We need Go For The Throat back in this format. Ability to kill Rhino among others is much needed.
No... no it's not. 3 mana is plenty for hard removal
Er... not really. Bile blight's great, but there are far too many things it just doesn't deal with. I'm very glad that I'm not forced to shove 4 of them into my main board anymore just because it was the only 2-mana removal available.
We need Go For The Throat back in this format. Ability to kill Rhino among others is much needed.
No... no it's not. 3 mana is plenty for hard removal
Er... not really. Bile blight's great, but there are far too many things it just doesn't deal with. I'm very glad that I'm not forced to shove 4 of them into my main board anymore just because it was the only 2-mana removal available.
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
We need Go For The Throat back in this format. Ability to kill Rhino among others is much needed.
No... no it's not. 3 mana is plenty for hard removal
Er... not really. Bile blight's great, but there are far too many things it just doesn't deal with. I'm very glad that I'm not forced to shove 4 of them into my main board anymore just because it was the only 2-mana removal available.
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
That's why 2 mana removal has traditionally been conditional. Non-black, non-artifact, mono-colored, non-vampire/werewolf/zombie, 3cmc or less, etc. They can't just kill anything, like downfall (save RB spells like terminate or dreadbore, with their only restriction being their cost). Saying cheap removal is the cause of oppressive creatures seems like an awfully big leap when this entire standard has been full of oppressive creatures with no cheap removal that could kill anything big until this set. Not to mention old magic was full of insanely efficient removal with relatively few oppressive creatures.
Every answer shouldn't only be able to answer threats with equivalent cmc's to themselves, that's just not how that works and it seems to be what you're implying with your initial statement here. If that were the case, control would never be anything more than 1-for-1 removal (and thus wouldn't usually be viable).
We need Go For The Throat back in this format. Ability to kill Rhino among others is much needed.
No... no it's not. 3 mana is plenty for hard removal
Er... not really. Bile blight's great, but there are far too many things it just doesn't deal with. I'm very glad that I'm not forced to shove 4 of them into my main board anymore just because it was the only 2-mana removal available.
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
That's why 2 mana removal has traditionally been conditional. Non-black, non-artifact, mono-colored, non-vampire/werewolf/zombie, 3cmc or less, etc. They can't just kill anything, like downfall (save RB spells like terminate or dreadbore, with their only restriction being their cost). Saying cheap removal is the cause of oppressive creatures seems like an awfully big leap when this entire standard has been full of oppressive creatures with no cheap removal that could kill anything big until this set. Not to mention old magic was full of insanely efficient removal with relatively few oppressive creatures.
Every answer shouldn't only be able to answer threats with equivalent cmc's to themselves, that's just not how that works and it seems to be what you're implying with your initial statement here. If that were the case, control would never be anything more than 1-for-1 removal (and thus wouldn't usually be viable).
My point was we shouldn't have a 2 mana hard removal, I have no problem with better removal at higher mana costs, especially wipes etc. He was saying he wanted go for the throat which would kill literally every creature in standard
I am surprised this was printed. I believe it was MaRo that wrote an article on Wizards of the Coast's website about power creep and how there was an arms race between better removal and creatures that either had enter the board effects or hexproof/protection. I believe the conclusion was that by weakening removal it opened up the doors for them to make more creative and interesting creatures.
Many people find this standard format to be one of the best in a while and its due in part (arguably) to the very limited removal options.
It seems Ultimate Price allows for 2cc removal but also allows design to create powerful and interesting creatures (multicolored). It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, is printed to pair with Ultimate Price once bile blight and hero's downfall rotates out.
The problem with cheap removal is the effect on limited. That being said, a SINGLE kill spell shouldn't be an issue, just make sure to run your bombs gold colored. Since we're also talking about which colors should die, red is the dumbest color ever. People who complain about blue are red mages.
Cheap removal isn't bad for limited. When you cut back hard on removal, you get stuff like THS limited, which was awful.
I am surprised this was printed. I believe it was MaRo that wrote an article on Wizards of the Coast's website about power creep and how there was an arms race between better removal and creatures that either had enter the board effects or hexproof/protection. I believe the conclusion was that by weakening removal it opened up the doors for them to make more creative and interesting creatures.
Many people find this standard format to be one of the best in a while and its due in part (arguably) to the very limited removal options.
It seems Ultimate Price allows for 2cc removal but also allows design to create powerful and interesting creatures (multicolored). It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, is printed to pair with Ultimate Price once bile blight and hero's downfall rotates out.
The only problem is it forces people into 2 or more colour decks, which people may not want to do. Not with devotion still a standard mechanic
I am surprised this was printed. I believe it was MaRo that wrote an article on Wizards of the Coast's website about power creep and how there was an arms race between better removal and creatures that either had enter the board effects or hexproof/protection. I believe the conclusion was that by weakening removal it opened up the doors for them to make more creative and interesting creatures.
Many people find this standard format to be one of the best in a while and its due in part (arguably) to the very limited removal options.
It seems Ultimate Price allows for 2cc removal but also allows design to create powerful and interesting creatures (multicolored). It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, is printed to pair with Ultimate Price once bile blight and hero's downfall rotates out.
Maro's article, as I recall, was about limited. It was their justification for moving doom blade and company to uncommon, and things like dreadbore to rare, as opposed to commons like terminate.
Many people also hate the limited removal options of this standard. At one time, spells were significantly stronger than creatures. Creature-heavy decks were the underdogs because the existing removal was much better than the existing creatures. This standard is a little too far in the opposite direction, with creature-heavy decks being the norm and spell-heavy decks being the underdogs (with UB control being the only one really viable). I would prefer more equal footing, but Wizards has been pushing creatures more and more for some time now and it's gone a little too far in the other direction for my liking.
I am surprised this was printed. I believe it was MaRo that wrote an article on Wizards of the Coast's website about power creep and how there was an arms race between better removal and creatures that either had enter the board effects or hexproof/protection. I believe the conclusion was that by weakening removal it opened up the doors for them to make more creative and interesting creatures.
Many people find this standard format to be one of the best in a while and its due in part (arguably) to the very limited removal options.
It seems Ultimate Price allows for 2cc removal but also allows design to create powerful and interesting creatures (multicolored). It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, is printed to pair with Ultimate Price once bile blight and hero's downfall rotates out.
Maro's article, as I recall, was about limited. It was their justification for moving doom blade and company to uncommon, and things like dreadbore to rare, as opposed to commons like terminate.
Many people also hate the limited removal options of this standard. At one time, spells were significantly stronger than creatures. Creature-heavy decks were the underdogs because the existing removal was much better than the existing creatures. This standard is a little too far in the opposite direction, with creature-heavy decks being the norm and spell-heavy decks being the underdogs (with UB control being the only one really viable). I would prefer more equal footing, but Wizards has been pushing creatures more and more for some time now and it's gone a little too far in the other direction for my liking.
Actually, his article talked about standard, and explained why End Hostilites was 5 mana instead of 4 even though it can be countered. And why Hero's downfall was the best we could expect to get.
I am surprised this was printed. I believe it was MaRo that wrote an article on Wizards of the Coast's website about power creep and how there was an arms race between better removal and creatures that either had enter the board effects or hexproof/protection. I believe the conclusion was that by weakening removal it opened up the doors for them to make more creative and interesting creatures.
Many people find this standard format to be one of the best in a while and its due in part (arguably) to the very limited removal options.
It seems Ultimate Price allows for 2cc removal but also allows design to create powerful and interesting creatures (multicolored). It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, is printed to pair with Ultimate Price once bile blight and hero's downfall rotates out.
Maro's article, as I recall, was about limited. It was their justification for moving doom blade and company to uncommon, and things like dreadbore to rare, as opposed to commons like terminate.
Many people also hate the limited removal options of this standard. At one time, spells were significantly stronger than creatures. Creature-heavy decks were the underdogs because the existing removal was much better than the existing creatures. This standard is a little too far in the opposite direction, with creature-heavy decks being the norm and spell-heavy decks being the underdogs (with UB control being the only one really viable). I would prefer more equal footing, but Wizards has been pushing creatures more and more for some time now and it's gone a little too far in the other direction for my liking.
Actually, his article talked about standard, and explained why End Hostilites was 5 mana instead of 4 even though it can be countered. And why Hero's downfall was the best we could expect to get.
Hmm. I think we're thinking of different articles, because I explicitly remember one popping up around M14 to explain moving doom blade to uncommon (i.e. for limited).
My point was we shouldn't have a 2 mana hard removal, I have no problem with better removal at higher mana costs, especially wipes etc. He was saying he wanted go for the throat which would kill literally every creature in standard
I can agree with gftt being overkill. In a standard with zero relevant artifact creatures it's just murder for 1b which is too much.
I am surprised this was printed. I believe it was MaRo that wrote an article on Wizards of the Coast's website about power creep and how there was an arms race between better removal and creatures that either had enter the board effects or hexproof/protection. I believe the conclusion was that by weakening removal it opened up the doors for them to make more creative and interesting creatures.
Many people find this standard format to be one of the best in a while and its due in part (arguably) to the very limited removal options.
It seems Ultimate Price allows for 2cc removal but also allows design to create powerful and interesting creatures (multicolored). It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, is printed to pair with Ultimate Price once bile blight and hero's downfall rotates out.
Maro's article, as I recall, was about limited. It was their justification for moving doom blade and company to uncommon, and things like dreadbore to rare, as opposed to commons like terminate.
Many people also hate the limited removal options of this standard. At one time, spells were significantly stronger than creatures. Creature-heavy decks were the underdogs because the existing removal was much better than the existing creatures. This standard is a little too far in the opposite direction, with creature-heavy decks being the norm and spell-heavy decks being the underdogs (with UB control being the only one really viable). I would prefer more equal footing, but Wizards has been pushing creatures more and more for some time now and it's gone a little too far in the other direction for my liking.
Actually, his article talked about standard, and explained why End Hostilites was 5 mana instead of 4 even though it can be countered. And why Hero's downfall was the best we could expect to get.
Hmm. I think we're thinking of different articles, because I explicitly remember one popping up around M14 to explain moving doom blade to uncommon (i.e. for limited).
Then yes we are, because the article I'm talking about came out with Khans
Thank god black finally got some efficient removal, they've been really hurting in that category. All they have are Heros Downfall, Bile Blight, Abzan Charm, Sultai Charm, Murderous Cut and Drown in Sorrow.
Huey, Dewey and Louie are always dressed in RUG. it is CLEARLY going to be the wedges block Pioneer: WURFaerie fires BRGDragons ModernBGElves WRBurn UR Fires Turns URGift Storm UG Twiddle Storm
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Melek, Izzet Paragon
Oona, Queen of the Fae
Bruna, Light of Alabaster
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Rhys the Redeemed
Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Sen Triplets
The Mimeoplasm WUBRGSliver OverlordGRBUW WUBRGSliver Hivelord(Superfriends)GRBUW
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
When we have strong threats and bad removal, like we do now, we end up with a *****ty format where you're better off just ramming more threats and hoping for the best than actually trying to interact with your opponent.
Pretty much every deck doing well in Standard does this right now, it's why the die roll ends up being so important and why it's hard to get a grip on the format.
Strong removal is the only way to impose checks and balances, every format should have it.
Threats can easily be too strong, the same isn't true of answers however.
Strong removal forces playable creatures to either have hexproof or the ability to avoid removal or have ETB effects. There's a reason cards like Polukranos hardly see play atm.
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
When we have strong threats and bad removal, like we do now, we end up with a *****ty format where you're better off just ramming more threats and hoping for the best than actually trying to interact with your opponent.
Pretty much every deck doing well in Standard does this right now, it's why the die roll ends up being so important and why it's hard to get a grip on the format.
Strong removal is the only way to impose checks and balances, every format should have it.
Threats can easily be too strong, the same isn't true of answers however.
Strong removal forces playable creatures to either have hexproof or the ability to avoid removal or have ETB effects. There's a reason cards like Polukranos hardly see play atm.
Because there's a big lifedraining rhino stealing all of his thunder?
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
When we have strong threats and bad removal, like we do now, we end up with a *****ty format where you're better off just ramming more threats and hoping for the best than actually trying to interact with your opponent.
Pretty much every deck doing well in Standard does this right now, it's why the die roll ends up being so important and why it's hard to get a grip on the format.
Strong removal is the only way to impose checks and balances, every format should have it.
Threats can easily be too strong, the same isn't true of answers however.
Strong removal forces playable creatures to either have hexproof or the ability to avoid removal or have ETB effects. There's a reason cards like Polukranos hardly see play atm.
Because there's a big lifedraining rhino stealing all of his thunder?
Lol, no kidding. Removal isn't any better right now than it was when polukranos was a big thing. The difference is, there's a rhino that's just better than him at the same cost.
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
When we have strong threats and bad removal, like we do now, we end up with a *****ty format where you're better off just ramming more threats and hoping for the best than actually trying to interact with your opponent.
Pretty much every deck doing well in Standard does this right now, it's why the die roll ends up being so important and why it's hard to get a grip on the format.
Strong removal is the only way to impose checks and balances, every format should have it.
Threats can easily be too strong, the same isn't true of answers however.
Strong removal forces playable creatures to either have hexproof or the ability to avoid removal or have ETB effects. There's a reason cards like Polukranos hardly see play atm.
Because there's a big lifedraining rhino stealing all of his thunder?
Lol, no kidding. Removal isn't any better right now than it was when polukranos was a big thing. The difference is, there's a rhino that's just better than him at the same cost.
And you seem to completely fall into the point while missing it. Rhino exists due to strong removal. With strong removal they are forced to print ETB effects.
When we have strong threats and bad removal, like we do now, we end up with a *****ty format where you're better off just ramming more threats and hoping for the best than actually trying to interact with your opponent.
Pretty much every deck doing well in Standard does this right now, it's why the die roll ends up being so important and why it's hard to get a grip on the format.
Strong removal is the only way to impose checks and balances, every format should have it.
Threats can easily be too strong, the same isn't true of answers however.
Strong removal forces playable creatures to either have hexproof or the ability to avoid removal or have ETB effects. There's a reason cards like Polukranos hardly see play atm.
Because there's a big lifedraining rhino stealing all of his thunder?
Lol, no kidding. Removal isn't any better right now than it was when polukranos was a big thing. The difference is, there's a rhino that's just better than him at the same cost.
And you seem to completely fall into the point while missing it. Rhino exists due to strong removal. With strong removal they are forced to print ETB effects.
Except Polukranos did very well for himself in a format with very strong removal. In a format with UW and esper control variants running 4-of verdict plus asorted other removal spells, and Mono-B devotion doing it's stupid thing. Even in that meta, Mono-G devotion decks (and variants) did pretty well for themselves without silly ETB triggers or oppressive creatures. They had value generators like Domri and xenagos and garruk (occasionally Zegana) to keep cards up through removal. Strong removal does not necessitate oppressive creatures, it just necessitates viable card-advantage and engines. Whisperwood elemental is a perfectly good card against heavy removal without being oppressive like rhino. As is xenagos, elspeth, nissa, sagu mauler. There are non-oppressive ways to make creature decks viable against removal. Siege rhino was just pushed so hard he is significantly better than the rest, forcing competitive players to choose him over the other options that exist.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
No... no it's not. 3 mana is plenty for hard removal
Sliver Hivelord - Endless Winter
Er... not really. Bile blight's great, but there are far too many things it just doesn't deal with. I'm very glad that I'm not forced to shove 4 of them into my main board anymore just because it was the only 2-mana removal available.
I'm sorry, but you shouldn't be able to wipe out X mana worth of investment for 2 mana. The fact that cheap removal exists is why we get such oprresive creatures in the first place
That's why 2 mana removal has traditionally been conditional. Non-black, non-artifact, mono-colored, non-vampire/werewolf/zombie, 3cmc or less, etc. They can't just kill anything, like downfall (save RB spells like terminate or dreadbore, with their only restriction being their cost). Saying cheap removal is the cause of oppressive creatures seems like an awfully big leap when this entire standard has been full of oppressive creatures with no cheap removal that could kill anything big until this set. Not to mention old magic was full of insanely efficient removal with relatively few oppressive creatures.
Every answer shouldn't only be able to answer threats with equivalent cmc's to themselves, that's just not how that works and it seems to be what you're implying with your initial statement here. If that were the case, control would never be anything more than 1-for-1 removal (and thus wouldn't usually be viable).
My point was we shouldn't have a 2 mana hard removal, I have no problem with better removal at higher mana costs, especially wipes etc. He was saying he wanted go for the throat which would kill literally every creature in standard
Storm Crow is strictly worse than Seacoast Drake.
Many people find this standard format to be one of the best in a while and its due in part (arguably) to the very limited removal options.
It seems Ultimate Price allows for 2cc removal but also allows design to create powerful and interesting creatures (multicolored). It'll be interesting to see what, if anything, is printed to pair with Ultimate Price once bile blight and hero's downfall rotates out.
Cheap removal isn't bad for limited. When you cut back hard on removal, you get stuff like THS limited, which was awful.
The only problem is it forces people into 2 or more colour decks, which people may not want to do. Not with devotion still a standard mechanic
Maro's article, as I recall, was about limited. It was their justification for moving doom blade and company to uncommon, and things like dreadbore to rare, as opposed to commons like terminate.
Many people also hate the limited removal options of this standard. At one time, spells were significantly stronger than creatures. Creature-heavy decks were the underdogs because the existing removal was much better than the existing creatures. This standard is a little too far in the opposite direction, with creature-heavy decks being the norm and spell-heavy decks being the underdogs (with UB control being the only one really viable). I would prefer more equal footing, but Wizards has been pushing creatures more and more for some time now and it's gone a little too far in the other direction for my liking.
Actually, his article talked about standard, and explained why End Hostilites was 5 mana instead of 4 even though it can be countered. And why Hero's downfall was the best we could expect to get.
Hmm. I think we're thinking of different articles, because I explicitly remember one popping up around M14 to explain moving doom blade to uncommon (i.e. for limited).
I can agree with gftt being overkill. In a standard with zero relevant artifact creatures it's just murder for 1b which is too much.
Then yes we are, because the article I'm talking about came out with Khans
They really needed this.
CUBE: http://www.cubetutor.com/viewcube/73964;jsessionid=2DE1F5FF41A24820A137448A2FD5CF8F
I LIKE DRAGONS!
But in all seriousness though, neat card for standard that will definitely shake things up.
yeah, i guess hero's downfall, glare of heresy, abzan charm, dark betrayal, reality shift, valorous stance, murderous cut, banishing light, radiant purge, roast and devouring light are not enough. and I stayed at 3CMC max.
we definitely need also go for the throat. which by the way makes perfect sense in a format where there are basically no artefact creatures so it can kill pretty much ANYTHING.
Pioneer: WURFaerie fires BRGDragons
ModernBGElves WRBurn UR Fires Turns URGift Storm UG Twiddle Storm
Reprint Stasis!
Control needs more love.
EDH:
Momir Vig, Simic Visionary
Melek, Izzet Paragon
Oona, Queen of the Fae
Bruna, Light of Alabaster
Gisela, Blade of Goldnight
Rhys the Redeemed
Jarad, Golgari Lich Lord
Sen Triplets
The Mimeoplasm
WUBRGSliver OverlordGRBUW
WUBRGSliver Hivelord(Superfriends)GRBUW
Strong removal forces playable creatures to either have hexproof or the ability to avoid removal or have ETB effects. There's a reason cards like Polukranos hardly see play atm.
Because there's a big lifedraining rhino stealing all of his thunder?
UR Blue-Red Control
Modern:
UBR Grixis Control
UWR Jeskai Control
And you seem to completely fall into the point while missing it. Rhino exists due to strong removal. With strong removal they are forced to print ETB effects.
Except Polukranos did very well for himself in a format with very strong removal. In a format with UW and esper control variants running 4-of verdict plus asorted other removal spells, and Mono-B devotion doing it's stupid thing. Even in that meta, Mono-G devotion decks (and variants) did pretty well for themselves without silly ETB triggers or oppressive creatures. They had value generators like Domri and xenagos and garruk (occasionally Zegana) to keep cards up through removal. Strong removal does not necessitate oppressive creatures, it just necessitates viable card-advantage and engines. Whisperwood elemental is a perfectly good card against heavy removal without being oppressive like rhino. As is xenagos, elspeth, nissa, sagu mauler. There are non-oppressive ways to make creature decks viable against removal. Siege rhino was just pushed so hard he is significantly better than the rest, forcing competitive players to choose him over the other options that exist.