|
3 years ago ::
Jan 28, 2010 - 1:12PM
#1
|
|
|
This thread is for discussion of this week's Latest Developments, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 28, 2010 - 9:59PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Oct 29, 2007
|
Why is nobody concerned at how many times the Coastal Tower cycle has been obsoleted? In the last year? As Tom pointed out, the originals were played in constructed. The only reason can be power creep (and multicolor fanboyism).
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 28, 2010 - 11:06PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Sep 13, 2001
|
I played back in the days from 4E to the Urza block. Although the pain lands were available at the time, for a casual player like myself, the Mirage fetch lands were the best I can hope to get in adequate quantities. I stopped playing after Urza, but when I heard about the Invasion tap lands, I couldn't believe it. The pendulum sure swung from the days where mono-coloured decks were quite common to practically non-existent now.
I personally would like to see mono-coloured decks be more common. It seems that mana bases for multi-coloured decks are much easier to build now, but I think it's just too easy to add a third colour now. I liked it when mono-coloured decks can deal with the limitations of playing only one colour and that's when colour hosers were way better than they are now. Back then, when you played mono-black, you know you have difficulties dealing with enchantments and artifacts, but you played around it. Now, it's so easy to add green and/or white to add naturalise plus other cards.
<\
\>tuntman
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 28, 2010 - 11:08PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Feb 26, 2004
|
Given that the Invasion dual lands were printed on the understanding that the Tempest ally-color duals sucked, why exactly did they reprint (with different names and art) the Tempest ally-color duals in the already-underpowered Champions of Kamigawa set? If they'd made sexy dual lands in that set, nobody would have cared about the fact that most of the other cards were underpowered; Vorthoi like myself would still have the flavor-rich setting, but the tourney rats would have the dual lands to obsess over, and the whole set would have fared better, instead of being stuck in this slump between broken Mirrodin and not-broken-but-awesome Ravnica.
My New Phyrexia Writing CreditsMy M12 Writing CreditsAs far as the benefit of the rest of Magic is concerned, gold cards in Legends were executed perfectly. They got all the excitement a designer could hope out of a splashy new mechanic without using up any of the valuable design space. Truly amazing.
--Aaron Forsythe's Random Card Comment on Kei Takahashi 
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 28, 2010 - 11:25PM
#5
|
- YMtC Champion
- Ceci n'est pas une porte
Date Joined:
Mar 22, 2004
|
I really like these EBT man-lands too. Balancing a land's drawback (e.g. EBT or "T: Add 1") is an interesting topic. My personal opinion is that a properly-designed land is one that always warrants consideration. It doesn't automatically go in your deck if you're playing the right colours, nor does it automatically get left out. I do have one issue in general though. There's a rule stating that lands can't be strictly better than the basic lands. As long as they're not stricly better, then everything is fine. I'd argue that some lands are better than basic lands. They're not strictly better, but they'll almost always be played, which invalidates the whole point of lands not being strictly better than basic lands. The M10 lands will almost always be played in a deck of the right colours. The only reason better-than-basic lands don't totally obsolete basic lands, is because they appear in limited numbers. (Of course there are various interactions and issues that mean you probably wouldn't play entirely better-than-basic lands, but these lands are still better than basics.) I understand that WOTC wants to enable multicolour play, but there's an easier way to do this. No drawbacks or other shenanigans. The "lands can't be strictly better than basics" rule has already been undermined by lands that are better than basics, but not stricly better than them, so there's no reason why the following solution doesn't work: Here's the card: Spoiler:
Show
Yep. Duals.
Like the M10 lands, they're better than basics, and their play is only limited by the fact that you can only have four of each in your deck.
Crazy huh? \:>
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 28, 2010 - 11:28PM
#6
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
Why is nobody concerned at how many times the Coastal Tower cycle has been obsoleted?
They were already obsolete the moment they were printed.
As Tom pointed out, the originals were played in constructed.
So was Volcanic Hammer.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 29, 2010 - 1:51AM
#7
|
|
|
Why is nobody concerned at how many times the Coastal Tower cycle has been obsoleted? In the last year? As Tom pointed out, the originals were played in constructed. The only reason can be power creep (and multicolor fanboyism).
If you read the intro to the article:
"To my modern developer eyes, the message of these cards is that, if you decide that you want to play a multicolored deck, I guess that's okay, but you deserve to be punished for such impetuosity by a terrible mana base.
This is not the message that we want modern dual lands to send."
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 29, 2010 - 2:31AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
|
Indeed. Although I liked Coastal Tower back in the day (I remember seeing my first one at the Invasion prerelease), I'm also happy to see the uncommons that have obsoleted it. Of course, half the cards to obsolete Coastal Tower have been rare (Hallowed Fountain, Wanderwine Hub, the M10 one that nobody has, and now Celestial Colonnade), but I'm particularly pleased at the uncommons. Cards like the uncommon shardlands and the common Ravduals are the absolute foundation of many of my casual decks, not being able to afford rare duals for my 80+ decks.
The manduals are very good. I still think Celestial Colonnade is the best of the bunch, though I know the fans of Creeping Tar Pit outnumber me. But it's certainly a safe bet that any of the five I end up with will certainly find places in my decks.
Thank you to Tom for at least mentioning the rarity issue, and in this case I guess "balance in Limited" is a fair excuse for making these duals rare. (Better than with most rare duals, anyway!)
As for prereleases, I've gone to the regional prerelease in London for every prerelease for several years, but for WWK I'm going to the local one in Cambridge because several of my London-based friends won't be able to make it, and so the extra 4 hours travelling aren't worth it. It's a pity to miss out on the triple small-set drafts and the atmosphere of the bigger event, but we'll see if the reduction in travel time is worth it.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 29, 2010 - 5:24AM
#9
|
|
|
I am also disturbed by the number of non-basic lands these days. I think stuntman summed it up best. There really is no reason to ever play mono-colored. You never have to worry about color limitations. Rather than work inside color limitations, WOTC has taken the lazy route and just made it easier to use other colors. Why have to design a way for green to resolve its creatures when you can just make it easier for green to add blue and play counterspells? Deisgn made easy, color pie be damned.
I think the most interesting thing about this entire article is the poll at the bottom. While focusing on the possibility of people playing in both GP's, he seems to missed the massive point of the poll staring him in the face. 93% non-attendance at GP's? That seems like a serious concern and maybe he should have focused on explaining what WOTC plans to do about that? 81% not interested in PTQ's seems like trouble brewing. I hope next week we get a REALLY good article from someone/ANYONE at WOTC explaining what is happening to tournament magic. Even the sanctioned and FNM are near 50% non-attendance. I have my thoughts on the subject, and they mimic the thoughts in this article. Every deck is multicolored so strategy is disappearing since everyone is being routed into the same decks. The other concern would be the presense of massivly expensive Mythic Rares (baneslayer, planeswalkers) and preview cards that make it look like it's not going to get any better. I think it's about time, someone (I'm really looking at Rosewater) step forward and talk SERIOUSLY about what is happening to magic.
|
|
|
|
3 years ago ::
Jan 29, 2010 - 6:28AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
|
What? Why on earth is it a problem that people don't go to tournaments? Spot the massive presumption that tournament Magic is the only kind that matters!
Remember, 90% of the player base doesn't play in tournaments. The tournament Spikes are vastly outnumbered by the kitchen table Timmies and Johnnies - in fact, they're even outnumbered by the kitchen table Spikes.
Magic is perfectly healthy if it manages to simultaneously appeal to a large number of tournament players and an even larger number of casual players.
Always remember this: Magic is many things to many people. Surely the fact that there are so many random products like Planechase, all-foil boosters, EDH Slivers, and so on should be a reminder of this?
...Actually, wait, sorry. "Every deck is multicolored so strategy is disappearing since everyone is being routed into the same decks" - okay, I just fell for a troll, didn't I? Nobody could think that seriously after Zendikar.
|
|
|
