Not primarily I think, it has more to do with recognition of key mechanics in an environment. Sure, some evergreen keywords like trample etc are used without the rules text, but usually it is to make it easier to get a feel for which cards behaves in the same way and what the general themes in a set are. Revolt, Improvise, Landfall etc are all examples of this. Thinking about it, that's probably why they didn't make use of the Landfall keyword for Tireless Tracker, as making multiple land drops and having that trigger your permanents isn't a theme otherwise in SoI.Originally Posted by Dice_Box
If you start leaving out rules text and only make use of keywords that people have to be familiar with to play the game then complexity starts creeping up real fast I think. Would be nicer for experienced players of course, but not for beginners. Can't please everybody. :p
Just a question for the peeps deeper into format schedules:
How much is actually left of Modern? Is that still a real format?
www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!
Join us at Facebook!
Yes. Granted here in Brisbane the GP happens next week, so the numbers are booming artificially. But Modern is popular. I have seen people play shit like Mono Green Devotion and just destroy others. The format is open, but a lot of decks seek to play in very liner styles leading to some "Ships passing" feelings.
It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
I don't think its necessarily the linear decks that causes this perception in Modern. Its the relative power level of certain cards and synergies, combined with the almost total lack of deck manipulation in most decks. I'd say Jund vs Affinity, for example, can be one of the most interactive matchups in the format. And I've seen Jund keep a perfectly fine blind hand of Bob, Goyf, Lily, Inquisition, Bolt, 3 lands and die on turn 4 vs Affinity. Basically doing nothing. This to me is more indicative of the "ships passing in the night" phenomenon. Some love the linear decks, and that's what draws those types to Modern. But those decks are often dismantled by sideboards. Those are my two main problems with the format. Unfortunately, all due to the ban list. Decks that are based on forcing interaction can still just be blanked by drawing the wrong part of their deck in the wrong matchup, with no way to recover. And the linear decks keep getting castrated by the ban list, while all the best cards to fight them are freely available and keep getting functional reprints. I mean, every Legacy player knows the breadth and depth of GY hate available. And in almost every color. If GY decks become relevant in the meta, its a foregone conclusion that they will get hated out. And Dredge never has had as large a meta share, nor a Top 8 share as Dredge in Modern a few months ago. Can you imaging trying to play Dredge without GGT in Legacy? Can you ever imagine a need to ban anything in Legacy Dredge?
~ Team Unicorn Motto
If you sit down and play Infect v Affinity, it's often a game of little interactivity and mostly a rush to the end goal. I mean, SCG just did Paladin v Infect. That's a game of "Who's the faster Goldfish?".
Some decks, Company, Jund, Junk, Grixis, they have a lot of interaction. These decks normally are a lot of fun to play against and with, but they are a subset of decks. You can sit them next to Titanshift, Paladin, Elves, Infect or Affinity and you see the difference though. These other decks are often built not to interact. Elves and Fish often have at most, 4 cards that can do anything to the opponent before sideboarding. It really depends on what you play yourself. If you seek inaction in Modern, you need to bring it yourself, because a large amount of the format doesn't plan to interact with you.
It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
If wizards continue to try to push standard, I'm out. Have played over 15 years total. Legacy is very popular in my area, its the only thing besides limited that has weekly FNM / tournaments / active community. Standard simply doesn't offer the same experience, and certainly not the complexity.
Only an idiot would think that forcing people out of their favorite type will get them to play a dumbed down version of the same game.
You don't take support away from product A in an attempt to sell more of product B, you improve product B so it sells well based on its own merits .. doing the former is simply a bad practice that will drive customers away.
Their economic incentives are clearly to push the fastest-rotating formats. So standard and limited are always first in on their agenda.
I'm fine with them promoting standard, just not with them cannibalizing legacy.
If the only way they see to pursue their economic goals is to try to wreck communities and formats by no longer offering support, its probably time to quit, as that doesn't bode well for the game at all.
The problem I see more in standard and modern is high cmc cards, which means lots of lands, which means low hand size...to the point that you're quickly playing topdeck wars, the statistics simulator. Fewer things can go horribly awry when cheaper removal spells undo whatever threat they likely tapped out to cast, and the player with the threat is just trying to play around a known removal option such that they never get 2 for 1'd. The gamestate rapidly devolves into having more mana than you can possibly use; this is especially pronounced in standard. R&D seems to at least understand the issue (things like Tireless Tracker or new Nissa ult), but seem hesitant to reintroduce meaningful lines of play at low cmcs.
In Modern, unless you are ramping the cmc of your cards will normally top out at 4. I am not sure where you are thinking the cmc is high. Also for a long while removal in the format has been mostly Path and Decay. Not really that different from Legacy having Swords and Decay. As for having more mana then you can use, most of the midrange decks play effective sinks, Man lands, Gavony Township, Ooze. I can not speak for Standard, but at one point the only difference between Legacy Jund and Modern Jund was the choice of lands (The amount was the same) and Punishing Fire. Then Bloodbraid ate the hammer and shit started to change.
It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
That's basically inevitable. WotC is a business. If they can't make money on legacy they won't spend resources on it.
You're never really fighting over mana though, so any land you get you're going to play and it's going to be relatively safe. Worst case generally is that a utility land gets turned into a basic by Ghost Quarter. High land counts without predators doesn't make a ton of sense design-wise, then that is coupled with a lack of useful proactive plays on the cmc floors. In legacy you get to play a few answers, but there is also a diversity of strategies where they may do nothing; you're making some pretty bold life choices if you start running >6 removal (for the sake of removal) spells. In legacy you're more pressured to also pursue a coordinated, proactive game plan than getting to the point of topdeck a dude, a land, or a removal spell and jam it.
Tough to justify a high end of cards when you can't just exchange them and shuffle them back. In modern way more that Legacy your opening hand will define whatever tactics you take and the outcome. So having 2 5's in your opener is an auto-mulligan, a hand with a 5 and 6 meh cards is probably a mulligan also. In Legacy a 2 Terminus, Brainstorm, Fetch x 2, Top, Ponder hand is a Sneep.
What are you talking about? Tectonic edge is everywhere in Modern. It's sole purpose is literally to keep land counts low (3 or less, some might say...).
I get we won't ever have a discussion on a Legacy thread about another format being good, but it's hilarious to see such incorrect comments.
There are other cards that hit at lands, but I agree, that is often not a main point of attack. At the same time I actually enjoy that (And I am a Lands guy) because it feels different. The format is not Land or stack control based. Mostly its hand and creature control. A very different format.
As for Tectonic edge, I have not seen that played in at least a year and a half. These days its seen as secondary to Ghost Quarter. Because Tec Edge does not stop Tron, so it is left by the wayside. Fact I have not seen it around since DRS was banned.
It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
I admittedly don't play modern, but isn't ghost quarter far more prevalent than Tec Edge? Edge doesn't hit tron if they assemble it quickly so it's useless isn't it?
Tech edge is only played in hard control decks that can toss a few copies in, but it's always been pretty bad. It's not just Tron that it's bad against, the format is just too fast.
With no Wasteland (another part of why the format is so fast, abstractly 'faster' than Legacy) there's more room in Modern to abuse non-basics. You can't build anything as busted as actual legacy-Lands, but the % of decks trying to do funny stuff with their lands is way higher than Legacy. Tron and Valakut strategies are fully dependent on their non-basics, Infect and Affinity aren't fully dependent but win a decent % of games off their manlands, and basically all midrange and control decks throw in some manlands. Whereas in Legacy there are a few t1 decks that abuse funlands (Lands, DnT) but most people are just trying to cast their spells.
They do make a profit, legacy players attend events (too bad WotC does so few) and buy cards. I collect all the FTV just because, and usually open at least 2 boxes / expansion for the fun of it.
Its like saying car companies should not offer a repair network, selling new cars is more profitable. Bad practice and consumers should/will find alternatives.
EOR (end of rant)
You are the minority.
It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
WotC doesn't make significant money off event attendance. (I expect that large WotC events are put on at a loss.) The money is in selling cards, and WotC doesn't deal in most of the cards that legacy players are interested in.
As for the simile, auto manufacturers do make money off the 'repair network' and from selling parts.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote