well hey.. i get cryogen's and MRHblue's response though, that when people ask for a response, they'd expect to have some amount of time to craft their comments (and perhaps filter out aggro stuff that seeped into the comments, and focus on their point) before sending it in. To be honest, I'm surprised that the RC and CAG had waited so long before asking for community feedback (I assumed they had already started gathering data from 'the community' way before this announcement). It's not exactly great having only given knee-jerk reaction-based comments (or perhaps just quickly written comments), since there's a chance for biases, but it is what it is.
But at the end of the day, I also get why it was done the way it was done; the RC+CAG were probably blindsided by the announcement from wizards, and hands were forced.
Personally, i don't think anyone would think that this was an unexpected development. What i think was unexpected was the sequence of events that led to it. Now that it's done though, i'm hoping no one is going to have regrets over this, mostly 'cuz it's what i'd call a storm in a teacup. It's probably for the best to just learn to sequence better, and move on.
....Did grenzo and serum powder spike overnight, by the way?
It's not just combo decks that benefit from London Mulligan. Decks like Maelstrom Wanderer who want land and ramp and are fine to put everything else on the bottom benefit greatly. If I can mull to 4 and still cast MW on turn 3 I will be pretty far ahead.
sure. a few things though:
1. do you consider yourself to be within the 80-90% of EDH players who the RC have on the top of their mind when they're coming up with rules changes?
2. the way you describe your MW deck is almost like a combo deck (i.e. combining excess ramp and powering out an early MW). not that I'm saying that it is definitively a combo deck, nor am i saying that it's more or less ok to run combo decks, but i can definitely see combo archetypes benefitting from this mulligan.
And at the end of the day, would you consider that you being able to power off a earlier MW to be offset by the lower chances of players playing non-games?
It's actually brilliant for all metas that are not in the top 90% of competitiveness/try-hardedness.
This is totally irrelevant to your point and nitpicky in the extreme but..."in the top 90% of competitiveness" means the same thing as "not in the bottom 10% of competitiveness". Which is to say...almost everyone, except the worst players.
I think you mean "in the top 10% of competitiveness".
I've never done a london mulligan so I have nothing actually useful to contribute. Although I was at the London GP, and they had to keep reminding all of us to do a regular Vancouver mulligan (London mulligan was only for the mythic championship, which I was not part of...yet).
whoops yea, thats what i meant. And even then, that only really applies to combo decks.
I think balance between removing all non-games vs the higher % chance of a super quick combo, i think the removal of non-games matters more to the players who actually follow the RC's rules strictly, and to the player base in general.
So it's been a while, but is there any talk about making london mulligan a thing?
It's actually brilliant for all metas that are not in the top 90% of competitiveness/try-hardedness. Even having a slightly 'techy' thing with grenzo, it has 2 things that it improves over the current mulligan rule:
1. it feels like mulliganning is a heck of a lot less demanding/painful, so everyone is more likely to have game turns 1-3.
2. speeds the game up. every time i draw a hand now, i can snap-decide whether to ship or not, 'cuz the price of mulling isn't that steep anymore.
I think there was a lot of naysayers about the mulligan rule, but my group's using it now, and liking it. Unsure if anyone else are using/testing it.
::putting on a trolling face::
I'm going to build a grenzo, dungeon warden deck to completely break the mulligan rule in half
::taking the troll-face off::
So it's really not going to be all that relevant in EDH, except that you're significantly less likely to get mana screwed even if you mulligan down to 4 (as in, you'd draw 7, four times, and within that, you're bound to get at least one hand with 2 or more mana sources, right?). For the vintage and legacy, it's really going to mess things up. We're going to be playing chalice on 0, trinisphere and lodestone golem turn 1 all day every day.
But for EDH, i think it's going to be great. In fact, it's probably gonna be great specifically for decks with grenzo in it. being able to plan for your turn 2-3 creature-drops with grenzo is awesome!
I think that it's going to affect more tuned/competitive metas, but for EDH at large, it is most definitely a positive thing i think. I think even before it becomes an official thing, we're gonna give it a go here.. looking forward to it too.
It helps make mulligan decisions easier by allowing some nominal level of sculpting the draw a bit more. Too often have I seen relative newbies just snap-keep a 3x land hand with 4x 6+ drops. Sure mulligans allow for more skilled players to gain an advantage, but making mulligan decisions easier would allow newer players to not get completely hamstrung by 'greedy' mulls.
I feel like this could be a storm in a teacup, to be honest. Like some of us have already stated, it's not going to change how we build decks, but it will allow us to mulligan a lot more aggressively. That's good, since mulligans are a really difficult part of the game (much more so for 60-card constructed), and i think this will make for fewer 'mull to oblivion' rollover games.
There was a group of legacy players who crunched the numbers, and the new mulligan system will allow for turn 1 chalice hit nearly 90%, and belcher decks hitting a good 80-90% turn 1 kill.
That being said, i imagine this was done purely for draft/sealed games, where mulligans are quite uncommon.
Is there any talk of implementing this into EDH? I imagine it'd make little difference in the larger perspective, but in more tuned/competitive metas, it could make prison/combo decks thrive. At the end of the day though, EDH is a 100-card singleton, so the chances of getting exactly a turn 1 sol ring or perfect god-hand is still not as great as in other 60-card formats.
...geez, can you imagine vintage dredge or shop decks with this mulligan rule?
So far, no real difference for me. It's made me mulligan more aggressively though, which is good; i tend to keep less greedy hands.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
But at the end of the day, I also get why it was done the way it was done; the RC+CAG were probably blindsided by the announcement from wizards, and hands were forced.
Personally, i don't think anyone would think that this was an unexpected development. What i think was unexpected was the sequence of events that led to it. Now that it's done though, i'm hoping no one is going to have regrets over this, mostly 'cuz it's what i'd call a storm in a teacup. It's probably for the best to just learn to sequence better, and move on.
....Did grenzo and serum powder spike overnight, by the way?
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
sure. a few things though:
1. do you consider yourself to be within the 80-90% of EDH players who the RC have on the top of their mind when they're coming up with rules changes?
2. the way you describe your MW deck is almost like a combo deck (i.e. combining excess ramp and powering out an early MW). not that I'm saying that it is definitively a combo deck, nor am i saying that it's more or less ok to run combo decks, but i can definitely see combo archetypes benefitting from this mulligan.
And at the end of the day, would you consider that you being able to power off a earlier MW to be offset by the lower chances of players playing non-games?
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
whoops yea, thats what i meant. And even then, that only really applies to combo decks.
I think balance between removing all non-games vs the higher % chance of a super quick combo, i think the removal of non-games matters more to the players who actually follow the RC's rules strictly, and to the player base in general.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
It's actually brilliant for all metas that are not in the top 90% of competitiveness/try-hardedness. Even having a slightly 'techy' thing with grenzo, it has 2 things that it improves over the current mulligan rule:
1. it feels like mulliganning is a heck of a lot less demanding/painful, so everyone is more likely to have game turns 1-3.
2. speeds the game up. every time i draw a hand now, i can snap-decide whether to ship or not, 'cuz the price of mulling isn't that steep anymore.
I think there was a lot of naysayers about the mulligan rule, but my group's using it now, and liking it. Unsure if anyone else are using/testing it.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
I'm going to build a grenzo, dungeon warden deck to completely break the mulligan rule in half
::taking the troll-face off::
So it's really not going to be all that relevant in EDH, except that you're significantly less likely to get mana screwed even if you mulligan down to 4 (as in, you'd draw 7, four times, and within that, you're bound to get at least one hand with 2 or more mana sources, right?). For the vintage and legacy, it's really going to mess things up. We're going to be playing chalice on 0, trinisphere and lodestone golem turn 1 all day every day.
But for EDH, i think it's going to be great. In fact, it's probably gonna be great specifically for decks with grenzo in it. being able to plan for your turn 2-3 creature-drops with grenzo is awesome!
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
It helps make mulligan decisions easier by allowing some nominal level of sculpting the draw a bit more. Too often have I seen relative newbies just snap-keep a 3x land hand with 4x 6+ drops. Sure mulligans allow for more skilled players to gain an advantage, but making mulligan decisions easier would allow newer players to not get completely hamstrung by 'greedy' mulls.
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom
There was a group of legacy players who crunched the numbers, and the new mulligan system will allow for turn 1 chalice hit nearly 90%, and belcher decks hitting a good 80-90% turn 1 kill.
That being said, i imagine this was done purely for draft/sealed games, where mulligans are quite uncommon.
Is there any talk of implementing this into EDH? I imagine it'd make little difference in the larger perspective, but in more tuned/competitive metas, it could make prison/combo decks thrive. At the end of the day though, EDH is a 100-card singleton, so the chances of getting exactly a turn 1 sol ring or perfect god-hand is still not as great as in other 60-card formats.
...geez, can you imagine vintage dredge or shop decks with this mulligan rule?
Legacy - Solidarity - mono U aggro - burn - Imperial Painter - Strawberry Shortcake - Bluuzards - bom