I don't understand the argument of "Limited environments need inherently sub-optimal/objectively bad cards to be fun." Have you people just never heard of a Cube? Do you enjoy playing with bad cards? Are you trying to formulate excuses simply to argue?
Also, if you want to claim that people are "making this set about money," keep in mind that WIZARDS are ones making this all about money by charging an increased amount for a product that costs no more than usual to produce. It shouldn't matter what valuable cards the product contains, it costs them the same amount to print any given non-foil card.
I think you're only playing with poorly built cubes if there aren't bread and butter, unexciting two drops in them. "Dragon cubes" as people call them, cubes with nothing but bomb rares. Good cubes are like good sets: they include curve fillers so you can, you know, build real decks.
Amazing how the people with no idea what they're talking about in regards to limited are the ones complaining here lol I'm out.
We are coming from two different angles. We have to agree to disagree and move on. It would be like buying a PREMIUM luxury car and opening the door to find it with cloth seats, 1992 digital radio and lacking power seats, windows or cruise control. My argument is even the commons need to be premium and if they are not available bump certain uncommons to common to make it so. Again, we have to cite our differences and move on.
That's a really poor analogy. It's like buying a luxury car only to discover...it drives like a luxury car, because it was designed to be used and they really hit the mark.
No its a PERFECT analogy. Time to move on, let it go. I'm done.
We are coming from two different angles. We have to agree to disagree and move on. It would be like buying a PREMIUM luxury car and opening the door to find it with cloth seats, 1992 digital radio and lacking power seats, windows or cruise control. My argument is even the commons need to be premium and if they are not available bump certain uncommons to common to make it so. Again, we have to cite our differences and move on.
That's a really poor analogy. It's like buying a luxury car only to discover...it drives like a luxury car, because it was designed to be used and they really hit the mark.
The question is WHY does there need to be an early game blocker? For draft in a Standard mass market 4 dollar product yes. But in a PREMIUM, constructed format, 10 dollar a pack set that reasoning does not fit. Why am I going to pay extra money to draft something like this when I can get the exact same card in a much cheaper, much more available, Standard draft? Why would I pay 30 to 35 bucks to end up with a deck full of Giant Tortoise and Worldgorger Dragon?
We will have to agree to disagree and move on.
Because having a good curve is generally a great way to win in limited? And winning an EMA draft yields more packs of EMA?
Also why are you drafting Worldgorger at all?
You're clearly not someone who plays limited much at all, so it's fine you don't get it.
Welp, I think I'm out of the box contest - was kind of expecting Top to be left out of EMA for the same reason it's banned in Modern (massively dragging out the time of a round when it's in play). Guess that's not as much of a thing at rare, when most of the time there's only going to be one per deck at most, and there aren't quite as many deck-shuffling effects readily available. *shrug* Oh well.
Also, Elves being a draft archetype means there'll be plenty at common, which significantly increases the likelihood of me actually finding cards that I'd use in one of my casual decks out of the few EMA boosters I'll probably end up buying. So that's a plus.
Puts me out as well: I thought Top was just too much of a time-eater for them to reprint it in a set "balanced for Draft."
It's balanced by the fact that Top is borderline unplayable in limited.
Yeah, because rarity totally dictates viability within a given format. I'll be sure to write that down.
They can print any other card in this slot that has seen play in, let's see....the past TWO DECADES?
This is obviously filler for draft decks. Maybe they're seeding a slower archetype that wants early blockers. This isn't in here for it's viability in any format other than EMA draft.
Which is exactly the problem with these sets, screw draft, this is a limited print run product that is supposed to help inject some life into eternal cardpools, it's shouldn't have to worry about draft as a format.
Wow, I absolutely disagree. I, and many others I'm sure, would not buy boosters of this at all if it weren't for draft. Buying boosters is such a horrible lottery that you need actual value (The draft experience) to make it worth it. I'm thankful that WotC puts suboptimal cards in to account for good drafting instead of bending to pressure and slotting in a bunch of limited unplayable money cards.
MMA 1 and 2 were both amazingly fun to draft, and I hope this will be as well.
There are plenty of sets to draft already in circulation, why should the premium sets suffer in card quality for a format that is already supported by every new set they print?
If this was called draft masters I'd understand, but with a card pool as big as Eternal is I don't expect chaff like this to make it into a pack while wizards hide behind the excuse of "it's for drafts!" and you silly gooses eat it up.
Exactly that, it's a premium set. This allows for more complex draft cards and interactions. We get to draft with mechanics that are "too complicated" to return to standard, or cards that are too powerful to be reprinted. It's not like the set is devoid of value, just that some concessions are made so that drafters are included too.
And guess what, drafters make up a large proportion of sales. And people doing sealed, too. Remember how large the MMA GPs were? The several of them that were held around the world? Can't hold these events (And similar events at LGS) without making the set play well in limited.
When I think of cards I love to crack in $10 MSRP boosters, my mind immediately jumps to dopey tortoises. Thanks Wizards!
It's a common. Chill out.
Yeah, because rarity totally dictates viability within a given format. I'll be sure to write that down.
They can print any other card in this slot that has seen play in, let's see....the past TWO DECADES?
This is obviously filler for draft decks. Maybe they're seeding a slower archetype that wants early blockers. This isn't in here for it's viability in any format other than EMA draft.
Which is exactly the problem with these sets, screw draft, this is a limited print run product that is supposed to help inject some life into eternal cardpools, it's shouldn't have to worry about draft as a format.
Wow, I absolutely disagree. I, and many others I'm sure, would not buy boosters of this at all if it weren't for draft. Buying boosters is such a horrible lottery that you need actual value (The draft experience) to make it worth it. I'm thankful that WotC puts suboptimal cards in to account for good drafting instead of bending to pressure and slotting in a bunch of limited unplayable money cards.
MMA 1 and 2 were both amazingly fun to draft, and I hope this will be as well.
[quote from="Lord Void »" url="http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/magic-fundamentals/the-rumor-mill/703273-dualcaster-mage-and-giant-tortoise?comment=15"]Maybe they're seeding a slower archetype that wants early blockers.
So out of every possible defensive low curve option in Blue....they pick this?
I'm sorry, this is simply not appropriate for a set of this caliber.
Sure it is. What? Does every card have to reach a certain dollar threshold before it is included? That's not only ridiculous, it's unrealistic. Especially if you expect a playable limited format; you can't have a good draft set when limiting yourself to only expensive cards.
When I think of cards I love to crack in $10 MSRP boosters, my mind immediately jumps to dopey tortoises. Thanks Wizards!
It's a common. Chill out.
Yeah, because rarity totally dictates viability within a given format. I'll be sure to write that down.
They can print any other card in this slot that has seen play in, let's see....the past TWO DECADES?
This is obviously filler for draft decks. Maybe they're seeding a slower archetype that wants early blockers. This isn't in here for it's viability in any format other than EMA draft.
Perhaps I should've stated, "Outside of Limited, this card is bonkers".
Then you're misusing the phrase "mythic uncommon".
Also, Monastery Swiftspear has existed for about a year and literally no Storm deck plays it. This should be no different. It'll see play in more tempo or aggro style decks.
A manastone for 3 is just bad in limited.. Even those which fixed 2 colors were not good really enough in limited. And having such a weak additional effect (scry 1) does not really help.
I disagree. Mana stones for 3 are definitely playable in limited, though they are usually for fixing/splashing than acceleration. And making colorless is fixing for this set.
Well you play them if you realy have to, but you are never happy about it. This was the case in every limited set I played even in Shards of Alara where the obelisks did fix 3 mana you did not really like them.
And all the ones you played could fix at least 2 colors not only 1 (colorless) so this one is a even worse in this regard.
Even more recently in Khans block the banner cycle was basically unplayable. Even the 5 color decks didn't want them.
For tribal strategies to be competitive they need more than win-more artifacts and enchantments. Think about how many creatures you need in play for Animosity/Masterwork to do anything substantial, and then tell me why you actually need these cards to win the game at that point.
Because a pile of 10 1/1 goblins tokens is typically not enough to take a player out in EDH. But a pile of 10 1/1 goblin tokens that are all getting +9/+0 easily could be... only half of them need to get through to deal 50 damage. You need those sort of really efficient payoffs to close a game when all you're doing is creating a bunch of little threats for value.
Oh my god who cares about EDH. You could run anything in that format. Even if you take it seriously, it doesn't actually matter lol
Apparently a lot of people care about EDH, because that's what a lot of the comments were on. You could run anything, but if you want to win you should probably run Shared Animosity before this.
Sure, I agree that this card isn't playable in Standard. I don't really think the question is that interesting. But these sort of effects do have a place -- even if it's a place you don't care about -- and this is a bad iteration of those effects compared to Shared Animosity, which is actually good.
I agree Shared Animosity is better. But I still think that card is bad.
We can discuss forever which cards make aggro viable in a format like EDH (The only format where one would think about playing Animosity), but aggro is so wildly unplayable in that format that the discussion is moot. Once you've resigned yourself to playing such a bad strategy, the 100 cards you choose are basically irrelevant.
For tribal strategies to be competitive they need more than win-more artifacts and enchantments. Think about how many creatures you need in play for Animosity/Masterwork to do anything substantial, and then tell me why you actually need these cards to win the game at that point.
Because a pile of 10 1/1 goblins tokens is typically not enough to take a player out in EDH. But a pile of 10 1/1 goblin tokens that are all getting +9/+0 easily could be... only half of them need to get through to deal 50 damage. You need those sort of really efficient payoffs to close a game when all you're doing is creating a bunch of little threats for value.
They're already printed that on card, so I don't know why you've been waiting. Get Wood-Kin'd.
I think you're only playing with poorly built cubes if there aren't bread and butter, unexciting two drops in them. "Dragon cubes" as people call them, cubes with nothing but bomb rares. Good cubes are like good sets: they include curve fillers so you can, you know, build real decks.
Amazing how the people with no idea what they're talking about in regards to limited are the ones complaining here lol I'm out.
"Nuh uh!"
Well alright then. Ciao.
That's a really poor analogy. It's like buying a luxury car only to discover...it drives like a luxury car, because it was designed to be used and they really hit the mark.
Because having a good curve is generally a great way to win in limited? And winning an EMA draft yields more packs of EMA?
Also why are you drafting Worldgorger at all?
You're clearly not someone who plays limited much at all, so it's fine you don't get it.
It's balanced by the fact that Top is borderline unplayable in limited.
Exactly that, it's a premium set. This allows for more complex draft cards and interactions. We get to draft with mechanics that are "too complicated" to return to standard, or cards that are too powerful to be reprinted. It's not like the set is devoid of value, just that some concessions are made so that drafters are included too.
And guess what, drafters make up a large proportion of sales. And people doing sealed, too. Remember how large the MMA GPs were? The several of them that were held around the world? Can't hold these events (And similar events at LGS) without making the set play well in limited.
Wow, I absolutely disagree. I, and many others I'm sure, would not buy boosters of this at all if it weren't for draft. Buying boosters is such a horrible lottery that you need actual value (The draft experience) to make it worth it. I'm thankful that WotC puts suboptimal cards in to account for good drafting instead of bending to pressure and slotting in a bunch of limited unplayable money cards.
MMA 1 and 2 were both amazingly fun to draft, and I hope this will be as well.
Sure it is. What? Does every card have to reach a certain dollar threshold before it is included? That's not only ridiculous, it's unrealistic. Especially if you expect a playable limited format; you can't have a good draft set when limiting yourself to only expensive cards.
This is obviously filler for draft decks. Maybe they're seeding a slower archetype that wants early blockers. This isn't in here for it's viability in any format other than EMA draft.
Then you're misusing the phrase "mythic uncommon".
Also, Monastery Swiftspear has existed for about a year and literally no Storm deck plays it. This should be no different. It'll see play in more tempo or aggro style decks.
Even more recently in Khans block the banner cycle was basically unplayable. Even the 5 color decks didn't want them.
Your meta doesn't sound very competitive then lol Cheers.
I agree Shared Animosity is better. But I still think that card is bad.
We can discuss forever which cards make aggro viable in a format like EDH (The only format where one would think about playing Animosity), but aggro is so wildly unplayable in that format that the discussion is moot. Once you've resigned yourself to playing such a bad strategy, the 100 cards you choose are basically irrelevant.
Oh my god who cares about EDH. You could run anything in that format. Even if you take it seriously, it doesn't actually matter lol