So more money would go to the more popular franchises, and less money would go to the least popular franchises?
But how would you feel if you spent money on MTG, but it isn't used on any MTG related endeavors?
Maybe not exactly. I'm sure WOTC might put more money into a new product if they feel it has a good chance at becoming a new cash cow. Honestly, the only people that know WOTC's business model is WOTC.
MtG is an important part of what makes WOTC money, and they put funds into it accordingly. I don't really care if its not always a 1-for-1 ratio.
How do you guys color-code your deck sleeves? Do you use the same color for every deck? Do you base the sleeve color on the deck color (red sleeves for a mostly red deck, etc.), or does that give opponents a strategic advantage?
A lot of my decks share common cards, so I use the same color sleeves with all my decks, which makes building/tearing apart decks easier.
Sleeves split. It happens. Maybe if you don't mash shuffle, you'll not break the sleeve, but mashing is generally the best form of shuffling I've found to keep the cards in good condition. I'd rather split a sleeve than damage my card, which is kind of the whole point of using sleeves in the first place.
I use dragon shields. No double-sleeving. Works fine for me, never had any issues. I've shuffled some friend's decks that used kmc perfect fits with dragon shields. They shuffled nice, but I couldn't really tell a significant difference.
Ideally, the MD tombstalker should be a Necrotic Ooze, and something from the side gets removed to fit in the tombstalker, but I wasn't able to find a 4th in time.
I really just threw this together for fun since the manabase for the deck I intended to run hasn't arrived yet, but if I were to play mono-black reanimator, this is what I'd play.
At worst, they are the same. But its also the mere fact that you have to pay lif in multiples of 7 that goes against Mr. Brand. Lets say I edict him, you pay 7x, draw 7x cards, where x is number of activations... If I go to remove bargain, you can draw as many cards as you are willing to part with life for.
Now lets look at another cards: Stifle. If I stifle a mr. brand activation, you just lost 7 life. If I stifle a bargain activation, you lost a single life.
And you dont play bargain in an SnT deck, you'd play it in a storm deck like AnT or TES.
Very much this. Although the question, I think, is is Ad Nauseum better than bargain in Legacy Storm? With bargain, 15 life =15 cards. Always. I think on average, Ad Nauseum will draw more than 15 cards for 15 life -- I haven't done the math in a while, but last I remember my TES's average CMC was around 0.8. Ad Nauseum also doesn't lose to Krosan Grip and friends.
The advantage of Bargain is consistency. Its rare that you lose to your own Ad Nauseum when casting from a decent life total, but it happens. With bargain, you'll know exactly how many cards you'll get, which helps the storm player know when to pull the trigger. The other benefit is that it will allow storm to up its mana curve and play cards like FoW and possibly even combine SnT/Emrakul into the deck as an alt. win.
I guess with these added tools, I'd be in favor of it staying banned. But on the surface, bargain isn't as powerful as what we already have --Griselbrand is a beatstick and a source of more life/cards and Ad Nauseum draws more on average -- the strength seems to be that it lowers the constraints the decks that would play it have.
Dies to creature removal, too slow or needs too many cards. Just strictly better combos out there. You could make a deck out of it and it may do fairly well at local tourneys, but nothing that would become tier one.
If you really like playing dredge, I'd say dredge. However, if you're only choosing dredge because its cheap, I'd say go with something else. While dredge is cheap, very few cards in the deck carry over to other decks so when you try to expand, you'll have to start fresh. I'd suggest picking something a bit worse, but with more staples so you can expand into more expensive and better decks if you plan on investing in the deck later.
For example
mono-red burn -> U/R Delver -> RUG
MUC -> UW control -> UWB or UWR control
some sort of mono U show and tell deck like hive mind or dream halls -> omnicience
monoB reanimator -> reanimator
basically, find a deck you really like regardless of price if you plan on investing in it later, then aquire staples and build a cheaper deck from the staples. This is cheaper in the long run.
Unless of course you don't plan on investing later, in which case go with dredge.
I think the most common reason a card ends up on the banned list is if it warps the metagame to an unhealthy state, and that's what Black Vise does. Its not that its so incredibly powerful that it needs to be banned. As others have mentioned, its quite bad against decks like RUG Delver. However, its such a powerful must-answer against slow grindy control, that it has a strong possiblity to push that archetype out of the format. This is unhealthy in Wizards eyes for a few reasons. One is I think Wizards generally likes slow grindy control and wants the deck to be able to have a presence in the metagame. The other is that without that archetype in the format, it makes decks that have poor matchups against it much stronger. Generally, this is fast broken combo decks, which historically, Wizards has tried to stop from having an overwhelming precense whenever possible.
Sure it can get 6+ damage against midrange if landed early, and might make Stasis a little better, but that's not why its on the banned list in my eyes. To be good against anything other than control, you need to get it turn 1, preferably on the play. And I don't think needing a better win condition is what's keeping Stasis from being competitive.
Maybe not exactly. I'm sure WOTC might put more money into a new product if they feel it has a good chance at becoming a new cash cow. Honestly, the only people that know WOTC's business model is WOTC.
MtG is an important part of what makes WOTC money, and they put funds into it accordingly. I don't really care if its not always a 1-for-1 ratio.
A lot of my decks share common cards, so I use the same color sleeves with all my decks, which makes building/tearing apart decks easier.
How does that work?
Who's the beatdown?
On evaluating cards and building an optimal decklist
1 Tombstalker
3 Griselbrand
3 Necrotic Ooze
1 Phyrexian Devourer
1 Triskelion
4 Entomb
4 Buried Alive
4 Exhume
2 Shallow Grave
3 Hymn to Tourach
4 Thoughtseize
4 Dark Ritual
4 Lotus Petal
15 Swamp
4 Snuff Out
1 Phyrexian Obliterator
4 Hypnotic Specter
1 Bloodghast
3 Desecration Demon
2 Tombstalker
Ideally, the MD tombstalker should be a Necrotic Ooze, and something from the side gets removed to fit in the tombstalker, but I wasn't able to find a 4th in time.
My matches were:
UB Reanimator 1-2
Esper Miracle 1-1-1
Esper Stoneblade 2-0
UR Merfolk 2-0
I really just threw this together for fun since the manabase for the deck I intended to run hasn't arrived yet, but if I were to play mono-black reanimator, this is what I'd play.
Very much this. Although the question, I think, is is Ad Nauseum better than bargain in Legacy Storm? With bargain, 15 life =15 cards. Always. I think on average, Ad Nauseum will draw more than 15 cards for 15 life -- I haven't done the math in a while, but last I remember my TES's average CMC was around 0.8. Ad Nauseum also doesn't lose to Krosan Grip and friends.
The advantage of Bargain is consistency. Its rare that you lose to your own Ad Nauseum when casting from a decent life total, but it happens. With bargain, you'll know exactly how many cards you'll get, which helps the storm player know when to pull the trigger. The other benefit is that it will allow storm to up its mana curve and play cards like FoW and possibly even combine SnT/Emrakul into the deck as an alt. win.
I guess with these added tools, I'd be in favor of it staying banned. But on the surface, bargain isn't as powerful as what we already have --Griselbrand is a beatstick and a source of more life/cards and Ad Nauseum draws more on average -- the strength seems to be that it lowers the constraints the decks that would play it have.
For example
mono-red burn -> U/R Delver -> RUG
MUC -> UW control -> UWB or UWR control
some sort of mono U show and tell deck like hive mind or dream halls -> omnicience
monoB reanimator -> reanimator
basically, find a deck you really like regardless of price if you plan on investing in it later, then aquire staples and build a cheaper deck from the staples. This is cheaper in the long run.
Unless of course you don't plan on investing later, in which case go with dredge.
Sure it can get 6+ damage against midrange if landed early, and might make Stasis a little better, but that's not why its on the banned list in my eyes. To be good against anything other than control, you need to get it turn 1, preferably on the play. And I don't think needing a better win condition is what's keeping Stasis from being competitive.