|
DAD LOST MY IPOD posted:historic is probably the best format at the moment and wotc putting a bullet in its head is unforgivable. Yea, its really fun at the moment and pretty much the only thing I’ll spend wildcards on. But uh, why would I do that anymore.
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 05:17
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Pablo Nergigante posted:To be fair it launched literally right before the world shut down People were playing the format for nearly half a year.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 05:19
|
|
|
So according to The Rules: 108.1. Use the Oracle card reference when determining a card’s wording. A card’s Oracle text can be found using the Gatherer card database at Gatherer.Wizards.com. Which is done because wording and templating change but Oracle is the repository of a card's offical text. How does this work with a balanced card?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 05:20
|
|
|
Arena isn't bound by the Comprehensive Rules used in paper. For other examples, consider that paper magic doesn't have a rule that creating a 251st token instead doesn't do anything.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 05:30
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:Honestly I'm not even sure why people want pioneer? They let it languish in to nothing over a matter of mere months. It never got off the ground. How coul you even have an opinion of it? For me, it's wanting to play an eternal format on digital that they can also play on paper, without having to spend $500 on mtgo
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 05:36
|
|
|
SphericalDan posted:My only concern is how quickly will they implement rebalances to cards. Runeterra and Hearthstone would take forever for hotfixes and rebalances I'm hoping if there are problematic cards rebalances can be implemented in days and not weeks. Since MTG Arena will be maintaining a separate Standard ecology, hopefully the Alchemy rebalances will really be fast and furious. Currently, standard rebalances are an injection of currency, which can be at cross purposes with making money. Since they're giving us duplicate Arena/Standard versions of each card, I suspect changes to Alchemy are just part of the game, and you can pound sand if you want a refund for an Alchemy nerf. You still have the Standard card, after all. Also the article example had a buff, which is encouraging, since there's a lot more design space opened when you're not just nerfing the good cards.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 05:46
|
|
|
they're gonna buff some random junk rares from past sets which sounds interesting in theory but in reality is going to create a wildcard churn that the economy can't support. every three months a number of cards in your collection will become worthless at the whim of wotcs balancing team. loving insane
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 06:24
|
|
|
apparently on stream they said they've been working on this for a year.. and that pioneer, had they started on it instead of alchemy would still have taken 2 additional years. so maybe if you remind them again in 3 years they'll give an update.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 06:48
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:apparently on stream they said they've been working on this for a year.. and that pioneer, had they started on it instead of alchemy would still have taken 2 additional years. Yeah, I’m sure plenty of goons are professional computer-touchers, so there should be a general understanding here that if a developer says something is planned for the far future, it means there are no actual plans/roadmaps for it at this time, and they’ll only develop one if the business actively pushes them to.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 06:56
|
|
|
Devor posted:Since MTG Arena will be maintaining a separate Standard ecology, hopefully the Alchemy rebalances will really be fast and furious. Currently, standard rebalances are an injection of currency, which can be at cross purposes with making money. Since they're giving us duplicate Arena/Standard versions of each card, I suspect changes to Alchemy are just part of the game, and you can pound sand if you want a refund for an Alchemy nerf. You still have the Standard card, after all. Word is they said on stream you don't get a refund for nerfs.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 07:03
|
|
|
Fantastic Foreskin posted:Word is they said on stream you don't get a refund for nerfs. yes this is confirmed
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 07:06
|
|
|
TotalHell posted:Yeah, I’m sure plenty of goons are professional computer-touchers, so there should be a general understanding here that if a developer says something is planned for the far future, it means there are no actual plans/roadmaps for it at this time, and they’ll only develop one if the business actively pushes them to. yeap. if pioneer was really a priority they would have done as much as possible to get it closer to that. even if it would take them 3 years to "finish" pioneer, if that was what they thought would bring them the most money they would have prioritized that first. and its not as though it would have taken 3 years before you'd see any results. they'd probably start working through sets and releasing those. also, i'm still watching through the stream... have they explained why a card need would need a digital nerf...but would not just get a ban in standard? alrund's epiphany was too good so we made it cost (1) more for its foretell cost and you only get birds with that foretell casting.. but we won't ban this in standard? the developer has to catch himself because he's saying, "the problem with this card" every time they explain a nerf..
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 07:10
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:yeap. if pioneer was really a priority they would have done as much as possible to get it closer to that. even if it would take them 3 years to "finish" pioneer, if that was what they thought would bring them the most money they would have prioritized that first. and its not as though it would have taken 3 years before you'd see any results. they'd probably start working through sets and releasing those. quote:also, i'm still watching through the stream... have they explained why a card need would need a digital nerf...but would not just get a ban in standard? alrund's epiphany was too good so we made it cost (1) more for its foretell cost and you only get birds with that foretell casting.. but we won't ban this in standard? *this* one i can only conjecture is b/c the team in charge of doing tweaks for alchemy/historic is a different team than the one who decides if a card eats a ban in paper
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 07:28
|
|
|
No wildcard refund on nerfed cards is really lovely, even hearthstone does that. I didn't even mind the digital only cards in historic but for gently caress's sake saying in tandem "effectively we are never going to ban a card in historic again" and "we are not compensating you in any way if a deck you like loses a key card it needs to function" is a gut punch.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 07:53
|
|
|
Pioneer is a fun format, I want to make a new deck for it to get away from pure aggro. The problem was it got double done by the pandemic and wotc not giving a poo poo about the combo meta for so long
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 08:07
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:
Making the foretell cost one more is secretly a buff in Dragons.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 08:47
|
|
|
Strong Sauce posted:yeap. if pioneer was really a priority they would have done as much as possible to get it closer to that. even if it would take them 3 years to "finish" pioneer, if that was what they thought would bring them the most money they would have prioritized that first. and its not as though it would have taken 3 years before you'd see any results. they'd probably start working through sets and releasing those. Maybe they don't want to damage paper Epiphany and Goldspan equity? Goldspan is a $35 card and it's a big feelsbad for it to get banned because it's just a little bit beyond reasonable but not truly banworthy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 09:27
|
|
|
Eej posted:Goldspan is a $35 card WHAT?!? jfc
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 10:22
|
|
|
so theyre changing the digital versions of the cards but only for historic and the new format? why not just ban the cards in those formats and introduce the nerfed cards under new names? like, historic: esika's chariot is banned bill's chariot however...
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 12:38
|
|
|
Pablo Nergigante posted:So it’s taking SSRIs? 😂😂😂🤣 This was a good post, shane being a baby
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 12:53
|
|
|
So like, i remember historic being sold as "eternal format for people worried that cards rotating out of standard devalued the wildcards used for them". How is this change not immediately going back to devaluing wildcards lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 12:57
|
|
|
kalvanoo posted:so theyre changing the digital versions of the cards but only for historic and the new format? why not just ban the cards in those formats and introduce the nerfed cards under new names? Different names means more wildcards and if the card is still playable you could have 8 copies in the format it wasn't banned
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 13:05
|
|
|
HootTheOwl posted:Different names means more wildcards and if the card is still playable you could have 8 copies in the format it wasn't banned I assume they mean for the replacement card to be given to anyone with the banned card, and for the replacement card to only exist in the digital formats. Which sounds just as clunky as what theyre doing now tbh, maybe just...dont have digital only formats, that sound like the real problem
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 13:11
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:I assume they mean for the replacement card to be given to anyone with the banned card, and for the replacement card to only exist in the digital formats. Which sounds just as clunky as what theyre doing now tbh, maybe just...dont have digital only formats, that sound like the real problem its clunky but doesnt interfere with paper. now you have a paper card and a digital card with the same name that does something different. its very weird
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 13:59
|
|
|
Rinkles posted:some of the changes really glad they're going through all this trouble and burning so much goodwill in order to give +1 toughness to a janky build-around lol
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 15:11
|
|
|
Their changes image is difficult to read due to low contrast between the image and letters. That's the state of Alchemy.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 15:13
|
|
|
wotc upper management examining how every recent attempt to "curate" a format has resulted in mass abandonment of said format, with the one exception of historic: we need to curate historic even harder
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 15:24
|
|
|
Maybe WotC knows that Magic is only a good game if you trick yourself into thinking it because you spent $3000 on a deck, so they don't want us to be able to play eternal formats cheaply. That's the only explanation I can think of, because all anyone wants out of arena is to play expensive cards without spending a downpayment on a car for cards, why else would they be so reluctant to give us something resembling that?
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 15:31
|
|
|
I don't get why they don't just make a normal Historic and an Alchemy Historic queue
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 15:44
|
|
|
Mike N Eich posted:I don't get why they don't just make a normal Historic and an Alchemy Historic queue Probably the same reasoning that they used to hold out on Historic Brawl for ages, ie. too many formats leads to long queue times But yeah I don’t get why they have to gently caress up Historic with this bullshit
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 15:55
|
|
|
Mike N Eich posted:I don't get why they don't just make a normal Historic and an Alchemy Historic queue So they don't have to give put wildcards when they thrust a vintage staple into the format next time, duh.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 16:04
|
|
|
Hey don't punish Historic players just because you can't design cards for a healthy Standard format, TIA
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 16:18
|
|
|
C-Euro posted:Hey don't punish Historic players just because you can't design cards for a healthy Standard format, TIA They aren't going to resort to keeping two versions of "digital only" cards in order to not gently caress over historic. Historic is either going to benefit from the tweaks or get hosed over. Its just not going to be left alone at this point.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 16:23
|
|
|
Alchemy draft when
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 18:04
|
|
|
I'm not sure how I feel about this yet. A lot depends on realities of the live balancing. There's a version of this that's a good thing, IMO, Standard could use some tweaking here and there given the sheer amount of games played on Arena, but it looks like WOTC wants to do a lot more than that. The goal should be to tweak the minimal amount required to let Standard have meta shifts without intervention and a format people largely like. Instead, it looks like they want to regularly shake things up and print more competitively required rares. Something gets lost when the format never has any time to settle and develop - even in the Arena years some of the best decks have come out of the last month of a format.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 18:24
|
|
|
No wonder they can't work on pioneer when they have to code such critical new additions such as this
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 18:41
|
|
|
Sickening posted:They aren't going to resort to keeping two versions of "digital only" cards in order to not gently caress over historic. Historic is either going to benefit from the tweaks or get hosed over. Its just not going to be left alone at this point. The balance changes they trotted out as examples are all predicated on improving Standard, not Historic. Is anyone playing Historic asking for a Goldspan Dragon nerf? You also unintentionally nerfed the most-represented deck at the ongoing Historic Championship by making Luminarch Aspirant worse, and that deck was good but not ban-worthy. Just go all-in and start doing live balance changes to Historic as well if you're going to do this for Standard, but make changes for Historic that make sense for Historic instead of grandfathering in stuff that's largely irrelevant to the format (note that I think this will happen by this time next year).
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 18:53
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:No wonder they can't work on pioneer when they have to code such critical new additions such as this Wow they buffed Druid class and now I get to turn my game into Hearthstone even more? My cup truly runneth over 
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 18:58
|
|
|
Apparently boxes of Innistrad Double Feature are going to be $200-250 and only have 24 packs in a box. Why would anyone buy this? Getting one black and white card per pack is not worth $8-9.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 19:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 4, 2024 21:56 |
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:No wonder they can't work on pioneer when they have to code such critical new additions such as this Can you imagine? If this was paper you'd have to print it with wither! Or go back to a classic, like -0/-1 counters. E: But yes this card is neat and I might find a home for it in my historic zombies deck.
|
|
#
?
Dec 3, 2021 19:06
|
|