|
So on modo right now in the premiere 64 person drafts, after the top8 draft your deckbuilding pool contains your picks from both drafts. lol :modo:
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:13
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Yeah that deck saw a TON of play and did not have a single even close to winning match up against anything. At all. IIRC its best matchup was Junk, with like a low 40% win rate, and everything else was less than 35.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:So on modo right now in the premiere 64 person drafts, after the top8 draft your deckbuilding pool contains your picks from both drafts. lol I love the bugs where it's like "how did they even manage to break it like that?"
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:18
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:So on modo right now in the premiere 64 person drafts, after the top8 draft your deckbuilding pool contains your picks from both drafts. That's actually kind of a sweet format - you're incentivized to try to draft to improve your previous deck, and counterdrafting is encouraged, while also getting a lot of picks for sideboard or niche cards or you can go crazy and just have a second deck in your sideboard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:25
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:That's actually kind of a sweet format - you're incentivized to try to draft to improve your previous deck, and counterdrafting is encouraged, while also getting a lot of picks for sideboard or niche cards or you can go crazy and just have a second deck in your sideboard. Yeah totally. I could see doing that with minimasters too where when you win you just get your opponent's entire pool. Things would get super sick after a few rounds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Yeah that deck saw a TON of play and did not have a single even close to winning match up against anything. At all. it's very rarely listed because the percentage of field data is not as commonly available doesn't sell cards like top 8 decklists do
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
http://blogs.magicjudges.org/seacat/applying-a-lens-of-clarity-to-the-us-southeast-suspensions/ This is the judge leadership detailing how they poo poo on the judges they lead. I especially like this part. quote:We don’t oversee them in any fashion. We abide by their decisions because they’re not decisions that we’re empowered to remake or question. There’s a fundamental dependency of the Judge Program on Wizards, and that’s not something I was (or am) capable of changing in that moment or any other. Ultimately, Magic is Wizards’ game and Wizards’ property, simple as that. It feel like that these people are giving WOTC complete power of them without you know, being employed by them. Sure these judges can't host events, but your going to follow through with forbidding them to talk on judges forums or do their 3rd party judge projects aimed solely at helping the community of judges? Who gives someone that much power over them without requiring a pay check? Simply amazing.
|
|
#
?
Feb 1, 2016 23:46
|
|
|
y'all know beyond the PT level wotc could completely kill judges and not really care right? starting tomorrow all events could be judged by the TO/shop owner as judge and they would see no real difference in outcomes.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:12
|
|
|
I think Maro does himself a disservice when he answers questions like "why isn't Inquisition of Kozilek in Oath of the Gatewatch" and the answer is a nebulous "development" issues answer. When the same question was brought up for Lightning Helix they answered it by saying it was miserable with Snapcaster Mage in standard. This is a fine answer, just like "Jace, Telepath Unbound with Inquisition of Kozilek loving sucked" would be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:y'all know beyond the PT level wotc could completely kill judges and not really care right? starting tomorrow all events could be judged by the TO/shop owner as judge and they would see no real difference in outcomes. Do you really believe this?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:20
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I think Maro does himself a disservice when he answers questions like "why isn't Inquisition of Kozilek in Oath of the Gatewatch" and the answer is a nebulous "development" issues answer. When the same question was brought up for Lightning Helix they answered it by saying it was miserable with Snapcaster Mage in standard. This is a fine answer, just like "Jace, Telepath Unbound with Inquisition of Kozilek loving sucked" would be. I think his answers were perfectly legitimate about why they weren't able to reprint it in OGW/in standard generally. The problem is that they have no backup plan for how to create some supply. If I'm given a task at my job and my first two ideas for how to implement it are legitimately unworkable, that's too bad for me and my boss might be sympathetic but it doesn't mean I get to just throw up my hands. (A related issue is that the whole Magic team apparently doesn't consider "holy poo poo create some supply for staple cards" to be nearly as high up on their job description as you'd think it ought to be, but that's a larger topic.)
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure Inquisition isn't in because all the Eldrazi themed spells have devoid, so it's stick out if it was the only one that wasn't. Of course, that's no excuse for it not to be in a Modern Masters or other supplemental set.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:24
|
|
|
The funnier part of that article is that Hedron Crab was killed "for constructed reasons"
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
I mean to be fair Inquisition wasn't a particularly expensive card back when OGW was being designed.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:29
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:The funnier part of that article is that Hedron Crab was killed "for constructed reasons" I mean t1 land do whatever then t2 play crab, play fetch, crack fetch, play any XM costed delve spell. Seems pretty good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:30
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:I think his answers were perfectly legitimate about why they weren't able to reprint it in OGW/in standard generally. The problem is that they have no backup plan for how to create some supply. If I'm given a task at my job and my first two ideas for how to implement it are legitimately unworkable, that's too bad for me and my boss might be sympathetic but it doesn't mean I get to just throw up my hands. It's not that his answer isn't legitimate, its that I don't think he goes far enough to explain why things happen in development so it ends up sounding like he's just saying "too strong for standard" which is something that detractors jump on in order to complain. I'm guessing the actual reason was that, as I said, it probably was a serious problem both at Limited and in Constructed because in limited, the expectation is that the card is going to continue to be an uncommon, but unlike ROE, the set doesn't have an established "Eldrazi care about huge CMC" so you're basically just hitting a ton of any opponent's best plays. In constructed I suspect Jace and Inquisition at the same time was lovely. whydirt posted:I'm pretty sure Inquisition isn't in because all the Eldrazi themed spells have devoid, so it's stick out if it was the only one that wasn't. Of course, that's no excuse for it not to be in a Modern Masters or other supplemental set. Maro's first post on the card was that the original plan was to use the card themed with Kalitas's/Ayli's Eldrazi-allied tribe.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:37
|
|
|
whydirt posted:I'm pretty sure Inquisition isn't in because all the Eldrazi themed spells have devoid, so it's stick out if it was the only one that wasn't. Of course, that's no excuse for it not to be in a Modern Masters or other supplemental set. That's covered in the article - creative found a way to make it work (a couple lines of flavor text indicating that the spell represented the work of Kozilek cultists rather than Kozilek itself) but it didn't end up mattering because development said no.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:y'all know beyond the PT level wotc could completely kill judges and not really care right? starting tomorrow all events could be judged by the TO/shop owner as judge and they would see no real difference in outcomes. i would absolutely love to see this happen for just one month, just to shut people like this up
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:40
|
|
|
I wish they'd reprint Blackmail in Standard sometime. While less powerful than Inquisition and Thoughtseize, it's a much more interesting spell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:41
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Maro's first post on the card was that the original plan was to use the card themed with Kalitas's/Ayli's Eldrazi-allied tribe. Ideally it would have been part of a larger subset of cards showing this whole development. As is, it feels like they basically don't develop that subplot at all in the cards. How many cards are there that explicitly show some aspect of it, aside from the two legends in question? OGW really tried to do much too much with its space. Kozilek was suddenly back and doing stuff. The eponymous Oath was suddenly a thing. Ulamog and Kozilek were suddenly dead. All of this in the space of a single small set. whydirt posted:I wish they'd reprint Blackmail in Standard sometime. While less powerful than Inquisition and Thoughtseize, it's a much more interesting spell. It's a cool design but was it ever even seriously playable?
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:45
|
|
|
Probably because those things were all intended to happen over two sets.whydirt posted:I wish they'd reprint Blackmail in Standard sometime. While less powerful than Inquisition and Thoughtseize, it's a much more interesting spell.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
GottaPayDaTrollToll posted:That's covered in the article - creative found a way to make it work (a couple lines of flavor text indicating that the spell represented the work of Kozilek cultists rather than Kozilek itself) but it didn't end up mattering because development said no. JerryLee posted:It's a cool design but was it ever even seriously playable? No, Browbeat-style cards where your opponent gets too much control over the choice are almost always bad. I guess in theory Blackmail is a better topdeck in the late game when your opponent has <=3 cards in hand? But on turn 1-2 you'd always rather have Thoughtseize or Inquisition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:51
|
|
|
I think it would be loving dope if they had made a functional reprint of Wrench Mind but make it Devoid.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:I think it would be loving dope if they had made a functional reprint of Wrench Mind but make it Devoid. To be flavourful it would be "Target players discards two cards from his or her hand unless he or she discards a colorless card". Which I guess lets them discard lands, which would probably make it worse.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:56
|
|
|
Entropic posted:To be flavourful it would be "Target players discards two cards from his or her hand unless he or she discards a colorless card". Which I guess lets them discard lands, which would probably make it worse. You could very easily add the "non-land" clause to this. edit: Specifically "discards two cards unless they discard a non-land colorless" as opposed to just making them unable to discard lands to it at all.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
I'm not sure you guys have thought through the implications of what you're asking. Saying development discovered it wasn't workable is about all you could ask for. To say otherwise would mean they'd have to explain: - Potentially mechanics of unreleased coexisting standard sets - At least some indication of pushed cards and how this would relate to them in the environment - Numerous other details from their process. Like, not gonna happen.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 00:58
|
|
|
Entropic posted:I guess in theory Blackmail is a better topdeck in the late game when your opponent has <=3 cards in hand? But on turn 1-2 you'd always rather have Thoughtseize or Inquisition.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:02
|
|
|
So, with four haven if the spirit dragon, does it seem possible to add in reality smashers to B/R dragons? I'm pretty sure the answer is no, but I got a couple and the idea of regent turn four into smasher on turn five seems so... juicy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:08
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:The funnier part of that article is that Hedron Crab was killed "for constructed reasons" It's one of most efficient cards in the UBx mill deck 
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:10
|
|
|
Fiend Computer posted:So, with four haven if the spirit dragon, does it seem possible to add in reality smashers to B/R dragons? I'm pretty sure the answer is no, but I got a couple and the idea of regent turn four into smasher on turn five seems so... juicy. If a b/r painland existed in standard than it would work. 4 sources of colorless mana isn't enough sources.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:12
|
|
|
Sickening posted:If a b/r painland existed in standard than it would work. 4 sources of colorless mana isn't enough sources. Could probably just throw in Crumbling Vestiges or something. The mana base isn't that tight in a two-color deck.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:33
|
|
|
That could work. Like I said, I figured it wouldn't really work. It just seems so fun to do.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:36
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:I'm not sure you guys have thought through the implications of what you're asking. Saying development discovered it wasn't workable is about all you could ask for. To say otherwise would mean they'd have to explain: They do it all the time, e.g., the Lightning Helix, the Liliana of the Veil, Damnation - all cards in recent sets (most of which are still in Standard) which were taken out for power reasons. Maro just says "power reasons" and then doesn't explain it and then Sam Stoddard will explain it later on. In some sense it's fine, but people listen to Maro far more than they listen to Sam Stoddard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
Not really, they just say it was too good, basically like they did here.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:48
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Not really, they just say it was too good, basically like they did here. Lightning Helix - Too good with Snapcaster Mage Damnation - They removed 4 mana sweepers Liliana of the Veil - OP in Devotion Strategies from late Theros block They often do explain what was specifically too good about them. We just don't get the explanation from Maro, its usually Stoddard in response to random Twitter questions.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:51
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Do you really believe this? below that it's mostly fnm/gpt/etc which beyond existing to drive product aren't really things wotc cares about. tournaments exist to sell product and nothing more. the competitive thing is just free advertising.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:55
|
|
|
JerryLee posted:The funnier part of that article is that Hedron Crab was killed "for constructed reasons" I mean turn 2 treasure cruise is a thing you can do very easily with crab
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 01:57
|
|
|
Elyv posted:I mean turn 2 treasure cruise is a thing you can do very easily with crab Or more worrying, turn 2 Joe Gurmaggio.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 02:07
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:Yeah that deck saw a TON of play and did not have a single even close to winning match up against anything. At all. That analysis wasn't based on % of field data, it was based on a bunch of MTGO matches and Wizards told the guys who did it to cut it out. Kind of a stupid move in my opinion.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 02:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 14:44 |
|
|
I know that wasn't field percent at tournaments but it's a similar concept. The amount of any given field a deck makes up skews t8 numbers and MODO X-0 and X-1 finishes the same.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2016 02:16
|
|