|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Banning cards is stupid and shouldn't be done, in any format, ever. Did you play against the affinity deck with Skullclamp and Disciple?
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It really is stupid, banning X card because it's overpowered for Y reason(s) only causes people to play the next most powerful card similar to the now banned card. Then, the meta of the format is stuck revolving around the "next card up" to the banned card(s) This argument would make more sense if the gap between each next-most powerful card and the ones below/around it was the same all the way down.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:00
|
|
|
Entropic posted:What's the best combo you can cram into a 40 card deck with 4 Advantageous Proclamation and 4 Backup Plan? Probably not the BEST, but the most fun thing that comes to mind is that Leylines would really appreciate 4 free Serum powders.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:01
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:This argument would make more sense if the gap between each next-most powerful card and the ones below/around it was the same all the way down. Or if those cards were all turtles all the way down
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It really is stupid, banning X card because it's overpowered for Y reason(s) only causes people to play the next most powerful card similar to the now banned card. Then, the meta of the format is stuck revolving around the "next card up" to the banned card(s) I also want all magic games to end on turn 1 (or 2 if both players have bad starting hands),
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
What would a Legacy with all reserve list cards banned look like?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Zoness posted:I thought you were being ironic but holy poo poo you actually believe that. It's literally true. The only reason the T1 decks that exist now do is because of the cards on the ban list. If you add current T1 cards to the ban list then you're going to have a bunch of probably unplayed cards become the new T1 cards because they're now the best cards at doing what they do. Rinse and repeat as bannings happen
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:02
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's literally true. The only reason the T1 decks that exist now do is because of the cards on the ban list. If you add current T1 cards to the ban list then you're going to have a bunch of probably unplaged cards become the new T1 cards because they're now the best cards at doing what they do. Have you actually seen what some of the banned cards do to a format?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:03
|
|
|
whydirt posted:What would a Legacy with all reserve list cards banned look like?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:04
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It really is stupid, banning X card because it's overpowered for Y reason(s) only causes people to play the next most powerful card similar to the now banned card. Then, the meta of the format is stuck revolving around the "next card up" to the banned card(s) You're opinions are bad and you should feel bad for having them. I award you zero points and may god have mercy on your soul. Everyone else: you can't tell LT barely plays magic now never mind they most def haven't lived through combo winter etc? We're talking statements about bannings that are so egregious and woefully misinformed that even our yugioh grads have failed to derp this hard here. PleasantDirge fucked around with this message at 20:09 on Oct 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:05
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:You're opinions are bad and you should feel bad for having them. I award you zero points and may god have mercy on your soul. It's not really an opinion. It's just the progression of how formats are when you ban cards and then the format is dominated by the "next card up"
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:07
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's literally true. The only reason the T1 decks that exist now do is because of the cards on the ban list. If you add current T1 cards to the ban list then you're going to have a bunch of probably unplayed cards become the new T1 cards because they're now the best cards at doing what they do. I agree, bannings are stupid, everyone should be playing or playing against Flash + Protean hulk, or some kind of Memory Jar nonsense.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:08
|
|
|
Attorney at Funk posted:Do you guys remember the Open a while ago where a Miracles mirror in the finals kept the tournament going until like 1:30 in the morning? That's the way all Magic should look. I'm as serious as a heart attack right now. Was that the final where game one went over 50 minutes and it ended abruptly with an accidental card draw where the miracles player thought he was resolving a ponder when it was post brainstorm fetch or something like that? Both players looked like they were about to fall asleep at the table.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:09
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's not really an opinion. It's just the progression of how formats are when you ban cards and then the format is dominated by the "next card up" You're making an assumption that the banned cards aren't overcentralizing/overpowered in the first place. This makes for a bad argument because you're assuming that there are no inherent problems with unbannings - just that the best cards are replaced with better cards - but this is false because the "next best" cards to Academy and Ancestral happen to exist in different decks, inherently diversifying the format.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's not really an opinion. It's just the progression of how formats are when you ban cards and then the format is dominated by the "next card up" You have no idea how competitive game formats work do you?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:10
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's not really an opinion. It's just the progression of how formats are when you ban cards and then the format is dominated by the "next card up" Zing! Sick burn from a long time game designer! I'll just go sit down with all the regular jackoffs so you can keep dropping knowledge bombs doc 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:11
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Banning cards is stupid and shouldn't be done, in any format, ever. One thing I like about YGO's design is that it uses a lot of "tribal" card type interactions. This means that while those cards are parasitic wrt each other and are usually contained within certain sets, it allows for v powerful effects without them affecting the rest of the other cards and without requiring bans because of it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:14
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:You have no idea how competitive game formats work do you? LT centaur is worse at magic than I am at posting so, no, not at all
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Andrast posted:I also want all magic games to end on turn 1 (or 2 if both players have bad starting hands), there was a joke about extended slightly after urza's saga got released the early game is the shuffling, the mid game is the mulligan decisions the late game is turn 1
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
I wonder what it would be like if there could only be a certain number of banned cards at any given time. Like if you wanted to ban a card, you had to take something else off of the list to make room for it. Maybe adjust the number of slots for bans based on how many cards are available in that format, I don't know. I like the idea of forcing decks to not just rely on the strongest cards in a given format but also don't like how certain archetypes are banned out of formats.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:15
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:One thing I like about YGO's design is that it uses a lot of "tribal" card type interactions. This means that while those cards are parasitic wrt each other and are usually contained within certain sets, it allows for v powerful effects without them affecting the rest of the other cards and without requiring bans because of it. Even then they restrict / ban engine cards in particular tribes. For example Shurit, a tutor/utility card with warrior typing in Nekroz, was restricted to one copy because it played a role in so many card tutor strings. Also Elemental Hero Stratos, a HERO archetype searcher, is still banned (probably for a good reason) despite being a parasitic card.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:18
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:I wonder what it would be like if there could only be a certain number of banned cards at any given time. Like if you wanted to ban a card, you had to take something else off of the list to make room for it. Maybe adjust the number of slots for bans based on how many cards are available in that format, I don't know. I like the idea of forcing decks to not just rely on the strongest cards in a given format but also don't like how certain archetypes are banned out of formats. I really dig this but I don't think it meshes with wotc policy of not testing for eternal formats. Otherwise that sounds p exciting and like it would put real tension on new bans. I don't think TC and DTT would have been dealt with the same way if they had to unban two other cards in modern to make room on the list.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:20
|
|
|
Zoness posted:Even then they restrict / ban engine cards in particular tribes. Right, but at least you can open up design space that way by making sure it doesn't have to interact with the entirety of a card pool. It's really too bad wotc abandoned the tribal experiment because they could've done a lot more with it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:I wonder what it would be like if there could only be a certain number of banned cards at any given time. Like if you wanted to ban a card, you had to take something else off of the list to make room for it. Maybe adjust the number of slots for bans based on how many cards are available in that format, I don't know. I like the idea of forcing decks to not just rely on the strongest cards in a given format but also don't like how certain archetypes are banned out of formats. This doesn't really make sense given the purpose of a ban list. There might be individual nitpicks wrt how effective some bans actually are but bans shouldn't be seen as a quota but rather an admission that something was inappropriate for the format - as formats expand the number of possible cards that could fit here would naturally increase. It should be seen as a good thing that card game makers are willing to make mistakes and admit those mistakes in trying to make the game as fun as possible. Chill la Chill posted:Right, but at least you can open up design space that way by making sure it doesn't have to interact with the entirety of a card pool. It's really too bad wotc abandoned the tribal experiment because they could've done a lot more with it. True, it's also neat when some archetypes overlap, like being able to run Dante as a rank 3 xyz for lightsworns or charge of the light brigade/raiden engine in burning abyss because both archetypes can make use each other's self mill effects. There's a good number of variant decks in yugioh that put a smaller archetype as a CA engine for a larger archetype. Zoness fucked around with this message at 20:24 on Oct 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
Unban all cards in all format, and then ban all blue cards and islands.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:22
|
|
|
More like ban all nonblue cards. For real though, unbanning Visions is a really good idea because Modern needs control back.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
LC's argument only makes sense if card power level is a constant gentle slope. Then choosing the cutoff would be arbitrary. In reality there is a fairly flat power level among Modern/Legacy playables with a few enormous spikes. With the spikes the universe of acceptably strong cards for deck building is a dozen or so. Without them you have hundreds of cards that can all be played because, while some are stronger than others in one area or another, none is strong enough to wholly invalidate broad swathes of others.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:42
|
|
|
PleasantDirge posted:Zing! Sick burn from a long time game designer! I'll just go sit down with all the regular jackoffs so you can keep dropping knowledge bombs doc Except that it wasn't a zing or a statement like "I'm right and you're all wrong" It's simply the degradation of how a MTG format will look. It also applies to any game that's not MTG. Regardless of the game discussed when you ban something it creates a domino effect that takes it out of the top tier rotation and something else will take it's place. From a card game viewpoint if there is no card similar to the now banned card then something will take it's place as the new top tier and the format will revolve around that and the cycle will keep repeating as bans go on. I'm not sure where the confusion came from there
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:48
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Except that it wasn't a zing or a statement like "I'm right and you're all wrong" It's p sweet to see this happen in fast forward when you use an easily rotated "banlist" in dominion.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:50
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:LC's argument only makes sense if card power level is a constant gentle slope. Then choosing the cutoff would be arbitrary. In reality there is a fairly flat power level among Modern/Legacy playables with a few enormous spikes. With the spikes the universe of acceptably strong cards for deck building is a dozen or so. Without them you have hundreds of cards that can all be played because, while some are stronger than others in one area or another, none is strong enough to wholly invalidate broad swathes of others. Well yeah. It should be self-evident with just a bit of critical thought that WotC's goal (or one of them, at least) in having a heavily curated format like modern is to maximize the number of competitively viable decks in as wide a variety of playstyles as possible.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 20:52
|
|
|
Static Equilibrium posted:Well yeah. It should be self-evident with just a bit of critical thought that WotC's goal (or one of them, at least) in having a heavily curated format like modern is to maximize the number of competitively viable decks in as wide a variety of playstyles as possible. Granted I don't follow Modern as much as many people ITT but isn't Modern known for not having many competitive viable decks in the format? Isn't it like the same top 5 that take turns winning? Weird jank doesn't have a history of winning Opens or PT's does it?
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:LC's argument only makes sense if card power level is a constant gentle slope. Then choosing the cutoff would be arbitrary. In reality there is a fairly flat power level among Modern/Legacy playables with a few enormous spikes. With the spikes the universe of acceptably strong cards for deck building is a dozen or so. Without them you have hundreds of cards that can all be played because, while some are stronger than others in one area or another, none is strong enough to wholly invalidate broad swathes of others. I guess I just don't understand LC's argument to begin with. Sure, they play the next most powerful card, but most of the cards on the banlist are engines to do broken poo poo for which there isn't a replacement, e.g. there isn't some next level replacement for Hypergenesis, but unbanning Hypergenesis would probably make the only good decks Hypergenesis and decks that decks that can counter a Turn 2 Hypergenesis.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Granted I don't follow Modern as much as many people ITT but isn't Modern known for not having many competitive viable decks in the format? Isn't it like the same top 5 that take turns winning? I'm under the impression that it's a pretty healthy meta, much moreso than standard. There are certainly ~5 tier one decks, but decks recently shift into and out of tier 1 depending on the metagame. I don't know that you'll see a deck as crazy as Slivers win an open, but it top 8ed one last month, and Lantern Control won GP Oklahoma. I think it's also the case that no variety of Twin has won an SCG open.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:06
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Granted I don't follow Modern as much as many people ITT but isn't Modern known for not having many competitive viable decks in the format? Isn't it like the same top 5 that take turns winning? Fuckin' Lantern of Insight won the last Modern GP.
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:07
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Granted I don't follow Modern as much as many people ITT but isn't Modern known for not having many competitive viable decks in the format? Isn't it like the same top 5 that take turns winning? lol
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:10
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Granted I don't follow Modern as much as many people ITT but isn't Modern known for not having many competitive viable decks in the format? Isn't it like the same top 5 that take turns winning? The chief complaint pros have about modern as a competitive format is that there are so many powerful strategies which attack you at such disparate angles that you can't really solve the format and just bring the Best Deck like you can in standard, and a lot of your games come down to how much sideboard hate you/your opponents pack/draw. Consider that two of the stronger strategies right now are a janky Lantern of Insight prison deck and a weird Amulet of Vigor combo deck: both of which look like piles of hot garbage at first glance. Or that tron, affinity, twin, scapeshift, tokens, zoo, living end, BGx midrange, elves, infect, boggles, merfolk, grixis delve (with and without delver), and burn all still post tournament results to some degree or another. Edit: like even if, say, some sort of midrangey pile of good cards like junk or grixis is the best deck in the format by whatever measure you want to use, there's a huge pile of decks that are close enough to that mark that there's a huge variety of options in a bunch of different archetypes that all have a realistic chance of placing well at a large tournament, which would certainly not be the case if f. ex. blazing shoal and hyper genesis were legal. fomo sacer fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Oct 19, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:Granted I don't follow Modern as much as many people ITT but isn't Modern known for not having many competitive viable decks in the format? Isn't it like the same top 5 that take turns winning? I don't follow modern at all, here, have some posts about the ban list in modern 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
Lieutenant Centaur posted:It's not really an opinion. It's just the progression of how formats are when you ban cards and then the format is dominated by the "next card up"
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
Yawgmoth posted:Your opinions are the MtG version of being an anti-vaxxer. I'm waiting for the "haha i was only joking guys" and "you got punked" but apparently this guy is serious? Like how is this possible 
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 07:50 |
|
|
If you're interested in seeing how a game without a ban list works out might I suggest that you go play original netrunner  actually that's a problem with android netrunner too
|
|
#
?
Oct 19, 2015 21:24
|
|
