MAGIC 2010 RULES CHANGES (3rd thread)

1648 posts / 0 new
Last post
This thread is to continue the discussion found here: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1202188

The original thread AND the second thread are getting very close to being too large for the forums to handle. We are sorry for any inconvenience.

Carry on!

Eric Sorensen
Wizards of the Coast
Organized Play

wow, 3 stickied threads, think the players have something to say?
wow, 3 stickied threads, think the players have something to say?

Just a little bit.

Eric Sorensen
Wizards of the Coast
Organized Play

that was a lot earlier than the first thread getting closed
The changes have officially caused more outrage than any other MtG-related change ever. (including 8th ed card frames and Mythics)
Just a little bit.

You know who else plays this game? WOTC employees Mike Turian, Jacob Luren, and many other design team members. I would sure like to to hear Mike Turian's opinions especially.
You know who else plays this game? WOTC employees Mike Turian, Jacob Luren, and many other design team members. I would sure like to to hear Mike Turian's opinions especially.

I have my doubts they are allowed to say anything other than
"awesome, simply awesome, it helps the game so much, it helps evolve our player base, its just awesome"

And if they're sincere that they like the new rules better, some players will say that that just proves that working in R&D makes you a bad Magic player.

well how do i know when they are sincere and when they are following company lines ?
If they Speak out on Magic we have to assume the later i think.


btw ;)

The original thread AND the second thread are getting very close to being too large for the forums to handle. We are sorry for any inconvenience.

he apologizes for creating a new thread... other don't even for screwing up the rules
I have my doubts they are allowed to say anything other than
"awesome, simply awesome, it helps the game so much, it helps evolve out player base, its just awesome"

True story... we get to hear MaRo's version of that on Monday.
And if they're sincere that they like the new rules better, some players will say that that just proves that working in R&D makes you a bad Magic player.
You know who else plays this game? WOTC employees Mike Turian, Jacob Luren, and many other design team members. I would sure like to to hear Mike Turian's opinions especially.

I would like to hear the opinions of the Tourny players. Anyone post a like of that for me...I hope that doesn't get you banned if you do.
(From other thread )I'm pretty sure the thousands of posts on here prove that many, many players care about these cards.

No, they are saying that because it helps their arguments out (I admit, I do it too sometimes when it suits me). They care about a handful of cards that they now have to consider removing from decks, and they care about now having to play the game differently. I don't want to dismiss those concerns out of hand because they are legitimate for a number of reasons, but what I am seeing is a complete exaggeration of the situation. I wonder if I did this ten years ago. I probably did. I probably did it a lot actually.

I don't like them alienating established players, and when I saw that I knew there would be trouble ahead in the forums. In fact by the time I saw the article people had been railing out against them all night. But it is honestly hard for me to say I didn't see something like this coming, and to be honest it is so much more benign than people are making it out to be compared to all of the little things Mark Gottleib has done in the updates. These are slowly eroding the interest older players that don't visit these forums but like to bring out their old cards occasionally, only to find out they don't quite work like they used to any more. There are two people in my old playgroup that showed interest in playing again in the last couple of years, but after a few games they decided that the game had changed far too much and they did not appreciate what happened to their cards. They aren't playing now and are probably lost forever - in fact I now have one of their collections.

Of course when you bring this up on the forums people will jump in front of a bus for MaGo. They think it's great that he went and errataed the creature types for cards played only by people who don't read the forums, or that under current errata neither Bounty of the Hunt nor Ring Of Renewal work as worded. The people that do care about these things are not high enough on the food chain to matter. I think what is really happening now is that a whole new generation of players is learning what we had to learn so long ago - that they aren't on the top of the food chain anymore, either. I hear you, I feel you, I empathize. You're going to have to come to terms with it at some point as we did. It starts with understanding the real impact of the change, and not embellishing it. I had to get away from the game for years before I came back to it (and am now starting to fade away again). Hopefully the game will be around long enough for others to do this.
again, for the sake of clarity, the original information regarding why damage in combat went on the stack, from wizards own mouth-

We made a bigger change to the way creatures deal their combat damage. This change was made so that combat damage fit into the Grand Unified Timing System (AKA the stack). We wanted to allow players to prevent damage after they saw how creature damage was being divided (which is what happens under Fifth Edition rules). We also wanted for spells played during combat to work the same way they do outside of combat. In the end we created a system that has simpler rules but much more complex play strategies.

you have eliminated simplistic rules that take only 1-2 sentences with complicated damage assignment requirements and extremely difficult to justify/explain combat rules. the damage assignemnt rule is the rule I hate the absolute most, as it invalidates huge numbers of cards.

this really seems like you are catering to former yugioh players where they had to deal all their damage to 1 creature. It also seems like you may be changing the rules so they match up with AI limitations in your Xbox 360 game. the games logic engine cannot compute all the possible interactions of damage being on the stack and its source dying and/or handling activated abilities of permanents that are doing damage.. the reason it works in mtgo is because you have a human opponent.

this will restrict design space and player creativity.
WOTC doesn't understand that the majority of players respect the opinions of the best players. When Blizzard balances their games, they do so on the advice of the top players. While of course there are complaints, its hard to mount any realistic denial these players know what they're talking about.

It's too bad WOTC isn't going to do that. If there were multiple pros coming out and saying "I think these changes are great for the game" it would really do a LOT to convince me. Whether or not they want that sort of responsibility, their status in the Magic world makes it so.

I would say the community needs leadership from its top ambassadors at this time, whether it be to love, tolerate, or hate the changes.
I have my doubts they are allowed to say anything other than
"awesome, simply awesome, it helps the game so much, it helps evolve our player base, its just awesome"

If this weren't a collectible card game, a writer using the word awesome like that would indicate a hostage situation.

When orcs are involved, it's a bit murkier.
No, they are saying that because it helps their arguments out (I admit, I do it too sometimes when it suits me). They care about a handful of cards that they now have to consider removing from decks, and they care about now having to play the game differently. I don't want to dismiss those concerns out of hand because they are legitimate for a number of reasons, but what I am seeing is a complete exaggeration of the situation. I wonder if I did this ten years ago. I probably did. I probably did it a lot actually.

I don't like them alienating established players, and when I saw that I knew there would be trouble ahead in the forums. In fact by the time I saw the article people had been railing out against them all night. But it is honestly hard for me to say I didn't see something like this coming, and to be honest it is so much more benign than people are making it out to be compared to all of the little things Mark Gottleib has done in the updates. These are slowly eroding the interest older players that don't visit these forums but like to bring out their old cards occasionally, only to find out they don't quite work like they used to any more. There are two people in my old playgroup that showed interest in playing again in the last couple of years, but after a few games they decided that the game had changed far too much and they did not appreciate what happened to their cards. They aren't playing now and are probably lost forever - in fact I now have one of their collections.

Of course when you bring this up on the forums people will jump in front of a bus for MaGo. They think it's great that he went and errataed the creature types for cards played only by people who don't read the forums, or that under current errata neither Bounty of the Hunt nor Ring Of Renewal work as worded. The people that do care about these things are not high enough on the food chain to matter. I think what is really happening now is that a whole new generation of players is learning what we had to learn so long ago - that they aren't on the top of the food chain anymore, either. I hear you, I feel you, I empathize. You're going to have to come to terms with it at some point as we did. It starts with understanding the real impact of the change, and not embellishing it. I had to get away from the game for years before I came back to it (and am now starting to fade away again). Hopefully the game will be around long enough for others to do this.

If everyone has 5-10 cards from the last ten years negatively affected and it upsets them (and I would say the majority of players do), I think that is more than enough to justify how the changes hurt the last ten years of magic.

I've been playing this game for under a year and don't have more than 50 cards from pre-Shadowmoor. These changes are still really hurting the game I came to love, especially in limited, by favorite format and the only one I play in tournaments. I don't buy boosters or boxes just to do so. I accumulate my collection through draft because I think it is the most challenging and fun. These changes really hurt the format, and as a result could cause me to quit. I'm going to give them a chance, but it just isn't the same magic.
Mag Ic Oh...... Now we can make a cartoon!

...... and toy figurines.....
.
..... and cereal.....


The kids will love it!

I'm sold..... Make the changes..........

..... Oh no.... They hate it.......

Don't blame me I said add sugar.
You know who else plays this game? WOTC employees Mike Turian, Jacob Luren, and many other design team members. I would sure like to to hear Mike Turian's opinions especially.

Im sure Mike will be along soon enough - right after he gets his script handed to him by the Marketing Department....

C.
If everyone has 5-10 cards from the last ten years negatively affected and it upsets them (and I would say the majority of players do), I think that is more than enough to justify how the changes hurt the last ten years of magic.

And what I was saying is that this was happening already, before this particular rules change, and hardly anyone here had an issue with it. It looks like your timing is unfortunate, but a silver lining for you is that you'll have a good opportunity to get used to the changes much earlier in your playing career. If you choose not to continue, it's understandable, and again, I empathize.
again, for the sake of clarity, the original information regarding why damage in combat went on the stack, from wizards own mouth-

We made a bigger change to the way creatures deal their combat damage. This change was made so that combat damage fit into the Grand Unified Timing System (AKA the stack). We wanted to allow players to prevent damage after they saw how creature damage was being divided (which is what happens under Fifth Edition rules). We also wanted for spells played during combat to work the same way they do outside of combat. In the end we created a system that has simpler rules but much more complex play strategies.

you have eliminated simplistic rules that take only 1-2 sentences with complicated damage assignment requirements and extremely difficult to justify/explain combat rules. the damage assignemnt rule is the rule I hate the absolute most, as it invalidates huge numbers of cards.

Where did you get that quote? Because that is exactly what they have nullified with this stupid new system. No longer does it mesh with the rest of the game (which uses the stack). No longer can you respond after seeing how creature damage is divided. And no longer are the rules simpler with greater strategy. Now the rules are more complex, the exceptions are longer, and the play strategies are limited to using unblockable creatures or sitting on defense with pump spells for your #1 blocker.
Im sure Mike will be along soon enough - right after he gets his script handed to him by the Marketing Department....

on www.top8magic.com Zvi moshowitz rails against the changes while some random writer I have never heard of fights for them.
So.... Will these rule changes effect the preset game play of the Xbox 360 game that is set to release? Or was the game designed to follow these changes?

Just a thought.:D :D
Where did you get that quote? Because that is exactly what they have nullified with this stupid new system. No longer does it mesh with the rest of the game (which uses the stack). No longer can you respond after seeing how creature damage is divided. And no longer are the rules simpler with greater strategy. Now the rules are more complex, the exceptions are longer, and the play strategies are limited to using unblockable creatures or sitting on defense with pump spells for your #1 blocker.

6th edition player rules change announcement.

sometimes being around for a long time beats being a new fanboy.

and yes, the Xbox game has only the same functionality as the current M10 rules, which is what i think they are trying to go for, using the Xbox game to get people to buy paper cards or mtgo.
I wanted to congratulate WotC for finally breaking my Magic addiction. The cards previewed for M10 are boring. The changes to combat unnecessary. The removal of Mana Burn killed one of my favorite decks that I have spent quite a bit of $ on.

Time to move on to something else. As for those who will request my cards. I won't give away my cards for free because I payed good money for them, but I sure am going to put them up on Ebay. Enjoy bidding.
I think what is really happening now is that a whole new generation of players is learning what we had to learn so long ago - that they aren't on the top of the food chain anymore, either. I hear you, I feel you, I empathize. You're going to have to come to terms with it at some point as we did. It starts with understanding the real impact of the change, and not embellishing it. I had to get away from the game for years before I came back to it (and am now starting to fade away again). Hopefully the game will be around long enough for others to do this.

I'd argue that the 6E rules changes were necessary to actually make the rules work and actually develop a workable rulebook. There were pure intentions behind it to evolve the game.

Difference is now...the rules were very clean and clear-cut. This change is a pure and simple marketing decision. They are now actively devolving the game. There are no good intentions behind this...no altruism...just an effort to make the game more mainstream.

Like it or not, that's what this is. Whether it's a good decision or not remains to be seen. But, it's not completely comparable to 6E imo.

;)
wow, 3 stickied threads, think the players have something to say?

If you're going to blame someone, blame everyone who cried wolf when Sixth Edition came out. It didn't destroy Magic, despite all the doomsayers, and now the doomsayers' credibility is shot.

The game has gone through worse. It'll be fine.
The World of Eldangard - a three act M:tG block by Fallingman Eldangard Stormfront Ragnarok
I was writing a long post only to see "thread closed" and having it gone. Grrr.

It's nice to see Erik Lauer right here, so there is actually incentive to write something polite and clear. I have two questions:

1) Now that mana empties at each step, doesn't it kills the phase term? Now there's nothing that defines a phase, so Magic turns from a 5 phase game to a 11 steps game.

2) The line - blocking system opens some design space, if mostly for limited, but since it isn't keyworded it may translate into a long template that is unworthy of creating cards for. I can easily imagine something like "rearrange all creatures blocking target creature" but maybe that's not templated correctly. Was this intended?

About the common posts, some opinions:

1) Manaburn was just an old, irrelevant rule most of the time turned a sacred cow by some people for the only fact it was there since Alpha. Mana production was intrinsecally noninteractive because it doesn't use the stack and mostly punishing some combo decks. Get over it.

2) The Mogg fanatic trick is overrated. The card got strictly worse, but the game doesn't become dumber. Sacrificing with damage in the stack was the obvious option before and now there are two equally good options to ponder. This makes the ability more challenge and skill - testing, rather than dumber.
If Limited gets in the way of printing good Constructed cards... Screw limited
From the last thread:
The cards currently affected are as follows:

-Any card with an activated ability. Not just sac creatures, or cards that sac creatures for an effect--any card with an activated ability.
-Any card with deathtouch.
-Any card with lifelink (or retconned lifelink) (except Loxodon Warhammer)
-Any instant
-Any sorcery that deals damage to a number of creatures
-Any card that provides mana
-a few other ACTUAL corner cases, like Wake Thrasher.

Note I did not say this affects them positively or negatively. However:

Is it a good idea to screw with literally thousands of cards to address a "problem" that actually works, mechanically, just fine for the people that take the time to learn the actual, proper rule?

Hear that, all? It's not just Mogg Fanatic. It's THE ENTIRE GAME.
If you're going to blame someone, blame everyone who cried wolf when Sixth Edition came out. It didn't destroy Magic, despite all the doomsayers, and now the doomsayers' credibility is shot.

The game has gone through worse. It'll be fine.

Except Sixth edition was a step forward and this is one or two back.
I'd argue that the 6E rules changes were necessary to actually make the rules work and actually develop a workable rulebook. There were pure intentions behind it to evolve the game.

Difference is now...the rules were very clean and clear-cut. This change is a pure and simple marketing decision. They are now actively devolving the game. There are no good intentions behind this...no altruism...just an effort to make the game more mainstream.

Like it or not, that's what this is. Whether it's a good decision or not remains to be seen. But, it's not completely comparable to 6E imo.

;)

It's not completely comparable for reasons you've stated, but also because those changes were more sweeping. Still, when the rule was introduced people had the exact opposite view of them, yet came to the same conclusion, that Wizards was dumbing down the game for noobs. The situations are not identical, but the reaction is very, very similar.
2) The line - blocking system opens some design space, if mostly for limited, but since it isn't keyworded it may translate into a long template that is unworthy of creating cards for. I can easily imagine something like "rearrange all creatures blocking target creature" but maybe that's not templated correctly. Was this intended?

It would be worded like Defensive Formation. Assigning the order of damage fills the same role as assigning actual damage numbers did before. (Note that it's not just blocking that uses this system. Creatures like Thoughtweft Trio do the same thing).
The World of Eldangard - a three act M:tG block by Fallingman Eldangard Stormfront Ragnarok
If you're going to blame someone, blame everyone who cried wolf when Sixth Edition came out. It didn't destroy Magic, despite all the doomsayers, and now the doomsayers' credibility is shot.

The game has gone through worse. It'll be fine.

here is the difference, this time the people making the noise actually ARE the ones with the spending power.

there are only 2 card shops left in my state ( from around 10 when ravnica came out). I have spoken to the owners of both who watched how fickle the yu-gi-oh crowd is and they both agree this is not going to be good. magic is their bread and butter and already there are players selling their collections and ending playing the game.

today there were 3 players in the store selling off their collections as I watched, saddened. the owners of the one shop actually are worried they wont have people for their saterday tournament, because as it was, the adults with money were getting chased away by the kids that try to get draft sets for $9 instead of $11, or who leave garbage strewn across the play area, and have their parents flip out when a kid gets kicked out of the store for lighting cards on fire.

the flash in the pan younger players are not going to replace adults with jobs and much deeper pockets, especially in this economy.
Except Sixth edition was a step forward and this is one or two back.

Except that players said the exact same thing about Sixth edition.


Credibility shot. Even if you're right, nobody's going to believe you.
The World of Eldangard - a three act M:tG block by Fallingman Eldangard Stormfront Ragnarok
6th Edition
We made a bigger change to the way creatures deal their combat damage. This change was made so that combat damage fit into the Grand Unified Timing System (AKA the stack). We wanted to allow players to prevent damage after they saw how creature damage was being divided (which is what happens under Fifth Edition rules). We also wanted for spells played during combat to work the same way they do outside of combat. In the end we created a system that has simpler rules but much more complex play strategies.

8th Edition
The other area that we could have changed in this way was the combat damage step. We could have split it into two steps – one for assigning damage and one for dealing it. But we didn’t, mainly because we didn’t want to take away the phrase “damage on the stack”(Here in R&D, we’re big fans of putting damage on the stack – for some people, it’s the highlight of their entire day.)

M10
The intricate system via which combat is currently handled creates many unintuitive gameplay moments. For starters, "the stack" is a difficult concept, even after all these years, so it is no wonder that many players go about combat without invoking it at all. Second, creatures disappearing after damage has been put on the stack leads to a ton of confusion and disbelief: How is that Mogg Fanatic killing two creatures? How did that creature kill mine but make your Nantuko Husk big enough to survive? How can you Unsummon your creature and have it still deal damage? While many of us may be used to the way things are now, it makes no sense in terms of a game metaphor and only a bit more sense as a rule.

So, wait, using the stack has gone from "this makes combat just like the rest of the game and leads to interesting strategic decisions" to "the stack is confusing and some new players don't want to learn to use it for strategy, we'll make combat work completely differently from all other parts of the game, because that definitely won't be confusing for new players."
The end is always nigh.
More so than taking away from being able to beat bad players, this will create a divide between the mediocre players and the good players. Both those groups used to have damage on tricks an the like to take advantage of, and the players who are better will have access to more tricks in the coming months, and make better decisions in combat. This is the group that will struggle to adapt or die. They clearly have an idea of what’s going on in the game, but they may not have the depth to compete when their one tried-and-true trick is gone.

This on top8magic.com from an unheard of PT player. This quote is actually the opposite of what will happen because it further blurs the line between good and mediocre players. Now the mediocre players get away with more mistakes because it's harder to punish them. Any semi-legit player with fatties is going to have an advantage over a better player who doesn't have the same bombs in limited because the better player has fewer options to regain the card advantage created by the bomb. This of course is what WOTC is trying to do, focus the game on big critters because it's what kids like.
here is the difference, this time the people making the noise actually ARE the ones with the spending power.

As opposed to Sixth edition when all the players were poor? I don't get it.

Still looks like exactly the same scenario to me.
The World of Eldangard - a three act M:tG block by Fallingman Eldangard Stormfront Ragnarok
That being said, I don't understand why Wizards would discount me as a potential profit source and customer when they make changes to MTG. Every change made in recent history has been openly broadcasted as being directed at new players to bring in a younger audience. I have purchased playsets of every card printed since ravnica (including some foil playsets) because I enjoy both the collecting aspect and the gameplay.

The reason that changes are made to be directed at new players is that they are trying to increase the amount of product sold. Existing players love the game and therefore buy a lot of product. Non-players either haven't played the game, don't understand the game, or don't like the game, and as a result buy zero product. It's easier to get people who don't buy any Magic to buy a lot, than it is to get people who buy a lot to buy more. Put another way, the person I quoted states that he or she has a playset of every card in the Ravnica Block, for instance. What can Wizards do to sell this person more Ravnica Block? They know what they can do to sell non-players more Ravnica block, and the answer is (apparently) these rule changes.

. . . so they dumb down the rules a little bit.

I keep seeing comments like this, and it makes me wonder. What is wrong with "dumbing down" the game?

Magic is a complicated game. Fortunately, it's found its way into the hands of a lot of very intelligent people. Here's the catch though, people with an IQ considered "high average" or above make up only 25% of the population. Now, I don't know what the minimum IQ threshold for enjoying Magic is, but It certainly seems to be above the mean (average) IQ. Every IQ point closer to the mean they can lower this threshold will bring in more players than the last, so there is considerable incentive, from a business standpoint, to make the game more approachable for people of more average IQ.

But what's in it for existing (presumably smarter) players? The simple answer is more opponents. People who have never played before will bring new ways of thinking, and new strategies to the table that experienced players are not used to encountering, which should increase the amount of intellectual stimulation in the game (which is something that becomes more important for people of higher IQs). Although making the rules less complex does decrease intellectual stimulation from the rules, themselves, this is a facet of the game that established players have already mastered, and so the benefits of that stimulation, for us, is marginal at best.

Aside from that, it has been psychologically validated that the vast majority of people (aside from those with rather severe developmental disabilities) tend to derive pleasure from sharing experiences they enjoy. If the number of people likely to enjoy the game increases, so do your odds of being able to share the experience of enjoying the game with others.

But new players are brought in by the old players!

This is an interesting point, because it is an assumption that needs to be examined by the community and WOTC alike. The truth is that people are most likely to be "brought in" if they have an enjoyable time playing the game. Continually losing is not an enjoyable experience. If a new player's only opponents are established players who know the intricacies of Magic, as well as having access to a substantially larger collection, that new player is likely to lose frequently and is not likely to enjoy herself or himself. This is a problem that I feel can only be addressed by the return of the core game, which allowed players to teach themselves how to play, then immediately teach a friend. I know that this is how I learned the game, and it's also how many of my friends did. Players need to be able to teach themselves, now (as other posters have mentioned) you can't even find a rulebook without spending a lot of time on the company website.
"We will all be purified in Wurm. What is good will be used to heal Wurm, or grow Wurm, or to fuel Wurm's path. What is vile will be extruded, and we will be free of it forever." --Prophet of the Cult of Wurm
6th Edition


8th Edition


M10


So, wait, using the stack has gone from "this makes combat just like the rest of the game and leads to interesting strategic decisions" to "the stack is confusing and some new players don't want to learn to use it for strategy, we'll make combat work completely differently from all other parts of the game, because that definitely won't be confusing for new players."

Truly sad how much the powers that be at WOTC (bottom line) influence the game. It's hard to expect much more since they are a business, but this doesn't make sense even from a business perspective.
It's nice to see Erik Lauer right here,

Wait, what? Eric Lauer works for WotC? And is in this thread? I believe you're mistaken.

One more point. Why does Deathtouch get the "It doesn't work under the new rules" errata, yet Wither gets left on the side of the road to wither (ha) and die? Double Standard much?
I've been playing Magic on and off for the last 15 years...

I was annoyed when my icy manipulators no longer stopped defending creatures from dealing damage.

I was very annoyed when my force of nature couldn't trample over just the weakest creature blocking.

I was surprised when reading about combat damage using the stack, and how that actually worked. How cards like Mogg Fanatic just became even more Fantastic. How prevent damage cards actually became a bit better. I liked it. It was a good change.

I was extremely annoyed when the new card faces change the artifact colors.

I read these changes... and I'm just frustrated now... Of all the changes done prior, the part that I actually liked, has just been reversed upon. That really upsets me.

No mana burn? How many times have I seen the brokeness of Mana Drain reigned in by mana burn? at least, at the VERY LEAST, 20 times, but probably much more. At least 10 times in tournaments. What about Mind Slaving someone with infinite mana to kill them? That was so much fun! Friends of mine still talk about that to this day...

With so many cards that remove creatures from the game, I know people who MAIN DECK living wish ONLY to get those creatures back.. Now they can't!?

This goes on and on.. Over the years playing, many cards were played because of how they interacted with the current rules. Whole decks were designed to utilize the stack to their fullest. Now these players are getting the biggest slap in their face with these rules.

Wednesday night, I play big casual multiplayer games at a local card shop. Some are former YuGiOh players, others are old school magic players, some are just newer magic players. When I spent a half hour explaining the rules changes to everyone, and I had a huge crowd because no one else had heard about them yet.... The only people who liked the rules changes were the YuGiOh players. That is it. The tournament players got in their own heated discussions. The old school players, including 2 who had just come back to the game got very upset, claiming they were just going to quit again. The regular players, those who had only been playing for a year or two, wanted further explanations. I gave them more in depth examples.

Finally, after going over many scenarios that now change, they unanimously agreed that they didn't like the rules changes.

As for myself? Lifelink and DeathTouch as static abilities I can accept. Mana emptying at each step, no problem. Mana burn gone? I dislike it... I wish I had the sense to pick up that play set of mana drains a few weeks ago... New names for territories... Battlefield is a terrible and cheesey name. It should have been called "The Field". Exile is fine, IF WISHES CAN AFFECT THE EXILE AREA! Don't change the functionality of wishes! Don't do it! Allow them to affect this new play area!!!!

You changed death touch to use the old rules because under the new rules it was stupid (by the way, it's not just death touch, the new combat damage assignment is stupid for EVERY CREATURE, NOT JUST THOSE WITH DEATH TOUCH) but the point is.. You changed death touch so it gets around a change that would effectively nerf it.. Yet you didn't change wishes the same way!? FAIL!

Blockers lining up, and lethal damage having to go through 1 at a time. Don't do it. No. Don't. Seriously.. stop. Don't do it. Combat damage? Keep it how it was. It was better how it was post 6ed.

Mulligans? nice change....
The reason that changes are made to be directed at new players is that they are trying to increase the amount of product sold. Existing players love the game and therefore buy a lot of product. Non-players either haven't played the game, don't understand the game, or don't like the game, and as a result buy zero product. It's easier to get people who don't buy any Magic to buy a lot, than it is to get people who buy a lot to buy more. Put another way, the person I quoted states that he or she has a playset of every card in the Ravnica Block, for instance. What can Wizards do to sell this person more Ravnica Block? They know what they can do to sell non-players more Ravnica block, and the answer is (apparently) these rule changes.

This is terrible business logic. It costs, on average, more than twice as much to recruit a new customer than to keep an existing one. Those players who bought a playset of Ravnica will pay for new sets. With these moves, you run a high risk of running off that player for a new customer that might or might nor materialize.
OMFG A third thread already?

Wither will probably get new errata, but only on the Gatherer or when it sees a reprint in a set. But it doesn't really need it, because it does still work in the new rules set. Because it still just deals damage to creatures with -1/-1 counters, nothing new really, just the new combat rules make it weaker.