|
Enter the Battlefield is actually not terrible, but would be greatly improved if any of the featured players possessed anything resembling charisma. But still not bad.
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
odiv posted:Speaking of the judges' suit. PAX just happened and it made me wonder about their Enforcer volunteers. That seems like a little less murky situation than the MTG judge one, but I'm no lawyer. Enforcers aren't volunteers. They're paid and receive a W-2 and everything.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Don't see you: wotc using pro players to create interest in their product and create something new customers can aspire too is exactly the same as a farm paying for my failed restaurant
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
Noob question, if someone casts a Languish and I flicker a creature in response using Eerie Interlude, does my creature get -4/-4 when it re-enters the battlefield?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:Don't see you: wotc using pro players to create interest in their product and create something new customers can aspire too is exactly the same as a farm paying for my failed restaurant OH hey jackass late to the party. Read the thread.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
The sad part is the pro tour /pro player club is entirely in OPs hands and marketing has no control over it because wotc's internal organization is so bad
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:30
|
|
|
Yes, your flicker will go off while the languish is on the stack. The second your ability resolves the languish happens
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Iucounu posted:Noob question, if someone casts a Languish and I flicker a creature in response using Eerie Interlude, does my creature get -4/-4 when it re-enters the battlefield? All creatures on the battlefield when languish resolves will get -4/-4, regardless of when they entered the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:And yes, its pretty loving scummy that they implicitly (not legally) promised to continue the payouts earned in the 15-16 season to the 16-17 season and just aren't doing it. It's a lot more eye-rolling when you consider their stance on the entirely made-up Reserved List promise. Is there a legal liability here? Does promissory estoppel apply to things as abstract as Platinum level payouts?
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:OH hey jackass late to the party. Read the thread. At no point did anything you said get any less dumb. You made it very clear you have no understanding of marketing at even a basic level
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
Iucounu posted:Noob question, if someone casts a Languish and I flicker a creature in response using Eerie Interlude, does my creature get -4/-4 when it re-enters the battlefield? No, because Eerie Interlude returns it later, presumably long after the Languish has resolved. If it was Cloudshift or another similar flicker effect that returns the creature immediately, obviously it would get nailed by the Languish resolving. I think this is what 80s James Hetfield was assuming, btw.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Iucounu posted:Noob question, if someone casts a Languish and I flicker a creature in response using Eerie Interlude, does my creature get -4/-4 when it re-enters the battlefield? No. Edit: Anyone who posted before me saying yes didn't read what Eerie Interlude does.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
Iucounu posted:Noob question, if someone casts a Languish and I flicker a creature in response using Eerie Interlude, does my creature get -4/-4 when it re-enters the battlefield? No. The -4/-4 affects all existing creatures. Anything that comes in after the Languish has resolved isn't subjected to the effect. Since interlude does a delayed flicker, they're "safe" from it. Conversely, if you did the same trick with something like Eldrazi Displacer, since it's an instant bounce in and out, your guy dies since Languish resolves after the fact.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:32
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:At no point did anything you said get any less dumb. You made it very clear you have no understanding of marketing at even a basic level I have a decent understanding of marketing, actually. Not a professional marketing level one but a good enough one to understand that the argument that pros deserve a living wage from Wizards to play a game has nothing to do with marketing. If you wish to say it would be a good marketing move for Wizards to pay pros as brand ambassadors that can be argued, even though clearly Wizards doesn't think so. But to say they should be paid by the parent company because they are good at Magic: the Gathering card game is not, in any way, a marketing argument.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
cheetah7071 posted:Enforcers aren't volunteers. They're paid and receive a W-2 and everything. Googled it and found this from 3 months ago: https://www.reddit.com/r/PAX/comments/3yg874/previous_pax_enforcers_i_have_a_few_questions/ Which has some people saying they don't get paid unless I'm seriously misreading it. Anyway, kind of a derail, so we can drop it. Just thought it might be relevant to the judge situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:34
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:DON'T WORRY WOTC HAS YOU COVERED. God drat it wizards what the gently caress
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
Mezzanon posted:God drat it wizards what the gently caress It's a joke (I think)
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:38
|
|
|
rabidsquid posted:And wizards shouldn't be paying because? Because it's not worth their time and money really. Riot only pays out 20k a year or so to it's players and the LCS pulls in 5-10 times as many viewers as a gp. The biggest, most liked personality in the scene pulls in stream numbers that would have been spectacular back before lol season 1 but are like d tier lol personalities now. The only people who might be interested in sponsoring any of this are lgs' and online retailers and according to everyone in this thread none of those people outside cfb and scg are remotely in the position to be throwing money around like that. And even then SCG has cut tournaments this year so clearly they aren't making enough money off it either. So the bottom line is there's no sponsors with money to throw around, there's no personalities worth sponsoring, and there's no fans to justify the expense. If I were wotc in the current climate I wouldn't be wanting to pay out to pros either. I would lay the blame for this squarely on wotc though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:I have a decent understanding of marketing, actually. Not a professional marketing level one but a good enough one to understand that the argument that pros deserve a living wage from Wizards to play a game has nothing to do with marketing. Pro players earning "livable" money (not really but let's assume this is true) creates a goal people can aspire to. That goal drives those players to buy more and play more. It also creates this possibility, however distant, for new players to go for. Beyond this Having recognizable figures people attach to your brand carries your brand wherever those people go. When efro/williams were getting into poker their pro magic playing status was mentioned. This is free advertisement and gives you exposure in places you wouldn't otherwise.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
80s James Hetfield posted:Yes, your flicker will go off while the languish is on the stack. The second your ability resolves the languish happens Eerie Interlude returns the creatures to the battlefield in the End Step, so no, the Languish will not hit them.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
11k * 30 is ultimately an irrelevant number to wotc per year. Having a pro tour, pro players and a hall of fame as a goal to be aspired to creates far more long term value than the short term costs.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:Pro players earning "livable" money (not really but let's assume this is true) creates a goal people can aspire to. That goal drives those players to buy more and play more. It also creates this possibility, however distant, for new players to go for. Beyond this Having recognizable figures people attach to your brand carries your brand wherever those people go. When efro/williams were getting into poker their pro magic playing status was mentioned. This is free advertisement and gives you exposure in places you wouldn't otherwise. And Wizards believes less than 10% of their player base gives a flying gently caress about pros or competitive play at all. So the negligible number of people who would be "inspired" to want to be a pro counts as nothing in the scheme of things.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Yes and you have a different set of marketing to target those players. Which the do have. You see it every time your in your lgs. Competitive people in any hobby will exist and are generally an engaged audience willing to spend. So giving those people a reason to stick around is good. They're going to be competitive somewhere. If you don't make it your brand it will be somebody else and it's an all or nothing customer base.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
Marketing isn't one size fits all and you have to have multiple campaigns operating at different levels 
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:Marketing isn't one size fits all and you have to have multiple campaigns operating at different levels And they determined that it isn't in their best interest to continue on. I mean it may be the wrong choice in your eyes but not in theirs. But this is not the argument people were making, people said Wizards should pay them a livable wage as employees. Except they forget that being an employee of Wizards disallows you to play in tournaments. So they can't make players employees. It's all stuoid at this point because everyone has said their piece and no one is going to agree with the other side.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:Marketing isn't one size fits all and you have to have multiple campaigns operating at different levels This justifies the pro tour but it does not justify paying people with no personality to ensure they can be at your event. I've been watching pro magic for a couple years now and I do not give a single poo poo about any of these assholes other than shedding a single tear every time Jim Davis wins a game because I hate his MRA slow-play rear end so much.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:52
|
|
|
Wotc employees can and do play in tournaments as long as the prize is less than $200. You're also missing that paying as pros != employee
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:53
|
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:But this is not the argument people were making, people said Wizards should pay them a livable wage as employees. Except they forget that being an employee of Wizards disallows you to play in tournaments. So they can't make players employees. I think you're misinterpreting someone
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
Having bad guys means you have a good guy to cheer for against them. There is a reason comic books have villains. Games need them beyond the storyline villains.
|
|
#
?
Apr 25, 2016 23:54
|
|
|
born on a buy you posted:Having bad guys means you have a good guy to cheer for against them. There is a reason comic books have villains. Games need them beyond the storyline villains. WOTC are the bad guys. It's a work.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 00:23
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:WOTC are the bad guys. This would actually make sense, especially in the WotC:WWE analogy. Think about it. How many of their decisions make so much more sense if "an insane old man has complete control" is the root cause of everything?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:Eerie Interlude returns the creatures to the battlefield in the End Step, so no, the Languish will not hit them. Oh, whoops. I thought it was an instant not delayed return blink. My bad
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
80s James Hetfield posted:Oh, whoops. I thought it was an instant not delayed return blink. My bad If it was a blink like Eldrazi Displacer it would hit them because Languish would always resolve with the creature on the battlefield.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
Failboattootoot posted:This justifies the pro tour but it does not justify paying people with no personality to ensure they can be at your event. I've been watching pro magic for a couple years now and I do not give a single poo poo about any of these assholes other than shedding a single tear every time Jim Davis wins a game because I hate his MRA slow-play rear end so much. platinum pros are better than jim davis so you should be supporting platinum pros
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 00:54
|
|
|
Zoness posted:platinum pros are better than jim davis so you should be supporting platinum pros Well I'm convinced.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
Zoness posted:platinum pros are better than jim davis so you should be supporting platinum pros Can't we just get him fired? Like all we need to do is get him to write another article in poor taste.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 01:35
|
|
|
Weird question: I like posting tournament reports for large events. Should they be posted in this thread (where I usually do it), the deck building thread? Or should there be a thread for discussing tournaments and plays?
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 03:07
|
|
|
Mezzanon posted:Weird question: I like posting tournament reports for large events. Should they be posted in this thread (where I usually do it), the deck building thread? Or should there be a thread for discussing tournaments and plays? Post here to combo breaker the shitposts please.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 03:11
|
|
|
After this weekend's tournament I'm kinda wondering if Agent of Bolas actually does have a place in Modern, or if it's just not a good enough card to justify a competitive deck there.
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 22:41 |
|
|
Toshimo posted:Post here to combo breaker the shitposts please. I did last night and today it was buried by six pages of shitposting
|
|
#
?
Apr 26, 2016 03:44
|
|