|
That doesn't explain why they later decided to double-down on the reserved list and also bar themselves from reprinting them as promotional cards.
|
#
¿
May 25, 2016 11:06
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 01:16 |
|
|
Errant Gin Monks posted:Some really good stuff in this and some absolute loving garbage as well. I'm trying to figure out if I will even open the boxes I preordered or wait. What, you didn't expect this exact outcome from the moment the set was announced?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 16:07
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:The card says that when it enters the battlefield it "loses "enchant creature card in a graveyard" and gains "enchant creature put onto the battlefield with Animate Dead." This says that the only legal target would be the Worldgorger. I'll point out that Worldgorger Dragon is definitely not on the battlefield by the time its "When Worldgorger Dragon leaves the battlefield..." trigger resolves.
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:My point was that it reads like the new post-flicker Animate Dead also has that text because it's entered the battlefield. Can you name any card in Magic that remembers changes to an object after it gets exiled and then returned to play?
|
|
#
¿
May 27, 2016 19:08
|
|
|
Sickening posted:Wanna know how to get 10 gp top 8 in 4 years? Cheat. Judges finally picking up on the double nickel, or was this something more blatant?
|
|
#
¿
May 28, 2016 16:33
|
|
|
I'll point out that a perfect riffle is not actually a shuffle, just like counting out cards into separate piles is not shuffling. If there's no randomization, it's not a shuffle. The estimate of 7 riffle shuffles to sufficiently randomize a deck is based on the physical properties of the shuffle, and how typical human imperfections when performing the shuffle affect things. While a mash shuffle looks superficially similar to a riffle, I would not be surprised if in practice it ends up being much closer to "perfect" than a typical riffle, and hence require more iterations to sufficiently randomize a deck.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 03:00
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:You could have stopped there and said "I have no basis for anything in my post" Have you actually read the paper on why 7 riffle shuffles is the amount required to randomize a poker deck, or do you just quote chapter and verse? The randomization is based on physical properties of the shuffle. If the shuffle changes, the randomization changes to some degree, even if the ordering of cards after a single iteration looks similar. Is that enough to affect the number of shuffles required for this specific case? I don't know. I suspect you don't know either.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
Sickening posted:People are smug because this is the most baby steps concept to understand and its hilarious that people can't grasp it. [...] Now its folks who can't understand why splitting a deck in two and shuffling them together in different ways leads to the same outcome (randomness). I'm going to quote this because it's hilarious. Here's a puzzler for you to mull over: Does a perfect riffle shuffle introduce the same amount of randomness as a typical human riffle shuffle?
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 03:25
|
|
|
Sickening posted:No, because a perfect riffle shuffle doesn't randomize anything. IE, if you mean perfect being one card from one stack on top of the other in perfect alignment. But I thought you just said that splitting a deck in two and shuffling them together in different ways leads to the same amount of randomness  Do you have any basis for concluding that mash shuffles introduce the same amount of randomness as riffle shuffles?
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 03:32
|
|
|
Skyl3lazer posted:The difference is that I'm not stating opinion as fact |^: Skyl3lazer posted:If you're 'mash' shuffling correctly it's the same amount of randomization as riffling, so 8 mashes. I suppose you'd have evidence to back up this "fact", then?
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 03:35
|
|
|
Sickening posted:
So in your worldview, any shuffle that introduces some amount of randomness automatically introduces the same amount of randomness? standard.deviant posted:Here's a puzzler: if a poster Many of these same posters were just talking a whole lot of poo poo about basing their shuffling on evidence instead of superstition.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 03:39
|
|
|
Lottery of Babylon posted:Split the deck into two piles. If there are n cards left in the first pile and m cards left in the second pile, add the bottom card of the first pile to the top of the output deck with probability n/(n+m) and otherwise add the bottom card of the second pile. Repeat the previous step until both piles are empty and you're left with a single deck. And this is the point of contention - the riffle shuffle model doesn't accurately describe a mash shuffle. In a riffle shuffle, it is possible (though unlikely) for a large chunk of cards to all come from the same deck. In a mash shuffle, this is literally impossible for a large-enough chunk - the physical size of the cards constrains how "imperfect" the shuffle can be. So each shuffle introduces less randomness than the model expects.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 05:57
|
|
|
suicidesteve posted:Edit: What's everyone's favorite basics? My favorite island is TSP 289 but I need some nice Plains for Death and Taxes. M12 sky goatse, obviously. Joking aside, I quite like Jon Avon's wheat field from Invasion (the art's been reprinted a bunch), and Chippy's desert from Alara.
|
|
#
¿
May 29, 2016 06:56
|
|
|
TheMaestroso posted:His place in 20% of the vintage metagame seems to me to suggest he'll stay well above $15. Highly-available cards that are only used by the twenty people that actually play Vintage on the reg don't tend to maintain their price.
|
|
#
¿
May 30, 2016 16:19
|
|
|
Honestly you'd have to play quite a lot for your net winnings to be enough to buy tons of new cards. You're probably better off going in with the mindset that you're going to need to pay for your decks, but if you're good then you can chain constructed events without having to put in anything extra.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 04:01
|
|
|
Honestly, I'm not unhappy with Sylvan Scrying and Spatial Contortion. I mean yeah they're not exciting price-wise, but they're multi-format playable cards that are an affordable way to spice a deck a bit. As far as promos go, that's not bad. I have no idea what wizards is thinking with poo poo like clash of wills and crumbling vestige though.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 05:11
|
|
|
Urza's tower has four different seasons for a reason.
|
|
#
¿
May 31, 2016 09:15
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:Yeah, MODO is like 30-40% of their sales. I can think of exactly zero casual players I know who would stop playing paper magic even if there was a cheap online experience.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
Sigma-X posted:You wouldn't know them. I'm talking about the giant portion that never steps into a game store and registers a DCI number, the giant big box market they talk about. Why would they want to become shut-in computer nerds instead of hanging out around the kitchen table with friends?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Okay now actually look at the price people go by for literally everything for some stupid reason. That looks about the same as TCG Mid. In any case, I'm assuming Chill la Chill was referring to the probably-#mtgfinance-related shenanigans that happened on April 21.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 1, 2016 16:39
|
|
|
Carry dice of all sizes from 60 down to 1 and do a proper fisher-yates shuffle
|
|
#
¿
Jun 3, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I was seriously thinking it would have to be a one-sided card to actually be good. The problem with Werewolves is that they're inconsistent as gently caress because you can't reliably flip them, so the best card would probably just be a Werewolf with an ability like 0: Transform target non-Human werewolf. But it wouldn't make much sense for a Werewolf Lord to not be a DFC, obviously. Give it a day side that flips humans into werewolves on command (including itself), and a night side that makes werewolves super buff.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 5, 2016 02:01
|
|
|
Balon posted:Not all cards are printed for limited. There needs to be more ways to interact with planeswalkers in constructed formats. Currently we're seeing several decks in standard that just load the board up with walkers because it's near impossible to deal with more than 1 at a time. There are two different three-mana spells that remove planeswalkers in the format, while also have the benefit of not being incredibly narrow and useless if your opponent just ends up on a creature beatdown plan this game. Planeswalkers can also be dealt with by attacking them with your own creatures.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 01:09
|
|
|
an_mutt posted:"Gain control of target Planeswalker until end of turn." It literally already exists in Red, yes. Except, analogous to Clever Impersonator, it's far more general and useful.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 7, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
lmao the painter list has literally zero outs to a resolved chalice on 1. fun games. like seriously at least chuck in some cavern of souls so you can try to weld your way through it or something. i still beat eldrazi one game though, ensnaring bridge is pretty good e: beat miracles for a 2-1 breakeven finish, welder shenanigans are good fun. Jabor fucked around with this message at 13:54 on Jun 9, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 13:11
|
|
|
Just so everyone knows, you can actually gently caress around with your maindeck before game 1 ... you know, if you want to do the sensible thing and main blood moons. Not sure if your changes stick to rounds 2 and 3 though, because modo.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 9, 2016 16:21
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:Holy crap the Sneak and Show deck is way better than all the other decks I've played in the Legacy gauntlet. Just went up against Elves, and finished two games in 8 minutes, before any other match finished game 1. Blue cards are good cards. I remember not being impressed by sneak-and-show when I was playing painter, though that player ended up 0-3ing the gauntlet so it might not say that much. I didn't even have crypt in for game 1, just beat him down with a couple of 1/3s and countered every single show-and-tell and sneak attack. Then in game two I stuck painter and blood moon and red blasted his basic island, which might not have optimal but certainly felt pretty legacy.jpg
|
|
#
¿
Jun 10, 2016 08:57
|
|
|
The nature of experiments is that sometimes they don't work out - if you already knew things would work perfectly, you wouldn't need an experiment, you'd just do it. We might see cardboard packs coming back if they have ideas on how to fix the issues, or they might forever be an interesting idea that didn't pan out.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 11, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Alris posted:Do Spirit Link and Boros Reckoner create an infinite life combo? Only if you have some way to stop the reckoner from dying due to all that damage.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 12, 2016 03:27
|
|
|
Count Bleck posted:Because it's a lot harder to get playsets of foil everything for a set than a regular set of everything. That's a nice theory, but you mainly see the price difference in promos and non-redeemable sets. I would suppose that it's more likely players just want to have their entire deck matching instead of having a mix of foils and non-foils. Chase foils in redeemable sets typically are more expensive than the non-foil version, because a foil redemption set is more valuable to cash out.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 03:47
|
|
|
I'd be kinda annoyed at someone spent a ton of time looking at their phone during a draft, though it'd be way more the "goddamnit man the entire table is waiting for you to pick, why are you even here if you just want to play with your phone instead of playing the game?" factor rather than any concerns about cheating.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 13, 2016 15:03
|
|
|
I kind of want to see a T0 quad archive trap answered with "exile simian spirit guide, ritual, ritual, past in flames..."
|
|
#
¿
Jun 14, 2016 07:21
|
|
|
You want 4 inkmoths for the deck for sure. You can build budget infect without the hierarchs though - it's noticeably worse, but still quite scary to be on the other end of. e: also holy crap inkmoth is expensive, I'm used to thinking of it as like a $10 card Jabor fucked around with this message at 17:33 on Jun 15, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Jun 15, 2016 17:31
|
|
|
Needle spires does two things: 1. It's a Languish-resistant threat 2. It ups your land count so that you can reasonably cast the Gideons etc. that you're also bringing in for longer games
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 04:39
|
|
|
Cool, a 5 mana 13/13.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 15:42
|
|
|
I mean, it's definitely worse than old emrakul if you're doing something silly with like tron or cloudpost or something but honestly this guy seems reasonably castable off like eldrazi temples and stuff - instant, sorcery, land, creature, artifact and he's down into like Worldbreaker territory. And he'll usually come with a plague wind (via chump attacking) attached, plus some extra value depending on what your opponent actually has in hand. You can make them cast all their sorcery-speed removal on not-Emrakul targets, so that they'll have to topdeck well to actually get rid of him.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 15:54
|
|
|
Babylon Astronaut posted:It doesn't shuffle your yard back in, so self mill is probably not the way to go filling your yard either. This is a disappointing sequel to the most powerful creature ever printed. what? shuffling back in would make self-mill completely worthless, since you'd randomly undo all your progress are you one of those people who buy into the mill fallacy?
|
|
#
¿
Jun 20, 2016 16:23
|
|
|
Like most wishes, you basically pay a 3-mana premium in order to choose which effect you want. Rather than putting the wish target itself in your deck instead, which is cheaper mana-wise but you don't get to pick which one you draw. So usually that's good for cards that can be huge blowouts in certain situations but not so useful otherwise. Alas, all the eldrazi in standard right now are just super-pushed so there's not really any reason not to run them all main-deck. I suppose there might be one ultra-pushed eldrazi that you want 7 copies of or something, but even then you already have that land that tutors things up.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
mcmagic posted:They aren't in the MB of any T1 decks in standard. They aren't all that pushed. And we're all really shocked that cmc 4+ creatures are not seeing much play in a format dominated by Collected Company.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 21, 2016 03:14
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 01:16 |
|
|
Entropic posted:Really? It feels like one of those kinda-boring-but-plays-well creature mechanics that's easy to tack on to common creatures to keep combat interesting along the lines of Menace. I mean it's obviously not splashy but makes sense to me as a black-blue creature keyword. The problem is if you have too many "evergreen" mechanics, things start turning into keyword soup. Which is the big problem that actually motivated the whole "cutting back on recurring mechanics" thing in the first place. We might see skulk crop up again in the future (possibly in innistrad mk 3 or something), but blue and black already have their own evasion abilities, and it's not like you really need an extra ten just so every colour pair can have their own.
|
|
#
¿
Jun 22, 2016 03:08
|
|