Fishing for emails ?
- Registered User
Member for 12 years, 8 months, and 10 days
Last active Thu, Oct, 21 2021 21:50:25
- 2 Followers
- 5,544 Total Posts
- 988 Thanks
Oct 1, 2021TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on Innistrad Double Feature and Commander Collection BlackPosted in: The Rumor MillQuote from Dontrike »
Either? Choose two of one and one of the other? Again, back when blocks were a thing that's how it happened and yes both Innistrad 3 sets will be large sets, but the solution definitely isn't "here's another product."
The irony is that WotC produces these "issues" of not having a block of 3 sets anymore, then "fixes" the issue they produced with another product to sell the same cards in new packaging.
Its absolutely hilarious, but if just 1 person buys this product, it will embolden them in their path.
(They kinda did that in the past, like with the Premium all foil Shards of Alara packs, which had cards of all the sets in the block, so it was a 3-in-1 thing)
Sep 29, 2021TheOnlyOne652089 posted a message on Innistrad Double Feature and Commander Collection BlackSo these packs are basically just glorified REPACKS of their own product ?Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Amazin ... a new low ...
Why spend time and effort making new cards when you can just put the old stuff in a new pack and sell it again.
Seriously question who exactly buys into these products, somebody clearly does, but absolutely everyone i know is only buying singles by now, as the sheer avalanche of product completely alienated the experience.
If you are a completionist and want a full set, Magic is more expensive then ever (and not by a small amount, but by multiple factors).
At this point you can only really buy into very specific stuff and ignore all the rest.
Sep 24, 2021Yes, having more generic mechanics and wording of mechanics to allow them to work with more mechanics is much better game design than parasitic mechanics that only work with themselves.Posted in: Magic General
They realized that with "Arcane" spells and the like, but today they embrace this stuff with the gimmick mechanics.
Rosewater especially is fully aware of the problems they introduce in game design, but hes just not acting to avoid them (or other designers just blatantly run in the same errors again and again).
I dont like it either, but in the end, they make a mechanic, print like a Commander deck with it as a theme and call it a day, Next set is just a blink of an eye away.
Sep 23, 2021In the past Magic was about Blocks , 1 big set, then 2 smaller expansions to that set.Posted in: Magic General
That way you had a story over 9 months, much more cards, much more time to play and collect these cards and everything was slower and cleaner.
Today, every set (with exceptions) is just 1 set, then you hop to another set, another story, the story itself is much less fleshed out, theres more product and variations of everything, so its much more of a "rush".
And WotC is chasing that "high" on full force, with their screwed idea of pleasing everyone a little bit, its easily overkill if you commit to much to all of it.
I personally resort to playing just on Fridays (and PreReleases on the weekend) very regularly, so its more of a constant and less too much of Magic (as you can totally burn out).
Current set designs follow somewhat of a checkbox sheet.
They very much tend to have at least 5 color combinations per set and often all 10 2-color pairs in some kind of theme for a set.
Thats super cramped up for a single set, to have basically 10-factions in some kind or another.
Planeswalker for a long time had the issue that they also followed some kind of template , 4-5 mana, +1 had to either make tokens or draw a card, -2 had to be some kind fo removal or produce some bigger card advantage, and the ultimate had to somehow win the game.
For the first bunch of planeswalkers thats cool new stuff, but when you get the 20th planeswalker with that design template, well, it gets super boring.
The planeswalkers that break out of these templates are either super bad, or pretty broken (playable 3 mana planeswalkers tend to be pretty overpowered).
Most set mechanics are mainly done for Limited play. Almost all cards in a set are just useful for Limited, draft, or sealed format, all the "bad" commons and fringe uncommons and otherwise unplayable rares.
In constructed just a subset of a set actually can be relevant, as so many cards are just flat out worse than the "mythic" in the set.
And the way WotC designs sets, they have a metagame in mind they are planning to see, so they are aware what cards are pushed in powerlevel and they basically pre-build some decks with the cards to guess what the metagame of standard might be.
A even smaller subset of cards is designed to be powerful or specific enough for other formats, like Modern.
And of course theres Commander / EDH format of people that want their fix too, so each set has to have some legendary creatures for them and some toys to play with.
That way sets can quite easily feel more and more the same, as they follow the same check boxes of card design variations.
Lately especially WotC resorted to "gameplay gimmicks" , like Dungeons, the Day/Night mechanic and stuff like that, which are much less card-design and put some element in the game that is alien and they design it in powerlevel much more conservative, so it wont completely shake up a format ... exception to that are the "Modern Horizon" and the other super premium products, as they push powerlevel of cards intentionally to guarantee the cards will influence a existing constructed format.
Sets are designed by teams self-contained , just a little bit of leeway between the sets and some "bridge" cards that combo with something from the new set (like you get a bunch of vampires in the werewolf set, "teasing" the upcoming vampire set).
With the old set design of 3 sets per block, interaction between the sets in a block was given by design, today thats not the case anymore.
That has the advantage, that if someone really does not like a sets mechanic, they will get a fresh one in a shorter time period.
On the same coin, if someone really likes a sets mechanic, they are basically guaranteed to not get more of it for the foreseeable future.
Especially during Covid i resorted to just buying the bunch of interesting singles of a set i wanted and nothing else.
Normally i play a lot more Limited, so you get to play a lot more of the cards in a set, not just the tiny subset of pushed constructed cards.
Sep 20, 2021Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from Xcric »
Youre aware there are commander events and its played in environments where consistency needs to be a thing right?
Imagine for a moment you roll up and find out the store has banned xyz and now you have to cut all those cards without a backup plan.
It also works the same if they allow xyz and youre ill equipped to deal with it.
Some things are also incredibly toxic to the format. Without a banned list you can turn your game night into a hellscape and it makes new players not want to come back.
One personal example is when my local group was doing 2v2 a lot on edh night. We had to house rule time warps didnt effect both players because thats all that was dominating the meta. This caused several people to not come back as they felt their deck concept was wrecked and they had no replacements.
Rule 0 is not a magical catch all.
No banned list works fine at home, but not in public
The entire argument falls flat on its face, as the banned list does not accomplish that at all.
There are a lot of cards totally legal that are completely cancer to play against.
Winter Orb anyone ? Yea, its so amazing fun ... (if your deck is competitive, but its a complete trainwreck for casual decks that will cast 1 spell after like 4 turns each, and thats when the card is not abused in any way to just lock anyone out entirely to never get any lands anymore)
Stasis , Static Orb, basically the same boat.
Blood Moon , Back to Basics , contamination, completely destroy decks, they make a game unplayable miserable.
Food Chain, does anybody seriously play this card without going infinite with their Commander ? Like anybody ? Never seen these people.
The list of absolute cancerous cards is huge, and they are arguably way more oppressive cards than any other card on the banned list.
The banned list "somewhat" works for cEDH as the majority of the cards are completely irrelevant for competitive decks, only in latest times, actual strong cEDH cards got banned in Commander (Flash, Hullbreacher, the big boys.
As a "casual" banned list the power 9 are mostly banned, while Timetwister is legal, if its all about having some fun, there are a bunch of Moxes legal and Mana Crypt, Sol Ring, the big boy Moxes wouldnt really be far off (you would just play all of them, but people would proxy them, or who exactly puts 5 Moxes in their deck and their Black Lotus and plays with them in a "casual" format ? Having them on the banned list is completely pointless)
In a world in which you want to build some cheesy casual deck and just play a bit with it, the opponent will durdle around with you and see some wacky cards, have some interactions and the game ends at some point, nobody needs a banned list at all to accomplish that.
And as said, the list of "salty" cards is much bigger than the banned list, so the intention of the deck builder is way more important, if they include cards that people dislike to play against they dont need a list to tell them they cant even try them, and if they use them in an ethical way, why smoother that creativity (if someone wins with Coalition Victory by assembling the Legendary creatures in the art and put effort into it, thats exactly the same kind of win like someone putting a lot of creatures in play and Craterhoof Behemoth everyone to death, the same crap gets old regardless, if they just keep doing the same thing every game or rush it with tutors).
To ask players to have a 30 Minute discussion before each game is silly.
If anything people just make a broad claim "Casual ? or competitive ?", already fixes basically the biggest gaps.
If anything a "after" game short exchange is much more realistic to give feedback for a deck on what you liked, what surprised you, a card you might never have seen before, praise a deck for some creativity, or tell them what cards are just flat out annoying.
At some point you either play enough to make your own "salty card list" or you find some community feedback on especially bad cards, and that way players make their decks more enjoyable for anybody involved.
The banned list is overall more of an issue, as its not comprehensive enough and at the same time, includes some cards that could be no issue at all for a lot of groups.
Sep 17, 2021Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from MrMoustacheMM »
And I wouldn't feel bad for those people at all. Bans happen; it's an understood part of the format.
Yea thats a problem.
If you value the financial commitment of people that low (or not at all) you would be surprised how many people get such a hit that they quit the game.
Banning cards should be for MISTAKES that never should exist in a format and for a CASUAL format thats basically never the case, as the people in question have the goal to have fun, not necessarily win a game.
Thats the argument to not have a Banned List at all, but replace it with a list of cards that are "potentially" problematic for the fun of a casual group, or at least very likely (as different people have different opinions, theres still no space to argue that mass land destruction is just flat out bad for a casual table).
So if someone has a bunch of Moxes and Black Lotus and they want to play their casual whatever deck with them ... why not ? Whats the problem with that ?
Yea, exactly nothing.
So the salt-score for power 9 is actually quite low, the problem just arises if people want to play competitive and all the others want to play casual (and theres the issue of having mega expensive cards that people cannot buy, but making that an argument for a ban ends up just silly).
A banned list should not be in flux, if the rules are strong banning a card needs to have a very high barrier, and if the problem just tickles the barrier you dont ban it.
That said, replace the banned list with a salt-score for a bunch of cards and people can browse that list if they want to check their deck against what other people might consider un-fun cards ... then they choose to replace them, or not, its up to them.
If someone wants to play Golos and is happy with that in a casual inspired deck , people should not use the banned list to tell that person to go away, its actively anti-social.
If a card has a massive salt score chances are that its even unfun if people try to not abuse it in a combo or just accidentally play them, as the effect is oppressive for a game and does so regularly.
You can collect these datas with sites like edhrec , which is much much better than a selected few that make the decision for everyone else.
If your selected few are supposed to look at some data anyway, and make their decision based on that data they collect on their own by asking communities, you get the same result as you would just remove these selected few and use the data directly.
So it comes down to not having a committee for the banned list, and instead use a properly named "Salty-Card list" that people can still use, but might think about before or after they are aware of it.
And for a competitive mindset there needs to be a banned list not on whats "fun" , but whats actually too strong, thats the only proper argument for any competitive environment and shouldnt be mixed.
Sep 16, 2021Any casual group should absolutely not give a damn about the Commander banned list, the suggestions from them reflect their idea, like a local playgroup of them, others might completely disagree.Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Ironically the only place where the list is really relevant is in tournaments for cEDH that use the banned list as an actual banned list, and you cant play if your deck is illegal.
In any casual world, its irrelevant, so the entire point of the banned list is pretty damn pointless in the first place.
A much better approach is to have an actual community rate each rate if they have fun with it or not.
Then remove the biggest offenders that the majority dislikes to play with an you have a "working" banned list in a group (thats basically what the potentially time wasting "pre-game discussion" is trying to accomplish, which is super silly in my eyes, as playing against as many different decks as possible is much more interesting than restricting yourself).
Good example is a Saltiest cards list:
Top 100 Saltiest Cards
Any card of that list has super high potential to be game-breaking annoying, while they are not banned, if someone plays them chances are its very little or no fun at all for the rest of the table, as these cards when used "properly" will be backbreaking and game warping for the table.
You can play basically any Magic card in a fair and fun way, if thats your approach and if its about competitive play, anything goes.
To have a big compilation of ratings for cards if they are "salty" or not is much better reflection of what a community thinks about a card rather than asking a tiny selection of advocates (and they unquestionable have a massive market manipulation effect with their bannings / unbannings , would not be surprised if some of them bought a lot of Worldfire just to flip them instantly).
Sep 14, 2021Golos never sold anything.Posted in: The Rumor Mill
The card is cheap , available in massive numbers and absolutely nobody bought M20 packs to get Golos.
So WotC cant care less for this.
If anything, the fact they dont want to print any good (generic) 5-color Commander anymore (at least till they do it again, which can be any minute) might drive their sale numbers down, as people clearly go out of their way to buy them if there is a 5-color Commander they are always super popular.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Oct 9, 2021ilovesaprolings posted a message on Innistrad Double Feature and Commander Collection BlackPosted in: The Rumor MillQuote from ZasZ234 »here seem to be just too many people all too willing to ignore that we are not past the threshold where all "old employees will go away and they'll hire new ones who have no passion". There are plenty of people who are putting in the work to make more of a game they are passionate about while also satisfying the directions of "the proprietors". People that care about gameplay. People that care about story. Or at least people that care about balancing the wishes of a diverse fan base in addition to the voices of the investors.
We are not past that but we are approaching it imo. It's more a when than a if, to quote maro. I think it's going to happen simply because the current rhythm is unsustainable, hasbro tries to milk mtg more and more and we keep getting more and more products. It can't last.
We kinda saw something like that with story and lore. You claim that there are people that care about story but lore was shafted multiple times. It was clearly the lowest priority and many untalented/uninterested people were hired.
Sorry to sound like the doomsday guy but product fatigue is real
Oct 6, 2021Flamebuster posted a message on Innistrad Double Feature and Commander Collection BlackI hate to point it out but this is the state of the game now. Gone are the days when the proprietors cared about gameplay and all other factors in between. I doubt it will change any time soon. It's Money: The Making now.Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Sep 28, 2021The Lord of Tresserhorn posted a message on Innistrad Double Feature and Commander Collection BlackI see Papa Hasbro is milking it for all they can get!Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Sep 28, 2021WarMachinePrime posted a message on Innistrad Double Feature and Commander Collection BlackPlease excuse if this is posted elsewhere but I haven't seen it here yet. But looks like Innistrad Double Feature coming out in January will be black and white versions of cards from Midnight Hunt and Crimson Vow.Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Sep 23, 2021After playing Magic for a long long time, and in the recent year I started to be a bit more "competitive" with playing on MTGA.Posted in: Magic General
But when I fight certain "tier" deck such as mono white gain life or mill rogue, there is just no real fight, most of these duel are very very often one sided, no real chance to "interact" or anything you can do to catch up. Like against mill, there is basically nothing to protect you, the moment you are at 15 or less card in library you can't catch up, compare to almost any other kind of board state that you can either "doomskar" it or similar other wipe card.
I had even worst feel when I play historic and fight against deck that if you had no way to spot removal or wipe before your turn 3 (even worst when you are on the draw) that there nothing you can do, you lost on turn 4 and there were basically no interaction, mono w life gain, goblin with muxus, elf ball with craterhoof or such, or even deck where its all about the 2 card combo, "oh you didnt had the removal on that turn? I WIN" or even worst when its something like any "copy the next spell" and Approach of the Second Sun, there nothing you can do other than win with aggro before turn 7...
Im tired of this idea, more than 70% of my match boils down to if either player had a specific card on a specific turn, Tetsuko and rat colony, Muxus, mono W gain life, mill, mono R burn or aggro, where is the fun is anyway your opponent couldnot do anything? you have fun playing all by yourself? or that its almost a coin toss of if the opponent had a specific card or not...
Is being competitive all about just not caring and hope for the least amount of interaction? or that the opponent has very little way to even interact with you?
Sep 23, 2021Well, its been a while that recently I really felt like that its going all over the place in term of theme, sotry and that mechanic within set are way too narrow or self contain to be use outside of their set.Posted in: Magic General
In term of "story" of set we went from big "Gozilla" style monster to viking theme, to medieval fantasy to "victorian" style, no ties in within 2 sets that are release, no combination or even relation within sets. It is quite hard to have a sentiment of being in a story line or what not when each set is so different.
The mechanics of a set most of the time feel flat in most case and doesnt allow much constructive power to be interesting or even give possibility outside the few brew you can "select a mechanic and build a deck around it" then that it, you will have all those from one set, then you complete the rest with "staple" card of the color. There usually not enough possibility to the mechanic to not fall just as a "brew" idea within the deck and will just rarely be interestingly "competitive", having a party, venture in the dungeon, energy or card with effect like "when you surveil" are too restricted, you are just better off with card with effect that are less restricted like magecraft / prowess and allow much more "build" around.
Why are set mechanic always usually purely so self contain and never really ties in, combine or even appear in other set, that EVERY set you need to "learn" the 4-5 new mechanic words and that those words will be basically never used again (bare the few exception that became evergreen like scry) and doesnt really allow to be built around much, Magic is supposed to give the ability to combine card and power but the moment you want to choose a mechanic, you are restricted a lot, because if you want a energy usage deck, you need to use a good portion of your deck to be from Kaladesh, no real choice of selection.
Sep 17, 2021Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from ilovesaprolings »
I mean really? Golos ban is crazy? upside-down world?
RC has stated its reasons. They are all valid. Maybe you think that the only criteria for a ban should be pure power level. Maybe you are salty because now you can't play your Golos deck anymore. But saying the ban is crazy, insular or has no reasons is just being intellectually dishonest. Golos is THE TOP goodstuff commander and it's not even close. EVERY DECK can be turned into a 5c golos deck and still be playable. Everyone can see that. not everyone want the future of commander meta be 5c golos decks.
1. Yes, lots and lots of people think the Golos ban is crazy. The fact that you don't is exactly my point. There is a ton of disagreement here, including, as I said, from lots of people who are smarter and more dedicated to this format than I am. Go watch the Command Zone video on the topic and come back if you haven't. I'm not being rude, I think your opinion is valid, but objectively this ban is very divisive and there's a ton of disagreement. So please don't call me "intellectually dishonest," because I'm not. My point was actually NOT to debate this specific ban too much, but to point out that it's so divided that it illustrates a problem with the process.
2. To address Golos specifically, there's nothing wrong with having a top good stuff Commander. I think it's boring and not very creative, but it's also a great gateway commander for new players with budget mana bases, and some people believe there's room in the format for a few "easy mode" decks. I've played since Revised and have all of the format staples including reserved list stuff. If a new player wants to hang with my more powerful decks, they'll need something like Golos to make an even match.
3. Everyone keeps saying stuff like, "Golos would be a better Commander for any deck," but LOTS of people choose and build less competitive commanders all the time, so I don't really get this point. No one was doing that. In my experience, playing with my group and in stores, and at Magic Fests before covid, people were still running a huge diversity of commanders and building creative decks around them. So the fact that some decks could be powered up with Golos only seems relevant in hypothetical world to me.
[/quote]Quote from WizardMN »Quote from awesomer phantasm »
My opinion is that it's time to massively expand the RC. Give seats to Josh, Jimmy, DJ, the Prof, etc. and let a larger group of folks weigh in and make the call together. Maybe even include a few folks from Wizards, like Gavin Verhey.
Ignoring the fact that plenty of people already think the Wizards' banlists are a mess, even with their data, this comment has already happened. They *did* expand things and have somewhere around 11 other people on their Commander Advisory Group. With Josh from the Command Zone already being one of them. And they expanded it once after creating it initially. And that group helped achieve the Flash ban and likely weighed in on these two changes as well.
That's not correct. They added the "Commander Advisory Group" where they get advice from others, but only four people make the final call. Speaking of Josh, he's been against every recent ban they did, and even after all of his conversations with them, he thinks the Golos ban "makes no sense," in his words. So they seem to pick and choose what advice they listen to. It's one thing to say "we're listening" and another thing to give people a vote of their own.
And yes, WotC banlists can be messy too, which is why I did not say that WotC should manage this. I just think having more people from more perspectives would make for a better and more credible process.
Thanks in advance for being respectful and polite
TL;DR: Whatever you personally feel about this specific ban, I believe we need a larger governing body for the format that includes a broader range of thinkers.
Sep 17, 2021Here's a question: if someone said that the Standard ban list, or the Modern one, or the Legacy one, was no longer going to be controlled by Wizards of the Coast (who have access to huge resources in terms of player feedback, data, etc.), but would instead be controlled by just four people who are all friends (and a few "advisors" who don't seem to have much sway), would anyone be surprised that the ban list was a mess? Would you be surprised that it reflected the strange whims of certain group rather than a measured and consistent approach? Would we be surprised that they get super defensive and take valid criticism personally? Nope. That would be completely inevitable.Posted in: The Rumor Mill
Hear me out. The problem here isn't really the Golos ban per se. My personal opinion on that ban isn't relevant. The problem is that the RC is way too insular and way too small to be steering this ship on their own. The truth is, whatever you personally think about Golos, a huge portion of the community feels that this ban is completely crazy, like it's from upside-down world. And that group includes a ton of thoughtful folks who spend their whole careers thinking about Magic -- folks like Josh and Jimmy from the Command Zone, the Prof, Mitch from Commanders Quarters, DJ from Jumbo Commander, etc. etc. When that many people, including high level thinkers, believe a high-stakes ban like this is absolutely wrong for the game, you have to start questioning the process by which we got here, even if you personally agree with the outcome.
My opinion is that it's time to massively expand the RC. Give seats to Josh, Jimmy, DJ, the Prof, etc. and let a larger group of folks weigh in and make the call together. Maybe even include a few folks from Wizards, like Gavin Verhey. Side bonus, give some seats to folks who aren't white guys. My point is that, individual bans aside, we as a community deserve a better process. And speaking for myself, if I felt that a large group of smart, critical people, all came together and voted by 2/3 majority (or something, it's an example), it would be a little easier for me to understand and accept why my (expensive) deck is no longer allowed.
It's about the process, even more than the outcome.
Sep 17, 2021Posted in: The Rumor MillQuote from SecretInfiltrator »Yeah, a cEDH affectionado calling the EDH Rules Committee out of touch because the RC looks at EDH without a focus on cEDH would very well have not much of a standing - you play your own separate format, you better take care of your own separate ban list. If you don't, then that's your decision to implicitly accept that other banlist and the decisions that were made with another format in mind.
That said Sunflower MTG doesn't mention cEDH. But with how different the format is, it should have its own banlist easily.
I mean "for the people who do not Rule 0, they just lost their favorite or most fun commander" is also basically an admission that the people who now "just suffered a wrongful, tasteless ban" are suffering due to their own choice to pick and choose which rules they follow. They choose tofollow the banlist, but choose to ignore Rule 0. If they were consistent between following either both or neither, there would beno issue, correct?
I strongly disagree on your take. Rule 0 is fine if you keep playing with only the same 8 people, or if you have the resources to build a number of decks. But Golos was popular with new players because he's so flexible and easy to build. New players, who may just be trying the game, who don't have access to a metric buttload of cards like the more experienced players do.
You're a new player. You see Golos, which is super Timmy. You build him, using your lunch money to buy cards and sleeves. You bring him to the large, successful LGS down the street, eager to play. You grab a seat in an open group....and because it's a setting where you sit where there is room instead of it being 'your group' they adhere to the official banlist to keep things consistent. So that first deck can't be played, Timmy does not have a deck of his own, because too many people liked playing the card, not because it was too strong.
The question is this, does Timmy go through the process of trading and buying his way to another deck before he can play again, or does Timmy go play a different game?
When I am playing with my small group of friends who get together every few weeks, we have no problem with Golos or Nephilim or something like that. But the rest of the time, I'm at the LGS, playing with people I don't know, or don't know well as often as I can get a seat with friends. Now I have been playing since Rise of the Eldrazi, grabbing a different deck is not an issue for me. But Golos specifically was extremely popular with new players just getting in.
Sep 13, 2021Wow, I did not see the Golos ban coming. I just run him in the 99, so it doesn't affect me much, but it's surprising. I get their reasoning, but he never felt insurmountable. I guess I'm apathetic about this one.Posted in: The Rumor Mill
If anyone plays Worldfire in one of my games, next game I'm breaking out Baral tribal counterspells and targeting only them. (The deck is literally built for next game retribution, not to win).
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.