I believe the core set should go back to every two years with a few other changes:
The year we use for the core set would have to be used to represent when the core set is either no good or is the year it comes out.
There would have to be a much larger print run or a second wave for the next year.
The number of cards in the core set must be increased to make up for the smaller overall card pool in standard.
Returning Mechanics would need to be done on a larger scale to have a greater impact on Standard. Bloodrush had one card see competitive play, exalted had three that comes to mind and Slivers are rocking nothing at the moment (Unless you count Mutavault, which I don't).
With these changes I would prefer every two years with Modern Masters alternating on the off year. I would also like a foil in every pack, but that's just me dreaming.
I agree that having the Core set every year has made me even less excited for Core sets than I already was back then (which was not really). I'd much prefer it if Core sets had time to "cook" and be spectacular.
I personally liked the short-lived model where they had a special set release on the non-Core years (Unhinged, Coldsnap, and Eventide) and I feel like Wizards is creative enough and have enough material that they could keep that going indefinitely. Stuff like Modern Masters was already mentioned, but other ideas might be something like a "mega-block" that has a 250-card set released every other year with a nice Vorthos reason for why that is.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Special thanks to Hakai Studios and SushiOtter for the sig!
Legacy:UR Sneak and Show IUBG Team America IX Metalworker MUD Modern:UBR Blue Jund IWBX Eldrazi Processors IX Affinity IWRG Nacatl Burn IGR Tron IUBR Grishoalbrand
2 years is better, less money sunk into a worthless set and less likely to have a random mythic or rare pop up to 20-$50 just due to it being opened less than other sets. Also given how crappy core sets have become, might as well just reduce the redundancy. If they can't print a card in a future block because of a coreset card, they should either let it be and see if it's as 'devastating' as they think it will be and ban if necessary or b. design better cards rather than the lazy designs we've seen for every recent set besides RtR.
I miss core sets being reprints and staples, it was far more interesting having those than the cards they create now.
Like someone else mentioned earlier, they should still release new core sets every year but also have the old one still be in standard so the core set cards aren't wasted in a yeat of being released.
I think the current model is just fine, and that it helps Standard not stagnate or become stale. I also think it's good for the game that certain staples aren't consistently reprinted and represented in decks, such as the Titans, because they become format defining and increase the money to play. Wrath of God and Birds of Paradise were an example of this in the past in that they were constantly in demand due to never rotating out, which increased the demand from their Standard legality, increasing their price.
Having the same cards reprinted consistently also decreases the fun of the product for those that do enjoy opening the sealed product. The collective userbase on these forums and even in the general online Magic community does not even represent a fraction of the total playerbase. This is why YMTC votes pertaining to the official website were often different than what was reflected here on the forums.
Frankly I wouldn't want cards like Thragtusk to remain in Standard for two years, and by the time the Titans were gone most everyone was jumping for joy. The impact the Core Set could be designed to have in Standard would have to be lessened for it to remain in Standard for more than a year at a time, which would then cause players to complain that the Core Sets aren't powerful enough and the cycle would continue.
I get the impression that those examples many of you are using (Titans, Thragtusk, etc.) are the result of the existence of the current model. I bet WotC wouldn't print such cards if they would have to stay for along two years. The way things work right now, we have to deal with cards that work as magnets, conditioning deck building around them for more than an entire year, and WotC's line of thought seems to be that puting an entire format under risk for such period of time is fair enough and justifies using standard as a lab to create bombs to expermient with.
A 2 year duration for cores would restrict them to be more careful with the reprints/new designs they decide to add. Yes, it would demmand more efforts from their side regarding logistics, but it would derive in a more healtier enviroment and, perhaps and luckily, into a closure for this era of bomby critters and crappy spells, wich happens to start worring me more and more as time goes on.
And as I said in my post above, if they went back to a 2-year rotation on Core Sets, they would have to reduce their power level and impact and then players would complain they weren't powerful enough and were more boring than they do now. The current method and design came about as a response to how poorly the summer reprint sets have done in the past and how little impact they had on the game.
I get the impression that those examples many of you are using (Titans, Thragtusk, etc.) are the result of the existence of the current model. I bet WotC wouldn't print such cards if they would have to stay for along two years. The way things work right now, we have to deal with cards that work as magnets, conditioning deck building around them for more than an entire year, and WotC's line of thought seems to be that puting an entire format under risk for such period of time is fair enough and justifies using standard as a lab to create bombs to expermient with.
A 2 year duration for cores would restrict them to be more careful with the reprints/new designs they decide to add. Yes, it would demmand more efforts from their side regarding logistics, but it would derive in a more healtier enviroment and, perhaps and luckily, into a closure for this era of bomby critters and crappy spells, wich happens to start worring me more and more as time goes on.
They did reprint the titans for 2 core sets. Yeah they may have to rethink a small percentage of cards, but over all it wouldnt change much.
The biggest thing is they use yearly core sets to fill gaps that they either cant fill in the block sets or forget until its too late. The way the core set is now is a precursor to the up coming block and its mechanics. If they switched back to every 2 years, it would be hard to hit at a block a year away without giving too much information.
And as I said in my post above, if they went back to a 2-year rotation on Core Sets, they would have to reduce their power level and impact and then players would complain they weren't powerful enough and were more boring than they do now. The current method and design came about as a response to how poorly the summer reprint sets have done in the past and how little impact they had on the game.
How can you ensure ppl would actually complain if we have never came back from the current model to see what happens? Now that we have faced a long period of an enviroment in wich criters break the ground and spells suck as hell, it would be interesting to see how the community would react/adapt if returning to an improved version of the old formula and accept that the current one isn't making the whole community happy, many of these unhappy players being old ones who have tried to adapt to a model that they (we) do not agree with in many aspects, core release periods included.
How can you ensure ppl would actually complain if we have never came back from the current model to see what happens? Now that we have faced a long period of an enviroment in wich criters break the ground and spells suck as hell, it would be interesting to see how the community would react/adapt if returning to an improved version of the old formula and accept that the current one isn't making the whole community happy, many of these unhappy players being old ones who have tried to adapt to a model that they (we) do not agree with in many aspects, core release periods included.
There will always be people in the Magic player base that will complain about something. Doesnt matter if they go back, stay the same, or change it all together. Someone is going to complain they dont like it.
The biggest thing is they use yearly core sets to fill gaps that they either cant fill in the block sets or forget until its too late. The way the core set is now is a precursor to the up coming block and its mechanics. If they switched back to every 2 years, it would be hard to hit at a block a year away without giving too much information.
I belive that core sets, in case of a return to the old formula, should work as a solid basis for sets to come in the subsecuent two years. They would need to be solid and safe enough to guarantee stability without undermining design flexibility regarding the second ones, while also ensure a solid toolkit that free R&D from the need of fixing base issues, such as color fixing, colorpie haters, etc. I see the current model as, to bring in a graphic example, a performing juggler instead of as a solid column, as it should be after 20 years of game development. Perhaps the next step is to revisite and improve old formulas with fresh experience from the current ones. We clearly haven't reached the perfect basis for the game from an organizational perspective.
There will always be people in the Magic player base that will complain about something. Doesnt matter if they go back, stay the same, or change it all together. Someone is going to complain they dont like it.
Yeah, perhaps I wasn't clear enough (my bad). There will always be ppl complaining, but the idea is to reach a point in wich these are the vast minority. Take a look at this poll and tell me if we have actually reached such point.
There will always be people in the Magic player base that will complain about something. Doesnt matter if they go back, stay the same, or change it all together. Someone is going to complain they dont like it.
Exactly this. Players are ALWAYS going to complain.
They'll never go back to the old model for one reason.
The videogame. Duels of the Planeswalkers for the PC and the consoles is the BIGGEST marketing tool and the biggest new player magnet they have. Because of this, you want to make a set that a player who just played the game will want to buy if they see packs sitting at the local big box store.
Thus, until there's no new acquisitions to be had, they're going to wring every new player they can out of that game, and the "20XX" set and "Duels of the Planeswalkers 20XX" walk hand in hand.
If you go to lots of game stores and talk to the new players, they most common answers you'll hear are "I used to play a long time ago" or "I started playing Duels on my Xbox/PS3".
Until you can come up with something that drives playerbase growth better than the Duels/Yearly set tied to Duels, you're not going to see them go back.
I feel the first few core sets after they started releasing them every year were okay (M10,11 and 12 I guess) but now I just don't look forward to them because they only have a few cards that make an impact.
I like what Grand Superior said and on non-core set years, it would be interesting if they released a special set or something
Exactly this. Players are ALWAYS going to complain.
True, but that does not mean all complaints are invalid. Some complaints are valid, and many are worthwhile for discussion.
I know the current model is very successful. The company is making money hand over fist and thus, major shakeups of any form are unlikely going to be considered, based solely on the premise, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
I do, however, believe the long-term success is being mortgaged at the price of these amazing short-term sales. You're oversaturating standard with a new core set each year, especially when it has almost no reprints in it, and you are causing player fatigue (i.e., fanatic players become exaugsted with the upkeep of playing standard, buying new cards, learning new decks constantly, and quite after a year or two instead of playing for the next decade).
I think the core could easily go back to a every other year thing, with a much higher volume of reprints, and the game would be improved dramatically. Printing something like Modern Masters in the in-between years could keep sales and player interest going.
True, but that does not mean all complaints are invalid. Some complaints are valid, and many are worthwhile for discussion.
I know the current model is very successful. The company is making money hand over fist and thus, major shakeups of any form are unlikely going to be considered, based solely on the premise, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
I do, however, believe the long-term success is being mortgaged at the price of these amazing short-term sales. You're oversaturating standard with a new core set each year, especially when it has almost no reprints in it, and you are causing player fatigue (i.e., fanatic players become exaugsted with the upkeep of playing standard, buying new cards, learning new decks constantly, and quite after a year or two instead of playing for the next decade).
I think the core could easily go back to a every other year thing, with a much higher volume of reprints, and the game would be improved dramatically. Printing something like Modern Masters in the in-between years could keep sales and player interest going.
I disagree with you for one major reason: Limited releases cause player fatigue quicker than yearly core sets ever could. While you get some complaints about core sets every now and again, it's nowhere near the volume (in numbers) and volume (in decibels) that you see from the various limited release products.
This year was particularly packed with it- Modern Masters/From the Vault 20/SDCC Planeswalkers- and that burst of releases caused far, far more drama than yearly core sets ever would.
Making the core set larger and legal for twice as long and then slotting a limited release product designed for a non-standard format into the whole would strike me as something that accelerates rather than slows player fatigue.
True, but that does not mean all complaints are invalid. Some complaints are valid, and many are worthwhile for discussion.
I know the current model is very successful. The company is making money hand over fist and thus, major shakeups of any form are unlikely going to be considered, based solely on the premise, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
I do, however, believe the long-term success is being mortgaged at the price of these amazing short-term sales. You're oversaturating standard with a new core set each year, especially when it has almost no reprints in it, and you are causing player fatigue (i.e., fanatic players become exaugsted with the upkeep of playing standard, buying new cards, learning new decks constantly, and quite after a year or two instead of playing for the next decade).
I think the core could easily go back to a every other year thing, with a much higher volume of reprints, and the game would be improved dramatically. Printing something like Modern Masters in the in-between years could keep sales and player interest going.
I actually find that Core sets tend to decrease my fatigue with the game. The expert sets generally end up outlasting their novelty, and start to just feel gimmicky by the end. Core sets serve as a nice palette cleanser, by just being plain, simple Magic. If they were to go back to biyearly, we'd lose that vital pause.
Edit: Also, I've found that over the past two years they have been the best limited formats. I think it ties back to my main point, they are more focused in delivering good magic than trying to tie to a theme.
I disagree with you for one major reason: Limited releases cause player fatigue quicker than yearly core sets ever could. While you get some complaints about core sets every now and again, it's nowhere near the volume (in numbers) and volume (in decibels) that you see from the various limited release products.
This year was particularly packed with it- Modern Masters/From the Vault 20/SDCC Planeswalkers- and that burst of releases caused far, far more drama than yearly core sets ever would.
Making the core set larger and legal for twice as long and then slotting a limited release product designed for a non-standard format into the whole would strike me as something that accelerates rather than slows player fatigue.
SDCC Planeswalkers were so limited in supply that most people hardly had a chance to get them.
From the Vault has been an annual thing for a while now, and for Modern Masters, this is yet to be confirmed but Wizards is considering having a bi-annual Modern Masters series.
When core sets were biannual, on two occasions only, in the non core set years, we always had a small set. The core sets were 100% reprints and the small set were 100% new, because they were expert expansions, so they had to be 100% new, or at least close to 100% new.
Take the small expansion and sever any ties to an existing block, meaning it is now a standalone set. Remove any gameplay or flavor themes from that set. Take both the core set and this small expansion, and take half of the cards from each of them, and put it in the other.
For example, let's use the pre 8th edition set sizes, where large sets were 350 cards and small sets were 143 cards. Dividing 350 by 2 is 175. Dividing 143 by 2 is 71.5. Add 175 and 71.5, and we get 246.5.
How large is a present day core set? Around 245 cards. Coincidence? You decide.
If you combined 2 present day core sets, and if you combined a old core set with a small expansion, you'd pretty much get the same number of cards. Just think of today's core sets as being one core set full of reprints, and one small expansion full of new cards, and half of each one of them were switched.
If they went back to biannual core sets, the set that is released in July in the year without the core set must also have the same product lineup as the other expansions, that is, 5 intro packs, a fat pack, and an event deck, so if it were to be modern masters, then the modern masters booster box must have 36 packs, 5 intro packs, a fat pack, and an event deck, just like any other set, and each booster must cost $3.99 at MSRP.
Even in the past, the summers were alternated between a large set of reprints and a small set of new cards. Now, it's just that every year we get reprints and new cards in the same set, and each core set being the same size every year, rather than alternating between large and small, and old and new cards.
Core sets are annual, not biannual because WOTC wants consistency, and a structured release. They don't want to have to decide on a 4th set in the block, or a standalone set, when they can easily do a core set. Core sets of today are not only the core sets of old, but also a small expansion fused with it as well, hence the new cards. Imagine taking the elements of the old core sets, and elements of the filler sets like coldsnap and eventide and combining them together, although the themes and ties to the block they belong in were severed. That's what the core sets of today are.
I don't know about you, but looking at the 8th edition, 9th edition, tenth edition, etc. naming model, I don't think anyone would even care that the game is at "15th edition", I mean, Final Fantasy XV is coming out. I don't see anyone who hasn't played any Final Fantasy game to buy a NES and play Final Fantasy I.
I also don't mind the current naming model as well though.
MTG, like EA sports game and Call of Duty, is now in a phase where they are in a scheduled predictable release. You can pretty much predict when each set is going to come out, and that every year now, will be the same type of release. What's coming out July of 2016? A core set. How about July of 2029? A core set.
The only time that this may be unpredictable is when they start up a MTG product line, and there is no knowledge whether it will be successful or not. This being in December when Premium Deck series died, but now we know that December will always be a commander release. It is unsure of if this December commander release will always be 5 decks every year, or if they are going to do something different each year.
The most variable month would probably be June. It used to be the "Summer of Multiplayer" release month, but now, I just don't know whether they are stopping the "Summer of Multiplayer", meanig no more planechase, archenemy, or any other multiplayer product other than the December Commander series, or if they are starting to do a Modern Masters.
I just had a realization. Suppose that WOTC did a Modern Masters every other year in June, and did a Multiplayer set other than Commander in the years they don't release Modern Masters. Do you know what this menas? It would be as if they released core sets every other year like they did in the past. In the past, Core sets didn't have the same product lineups as block exapnsions. They didn't have fat packs, until 9th edition, they had 5 40 card theme decks, not 4 60 card theme decks. They had a starter core game, while block expansions don't. Even back then, they treated core sets as a separate entity from block expansions, as if it was a "special set" of some sort.
Today, block expansions and core sets have same product lineups, such as intro packs, fat packs, and event decks. The new product lineup web page integrates the core set into the block expansion, so it is sort of like it was the fourth set of the year. Modern Masters, being a "special set", now takes the place of the old core set, because before, it was 3 sets every year, and sometimes a core set. Now it is 4 sets every year, and sometimes a Modern Masters. Both old core sets and Modern Masters are 100% reprints anyway. The difference is, the set for new players is no longer in the set that sometimes happens, or happens infrequently, like every 2 years, but is in a set that happens every year.
I'd like to see core sets eliminated and the game going down to 3 sets a year. There aren't any cards in the core sets that can't be put in the other ones.
Core sets are never going away completely. Such a move would be a very bad decision as well, as WotC brings new players in with core sets and at least one set has to cater to newbies, which fall sets tend not to do whereas the core set is pretty simple: attack and block go use your combat trick.
I think they should be every other year though if only to allow for some other type of set to be developed every other year like coldsnap, eventide, etc. etc. or for a megablock to happen (lorwyn and shadowmoor were mini blocks really.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Yawgmoth," Freyalise whispered as she set the bomb, "now you will pay for your treachery."
Core sets are never going away completely. Such a move would be a very bad decision as well, as WotC brings new players in with core sets and at least one set has to cater to newbies, which fall sets tend not to do whereas the core set is pretty simple: attack and block go use your combat trick.
I think they should be every other year though if only to allow for some other type of set to be developed every other year like coldsnap, eventide, etc. etc. or for a megablock to happen (lorwyn and shadowmoor were mini blocks really.)
Do you really want them to make an awesome fourth set or standalone set, only for it to be in standard for the shortest amount of time? Why not make a set without a theme, aka core set?
WOTC wants a predictable release schedule and pattern. WOTC also wants to release core sets. Releasing them every other year would mean that the set that is released when the core set isn't released would last as long as a core set would in standard, that is, eventide. I really feel sorry for eventide, or even the shadowmoor block as a whole for only lasting 18 months, while the themes from Lorwyn block lasted 24 months.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
With these changes I would prefer every two years with Modern Masters alternating on the off year. I would also like a foil in every pack, but that's just me dreaming.
I personally liked the short-lived model where they had a special set release on the non-Core years (Unhinged, Coldsnap, and Eventide) and I feel like Wizards is creative enough and have enough material that they could keep that going indefinitely. Stuff like Modern Masters was already mentioned, but other ideas might be something like a "mega-block" that has a 250-card set released every other year with a nice Vorthos reason for why that is.
Special thanks to Hakai Studios and SushiOtter for the sig!
Legacy: UR Sneak and Show I UBG Team America I X Metalworker MUD
Modern: UBR Blue Jund I WBX Eldrazi Processors I X Affinity I WRG Nacatl Burn I GR Tron I UBR Grishoalbrand
It's nice to have easy drafts now and again, especially if you want new people to get into the game.
I miss core sets being reprints and staples, it was far more interesting having those than the cards they create now.
Having the same cards reprinted consistently also decreases the fun of the product for those that do enjoy opening the sealed product. The collective userbase on these forums and even in the general online Magic community does not even represent a fraction of the total playerbase. This is why YMTC votes pertaining to the official website were often different than what was reflected here on the forums.
Frankly I wouldn't want cards like Thragtusk to remain in Standard for two years, and by the time the Titans were gone most everyone was jumping for joy. The impact the Core Set could be designed to have in Standard would have to be lessened for it to remain in Standard for more than a year at a time, which would then cause players to complain that the Core Sets aren't powerful enough and the cycle would continue.
(Also known as Xenphire)
A 2 year duration for cores would restrict them to be more careful with the reprints/new designs they decide to add. Yes, it would demmand more efforts from their side regarding logistics, but it would derive in a more healtier enviroment and, perhaps and luckily, into a closure for this era of bomby critters and crappy spells, wich happens to start worring me more and more as time goes on.
(Also known as Xenphire)
They did reprint the titans for 2 core sets. Yeah they may have to rethink a small percentage of cards, but over all it wouldnt change much.
The biggest thing is they use yearly core sets to fill gaps that they either cant fill in the block sets or forget until its too late. The way the core set is now is a precursor to the up coming block and its mechanics. If they switched back to every 2 years, it would be hard to hit at a block a year away without giving too much information.
There will always be people in the Magic player base that will complain about something. Doesnt matter if they go back, stay the same, or change it all together. Someone is going to complain they dont like it.
EDIT:
Yeah, perhaps I wasn't clear enough (my bad). There will always be ppl complaining, but the idea is to reach a point in wich these are the vast minority. Take a look at this poll and tell me if we have actually reached such point.
Exactly this. Players are ALWAYS going to complain.
They'll never go back to the old model for one reason.
The videogame. Duels of the Planeswalkers for the PC and the consoles is the BIGGEST marketing tool and the biggest new player magnet they have. Because of this, you want to make a set that a player who just played the game will want to buy if they see packs sitting at the local big box store.
Thus, until there's no new acquisitions to be had, they're going to wring every new player they can out of that game, and the "20XX" set and "Duels of the Planeswalkers 20XX" walk hand in hand.
If you go to lots of game stores and talk to the new players, they most common answers you'll hear are "I used to play a long time ago" or "I started playing Duels on my Xbox/PS3".
Until you can come up with something that drives playerbase growth better than the Duels/Yearly set tied to Duels, you're not going to see them go back.
I like what Grand Superior said and on non-core set years, it would be interesting if they released a special set or something
True, but that does not mean all complaints are invalid. Some complaints are valid, and many are worthwhile for discussion.
I know the current model is very successful. The company is making money hand over fist and thus, major shakeups of any form are unlikely going to be considered, based solely on the premise, "If it ain't broke, don't fix it."
I do, however, believe the long-term success is being mortgaged at the price of these amazing short-term sales. You're oversaturating standard with a new core set each year, especially when it has almost no reprints in it, and you are causing player fatigue (i.e., fanatic players become exaugsted with the upkeep of playing standard, buying new cards, learning new decks constantly, and quite after a year or two instead of playing for the next decade).
I think the core could easily go back to a every other year thing, with a much higher volume of reprints, and the game would be improved dramatically. Printing something like Modern Masters in the in-between years could keep sales and player interest going.
How To Keep Your FOIL Cards From Curling: http://youtu.be/QTmubrS8VnI
The Best Deck Boxes: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uEwgLph_Pjk
The Best Binders: http://youtu.be/H5IauASYWjk
I disagree with you for one major reason: Limited releases cause player fatigue quicker than yearly core sets ever could. While you get some complaints about core sets every now and again, it's nowhere near the volume (in numbers) and volume (in decibels) that you see from the various limited release products.
This year was particularly packed with it- Modern Masters/From the Vault 20/SDCC Planeswalkers- and that burst of releases caused far, far more drama than yearly core sets ever would.
Making the core set larger and legal for twice as long and then slotting a limited release product designed for a non-standard format into the whole would strike me as something that accelerates rather than slows player fatigue.
I actually find that Core sets tend to decrease my fatigue with the game. The expert sets generally end up outlasting their novelty, and start to just feel gimmicky by the end. Core sets serve as a nice palette cleanser, by just being plain, simple Magic. If they were to go back to biyearly, we'd lose that vital pause.
Edit: Also, I've found that over the past two years they have been the best limited formats. I think it ties back to my main point, they are more focused in delivering good magic than trying to tie to a theme.
SDCC Planeswalkers were so limited in supply that most people hardly had a chance to get them.
From the Vault has been an annual thing for a while now, and for Modern Masters, this is yet to be confirmed but Wizards is considering having a bi-annual Modern Masters series.
When core sets were biannual, on two occasions only, in the non core set years, we always had a small set. The core sets were 100% reprints and the small set were 100% new, because they were expert expansions, so they had to be 100% new, or at least close to 100% new.
Take the small expansion and sever any ties to an existing block, meaning it is now a standalone set. Remove any gameplay or flavor themes from that set. Take both the core set and this small expansion, and take half of the cards from each of them, and put it in the other.
For example, let's use the pre 8th edition set sizes, where large sets were 350 cards and small sets were 143 cards. Dividing 350 by 2 is 175. Dividing 143 by 2 is 71.5. Add 175 and 71.5, and we get 246.5.
How large is a present day core set? Around 245 cards. Coincidence? You decide.
If you combined 2 present day core sets, and if you combined a old core set with a small expansion, you'd pretty much get the same number of cards. Just think of today's core sets as being one core set full of reprints, and one small expansion full of new cards, and half of each one of them were switched.
If they went back to biannual core sets, the set that is released in July in the year without the core set must also have the same product lineup as the other expansions, that is, 5 intro packs, a fat pack, and an event deck, so if it were to be modern masters, then the modern masters booster box must have 36 packs, 5 intro packs, a fat pack, and an event deck, just like any other set, and each booster must cost $3.99 at MSRP.
Even in the past, the summers were alternated between a large set of reprints and a small set of new cards. Now, it's just that every year we get reprints and new cards in the same set, and each core set being the same size every year, rather than alternating between large and small, and old and new cards.
Core sets are annual, not biannual because WOTC wants consistency, and a structured release. They don't want to have to decide on a 4th set in the block, or a standalone set, when they can easily do a core set. Core sets of today are not only the core sets of old, but also a small expansion fused with it as well, hence the new cards. Imagine taking the elements of the old core sets, and elements of the filler sets like coldsnap and eventide and combining them together, although the themes and ties to the block they belong in were severed. That's what the core sets of today are.
Won't it be confusing to call another set 10th edition?:tongue:
I also don't mind the current naming model as well though.
MTG, like EA sports game and Call of Duty, is now in a phase where they are in a scheduled predictable release. You can pretty much predict when each set is going to come out, and that every year now, will be the same type of release. What's coming out July of 2016? A core set. How about July of 2029? A core set.
The only time that this may be unpredictable is when they start up a MTG product line, and there is no knowledge whether it will be successful or not. This being in December when Premium Deck series died, but now we know that December will always be a commander release. It is unsure of if this December commander release will always be 5 decks every year, or if they are going to do something different each year.
The most variable month would probably be June. It used to be the "Summer of Multiplayer" release month, but now, I just don't know whether they are stopping the "Summer of Multiplayer", meanig no more planechase, archenemy, or any other multiplayer product other than the December Commander series, or if they are starting to do a Modern Masters.
I just had a realization. Suppose that WOTC did a Modern Masters every other year in June, and did a Multiplayer set other than Commander in the years they don't release Modern Masters. Do you know what this menas? It would be as if they released core sets every other year like they did in the past. In the past, Core sets didn't have the same product lineups as block exapnsions. They didn't have fat packs, until 9th edition, they had 5 40 card theme decks, not 4 60 card theme decks. They had a starter core game, while block expansions don't. Even back then, they treated core sets as a separate entity from block expansions, as if it was a "special set" of some sort.
Today, block expansions and core sets have same product lineups, such as intro packs, fat packs, and event decks. The new product lineup web page integrates the core set into the block expansion, so it is sort of like it was the fourth set of the year. Modern Masters, being a "special set", now takes the place of the old core set, because before, it was 3 sets every year, and sometimes a core set. Now it is 4 sets every year, and sometimes a Modern Masters. Both old core sets and Modern Masters are 100% reprints anyway. The difference is, the set for new players is no longer in the set that sometimes happens, or happens infrequently, like every 2 years, but is in a set that happens every year.
I think they should be every other year though if only to allow for some other type of set to be developed every other year like coldsnap, eventide, etc. etc. or for a megablock to happen (lorwyn and shadowmoor were mini blocks really.)
Currently Playing:
Retired
Do you really want them to make an awesome fourth set or standalone set, only for it to be in standard for the shortest amount of time? Why not make a set without a theme, aka core set?
WOTC wants a predictable release schedule and pattern. WOTC also wants to release core sets. Releasing them every other year would mean that the set that is released when the core set isn't released would last as long as a core set would in standard, that is, eventide. I really feel sorry for eventide, or even the shadowmoor block as a whole for only lasting 18 months, while the themes from Lorwyn block lasted 24 months.