tie between Chandra and Tezzeret. Both are too deck specific where the others can play in a number of different decks/types of play.
Nissa? She's the most narrow one out there. She needs an elf deck to do anything, and she even needs specific cards in addition to her to make the most use. That's not a design I want to see on Planeswalkers...
Anyway, the planeswalkers I find among the "weakest" are...
-Bolas (cool, but far too costly)
-Sarkhan
Sarkhan has a cool ultimate, and threaten on a stick is nifty, but his primary ability isn't of much use in a Red/Green beatdown deck, and the primary abilities of Planeswalkers need to be decent.
I think Chandra Classic could use a little buffing too. She has a lot of loyalty, and her two negative abilities are good, it's just her primary needs a little push. Would Shock for plus one be too overpowered? Sorin seems to prove that isn't necessarily the case.
Don't kid yourself. Affinity was also a robotic deck and was extremely forgiving, even moreso than Jund. I have seen players make all sorts of mistakes when playing Affinity and still beat someone better than them because the deck was that broken.
Jund has nothing on a deck that brutally oppressed one of the worst T2 formats in Magic, causing players to quit the game in droves.
The problem came when Kamigawa showed up, and brought nothing substantial. Ravager Affinity had nothing to punish it that wasn't purely a hate deck, which made for a terrible format.
Say Affinity never got DOTV or the ravager and the Broodstar Affinity build was the optimal one. It never had the raw power of the Ravager build, and it would have made much less of a splash in Onslaught/Mirrodin standard. The thing is, Kamigawa still didn't bring much of anything to the table, so Affinity still would have reigned supreme, even de-powered. While the Ravager/Disciple were pretty broken, Affinity as a mechanic was mostly degenerate because Kamigawa was so terrible. It wasn't so much about Affinity's power as much as Kamigawa's lack of anything*. If a "good" block followed Mirrodin, then maybe Affinity wouldn't be seen in the same light.
*Affinity as a mechanic...Ravager Affinity, the deck, was just wrong.
I'm sorry, but this is flat out ignorance. U/X aggro demands support for their often lacking creature quality, and countering any creature that is better than yours while simultaneously bolstering your crew is flat out SOLID.
In theory, yeah...that sounds super. Problem is, in practice, it seems kinda inapplicable.
In Standard, what kind of Blue aggro deck exists that would make use of this spell? What kind of Blue aggro deck wouldn't have much better options for dealing with creatures via removal in other colors?
In older formats, how does it compete with much better counters available (like that counter-faerie, Mystic Snake, freebie counters, Counterspell, etc.)?
Can you elaborate on how this is good beyond just card advantage theory? Because outside of that, this card seems like a very narrow, conditional, and expensive solution....hence, not very good.
Affinity is way harder to pilot than Jund. If you don't think so, then you haven't played enough Affinity. Not that it was hard compared to something like Gifts Tron, but compared to Jund....
Also the Affinity Mirror match is way cooler than the Jund mirror match. The Jund mirror match is just stupid and everyone hates playing it.
As a guy who played the "wrong build" (Broodstar plus a heavy Blue influence) of Affinity back in the day (pre Darksteel and a little post Darksteel), I'd agree it was far from brainless. Playing around copious amounts of, often maindeck, artifact hate, and knowing how to use all the tools at your disposal (spellbombs, counters, etc.) the right way was far from brainless. Even the aggro version required thought too, though I never played it much, $20-$25 Ravagers was a little too steep for me, seeing as the entirety of my deck beforehand had only cost about $40 to build at the start, and a little trading for Glimmervoids.
Control decks are coming, EVERY new standard format is dominated by agro decks, then control comes later.
That's not necessarily true. After Odyssey rotated out of Standard, control, namely white-based control, was the top deck, mostly because all of it's core components (Exalted Angel, Eternal Dragon, Wrath, Akroma's Vengeance) didn't rotate with Mirrodin and/or Eighth whereas a lot of aggro decks lost a lot (Call of the Herd, Grim Lavamancer), or everything (U/G Madness).
The thing here is that whatever archetype's decks loses the least out of rotation will usually have a powerful showing post-rotation, and this time it was aggro.
As for control needing a few cards to be good...maybe. Mono-Black could be extremely solid if they pick up a good sweeper (come on Mutilate...) and anything Blue-based desperately needs instant speed card draw, or a Blue Wall of Blossoms to even stand a chance, not to mention a solid 2 mana soft counter (like Mana Leak) could also work wonders. White control seems solid enough, it's just that aggro needs to not get a huge boost.
Well...I'd like Suicide Black back for one. Probably the most fun and flavorful kind of aggro out there. But, like most every deck archetype I enjoy, it seems Wizards doesn't.
As for Blue aggro....I don't think it should exist. There are things colors shouldn't be able to do on their own, and aggressive creatures is out of character for Blue. That's why I didn't like Lorwyn's tribal at all. Blue Merfolk were almost as good of beaters as Green or White guys and that doesn't feel right seeing as Blue is not a "creature color" nor a "work together" color.
Are you serious? I find it hard to believe somebody wants the game to be both unbalanced and unfriendly for new players.
Huh? I'm pretty sure Yawgmoth's Win is almost the textbook definition of unbalanced and unfriendly to new players. For the sake of casual balance, it would be a bad idea to print loads of broken, old cards in specialty sets, especially tourney-legal ones. All that will do is make some expensive cards slightly less expensive, and make a lot of kitchen tables be dominated by Type 1 powered decks and will seriously discourage and overwhelm newer players.
I mean, imagine sitting down to play your 5th, maybe 6th game against some guy who combos out on the first turn with a bunch of prohibitively expensive cards (in the eyes of a casual newbie). That would probably discourage them by making it seem like Magic is all about getting money cards and the player with the most money wins...and maybe quit.
I mean....I think that was what he was talkin' bout.
One thing I've never really understood is why some people on this site insist that Mono Blue Control has been a dominant archetype in Type 2 for ages; like some sort of constantly reprinted Academy deck. This just isn't true. While Blue has usually always made a decent showing in decklists, outside of Wizards screwing up hard (Academy, Lorwyn in general) it has never been "Go Blue or go home". Just listing off a smattering of Tier 1 decks with Blue in them over the history of the game, completely out of context, proves little.
Honestly, counterspells aren't all that good nowadays, where an aggro deck can already (and often will) have serious threats on the board by/at turn three, which (assuming they are playing first) is when a control player will have 2 mana open to counter a creature with I Can't Believe It's Not Remove Soul. Then again, almost nobody would run that...so that's another turn the aggro deck would get on mono-blue until they have the mana available for Double Negative....or Cancel.
Mono-blue control will likely never be viable again. It's entire existence was a fluke in which a lot of strong counters and strong instant speed card draw existed all at once. That's never happening again. I can live with that, but that still doesn't mean I don't like the idea of blue-based control going the way of the dodo and counterspells being so...crap.
But counterspells don't seem to be a favorite of Wizards now, which prizes "interactivity" above all else. Funny thing is, a lot of games against control decks packing countermagic where some of the most interactive I've ever played. But it wasn't the cards interacting, like the way Wizards seems to define "interactivity", it was me and my opponent. In the same way that an aggro player has to play around sweepers, people have to play around counterspells...and that's a kind of fun/interstingness that a lot of people probably don't get anymore.
So I'd say print a decent counter or two, or maybe reprint Inspiration or Thirst For Knowledge but with land discard instead of artifact. That would give Blue a fighting chance, but not overpower it.
Nissa? She's the most narrow one out there. She needs an elf deck to do anything, and she even needs specific cards in addition to her to make the most use. That's not a design I want to see on Planeswalkers...
Anyway, the planeswalkers I find among the "weakest" are...
-Bolas (cool, but far too costly)
-Sarkhan
Sarkhan has a cool ultimate, and threaten on a stick is nifty, but his primary ability isn't of much use in a Red/Green beatdown deck, and the primary abilities of Planeswalkers need to be decent.
I think Chandra Classic could use a little buffing too. She has a lot of loyalty, and her two negative abilities are good, it's just her primary needs a little push. Would Shock for plus one be too overpowered? Sorin seems to prove that isn't necessarily the case.
The problem came when Kamigawa showed up, and brought nothing substantial. Ravager Affinity had nothing to punish it that wasn't purely a hate deck, which made for a terrible format.
Say Affinity never got DOTV or the ravager and the Broodstar Affinity build was the optimal one. It never had the raw power of the Ravager build, and it would have made much less of a splash in Onslaught/Mirrodin standard. The thing is, Kamigawa still didn't bring much of anything to the table, so Affinity still would have reigned supreme, even de-powered. While the Ravager/Disciple were pretty broken, Affinity as a mechanic was mostly degenerate because Kamigawa was so terrible. It wasn't so much about Affinity's power as much as Kamigawa's lack of anything*. If a "good" block followed Mirrodin, then maybe Affinity wouldn't be seen in the same light.
*Affinity as a mechanic...Ravager Affinity, the deck, was just wrong.
In theory, yeah...that sounds super. Problem is, in practice, it seems kinda inapplicable.
In Standard, what kind of Blue aggro deck exists that would make use of this spell? What kind of Blue aggro deck wouldn't have much better options for dealing with creatures via removal in other colors?
In older formats, how does it compete with much better counters available (like that counter-faerie, Mystic Snake, freebie counters, Counterspell, etc.)?
Can you elaborate on how this is good beyond just card advantage theory? Because outside of that, this card seems like a very narrow, conditional, and expensive solution....hence, not very good.
As a guy who played the "wrong build" (Broodstar plus a heavy Blue influence) of Affinity back in the day (pre Darksteel and a little post Darksteel), I'd agree it was far from brainless. Playing around copious amounts of, often maindeck, artifact hate, and knowing how to use all the tools at your disposal (spellbombs, counters, etc.) the right way was far from brainless. Even the aggro version required thought too, though I never played it much, $20-$25 Ravagers was a little too steep for me, seeing as the entirety of my deck beforehand had only cost about $40 to build at the start, and a little trading for Glimmervoids.
That's not necessarily true. After Odyssey rotated out of Standard, control, namely white-based control, was the top deck, mostly because all of it's core components (Exalted Angel, Eternal Dragon, Wrath, Akroma's Vengeance) didn't rotate with Mirrodin and/or Eighth whereas a lot of aggro decks lost a lot (Call of the Herd, Grim Lavamancer), or everything (U/G Madness).
The thing here is that whatever archetype's decks loses the least out of rotation will usually have a powerful showing post-rotation, and this time it was aggro.
As for control needing a few cards to be good...maybe. Mono-Black could be extremely solid if they pick up a good sweeper (come on Mutilate...) and anything Blue-based desperately needs instant speed card draw, or a Blue Wall of Blossoms to even stand a chance, not to mention a solid 2 mana soft counter (like Mana Leak) could also work wonders. White control seems solid enough, it's just that aggro needs to not get a huge boost.
As for Blue aggro....I don't think it should exist. There are things colors shouldn't be able to do on their own, and aggressive creatures is out of character for Blue. That's why I didn't like Lorwyn's tribal at all. Blue Merfolk were almost as good of beaters as Green or White guys and that doesn't feel right seeing as Blue is not a "creature color" nor a "work together" color.
Huh? I'm pretty sure Yawgmoth's Win is almost the textbook definition of unbalanced and unfriendly to new players. For the sake of casual balance, it would be a bad idea to print loads of broken, old cards in specialty sets, especially tourney-legal ones. All that will do is make some expensive cards slightly less expensive, and make a lot of kitchen tables be dominated by Type 1 powered decks and will seriously discourage and overwhelm newer players.
I mean, imagine sitting down to play your 5th, maybe 6th game against some guy who combos out on the first turn with a bunch of prohibitively expensive cards (in the eyes of a casual newbie). That would probably discourage them by making it seem like Magic is all about getting money cards and the player with the most money wins...and maybe quit.
I mean....I think that was what he was talkin' bout.
Honestly, counterspells aren't all that good nowadays, where an aggro deck can already (and often will) have serious threats on the board by/at turn three, which (assuming they are playing first) is when a control player will have 2 mana open to counter a creature with I Can't Believe It's Not Remove Soul. Then again, almost nobody would run that...so that's another turn the aggro deck would get on mono-blue until they have the mana available for Double Negative....or Cancel.
Mono-blue control will likely never be viable again. It's entire existence was a fluke in which a lot of strong counters and strong instant speed card draw existed all at once. That's never happening again. I can live with that, but that still doesn't mean I don't like the idea of blue-based control going the way of the dodo and counterspells being so...crap.
But counterspells don't seem to be a favorite of Wizards now, which prizes "interactivity" above all else. Funny thing is, a lot of games against control decks packing countermagic where some of the most interactive I've ever played. But it wasn't the cards interacting, like the way Wizards seems to define "interactivity", it was me and my opponent. In the same way that an aggro player has to play around sweepers, people have to play around counterspells...and that's a kind of fun/interstingness that a lot of people probably don't get anymore.
So I'd say print a decent counter or two, or maybe reprint Inspiration or Thirst For Knowledge but with land discard instead of artifact. That would give Blue a fighting chance, but not overpower it.