Have you noticed what they did to them? Yellow is not an attractive color on cards as an overlay. (Imho of course.) It's like the family dog had a go at them.
And additionally when people sold out in panic sales, foils suddenly became very accessible and undesirable.
Off topic, but I don't know where else to ask this. I've been selling out of my collection and I've noticed foils are not worth anything anymore. Many foils go for less than the regular version. Why?
I just hope that these continuous sealed dailies do not give Wizards reason to not introduce the actual sealed leagues. And before some jumps on me--leagues were about far more than playing when you want. Spending 30 on one of these is not nearly the same value as spending 30 on the add a pack version. Further, the formats are different, and considering the trimming of formats, I welcome the return of something old and slightly different.
I always mention this when people talk about the early evaluations of Necropotence. It wasn't a good card until Black Vise was restricted (then eventually banned). The initial evaluations of Necropotence came at a time when every deck had 4 copies of Black Vise. In that type of environment, there was no reason to consider it a good card.
Kuma, I was looking at your Treefolk deck last weekend, liked it, but was trying to figure out the mana. 4 Taiga for the Xenagos but the fetch spell Cultivate couldn't get access to red (I think). Am I missing something? Would something like Farseek (for Taiga) or a single Mountain have been better?
Emil, Thanks for the reply. There is no definitive information that they are building a new client, in fact as I mentioned they failed to communicate any real strategy. Because they have not been transparent on a strategy all we can do is make assumptions, so my assumption is a new client is in the works.
In terms of the current client and its suitability to meet demands compared to a new client is a matter of opinion. You may feel it is suitable but others will not. What is important to me is what is their goals and do the indicators show the client is meeting those goals. For instance, if a goal is to have increased usage of MTGO then I would say the platform is paramount to that goal. If MTGO usage has not been increasing at the same or at a greater ratio than their highly successful card business then I would say the platform is one contributing factor that needs to be explored. How their platform compares to the competition also has to be looked at. If WOTC thinks that a game like Hearthstone is a competitor then they have to see how MTGO compares in the eyes of the majority.
it still bothers me that the flashback drafts are single elim. I didn't play for a lot of the old sets and would love to get a feel, but i'm not dropping 10 bucks to lose out in the first round with a pile of mostly useless cards. I'd prefer phantom to be honest.
So you AREN'T a proponent of the "play what you want, concede when you want" philosophy? What's the alternative? Seems like casual gets a LOT less casual if you take that away...
Just to be clear my objection is that PWYWCWY is not the problem. The problems are: Poor communication and a lack of online culture. PWYWCWY at least gives players a way to avoid annoyingly broken games or games where you are having no fun at all.
Sure it also gives the immature an excuse to bully (though that is not actually acceptable) or rage quit (again not acceptable) but mostly it is for those who do not want to deal with yet another iteration of deck XYZ.
Poor communication software means the opponent has no idea why you are conceding most of the time. It is just an abrupt game over. Still a win though.
Lack of online culture has been deliberately and with forethought cultivated and nurtured to its present state by the neglect to the chatting interface, clans, and any kind of community outreach. For an example of how things have degraded think back 5 years.
Ichor is making a on/off type state check and the lens is checking for each occurance. Though interestingly since it specifies being blocked by a creature another form of becoming blocked could trigger the pump but not the draw.
why isn't "becomes blocked by a creature" binary in exactly the same way that "becomes blocked" is? After the first creature blocks the Myr, it becomes "blocked by a creature"--if you asked someone the state-based question "is that creature blocked by a creature?" the answer would have to be "yes." So now it can't "become" what it already is, for just the same reason the Myr doesn't trigger again.
at least, I don't see how to get to your argument from the wording of the cards. could you explain more?
I would understand your argument better if the Lens read "whenever a creature blocks equipped creature," which should trigger for every creature that blocks it, but it uses that word "becomes" which sounds to me like the linchpin of your argument about the wording being binary.
I guess it's because they're a goofy, obscure tribe but with an obvious direction to build the deck that seems like it might be decently powerful. I don't actually think my deck is any good though, the reason I played it was because I was feeling very ill and I just wanted something incredibly simple to play that had a decent chance to win the Underdog prize; I wasn't really expecting to win any matches with it.
I think GSZ is much better for this deck, because with it, you can get both early ramp (dryad arbor on turn 1, and consistently singleton overgrown battlement on turn 3 (or, another idea, Rofellos, if you only play forests) and early fodder for natural order, as well as almost all of the big creatures later in the game. Chord of Calling is a late game card, and the instant speed is not really relevant in this deck, especially because people don't play Counterspells. So the early game flexibility >>>>> ability to fetch Massacre Wurm later on.
Probably the right call, I was thinking of it myself – GSZ was miha's planned change before I stole borrowed the deck's idea from him :)
The idea was to have GSZ work as a turn-1 Elf via Dryad Arbor, or even fetching a Singleton Overgrown Battlement later.
I'd probably sub Chord of Calling for the Sylvan Offerings as the instant speed and alt cost add some flexibility to the deck. GSZ is not better in any way here.
I've been waiting for this information, thanks.
digital masakan, resep masakan kreatif, cara memasak enak
Thank you for a great willing to share information like that, because I also happen'm looking for her.
resep masakan tersedap, cara masak bunda, informasi resep koki
information which is very cool and amazing, a lot of readers who love to read on your site because the information is pretty good.
cara membuat masakan, resep kuliner indonesia, berita masakan terkini
That was the missing link - thanks, AJ.
Have you noticed what they did to them? Yellow is not an attractive color on cards as an overlay. (Imho of course.) It's like the family dog had a go at them.
And additionally when people sold out in panic sales, foils suddenly became very accessible and undesirable.
Off topic, but I don't know where else to ask this. I've been selling out of my collection and I've noticed foils are not worth anything anymore. Many foils go for less than the regular version. Why?
Ice Age (no s)
Was it Duelist that dissed Necropotence? I thought only Inquest did.
Regrettably I will most likely be absent tomorrow. Meeting up with some old friends.
Possibly, but at the very least the Harbingers can fetch them.
I just hope that these continuous sealed dailies do not give Wizards reason to not introduce the actual sealed leagues. And before some jumps on me--leagues were about far more than playing when you want. Spending 30 on one of these is not nearly the same value as spending 30 on the add a pack version. Further, the formats are different, and considering the trimming of formats, I welcome the return of something old and slightly different.
I always mention this when people talk about the early evaluations of Necropotence. It wasn't a good card until Black Vise was restricted (then eventually banned). The initial evaluations of Necropotence came at a time when every deck had 4 copies of Black Vise. In that type of environment, there was no reason to consider it a good card.
Kuma, I was looking at your Treefolk deck last weekend, liked it, but was trying to figure out the mana. 4 Taiga for the Xenagos but the fetch spell Cultivate couldn't get access to red (I think). Am I missing something? Would something like Farseek (for Taiga) or a single Mountain have been better?
Maybe players really need their Ports for Legacy Leagues?
Players mistakenly believe its on the Reserve List?
Emil, Thanks for the reply. There is no definitive information that they are building a new client, in fact as I mentioned they failed to communicate any real strategy. Because they have not been transparent on a strategy all we can do is make assumptions, so my assumption is a new client is in the works.
In terms of the current client and its suitability to meet demands compared to a new client is a matter of opinion. You may feel it is suitable but others will not. What is important to me is what is their goals and do the indicators show the client is meeting those goals. For instance, if a goal is to have increased usage of MTGO then I would say the platform is paramount to that goal. If MTGO usage has not been increasing at the same or at a greater ratio than their highly successful card business then I would say the platform is one contributing factor that needs to be explored. How their platform compares to the competition also has to be looked at. If WOTC thinks that a game like Hearthstone is a competitor then they have to see how MTGO compares in the eyes of the majority.
it still bothers me that the flashback drafts are single elim. I didn't play for a lot of the old sets and would love to get a feel, but i'm not dropping 10 bucks to lose out in the first round with a pile of mostly useless cards. I'd prefer phantom to be honest.
So you AREN'T a proponent of the "play what you want, concede when you want" philosophy? What's the alternative? Seems like casual gets a LOT less casual if you take that away...
Just to be clear my objection is that PWYWCWY is not the problem. The problems are: Poor communication and a lack of online culture. PWYWCWY at least gives players a way to avoid annoyingly broken games or games where you are having no fun at all.
Sure it also gives the immature an excuse to bully (though that is not actually acceptable) or rage quit (again not acceptable) but mostly it is for those who do not want to deal with yet another iteration of deck XYZ.
Poor communication software means the opponent has no idea why you are conceding most of the time. It is just an abrupt game over. Still a win though.
Lack of online culture has been deliberately and with forethought cultivated and nurtured to its present state by the neglect to the chatting interface, clans, and any kind of community outreach. For an example of how things have degraded think back 5 years.
Ichor is making a on/off type state check and the lens is checking for each occurance. Though interestingly since it specifies being blocked by a creature another form of becoming blocked could trigger the pump but not the draw.
why isn't "becomes blocked by a creature" binary in exactly the same way that "becomes blocked" is? After the first creature blocks the Myr, it becomes "blocked by a creature"--if you asked someone the state-based question "is that creature blocked by a creature?" the answer would have to be "yes." So now it can't "become" what it already is, for just the same reason the Myr doesn't trigger again.
at least, I don't see how to get to your argument from the wording of the cards. could you explain more?
I would understand your argument better if the Lens read "whenever a creature blocks equipped creature," which should trigger for every creature that blocks it, but it uses that word "becomes" which sounds to me like the linchpin of your argument about the wording being binary.
Two creatures = two triggers = FOUR cards. You get two cards per trigger, right? It makes your answer pretty confusing.
I guess it's because they're a goofy, obscure tribe but with an obvious direction to build the deck that seems like it might be decently powerful. I don't actually think my deck is any good though, the reason I played it was because I was feeling very ill and I just wanted something incredibly simple to play that had a decent chance to win the Underdog prize; I wasn't really expecting to win any matches with it.
I think GSZ is much better for this deck, because with it, you can get both early ramp (dryad arbor on turn 1, and consistently singleton overgrown battlement on turn 3 (or, another idea, Rofellos, if you only play forests) and early fodder for natural order, as well as almost all of the big creatures later in the game. Chord of Calling is a late game card, and the instant speed is not really relevant in this deck, especially because people don't play Counterspells. So the early game flexibility >>>>> ability to fetch Massacre Wurm later on.
I found that out shortly after I wrote this :) That could be a better time to get into Legacy
Probably the right call, I was thinking of it myself – GSZ was miha's planned change before I
stoleborrowed the deck's idea from him :)The idea was to have GSZ work as a turn-1 Elf via Dryad Arbor, or even fetching a Singleton Overgrown Battlement later.
I'd probably sub Chord of Calling for the Sylvan Offerings as the instant speed and alt cost add some flexibility to the deck. GSZ is not better in any way here.