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

    posted a message on
    Comment Hidden
    Link Removed
  • 1

    posted a message on
    Comment Hidden
    Link Removed
  • 1

    posted a message on
    Comment Hidden
    Link Removed
  • 2

    posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    i agree. i also get that opinions can change over time, and maybe some people were on the fence about it.

    i thought the info that kt revealed on how much stirrings is played relative to visions (and subsequently decks that would play preordain) was quite telling. it also doesnt help that the decks that tend to play stirrings usually arent doing something 'wholesome'.

    so maybe we advocate for a preordain unban. however bans should have a higher bar to pass. if anyone has ever had a ban hit them, they should know its a really crappy experience. frankly i wouldnt mind if stirrings decks went away, but i also realize that bias is driving that perspective. so i cant in good conscious get behind mangling a number of decks when none of them is breaking any of the 'rules' established with the pattern of previous ban decisions.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • 1

    posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    which just goes to show how fickle the community can be, and how much bandwagoning occurs. the reasons for not banning stirrings back when you proposed the idea are just as true now as they were back then.

    kci is a durdly combo deck, and tron is one of the most maligned decks in the history of the format. of course people are going to get up in arms when they see them at the forefront of a GP. as people who talk about this stuff constantly we should be more level headed than that.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • 1

    posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    i can see that as reasoning to unban preordain, but not for banning stirrings.

    you said it yourself a while back ktkenshinx (when you were defending stirrings). cards arent a problem unless the deck itself is problematic. none of the decks that play stirrings have crossed any line yet as far as i know. so whats the justification for the ban? avoiding hypocrisy? a stirrings banning entails hurting multiple decks, none of which are too good; which in itself is hypocritical.

    so we can debate balance amongst various effects, but lets not forget that we are talking about seriously nerfing decks that a lot of people are invested in for reasons completely unrelated to performance. bans seriously blow. they are the extreme, and should be avoided at all costs.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • 1

    posted a message on [[Official]] Modern Prices Discussion
    this is just hearsay, but i believe they give artists guidelines for certain pieces of art but not all of it. because ive heard that they stockpile art, and when it fits something they can use it. also i remember reading one designer (maybe maro?) who talked about liking a piece of art destined for a product further down the line, and hijacking it for another card he thought it would be better for.

    im sure there is a whole lot that goes into it that people generally dont know about (myself included). however i think having distinct art between high profile reprints is favorable factor in the card economy. its not going to stonewall prices dropping, but its also a small buffer for collectors.

    for instance if they reprint shocks in the new ravnica block i hope they have new art. more options are good in my book.
    Posted in: Modern
  • 1

    posted a message on Grixis Control
    tron lands check sub-type, not the name. it doesnt show on the earlier printings of the card, but check out the 8th edition version. its the reason that spreading seas still shuts off tron.
    Posted in: Control
  • 1

    posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    Quote from javert »

    I admit that, given Modern metagame as a Eternal format is quite different and definitions are prone to shift, Jund and Mardu have been called midrange usually. No problem, but I oppose not calling Tron midrange especially if comes of sort of scorn that may drive it to call it "linear" and group it along Bloo or KCI.


    i guess if you really care what people call a deck, or are trying to campaign to get the community to acknowledge a change you would like. other than that it hardly matters. these classifications are just a means of identification and mutual understanding used in these conversations. we can call tron midrange, but its main objective and strategy to reach it IS linear because it devotes the majority of the deck to accomplishing it. sure some people use it as a slur, but that is mostly out of ignorance. kci is linear, but its a difficult and decision laden deck. similarly titanshift is also linear, but is oft cited as being on the lower end of the difficulty scale.

    so tron may be midrange to you, but what does that matter. it certainly doesnt make it more similar to jund than it was before like you pointed out. likewise people call lantern a control deck, but its obvious it shares few play patterns associated with a blue based control deck.

    if you want to convince people that tron is harder to play than the very common opinion. using some indirect method to re-establish archetype labels seems a poor way to go about it. if it has nothing to do with perceived skill. well then good luck with your campaign.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • 1

    posted a message on The State of Modern Thread (B&R 16/04/2018)
    i believe shaheen soorani has been on kci for a while. he would probably like to play some UW jace control deck though.
    Posted in: Modern Archives
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.