Because Chromatic Sphere draws a card as part of a mana ability (as opposed to the Star, which draws a card as a triggered ability), it can also be used for some shenanigans, non-intuitive plays that are amusing, though not necessarily competitive.
Activate Words of Wind, to replace the next card draw with bouncing a permanent. Activate one of the Grandeur abilities (Tarox isn't useful once he's bounced, so I'm excluding him), which costs an additional to activate from the Suppression Field. You may pay costs in any order, so pay the first. As part of that, use mana from Chromatic Sphere, which uses the Words of Wind replacement to bounce the Grandeur creature. Now that the is paid, you can pay the cost of discarding a creature with the appropriate name, since you just bounced it.
To add to this, a more competitive use is dropping into play a Laboratory Maniac, retaining priority, and using Sphere's "mana ability" before your opponent ever gets a chance to respond. GG.
1) Show and Tell - The fact that Oath of Druids is banned and this is legal is pretty stunning to me. It's the only combo deck in the format that requires zero skill to pilot and very difficult to hate on. I think it's oppressive to the format as a whole and the format would be more diverse without it's presence.
Oath costs 2 mana instead of 3 (huge deal) and generally is a one card combo against creature decks. When it isn't a 1 card combo, the other part of the combo is "needing" to tap a rainbow land or maybe counter something with a card like Swan Song. It doesn't sound glamorous, but it is much more useful than a dead Yugimon monster in your hand/dead sorcery that you can't cast if you're missing the other piece. The only downsides are waiting a turn for the creature and the fact that the enchantment can be destroyed. Oath still seems far better and I don't see how Show and Tell being legal and Oath being banned is "stunning." There's a reason Oath is a huge part of Vintage while Show and Tell is a footnote.
I'm just not convinced a Legacy Oath deck would be any less oppressive than Legacy Show and Tell. Oathing into play Griselbrand is so good in Vintage because of the fast mana, your interaction with the graveyard that follows with it and the ability to Storm Tendrils someone in the Burning Oath variation. In Legacy, is T1 Oath that much different than T1 Entomb/Reanimate Griselbrand or T2 Show and Tell - Omniscience especially with hate cards that exist in the format. I'm not sure.
Yes, it is. It is very different because Oath is often a one card combo and also cheaper. This is like comparing Necropotence to Show and Tell + Griselbrand. If you think Sneak and Show is "oppressive," Oath would be a horror show for you. I recommend that you run a gauntlet if you don't believe my words.
1) Show and Tell - The fact that Oath of Druids is banned and this is legal is pretty stunning to me. It's the only combo deck in the format that requires zero skill to pilot and very difficult to hate on. I think it's oppressive to the format as a whole and the format would be more diverse without it's presence.
Oath costs 2 mana instead of 3 (huge deal) and generally is a one card combo against creature decks. When it isn't a 1 card combo, the other part of the combo is "needing" to tap a rainbow land or maybe counter something with a card like Swan Song. It doesn't sound glamorous, but it is much more useful than a dead Yugimon monster in your hand/dead sorcery that you can't cast if you're missing the other piece. The only downsides are waiting a turn for the creature and the fact that the enchantment can be destroyed. Oath still seems far better and I don't see how Show and Tell being legal and Oath being banned is "stunning." There's a reason Oath is a huge part of Vintage while Show and Tell is a footnote.
No they are morons because they are tennis fans arguing in a football forum. Jees, follow the analogy...lol.
He's not saying they are right or wrong he's saying they are arguing for the wrong thing in the wrong place.
Except that the "football" stadium doesn't inherently need to be a football stadium that you see today. In this world, the lines between different sports are blurred and features of the sports don't always remain the same. It, like many other stadiums in this world, can change over time. Those people are only "harmful morons" if your opinion is different than their opinion on which direction you'd like the sport to move.
Maybe it's just my desire to converse with people who like Modern and play and brew in it with passion. Sometimes this feels like Im a football fan who joined a forum about football only for the tennis crowd to show up and say how much football sucks and how much more skill tennis takes and if you disagree you must obviously be a child. They both use balls but that doesn't make them comparable or means that one should get closer to the other. Ridiculous if you think about it.
Following your analogy, you'd have to acknowledge that there's only one tennis stadium in the world. The last seats for it were built 20 years ago, after which the sports gods promised they'd never build a seat for it again. Around 2009-2011, the stadium is becoming far too packed, and gigantic lines are forming out the doors. The people in these lines beg for a new tennis stadium, and the sports gods go "oh here, here's a football stadium." The football stadium is magical, it can continue to grow because seats can be added. The people waiting in the lines at the tennis stadium go to the football stadium, asking why the sports gods, instead of giving them the tennis stadium they were actually asking for, gave a stadium for a different sport and also refused to build a tennis stadium, even if merely as an addition. The usher at the football stadium says "lawl go back to the tennis stadium." It is 2015. A small fraction of the people waiting in lines at the tennis stadium have gotten in. Seats doesn't open frequently. Another group from that line have decided that they'll go with football. But another part of that group? Another part of the group in that line has just stopped watching sports altogether.
As a result of them gutting Legacy coverage, I no longer pay attention to SCG. Not out of spite or anything, they just don't pop into my head anymore. As I predicted a few months ago, I no longer even remember when they're having an event. For me, at least, that explains the "no thread for this." Thanks for the reminder, krimson.
A card being price x makes it worth price x in the market, but it doesn't make it worth price x for everyone. That price x represents where supply and demand meet, but we have no idea what your demand is. We have no clue how much money you make, how much money you've saved, what your bills are, how much you value Tarmogoyf relative to other cards, how much you value magic as a hobby, or any of the other ten million factors involved in giving an answer. In the end, only you can answer this question. No one here has as much information as you do, so no one will have a better answer than you do. Will you buy it?
Yes - it is worth it.
No - it is not worth it.
The only accurate answer is through revealed preference.
Tossing a couple cards out for discussion that I think would be interesting to see legalized in Legacy-- or at the very least given a trial run.
1. Mishra's Workshop. This card has only one deck that it can realistically go in-- MUD. MUD is a fringe deck that occasionally posts good results. The deck is fringe with lands that produce two mana and a number of other mana producers (ie Mox Opal, Grim Monolith). Maybe I'm wrong, but I can't see Mishra's Workshop being legalized breaking or warping the format. If anything, legalizing Mishra's Workshop will just open up MUD to be a bit more legit contender.
2. Sol Ring. Legacy, by and large, relies on spells that cost three or less and many of the spells are a bit color intensive and require at least two mana of a specific color to be used to cast it (ie Liliana of the Veil, Baleful Strix, True Name Nemesis). Like Workshop above, I don't see Sol Ring being legalized as a format warping card. It would be great in a MUD deck, but beyond that where would it fit or warp the format?
Interested to read what others think about those two cards. Again, I don't think either would warp or severely alter the format, but they could both make MUD a bit less fringe and more of a competitive deck.
Workshop would be horrific. A big weakness of MUD in Legacy (and one thing that keeps it from being too strong for the meta) is the fact that it only has 8 sol lands. Giving it access to 12 sol lands alone would already make it a lot better. But if instead that land produced three mana and had zero downside in the context of the deck? That would be an absolute nightmare. The sheer power of a land that produces 3 mana with no drawbacks is just too much for Legacy. The only thing that would stop Legacy from being MUD/Ingot Chewer.format would be how few Mishra's Workshops actually exist. And I'd consider that another downside. You notice how scarce The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale is? That's for a singleton in one Legacy deck, and I'd say one of the contributing factors to 43 Lands being underrepresented. Now...imagine if we had a card from a similar time period with a similar print run...but instead you needed four of them for arguably the best deck in the format.
Sol Ring is also way above the curve and in many ways better than Moxen. I'd say it is way too swingy a card. Sure, almost anyone can play it, but the reward for having it in the first few turns is just too large.
There are 2 graphs, the foil graph is under the normal graph. Hovering over the graph will show your the value of the foil at the time. So yes, there is price history on a website that makes actual sales. There was no spike in the foils.
Check again. That's the timescale for the non foil. It lets you change the period you're viewing in the graph above...There's a reason it has no y-axis label.
First because there hasn't been a dual reprint, the only thing anyone can do is analyze past events that resemble what would happen and predict using that data. So far my data without a doubt suggests that, mass prints(in an amount that will effect the price of the "regular" version of the card) will also have a great effect on the pimp version of the card. This is proven (yes, proven) by the trend in fetches, which is the closest thing we have to a dual reprint because of the following factors:
1 The old printing price is fairly high pre-reprint (due to limited supply, onslaught boosters are 15$ purely on their value)
2 It's a multiple of in many decks
3 A pimp version exist that is many times the regular price
4 It saw a mass reprint that greatly lowered the price of the regular card
5 The new printing has new art (which I assume new dual will have too)
The big part that you're missing here, though, is the level of pimp. You're trying to compare relatively common Onslaught foils which is obviously wrong. You're talking about multipliers, well Beta Shivan Dragon is 800 times the price of a Revised version. Beta Sea is 20 times the price. Foil Polluted Delta was 3, maybe 4 times the price tops. Beta and Revised duals vs. Foil and nonfoil Fetches isn't even close to a good comparison.
As for shivan dragon, back to my point again. If it's as you say, ever other printing is but a substitute and has no correlation to the price of the beta one, whose price is purely on age and collectability. Why oh why do they not cost the same as a U. Sea? A card that saw the same number of prints in beta and is of the same age?
...Because demand for Beta Underground Sea is greater than the demand for Beta Shivan Dragon? That isn't a difficult question. There is correlation, it simply doesn't mean causation.
My answer, by being a card that is highly in demand card adds a massive premium on the card, a premium that is multiplied many times in it's older, pimpy-er forms. Therefore, if the card is not highly in demand any more and say, was $1 like a Shivan Dragon, there will no longer be a premium on the card, which translates to a less expensive older, pimpy-er form.
Why though? Why is there no longer a premium? There is almost a complete dichotomy between the market for Beta and Revised cards. In what way does higher supply (I don't know why you're bringing up demand, when it hasn't changed) translate to lower demand for Beta?
If we're going by your explanation, if Wizards printed a (legal to play) U.Sea for every player on Earth tomorrow and the revised priced dropped to $1, a beta would still fetch $6000. Which, in my opinion, is not the case.
This is talking about a systematic case, where the game basically dies, killing demand across the board. It doesn't pertain to Beta cards, but the entire market and has nothing to do with the substitutability of a Beta and Revised card. That said, Beta cards might even survive. Because why would holders of Beta cards suddenly want to unload, even in this Magicopalypse?
I don't see how my analogy doesn't work. The main function of a dual is playbility, with collectability as a second. The dual reprint fulfills their main function. So many a better anaology is if it was the same car except a different paint job?
KTK and prints were announced. http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Onslaught:Foil/Polluted Delta#paper
You can see it has ups and downs, all the way till between m15 - KTK, where the reprints were announced where into went into a steady decline losing around 10-15% of it's value to this day.
(1) Another example of why you can't assume that correlation is causation. What you're actually seeing is a trend of dropping during the summer that happens with many Legacy staples. Every. Year.
By only looking at Polluted Deltas, you don't realize that what you actually are seeing the corrections of a gigantic price spike that happened a year ago. A ton of Legacy cards skyrocketed. But you can't just look at the correlation between two things and assume, hey, those Khans fetches really did a number on the price of Revised duals and Wasteland and Abrupt Decay and Show and Tell. You have to understand the factors of why the card changed in price. You didn't perform a test. You looked at two cards that were consistent with your argument but did not prove your argument.
(2) English foils aren't even the correct pimp to look at. Comparing Onslaught cards to Beta doesn't work. Onslaught never was and never will be anything like Beta pimp. Looking at English foils makes it even worse.
(3) The main function of a revised dual is playability. There is no way the "main" function of a Beta dual is playability. You're kidding yourself if you think that anyone would buy a card for $6000 when there is a $300 option that has the same "main" purpose. They're completely different products.
Please, there was no spike in foiled fetches, it's pretty easy to see the price was up and down within a given margin, followed by a consistent decline since the announcement of reprint. Your "foil fetches only followed the price change of legacy in general" holds no water, because there was no spike in foil fetches so they should have stay consistant with no real price correction instead of a constant decline.
That's a pretty bold claim to make considering your only graph with foils goes back to April 2014, after the spikes. I do think that foils went up around the same time, but I'll look for a graph that does go back farther than a year before I make definitive claims of a spike/lack of spike with absolutely no backing, and you should do the same.
Uhh. Aren't those are just a graph of non-foil fetches? That doesn't show anything. It's like saying that a reprint could hurt the price of revised duals. Everyone knows that.
As a side note, this entire Polluted Delta tangent is meaningless. Beta duals were printed in 1993 with a MAXIMUM of 3200 in existence (and we all know the real number is significantly less). Onslaught was printed in 2002 and although the print run is unknown, it's a no brainer that the amount of English (most pimpers don't care about anyways) Foil Polluted Deltas is a lot higher than the 3000 range. All that is to say that no version of Polluted Delta, a card from 2002, has ever had anywhere close to the pimp/collectibility of a Beta dual making them susceptible to substitute goods.
AS for your third point. The main function of ANY dual is playability. If the card wasn't playable or was not played, the price wouldn't be driven up as high as it is. The reason it's a $6000 card in beta is because it's a $300 cards in revised. The reason it's a $300 card in revised, is because it's playability. Once again, see beta Shivan Dragon. A card card just as collectible as a beta dual, printed in the same numbers and of the same age. It's $500 because of it's playability. You buy a beta dual to play it in your pimp legacy/vintage deck, not to put it in your binder. That's where the beta Shivan Dragon and beta Wrath of God sits.
Yeah, markets just don't work that way. In the case of non-substitutes, the price of a product A is not some multiplier of product B. The price of product A is based on the supply and demand of product A. Neither of which a reprint changes. I'll try again.
Aggregate Supply: how many Beta duals are sellers willing to sell at a given time at a given price point?
Aggregate Demand: how many Beta duals will buyers want to buy at a given time at given price points?
For the price of Beta duals to drop, one or both of those have to change.
You need either
a) Sellers to suddenly decide, hey, I like these duals as much and I'm willing to part with them for less money, or
b) Buyers to suddenly decide that they don't want to buy beta duals anymore at their current demand schedules.
Here's the thing about both group A and group B: neither will happen because if they saw reprinted duals as appropriate substitute goods, they would have seen Revised duals as appropriate substitutes at some time in the last twenty years. If Beta and Revised were substitute goods, we wouldn't be seeing this gigantic "multiplier" in the first place.
One need only look at the aforementioned Shivan Dragon. Revised and M2014 Shivan Dragons are substitute goods. 4th Edition and 8th edition Dragons are substitutable. 5th edition and freaking Beatdown are substitutable goods. Revised Shivan dragon is absolutely NOT a substitute good for Beta. There is no substitute good for any Beta card, except perhaps alpha or Foreign Black Border.
I don't see how my analogy doesn't work. The main function of a dual is playbility, with collectability as a second. The dual reprint fulfills their main function. So many a better anaology is if it was the same car except a different paint job?
KTK and prints were announced. http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Onslaught:Foil/Polluted Delta#paper
You can see it has ups and downs, all the way till between m15 - KTK, where the reprints were announced where into went into a steady decline losing around 10-15% of it's value to this day.
(1) Another example of why you can't assume that correlation is causation. What you're actually seeing is a trend of dropping during the summer that happens with many Legacy staples. Every. Year.
By only looking at Polluted Deltas, you don't realize that what you actually are seeing the corrections of a gigantic price spike that happened a year ago. A ton of Legacy cards skyrocketed. But you can't just look at the correlation between two things and assume, hey, those Khans fetches really did a number on the price of Revised duals and Wasteland and Abrupt Decay and Show and Tell. You have to understand the factors of why the card changed in price. You didn't perform a test. You looked at two cards that were consistent with your argument but did not prove your argument.
(2) English foils aren't even the correct pimp to look at. Comparing Onslaught cards to Beta doesn't work. Onslaught never was and never will be anything like Beta pimp. Looking at English foils makes it even worse.
(3) The main function of a revised dual is playability. There is no way the "main" function of a Beta dual is playability. You're kidding yourself if you think that anyone would buy a card for $6000 when there is a $300 option that has the same "main" purpose. They're completely different products.
You're trying to say well since a Shivan Dragon sold for $480 therefor a alpha dual should stay at $2000. Which is false. If age and collectability was the only driving force for alpha cards a Shivan Dragon should also be $2000 since they are of the same rarity and printed in the same numbers.
This is basic supply and demand, demand causes revised duals to go to hundreds of dollars, which makes alpha duals to go to thousands of dollars. More supply = less demand = prices go down INDEPENDENT of age and collect ability. So yes, prices on old playable cards will definitely go down due to more supply.
First of all, "more supply = less demand" makes no sense. Price is a function of supply and demand. Higher supply does not effect demand except in the most fringe of cases.
The reason a Beta Shivan Dragon is cheaper than a Beta dual is that demand for that Beta dragon is lower. Printing more duals doesn't decrease demand for Beta duals. It increases supply for duals in general. But increasing supply for duals in general only decreases the price of Beta duals if the reprint duals and Beta duals are substitute goods. You may be tempted to think that a Beta dual and a reprint dual are substitute goods because they have the same name, but they are absolutely not. The markets for a Beta dual and a revised dual are completely different just like the markets for a Beta Shivan Dragon and and a Revised Shivan Dragon are completely different. Reprinting duals could negatively affect Revised prices if the supply outpaces the increased demand due to wizard's support, but any negative effect on Betas would be negligible.
The price of beta duals directly reflect the price of revised duals. If revised duals are the same prices as a shivan dragon, beta duals will not fetch the price it does, which is not hard to see. This is extremely easy to prove: http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Limited Edition Beta/Underground Sea#paper look at the price of the beta sea, and compare it to a revised sea. They follow the same trend, in fact try that with every dual from ABUR. As for reprints, any reprinting of cards needs to be done in a large enough scale to reduce demand(and price). Otherwise there's no point to reprinting them in the first place. People who can't play still can't play because of price and SCG + friends will likely be the only people that can reap the benefit.
Beta prices are not based on revised prices. A Beta Underground Sea is not more expensive than a Beta Shivan Dragon because a revised Underground Sea is more expensive than a Revised Shivan Dragon. The Beta Underground Sea is more expensive because there is more demand for the dual than the dragon. You're just seeing the same trend because (obviously) there is a higher demand for Revised Underground Seas than Revised Shivan Dragons. Correlation is not causation. It is merely that for obvious reasons, both demands are moving together. Saying that a ton of reprints would drop the price of Beta duals is like saying that flooding the car market with Nissans would drop the price of Ferraris. They may do the same thing, but the markets for each are completely different.
I don't follow that analogy, it's more applicable to comparing shocks to duals than duals to old duals. A better one would be if Ferrari put out a car exactly the same as their most expensive car, mass produced it and sold it at 1/100the price. The only difference being that their year of production is different. Of course the demand for their original is going to drop, because it will no longer be "special/desirable" since everyone will have it with a very minor detail change.
I consider the same with duals. If duals were to be reprinted enmass like Shivan Dragons and the price dropped to Shivan Dragon price, the beta/alpha printings of the duals will without a doubt drop from the current 2k+ range. Simply because it's won't be the pimp version of an already expensive and sought after card. Remember the difference from revised to beta is round 5x the price, if the price of duals do drop to say in the $20/30 range, then the difference between beta and the rest will grow to around 50x the price. That premium in my opinion (and I think common sense) is not going to be a justifiable price for "pimping" out your deck, and will infact be far more than every other pimp card ever printed by far. (this is a bit of a exaggeration, I'm just trying to point out that old duals do follow the prices of reprints).
No. YOUR analogy doesn't work because with your Ferrari example, they're putting out the same exact car. Which a dual reprint is not doing.
You have to think about the market for Beta cards. Who is buying Underground Seas for 4-6000 dollars? That market is collectors and/or pimpers. They most assuredly would NOT see a reprint as a substitute good. It isn't the same thing at all. If having the same name were enough for the reprint and the alpha/beta version to be anywhere NEAR interchangeable, revised duals would have crashed alpha/beta a long time ago. You're saying 5x Revised price is reasonable for Beta, but a Beta Sea is currently TWENTY times the price of the revised version.
You have alpha/beta cards because you want THE pimp version of the card. This takes any substitute goods argument out of the picture. If duals are reprinted, the supply for pimp cards has not changed. The demand for pimp cards does not change. How does price change here?
Every version of a card has a supply and has a demand. Again, pimp duals and revised duals follow the same pattern because their demands follow similar patterns. But that doesn't mean there is some magical x5 multiplier. Revised Underground Sea is ~$300 because that is where Revised supply meets Revised demand. Beta Underground Sea is ~$6000 because that is where Beta supply meets Beta demand. There is no economic social planner looking at Revised Underground Sea and saying that the Beta should be 5 times the price. If a $20 Underground Sea came out (not that it would happen to begin with), no economic social planner is going to dictate that all Beta Underground Seas now cost $100, despite neither supply nor demand for it changing.
Shenanigans. Shivan Dragon and ***'s price are based 100 percent on their collecatbility, because they're barely playable in todays game. Price of duals and power are based both on collecatbiity and playablility, meaning they're in demand. Being in demand = price goes up = old printing of the cards's price go up because they're the pimp version of the cards that are already hard to get. Simple.
Think of alpha and beta cards as super foils. They go up with the price of the card meaning its very much tied to how expensive the non foil version of the card is.
You pretty much repeated my point for me. Did you not ever read what I wrote? Take two cards with no current playability, just pure nostalgia, a ten cent card, was sole for $480 like a month ago. If power were reprinted, what a number of ignotant collectors think is that it would cause their beta and unlimited P9 cards to plummet. Who here really thinks that reprinting Library of Alexandria would have a negative impact on the original AN printings? Modern Masters has shown that reprints of in-demand cards have raised the value by raising said demand. This isn't 1996. We are no longer in the middle of a comic book crash, sports card saturation crash, and Beanie Baby fad. The reserve list was a knee jerk reaction to a knee jerk reaction and a huge mistake.
You're trying to say well since a Shivan Dragon sold for $480 therefor a alpha dual should stay at $2000. Which is false. If age and collectability was the only driving force for alpha cards a Shivan Dragon should also be $2000 since they are of the same rarity and printed in the same numbers.
This is basic supply and demand, demand causes revised duals to go to hundreds of dollars, which makes alpha duals to go to thousands of dollars. More supply = less demand = prices go down INDEPENDENT of age and collect ability. So yes, prices on old playable cards will definitely go down due to more supply.
First of all, "more supply = less demand" makes no sense. Price is a function of supply and demand. Higher supply does not effect demand except in the most fringe of cases.
The reason a Beta Shivan Dragon is cheaper than a Beta dual is that demand for that Beta dragon is lower. Printing more duals doesn't decrease demand for Beta duals. It increases supply for duals in general. But increasing supply for duals in general only decreases the price of Beta duals if the reprint duals and Beta duals are substitute goods. You may be tempted to think that a Beta dual and a reprint dual are substitute goods because they have the same name, but they are absolutely not. The markets for a Beta dual and a revised dual are completely different just like the markets for a Beta Shivan Dragon and and a Revised Shivan Dragon are completely different. Reprinting duals could negatively affect Revised prices if the supply outpaces the increased demand due to wizard's support, but any negative effect on Betas would be negligible.
The price of beta duals directly reflect the price of revised duals. If revised duals are the same prices as a shivan dragon, beta duals will not fetch the price it does, which is not hard to see. This is extremely easy to prove: http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Limited Edition Beta/Underground Sea#paper look at the price of the beta sea, and compare it to a revised sea. They follow the same trend, in fact try that with every dual from ABUR. As for reprints, any reprinting of cards needs to be done in a large enough scale to reduce demand(and price). Otherwise there's no point to reprinting them in the first place. People who can't play still can't play because of price and SCG + friends will likely be the only people that can reap the benefit.
Beta prices are not based on revised prices. A Beta Underground Sea is not more expensive than a Beta Shivan Dragon because a revised Underground Sea is more expensive than a Revised Shivan Dragon. The Beta Underground Sea is more expensive because there is more demand for the dual than the dragon. You're just seeing the same trend because (obviously) there is a higher demand for Revised Underground Seas than Revised Shivan Dragons. Correlation is not causation. It is merely that for obvious reasons, both demands are moving together. Saying that a ton of reprints would drop the price of Beta duals is like saying that flooding the car market with Nissans would drop the price of Ferraris. They may do the same thing, but the markets for each are completely different.
Yes - it is worth it.
No - it is not worth it.
The only accurate answer is through revealed preference.
Sol Ring is also way above the curve and in many ways better than Moxen. I'd say it is way too swingy a card. Sure, almost anyone can play it, but the reward for having it in the first few turns is just too large.
Own List off the top of my head:
White: Stoneforge Mystic, Terminus, Thalia, Guardian of Thraben
Blue: Delver of Secrets, Ponder, Treasure Cruise/Jace, the Mind Sculptor/Vendilion Clique/True-Name Nemesis/Snapcaster Mage/Spell Pierce/Flusterstorm (seriously, why wizards?) Oh, forgot Counterbalance
Black: Griselbrand?, Thoughtseize, Liliana of the Veil
Red: Young Pyromancer, Punishing Fire?, Goblin Guide
Green: Tarmogoyf, Green Sun's Zenith, Noble Hierarch
Multi: Deathrite Shaman, Abrupt Decay, Shardless Agent
Colorless: Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, Batterskull, Lodestone Golem
As a side note, this entire Polluted Delta tangent is meaningless. Beta duals were printed in 1993 with a MAXIMUM of 3200 in existence (and we all know the real number is significantly less). Onslaught was printed in 2002 and although the print run is unknown, it's a no brainer that the amount of English (most pimpers don't care about anyways) Foil Polluted Deltas is a lot higher than the 3000 range. All that is to say that no version of Polluted Delta, a card from 2002, has ever had anywhere close to the pimp/collectibility of a Beta dual making them susceptible to substitute goods.Yeah, markets just don't work that way. In the case of non-substitutes, the price of a product A is not some multiplier of product B. The price of product A is based on the supply and demand of product A. Neither of which a reprint changes. I'll try again.
Aggregate Supply: how many Beta duals are sellers willing to sell at a given time at a given price point?
Aggregate Demand: how many Beta duals will buyers want to buy at a given time at given price points?
For the price of Beta duals to drop, one or both of those have to change.
You need either
a) Sellers to suddenly decide, hey, I like these duals as much and I'm willing to part with them for less money, or
b) Buyers to suddenly decide that they don't want to buy beta duals anymore at their current demand schedules.
Here's the thing about both group A and group B: neither will happen because if they saw reprinted duals as appropriate substitute goods, they would have seen Revised duals as appropriate substitutes at some time in the last twenty years. If Beta and Revised were substitute goods, we wouldn't be seeing this gigantic "multiplier" in the first place.
One need only look at the aforementioned Shivan Dragon. Revised and M2014 Shivan Dragons are substitute goods. 4th Edition and 8th edition Dragons are substitutable. 5th edition and freaking Beatdown are substitutable goods. Revised Shivan dragon is absolutely NOT a substitute good for Beta. There is no substitute good for any Beta card, except perhaps alpha or Foreign Black Border.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Underground Sea#paper
Look at how those foil Polluted Deltas...uhh...made Underground Sea decline in price.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Tundra#paper
And also Tundra.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Volcanic Island#paper
and err...Volcanic Island.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Tropical Island#paper
and Tropical Island.
in fact...Every.Single.Dual.
Bayou.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Badlands#paper
Badlands as well.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Scrubland#paper
Scrubland.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Savannah#paper
too Savannah.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Taiga#paper
And Taiga.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Revised Edition/Plateau#paper
Even Plateau.
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Tempest/Wasteland#paper
Wasteland
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Return to Ravnica/Abrupt Decay#paper
Abrupt Decay
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Return to Ravnica/Deathrite Shaman#paper
Deathrite Shaman
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Urzas Saga/Show and Tell#paper
Show and Tell
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Alliances/Force of Will#paper
Force of Will
By only looking at Polluted Deltas, you don't realize that what you actually are seeing the corrections of a gigantic price spike that happened a year ago. A ton of Legacy cards skyrocketed. But you can't just look at the correlation between two things and assume, hey, those Khans fetches really did a number on the price of Revised duals and Wasteland and Abrupt Decay and Show and Tell. You have to understand the factors of why the card changed in price. You didn't perform a test. You looked at two cards that were consistent with your argument but did not prove your argument.
(2) English foils aren't even the correct pimp to look at. Comparing Onslaught cards to Beta doesn't work. Onslaught never was and never will be anything like Beta pimp. Looking at English foils makes it even worse.
(3) The main function of a revised dual is playability. There is no way the "main" function of a Beta dual is playability. You're kidding yourself if you think that anyone would buy a card for $6000 when there is a $300 option that has the same "main" purpose. They're completely different products.
You have to think about the market for Beta cards. Who is buying Underground Seas for 4-6000 dollars? That market is collectors and/or pimpers. They most assuredly would NOT see a reprint as a substitute good. It isn't the same thing at all. If having the same name were enough for the reprint and the alpha/beta version to be anywhere NEAR interchangeable, revised duals would have crashed alpha/beta a long time ago. You're saying 5x Revised price is reasonable for Beta, but a Beta Sea is currently TWENTY times the price of the revised version.
You have alpha/beta cards because you want THE pimp version of the card. This takes any substitute goods argument out of the picture. If duals are reprinted, the supply for pimp cards has not changed. The demand for pimp cards does not change. How does price change here?
Every version of a card has a supply and has a demand. Again, pimp duals and revised duals follow the same pattern because their demands follow similar patterns. But that doesn't mean there is some magical x5 multiplier. Revised Underground Sea is ~$300 because that is where Revised supply meets Revised demand. Beta Underground Sea is ~$6000 because that is where Beta supply meets Beta demand. There is no economic social planner looking at Revised Underground Sea and saying that the Beta should be 5 times the price. If a $20 Underground Sea came out (not that it would happen to begin with), no economic social planner is going to dictate that all Beta Underground Seas now cost $100, despite neither supply nor demand for it changing.
Personally, I like white boarder for fetching too. And I just use unlimited. I like how they literally say "tap."