|
11 months ago ::
Aug 06, 2012 - 10:56AM
#21
|
|
|
Mark's claim that power creep must preclude either old or new cards from being relevant is puzzling and observably false.
It's absolutely true, but format dependent. For example, in Legacy, no one plays Shock over Lightning Bolt.
Power creep implies that the larger a card pool is, the more cards in that pool are unplayable due to ones that are 'strictly better'.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 2:52AM
#22
|
|
|
Is this always true? Has it always been historically true? With the exceptions of the last 5 years (Bitterblossom in Lorwyn, Bloodbraid in Alara, Jace in Zendikar, Swords in Scars, Delver/Snap in Innistrad), what cards have "warped" formats? This seems to be the fault of the current crop of R&D, not the fault of Standard as a format.
[...]
Umezawa's Jitte, Arcbound Ravager and Disciple of the Vault, Skull Clamp, Astral Slide, Psychatog, Flametongue Kavu, Rishadan Port, Lin-Sivvi, Defiant Hero, Urza block, Necropotence, Stasis. And I'm just thinking of the big ones.
I notice that the Ravnica-Time Spiral era of standard isn't mentioned in either post, and from what I remember, was generally well liked and diverse.
I'm curious about why. I know that that standard format was much larger than sets are now, and marginally larger than formats before it. Ravnica, Time Spiral, and 10th edition were all huge sets, and Coldsnap was also legal at the time. I don't necessarily think that the sets were designed and balanced better. I think figuring that out would require more time than I want to spend thinking about it. I do think that having so many more cards in the format allowed for more answers to problem cards. Though Faeries could be a strong counter argument, but I think a lot of people would agree that that deck was just a mistake, and that being able to play at instant speed cut the amount of effective answers to "not enough".
I think Zendikar/Scars and Scars/Innistrad are good examples of a small format becoming stale and less diverse too quickly.
And I think adding M13 without removing M12 has added a lot to the format. Adding M13 brings the total amount of cards close to the number in Ravnica/Time Spiral. Before M13 there was about a 350 card difference. That's a lot of possible answers and "build-around-me" cards:
Ravnica 306
Guildpact 165
Dissention 180
Coldsnap 155
Time Spiral 301
Planar Chaos 165
Future Sight 180
10th 383
Total: 1835
Scars 249
Besieged 155
New Phyrexia 175
M12 249
Innistrad 264
Dark Ascension 158
Avacyn 244
M13 249
Total: 1743
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 9:04AM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2008
|
I notice that the Ravnica-Time Spiral era of standard isn't mentioned in either post, and from what I remember, was generally well liked and diverse.
If we want to talk about a card from Time Spiral block that warped a format, that's easy. It's Tarmogoyf 
Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.
I've seen angels fall from blinding heights.
But you yourself are nothing so divine.
Just next in line.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 10:00AM
#24
|
|
|
I'm curious about why. I know that that standard format was much larger than sets are now, and marginally larger than formats before it. Ravnica, Time Spiral, and 10th edition were all huge sets, and Coldsnap was also legal at the time. I don't necessarily think that the sets were designed and balanced better. I think figuring that out would require more time than I want to spend thinking about it. I do think that having so many more cards in the format allowed for more answers to problem cards. Though Faeries could be a strong counter argument, but I think a lot of people would agree that that deck was just a mistake, and that being able to play at instant speed cut the amount of effective answers to "not enough".
I don't think it was so much the number of cards as the fact that they hadn't yet started removing complexity from commons. In Ravnica/Time Spiral Standard, you had a lot of options for Constructed decks because so many cards filled so many different roles in all rarities. Then they started removing complexity in Lorwyn, so common and uncommon options started dwindling, and then NWO order set in (in addition to smaller set sizes), greatly limiting the number of options available to deck-builders.
Now, the majority of commons (and a fair amount of uncommons) are so simple that they don't really separate themselves from the competition. We have more vanilla creatures, more virtual vanilla creatures, much simpler instants/sorceries, etc. It makes it much harder for a common to compare well to a rare or mythic when the rares are allowed to do more, allowing them to be applicable in more situations. Basically the only commons that get played any more are going to be those that don't have an analogue in higher rarities, such as pinpoint  removal  , counterspells  and bounce  .
And yes, they push the power level of mythics more, so there's that too. We're closing on "best cards", such as the Titans, which further limits your options because choosing anything else is almost always going to be wrong.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 10:14AM
#25
|
Date Joined:
Apr 17, 2007
|
Is this always true? Has it always been historically true? With the exceptions of the last 5 years (Bitterblossom in Lorwyn, Bloodbraid in Alara, Jace in Zendikar, Swords in Scars, Delver/Snap in Innistrad), what cards have "warped" formats? This seems to be the fault of the current crop of R&D, not the fault of Standard as a format.
Yes, this is historically accurate. Fireballmage and Tymestalker listed out a few examples, but every standard has had top cards that got stale by rotation.
Is Standard popular because people like to play it, or because it's the format that most tournaments are held as? ...Judging by personal anecdotal experience, I would venture to guess that, aside from the financial barrier to entry (which actually isn't that high anymore compared to Standard), Legacy is actually the most "popular" format (in that most players actually find enjoyment in playing Legacy).
There's no requirement that tournament organizers run Standard (even for FNM). In-store tournaments tend to be standard because that's what most players want. Your personal experience with Legacy doesn't really translate to the general population; Legacy players tend to be really invested in the format and enjoy it a lot, but they're a minority of players. And there's really no comparison in price. For a $200, I can buy a tournament quality UW Delver-Pike deck. Or I can buy 2-3 duals (maybe).
I notice that the Ravnica-Time Spiral era of standard isn't mentioned in either post, and from what I remember, was generally well liked and diverse.
I'm afraid you're remembering with rose-colored glasses. Yes, the format was very diverse, and some players had a lot of fun with it. But it was very difficult for new players to get into. On top of that, it had some severely busted decks (storm anyone?).
The size of the Core sets was also a huge problem. The high number of cards made it less likely that your box or boosters would actually have anything good. You ended up plowing through piles of Emperor Crocodiles, Mahamoti Djinns, and Jayemdae Tomes (it used to be rare) to find the few painlands or Wraths that you actually wanted. And since Core sets only came out every two years, there was a lot less product drafted, which made the rares even harder to find.
And the larger sets didn't actually make it easier to find answer cards or alternative strategies. The best cards were still the best; you just got more junk to go with them.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 10:32AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Aug 11, 2008
|
And lest we forget, Ravnica's main issue came from the Dredge mechanic, which made the Golgari Grave-Troll/Stinkweed Imp very powerful.
Those who fear the darkness have never seen what the light can do.
I've seen angels fall from blinding heights.
But you yourself are nothing so divine.
Just next in line.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 10:40AM
#27
|
|
|
Then they started removing complexity in Lorwyn, so common and uncommon options started dwindling, and then NWO order set in (in addition to smaller set sizes), greatly limiting the number of options available to deck-builders.
Eh? I thought Lorwyn was one of the reasons they started removing complexity because it was so complex itself?
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 10:45AM
#28
|
|
|
Then they started removing complexity in Lorwyn, so common and uncommon options started dwindling, and then NWO order set in (in addition to smaller set sizes), greatly limiting the number of options available to deck-builders.
Eh? I thought Lorwyn was one of the reasons they started removing complexity because it was so complex itself?
Lorwyn caused them to remove synergistic complexity (or on-board complexity as they call it), to start toning down the number of cards with activated abilities that mess with combat math. But they were already taking complexity away on a card-by-card basis by Lorwyn (thanks to Time Spiral block).
So, starting in Lorwyn they began toning down complexity of the cards, and then post-Lorwyn they started toning down complexities of card interactions.
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 1:18PM
#29
|
|
|
The size of the Core sets was also a huge problem. The high number of cards made it less likely that your box or boosters would actually have anything good. You ended up plowing through piles of Emperor Crocodiles, Mahamoti Djinns, and Jayemdae Tomes (it used to be rare) to find the few painlands or Wraths that you actually wanted. And since Core sets only came out every two years, there was a lot less product drafted, which made the rares even harder to find.
And the larger sets didn't actually make it easier to find answer cards or alternative strategies. The best cards were still the best; you just got more junk to go with them.
"And since Core sets only came out every two years, there was a lot less product drafted, which made the rares even harder to find." this makes me wondering why the prices of singles have gone up so insanely for competitive rares since then
im going to agree with chronego: "Basically the only commons that get played any more are going to be those that don't have an analogue in higher rarities, such as pinpoint removal, counterspells and bounce."
not running mythics nowadays means less change at winning (a lot less)
|
|
|
|
11 months ago ::
Aug 07, 2012 - 2:03PM
#30
|
|
|
Standard is probably the best format for magics long-term survival. I wouldn't have bothered with the game if it costed $500+ just to build a mana base. WhIle I can understand that older players like using their older cards that they obtained for $5 before they became $100, it's unfair for them to think that the game can survive and remain dynamic without allowing new players and fresh metagames. I also doubt that the older players would enjoy seeing their collections value be destroyed by mass reprints of old cards, which is exactly what legacy-only yugioh does to remain accessible and relevant.
|
|
|
