New block structure and set rotation changes

[Barook]

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles.../metamorphosis

Sure, we're playing an Eternal format, but in the end, these changes are going to affect us as well.

1) No more Core sets after 2015 (good change, because those were ass).

2) Instead of one 3-set block each year, we get two 2-set blocks each year with the 4th set occupying the previous Core set slot.

3) Blocks remain only 18 months Standard-legal instead of 24 months to keep Standard "less stale" (and forcing people to buy more packs ). Doesn't really affect us aside from buying/selling future staples to keep that in mind.

[iamajellydonut]

1) Fuck the core.

2) I'm wondering how this works in terms of room for set development. Both in terms of mechanics and flavor (RIP Flavor).

3) So, that'll leave six sets in at any given time? More big sets should make a decent card pool.


Edit: Actually, I really don't like #2.
Edit: I'm back to not knowing how I feel about #2.
Edit: Eight sets. Woah
Edit: NOPE.

[Tylert]

1) and the draft environement of the last core set is horrible from my point of view (The UR tempo archetype doesn't work).

2) In terms of flavor, the small block with two sets is like the old three sets blocks.

3) less stale standard but smaller pool. SCG standard opens should be more interresting to watch i guess. poor standard players which will spend so much more money :(

[Ellomdian]

poor standard players which will spend so much more money :(

I have to wonder how a shortened lifespan of format-defining cards (and a shortened lifespan of the format they define) will affect things like peak-value - theoretically, it should suppress the peak value of cards across the board, since they aren't as good for as long.

Also, fascinating that this only actually affects Standard - outside of changes to the way they do design, Modern/Legacy/Vintage just yawned a lot.

[sjmcc13]

1) No more Core sets after 2015 (good change, because those were ass).

Core sets worked when they were basically re-prints of the cards new players needed, and staples that should always be available. After the M10 changes they kind of lost their purpose, as that relied on people wanting cards for constructed rather then just limited play. As making heavily played cards in small drafted sets when drafting is the primary source of opened packs because there is not enough value per booster to justify opening on a large scale to most players just leads to cards that cost to buy for Std.

This is a loss, but the loss occurred in stages.

2) Instead of one 3-set block each year, we get two 2-set blocks each year with the 4th set occupying the previous Core set slot.

If they do it right this will be fine, but it will require more reprints in larghe sets which is potentially worrysome.

3) Blocks remain only 18 months Standard-legal instead of 24 months to keep Standard "less stale" (and forcing people to buy more packs ).

This could easily lead to problems, one of Std's biggest problems for new players is the yearly rotation, they are not always aware of it, and an can get into problems when they buy cards right before rotation, or do not remove old cards from their deck, because they were not aware of it. Making it twice a year will increase these problems.

[Tylert]

I have to wonder how a shortened lifespan of format-defining cards (and a shortened lifespan of the format they define) will affect things like peak-value - theoretically, it should suppress the peak value of cards across the board, since they aren't as good for as long.

For each set there will be 6 months less of opening (If we refer to the normal structure of limted events with 1 big set 2 small sets in a block), so cards should be less available and therefore cost more :)

[cab0747]

Article is blocked at work.

Is there any speculation on why they did this? Were standard players complaining the format was stale?

[TsumiBand]

Yeah, the Core Set is/was always awkward. I thought it served a clear purpose though, namely to get people coming back to Standard. You're a control player; you got your Wraths, your painlands, etc... the Core Set used to keep such things from rotating out, so that you could come back and check out what Standard was doing lately. You still have to buy your planeswalkers and whatever else, but you're good in regard to the dumb stuff; if nothing else, you have a manabase.

It hasn't served that purpose for quite some time, so I say that's probably fine.

I always thought putting 50% new stuff into the Core Set was a stupid idea as well. Yes it was a dumb set of reprints but again, it kept stuff like BoP/Duress/lands/etc in Standard. It necessarily meant that one had to suffer the occasional Vizzerdrix, but who cares? At any rate, the kludgy nature of the Core Set was shown this last couple of years with the random inclusion of Slivers and trying to expand it across two Core Sets. Weird and weirder, especially concerning how trotting out Slivers is a big play for anyone who has a fondness of the old bastards (though executing them so strangely has been a mixed bag of its own weirdness. Weirdception)

I mean as long as it wasn't even serving the purpose it used to serve, so much the better; keep the new cards for new sets, and quit trying to get people to dream up themeless Core Sets that also appeal to the masses with stuff like Slivers and blah blah blah. It also probably makes life easier for the Modern Masters sets of the future; I mean really, what was MMA but a Core Set++? Fine reprints, some format staples, an interesting Limited environment -- everything that a Core Set wanted to be but never fully achieved.

Yeah, on the whole this is probably a good thing.

[cdr]

Article is blocked at work.

Is there any speculation on why they did this? Were standard players complaining the format was stale?

Why does Wizards do anything? They did this to sell more cards to sucker Standard players.

And well, this explains why no more block PTs.

[iamajellydonut]

Yeah, the Core Set is/was always awkward. I thought it served a clear purpose though, namely to get people coming back to Standard. You're a control player; you got your Wraths, your painlands, etc... the Core Set used to keep such things from rotating out, so that you could come back and check out what Standard was doing lately. You still have to buy your planeswalkers and whatever else, but you're good in regard to the dumb stuff; if nothing else, you have a manabase.

Agreed. I actually loved the core set when it was dedicated to staples. Unfortunately, profits come first.

[Barook]

Article is blocked at work.

Is there any speculation on why they did this? Were standard players complaining the format was stale?

Standard is especially stale right now (after Theros block, who would have guessed? ), but it's a general problem.

One thing Maro mentions is the third set problem. It sells the lowest normally. They tried to migate that with JOU by putting all the interesting cards into it, ruining BNG in the process. Considering Dragon's Maze was a major failure, too, it makes sense to cut the third set. From a financial point of view, it's major win for Wizards:

- force people into drafting more and getting new cards more often due to more sets and rotations
- cut the least profitable set of the year

There's also Maro mentioning that with more blocks, they could revisit old planes more often, but how that plays out has to be seen.

[Richard Cheese]

I didnt' see it in the article, but assuming they're going to continue trying to introduce new mechanics in every block, this is going to lead to a bunch more orphaned and copycat mechanics.

They used to have a pretty well-defined policy of two new keyword mechanics per block, but I'm not sure if there's any rhyme or reason anymore. Khans has a new mechanic per shard, from Lorwyn to Eventide there was what...like 13 mechanics?

Hopefully they'll try to revisit more of the older mechanics that didn't get explored very well instead of "We put Chroma on 9 mediocre cards and none of them were super popular so clearly it failed as a mechanic. Devotion is way better because it's called devotion."

[cab0747]

Great! A 2 set block!

Fetches 100% confirmed in fall 2015!

</sarcasm>

[Barook]

Great! A 2 set block!

Fetches 100% confirmed in fall 2015!

</sarcasm>

I could see it helping them reacting to demand a bit faster, though, since they don't have to wait for a new block in fall and go with the second big block instead.

[Humphrey]

I thought the purpose for coresets were a lower powerlevel to attract new players. When every block becomes like the coresets its gonna suck for us competitve player. And it seems WotC goes that direction to attract the ("stupid") masses.

Well, I can see them doing a MastersEdition Set every year now.

[Ellomdian]

For each set there will be 6 months less of opening (If we refer to the normal structure of limted events with 1 big set 2 small sets in a block), so cards should be less available and therefore cost more :)

After the successive 3rd set retail mess that was DGM and JOU, I expect that the increased interest in May-September will offset that. Ask your local store how much RTR and THE they were selling a month after the blocks completed, or how much of last year's Core set they still have on hand.

[Ace/Homebrew]

It also probably makes life easier for the Modern Masters sets of the future; I mean really, what was MMA but a Core Set++? Fine reprints, some format staples, an interesting Limited environment -- everything that a Core Set wanted to be but never fully achieved.

This makes a lot of sense. Having a MMA set every other year is basically what the old core sets were anyways.

I suspect they are going to try to bring back Extended... again...

And the return of Horsemanship for the new Portal products designed for beginners!!

[Rizso]

After the successive 3rd set retail mess that was DGM and JOU, I expect that the increased interest in May-September will offset that. Ask your local store how much RTR and THE they were selling a month after the blocks completed, or how much of last year's Core set they still have on hand.

DGM and JOU had almost 0 playable cards also reduces the sales :P

[Koby]

DGM and JOU had almost 0 playable cards also reduces the sales :P

You take that back. Sire of Insanity is hell-on-wheels, also Eidolon of the Great Revelry has caused me many match losses since May. *grumble grumble*

[iamajellydonut]

You take that back. Sire of Insanity is hell-on-wheels

AAAAWW YISS. Roll that out!

Seriously though. I have like thirty of these things floating around from random trades and redrafts. I don't regret picking them up. Too sexy. And I still say it would have been a major player had devotion not taken over.