|
Viewing 1 - 9 out of 18 Blogs.
Page:
1 |
|
Actually, all in one:  
Follow this link for the Eventide Booster preview: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=magic/preview/evepack Scroll over the Overbeing for her card text. A smidge underwhelming, compared to her godlike bretheren, but a Maro certainly loves to pack its own card drawing. Let the Eventide spoiler season officially commence!
If you've ever been thinking about taking the plunge and starting an online collection, now is the time. While griping about the new system abounds it is certainly very playable. Not all features are enabled, but they will be... eventually. MTGO is too much of a gold mine for Wizards to fail to ultimately make it work, but for right now a lack of a feature is working IN FAVOR of the average online collector. You see, for the moment there is no option to redeem a full online set for physical cards. At the same time the drafting rate has remained essentially the same as during the 2.5 days. This means that the online world is being flooded (FLOODED!) with Lorwyn and Morningtide cards that cannot be redeemed (thus removing them from online circulation). In turn, this driving card prices down like never before. The cost of standard cards has dropped an average of 20% since February, with the bulk of that reduction being in the more frequently draft Lorwyn and Morningtide sets. An example? IRL a single Countryside Crusher costs $8-10 online you can easily find Crushers for 3tix each (tix are worth ~$.80-$.90) and if you look you can usually buy a set of four for just 10tix! A set for approximately the same cost as a single card IRL. Now, bitterblossoms and Goyfs are still pretty pricey, getting involved in the Online game at a constructed level does still involve an investment but right now is the best time yet to "buy in." Get in the game now because prices will certainly rise again once redemption is enabled. For more information on usage and current card value online check out this great thread: http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=1032226 Hope to see you in the queues! -Robin rwildernessr on MTGO edit: PS - It looks like Monday 6/9 is the most recent "likely" date for shadowmoor cards to become available. Release events would presumably start the following Thursday (6/12).
Tags: MTGO Economics Online
Well I got an email today from the Northwest tourney organizer that sets up most of the big time event in the greater northwest about this year's States tournament. 
http://www.cascadegames.com/games/1 What? Thats right. States. Advertised with plaques and all. Now, don't get too excited, as I can find nothing on Wizards' site with any information about a new format for states. As such it is almost certainly not a feeder tournament for nationals. In all likelyhood this is simply one organizer trying to pick up the torch that WotC dropped... but it piqued my curiousity. Are any major organizers in your neck of the woods doing the same thing? If so, sound off. States was such an "unsustainable program" that at least some organizers have decided to maintain the tradtion even without support from Wizards...
Everyone knows the story of the three billy goats gruff, and their run in with a troll living under the bridge. Lorwyn a land of fairy tales had the bridge, but only a hint of the troll in the artwork. Well, the twisted Grimm world of Shadowmoor finally shows us the troll: 
In the process it also shows us where that mysterious +20/+20 came from. I've been right about several of the rumors swirling around shadowmoor, but I was dead wrong about this one. I was convinced that anything that said +20/+20 would be a variation on righteousness... umm... not so much. Instead it is tacked on to an incredibly flavorful rare that has the potential to turn casual tables from coast to coast on their collective ears. While this Troll has to have alot of things go right for him to prove his chops in a competitive constucted format more than a few Timmys will be consumed with getting the troll out from under his bridge. I have to say that I would certainly hesitate to NOT leave at least one blocker back if my opponent had the means to activate their mosswort bridge. Someone at a prerelease somewhere will end up popping an EOT Troll from under a bridge, followed by a pseudo hasty attack by a 25/25 troll for the win and become the stuff of legends among their play group. Will that person be you? Oh yeah... and if you had some means to give him trample, just "fugedaboutit". But how would you do that??? 
Tags: Shadowmoor Troll Spoiler
I love blue, in fact I love black, green, white, red, artifact, gold, colorless, and lands too. But blue is sometimes a tough color to love. You see, blue has an ego problem that rubs me the wrong way. Now you can't really blame blue for thinking that it is the best. Since our game's inception the fawning syncophants in research and development having been consistently giving blue more and more to be proud of. Yes, its true, blue has gotten more and more insufferable over the years, but we still love it because blue gives back. Those in the know use blue to bring home state, city, national, and pro tour chamionships. U to Q has been the rallying cry of many a pro tour hopeful over the years. Until recently blue generally had a paucity of efficient creatures. Though there have been some notably exceptions, even the humble grizzly bear was often above the curve for blue. Time Spiral keyworded the ability to play creatures at instant speed as "flash." Historically "flash" was primarily (though not exclusively) a green ability. Originally this reflected the stalking/pouncing nature of green jungle creatures. Until Time Spiral block blue had only one "flash" creature (Plaxmanta.) And yea blue was sad, for blue saideth "Oh R&D in this lone area do you giveth unto me less than you giveth to my brother green. Why dost you forsake me." For such was blue's greed. None the less, R&D looked down on the magificent wealth that blue already possessed, took pity, and whispered... "Lorwyn" And yea blue was happy, for blue was given flash. After all, blue is "sneaky," so it can do anything right? "But wait" I hear you say "flash isn't a blue trait now, it is a faerie trait." Fair enough, how many black faeries have flash? None. Zip. Nada. Zilch. Fortunately green does continue to receive a few flash creatures, but blue has now received more flash for a block and a half. So what is the problem? In case you have forgotten blue is (nearly) the sole proprietor of the counterspell. In order to successfully use counterspells you need to leave mana open during your own turn so that it can be used during your opponent's turn. However, now blue can wait until the end of and opponent's turn to cast its creatures, I hear this was used to good effect in decks featuring Teferi over the last year. Now blue has a whole class of creatures that can flash in without Teferi's help. I grant you, this sounds unfair. Surely wizards would not combine an efficient creature, with flash, and give blue access to yet another traditional weakness... right? Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you THE ABOMINATION: 
That is right. No need to lean on black for hand disruption any longer blue mages. Rejoice! You can now cast a hand disrupting 3 power evasive creature at the end of your opponents turn, unless of course you decided to outright counter something instead. Three mana, for 3 evasive power in blue is already frankly well above the curve, but this guy is ridiculous. Lets compare this gentlemen to two black cards in lorwyn: Thoughtseize and Oona's Prowler. Both very good cards with powerful effects and drawback. Together they cost 1BB, conveniently comparable to the 1UU that Vendilion Clique costs. Thoughtseize costs you 2 life and you 3/1 can be reduce to 1/1 (or less) should your opponent choose to discard a card. Thoughtseize forces and actually discard rather than going to the bottom of the deck, depending on the chosen card and the presence or absence of shuffle effects or tutoring in a given deck, the discard may or may not be more effective disruption. For simplicity's sake (and to help my case) I'll call the disruption even.
The Clique has no disadvantage. Your opponent can't make it smaller, and that whole "draw a card" after the disruption effect? Well that just means that your opponent stays even with you since you only have to expend one card rather than two to achieve a Thoughtseize + Prowler. Holy cow is that alot of unfairness to squeeze onto one card. I hope you've told blue how much you love it recently. You'll definitely want big blue on your side in the coming months.
I started a thread in the forums but I figured I might as well bring it to your attention here as well. Nothing earth shattering from a mechanics perspective, but here you are: 
Just a heads up: in case you haven't noticed every other article on the web this week has included a feature on drafting merfolk. Pick orders, top commons, uncommons, etc. Historically this kind of confluence of well meaning advice (from so many sources) is (not too surprisingly) almost always followed by a flood of MTGOers following said advice.
That being the case you may want to use additional caution when drafting the little blue(and white) men this weekend. Unless you are getting strong signals or feel like sharing your merfolk with 2+ other drafters at the table you may want to avoid this kettle of fish all together for a couple of days. Try out that Kithkin/Giant archetype or GOBLINS/elves, anything that doesn't require you to fight over dowsers. Best of luck 
Clash in Limited Well I'm not sure that there will a standard "competitive clash deck" but I'm sold on the mechanic as an intriguing one. Its impact on the limited environment is a huge one. In a typical game this weekend players clashed 4-5 times giving each player the option of seeing 4-5 more cards per game than they would have otherwise. That is 10%+ of your cards in a limited deck exposed when they wouldn't other be. These extra cards smoothed mana draws on a day when many players started the day playing tribes spread across three colors. Clash also dug deeper into decks unearthing planeswalkers and greater elementals across tables all day long. In sealed this gave the impression of the format being even "bombier" than others, since the chances of an otherwise weaker deck finding its board sweeping bomb was even greater. However in Draft it seemed to have the opposite affect: pushing the most synergistic and interactive decks to the top of the tables. It is possible that as players learned the format and cards over the course of the day they were able to take better advantage of the set's interactivity. None the less I believe Clash had a very substantial impact on the way this limited format played out. All in all, at the start of the day, players were moaning and groaning about more luck being added to the equation with the advent of Clash. Yet, I went away convinced that the randomness Clash inserts in terms of individual card effects is at least counterbalanced, and possibly far outweighed by the "chance" it removes in the form of giving both players greater card selection for a nominal price.
A Little on Colors vs. Tribes Oh the temptation. The temptation to play more than two colors in limited is always strong and this formats temps you down the three color road as well. It is easy to fall into two colors and two tribes, and then begin bleeding into the third color of your tribes' affiliation. This is fine as a draft strategy, but as a deckbuilding strategy you can get into trouble (despite Clash smoothing) if you run more than a splash. The winning strategy on prerelease day seemed be to settle into a tribe and then add then best cards from the 1-2 other tribes that overlap your colors.
The Clash were an Iconic band. Dubbed "the only band that matters", in the top 50 of Rolling Stone's Greatest Artist of All Time. Their signature album "London Calling" was named #8 by the same magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums.
What are the chances that the new Clash mechanic can live up to that legacy? So far everyone I've seen seems pretty skeptical that clash can make much of a splash so I decided to run the numbers.
For those whose haven't seen it yet, the clash mechanic reads thus:
(Each clashing player reveals the top card of his or her library then puts that card on the top or bottom. A player wins if his or her card had a higher converted mana cost)
The if your card "initiates" the clash and you win you gain an extra effect like draw a card, more damage, double the effect. Something good. You can only gain by initiateing a clash (so far) never lose anything if your clash fails.
In the abstract most decks are composed of approximately 40% 0 casting cost cards (land). That means even a card composed of 60% one casting cost cards has nearly a one in four chance chance (.40*.60 = 24%) of winning a given clash. If nearly the worst possible configuration of a clash deck can win 1/4 of the time than maybe there are some legs in this mechanic.
I decided to dig a little deeper and came up with some generic deck configurations. The table below lays out their casting costs as well as some other stats I'll refer to.
 The table didn't work at all, so I'll try to list the deck compositions below - sorry.
Aggro:
0cc: 23
1cc: 16
2cc: 12
3cc: 6
4cc: 3
5+cc: 0
avg cc: 1.17
Control:
0cc: 25
1cc: 4
2cc: 12
3cc: 10
4cc: 4
5+cc: 5
avg cc: 1.65
Midrange:
0cc: 24
1cc: 10
2cc: 8
3cc: 8
4cc: 4
5+cc: 6
avg cc: 1.60
Clash:
0cc: 24
1cc: 4
2cc: 10
3cc: 12
4cc: 5
5+cc: 5
avg cc: 1.75
The decks above are meant to approximate the listed archetypes. The first important thing to notice is that thanks to lands it is VERY difficult to build a deck with an effective casting cost of greater than two. That means that any deck with 30 or more cards above 2cc will achieve a 50% ratio of wins against a random field. Focusing your deck on cards 2cc and above seems pretty non-restrictive and we are already at the coinflip point for wins with clash. With that in mind I added the "clash" list above trying keep a reasonable curve that still focused above the 2cc mark.
Since all of the above decks (and virtually ever list I plugged in) had a average casting cost between 1 and 2 the calculations were pretty straight forward. Just add up the cards with cc 2+ in each deck and divide by 60 and you discover that each deck wins clashes against a random card from almost any deck at a rate of:
"Aggro": 35%
"Control": 52%
"Mid-Range": 43%
"Clash": 53%
Unfortunately, as easy as it is to get your win percentage above 50% your lands eventually hold you down. Remember, you can never win when you flip a land which means that you basically max out at 60% success rate (due to having ~40% lands). So does a slightly better than 50% rate make clash playable? My guess is that it is close. Clash by its nature is cheap, being tacked on to other effects. Unfortunately so far it has been spoiled as added to creatures (fragile) and one shot spells. The only clash effects on less vulnerable permanents so far are clash triggers (ex: when you win a clash, draw a card).
In my humble opinion for clash to be "the next cycling" it will take more permanents that can repeatedly trigger clash. If those hit a critical mass then I think the 55% win rate in a clashes would make this a competitor, as least within the block environment.
Page:
1 |
|
|
