|
What cause does WOTC have to give about anyone's investment but their own? The people who try to finance a lifestyle off of this game are a tiny, tiny fraction of people who yell loudly on YouTube.
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 18:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 06:49 |
|
|
For Amazon prime day two commander deals. The 2021 Commander deck has a bundle for 90, so that is 5 commander decks from Strixhaven. The 2020 Commander bundle is 70, so that is 5 commander decks. This includes deflecting swat and fierce guardianship, so if you have thought about buying both of those singles before this is a better deal.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 18:47
|
|
|
Opposition agent could/should have been "exile the card, either you or the owner may play it" But I love that this guy thinks he knows better than WotC what cards should be printed and how and headed off "mistakes".
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Heath posted:What cause does WOTC have to give about anyone's investment but their own? The people who try to finance a lifestyle off of this game are a tiny, tiny fraction of people who yell loudly on YouTube. People making money off MTG reinforces the idea that a game where most of the good cards cost unreasonable amounts of money is low risk to get into because you can always reliably cash out. If your YouTube recommendations are suddenly full of people yelling about this not being the case then it undermines that idea. Outside of the reserve list, they care a lot about the value of cards on the secondary market because that determines whether masters sets (or equivalent) sell out like hot cakes or sit on the shelves gathering dust until prices are slashed.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 19:14
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:People making money off MTG reinforces the idea that a game where most of the good cards cost unreasonable amounts of money is low risk to get into because you can always reliably cash out. If your YouTube recommendations are suddenly full of people yelling about this not being the case then it undermines that idea. Yeah but I think those conditions would exist in the absence of "serious" investors because aside from pure financial investment there exist other motivations (playing the game with your friends, for example) that affect prices and purchase. Like I really think the concept of investors in MTG could vanish overnight and it wouldn't affect WotC's actual profits all of that much -- their actual investment is the same no matter what (excepting like, printing cost variance, distribution variance, etc.) I think WotC actually makes most of their money off of selling commons because they get the same value out of any given common that they do out of any given mythic, since what they're selling is the pack. If you buy a box of packs, the vast majority of that money is paying for commons. The good cards provide the motivation, the bad ones drive the profits. Like, as far as WotC is concerned, you're paying as much for the advertisement card as you are for the Ragavan or whatever.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 19:25
|
|
|
Heath posted:Yeah but I think those conditions would exist in the absence of "serious" investors because aside from pure financial investment there exist other motivations (playing the game with your friends, for example) that affect prices and purchase. Like I really think the concept of investors in MTG could vanish overnight and it wouldn't affect WotC's actual profits all of that much -- their actual investment is the same no matter what (excepting like, printing cost variance, distribution variance, etc.) I agree that over the long term, pissing off the investors wouldn't have any noticeable effect and would probably be a good thing. Companies with shareholders are, unfortunately, not incentivised to think much further than next quarter, which makes them intensely conservative about rocking the boat
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 19:36
|
|
|
Heath posted:Yeah but I think those conditions would exist in the absence of "serious" investors because aside from pure financial investment there exist other motivations (playing the game with your friends, for example) that affect prices and purchase. Like I really think the concept of investors in MTG could vanish overnight and it wouldn't affect WotC's actual profits all of that much -- their actual investment is the same no matter what (excepting like, printing cost variance, distribution variance, etc.) If they started reprinting the reserve list or banned it from commander I could see players leaving the format leading to a downward spiral. If the prices of Tundras started going down people might liquidate their tundras. There's plenty of smarmy old players who make nasty comments about net decking and proxies who run $100 cards in their deck because they bought it for a dollar or got it free with a book. Don't worry though, Shelden Menery has this to say: quote:while we’re sensitive and have a strong understanding of Magic economies
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 19:37
|
|
|
Fritzler posted:For Amazon prime day two commander deals. thank you for sharing this is good and cool
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 20:07
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:so I'm sure he's taken advanced courses in both Micro and Macro-economics, so he knows what he's doing. so what's fun about this, is unless you are actually an Econ major, you really don't experience much beyond intro to micro and macro. It's hilarious when people say 'free-market competition' when justifying bizarre pricing in the collectible markets. 'free-market' economics ( are bad, and don't really exist? ) and don't apply to secondary market pricing. you have to operate under 'monopolistic competition' since there is no free-entry into the market from the seller's side. well, there would be if you could sell proxies, but we've agreed that is bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 20:18
|
|
|
Fritzler posted:For Amazon prime day two commander deals. Thanks for the heads up, been waiting on a sale to pick up the Strixhaven decks
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 22:16
|
|
|
The thing that most irks me about that article is honestly number 3. There's a reason why, over time, decks in any TCG will start including the same cards and combos- because the players have determined that those are the cards and combos that win. And while there are certainly extreme Timmy players who go into every game thinking "If I can make a 100/100 then I'll be happy". I don't think it's an exaggeration to say the vast majority of players play to win. Even the people who build on a budget, their question isn't "what's the cheapest deck I can make", it's "what's the strongest deck I can make for X dollars". By admonishing the people who (rightfully) suggest you run Entomb instead of Unmarked Grave, it feels like he's admonishing the people who play to win- which is to say, the vast majority of the playerbase.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 23:14
|
|
|
Sheldon is so divorced from how normal people think, it's sickening and the fact that WotC gave him this format to poo poo up as the grand prize for doing a decade of unpaid labor is infuriating on multiple levels.
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 23:28
|
|
|
Grevlek posted:thank you for sharing this is good and cool
|
|
#
?
Jun 21, 2021 23:50
|
|
|
There's too much deck searching. Among other things, it slows the game down.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 00:36
|
|
|
Only if you don't know your deck. Sometimes it takes a minute or two if you're tutoring up for an answer to the board state, but if you're going for a win, it should not take long to get the card you need.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 06:05
|
|
|
berenzen posted:Only if you don't know your deck. Sometimes it takes a minute or two if you're tutoring up for an answer to the board state, but if you're going for a win, it should not take long to get the card you need. Turn 1 crackland, search, turn 2 crackland, land tutor or regular tutor, turn 3 crackland.. I've been in plenty of games where I have to search and shuffle more often than 1x per turn, multiply that by 4 people.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 06:23
|
|
|
I should generally know what land I'm searching for before I pick up my deck, and unless I'm doing something funky after, you can often announce what land you're searching for, play the card you need, then go and get your land. Regardless, it shouldn't take you more than 30s to get the card you need, unless there's a complex board state that you need to seach through your deck to try and figure out what answer might be in your deck.
berenzen fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Jun 22, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 06:43
|
|
|
pseudanonymous posted:Turn 1 crackland, search, turn 2 crackland, land tutor or regular tutor, turn 3 crackland.. This. The more experienced my playgroup gets the more searching there is. I run opposition agent now in one of my decks. That's fun when I don't even know what's in your deck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 11:58
|
|
|
“I cast a tutor, hang on, I don’t know what I’m searching for…” has the same energy as rolling a die to decide who you are attacking in that they are both almost certainly the wrong way to play! Don’t tutor if you don’t know why you’re tutoring, and for the LOVE OF GOD, Montressor, make intentional attacks with a strategy in mind!
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 12:07
|
|
|
Toshimo posted:Sheldon is so divorced from how normal people think, it's sickening and the fact that WotC gave him this format to poo poo up as the grand prize for doing a decade of unpaid labor is infuriating on multiple levels. Yes, this. I recall reading in the old Rage ccg guidebook (can't remember if it was Savage Attack or With Fang and Claw) an extremely 90s White Wolf essay about how sure, you could load your deck up with the best cards and treat it like a game, but there's also satisfaction to be had in winning with (dumb combo using 3 bad cards to achieve what 1 better card does). He seems to be from this "role playing" school of game playing, which, frankly, always loses to the "pure strategy and optimization" school of game playing if you care about winning. In order to keep a "RP friendly" playing environment, you need to actively curate the types of game pieces available. Canadian Highlander and French Commander are quite stark examples of what this sort of tailoring looks like. These folks know what they want their games to look like, and rely on more than just conventions and manners to enforce that. And when curation is done very poorly, you get "Alpha 40", which requires $1 million decks to play, and is decided by the opening rock/paper/scissors: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=96sukgjTZk4 pseudanonymous posted:If they started reprinting the reserve list or banned it from commander I could see players leaving the format leading to a downward spiral. If the prices of Tundras started going down people might liquidate their tundras. I'm most of the way through an economics masters. Collectables are very weird from an economic standpoint, because they rely on there being enough people who want what you're selling, which is by definition a niche and odd thing in order for it to be a collectable. On the one side, you have the guy who bought out an entire factory's worth of slide rules, and has been slowly auctioning them off one at a time to keep the price artificially high. On the other side, you have the family of (IIRC) Dan DeCarlo putting up all their father's original Archie Comics art from the 50s through an art dealer, and the dealer getting into a law suit when he couldn't sell all the art and make the money he'd promised the family he'd make, because, while the pieces themselves are each individually worth a fair amount, there simply aren't that many Archie Comics original art collectors. Right now, we're in a slide rule situation with the RL. Some printings of some cards are just super scarce (ie. in the above video, there's around 10% of all the Alpha printing Black Lotuses in existence). Banning or reprinting the reserved list would lead to a DeCarlo situation, which is perfectly fine if you're not the person who bought looking to resell. On the other hand, if you're a guy who bought to hold, expecting to resell in a couple years to get yourself a house... Or a hoarder like the Alpha Investments guy... Banning the reserved list would cause a price drop, probably keeping along the lines of most collectable MTG cards. Black Lotus is playable in only one official format, and it's restricted in that, but still commands a ludicrous price. The range in price between Alpha Shivan Dragon ($2899.99) and its latest reprinting in M20 ($0.12) is similarly illustrative. Even the Unlimited version commands a price of $224, and this is for a card which is basically unplayable these days due to how many better options exist for 6 mana. Or, to look at a card without the sentimental attachments and nostalgia, Fire Elemental is $85.90 from Alpha, $8.04 in Unlimited, and $0.02 in M20. Or, for one without the weird "naked woman on a magic card" factor, Earth Elemental is $82.50 from Alpha, $2.62 from Unlimited, and $0.03 from Battlebond. If the RL was banned from Commander, I'd expect a bit of a flattening of prices. The Revised and older cards would retain value due to scarcity (ie. Revised Duals would likely go for $200-300 due to the market flood, rather than their current $500+), while those overcosted from 4th and beyond without other format uses to drop like rocks (ie. probably no one outside of Commander is playing Koskun Falls or Zirilan of the Claw), and those already at the floor to remain there (ie. No one was playing Thelonite Monk or Chaos Harlequin to begin with, so they would stay in the $3 range).
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 20:32
|
|
|
At this point they should really just print Realms Beyond versions of the ABU Duals. They aren't reprinting badlands, it's a completely distinct card that happens to function as Badlands in a deck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 20:51
|
|
|
Kurieg posted:At this point they should really just print Realms Beyond versions of the ABU Duals. They aren't reprinting badlands, it's a completely distinct card that happens to function as Badlands in a deck. Unfortunately, Wizards has stated even functional reprints go against 'the spirit of the reserved list'. The real solution is to just abolish the reserved list and give a gently caress you to 'investors'.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 21:34
|
|
|
high five advanced econ degree buddy! Outside of the reserved list, which is bad and should go, you can't discount just the basic FOMO surrounding MTG and Commander specifically. I'm a part of a few facebook pages, and they all have variations on the "32" color challenge, where people want to have a deck for every color/color combination. I can barely play with 2~4 decks a week, it would take months to play each deck once. I can only imagine how many 'staples' are being hoovered up, because magic is 'an investment' and then stored in a closet.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 21:35
|
|
|
They could even move slow. Just announce they're abolishing the reserve list, and reprint like Abeyance, Braingeyser, Fork, Oath of Ghouls, and Powerleech to celebrate. Mediocre and relatively inexpensive cards that have been power crept in the past 20+ years. They don't even need to reprint the expensive cards into oblivion, just make a tiny move in the direction of accessibility. Then don't need to actually reprint cards even if they have the right to. Someday they could reprint some of the duals in a masterpiece sub-set and they'd probably barely make a dent in the price.
|
|
#
?
Jun 22, 2021 22:13
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/cobblepott__/status/1407805380290400257?s=21 Sheldon is doing an open forum/AMA regarding his last SCG article. If you would like to continue the conversation or call him a diaper-sodden clown, here is your chance. Started like an hour ago.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 22:06
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:https://twitter.com/cobblepott__/status/1407805380290400257?s=21 Yeah, I'm gonna wade in the filth of Reddit to call someone a poo poo-stain. Nice try satan.
|
|
#
?
Jun 23, 2021 23:57
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:https://twitter.com/cobblepott__/status/1407805380290400257?s=21 He posted 7 replies across two threads and then hosed off
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 00:13
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:He posted 7 replies across two threads and then hosed off This is the proper way to do this
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 00:32
|
|
|
Heath posted:This is the proper way to do this Yes in as much as Reddit is generally a festering hole with little of value to be found. But treating it like that seems like it goes against the whole "good faith" thing
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 00:49
|
|
|
Tarnop posted:Yes in as much as Reddit is generally a festering hole with little of value to be found. But treating it like that seems like it goes against the whole "good faith" thing What.. Shelden Menery not acting in good faith? How do I make a shocked face emoji? Or is it a not-shocked face?
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 00:55
|
|
|
But he said he would!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 01:00
|
|
|
Now he's just gonna ban every wheel out of spite 
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 02:25
|
|
|
quote:Also, please understand that we're not going to craft the banned list to support competitive play. This right here is at the heart of why he doesn't get it. What else is a ban list for, other than to craft the limits of competitive play? Ban lists literally exist to eliminate strategies and win conditions deemed negative to play. Coalition Victory (which requires at minimum a Triome and a Dual Land, and a 5 color creature in addition to CV itself and the mana to cast it at Sorcery speed; a 4 card "combo" leading to Sorcery speed victory) is banned, but Demonic Consultation or Thassa's Oracle aren't? A somewhat difficult to execute, very Johnny win condition requires a ban, but a very Spikey two card combo win needs to rely on social convention to stop it from being played? Incidentally, no ban list commander is... interesting? I mean, obviously some people like it, but, similar to Alpha 40, there's not much of a "game" happening once the deck is built and one knows how to play it, and it demands the use of proxies unless you're filthy rich or got into Magic very early. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQqkTjcVLvM Toph Bei Fong fucked around with this message at 03:53 on Jun 24, 2021 |
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 03:43
|
|
|
The banlist is not for banning A+B combos, Coalition Victory is banned because it’s would be trivially, arbitrarily easy for every 5-color deck to just have a free “I Win” card with absolutely no deckbuilding drawbacks. We do not need, nor do we want, the banlist tuned for competitive play. There is nothing currently on the banlist that would make Commander a better format if it were unbanned. I’m saying this as someone who prays to his Paradox Engine shrine every night. I genuinely don’t understand how anyone can even stand to look at Leovold’s face in that thumbnail, the banlist is GOOD!
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 04:32
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:The banlist is not for banning A+B combos, Coalition Victory is banned because it’s would be trivially, arbitrarily easy for every 5-color deck to just have a free “I Win” card with absolutely no deckbuilding drawbacks. Some might consider the presence of an 8 mana brick in the deck to be a drawback all on its own.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 04:54
|
|
|
I mean, not all bans are for competitive reasons, there's nothing conceptually wrong with what he stated to start with.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 05:11
|
|
|
Bust Rodd posted:The banlist is not for banning A+B combos, Coalition Victory is banned because it’s would be trivially, arbitrarily easy for every 5-color deck to just have a free “I Win” card with absolutely no deckbuilding drawbacks. I suspect we're talking past each other. I like the ban list. A well curated ban list is a good thing that keeps the game healthy. I can think of a couple cards that ought to be added to it. I have earlier cited the French Commander ban list as one which has a lot of time and care put into it, to make the game exactly the sort that their RC intends it to be. I find it strange that a not great card like Coalition Victory (8 CMC, requires a minimum of 3 other cards already in play) is on the ban list, while an extremely good combo, Demonic Consultation or Tainted Pact (1 or 2 CMC)/Thassa's Oracle (2 CMC) (total of 3 or 4 CMC, requires an instant to be cast in response to casting a creature), which does exactly what Coalition Victory does, only easier, does not have one of its components banned. I find it arbitrary that the combo of Painter's Servant (2 CMC)/Iona, Shield of Emeria (9 CMC) (two creatures, total of WWW8) was banned for so long, but the same speed combo of Karn, the Great Creator (4 CMC)/Mycosynth Lattice (6 CMC) (Artifact and Planeswalker, total of 10), which is easier to pull off and has the same effect of locking all other players out of the game, is still legal. I find it troubling that Sheldon had to be bullied into banning Flash, and when the RC did ban it, for him to include a little tantrum about how they aren't going to do this again. I agree 100% with your statement that "There is nothing currently on the banlist that would make Commander a better format if it were unbanned."
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 06:06
|
|
|
So here's some wild speculation on the rules committee's state of mind.Toph Bei Fong posted:I find it arbitrary that the combo of Painter's Servant (2 CMC)/Iona, Shield of Emeria (9 CMC) (two creatures, total of WWW8) was banned for so long, but the same speed combo of Karn, the Great Creator (4 CMC)/Mycosynth Lattice (6 CMC) (Artifact and Planeswalker, total of 10), which is easier to pull off and has the same effect of locking all other players out of the game, is still legal. Well, Iona is banned for two reasons. One is that combo, but the other is that sometimes people would just reanimate an iona and completely lock out one of their opponents without the second combo piece, because that opponent had a monocolored deck. Karn+Mycosynth doesn't have that. I don't know exactly what they were thinking, but I'd say that someone getting a hard lock on everyone and shuffling up for the next game is more fun than one person sitting there, saying draw-go, waiting for someone to kill iona and free them from their prison, but at the same time knowing that they're incredibly unlikely to be able to win. Games where one or more people sit around doing nothing, waiting to find out if they lose, are unfun. Toph Bei Fong posted:I find it strange that a not great card like Coalition Victory (8 CMC, requires a minimum of 3 other cards already in play) is on the ban list, while an extremely good combo, Demonic Consultation or Tainted Pact (1 or 2 CMC)/Thassa's Oracle (2 CMC) (total of 3 or 4 CMC, requires an instant to be cast in response to casting a creature), which does exactly what Coalition Victory does, only easier, does not have one of its components banned. This one is a little harder to explain. I think the reason is that Coalition Victory is that the rules committee specifically does not like cards where a single topdecked card, plus a bunch of lands/mana rocks, wins the game (with Coalition Victory, you've also gotta cast your 5-color commander, but that's equivalent to simply increasing the mana requirement). That's the same reason why Sway of the Stars is banned. They want commander games that go long and cast big spells, but not just single cards that win the game alone when you get to that point, because that's too swingy. Now, obviously, if your commander is Prossh and you draw Food Chain, or if your commander is Mimeoplasm and you draw Buried Alive, or a whole bunch of others, that's a pretty similar situation. In my casual playgroup, we have this situation with Primal Surge (which we tolerate because of the severe deckbuilding constraint makes it seem fair). But all those cards aren't banned because. . . ? Coalition Victory has been on the banned list for a long, long time, and I think the list still has a lot of weirdness that comes from specifically what was a "problem" in the rules committee's idiosyncratic metagame in 2006 or whatever. And they don't want to unban that stuff, because those cards would still do the thing they don't want them to do, but they don't bother to ban more to make the banned list consistent in this regard, for some reason. I have 2 hypotheses: (1) they don't bother because the banned list would be super huge and they can't be assed, or (2) their personal metagame/playing style has shifted and this issue just doesn't come up as much, so new problems of this variety don't come to their attention (at which point they should unban CV and Sway, but they don't, because they still remember why they were banned and aren't self-aware enough to realize that they wouldn't be a problem anymore in their newer metagame). Basically, about half of the banned list is based not around what is too powerful, but what one particular playgroup thinks is too unfun. You're not going to understand it if you think about it as if it's a tool for curbing the power level of EDH decks. In fact, at this point, cards that are very powerful are almost guaranteed NOT to be banned, because they don't show up in that one playgroup's non-competitive metagame at all.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 09:32
|
|
|
DontMockMySmock posted:one particular playgroup I see this assertion a lot but I'm pretty sure none of the RC guys even live anywhere remotely near each other never mind play together regularly so it's a pretty weird one.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 09:45
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 9, 2024 06:49 |
|
|
Believe it or not, it's somehow dumber than this. The stated reason for banning Upheaval/Sway isn't that it wins, it's that it doesn't. The problem, as they saw it, was that people would just smash the reset button with no plan, and turn a 4 hour game into a 6 hour one, and that's why they banned them. Which is, of course, the opposite reasons for banning Worldfire/Biorythm/Coalition. In short, they're morons.
|
|
#
?
Jun 24, 2021 10:06
|
|