2019 Holiday Exchange!
 
A New and Exciting Beginning
 
The End of an Era
  • 1

    posted a message on [M20] Core Set Magic 2020 Previews: Modern Discussion
    Quote from The Fluff »
    the rotting regisaur feels like there is a way to break it. The discard can be turned into something positive.



    and this guy is scaled wurm size for only three mana...


    damn... it looks broken enough on its own. 3 mana for a 7/6, and discarding isnt exactly that bad, just play w/e you draw....
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [MH1] Modern Horizons Discussion Thread
    TBH, still haven't seen too many exciting cards yet. Their design philosophy though, is excellent ability and flavor wise, just lacks a little bit of power.

    combined with the premium price tag slashed on MH1, it is highly likely to be marked as a failure financial wise, and that may hinder any efforts to make another MH set in the near future.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [MH1] Modern Horizons Discussion Thread
    Quote from Ym1r »
    Quote from Aeonsz »
    I understand that many of you will disagree, but I have yet to see a single main deck playable level card spoiled from MH1, excluding the slivers and the canopy land cycle.
    You mean that cards like Archmage's Charm Ranger-Captain of Eos, Force of Negation, Giver of runes, Fact or Fiction, Prohibit, Scale Up, Lava Dart, Wrenn and Six, Fallen Shinobi, Eladamri's Call, Ice-Fang Coatl, and Mox Tantalite, and that's just from the top of my head, are not maindeckable?

    Yes, I meant that none of those seem maindeckable in today's modern metagame.

    I may be wrong, as some of them seem borderline playable (maybe as a 1-2 of), but that's my initial assessment.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [MH1] Modern Horizons Discussion Thread
    I understand that many of you will disagree, but I have yet to see a single main deck playable level card spoiled from MH1, excluding the slivers and the canopy land cycle.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [GRN] Guilds of Ravnica previews and spoilers: Modern edition
    Ionize is just a bad colorshifted undermine

    they should've just reprinted undermine... 4 undermine + 4 countersquall + snapcaster mage = counter till you die
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on [GRN] Guilds of Ravnica previews and spoilers: Modern edition
    Haven't really seen anything modern playable yet, fingers crossed for some great UB surveil cards...
    Posted in: Modern
  • 2

    posted a message on WOTC Considering Modern Only Boosters
    Quote from Colt47 »
    Quote from cfusionpm »
    I would honestly rather see <$20 goyfs/bobs/etc in my binders, than look longingly at a playset of cards I *might* use that cost $400+ and never buy.


    Agreed 100%. Having a price decrease doesn't mean the card got Obsoleted as much as there is an actual viable alternative that works. Also, I love the idea of modern only sets since it means we finally could get things like Counter Spell, Baleful Strix, Sanctum Prelate, Selvala, Heart of the Wilds, Shardless Agent, etc.


    Getting cards like Baleful Strix is a great idea, but if you get an upgrade of baleful strix every year and your new toy sits there useless after 6 months, it defeats the purpose of a non rotating format. Another channel of introducing cards into the format is absolutely wonderful, as long as they get the balance right, and don't take it too far.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on WOTC Considering Modern Only Boosters
    Quote from Colt47 »
    Quote from Aeonsz »
    Glad to see wizards paying attention to us modern players.

    But I am skeptic as to which direction they are going into. Let's think for a sec, if they introduce such a booster set, it needs to differ from modern masters, which is modern legal reprints only. So there are two kind of cards it needs to introduce, in addition to modern legal reprints, those are 1. non-modern legal reprints, and 2. newly designed modern specific cards. If neither of those cards printed are more powerful than the current modern available card pool, the product simply won't move. However, if they start introducing increasingly powerful cards through modern legal booster sets that effectively power creep modern, it'll turn modern into a non-rotating standard, which is very very dangerous.


    If they go the route of creating modern only booster pack products I'm not sure what that will mean for modern in other respects, or if it will even be the same format the players envisioned. The thing is, with commander it is a casual format, so as long as all the cards fit into the design space and limitations they put on power for each point of the curve it can go in the set. That's why commander always seems to get really insanely powerful cards that often feed into infinite combo engines or do crazy things like blink your entire board out of existence. Modern can never be on such a loose leash.

    If wizards starts making a modern specific product that implies much more scrutiny than they currently employ. I do think it would help a lot on accessibility, though. It took me close to four years to finally scrounge up enough money to afford an abzan fetchland mana-base and the inescapable fact of modern is that that people are limited by the bread and butter of the format as far as cost. Wizards made a horrible mistake making Noble Heirarch, Snapcaster Mage, Cavern of Souls, and other boring, but necessary cards mythic. They did it because it made stores confident in the boxes selling, but that confidence came from the wrong kinds of player needs and motivations.


    I'm afraid accessibility isn't fully in WOTC's hands, and maybe not even in their interest. Their target is to make profit, profit comes from revenue which is always a function of price and quantity. It's not always the best for WOTC to increase accessibility, aka quantity. They printed noble heirarch and snapcaster on mythic not because of flavor, but because of secondary market interests. In fact, introducing mythic rarity basically meant that they sided with secondary market players, such as SCG, CFB and other big card stores. In economics, that's text book price discrimination, and as a for profit company, they should by all means do so. By siding with the secondary players though, WOTC relinquishes control of the secondary market price to an extend, in exchange of liquidity, or volume. That's what made the game prosperous for the players, and lucrative for WOTC. TBH it worked, at least on the financial statements. But short term monetary gain could come at a long term cost, i.e. their printing quality sucked for the past few years, their questionable arrangements of product line also kinda hurted.

    Following that logic, even if they introduce a modern specific booster product, what they really wanted to do is to milk cash out of modern players' pockets, which is perfectly reasonable. What's WOTC's most lucrative product line? Booster boxes, always. Everyone knows that the best way to sell packs is through limited, but the dilemma is that constructed has been the primary selling point of MTG for at least the first 20 years (correct me if I'm wrong), and will continue to remain that way. Out of all constructed formats, which one is the most lucrative? Standard, because cards become obsolete every 2 years. Non rotating formats are nice to keep players happy with the game, but what happens when more and more players start sitting on their "modern staple" cards and don't buy booster packs? What's the best way to get these modern players to buy packs? If you ask me, I'd say shake up the format, make it "rotate" through power level shifts. from Jund to Twin to Pod to Scapeshift to Tron etc. If these metagame shifts are due to new prints, the new boosters will be highly sought after, just imagine modern specific booster set #1 prints baleful strix engineered plague counterspell, boosting the power lvl of UB color combination. Then set #2 prints swords to plowshares astral slide etc. intentionally shifting power lvls across different colors/archetypes and increasing the power level of modern. Eventually one day you'll be sitting there with a bunch of tarmogoyfs dark confidant worth $20, because the new prints are so powerful that these don't even see play anymore, and you'll have to keep buy new booster packs to keep up.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on WOTC Considering Modern Only Boosters
    Glad to see wizards paying attention to us modern players.

    But I am skeptic as to which direction they are going into. Let's think for a sec, if they introduce such a booster set, it needs to differ from modern masters, which is modern legal reprints only. So there are two kind of cards it needs to introduce, in addition to modern legal reprints, those are 1. non-modern legal reprints, and 2. newly designed modern specific cards. If neither of those cards printed are more powerful than the current modern available card pool, the product simply won't move. However, if they start introducing increasingly powerful cards through modern legal booster sets that effectively power creep modern, it'll turn modern into a non-rotating standard, which is very very dangerous.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 2

    posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 02/07/2018)
    Quote from gkourou »
    Quote from Wraithpk »
    Quote from gkourou »
    @wraith, Blue is never getting enchantment removal, neither is black, or blue.

    The closer one can get is to ask for a better Perilous Voyage, but that's that. U is only getting bounce cards. Alternatively, one can play colourless cards like Engineered Explosives or destroy all permanent effects like Apocalypse(which is not Modern legal I believe-and find cards like this one).

    You can ask Maro, and he will almost surely give you this exact answer.
    I think I remember someone, might have been Maro, saying that red can't destroy enchantments because the color is too dumb, basically. They can smash artifacts and fling fireballs, but they don't know what to do with a persistent magical spell like an enchantment. I know that blue usually only gets bounce spells, but from a flavor perspective, if enchantments are supposed to be persistent spells, doesn't it make sense that blue should be able to undo them? I think it makes sense, and I really think enchantment destruction needs to be opened up to a third color anyway.


    I am confused. Artifact destruction is in R, G. Enchantments destruction is in G,W.
    2 for both. Seems fair. Nothing is going to change in that department.
    Disenchant is a colour shifted time spiral card, don't forget.


    disenchanthas been there since alpha....
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.