|
2 years ago ::
Aug 18, 2011 - 4:17PM
#1
|
Date Joined:
Jun 24, 2008
|
This thread is for discussion of this week's Latest Developments, which goes live Friday morning on magicthegathering.com.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 18, 2011 - 10:18PM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2010
|
Er, except Unhinged. As much fun as it might be, I don't think Pro Tours being decided by Ass Whoopin' is a good idea :P
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 18, 2011 - 11:18PM
#3
|
Date Joined:
Feb 26, 2004
|
I despise games of magic ending on turn 4 and 5; it makes me think I wasted time shuffling. I'd say the optimal game is between seven and ten turns. That gives you enough time to really see things develop; for the first few turns not much is likely to happen, in the midgame players build up and have serious exchanges, and the endgame features tense confrontations and possible turnarounds.
And I strongly disagree that unfair and exciting is preferable. Fallen Empires remains one of my favorite sets of all time; the modern design aesthetic seems to be all about hype, and I much prefer holism. Don't sell me on the set's hot mythic rare, dammit; sell me on the whole set. Make me think every single card in every booster pack is worth the $0.25 it costs me, and I'll buy the set once in a while; convince me that nothing but the chase cards are any good, and I'll regard the booster packs as overpriced lottery tickets and won't waste my money on them. (Things aren't quite to that point yet, but that's mostly because of Creative, and I really wish R&D would follow their example and show every single card some love.)
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 
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 19, 2011 - 12:45AM
#4
|
Date Joined:
May 28, 2009
|
On the poll:
I never really thought about this question, in the end I went with red because I don't like playing around blue counterspells better then another style of play, green doesn't have creature removal and I like it when my opponent can do stuff against me. Black can sometimes be a bit annoying in having to deal with a dead creature again and again and again. Leaving me with white and red and I just felt like going for red on that one for no reason I can think of.
But I have to add that in order to answer this question I really had to force an answer. Which I liked about this pole, since it forces you to make a choice rather than take the easy way out with an added "I don't care" option. If poles do have these options I always try my best to avoid them, but in this one I like the lack of it.
On the whole I feel more like I don't care about my opponents colors and more about the style of play their deck has. But as I said before still liked thinking about "what if you really have to pick one prefered opposing color."
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 19, 2011 - 1:23AM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 11, 2007
|
The poll really depends on what I'm playing and what kind of game I want. I voted blue because I feel like I'm the only person in the world who likes playing against counter-heavy decks, but it's far from true that that's always what I want to play against.
blah blah metal lyrics
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 19, 2011 - 1:48AM
#6
|
Date Joined:
Aug 28, 2009
|
Millions of players globally, myself included, will feel awkward about the idea of games ending on turn four or five - are we doing it wrong when our games go long? A lot of people might never pull a mythic card, despite buying regularly - is "unfair and exciting" working for them, or against them?
I wonder what audience this column is geared towards. It ain't the ones who place trust in the ideals of the designers, because you're brutal.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 19, 2011 - 2:50AM
#7
|
Date Joined:
May 25, 2006
|
The poll really depends on what I'm playing and what kind of game I want. I voted blue because I feel like I'm the only person in the world who likes playing against counter-heavy decks, but it's far from true that that's always what I want to play against.
You´re not alone with this. Playing with a well-built deck (aka mana curve etc.) against a counter-heavy deck is one of the most interesting matchups in the game. It is challenging and both players need a good poker-face.
But it is important that both players have the same "skill level". A beginner who can´t grasp all the necessary information (and e.g.: doesn´t know which cards must be countered at all cost) has no fun in this matchup.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 19, 2011 - 3:05AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Mar 17, 2003
|
Considering it is feedback week and I'm pretty sure there was plenty of feedback received about the Modern ban list, I'm a bit disappointed that Tom sidestepped the issue entirely. I presume those were among the questions he didn't felt were interesting to answer, but with all the people asking why several of the cards really got banned it sure would be interesting to get a straight answer. Maybe they were not interesting to answer in the end because he can not give straight answers for some reason.
I hope that they at least eventually address the fact that this was effectively a huge emergency banning of several cards (well, sort of a whole format really). I will probably be able to figure out the real reasons some of those cards were banned in future B&R decisions - if they really do unban several cards relatively fast, I pretty much confirm my guesses - they rushed the format out, they didn't test enough, they were too scared of some cards to trust the Overextended data (without real reason in my opinion), and they didn't want players traumatized from Standard to irrationally give Modern a pass even though Jace wouldn't be overpowered.
I also happen to strongly believe Mystic is fine in the format, although that one is much more borderline (particularly if it is in the format together with Jace - but Overextended data pretty much shows it to be safe). I think Dark Confidant is a stronger card in the format (and also in Legacy), and due to the lack of FoW (protects the Mystic) and other differences even Tarmogoyf would possibly be borderline stronger than Mystic. Goyf protects itself much better, and Dark Confidant is surprisingly less vulnerable and only costs you 2 mana - while Mystic is vulnerable to many maindecked cards - including burn such as Punishing Fire and Bolt, to Qasali Pridemage which can deal with the artifact, Repeal / Into the roil which can deal with the token or get massive tempo if you would go for something with "equip 2" and even Vendilion Clique in response to the activation. which is once again quite a tempo blowout. Overextended results reveal this: UW decks with Jace and Stoneforge were very good but not nearly as dominant as Punishing Fire Zoo decks running GSZ and several maindeck Qasali Pridemages.
Ivo.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 19, 2011 - 4:09AM
#9
|
Date Joined:
Apr 25, 2010
|
In regards to the poll (which seemed like a random but nonetheless thought-provoking question), I like playing against green the best. Black is probably my least favorite color to play against because it can be very annoying. Blue is alright to play against and white is the same. Red can be annoying at times but is generally alright. Green is the easiest to play against because you can sit and watch as they don't interact with your strategy at all and sit there wondering why they are losing.
|
|
|
|
2 years ago ::
Aug 19, 2011 - 4:15AM
#10
|
Date Joined:
Mar 16, 2004
|
You... don't like signets and bounce lands? You seriously think that the game is better when people don't have manafixing? :..-( If that means we're not going to see common manafixers that good ever again while you're in development, then... that's really sad... and for the first time I find myself looking forward to the end of your time in dev  I really hope I'm misunderstanding you here, Tom. The Ravnica bouncelands are the best thing to ever happen to my casual decks. I have over 100 decks (around 110 last count) and it's utterly ludicrous to imagine I could get enough rare or even uncommon dual or triple lands to power them. The Ravblock bouncelands I could and did buy in bulk, 20 of each of the 10, and occasionally top up those where all of them end up in decks. Good budget manafixers let people play their cards. The game is a heck of a lot more interesting when people can play their cards. The game is a lot less interesting when any deck that wants to play heavy-white and heavy-red, or wants to play white red and black, has to go base-green purely for manafixing. Yet... that's what Tom is describing as the ideal? Surely, surely, the solution to "Green in my Cube is boring" is to make more interesting green cards, not to cut the good any-colour manafixing? ...I did have other topics I was going to talk about, but I'm getting so emotional about this one that I think I'd better stop here.
|
|
|
