WotC future vision of Aggro vs. Control

[TsumiBand]

I guess there is much space for interpretation if he says that aggro can kill turn 5 and he don't want their assault killed by a sweeper turn 4 while the #1 spot removal hero's downfall costs 3 in a world of powercreep within the creature cardtype. They don't want the race to turn 4 anymore, fine. The Problem is that spot & conditional removal is so underpowered to fill the gap they are about to create. I'm hoping to be proven wrong soon and that the easy and obvious solution is not to play creature-trumps yourself. The fact that he was trying to directly link a resolved turn 4 sweeper to the automatic loss of the Aggro deck was plain hilarious.

Well consider the math that goes into dealing 20 by the time the control player lays that 4th land. If you're incredibly aggressive (talking Standard here; Legacy is full of stuff that lowers the fundamental turn significantly) you have to deal, on average, 5 per turn. This assumes you're on the play; on the draw, if we're strictly talking about getting the other player to 0 damages, that's 7 damage per turn (rounded up, because 6.6... is dumb).

I mean the turn 4 WoG is a much bigger stumbling block than it seems, because it pushes *both* players to play the long game, which control is suited for and aggro is typically not. The old adage about not over-extending into Wrath was always a double-edged sword; you're sacrificing board position for the ability to recover successfully from a wipe, but you're doing so to the detriment of your own plan, not to the advancement. I mean yes, we could talk about building against that expectation, but then we're talking about everyone building for the mid-to-long game because the short game is occupied entirely by decks the article doesn't even cover (combo, SnT/Reanimator-style decks, etc). That sucks. It sucks because without a legit, non-combo blitzkrieg strategy in the game there's nothing to keep everything from bowing to control's idea of tempo; every matchup is "the control deck either did, or didn't maintain tempo." Boooooo. That's astoundingly bland. (It's probably also a bit of hyperbole, but I'm trying to avoid the idea of changing all decklists to match a metagame because then the conversation just rabbit holes ad strawmanium, and that's useless.)

[Higgs]

Probably turn 4 wrath feels like a kick to their sand castle for enough players, hence the change in philosophy.

Frankly I think WoTC, as an extension of Hasbro, is and has been catering to children and treating this game as a child's game. There I said it. I know no long time magic player likes using or hearing child's game and MtG in the same sentence but I think this is the unfortunate truth although we don't confess it to ourselves. Everything from their recent printings, design decisions, rule changes, direction they take with art and flavor is geared towards the player base aged 10-16. Everytime I read something from Maro, or watch him in a panel, I see him addressing the whole player base as he is addressing kids. I don't see a point in complaining in anything Wizards does anymore because once you accept that Wizards and the game they are currently producing doesn't cater to you anymore you accept that there's no point in expecting anything different. As a grown up Magic player who understand and appreciates the game at a different level, everything you like and you expect from the game is probably against how WoTC views it. It doesn't mean that Magic is not for you anymore, it just means that you should find the niche in Magic that you are still able to enjoy, stick to that niche and salvage whatever you can from all the shit Wizards is producing.

/rant

[tescrin]

But your claim was that they stopped printing burn spells. That's just not true. Sure, Searing Spear/Lightning Strike is not close to the power of Lightning Bolt, but it's still a quite playable burn spell in Standard.

First, Spear is rotating. This is such a minor thing to quarrel about; but current Burn cards in standard rotating out:
Shock, Spear, Helix, Charm, Skullcrack

What is it being replaced with? If you think they're replacing those 4-damage burn spells with anything that can hit a player that even does *3* damage, I'll buy a hat and then I'll eat my hat. You *might* see a Char on one of the charms; forcing a 3-color deck that's still less powerful than the currently mediocre deck. They saw a semi-viable non-creature (~12 creatures still) deck and made sure it went away.

[TsumiBand]

Probably turn 4 wrath feels like a kick to their sand castle for enough players, hence the change in philosophy.

Frankly I think WoTC, as an extension of Hasbro, is and has been catering to children and treating this game as a child's game. There I said it. I know no long time magic player likes using or hearing child's game and MtG in the same sentence but I think this is the unfortunate truth although we don't confess it to ourselves. Everything from their recent printings, design decisions, rule changes, direction they take with art and flavor is geared towards the player base aged 10-16. Everytime I read something from Maro, or watch him in a panel, I see him addressing the whole player base as he is addressing kids. I don't see a point in complaining in anything Wizards does anymore because once you accept that Wizards and the game they are currently producing doesn't cater to you anymore you accept that there's no point in expecting anything different. As a grown up Magic player who understand and appreciates the game at a different level, everything you like and you expect from the game is probably against how WoTC views it. It doesn't mean that Magic is not for you anymore, it just means that you should find the niche in Magic that you are still able to enjoy, stick to that niche and salvage whatever you can from all the shit Wizards is producing.

/rant

Um, yeah. This times a fsckbillion.

It says right on the package, ages 13+. Yes adults play this game. Yes, I prefer playing the game with adults. No, this game is not necessarily created with adults in mind.

Eventually the pop music machine leaves you behind and you look back at the music from your favorite period of life and go, "Whatever this stuff is today, it's terrible. Nothing like when I was your age, whippersnapper." This speech belongs in a museum because it's timeless. That it is a hallmark of every generation is not an indicator that music is getting worse; rather, that it is simply something a generation says as it ages. To wit - Your old cards are Soundgarden, and you're pissed because new cards are Paramore, but here's the thing; the kids don't give a shit, and neither do theirs, and neither do theirs. That you see a linear progression towards a lower quality is only indicative of your bias of experience and fondness of an older paradigm.

[Richard Cheese]

Probably turn 4 wrath feels like a kick to their sand castle for enough players, hence the change in philosophy.

Frankly I think WoTC, as an extension of Hasbro, is and has been catering to children and treating this game as a child's game. There I said it. I know no long time magic player likes using or hearing child's game and MtG in the same sentence but I think this is the unfortunate truth although we don't confess it to ourselves. Everything from their recent printings, design decisions, rule changes, direction they take with art and flavor is geared towards the player base aged 10-16. Everytime I read something from Maro, or watch him in a panel, I see him addressing the whole player base as he is addressing kids. I don't see a point in complaining in anything Wizards does anymore because once you accept that Wizards and the game they are currently producing doesn't cater to you anymore you accept that there's no point in expecting anything different. As a grown up Magic player who understand and appreciates the game at a different level, everything you like and you expect from the game is probably against how WoTC views it. It doesn't mean that Magic is not for you anymore, it just means that you should find the niche in Magic that you are still able to enjoy, stick to that niche and salvage whatever you can from all the shit Wizards is producing.

/rant

News flash: Magic has always appealed to the 10-16 demographic. I first got into the game around Revised, when I was ~13. By high school I was going to tournaments pretty regularly, brewing shit, reading Inquest...and there were a lot of other people around my age into it at the time. It's a collectible game with dragons and wizards and goblins and shit...it's always going to appeal to that age group. It's more a matter of medium and subject matter than anything. Of course WotC knows this and is going to continue going after that group, it's just in their best financial interest.

[Lord Seth]

First, Spear is rotating. This is such a minor thing to quarrel about; but current Burn cards in standard rotating out:
Shock, Spear, Helix, Charm, Skullcrack

What is it being replaced with?

Searing Spear isn't rotating, it's already rotated out. I wrote "Searing Spear/Lightning Strike" because they're the same card under different names. The point was that such a card was still around. You claimed they were getting rid of Burn cards, even though they just put one into Magic 2015. Okay, fine, it was also from Theros (still after RTR!), but you can't claim that they stopped printing Burn cards when there are Burn cards right there in the most recent set.

Or, for other post-Ravnica cards: Magma Jet (Theros), Searing Blood (Born of the Gods), and Stoke the Flames (another Magic 2015 card). Or how about the fact that the card that made Burn competitive in Legacy was from Journey into Nyx?

I don't really understand how you can claim they didn't print burn cards after Ravnica when there so clearly are burn spells printed afterwards. It makes about as much sense as claiming they stopped printing planeswalkers after Ravnica; it's so obviously untrue the assertion makes no sense.

[tescrin]

I mean, if you think reprinting Strike when they could've done Spear or Shock isn't telling and you think that Searing Blood counts as a legit burn spell; I can't really argue with you. Blood is a conditional bolt based on shocking something in a format full of giant beasties. I realize people weren't using 4 Spear, 4 Strike, 4 Skullcrack; but with all the stuff rotating I bet they
would by comparison to *nothing* or Searing Blood.

You can't count creature prints as evidence for your case when we're speaking about a deck that wouldn't use creatures if it didn't *have to.*

[Adryan]

I think Wrath of God will come back in a future Standard format. Now they just want to have a different Standard format. A format where Control needs to play Creatures, which is acutally a good thing because i think the current standard UWx Control is one of the most boring decks one can imagine. And i play Miracle, so that does say quite a lot.

The skill needed to pilot the current Standard UWx Control is very low. Control with Creatures (Caw- Blade, Faeries etc.) has a very high skill cap and is more fun to play for the majority of people. So i think it's a good thing to reintroduce creatures in U- based Controldecks, as long as they have cool triggers and feel like spells ^^

[wonderPreaux]

So i think it's a good thing to reintroduce creatures in U- based Controldecks, as long as they have cool triggers and feel like spells ^^

For the sake of eternal formats, I think it'd be real cool if blue actually didn't get ridiculously efficient creatures with absurd abilities. We probably don't need more Snapcaster Magi or Vendilion Cliques.

[rufus]

For the sake of eternal formats, I think it'd be real cool if blue actually didn't get ridiculously efficient creatures with absurd abilities. We probably don't need more Snapcaster Magi or Vendilion Cliques.

If they also parted out eternal-level stack control and card quality cards to other colors, it would probably be fine.

[Lord Seth]

I mean, if you think reprinting Strike when they could've done Spear or Shock isn't telling

Telling of what? It's a burn spell, which is what you were asking for. Even if you don't want to count the reprint, Lightning Strike was still in Theros, post-RTR.

When Shock wasn't in M13, was that "telling" of anything?

and you think that Searing Blood counts as a legit burn spell; I can't really argue with you. Blood is a conditional bolt based on shocking something in a format full of giant beasties. I realize people weren't using 4 Spear, 4 Strike, 4 Skullcrack; but with all the stuff rotating I bet they
would by comparison to *nothing* or Searing Blood.

And you're still evading the point, that you claimed they stopped printing burn cards after Return to Ravnica, even though I just pointed to multiple burn spells they printed afterwards. Like I said, your claim was as nonsensical as claiming they stopped printing planeswalkers. It's objectively untrue.

[tescrin]

Telling of what? It's a burn spell, which is what you were asking for. Even if you don't want to count the reprint, Lightning Strike was still in Theros, post-RTR.

And you're still evading the point, that you claimed they stopped printing burn cards after Return to Ravnica, even though I just pointed to multiple burn spells they printed afterwards. It's objectively untrue.

You are being (purposefully) dense for the sake of trolling me into replying; and it's unfortunately working..

-Burn is losing 20 cards and gaining 4 (from M15.)
-They reprinted a spell that was already going to stay in standard rather than print one that is rotating (or one that does a similar job) which reduces the overall number of burn cards in standard.
-The garbage you cited aren't burn cards so your argument is incoherent.
-Saying "X is objectively untrue" doesn't actually make it objectively untrue.

Please take your fanboyism and stop jamming your "REPLY WITH QUOTE" dick into my forum ass. I'm saying they're killing the DECK burn, not the cards that happen to "cause burn."
Even if you disagree i'd appreciate if you stopped playing "Forum footsie" with me and let my damn post die. I posted my thoughts on a shitty format in a thread about how wizards is continuing to ruin an already shitty format. Shit.

[Lord Seth]

You are being (purposefully) dense for the sake of trolling me into replying; and it's unfortunately working..

Let's look at exactly what you said, word for word:
"We've killed aggro by printing no burn spells after Ravnica since it started becoming a deck."

You claimed there were no burn spells printed after Ravnica. I showed that was wrong. Is there some reason you won't admit that this plainly wrong assertion of yours is... plainly wrong? That's why I keep hammering at it; it's so blatantly inaccurate.

-Burn is losing 20 cards and gaining 4 (from M15.)
-They reprinted a spell that was already going to stay in standard rather than print one that is rotating (or one that does a similar job) which reduces the overall number of burn cards in standard.

This point of yours isn't really relevant to my criticism outside of reinforcing it (as you note there are new burn spells, thus disproving your original claim), but I do question how relevant a comparison a full block versus 1/3 of one set (how much of Khans has been spoiled) is.

-The garbage you cited aren't burn cards so your argument is incoherent.

By what weird definition of burn are Lightning Strike, Magma Jet, and Stoke the Flames not burn?

They're cheap cards that deal direct damage to a creature or player. Unless you're operating under some completely different definition of burn than the rest of the world, that's the definition of a burn spell.

-Saying "X is objectively untrue" doesn't actually make it objectively untrue.

You're right it doesn't. But in this case, it is objectively untrue. Heck, all I have to do is point to Lightning Strike... that one card's existence singlehandedly disproves your claim. So do Magma Jet and Stoke the Flames. You can finagle a bit on Searing Blood, but that does nothing in regards to the other ones I pointed to.

I'm saying they're killing the DECK burn, not the cards that happen to "cause burn."

No, that is not what you said. Again, read your statement I quoted at the start. You didn't say they were killing the deck burn; you were claiming they were killing aggro by not printing burn spells, which is a totally different claim and a far more dubious one (some aggro decks, most notably Blue Devotion, don't even play burn). You also said they printed no burn spells after Ravnica, which again I pointed out was false.

Now, as to the claim of the deck burn likely dying out... yeah, probably. Just like how most of the decks currently in Standard are going to die out or at least dramatically change post rotation.

Maybe you just didn't phrase your original assertion well, and this is a big case of miscommunication in me going by what you said and you going by what you meant to say. But your statement, as it was written, made a quite different claim than you're making here, and that original claim is pretty obviously false.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Tescrin, would you be so kind as to agree you were wrong so that we may move away from your silly claim of "no burn spells printed since RTR"?
Also, if you meant that "the deck Burn is dead" or even "they didn't print many new burn spells in last year", you should have written it like that and either:
- inform us that you were metaphoric
- or rather not make ridiculous claims at all