Page 7 of 12 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 121 to 140 of 238

Thread: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks?

  1. #121

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Oh my god I posted that without knowing you people filled up another page with this stupid slap fight.

    E: And it was a page because I just page sniped myself onto a new one. Now I have to make some content uh...
    Reserved List sucks and if you think they can't drop it you're wrong. Source: The times they dropped cards off it
    Yes Magic cards are a luxury good, a status symbol, like LV purses or Ugly ass OFF-White Dunks. Source: Hundred + dollar APAC lands.

  2. #122

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    Yes, the more I think about it, the more the OUAT clause makes sense. It's could have a substantial drawback to normal duals, but just have the drawback only apply if it's the first land you played that game. Even the same exact drawback as the shocklands (lose 10% of your life) wouldn't be a big deal if you could avoid the drawback by playing a fetchland as your first land of the game and then use it to fetch this new weaker dual land out.
    Sure one could argue that there isn't even a drawback really and balancing wise these might be horrible if held next to other duals wizards made, but the goal for me was to get as closely to the real deal while elegantly shipping around reserve and still keeping it recognisable as a real Magiccard regarding rules and flavour. Flip 10 coins duals and alike belong into Un... sets from my point of view.

    That's the best I could come up with

    Quote Originally Posted by FourDogsinaHorseSuit View Post
    Oh my god I posted that without knowing you people filled up another page with this stupid slap fight..
    If it wasn't for the mods, we could easily fill up 20 more pages of that jibberish

  3. #123

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    So does anyone have any other ideas for duals with very slight drawbacks that will neither violate the reserve list nor cost people games... Basically duals like these?
    Drawbacks are way too minor for them to be printed, unfortunately. (Plus where would they be printed?)

  4. #124
    (' ' '\( 0 ,o)/''')
    TheInfamousBearAssassin's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2004
    Location

    Northern Virginia
    Posts

    6,627

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    Yes it seems pretty clear to me that he is concern trolling at this point. Why else keep reasking the same questions that people already answered multiple times, including in the OP where it's suggested these lands be introduced in Commander Legends 2 or a similar legacy and commander only set.
    Yeah I never asked that question a first time and I’ve spent honestly way too much time explaining in painful detail why Wizards has no incentive to do the thing you’re imagining. It’s obvious to me that you just don’t want to hear it, you want to hear people gushing about bad amateur card design.

    And why without any legal education, make claims that Wizards would face zero legal risks or consequences if they straight up abandoned the reserve list promise they made earlier and strengthened again just a decade ago, despite not being a legal expert qualified to make such a claim.
    I mean ignoring that I spent almost a decade doing paralegal work, the burden is on you to show what plausible legal repercussions Wizards would face. Who would sue them and on what grounds, in what court? What precedent can you point to for a successful lawsuit on the grounds that a game company or producer of collectibles said they wouldn’t do a thing and then changed their mind? Can you point to anyone that successfully sued Wizards over Ragavan after they said they’d never print Lazy Goblin? Who won or settled against DC for bringing Superman back from the dead? Over The Rolling Stones not actually retiring after farewell tour #n?

    It’s honestly embarrassing to watch you confidently declare that a multi billion dollar international corporation is obligated to never do something because some dude pinky promised, especially when said corporation literally has a well established track record of changing its mind about what it will and won’t do.
    For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
    And found I was for endurance made

  5. #125
    (' ' '\( 0 ,o)/''')
    TheInfamousBearAssassin's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2004
    Location

    Northern Virginia
    Posts

    6,627

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Like just rename the thread “Design duals that skirt but don’t break the reserve list” if that’s the only thing you’re interested in. Because instead you asked a question you seem to really not want the answer to.
    For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
    And found I was for endurance made

  6. #126
    Administrator
    Zilla's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2003
    Location

    Portland, OR
    Posts

    5,532

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    I know you're new here, but please stop double posting. Thanks.

  7. #127

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post
    I mean again that's from Wizards' fiduciary perspective, I would like them to make the game overall way more accessible, including Legacy, but I don't think that's really profitable for them.
    Its pretty simple: they want formats that involve you buying cards as often as possible to be the most accessible. Draft is on one end of the spectrum and Legacy/Vintage is on the opposite end. There's no money in it for them if I'm playing the same deck (and maybe changing a handful of cards per year) for the next decade. There's a lot of money if I literally have to open multiple packs every time I want to play a new round.

  8. #128

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    I look at how many commander legends and modern horizons and even strixhaven cards show up in legacy decks, and how much the legacy metagame evolves around these cards each year and I am left dumbfounded how anyone can believe the ridiculous notion that legacy players don't buy new cards.

    Most people play commander casually, and stick to their favorite decks wirh minimal changes for years. Legacy however is a more competitive format and the format and it's players incorporate powerful new cards into their decks much faster.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wrath of Pie View Post
    Drawbacks are way too minor for them to be printed, unfortunately. (Plus where would they be printed?)

    Just take a look at how well the Uro secret lair despite only seeing play in legacy, or how it's maintained its price. The wasteland secret lair will sell a boatload as well.
    They literally printed a commander only slightly weaker black lotus in Commander Legends 1. There is no reason they can't print commander/legacy/vintage only slightly weaker dual lands in Commander Legends 2, particularly when doing so would both sell a ton of product and help save a dying prestige format that so many people love. A very fun and diverse format at that that is unlike any other format out there

    The original duals by being slightly better and being so old, will remain just as valuable. But these new duals will make the format far more accessible than the current best alternative that has people lose 2-8 life each game for the sake of a consistent manabase.

    And those with original duals would have a healthy sanctioned legacy paper format they can use them in.

    This is the definition of a win win move. Sell product, keep a format alive, keep magic's oldest and most loyal playerbase happy.

    Given that, the better question is, why wouldn't Wizards do it?

    But the more interesting question is the one that many here are discussing, how best to design a land that is close enough to duals that the drawback will not cause people to lose games the way shocklands do, without being considered a reserve list violation the way that snowduals would be according to Maro.

  9. #129
    Member

    Join Date

    Feb 2014
    Posts

    1,199

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    Given that, the better question is, why wouldn't Wizards do it?
    To not double down on a clear design mistake?
    From a gameplay perspective, ABUR duals are bad/boring. Modern databases are much more interesting both to play and to build, when you have to balance your greed over colors versus life (fetch/shocklands), need for basics (both in play and in the library), and EtB tap effects (mostly fastlands, but also manlands). The only lands that are used that are worse than duals from my (yes, it is subjective) gameplay perspective are fetchlands, with these endless search and shuffle. And they regularly reprint those, so my argument might be completely invalid.

    On access to legacy issues, the biggest trouble I see is to keep repeating that duals or other expensive cards are essential. To my opinion, this is a fallacy, and quality of builds/play matters much more than duals. Some decks cannot be played without, but legacy is diverse enough that there are plenty of budget decks that can win tournaments if well build/played, from humans and D&T to death shadow and co. A funny point is that actually modern attracts much more player with suboptimal/cheap builds. I do think that it is mostly because it is not as badly perceived to do so, not because it is intrinsically a lower power gap between Tiers 1 decks and budget ones.

  10. #130
    (' ' '\( 0 ,o)/''')
    TheInfamousBearAssassin's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2004
    Location

    Northern Virginia
    Posts

    6,627

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Purple Blood View Post
    Its pretty simple: they want formats that involve you buying cards as often as possible to be the most accessible. Draft is on one end of the spectrum and Legacy/Vintage is on the opposite end. There's no money in it for them if I'm playing the same deck (and maybe changing a handful of cards per year) for the next decade. There's a lot of money if I literally have to open multiple packs every time I want to play a new round.
    See this guy knows what's up

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    I look at how many commander legends and modern horizons and even strixhaven cards show up in legacy decks, and how much the legacy metagame evolves around these cards each year and I am left dumbfounded how anyone can believe the ridiculous notion that legacy players don't buy new cards.
    You seem to be incapable of not strawmanning people, or at least incapable of understanding how numbers work. Legacy players don't buy new cards in the same numbers as limited and Standard players, this is just factual. The Eternal players who do buy lots of new product are EDH players, which is why Wizards prints shit for EDH.

    And like if I am trying to borrow cards from people for a Legacy deck it is routinely the new cards I have trouble finding, even when it's a new card that's actually seeing Legacy play.

    They literally printed a commander only slightly weaker black lotus in Commander Legends 1.
    Okay

    1) No they didn't.

    2) cEDH isn't a real thing so they don't really care what dumb stuff they print for commander because it's a casual and mostly self-regulating format.

    There is no reason they can't print commander/legacy/vintage only slightly weaker dual lands in Commander Legends 2
    No, there's no reason they can't but there's lots of reasons they won't.

    particularly when doing so would both sell a ton of product
    I literally just dismantled this argument with factual numbers.

    and help save a dying prestige format that so many people love.
    lmao citation needed

    A very fun and diverse format at that that is unlike any other format out there
    Ehhhhh...?

    The original duals by being slightly better and being so old, will remain just as valuable.
    lmao this is just a contradiction. If you're trying to make it easier to play without duals you're going to lower the value of duals because that's the thing you just said.

    But these new duals will make the format far more accessible than the current best alternative that has people lose 2-8 life each game for the sake of a consistent manabase.
    So again

    1) Why do you think Wizards wants to make Legacy more accessible?

    2) If they want to make the format more accessible, why wouldn't they just reprint duals?

    And those with original duals would have a healthy sanctioned legacy paper format they can use them in.
    But they already have that. In fact they have two, including Vintage.

    This is the definition of a win win move. Sell product, keep a format alive, keep magic's oldest and most loyal playerbase happy.
    They're already selling product, Legacy seems fine and about as alive as they want it, and uh lol ignoring the presumption of the last point, Wizards doesn't care about happiness except as it relates to selling products, which is why they are more focused on selling products aimed at the people who buy more products.

    This doesn't seem like a win win, it just seems like you fantasizing about something you want and then working backwards to rationalize it.

    Given that, the better question is, why wouldn't Wizards do it?
    Why wouldn't you set your dick on fire, if it feels really good and won't harm you at all? I guess the answer is that there's no reason not to given those priors, but your priors are bad.
    For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
    And found I was for endurance made

  11. #131

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by dte View Post
    To not double down on a clear design mistake?
    Duals work well in legacy and commander, and function well in a format with Wasteland alongside other nonbasic hate. If you disagree, you should instead be arguing for the original duals to be banned in legacy.

    For the third time, the fact that these duals would be too powerful for modern is irrelevant. No one is arguing for these cards to be printed in Modern Horizons 3. We are talking about them being printed into Commander Legends 2.

  12. #132
    (' ' '\( 0 ,o)/''')
    TheInfamousBearAssassin's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2004
    Location

    Northern Virginia
    Posts

    6,627

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by dte View Post
    To not double down on a clear design mistake?
    From a gameplay perspective, ABUR duals are bad/boring. Modern databases are much more interesting both to play and to build, when you have to balance your greed over colors versus life (fetch/shocklands), need for basics (both in play and in the library), and EtB tap effects (mostly fastlands, but also manlands). The only lands that are used that are worse than duals from my (yes, it is subjective) gameplay perspective are fetchlands, with these endless search and shuffle. And they regularly reprint those, so my argument might be completely invalid.

    On access to legacy issues, the biggest trouble I see is to keep repeating that duals or other expensive cards are essential. To my opinion, this is a fallacy, and quality of builds/play matters much more than duals. Some decks cannot be played without, but legacy is diverse enough that there are plenty of budget decks that can win tournaments if well build/played, from humans and D&T to death shadow and co. A funny point is that actually modern attracts much more player with suboptimal/cheap builds. I do think that it is mostly because it is not as badly perceived to do so, not because it is intrinsically a lower power gap between Tiers 1 decks and budget ones.
    +this

    Including fetchlands just being absolutely terrible for the game. I find them being banned in Historic a promising sign but yeah then they went ahead and reprinted them in MH2 so, not 100% clear on what their position is on the fucking things.
    For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
    And found I was for endurance made

  13. #133

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    They literally printed a commander only slightly weaker black lotus in Commander Legends 1. There is no reason they can't print commander/legacy/vintage only slightly weaker dual lands in Commander Legends 2, particularly when doing so would both sell a ton of product and help save a dying prestige format that so many people love. A very fun and diverse format at that that is unlike any other format out there
    Commander makes them massively more money than Legacy could dream of, and Black Lotus is banned in Commander, so it makes sense for them to make a Commander-compatible Lotus that isn't LED. (Also, slightly weaker is not a fair description.)

    That's why I suggested a Commander-compatible drawback, because that's who they design dual land cycles for in those products, not Legacy players.

  14. #134

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post

    Including fetchlands just being absolutely terrible for the game. I find them being banned in Historic a promising sign but yeah then they went ahead and reprinted them in MH2 so, not 100% clear on what their position is on the fucking things.
    It's pretty clear what their position is. They want multiple formats that coexist at multiple different power levels, even the mana bases.

    It's a great sign that there are people that enjoy so many differnt formats, including Pioneer and Historic that do not have fetchlands. If you find historic more fun, play that. But if you also enjoy playing legacy, you have to accept that it has a significantly more powerful manabase than Modern and should be supportive of efforts to make the format more accessible to more players.

    It's almost like some legacy players have a death wish for paper legacy and actively want people to remain priced out even if it means that paper legacy goes the way that paper vintage did.

    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post
    Why wouldn't you set your dick on fire, if it feels really good and won't harm you at all? I guess the answer is that there's no reason not to given those priors, but your priors are bad.
    Lol. How am I even supposed to ridiculous analogies like this? In what universe is setting your dick on fire causes no harm at all. Is it the same universe where printing these lands into a legacy/commander only product somehow harmful to health of legacy?

    How is making legacy more accessible for more people equivalent to burning a body part off?

  15. #135
    (' ' '\( 0 ,o)/''')
    TheInfamousBearAssassin's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2004
    Location

    Northern Virginia
    Posts

    6,627

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    It's pretty clear what their position is. They want multiple formats that coexist at multiple different power levels, even the mana bases.

    It's a great sign that there are people that enjoy so many differnt formats, including ones that Pioneer and Historic that do not have fetchlands. If you find historic more fun, play that. But if you want play legacy, you have accept that it has a significantly more powerful manabase than Modern and should be supportive of efforts to make the format more accessible to more players.
    Historic is Arena's "eternal" format. Fetchlands aren't banned for power reasons, at least not power reasons as it relates to mana fixing. The problems fetchlands introduce to the game are unintended effects as far as shuffling, graveyard filling etc.., and mitigation of nonbasic hate. They're basically just really badly designed lands that made the game worse, and this is all discounting the effects on paper which are worse because it wastes a lot of time with shuffling and creates opportunities for both cheating and theft.

    Also like, I've played this format since before it was this format so I'm really not interested in your lectures about what I should or shouldn't support, especially when they're based in bad logic and poor reading comprehension.

    If you need a recap/summary, and it's very obvious that you do

    1) I do not own duals

    2) I support breaking the reserved list and reprinting duals

    3) I recognize that Wizards has no actual reason to do so at this time

    4) I recognize that the RL is an excuse and if they want to "functionally" reprint duals they'll just do that and not do this Rumplestiltskin routine of just skirting the edges or w/e

    5) On a side note I think fetchlands should be banned for multiple power and gameplay reasons because they're just badly designed cards that make the game worse.
    For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
    And found I was for endurance made

  16. #136
    Member

    Join Date

    Feb 2014
    Posts

    1,199

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    Duals work well in legacy and commander, and function well in a format with Wasteland alongside other nonbasic hate. If you disagree, you should instead be arguing for the original duals to be banned in legacy.
    I really doubt that would make legacy players happy. But it is a bit puzzling to me to argue on one hand that duals are absolutely needed, and on the other that they "function well"? They do the job for sure, but so would black lotus, sol ring and a few moxes if they were authorized - at least they seem to do so in the format they are legal in.
    So I would think that "working well" in a given format would mean "balanced", and that they are not.
    I think it is fair to say that duals are overpowered and a bad design from the first editions, but that there are players who enjoy playing them, and that there is a dedicated sanctioned format that allow them to do so.
    I would like to add that it is possible to play this format without duals and do well.

    Edit:
    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post
    The problems fetchlands introduce to the game are unintended effects as far as shuffling, graveyard filling etc.., and mitigation of nonbasic hate. They're basically just really badly designed lands that made the game worse, and this is all discounting the effects on paper which are worse because it wastes a lot of time with shuffling
    Completely agreeing with this.

  17. #137

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post
    Like just rename the thread “Design duals that skirt but don’t break the reserve list” if that’s the only thing you’re interested in. Because instead you asked a question you seem to really not want the answer to.
    We already have a shitty card creation thread

  18. #138

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    But it is a bit puzzling to me to argue on one hand that duals are absolutely needed, and on the other that they "function well"?
    If force of will was a reserve list card, thus selling for $3000 for a playset, I would be making this same arguement for Force. That Force is absolutely needed for a paper legacy format not dominated by combo, functions well, and would be arguing for FoW (or something that serves that same function just as well but not reserve list such as a Force of Negation that can counter Thassa and can be used during either players turn) to be printed as well.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wrath of Pie View Post
    That's why I suggested a Commander-compatible drawback, because that's who they design dual land cycles for in those products, not Legacy players.
    That's irrelevant to the thread. This isn't a discussion about how to make cEDH cheaper and more accessible. It's about how to make legacy more accessible and able to support sanctioned paper events again.

    More duals that are only usable in Commander does nothing to make paper legacy more accessible.

  19. #139
    (' ' '\( 0 ,o)/''')
    TheInfamousBearAssassin's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2004
    Location

    Northern Virginia
    Posts

    6,627

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    That's irrelevant to the thread. This isn't a discussion about how to make cEDH cheaper and more accessible. It's about about to make legacy more accessible and able to support sanctioned paper events again.

    More duals that are only usable in Commander does nothing to make paper legacy more accessible.
    I thought it was a discussion about whether we think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    And like, again, and I know you'll just keep ignoring this question, but why do you think Wizards wants Legacy to be more accessible?
    For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
    And found I was for endurance made

  20. #140
    Member

    Join Date

    Feb 2014
    Posts

    1,199

    Re: Do you think Wizards will ever again print dual lands that are better than shocks

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    If force of will was a reserve list card, thus selling for $3000 for a playset,
    FoW was not reprinted until very recently, without a big effect on its cost. You might have confused "reserve list" and "rare"?

    Quote Originally Posted by Clark Kant View Post
    I would be making this same arguement for Force. That Force is absolutely needed for a paper legacy format not dominated by combo, functions well, and would be arguing for FoW (or something that serves that same function just as well but not reserve list such as a Force of Negation that can counter Thassa and can be used during either players turn) to be printed as well.
    Those are two different arguments. In your first, you had that duals were needed to play legacy.
    You could argue that FoW is absolutely needed for the format health (and here Wizard did a great thing by printing a fixed version in FoN that complements FoW in legacy, and is pulling weight elsewhere), but not that you need FoW to play legacy.
    Half of the legacy decks do not play FoW.

    Last, FoW have no real alternatives, and has a great effect but at a large cost. Duals do have many alternatives, only slightly less powerful, and are basically great because they do not have much deckbuilding cost, especially since fetchlands pair well with them and allow you to play basics around waste/moon.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)