and *sarcastic voice* omg I’m so surprised IM So Shocked! *sarcastic voice*
They don't want/refuse to put DFC's and checklist cards in precon decks
Otherwise known as "we don't want to put in the work for this when we can put out 14 Secret Lairs in two months."
More like 'it just costs more to produce a precon with DFCs than one without so we just did other precons that didn't need DFCs because we like money'.
Like, when they talk about logistical difficulties and such, this is 100% what they mean. They are a business, they make maximal return for minimal investment. They for sure will cut printing costs unless they get great returns. For a whole set, that's true, for one precon deck? Not so much.
More like 'it just costs more to produce a precon with DFCs than one without so we just did other precons that didn't need DFCs because we like money'.
Like, when they talk about logistical difficulties and such, this is 100% what they mean. They are a business, they make maximal return for minimal investment. They for sure will cut printing costs unless they get great returns. For a whole set, that's true, for one precon deck? Not so much.
I'm fully aware a company does stuff to make money, but at the same time I'm not interested in hearing a company making more money than ever going "We won't make enough." Cry me a river million dollar company. While they're at it they might as well go "yard work is so hard in these diamond shoes." This was absolutely not wanting to put the work in, doesn't matter if it was laziness or the perceived "we're poor and won't make money" it was absolutely them not wanting to do the work.
They absolutely know people will buy a werewolf deck and definitely enough to make money back and if they don't I'm sure they can afford to take a small hit after years of continuous increased profits.
More like 'it just costs more to produce a precon with DFCs than one without so we just did other precons that didn't need DFCs because we like money'.
Like, when they talk about logistical difficulties and such, this is 100% what they mean. They are a business, they make maximal return for minimal investment. They for sure will cut printing costs unless they get great returns. For a whole set, that's true, for one precon deck? Not so much.
I'm fully aware a company does stuff to make money, but at the same time I'm not interested in hearing a company making more money than ever going "We won't make enough." Cry me a river million dollar company. While they're at it they might as well go "yard work is so hard in these diamond shoes." This was absolutely not wanting to put the work in, doesn't matter if it was laziness or the perceived "we're poor and won't make money" it was absolutely them not wanting to do the work.
They absolutely know people will buy a werewolf deck and definitely enough to make money back and if they don't I'm sure they can afford to take a small hit after years of continuous increased profits.
I mean, there's definitely other difficulties to it as well. DFCs need special sheets and that needs to be decided in advance but then if you make last minute changes that affect the number of DFCs you will need to change the size of the sheets. A commander deck would also need a lot of unique DFCs which would make using checklist cards quite cumbersome.
But also, welcome to capitalism my dude.
Haven't they been putting dual faced tokens in every commander set for like 5 years now? Is a DFC that more difficult than a token?
When it comes to drafting? Yes.
The question was asked in the context of commander decks, not drafting. (And also, DFCs have been done in drafts and apparently are being included in this draft set.)
Haven't they been putting dual faced tokens in every commander set for like 5 years now? Is a DFC that more difficult than a token?
Yes. Tokens and ad cards are printed differently from normal magic cards, they don't have magic backs for one, so making tokens double faced is logistically easier than making normal cards double faced. Normal cards are printed together on sheets but double-faced cards need their own sheet because they don't have a magic card back like all the rest.
Ok so... make the double-faced sheet. Look I'm not saying a commander deck with DFCs would be simple, but it is clearly possible. And sure tokens don't have magic backs and normal magic cards do, but the whole point of a DFC is that it doesn't have a normal magic back - while still being a magic card.
Look, I get it isn't easy, but not having a werewolf tribal commander deck in the werewolf-themed set, on the third trip to the werewolf plane is just a huge miss, no question. But wotc will probably make up for it by finally printing a true red/green werewolf tribal legend for commander folks to use to lead their werewolf tribal commander decks. Not even a deck I want to build, but it's obvious there is demand for it.
Haven't they been putting dual faced tokens in every commander set for like 5 years now? Is a DFC that more difficult than a token?
Yes. Tokens and ad cards are printed differently from normal magic cards, they don't have magic backs for one, so making tokens double faced is logistically easier than making normal cards double faced. Normal cards are printed together on sheets but double-faced cards need their own sheet because they don't have a magic card back like all the rest.
Ok so... make the double-faced sheet. Look I'm not saying a commander deck with DFCs would be simple, but it is clearly possible. And sure tokens don't have magic backs and normal magic cards do, but the whole point of a DFC is that it doesn't have a normal magic back - while still being a magic card.
Look, I get it isn't easy, but not having a werewolf tribal commander deck in the werewolf-themed set, on the third trip to the werewolf plane is just a huge miss, no question. But wotc will probably make up for it by finally printing a true red/green werewolf tribal legend for commander folks to use to lead their werewolf tribal commander decks. Not even a deck I want to build, but it's obvious there is demand for it.
Logistics have screwed with them before. Battlebond was barely advertised because only one printer could pull off putting matching partners in one pack. They were lucky that there was near-zero demand at first. There's also the entire issue of most of these target audience of this precon not playing with sleeves. Either you flood the box with checklist tokens (that for once will match the werewolves), or you don't bother and let the players playing against the Werewolf precon have a free look at what the top of their deck is.
Logistics have screwed with them before. Battlebond was barely advertised because only one printer could pull off putting matching partners in one pack. They were lucky that there was near-zero demand at first. There's also the entire issue of most of these target audience of this precon not playing with sleeves. Either you flood the box with checklist tokens (that for once will match the werewolves), or you don't bother and let the players playing against the Werewolf precon have a free look at what the top of their deck is.
They could put actual sleeves in the precons ... i would enjoy that.
They could put actual sleeves in the precons ... i would enjoy that.
They did that for the Modern Event Deck and the sleeves sucked. The first time I shuffled several of the sleeve backs peeled. It's a good idea, but they have to pick better sleeves in the future.
Pokemon have sleeves in all their Trainer boxes. And its cheaper than MTG. Doesnt seem that hard to do on WoTC part. But ya know money, I mean we don't even get a Player's Guide anymore. And now they are going to 8 set boosters instead of 10 draft boosters in the Bundles.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Resigned up after getting lost in the Twitch/MTGS whatever crossover
Been on this forum for 10++ years
Playing since '94
Pokemon have sleeves in all their Trainer boxes. And its cheaper than MTG. Doesnt seem that hard to do on WoTC part. But ya know money, I mean we don't even get a Player's Guide anymore. And now they are going to 8 set boosters instead of 10 draft boosters in the Bundles.
Isnt the Pokemon TCG property of Wizards of the Coast anyway?
Pokemon have sleeves in all their Trainer boxes. And its cheaper than MTG. Doesnt seem that hard to do on WoTC part. But ya know money, I mean we don't even get a Player's Guide anymore. And now they are going to 8 set boosters instead of 10 draft boosters in the Bundles.
Isnt the Pokemon TCG property of Wizards of the Coast anyway?
Not since 2003. It's currently owned by The Pokémon Company.
I have bought a bundle/fat pack (sometimes multiples) for every set dating back to when they were briefly 9 packs per bundle. Unless there is a corresponding 20% drop in price (or they resume including the visual card guide) the AFR bundle I purchased recently will be the last one I buy. I hope others will follow suit.
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
I have bought a bundle/fat pack (sometimes multiples) for every set dating back to when they were briefly 9 packs per bundle. Unless there is a corresponding 20% drop in price (or they resume including the visual card guide) the AFR bundle I purchased recently will be the last one I buy. I hope others will follow suit.
Bundles are poor value for packs anyway, but it's worth noting I think that EV on total rares/mythics opened does not decrease going from 10 draft boosters to 8 set boosters. You lose a few uncommons (between 6 and 10, chart on Wiki doesn't indicate frequency in one slot) and quite a few commons (40-50) in exchange for 8 art cards, 2 List cards and 6 foil cards. Your variance on foils decreases, but variance on number of rares/mythics and uncommons increases.
If you buy bundles in part to fill out your commons and uncommons, or if you are particularly risk averse, this is worse. If you only care about rares and mythics and are not particularly risk averse, it's better.
Edit: I was way off on my initial estimate of how many commons you lose. You'll get 40-50 less, not 60-70.
Beginning with Innistrad: Midnight Hunt, Bundles now include eight Set Boosters!
Also, the boxes say that they include 8 set boosters.
I was unaware of this, if the price remains the same at $40 that's still not a terrible deal. While the set boosters can offer more, and usually tend to compared to draft boosters losing a couple total still seems wrong.
I am not a fan of how the bundle promo was described. "traditional foil promotional version of Triskaidekaphile" That is a crap ton of prefixes to describe "promo."
I have bought a bundle/fat pack (sometimes multiples) for every set dating back to when they were briefly 9 packs per bundle. Unless there is a corresponding 20% drop in price (or they resume including the visual card guide) the AFR bundle I purchased recently will be the last one I buy. I hope others will follow suit.
I always get a bundle, even if I don't intend to buy a lot of boosters, like with MH2 or D&D, and because I like to collect dice. With this one having a glow in the dark die I might just buy two, because I'm a 90s kid that had a ton of glow in the dark crap. Heck, I may just buy as many as I can (bundle dice) and throw them in an empty lamp post for no reason.
I can understand the negative reaction to reducing the packs inside, and it does feel a bit wrong, but set boosters do tend to bring with them more value. Of course only if they stay at $40.
New 2025 Bundle Packs!!! Now with 2 Collector Boosters!!! "MSRP" $49.99
Nothing like having a huge storage box that can hold 500+ cards to fill up with 30 cards and 60 basic lands. It (or something similar) is coming.
Less is LESS.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
New 2025 Bundle Packs!!! Now with 2 Collector Boosters!!! "MSRP" $49.99
Nothing like having a huge storage box that can hold 500+ cards to fill up with 30 cards and 60 basic lands. It (or something similar) is coming.
Less is LESS.
I could put 15 Tiamats in an old shoebox and sell it for $35 more easily than a bundle. The value of Magic cards bears almost no relation to the quantity of cardboard involved. Would you buy a bundle with 200 basics because "more is more"? How about if they put 5 theme boosters in it? Wizards does not sell cardboard, they sell black, silver, gold and orange expansion symbols and we long ago agreed to accept that.
New 2025 Bundle Packs!!! Now with 2 Collector Boosters!!! "MSRP" $49.99
Nothing like having a huge storage box that can hold 500+ cards to fill up with 30 cards and 60 basic lands. It (or something similar) is coming.
Less is LESS.
Then I guess they could sell 500 commons and you'd accept that. More is more, right? See, I can use silly arguments that go to worst case scenarios too!
You forget that often set boosters give more value than draft. I can agree a two collector booster bundle would be terrible, cause collector's boosters are terrible, but you're taking this into a hyperbolic, almost silly, place. I tend to agree with you, but you're tryin' way too hard here and getting a little too upset.
New 2025 Bundle Packs!!! Now with 2 Collector Boosters!!! "MSRP" $49.99
Nothing like having a huge storage box that can hold 500+ cards to fill up with 30 cards and 60 basic lands. It (or something similar) is coming.
Less is LESS.
Then I guess they could sell 500 commons and you'd accept that. More is more, right? See, I can use silly arguments that go to worst case scenarios too!
You forget that often set boosters give more value than draft. I can agree a two collector booster bundle would be terrible, cause collector's boosters are terrible, but you're taking this into a hyperbolic, almost silly, place. I tend to agree with you, but you're tryin' way too hard here and getting a little too upset.
While I will agree that the poster might be trying to be silly that doesn't mean we shouldn't be criticizing the choices WOTC make when those choices take advantage of us. Yes Set boosters might be better in some degrees but the people who benefit the most from it is WOTC, they are printing less and selling for a higher price, a Jace the mind sculptor costs the same as Forest to print. And while the set booster can potentially have more value in it, it equally can have less than the value of a draft booster. It's just a new loot box with higher win/lose stakes at a higher price.
WOTC is a business and they want to maximize profit with as little effort as possible. We the consumers need to remember that our goal is to make the most of our free income by seeking the best deals. So when they try to shave off a corner at our expense we should criticize them, otherwise they will just keep picking away at us little by little.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Never forget whose grace and favor led to your success and always give your thanks, otherwise you might be doomed to loose it.
Bundle can be good value, if it has something that the other product does not have.
A complete pack of lands can be pimped up, Full-Art lands, bunch of foil lands, special Ravnica-Guild-Themed lands, all of that adds value to a Bundle that is far better than messing with the booster packs (which ironically basically always had more value in their content than the same number of packs from a box).
A complete list of cards to use like a check-list is great, printed like a visual spoiler, cheap to produce, nice value for people to cinder their collector spark.
The boxes are large enough that you can put basically a full set of cards in them (1-of each) to store them, with a theme-packaging thats nice.
The number of packs should make sense for something its used for.
12 packs would be fine so 2 people can use 6 to make a Sealed deck play against each other, 12 would also be good to have 4 player draft 3 packs each.
Any other number gets weird and useless (yea it can "force" you to buy a bunch extra booster packs to do the activities above, but thats just asking for extra money, good for the company to make some quick bucks, bad for the customer as its annoying extra purchases, when a single product can provide a better deal on its own).
----
People that always bought a Bundle of basically all sets got their moneys value at some point, changing the product too much messes with peoples expectation what they buy from a bundle, and thats a harm in itself.
Bundle can be good value, if it has something that the other product does not have.
A complete pack of lands can be pimped up, Full-Art lands, bunch of foil lands, special Ravnica-Guild-Themed lands, all of that adds value to a Bundle that is far better than messing with the booster packs (which ironically basically always had more value in their content than the same number of packs from a box).
A complete list of cards to use like a check-list is great, printed like a visual spoiler, cheap to produce, nice value for people to cinder their collector spark.
The boxes are large enough that you can put basically a full set of cards in them (1-of each) to store them, with a theme-packaging thats nice.
The number of packs should make sense for something its used for.
12 packs would be fine so 2 people can use 6 to make a Sealed deck play against each other, 12 would also be good to have 4 player draft 3 packs each.
Any other number gets weird and useless (yea it can "force" you to buy a bunch extra booster packs to do the activities above, but thats just asking for extra money, good for the company to make some quick bucks, bad for the customer as its annoying extra purchases, when a single product can provide a better deal on its own).
----
People that always bought a Bundle of basically all sets got their moneys value at some point, changing the product too much messes with peoples expectation what they buy from a bundle, and thats a harm in itself.
While I will agree that the poster might be trying to be silly that doesn't mean we shouldn't be criticizing the choices WOTC make when those choices take advantage of us. Yes Set boosters might be better in some degrees but the people who benefit the most from it is WOTC, they are printing less and selling for a higher price, a Jace the mind sculptor costs the same as Forest to print. And while the set booster can potentially have more value in it, it equally can have less than the value of a draft booster. It's just a new loot box with higher win/lose stakes at a higher price.
WOTC is a business and they want to maximize profit with as little effort as possible. We the consumers need to remember that our goal is to make the most of our free income by seeking the best deals. So when they try to shave off a corner at our expense we should criticize them, otherwise they will just keep picking away at us little by little.
Good to see some common sense replies that are realistic. I usually don't see the nonsense posted as certain members are on my ignore list setting unless they in turn get quoted.
@ManaGoat: Agreed on WotC reducing their costs at the expense of the consumer. Giving a "chance" at a potential better bundle is not an even trade off in my book or a lot of consumers of this product.
@OneandOnly: Agreed. They are devaluing the product in my eyes. Good for them but bad for me. Give me something I can't get somewhere else for a decent deal. I can already buy 8 set boosters separately. Where is the visual guide? Where are the full art lands? Where is the novella? Where is the exclusive(valuable) foil promo? Where are the other 50 plus cards? 96 versus 150??? Just for a "chance" to get more rares? How about a 8 set booster bundle that contains 1 complete set of all the commons and tokens??? Oh they couldn't trim costs and buy the CEO another mega-yacht this year right? The same is the same. More is more and less is less, plain and simple. This product will be LESS.
Playing since 1994: Currently MAGS (HomeBrew),Standard & Pauper (Pioneer and Modern are degenerate trash formats)
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Going to try to respond to the multiple topics going on here:
Set boosters are better if you just want to crack packs and aren't interested in drafting, so I'm down with that change. It's also cool that they give you a foil promo card in the bundles now. Value seems pretty similar to me overall. Still, sucks that they got rid of the booklets--I haven't bought a bundle in a minute and didn't know that. That was pretty much the reason I bought those guys.
Step back a second and think about the issues they mention re: the werewolf deck. At first, I thought it was weird that there wasn't a werewolf deck, but all the reasons they put forward make perfect sense to me. I think sometimes people like to act like WotC is screwing them ALL the time, when in reality it's just some of the time, lol. If your idea of corporate greed is that the business didn't overhaul its packaging, include additional product (sleeves), etc., just so they could print the specific deck you want, I mean, sorry?
AFR is a lot better than everyone seems to think. Throne and Ikoria were just egregiously pushed sets so almost anything looks *****e in comparison. We are seeing Standard be a little powered down, but that's a good thing overall. If you play Standard 2022 on MTGA at all you know that tons of cards from AFR are seeing play when they're not competing with companions and adventures. In any case, none of the cards in Midnight Hunt look particularly busted. Also, for all we know some of these previews are the most powerful cards in the set, and the rest could look just as powered down as AFR. Lot of jumping to conclusions going on.
WotC was on my bad list because of curly foils and BS like Oko and Uro. It's tentatively looking like they may have fixed one or both of these problems. The rest of the things people complain about really don't bother me. Here's to another 30 years of MtG being awesome.
This thread is about the discussion of Wrenn and Seven and the other previewed cards. This is NOT a thread to discuss logistics, pricing models, corporate greed, or anything else having to do with the game. If the discussions continues to run off the road, I'll put a nail in this thread. Take the other discussions to the appropriate forums, please and thank you.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Otherwise known as "we don't want to put in the work for this when we can put out 14 Secret Lairs in two months."
More like 'it just costs more to produce a precon with DFCs than one without so we just did other precons that didn't need DFCs because we like money'.
Like, when they talk about logistical difficulties and such, this is 100% what they mean. They are a business, they make maximal return for minimal investment. They for sure will cut printing costs unless they get great returns. For a whole set, that's true, for one precon deck? Not so much.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
I'm fully aware a company does stuff to make money, but at the same time I'm not interested in hearing a company making more money than ever going "We won't make enough." Cry me a river million dollar company. While they're at it they might as well go "yard work is so hard in these diamond shoes." This was absolutely not wanting to put the work in, doesn't matter if it was laziness or the perceived "we're poor and won't make money" it was absolutely them not wanting to do the work.
They absolutely know people will buy a werewolf deck and definitely enough to make money back and if they don't I'm sure they can afford to take a small hit after years of continuous increased profits.
I mean, there's definitely other difficulties to it as well. DFCs need special sheets and that needs to be decided in advance but then if you make last minute changes that affect the number of DFCs you will need to change the size of the sheets. A commander deck would also need a lot of unique DFCs which would make using checklist cards quite cumbersome.
But also, welcome to capitalism my dude.
RUNIN: Norse mythology set (awaiting further playtesting)
FATE of ALARA: Multicolour factions (currently on hiatus)
Contibutor to the Pyrulea community set
I'm here to tell you that all your set mechanics are bad
#Defundthepolice
The question was asked in the context of commander decks, not drafting. (And also, DFCs have been done in drafts and apparently are being included in this draft set.)
Ok so... make the double-faced sheet. Look I'm not saying a commander deck with DFCs would be simple, but it is clearly possible. And sure tokens don't have magic backs and normal magic cards do, but the whole point of a DFC is that it doesn't have a normal magic back - while still being a magic card.
Look, I get it isn't easy, but not having a werewolf tribal commander deck in the werewolf-themed set, on the third trip to the werewolf plane is just a huge miss, no question. But wotc will probably make up for it by finally printing a true red/green werewolf tribal legend for commander folks to use to lead their werewolf tribal commander decks. Not even a deck I want to build, but it's obvious there is demand for it.
They could put actual sleeves in the precons ... i would enjoy that.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
They did that for the Modern Event Deck and the sleeves sucked. The first time I shuffled several of the sleeve backs peeled. It's a good idea, but they have to pick better sleeves in the future.
Been on this forum for 10++ years
Playing since '94
Isnt the Pokemon TCG property of Wizards of the Coast anyway?
When was this announced? I must have completely missed that.
https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/first-look-innistrad-midnight-hunt-and-innistrad-crimson-vow-2021-08-05
Also, the boxes say that they include 8 set boosters.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Bundles are poor value for packs anyway, but it's worth noting I think that EV on total rares/mythics opened does not decrease going from 10 draft boosters to 8 set boosters. You lose a few uncommons (between 6 and 10, chart on Wiki doesn't indicate frequency in one slot) and quite a few commons (40-50) in exchange for 8 art cards, 2 List cards and 6 foil cards. Your variance on foils decreases, but variance on number of rares/mythics and uncommons increases.
If you buy bundles in part to fill out your commons and uncommons, or if you are particularly risk averse, this is worse. If you only care about rares and mythics and are not particularly risk averse, it's better.
Edit: I was way off on my initial estimate of how many commons you lose. You'll get 40-50 less, not 60-70.
I was unaware of this, if the price remains the same at $40 that's still not a terrible deal. While the set boosters can offer more, and usually tend to compared to draft boosters losing a couple total still seems wrong.
I am not a fan of how the bundle promo was described. "traditional foil promotional version of Triskaidekaphile" That is a crap ton of prefixes to describe "promo."
I always get a bundle, even if I don't intend to buy a lot of boosters, like with MH2 or D&D, and because I like to collect dice. With this one having a glow in the dark die I might just buy two, because I'm a 90s kid that had a ton of glow in the dark crap. Heck, I may just buy as many as I can (bundle dice) and throw them in an empty lamp post for no reason.
I can understand the negative reaction to reducing the packs inside, and it does feel a bit wrong, but set boosters do tend to bring with them more value. Of course only if they stay at $40.
Nothing like having a huge storage box that can hold 500+ cards to fill up with 30 cards and 60 basic lands. It (or something similar) is coming.
Less is LESS.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
I could put 15 Tiamats in an old shoebox and sell it for $35 more easily than a bundle. The value of Magic cards bears almost no relation to the quantity of cardboard involved. Would you buy a bundle with 200 basics because "more is more"? How about if they put 5 theme boosters in it? Wizards does not sell cardboard, they sell black, silver, gold and orange expansion symbols and we long ago agreed to accept that.
Then I guess they could sell 500 commons and you'd accept that. More is more, right? See, I can use silly arguments that go to worst case scenarios too!
You forget that often set boosters give more value than draft. I can agree a two collector booster bundle would be terrible, cause collector's boosters are terrible, but you're taking this into a hyperbolic, almost silly, place. I tend to agree with you, but you're tryin' way too hard here and getting a little too upset.
While I will agree that the poster might be trying to be silly that doesn't mean we shouldn't be criticizing the choices WOTC make when those choices take advantage of us. Yes Set boosters might be better in some degrees but the people who benefit the most from it is WOTC, they are printing less and selling for a higher price, a Jace the mind sculptor costs the same as Forest to print. And while the set booster can potentially have more value in it, it equally can have less than the value of a draft booster. It's just a new loot box with higher win/lose stakes at a higher price.
WOTC is a business and they want to maximize profit with as little effort as possible. We the consumers need to remember that our goal is to make the most of our free income by seeking the best deals. So when they try to shave off a corner at our expense we should criticize them, otherwise they will just keep picking away at us little by little.
A complete pack of lands can be pimped up, Full-Art lands, bunch of foil lands, special Ravnica-Guild-Themed lands, all of that adds value to a Bundle that is far better than messing with the booster packs (which ironically basically always had more value in their content than the same number of packs from a box).
A complete list of cards to use like a check-list is great, printed like a visual spoiler, cheap to produce, nice value for people to cinder their collector spark.
The boxes are large enough that you can put basically a full set of cards in them (1-of each) to store them, with a theme-packaging thats nice.
The number of packs should make sense for something its used for.
12 packs would be fine so 2 people can use 6 to make a Sealed deck play against each other, 12 would also be good to have 4 player draft 3 packs each.
Any other number gets weird and useless (yea it can "force" you to buy a bunch extra booster packs to do the activities above, but thats just asking for extra money, good for the company to make some quick bucks, bad for the customer as its annoying extra purchases, when a single product can provide a better deal on its own).
----
People that always bought a Bundle of basically all sets got their moneys value at some point, changing the product too much messes with peoples expectation what they buy from a bundle, and thats a harm in itself.
WUBRG#BlackLotusMatterWUBRG
👮👮👮 #BlueLivesMatter 👮👮👮
Good to see some common sense replies that are realistic. I usually don't see the nonsense posted as certain members are on my ignore list setting unless they in turn get quoted.
@ManaGoat: Agreed on WotC reducing their costs at the expense of the consumer. Giving a "chance" at a potential better bundle is not an even trade off in my book or a lot of consumers of this product.
@OneandOnly: Agreed. They are devaluing the product in my eyes. Good for them but bad for me. Give me something I can't get somewhere else for a decent deal. I can already buy 8 set boosters separately. Where is the visual guide? Where are the full art lands? Where is the novella? Where is the exclusive(valuable) foil promo? Where are the other 50 plus cards? 96 versus 150??? Just for a "chance" to get more rares? How about a 8 set booster bundle that contains 1 complete set of all the commons and tokens??? Oh they couldn't trim costs and buy the CEO another mega-yacht this year right? The same is the same. More is more and less is less, plain and simple. This product will be LESS.
STOP using "dude/bro" as a pejorative or insult. Grow up.
Margaret Thatcher: “The problem with socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money.”
Benjamin Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
Martin Luther King Jr.: "I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character."
Set boosters are better if you just want to crack packs and aren't interested in drafting, so I'm down with that change. It's also cool that they give you a foil promo card in the bundles now. Value seems pretty similar to me overall. Still, sucks that they got rid of the booklets--I haven't bought a bundle in a minute and didn't know that. That was pretty much the reason I bought those guys.
Step back a second and think about the issues they mention re: the werewolf deck. At first, I thought it was weird that there wasn't a werewolf deck, but all the reasons they put forward make perfect sense to me. I think sometimes people like to act like WotC is screwing them ALL the time, when in reality it's just some of the time, lol. If your idea of corporate greed is that the business didn't overhaul its packaging, include additional product (sleeves), etc., just so they could print the specific deck you want, I mean, sorry?
AFR is a lot better than everyone seems to think. Throne and Ikoria were just egregiously pushed sets so almost anything looks *****e in comparison. We are seeing Standard be a little powered down, but that's a good thing overall. If you play Standard 2022 on MTGA at all you know that tons of cards from AFR are seeing play when they're not competing with companions and adventures. In any case, none of the cards in Midnight Hunt look particularly busted. Also, for all we know some of these previews are the most powerful cards in the set, and the rest could look just as powered down as AFR. Lot of jumping to conclusions going on.
WotC was on my bad list because of curly foils and BS like Oko and Uro. It's tentatively looking like they may have fixed one or both of these problems. The rest of the things people complain about really don't bother me. Here's to another 30 years of MtG being awesome.