Banning people is a way to reduce that problem. These cards are only needed for cheating at tournaments, so severe punishment for that would help a lot.
What other solutions do you offer?
There are no interesting tournaments for these cards, just small ones in rare places.
And regarding the morals things are two-fold; cheating wotc which isn't bad, and cheating other players which is a bit bad, but the tournaments are so few that this is very limited.
The P9 are like the dinosaurs, their value is in hanging on the wall.
Bleiweiss, Larabee, Rosewater, the french woman, Menery or whoever at wotc; People must never bring quotes from them to discuss or quarrel about in these forums. They will say whatever suits them and/or is instructed that they say. What they say have no direct relevance to reality whether it is about the game itself or anything remotely related. On the contrary, when they say something then that is considered part of the game/fun/show, they are in an act, their act is an integral part of what you buy. Acts are manuscript-ed in advance and have no intention of including communication at any point, they are speeches, they go one way.
Always keep in mind that the buyout is only a USA thing.
There is still plenty of stock in europe. Yes, the prices moved a bit due to the hype but that's about it.
As soon as there is real demand and money to be made the traders will pick up cards in europe and sell them in the states.
Traders are already doing this for staples prior to big events if they run out of stock. I had several transactions with them two years ago when I was selling my collection on MKM.
So, there is no such thing as a "hatepick/draft" in booster one or two ?
"Might never play..." - but you might, so basically you can never say that there is basically no reason for hatedrafting ?
... For example, if you made 12 solid U/B eldrazi picks in pack one of triple Battle for Zendikar then you should pass the P2P1 Gideon (ignoring monetary value) even though it's miles better than anything else in the pack and might beat you if an opponent has it. ...
Id say the opposite, that barring a (close to) very good card in your colors then you should defensive draft the Gideon.
My experience with mtg drafters is that they end up with 8+ too many 20-23d cards, that is many defensive picks that would substantially have lowered the quality of the other decks in the draft, and thus increased your chances further to win it.
Many of us have already done this, but its worth breaking down again why hatedrafting is usually bad. If you literally see no cards that would make your deck or be useful in your sideboard, then sure take the best card, but hatedrafting usually implies that you could have chosen a C-level card that would have made your deck.
When you hatedraft, you are impacting one opponent's deck. There is only about a 43% chance that you will play that player at all so right away 57% of the time you worsened your own deck for no gain at all. Even if you do play against that player, first they have to draw that card which often doesn't happen. Maybe 1 or 2 of the games out of 3. Then they have to cast it. Then the card has to matter to the outcome of the game.
In exchange for making one player's deck slightly worse, who you might not play, and which probably won't impact the outcome even if you do play them, you are exchanging, say your 15th or 16th-best card for that 24th card that wouldn't have quite made the cut. You are probably playing a D instead of a C. You made your deck a bit worse against all opponents in all matches, and its probably going to matter for at least 1 or 2 games.
Thats the subjective explanation against hatedrafting, some people have used some math for specific formats and situations and it usually pencils out against hatedrafting.
- If you literally see no cards that would make your deck or be useful in your sideboard, then sure take the best card...
- There are plenty of times it is best not to take the best card even if there isnt a card for yourself. Sometimes you want players to your left to go down the path that that card represents.
- hatedrafting usually implies that you could have chosen a C-level card that would have made your deck
- Random truth - I disagree 50 percent.
- When you hatedraft, you are impacting one opponent's deck.
This is where I disagree most with you, I believe the crux of our opposing opinions lies here.
- There is only about a 43% chance that you will play that player at all so right away 57% of the time you worsened your own deck for no gain at all. Even if you do play against that player, first they have to draw that card which often doesn't happen. Maybe 1 or 2 of the games out of 3. Then they have to cast it. Then the card has to matter to the outcome of the game.
- I disagree with everything here.
- In exchange for making one player's deck slightly worse, who you might not play, and which probably won't impact the outcome even if you do play them, you are exchanging, say your 15th or 16th-best card for that card that wouldn't have quite made the cut. You are probably playing a D instead of a C. You made your deck a bit worse against all opponents in all matches, and its probably going to matter for at least 1 or 2 games.
- Well yes, but dont you see how little this means ? Card 16/17th might be extremely close to how good card 15/16th is, and so forth, card 24 might be just as good as card 23.
The quality difference betweem A and B class cards is much bigger than the quality difference between C and D class cards. The potential danger with too much defensive drafting is if you end up with only 22 playables for a 24 card deck (or 21 for a 23 card deck) - then you have made a very big error.
- Thats the subjective explanation against hatedrafting.
- I see this more as misconceptions than something subjective, seen/heard this many times before.
- some people have used some math for specific formats and situations and it usually pencils out against hatedrafting
- I dont believe much in calculations at various mtg-sites, for one thing it is very hard to pick relevant factors/numbers to involve in such calculations.
It is also easy to change to rules to make it work this way.
And regarding the morals things are two-fold; cheating wotc which isn't bad, and cheating other players which is a bit bad, but the tournaments are so few that this is very limited.
The P9 are like the dinosaurs, their value is in hanging on the wall.
- There are plenty of times it is best not to take the best card even if there isnt a card for yourself. Sometimes you want players to your left to go down the path that that card represents.
- hatedrafting usually implies that you could have chosen a C-level card that would have made your deck
- Random truth - I disagree 50 percent.
- When you hatedraft, you are impacting one opponent's deck.
This is where I disagree most with you, I believe the crux of our opposing opinions lies here.
- There is only about a 43% chance that you will play that player at all so right away 57% of the time you worsened your own deck for no gain at all. Even if you do play against that player, first they have to draw that card which often doesn't happen. Maybe 1 or 2 of the games out of 3. Then they have to cast it. Then the card has to matter to the outcome of the game.
- I disagree with everything here.
- In exchange for making one player's deck slightly worse, who you might not play, and which probably won't impact the outcome even if you do play them, you are exchanging, say your 15th or 16th-best card for that card that wouldn't have quite made the cut. You are probably playing a D instead of a C. You made your deck a bit worse against all opponents in all matches, and its probably going to matter for at least 1 or 2 games.
- Well yes, but dont you see how little this means ? Card 16/17th might be extremely close to how good card 15/16th is, and so forth, card 24 might be just as good as card 23.
The quality difference betweem A and B class cards is much bigger than the quality difference between C and D class cards. The potential danger with too much defensive drafting is if you end up with only 22 playables for a 24 card deck (or 21 for a 23 card deck) - then you have made a very big error.
- Thats the subjective explanation against hatedrafting.
- I see this more as misconceptions than something subjective, seen/heard this many times before.
- some people have used some math for specific formats and situations and it usually pencils out against hatedrafting
- I dont believe much in calculations at various mtg-sites, for one thing it is very hard to pick relevant factors/numbers to involve in such calculations.