|
Rimusutera posted:We're talking about 2 as literal theft of property belonging to a Wizards employee here, I don't know what you're on about. He's a judge and he's very, very mad
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 13:59 |
|
|
Did none of you aside from Zoness try to look at this without immediately demonizing WotC? Like, it seems pretty clear to me that what happened was: there were a bunch of leaks for a few sets now (eg this had been happening before OGW, in like, I dunno, KTK and DTK: maybe they revealed mantis rider or something). WotC learned that all of the people in this group knew about the leaks and told no one. So in response, in order to send a message that not telling on leakers will get you in trouble (though not legal trouble), they gave these people who deliberately refused to reveal the leak source a short suspension. Which is, uh, something they're well in their rights to do: judges aren't employees, regardless of the morality of that, and the DCI is allowed to unilaterally ban someone for any reason. They gave the actual leakers a much longer ban, so it seems like they exercised a bit of discretion. Is it probably a dumb move? Yeah. It looks like they tried to get everyone who knew about earlier leaks (like the theoretical KTK one I mentioned) and knew about the Wastes/Kozilek leak but said nothing. They apparently also got a bunch of people who had no clue about earlier leaks. I haven't actually seen any of the judges categorically deny that they knew about a source of leaks and didn't tell WotC, so this is just being charitable to the judges' point of view. It would be nice if WotC would actually say more than "this was happening over multiple sets", because it's also possible that they meant "these people were leaking stuff from multiple sets, and we banned everyone who ever associated with them" instead of the much more reasonable possibility I outlined above.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 21:59
|
|
|
I figure there had to be 1-2 card leaks in every spoiler season, and am way too uninvested in this to actually check
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 22:05
|
|
|
Okay, cool, then it's a game of he-said/she-said.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 22:17
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:Sorry no one liked your article last week, Trick. Oh dear god no also that article was hilariously stupid pandering and WotC would be viewed better if they stopped trying to pretend that it's a moral imperative to not leak wizard cardboard pictures, but let's stay on the subject of what may or may not be another hilarious fuckup
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 22:31
|
|
|
 Someone compare it to dealing ecstasy in response please
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 22:36
|
|
|
Deofuta posted:I just read all the statements again and that is true, but then why were those who did not take actively take part in the spreading/obtaining of the spoilers suspended? If we do not extrapolate a reason from what is presented, then perhaps WotC should provide a reason. Obviously they do not have to provide a reason, but failing to do so can lead to ramifications seen today. Yeah I hope no one's arguing that WotC shouldn't have seen this coming/shouldn't be a hell of a lot more forthright about things like this getting a man named "trick" to write an article praising the moral righteousness of snitching and then banning a bunch of people with little explanation is pretty bad these are equally bad things, btw, trick is a bad nickname
|
|
#
¿
Dec 22, 2015 22:40
|
|
|
TheKingofSprings posted:The DCI is allowed to unilaterally ban, sure, and the owner of magicjudges is allowed to unilaterally close it down. So no complaining about that! Yup! I hope this becomes a full-on judge's strike
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2015 00:36
|
|
|
GeneX posted:
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2015 03:49
|
|
|
WotC should hold all events on MTGO for the duration of the suspension, to make the judges completely sidelined
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2015 18:37
|
|
|
Cynic Jester posted:Bolded the relevant part of the post. At no point in time has leaks been something that Wizards has required their consumers to report, nor is it something judges have been expected to report. Just straight up banning a bunch of people out of the blue for something that was never communicated to them to be something they would be punished for not reporting is just another great example of Wizards consistency in enforcing DCI rules. Or even making them. There are no explicit DCI rules they have to follow; wizards doesn't actually need an explicit policy in place to give a DCI suspension. That's your consistency: refardless of the morality of it, wizards' policy is "we can ban you at any time for any reason." The dirty not-so-secret about magic is that the consumer doesn't have any recourse if WotC decides to ban them for, say, wearing a hearthstone t-shirt in a feature match. There's a difference between whether an action makes sense from WotC's perspective (eg banning everyone in the judge chat who, if we take WotC on their word, knew about multiple leak sources and said nothing) and whether it's morally right. I'd hazard a guess that if anyone had knowledge of multiple leaks and the source thereof, and didn't tell wotc as soon as they suspected the truth, wotc would ban them for not going to them sooner, presumably in an attempt to scare people into reporting leakers ASAP. Is that reasonable? I dunno, probably not. This reaction seems more likely to stop people from reporting leakers altogether than to get the leakers reported sooner. It's a bad move; not because of the ambiguous morality of the situation (knowing about leaks and not reporting them seems like an arguably good reason for wotc to get mad, since the leakers are, though unquantifiably, making the marketing team have a harder job; the idea that it's not reasonable to report the leaks, and that not reporting them would have no consequences, seems a bit more out there than wotc's response) rather because, practically, the message from this ban is likely to deter the exact wrong thing. Jen X fucked around with this message at 19:30 on Dec 23, 2015 |
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2015 19:15
|
|
|
There's a legitimate argument, mind, that it's unfair to the judges since they didn't have any expectation of being banned if they didn't do what wotc wanted. The problem is that "unfairness" isn't a thing wotc cares about, and never will be, because they value the ability to ban people for unforseen actions (eg crackgate guy) more than they do the illusion of a rigid policy
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2015 19:18
|
|
|
If they don't bring back Flashback, I'll be sad. If they do bring back madness, I'll be very, very happy. I want a standard where Jace is used in an entirely separate manner, to discard madness cards instead of just trying to fill up the graveyard for delve and flashback purposes.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 23, 2015 23:42
|
|
|
Angry Grimace posted:I still think the actual way Madness works is a bit too wonky to come back. Yeah, but couldn't they just change it to a replacement effect? (As in, a new mechanic that works the way people think madness does, sort of like converge vs. sunburst) eg. something like "if you would discard X, you may instead pay Z mana and cast X."
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 01:57
|
|
|
Mr. Jive posted:Saffron Olive articles keep pulling me back in. I hate that guy. The most recent "Against the Odds" may well be the worst deck he's ever run.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 07:21
|
|
|
Just stop playing organized magic. No trolling here. It's a card game; if you're so invested that even the remote possibility of you running afoul of WotC's whims (a bad argument in and of itself, but whatever) causes you to get mad, put down your cardboard, read a book, and maybe play something that you don't quite care about as much. Like some of the eurogames Chill la Chill won't shut up about. A DCI suspension shouldn't matter all that much to anyone besides the people who make a living off of the game. You can still play magic with friends or in unofficial tournaments, and that's really what the majority of magic players do. E: this was directed at the guy who wants very specific DCI guidelines for what you can be banned for
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 09:49
|
|
|
kizudarake posted:One of my gimmicks is to take posts from Reddit and MTGSalvation that are silly and post them here ironically. Well goddamn. I was owned pretty loving hard.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 12:51
|
|
|
Gyshall posted:everyone complaining about leaks and bans and I'm just over here casting t1 channel into emrakul nbd I have never achieved that in cube. I've gotten the zuran orb/fastbond/crucible combo. I've gotten like every permutation of twin. I've tinkered T1 for blightsteel, and I've gotten Ral Zarek/Time Vault while it existed but somehow, every single time I pick channel, I get no goddamn eldrazi
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 18:05
|
|
|
It's gonna be a 2/2 with prowess for 1UR, and it's going to be disappointing.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 24, 2015 22:12
|
|
|
I hope everyone in this thread is banned for the next 3 years, except MCMagic
|
|
#
¿
Dec 25, 2015 02:37
|
|
|
Orange Fluffy Sheep posted:(If it doesn't have suspend, it gains suspend.) 4UW Enchantment All spells without suspend gain suspend X, where X is that spell's converted mana cost.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2015 04:53
|
|
|
Also, feel free to ask questions in this thread: when we're not imploding over ~magic community drama~ or laughing at/tormenting mcmagic for his card analysis skills, we're all happy to help out.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2015 16:59
|
|
|
"lsv-types" meaning...?
|
|
#
¿
Dec 26, 2015 19:11
|
|
|
Ramos posted:White is never in surplus or shortage. There is always an exact balance of supply of it around. it's travis "an actual neo-nazi" woo. To him, you can never have too much white.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 27, 2015 23:28
|
|
|
Cactrot posted:If they don't print a Lightning Strike that surges into Bolt, they screwed up. This won't happen for exactly the same reason that fiery impulse can't target players
|
|
#
¿
Dec 28, 2015 18:54
|
|
|
Zemyla posted:Standard has been a dumpster fire since
|
|
#
¿
Dec 29, 2015 06:58
|
|
|
Can't wait for this, this, prism array
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 07:39
|
|
|
The man o war is a solid card that might, depending on how things go, end up in the core of a UW tempo deck featuring harbinger, it, and various awaken spells like roil spout, clutch of currents, etc. I'll certainly be trying to brew one of those up, at least.
|
|
#
¿
Dec 30, 2015 23:54
|
|
|
Elyv posted:When zombie Sigmund kills you, does he use an Unscythe? Depends on whether you can give weapons directly to zombie familiars
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 00:25
|
|
|
Irony Be My Shield posted:I prefer silly puns to generic fantasy stuff. Also I'm always down with flavour text that plays up the danger of a 1/2 with no further combat abilities I very badly wish WotC would return to nothing but worldbuilding and bad jokes in flavor text, instead of using it to tell a disjointed, halfassed story about the knockoff power rangers
|
|
#
¿
Dec 31, 2015 14:04
|
|
|
Frog of War posted:
I desperately, desperately wish this could end up as a real standard deck.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 00:55
|
|
|
force of will is a fun and interesting card and should be reprinted at common in ogw
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 01:42
|
|
|
It's green anticipate, it's not ponder. Also, it doesn't let you grab instants or sorceries, which means that jund may very well not actually want it. It'll be great in standard, where G/x decks are always hugely creature focused, but I don't know if the inability to find interactive cards is worth playing it in modern, where not interacting means you're either a combo deck or dead. I guess the question is whether very limited card filtering is good enough in a format where those limitations matter a lot more than in standard. I don't play jund or junk or whatever, so I can't claim to be an expert, but I don't think it'll work out.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 22:54
|
|
|
Fish Of Doom posted:I hope it's just Ob swearing to kill every living being in the multiverse. Have him doing the goofy little hand sign and everything. Giving the finger, preferably
|
|
#
¿
Jan 1, 2016 23:08
|
|
|
I would legitimately be satisfied with a metagame containing nothing but elixer and/or drownyard control decks
|
|
#
¿
Jan 3, 2016 06:05
|
|
|
Reprint mental misstep imo
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2016 10:39
|
|
|
Ramos posted:It'd be poo poo useless in this meta. I mean, it was more an example of the type of environment that card would need to even see any play whatsoever, but yeah standard is pretty much all at CMC 2 or higher right now
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2016 11:56
|
|
|
it's best use is in a control mirror, because while surge is theoretically useful, the actual important part of it is "can't be countered".
|
|
#
¿
Jan 4, 2016 13:12
|
|
|
Hellsau posted:Bone Saw is your support. Taste it. They'll reprint ponder, preordain, and brainstorm at common, obviously. And surge would still be too weak based on the cards we currently know about.
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 00:38
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 17, 2024 13:59 |
|
|
Count Bleck posted:UR Aggro, can it be real? I would absolutely love a UR tempo/aggro deck maybe an even lower to the ground jeskai tempo/prowess deck featuring mentor/new man o' war/mantis rider as highest CMC creatures
|
|
#
¿
Jan 5, 2016 15:46
|
|