I think half the fun is the variance. Regardless of what decks move up or down, I think this rule will lead to a consolidation of power within the meta. Decks which have a best draw that just can't beat many other decks' best draws will disappear at competitive events.
This rule, to me, is silly. All card games have variance. People need to grow up and accept the inherent chaos of this type of game. Give us consistency via cards that require resources and proper usage, instead of just allowing people to sculpt an ideal opening hand.
This rule, to me, is silly. All card games have variance. People need to grow up and accept the inherent chaos of this type of game. Give us consistency via cards that require resources and proper usage, instead of just allowing people to sculpt an ideal opening hand.
I agree that all card games have variance and variance is a part of the game, but one can argue how much of it is the optimum. Too much variance too much chaos makes a game less challenging and for a strategic game that tends to lessen the fun.
I haven't tested the London mulligan much, but I think overall it's more positive than negative. But it certainly has it's pros/cons.
PS.:
In some commander groups Partial Paris Mulligan is/was used and that to me was much more of a sculpt your hand mulligan rule than london is and while i think that is a way with more cons than pros overall it doesn't harm the format in a major way. That being said it is a singleton format after all but idk food for thought.
I think people are worrying too much, I think the vast majority of the impact WILL be people making land drops. Tron is one of the decks that is supposed to profit the most, and it does, but the general rule of 'be ready to deal with a small apocalypse on the third turn' still applies, it happens a bit more often, but you always had to be READY for it. I just think like my Burn deck, I am a very small bit less likely for my deck to defeat me way more than the other player does. some less interactive decks do get better, but I really do see it being more about decks that want to interact getting a real chance to do so
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Project Booster Fun makes it less fun to open a booster.
starting with a treasure token if you go 2nd helps a ton. It makes it way less a problem if someone has a turn 1 Thought Seize or other discard, which right now the only way to deal with is with a Force of Negation in modern. They probably wouldn't need a force cycle.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
starting with a treasure token if you go 2nd helps a ton. It makes it way less a problem if someone has a turn 1 Thought Seize or other discard, which right now the only way to deal with is with a Force of Negation in modern. They probably wouldn't need a force cycle.
I can't envision that attempt to counteract the on-the-play advantage as balanced. Combo decks like UR Storm, Neobrand, and Ad Nauseam-Angel's Grace will completely abuse the Treasure token to combo off 1 turn sooner (or, in the case of Neobrand, increasing the chance they go off on Turn 1) without incurring card disadvantage.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
This rule, to me, is silly. All card games have variance. People need to grow up and accept the inherent chaos of this type of game. Give us consistency via cards that require resources and proper usage, instead of just allowing people to sculpt an ideal opening hand.
I agree that all card games have variance and variance is a part of the game, but one can argue how much of it is the optimum. Too much variance too much chaos makes a game less challenging and for a strategic game that tends to lessen the fun.
I haven't tested the London mulligan much, but I think overall it's more positive than negative. But it certainly has it's pros/cons.
PS.:
In some commander groups Partial Paris Mulligan is/was used and that to me was much more of a sculpt your hand mulligan rule than london is and while i think that is a way with more cons than pros overall it doesn't harm the format in a major way. That being said it is a singleton format after all but idk food for thought.
Well, brainstorming is open. Example: who starts draws 6.
1. (Ravnica Allegiance): You can't keep a good esper control deck down... Or Wilderness Reclamation... or Gates...
2. (War of the Spark): Guys, I know what we need! We need a cycle of really idiotic flavor text victory cards! Jace's Triumph...
3. (War of the Spark): Lets make the format with control have even more control!
I can't envision that attempt to counteract the on-the-play advantage as balanced. Combo decks like UR Storm, Neobrand, and Ad Nauseam-Angel's Grace will completely abuse the Treasure token to combo off 1 turn sooner (or, in the case of Neobrand, increasing the chance they go off on Turn 1) without incurring card disadvantage.