I appreciate the comments. My bad on Necro. I do like that we get a foily necro, but I hate the art, so it's kind of a wash. Paper copies are probably going to be silly-expensive, which is really stupid, but whatever.
The "deflation" is probably more of a product of over-valuation of a new set rather than too much product being in the pool. Magic Online is an example of a global market place. Every piece of product ever "printed" is accounted for, no cards get lost or damaged, they stick around and they're easily traded and sold. Expecting Magic Online cards to go for the price of their physical counterparts is faulty logic.
Physical cards are significantly harder to obtain, require shipping and countless hours sorting and keeping stock, with MO it's all done for you. A brick and mortar store or even an online shop require physical space, storage, a staff to sort and package cards, a web designer, and management. An MO store requires a $200 bot and capital. Overhead decreases and so does product price. Trying to artificially increase is directly contrary to a free market. They already charge MSRP for boosters which increases their value immensely.
As long as I can't bring my entire collection of paper Magic cards to a store, wait 30 seconds and have the guy automatically remove all of the cards he's interested in, and quote me a price, MO cards are going to be cheaper because 99% of people's junk cards sit in a closet.
There have always been tap effects around, and they're great with the Assassin. I used to have a nice B/W deck which combined Royal Assassin and Master Decoy. This (and next week's) article is about keeping the Assassin up, rather than building a combo deck around him, but thanks for the input :).
I'm glad to provide here www.theinvestblog.com an interesting
kind of making money. Can you imagine a person
may make up to 3% a daily through by investing without limitations in sums ?
I. e. that even if one has US$1.000,00 one may earn the same amount in a monthly!
Ever thought of combining Royal with Alluring Siren?
Now, people can just not attack untill they can deal with the Royal.
If you have Siren, you can kills guys all the time.
You know, I thought my mini Rant would provoke the most discussion. You all put across very valid arguments, which is one reason why this debate rages on in Magic forums across the net, and will continue to rage until the insects rise up and take over.
I've hoist my flag firmly in the pro-counters camp, and I'd even welcome LD into the casual fold too. It's all beatable, and it's all part of the rich tapestry that is Magic. The only thing I can't abide in the casual room is tier one decks, besides that it's all game.
Finally @ Paul - your last paragraph is a nice segue into next week's article where I test the Assassin with recursion backup. Some fun games there, and probably my favourite build of the five...
That plan would kill mtgo for me. Some months money is so tight food is a worry. Having a sizable collection (8k or so cards) means I can trade out what I don't need and still play constructed if I can't draft in a particular month. Paying a premium would make this impossible for me as well as hundreds (if not thousands) of others I suspect.
More people playing means more people drafting, it would (assuming that people drafted the same amount each) leave prices as they were, at least for the current sets, it would actually boost the prices of old cards a lot, but that point isn't really related to the reason they might want to raise individual card prices.
Personally I'd rather keep the singles prices low, I don't draft very often but I enjoy making different decks and playing constructed.
the 1 in x quotes that people give on how many of a given rare appear are somewhat skewed by the fact that WotC only simulates a print run online. Since no cards are actually cut from actual sheets the randomization algorthim is a bit off what we would expect it to be irl. I actually think they do this to encourage spending and decrease Rare Drafting. But I could be wrong. Think of those 1 in x quotes as a loose guideline instead.
I think it is right to suggest that counterspells can be as casual as say cookies. After all there ARE plenty of bad players who will have no clue how to pilot even a good deck to victory. Such players would be shredded in Tourney Practice so they by force end up in Casual Decks. On the other hand, assuming you don't suck at the game and are at least somewhat familiar with counter magic strategies why bother? This might be my inner Johnny talking but isn't counter magic a tool for winning tourneys and leave them at the door when playing friends?
Well my inner Spike says yes of course but a good friend trains his buddies on how to play against the evil blue deck. Not only are counter decks beatable even against good opponents but someone recently wrote a fairly succinct description of how to go about it. So no, counters are not the friendliest of decks to play against but they are an integral part of the game and until a player understands how to play them and against them they aren't a true player of the game. (Imho of course). That said, and as you pointed out you can make your own tables and put rules up on them (which people may or may not ignore at their individual whims.) and hope for the best.
I prefer the randomness of not knowing what is coming next. I don't like losing to counterspells + bad draws or when I have a totally untuned deck facing a tuned one. But it is a part of the game. No less annoying than Land Destruction imho (which is an even more beatable strategy) but it can be great fun and not necessarily a loss. This is true for Storm, Slivers, Affinity, NuAffinity, discard, theft, bounce, massremoval and most certainly combo. Combo might be the most heinous offender of casual since if it works it tends to be monoplayered. (You sigh as your op takes 10 turns to kill you while you do nothing but click ok.) So all that said casual is what you define it. I have been seeing a lot of discussion about this lately and the most pointed and accurate and perhaps funny of these is the article by The Ferrett. (Google it).
Meanwhile, I love Royal. He is my favorite assassin but sadly I don't own him. I had 4x back in the day (mid 90s) but now I just reminisce about the good old days of icying your shivan at the end of your turn and sending the poor dragon to the graveyard. Bolt bait? who cares? I've got Animate Dead, Dance of the Dead, Necromancy, Coffin Queen, Corpse Dance etc. Oh Swords to Plowshares? Frown. Hence we don't ever play him in Eternal formats. :P
If anyone gives you grief about casual permission (not like, FoW or a Counterbalance lock) then show them these cards.
It's Cradle to Grave or Negate! It's conditionally one of two already conditional spells. That'll get them started on the path of learning how to play around it.
I think they'll restrict Strip Mine, Balance, and Tinker right away. Strip Mine they just _have_ to. Four Land Taxes is probably also stupid, but not as bad as four Tinkers.
I think the counterspell problem is that a deck with counterspells is a good 50% of the time just very very dull to play against, and removal is one step in, your crit still hits the table, so psychologically it's very different. There's also far more ways of defending against straight removal than against counterspells.
What stops counterspells - other counter spells.
What stops removal - gaining toughness, indestructibility, momentary blink effects, damage prevention or redirection, regeneration, protection and counterspells.
Negative play in almost any game is less interesting than positive play, and it does feel a bit dull. I know it's beatable, but I just can't be bothered to rake my feet through sludge when I'm playing a dedicated counter deck. Someone plays turn one force spike, I think they should expect everyone to just go "can't be bothered with this"
The QP totals would support this. During Season 5, Week 3 (week one of M10 pre-release), over 14000 QPs were earned, shattering the former record of ~9700. Now, there were some changes to how QPs were given out this season, but these come far from explaining the huge increase.
Never going to happen. And if it did, mtgo would quickly become boring. Try playing a game on the beta servers (where everyone has x4 of each card), all that happens is everyone tries to make the most broken decks possible, no casual decks. Plus if it was switched to a monthly fee, what would happen to peoples collections? My collection is worth over $500 easily, i wouldnt be to happy if that disapeared.
Im not a collector, nor an investor, but I am a player.
I wish I didn't have to worry about what the cards cost. To me the perfect mtgo online would be a Premium service with a monthly charge for $20 or even $30 where I can use every card online and as many copies as I want.
This way I can play whatever crazy classic off the wall deck I want without having to pay a couple hundred dollars to do so. I could then afford to put together k-scope decks with all the cool lands, decent commander decks, Emperor or 2hg/3hg specific decks and more.
Wotc could still sell tickets for entry fee's but prizes would have to be in tickets only. You could still run regular mtgo for people to draft, constructed, redeem, and win boosters etc.
I haven't put a bunch of thought about how it would effect things or if it would even be beneficial to wotc, just seems like something I would be interested in.
I don't neccessarily agree that a revamped trading system that makes cards in collections more liquid would decrease prices. I think the following is quite plausible: collections more liquid->decrease in bid/ask spread->you don't need high volume to "play the redemption game"->higher demand for redemptions->better equilibrium with paper prices.
"Some months money is so tight food is a worry."
You could always sell your guitar ;)
its on the reserve list so that might be why.
dont worry the next med set will most likely be based on arabian nights, antiquitys and alpha.
I appreciate the comments. My bad on Necro. I do like that we get a foily necro, but I hate the art, so it's kind of a wash. Paper copies are probably going to be silly-expensive, which is really stupid, but whatever.
The "deflation" is probably more of a product of over-valuation of a new set rather than too much product being in the pool. Magic Online is an example of a global market place. Every piece of product ever "printed" is accounted for, no cards get lost or damaged, they stick around and they're easily traded and sold. Expecting Magic Online cards to go for the price of their physical counterparts is faulty logic.
Physical cards are significantly harder to obtain, require shipping and countless hours sorting and keeping stock, with MO it's all done for you. A brick and mortar store or even an online shop require physical space, storage, a staff to sort and package cards, a web designer, and management. An MO store requires a $200 bot and capital. Overhead decreases and so does product price. Trying to artificially increase is directly contrary to a free market. They already charge MSRP for boosters which increases their value immensely.
As long as I can't bring my entire collection of paper Magic cards to a store, wait 30 seconds and have the guy automatically remove all of the cards he's interested in, and quote me a price, MO cards are going to be cheaper because 99% of people's junk cards sit in a closet.
There have always been tap effects around, and they're great with the Assassin. I used to have a nice B/W deck which combined Royal Assassin and Master Decoy. This (and next week's) article is about keeping the Assassin up, rather than building a combo deck around him, but thanks for the input :).
There are Mythics in M10. A M10 BoP is half as rare as a 10th BoP.
Duh.
Hi all,
I'm glad to provide here www.theinvestblog.com an interesting
kind of making money. Can you imagine a person
may make up to 3% a daily through by investing without limitations in sums ?
I. e. that even if one has US$1.000,00 one may earn the same amount in a monthly!
If someone is interested welcome to visit my web site www.theinvestblog.com.
Ever thought of combining Royal with Alluring Siren?
Now, people can just not attack untill they can deal with the Royal.
If you have Siren, you can kills guys all the time.
Agreed. There is no problem with low card prices except for people who want to profit from them (in other words, people who have lot of cards already)
Thanks for all the comments guys.
You know, I thought my mini Rant would provoke the most discussion. You all put across very valid arguments, which is one reason why this debate rages on in Magic forums across the net, and will continue to rage until the insects rise up and take over.
I've hoist my flag firmly in the pro-counters camp, and I'd even welcome LD into the casual fold too. It's all beatable, and it's all part of the rich tapestry that is Magic. The only thing I can't abide in the casual room is tier one decks, besides that it's all game.
Finally @ Paul - your last paragraph is a nice segue into next week's article where I test the Assassin with recursion backup. Some fun games there, and probably my favourite build of the five...
That plan would kill mtgo for me. Some months money is so tight food is a worry. Having a sizable collection (8k or so cards) means I can trade out what I don't need and still play constructed if I can't draft in a particular month. Paying a premium would make this impossible for me as well as hundreds (if not thousands) of others I suspect.
Well said!
More people playing means more people drafting, it would (assuming that people drafted the same amount each) leave prices as they were, at least for the current sets, it would actually boost the prices of old cards a lot, but that point isn't really related to the reason they might want to raise individual card prices.
Personally I'd rather keep the singles prices low, I don't draft very often but I enjoy making different decks and playing constructed.
He was being optimistic.
the 1 in x quotes that people give on how many of a given rare appear are somewhat skewed by the fact that WotC only simulates a print run online. Since no cards are actually cut from actual sheets the randomization algorthim is a bit off what we would expect it to be irl. I actually think they do this to encourage spending and decrease Rare Drafting. But I could be wrong. Think of those 1 in x quotes as a loose guideline instead.
I was disappointed to not see Drop of Honey in the spoiler. I know it's a silly card but I really wanted to see it there. :(
I think it is right to suggest that counterspells can be as casual as say cookies. After all there ARE plenty of bad players who will have no clue how to pilot even a good deck to victory. Such players would be shredded in Tourney Practice so they by force end up in Casual Decks. On the other hand, assuming you don't suck at the game and are at least somewhat familiar with counter magic strategies why bother? This might be my inner Johnny talking but isn't counter magic a tool for winning tourneys and leave them at the door when playing friends?
Well my inner Spike says yes of course but a good friend trains his buddies on how to play against the evil blue deck. Not only are counter decks beatable even against good opponents but someone recently wrote a fairly succinct description of how to go about it. So no, counters are not the friendliest of decks to play against but they are an integral part of the game and until a player understands how to play them and against them they aren't a true player of the game. (Imho of course). That said, and as you pointed out you can make your own tables and put rules up on them (which people may or may not ignore at their individual whims.) and hope for the best.
I prefer the randomness of not knowing what is coming next. I don't like losing to counterspells + bad draws or when I have a totally untuned deck facing a tuned one. But it is a part of the game. No less annoying than Land Destruction imho (which is an even more beatable strategy) but it can be great fun and not necessarily a loss. This is true for Storm, Slivers, Affinity, NuAffinity, discard, theft, bounce, massremoval and most certainly combo. Combo might be the most heinous offender of casual since if it works it tends to be monoplayered. (You sigh as your op takes 10 turns to kill you while you do nothing but click ok.) So all that said casual is what you define it. I have been seeing a lot of discussion about this lately and the most pointed and accurate and perhaps funny of these is the article by The Ferrett. (Google it).
Meanwhile, I love Royal. He is my favorite assassin but sadly I don't own him. I had 4x back in the day (mid 90s) but now I just reminisce about the good old days of icying your shivan at the end of your turn and sending the poor dragon to the graveyard. Bolt bait? who cares? I've got Animate Dead, Dance of the Dead, Necromancy, Coffin Queen, Corpse Dance etc. Oh Swords to Plowshares? Frown. Hence we don't ever play him in Eternal formats. :P
If anyone gives you grief about casual permission (not like, FoW or a Counterbalance lock) then show them these cards.
It's Cradle to Grave or Negate! It's conditionally one of two already conditional spells. That'll get them started on the path of learning how to play around it.
I think they'll restrict Strip Mine, Balance, and Tinker right away. Strip Mine they just _have_ to. Four Land Taxes is probably also stupid, but not as bad as four Tinkers.
<- Also dislikes Necro. Oh well.
I think the counterspell problem is that a deck with counterspells is a good 50% of the time just very very dull to play against, and removal is one step in, your crit still hits the table, so psychologically it's very different. There's also far more ways of defending against straight removal than against counterspells.
What stops counterspells - other counter spells.
What stops removal - gaining toughness, indestructibility, momentary blink effects, damage prevention or redirection, regeneration, protection and counterspells.
Negative play in almost any game is less interesting than positive play, and it does feel a bit dull. I know it's beatable, but I just can't be bothered to rake my feet through sludge when I'm playing a dedicated counter deck. Someone plays turn one force spike, I think they should expect everyone to just go "can't be bothered with this"
Royal Assassin - Hey, he doesn't die to Terror or Doomblade!
I just thought of a good Counterspell for you.
The QP totals would support this. During Season 5, Week 3 (week one of M10 pre-release), over 14000 QPs were earned, shattering the former record of ~9700. Now, there were some changes to how QPs were given out this season, but these come far from explaining the huge increase.
Never going to happen. And if it did, mtgo would quickly become boring. Try playing a game on the beta servers (where everyone has x4 of each card), all that happens is everyone tries to make the most broken decks possible, no casual decks. Plus if it was switched to a monthly fee, what would happen to peoples collections? My collection is worth over $500 easily, i wouldnt be to happy if that disapeared.
Im not a collector, nor an investor, but I am a player.
I wish I didn't have to worry about what the cards cost. To me the perfect mtgo online would be a Premium service with a monthly charge for $20 or even $30 where I can use every card online and as many copies as I want.
This way I can play whatever crazy classic off the wall deck I want without having to pay a couple hundred dollars to do so. I could then afford to put together k-scope decks with all the cool lands, decent commander decks, Emperor or 2hg/3hg specific decks and more.
Wotc could still sell tickets for entry fee's but prizes would have to be in tickets only. You could still run regular mtgo for people to draft, constructed, redeem, and win boosters etc.
I haven't put a bunch of thought about how it would effect things or if it would even be beneficial to wotc, just seems like something I would be interested in.
RagMan
I don't neccessarily agree that a revamped trading system that makes cards in collections more liquid would decrease prices. I think the following is quite plausible: collections more liquid->decrease in bid/ask spread->you don't need high volume to "play the redemption game"->higher demand for redemptions->better equilibrium with paper prices.
Just a thought.