EPTOld Magic the Gathering cards vs New ones - Page 5
| Forum Index > General Games |
|
misaTO
Argentina204 Posts
| ||
|
NicolBolas
United States1388 Posts
I understand that some of the changes they've made to cards has probably been for balance reasons (cancel as opposed to counterspell, lightning bolt to shock, and then they brought back lightning bolt), this general progression of newer cards getting more for the same mana seems like a strategy to increase profits from the casual sector of the player base - the people who don't play tournaments and just play with their friends. That's not really how it works. Polar Kraken was shit. It was always shit. Even when it was good, it was terrible. Oh, it looks impressive, with high attack/defense and all. But that doesn't make it any less crappy. The problem with early edition MtG was that it was all about the spells. Creatures were at best supplements and at worst unused. Later editions specifically went out of their way to rectify this. That meant making creature cards that didn't suck on toast. That also meant toning down the overpowered non-creature cards. What you have now is a game that you can play creatureless, but you also can play it with creatures. Which is not really what early MtG was. Not competitively. Overall, this is a net positive. If your game has an entire dimension of play that is rendered worthless, then that is bad game design and needs to be rethought. Wizards did this with MtG, and the game as a whole is better for it. And who cares about readability? Um, I'm guessing WotC does. Because new players do. New players have to read their cards. Which requires readability. A game that can't attract new players is doomed. WotC doesn't want MtG to be doomed, so they made some alterations that make it more attractive to new players. The guy who opened up the river with his staff was pretty evil...in the exodus... Killing all of the first-born is not unlike Wrath of God, yes? White is old-testament God. The game is turning into WoW. I've heard this statement several times, but nobody ever explains what this statement actually means. It's like a generic insult: something is "turning into WoW", and that's terrible. Somehow. First, WoW is the most popular MMO on the planet. So "turning into WoW" is not exactly a bad thing, from WotC's perspective. Second, what aspects of WoW is it turning into? I don't recall MtG suddenly getting raid instances, real-time combat, and so forth. So in what way is it becoming WoW? Third, what exactly do you expect from a CCG? Standard constructed has rotated in and out of blocks for over a decade now. The only way to make more money with a CCG is to get people to buy new cards. If the old cards are still viable, they won't buy new ones. So the old cards have to rotate out, and the new ones need to be interesting and powerful enough to be worth building a new deck for. Vintage and Legacy. Nothing can change them. Nothing can affect them, because after tens of thousands of cards, they have distilled down to a series of one-turn-kill decks. Either you get your OTK or you lose. Nothing can change that. And most of these OTKs were available during the early days of MtG. So how exactly do you expect a CCG to remain viable without constantly churning out new cards and therefore obsoleting old ones? WotC was doing this before Urza's block. WotC was doing this since 4th edition, if not earlier. Some people really need to have their nostalgia filter checked. | ||
|
Sqalevon
Netherlands523 Posts
| ||
|
Effect010
Germany89 Posts
| ||
|
Orpheos
United States1663 Posts
On January 08 2011 03:10 Sqalevon wrote: IMHO, Invasion Block was the last good thing they released. idk odyssey block was pretty sweet too. and i think mirrodin had ALOT of really cool cards. the environment was just abit stifled by affinity. | ||
|
Pigsquirrel
United States615 Posts
Like anything, it can be a cheap, fun hobby, but can also be as expensive as you want to commit to it. EDIT: The game is turning into WoW. I hate to agree, but I do. The M11 changes really did dumb down the game, and I am not a fan. My dad used to run a lot of tournaments, and has every single precon deck ever made. Rolling a random precon and playing is quite fun, and always good to play old cards. That and EDH. | ||
|
Judicator
United States7270 Posts
| ||
|
The Communist
United States33 Posts
| ||
|
FindingPride
United States1001 Posts
On January 07 2011 10:14 misaTO wrote: ![[image loading]](http://magiccards.info/scans/en/pr/56.jpg) In response, counterspell (?) As You mentioned Lin Siivi retarded combo, i must ask if you remember the rising waters thingy. That was soooooooo anoying.. You MUST HAVE SUFFERED TINKER/MANTICORE DECKS!!! I dunno why, but i have always favored a deck with a system over "combo decks" Did anyone play a Fires of yavimaya deck? Flametongue Kavus, Fires, Spiritmongers Cloaks? ta4tdfgsfadfbea THE BANE OF MY GOBLIN DECK ( AVATAR of Woe) | ||
|
TalonKarrde
Canada104 Posts
Hell I love my Zur the enchanter EDH or Captain Sisay EDH they are so much fun to play! | ||
|
dignity
Canada908 Posts
| ||
|
LazyMacro
976 Posts
| ||
|
FishFuzz99
United States152 Posts
Hell I love my Zur the enchanter EDH ... they are so much fun to play! Fun for who? | ||
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 07 2011 21:09 futility wrote: I haven't played since 2004 or 2005 but back then I actually didn't think Magic was expensive to play at all. To play standard the biggest investment for me was getting my first good deck put together when I started playing competitively. I remember using Thieving Magpies in place of Shadowmage Infiltrators for a while and stuff like that. Once I got competitive though it pretty much paid for itself with tournament winnings. I've thought about getting into it again a few times but I saw the new planeswalker bullshit and lost any interest. See, that was back when a large portion of tournament staples were at the lower rarities. Decks like 'Tog were centered almost exclusively around commons and uncommons, and typical UG Madness builds only ran rares in the land base. Since then there's been a gradual upward shift in the average rarity of cards in a Standard constructed deck. On January 08 2011 00:29 GWBushJr wrote: Why'd they up counter spell by one mana? In theory there's a sound reason for it--Counterspell edges out a large portion of the low-CMC countermagic that you can print. It's hard to design 2 CMC countermagic when you always have to worry about "Counterspell is better", particularly if you're making sure that Counterspell never rotates out. They printed Cancel not because Counterspell is necessarily overpowered, but because pushing up the cost of the unconditional hard counter opens up design space for softer counters that are still strong and playable (balanced around Mana Leak). The problem is that they totally threw that logic out the window by printing Lightning Bolt--which exerts similar pressure on red burn spells. On January 08 2011 03:08 NicolBolas wrote: Vintage and Legacy. Nothing can change them. Nothing can affect them, because after tens of thousands of cards, they have distilled down to a series of one-turn-kill decks. Either you get your OTK or you lose. Nothing can change that. Ironically, the block to have THE WORST impact on Legacy and Vintage by far is Urza block, which is being praised in this thread--that's where a large percentage of the dominant combo decks began to arise (Time Vault + Voltaic Key, for example), and where Control in Vintage went from being a viable all-around strategy to something you have to design for each event's metagame, because without specific responses, you simply can't race with the combo decks. And I agree with the rest of your post. On January 08 2011 03:10 Sqalevon wrote: IMHO, Invasion Block was the last good thing they released. Looking at card design as objectively as possible, I would say that Ravnica is the most recent block that is good all-around, and that 3xRoE draft is a contender for the best draft format of all time (though I still wish Rochester draft was still around)--unfortunately 3xZen and Zen/Zen/Wwk were such awful draft formats that I can't really call the block as a whole very good. On January 08 2011 04:08 Judicator wrote: I like how people bring up Affinity as example of breaking the environment, but then ignore Necropotence and Moat. Part of it is that Necropotence and Moat were single cards that affected people who had full playsets and played the relevant formats, while Affinity was a mechanic that exerted undue pressure not only in competitive Constructed, but in Limited and casual play as well. On January 08 2011 05:28 LazyMacro wrote: I had a really nice mono black vampires deck going for a while, but then Nocturnus fucking rotated out. There goes almost $100 worth of four cards and now the rest of my deck is probably useless. I haven't played since just after M11 came out. Why would you keep Nocturnus through till rotation? If you can get then off your hands several weeks before they rotate and preorder the relevant replacements, you can save a lot of money. It's expensive for people who don't have the foresight to realize what they'll need post-rotation, and the barrier of entry is high, but people honestly overstate the cost of replacing cards post-rotation, seeing as a rudimentary knowledge of card value can get you cards way below their eventual price, and get cards like Nocturnus off your hands before their values drop. And Vampires was a very playable deck at the start of Zen/Scars Standard. Not sure about now. | ||
|
terr13
United States298 Posts
On January 08 2011 03:08 NicolBolas wrote: Vintage and Legacy. Nothing can change them. Nothing can affect them, because after tens of thousands of cards, they have distilled down to a series of one-turn-kill decks. Either you get your OTK or you lose. Nothing can change that. And most of these OTKs were available during the early days of MtG. . This is untrue. Legacy is not, and never has been dominated by one-turn kills. Neither has Vintage. Only players that have played neither would even say that. As of right now, I think the most popular decks in Legacy are Survival Decks, which most certainly cannot even kill on Turn 1, and I don't even think it can kill on turn 2, even with a god draw. In Vintage, I think Stax and Tezzeret are still dominant, neither of which can really kill on turn 1, although with godly draws they can lock you out. Almost every single deck would sacrifice that potential turn 1 kill to have a consistent and resilient turn 3 kill. There has never been a deck with over a 70% chance of a one turn kill. Both of these formats are also relatively dynamic still, although not quite as much as other formats. Rather than having huge overhauls of every deck, it's usually a few cards that completely change the metagame. In recent years, Tarmogoyf completely killed Legacy, Vengevine brought Survival to the top, Faeries have become a viable deck, Jace is one of the strongest cards to hit Vintage and almost every creature that is being used was printed in the last 3 years. Aggro and Aggro/Control decks all run the new creatures, whereas many of the new win conditions are also the fatties printed recently, rather than the ones from before. | ||
|
BROverlord
United States80 Posts
On January 07 2011 23:18 Gann1 wrote: I haven't played Magic in a really long time. I had a hell of a lot of fun playing Invasion/Odyssey at my local card shop on friday nights, quit after Invasion phased out. I tried coming back for Onslaught/Mirrodin, but quit after a couple weeks because it wasn't nearly as fun as Invasion/Odyssey was. It seems like it would be really hard to get into now with the new super duper rare cards, or whatever they're called. The reason i preferred Magic over Yu-Gi-Oh was because of the much lower cost of deckbuilding. moar like Money: the wasting amirite? That was pretty much the reason i stopped playing; It felt more about who spent more money on their deck than strategy. Now i hear about these planeswalker cards that pretty much anyone who wants to be competitive has to have. look at this motherfucker: that is just nonsense. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
Alara block had a relatively small number of viable cards for blue-based control decks. No doubt this was intentional--Faeries and Cryptic Command basically had a stranglehold on the metagame through that time, and printing staples for blue-based control during Alara could have killed the metagame. I'm sure WotC was very mindful of printing things that were too useful blue-based control. The problem was that lack of blue control cards extended through M10 and Zendikar (admittedly, I didn't realize how good Spreading Seas was going to become). From the card lists, I expressed worries that if WotC wanted to leverage blue-based control, there wasn't enough room in Zendikar block for them to do it by the end of the block, unless they printed something super-powerful, at least as good as Cryptic Command, and probably better. Lo and behold, Worldwake comes out and we get New Jace. | ||
|
misaTO
Argentina204 Posts
On January 08 2011 03:08 NicolBolas wrote: That's not really how it works. Polar Kraken was shit. It was always shit. Even when it was good, it was terrible. Oh, it looks impressive, with high attack/defense and all. But that doesn't make it any less crappy. The problem with early edition MtG was that it was all about the spells. Creatures were at best supplements and at worst unused. Later editions specifically went out of their way to rectify this. That meant making creature cards that didn't suck on toast. That also meant toning down the overpowered non-creature cards. What you have now is a game that you can play creatureless, but you also can play it with creatures. Which is not really what early MtG was. Not competitively. Overall, this is a net positive. If your game has an entire dimension of play that is rendered worthless, then that is bad game design and needs to be rethought. Wizards did this with MtG, and the game as a whole is better for it. Um, I'm guessing WotC does. Because new players do. New players have to read their cards. Which requires readability. A game that can't attract new players is doomed. WotC doesn't want MtG to be doomed, so they made some alterations that make it more attractive to new players. Killing all of the first-born is not unlike Wrath of God, yes? White is old-testament God. I've heard this statement several times, but nobody ever explains what this statement actually means. It's like a generic insult: something is "turning into WoW", and that's terrible. Somehow. First, WoW is the most popular MMO on the planet. So "turning into WoW" is not exactly a bad thing, from WotC's perspective. Second, what aspects of WoW is it turning into? I don't recall MtG suddenly getting raid instances, real-time combat, and so forth. So in what way is it becoming WoW? Third, what exactly do you expect from a CCG? Standard constructed has rotated in and out of blocks for over a decade now. The only way to make more money with a CCG is to get people to buy new cards. If the old cards are still viable, they won't buy new ones. So the old cards have to rotate out, and the new ones need to be interesting and powerful enough to be worth building a new deck for. Vintage and Legacy. Nothing can change them. Nothing can affect them, because after tens of thousands of cards, they have distilled down to a series of one-turn-kill decks. Either you get your OTK or you lose. Nothing can change that. And most of these OTKs were available during the early days of MtG. So how exactly do you expect a CCG to remain viable without constantly churning out new cards and therefore obsoleting old ones? WotC was doing this before Urza's block. WotC was doing this since 4th edition, if not earlier. Some people really need to have their nostalgia filter checked. Turning sthg into wow means dumbing it down. No wonder why WoW is the most popular mmo. Its dumb. If planeswalkers were released 10 years ago, people would have screamed imba. Jace's are broken. The whole concept is flawed and unoriginal. I don't mind changing my deck every 2 years, but the thing i hate is that instead of promoting interesting, original or synergetic cards, they just promote the ugly imba for selling. Option one : OMG that simple change opens new posibilities. EG : Removing Vampiric Tutor Option two : OMG let's make a card so powerfull people will need at least 4. | ||
|
TheYango
United States47024 Posts
On January 08 2011 06:25 misaTO wrote: Turning sthg into wow means dumbing it down. No wonder why WoW is the most popular mmo. Its dumb. If planeswalkers were released 10 years ago, people would have screamed imba. Jace's are broken. The whole concept is flawed. New Jace is an anomaly--it's super-broken, but honestly its not out of the ordinary for super-broken cards to arise--Survival of the Fittest, Fact or Fiction, Psychatog, Arcbound Ravager, Tarmogoyf, etc. were all cards that had vast implications across many formats very quickly. WotC hasn't gotten any better or worse with regard to these types of cards. They're not "promoting" them--the existence of Jace has nothing to do with their design paradigm; it's just a mistake that slips by development. And again, you can't really complain about New Jace, and praise the card design in Urza block when Memory Jar is the only emergency ban ever to occur in the history of Magic. | ||
|
misaTO
Argentina204 Posts
 .I have no problem with banning, but they are printing stronger cards, instead of just new original ones. I just loved him. | ||
| ||
