But if this is true then how can Unstable be considered a success?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
So if you read blogatog and some of the articles on other sites Unstable is a giant hit. On sales figures alone, the 4th Unset is probably a when and not an if. Maro's mission accomplished.
I wonder however, how much of this is because of the actual silverbordered cards and how much this is because of the goodies - which in this case means the foil tokens but most importantly - the full art basics. Looking at the current prices on magiccardmarket.com, the price of an unstable booster starts at €2,15 whereas the single prices for the full art basics range from €1,60 - €2,85, which means an average of €2,23 - more than the price of a booster! So it seems that the price of a pack is roughly equivalent to the expected value of the full art basic in there (a little lower because sometimes you pull a steamflogger boss) and the rest is just the toilet paper that comes with it.
Now as someone who finds silver bordered only slightly amusing to see and would never spend any real money on it this is understandable. But if this is true then how can Unstable be considered a success?
Questions to consider: How is any set with chase cards a success? How is this different than basically any set? What about the other Un-sets that were less successful but also had goodies?
So if you read blogatog and some of the articles on other sites Unstable is a giant hit. On sales figures alone, the 4th Unset is probably a when and not an if. Maro's mission accomplished.
I wonder however, how much of this is because of the actual silverbordered cards and how much this is because of the goodies - which in this case means the foil tokens but most importantly - the full art basics. Looking at the current prices on magiccardmarket.com, the price of an unstable booster starts at €2,15 whereas the single prices for the full art basics range from €1,60 - €2,85, which means an average of €2,23 - more than the price of a booster! So it seems that the price of a pack is roughly equivalent to the expected value of the full art basic in there (a little lower because sometimes you pull a steamflogger boss) and the rest is just the toilet paper that comes with it.
Now as someone who finds silver bordered only slightly amusing to see and would never spend any real money on it this is understandable. But if this is true then how can Unstable be considered a success?
Questions to consider: How is any set with chase cards a success? How is this different than basically any set? What about the other Un-sets that were less successful but also had goodies?
Yes, every set has chase cards, but those are actually cards of the expansion. Take the chase cards away and the next top X cards from that set will be chased after. Unstable however, like any unset, is about silver bordered goofyness, with the full art lands just being a side bonus. Yet, I feel that it is the side bonus what makes Unstable sell so well instead of the actual expansion. In other words: if Unstable did not include these lands but sales had to be based soley of the silver bordered cards, I think sales wouldn't even be half of what they are now, and probably even less than a quarter.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
The basics and tokens are there to give value to otherwise janky cards that cannot be played in most "spike" formats. The set is meant to be fun. They knew they had to put something in there to make it worth it to us spikes. And it totally worked. I bought 4 draft packs from walmart because I wanted a couple of each basic for my modern decks and figured I might as well get the fun to go along with it. You are making it sound like a bad thing they put value in the set other than the silver border, but that sounds exactly like the reason the set is successful. The players that wanted the silver boardered cards don't care about the value of them, and the people that don't want silver boarders appreciate the cool lands and tokens. If you can make both types of players happy with one set, then why wouldn't you?
I had a great time with the set. Between the basic lands and the foil tokens, you get the basic value out of the pack you put into it.
Great time doing silly/dumb things during the draft with so many giggles and laughs around the tables.
After it was open, there were a handful of people who were looking to build actual decks out of cards for the kitchen tables. Was great I could trade away cards I'd never use again for an extra land/token here or there.
Also, there are a random number of cards that will look great in a commander deck. Extremely Slow ZombieGrusilda, Monster MasherSword of Dungeons & Dragons
This is not the type set I'd want every year, but as an every 4 years type thing, I think it would be great. Have it released on February 29th would make it even more fun since you could do all sort of date references, etc.
Did a sealed at FNM, and was just happy to get one of each basic (plus an additional Island, which I traded for a second mountain). I had a freaking blast with the set. Was lucky to get some of the cards I really wanted to play with (Modular Monstrosity, Phoebe, Head of S.N.E.A.K., and The Grand Calcutron. Even though I went 1-2, had a blast, especially when I got involved in another player's game.
(Also won play of the night after telling my opponent that there was something wrong with his glasses, then windmill slamming Blurry Beeble when he took them off. Still lost, but that was worth it all the same)
ONly aspect I didn't really enjoy were the contraptions, but that's probably because mine were all crappy.
For once wizards released a set where it feels like it doesn't matter if you win or lose, the set is so wild that you end up enjoying it anyway. Nobody knows how the heck to build anything with this insanity. (for now at least)
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 love how this set is perfectly playable on its own. It's a well-designed set with a bunch of great nonsense. I'm dubious about Commander play, I don't play much as it is and haven't seen this stuff in action yet, but if it works, that will be incredible. If the effects of the secondary market are any indication, the prices of cards from the other Un-sets have exploded.
I love how this set is perfectly playable on its own. It's a well-designed set with a bunch of great nonsense. I'm dubious about Commander play, I don't play much as it is and haven't seen this stuff in action yet, but if it works, that will be incredible. If the effects of the secondary market are any indication, the prices of cards from the other Un-sets have exploded.
If Marks last few interviews are any indication they designed it completely for the casual player and drafting. Not to mention he admitted they designed it more like a normal magic set than prior unstable sets (which is what people were thinking from the get go), so there are plenty of fair cards and a lot less odd ball cards that are just too quirky to endure. Crow Storm is a good example along with things like Earl of Squirrel.
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!
The value of cards in a sets seems like a pretty lame and pessimistic way of determining a set's success. For someone like me, who only plays limited and cube nowadays, this set is perfect. Perhaps more importantly, everyone I drafted this set with had a good time.
The OP is complaining that no cards other than the basic lands have real monetary value, but I don't understand in what universe that could be a bad thing. MTG packs are not lottery tickets, if you're buying them to make money you're buying them for the wrong reasons.
in the universe where you're exchanging real dollars for cards.
you do have to wonder if the set is as successful as it is not because of merit, but because of the full art lands being in demand. especially when you factor in that none of the cards are useful outside of that draft environment. its a legit concern, and like the expeditions sets a standard that says fill this booster with literal garbage, but include something of value that can pop up sometime and it'll sell.
The value of cards in a sets seems like a pretty lame and pessimistic way of determining a set's success. For someone like me, who only plays limited and cube nowadays, this set is perfect. Perhaps more importantly, everyone I drafted this set with had a good time.
The OP is complaining that no cards other than the basic lands have real monetary value, but I don't understand in what universe that could be a bad thing. MTG packs are not lottery tickets, if you're buying them to make money you're buying them for the wrong reasons.
in the universe where you're exchanging real dollars for cards.
you do have to wonder if the set is as successful as it is not because of merit, but because of the full art lands being in demand. especially when you factor in that none of the cards are useful outside of that draft environment. its a legit concern, and like the expeditions sets a standard that says fill this booster with literal garbage, but include something of value that can pop up sometime and it'll sell.
The parody set is doing better than the regular sets.
The set that is meant to be satire of MTG is selling better than a regular set.
The joke set is what causes distributors to be out of stock of a product.
This gag set which has for its chase cards, foil basics and foil tokens, manages to keep a 95-100+ price tag on booster boxes.
This silly set which has one of the better draft environments created in the past few years.
This jesting set that took 13 years to make is one of the best crafted sets in recent years.
This was so popular that even the Rules Committee decided to temporarily allow UN-sets for Commander deck building and play.
a few nitpicks.
its out of stock because its not printed to the same capacity that other sets are
the rules committee decided to allow un-sets before the set was released, therefore it was done without knowing popularity. further, i would question if it was done as a means to push sales.
They intentionally print less of this product and will simply print a 2nd, 3rd or even more waves if it still sells.
They burned themselves with some of these sets and will not do it again.
Yeah, I don't think many people were aware that unhinged was over printed much like the old ET game for the Atari, which forced wizards to destroy boxes of the product. Unfortunately they burned these boxes instead of burying them.
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!
So if you read blogatog and some of the articles on other sites Unstable is a giant hit. On sales figures alone, the 4th Unset is probably a when and not an if. Maro's mission accomplished.
I wonder however, how much of this is because of the actual silverbordered cards and how much this is because of the goodies - which in this case means the foil tokens but most importantly - the full art basics. Looking at the current prices on magiccardmarket.com, the price of an unstable booster starts at €2,15 whereas the single prices for the full art basics range from €1,60 - €2,85, which means an average of €2,23 - more than the price of a booster! So it seems that the price of a pack is roughly equivalent to the expected value of the full art basic in there (a little lower because sometimes you pull a steamflogger boss) and the rest is just the toilet paper that comes with it.
Now as someone who finds silver bordered only slightly amusing to see and would never spend any real money on it this is understandable. But if this is true then how can Unstable be considered a success?
Questions to consider: How is any set with chase cards a success? How is this different than basically any set? What about the other Un-sets that were less successful but also had goodies?
Yes, every set has chase cards, but those are actually cards of the expansion. Take the chase cards away and the next top X cards from that set will be chased after. Unstable however, like any unset, is about silver bordered goofyness, with the full art lands just being a side bonus. Yet, I feel that it is the side bonus what makes Unstable sell so well instead of the actual expansion. In other words: if Unstable did not include these lands but sales had to be based soley of the silver bordered cards, I think sales wouldn't even be half of what they are now, and probably even less than a quarter.
Well... yeah. That was the entire point of putting full art basics and the tokens in packs. They are pretty candid about that, honestly. The unsets need some level of broad appeal beyond being a casual joke set to sell well, and those two things are it (coupled with making thebdraft format functionable).
Going to be honest, I am not entirely sure what there is to argue here. Unstable was a success as it indicated people are willing to buy the product for whatever reason. They know full well that it wouldn't have sold as well as it has without the Full Arts and tokens. It is the entire point they exist in the packs.
I love how this set is perfectly playable on its own. It's a well-designed set with a bunch of great nonsense. I'm dubious about Commander play, I don't play much as it is and haven't seen this stuff in action yet, but if it works, that will be incredible. If the effects of the secondary market are any indication, the prices of cards from the other Un-sets have exploded.
If Marks last few interviews are any indication they designed it completely for the casual player and drafting. Not to mention he admitted they designed it more like a normal magic set than prior unstable sets (which is what people were thinking from the get go), so there are plenty of fair cards and a lot less odd ball cards that are just too quirky to endure. Crow Storm is a good example along with things like Earl of Squirrel.
So if you read blogatog and some of the articles on other sites Unstable is a giant hit. On sales figures alone, the 4th Unset is probably a when and not an if. Maro's mission accomplished.
I wonder however, how much of this is because of the actual silverbordered cards and how much this is because of the goodies - which in this case means the foil tokens but most importantly - the full art basics. Looking at the current prices on magiccardmarket.com, the price of an unstable booster starts at €2,15 whereas the single prices for the full art basics range from €1,60 - €2,85, which means an average of €2,23 - more than the price of a booster! So it seems that the price of a pack is roughly equivalent to the expected value of the full art basic in there (a little lower because sometimes you pull a steamflogger boss) and the rest is just the toilet paper that comes with it.
Now as someone who finds silver bordered only slightly amusing to see and would never spend any real money on it this is understandable. But if this is true then how can Unstable be considered a success?
Questions to consider: How is any set with chase cards a success? How is this different than basically any set? What about the other Un-sets that were less successful but also had goodies?
Yes, every set has chase cards, but those are actually cards of the expansion. Take the chase cards away and the next top X cards from that set will be chased after. Unstable however, like any unset, is about silver bordered goofyness, with the full art lands just being a side bonus. Yet, I feel that it is the side bonus what makes Unstable sell so well instead of the actual expansion. In other words: if Unstable did not include these lands but sales had to be based soley of the silver bordered cards, I think sales wouldn't even be half of what they are now, and probably even less than a quarter.
Well... yeah. That was the entire point of putting full art basics and the tokens in packs. They are pretty candid about that, honestly. The unsets need some level of broad appeal beyond being a casual joke set to sell well, and those two things are it (coupled with making thebdraft format functionable).
Going to be honest, I am not entirely sure what there is to argue here. Unstable was a success as it indicated people are willing to buy the product for whatever reason. They know full well that it wouldn't have sold as well as it has without the Full Arts and tokens. It is the entire point they exist in the packs.
Before Unstable's release, Mark Rosewater was all about Unstable being the testing ground if Un sets would have any merit. He was very open in that if Unstable would fail commercially, it would be the last silver bordered expansion. What I'm "arguing" is that the claim that Unstable is such a good success now is thanks to the lands and tokens, not the actual silver bordered cards. The prices seem to indicate that people generally do not adhere any value to the silver bordered cards. Which leads me to
The value of cards in a sets seems like a pretty lame and pessimistic way of determining a set's success. For someone like me, who only plays limited and cube nowadays, this set is perfect. Perhaps more importantly, everyone I drafted this set with had a good time.
The OP is complaining that no cards other than the basic lands have real monetary value, but I don't understand in what universe that could be a bad thing. MTG packs are not lottery tickets, if you're buying them to make money you're buying them for the wrong reasons.
The monetary value, being a function of supply and demand, is good proxy indicator for the general demand of the public. What the prices seem to indicate is that people are only interested in the land/token and not the rest of the pack.
Hence, it's not silver bordered that's a commercial succes, it no border.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
So if you read blogatog and some of the articles on other sites Unstable is a giant hit. On sales figures alone, the 4th Unset is probably a when and not an if. Maro's mission accomplished.
I wonder however, how much of this is because of the actual silverbordered cards and how much this is because of the goodies - which in this case means the foil tokens but most importantly - the full art basics. Looking at the current prices on magiccardmarket.com, the price of an unstable booster starts at €2,15 whereas the single prices for the full art basics range from €1,60 - €2,85, which means an average of €2,23 - more than the price of a booster! So it seems that the price of a pack is roughly equivalent to the expected value of the full art basic in there (a little lower because sometimes you pull a steamflogger boss) and the rest is just the toilet paper that comes with it.
Now as someone who finds silver bordered only slightly amusing to see and would never spend any real money on it this is understandable. But if this is true then how can Unstable be considered a success?
Questions to consider: How is any set with chase cards a success? How is this different than basically any set? What about the other Un-sets that were less successful but also had goodies?
Yes, every set has chase cards, but those are actually cards of the expansion. Take the chase cards away and the next top X cards from that set will be chased after. Unstable however, like any unset, is about silver bordered goofyness, with the full art lands just being a side bonus. Yet, I feel that it is the side bonus what makes Unstable sell so well instead of the actual expansion. In other words: if Unstable did not include these lands but sales had to be based soley of the silver bordered cards, I think sales wouldn't even be half of what they are now, and probably even less than a quarter.
Well... yeah. That was the entire point of putting full art basics and the tokens in packs. They are pretty candid about that, honestly. The unsets need some level of broad appeal beyond being a casual joke set to sell well, and those two things are it (coupled with making thebdraft format functionable).
Going to be honest, I am not entirely sure what there is to argue here. Unstable was a success as it indicated people are willing to buy the product for whatever reason. They know full well that it wouldn't have sold as well as it has without the Full Arts and tokens. It is the entire point they exist in the packs.
Before Unstable's release, Mark Rosewater was all about Unstable being the testing ground if Un sets would have any merit. He was very open in that if Unstable would fail commercially, it would be the last silver bordered expansion. What I'm "arguing" is that the claim that Unstable is such a good success now is thanks to the lands and tokens, not the actual silver bordered cards. The prices seem to indicate that people generally do not adhere any value to the silver bordered cards. Which leads me to
The value of cards in a sets seems like a pretty lame and pessimistic way of determining a set's success. For someone like me, who only plays limited and cube nowadays, this set is perfect. Perhaps more importantly, everyone I drafted this set with had a good time.
The OP is complaining that no cards other than the basic lands have real monetary value, but I don't understand in what universe that could be a bad thing. MTG packs are not lottery tickets, if you're buying them to make money you're buying them for the wrong reasons.
The monetary value, being a function of supply and demand, is good proxy indicator for the general demand of the public. What the prices seem to indicate is that people are only interested in the land/token and not the rest of the pack.
Hence, it's not silver bordered that's a commercial succes, it no border.
See, the thing is, you’re summing the entire success of the unset to the secondhand market as though that is the sole reason people ever buy packs. Full art lands are still worth less than the pack. Same with full art tokens. Believe it or not, people do spend money on just having fun. I’ve already bought 5 boxes myself and many of my friends have bough several boxes themselves and not one of us bought them because the land or tokens. Those were bonuses. This is a fun draft set and people have taken notice of that.
Another huge impact is the temporary legality of the card in commander. While technically, playgroups still decide, many playgroups go by the vanilla rules, so once these cards became legal in their favorite format, it was free game.
It was a culmination of things. I’m not saying the full art land and token didn’t contribute. They most definitely did, but they weren’t the sole contributors or even the majority. Contraptions, fun draft format, wacky cards, overwhelming fun, the lack of an unset in 13 years, and the legailty in commander were all huge contributors to the success of Unstable.
I did a draft and sealed on the weekend, people seemed to have fun with the set. Didn't play during the first un-set, but I was still pretty new when the second came out. With the second one, it seemed to lose the novelty value after a few weeks. Unstable seems to have a lot more playability to it so I can see people wanting to play more. Not sure how much of people wanting to open it was just due to the lands though
Questions to consider: How is any set with chase cards a success? How is this different than basically any set? What about the other Un-sets that were less successful but also had goodies?
Yes, every set has chase cards, but those are actually cards of the expansion. Take the chase cards away and the next top X cards from that set will be chased after. Unstable however, like any unset, is about silver bordered goofyness, with the full art lands just being a side bonus. Yet, I feel that it is the side bonus what makes Unstable sell so well instead of the actual expansion. In other words: if Unstable did not include these lands but sales had to be based soley of the silver bordered cards, I think sales wouldn't even be half of what they are now, and probably even less than a quarter.
Well... yeah. That was the entire point of putting full art basics and the tokens in packs. They are pretty candid about that, honestly. The unsets need some level of broad appeal beyond being a casual joke set to sell well, and those two things are it (coupled with making thebdraft format functionable).
Going to be honest, I am not entirely sure what there is to argue here. Unstable was a success as it indicated people are willing to buy the product for whatever reason. They know full well that it wouldn't have sold as well as it has without the Full Arts and tokens. It is the entire point they exist in the packs.
Before Unstable's release, Mark Rosewater was all about Unstable being the testing ground if Un sets would have any merit. He was very open in that if Unstable would fail commercially, it would be the last silver bordered expansion. What I'm "arguing" is that the claim that Unstable is such a good success now is thanks to the lands and tokens, not the actual silver bordered cards. The prices seem to indicate that people generally do not adhere any value to the silver bordered cards. Which leads me to
The value of cards in a sets seems like a pretty lame and pessimistic way of determining a set's success. For someone like me, who only plays limited and cube nowadays, this set is perfect. Perhaps more importantly, everyone I drafted this set with had a good time.
The OP is complaining that no cards other than the basic lands have real monetary value, but I don't understand in what universe that could be a bad thing. MTG packs are not lottery tickets, if you're buying them to make money you're buying them for the wrong reasons.
The monetary value, being a function of supply and demand, is good proxy indicator for the general demand of the public. What the prices seem to indicate is that people are only interested in the land/token and not the rest of the pack.
Hence, it's not silver bordered that's a commercial succes, it no border.
See, the thing is, you’re summing the entire success of the unset to the secondhand market as though that is the sole reason people ever buy packs. Full art lands are still worth less than the pack. Same with full art tokens. Believe it or not, people do spend money on just having fun. I’ve already bought 5 boxes myself and many of my friends have bough several boxes themselves and not one of us bought them because the land or tokens. Those were bonuses. This is a fun draft set and people have taken notice of that.
Another huge impact is the temporary legality of the card in commander. While technically, playgroups still decide, many playgroups go by the vanilla rules, so once these cards became legal in their favorite format, it was free game.
It was a culmination of things. I’m not saying the full art land and token didn’t contribute. They most definitely did, but they weren’t the sole contributors or even the majority. Contraptions, fun draft format, wacky cards, overwhelming fun, the lack of an unset in 13 years, and the legailty in commander were all huge contributors to the success of Unstable.
I understand people like to play it for fun, I'm not arguing nobody enjoys Unstable or buys it for fun. But there were people who enjoyed the first two unsets as well even though those are considered commercial failures. I understand people are buying the product initially. But that alone and a few drafts on release weeekend is not enough to support the set. Magic would not be the succes it is today if a set only sells for one or two weeks.
As for predicting what will happen, price information on the secondary market is a good indication of supply and demand at large, and thus the expectation people will have about the demand for the cards. I'm not saying it's an indication of fun. After all, the intrinsic value of a few pieces of printed cardboard are what, €0,20? Yet we're paying €3-4 for a pack so obviously there are other factprs in play here.
What's happening now is the same as if McDonalds would launch a new menu for €5 that amongst other things, comes with a wallmart voucher worth €5 and then after it sells like mad concludes that customers must really like the taste of the new menu because it sold so well.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
The secret to enjoyable Commander games is not winning first, but losing last.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
It is entirely possible that people might want to draft unstable for the second week at my LGS as Ixalan has bored the draft crew immensely and it drew in more people than usual on the week of release.
There may not be excessive demand for the cards, but if there's any kind of decent prize support there might be enough people to do it anyway.
Sure, lands and tokens get people to buy packs, but I don't see how that could be a bad thing. It's a lot better than people peeling for masterpieces they have almost no chance of opening.
If you want to see cards as an investment (which I find tedious), a booster pack of Unstable is ironically far more stable an investment than almost any other, with a guarantee of a solid value card (land), a chance at a chase card (foil land), a chance at a rare or mythic with cult appeal, and a guarantee of a foil token with cult appeal. Even if you shred all the commons and uncommons for the crime of being silver-bordered, that's a better deal than any recent set. That's why some people buy it, but that says nothing of the set itself.
Unstable is a really good set. The limited environment is solid, and a much larger portion of the cards are interesting than in the average set. Ixalan is pretty drab by comparison, begging us to be excited over things like dinosaurs while doing little with them. To my eye, Unstable is the best set since... geez what was the last set that even competes? Khans?
Granted, I am a casual and cube player, unaffected border. Still, Conspiracy and Unstable have both shown that not everybody cares about format legality.
Unstable is successful because the way the set is designed it is made to be cracked open by players and not singles sellers. Cards with the same name can have multiple different configurations, every pack has a full art land, shiny tokens everywhere, and lots of depth to the cards in the set. Despite having semi-decent mechanics, Ixalan and Amonkhet did not have enough depth of play to keep things interesting. Unstable avoided NWO and you can feel it just from looking at all the cards and what they do.
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!
The lands also ensure the value variance of packs is really low - which I strongly prefer to lottery packs.
Absolutely agree. I quit drafting and buying boxes a long time ago because every single time, I lost money. How is it I can draft, win prize packs, and still not break even? Last time I opened three prize packs, and all six of my packs totaled only $6 - which means I lost $10 in the draft. I got sick of that and started buying singles only.
Then Unstable came along, with guaranteed value in every pack - I drafted and bought a box for the first time in a very long time. I had a blast playing with the wacky cards, I sold the lands to pay for a big chunk of it, and now I have a bunch of fun cards to build an Un-Cube with so I can play them all over again.
Hence, it's not silver bordered that's a commercial succes, it no border.
And why can't it be both? I didn't want the set for the land - I actually don't like the frameless look, and I sold all of the basics to pay for 75% of the box price - I wanted the wacky silver bordered cards. They were the success to me. But as I said above, the guaranteed value and lack of lottery variance made it actually worth buying sealed product rather than just ordering singles.
Personally, I think that is the lesson Wizards needs to learn from this set: don't pack all the value in three chase cards; try to spread it more evenly, and people will be more willing to buy.
The lands also ensure the value variance of packs is really low - which I strongly prefer to lottery packs.
Absolutely agree. I quit drafting and buying boxes a long time ago because every single time, I lost money. How is it I can draft, win prize packs, and still not break even? Last time I opened three prize packs, and all six of my packs totaled only $6 - which means I lost $10 in the draft. I got sick of that and started buying singles only.
Then Unstable came along, with guaranteed value in every pack - I drafted and bought a box for the first time in a very long time. I had a blast playing with the wacky cards, I sold the lands to pay for a big chunk of it, and now I have a bunch of fun cards to build an Un-Cube with so I can play them all over again.
Hence, it's not silver bordered that's a commercial succes, it no border.
And why can't it be both? I didn't want the set for the land - I actually don't like the frameless look, and I sold all of the basics to pay for 75% of the box price - I wanted the wacky silver bordered cards. They were the success to me. But as I said above, the guaranteed value and lack of lottery variance made it actually worth buying sealed product rather than just ordering singles.
Personally, I think that is the lesson Wizards needs to learn from this set: don't pack all the value in three chase cards; try to spread it more evenly, and people will be more willing to buy.
I'm starting to see why they may not have done it and it is a complete misunderstanding of what value actually means. People aren't talking about monetary value or the power of the card, we're talking about the depth of play the card has. I'm starting to think that NWO might have been the worst decision wizards ever made in the history of the entire game. I know they are worried about accessibility, but the entire problem is that they pushed all the cards with complexity to them into the rare slot and sometimes maybe one or two uncommons. Heck, the big factor as to why Cut // Ribbons was not instant speed is because it can be played from the graveyard, which would have made that card have a lot of lines of play that aren't immediately apparent.
Maybe what we want is the ability to discover things again?
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!
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I wonder however, how much of this is because of the actual silverbordered cards and how much this is because of the goodies - which in this case means the foil tokens but most importantly - the full art basics. Looking at the current prices on magiccardmarket.com, the price of an unstable booster starts at €2,15 whereas the single prices for the full art basics range from €1,60 - €2,85, which means an average of €2,23 - more than the price of a booster! So it seems that the price of a pack is roughly equivalent to the expected value of the full art basic in there (a little lower because sometimes you pull a steamflogger boss) and the rest is just the toilet paper that comes with it.
Now as someone who finds silver bordered only slightly amusing to see and would never spend any real money on it this is understandable. But if this is true then how can Unstable be considered a success?
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
TerribleBad at Magic since 1998.A Vorthos Guide to Magic Story | Twitter | Tumblr
[Primer] Krenko | Azor | Kess | Zacama | Kumena | Sram | The Ur-Dragon | Edgar Markov | Daretti | Marath
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
Great time doing silly/dumb things during the draft with so many giggles and laughs around the tables.
After it was open, there were a handful of people who were looking to build actual decks out of cards for the kitchen tables. Was great I could trade away cards I'd never use again for an extra land/token here or there.
Also, there are a random number of cards that will look great in a commander deck.
Extremely Slow Zombie Grusilda, Monster Masher Sword of Dungeons & Dragons
This is not the type set I'd want every year, but as an every 4 years type thing, I think it would be great. Have it released on February 29th would make it even more fun since you could do all sort of date references, etc.
(Also won play of the night after telling my opponent that there was something wrong with his glasses, then windmill slamming Blurry Beeble when he took them off. Still lost, but that was worth it all the same)
ONly aspect I didn't really enjoy were the contraptions, but that's probably because mine were all crappy.
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!
If Marks last few interviews are any indication they designed it completely for the casual player and drafting. Not to mention he admitted they designed it more like a normal magic set than prior unstable sets (which is what people were thinking from the get go), so there are plenty of fair cards and a lot less odd ball cards that are just too quirky to endure. Crow Storm is a good example along with things like Earl of Squirrel.
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!
in the universe where you're exchanging real dollars for cards.
you do have to wonder if the set is as successful as it is not because of merit, but because of the full art lands being in demand. especially when you factor in that none of the cards are useful outside of that draft environment. its a legit concern, and like the expeditions sets a standard that says fill this booster with literal garbage, but include something of value that can pop up sometime and it'll sell.
a few nitpicks.
its out of stock because its not printed to the same capacity that other sets are
the rules committee decided to allow un-sets before the set was released, therefore it was done without knowing popularity. further, i would question if it was done as a means to push sales.
They burned themselves with some of these sets and will not do it again.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Yeah, I don't think many people were aware that unhinged was over printed much like the old ET game for the Atari, which forced wizards to destroy boxes of the product. Unfortunately they burned these boxes instead of burying them.
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!
Well... yeah. That was the entire point of putting full art basics and the tokens in packs. They are pretty candid about that, honestly. The unsets need some level of broad appeal beyond being a casual joke set to sell well, and those two things are it (coupled with making thebdraft format functionable).
Going to be honest, I am not entirely sure what there is to argue here. Unstable was a success as it indicated people are willing to buy the product for whatever reason. They know full well that it wouldn't have sold as well as it has without the Full Arts and tokens. It is the entire point they exist in the packs.
Crow Storm
Create creatures names Storm Crow
Storm
It is too good to be true.
The monetary value, being a function of supply and demand, is good proxy indicator for the general demand of the public. What the prices seem to indicate is that people are only interested in the land/token and not the rest of the pack.
Hence, it's not silver bordered that's a commercial succes, it no border.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
See, the thing is, you’re summing the entire success of the unset to the secondhand market as though that is the sole reason people ever buy packs. Full art lands are still worth less than the pack. Same with full art tokens. Believe it or not, people do spend money on just having fun. I’ve already bought 5 boxes myself and many of my friends have bough several boxes themselves and not one of us bought them because the land or tokens. Those were bonuses. This is a fun draft set and people have taken notice of that.
Another huge impact is the temporary legality of the card in commander. While technically, playgroups still decide, many playgroups go by the vanilla rules, so once these cards became legal in their favorite format, it was free game.
It was a culmination of things. I’m not saying the full art land and token didn’t contribute. They most definitely did, but they weren’t the sole contributors or even the majority. Contraptions, fun draft format, wacky cards, overwhelming fun, the lack of an unset in 13 years, and the legailty in commander were all huge contributors to the success of Unstable.
I understand people like to play it for fun, I'm not arguing nobody enjoys Unstable or buys it for fun. But there were people who enjoyed the first two unsets as well even though those are considered commercial failures. I understand people are buying the product initially. But that alone and a few drafts on release weeekend is not enough to support the set. Magic would not be the succes it is today if a set only sells for one or two weeks.
As for predicting what will happen, price information on the secondary market is a good indication of supply and demand at large, and thus the expectation people will have about the demand for the cards. I'm not saying it's an indication of fun. After all, the intrinsic value of a few pieces of printed cardboard are what, €0,20? Yet we're paying €3-4 for a pack so obviously there are other factprs in play here.
What's happening now is the same as if McDonalds would launch a new menu for €5 that amongst other things, comes with a wallmart voucher worth €5 and then after it sells like mad concludes that customers must really like the taste of the new menu because it sold so well.
If my post has no tags, then i posted from my phone.
There may not be excessive demand for the cards, but if there's any kind of decent prize support there might be enough people to do it anyway.
The Unidentified Fantastic Flying Girl.
EDH
Xenagos, the God of Stompy
The Gitrog Monster: Oppressive Value.
Marchesa, Marionette Master - Undying Robots
Yuriko, the Hydra Omnivore
I make dolls as a hobby.
If you want to see cards as an investment (which I find tedious), a booster pack of Unstable is ironically far more stable an investment than almost any other, with a guarantee of a solid value card (land), a chance at a chase card (foil land), a chance at a rare or mythic with cult appeal, and a guarantee of a foil token with cult appeal. Even if you shred all the commons and uncommons for the crime of being silver-bordered, that's a better deal than any recent set. That's why some people buy it, but that says nothing of the set itself.
Unstable is a really good set. The limited environment is solid, and a much larger portion of the cards are interesting than in the average set. Ixalan is pretty drab by comparison, begging us to be excited over things like dinosaurs while doing little with them. To my eye, Unstable is the best set since... geez what was the last set that even competes? Khans?
Granted, I am a casual and cube player, unaffected border. Still, Conspiracy and Unstable have both shown that not everybody cares about format legality.
Low-power cube enthusiast!
My 1570 card cube (no longer updated)
My 415 Peasant+ Artifact and Enchantment Cube
Ever-Expanding "Just throw it in" cube.
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!
Then Unstable came along, with guaranteed value in every pack - I drafted and bought a box for the first time in a very long time. I had a blast playing with the wacky cards, I sold the lands to pay for a big chunk of it, and now I have a bunch of fun cards to build an Un-Cube with so I can play them all over again.
And why can't it be both? I didn't want the set for the land - I actually don't like the frameless look, and I sold all of the basics to pay for 75% of the box price - I wanted the wacky silver bordered cards. They were the success to me. But as I said above, the guaranteed value and lack of lottery variance made it actually worth buying sealed product rather than just ordering singles.
Personally, I think that is the lesson Wizards needs to learn from this set: don't pack all the value in three chase cards; try to spread it more evenly, and people will be more willing to buy.
2023 Average Peasant Cube|and Discussion
Because I have more decks than fit in a signature
Useful Resources:
MTGSalvation tags
EDHREC
ManabaseCrafter
I'm starting to see why they may not have done it and it is a complete misunderstanding of what value actually means. People aren't talking about monetary value or the power of the card, we're talking about the depth of play the card has. I'm starting to think that NWO might have been the worst decision wizards ever made in the history of the entire game. I know they are worried about accessibility, but the entire problem is that they pushed all the cards with complexity to them into the rare slot and sometimes maybe one or two uncommons. Heck, the big factor as to why Cut // Ribbons was not instant speed is because it can be played from the graveyard, which would have made that card have a lot of lines of play that aren't immediately apparent.
Maybe what we want is the ability to discover things again?
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!