with MTg now doing sequels to previously visited planes, I was wondering if it were possible to introduce a new limited format, where basically all of the cards from a particular plane are legal, and only those cards.
for example, You could have Mirrodin Block and Scars Block be one big limited format, or both Ravnica blocks.
I think it would add some cool new interactions to deckbuilding, and get some more mileage out of the older expansions.
One major benefit of Limited is accessibility. MD5 packs are not at all accessible, RGD packs even less so.
It'd probably be really fun to do 6-pack sealed with MD5NBS, but I doubt it'd ever be a format supported on MTGO or anything. Both Rav blocks would probably be less great, since their common mechanics for mana fixing (bouncelands and Gates) don't synergize very well together, but it'd probably still be cool to try.
Wit's End is the PERFECT answer to your opponent's Monomania however.
Just hold on to your Wit's End when they Monomania, so you can Wit's End them on your next turn!!!
I think this is fairly reminiscent of the "Jace Battles" we have seen in past standards.. My guess is we will soon witness the great Monomania-Wit's End battles.
One major benefit of Limited is accessibility. MD5 packs are not at all accessible, RGD packs even less so.
It'd probably be really fun to do 6-pack sealed with MD5NBS, but I doubt it'd ever be a format supported on MTGO or anything. Both Rav blocks would probably be less great, since their common mechanics for mana fixing (bouncelands and Gates) don't synergize very well together, but it'd probably still be cool to try.
You're more worried about bouncelands and gates playing nicely than only having three packs of infect?
Also, one pack of sunburst? That would be rough.
Currently, I can't think of any limited blocks that I would want to do sealed with in this way. I'd probably play an ACRZWE sealed... but that's not quite the same.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll be sad if people don't start calling The Chain Veil "Fleetwood Mac."
i'd be fine with RGDRGS block limited, in fact i've mentioned it quite a few times to my clan. Even if the fixing of karoos and gates dont synergize well it'd be an awesome limited format. everyone plays with 12 packs, building the best 60 card deck possible. and play
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Ravarshi Kashaku, Ancient Dragon of the Darkened Realms;
The Merciless Lord of Torture, Permanently Bound To: ">[THE PACK] 11/5/63 - 11/25/09 Goodbye mom, i'll always love you...
You're more worried about bouncelands and gates playing nicely than only having three packs of infect?
Also, one pack of sunburst? That would be rough.
Well, yeah, each Mirrodin block has mechanics that work poorly without a critical mass of cards with the mechanic, but none of those mechanics fundamentally define the game. Too few infect guys? Don't play them. Rav, on the other hand, doesn't leave you with that luxury of just not playing with bad synergy. If your mana fixing leaves you with the risk of having to return a tapland to your hand, you just have to bite the bullet and accept that your mana might be damaging your development for 3 consecutive turns, because you need the fixing.
I'd much rather have cards in my sideboard that are bad in the environment than have to play cards in my deck that are bad in the environment, but still necessary.
Wit's End is the PERFECT answer to your opponent's Monomania however.
Just hold on to your Wit's End when they Monomania, so you can Wit's End them on your next turn!!!
I think this is fairly reminiscent of the "Jace Battles" we have seen in past standards.. My guess is we will soon witness the great Monomania-Wit's End battles.
I dunno. Lowering werewolf density that far would destroy it as an archetype, while graveyard based strategies wouldn't lose much. And AVR+Judgment would make green super strong. It could be fun, but it would almost definitely be very unbalanced.
Wit's End is the PERFECT answer to your opponent's Monomania however.
Just hold on to your Wit's End when they Monomania, so you can Wit's End them on your next turn!!!
I think this is fairly reminiscent of the "Jace Battles" we have seen in past standards.. My guess is we will soon witness the great Monomania-Wit's End battles.
Often with these formats they're fun to play exactly once, because the game is really to see who can find the cards that break the most when outside their intended environment. (eg. Drooling Ogre in a non-artifact-heavy game.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
I dunno. Lowering werewolf density that far would destroy it as an archetype, while graveyard based strategies wouldn't lose much. And AVR+Judgment would make green super strong. It could be fun, but it would almost definitely be very unbalanced.
Yeah, a lot of these formats just become "cherry pick the bombs and guys that can attack well."
Although I've never done exactly this, I've done somewhat similar formats, and that's what happened.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll be sad if people don't start calling The Chain Veil "Fleetwood Mac."
I'm sure it would be challenging, but I would be VERY impressed if they designed two blocks that are designed to work independently -- ABC Draft & DEF Draft -- but also together -- ABCDEF Sealed.
The problem of course is supply. For the most part only the latest set sells, so stores don't want to stock much ABC after D comes out. And Wizards doesn't want to keep having to supply 6 sets concurrently. It would be cool online though.
I dunno. Lowering werewolf density that far would destroy it as an archetype, while graveyard based strategies wouldn't lose much. And AVR+Judgment would make green super strong. It could be fun, but it would almost definitely be very unbalanced.
I honestly think you're putting way too much emphasis on this "anti-synergy." Yes, it exists, but only in very small amounts (Its unlikely that sinker will have guild gates, for instance).
Even if you had, say, three gates and three karoos, (and you don't even need to play all the gates), its even still unlikely that you'd be "forced" to bounce your gate. And saying that you'd lose "three turns" of mana efficiency implies that you're playing a gate turn one, bouncing it turn two, then playing it again on turn three. Counting the first turn isn't very fair, its pretty rare for a draft deck to want to play one drops.
Now, RGS might end up being much faster than RGD, but losing tempo in the first three turns wasn't all that scary, people generally durdled for at least a short while.
You're right that the issue isn't likely to come up a whole lot, but it is likely to come up sometimes. And games where you lose because of drawbacks on your good cards stacking on top of each other are frustrating, unfun games. Such games would exist in that format, and they would be remembered as frustrating and unfun. Since we're talking about whether it would be fun to play limmited with a format where this interaction is certainly going to come up eventually (and ruin games when it does), I think it's a relevant argument.
But I don't really care enough to continue it, since it isn't a format I'll ever play anyway. Paper RGD packs are expensive.
Wit's End is the PERFECT answer to your opponent's Monomania however.
Just hold on to your Wit's End when they Monomania, so you can Wit's End them on your next turn!!!
I think this is fairly reminiscent of the "Jace Battles" we have seen in past standards.. My guess is we will soon witness the great Monomania-Wit's End battles.
It sounds fun but it's not. Trying to match up sets across time is tough. We did a MD5SMN draft last year and it was overall unpleasant. It was only 6 people but I don't think a greater pool of participants would have helped. One guy ended up with the red metalcraft deck, fairly sick actually, and didn't drop a game. Doing a sealed version might be different, but probably would just result in even screwier, less synergistic decks. We also wacky drafted a lot before local supplies of packs either dried up or inflated in price greatly. As stated, the mechanics in different blocks, even the revisited ones, are often either completely unrelated or actually conflicting with each other. Rtr might be different, but original RGD packs are beyond the price most people want to pay for a casual event.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I was just wondering...
with MTg now doing sequels to previously visited planes, I was wondering if it were possible to introduce a new limited format, where basically all of the cards from a particular plane are legal, and only those cards.
for example, You could have Mirrodin Block and Scars Block be one big limited format, or both Ravnica blocks.
I think it would add some cool new interactions to deckbuilding, and get some more mileage out of the older expansions.
Would this be a good idea?
Click the pic for more info.
It'd probably be really fun to do 6-pack sealed with MD5NBS, but I doubt it'd ever be a format supported on MTGO or anything. Both Rav blocks would probably be less great, since their common mechanics for mana fixing (bouncelands and Gates) don't synergize very well together, but it'd probably still be cool to try.
You're more worried about bouncelands and gates playing nicely than only having three packs of infect?
Also, one pack of sunburst? That would be rough.
Currently, I can't think of any limited blocks that I would want to do sealed with in this way. I'd probably play an ACRZWE sealed... but that's not quite the same.
The Merciless Lord of Torture, Permanently Bound To: ">[THE PACK] 11/5/63 - 11/25/09 Goodbye mom, i'll always love you...
Tibalt & His Devils vs. Avacyn's Inquisitors
My EDH decklists
Practice for Khans of Tarkir Limited:
Draft: (#1) (#2) (#3) (#4) (#5)
Well, yeah, each Mirrodin block has mechanics that work poorly without a critical mass of cards with the mechanic, but none of those mechanics fundamentally define the game. Too few infect guys? Don't play them. Rav, on the other hand, doesn't leave you with that luxury of just not playing with bad synergy. If your mana fixing leaves you with the risk of having to return a tapland to your hand, you just have to bite the bullet and accept that your mana might be damaging your development for 3 consecutive turns, because you need the fixing.
I'd much rather have cards in my sideboard that are bad in the environment than have to play cards in my deck that are bad in the environment, but still necessary.
Interested in Custom Card Creation.
My Cube:Cardinal Custom Cube
A custom version of a third modern masters: MM2019
(filter->rarity to see in set rarity).
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Yeah, a lot of these formats just become "cherry pick the bombs and guys that can attack well."
Although I've never done exactly this, I've done somewhat similar formats, and that's what happened.
The problem of course is supply. For the most part only the latest set sells, so stores don't want to stock much ABC after D comes out. And Wizards doesn't want to keep having to supply 6 sets concurrently. It would be cool online though.
I honestly think you're putting way too much emphasis on this "anti-synergy." Yes, it exists, but only in very small amounts (Its unlikely that sinker will have guild gates, for instance).
Even if you had, say, three gates and three karoos, (and you don't even need to play all the gates), its even still unlikely that you'd be "forced" to bounce your gate. And saying that you'd lose "three turns" of mana efficiency implies that you're playing a gate turn one, bouncing it turn two, then playing it again on turn three. Counting the first turn isn't very fair, its pretty rare for a draft deck to want to play one drops.
Now, RGS might end up being much faster than RGD, but losing tempo in the first three turns wasn't all that scary, people generally durdled for at least a short while.
You're right that the issue isn't likely to come up a whole lot, but it is likely to come up sometimes. And games where you lose because of drawbacks on your good cards stacking on top of each other are frustrating, unfun games. Such games would exist in that format, and they would be remembered as frustrating and unfun. Since we're talking about whether it would be fun to play limmited with a format where this interaction is certainly going to come up eventually (and ruin games when it does), I think it's a relevant argument.
But I don't really care enough to continue it, since it isn't a format I'll ever play anyway. Paper RGD packs are expensive.