Magic Market Index for Nov 2nd, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for October 26th, 2018
 
Magic Market Index for October 12th, 2018
  • posted a message on Unban any cards?
    So now Modern has changed bit perhaps it's time to unban some cards? What cards do you think can be unbanned now that would change, but not break the format?

    It seems Preordain and Stoneforge Mystic are reasonable and safe to unban now. Do you guys agree or disagree? Why?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Pithing Needle
    Thanks for all the help. I appreciate it!
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Pithing Needle
    Will Pithing Needle stop Meddling Mage and Reflector Mage? I believe the answer is no, but I wanted to make sure.
    Posted in: Magic Rulings
  • posted a message on Ultimate Masters
    Well that was an interesting announcement. That MSRP though, wow. Who is planning to buy a box? What are your thoughts on the set?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on If we were to shoehorn planeswalkers into Ravnican guilds... TAKE 2
    No placement of the main, single color Planeswalkers? Jace, Gideon, Liliana, and Chandra?
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on Vivien Reid story, "Unbowed"
    Found myself really liking this one even though the vocabulary was very flashy and unnecessary it seemed (Perhaps this was intentional due to the similar contents of the story itself?). Then again I love animals so I probably got some inner satisfaction from the excrutiating pain, fear and death that was wrought on those who tortured the animals, even if they were fictional.

    Anyone else like this story? What did you like or dislike about it? More importantly, it seems that Vivien has a tie to Nicol Bolas (who destroyed her plane of Skalla), how do you think she will fit into future stories? Will she become part of the main story arc and help the Planeswalkers? I hope so. We'll find out soon enough.
    Posted in: Magic Storyline
  • posted a message on Holy *****, this game sucks as a "new" player
    Quote from Lakanna »
    It's great if you want to pay cash. If you want to be F2P, then there's a LOT of variance, and if you're unlucky, you're going to be miserable. New sets every 3 months means that even as F2P, unless you're amazingly good, you're gong to fall behind and always be playing sub-par lists against the people who spent the money and have the wildcards and collections to build any deck day 1.
    Working exactly like all the Beta players told them it would work: great for people who spend money, hostile to F2P players. Who would have guessed that?


    Thank you Captain Obvious
    Posted in: MTG Arena
  • posted a message on Censorship in the art?
    Quote from Laughing Loa »
    Yet if people wanted fanservice on their cards in MTG, there is this handy thing called alters which allow for much creativity and fanservice is one of those areas


    Handy huh? Not as handy given the possibility that you can’t use these alters in sanctioned/competitive event since the judges can ultimately decide whether you can use them or not at their discretion with no justification needed. Nice try though.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Overcosted CMC?
    Quote from Laughing Loa »
    The deal with creatures is that the context is so important...

    To make a reasonable mono colored deck work against a broad field of decks, it has to do something especially broken to compete with multicolored cards on a powerlevel alone.
    I agree with this as well, perhaps blue is simply meant to be a support color for card draw unless you build around them - like Snapcaster, etc.
    Is given a counter point showing an aggressive tribal merfolk deck, doesn't acknowledge it since it doesn't fit narrative of "blue is supportive color".

    Laughing


    Oh, Merfolk is competitive in Legacy and Modern? Wow! Let me see take a look at the metagame for each of those formats...

    Modern - https://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/modern#paper

    Legacy - https://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/legacy#paper

    Nope, no merfolk there. Now I'm going to act like you and Laughing at you for providing a tribal merfolk deck that isn't putting up any significant results competitively.

    You get an "A" for effort though. Good job. Smile
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Overcosted CMC?
    Quote from Lakanna »
    Mono-Blue needs more efficient creatures? OK, I'm all for that, when every other color gets Blue's incredibly diverse bag of tricks. Pongify, Disallow, Snapcaster Mage, Serum Visions, and especially the 4-mana toolbox of a card named Cryptic Command. Since you want Blue to have no weaknesses at all, might as well take the same weaknesses from every other color at the same time.


    I never said I wanted Blue to have no weaknesses at all, please find my quote where I said that. Oh wait, I didn't. Please act like an adult and don't put words into people's mouths. I just asked about why blue doesn't have efficient creatures and seems like they need them. You get an "A" for sarcasm though. Smile
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Overcosted CMC?
    Quote from Lithl »
    Smaller blue creatures (Merfolk, Wizards) just aren't good enough to compete given their abilities and CMC - it seems like blue needs better 1 CMC drops - in order to be viable in Modern or Legacy. Perhaps this is why Blue is generally regulated to a support or splash color for card draw for the most part?
    I suggest looking at some Modern and Legacy blue decks, to see what creatures are considered 'viable' in those formats. While blue rarely gets efficient, large creatures, they do occasionally get efficient creatures, and small does not mean the creature can't compete.


    I agree, but creatures like Snapcaster (which I love), Phantasmal Image (like it too), Delver of Secrets (Also like) are very situational and require the right spell to be in your graveyard already (Snapcaster), for you to have lots of spells in your deck (Delver) or to have a significantly impactful creature already on the board. These are impactful and can compete in the right situations, but I'm not sure about their efficiency otherwise.



    To me this is like saying that Tarmogoyf isn't strong because you need specific things to be in graveyards, or Dark Confidant isn't strong because you need to be able to draw lower costed cards not to kill yourself, or Arcbound Ravager and Steel Overseer aren't strong because because you need to have artifacts/artifact creatures on the board, or Thalia's Lieutenant is not strong because you need to have other humans on board or to play them afterwards.

    Most of the time strength is relative to deck building, cards available, and match up. There are tons of strong cards that are not "strong" in and of themselves. How efficient are the above mentioned cards on their own? But in the right decks they are great. The blue creatures talked about are just in that category.


    I agree for the most part, but other colors seem to have a way to remove these fairly quickly after they hit the board (Black - Fatal Push, White - Path to Exile, Green - Have more efficient and ramp to bigger creatures, Red - Bolt), with blue you need the right counterspell to prevent them from hitting the board (which - specifically in Modern - is inefficient itself due to the specificity of these spells and their cost), or if you bounce them it can give you a minor tempo advantage before they are out again to wreak havoc and your trailing again.

    Having said that it seems like mono-blue needs more efficient creatures to even somewhat deal with this because the probability of you having the right counterspells at the right time to prevent these things from hitting the board and overwhelming or curbstomping blue's inefficient creatures seems highly unlikely. Even when you do, you're still behind because you spent 2 counterspells to get 2 creatures off the board and there is still plenty where that came from (again, you get overwhelmed quickly).
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Overcosted CMC?
    The deal with creatures is that the context is so important...

    To make a reasonable mono colored deck work against a broad field of decks, it has to do something especially broken to compete with multicolored cards on a powerlevel alone.


    I agree with this as well, perhaps blue is simply meant to be a support color for card draw unless you build around them - like Snapcaster, etc.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Overcosted CMC?
    Quote from Lithl »
    Smaller blue creatures (Merfolk, Wizards) just aren't good enough to compete given their abilities and CMC - it seems like blue needs better 1 CMC drops - in order to be viable in Modern or Legacy. Perhaps this is why Blue is generally regulated to a support or splash color for card draw for the most part?
    I suggest looking at some Modern and Legacy blue decks, to see what creatures are considered 'viable' in those formats. While blue rarely gets efficient, large creatures, they do occasionally get efficient creatures, and small does not mean the creature can't compete.


    I agree, but creatures like Snapcaster (which I love), Phantasmal Image (like it too), Delver of Secrets (Also like) are very situational and require the right spell to be in your graveyard already (Snapcaster), for you to have lots of spells in your deck (Delver) or to have a significantly impactful creature already on the board. These are impactful and can compete in the right situations, but I'm not sure about their efficiency otherwise.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Overcosted CMC?
    Quote from thatmarkguy »
    Per MTGTop8, of the 8 most used creatures in modern top8 decks over the last two months, 2 are monoblue (#2 Snapcaster Mage and #4 Phantasmal Image) and 3 are multicolor including blue (#6 Reflector Mage, #7 Meddling Mage, #8 Mantis Rider).

    It is the most represented color in the top 8 played modern creatures - by contrast, there are no black creatures at all, and no mono-red crteatures.


    Good point and I agree, although I would argue that Snapcaster (I love this card) doesn't necessarily wins games since you need a lot of powerful spells to be in your graveyard at the right time for him to make a significant impact on your progression toward a victory. I also like Phantasmal Image, but it's also situational (needs other big or impactful ceatures to be on the board) in order for it to make significant impact toward your progression to victory.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Overcosted CMC?
    It seems that almost all blue creatures are far too overcosted in regards to CMC for them to be even remotely viable in Modern or Legacy even though their abilities are pretty powerful - Deadeye Navigator, Consecrated Sphinx, Aetherling, etc. (great for Commander) - these creatures would be better if their CMC could be reduced by 1, although this probably still doesn't make them useful in Modern or Legacy given the speed of the format.

    Smaller blue creatures (Merfolk, Wizards) just aren't good enough to compete given their abilities and CMC - it seems like blue needs better 1 CMC drops - in order to be viable in Modern or Legacy. Perhaps this is why Blue is generally regulated to a support or splash color for card draw for the most part?

    Brightling with unblockable and another ability replacing vigilance and lifelink seems like what blue desperately needs.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.