|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 5:33AM
#11
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2010
|
The article started to bore me so I just skimmed through it. I'm terrible, I know. But it's the summer.
Anyway I really like the event decks. They are actually competitive, which we rarely see out of preconstructed products. The one thing that kinda bothers me is that one is always obviously way out of the league of the one released alongside it. The kuldotha deck in besieged, the stoneforge deck in new phyrexia, and now the vampire deck in M12 easily and irrefutably outclass their counterparts.
You probably explained why that is in the article, but, like I said, I was to lazy to read it.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 6:35AM
#12
|
|
|
I'm definitely interested in behind the scenes articles, but how can you justify that one deck can completely steanroll when looking at the deck lists?
I think most of what chronego said is true as well. Deck-building isn't the easiest thing in the world. It requires experience with the game and how the game is played where you live to make an effective deck, from what I've read. But I'm repeating chronego here.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 8:55AM
#13
|
|
|
I'm torn about the Event Decks. I like the idea and I think they accomplish their goal but I don't like how one deck is clearly better than the other and they shouldn't be so full of cards that are going to rotate soon. That is just greedy asking people to either a) invest the money in cards to replace the outdated ones even though they just started the game or 2) invest money in the next event deck that comes out, in which case they'll probably run in to the same problem. Suddenly endless cycle.
On the other hand, $25 for two months of use out of something isn't terrible. Most people have no qualms spending that amount of money on consumable forms of entertainment and it isn't like new players are going to throw them in the trash after they rotate. They will still get some use in the form of casual play.
The article itself was very insightful. I love reading the behind-the-scenes articles. I have NEVER played in a standard constructed tournament and I have been playing for 4 years; maybe i'll give it a shot now.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 9:14AM
#14
|
|
|
I thought Vampire Outcasts was constructed unplayable?
It is. that's one of the cards you're supposed to cut when you find out it sucks.
Check out my magic blog: http://magicthemusing.wordpress.com/
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 9:31AM
#15
|
|
|
I hear people complaining about the non-use of four-of of some of the better cards and the price disparity between the decks and it seems there are reason for both of these.
First, the decks can't make too liberal use out of the four-of specifically because they are designed to be available to newer players. If the deck has a 4-of of some chase rare, for example, then new players wouldn't be able to by it because experienced players would in order to get a cheap and easy playset. Just from the New phyrexia event decks I can tell you that if a new player wanted to play the War of Attrition deck he would be out of luck. The fact it contained 2 stoneforges meant that it was sold out almost as soon as it hit the shelf, while on the other hand the mono-green infect deck has lingered on shelves longer, meaning a new player could actually walk into the store at any given FNM and use it. Its a lot like card design, if you make a card super efficient everyone wants to play it because its good, but if you make it less efficient than only people who want the effect (the people the card is targeted towards) will bother to pick it up.
As for the price disparity between deck I think you missing the point of the decks if thats what your looking at. Price of contained card matters only if you are buying with intent to resell. These are for people without such intents and therefore aiming at giving them a more synergistic deck is more important than making sure there is a quota of value rares with them.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 11:31AM
#16
|
Date Joined:
Mar 19, 2011
|
I love the idea of Event Decks; I don't play FNM but I am an avid casual player, so I see an Event Decks more as a quick, cheap way of getting a good number of quality cards - Goblin Guide  and Stoner  at the top of that list, but also stuff like Goblin Wardriver  , Phyrexian Vatmother  , Mirran Crusader  , Go for the Throat  , etc - which can be cannabalised and added to my own decks, but even then I'd like to play a few games with the Event Deck in its "raw" form, just for giggles. The power/quality balace has already been brought up; Kuldotha vs U/B Infect, Stoneforge vs G Infect, and now Vampires vs some kind of Illusion/artifact mess. The blue M12 Event Deck just boggles my mind; I really can't wrap my head around the whole random artifact sub-theme going on. Precursor Golem  ? Why!? There's nothing in the deck to benefit it! The Grand Architect  boosts your Illusions, but couldn't those 2 slots be better used on a second Lord of the Unreal  and another Phantasmal Image  ? Some Mental Mistep  s or Spell Pierce  s would've been pretty sweet too, but Mana Leak  , so can't complain. However the Spined Thopter  s easily could've been Aether Figment  s, or Phantom Warrior  s, or Phantom Beast  s; they've used Preordain  , so clearly using M11 cards isn't an issue. Pfff, I dunno. The Vampire deck though is pants-tighteningly awesome. I'll be picking that up alone for a playset of Dismember  and another playset of Gatekeeper and Nighthawk; the Highborn, Hexmages and Blade of the Bloodchief  are just sexy sangrophilic icing. Edit - derp, Phantom Warrior wasn't in M11.... >_<
"Waaah there's a few cards I don't like in the latest set! This game sucks now! Everything should just always stay the same because I'm threatened by change! I'm going to quit! I'm quitting! SOMEONE PAY ATTENTION TO MEEEE" - approximately 10% of MtG players on all forums, ever.Read my thoughts, feed my ego! - www.tzaphiel.wordpress.com
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 11:32AM
#17
|
Date Joined:
May 18, 2002
|
If the deck has a 4-of of some chase rare, for example, then new players wouldn't be able to by it because experienced players would in order to get a cheap and easy playset.
Seems to me that putting in four-of's would mean the poachers would buy half as many.
The reason the SFM and Goblin Guide decks were so hard to find is because someone looking to poach Stoneforges or Guides had to buy two decks (and still pretty much come out ahead, at least with SFM, for a couple weeks).
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 12:28PM
#18
|
Date Joined:
Sep 29, 2010
|
I would like to play FNM, only there's no Magic store here on the Big Island on Hawaii. If I wanted to play Friday Night Magic I'd have to go to Honolulu ... I have to be happy playing Magic with my brothers.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 12:35PM
#19
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2006
|
from the New phyrexia event decks I can tell you that if a new player wanted to play the War of Attrition deck he would be out of luck. The fact it contained 2 stoneforges meant that it was sold out almost as soon as it hit the shelf, while on the other hand the mono-green infect deck has lingered on shelves longer.
...
As for the price disparity between deck I think you missing the point of the decks if thats what your looking at. Price of contained card matters only if you are buying with intent to resell. These are for people without such intents and therefore aiming at giving them a more synergistic deck is more important than making sure there is a quota of value rares with them.
The answer to your second statement ... is your first statement.
As you may know, Wizards sells these decks to stores in pairs. They can't get one without also purchasing the other. So when one is more desireable (a.k.a. more valuable), it sells out. But the store can't afford to restock because they haven't made back their money on the "lesser" one. This means it's impossible for the decks to both be available as desired. It's not a matter of re-selling, it's a matter of original-selling. If both decks have roughly the same appeal then they will sell about equal and the stores can always keep ordering more. It's win/win/win - more orders from Wizards, more sales for the store, and more variety for customers. Now that said, for M12 decks we have a Vampires that's hotter but rotates out in 3 months and an Illusions that's weaker but stable. It may be that one sells well now and the other gets scooped up if Innistrad's ghosts are creature-type Illusion. That wouldn't be so bad, except that by then it would be too late to reorder supplies. I know they can't predict perfectly, but when one of the deck's rares is a triple-reprinted Glacial Fortress  in a deck that shouldn't even be playing White, I don't feel it's their best effort, either.
Free MTGO Tournaments you should be playing: Pauper (all commons) - Tuesday Nights, prizes by MTGOTraders Peasant (Pauper + 5 uncommons, with paper rarity) - Sunday Nights, prizes by MTGOTraders Silverblack (Modern-era Commons and Uncommons - Most Wednesday nights, prizes by MTGO Bazaar Heirloom ("Cheap" cards only, e.g. rares under 20 cents) - Sunday afternoons, sponsored by MTGOTraders Check the superbly-made Gatherling site for more. Other games you should try: Spectromancer - Online card game by Richard Garfield, available cheap on Steam. DC Universe Online - action-based MMO. Free to play. Surprised me how well designed it is. Simunomics - Free-to-play economy simulation game.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 08, 2011 - 12:43PM
#20
|
|
|
Price of contained card matters only if you are buying with intent to resell. These are for people without such intents and therefore aiming at giving them a more synergistic deck is more important than making sure there is a quota of value rares with them.
If you were looking to get cards contained in an event deck, the event deck might be the cheapest way to get them for cash at the time. I don't have to be planning to resell the cards to save some money. On the other hand, if they print up a very powerful Event Deck but the contents are worth $10, why not just go buy the decklist as singles and save some cash? Obviously, they need to hit some value to make the product worth it to buy. There's nothing new in the decks so they compete directly with the secondary market for the cost of the contents.
As far as what that value of any event deck is, the author stated that these are prepared way in advance of knowing what the prices actually are on the secondary market.They didn't just toss those cards in there two weeks before the product hit the shelves.
It is obvious from Tom L.'s column they thought green infect was going to be a real deck. However, it hasn't panned out that way. If it had, then the contents of that event deck would have totalled quite a bit more than it did. The two lands would probably be worth MSRP on the product if infect was regularly performing well at high-level events.
|
|
|
