I just want to state, before the site gets archived forever, that the nonsense mental gymnastics people are doing, in order to get riled up and call for bans for a card that isn't even released yet are staggering.
....
Here's to a more positive discourse and the faint hope that the new website in the works curates spaces that engender positive, useful discussion instead of a blank slate for useless uninformed negativity to rule.
I think noting things that are new, and explosive, and can look absurd, is not an issue. I think calling for emergency ban's are hyperbolic certainly, but a lot of your post also boils down to people wanting different things.
For everyone that wants a churning, rotational meta, there is AT LEAST one person, that wants to play 'their deck' that for some is the only deck they could afford to build, to remain viable (if not optimal) and competitive.
People who are satisfied, by and large, do not go to forums to talk about things. They go there to complain about things, look for answers and help.
Personally, I find we can watch the trends of the online/high end meta unfold, and for that purpose this thread and twitter, have served me quite well over the years.
Oh I just wanna smack that guy. People are allowed to be negative.
Hoping you were betting on a joke. Surgical Extraction vs Humans is the shi_ttiest card ever.
I do agree about the fact it’s useful even maindeck in some sort of strategies (especially when you’ve got Faithless Looting to dispose of it when unnecessary).
I played against the AltarVine deck a lot with several different archetypes. Comparing this to Eldrazi with Eye is utterly ridiculous. I suspect people just want to play their pet decks (which aren’t well positioned) and that’s it. We’ve got lots of powerful options (all of them with different strategies) in Modern. The new piece of candy is only one of them.
I have played both decks fairly extensively. I played UR Eldrazi during the whole Eldrazi Winter. That deck is definitely more busted and nearly impossible to hate on without giving up your matchup to nearly every other deck in the meta (which probably is worth it at the time in my opinion). Eye of Ugin was seriously busted. I first realized this when I mulliganed to Eye, Eldrazi Temple, Thought-Knot Seer, and Eldrazi Mimic and thoroughly slaughtered my opponent. I had never slaughtered an opponent on 4 cards. I had won a few close ones sometimes, but never like this.
As for BridgeVine, I have played it in a lot of forms and this form with Hogaak, which I have tested the past 3 days, is pretty insane. I did have some poor draws before the tournament vs. Amulet with Devoted Druid (a friend) and only won 3 of 5 games. This deck can be hurt slightly by multiple pieces of hate.
I predict Grafdigger's Cage going up in value. It also shuts down NeoBrand, a deck that I'm now 14-2 with. So, these are the cards that I expect to see more play.
1. Grafdigger's Cage
2. Ravenous Trap
and to a lesser extent, Leyline of the Void.
I personally will always assume my opponent has Ravenous Trap in games 2 and 3 when I'm on Hogaak Vine unless I've seen different when I milled them out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Somewhat related, I don't know why wizards created arclight phoenix, prized amalgam, or hollow one, cards that enable recursive graveyard strategies. Dredge was already problematic.
Somewhat related, I don't know why wizards created arclight phoenix, prized amalgam, or hollow one, cards that enable recursive graveyard strategies. Dredge was already problematic.
They don't test for Modern.
Arclight Phoenix made an archetype in Standard and even Prized Amalgam was in a fun Standard deck (UR Zombies). Had a local 12-0 at a GP into 12-3 with UR Zombies during its Standard run. Skaab Stitching or something like that, lol. They may have thought that Hollow One could do something in Standard?
Wizards literally does not think at all about other formats. London Mulligan? That's terrible news for Modern and Legacy, the 2 formats I play the most.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
Somewhat related, I don't know why wizards created arclight phoenix, prized amalgam, or hollow one, cards that enable recursive graveyard strategies. Dredge was already problematic.
They don't test for Modern.
Arclight Phoenix made an archetype in Standard and even Prized Amalgam was in a fun Standard deck (UR Zombies). Had a local 12-0 at a GP into 12-3 with UR Zombies during its Standard run. Skaab Stitching or something like that, lol. They may have thought that Hollow One could do something in Standard?
Wizards literally does not think at all about other formats. London Mulligan? That's terrible news for Modern and Legacy, the 2 formats I play the most.
I'm fine with allegations that Wizards doesn't test new cards in Standard-legal sets for Modern. They've literally said that in Play Design articles. But the allegation that Wizards "does not think at all about other formats" with the citation of the "London Mulligan" is patently incorrect. They literally tested the rule at a Modern MC prior to releasing it, and explicitly cited Modern results in evaluating it. I don't know how much more they could have realistically acknowledged Modern in that rollout.
They don't test past standard, that's why the ban list exists, to ban problematic cards. Don't know why people are so afraid of bans. Bans are also what mantains the format fresh and evolving. Don't be afraid of bans. I guess I'm so used to "bans" aka buffs and nerfs in other online games that it's just a natural process to me.
Half the bans wizards makes don't even outright kill the deck, just downgrade them from tier0 to tier1-3.
They don't test past standard, that's why the ban list exists, to ban problematic cards. Don't know why people are so afraid of bans. Bans are also what mantains the format fresh and evolving. Don't be afraid of bans. I guess I'm so used to "bans" aka buffs and nerfs in other online games that it's just a natural process to me.
Half the bans wizards makes don't even outright kill the deck, just downgrade them from tier0 to tier1-3.
If cards were free, bans and unbans could be made with much more ease and less risk (JTMS comes to mind, unbanning it was dangerous in part because of its price and the economic implications, it had to come with a reprint to alleviate the increase in demand)
In terms of gameplay, you are correct, bans are made to fix something problematic and improve the game experience so being able to fix those quickly should be positive. But when your playerbase has already invested money to get their cards, making these changes becomes a challenge since you now have to keep in mind other things besides how good the format will look afterwards, otherwise you could take away motivation from some players (even if their cards didn't plummet in price, having to move to another deck is not easy in paper and usually takes some time) resulting in less people attending tournaments, even if gameplay had improved. That's why WotC has to always be cautious with B&R announcements affecting paper magic.
Arena could be the environment where WotC is quicker in terms of bans and unbans since the economic and logistic repercusions are diminished or almost gone. I know, crafting new cards requires game resources but you can get them for free in a reasonable amount of time so players don't suffer too much if a card gets banned like Nexus of Fate did.
Arena could be the environment where WotC is quicker in terms of bans and unbans since the economic and logistic repercusions are diminished or almost gone. I know, crafting new cards requires game resources but you can get them for free in a reasonable amount of time so players don't suffer too much if a card gets banned like Nexus of Fate did.
Even stronger, when Nexus of Fate got banned, everyone who had them got mythic wildcards for free.
They don't test past standard, that's why the ban list exists, to ban problematic cards. Don't know why people are so afraid of bans. Bans are also what mantains the format fresh and evolving. Don't be afraid of bans. I guess I'm so used to "bans" aka buffs and nerfs in other online games that it's just a natural process to me.
Half the bans wizards makes don't even outright kill the deck, just downgrade them from tier0 to tier1-3.
If cards were free, bans and unbans could be made with much more ease and less risk (JTMS comes to mind, unbanning it was dangerous in part because of its price and the economic implications, it had to come with a reprint to alleviate the increase in demand)
In terms of gameplay, you are correct, bans are made to fix something problematic and improve the game experience so being able to fix those quickly should be positive. But when your playerbase has already invested money to get their cards, making these changes becomes a challenge since you now have to keep in mind other things besides how good the format will look afterwards, otherwise you could take away motivation from some players (even if their cards didn't plummet in price, having to move to another deck is not easy in paper and usually takes some time) resulting in less people attending tournaments, even if gameplay had improved. That's why WotC has to always be cautious with B&R announcements affecting paper magic.
Arena could be the environment where WotC is quicker in terms of bans and unbans since the economic and logistic repercusions are diminished or almost gone. I know, crafting new cards requires game resources but you can get them for free in a reasonable amount of time so players don't suffer too much if a card gets banned like Nexus of Fate did.
I still believe the way of the future will ultimately be a form of card patching, where Wizards can adjust problematic cards to not ban them outright. This would be the end of feelbad bans as we know it and is the way every digital game I know of handles similar balance issues. This would require an even heavier investment in Arena, however, as well as a total paradigm shift to how we think about paper vs. digital Magic. It's also not a panacea. Bad patches can still happen, especially if Wizards starts both nerfing problems AND buffing struggling archetypes. This would create its own set of risks and benefits. But ultimately, it would eliminate the need to ban cards outright.
They don't test past standard, that's why the ban list exists, to ban problematic cards. Don't know why people are so afraid of bans. Bans are also what mantains the format fresh and evolving. Don't be afraid of bans. I guess I'm so used to "bans" aka buffs and nerfs in other online games that it's just a natural process to me.
Because sometimes they make very strange and poorly supported decisions, and then refuse to further aknowledge them, while the cards laughably rot on the banned list. Stoneforge Mystic is a perfect example of this. Banned for the sins of a completely irrelevant and separate format, having never been in Modern, and being CONSIDERABLY less powerful than nearly everything all top decks are doing. It's embarrassing and silly that she remains banned.
Half the bans wizards makes don't even outright kill the deck, just downgrade them from tier0 to tier1-3.
They do not mind killing decks. As long as it's a deck they don't like or want. Just look at KCI.
I would be very against card patching, as I just do not believe Wizards would be able to get it right.
Would Goyf see play a 2G? (Assuming it saw play today) probably not. Being on the treadmill of constant updates, constant tweaks, and thats before set releases...its a terrible life, and anyone that games semi-competitively online is well used to it from any number of 'I just want to play but you keep changing it' competitive online games.
What kind of card patching exactly.. is it increase cmc?. Games on paper would be awkward as when I for example play a Goblin Guide, what's written on the card is R but I had to tap two mana because WoTC "patched" it to become 1R. Patching the rules text of a card would be even worse.. I would pretty much prefer bans to patching.
What kind of card patching exactly.. is it increase cmc?. Games on paper would be awkward as when I for example play a Goblin Guide, what's written on the card is R but I had to tap two mana because WoTC "patched" it to become 1R. Patching the rules text of a card would be even worse.. I would pretty much prefer bans to patching.
Yeah exactly, its not like there is a ton of granularity in some of these cards.
Guide is a good example. R for 2/2 Haste with upside/downside? Fine, and clearly playable. How about RR? How about 1R? How about R and 1/2 or 2/1?
Its a really bad slope to get on.
I would rather my deck be banned, than have the entire game/format thrown into chaos like that.
Patching in paper doesn't make any sense at all. It would just be an extreme mess with rules and whatnot. The effects on the secondary market would be so huge that it's unthinkable. Besides it would just make their Design team more loose on doing real testing, like HS does. Actually it is the number one reason I dislike HS. I'd just quit if they started patching things up.
Unless you mean that we'll just kill paper magic before that happens. If that's the proposal then by all means do it. Even if Arena is cool and all, and it was the reason I returned from my hiatus, I can't stand the idea of not playing paper magic.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Currently Playing: WUMiracles ControlUW RUBGrixis Death's ShadowBUR
I would be very against card patching, as I just do not believe Wizards would be able to get it right.
Would Goyf see play a 2G? (Assuming it saw play today) probably not. Being on the treadmill of constant updates, constant tweaks, and thats before set releases...its a terrible life, and anyone that games semi-competitively online is well used to it from any number of 'I just want to play but you keep changing it' competitive online games.
What kind of card patching exactly.. is it increase cmc?. Games on paper would be awkward as when I for example play a Goblin Guide, what's written on the card is R but I had to tap two mana because WoTC "patched" it to become 1R. Patching the rules text of a card would be even worse.. I would pretty much prefer bans to patching.
I'm less talking about cards like Guide and Goyf, which have never been banned, and am instead talking about cards that were banned in one format or another. Patching would just be an alternative to banning. Of course, as you both suggest, this opens up the can of worms to patching for all kinds of balance reasons, not just bans. I too am not entirely confident Wizards would do this right. It's just the direction I eventually see the game going in the distant future.
Patching in paper doesn't make any sense at all. It would just be an extreme mess with rules and whatnot. The effects on the secondary market would be so huge that it's unthinkable. Besides it would just make their Design team more loose on doing real testing, like HS does. Actually it is the number one reason I dislike HS. I'd just quit if they started patching things up.
Unless you mean that we'll just kill paper magic before that happens. If that's the proposal then by all means do it. Even if Arena is cool and all, and it was the reason I returned from my hiatus, I can't stand the idea of not playing paper magic.
Like I said in my original post, the concept of patching forces us to entertain an entirely new idea about digital vs. paper Magic. It might be something that happens in the distant future, and we just don't know how "distant" that is. It's just the direction I see the game eventually going, much like in 2017 it was clear that Arena was going to be the all-in bet for Magic's future, and in early 2019 it was clear that Wizards would promote Arena-only esport style events with no paper component. I am confident Wizards and Hasbro continue to have these discussions about paper vs. digital Magic, and I am confident it is an extremely complicated issue that none of us have enough inside information and perspective to understand. Patching is just a small piece of that conversation and one I eventually see happening with Magic. Also, logistics aside, I would much rather Wizards patch cards than ban cards, if we had some guarantee (unlikely) that the only time a card would be patched is if it would otherwise be banned. Of course, as I've acknowledged a few times, Wizards could start patching for lots of reasons, which creates a lot of potential risks and rewards we'd have to consider. Obviously, this isn't a near-future prediction; just a distant future idea that I predict will one day happen in place of bans.
I would hope it never goes beyond things like Pridemate then. I doubt, deeply, that if Wizards has even thought about this, that they would consider the ramifications to Legacy and Modern.
It would (will?) be beyond obnoxious.
If people find this thread unbearable now, let's start thinking about us fighting over 1 mana difference, or 1 toughness.
I would hope it never goes beyond things like Pridemate then. I doubt, deeply, that if Wizards has even thought about this, that they would consider the ramifications to Legacy and Modern.
It would (will?) be beyond obnoxious.
If people find this thread unbearable now, let's start thinking about us fighting over 1 mana difference, or 1 toughness.
No thanks.
I understand Ajani's Pridemate was errata'd to be a "MUST" ability - but what was the cause of this? Did it screw with the program's system, or the game play?
I would hope it never goes beyond things like Pridemate then. I doubt, deeply, that if Wizards has even thought about this, that they would consider the ramifications to Legacy and Modern.
It would (will?) be beyond obnoxious.
If people find this thread unbearable now, let's start thinking about us fighting over 1 mana difference, or 1 toughness.
No thanks.
I understand Ajani's Pridemate was errata'd to be a "MUST" ability - but what was the cause of this? Did it screw with the program's system, or the game play?
Thats the part that scares me, it was simply a 'Quality of Life' change due to Arena, saving a click of 'Yes' and was not needed in the slightest.
Meanwhile, we in Modern say 'well what if I want to go under a Bridge, and now I cannot'.
Thats the exact kind of stuff I would rather never see.
Cards like this are driving me away from Modern. I'm just waiting for the "fixed" Stoneforge Mystic and then I'm probably out.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Legacy - Sneak Show, BR Reanimator, Miracles, UW Stoneblade
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/ Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander - Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build) (dead format for me)
I would hope it never goes beyond things like Pridemate then. I doubt, deeply, that if Wizards has even thought about this, that they would consider the ramifications to Legacy and Modern.
It would (will?) be beyond obnoxious.
If people find this thread unbearable now, let's start thinking about us fighting over 1 mana difference, or 1 toughness.
No thanks.
I understand Ajani's Pridemate was errata'd to be a "MUST" ability - but what was the cause of this? Did it screw with the program's system, or the game play?
Things like this have back and forth game play ramifications that bother me. Take just Pridemate, for example, if I know I'm playing around a Citywide Bust, I may not want to take the advantage of those +1/+1 counters. Not all advantages are advantages in all cases; I had this come up like a month ago with WAR when I proliferated one of my opponent's creatures into a 4/4 to Despark it (or something while Drafting).
I'm just not sure all these things should be messed with even when you think it's taking the advantage, that "may" is a very powerful word.
I would hope it never goes beyond things like Pridemate then. I doubt, deeply, that if Wizards has even thought about this, that they would consider the ramifications to Legacy and Modern.
It would (will?) be beyond obnoxious.
If people find this thread unbearable now, let's start thinking about us fighting over 1 mana difference, or 1 toughness.
No thanks.
I understand Ajani's Pridemate was errata'd to be a "MUST" ability - but what was the cause of this? Did it screw with the program's system, or the game play?
I thought they said it was click intensive as a may ability, and it's not an earth shattering card to test the waters with imo.
I'm highly highly skeptical we'll ever see paper "patches" as banning and printing a fixed version has been the go to strat for years. They generate sales, we don't have to deal with a format being broken until a safety valve can be released, and it's just all around cleaner. Especially since magic is multilingual and artwork is key in identifying a card (yes we go by the oracle text in tournaments, but we identify and process board state data largely by card position and artwork).
We've even seen it with stuff that's in the reserved list and getting cards like deep forest hermit. Its too strong for standard (9 p/t accross 5 bodies for 5 mana is kinda powerful). They can't print the old card, so you riff of it and make something new. Often times it's more fun anyway (better creature types, better stats/mana, or an effect that doesn't break the game wide open like time walk).
My gut feeling to pridemate was that they were very leery about introducing another functional reprint at 2 cmc as it could seriously throw standard out of whack or have eternal format effects (soul sisters wouldn't mind 8 goyfs, fwiw). I would have rather seen an edit on the design (make it legendary and give it trample) instead of the errata though.
They can always revert the change as well once the card rotates from standard. I doubt they will, but it's an option.
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Oh I just wanna smack that guy. People are allowed to be negative.
Hoping you were betting on a joke. Surgical Extraction vs Humans is the shi_ttiest card ever.
I do agree about the fact it’s useful even maindeck in some sort of strategies (especially when you’ve got Faithless Looting to dispose of it when unnecessary).
Dredge
Bridge
Phoenix
Humans
UW
Tron
Would that be the worst thing?
Instead of aggressively jumping on every point, let's look at the nuances and assume the best of each other?
Spirits
Yet, it’s just *utterly terrible* against Humans, no questions about this one.
I have played both decks fairly extensively. I played UR Eldrazi during the whole Eldrazi Winter. That deck is definitely more busted and nearly impossible to hate on without giving up your matchup to nearly every other deck in the meta (which probably is worth it at the time in my opinion). Eye of Ugin was seriously busted. I first realized this when I mulliganed to Eye, Eldrazi Temple, Thought-Knot Seer, and Eldrazi Mimic and thoroughly slaughtered my opponent. I had never slaughtered an opponent on 4 cards. I had won a few close ones sometimes, but never like this.
As for BridgeVine, I have played it in a lot of forms and this form with Hogaak, which I have tested the past 3 days, is pretty insane. I did have some poor draws before the tournament vs. Amulet with Devoted Druid (a friend) and only won 3 of 5 games. This deck can be hurt slightly by multiple pieces of hate.
I predict Grafdigger's Cage going up in value. It also shuts down NeoBrand, a deck that I'm now 14-2 with. So, these are the cards that I expect to see more play.
1. Grafdigger's Cage
2. Ravenous Trap
and to a lesser extent, Leyline of the Void.
I personally will always assume my opponent has Ravenous Trap in games 2 and 3 when I'm on Hogaak Vine unless I've seen different when I milled them out.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)They don't test for Modern.
Arclight Phoenix made an archetype in Standard and even Prized Amalgam was in a fun Standard deck (UR Zombies). Had a local 12-0 at a GP into 12-3 with UR Zombies during its Standard run. Skaab Stitching or something like that, lol. They may have thought that Hollow One could do something in Standard?
Wizards literally does not think at all about other formats. London Mulligan? That's terrible news for Modern and Legacy, the 2 formats I play the most.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)I'm fine with allegations that Wizards doesn't test new cards in Standard-legal sets for Modern. They've literally said that in Play Design articles. But the allegation that Wizards "does not think at all about other formats" with the citation of the "London Mulligan" is patently incorrect. They literally tested the rule at a Modern MC prior to releasing it, and explicitly cited Modern results in evaluating it. I don't know how much more they could have realistically acknowledged Modern in that rollout.
Half the bans wizards makes don't even outright kill the deck, just downgrade them from tier0 to tier1-3.
If cards were free, bans and unbans could be made with much more ease and less risk (JTMS comes to mind, unbanning it was dangerous in part because of its price and the economic implications, it had to come with a reprint to alleviate the increase in demand)
In terms of gameplay, you are correct, bans are made to fix something problematic and improve the game experience so being able to fix those quickly should be positive. But when your playerbase has already invested money to get their cards, making these changes becomes a challenge since you now have to keep in mind other things besides how good the format will look afterwards, otherwise you could take away motivation from some players (even if their cards didn't plummet in price, having to move to another deck is not easy in paper and usually takes some time) resulting in less people attending tournaments, even if gameplay had improved. That's why WotC has to always be cautious with B&R announcements affecting paper magic.
Arena could be the environment where WotC is quicker in terms of bans and unbans since the economic and logistic repercusions are diminished or almost gone. I know, crafting new cards requires game resources but you can get them for free in a reasonable amount of time so players don't suffer too much if a card gets banned like Nexus of Fate did.
Even stronger, when Nexus of Fate got banned, everyone who had them got mythic wildcards for free.
I still believe the way of the future will ultimately be a form of card patching, where Wizards can adjust problematic cards to not ban them outright. This would be the end of feelbad bans as we know it and is the way every digital game I know of handles similar balance issues. This would require an even heavier investment in Arena, however, as well as a total paradigm shift to how we think about paper vs. digital Magic. It's also not a panacea. Bad patches can still happen, especially if Wizards starts both nerfing problems AND buffing struggling archetypes. This would create its own set of risks and benefits. But ultimately, it would eliminate the need to ban cards outright.
Because sometimes they make very strange and poorly supported decisions, and then refuse to further aknowledge them, while the cards laughably rot on the banned list. Stoneforge Mystic is a perfect example of this. Banned for the sins of a completely irrelevant and separate format, having never been in Modern, and being CONSIDERABLY less powerful than nearly everything all top decks are doing. It's embarrassing and silly that she remains banned.
They do not mind killing decks. As long as it's a deck they don't like or want. Just look at KCI.
UR ....... WUBR ........... WB ............. RGW ........ UBR ....... WUB .... BGU
Spells / Blink & Combo / Token Grind / Dino Tribal / Draw Cards / Zombies / Reanimate
Would Goyf see play a 2G? (Assuming it saw play today) probably not. Being on the treadmill of constant updates, constant tweaks, and thats before set releases...its a terrible life, and anyone that games semi-competitively online is well used to it from any number of 'I just want to play but you keep changing it' competitive online games.
Spirits
Nexus MTG News // Nexus - Magic Art Gallery // MTG Dual Land Color Ratios Analyzer // MTG Card Drawing Odds Calculator
Want to play a UW control deck in modern, but don't have jace or snaps?
Please come visit us at the Emeria Titan control thread
Yeah exactly, its not like there is a ton of granularity in some of these cards.
Guide is a good example. R for 2/2 Haste with upside/downside? Fine, and clearly playable. How about RR? How about 1R? How about R and 1/2 or 2/1?
Its a really bad slope to get on.
I would rather my deck be banned, than have the entire game/format thrown into chaos like that.
Spirits
Unless you mean that we'll just kill paper magic before that happens. If that's the proposal then by all means do it. Even if Arena is cool and all, and it was the reason I returned from my hiatus, I can't stand the idea of not playing paper magic.
WUMiracles ControlUW
RUBGrixis Death's ShadowBUR
I'm less talking about cards like Guide and Goyf, which have never been banned, and am instead talking about cards that were banned in one format or another. Patching would just be an alternative to banning. Of course, as you both suggest, this opens up the can of worms to patching for all kinds of balance reasons, not just bans. I too am not entirely confident Wizards would do this right. It's just the direction I eventually see the game going in the distant future.
Like I said in my original post, the concept of patching forces us to entertain an entirely new idea about digital vs. paper Magic. It might be something that happens in the distant future, and we just don't know how "distant" that is. It's just the direction I see the game eventually going, much like in 2017 it was clear that Arena was going to be the all-in bet for Magic's future, and in early 2019 it was clear that Wizards would promote Arena-only esport style events with no paper component. I am confident Wizards and Hasbro continue to have these discussions about paper vs. digital Magic, and I am confident it is an extremely complicated issue that none of us have enough inside information and perspective to understand. Patching is just a small piece of that conversation and one I eventually see happening with Magic. Also, logistics aside, I would much rather Wizards patch cards than ban cards, if we had some guarantee (unlikely) that the only time a card would be patched is if it would otherwise be banned. Of course, as I've acknowledged a few times, Wizards could start patching for lots of reasons, which creates a lot of potential risks and rewards we'd have to consider. Obviously, this isn't a near-future prediction; just a distant future idea that I predict will one day happen in place of bans.
It would (will?) be beyond obnoxious.
If people find this thread unbearable now, let's start thinking about us fighting over 1 mana difference, or 1 toughness.
No thanks.
Spirits
I understand Ajani's Pridemate was errata'd to be a "MUST" ability - but what was the cause of this? Did it screw with the program's system, or the game play?
GWUBRDraft my Old Border Nostalgia Cube! and/or The Little Pauper Cube That Could!RBUWG
Modern:WDeath & TaxesW | RUGRUG DelverRUG
Thats the part that scares me, it was simply a 'Quality of Life' change due to Arena, saving a click of 'Yes' and was not needed in the slightest.
Meanwhile, we in Modern say 'well what if I want to go under a Bridge, and now I cannot'.
Thats the exact kind of stuff I would rather never see.
Spirits
Cards like this are driving me away from Modern. I'm just waiting for the "fixed" Stoneforge Mystic and then I'm probably out.
Premodern - Trix, RecSur, Enchantress, Reanimator, Elves https://www.facebook.com/groups/PremodernUSA/
Modern - Neobrand, Hogaak Vine, Elves
Standard - Mono Red (6-2 and 5-3 in 2 McQ)
Draft - (I wish I had more time for limited...)
Commander -
Norin the Wary, Grimgrin, Adun Oakenshield (taking forever to build)(dead format for me)I'm just not sure all these things should be messed with even when you think it's taking the advantage, that "may" is a very powerful word.
"Reveal a Dragon"
I thought they said it was click intensive as a may ability, and it's not an earth shattering card to test the waters with imo.
I'm highly highly skeptical we'll ever see paper "patches" as banning and printing a fixed version has been the go to strat for years. They generate sales, we don't have to deal with a format being broken until a safety valve can be released, and it's just all around cleaner. Especially since magic is multilingual and artwork is key in identifying a card (yes we go by the oracle text in tournaments, but we identify and process board state data largely by card position and artwork).
We've even seen it with stuff that's in the reserved list and getting cards like deep forest hermit. Its too strong for standard (9 p/t accross 5 bodies for 5 mana is kinda powerful). They can't print the old card, so you riff of it and make something new. Often times it's more fun anyway (better creature types, better stats/mana, or an effect that doesn't break the game wide open like time walk).
My gut feeling to pridemate was that they were very leery about introducing another functional reprint at 2 cmc as it could seriously throw standard out of whack or have eternal format effects (soul sisters wouldn't mind 8 goyfs, fwiw). I would have rather seen an edit on the design (make it legendary and give it trample) instead of the errata though.
They can always revert the change as well once the card rotates from standard. I doubt they will, but it's an option.