I think the problem is that black's removal is not very good, which is usually the reason you play black. Red has great low damage removal, white has divine verdict and blue has some of the best bounce spells in any format. Green has a fight card, plus with white and red has some amazing combat tricks.
Black got the short end of removal and combat tricks. So, most players like myself, that play black because of the removal, are a little disappointed. The only reason really to play black now is for devotion more often than anything else.
yep. not sure how you give black the worst removal, they already have the worst or near the worst creatures... i just dont get wtf this game is balanced around anymore
maybe it was just magic, maybe its the format. but i drafted last night and went 1-1-1 drop. it could just be magic, because i should have won the draw game, but my opponent played slow as all hell and my deck just happened to be super slow. and game 3 he was pretty much drawing dead.
but this post is about the loss that was had. game 1 was easy mode. i drew non lands it was good. game 2 i drew only lands after keeping a loose hand, but if i had drawn 1 spell that cost less than 4 i was good to go.....
its the game 3 that just disgusted me to no end. my opponent goes 1st, turn 2 1/1 heroic white WW dude. the non his turn, he main phase +2+2 scrys just to pump him, gave him protection from black and attacks. he pretty much did the same scrubby, horrible plays, and i lost to this. why? because there is no quality removal in this set. if i was playing blue, it would have been okay i suppose. but i was playing B/g i literally had 1 card in my deck that could kill any of his out of hand creatures, and it cost 6. he got 1 of his guys to be something stupid like an 11/11, and unblockable with lifelink. he literally didnt attack for about 4-5 turns, for some horrible reason(him being a terrible player is what really makes me feel this is stupid) so he gives me extra turns to get my 1 out, of course i dont draw it. he also wastes his protection from X color for W spell just to pump his creature. just amazes me how somebody can play so poorly and still win just because voltron crap gets there.
maybe i need value bounce and that 6 CC removal spell more for this format. which is fine, if thats the case i guess i will need to. but i will say the whip -4/-4 was very underwhelming and it certainly didnt do anything against my 3rd round opponent. this removal just seems super poor. yes we already know that, but its like REALLY poor. i see no reason not to just play guys and tricks in this format. unless you're playing blue. because paying 6 to kill a creature is the stone garbage
in formats with nice removal, rares are less of a problem. losing to rares because you dont have the answer sucks. losing to rares because there are pretty much no good answers sucks even more.
kind of why i hate planeswalkers for limited play.
I had it all planned out. The secret tech. No one was gonna be ready for it. And it was gonna smash face. All the face.
Yes friends, no one saw Tribal Minotaurs coming at all!
Mainly because I didn't end up drafting it. Despite p1p1 and p1p2 Kragma Warcaller. I saw ZERO minotaurs aside from these two. I was heartbroken. And after pack 1 had a pile of ****ty Black/Red jank.
But not all was lost. As it turned out the guy 3 seats to my left took them all, but in lieu more powerful Black staples. So I was able to reap benefits in pack 3, and pack 2 as well since I cut the colors so hard trying to force. In the end, while still bemoaning not having my Tauren army at the ready, I ended up with presumably a far more powerful deck. But didn't see it at first due to tunnel vision.
Insight
Turns out the only two minotaurs worth a damn are Warcallers. In three out of 4 matches I had both on board and followed up with Marauder. That's 14 damage minimum. Marauder is stone cold nuts and wins games as easy as Gray Merchant, even without Warcallers to back him up. Removal is still removal. It was never dead. Yes sorcery speed hurts Rage, but as in RtR the key toughness here is 4. Never discard cards to Emissary unless you feel like getting blown out. Gorgon is definitely one of the top 3 uncommons.
Merchant is probably the best common in the set. It's so can be ridiculously unfair. In one game, dude plays his THREE mainboard Demolish, setting me back considerably. I have 4 swamps and staring at a Arbor Colossus with him at enough mana to Monster it and me at 6, him at 14. After the last Demolish I Pharika's Cure two of his creatures putting me at 10 and out of loss range. Luckily I rip a land off the top and drop a Keepsake to stave off the Colossus. Turn after, drop Keepsake. Next turn, drop Merchant for 6. Next turn, drop Merchant for 8.
I will be going Mono Black for the foreseeable future until people catch on. Also, do not underestimate the Devotion Discard guy. That thing will shred your opponent's hand.
Now I did drop a match (4-1 on the night) to America Aggro, the guy I was passing to. But I attribute this loss more to a landscrew game 2, and a hilarious game three where I kept Murder King and Double Warcaller hand, only to get roadblocked by the Pro-Multicolor guy with Heliod Ordeal slammed onto it turn 3. Honestly though, any quick aggro deck would probably cause this deck considerable trouble unless my opening hand is 3x Cure.
So first draft was a blast. Already like this more than RtR Block. Of course, RtR had SO much to live up to. Didn't really get there in my opinion (off topic).
shhhhhhhh if i open up any card 1st pack for devotion, im going to play it. im pretty sure everybody is set on heroic right now.
I happen to think the removal in this set is just fine. Stop using it where you shouldn't. It's more important than ever to hold on to it in this format.
i would say its not "just fine" it comes down to who has the most threats, aka who opened better.
i can put an agent out, and either you answer it, or you lose. since theres so few good removal spells, you probably wont have very many that efficiently deal with anything. so you kill my agent somehow, then next i just voltron something up.
ill be drafting it today, and i already have some strategies i want to try. i think this format looks wide open, with maybe a little bit leaning to W/* or U/* aggro. or just aggro in general. but unfortunately i think the games are gonna be like solitaire games, and whoever just does the most stuff wins.
This is exactly why I love this format so much. Firaxis’ Sid Meier, creator of Civilization, made the following statements while being asked about his design process.
Want to make a game fun? Give players a choice. This is exactly why I love the removal in this format. You are forced to make decisions while drafting, playing and even side boarding. Does my deck need more creatures? Does my deck need more combat tricks? Is this the right type of combat trick for my deck? Could this help me in certain match-up more so than other cards in my current deck? What signals will I send by not taking this card? Will this card wheel?
dont know if you can compare civ to mtg on a intellectual standpoint.... speaking of which... i need to start playing that game again.. SO GOOD
what is the math showing that 18 mana is so much better than 17?
im curious.... i ran 18 at prerelease, but so many times i'd keep a 3 land hand and never draw a 4th land on turn 4. i went u/b in all my prereleases except 1(i played 17 land in that deck) and all the time i was just wanting land.
im wondering the rational of why 18 is so much more than 17, but nobody is mentioning 19 land.
First of all, I have a 9-6-1 Pro Tour record, from the single one I played. I've played four Grand Prix, where I have a 36-12 record. I don't travel for Magic, only playing local events, excepting the PT. My overall record is around 935-320, or somewhere close to that. Don't try to statistically compare to me, because I've done pretty darn well over the 11+ years I've been playing sanctioned Magic.
Secondly, I'm a pretty good card evaluator, which is somewhat proven through my ~82% win rate at prereleases (200+ matches). I am a constant presence here, and you can find plenty of examples of my evaluative mettle if you really want to. I know what I'm doing, and while I'm usually more interested in letting my words do the talking, I have zero issue with touting personal achievements when some fool calls my ability into question so directly. You're out of your element, Donnie.
As for the card, I still find it bad, and mediocrity is as far as I see it extending, if anywhere. You are not capable of being completely sure about anything at this stage, and your apparent inability to explain your evaluations beyond "well, look at what it does" shows that you have a strikingly naive view of your competency. I made a number of cogent points here about the card, none of which you address at all, instead resorting to paltry attempts to impugn my integrity. That's pretty character defining, not to mention indicative of your ability to engage in analytical debate.
Unless you have any interest in some intellectual discourse about Hopeful Eidolon (which I know many competent, successful players agree is pretty poor at this early stage), I'm done with this idiotic pissing match.
Posted from MTGsalvation.com App for Android
"dont try to statistically compare me"
clearly you think you are the only person who has played for 11 years beating local scrubs day to day.
i really have no reason to actually engage intellectually with you. you are a big headed individual who does well in his local area. on top of that, you seem to frequent this site QUITE A BIT(and im sure you have other magic outlets) so its clear, this game is a big chunk of your life, yet your past card evaluations and your general opinions have been off a good # of times.
First of all, you really don't want to try comparing stats with me. I posted mine in the bragging thread, if you want to check them out. And that was a month ago. I'm 27-2-3 since then, with 7 of the matches being random local modern tourneys. Don't bring personal accomplishments into a conversation like this, internet all star. It's never going to go the way you want it to.
I saw the Eidolon played about 6 times over the weekend, all but one time played for Bestow. The problem isn't that W3 is super expensive or anything. It's that the boost is menial, and the ability, while cute, isn't game-breaking unless you already have a game-breaking creature. Yeah, it feels great to slap this on a Shipbreaker Kraken, but if the Kraken was already dominating, then Bestowing it is the definition of "win more." From what I saw this weekend, Bestow is really only worthwhile if the guy it leaves behind can do something in combat or, at worst, if it gives a significant statistical or ability boost (see the Nimbus Naiad cycle; every one of those grants an ability that's universally more relevant than lifelink).
Of course, there's always Magical Christmasland, where you suit up your Wingsteed Rider on turn four and your opponent can't do anything about it, but when they can, you have yourself a completely irrelevant creature on the board in your 1/1. Being able to chump something and gain a life does not suddenly turn him into card advantage. Yeah, Observant Alseid doesn't leave behind a huge body, but a 2/2 is quite a bit larger functionally than a 1/1, and vigilance is far more combat relevant than lifelink in terms of making it an aura. Also, consider that much of the removal in the set is numerical, so that 1 extra p/t boost is hugely relevant as well, thanks to cards like Rage of Purphuros and Lash of the Whip.
The value of Bestow is that it leaves a guy behind, negating the usual card advantage loss that you risk when running auras. However, they're generally overcosted for their effects, which means you're actually paying for them to have that failsafe built in. If that extra mana investment isn't worth the contingency plan, the card becomes much worse, both in theory and from my admittedly limited sampling.
Both of us might be wrong here (and I'm fine being wrong; it's part of the evaluation game), but you've provided zero analysis at all, instead puffing out your chest hilariously after having contributed nothing to warrant it. I can't say I don't enjoy getting into these kinds of debates, but I will say I enjoy doing so with people who think they're hotter than the sun because they're the biggest guppy swimming around in their local puddle.
Edit: Just read LSV's white set review, in which he places the card pretty highly. I'll rethink it now, but I'm not sold at all. Many people in the comments section also express surprise in this rating, and I would be shocked if we weren't considering the card to be mediocre at best in a month. Again, though, I'm open to being wrong, but not just because someone says so haughtily.
honestly i dont think you have a winning PT and GP record, nor do i think you have greater than a 70% win rate.
this card isnt hard to evaluate at all.
i dont think im hotter than the sun. i just think you have no clue how to evaluate cards. btw, you do realize you're the 1 who brought up "being good' at this game, or whatever you want to call it. im guessing you think you're a shark in the ocean?
btw mediocre =/= bad. so even if the card is mediocre you are still wrong.
the people who said the ordeals are underwhelming, did you just try to play them in any deck?
honestly ordeals are crap if you arnt playing heroic. and most the time i wouldnt play 1 if i didnt have a way to prevent my guy from getting bounced or what not. or i'd play them if a big heroic trigger would happen
It's far too expensive to Bestow, and it's meaningless on the board as a 1/1. Do you consider yourself a strong card evaluator and still think that makes this card good?
4 is too expensive for bestow? what? you must think all bestow is horrible....
you dont play it for W, its pretty much bestow only.
we can kavu.ru if you really feel like it, you are insane if you think that card is bad. you seem to post quite a bit, im sure i can bring up a post where your evaluations are dead wrong.
Not saying it wasn't fun. It's perfectly good Magic. If anything, it shows great design skill in how the set is balanced.
I just think it's going to get stale quickly because there are essentially two decks (Heroes, Monsters) that come in a variety of colors but all have the same essential strategies.
For me personally, what gets me excited about a set is when the draft itself is challenging and complex. I'm not seeing that here, but I admit I could be wrong. It's just speculation.
you are thinking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too binary. i highly doubt there are gonna be decks that are strictly hero based, and strictly monster based. thats like saying in innistraad you are either going to be dredge or you are going to be werewolves.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
yep. not sure how you give black the worst removal, they already have the worst or near the worst creatures... i just dont get wtf this game is balanced around anymore
but this post is about the loss that was had. game 1 was easy mode. i drew non lands it was good. game 2 i drew only lands after keeping a loose hand, but if i had drawn 1 spell that cost less than 4 i was good to go.....
its the game 3 that just disgusted me to no end. my opponent goes 1st, turn 2 1/1 heroic white WW dude. the non his turn, he main phase +2+2 scrys just to pump him, gave him protection from black and attacks. he pretty much did the same scrubby, horrible plays, and i lost to this. why? because there is no quality removal in this set. if i was playing blue, it would have been okay i suppose. but i was playing B/g i literally had 1 card in my deck that could kill any of his out of hand creatures, and it cost 6. he got 1 of his guys to be something stupid like an 11/11, and unblockable with lifelink. he literally didnt attack for about 4-5 turns, for some horrible reason(him being a terrible player is what really makes me feel this is stupid) so he gives me extra turns to get my 1 out, of course i dont draw it. he also wastes his protection from X color for W spell just to pump his creature. just amazes me how somebody can play so poorly and still win just because voltron crap gets there.
maybe i need value bounce and that 6 CC removal spell more for this format. which is fine, if thats the case i guess i will need to. but i will say the whip -4/-4 was very underwhelming and it certainly didnt do anything against my 3rd round opponent. this removal just seems super poor. yes we already know that, but its like REALLY poor. i see no reason not to just play guys and tricks in this format. unless you're playing blue. because paying 6 to kill a creature is the stone garbage
in formats with nice removal, rares are less of a problem. losing to rares because you dont have the answer sucks. losing to rares because there are pretty much no good answers sucks even more.
kind of why i hate planeswalkers for limited play.
"i beat elspeth!!"
"how?"
"he didnt draw her!"
shhhhhhhh if i open up any card 1st pack for devotion, im going to play it. im pretty sure everybody is set on heroic right now.
i would say its not "just fine" it comes down to who has the most threats, aka who opened better.
i can put an agent out, and either you answer it, or you lose. since theres so few good removal spells, you probably wont have very many that efficiently deal with anything. so you kill my agent somehow, then next i just voltron something up.
ill be drafting it today, and i already have some strategies i want to try. i think this format looks wide open, with maybe a little bit leaning to W/* or U/* aggro. or just aggro in general. but unfortunately i think the games are gonna be like solitaire games, and whoever just does the most stuff wins.
dont know if you can compare civ to mtg on a intellectual standpoint.... speaking of which... i need to start playing that game again.. SO GOOD
im curious.... i ran 18 at prerelease, but so many times i'd keep a 3 land hand and never draw a 4th land on turn 4. i went u/b in all my prereleases except 1(i played 17 land in that deck) and all the time i was just wanting land.
im wondering the rational of why 18 is so much more than 17, but nobody is mentioning 19 land.
"dont try to statistically compare me"
clearly you think you are the only person who has played for 11 years beating local scrubs day to day.
i really have no reason to actually engage intellectually with you. you are a big headed individual who does well in his local area. on top of that, you seem to frequent this site QUITE A BIT(and im sure you have other magic outlets) so its clear, this game is a big chunk of your life, yet your past card evaluations and your general opinions have been off a good # of times.
honestly i dont think you have a winning PT and GP record, nor do i think you have greater than a 70% win rate.
this card isnt hard to evaluate at all.
i dont think im hotter than the sun. i just think you have no clue how to evaluate cards. btw, you do realize you're the 1 who brought up "being good' at this game, or whatever you want to call it. im guessing you think you're a shark in the ocean?
btw mediocre =/= bad. so even if the card is mediocre you are still wrong.
honestly ordeals are crap if you arnt playing heroic. and most the time i wouldnt play 1 if i didnt have a way to prevent my guy from getting bounced or what not. or i'd play them if a big heroic trigger would happen
4 is too expensive for bestow? what? you must think all bestow is horrible....
you dont play it for W, its pretty much bestow only.
we can kavu.ru if you really feel like it, you are insane if you think that card is bad. you seem to post quite a bit, im sure i can bring up a post where your evaluations are dead wrong.
do you people even play this game?
you are thinking waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay too binary. i highly doubt there are gonna be decks that are strictly hero based, and strictly monster based. thats like saying in innistraad you are either going to be dredge or you are going to be werewolves.