- mikeyG
- Registered User
-
Member for 16 years and 19 days
Last active Thu, Jan, 21 2021 21:12:40
- 15 Followers
- 15,728 Total Posts
- 542 Thanks
-
Dec 3, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Why Breaking Dawn MUST Be Made Into A MovieThey're expected to break the fourth book into two films to fit it all in, so I doubt much will be sped up or omitted.Posted in: Random Rants
-
Dec 1, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Why Breaking Dawn MUST Be Made Into A MoviePlagiarized!Posted in: Random Rants
But it was a great article, so I'm not hatin'. -
Nov 29, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Friggin' PolanskiHe's one of the most infamous flight risks in the past 50 years and they gave him house arrest.Posted in: {bloggyG}
House arrest in a luxury chalet.
I need to break more ☺☺☺☺ing lamps. -
Oct 7, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Raw, raw, fight the power.Nice repost. Be more originalPosted in: File Under Sexy
-
Sep 20, 2009mikeyG posted a message on the end of friends...Facebook: home of Farmville, useless quizzes, photo-memes and drama llamas.Posted in: 1-800-cyanide line
-
Aug 17, 2009mikeyG posted a message on I have an idea...Actually, right in the rules it states that the rules apply to the Blog section. As the staff member unofficially in charge of Blogs, I tend to keep it fairly loose, but there are lines. Thanks for crossing one.Posted in: Tyler Durden Blog
For anyone wondering, he was infracted for this. -
Jun 27, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Leave for japan!Chances are, if you qualify for enrollment in a mental health facility you really ought to go.Posted in: Archon Kamigawa Blog
-
Mar 30, 2009mikeyG posted a message on [ALR]From Game Japan 5So hybrid is in the set as well as enemy gold and a 'double cast' ability which I'm a bit confused on.Posted in: MTG Japan news blog
-
Mar 29, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Let's celebrate!!!!Well, no, you attributed your incessant posting to boredom several times in this entry as well as the comments, including the one I was replying to.Posted in: Keeperofzion Blog
i am currently not that bored yet...although i think i will be this monday
At no point did you say you were too busy tospam the ever-living crap out of the forummake your contributions to the forum. So sorry if you lost me. -
Mar 27, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Let's celebrate!!!!You plan out your boredom?Posted in: Keeperofzion Blog
-
Mar 26, 2009mikeyG posted a message on Let's celebrate!!!!Quality not quantity.Posted in: Keeperofzion Blog
-
Feb 26, 2009mikeyG posted a message on My Late EpiphanyStop asking good questionsPosted in: {bloggyG}
-
Feb 24, 2009mikeyG posted a message on My Late EpiphanyNo one is who they seem! I am awash in duplicity and betrayal! Oh the humanity of it all!Posted in: {bloggyG}
-
Feb 23, 2009mikeyG posted a message on My Late EpiphanyI was kingcobweb all along.Posted in: {bloggyG}
Think about it. - To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I'm saying that using the unrealistic theory of MTGS' resident conspiracy theorist (no offense, CSJ, but you did once claim that we need to get more concerned about EMPs) isn't solid ground to build much of an argument. Much ado about nothing, as I said.
If you say so, I don't really see it. If anything, you and Cranky seems to be the vocal minority behaving in tiresome ways. I'm honestly unsure what you're hoping to achieve here, it just seems like you're trolling at this point.
It was a couple posts from a regular poster with a history of unsubstantiated and we'll say dubious theories, a post or two explaining why that was unlikely, and one saying that the RC could theoretically profit from the corporation in other ways if such a thing were going on. Much ado about nothing, my dude. You're just making it into a bigger thing than it is because it validates your position.
That's what you think other posters here are doing?
Really? Really?
I know that's likely hyperbole, but I think it reveals more about you and your friends than it does the toxicity of the MTG playerbase.
Careful, your slip is showing.
Well, no, and that's a bit of a strawman. I don't do that, I doubt anyone here does. Speaking for myself, however, when I'm in a public space (like a forum) and I witness ignorant comments or bigoted behavior I will (if safe) say something. And, in my experience, the reverse is also true and I've been in public and have had bigoted things said to me (usually for being ~*~TOO GAY~*~ but sometimes for other social justice/progressive statements). Being in public and never experiencing socio-political issues in everyday places is completely foreign to me.
The point I'm trying to make, though, is that the behavior I'm describing, people in public spaces responding to socio-political cues from others, is exactly what was transpiring on the forums. And it's probably going to keep happening because humans have opinions and there will always be organic moments when those opinions are shared in public.
* * *
For me, though, I'm going to take your advice and I'm going to go. I'll probably lurk and hibernate, see if the site changes again, but this clearly isn't the place for me anymore.
For what it's worth, a 'lynch' in mafia-style games refers to the elimination of a player based on group vote. It's literally a game term for mob 'violence', and it's been used on these forums as long as I've been around on the site (likely back to the 'News days).
Though, for the sake of fairness, I know some mafia communities are moving away from that term for obvious reasons.
Mine is really wholesome and not so doggedly competitive so there's a feeling of enjoying seeing other players' decks do their thing, so to speak. That, plus we're all largely budget players, means that we can all get away with more synergistic cards that may not provide the best utility for the cost. And we can get away with decks that aren't as finely tuned so there's less stress about utility.
I'm a bigger fan of being on theme, but I'm also not competitive at all and get more enjoyment out of doing fun things than actually winning. And one of our players has the most fun slowing games down and helping underdogs win (or at least not lose). So my situation is a bit different.
At the end of the day, though, the game supports an array of approaches. I say do you, have fun, and don't worry about what's most ideal or 'right'.
Same. The only sealed products I buy are Commander decks and the odd booster box when I want to treat my staff to a draft night, and I feel ver (as you put it) bogged down.
I maintain 12-15 EDH decks at any time and I usually build one or two new decks when a set releases depending on set themes and interesting/affordable commanders (along with, of course, rebuilding/refining existing decks to include new cards). And I haven't built a new deck since Commander 2019 and there are a ton of interesting commanders and themes that I probably just won't catch up on when in prior years, I likely would have.
That's not entirely on WotC, part of it is the pandemic and part of it was my work situation in the months before the pandemic. And I'm not sharing that for the sake of being negative on the internet (:rollout:), it's just the reality of the situation for me at the moment. The perceived barrage of new products makes catching up feel more overwhelming and expensive, and decreases my desire to do so.
Hahaha, same.
It's a worthwhile exploration of MDFCs. I like that it's a dual to fix you if you didn't draw into one of your colors, and it's a decent spell if you're good on mana. It's also a really neat way of bolstering a multicolor set's number of multicolor cards while also providing the manabase decks in Limited require in that environment.
In terms of aggressive costing generally, I think MDFCs do require the spell side be less efficient as a trade-off for the added flexibility. I think making things sorceries rather than instants can help reduce how much more expensive the cost can be. Ditto with increased color requirements (where applicable), though your mileage may vary as monocolored spells with higher color needs aren't always a major drawback or balance dial. I think if the spell is much more narrow in effect, it can probably be more in line with how it'd be costed if it were not an MDFC, with mind still paid to the flexibility inherent in MDFCs.
Legit, I still haven't played anything from Ikoria yet, and barely played with Theros before lockdown. Obviously WotC couldn't have planned for a pandemic, and as a business they're not inclined to slow down a product release schedule, I'm just getting to the point where I just may not catch up. I likely won't see my playgroup until the new year at the earliest (we have immuno-compromised people in the group, and several of us work with youth/in schools/with the unhoused so there's some concerns around risk) and everyone in the group is on the same page. Still excited for the new cards, but between lack of play and reduced luxury spending budgets I don't see anyone in my group buying a lot of the 2020 products anytime soon. By the time I figure we'll be playing again, I'll have Ikoria through to (probably) the D&D set to catch up on, that's 10+ product releases which is an overwhelming number. I don't know how I'll be able to do much beyond get singles to slot into existing decks, it'd be too much to try to build a bunch of new decks around new commanders/themes from almost a dozen releases.
I don't know what to say about it. I'm excited for new cards, but that's tempered somewhat by a lack of play to warrant buying them and a lack of cash to actually buy them with. Who knows, maybe by the time I can justify catching up on all the sets I missed, the single prices will be really down and I'll have more disposable income.
That depends entirely on the framework you're looking at, the colloquial usage or the social sciences usage. Colloquially, of course anyone can be racist in the sense that anyone of any race can hold race-based prejudices that cause them to see other races as less than and/or their own race as greater than, or otherwise infers inequality on an individual level. That's the typical definition you get when you google racism, and it is entirely true on an individual level.
I think the problem here is that many engaged in this conversation are, because the topic is on a society-wide issue, talking about systemic/institutionalized racism, which is a whole different beast. Unequal practices built into organizations or institutional systems that disproportionately benefit or disadvantage particular racial groups is really what we're talking about here, not racism on an individual level. Within a white supremacist society/system, nonwhite people and groups are going to lack or be denied institutional power, and without significant power on a systemic level, those people/groups are unable to wield systemic racism, even if they may be racially prejudiced on an individual level. So when people say "black people can't be racist," what they're really saying is "black people are denied systemic power and therefore cannot create systems that meaningfully create/sustain black supremacy." Black people can certainly be prejudiced, they just don't have the power to control the very systems oppressing them (which was the point of those systems in the first place). Is that more complicated? Yes. Can it be hard to parse through someone's words to understand what they mean when they talk about racism? Sure. Are the distinctions between the two uses of the word vital to talking about the issue of systemic racism and unjust policing? Absolutely.
Systemic racism and individual racism are certainly connected, they feed and reinforce one another, and dismantling one requires dismantling the other. They just serve distinct functions within society and their complex interactions are a significant reason why these conversations are challenging.
** As an aside, I think there is an interesting conversation to be had about whether racial minorities can create pockets within the larger white supremacist society that involve racially prejudiced systems, but that's a conversation not best served by having it amongst (presumably, and pardon to anyone this does not apply to) white people. At a time where systemic racism is causing untold suffering and taking lives. I think there's an intriguing academic discussion there, it would only serve as a distraction in the current climate/discussion, though.
Thank you, though it would appear WotC has their reasons for choosing a different path. Maybe next year.
In the early days of spoiler season, I expected we'd get an answer to the question "Why play this mechanic if it expects you to keep four creatures of different tribes (and in some cases, colors) alive?" I don't think we ever got the reason. As you said, the mechanic was designed to be conservative, which is probably easier to balance, but I don't think for a mechanic that's more fun or worth building around.
I agree with you that they may expand on party down the line, even if it'll probably still be conservative.
I agree with you, though I don't think pushing some of the scaling effects over to "if you have two or more creatures in your party" would make the set too challenging for draft. The mechanic really needed something to fill out the early/midgame. Thinking about building around party, my biggest reservation is that a lot of the more playable party cards still demand a full party for optimal use, do I just hold them while I'm waiting for another Cleric to cast? That's somewhat facetious.
I don't know that it's completely failed, though I certainly don't see it as a success. I'm interested to see if players are able to build something fun and playable, and how.
Really? It was the cycle of Duos, the auras of the demigods, and the scarecrows at common that cared about how deep you were in a color pair, was that what was considered mentally taxing? Those sets also had cards that cared about their own colors, not unlike Zendikar Rising having cards that cared about their own tribe/tribal theme, so I'm guessing you meant WotC considered the cross-color interactions too complex?
I think a part of it is the limitations of the way they do batching mechanics, your party isn't chosen/static and all the mechanics do is check if things fit basic criteria. What I mean is, the way party was designed doesn't allow for things like "When a creature joins your party" "When ~ dies, if it was a member of your party, " or "Members of your party have lifelink." They were limited to counting roles filled, but even that could have been explored in more dynamic ways than basic scaling with some bonuses for a full party.
Caring if your party has other members ("If your party has two or more creatures in it, ") or more interesting cross-class encouragement ("Target creature gets +1/+1 until end of turn. if it's a Warrior, it gains lifelink until end of turn." on a Cleric or "When ~ attacks, it gains flying until end of turn if you control a Wizard." on a Rogue) may have helped. As it stands, party is quite a binary mechanic, you either want full party to maximize everything or you don't want it at all. I respect that WotC was pushing for that (much the same way Domain was intended to be maximized and encouraged five color play and didn't bother with half steps), I just think it made for a less dynamic, less interesting mechanic.
I think the flavor was well-received, so hopefully they bring party back and expand on how it is explored.
Maybe? I think there's some potential in a WUB build as that trio has some of the better party payoff cards and have a really flush history in the four tribes with really good potential candidates to expand the party with creatures that you both want to play, contribute to a bigger gameplan, and/or protect the party. I think it'd still be pretty casual, and I don't see it making a big splash outside of Limited and constructed formats more focused on fun than fine-tuned competition.
The colors struggle a bit for Warriors that measure up, but a handful may have potential.
Mindblade Render
Mardu Strike Leader
Species Specialist
God-Eternal Oketra
Butcher of Malakir
Solemn Recruit
Once you get into the other tribes, though, things get wonderful. Wizards has Commander stalwarts like Sen Triplets, Azami, Teferi, Venser, Snapcaster. Not to mention more workhorse cards like Exclusion Mage, Vedalken AEthermage, Glen Elendra Archmage, Wizard's Retort, Archaeomancer, Deadeye Navigator. Clerics has Ravos, Ayli, new Mangara, Bishop of Rebirth, Selfless Spirit, Containment Priest. Rogues get Sygg, Oona, Invisible Stalker, Rankle, True-Name Nemesis, Zulaport Cutthroat, Notorious Throng, Gwafa Hazid, Brazen Borrower. These three tribes are deep in these colors, so there's a lot to pick from depending on your playstyle, deck concept, and meta.
Am I overly invested in building around party? No, not really, but if I were, I'd probably run Tazri as a commander focusing only on WUB. I think the biggest hurdles party decks face are consistently getting a full party and keeping that party on the board. WUB likely has the best tools to assemble a party and keep it around, and they have a few party payoffs that are worth it. The red and green party payoffs just aren't worth it.
Ancient powerful character from an empire that fell (leading to its people struggling) regrets not using their power to save their people, decides to address their regret by taking steps to bring peace through restoring their old empire (or parts of it), even if that'll hurt everyone else. Certainly there's nuances between the stories, but at their core (heh), they're quite similar.