I have to say though, I was fairly shocked to see SO many changes. The fewer cards thing is a good thing, but as a limited player I died a little inside when they said ALL boosters would have a basic land in it in PLACE of a common.
I have a huge qualm with this. MaRo said the reasoning was because they feel that new players have trouble getting basic lands. So.....if we're tinkering with Boosters how about we add a 16th card as a land? Draft wouldn't be a problem.....when you open your pack take the basic and toss it in the middle of the table, then pick your card. Sealed will indeed be a problem, though.
Wait... thats why more lands are being added to packs instead of that 1 common!?! Thats MAJOR BS Right There! I mean really how hard is it now in days to get a full play set of lands now in days that they must be in every pack?
Mythic rares are going to be big splashy cards ala Timmy? Sweet this means I won't have to pull them as often. Cards like Garruk and Doran are gonna be more expensive though.
That being said...
Just like the new card frame, people will quit because of this and guess what? Mythic rares will be a normal part of the game years down the road.
I just realized. Mycoloth perfectly demonstrates the devour mechanic.
Mycoloth: NOMNOMNOM on Dragon Fodder.
One turn later, 1/1 turds come out.
Quote from kalkris »
btw i did it because i could. i was bored and decided to let my little med-free spree go ahead. I am bipolar, explaining all the drama that ensued after. I have problems.
Quote from ShadowWaveInc. »
Jon Finkel can simply walk into Mordor.
"When an artist dies the world loses two lives, that of the artist and that of his unfinished work."
You guys need to read the article and understand it before responding; all these complaints are missing the fact that this move makes rare cards more common and easier to acquire on the whole, not less.
There are 15 ultra rares in a big set. That means that if every pack contains a different rare, it would take 120 packs to get all 15 -- this means they are the same rarity as a Tenth Edition rare or a Time Spiral purple card.
There are 10 ultra rares in a small set. This means that each one is one out of eighty packs, which is the same distribution exactly as rares in Shadowmoor.
There are 53 regular-rares in a big set; they appear in seven out of eight packs. They work out to about one per sixty packs, meaning they are about as rare as the current rares in small sets.
There are 35 regular-rares in a small set; they appear in seven out of eight packs. This means they work out to about one per forty packs; this is the ratio of regular-rares in Planar Chaos, which had a notably small number of more easily collectible rares.
The net effect of this is (a) to make a few rares a little more rare, but no more rare than past rare cards have been -- pulling a given Planeswalker out of an Alara pack will be as hard as pulling a Wrath of God out of a 10th Edition pack, and (b) to make other rares (especially utility rares, like dual lands and other staple rare cycles) a little more common, making it more likely to pull one of these out of a given pack.
The overall effect of this change shouldn't noticeably impact players; my guess is that mana bases will get a little cheaper but cards like Planeswalkers (which will be needed for many tournament decks) might pick up a $1-2 premium due to their very slightly increased rarity.
This is an issue with a ton of potential for sound and fury, so I want everyone to read this post carefully before responding. (If you understand the change that's being made and still think that it's a bad idea, please go ahead and say so.)
The overall effect of this change shouldn't noticeably impact players; my guess is that mana bases will get a little cheaper but cards like Planeswalkers (which will be needed for many tournament decks) might pick up a $1-2 premium due to their very slightly increased rarity.
It should also help the sales of small sets due to the Mystic rare giving people a reason to open more boxes.
I don't like that Magic is conforming to other card games. I think the rarities were fine as they were and I don't think the mithic rares will attract new players or the games lack thereof has scared any away.
The land in booster packs doesn't really affect us that much, so we lose 3 cards in booster draft, how many of the pack isn't playable anyway, plus with fewer cards I imagine that extra card would have been redundant anyway. My only quam is that if your only way to acquire lands is through booster packs, you're kinda screwed as you're going to have to buy an entire booster box to get lands for one deck. The solution isn't really fixing the problem.
But in the end, people said they would quit magic when they changed the card frames, and the game doesn't seem to have suffered since then. I like the new intro decks, they're going to make theme decks more attractive to current players. I'm not happy with some of the other changes but I'm sure they'll grow on me and I don't think they're going to affect us that much. If they can attract new players and keep the game healthy in the end, its fine by me.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
:symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg:
Wolf Rider of the Selesnya Guild! Join the Selesnya Guild! Signature by: me Awesome Avatar by IloveAtogs Thanks!
Originally Posted by PolarBearGod
I would hate to be the people who try and keep everything secretive about new sets and stuff. Magic players are like crack fiends for info on new stuff - myself included I guess.:rolleyes:
On top of all this, why the **** does Magic have to conform to the other card games? As was stated in MaRo's article, Magic started it all. Magic was the big first that put TCGs on the map. Why the **** aren't the little kid card games, like Yu-Gi-Oh, conforming to us, the grandfather of the games you know and love?
Well, to put it in perspective......the same reason we favor iPods over record players. The new things are evolved versions of previous models.
Magic, as you have noted, is the first [successful] model for a TCG. The next group saw it and said 'I can make it bigger/better'. Eventually, these TCGs are much bigger and better than the original.
Now, I'm not saying that the analogy compares magnitude well, but the concept is the same. Nowadays, TCGs need those gimmicky things like 'Mythic Rares' to draw attention.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Waiting patiently for MTGO Leagues to become a priority again. It's been 4 years :sick:.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
I honestly don't mind the mythic rare change. I don't mind the set size change (it's quite welcome, actually). Both of these will make my wallet feel heftier when buying cards and building decks (for idiots: under the new system, any given mythic rare will crop up about 0.625, or 5/8th as much as any given existing rare. Regular rares are now twice as common). I also like the fact that small sets are now closer to big ones in size - it's a great thing, because the difference was always a major strain on me.
I don't like the basic land change, but I accept it. It's necessary. I can't count the number of times I've seen friends (or even myself) use off-color cards because they just don't have enough basics. This is a good change, in my opinion.
Mythic rares are a cool idea. I like labeling beginner-favorite rares like legends, planeswalkers, and giant dragons as something even more special and elite. It's great flavor. I like that it actually makes utility rares easier to come by--this also rewards experienced players.
Fewer cards per year sounds like a great idea. Sets get filled up with fodder sometimes. This ought to allow for more streamlined sets altogether. However, the only thing no one seems to be commenting on is: is this some sort of silent concession that fresh cards are harder to come up with? They need to slow down...?
Lands in boosters: I wish they'd just added another card to boosters. This does impact Draft. But hopefully with less cards per set, there will be less useless commons anyway (I'm looking at you, Bloodshed Fever).
I don't really like the reasons behind it, though. I think the idea of mythic rares has a lot of flavor (can you imagine a mythic rare equipment? how cool), but Maro hardly talked about that. Instead, it was strictly marketing, which makes it feel a lot worse.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
On MTGO as Protoman.
On 7/14/10, broke 1900 mark! <3 ROE.
Doubtless similar on the Mothership - hell, I'm viewing both.
Why would anyone need Mythic Rares as a gimmick? Show us the ****ing planeswalkers and we'll buy the damn things. Don't use rarity as a crutch - rare doesn't mean good, it can be cool and NOT rare.
(Can I say ****ing on mtgsal? It's really obscene. Oh, you censor it for me. Saves me doing it. It was the F-bomb, in case you can't tell. Needed, here.)
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "Flamebuster" »
Tarmogoyf has no evasion, yet it sees tonnes of play. What makes this any different?
So mythic rares are 1 in 8 packs... and there are 15 different ones.
So to get a specific one you'll go through 120 packs (3 1/3 boxes)
regular rares - 53 of them in the set. So: 36 packs in a box, 4.5 will be replaced by mythic rares. 31.5 rares per box. 1.68 boxes to get 1 of each rare. Netting you 7.56 mythic rares.
Making specific mythic rares twice as hard to find as regular rares.
While the difficulty to find them balances out to equal that of 10th edition rares there are far fewer in circulation, and are very difficult to pull in packs. The difficulty to pull certain rares in TS purples or Core sets is off set by the previous printings. They are plenty previous copies of the card availible, keeping the price down.
Imagine if bitterblossom was twice as hard to get as it is now. then what happens to it's price? $45+? Keeping chase rares high and dual lands low is a good thing, except when your chase rares are high because they are twice as hard to find, and like those dual lands, are still needed for high level tournament play.
I really thing this is a bad move by WOTC. It seems good to help make normal rares more common, but it's not the normal rares that command high price tags. It's the chase rares that everybody needs.
If you really think about it, the extra land instead of a common isn't that big of a deal. Since the set would have less commons, then it would be the same or even easier to complete 4x commons in alara. It's also comparable to think that the number of boxes you buy to complete a set of rares in shadowmoor is the same or within striking distance in completing the mythic rares in shards of alara.
The new actual rarity would actually be the "vanilla" rare. it would show up in more numbers due to the percentages. Yes, my first reaction was the "Yu-gi-oh"ing of magic, but after thinking about it, its really not that bad.
The only big problem i can see from the new "leaner is better" approach is that each card carry a bigger weight. in a set with 80 rares, you can have 15 or so rares which are crap but can still be covered up by the good ones. but in a set of 55 rares (vanilla and mythic), having 15 rares thats crap would really stink up the set.
So now we have Epic... i mean mythic... rares.
.... when are we going to be able to open rares that we can scratch off for codes that redeem for digital versions of MTGO cards? Oh wait.... when MTGO has any semblance of functionality.... so...2011?
The Epic rares in Warcraft and Super/Ultra Rares in Pokemon/Yugioh poll really high with kids and more noobish users - because even though some of the epics are simply awful, they have that cool factor that score them extra points (and even extra $$$ value). If rares like Stronghold Gauntlets in the WoW tcg were able to push $40-50 during the tournament season when the economy was somewhat inflated, it isn't hard to imagine that 1-2 of these Mythic rares are going to push $50 or higher, especially for premium version.
ultimately, I'm surprised they were relying on brand name alone to push the game all these years without trying to directly compete with their play style, especially when the WoW tcg has basically been designed, and to some extent, marketed, as a "Fixed" version of Magic.
I still feel like Rosewater is constantly cowed by corporate pressure and isn't always doing the job he should to stick up for the traditions that made the game good. But, I suppose he has to walk a pretty tight line there.
The intro packs were a good idea. Most precons go on clearance racks. At least these have a booster thrown in.
And with all the Alara buzz they're starting is that a subtle way of saying Eventide is teh suck? I hope not! We were hoping for multicolored planeswalkers in Shadowmoor but I guess we can wait..
No one but maybe collectors will care about the symbol if the card is a mediocre card or a pile. If they choose to make EVERY mythic rare the best rares then yeah its crap.
If you really think about it, the extra land instead of a common isn't that big of a deal. Since the set would have less commons, then it would be the same or even easier to complete 4x commons in alara.
What does the number of commons in the set have to do with losing a common in each pack? That means there are fourteen picks per pack instead of fifteen. I don't like sacrificing even my fifteenth pick for a land.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Quote from "Flamebuster" »
Tarmogoyf has no evasion, yet it sees tonnes of play. What makes this any different?
You guys need to read the article and understand it before responding; all these complaints are missing the fact that this move makes rare cards more common and easier to acquire on the whole, not less.
There are 15 ultra rares in a big set. That means that if every pack contains a different rare, it would take 120 packs to get all 15 -- this means they are the same rarity as a Tenth Edition rare or a Time Spiral purple card.
There are 10 ultra rares in a small set. This means that each one is one out of eighty packs, which is the same distribution exactly as rares in Shadowmoor.
There are 53 regular-rares in a big set; they appear in seven out of eight packs. They work out to about one per sixty packs, meaning they are about as rare as the current rares in small sets.
There are 35 regular-rares in a small set; they appear in seven out of eight packs. This means they work out to about one per forty packs; this is the ratio of regular-rares in Planar Chaos, which had a notably small number of more easily collectible rares.
The net effect of this is (a) to make a few rares a little more rare, but no more rare than past rare cards have been -- pulling a given Planeswalker out of an Alara pack will be as hard as pulling a Wrath of God out of a 10th Edition pack, and (b) to make other rares (especially utility rares, like dual lands and other staple rare cycles) a little more common, making it more likely to pull one of these out of a given pack.
The overall effect of this change shouldn't noticeably impact players; my guess is that mana bases will get a little cheaper but cards like Planeswalkers (which will be needed for many tournament decks) might pick up a $1-2 premium due to their very slightly increased rarity.
Thanks for the explanation. It is not nearly as bad as people are saying.
You guys need to read the article and understand it before responding; all these complaints are missing the fact that this move makes rare cards more common and easier to acquire on the whole, not less.
I did read the article and I still don't like the change. I'm sure it'll be great for the game, I'm sure six months after the release no one will care anymore... but isn't being unique also important to a card game? Isn't it the differences that separate which card game people play? I do like that it will be easier to pick up the non-Mythic Rares, but I would rather have a harder time finding the cards than have Magic try to conform to other popular TCGs. I'm not saying the change might not have been needed or necessary, but I really really don't like it or the reasoning behind it.
The overall effect of this change shouldn't noticeably impact players; my guess is that mana bases will get a little cheaper but cards like Planeswalkers (which will be needed for many tournament decks) might pick up a $1-2 premium due to their very slightly increased rarity.
The overall effect of Mythic Rares won't do much to change the game, it'll do more to change the price of packs, singles, and sales. Which, yes, I know, Magic is a business and has to make money. I've used this argument to debate certain cards/changes before, as well. But I just don't think a change like this is worth the slight bonus they'll make. The established part of the player base will be, for the most part, very upset with the change. But we all know Magic is too big for its own good and nothing like this will be able to kill it (thank God). As much as I don't like the change, I'll still be playing.
The Mythic Rare change won't do much to change the game, but the land in every pack will, at least for Limited. It essentially brings each pack to 14 cards instead of 15. As I said before, not a huge change, but it is noticeable. On top of that, expansion sets are meant to be expert level sets, not for players new to the game. If they wanted to use a year to draw in players and make a change like an extra land each pack, they should have done it last year or next year, when they have a core set to push. I have no problem with a basic land in a core set pack. That's a good idea. But in an expert level set? Players ready to play at that level should not need lands.
Maybe back when the game started shops didn't have an overabundance of land sitting around, but most shops run drafts and other tournaments at this point, so they tend to pick up a lot of land and just have it sitting around.
Well, to put it in perspective......the same reason we favor iPods over record players. The new things are evolved versions of previous models.
Okay, that is a really good point and I'll concede that to you (and anyone else that was going to make that point). That being said, I still don't like it. I'm sure some of my arguments against the orange rarity are very weak, but it really all just comes down to the fact that I don't think this change really does enough for Magic.
Also, I do like the smaller set size and that does help justify some super rares. -Jack
No one but maybe collectors will care about the symbol if the card is a mediocre card or a pile. If they choose to make EVERY mythic rare the best rares then yeah its crap.
2 Color Lands would fall under the "staple" cards they've said won't be made into Mythic Rares.
Bitterblossom wouldn't be a Mythic Rare though. While an amazing spike card, there's nothing epic about a 1/1 every turn. Neither would sleepers like Tarmogoyf
I played the WoW TCG and the epics they had never made it to ridiculous price levels. Being only 15, as long as mythic rares aren't like tarmogoyfs or bitterblossoms, it won't be a big deal. People need to see it in action before they make judgements on this.
Look, people. I came from YuGiOh, and this change doesn't make Magic into it.
Lands in boosters? It sounds retarded at firsr. I have a fatpack boxfull of lands; I'm sure others do too.
But I remember when I was just starting. When I had my ONE Ninth edition fat pack, and NOTHING else. When whatever deck had the Loxodon Warhammer in it won
And the extra lands from the packs helped me a LOT, there.
Plus, I'm the sort of guy who doesn't go to shops often. Sometimes I see lands I like. How can I get them? The fat pack; that's pretty much IT, when I don't want the crappy theme decks. So I don't mind seeing more "nice" lands like this.
What this does to Limited: It makes one common crap. Aren't there always crap commons? Do you ever use the 15th pick? 14th? 13th? (OK, I've used the 13th. I draft with noobs). It's gonna hit the format, but not smash it.
Overall, not so awful. I'd rater have more crushable noobs at prereleases; it makes it easier to get more product there.
The mythic rares?
That kinda annoys me. I LIKE some of the bomby, silly rares, and this'll make them that much harder to get.
HOWEVER
I will trade in every huge, silly rare I own for a set of dual lands.
And under this system, duals (and their useful ilk) will be cheaper. The bomby rares that work in Constructed will be pricier, but not by double, probably. It averages out, I suspect.
'Nuff said.
Other than that, I don't care much.
That (R/G) 'walker had BETTER be cool, though. Those are my favorite colors.
Hey, is there anyone else on the forums going to Rice University in Houston? We could ALWAYS use more people in our Magic games. PM me if you want to play sometime
Making utility rares easier to get is a great thing. I've always thought that all dual lands should be uncommon like the Invasion cipt lands. This takes a small step in that direction. Also, if the utility rares are easier/cheaper to get, then I'll have more money to spend on the few mythic rares that I do need to buy as singles.
After I quelled my knee-jerk reaction, I realized that this is all upside.
1. They are RIGHT on the money about both the intro pack thing and the basic land thing: most MtG sales are at Wal-Mart / Target these days and new players have no way to get fundamental cards (basic lands) six months or so after the base set is released. Good job, WotC.
2. Mythic rares are stupid, yes. But, they're not going to be tourney-level cards, they'll make regular rares slightly more accessible, and they're not going to change the composition of the packs that they are in (other than to replace a rare). If this is what the Yu-Gi-Oh! crowd wants, give it to them. In fact, it has the potential to turn bad rares into valuable ones (because they are "mythic" and that appeals to a certain segment of players).
3. Fewer cards? Yeah, I think this line is BS. But I'm happy anyway. WotC has spent so much time saying how larger tourney environments are better tourney environments, I just don't believe them here. But, seriously, times are tough in the economy, WotC needs to trim the fat. Fewer cards means less art to commission, fewer designers and developers on the staff, lots of money saved all around.
I'm gonna guess that, if these changes stick, especially the smaller set size change, we'll see a three-year Standard environment as the next big change, in order to keep the larger tourney environment. I'm thinking Lorwyn / Shadowmoor (or at least Shadowmoor) will stay in Standard in Fall 2009 rather than rotate out.
I like the new Mythic Rare idea only because it will make dual lands easier to get. Now we won't need Horrible dual lands like the common duals from Rav block.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
There's no proof she's being chased
by ninja squirrels either. - Dr. Wilson
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Wait... thats why more lands are being added to packs instead of that 1 common!?! Thats MAJOR BS Right There! I mean really how hard is it now in days to get a full play set of lands now in days that they must be in every pack?
That being said...
Just like the new card frame, people will quit because of this and guess what? Mythic rares will be a normal part of the game years down the road.
There are 15 ultra rares in a big set. That means that if every pack contains a different rare, it would take 120 packs to get all 15 -- this means they are the same rarity as a Tenth Edition rare or a Time Spiral purple card.
There are 10 ultra rares in a small set. This means that each one is one out of eighty packs, which is the same distribution exactly as rares in Shadowmoor.
There are 53 regular-rares in a big set; they appear in seven out of eight packs. They work out to about one per sixty packs, meaning they are about as rare as the current rares in small sets.
There are 35 regular-rares in a small set; they appear in seven out of eight packs. This means they work out to about one per forty packs; this is the ratio of regular-rares in Planar Chaos, which had a notably small number of more easily collectible rares.
The net effect of this is (a) to make a few rares a little more rare, but no more rare than past rare cards have been -- pulling a given Planeswalker out of an Alara pack will be as hard as pulling a Wrath of God out of a 10th Edition pack, and (b) to make other rares (especially utility rares, like dual lands and other staple rare cycles) a little more common, making it more likely to pull one of these out of a given pack.
The overall effect of this change shouldn't noticeably impact players; my guess is that mana bases will get a little cheaper but cards like Planeswalkers (which will be needed for many tournament decks) might pick up a $1-2 premium due to their very slightly increased rarity.
This is an issue with a ton of potential for sound and fury, so I want everyone to read this post carefully before responding. (If you understand the change that's being made and still think that it's a bad idea, please go ahead and say so.)
It should also help the sales of small sets due to the Mystic rare giving people a reason to open more boxes.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
The land in booster packs doesn't really affect us that much, so we lose 3 cards in booster draft, how many of the pack isn't playable anyway, plus with fewer cards I imagine that extra card would have been redundant anyway. My only quam is that if your only way to acquire lands is through booster packs, you're kinda screwed as you're going to have to buy an entire booster box to get lands for one deck. The solution isn't really fixing the problem.
But in the end, people said they would quit magic when they changed the card frames, and the game doesn't seem to have suffered since then. I like the new intro decks, they're going to make theme decks more attractive to current players. I'm not happy with some of the other changes but I'm sure they'll grow on me and I don't think they're going to affect us that much. If they can attract new players and keep the game healthy in the end, its fine by me.
:symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg::symwg:
Wolf Rider of the Selesnya Guild!
Join the Selesnya Guild!
Signature by: me
Awesome Avatar by IloveAtogs Thanks!
Quoted for truthery!
Well, to put it in perspective......the same reason we favor iPods over record players. The new things are evolved versions of previous models.
Magic, as you have noted, is the first [successful] model for a TCG. The next group saw it and said 'I can make it bigger/better'. Eventually, these TCGs are much bigger and better than the original.
Now, I'm not saying that the analogy compares magnitude well, but the concept is the same. Nowadays, TCGs need those gimmicky things like 'Mythic Rares' to draw attention.
Drop by my Helpdesk if you have any questions/concerns on the Limited forum.
Excited for M13 Limited? What do you think the format will look like? Head over to the limited forum and let us know what you think.
I don't like the basic land change, but I accept it. It's necessary. I can't count the number of times I've seen friends (or even myself) use off-color cards because they just don't have enough basics. This is a good change, in my opinion.
Mythic rares are a cool idea. I like labeling beginner-favorite rares like legends, planeswalkers, and giant dragons as something even more special and elite. It's great flavor. I like that it actually makes utility rares easier to come by--this also rewards experienced players.
Fewer cards per year sounds like a great idea. Sets get filled up with fodder sometimes. This ought to allow for more streamlined sets altogether. However, the only thing no one seems to be commenting on is: is this some sort of silent concession that fresh cards are harder to come up with? They need to slow down...?
Lands in boosters: I wish they'd just added another card to boosters. This does impact Draft. But hopefully with less cards per set, there will be less useless commons anyway (I'm looking at you, Bloodshed Fever).
I don't really like the reasons behind it, though. I think the idea of mythic rares has a lot of flavor (can you imagine a mythic rare equipment? how cool), but Maro hardly talked about that. Instead, it was strictly marketing, which makes it feel a lot worse.
On 7/14/10, broke 1900 mark! <3 ROE.
Doubtless similar on the Mothership - hell, I'm viewing both.
Why would anyone need Mythic Rares as a gimmick? Show us the ****ing planeswalkers and we'll buy the damn things. Don't use rarity as a crutch - rare doesn't mean good, it can be cool and NOT rare.
(Can I say ****ing on mtgsal? It's really obscene. Oh, you censor it for me. Saves me doing it. It was the F-bomb, in case you can't tell. Needed, here.)
So to get a specific one you'll go through 120 packs (3 1/3 boxes)
regular rares - 53 of them in the set. So: 36 packs in a box, 4.5 will be replaced by mythic rares. 31.5 rares per box. 1.68 boxes to get 1 of each rare. Netting you 7.56 mythic rares.
Making specific mythic rares twice as hard to find as regular rares.
While the difficulty to find them balances out to equal that of 10th edition rares there are far fewer in circulation, and are very difficult to pull in packs. The difficulty to pull certain rares in TS purples or Core sets is off set by the previous printings. They are plenty previous copies of the card availible, keeping the price down.
Imagine if bitterblossom was twice as hard to get as it is now. then what happens to it's price? $45+? Keeping chase rares high and dual lands low is a good thing, except when your chase rares are high because they are twice as hard to find, and like those dual lands, are still needed for high level tournament play.
I really thing this is a bad move by WOTC. It seems good to help make normal rares more common, but it's not the normal rares that command high price tags. It's the chase rares that everybody needs.
The new actual rarity would actually be the "vanilla" rare. it would show up in more numbers due to the percentages. Yes, my first reaction was the "Yu-gi-oh"ing of magic, but after thinking about it, its really not that bad.
The only big problem i can see from the new "leaner is better" approach is that each card carry a bigger weight. in a set with 80 rares, you can have 15 or so rares which are crap but can still be covered up by the good ones. but in a set of 55 rares (vanilla and mythic), having 15 rares thats crap would really stink up the set.
.... when are we going to be able to open rares that we can scratch off for codes that redeem for digital versions of MTGO cards? Oh wait.... when MTGO has any semblance of functionality.... so...2011?
The Epic rares in Warcraft and Super/Ultra Rares in Pokemon/Yugioh poll really high with kids and more noobish users - because even though some of the epics are simply awful, they have that cool factor that score them extra points (and even extra $$$ value). If rares like Stronghold Gauntlets in the WoW tcg were able to push $40-50 during the tournament season when the economy was somewhat inflated, it isn't hard to imagine that 1-2 of these Mythic rares are going to push $50 or higher, especially for premium version.
ultimately, I'm surprised they were relying on brand name alone to push the game all these years without trying to directly compete with their play style, especially when the WoW tcg has basically been designed, and to some extent, marketed, as a "Fixed" version of Magic.
I still feel like Rosewater is constantly cowed by corporate pressure and isn't always doing the job he should to stick up for the traditions that made the game good. But, I suppose he has to walk a pretty tight line there.
The intro packs were a good idea. Most precons go on clearance racks. At least these have a booster thrown in.
And with all the Alara buzz they're starting is that a subtle way of saying Eventide is teh suck? I hope not! We were hoping for multicolored planeswalkers in Shadowmoor but I guess we can wait..
Really all the expensive cards will once again become cards like:
2 Color Lands
No one but maybe collectors will care about the symbol if the card is a mediocre card or a pile. If they choose to make EVERY mythic rare the best rares then yeah its crap.
Feel free to bid on my cards here!
Thanks for the explanation. It is not nearly as bad as people are saying.
The Mythic Rare change won't do much to change the game, but the land in every pack will, at least for Limited. It essentially brings each pack to 14 cards instead of 15. As I said before, not a huge change, but it is noticeable. On top of that, expansion sets are meant to be expert level sets, not for players new to the game. If they wanted to use a year to draw in players and make a change like an extra land each pack, they should have done it last year or next year, when they have a core set to push. I have no problem with a basic land in a core set pack. That's a good idea. But in an expert level set? Players ready to play at that level should not need lands.
Maybe back when the game started shops didn't have an overabundance of land sitting around, but most shops run drafts and other tournaments at this point, so they tend to pick up a lot of land and just have it sitting around. Okay, that is a really good point and I'll concede that to you (and anyone else that was going to make that point). That being said, I still don't like it. I'm sure some of my arguments against the orange rarity are very weak, but it really all just comes down to the fact that I don't think this change really does enough for Magic.
Also, I do like the smaller set size and that does help justify some super rares. -Jack I did read the article and I still don't like the change. I'm sure it'll be great for the game, I'm sure six months after the release no one will care anymore... but isn't being unique also important to a card game? Isn't it the differences that separate which card game people play? I do like that it will be easier to pick up the non-Mythic Rares, but I would rather have a harder time finding the cards than have Magic try to conform to other popular TCGs. I'm not saying the change might not have been needed or necessary, but I really really don't like it or the reasoning behind it. The overall effect of Mythic Rares won't do much to change the game, it'll do more to change the price of packs, singles, and sales. Which, yes, I know, Magic is a business and has to make money. I've used this argument to debate certain cards/changes before, as well. But I just don't think a change like this is worth the slight bonus they'll make. The established part of the player base will be, for the most part, very upset with the change. But we all know Magic is too big for its own good and nothing like this will be able to kill it (thank God). As much as I don't like the change, I'll still be playing.
Want a cool banner like mine?
Go to Heroes of the Plane Studios!
Vizzerdrix Count = 183, 3 in Italian, 2 Foil
2 Color Lands would fall under the "staple" cards they've said won't be made into Mythic Rares.
Current post- Grand Prix KC Modern Postmortem (7/7/13)
Cryptic Command and Garruk Wildspeaker is more the thing to worry about. Though on that same list you get cards like Sygg, River Guide and Brigid, Hero of Kinsbaile. In Shadowmoor, I'd think the Timmy cycle would be mythic too.
That wouldn't be a CHANGE per se.
With that information it may be safe to say there will be 10 PW's of each color combo and 5 "other cards" or 15 PWs 10 dual colored and 5 mono.
How you should approach every game of Magic.
Mod Helpdesk (defunct)
My Flawless Score MCC Card | My Other One | # Three!
Lands in boosters? It sounds retarded at firsr. I have a fatpack boxfull of lands; I'm sure others do too.
But I remember when I was just starting. When I had my ONE Ninth edition fat pack, and NOTHING else. When whatever deck had the Loxodon Warhammer in it won
And the extra lands from the packs helped me a LOT, there.
Plus, I'm the sort of guy who doesn't go to shops often. Sometimes I see lands I like. How can I get them? The fat pack; that's pretty much IT, when I don't want the crappy theme decks. So I don't mind seeing more "nice" lands like this.
What this does to Limited: It makes one common crap. Aren't there always crap commons? Do you ever use the 15th pick? 14th? 13th? (OK, I've used the 13th. I draft with noobs). It's gonna hit the format, but not smash it.
Overall, not so awful. I'd rater have more crushable noobs at prereleases; it makes it easier to get more product there.
The mythic rares?
That kinda annoys me. I LIKE some of the bomby, silly rares, and this'll make them that much harder to get.
HOWEVER
I will trade in every huge, silly rare I own for a set of dual lands.
And under this system, duals (and their useful ilk) will be cheaper. The bomby rares that work in Constructed will be pricier, but not by double, probably. It averages out, I suspect.
'Nuff said.
Other than that, I don't care much.
That (R/G) 'walker had BETTER be cool, though. Those are my favorite colors.
Hey, is there anyone else on the forums going to Rice University in Houston? We could ALWAYS use more people in our Magic games. PM me if you want to play sometime
1. They are RIGHT on the money about both the intro pack thing and the basic land thing: most MtG sales are at Wal-Mart / Target these days and new players have no way to get fundamental cards (basic lands) six months or so after the base set is released. Good job, WotC.
2. Mythic rares are stupid, yes. But, they're not going to be tourney-level cards, they'll make regular rares slightly more accessible, and they're not going to change the composition of the packs that they are in (other than to replace a rare). If this is what the Yu-Gi-Oh! crowd wants, give it to them. In fact, it has the potential to turn bad rares into valuable ones (because they are "mythic" and that appeals to a certain segment of players).
3. Fewer cards? Yeah, I think this line is BS. But I'm happy anyway. WotC has spent so much time saying how larger tourney environments are better tourney environments, I just don't believe them here. But, seriously, times are tough in the economy, WotC needs to trim the fat. Fewer cards means less art to commission, fewer designers and developers on the staff, lots of money saved all around.
I'm gonna guess that, if these changes stick, especially the smaller set size change, we'll see a three-year Standard environment as the next big change, in order to keep the larger tourney environment. I'm thinking Lorwyn / Shadowmoor (or at least Shadowmoor) will stay in Standard in Fall 2009 rather than rotate out.
There's no proof she's being chased
by ninja squirrels either. - Dr. Wilson