|
TheChirurgeon posted:I haven't, but I'll take a deeper look this weekend. A cursory glance looks like a lot of "not enough room for advancement," which doesn't surprise me given how long the execs have hung around there. I'd say the bigger problem is the sexism
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 06:54 |
|
|
Lets Pickle posted:Signets in at uncommon, not sure if that was mentioned. holy poo poo that's a lot of fixing in one set. They're really going all in on making shards (and probably 4-5 color decks) draftable.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:41
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Mishra's Bauble would make for a great FNM promo... Fatal Push would too.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:45
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:I'd say the bigger problem is the sexism The strident and repeated mentioning of their inclusiveness points to the opposite, I agree.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:47
|
|
|
Do you all think stores will be giving out MM17 packs as prizes for MM17 drafts? If so, that makes understanding this limited format a very valuable thing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:49
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:The strident and repeated mentioning of their inclusiveness points to the opposite, I agree. If we're specifically talking about glassdoor reviews, that is a problem that apparently exists internally
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:50
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:honestly I'm curious as to which sets you think were bad vs good, since you think the last what, 5? 10? years have been a horrible disaster? I don't really care to itemize my grievances or whatever you're looking for, I'm just saying that they have made decisions and actions that myself and others disagree with in multiple areas, and to spring to their defense at one criticism and just deflect it as a one-off mistake seems pretty delusional to me based on how I see people talk about the game The game is still fine but some of these decisions have caused me to stop playing it anywhere near as much I did a few years ago, and I'm not trying to attack you for continuing or anything lmao
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:51
|
|
|
Entropic posted:holy poo poo that's a lot of fixing in one set. They're really going all in on making shards (and probably 4-5 color decks) draftable. Gotta make that payoff for blood moon 
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:55
|
|
|
Well, next year Mishra's Bauble can be printed at uncommon and drop down to 4 dollars.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:57
|
|
|
Smashing Link posted:Do you all think stores will be giving out MM17 packs as prizes for MM17 drafts? If so, that makes understanding this limited format a very valuable thing. xmage/cockatrice. there's no replacement for actual reps
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 20:58
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:
pretty sure he is refering to the first one or two versions that were console games. they were good and attracted quite a few people to the game.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:00
|
|
|
Drafting this set is going to be a mess what with everyone just grabbing value.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
DangerDongs posted:Well, next year Mishra's Bauble can be printed at uncommon and drop down to 4 dollars. There won't be a MM set next year.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:01
|
|
|
My friends and my plan is to just do team sealed with individual people's boxes. The person who brought the box keeps everything to avoid feelbads. Repeat with other people's boxes. Better support to play the archetypes and no worries about what you take out of packs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:Drafting this set is going to be a mess what with everyone just grabbing value. Or people just bringing packs for the whole pod and taking all the cards at the end.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:02
|
|
|
Soul Glo posted:Drafting this set is going to be a mess what with everyone just grabbing value. The set explicitly supports it to the point I'm guessing the default draft strategy is "draft the best cards in 4 colors." There's 10 duals at common, presumably Shimmering Grotto at common, and 15 uncommon fixers. The only way I don't see that being the strategy is if the power level at common and uncommon is super low or super synergistic compared to the stuff we've seen. Angry Grimace fucked around with this message at 21:09 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:04
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:Their market research should be considered completely flawed, given the amount of panic WotC has shown with regards to how they've handled Standard in the last two years. They don't get to the point they have with their main attraction without having some extremely incorrect assumptions made due to misusing focus group data. Standard was on life support, and they've After the research is done, someone still has to interpret it and make a decision about it, and that won't always be what the research suggests. Additionally, what gamers want may not align with the company's priorities. I'd rather the game not be collectible. That seems counter to their goals of making a profit, though. I'm straight-up not qualified to judge whether standard is healthy, nor whether banning cards in standard is good/bad for the health of the format, so I won't comment there. My general take on tournaments from what I've read (it's been a few years since my tournament regular days) and seen and has been published over the years is that modern players overestimate the popularity of their format and think they're a larger group than Standard players, who overestimate their size, and think they're a larger group than casual/"kitchen table" players, who actually make up the bulk of the game's customers. But it's been a while since I've seen anything approaching numbers on this, so I could be wrong. e: the point is, even if WotC is making the *wrong* decision from their research, they still have that when they make the decision, vs. random person with no insight into their sales/profit numbers or the research quote:Lol what? One of the versions (ios?) literally did not function for weeks, the PC version would routinely disconnect you (no prize for either player) and I stopped playing because I had two of my three missions fail - one went to 5/4 games played with X deck, and the other just didn't count matches played with Y deck. I'm the kind of idiot that would have paid money to them if their poo poo worked and their poo poo did not work. Which version are you talking about? When I said "good for a while," I think it was pretty clear I meant "the first couple iterations." I don't think I picked it up after 2013. Also should have been obvious that I didn't think it was still good. But it was a strong intro product when it came out. I know people who got into Magic playing it, which seems like the ultimate goal of the product. ThePeavstenator posted:I'd say the bigger problem is the sexism I'm not about to leave a review on Glassdoor just to see the second page, but this doesn't surprise me. Though it's not some super-rare occurrence on the West Coast either, unfortunately TheChirurgeon fucked around with this message at 21:10 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:05
|
|
|
gwrtheyrn posted:Or people just bringing packs for the whole pod and taking all the cards at the end. This is what I'm doing with my boxes. A friend is moving to San Diego, so we're going to have a big limited blowout before he goes...Cube and MM3 drafts all day!
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:11
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:I'm straight-up not qualified to judge whether standard is healthy, nor whether banning cards in standard is good/bad for the health of the format, so I won't comment there. My general take on tournaments from what I've read (it's been a few years since my tournament regular days) and seen and has been published over the years is that modern players overestimate the popularity of their format and think they're a larger group than Standard players, who overestimate their size, and think they're a larger group than casual/"kitchen table" players, who actually make up the bulk of the game's customers. But it's been a while since I've seen anything approaching numbers on this, so I could be wrong. Standard showdown was created because no one was showing up to play standard. Kitchen table players are important but they spend the least amount per capita. In software if you're doing a FTP app/game your most important customers are the "whales" who spend ludicrous amounts of money and also are the fewest in number. I don't know how well that translates to MTG.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:13
|
|
|
First picking Blood Moon, y'all can suck it
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:14
|
|
|
St0rmD posted:First picking Blood Moon, y'all can suck it First picking Blood Moon, revealing it before each game to your opponent, and not playing it. The true Bushido way.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:16
|
|
|
I don't see how any local draft isn't going to be "Oh poo poo! I just pulled a X!" So that's pretty good for a bit of an edge. We're probably not going to draft it more than twice though because $$$.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:17
|
|
|
odiv posted:I don't see how any local draft isn't going to be "Oh poo poo! I just pulled a X!" Every MMA draft I've ever played is an "Oh poo poo! I just pulled X" draft. I think people are overestimating how hard it will be to find a game or two. I don't think the final EV will turn out well above MSRP of a pack. Although most of my MMA drafts I've actually played are on MTGO.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:Standard showdown was created because no one was showing up to play standard. I know how app dev works for FTP. Magic complicates things because your "whales" tend to buy singles and think about poo poo like pack EV, while your kitchen table gamers and limited players seem like much bigger drivers of actual product purchases, so I'm not 100% sure how that translates to MTG. Re: Standard Showdown, it's not even clear to me *why* Standard was struggling? Clearly someone at WotC thought bannings would help, and I can see how Standard Showdown might help.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:18
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:After the research is done, someone still has to interpret it and make a decision about it, and that won't always be what the research suggests. Additionally, what gamers want may not align with the company's priorities. I'd rather the game not be collectible. That seems counter to their goals of making a profit, though. If you believe standard players are still the larger group you haven't been paying attention to the information we have access to. Hell, EDH might be the largest group of players at this point for any LGS well before its standard across the board. TheChirurgeon posted:Re: Standard Showdown, it's not even clear to me *why* Standard was struggling? Clearly someone at WotC thought bannings would help, and I can see how Standard Showdown might help. It was struggling because standard since battle of zendikar came out has been really bad. Players switch to modern/EDH pretty heavily in this time. Once they switched there hasn't been much reason for them to come back. Standard, while better than it was a set ago, is still not that appealing. Sickening fucked around with this message at 21:22 on Mar 2, 2017 |
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:20
|
|
|
Sickening posted:If you believe standard players are still the larger group you haven't been paying attention to the information we have access to. I'd believe that. I'm pretty sure I typed "I could be wrong" right there in my post e: What would still surprise me though is to find that Modern players were actually a larger group than Standard. I totally believe that EDH players are everywhere, but I tend to think of them as part of the "Kitchen table" group, for whatever reason
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
TheChirurgeon posted:Re: Standard Showdown, it's not even clear to me *why* Standard was struggling? Clearly someone at WotC thought bannings would help, and I can see how Standard Showdown might help. Cards were/are under-powered except for the "super important story cards that we want to see play and are pushed for constructed". You had 2 decks to choose from that built themselves and were also very expensive.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:21
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I think people are overestimating how hard it will be to find a game or two. edit: Re: standard struggling, the previous standard was super expensive too, wasn't it? Fetches, Jaces, etc. After that rotated out some people might have re-examined what they were spending and taken a step back.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:22
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:First picking Blood Moon, revealing it before each game to your opponent, and not playing it. The true Bushido way. First picking Blood Moon, laying it face up on the table for the whole draft. And not playing it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:24
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:Cards were/are under-powered except for the "super important story cards that we want to see play and are pushed for constructed". You had 2 decks to choose from that built themselves and were also very expensive. I get all that (not out of the loop on Magic, I just don't go to tournaments these days), but then I see Hellsau posted:C) banned cards in standard (bad precedent, especially when we aren't in a Caw-Blade or Affinity one-deck standard situation) and I wonder--is banning cards to open up the format bad, or just setting a bad precedent? If certain cards are killing the format, I'd worry less about whether it's a bad precedent to ban cards in Standard than the health of the format
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:25
|
|
|
I just hope that the EMA surprise reprint is able to quell some of the greed that comes along with these sets. When I first started playing there was an LGS that did MM15 drafts for like $40 with the prize support being rare redrafts. I learned about who actually owns draft packs too. A lady opened a Goyf and foil Karn and the shop owner told her she couldn't buy a new pack (because he wanted to sit on some of the boxes he was allocated) so she left the draft at the start of pack 2 in tears.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:28
|
|
|
 Not mad, but still a little meh.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:34
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:
Super fun to play against in limited.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:35
|
|
|
Yall gonna really spend 50 dollars to draft?
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:Super fun to play against in limited. Most of the Mythics in this set are dumb to play against in limited. Would I rather play against Olivia or BONFIRE? Let's ask Brian Kibler.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:36
|
|
|
80s James Hetfield posted:Yall gonna really spend 50 dollars to draft? Nope, but I will defer my standard packs for a modern masters one for FNM and other events.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:37
|
|
|
80s James Hetfield posted:Yall gonna really spend 50 dollars to draft? 3 packs has an EV of like $60-70. That will go down but the value is not top-heavy and the format looks like it could be really fun.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:38
|
|
|
80s James Hetfield posted:Yall gonna really spend 50 dollars to draft? Nah, but I'll buy a box and draft with friends
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
ThePeavstenator posted:3 packs has an EV of like $60-70. That will go down but the value is not top-heavy and the format looks like it could be really fun. I'm not really sure it won't be a poo poo-show, really. It seems super bomby.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:39
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 15, 2024 06:54 |
|
|
I'll do it once, at the very least I'll get to crack some packs.
|
|
#
?
Mar 2, 2017 21:41
|
|