Sorry buddy, but the set is crap and the cards that aren't green and white are crap. There's no misjudging poor design and blatantly, pushed and overpowered cards.
No, in fact, there's misjudging when you are pronouncing wildly subjective and biased judgement before even touching the first card of the set, let alone before the community has played with them extensively. How do I know it? Because that paragraph of yours is repeated almost word by word eeeeevery new set between the very first spoiler and the first couple weeks after release... and in the end, most sets turn out similarly ok.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Sorry buddy, but the set is crap and the cards that aren't green and white are crap. There's no misjudging poor design and blatantly, pushed and overpowered cards.
No, in fact, there's misjudging when you are pronouncing wildly subjective and biased judgement before even touching the first card of the set, let alone before the community has played with them extensively. How do I know it? Because that paragraph of yours is repeated almost word by word eeeeevery new set between the very first spoiler and the first couple weeks after release... and in the end, most sets turn out similarly ok.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
Sorry buddy, but the set is crap and the cards that aren't green and white are crap. There's no misjudging poor design and blatantly, pushed and overpowered cards.
No, in fact, there's misjudging when you are pronouncing wildly subjective and biased judgement before even touching the first card of the set, let alone before the community has played with them extensively. How do I know it? Because that paragraph of yours is repeated almost word by word eeeeevery new set between the very first spoiler and the first couple weeks after release... and in the end, most sets turn out similarly ok.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
I'm not sure if that's better, standard is stagnant and will only get worse. Your only choices are bant company, bant humans, w/r humans, g/w tokens and mono white humans. The only major change will be the variation between which route you choose to go, midrange with walkers or company aggro. Either way, the white removal is beyond broken and so are the creatures. I suspect that cards like Gravecrawler and Diregraf Ghoul would change nothing if they were reprinted. Likewise, if vampires received some useful cards like Viscera Seer and maybe Bloodghast little would change in standard.
my overall impression of the set is that wizards seems to be afraid of color balancing. I don't know what they think would happen if every color was playable, but they seem to want to push specific colors and builds, and make the others play catch up the whole game, before the eventual loss. its sad, but its what I think
Very happy with the set. From the perspective of an avid brewer first and foremost, there are many tools for my brews. I'd say I play 70% casual, 20% limited, and 10% competitive Modern, and a little Standard here and there maybe a splash of legacy. There is a nice mix of powerful new toys for existing decks and a surprising number of cards lending themselves to entirely new approaches or new twists on some existing archetypes. I strongly believe there will be some new Standard contenders despite all the "G/W got more powerful" hubbub. There were plenty of decks knocking on the door with good finishes and their dominance is overstated. Additionally, those same new G/W tools lend themselves to other potentially strong decks, not just G/W.
Magic color balance has become like Korean MMORPG character balance - way too much lopsided. Green and White right now are just too oppressive and they get new useful tools in EMN.
sad thing for me is that i quit playing MMORPGs last 2014 to get back into Magic after a decade and in less than 2 years i get the same nightmarish scenario of dealing with favoritism.
so no, i am far from happy. i don't wanna quit Magic again because i find the art and story better than it was years ago (i got myself a copy of Art of Zendikar months ago and will get my copy of Art of Innistrad tomorrow because i like the lore) but the way Wizards balance the colors just might force me to.
Now that the spoiler is fully complete, for me its 5-6 out of 10 so mediocre. There is some good stuff for a lot decks in Standard and Modern. There will also be a new competitive tribe deck, Spirits. I expect the next set to be better since it will be a set that rotates a lot of playable cards.
there will be a new contender in standard. Bant spirits....with CoCo of course. same deck, new flavor, everyone pretends its different. Rakdos get the shaft again, except liliana, who is decent.
Like it was said before, the mechanics are sketchy at best and all the power lies in one or 2 colors. I'm excited to give my mono white humans a much needed overhaul and maybe even splash green but outside of that not really. I might be able to make a bug delirium deck somehow but I don't think it will be all that effective. That is a mechanic I feel should've been reserved for commander decks
I feel kinda iffy about it. there are a few good things, but overall i just dont like it.
Remember that green red legendary werewolf everyone wanted? You finally got it.
i love emerge, except for the fact that there's very few actual emerge cards. and fewer still that's playable. it seems like wizards is just showing some mechanics lately, but not printing enough of it for them to be actually useful. I'd have loved to see more emerge, and spell mastery back in origins.
bant tamiyo is neat.
i don't like lili. i just don't. in standard i don't see her doing much, and in modern she just seems like a straight worse veil. it feels like they wanted to support zombies, but instead of actually supporting zombies, threw a planeswalker at it and called it good.
another thing i don't like is how all the power is in one specific color again. White. white has a lot of the great stuff in standard right now. apparently things like go for the throat and doom blade are to powerful for kill spells that hit almost everything, but silkwrap is just fine because, ya know, logic. in terms of creatures avacyn is GREAT and so is the new gisela. if you happen to pla bruna with a gisela on the field, then you essentially pay 7 mana for a Brisela, Voice of Nightmares which is totes worth.
im not saying this is bad. remember back in return to ravnica / theros blocks where the only decks were esper control and mono black? yeah me too. It seems like wizards has taken to making this color great (at that point black), then that color great, then this color great. it just feels like it shafts a lot of colors. and right now especially so since the printing of 1 cmc mana dorks is gone, and 2 mana kill spells is gone and....a lot of red that hits players is gone and any blue 2 cmc counter worth any kind of damn is gone. remember essence scatter? it just seems like everything but white has been nerfed into the ground to me. certain colors have been able to handle it better than others, like green, which is def #2 right now. but this set definitely hasn't restored any kind of balance. but i think im rambling, i can't really blame this set for that.
flavorfully it's been kind of a hit and miss for me. i think the whole gothic horror thing is great on it's own. it didnt need lovecraftian eldrazi's too. i just think they're dragging it out to far, and taking story away from a potentially, really neat plane. instead of giving us the gothic story we love from innistrad, they just gave us eldrazi and put it in innistrad. at least it kind of gives it a dunwich horror feel? i guess? I don't know i think i'll just be happier when we're finally done with the eldrazi, as much as i'm loving innistrad/eldrazi art.
^ Amen, they still haven't figured out that magic is most fun when there are a lo of strong cards to use in brews.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Modern:
Affinity
Naya Burn
Merfolk
White Blue Midrange
Boggles
Grixis Delver
Esper Control(It's semi playable, believe it or not! Dont bring it to a tourny you care about winning though)
Sorry buddy, but the set is crap and the cards that aren't green and white are crap. There's no misjudging poor design and blatantly, pushed and overpowered cards.
No, in fact, there's misjudging when you are pronouncing wildly subjective and biased judgement before even touching the first card of the set, let alone before the community has played with them extensively. How do I know it? Because that paragraph of yours is repeated almost word by word eeeeevery new set between the very first spoiler and the first couple weeks after release... and in the end, most sets turn out similarly ok.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
Cool. And if it turns out we're right and the cards suck, will Wizards be offering us refunds on that? Because if not, then your suggestion to "buy before you try" is completely bass-ackwards. Why should anyone have to spend money on this set just to win an internet argument about whether it's balanced? We are capable of reading what the cards do on the spoilers just fine and it's not particularly hard to see that GW/Bant decks are going to continue dominating the format.
Black will probably end up being the best color in limited. Along with red. Can't have it all I guess.
Gotta admit though. I have to trash the idea of mono black zombies. The only decent card it got was Liliana, and she costs 3. That MC is overcrowded.
No, in fact, there's misjudging when you are pronouncing wildly subjective and biased judgement before even touching the first card of the set, let alone before the community has played with them extensively. How do I know it? Because that paragraph of yours is repeated almost word by word eeeeevery new set between the very first spoiler and the first couple weeks after release... and in the end, most sets turn out similarly ok.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
Cool. And if it turns out we're right and the cards suck, will Wizards be offering us refunds on that? Because if not, then your suggestion to "buy before you try" is completely bass-ackwards. Why should anyone have to spend money on this set just to win an internet argument about whether it's balanced? We are capable of reading what the cards do on the spoilers just fine and it's not particularly hard to see that GW/Bant decks are going to continue dominating the format.
Black will probably end up being the best color in limited. Along with red. Can't have it all I guess.
Gotta admit though. I have to trash the idea of mono black zombies. The only decent card it got was Liliana, and she costs 3. That MC is overcrowded.
black my be good in limited, I'm not sure, but red?! Red has exactly one 1 drop that you can play if you go first, and two if you go second. there is not a single red rare in this set under 3cmc, compared to every other color getting one in the 1 an two cmc slots except green not having the 2 drop rare, but does have a mythic 2 drop. yes red got some fun removal spells, but every playable red card is an uncommon before 3cmc. so red players are supposed to wait 3 turns to start playing? at least one full turn if you didn't get the only 1 drop creature in the set. yes the mythic dragon is bonkers good, and the hanweir token maker is excellent to, but every other rare or mythic is horrendous in limited. the red commons are vastly overcosted for what they do, ESPECIALLY when compared to what whites commons can do, and greens commons, even blues commons are vastly superior. red will be strictly a support color in limited, and a very good one, but it cant begin to hold a candle to the power of the other 4 colors, with the obvious 2 colors way above the rest.
Sorry buddy, but the set is crap and the cards that aren't green and white are crap. There's no misjudging poor design and blatantly, pushed and overpowered cards.
No, in fact, there's misjudging when you are pronouncing wildly subjective and biased judgement before even touching the first card of the set, let alone before the community has played with them extensively. How do I know it? Because that paragraph of yours is repeated almost word by word eeeeevery new set between the very first spoiler and the first couple weeks after release... and in the end, most sets turn out similarly ok.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
Cool. And if it turns out we're right and the cards suck, will Wizards be offering us refunds on that? Because if not, then your suggestion to "buy before you try" is completely bass-ackwards. Why should anyone have to spend money on this set just to win an internet argument about whether it's balanced? We are capable of reading what the cards do on the spoilers just fine and it's not particularly hard to see that GW/Bant decks are going to continue dominating the format.
That's ridiculous. No one is telling you to spend money to win Internet arguments. You spend money to play a game and have fun. If you think the set is unbalanced, play GW as that is assured to be powerful. If you have philosophical or moral qualms about playing GW, and are positive that you are so incredibly insightful that your first impressions trump empirical testing, then don't buy. It's your money and it's just a game so you are in your right to do as you will. However, you may be missing out. Knee-jerk opinions and reactions after a set is first released are wrong or at least exaggerated more often than not. Again, it's your prerogative.
My advice works if you believe that the people that have been working at this game for up to decades are at all competent and capable of delivering a fun product. If you don't, then keep your money and your belief of being right (without risking obtaining any pesky "evidence" to tell you otherwise), but know that your opinions will matter nothing next to the ones of the people who actually gave it a go.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
The set is interesting, but nothing speaks to me as a currently only EDH player. I am glad I will only have to spend like $50 on singles this set instead of like $120 like I usually do.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
Cool. And if it turns out we're right and the cards suck, will Wizards be offering us refunds on that? Because if not, then your suggestion to "buy before you try" is completely bass-ackwards. Why should anyone have to spend money on this set just to win an internet argument about whether it's balanced? We are capable of reading what the cards do on the spoilers just fine and it's not particularly hard to see that GW/Bant decks are going to continue dominating the format.
Black will probably end up being the best color in limited. Along with red. Can't have it all I guess.
Gotta admit though. I have to trash the idea of mono black zombies. The only decent card it got was Liliana, and she costs 3. That MC is overcrowded.
black my be good in limited, I'm not sure, but red?! Red has exactly one 1 drop that you can play if you go first, and two if you go second. there is not a single red rare in this set under 3cmc, compared to every other color getting one in the 1 an two cmc slots except green not having the 2 drop rare, but does have a mythic 2 drop. yes red got some fun removal spells, but every playable red card is an uncommon before 3cmc. so red players are supposed to wait 3 turns to start playing? at least one full turn if you didn't get the only 1 drop creature in the set. yes the mythic dragon is bonkers good, and the hanweir token maker is excellent to, but every other rare or mythic is horrendous in limited. the red commons are vastly overcosted for what they do, ESPECIALLY when compared to what whites commons can do, and greens commons, even blues commons are vastly superior. red will be strictly a support color in limited, and a very good one, but it cant begin to hold a candle to the power of the other 4 colors, with the obvious 2 colors way above the rest.
One drops have rarely been a priority in limited formats. White also has a single one drop. But it's a mid/late game card (Thraben standard bearer) Blue's one drop is rare. Black has a rare and an uncommon one. Though turn 1 vampire cutthroat can hurt a lot. Especially in sealed. Green has a common, an uncomon and a rare. Though Crossroads Consecrator needs a human to get started, and werewolves no longer start as humans. There is pretty much no evasion in the format. So if you have the removal, you win. The card quality is great in both black and red.
And red has stuff like Brazen wolf that punishes the opponent hard for having a stumbling early game or going 2nd. Your uncommons are pretty insane too. Spreading flames will win games, smoldering werewolf is a house that spits card advantage out of its mouth. Abandon reason is the worse combat trick you can possibly hit yourself to. And the fact that it has madness creates ridiculous scenarios. Deranged whelp is reliable, incindiary flow, nuff said, furyblade vampire is a free madness engine with the drawback of giving you an additional 3 power.
Savage alliance is just stupid good. Shreds of insaity. Yeah, you have the most removal and you get an uncommon that lets you take two of them back. Grab abandon reason and anything else and see if your opponents attacks next turn.
This set is a pile of hot steaming garbage. If it's a non-white or non-green card, just throw it in the trash. Terrible color balance. Weak cards. Poor, boring design. Awful new Liliana. A worse Emrakul. More Eldrazi which we are all sick of. No meaningful reprints for any format. Another set where the creatures are about creatures and the spells are about creatures and combat. The only interesting new mechanic from Shadows over Innistrad, investigate - nowhere to be found. Madness cards are all very weak and will see zero constructed play. Such a shame. A huge letdown of a set. A joke. A tragedy. A disaster.
This set is a pile of hot steaming garbage. If it's a non-white or non-green card, just throw it in the trash. Terrible color balance. Weak cards. Poor, boring design. Awful new Liliana. A worse Emrakul. More Eldrazi which we are all sick of. No meaningful reprints for any format. Another set where the creatures are about creatures and the spells are about creatures and combat. The only interesting new mechanic from Shadows over Innistrad, investigate - nowhere to be found. Madness cards are all very weak and will see zero constructed play. Such a shame. A huge letdown of a set. A joke. A tragedy. A disaster.
Wizards should be ashamed
We've already seen what happens when there are too many good madness cards. It becomes stupid to play anything else than a deck that abuses them. I agree that black isn't in a very good place though. But I think it will rule limited.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
Cool. And if it turns out we're right and the cards suck, will Wizards be offering us refunds on that? Because if not, then your suggestion to "buy before you try" is completely bass-ackwards. Why should anyone have to spend money on this set just to win an internet argument about whether it's balanced? We are capable of reading what the cards do on the spoilers just fine and it's not particularly hard to see that GW/Bant decks are going to continue dominating the format.
Black will probably end up being the best color in limited. Along with red. Can't have it all I guess.
Gotta admit though. I have to trash the idea of mono black zombies. The only decent card it got was Liliana, and she costs 3. That MC is overcrowded.
black my be good in limited, I'm not sure, but red?! Red has exactly one 1 drop that you can play if you go first, and two if you go second. there is not a single red rare in this set under 3cmc, compared to every other color getting one in the 1 an two cmc slots except green not having the 2 drop rare, but does have a mythic 2 drop. yes red got some fun removal spells, but every playable red card is an uncommon before 3cmc. so red players are supposed to wait 3 turns to start playing? at least one full turn if you didn't get the only 1 drop creature in the set. yes the mythic dragon is bonkers good, and the hanweir token maker is excellent to, but every other rare or mythic is horrendous in limited. the red commons are vastly overcosted for what they do, ESPECIALLY when compared to what whites commons can do, and greens commons, even blues commons are vastly superior. red will be strictly a support color in limited, and a very good one, but it cant begin to hold a candle to the power of the other 4 colors, with the obvious 2 colors way above the rest.
One drops have rarely been a priority in limited formats. White also has a single one drop. But it's a mid/late game card (Thraben standard bearer) Blue's one drop is rare. Black has a rare and an uncommon one. Though turn 1 vampire cutthroat can hurt a lot. Especially in sealed. Green has a common, an uncomon and a rare. Though Crossroads Consecrator needs a human to get started, and werewolves no longer start as humans. There is pretty much no evasion in the format. So if you have the removal, you win. The card quality is great in both black and red.
And red has stuff like Brazen wolf that punishes the opponent hard for having a stumbling early game or going 2nd. Your uncommons are pretty insane too. Spreading flames will win games, smoldering werewolf is a house that spits card advantage out of its mouth. Abandon reason is the worse combat trick you can possibly hit yourself to. And the fact that it has madness creates ridiculous scenarios. Deranged whelp is reliable, incindiary flow, nuff said, furyblade vampire is a free madness engine with the drawback of giving you an additional 3 power.
Savage alliance is just stupid good. Shreds of insaity. Yeah, you have the most removal and you get an uncommon that lets you take two of them back. Grab abandon reason and anything else and see if your opponents attacks next turn.
There's nothing wrong with the uncommons.
I never said their was anything wrong with the uncommons, they are good. but when evaluating a set, especially for limited, you have to assume that you will be getting very little amounts of the rares and uncommons, obviously. you may get a whole pool with one or two of those good uncommon red cards to go with your new fun rare you want to play. so you need backup from the commons. the only common red got that is truly good, solid card is otherworldy outburst. yes galvanic bombardment is okay, but only in multiples. all of the strength for red is in the uncommons, which you CANNOT bank on. the other colors have a lot of support in early turns that get you to their bombs, and have serious quality in those cards. red simply does not. you have to hope you get enough uncommons to not lose all of the board advantage before getting to any of those super expensive removal cards. you will get run over by your opponents if you are waiting on a spreading flames, or savage alliance, or frankly any red escalate card. you have to pay for those abilities in red, not just discard cards like black, or tap creatures like white. what I'm saying is you will definitely be playing catch up if you go red against any marginally experienced opponent.
Been playing for 16 years now. I am a huge, HUGE HPL fan. This was gonna be MY JAM.
Turns out, it's rather boring and a complete cluster**** of a set. (Nothing new on the second part, but the first is totally inexcusable, given the richness of the source material.)
4/10 is about all I can muster, after reading the entire spoiler. My opinion was more like 6/10 before I did that. Ugh.
Yes, there are a few very playable obvious Modern plants but apart from that, there's not much to get worked up over.
I will give them a pretty big pass because I know they are still finding their footing on the whole two-set block thing. That said, I hope they can begin to demonstrate WHY this was a good idea for anyone other than R&D & Hasbro investors. They better start figuring ***** out in Kaladesh or I am not sure how much longer I will bother with this game. I was very excited about the 3-sets->2-sets change but MAAAAAN can they actually make it work better than what we had before? So far, I'm extremely underwhelmed with this change.
Been playing for 16 years now. I am a huge, HUGE HPL fan. This was gonna be MY JAM.
Turns out, it's rather boring and a complete cluster**** of a set. (Nothing new on the second part, but the first is totally inexcusable, given the richness of the source material.)
4/10 is about all I can muster, after reading the entire spoiler. My opinion was more like 6/10 before I did that. Ugh.
Yes, there are a few very playable obvious Modern plants but apart from that, there's not much to get worked up over.
I will give them a pretty big pass because I know they are still finding their footing on the whole two-set block. That said, I hope they can begin to demonstrate WHY this was a good idea for anyone other than R&D & Hasbro investors. They better start figuring ***** out in Kaladesh or I am not sure how much longer I will bother with this game. I was very excited about the 3-sets->2-sets change but MAAAAAN can they actually make it work better than what we had before? So far, I'm extremely underwhelmed with this change.
I agree, the problem is the two- set block system and the elimination of the core set. Core sets gave us non story line cards and reprints. With Two-set block system there will never be enough cards in standard to have fun in my opinion, unless they raise the number of cards in the sets to something like 400 cards.
This set is a pile of hot steaming garbage. If it's a non-white or non-green card, just throw it in the trash. Terrible color balance. Weak cards. Poor, boring design. Awful new Liliana. A worse Emrakul. More Eldrazi which we are all sick of. No meaningful reprints for any format. Another set where the creatures are about creatures and the spells are about creatures and combat. The only interesting new mechanic from Shadows over Innistrad, investigate - nowhere to be found. Madness cards are all very weak and will see zero constructed play. Such a shame. A huge letdown of a set. A joke. A tragedy. A disaster.
Wizards should be ashamed
We've already seen what happens when there are too many good madness cards. It becomes stupid to play anything else than a deck that abuses them. I agree that black isn't in a very good place though. But I think it will rule limited.
and now there are no decent madness cards just a shedload of enablers with nowhere to go... what was the damn point... now you can keep discarding till all your ineffectual creatures are on the board - sorry we didn't give you anything to finish the game. Madness was overpowered in the past so we just straight up crippled it completely to balance it out. Previous poor design justifying the other extreme of poor design
The problem is that they simply are not designing these mechanics for constructed play, but instead for Draft and limited in mind (Which is what sells a lot of packs). The unexciting madness cards are integral to the draft archetypes, even though they will never get played in constructed.
... WHich is a damn shame that they are deciding that a mechanic will never played in constructed, given that Constructed (And casual constructed) is the life blood of the game. What we are seeing these days is that they are developing *largely* with limited in mind, to the point where entire mechanics are never even meant to be played outside of limited formats. I refuse to believe that the choice needs to be between Limited and Constructed.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
Cool. And if it turns out we're right and the cards suck, will Wizards be offering us refunds on that? Because if not, then your suggestion to "buy before you try" is completely bass-ackwards. Why should anyone have to spend money on this set just to win an internet argument about whether it's balanced? We are capable of reading what the cards do on the spoilers just fine and it's not particularly hard to see that GW/Bant decks are going to continue dominating the format.
That's ridiculous. No one is telling you to spend money to win Internet arguments. You spend money to play a game and have fun. If you think the set is unbalanced, play GW as that is assured to be powerful. If you have philosophical or moral qualms about playing GW, and are positive that you are so incredibly insightful that your first impressions trump empirical testing, then don't buy. It's your money and it's just a game so you are in your right to do as you will. However, you may be missing out. Knee-jerk opinions and reactions after a set is first released are wrong or at least exaggerated more often than not. Again, it's your prerogative.
My advice works if you believe that the people that have been working at this game for up to decades are at all competent and capable of delivering a fun product. If you don't, then keep your money and your belief of being right (without risking obtaining any pesky "evidence" to tell you otherwise), but know that your opinions will matter nothing next to the ones of the people who actually gave it a go.
Your opinion boils down to "If you didn't spend money on these cards, you cannot disprove my argument that they're good." It's a great tactic to ensure that anything you say is infallible because any response a person gives to you can be countered by "You just need to buy more cards and keep playing".
Except I haven't said that "the cards are good". What's "good" anyway? For some people, it means constructed playable, for others exclusively eternal constructed playable, for others, flavourful and interesting, for others, part of a fun limited gameplay, funny combos, tribal unity, commander-worthy, pauper-worthy, etc, etc, etc. I'm sorry that the "goodness" that you expect from cards is not there in your un-empirical opinion. I argue that it may be there but you cannot know for sure until you try it. Yes, there's a financial risk to it, but this is not endemic of this set. Every set is like that. Every entertainment investment, in fact, is like that. Movies, videogames, concerts, etc. Anything can end being a disappointment from an initial positive impression, or a pleasant surprise from a negative one, and again, it is up to you to assess the risk.
Or just do what you were perhaps planning to do from the beginning: wait until the first reports of people actually playing the cards start trickling into the open, quickly buy the singles, and when eventually you are "pwning n00bs" with those cards, claim that you knew from the beginning that they were awesome and anybody who believed otherwise was an idiot.
I'm calling it right now- worst rare in the set. Even good limited players will find better bombs at common and uncommon no sweat. Worst. Episode. Ever.
I really do predict this to be our worst rare in set award winner. I'd be happier opening a jar of eyeballs, so I think anything worse is highly unlikely. This card wont just have zero constructed potential, but not be significantly better than a mass of ghouls in a draft.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm sorry, let me add some context to my rant. Bant colors got some really good playable cards. The set has really good cards, unfortunatley, the playable cards reinforce existing tier one decks in standard. The color red got some nice removal spells and a creature that will see play in modern, possibly. Most of my complaints are centered around black and the poor removal and creatures. Yes, the set is good for standard, the set will diversify existing tier one decks and give those decks more tools to play with. But, the black cards are trash the blue cards are suspect.
Much better. I'd still say "wait and see until playing with the cards", but I can respect a more detailed analysis that accounts for both strengths and failures.
I'm not sure if that's better, standard is stagnant and will only get worse. Your only choices are bant company, bant humans, w/r humans, g/w tokens and mono white humans. The only major change will be the variation between which route you choose to go, midrange with walkers or company aggro. Either way, the white removal is beyond broken and so are the creatures. I suspect that cards like Gravecrawler and Diregraf Ghoul would change nothing if they were reprinted. Likewise, if vampires received some useful cards like Viscera Seer and maybe Bloodghast little would change in standard.
sad thing for me is that i quit playing MMORPGs last 2014 to get back into Magic after a decade and in less than 2 years i get the same nightmarish scenario of dealing with favoritism.
so no, i am far from happy. i don't wanna quit Magic again because i find the art and story better than it was years ago (i got myself a copy of Art of Zendikar months ago and will get my copy of Art of Innistrad tomorrow because i like the lore) but the way Wizards balance the colors just might force me to.
Remember that green red legendary werewolf everyone wanted? You finally got it.
i love emerge, except for the fact that there's very few actual emerge cards. and fewer still that's playable. it seems like wizards is just showing some mechanics lately, but not printing enough of it for them to be actually useful. I'd have loved to see more emerge, and spell mastery back in origins.
bant tamiyo is neat.
i don't like lili. i just don't. in standard i don't see her doing much, and in modern she just seems like a straight worse veil. it feels like they wanted to support zombies, but instead of actually supporting zombies, threw a planeswalker at it and called it good.
another thing i don't like is how all the power is in one specific color again. White. white has a lot of the great stuff in standard right now. apparently things like go for the throat and doom blade are to powerful for kill spells that hit almost everything, but silkwrap is just fine because, ya know, logic. in terms of creatures avacyn is GREAT and so is the new gisela. if you happen to pla bruna with a gisela on the field, then you essentially pay 7 mana for a Brisela, Voice of Nightmares which is totes worth.
im not saying this is bad. remember back in return to ravnica / theros blocks where the only decks were esper control and mono black? yeah me too. It seems like wizards has taken to making this color great (at that point black), then that color great, then this color great. it just feels like it shafts a lot of colors. and right now especially so since the printing of 1 cmc mana dorks is gone, and 2 mana kill spells is gone and....a lot of red that hits players is gone and any blue 2 cmc counter worth any kind of damn is gone. remember essence scatter? it just seems like everything but white has been nerfed into the ground to me. certain colors have been able to handle it better than others, like green, which is def #2 right now. but this set definitely hasn't restored any kind of balance. but i think im rambling, i can't really blame this set for that.
flavorfully it's been kind of a hit and miss for me. i think the whole gothic horror thing is great on it's own. it didnt need lovecraftian eldrazi's too. i just think they're dragging it out to far, and taking story away from a potentially, really neat plane. instead of giving us the gothic story we love from innistrad, they just gave us eldrazi and put it in innistrad. at least it kind of gives it a dunwich horror feel? i guess? I don't know i think i'll just be happier when we're finally done with the eldrazi, as much as i'm loving innistrad/eldrazi art.
Affinity
Naya Burn
Merfolk
White Blue Midrange
Boggles
Grixis Delver
Esper Control(It's semi playable, believe it or not! Dont bring it to a tourny you care about winning though)
Legacy:
Miracles
Deathblade
Black will probably end up being the best color in limited. Along with red. Can't have it all I guess.
Gotta admit though. I have to trash the idea of mono black zombies. The only decent card it got was Liliana, and she costs 3. That MC is overcrowded.
black my be good in limited, I'm not sure, but red?! Red has exactly one 1 drop that you can play if you go first, and two if you go second. there is not a single red rare in this set under 3cmc, compared to every other color getting one in the 1 an two cmc slots except green not having the 2 drop rare, but does have a mythic 2 drop. yes red got some fun removal spells, but every playable red card is an uncommon before 3cmc. so red players are supposed to wait 3 turns to start playing? at least one full turn if you didn't get the only 1 drop creature in the set. yes the mythic dragon is bonkers good, and the hanweir token maker is excellent to, but every other rare or mythic is horrendous in limited. the red commons are vastly overcosted for what they do, ESPECIALLY when compared to what whites commons can do, and greens commons, even blues commons are vastly superior. red will be strictly a support color in limited, and a very good one, but it cant begin to hold a candle to the power of the other 4 colors, with the obvious 2 colors way above the rest.
That's ridiculous. No one is telling you to spend money to win Internet arguments. You spend money to play a game and have fun. If you think the set is unbalanced, play GW as that is assured to be powerful. If you have philosophical or moral qualms about playing GW, and are positive that you are so incredibly insightful that your first impressions trump empirical testing, then don't buy. It's your money and it's just a game so you are in your right to do as you will. However, you may be missing out. Knee-jerk opinions and reactions after a set is first released are wrong or at least exaggerated more often than not. Again, it's your prerogative.
My advice works if you believe that the people that have been working at this game for up to decades are at all competent and capable of delivering a fun product. If you don't, then keep your money and your belief of being right (without risking obtaining any pesky "evidence" to tell you otherwise), but know that your opinions will matter nothing next to the ones of the people who actually gave it a go.
And I'm loving them.
One drops have rarely been a priority in limited formats. White also has a single one drop. But it's a mid/late game card (Thraben standard bearer) Blue's one drop is rare. Black has a rare and an uncommon one. Though turn 1 vampire cutthroat can hurt a lot. Especially in sealed. Green has a common, an uncomon and a rare. Though Crossroads Consecrator needs a human to get started, and werewolves no longer start as humans. There is pretty much no evasion in the format. So if you have the removal, you win. The card quality is great in both black and red.
But look at your red 1 mana cards. bold impaler, Otherworldly Outburst, prophetic ravings ,galvanic bombardment, borrowed hostility.
All of them are playable. Impaler doesn't look like much but he trades up.
And red has stuff like Brazen wolf that punishes the opponent hard for having a stumbling early game or going 2nd. Your uncommons are pretty insane too. Spreading flames will win games, smoldering werewolf is a house that spits card advantage out of its mouth. Abandon reason is the worse combat trick you can possibly hit yourself to. And the fact that it has madness creates ridiculous scenarios. Deranged whelp is reliable, incindiary flow, nuff said, furyblade vampire is a free madness engine with the drawback of giving you an additional 3 power.
Savage alliance is just stupid good. Shreds of insaity. Yeah, you have the most removal and you get an uncommon that lets you take two of them back. Grab abandon reason and anything else and see if your opponents attacks next turn.
There's nothing wrong with the uncommons.
Wizards should be ashamed
We've already seen what happens when there are too many good madness cards. It becomes stupid to play anything else than a deck that abuses them. I agree that black isn't in a very good place though. But I think it will rule limited.
I never said their was anything wrong with the uncommons, they are good. but when evaluating a set, especially for limited, you have to assume that you will be getting very little amounts of the rares and uncommons, obviously. you may get a whole pool with one or two of those good uncommon red cards to go with your new fun rare you want to play. so you need backup from the commons. the only common red got that is truly good, solid card is otherworldy outburst. yes galvanic bombardment is okay, but only in multiples. all of the strength for red is in the uncommons, which you CANNOT bank on. the other colors have a lot of support in early turns that get you to their bombs, and have serious quality in those cards. red simply does not. you have to hope you get enough uncommons to not lose all of the board advantage before getting to any of those super expensive removal cards. you will get run over by your opponents if you are waiting on a spreading flames, or savage alliance, or frankly any red escalate card. you have to pay for those abilities in red, not just discard cards like black, or tap creatures like white. what I'm saying is you will definitely be playing catch up if you go red against any marginally experienced opponent.
Turns out, it's rather boring and a complete cluster**** of a set. (Nothing new on the second part, but the first is totally inexcusable, given the richness of the source material.)
4/10 is about all I can muster, after reading the entire spoiler. My opinion was more like 6/10 before I did that. Ugh.
Yes, there are a few very playable obvious Modern plants but apart from that, there's not much to get worked up over.
I will give them a pretty big pass because I know they are still finding their footing on the whole two-set block thing. That said, I hope they can begin to demonstrate WHY this was a good idea for anyone other than R&D & Hasbro investors. They better start figuring ***** out in Kaladesh or I am not sure how much longer I will bother with this game. I was very excited about the 3-sets->2-sets change but MAAAAAN can they actually make it work better than what we had before? So far, I'm extremely underwhelmed with this change.
Fully-powered 600-Card "Dream Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/dreamcube
450-Card "Artificer's Cube" https://cubecobra.com/cube/list/artificer
Cubing in Indianapolis...send me a PM!!
The problem is that they simply are not designing these mechanics for constructed play, but instead for Draft and limited in mind (Which is what sells a lot of packs). The unexciting madness cards are integral to the draft archetypes, even though they will never get played in constructed.
... WHich is a damn shame that they are deciding that a mechanic will never played in constructed, given that Constructed (And casual constructed) is the life blood of the game. What we are seeing these days is that they are developing *largely* with limited in mind, to the point where entire mechanics are never even meant to be played outside of limited formats. I refuse to believe that the choice needs to be between Limited and Constructed.
Except I haven't said that "the cards are good". What's "good" anyway? For some people, it means constructed playable, for others exclusively eternal constructed playable, for others, flavourful and interesting, for others, part of a fun limited gameplay, funny combos, tribal unity, commander-worthy, pauper-worthy, etc, etc, etc. I'm sorry that the "goodness" that you expect from cards is not there in your un-empirical opinion. I argue that it may be there but you cannot know for sure until you try it. Yes, there's a financial risk to it, but this is not endemic of this set. Every set is like that. Every entertainment investment, in fact, is like that. Movies, videogames, concerts, etc. Anything can end being a disappointment from an initial positive impression, or a pleasant surprise from a negative one, and again, it is up to you to assess the risk.
Or just do what you were perhaps planning to do from the beginning: wait until the first reports of people actually playing the cards start trickling into the open, quickly buy the singles, and when eventually you are "pwning n00bs" with those cards, claim that you knew from the beginning that they were awesome and anybody who believed otherwise was an idiot.