Just because there are problems with the two-set block structure right now doesn't mean WOTC is just going to forget about the systemic flaws of three-set blocks. It would be very surprising if they reverted to the old system full-stop, but they could bring back something like the core set. It would be cool if we had an origins style set every year that flavor wise was sort of a "meanwhile on X" series of vignettes. The new play design team might also need a set that isn't encumbered by all the restrictions of block-sets to dump the reprints they want each year.
Bolas seems really strong if you can land him on an empty board. Once you strip your opponent's hand the +2/-4 will either drown them in card advantage or burn them outright. The issue is he's terrible at stabilizing, which was a big reason for why Ugin was so good. Playing him against a zombies/mardu opponent, shooting a creature, then having him die the next turn is terrible. So basically we appear to have a very strong wincon for a specific kind of deck, much like Kefnet.
If the meta doesn't evolve and Aetherworks Marvel is still dominating in a few weeks, it absolutely should be banned and not Ulamog. We can compare Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger to other fatties all day long. You want other cards that end the game virtually on the spot? Blightsteel Colossus, OG Emrakul, and Craterhoof will do that, and Griselbrand, Iona, and Progenitus will likely put your opponent into an unwinnable situation. These cards are not eminently castable in standard outside of highly specialized decks, and if you do design a deck that gets there, I say you deserve the reward. These cards are normally just fine in standard. Aetherworks Marvel invalidates the high mana cost that does balance these cards normally. Is Ulamog very difficult to deal with when cast? Yes, but the problem is that he's being cast for 4 mana and not 10.
Imaging if Ulamog is banned instead of Marvel, Standard gets better, but then Nicol Bolas comes around and the card is about the same power level as Ugin. That could absolutely create another toxic standard. So then he gets banned. Even if Ixalan and the following block have only 1 card between them that also fits these criteria, you've now banned 3 cards that would otherwise be fine in standard (and could even be healthy for it) vs 1 card (marvel) that repeatedly caused problems. Obviously this is speculation, but I think the risks of keeping marvel around and repeatedly banning its targets are too great, and place unreasonable restrictions on how sets are designed.
I Like O-Kagachi a lot- the trigger isn't so bad that nobody attacks you and you never get to use it, and he's not so big that he always gets killed on sight. That said, he does feel as if he's lacking that extra oomph that one would expect from the biggest, baddest spirit on Kamigawa. Haste in particular would work really well on this design, especially if he were your commander.
Asking for a ban of every high powered, high cmc mythic that comes out in the next 5 sets before Marvel rotates seems like a bit much. Yes, it might be fun to play a grindy value-Marvel deck, but does that really outweigh the fact that you would have to ban more cards? Practically this also presents issues because, barring more emergency bans, you wouldn't know that a card was broken in marvel before it had a deleterious effect on standard.
Marvel or no Marvel, the issue is that they exist an ppl will always look for a way to cheat them in. 99% of the time, these cards are dollar rare bin fodder. But that 1% of the time, they break things. IMO Wizards needs to sit down and instead of printing the overpowered and easily abused monsters, make more reasonable and playable top cost creatures. Or if youre going to make absurd cards, dont make them impossible to deal with. In short, more Titan like cards and less Eldrazi. The former is better for other formats too imo
The titans kind of warped Standard pretty badly, actually. Numerous designers and developers at Wizards have publicly stated that the Titan cycle is the epitome of creature power creep, and they don't want to get to that point ever again for the health of the game.
High-powered, high CMC monsters are just fine as they are without a way to cheat them into play too early. Virtually no decks but some fringe control or ramp strategies would play Ulamog in Standard without Marvel. And if you do manage to cast it on curve or even a turn or two early, good for you, you deserve to win after staying alive for so long. Of course, the opponent's board state may be such by that point that casting Ulamog doesn't automatically win the game the same way it does on turn 4. Hence, why they are fair at such high CMCs.
And those high-CMC monsters generally appeal to casuals quite a bit, and that market segment spends way more money on packs than spikes and other players who care most about the competitive scene.
I would love to read those articles because that was far from my experience playing with those cards. Were they some of the most powerful cards during that rotation? Sure. Were they impossible to deal with when they hit the battlefield like Eldrazi? No. "Power creep" then and "power creep" now are completely different. It would be impossible to argue that creatures now are less powerful than creatures 8-10 years ago
People that buy packs and boxes are gonna buy packs and boxes, whether there are 10/10's or not. Even the casual player is smart enough to know that spending $1 for that rare is a better deal than cracking packs looking for one
Okay but saying the titans, which are 6 drops, are less powerful than newlamog when cheated into play is not a great comparison. Torrential gearhulk is a maybe good point of comparison to the titans, but other than that today's 6-drops are weaker. Looking at older formats, Ulamog still doesn't beat out the best creatures from the titan era. Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, Iona, Elesh Norn, and Griselbrand are still the best.
If we reach the point in standard where the metagame is Marvel + decks that are faster than Marvel (much like we ended up with Saheeli and the deck faster than it), and WOTC feels they need to ban a card, it should absolutely be Marvel and not Ulamog.
Asking for a ban of every high powered, high cmc mythic that comes out in the next 5 sets before Marvel rotates seems like a bit much. Yes, it might be fun to play a grindy value-Marvel deck, but does that really outweigh the fact that you would have to ban more cards? Practically this also presents issues because, barring more emergency bans, you wouldn't know that a card was broken in marvel before it had a deleterious effect on standard.
That's true. In my opinion it seems implied that it was Hazoret but technically could have been another god. I think the fat pack book also mentions that the trial of strength is no-magic. Glorybringer's flavor text suggests the final trial changes at Hazoret's discretion, so maybe this was her treat for the gatewatch.
The whole trial of zeal scene where the gatewatch couldn't use magic seemed very implausible to me. It's very frustrating when magic in the stories in no way matches the cards. Preventing players from casting spells is almost always a white effect, so it's very weird that Hazoret can do it, unless this is the story representation of reds new ability to freeze lands. It's also strange that Jace is completely incapable of interacting with the spell when he is depicted on multiple counterspells. The cherry on top is that we're expected to believe that characters like Jace, Chandra, and Liliana, who have little hand-to-hand combat experience and were unarmed, somehow survive a battle with armed, highly trained warriors doing everything they can to kill them and earn a spot in Bolas's afterlife.
WOTC refuses to accept that powerful spells can be a part of good limited environments. Cube is undoubtedly in the top 5 draft formats ever, if not the best. Good cubes far outstrip even masters sets in terms of power level, and are often more balanced than triple large set environments, with less testing. This is relevent because, in addition to story/setting concerns, the powerful noncreature/removal spells that were previously relegated to core sets are and were likely omitted from large sets due to concerns that they would spoil the draft environment. The overwhelming dogma is that bad removal=good limited. WOTC has clearly expressed that they have had trouble printing these cards since the shift to two set blocks.
Additionally, anyone who follows the mothership development articles has seen how they continuously declare one effect after another is "too strong for standard." They've also powered up creatures and depowered noncreatures under the logic that creatures should be equal in power to spells, but they never asked themselves what the "correct" power balance between creatures and spells is. Maybe having instants/sorceries be more powerful produces better magic environments. It's certainly possible given what's happened to standard recently, and it's almost as if they don't understand that removing a powerful effect can then make another, previously okay effect seem broken. R&D needs a reset on the game on the scale of M10. They need to take a hard look at a lot of the developmental decisions they've made over the past few years, and probably scrap many of them. Hopefully play design will let them do that.
Also, to echo the point many have already made, WOTC should loosen up on determining what's fun and isn't fun. Just because some players respond poorly to things like prison, LD, mill, doesn't mean they should always cost those cards into unplayability. Kamigawa-ravnica standard is often cited as the best standard ever specifically because of its deck diversity.
Given how the Aether Revolt standard meta evolved, it seems correct to ban copycat, but its very interesting to me that the actual splinter twin-exarch combo existed briefly in standard without dominating (supported by spell pierce, gitaxian probe, mana leak, lightning bolt, ponder and preordain no less!). Granted it was competing with other broken decks, even post JTMS/stoneforge ban, but I hope that this new team, when it encounters broken environments, will identify ways to power up competing strategies rather than just nerfing cards.
Also, it seems as if future future league, which probably has a lot of people involved in the design/development of the cards they're testing, may be too preoccupied with what their cards are "supposed" to do, rather than what they can do. If the play design team has a lot of people on it who don't design cards themselves, they'll have fresh eyes when looking at a set, and may be able to more correctly evaluate cards and environments.
Imaging if Ulamog is banned instead of Marvel, Standard gets better, but then Nicol Bolas comes around and the card is about the same power level as Ugin. That could absolutely create another toxic standard. So then he gets banned. Even if Ixalan and the following block have only 1 card between them that also fits these criteria, you've now banned 3 cards that would otherwise be fine in standard (and could even be healthy for it) vs 1 card (marvel) that repeatedly caused problems. Obviously this is speculation, but I think the risks of keeping marvel around and repeatedly banning its targets are too great, and place unreasonable restrictions on how sets are designed.
Okay but saying the titans, which are 6 drops, are less powerful than newlamog when cheated into play is not a great comparison. Torrential gearhulk is a maybe good point of comparison to the titans, but other than that today's 6-drops are weaker. Looking at older formats, Ulamog still doesn't beat out the best creatures from the titan era. Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, Iona, Elesh Norn, and Griselbrand are still the best.
If we reach the point in standard where the metagame is Marvel + decks that are faster than Marvel (much like we ended up with Saheeli and the deck faster than it), and WOTC feels they need to ban a card, it should absolutely be Marvel and not Ulamog.
Additionally, anyone who follows the mothership development articles has seen how they continuously declare one effect after another is "too strong for standard." They've also powered up creatures and depowered noncreatures under the logic that creatures should be equal in power to spells, but they never asked themselves what the "correct" power balance between creatures and spells is. Maybe having instants/sorceries be more powerful produces better magic environments. It's certainly possible given what's happened to standard recently, and it's almost as if they don't understand that removing a powerful effect can then make another, previously okay effect seem broken. R&D needs a reset on the game on the scale of M10. They need to take a hard look at a lot of the developmental decisions they've made over the past few years, and probably scrap many of them. Hopefully play design will let them do that.
Also, to echo the point many have already made, WOTC should loosen up on determining what's fun and isn't fun. Just because some players respond poorly to things like prison, LD, mill, doesn't mean they should always cost those cards into unplayability. Kamigawa-ravnica standard is often cited as the best standard ever specifically because of its deck diversity.
Also, it seems as if future future league, which probably has a lot of people involved in the design/development of the cards they're testing, may be too preoccupied with what their cards are "supposed" to do, rather than what they can do. If the play design team has a lot of people on it who don't design cards themselves, they'll have fresh eyes when looking at a set, and may be able to more correctly evaluate cards and environments.