Also i think that they could for exemple do like M13 and innistrad ( make the cycle between the block and the core set) with khans block, or instead do it with M15, M16(reprinting again alied fetches) , and fall 2015
I think it's kind of obvious. Because we know that they are 8 spots left and they no longer want to print half-cycles of lands in core sets (in blocks they can spread them) and the idea of printing half in M15 and half in KTK is unbalanced for the limited portion we come to the conclusion that we will get mono-color utility lands. Maybe it's the old Treetop Village cycle or a new one. That gives use 5 lands plus three more colorless lands like Evolving Wilds, Ghost Quarter or Tectonic Edge if we are lucky (not all of them obviously).
Edit: Also I am prety sure that the background from the KTK promo pic is Dragonskull Summit. So we get Temples from Theros and Checklands from KTK. It's a strong mana base but not abusable like Checklands with Shocklands together.
I think it's kind obvious. Because we know that they are 8 spots left and they no longer want to print half-cycles of lands in core sets (in blocks they can spread them) and the idea of printing half in M15 and half in KTK is unbalanced for the limited portion we come to the conclusion that we will get mono-color utility lands. Maybe it's the old Treetop Village cycle or a new one. That gives use 5 lands plus three more colorless lands like Evolving Wilds, Ghost Quarter or Tectonic Edge if we are lucky (not all of them obviously).
we are not at 8...
we are at 10(see the two spots after the last staff?) to 5...
Half cycle in M15 and half in Tarkir is not possible because it messes up mana bases for block constructed real bad and R&D has stated they are doing full ten duals per block from Theros forward.
I have not seen this as a direct statement, including the per block part. The way I have interpreted their statements, I have understood them to be concerned about equal mana-fixing in Standard, and apparently over an entire year, as they seem to be OK with having differences over a few months of the year.
I had not considered block constructed though, and this is indeed a valid point. In fact, going back to the Sam Stoddard article I see, that while he does talk a lot about Standard (and this I guess is why I remember that aspect of his argument so vividly), he does state:
Keeping only one set in the core set instead of both would've caused an inequity in the mana fixing and led us to printing only one set of duals in Theros, making Block worse, and forcing us to continue an inequity somewhere else.
EDIT: M14 had 9 rares/colour, so that is already 45/53.
After I typed this, I started to think. Having a full cycle of 10 duals would take 10 of 53 rare-slots, meaning that they would have to lower the rare-count for each colour just to fit the lands in, before even thinking about what to do with any artifacts they might want to print as rares. Logistically then, could and would they ever do 10 duals in a core set?
However, Sam Stoddard says, in the same article that he states that he is worried about mana-fixing for block:
This year, the core set has no duals. Next year it could, and they might disappear the year after that. It's really hard to say this far out. What we plan to do is use the slot of rare dual lands in the core set as a tool to help balance out Standard and make sure that we have enough mana fixing in the format year after year.
Notice the "Next year it could".
I struggle with making all of this consistent. On the one hand, he seems to say that there will be 0 or 10 duals in core, but on the other, he doesn't rule out duals in future core sets. Does this mean that they are ok with 1 in 6 boosters having a land in the rare-slot?
Lastly, about his very last sentence, about using the core-set dual slots to help balance Standard: To me this seems as a neat tool for Development. Their hands will be in no ways tied by the needs/themes of the block, but they can look solely at the mechanical needs of standard. However, if they limit themselves to 10 or 0 duals in core, it seems as if they to a large extent is giving up this tool.
I guess it must mean that they are ok with one of the following:
Never having duals in core
Occasionally messing up dual-land distribution for block constructed
Occasionally having a high density of lands in core-set rares.
I think it's very likely we'll see a cycle of five duals in the core set. Why?
If they want to print a full cycle of ten in Tarkir block, they're going to have some issues. It's Large/Small/Large, so they can't really break it up 5/3/2 like they did with Theros. They probably don't want ten rare lands in Khans either. They could put 5 in Khans and 5 in the third set, but that means half the pairs will be without fixing in block for most of the block anyways. Also, if they're printing something like fetchlands to make them widely available, the five in the third set would end up getting much less opened than the five in Khans, which could lead to an imbalance.
My best guess is that they'll do something like this (replace fetches with something else for less wishful thinking):
5 Allied Fetches in M15
5 Enemy Fetches in Khans
5 Allied Fetches in M16
This gives everyone a lot of chances to open both sets of fetches, and leaves them legal for about the same amount of time.
Alternately, they could do this:
5 Allied <Something> in M15
5 Enemy <That same thing or maybe something else> in Khans
5 Allied <Same as Khans if it was different from m15 otherwise something new> in third set
Nothing in M16.
This means that standard has 10 duals starting at Khans, then picks up another 5 in the third Tarkir set, then the M15 ones go away since they won't be in M16. So for most of Khans' run in standard, it would have 10 legal duals, just 5 of those would change after a short overlap.
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 think it's very likely we'll see a cycle of five duals in the core set. Why?
If they want to print a full cycle of ten in Tarkir block, they're going to have some issues. It's Large/Small/Large, so they can't really break it up 5/3/2 like they did with Theros. They probably don't want ten rare lands in Khans either.
Remember that Innistrad had 10 rare lands with the Enemy Checks and the Gavony Township cycle. They could do it if they wanted.
This is true, but the Kessig Wolf-run cycle is a lot more spell-like and doesn't leave the set with a 1/6 chance of opening a fixing-only land as the rare each pack.
Additionally, if they're bringing back fetchlands, I imagine they'd want to break them up over at least two sets, because:
A) People would buy a ton of both of those sets
B) The sheer value of a set with 10x Fetches in it is insane, and it would drive the prices down hugely. Imagine half of every table at a draft opening a fetch. Even if we assume that every other card in the set has a value of $0, with 6 packs = 1 fetch, that's an MSRP of $24 per. Any place you could get a box at $95 gives you fetchlands at about $16 per.
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 think it's very likely we'll see a cycle of five duals in the core set. Why?
If they want to print a full cycle of ten in Tarkir block, they're going to have some issues. It's Large/Small/Large, so they can't really break it up 5/3/2 like they did with Theros. They probably don't want ten rare lands in Khans either. They could put 5 in Khans and 5 in the third set, but that means half the pairs will be without fixing in block for most of the block anyways. Also, if they're printing something like fetchlands to make them widely available, the five in the third set would end up getting much less opened than the five in Khans, which could lead to an imbalance.
My best guess is that they'll do something like this (replace fetches with something else for less wishful thinking):
5 Allied Fetches in M15
5 Enemy Fetches in Khans
5 Allied Fetches in M16
This gives everyone a lot of chances to open both sets of fetches, and leaves them legal for about the same amount of time.
Alternately, they could do this:
5 Allied <Something> in M15
5 Enemy <That same thing or maybe something else> in Khans
5 Allied <Same as Khans if it was different from m15 otherwise something new> in third set
Nothing in M16.
This means that standard has 10 duals starting at Khans, then picks up another 5 in the third Tarkir set, then the M15 ones go away since they won't be in M16. So for most of Khans' run in standard, it would have 10 legal duals, just 5 of those would change after a short overlap.
its my guess we will get the enemy pain lands in M15 as a joke to mess with our heads wound this not be funny and then allied fetch lands in khans based upon what he said something we have been asking for in a long time for that set - this is my opinion though then allied pain lands in M16
Is there room left for a leyline cycle like "Leyline of ____" for each color? I see most colors don't have any cards that start with L and there is little to no room for them, is this just the formatting or is there no room?
I think it's funny that they've released spoilers in a certain order so that the Onslaught fetchlands can still fit. It's like they're toying with us.
There is no doubt in my mind that Wizards is trolling its "pro-fetchland" fans.
I remember that when M13 was featuring Exalted as the featured keyword, there was a slot open for green that Noble Hierarch could fit in for much of that spoiler season.
As a limited player though: That Giant. Hoo boy.
It would be a shame if they gave us all of these sweet artifacts only to let Post durdle with them for just two months.
http://magiccards.info/query?q=o:"pay 1 life" t:land o:search&v=card&s=cname
240 -Flooded Strand
241 -
242 - Darksteel Citadel, Uncommon
243 -
244 - Polluted Delta
245 -
246 - Radiant Fountain, Common
247 - Sliver Hive, Rare
248 - Windswept Heath
249 - Wooded Foothills
http://magiccards.info/query?q=t:"land" e:10e/en o:creature&v=card&s=cname
and wwk men lands would be out.
http://magiccards.info/query?q=t:"land" e:wwk/en o:creature r:rare o:becomes&v=card&s=cname
Also i think that they could for exemple do like M13 and innistrad ( make the cycle between the block and the core set) with khans block, or instead do it with M15, M16(reprinting again alied fetches) , and fall 2015
Now if they do the fast lands:
http://magiccards.info/query?q=t:"land" e:som/en r:rare &v=card&s=cname
239 - Blackcleave Cliffs
240 -Copperline Gorge
241 - Darkslick Shores
242 - Darksteel Citadel, Uncommon
243 -
244 - Radiant Fountain, Common
245 -Razorverge Thicket
246 -Seachrome Coast
247 - Sliver Hive, Rare
248 -
249 -
240 - Celestial Colonnade
241 - Creeping Tar Pit
242 - Darksteel Citadel, Uncommon
243 - Lavaclaw Reaches
244 -
245 - Radiant Fountain, Common
246 -Raging Ravine
247 - Sliver Hive, Rare
248 - Stirring Wildwood
249 -
Edit: Also I am prety sure that the background from the KTK promo pic is Dragonskull Summit. So we get Temples from Theros and Checklands from KTK. It's a strong mana base but not abusable like Checklands with Shocklands together.
Look to the bloodlust deepest scar
Look to the scattering Brythonic uprising
For this be the wall of Johnny Guitar
we are not at 8...
we are at 10(see the two spots after the last staff?) to 5...
I have not seen this as a direct statement, including the per block part. The way I have interpreted their statements, I have understood them to be concerned about equal mana-fixing in Standard, and apparently over an entire year, as they seem to be OK with having differences over a few months of the year.
I had not considered block constructed though, and this is indeed a valid point. In fact, going back to the Sam Stoddard article I see, that while he does talk a lot about Standard (and this I guess is why I remember that aspect of his argument so vividly), he does state:
After I typed this, I started to think. Having a full cycle of 10 duals would take 10 of 53 rare-slots, meaning that they would have to lower the rare-count for each colour just to fit the lands in, before even thinking about what to do with any artifacts they might want to print as rares. Logistically then, could and would they ever do 10 duals in a core set?
However, Sam Stoddard says, in the same article that he states that he is worried about mana-fixing for block:
Notice the "Next year it could".
I struggle with making all of this consistent. On the one hand, he seems to say that there will be 0 or 10 duals in core, but on the other, he doesn't rule out duals in future core sets. Does this mean that they are ok with 1 in 6 boosters having a land in the rare-slot?
Lastly, about his very last sentence, about using the core-set dual slots to help balance Standard: To me this seems as a neat tool for Development. Their hands will be in no ways tied by the needs/themes of the block, but they can look solely at the mechanical needs of standard. However, if they limit themselves to 10 or 0 duals in core, it seems as if they to a large extent is giving up this tool.
I guess it must mean that they are ok with one of the following:
Cubetutor Peasant'ish-Funbox
Project: Khans of Tarkir Cube (cubetutor)
If they want to print a full cycle of ten in Tarkir block, they're going to have some issues. It's Large/Small/Large, so they can't really break it up 5/3/2 like they did with Theros. They probably don't want ten rare lands in Khans either. They could put 5 in Khans and 5 in the third set, but that means half the pairs will be without fixing in block for most of the block anyways. Also, if they're printing something like fetchlands to make them widely available, the five in the third set would end up getting much less opened than the five in Khans, which could lead to an imbalance.
My best guess is that they'll do something like this (replace fetches with something else for less wishful thinking):
5 Allied Fetches in M15
5 Enemy Fetches in Khans
5 Allied Fetches in M16
This gives everyone a lot of chances to open both sets of fetches, and leaves them legal for about the same amount of time.
Alternately, they could do this:
5 Allied <Something> in M15
5 Enemy <That same thing or maybe something else> in Khans
5 Allied <Same as Khans if it was different from m15 otherwise something new> in third set
Nothing in M16.
This means that standard has 10 duals starting at Khans, then picks up another 5 in the third Tarkir set, then the M15 ones go away since they won't be in M16. So for most of Khans' run in standard, it would have 10 legal duals, just 5 of those would change after a short overlap.
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Remember that Innistrad had 10 rare lands with the Enemy Checks and the Gavony Township cycle. They could do it if they wanted.
Additionally, if they're bringing back fetchlands, I imagine they'd want to break them up over at least two sets, because:
A) People would buy a ton of both of those sets
B) The sheer value of a set with 10x Fetches in it is insane, and it would drive the prices down hugely. Imagine half of every table at a draft opening a fetch. Even if we assume that every other card in the set has a value of $0, with 6 packs = 1 fetch, that's an MSRP of $24 per. Any place you could get a box at $95 gives you fetchlands at about $16 per.
Currently Playing:
Legacy: Something U/W Controlish
EDH Cube
Hypercube! A New EDH Deck Every Week(ish)!
Hell, I'll take the one artifact by itself if it means I can use Trading Post competitively for only 3 months.
However, for a less high-profile land reprint it is still a possibility.
"Jalira, Master Polymorphogist" should be Jalira, Master Polymorphist.
Shrapnel Blast is misspelled.
The name Nissa, Worldwaker is confirmed and doesn't need to be in brackets. Also we can be quite certain of Elvish Mystic, it's in the green halfdeck.
Thank you again for putting this together!
Crucible of Fire #139
Brawler's Plate #213
Edit: 'Nathed
Endless Obedience 94
Paragon of Fierce Defiance 158
Cards without confirmed number
Miner's Bane
Heliod's Pilgram
Invasive Species
Hunter's Ambush
Black Cat
|One Red Mountain - A adventure in MTG Trading|
Miner's Bane #157
Invasive Species #181
Nitpicks:
Soulmender: Please move to #35, for it CANNOT come before Soul of Theros (Soul:Soulm)
In Garruk's Wake: Please swap numbers with Indulgent Tormentor, for In Garruk's Wake was confirmed @ #100 here: http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/561779-launch-promo-in-garruks-wake?comment=40, and for the same alphabetical reasons above (In:Ind).
Also the link for Nissa, Worldwaker needs fixing. Keep up the great work!
Think I've caught up with everything from today, but if you guys find any more errors do let me know.
its my guess we will get the enemy pain lands in M15 as a joke to mess with our heads wound this not be funny and then allied fetch lands in khans based upon what he said something we have been asking for in a long time for that set - this is my opinion though then allied pain lands in M16
Modern Warp / UR Control / UR Storm / Naya Breachshift / ElectroBalance
Solidarity / Lands / Sneak and Show / Grixis Delver / Reanimator / Belcher / Storm / Dredge
Stoke the Flames, Uncommon at #164
There is no doubt in my mind that Wizards is trolling its "pro-fetchland" fans.
I remember that when M13 was featuring Exalted as the featured keyword, there was a slot open for green that Noble Hierarch could fit in for much of that spoiler season.
Zendikar fetchlands also fit, but they've said they aren't doing partial cycles of lands anymore. We might get a cycle of monocolored lands.