|
Smashing Link posted:Prediction: Will be an "Expedition" equivalent in Return to Alara. That one would be an easy Masterpiece set- just do all gold cards. Plus Wizards has taken cards (even mythics) from the first time they went to a plane and reprinted them in the return set. Though granted, I don't know if they've done that with anything as valuable as Hierarch.
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:04 |
|
|
C-Euro posted:That one would be an easy Masterpiece set- just do all gold cards. Shocklands used to be in the 20-30 range before they printed them again. Pretty sure reprinting Noble Hierarch would bring it down (because like gently caress they'd ever reprint a mana dork at mythic).
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:26
|
|
|
I like the changes to Masterpieces cause, aside from how bad they look, the Invocations don't have any real strong thematic link and that just bothers me. Bring them back when it makes sense and they can be linked to each other easily
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:27
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:i have never actually seen this thread have a consensus opinion but it's actually nice to see we're all on the same page about the change Most everyone, myself included, thought getting rid of core sets and moving to the two block model was good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:29
|
|
|
I like how Maro gave the real reason for axing the 18 month rotation, that people didn't like how short-lived their standard cards were, and not what Forsythe said at the time. Some bullshit about the meta moving too quickly my rear end.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:33
|
|
|
Pontius Pilate posted:Most everyone, myself included, thought getting rid of core sets and moving to the two block model was good. Turns out a concept can be good but still flawed, and some of those flaws may only be evident in hindsight, wow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:34
|
|
|
Fuzzy Mammal posted:I like how Maro gave the real reason for axing the 18 month rotation, that people didn't like how short-lived their standard cards were, and not what Forsythe said at the time. Some bullshit about the meta moving too quickly my rear end. I seem to remember that when the rotation is pushed back to 24 months they actually made that same statement
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:37
|
|
|
Switching to a 2 set block structure was a fine idea but when actually implemented we learned that we actually kind of need the core set for printing important cards without worrying about flavor. Also they turned too many other knobs at the same time all of which turned out to be bad.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:40
|
|
|
I kind of expected them to go to a Big set-small set-Big return set-Big core set rotation, but this seems fine. Bringing back the core set was important. I'm not sure it was necessary to axe the small sets entirely, but in the end I doubt I'll care either way.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:42
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Them bringing back core sets is a good thing, now we can have reprints of cards that we really want. yesssssss 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:44
|
|
|
This seemed like one of the most in-touch corporate statements I've ever read. Perhaps there really is hope going forward.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:46
|
|
|
ShadeofBlue posted:I kind of expected them to go to a Big set-small set-Big return set-Big core set rotation, but this seems fine. Bringing back the core set was important. I'm not sure it was necessary to axe the small sets entirely, but in the end I doubt I'll care either way. I like the idea because small sets always felt more like killing time until the next actual new thing came out.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:47
|
|
|
I'll actually be a contrarian here for the sake of discussion. Core Sets, in my eyes, had a few issues. 1. There wasn't a lot of time to 'absorb' the set. There was maybe like 2 months between Core Sets and the next Big Sets. It felt like it was just jammed into the summer space for the sake of printing a product there. 2. Related to the first point, the set wasn't opened. I suspect this was partially because there were a large number of reprints and bland cards, since few new mechanics were used. Who wants to open Llanowar Elves for the 20th time? We want to play with them in Standard, but do we actually want to pay for them again? 3. Because the set wasn't opened a lot, the new, powerful cards that were printed were much higher than they should have been. I wasn't playing at the time, but I remember hearing rumblings of Stoke the Flames, which was a $5 uncommon. Jace VP was $70-$80. Goblin Rabblemaster was $15-$20. I'm not saying that these cards shouldn't cost more if they are played a lot, but if the 3 were printed in say RTR (size/popularity wise not the actual environment), I doubt we would see those prices. I think that you can get away without Core Sets if you commit to printing functional reprints of cheap answers that aren't tied to story or mechanics, but you lose the ability to 'forecast' decks a la Maro's Goblin Lord example. With the Modern/Eternal Masters sets, we likely won't see the reprints we want such as Noble Hierarch. This is going to be a place where you dump your Shocks, Elvish Visionaries, Disenchants, Murders, and idk Unsummons. In a few years, Wizards will realize that the Core Sets aren't selling again, and we will have an interesting situation since we know the consequences of not having answers.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:49
|
|
|
A core set sounds fine when it's not breaking up the Big/Small structure. I wonder if the Eldrazi's return in Eldritch Moon would have been better received if it was one big set of Battle for Zendikar (with no Oath) and then one big set of Shadows over Innistrad without the predictable tease. I also wonder how creative is going to change. For a long time it felt like they were the ones with the most power over Magic sets ("no baby dragons, sorry your set is going to suck, but Creative Has Spoken"), but their entire method of storytelling has to change when it's a one-set block. They'll occasionally get to continue a story in two sets, but that doesn't sound like it can happen that often.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:50
|
|
|
The big set solution also will play well with moden and older formats I think, as you won't get weird situations like Voice of Resurgence where it was awkwardly high priced because it was the only good card in a small set that that wasn't opened much due to the draft format of the block.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:51
|
|
|
Star Man posted:Bring back exalted for a set so we can have cheap Noble Hierarchs again. Considering that Elvish Mystic is apparently too good for Standard now, I wouldn't hold your breath.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:52
|
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:I like the changes to Masterpieces cause, aside from how bad they look, the Invocations don't have any real strong thematic link and that just bothers me. Bring them back when it makes sense and they can be linked to each other easily I'd be cool with them showing up only in the fall set, once a year.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:53
|
|
|
Entropic posted:Considering that Elvish Mystic is apparently too good for Standard now, I wouldn't hold your breath. How is it too good or is that like another Maro-ism?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
What's funny to me is that they used to reprint a handful of staples all the time as far back as Ice Age. They did it for the sake of letting the new block sets be played without cards that were long out of print, but cards like Counterspell, Dark Ritual, and Disenchant were frequently reprinted in the first set of every new block. That same reprinting structure lived on for a while with Cancel and Naturalize. The spells were so generic that they could fit into any set.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:55
|
|
|
Shadow225 posted:I'll actually be a contrarian here for the sake of discussion. I don't disagree with what you're saying here, especially how the price of constructed staples in core sets has been a real problem. But I would prefer to have them back because it lets Wizards space out the other sets a little more and it allows for miscellaneous staples to get the reprints they need. The reason they're bringing them back is because it turned out that they couldn't just print the staples they needed in flavor sets. Also their point on "set fatigue" is a good one. It's nice to be able to be able to skip a set and not feel like you need to keep up with a new release every 3 months or else fall behind.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:58
|
|
|
I only started playing again during BFZ's release, but I will say that the the two-set drafts were always kind of awkward because there was limited overlap in mechanics support. You were gonna have a hard time making Investigate work off one pack of SoI.Shadow225 posted:I think that you can get away without Core Sets if you commit to printing functional reprints of cheap answers that aren't tied to story or mechanics, but you lose the ability to 'forecast' decks a la Maro's Goblin Lord example. With the Modern/Eternal Masters sets, we likely won't see the reprints we want such as Noble Hierarch. This is going to be a place where you dump your Shocks, Elvish Visionaries, Disenchants, Murders, and idk Unsummons. In a few years, Wizards will realize that the Core Sets aren't selling again, and we will have an interesting situation since we know the consequences of not having answers. "Core sets are necessary for the health of the game" isn't mutually exclusive with "Core sets sell poorly for a variety of reasons". I'm sure they've got ideas to deal with some of the points you've mentioned, but at the end of the day it's been effectively demonstrated that they are a necessary element of standard's card pool and the game suffers without them. And hey, look on the bright side - now they won't have to waste slots for potentially new cards on yet another reprint of Negate and Dispel!
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 17:59
|
|
|
80s James Hetfield posted:How is it too good or is that like another Maro-ism? We haven't had one in Standard for a few rotations and maro or someone else in R&D has said they didnt want ramp to be that fast. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:01
|
|
|
Who wouldn't love a turn two Rhonas?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
One-drop mana dorks like 4-mana wraths are in the list of things Development decided was too constraining for Standard to have around all the time.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:06
|
|
|
Siivola posted:Who wouldn't love a turn two Rhonas? Obviously they juts reprint Path in the same set as Llanowar Elves.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Reprint Rampant Growth or Harrow or something you fucks. Hell, I'll even take Terror.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:09
|
|
|
Star Man posted:Reprint Rampant Growth or Harrow or something you fucks. Hell, I'll even take Terror. They'll print that with their version of Isis in Hour
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:13
|
|
|
Star Man posted:Reprint Rampant Growth or Harrow or something you fucks. Hell, I'll even take Terror. I think Attune with Aether is at worst of equivalent power level to Rampant Growth.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:14
|
|
|
Are they making MODO announcements at this thing?
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:18
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I think Attune with Aether is at worst of equivalent power level to Rampant Growth. Attune isn't even ramp.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:19
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I got smashed by in the top 8 of a PPTQ 2 weeks ago then played the deck the last 2 weekends with very good results. It's very strong and a billion times more fun to play than Marvel. Welcome to the light. Have you tried fitting in elder-deep fiends? I've been trying to in place of the third Chandra and Glorybringer, and they are either really on point or useless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I think Attune with Aether is at worst of equivalent power level to Rampant Growth. Entropic posted:Attune isn't even ramp. It's a good card for standard but it's energy production and fixing, not ramp.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:I think Attune with Aether is at worst of equivalent power level to Rampant Growth. I'd say more powerful, though narrower.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:21
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:They'll print that with their version of Isis in Hour nice
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:22
|
|
|
DangerDongs posted:Welcome to the light. Have you tried fitting in elder-deep fiends? I've been trying to in place of the third Chandra and Glorybringer, and they are either really on point or useless. I'm playing 2 Chandra Torch MB and 2 Chandra Flamecaller in the SB. You definitely want the 3 Glorybringers. Deep fiend didn't seem necessary to me in my testing. Also Aetherwind Basker is a very playable card in this deck.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:25
|
|
|
Smashing Link posted:I'd say more powerful, though narrower. It doesn't even accelerate your mana.
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:32
|
|
|
Pontius Pilate posted:Most everyone, myself included, thought getting rid of core sets and moving to the two block model was good. getting rid of core sets was good, back when they told us they would also increase the number of reprints in blocks. now that that was clearly a lie, bringing them back is good since they apparently can't fudge flavor just a little for IOK or Ghostfire
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:33
|
|
|
it's not even like ghostfire is a good card or anything it just would have been a cool card to print
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:34
|
|
|
AceClown posted:Are they making MODO announcements at this thing? Digital announcements are tomorrow. unclear if this means MTGO or something new or both
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 7, 2024 18:04 |
|
|
mandatory lesbian posted:it's not even like ghostfire is a good card or anything it just would have been a cool card to print Hell they could have printed it in Dragons of Tarkir as a precursor to BFZ and it would have fit the setting
|
|
#
?
Jun 12, 2017 18:35
|
|
