I'm basing my opinion from standard and not Draft. Drana is Good but not pushed. Drana with doublestrike would be pushed.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
I'm basing my opinion from standard and not Draft. Drana is Good but not pushed. Drana with doublestrike would be pushed.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
No, Hexproof would defiantly be broken and Doublestrike would be really pushed but lifelink would be fun. I played in the old days of magic were Dark Ritual , Lightning Bolt and Counterspell Existed in standard and it never felt broken to me because every color had pushed spells. Todays standard is so weak that cards like Mana Leak are considered to be to powerful for standard. I quit the game when JTMS was in Standard. Jace was defiantly broken but he had a lot of help to.
I'm basing my opinion from standard and not Draft. Drana is Good but not pushed. Drana with doublestrike would be pushed.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
No, Hexproof would defiantly be broken and Doublestrike would be really pushed but lifelink would be fun. I played in the old days of magic were Dark Ritual , Lightning Bolt and Counterspell Existed in standard and it never felt broken to me because every color had pushed spells. Todays standard is so weak that cards like Mana Leak are considered to be to powerful for standard. I quit the game when JTMS was in Standard. Jace was defiantly broken but he had a lot of help to.
You'd still complain that it dies to wrath of god, I don't think you played at the time, I was there when necro was out and bargain and jar and storm and affinity, and it certainly wasn't fun it was counterspell or see the opponent playing solitary until you conceded, commit suicide out of boredom or he eventually killed you, that's not a fun game, the current MtG is balanced, interactive and fun, and it doesn't need broken spells, power "ebbs and flows" in certain areas of the game, but it needs a balance, which you obviously don't realize.
I'm basing my opinion from standard and not Draft. Drana is Good but not pushed. Drana with doublestrike would be pushed.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
No, Hexproof would defiantly be broken and Doublestrike would be really pushed but lifelink would be fun. I played in the old days of magic were Dark Ritual , Lightning Bolt and Counterspell Existed in standard and it never felt broken to me because every color had pushed spells. Todays standard is so weak that cards like Mana Leak are considered to be to powerful for standard. I quit the game when JTMS was in Standard. Jace was defiantly broken but he had a lot of help to.
You'd still complain that it dies to wrath of god, I don't think you played at the time, I was there when necro was out and bargain and jar and storm and affinity, and it certainly wasn't fun it was counterspell or see the opponent playing solitary until you conceded, commit suicide out of boredom or he eventually killed you, that's not a fun game, the current MtG is balanced, interactive and fun, and it doesn't need broken spells, power "ebbs and flows" in certain areas of the game, but it needs a balance, which you obviously don't realize.
Some of us are timmies some of us are johnnies and lastly spikes so we will never fully agree on power level because what is good for one is bad for the other. It's not a bad thing it's just
different aspects of the game we as individuals care about.
I'm basing my opinion from standard and not Draft. Drana is Good but not pushed. Drana with doublestrike would be pushed.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
No, Hexproof would defiantly be broken and Doublestrike would be really pushed but lifelink would be fun. I played in the old days of magic were Dark Ritual , Lightning Bolt and Counterspell Existed in standard and it never felt broken to me because every color had pushed spells. Todays standard is so weak that cards like Mana Leak are considered to be to powerful for standard. I quit the game when JTMS was in Standard. Jace was defiantly broken but he had a lot of help to.
Yes. This is why I have a hard time buying the power creep theory. Spells are as weak as they have ever been right now (don't counter with the delve spells, Wizards clearly underestimated how easy delve was).
I'm basing my opinion from standard and not Draft. Drana is Good but not pushed. Drana with doublestrike would be pushed.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
No, Hexproof would defiantly be broken and Doublestrike would be really pushed but lifelink would be fun. I played in the old days of magic were Dark Ritual , Lightning Bolt and Counterspell Existed in standard and it never felt broken to me because every color had pushed spells. Todays standard is so weak that cards like Mana Leak are considered to be to powerful for standard. I quit the game when JTMS was in Standard. Jace was defiantly broken but he had a lot of help to.
Yes. This is why I have a hard time buying the power creep theory. Spells are as weak as they have ever been right now (don't counter with the delve spells, Wizards clearly underestimated how easy delve was).
Balance is Balance doesn't mater if it's high power standard or a low power standard the problems come when one or more colors becomes way more powerful or unbalanced than the others.
I'm basing my opinion from standard and not Draft. Drana is Good but not pushed. Drana with doublestrike would be pushed.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
No, Hexproof would defiantly be broken and Doublestrike would be really pushed but lifelink would be fun. I played in the old days of magic were Dark Ritual , Lightning Bolt and Counterspell Existed in standard and it never felt broken to me because every color had pushed spells. Todays standard is so weak that cards like Mana Leak are considered to be to powerful for standard. I quit the game when JTMS was in Standard. Jace was defiantly broken but he had a lot of help to.
Yes. This is why I have a hard time buying the power creep theory. Spells are as weak as they have ever been right now (don't counter with the delve spells, Wizards clearly underestimated how easy delve was).
Power creep is most certainly real. Just because magic has always had busted cards doesn't mean there can't be a trend of overall power increase. Plus, if they can power down as many claim they have done from KTK block to BFZ, it can go the other way too. Balance, an ebb and flow of power, is needed for the health and longevity of the game. Best accept that homie.
I don't know why we have to compare a set to others (lol im guilty of that too). It is what it is. It's the mana cost I think everyone is bummed out at. bet you like those lands, huh?? hahaha. actually I think they suck except 2 of the mountains are really beautiful.
I think BFZ is going to sync well with OGW when KTK and FRF drop from standard. that will be a sad day for sure. that's when I'll decide if just go with Modern or stick around standard another block
"Since the "legend rule" no longer works that way, we would be hard-pressed to put a card like Pendelhaven or Okina, Temple to the Grandfathers into Standard" Sam Stoddard
Neither of those lands are broken. Pendelhaven only pumps 1/1's and Okina only pumps legendary creatures for mana. Yet development think they are too strong.
They are too strong due to being strictly better than a basic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
"Since the "legend rule" no longer works that way, we would be hard-pressed to put a card like Pendelhaven or Okina, Temple to the Grandfathers into Standard" Sam Stoddard
Neither of those lands are broken. Pendelhaven only pumps 1/1's and Okina only pumps legendary creatures for mana. Yet development think they are too strong.
They are too strong due to being strictly better than a basic.
They are both LEGENDARY Lands! You cannot have 4 of each on the field. If I pull 4 Pendel Haven's in my opening hand, I muligan. Basic Lands are like common lands, they are the low tier not the best. Your arguement is like saying they can't print Triton Shorestalker at common anymore cause he's better than Merfolk of the Pearl Trident. I should expect my RARE lands to need to be powered down to be equal to my COMMON lands. Just like I would expect my rare creatures to be equal to my commons.
Rarity is about complexity and balance in draft/sealed, not power level
They are both LEGENDARY Lands! You cannot have 4 of each on the field. If I pull 4 Pendel Haven's in my opening hand, I muligan. Basic Lands are like common lands, they are the low tier not the best. Your arguement is like saying they can't print Triton Shorestalker at common anymore cause he's better than Merfolk of the Pearl Trident. I should expect my RARE lands to need to be powered down to be equal to my COMMON lands. Just like I would expect my rare creatures to be equal to my commons.
That isn't how strictly better than a basic works. The question isn't "Is 4 of land X strictly better than 4 basics" its "Is 1 of land X strictly better than a basic?" Those legendary lands fail the test. If they were printed into standard, every deck running Forests would be correct to drop two forests in order to run 1 of each of the legendary lands. Any reasonable person would agree that the first Pnedlehaven added to a deck is strictly better than the forest it replaces. That is all that matters, and its why they are too strong.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
But....one of the strongest standards of all time was 2-3 blocks right after Lorwyn....there was a deck in standad that outside of a few cards and land base was played in legacy.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"It's like some kind of Voltron... made of elephants??"
That isn't how strictly better than a basic works. The question isn't "Is 4 of land X strictly better than 4 basics" its "Is 1 of land X strictly better than a basic?" Those legendary lands fail the test. If they were printed into standard, every deck running Forests would be correct to drop two forests in order to run 1 of each of the legendary lands. Any reasonable person would agree that the first Pnedlehaven added to a deck is strictly better than the forest it replaces. That is all that matters, and its why they are too strong.
You shouldn't throw around the phrase "strictly better" here.
Cards like Price of Progress, Wasteland, and Blood Moon laugh at the notion of *any* nonbasic land being strictly better than a basic.
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 think BFZ suffers mainly from the decision to make each block a two set block right in the middle of its design/development. I'll be interested to hear about the compromises made when this decision was made. Did they already had 3 sets worth of cards designed and all of a sudden needed to make quick and sweeping cuts?
If anything, I feel like that was the case and to make the cuts simple they just chose to excise a new mechanic, most likely the one that made them the most wary (which usually means they weren't sure how to balance its power level). As a result the set feels underpowered because it's missing a possibly powerful mechanic that could have defined the set.
Imagine what Khans of Tarkir would have been like if Delve was cut.
That isn't how strictly better than a basic works. The question isn't "Is 4 of land X strictly better than 4 basics" its "Is 1 of land X strictly better than a basic?" Those legendary lands fail the test. If they were printed into standard, every deck running Forests would be correct to drop two forests in order to run 1 of each of the legendary lands. Any reasonable person would agree that the first Pnedlehaven added to a deck is strictly better than the forest it replaces. That is all that matters, and its why they are too strong.
You shouldn't throw around the phrase "strictly better" here.
Cards like Price of Progress, Wasteland, and Blood Moon laugh at the notion of *any* nonbasic land being strictly better than a basic.
Once again, that isn't how "strictly better than a basic" works. I grow tired of explaining it though, so I will just leave you with an article on the mothership...
Every time I read a comment about "Well if this card had card draw/trample/haste/indestructible/hexproof/life gain...", I think "You're missing the point." They're armchair developer comments that fail to take into account the card's role in the greater Limited and Standard environment. No, it may not be as good as whatever card you're comparing it to. There's a reason for that. Not every burn spell is Lightning Bolt, nor does it need to be or should be.
- Manite
That isn't how strictly better than a basic works. The question isn't "Is 4 of land X strictly better than 4 basics" its "Is 1 of land X strictly better than a basic?" Those legendary lands fail the test. If they were printed into standard, every deck running Forests would be correct to drop two forests in order to run 1 of each of the legendary lands. Any reasonable person would agree that the first Pnedlehaven added to a deck is strictly better than the forest it replaces. That is all that matters, and its why they are too strong.
You shouldn't throw around the phrase "strictly better" here.
Cards like Price of Progress, Wasteland, and Blood Moon laugh at the notion of *any* nonbasic land being strictly better than a basic.
Once again, that isn't how "strictly better than a basic" works. I grow tired of explaining it though, so I will just leave you with an article on the mothership...
You can quote all you want, but both you *and* MaRo are misusing "strictly better" here.
The cards I mentioned aren't even close to remote corner cases that shouldn't be factored into the equation (like Dissipate vs. Cancel)-
They are heavily played hate cards which will ensure, and let me say this again since you seem to think it's not true: No nonbasic land can EVER be strictly better than a basic land.
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
That isn't how strictly better than a basic works. The question isn't "Is 4 of land X strictly better than 4 basics" its "Is 1 of land X strictly better than a basic?" Those legendary lands fail the test. If they were printed into standard, every deck running Forests would be correct to drop two forests in order to run 1 of each of the legendary lands. Any reasonable person would agree that the first Pnedlehaven added to a deck is strictly better than the forest it replaces. That is all that matters, and its why they are too strong.
You shouldn't throw around the phrase "strictly better" here.
Cards like Price of Progress, Wasteland, and Blood Moon laugh at the notion of *any* nonbasic land being strictly better than a basic.
Once again, that isn't how "strictly better than a basic" works. I grow tired of explaining it though, so I will just leave you with an article on the mothership...
You can quote all you want, but both you *and* MaRo are misusing "strictly better" here.
The cards I mentioned aren't even close to remote corner cases that shouldn't be factored into the equation (like Dissipate vs. Cancel)-
They are heavily played hate cards which will ensure, and let me say this again since you seem to think it's not true: No nonbasic land can EVER be strictly better than a basic land.
Strip mine says hi. A card that under normal circumstances it's better than a basic land (Enters the battlefield untaped, has no built in drawback, adds unconditional colored mana AND has another positive ability, doesn't matter how big or small the ability is), is strictly better than a basic land that is all that, minus the extra ability.
Whether or not one is "strictly better" than the other, is judged in a vacuum, not in the context of a possible metagame, it's you that is misusing the term strictly better.
Strip mine says hi. A card that under normal circumstances it's better than a basic land (Enters the battlefield untaped, has no built in drawback, adds unconditional colored mana AND has another positive ability, doesn't matter how big or small the ability is), is strictly better than a basic land that is all that, minus the extra ability.
Whether or not one is "strictly better" than the other, is judged in a vacuum, not in the context of a possible metagame, it's you that is misusing the term strictly better.
I'm not sure if you and I are seeing the same version of Strip Mine, but I don't think it ever made any colored mana. And I'm just having a bit of fun here, but Strip Mine will still get locked when it's up against a Kismet plus a Back to Basics while a good old mountain would still be okay
Strictly in this case means exactly and rigidly held to be so. Rigidly as in inflexible, and without exception. In the case of "better" it is used to denote when something is better in all ways than something else. So in the case of Strictly better, a stripe mine is not strictly better than a mountain, which can tap for red. Whether or not strictly better is still a useful term given the absurd volume of card interactions is another thing entirely.
Is it more useful to use the term incorrectly? Probably, if you at least show a card is in most reasonable cases better.
Strip mine says hi. A card that under normal circumstances it's better than a basic land (Enters the battlefield untaped, has no built in drawback, adds unconditional colored mana AND has another positive ability, doesn't matter how big or small the ability is), is strictly better than a basic land that is all that, minus the extra ability.
Whether or not one is "strictly better" than the other, is judged in a vacuum, not in the context of a possible metagame, it's you that is misusing the term strictly better.
I'm not sure if you and I are seeing the same version of Strip Mine, but I don't think it ever made any colored mana. And I'm just having a bit of fun here, but Strip Mine will still get locked when it's up against a Kismet plus a Back to Basics while a good old mountain would still be okay
You cited wasteland (among others) as a reason why basics are always better than non basics, well sure, there are some cases where a non basic land is better than a basic, like the ones you cited, but in a vacuum they are not, it's a land that does everything that a basic does (Enters the battlefield untaped, has no built in drawback and adds unconditional colored mana of a single color), and more, so that's strictly better.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Drana with double strike would be broken. Your definition of 'pushed' is 'broken' . You are the type of person who tries to say that JTMS is fair and wizard's should just reprint ancestral recall. Have you even stopped for half a second to think how absurd drana would be with double strike? Of course even if evil Maro did manage to sneak a double strike drana into being legal, you are the type of person who says it's bad because it doesn't have hexproof.
- Manite
different aspects of the game we as individuals care about.
Yes. This is why I have a hard time buying the power creep theory. Spells are as weak as they have ever been right now (don't counter with the delve spells, Wizards clearly underestimated how easy delve was).
UR Blue-Red Control
Modern:
UBR Grixis Control
UWR Jeskai Control
I think BFZ is going to sync well with OGW when KTK and FRF drop from standard. that will be a sad day for sure. that's when I'll decide if just go with Modern or stick around standard another block
I get it! This thread will end with the release of the next expansion set. It will be the worse set in Magic's history.
3BB
Sorcery
You lose the game.
They are too strong due to being strictly better than a basic.
- Manite
That isn't how strictly better than a basic works. The question isn't "Is 4 of land X strictly better than 4 basics" its "Is 1 of land X strictly better than a basic?" Those legendary lands fail the test. If they were printed into standard, every deck running Forests would be correct to drop two forests in order to run 1 of each of the legendary lands. Any reasonable person would agree that the first Pnedlehaven added to a deck is strictly better than the forest it replaces. That is all that matters, and its why they are too strong.
- Manite
Credit goes to Brofoux for the Sig pic.
Current Modern Deck
Black Licorice
http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?p=11006564#post11006564
You shouldn't throw around the phrase "strictly better" here.
Cards like Price of Progress, Wasteland, and Blood Moon laugh at the notion of *any* nonbasic land being strictly better than a basic.
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
If anything, I feel like that was the case and to make the cuts simple they just chose to excise a new mechanic, most likely the one that made them the most wary (which usually means they weren't sure how to balance its power level). As a result the set feels underpowered because it's missing a possibly powerful mechanic that could have defined the set.
Imagine what Khans of Tarkir would have been like if Delve was cut.
Once again, that isn't how "strictly better than a basic" works. I grow tired of explaining it though, so I will just leave you with an article on the mothership...
http://archive.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtgcom/daily/mr65
- Manite
You can quote all you want, but both you *and* MaRo are misusing "strictly better" here.
The cards I mentioned aren't even close to remote corner cases that shouldn't be factored into the equation (like Dissipate vs. Cancel)-
They are heavily played hate cards which will ensure, and let me say this again since you seem to think it's not true:
No nonbasic land can EVER be strictly better than a basic land.
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
Whether or not one is "strictly better" than the other, is judged in a vacuum, not in the context of a possible metagame, it's you that is misusing the term strictly better.
I'm not sure if you and I are seeing the same version of Strip Mine, but I don't think it ever made any colored mana. And I'm just having a bit of fun here, but Strip Mine will still get locked when it's up against a Kismet plus a Back to Basics while a good old mountain would still be okay
Is it more useful to use the term incorrectly? Probably, if you at least show a card is in most reasonable cases better.
That's English for ya.
You cited wasteland (among others) as a reason why basics are always better than non basics, well sure, there are some cases where a non basic land is better than a basic, like the ones you cited, but in a vacuum they are not, it's a land that does everything that a basic does (Enters the battlefield untaped, has no built in drawback and adds unconditional colored mana of a single color), and more, so that's strictly better.