I guess I need to open this up with an apology. I really did mean to cover each week of Modern flashbacks, and I think I had a pretty good track record. I missed Alara Reborn and Magic 2010. I'm not sure why. I guess I could site burnout, or a project that was being worked on, but there were twenty between the Conflux recap and the new writers guide going up. The truth is, writing the series took a lot out of me, and as we progressed through the sets of the Modern format, the more unwilling I became to talk about my life, and my tournament exploits.
I was not in the best place during the time Magic 2010 came out. I put on my best face for our friends and family, but the writing was beginning to show up on the wall. To say that either of us were surprised that it ended the way it did would be an understatement, it was telegraphed, and just not confronted until it was far too late. I was spending way too much time without her at the local game store, hiding from working on a thing that was important to me, but was afraid of failing at it. I guess by hiding from it, I figured things would work themselves out, and they didn't. Really though, I knew it was over when we stopped being each other's best friends and sharing everything. The years that drug out afterward was just, I guess a mix of comfort and going through the motions and fear. Things started to become unknown.
I've already said more than I planned on the subject, but I did want to let you all know the recaps are coming back, with a different presentation. Sure there will still be drafts, and picture recaps, and a deck recap and all that great stuff, but instead of stories about my time on the road or event successes, I am going to do my best to fill the intro with an opinion of some sort.
I do want to thank you for following along so far, I did have a good time, relatively speaking about the younger me.
Let's get to the first opinion!
I've noticed on twitter a lot of Magic Online players discussing refunds on the client. More specifically, I am noticing these players talking about getting denied a refund because they won the match. That kinda bothers me, because as I recall, Worth stated that if a bug effected a player, a refund was coming (okay, that was paraphrasing to get to the gist of the statement, sorry). If the policy changed that is fine, but it should probably be a little easier to find and a lot more prominent in messages to online players.
If this is now true, I feel like Wizards of the Coast is kind of skirting responsibility here. I know multiple times I have been hit with the dreaded sideboard bug. You know the one, where you would side in a card, and take one out, but couldn't submit the deck because the submit button was greyed out? That bug appears to be fixed, or rather replaced I guess. I've personally not seen the submit bug in sometime, but I have been hit with the I sideboarded these cards, why are they still in my main deck bug recently.
Today, after a hard fought game one against Bogles that saw me at over 60 life before losing control of the game to an opponent that had a heavily enchanted Slippery Bogle because Path to Exile does nothing about Hexproof, I gritted my teeth and moved on to game two. I sided the Path to Exiles out. I brought in Sundering Growth and Celestial Flare. It seemed like an easy trade out. Remove the four targeted removal spells for two that kill enchantments and two pieces of removal that do not target.
In my opening hand was a Path to Exile. There was also a Celestial Flare. I know when I hit submit that Path to Exile was in the sideboard section of the deck editor. I wanted to keep as many possibly blockers in the deck. I felt there was no need to take out Soul Warden or Ajani's Pridemate for these cards. I ended up winning game two, mainly off the back of the Celestial Flare (there is something amazing about making the opponent sacrifice a creature with four auras on it), and game three I did not get a chance to see if I drew Path, or if it was in the board where it belonged because my frustrated opponent was mana screwed.
Now this is a bug that I reported to WotC, and am assuming that because I won the 2 player queue, it will be like what I have seen on Twitter with no refunds coming my way. That's fine. I guess that is what happens now. I'm not happy about it, and here is why.
When Magic Online breaks, the players are often the victims of this. We've seen MOCS events ruined because Pillar of Flame did not work. We've seen cards in Flashback drafts pulled out of packs because they did not work. The Bug Blog feels more bloated than it normally is. We still play though, because Magic is a great game, and I guess the downsides are worth putting up with this stuff from the client.
WotC does need to be held accountable for the client breaking down, or not working as intended. I believe that winners should get compensated in the same way as losers, and if policy has changed, then Wizards needs to do something in order to remain accountable.
It is of my opinion that if a winner gets hit by a bug, files a claim, and gets denied because they won, Wizards of the Coast should take their entry fee, and place it in a fund. Every quarter, take that money or digital objects and donate it. I'm not entirely sure how it would work, but the company would still be held accountable for their failings, and other people would benefit.
Bad plan? Good plan? Best Plan? Who knows? All I know is that it's time to draft and this week, by time to draft I mean I get to show you what not to do!
And here is a video of the draft if that is what you want. I had my son while I was recording, and we were kinda watching Steven Universe, and well, both enjoy singing, so there is not audio to go along with the picks or the playing, but just know I love allies. Ondu Cleric may not have been the most inspired first pick, but it played in to what I like. I was hoping to pick up some (Umbra Raptor)s because I prefer UW Allies to BW, and I may be remembering that archetype as being better when Worldwake was added.
I really liked my deck despite calling it embarrassing on Twitter. It's Black White, and that is not really a color combination I remember drafting often, if at all. I got what I guess could be called a hookup on Black Allies in pack two, and despite seeing a Turntimber Ranger in pack three I think the black I had already drafted made it impossible to try to manage a GW deck out of my collected pile of cards.
Here is the deck that I ended up playing for two rounds!
My deck was bad. The mana was not the best, it needed BBB for Gatekeeper of Malakir but it also needed W for anything else early in the game. Knowing this, I also went with 17 lands. While I believe it is better to run a higher land count in Zendikar, because of Landfall, it's not like this deck had anything to do with the mechanic. It might have made the mana a little smoother to run a higher land count.
However mana issues did not really make me lose the round I lost. I lost because of a few factors. The deck was bad first of all (though I did pick up the win in game two against largebrandon), but I played against a player that is not only better, but one that came back to MTGO well prepared for the format. Mono Green was not a strategy that was on my radar, but Gigantiform dropped on any creature is a huge threat. So is Timbermaw Larva. It may not block well, but turning it sideways does some real work.
I'm kinda excited to be back, hopefully I can start back on the Modern flashbacks with either bad opinions and bad decks, or good ones. Maybe a mix even! Worldwake is up next, see ya then!
I remember the times you speak of. I didn't know you all that well back then but I knew there was something amiss. And then later I found out why. Sad times are not great for reflecting upon (unless you have masochistic tendencies) but they do give your reads some very good insight into who you are and what makes you tick. Real is better than not real imho.
In RE: The bugs that keep breaking the game. It is a tough line to toe to keep everyone happy and interested. I suspect the PTB have stopped thinking about that aspect all together when making the tough decisions. Not without reason. Hard to please everyone and have everything work all the time. Not apologizing for WOTC. In an ideal world they WOULD be held accountable in a satisfactory way. But unideally there is no one to take that function up because the players won't. And WOTC won't self-police unless it is impacting profits. No company at their stage of the "game".
I love the idea that they could put themselves in the penalty box for failing to fix something that inconveniences players (again and again) but that would require a certain kind of person at the helm that I don't think is currently there. Only a very great leader would even begin to consider such an idea. And then that person would probably quickly either forget it (self-preservation) or lose their job.
"Give away money??? Are you nuts?? We only do that when we get a substantial benefit for doing so!" my idea of that conversation's end.
1 Comments
I remember the times you speak of. I didn't know you all that well back then but I knew there was something amiss. And then later I found out why. Sad times are not great for reflecting upon (unless you have masochistic tendencies) but they do give your reads some very good insight into who you are and what makes you tick. Real is better than not real imho.
In RE: The bugs that keep breaking the game. It is a tough line to toe to keep everyone happy and interested. I suspect the PTB have stopped thinking about that aspect all together when making the tough decisions. Not without reason. Hard to please everyone and have everything work all the time. Not apologizing for WOTC. In an ideal world they WOULD be held accountable in a satisfactory way. But unideally there is no one to take that function up because the players won't. And WOTC won't self-police unless it is impacting profits. No company at their stage of the "game".
I love the idea that they could put themselves in the penalty box for failing to fix something that inconveniences players (again and again) but that would require a certain kind of person at the helm that I don't think is currently there. Only a very great leader would even begin to consider such an idea. And then that person would probably quickly either forget it (self-preservation) or lose their job.
"Give away money??? Are you nuts?? We only do that when we get a substantial benefit for doing so!" my idea of that conversation's end.