Honestly, I wish they would still do two rotations a year I just wish they would have increased the number of sets in standard. Their goal had been 5-6 sets in standard at a time, I wish it had the two rotations a year with 7-8 sets in standard.
Moving back to a yearly rotation will mean between 5 and 8 sets to a standard rotation. I just dont like how you jump between card availability so much. This all comes form someone who played a lot in the past. I dont play standard any more either way so whatever.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I have officially moved to MTGNexus. I just wanted to let people know as my response time to salvation decks being bumped is very hit or miss.
Goddamit I can't get away from Sylvan advocate for extra 6 months. stupid BFZ still going to be here.
Although I do understand part of the problem in particularly when my deck, Esper dragons goes from top tier to barely playable with rotation, then I pick up a deck UR spells, then rotation hits again and... I am not sure if my deck is still good, certainly have to replace the more than the 6 rotated cards. If the meta is actually going to shift so rapidly from control to mid range to aggro like last two rotations its super jarring for your deck and deck choice.
The 2 rotation yearly isn't attractive to new player since they can't justify spending money and watch it rotate away so soon. New players were better of playing Commander. Just look at how slow the forums have been. It's because the rotation change ran a big portion of players out of the game. My local game store went under because of the rotation change.
Apparently, I'm alone in this opinion but i HATE this change. I play exclusively modern and quicker rotations ment i could get freshly rotated standard powerhouses cheap with regularity now i can only do that once a year. My more primary concern is that wizards will now be even more cautious with printing powerful modern playable cards (like coco) into standard because they now stay longer.
I have two big concerns, but off the bat I will say that yes, I am happy with the change, because that means 6 more months of Kaladesh and some other sets.
However:
1. I don't like WotC's inconsistency. When they changed the rotation they said that it was also due to player feedback. They said we were complaining that 2 years was "a lot", we were getting sick of the large sets/blocks by july/august, etc. Then they changed it, to bring something fresh. And now, with just ONE spring rotation in the books (Shadows removing Khans and FRF), they revert back. Honestly, they can't have enough data on this. This makes me feel a bit unsafe, just like everything related to Modern (bans, no Modern PT, ok 1 Modern PT, actually no, just no Modern PTs)
2. This new/old rotation model creates block hierarquy in Standard. Fall sets will always last 2 years (BFZ, Kaladesh) but spring sets will always last 25% less: 18 months (Shadows, Amonkhet). Yes this happened before, but before our spring set was a Core Set. It was, mostly, a reprint set, not a beloved new block. There is literally zero distinction between Kaladesh and Amonkhet. Both are large sets of roughly the same size, followed by 1 small set each of also same site. Except Kaladesh block will get to live 6 (kaladesh) or 3 (aether revolt) months more.
I don't like this change. I think they should have given it a bit more time. The way they are rolling this out seems rushed and panicked. I personally have been thankful at each rotation to see oppressive cards move out of the format. I would have preferred if they'd at least given it another year before changing.
It would not surprise me one bit if they change to extend the sprint set lifetime down the road. It would make more sense. It may just be that the future sets were designed not to overlap and extending Amonkhet would break something. (They often create card that would have been bonker with the rotating set in standard but weak enough to not impact modern. That would explain why they cannot extend Amonkhet, but could take it into account from now on and extend the sprint set in two years.)
Fortunately, there's not much more to save from BFZ. OGW is quite a different story, but Eldrazi isn't always a good choice for the metagame so that shouldn't impact too much, too.
Gideon will continue to be a 4-of in a lot of decks for another six months.
Standard attendance is falling like a brick that's the reason for the change. I applaud wizards for making the change quickly and not dragging their feet on this. I believe that if wizards would have waited much longer standard would have failed as a format, eventually. They are also printing to much to quick people are getting buyers fatigue.
Standard attendance is falling like a brick that's the reason for the change. I applaud wizards for making the change quickly and not dragging their feet on this. I believe that if wizards would have waited much longer standard would have failed as a format, eventually. They are also printing to much to quick people are getting buyers fatigue.
A year ago we got 30 people for Standard FNM's, these days we're lucky to get 8. A week ago it didn't even fire because we couldn't get 4 people together. If they didn't change things there's no question in my mind, Standard would have failed as a format.
I can't say i'm all happy with this decision. I think the problem with the rotation wasn't the frequency, but how long each block stayed on standard. Previously, each block stayed for 24 months, with the core sets at 15 months. Currently, each block stays for 18 months. Now we will have a 24 months block, and a 18 months block.
It would be better if the standard rotation stayed the same (each new block, the previous block fall, with 2 rotations a year) but with 4 blocks on each rotation, this way, all blocks would stay on standard for 24 months.
Bottom line is: Rotation is back to once per year, in late September/early October when the 1st set of a new block arrives.
In practice this means that:
BFZ and OGW got +6 months each. They would be rotating with Amonkhet, but now will rotate only in fall 2017.
Shadows and EMN stay the same. They would be rotating by the end of 2017 and will still do.
Fall 2017: We lose BFZ, OGW, SOI, EMN.
Fall 2018: We lose Kaladesh, Aether Revolt, Amonkhet and Hour of Devastation.
But they told in the article that in Fall 2018 only Kaladesh and Aether Revolt will rotate...
That means Kaladesh will be legal for two years instead of 18 months, and will rotate out of Standard with the release of the second large set in 2018. Aether Revolt will rotate out with Kaladesh.
Standard attendance is falling like a brick that's the reason for the change. I applaud wizards for making the change quickly and not dragging their feet on this. I believe that if wizards would have waited much longer standard would have failed as a format, eventually. They are also printing to much to quick people are getting buyers fatigue.
A year ago we got 30 people for Standard FNM's, these days we're lucky to get 8. A week ago it didn't even fire because we couldn't get 4 people together. If they didn't change things there's no question in my mind, Standard would have failed as a format.
Your lucky you still have a store to play at hopefully this change will save your LGS. I lost my LGS already do to the change in rotation. I have another place to play but added travel time and cost = less money to buy cards.
I am going to take a wild guess that sales and/or tournament attendance was down.
Probably, but I doubt it was because of the new rotation structure, I think its because they wasted spent two blocks on the least popular monsters in the MTG canon, completely destroyed two of the most popular recently visited planes and turned the overarching story into a campy Mighty Morphin Power Rangers spinoff.
When they changed the rotation they said that it was also due to player feedback. They said we were complaining that 2 years was "a lot", we were getting sick of the large sets/blocks by july/august, etc. Then they changed it, to bring something fresh. And now, with just ONE spring rotation in the books (Shadows removing Khans and FRF), they revert back. Honestly, they can't have enough data on this.
There are two kinds of feedback...what we say we want, and what we actually do. The original change was based on what we said we wanted. Reverting is a result of data on what we actually do, or do not do in this case.
This is really stupid. I actually liked the quicker rotation partially because it made standard more about brewing than just about finding the best deck but the part I most liked about the new rotation was that each set "saw" more blocks and other interactions plus was apart of more standards. If you found a cool card you liked in a set you had it's current environment and that of the following block to make it work. Standard rotated about 50% of the card pool at a time. When they changed it two years ago it meant each block would be in standard with the two behind it and the two in front of it which would've given these build around cards that never found a home a chance to shine. Plus it meant your deck was more likely to survive rotation when you only had to replace 33% of it as opposed to 50%. Plus the fact that new blocks don't necessarily mean rotation seems really dumb.
When they changed the rotation they said that it was also due to player feedback. They said we were complaining that 2 years was "a lot", we were getting sick of the large sets/blocks by july/august, etc. Then they changed it, to bring something fresh. And now, with just ONE spring rotation in the books (Shadows removing Khans and FRF), they revert back. Honestly, they can't have enough data on this.
There are two kinds of feedback...what we say we want, and what we actually do. The original change was based on what we said we wanted. Reverting is a result of data on what we actually do, or do not do in this case.
I agree this about obtaining new players and to re-engage the older players that walked away from standard. When I quit standard because of the rotation changes I also quit drafting since I didn't need to acquire more standard cards.
I am going to take a wild guess that sales and/or tournament attendance was down.
Probably, but I doubt it was because of the new rotation structure, I think its because they wasted spent two blocks on the least popular monsters in the MTG canon, completely destroyed two of the most popular recently visited planes and turned the overarching story into a campy Mighty Morphin Power Rangers spinoff.
I don't think this alone will save standard. I think they need to somewhat shift back to stronger non-creature spells, as right now creatures are stronger than ever, but non-creature spells have largely fallen. They did this deliberately because they seem to have thought this is what Standard players want, thanks to feedback, and spells have been weaker since Theros block started, but Standard has begun getting weaker around the time RTR rotated out, and I think blaming spells going down and creatures going up (siege rhino...) at the same time makes sense. You need to have spells either equal with, or slightly stronger than creatures in normal situations for a healthy format, IMO.
I don't like this change also because it means disparity in time between spring and fall blocks and how long they are in Standard, due to the current two-set block system. If they need sets in longer, I'd rather they kept doing 2 rotations a year, and instead have sets last another six months (so 7-8 sets in Standard rather than 5-6), so that blocks are treated fairly compared to each-other.
I also am concerned about what this means for Modern and other non-rotating, typically more powerful than Standard formats. More sets in Standard means things rotate out slower, which means they'll be more conservative about what they print in Standard, which means less new stuff for other formats, Modern in particular, when Modern is in desperate need of certain kinds of cards that they are reluctant to print in Standard to begin with.
This latest Wizards change also makes certain kinds of cards harder to shift into, when you don't want certain things to exist together in Standard, such as not being able to print too strong of pump spells in the same Standard as infect or powerful double-strike stuff, or the issues that turn up when printing fetchlands alongside duals with the subtypes from basics. This could heavily restrict both needed reprints and flexibility in set mechanics and themes when trying to balance blocks that will share Standard with each other for the sake of Standard.
I don't think this change will be enough to save Standard, I think it'll depend more on what they print (and don't print). They need to avoid printing siege rhinos in the future unless other colors and strategies besides midrange get comparable powerhouses, and keep things more balanced between colors and strategy types. They also may have emphasized limited overly-much, to the point that they pushed up the rarity of constructed cards a bit too much and made budget decks too much worse than non-budget decks to the point that it discourages newbie Standard players. They may need to work on making sure more constructed viable cards turn up at common and uncommon, and are more competitive against the latest rares and mythics, to avoid pushing out budget players who help fill out Standard events.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Moving back to a yearly rotation will mean between 5 and 8 sets to a standard rotation. I just dont like how you jump between card availability so much. This all comes form someone who played a lot in the past. I dont play standard any more either way so whatever.
Signature by Inkfox Aesthetics by Xen
[Modern] Allies
UBBreya's Toybox (Competitive, Combo)WR
RGodzilla, King of the MonstersG
-Retired Decks-
UBLazav, Dimir Mastermind (Competitive, UB Voltron/Control)UB
"Knowledge is such a burden. Release it. Release all your fears to me."
—Ashiok, Nightmare Weaver
So does this mean BFZ and OGW are still in print and will be until fall 2017?
Although I do understand part of the problem in particularly when my deck, Esper dragons goes from top tier to barely playable with rotation, then I pick up a deck UR spells, then rotation hits again and... I am not sure if my deck is still good, certainly have to replace the more than the 6 rotated cards. If the meta is actually going to shift so rapidly from control to mid range to aggro like last two rotations its super jarring for your deck and deck choice.
Pioneer:UR Pheonix
Modern:U Mono U Tron
EDH
GB Glissa, the traitor: Army of Cans
UW Dragonlord Ojutai: Dragonlord NOjutai
UWGDerevi, Empyrial Tactician "you cannot fight the storm"
R Zirilan of the claw. The solution to every problem is dragons
UB Etrata, the Silencer Cloning assassination
Peasant cube: Cards I own
However:
1. I don't like WotC's inconsistency. When they changed the rotation they said that it was also due to player feedback. They said we were complaining that 2 years was "a lot", we were getting sick of the large sets/blocks by july/august, etc. Then they changed it, to bring something fresh. And now, with just ONE spring rotation in the books (Shadows removing Khans and FRF), they revert back. Honestly, they can't have enough data on this. This makes me feel a bit unsafe, just like everything related to Modern (bans, no Modern PT, ok 1 Modern PT, actually no, just no Modern PTs)
2. This new/old rotation model creates block hierarquy in Standard. Fall sets will always last 2 years (BFZ, Kaladesh) but spring sets will always last 25% less: 18 months (Shadows, Amonkhet). Yes this happened before, but before our spring set was a Core Set. It was, mostly, a reprint set, not a beloved new block. There is literally zero distinction between Kaladesh and Amonkhet. Both are large sets of roughly the same size, followed by 1 small set each of also same site. Except Kaladesh block will get to live 6 (kaladesh) or 3 (aether revolt) months more.
Gideon will continue to be a 4-of in a lot of decks for another six months.
A year ago we got 30 people for Standard FNM's, these days we're lucky to get 8. A week ago it didn't even fire because we couldn't get 4 people together. If they didn't change things there's no question in my mind, Standard would have failed as a format.
It would be better if the standard rotation stayed the same (each new block, the previous block fall, with 2 rotations a year) but with 4 blocks on each rotation, this way, all blocks would stay on standard for 24 months.
But they told in the article that in Fall 2018 only Kaladesh and Aether Revolt will rotate...
UR Murktide
Pauper
RW Monarch
UW Caw-Gate
UBR Affinity
In Progress
GBIshkanah, Grafwidow ~ BWGRTymna the Weaver & Tana, the Bloodsower ~ UGRashmi, Eternities Crafter ~ RGAtarka, World Render
"All of the Tezzeret->Bolas cards will rotate out of standard together."
Older Magic as a Board Game: Panglacial Wurm , Mill
Probably, but I doubt it was because of the new rotation structure, I think its because they
wastedspent two blocks on the least popular monsters in the MTG canon, completely destroyed two of the most popular recently visited planes and turned the overarching story into a campy Mighty Morphin Power Rangers spinoff.Cant be that...
In Progress
GBIshkanah, Grafwidow ~ BWGRTymna the Weaver & Tana, the Bloodsower ~ UGRashmi, Eternities Crafter ~ RGAtarka, World Render
I don't like this change also because it means disparity in time between spring and fall blocks and how long they are in Standard, due to the current two-set block system. If they need sets in longer, I'd rather they kept doing 2 rotations a year, and instead have sets last another six months (so 7-8 sets in Standard rather than 5-6), so that blocks are treated fairly compared to each-other.
I also am concerned about what this means for Modern and other non-rotating, typically more powerful than Standard formats. More sets in Standard means things rotate out slower, which means they'll be more conservative about what they print in Standard, which means less new stuff for other formats, Modern in particular, when Modern is in desperate need of certain kinds of cards that they are reluctant to print in Standard to begin with.
This latest Wizards change also makes certain kinds of cards harder to shift into, when you don't want certain things to exist together in Standard, such as not being able to print too strong of pump spells in the same Standard as infect or powerful double-strike stuff, or the issues that turn up when printing fetchlands alongside duals with the subtypes from basics. This could heavily restrict both needed reprints and flexibility in set mechanics and themes when trying to balance blocks that will share Standard with each other for the sake of Standard.
I don't think this change will be enough to save Standard, I think it'll depend more on what they print (and don't print). They need to avoid printing siege rhinos in the future unless other colors and strategies besides midrange get comparable powerhouses, and keep things more balanced between colors and strategy types. They also may have emphasized limited overly-much, to the point that they pushed up the rarity of constructed cards a bit too much and made budget decks too much worse than non-budget decks to the point that it discourages newbie Standard players. They may need to work on making sure more constructed viable cards turn up at common and uncommon, and are more competitive against the latest rares and mythics, to avoid pushing out budget players who help fill out Standard events.