Sorry if I kept that argument going past its expiration date. As a mathematician, I just have a hard time with people making logical leaps that I can't follow.
No, not at all. I'd be happy to continue the discussion since not only do I find it interesting but I might learn something useful - I'm a game designer myself, so it's work-related for me. It's just that if we do we should probably take it to PM or something!
And I too am a mathematician, so I completely get where you're coming from with that. But you know how it is with eliminating logical leaps. In doing so, you go from a pithy one-liner to a wall of text!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Never go near the boardroom of a major company. Really, just don't. You wouldn't stop crying for a week.
To be fair, it depends a lot on the sales model of the game. Magic cares a lot about retention and virality, which means that they SHOULD be trying to make their user base happy.
You can't really be like "muah ha ha, how do we milk people through clever marketing" with something like magic. It might work for a console game, or a big board game like Descent, where you're just plopping down 60 dollars for a game once. But with something like magic, you're trying to figure out how to get Joe Customer to A.) spend more money next week and B.) tell his friends about the game.
I don't think Puddlejumper's viewpoint is that naive, but I also don't think that yours is too cynical. In broad strokes, both of you are describing motivations that seem realistic to me.
Also, go Tahn and Sene! Kind of a bummer that it's SUCH a big event, because that means like... X-2 might not make top 8. But... good luck guys!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll be sad if people don't start calling The Chain Veil "Fleetwood Mac."
Also, go Tahn and Sene! Kind of a bummer that it's SUCH a big event, because that means like... X-2 might not make top 8. But... good luck guys!
Tahn's on X-2 after round 12, but with only Nico Bohny still undefeated he's basically only one match off the leading players, so can clearly still T8.
Sene looks like he had a bad first draft, unfortunately.
Edit: I really wish the coverage reporters would get their act together and update the website. Tahn's T16 after Round 13 and the site hasn't updated in ages. Does this even still count as "live" coverage?
Edit2: Tahn's 10th place after Round 14! (Feature match!) Sene's hovering just outside the Top 64 - hopefully he'll be able to cross the boundary in the next two rounds...
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Hi folks, tournament's over. And I didn't really have a bad first draft, but my opponents were pretty adept at topdecking their best spell the turn before they would die (or two turns before in the case of one of them) Army of the Damned and Devil's Play. Yeah... I basically lost to just those cards in two of my matches, after they came off the top.
Still managed to salvage it by winning the last two rounds. I think I played quite well against Gaudenis Vidugiris (I have his number - I beat him in Philly too :p) in some tough games, but didn't play well at all in the first game of the final round, so I lost a game I might have been able to win. Luckily I pulled together, and I'm very satisfied with how I played games 2 and 3. All-in-all I'm happy with this tournament, and I feel like I've been improving a lot as a player recently, which is satisfying.
By the way, Tahn finished X-3, right outside of the top 8. He drafted Werewolves both drafts...
I'll post a more thorough report later, most likely. Didn't post one for Philly since I didn't want to write about my modern matches, and since I went 1-5 in limited there it would have been all whining about how I mulliganed to five 1.75 times per match
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Nice work Tahn and Sene in Italy! I was not able to make it to FNM this weekend, so I'm jonesing for some more Innistrad right now.
I did get in a couple of TPF drafts online. The first was ok: played BR and lost in round 2. The second draft was WUb. I had a minor rebels theme and I found a way to splash Null Profusion, which won me at least two games. It was nice to see that people still don't know how good that card is (I got it like 7th pick). I also got a late Jodah's Avenger (4th pick). I'm pretty sure I splashed those guys any chance I got. And he also helped me win a couple games. I lost in the finals. I couldn't race against Sprout Swarm+Essence Warden (not sure anyone can for that matter).
I'm probably going to try to get one more TPF draft in tonight or tomorrow. Hopefully I can win the draft and have three full draft sets to draft Nix-Tix.
I played two TPF over the weekend, man that format is fun. I went 0-1 in my first draft, which I thought was a pretty sweet grixia control deck, but I didn't have any great finishers and couldn't draw my sweeper when I needed it. Next draft I went 1-1, losing match two in incredibly close race to double removal spell on his last turn to swing for the win. That deck was a pretty neat RUG deck, green ramp, the red XXR fireball with free splitting, U for card advantage. I had an Intet, the dreamer as my primary win con but also some Gathan Raiders. Overall I love all the weird interactions in the format that are just neat to observe and play against, but it's really hard to win a previously close game against sprout swarm.
Hey guys, just got home from Milan. 15th is pretty nice so I'm quite happy, of course making top 8 would've been better but I can't complain about a top 16 really. I definitely made some suboptimal decisions and my Sealed pool was weak as well, so I was really happy to escape with a totally unexpected 9-1 record. Here's the deck I registered:
(Just try to count the cards that can actually win games in those decks. I never even drew Dearly Departed in any of my games!)
During the byes Levy spent some time looking over my pool; the deck he built was the WUr deck above minus Spectral Flight and Dissipate, and plus two Delver of Secrets. He likes that card. I tried it out in some of my matches (although I could never bring myself to bring both in, only one) and I still don't like it, so by the end I didn't bring it in anymore. I always sideboarded into the second deck, more or less. Depending on what I saw game 1, I could keep in cards like Armored Skaab and One-Eyed Scarecrow, or take out cards like Spectral Flight; and as I said I experimented with the Delver. Something important that is often overlooked imo is that you don't only sideboard for your opponent's deck, but also for how he plays. Does he play around Dissipate, Rebuke? Or for example, against an opponent who I noticed in game one was too eager to spend removal soon, I left in Spectral Flight (which I was originally planning to board out, going to Lévy's list) because it would be easy to land it once I knew he had no removal.
I can't tell a whole lot about day one unfortunately. Although both of my decks were quite mediocre, I rather easily went 9-1, because most of my opponents played really bad, and I also won several games because my opponents were mana screwed.
Day two was all about the Wolves. In case you wondered, this was definitely not a predetermined strategy. In fact, my colour order is blue > white > other. What happened is that in the first draft I opened Kruin Outlaw // Terror of Kruin Pass. Now the entertaining rule for this GP was that when opening your booster, you had to show the flip card to everyone around the table for about 15 seconds before you got to start your pick. And of course when you pick a DFC everyone can see it. So opening a rare DFC is retardedly good, because everyone around you will stay out of that colour. And by consequence, you are committed to your pick, and the draft is very easy. So I just took some red cards, and eventually went green as my second colour, and the draft was easy. Oh and the guy to my left opened the other red rare Wolf in pack two.
In the second draft I opened Kruin's Outlaw, showed it to all players and... yeah. I noticed no green flip cards were opened in the first pack, so green would be underdrafted probably. So from pick one I knew I was going to draft GR Werewolves again. INTERESTING DRAFT FORMAT.
Yeah that's a flavorful 12 Werewolves, 2 Wolves creature base. Apparently Victim of Night was not so good against me. Both decks went 2-1 which seems about right. I could never win the match I lost for top 8; the guy had two times the Vampire Lord that makes tokens (I shipped him the second in pack three, taking Blasphemous Act); the rest of his deck was solid UB control with double Alchemy, good control cards, and a splashed Blashemous Act. (Is that card really rare? I saw like ten of them during the tournament.)
Sorry for the short 'report', it's getting late and I mostly just wanted to get the decklists typed up before going to bed. Maybe I'll remember some interesting situations later, but now I'm too tired.
You really just need to embrace the rage. I keep a small colony of hamsters next to my computer and every time I lose a match to mana screw I throw one against the wall.
Not at all - thanks for typing in the lists. I must admit to being nothing short of shocked that it can be correct not to maindeck Armored Skaab or One-Eyed Scarecrow in U/X when Doomed Traveller makes the cut!
Or is it that Doomed Traveller was a marginal 23rd card on the basis of good synergy with your deck's plan? Although... you don't even have power boosting equipment. It still just seems really weak to me.
This really deserves to be a new post (stupid forum rules) but I'm not patient enough to wait to announce it...
Gavin Verhey (Lesurgo) has been offered and accepted a job with WotC R&D! As well as being good news because he's generally awesome, it's particularly good news from a Limited perspective since Gavin's a guy who really gets Limited. Indeed, he's a former moderator of Salvation's own Limited forum! It will be a while before we see any sets he's worked on of course. But still...
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
My report will not be short, let's just put it that way. I wrote nine pages tonight, and that was without the entire sealed pool (which I'll add when I find it). The internet at the hostel where I currently stay went down yesterday, so I figured I might as well write report, seeing as I couldn't really do anything else constructive I'll post it in a matter of minutes.
And Gavin Verhey getting the internship was pretty far from unexpected in my eyes, I've been waiting for it to happen for a while now Can't help feeling good for him, he's a terrific guy, and I had to post a congratulatory post on his Facebook too.
Thanks guys! Out of curiosity, as frequent limited players whose opinions I respect, what would you like to see changed - either added or removed - in future limited environments? What are some problems you feel exist in modern age Limited formats, and what have we done right that you would like to continue to see?
This is specifically in reference to the individual cards - sorry, I doubt I'll really be able to do a ton about set size.
I'd love to hear your feedback!
(And I know I'm not a clan member, but hopefully you have it in you to excuse the interruption. )
What are some problems you feel exist in modern age Limited formats, and what have we done right that you would like to continue to see?
My top three things would be:
1) Cards which encourage archetypes that are not just colour combinations (bonus points if they're not tribal either).
2) Cards which are decent but for which outright removing them (or countering them) is not the best solution. Too many Limited games come down to "remove this or lose" and Magic is diverse enough that this need not be the case. In fact in general any opportunity to make Limited less about removal without losing the interactivity would be good.
3) Cards which make people want to sideboard in interesting ways. Sideboarding in Limited is often a bit crude (he has flyers, in comes Wing Puncture) but it doesn't have to be. Recent example of success in this respect: Soul Parry vs Infect.
And of course there are lots of things I'd like to see continue. Most importantly, since Onslaught there has been a gradual improvement in the playability of the junk cards in each set. This is great news for Limited. Fewer Dripping Dead, more Blessing of Leeches! Long may it continue!
But most of all, just do all the stuff you've been advocating all along. After all, I remarked of Culvion that it really felt like an R&D set... and now you have a chance to introduce all the best ideas into real sets. Sounds good to me!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Per your question: The first limited format I played was RGD. I had just gotten back into Magic after a 9 year absence. Even though I was terrible, I immediately fell in love with drafting. Anytime they bring it back for Nix-Tix, I will gladly draft RGD online. The more I've played it recently, the more I've realized that I don't just like it because of the challenge of drafting the guilds, its because there aren't that many bombs. It seems like so many of the formats now come down to: "I felt pretty good about my deck, but he had (name a bomb) and I couldn't answer it," or "Luckily I drew my bomb first and was able to squeak through?" Sure there are often archtypes available that can be too fast for people relying on bombs, but then we're losing some of the interactivity.
I understand Wizards needs to continue making splashy cards at times, and RGD did have some cards that weresick when drafted, but there never seemed to be an overwhelming number of them. The first draft I ever won was a deck that had no bombs. It just had a perfect curve (and not a single card that cost more than 6 mana). It taught me a ton.
The other thing is, I don't agree with Tom LaPille. What made me a better player was getting beat by "gotcha" plays. It's really hard to learn to play better if you don't ever have a chance to make mistakes (and learn from them).
First, congrats Gavin. From what I understand, you've been aiming to get a job at Wizards, and you got the first step. Make the most of your internship; make sure they really get to recognize your skills, and hopefully you'll be able to get a permanent job at R&D.
3) Cards which make people want to sideboard in interesting ways. Sideboarding in Limited is often a bit crude (he has flyers, in comes Wing Puncture) but it doesn't have to be. Recent example of success in this respect: Soul Parry vs Infect.
I feel like this is actually mostly because players don't look further than the crude sideboard options, rather than the less obvious options not being there. I am absolutely convinced that people don't sideboard nearly enough in Limited. They only do the obvious things like landwalkers or flier-hate. I've said before that even vanilla creatures can be important sideboard material. Sideboarding is about what sort of threats your opponent has, what sort of threats you want to have, how he plays, how the tempo of the match-up develops, and so much more. And this goes so much further than specific hate cards.
As you said there hasn't been much complete trash in recent sets, and this means you always have sideboard options.
My main two points about Limited:
- If you really need to make splashy rares that wreck Limited games, please push them to Mythic - and don't make to many of them. The whole Scars block was infected with them (dat pun) and it was imo the major reason I didn't enjoy it much. Innistrad seems much better in that sense; there are some rares I'd rather not see, but at least they don't kill all your guys upon resolving. Having too many of them really hurts Limited play.
- I like to see possibilities for card and tempo advantage in every colour, and preferably lots of them - but balanced for Limited. One thing I liked about Scars of Mirrodin (the set, not the block) was that several effects that are traditionally very strong in Limited were appropriately costed for Limited - something that hasn't always been the case. Examples are Instill Infection, Trigon of Thought, Trigon of Infestation, most Equipments,... although there were some offenders like Oxidda Scrapmelter. In Innistrad I find this too. There are very few uncommons that are just better than any common - imo Murder of Crows is the best one, and that's pretty tame really. The 'Flametongue' of the set, Morkrut Banshee, is not that easy to use, and even requires a specific deck to be optimal. That's great. Cards like Think Twice and Forbidden Alchemy are great because they allow slower decks to reliably draft card advantage, but at the same time they are slow enough that aggressive decks can simply be too fast for them (much like Trigons). Basically this allows a healthy mix of aggro and control decks, and that mix is what makes or breaks a Limited format.
You really just need to embrace the rage. I keep a small colony of hamsters next to my computer and every time I lose a match to mana screw I throw one against the wall.
Thanks guys! Out of curiosity, as frequent limited players whose opinions I respect, what would you like to see changed - either added or removed - in future limited environments? What are some problems you feel exist in modern age Limited formats, and what have we done right that you would like to continue to see?
This is specifically in reference to the individual cards - sorry, I doubt I'll really be able to do a ton about set size.
I'd love to hear your feedback!
(And I know I'm not a clan member, but hopefully you have it in you to excuse the interruption. )
Congrats on your new gig!
As for limited formats, I always have quite a bit to say, but I'll keep it short:
1. I don't particularly like the fact that there exist a bunch of cards in Innistrad that are cumbersome to play from a physical standpoint. I like the gameplay functionality of the DFCs, but they're more of a hassle to use than I'd like. Add to that the awkwardness involved in randomizing graveyard targets (Ghoulraiser and Woodland Sleuth), and you have a set that can be annoying to play, even if it works well in the realm of Magic Online. This might be too specific, but I worry that the creative team is going to continue to explore design space that moves the game in this kind of direction, and I personally don't think it's necessary.
2. I think it's important to draw a fine line between theme and functionality. Sure, it's cool to make a set with a gothic theme, but it seems to me that the most interesting cards in the set, as in the ones that create the most tension for players (Snapcaster Mage, Liliana, Garruk, Blasphemous Act, Forbidden Alchemy, and the like) don't really fit as well within the gothic theme. The article MaRo wrote about this really bothered me, especially the part about Cellar Door. When you're designing cards for flavor first, the results tend to be mixed, and the pride MaRo feels for creating a card like Cellar Door is really quite disconcerting, as the card is cumbersome in the same way that the examples in #1 outlined, and it's really just a terrible card in general. Time Spiral and Ravnica were fantastic blocks all around in this regard, IMO, as the cards fit within the set's flavor but were still very functional and were clearly designed for function first and then made to work within the set's themes.
3. I dislike that the game is moving away from play on the opponent's turn. In LaPille's latest article, he wrote that the development team wanted to avoid "gotcha" moments, when a player feels bad for having either fallen victim to an on-board trick or forgotten it existed. The issue, though, is that these are skill testing moments, and they don't destroy the functionality of the game. Answers are a hugely important aspect of limited play, and limiting (har!) their effectiveness and making them sorceries does very little more than frustrate players who need more clever answers to their opponents. I submit that it feels much worse to know that you can't trick your opponent into a 2-for-1 because Silent Departure is a sorcery than it does to be punished for greed. It's easier to learn from a situation in which you get blown out by an instant speed removal or tempo spell than it is from one in which you're left facing down a now unkillable threat with nothing but sorcery speed answers at your disposal.
Note that I'm not suggesting Silent Departure should've been an instant; I'm aware that would be nuts. However, his reasoning for making it a sorcery was so obtuse and insulting, I couldn't help but be annoyed. If you're using Flashback, then the quantity of your graveyard should be a concern at all times anyway.
4. Lastly, and this is a big one for me, I crave competitive balance between archetypes. There's no way to guarantee this, of course, but the best limited formats have been those in which any basic archetype outside of combo is draftable and strong under a few not-so-rigid conditions. Formats like Zendikar and M12 were really troublesome, as they were so rawly aggressive and rarely rewarded control or midrange strategies. Rise of the Eldrazi, M10, and M11 were on the exact opposite end of that spectrum, essentially eschewing the possibility of there being more than one purely aggressive deck at any given draft table (and that deck would likely lose to the controlling builds, anyway).
I know this is less than concrete, but I simply don't like being funneled one way or another before I open my first pack. The conversations of how fast an entire format is did not exist as pervasively in the past, but nowadays people expect to be able to define them relatively unilaterally. Even if it's as simple as a rock-paper-scissors model between aggro, control, and midrange, I prefer being able to choose my path as I draft and build rather than have to completely avoid an archetype due to its lack of efficacy in the environment.
I realize that's a lot more than the snippet I promised, but I guess I'm like a bowling ball on a hill: once I start rolling, there's no stopping me until the terrain flattens.
Again, enjoy the internship, and hopefully you can help to ensure that limited Magic continues to be our obsession!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Providing a plethora of pompous and pedantic postings here since 2009.
:dance:Fact or Fiction of the [Limited] Clan:dance:
Signalling is like farting: it's a natural thing that helps people avoid being where you are, and if you try to do it deliberately, things turn to crap fast.
Quote from Hardened »
I hereby found the American Chapter of the Zealots of Semantics. All glory to The Curmudgeon.
I agree with most of the points that have been made here - certainly my suggestion would be the same as Tahn's when it comes to bomb rares. Those have always been a part of limited, and that is fine, but in Scars there were just way too many of them. I feel the format was a lot worse because someone would just play their Carnifex Demon, and the game would just be over. Not only were there a lot of cards like that, there were also very few answers, and that is not a good combination. Randomly losing on a regular basis because someone happens to have a ridiculous, almost unanswerable card is not too fun. I feel the mythic rarity should be the home of these kinds of cards, since otherwise there are too many of them in any given draft. That, or don't print them at all Remember LSV's match against Thopter Assembly?
In addition to what the others have said, I like cards that provide lots of options. I don't want the good cards to be vanilla or "French vanilla" (those should generally be curve-fillers and 23rd cards, in my opinion, like Riot Devils - I'm happy that card exists), but to have different modes (kicker, cycling, morph, evoke, etc, come to mind) so you're presented with a choice every time you have them in your hand. Not every card (they might have overdone this in Time Spiral, although I enjoyed that a whole lot), but more than there are in the current sets.
And I very much agree with Semantic's point about instant speed tricks. Setting them up or playing around them is in my opinion an important part of limited Magic, and I'm not at all a fan of moving away from those. Village Bell-Ringer is a nice one though, I like that kind of cards.
Thanks guys! Out of curiosity, as frequent limited players whose opinions I respect, what would you like to see changed - either added or removed - in future limited environments? What are some problems you feel exist in modern age Limited formats, and what have we done right that you would like to continue to see?
This is specifically in reference to the individual cards - sorry, I doubt I'll really be able to do a ton about set size.
I'd love to hear your feedback!
(And I know I'm not a clan member, but hopefully you have it in you to excuse the interruption. )
One thing that really excited me about Ravnica block was the fact that every set release made drafting into a completely new experience. I realize that's true to some extent with every block, but Guildpact and Dissension had, in the guilds, some very obvious themes that drastically affected the metagame of what decks were worth aiming for. I would love to see something similar happen someday in a future block.
I mean, in Scars, for example, the Infect deck from triple Scars was a very different beast from the one in NMS, but it was still the same basic idea. Dinosaurs was also a deck that pretty much survived the whole block, in terms of overall strategy. If you had the hang of just playing NMS, triple Scars drafting wouldn't hold any surprises for you about the kinds of available decks, and that's a shame. WotC haven't really made a block where different themes had sufficient support to justify playing between set releases since Rav ended*.
On another, related, note, I like it when there feels like there's a metagame. By which I mean, I like sets where low-pick cards enable situationally strong decks to the point where those deck regularly make an appearance and can have gameplay decisions made specifically because "Oh, he's playing THAT archetype." The self-mill strategy in Innistrad is a good example, but I'd like to see some more interactive decks in that vein. Having cards that seem unplayable except against situational decks like that lead to some fun aha! moments, for example.
I really enjoy decks that play in unconventional ways, like the Wall deck from RoE, or the Orzhov deck from Rav Block, and I would love to see more decks that are focused on winning outside of the red zone. I'd also second bat's idea of threats that get dealt with by stuff other than removal. Removal.dec is consistently a good strategy in limited, even though it's a patently unfun deck, and having cards that don't care if your opponent has removal, but care if he can do something else, would make having removal.dec a lot less worthwhile of a strategy. Werewolves are an interesting move in that direction, but it isn't nearly enough, being honest.
Anyway, I'm curious: I don't think there are any MTGS forum members that are known to be members of R&D, or to have access to them. Are you going to be allowed to still post here once you officially come on with them? I could see potential problems with that.
*Possible exception with Alara block, since I didn't play that year.
Wit's End is the PERFECT answer to your opponent's Monomania however.
Just hold on to your Wit's End when they Monomania, so you can Wit's End them on your next turn!!!
I think this is fairly reminiscent of the "Jace Battles" we have seen in past standards.. My guess is we will soon witness the great Monomania-Wit's End battles.
I feel like this is actually mostly because players don't look further than the crude sideboard options
Yeah, some truth in that, although I usually find that in that sense I'm pre-boarded for most opponents because only the very best players build extreme decks (very fast aggro or very slow control).
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Random bonus report - my three biggest play mistakes at GP Milan:
3) I managed to cast a Village Bell-Ringer in my turn, precombat, and then attacked with two guys. What happened: I needed to cast something to prevent a Hanweir Watchkeep from flipping, but I was thinking quite long about what I'd play, since I had some options but they all lost quite a bit of value from casting them at that point. Eventually I decided on the Bell-Ringer, and immediately played it, because I had been tanking so long. Then, of course I attacked with my two 1/1 flying Spirits, which looked really stupid of course, but oh well. I wasn't going to block with them anyway.
2) In my last match for top 16, in the third game, I had a great board position. I had a 7/7 Lumberknot, and three flipped Wolves: the 4/6, the 5/5 regenerate, and the 3/3 intimidate. My opponent had 7 Mountains (he was mono red) and Pitchburn Devils in play, and just one card in hand. I was at 9, he was at 15.
My hand was Blasphemous Act, Ranger's Guile, Reckless Waif, Moonmist. What's the play?
I figured there were only two relevant cards he could have or topdeck: Devil's Play and Blasphemous Act. What I did was attack with everything, then play Moonmist after he blocked Lumberknot, and after combat Reckless Waif. This way his Devils didn't die, and my Waif could chumpblock it, so I wouldn't die to Devil's Play. I would lose everything to Blasphemous Act, but I reasoned that wasn't so bad, as Devil's Play meant straight up losing, while against if he drew Act, I wasn't dead yet; I even had my own to kill his first guys. However my big mistake was that I didn't realize that with the line of play I chose, my Werewolves flipped, and when my opponent pointed it out I just flipped them immediately. Of course I should have realized this, and the answer was then to put two regeneration shields on Ulvenwald Mystics in response to the flip trigger, so it would survive both Blasphemous Act and the Pitchburn Devils trigger. This way I play around both cards.
(He drew another Mountain and conceded. He flipped a couple more cards from the top of his deck and showed... Blasphemous Act.)
1) The biggest screw-up of the day may even have cost me the match I lost in the first draft. I had Hanweir Watchkeep in play, and my opponent (GW) passed with three mana up. It flipped, and I just assumed he had Rebuke, figured there was nothing I could do about that, and attacked without playing my fourth land first... with a Geistflame in my graveyard. Ouch.
You really just need to embrace the rage. I keep a small colony of hamsters next to my computer and every time I lose a match to mana screw I throw one against the wall.
First, let me join the bandwagon at congratulating Lesurgo. I r teh jealous. I can't really comment on Limited formats enough, since I have not the qualifications for that compared to others whom have already gone bonkers with it.
Secondly, Sene, after reading your GP Milan report (TLDR NEXT TIME SHEESH <- kidding), I think you need to change your avatar and everything over from Mulldrifter to Mikaeus. He's your buddy and you keep your friends close, right?
Thanks for all of the feedback guys! I certainly agree with a lot of what was said. I totally am behind things like having lots of different archetypes (and cards that create archetypes!), most bomb rares at mythic, and a balance between control and beatdown cards.
I all more into the LaPille camp with "gotcha" cards, but I do agree that some of those cards can exist. I also think there's plenty of room under "gotcha" and more in the line of "instant speed trick" that can be explored. For example, Giant Growth isn't a "gotcha" card. Giant Growth is awesome! If it's coming out of your hand, it's expected that it can happen. It's just when someone constantly misses something they should have known about that it can be an issue.
I just wanted to touch on a few specific and interesting points I had questions about.
2) Cards which are decent but for which outright removing them (or countering them) is not the best solution. Too many Limited games come down to "remove this or lose" and Magic is diverse enough that this need not be the case. In fact in general any opportunity to make Limited less about removal without losing the interactivity would be good.
Can you provide some examples so I have a more concrete idea of what you mean? Do you mean something in the vein of Reassembling Skeleton, or something else entirely?
Add to that the awkwardness involved in randomizing graveyard targets (Ghoulraiser and Woodland Sleuth), and you have a set that can be annoying to play, even if it works well in the realm of Magic Online. This might be too specific, but I worry that the creative team is going to continue to explore design space that moves the game in this kind of direction, and I personally don't think it's necessary.
I don't think this is really creative's fault, it's pretty much all R&D. For what it's worth, I agree with you - common effects that are cumbersome and take time to resolve (as most random effects are) are something I am very against.
Anyway, I'm curious: I don't think there are any MTGS forum members that are known to be members of R&D, or to have access to them. Are you going to be allowed to still post here once you officially come on with them? I could see potential problems with that.
I would certainly not expect my posts here to be very common.
Also Lesurgo, as a fellow game designer, I just want to say good luck. It's fine and dandy to talk about all these changes we want, like designing coherent sets/themes/archetypes/sideboard cards, but most of the time in an actual environment you just don't have enough time and soul to put into every little piece in every part of the pipeline. So 1) Learn which of your fellow designers you can trust; 2) Don't ever be bothered when producers or leads go over your head and do something wrong, it happens. Do the best you can, and try to move towards a product you can be proud of at the end of the day.
It's a lot harder than it seems initially to design things that function on a deep and satisfying level.
@Lesurgo - One of the biggest game design principals I believe in is something that my creative director said several years ago.
"A game is a series of interesting decisions."
This statement has been quoted, parodied, backed up, and fought over in many game design publications and conferences, but at the core, I think that it applies greatly to magic.
Why are cards like Mulldrifter and Stormfront Riders so much fun to first pick in Cube and draft? Why are planeswalkers (a very difficult card type) so popular with new players? Why do people draft in the first place?
People love cards that give them the opportunity to feel like they did something smart, or outplayed their opponent. Winning because you chose the right modes with a Cryptic Command feels so much more satisfying than winning because your opponent couldn't beat an Oversoul of Dusk.
I know that most of those cards are pretty powerful, but those are the cards that I want to see more of in future draft sets. When I see a top table of drafters, I want to see them use late pick cards in a way that surprises and impresses me. I don't want to see an obvious P1p1 dragon or something.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
I'll be sad if people don't start calling The Chain Veil "Fleetwood Mac."
Can you provide some examples so I have a more concrete idea of what you mean? Do you mean something in the vein of Reassembling Skeleton, or something else entirely?
It's hard to find a single card example because WotC don't do this much, but the Goblins in Lorwyn are the best embodiment of this principle I've seen at Common. Each one advances the deck's gameplan a little, but there's no one card which the opponent is desperate to spot remove after which they will probably win.
Compare with Merfolk in the same set where Silvergill Dowser just gets killed on sight, but if you don't kill it you just lose.
Existing examples tend to involve things like comes-into-play triggers, leaves-play triggers, effects which trigger when killing things or hitting the opponent, effects which trigger when you play other things... but it's not the mechanics which matter, it's the principle that the pattern of a single card threat that is usually either answered by 1-for-1 removal or wins is overrepresented in Limited Magic at the moment.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
--
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
My favourite limited environments are the ones where play is rewarded more than draw. In Zendikar Limited, losing one land drop often meant the difference between a win and a loss. In Rise of Eldrazi one could win a game after losing a few land drops and the cards allowed for a lot of combos and tricks. It was a pretty deep set and you could even play aggro with decent success. So fra i'm liking the cards from Innistrad as it has a lot of combos and tricks but it supports aggro a bit more than Rise did, in a way it's more balanced.
I also agree with the sentiment that bombs should be located moreso at a mythic rare level. Scars had so many redicilous bombs that you would just lose to and set left a really bad taste in my mouth.
TL;DR: More sets with support to both control and aggro as well as synergistic cards. It should feel like drafting a well designed cube!
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
@Stoyrm on Twitter
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
No, not at all. I'd be happy to continue the discussion since not only do I find it interesting but I might learn something useful - I'm a game designer myself, so it's work-related for me. It's just that if we do we should probably take it to PM or something!
And I too am a mathematician, so I completely get where you're coming from with that. But you know how it is with eliminating logical leaps. In doing so, you go from a pithy one-liner to a wall of text!
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
To be fair, it depends a lot on the sales model of the game. Magic cares a lot about retention and virality, which means that they SHOULD be trying to make their user base happy.
You can't really be like "muah ha ha, how do we milk people through clever marketing" with something like magic. It might work for a console game, or a big board game like Descent, where you're just plopping down 60 dollars for a game once. But with something like magic, you're trying to figure out how to get Joe Customer to A.) spend more money next week and B.) tell his friends about the game.
I don't think Puddlejumper's viewpoint is that naive, but I also don't think that yours is too cynical. In broad strokes, both of you are describing motivations that seem realistic to me.
Also, go Tahn and Sene! Kind of a bummer that it's SUCH a big event, because that means like... X-2 might not make top 8. But... good luck guys!
Tahn's on X-2 after round 12, but with only Nico Bohny still undefeated he's basically only one match off the leading players, so can clearly still T8.
Sene looks like he had a bad first draft, unfortunately.
Edit: I really wish the coverage reporters would get their act together and update the website. Tahn's T16 after Round 13 and the site hasn't updated in ages. Does this even still count as "live" coverage?
Edit2: Tahn's 10th place after Round 14! (Feature match!) Sene's hovering just outside the Top 64 - hopefully he'll be able to cross the boundary in the next two rounds...
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Still managed to salvage it by winning the last two rounds. I think I played quite well against Gaudenis Vidugiris (I have his number - I beat him in Philly too :p) in some tough games, but didn't play well at all in the first game of the final round, so I lost a game I might have been able to win. Luckily I pulled together, and I'm very satisfied with how I played games 2 and 3. All-in-all I'm happy with this tournament, and I feel like I've been improving a lot as a player recently, which is satisfying.
By the way, Tahn finished X-3, right outside of the top 8. He drafted Werewolves both drafts...
I'll post a more thorough report later, most likely. Didn't post one for Philly since I didn't want to write about my modern matches, and since I went 1-5 in limited there it would have been all whining about how I mulliganed to five 1.75 times per match
Interesting and unexpected!
I look forward to both your reports.
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
I did get in a couple of TPF drafts online. The first was ok: played BR and lost in round 2. The second draft was WUb. I had a minor rebels theme and I found a way to splash Null Profusion, which won me at least two games. It was nice to see that people still don't know how good that card is (I got it like 7th pick). I also got a late Jodah's Avenger (4th pick). I'm pretty sure I splashed those guys any chance I got. And he also helped me win a couple games. I lost in the finals. I couldn't race against Sprout Swarm+Essence Warden (not sure anyone can for that matter).
I'm probably going to try to get one more TPF draft in tonight or tomorrow. Hopefully I can win the draft and have three full draft sets to draft Nix-Tix.
1 Gatstaf Shepherd
1 Orchard Spirit
1 Tree of Redemption
1 Festerhide Boar
1 Somberwald Spider
1 Grizzled Outcasts
1 Caravan Vigil
1 Ranger's Guile
1 Stitcher's Apprentice
1 Armored Skaab
1 Murder of Crows
1 Battleground Geist
1 Think Twice
1 Spectral Flight
1 Dissipate
1 Claustrophobia
1 Harvest Pyre
1 Blasphemous Act
1 Blazing Torch
1 One-Eyed Scarecrow
1 Traveler's Amulet
1 Shimmering Grotto
2 Mountain
6 Island
7 Forest
And here's the deck I would register now (and more or less what I sideboarded into):
1 Cloistered Youth
1 Chapel Geist
1 Elder Cathar
1 Village Bell-Ringer
2 Mausoleum Guard
1 Dearly Departed
1 Moment of Heroism
1 Rebuke
1 Rally the Peasants
1 Midnight Haunting
1 Stitcher's Apprentice
1 Murder of Crows
1 Battleground Geist
1 Think Twice
1 Spectral Flight
1 Dissipate
1 Claustrophobia
1 Harvest Pyre
1 Blasphemous Act
1 Traveler's Amulet
1 Shimmering Grotto
1 Mountain
7 Island
7 Plains
(Just try to count the cards that can actually win games in those decks. I never even drew Dearly Departed in any of my games!)
During the byes Levy spent some time looking over my pool; the deck he built was the WUr deck above minus Spectral Flight and Dissipate, and plus two Delver of Secrets. He likes that card. I tried it out in some of my matches (although I could never bring myself to bring both in, only one) and I still don't like it, so by the end I didn't bring it in anymore. I always sideboarded into the second deck, more or less. Depending on what I saw game 1, I could keep in cards like Armored Skaab and One-Eyed Scarecrow, or take out cards like Spectral Flight; and as I said I experimented with the Delver. Something important that is often overlooked imo is that you don't only sideboard for your opponent's deck, but also for how he plays. Does he play around Dissipate, Rebuke? Or for example, against an opponent who I noticed in game one was too eager to spend removal soon, I left in Spectral Flight (which I was originally planning to board out, going to Lévy's list) because it would be easy to land it once I knew he had no removal.
I can't tell a whole lot about day one unfortunately. Although both of my decks were quite mediocre, I rather easily went 9-1, because most of my opponents played really bad, and I also won several games because my opponents were mana screwed.
Day two was all about the Wolves. In case you wondered, this was definitely not a predetermined strategy. In fact, my colour order is blue > white > other. What happened is that in the first draft I opened Kruin Outlaw // Terror of Kruin Pass. Now the entertaining rule for this GP was that when opening your booster, you had to show the flip card to everyone around the table for about 15 seconds before you got to start your pick. And of course when you pick a DFC everyone can see it. So opening a rare DFC is retardedly good, because everyone around you will stay out of that colour. And by consequence, you are committed to your pick, and the draft is very easy. So I just took some red cards, and eventually went green as my second colour, and the draft was easy. Oh and the guy to my left opened the other red rare Wolf in pack two.
1 Darkthicket Wolf
2 Gatstaf Shepherd
1 Kruin Outlaw
1 Hanweir Watchkeep
3 Crossway Vampire
1 Feral Ridgewolf
1 Instigator Gang
3 Tormented Pariah
1 Prey Upon
3 Moonmist
1 Full Moon's Rise
1 Make a Wish
1 Into the Maw of Hell
8 Forest
In the second draft I opened Kruin's Outlaw, showed it to all players and... yeah. I noticed no green flip cards were opened in the first pack, so green would be underdrafted probably. So from pick one I knew I was going to draft GR Werewolves again. INTERESTING DRAFT FORMAT.
3 Village Ironsmith
1 Gatstaf Shepherd
1 Darkthicket Wolf
1 Kessig Wolf
2 Villagers of Estwald
1 Kruin Outlaw
2 Ulvenwald Mystics
1 Tormented Pariah
1 Grizzled Outcasts
1 Prey Upon
1 Geistflame
2 Moonmist
1 Sharpened Pitchfork
1 Cobbled Wings
1 Blasphemous Act
8 Mountain
Yeah that's a flavorful 12 Werewolves, 2 Wolves creature base. Apparently Victim of Night was not so good against me. Both decks went 2-1 which seems about right. I could never win the match I lost for top 8; the guy had two times the Vampire Lord that makes tokens (I shipped him the second in pack three, taking Blasphemous Act); the rest of his deck was solid UB control with double Alchemy, good control cards, and a splashed Blashemous Act. (Is that card really rare? I saw like ten of them during the tournament.)
Sorry for the short 'report', it's getting late and I mostly just wanted to get the decklists typed up before going to bed. Maybe I'll remember some interesting situations later, but now I'm too tired.
Double Bloodline Keeper? Ouch!
Not at all - thanks for typing in the lists. I must admit to being nothing short of shocked that it can be correct not to maindeck Armored Skaab or One-Eyed Scarecrow in U/X when Doomed Traveller makes the cut!
Or is it that Doomed Traveller was a marginal 23rd card on the basis of good synergy with your deck's plan? Although... you don't even have power boosting equipment. It still just seems really weak to me.
This really deserves to be a new post (stupid forum rules) but I'm not patient enough to wait to announce it...
Gavin Verhey (Lesurgo) has been offered and accepted a job with WotC R&D! As well as being good news because he's generally awesome, it's particularly good news from a Limited perspective since Gavin's a guy who really gets Limited. Indeed, he's a former moderator of Salvation's own Limited forum! It will be a while before we see any sets he's worked on of course. But still...
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
And Gavin Verhey getting the internship was pretty far from unexpected in my eyes, I've been waiting for it to happen for a while now Can't help feeling good for him, he's a terrific guy, and I had to post a congratulatory post on his Facebook too.
This is specifically in reference to the individual cards - sorry, I doubt I'll really be able to do a ton about set size.
I'd love to hear your feedback!
(And I know I'm not a clan member, but hopefully you have it in you to excuse the interruption. )
My top three things would be:
1) Cards which encourage archetypes that are not just colour combinations (bonus points if they're not tribal either).
2) Cards which are decent but for which outright removing them (or countering them) is not the best solution. Too many Limited games come down to "remove this or lose" and Magic is diverse enough that this need not be the case. In fact in general any opportunity to make Limited less about removal without losing the interactivity would be good.
3) Cards which make people want to sideboard in interesting ways. Sideboarding in Limited is often a bit crude (he has flyers, in comes Wing Puncture) but it doesn't have to be. Recent example of success in this respect: Soul Parry vs Infect.
And of course there are lots of things I'd like to see continue. Most importantly, since Onslaught there has been a gradual improvement in the playability of the junk cards in each set. This is great news for Limited. Fewer Dripping Dead, more Blessing of Leeches! Long may it continue!
But most of all, just do all the stuff you've been advocating all along. After all, I remarked of Culvion that it really felt like an R&D set... and now you have a chance to introduce all the best ideas into real sets. Sounds good to me!
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
Per your question: The first limited format I played was RGD. I had just gotten back into Magic after a 9 year absence. Even though I was terrible, I immediately fell in love with drafting. Anytime they bring it back for Nix-Tix, I will gladly draft RGD online. The more I've played it recently, the more I've realized that I don't just like it because of the challenge of drafting the guilds, its because there aren't that many bombs. It seems like so many of the formats now come down to: "I felt pretty good about my deck, but he had (name a bomb) and I couldn't answer it," or "Luckily I drew my bomb first and was able to squeak through?" Sure there are often archtypes available that can be too fast for people relying on bombs, but then we're losing some of the interactivity.
I understand Wizards needs to continue making splashy cards at times, and RGD did have some cards that were sick when drafted, but there never seemed to be an overwhelming number of them. The first draft I ever won was a deck that had no bombs. It just had a perfect curve (and not a single card that cost more than 6 mana). It taught me a ton.
The other thing is, I don't agree with Tom LaPille. What made me a better player was getting beat by "gotcha" plays. It's really hard to learn to play better if you don't ever have a chance to make mistakes (and learn from them).
I also agree with what Bateleur said.
I feel like this is actually mostly because players don't look further than the crude sideboard options, rather than the less obvious options not being there. I am absolutely convinced that people don't sideboard nearly enough in Limited. They only do the obvious things like landwalkers or flier-hate. I've said before that even vanilla creatures can be important sideboard material. Sideboarding is about what sort of threats your opponent has, what sort of threats you want to have, how he plays, how the tempo of the match-up develops, and so much more. And this goes so much further than specific hate cards.
As you said there hasn't been much complete trash in recent sets, and this means you always have sideboard options.
My main two points about Limited:
- If you really need to make splashy rares that wreck Limited games, please push them to Mythic - and don't make to many of them. The whole Scars block was infected with them (dat pun) and it was imo the major reason I didn't enjoy it much. Innistrad seems much better in that sense; there are some rares I'd rather not see, but at least they don't kill all your guys upon resolving. Having too many of them really hurts Limited play.
- I like to see possibilities for card and tempo advantage in every colour, and preferably lots of them - but balanced for Limited. One thing I liked about Scars of Mirrodin (the set, not the block) was that several effects that are traditionally very strong in Limited were appropriately costed for Limited - something that hasn't always been the case. Examples are Instill Infection, Trigon of Thought, Trigon of Infestation, most Equipments,... although there were some offenders like Oxidda Scrapmelter. In Innistrad I find this too. There are very few uncommons that are just better than any common - imo Murder of Crows is the best one, and that's pretty tame really. The 'Flametongue' of the set, Morkrut Banshee, is not that easy to use, and even requires a specific deck to be optimal. That's great. Cards like Think Twice and Forbidden Alchemy are great because they allow slower decks to reliably draft card advantage, but at the same time they are slow enough that aggressive decks can simply be too fast for them (much like Trigons). Basically this allows a healthy mix of aggro and control decks, and that mix is what makes or breaks a Limited format.
Congrats on your new gig!
As for limited formats, I always have quite a bit to say, but I'll keep it short:
1. I don't particularly like the fact that there exist a bunch of cards in Innistrad that are cumbersome to play from a physical standpoint. I like the gameplay functionality of the DFCs, but they're more of a hassle to use than I'd like. Add to that the awkwardness involved in randomizing graveyard targets (Ghoulraiser and Woodland Sleuth), and you have a set that can be annoying to play, even if it works well in the realm of Magic Online. This might be too specific, but I worry that the creative team is going to continue to explore design space that moves the game in this kind of direction, and I personally don't think it's necessary.
2. I think it's important to draw a fine line between theme and functionality. Sure, it's cool to make a set with a gothic theme, but it seems to me that the most interesting cards in the set, as in the ones that create the most tension for players (Snapcaster Mage, Liliana, Garruk, Blasphemous Act, Forbidden Alchemy, and the like) don't really fit as well within the gothic theme. The article MaRo wrote about this really bothered me, especially the part about Cellar Door. When you're designing cards for flavor first, the results tend to be mixed, and the pride MaRo feels for creating a card like Cellar Door is really quite disconcerting, as the card is cumbersome in the same way that the examples in #1 outlined, and it's really just a terrible card in general. Time Spiral and Ravnica were fantastic blocks all around in this regard, IMO, as the cards fit within the set's flavor but were still very functional and were clearly designed for function first and then made to work within the set's themes.
3. I dislike that the game is moving away from play on the opponent's turn. In LaPille's latest article, he wrote that the development team wanted to avoid "gotcha" moments, when a player feels bad for having either fallen victim to an on-board trick or forgotten it existed. The issue, though, is that these are skill testing moments, and they don't destroy the functionality of the game. Answers are a hugely important aspect of limited play, and limiting (har!) their effectiveness and making them sorceries does very little more than frustrate players who need more clever answers to their opponents. I submit that it feels much worse to know that you can't trick your opponent into a 2-for-1 because Silent Departure is a sorcery than it does to be punished for greed. It's easier to learn from a situation in which you get blown out by an instant speed removal or tempo spell than it is from one in which you're left facing down a now unkillable threat with nothing but sorcery speed answers at your disposal.
Note that I'm not suggesting Silent Departure should've been an instant; I'm aware that would be nuts. However, his reasoning for making it a sorcery was so obtuse and insulting, I couldn't help but be annoyed. If you're using Flashback, then the quantity of your graveyard should be a concern at all times anyway.
4. Lastly, and this is a big one for me, I crave competitive balance between archetypes. There's no way to guarantee this, of course, but the best limited formats have been those in which any basic archetype outside of combo is draftable and strong under a few not-so-rigid conditions. Formats like Zendikar and M12 were really troublesome, as they were so rawly aggressive and rarely rewarded control or midrange strategies. Rise of the Eldrazi, M10, and M11 were on the exact opposite end of that spectrum, essentially eschewing the possibility of there being more than one purely aggressive deck at any given draft table (and that deck would likely lose to the controlling builds, anyway).
I know this is less than concrete, but I simply don't like being funneled one way or another before I open my first pack. The conversations of how fast an entire format is did not exist as pervasively in the past, but nowadays people expect to be able to define them relatively unilaterally. Even if it's as simple as a rock-paper-scissors model between aggro, control, and midrange, I prefer being able to choose my path as I draft and build rather than have to completely avoid an archetype due to its lack of efficacy in the environment.
I realize that's a lot more than the snippet I promised, but I guess I'm like a bowling ball on a hill: once I start rolling, there's no stopping me until the terrain flattens.
Again, enjoy the internship, and hopefully you can help to ensure that limited Magic continues to be our obsession!
:dance:Fact or Fiction of the [Limited] Clan:dance:
I agree with most of the points that have been made here - certainly my suggestion would be the same as Tahn's when it comes to bomb rares. Those have always been a part of limited, and that is fine, but in Scars there were just way too many of them. I feel the format was a lot worse because someone would just play their Carnifex Demon, and the game would just be over. Not only were there a lot of cards like that, there were also very few answers, and that is not a good combination. Randomly losing on a regular basis because someone happens to have a ridiculous, almost unanswerable card is not too fun. I feel the mythic rarity should be the home of these kinds of cards, since otherwise there are too many of them in any given draft. That, or don't print them at all Remember LSV's match against Thopter Assembly?
In addition to what the others have said, I like cards that provide lots of options. I don't want the good cards to be vanilla or "French vanilla" (those should generally be curve-fillers and 23rd cards, in my opinion, like Riot Devils - I'm happy that card exists), but to have different modes (kicker, cycling, morph, evoke, etc, come to mind) so you're presented with a choice every time you have them in your hand. Not every card (they might have overdone this in Time Spiral, although I enjoyed that a whole lot), but more than there are in the current sets.
And I very much agree with Semantic's point about instant speed tricks. Setting them up or playing around them is in my opinion an important part of limited Magic, and I'm not at all a fan of moving away from those. Village Bell-Ringer is a nice one though, I like that kind of cards.
One thing that really excited me about Ravnica block was the fact that every set release made drafting into a completely new experience. I realize that's true to some extent with every block, but Guildpact and Dissension had, in the guilds, some very obvious themes that drastically affected the metagame of what decks were worth aiming for. I would love to see something similar happen someday in a future block.
I mean, in Scars, for example, the Infect deck from triple Scars was a very different beast from the one in NMS, but it was still the same basic idea. Dinosaurs was also a deck that pretty much survived the whole block, in terms of overall strategy. If you had the hang of just playing NMS, triple Scars drafting wouldn't hold any surprises for you about the kinds of available decks, and that's a shame. WotC haven't really made a block where different themes had sufficient support to justify playing between set releases since Rav ended*.
On another, related, note, I like it when there feels like there's a metagame. By which I mean, I like sets where low-pick cards enable situationally strong decks to the point where those deck regularly make an appearance and can have gameplay decisions made specifically because "Oh, he's playing THAT archetype." The self-mill strategy in Innistrad is a good example, but I'd like to see some more interactive decks in that vein. Having cards that seem unplayable except against situational decks like that lead to some fun aha! moments, for example.
I really enjoy decks that play in unconventional ways, like the Wall deck from RoE, or the Orzhov deck from Rav Block, and I would love to see more decks that are focused on winning outside of the red zone. I'd also second bat's idea of threats that get dealt with by stuff other than removal. Removal.dec is consistently a good strategy in limited, even though it's a patently unfun deck, and having cards that don't care if your opponent has removal, but care if he can do something else, would make having removal.dec a lot less worthwhile of a strategy. Werewolves are an interesting move in that direction, but it isn't nearly enough, being honest.
Anyway, I'm curious: I don't think there are any MTGS forum members that are known to be members of R&D, or to have access to them. Are you going to be allowed to still post here once you officially come on with them? I could see potential problems with that.
*Possible exception with Alara block, since I didn't play that year.
Yeah, some truth in that, although I usually find that in that sense I'm pre-boarded for most opponents because only the very best players build extreme decks (very fast aggro or very slow control).
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
3) I managed to cast a Village Bell-Ringer in my turn, precombat, and then attacked with two guys. What happened: I needed to cast something to prevent a Hanweir Watchkeep from flipping, but I was thinking quite long about what I'd play, since I had some options but they all lost quite a bit of value from casting them at that point. Eventually I decided on the Bell-Ringer, and immediately played it, because I had been tanking so long. Then, of course I attacked with my two 1/1 flying Spirits, which looked really stupid of course, but oh well. I wasn't going to block with them anyway.
2) In my last match for top 16, in the third game, I had a great board position. I had a 7/7 Lumberknot, and three flipped Wolves: the 4/6, the 5/5 regenerate, and the 3/3 intimidate. My opponent had 7 Mountains (he was mono red) and Pitchburn Devils in play, and just one card in hand. I was at 9, he was at 15.
My hand was Blasphemous Act, Ranger's Guile, Reckless Waif, Moonmist. What's the play?
(He drew another Mountain and conceded. He flipped a couple more cards from the top of his deck and showed... Blasphemous Act.)
1) The biggest screw-up of the day may even have cost me the match I lost in the first draft. I had Hanweir Watchkeep in play, and my opponent (GW) passed with three mana up. It flipped, and I just assumed he had Rebuke, figured there was nothing I could do about that, and attacked without playing my fourth land first... with a Geistflame in my graveyard. Ouch.
Secondly, Sene, after reading your GP Milan report (TLDR NEXT TIME SHEESH <- kidding), I think you need to change your avatar and everything over from Mulldrifter to Mikaeus. He's your buddy and you keep your friends close, right?
Past Ruminations
Links are broken, will fix in near future.
- Kaladesh
- Zendikar
- Rise of the Eldrazi
- Alara Reborn
- Innistrad <- Personal Favorite
- Dark Ascension
- Avacyn Restored
- Theros
- Return to Ravnica
- Tarkir
I all more into the LaPille camp with "gotcha" cards, but I do agree that some of those cards can exist. I also think there's plenty of room under "gotcha" and more in the line of "instant speed trick" that can be explored. For example, Giant Growth isn't a "gotcha" card. Giant Growth is awesome! If it's coming out of your hand, it's expected that it can happen. It's just when someone constantly misses something they should have known about that it can be an issue.
I just wanted to touch on a few specific and interesting points I had questions about.
Can you provide some examples so I have a more concrete idea of what you mean? Do you mean something in the vein of Reassembling Skeleton, or something else entirely?
I don't think this is really creative's fault, it's pretty much all R&D. For what it's worth, I agree with you - common effects that are cumbersome and take time to resolve (as most random effects are) are something I am very against.
I would certainly not expect my posts here to be very common.
Thanks for all of your responses!
It's a lot harder than it seems initially to design things that function on a deep and satisfying level.
"A game is a series of interesting decisions."
This statement has been quoted, parodied, backed up, and fought over in many game design publications and conferences, but at the core, I think that it applies greatly to magic.
Why are cards like Mulldrifter and Stormfront Riders so much fun to first pick in Cube and draft? Why are planeswalkers (a very difficult card type) so popular with new players? Why do people draft in the first place?
People love cards that give them the opportunity to feel like they did something smart, or outplayed their opponent. Winning because you chose the right modes with a Cryptic Command feels so much more satisfying than winning because your opponent couldn't beat an Oversoul of Dusk.
My ideal draft set is opening a pack where the first pick contenders are brutalizer exarch, Venser, Shaper Savant, and Momentary Blink.
I know that most of those cards are pretty powerful, but those are the cards that I want to see more of in future draft sets. When I see a top table of drafters, I want to see them use late pick cards in a way that surprises and impresses me. I don't want to see an obvious P1p1 dragon or something.
It's hard to find a single card example because WotC don't do this much, but the Goblins in Lorwyn are the best embodiment of this principle I've seen at Common. Each one advances the deck's gameplan a little, but there's no one card which the opponent is desperate to spot remove after which they will probably win.
Compare with Merfolk in the same set where Silvergill Dowser just gets killed on sight, but if you don't kill it you just lose.
Existing examples tend to involve things like comes-into-play triggers, leaves-play triggers, effects which trigger when killing things or hitting the opponent, effects which trigger when you play other things... but it's not the mechanics which matter, it's the principle that the pattern of a single card threat that is usually either answered by 1-for-1 removal or wins is overrepresented in Limited Magic at the moment.
(I'm on on this site much anymore. If you want to get in touch it's probably best to email me: dom@heffalumps.org)
Forum Awards: Best Writer 2005, Best Limited Strategist 2005-2012
5CB PotM - June 2005, November 2005, February 2006, April 2008, May 2008, Feb 2009
MTGSalvation Articles: 1-20, plus guest appearance on MTGCast #86!
<Limited Clan>
I also agree with the sentiment that bombs should be located moreso at a mythic rare level. Scars had so many redicilous bombs that you would just lose to and set left a really bad taste in my mouth.
TL;DR: More sets with support to both control and aggro as well as synergistic cards. It should feel like drafting a well designed cube!