Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Sep-18 5:43 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 127 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-03 10:59 pm 

Joined: 2010-Sep-11 12:19 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Baxter wrote:
commanderSucks wrote:
Your use of out of context quotes reminds me of a Republican politician. The EDH RC should have insisted that EDH be a rated and legal constructed format if they wanted them to go along with the other change. Standard can be a casual format, and so can Vintage. Doesnt mean they are not also sanctioned formats.

As a very politically active Republican I take offense to that. Out of context quotations and misleading statments are used heavily by BOTH national parties. Insulting a political party specificly has no bearing on anything here and does nothing to add any weight to your argument.

Which if I'm distilling correctly is "I buy enough boosters, I don't like the pre-constructed decks they've been doing outside of normal releases." which is fine, but don't mistake something you don't like for hurting the game.



I take offense to all politics, put it in spoilers with a warning, k thx. devil-troll going to shine his rifle.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-03 11:22 pm 

Joined: 2010-Mar-10 1:31 pm
Age: Dragon
my biggest issue with this hwole thing is that folks are uses the word "sacation" when you alread sacation it as a casual multiplayer non rated...I know they mean "rated formaat" but i jsut wish they would use that instead of "sacation"


as for the decks themselves,i'll have to wait and see the deck lsit,but i'll most likely raid them for cards to use in my RW EDH deck

_________________
onlainari wrote:
trappedslider wrote:
EDIT: so if i somehow manged to get down to 1 life,played Repay in Kind followed by Decree of Annihilation then it owuld be bad evil juju?

That's not how magic works. You can't equate cards and situations linearly like that!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-04 7:13 am 

Joined: 2008-Sep-09 9:54 am
Age: Dragon
Location: New England
commanderSucks wrote:
Standard can be a casual format, and so can Vintage. Doesnt mean they are not also sanctioned formats.


I missed this the first time around. Again, this could be a difference in LGS culture, but this is *completely* not the case here. I have absolutely never heard anyone say "Wanna play a quick vintage casual game?"

This is a great example of what happens to a format when it gets sanctioned, actually. No one sits down at a table and says, "Let's play Vintage; no Power, no combo wins, no Counter/Top. You have to attack with at least one creature in the game, and..." No, even casual games eventually get to the point where it's easier to just build for and play with the DCI B&R list and rulings.

Look straight at the current EDH environment; Here more than anywhere else, players are encouraged (and vocally do) play with the "official" banned list in their play groups, but let's be honest; I would wager that the vast majority of EDH players just use the list here, even though there's no reason to without a sanctioned format. This will only intensify if the DCI sanctions Commander.

trappedslider wrote:
my biggest issue with this hwole thing is that folks are uses the word "sanction" when you alread sanction it as a casual multiplayer non rated...I know they mean "rated format" but i jsut wish they would use that instead of "sanction"


Fixed a little there. I think I get what you are going for, but in this case, "sanction" really does mean "format recognized and governed by the DCI", not "a real format that is recognized by lots of people around the world." There's really no other word for it. "Ratings" occur in a sanctioned format.

--->DJ

_________________
General Damage Control - Magic: The Gathering. Elder Dragon Highlander/Commander. No Pulled Punches.

Co-Author, Dear Azami - StarCityGames.com


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-04 10:51 am 

Joined: 2009-Jan-23 11:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
This may be a little off topic but, well, not really.
Here's a very good article, ostensibly about online tribal wars, but really it's about what would/does happen when WotC or the DCI sanction a format which has never been sanctioned before.
http://puremtgo.com/articles/art-tribal-wars-rogue-play

(For reference, here's the other article which argues for sanctioning.
http://puremtgo.com/articles/rogue-play-art-tribal-wars)

_________________
Spekter wrote:
niheloim wrote:
Aggravated Assault + Bear Umbra = My attempt to make my group move to ban Uril.
That's not ban-worthy, that's the spirit of EDH. Three-card combo involving the combat phase? Awesome.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-04 8:32 pm 

Joined: 2010-Mar-10 1:31 pm
Age: Dragon
DJ Catchem wrote:
[
trappedslider wrote:
my biggest issue with this hwole thing is that folks are uses the word "sanction" when you alread sanction it as a casual multiplayer non rated...I know they mean "rated format" but i jsut wish they would use that instead of "sanction"


Fixed a little there. I think I get what you are going for, but in this case, "sanction" really does mean "format recognized and governed by the DCI", not "a real format that is recognized by lots of people around the world." There's really no other word for it. "Ratings" occur in a sanctioned format.

--->DJ


Thanks, its hard to type on an ipod touch sometimes on this forum. well considering that when i go to my DCI login to sabction an event I see the following on the side bar called "my links" Event Sanctioning and then clicking on that i get the following choices :

Magic
Magic Casual Non-rated
Magic Causal Non-rated Multiplayer
So this why i refer to it as rated vs non-rated formats....but its jsut a pet peeve of mine

_________________
onlainari wrote:
trappedslider wrote:
EDIT: so if i somehow manged to get down to 1 life,played Repay in Kind followed by Decree of Annihilation then it owuld be bad evil juju?

That's not how magic works. You can't equate cards and situations linearly like that!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-05 3:02 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Jun-13 2:13 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Memphis, TN
Quote:
This may be a little off topic but, well, not really.
Here's a very good article, ostensibly about online tribal wars, but really it's about what would/does happen when WotC or the DCI sanction a format which has never been sanctioned before.
http://puremtgo.com/articles/art-tribal-wars-rogue-play
That article is a gem! Everyone should read it. It explains a lot about EDH that I've felt but haven't understood. I think it's worth listing in the EDH resource thread.

_________________
CR 905.1. Haters gonna hate. It's not a may ability.
Were you blown away by the insight and hilarity of this post? Damn. Try CommanderCast anyway!


Last edited by Fugu on 2010-Dec-05 3:08 am, edited 1 time in total.

Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-05 3:03 am 

Joined: 2008-Aug-08 6:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Rouen, France
Fugu, do you EVER go to bed?

_________________
Current decks:
Sydri's random pile of cards with "Artifact" on them
Scarab God Zombie Horde
Sissay 5c Superfriends
Morophon Eldrazi (5C Devoid)
Grenzo's Goblins


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-05 3:09 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Jun-13 2:13 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Location: Memphis, TN
Sure! On Wednesdays!

(Being unemployed has its benefits.)

_________________
CR 905.1. Haters gonna hate. It's not a may ability.
Were you blown away by the insight and hilarity of this post? Damn. Try CommanderCast anyway!


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-05 10:12 pm 

Joined: 2008-Sep-09 9:54 am
Age: Dragon
Location: New England
Fugu wrote:
Quote:
This may be a little off topic but, well, not really.
Here's a very good article, ostensibly about online tribal wars, but really it's about what would/does happen when WotC or the DCI sanction a format which has never been sanctioned before.
http://puremtgo.com/articles/art-tribal-wars-rogue-play
That article is a gem! Everyone should read it. It explains a lot about EDH that I've felt but haven't understood. I think it's worth listing in the EDH resource thread.


This is one-hundred percent spot-on. When you take any format, casual or no, and sanction it (by definition, I mean add a defined tournament structure and prize support), this is always the expected outcome. At best, as is the case with Tribal, you end up with a slow death to a format as the split player base dwindles and people stop paying attention to it as a result. This is a guaranteed outcome if you were to let the DCI sanction EDH. It simply isn't possible to dangle the carrot of a reward in front of a body of players and not see the paradigm shift towards a competetive image, so Sanctioned EDH will receive the lion's share of LGS support (due to the added perks for the stores). And like the player-run events, some 'old-schoolers' will hang on to the old ways at their kitchen tables. Presto - a divided player base.

Online Classic was another format that went through this exact issue some time ago, though for slightly different reasons. You ultimately risk destroying your player base completely; If the law of averages says that 50% of current players will jump ship for the competetive side, and 50% will stick it out in favor of the old casual format, you can easily apply the math to your playgroup or weekly LGS game to end up with the expected outcome. In my store, a good week realizes 10 players for Wednesday night EDH. Split that down the middle, and you have 5 people waiting for an "official" event to fire, and 5 other people playing the same small game week in and out, with no new players due to no possiblity of exposure to 'casual' EDH. Anyone who wanders into a store will instead see hyper-competetive cutthroat EDH, and miss out on the spirit of the game. You may get a few who try it out, but the stores will quickly realize that 5 for EDH is worse than 20 for draft or Standard, and drop support. The end result is a slow death to the format as a whole.

I think Sheldon and company did the right thing completely here.

--->DJ

_________________
General Damage Control - Magic: The Gathering. Elder Dragon Highlander/Commander. No Pulled Punches.

Co-Author, Dear Azami - StarCityGames.com


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-06 9:58 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2010-Dec-05 12:19 pm
Age: Hatchling
Location: Miami, Fl
I'm new to edh (and yes, i said edh). So new that i still have yet to build a deck. The though of building a 100 card "one of" deck sounded so simple at first, but turned out to be pretty overwhelming when i actually tried it. I think these new precons will actually be a good thing for people new to the format because it gives us a point to build from like the intro packs for people new to mtg altogether. So what if the premade decks aren't beefed up, that's where people like me get to tinker around with the precons and have fun exploring the format without it feeling overwhelming. I'm looking forward to the precons and who cares if wizards sanctions it. That just means they're going to release more cards to support edh without tampering with the other sets.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-07 9:50 am 

Joined: 2010-Dec-02 9:25 am
Age: Wyvern
Baxter wrote:
As a very politically active Republican I take offense to that. Out of context quotations and misleading statments are used heavily by BOTH national parties. Insulting a political party specificly has no bearing on anything here and does nothing to add any weight to your argument.

Which if I'm distilling correctly is "I buy enough boosters, I don't like the pre-constructed decks they've been doing outside of normal releases." which is fine, but don't mistake something you don't like for hurting the game.


You are right...both major national parties twist statements out of context. I just dislike the Republican party more than I dislike the Democratic party.

Your analysis of my argument is not 100% accurate. An obtuse breakdown would be:
* I like precon decks just fine.
* I buy enough boosters (as a player, collector, reseller, etc.) that I do NOT like having Wizards produce yet ANOTHER product that I would have to buy in order to get the (normal, eternal legal) cards they print.
* Printing cards outside of their normal method of distribution will be a negative thing for us both as consumers and as players.
* I see nothing in this announcement that is positive for the EDH community at large and I am/was amazed at the (please no one take this personally) "EDH fanboy" mentality of "this is all such good news for us".

I think that it is clear, however, that both my view of EDH as well as that of my local EDH community is skewed enough from the broader EDH community as to cause irreconcilable differences of opinion on these matters.

If anyone would care to read a very discerning post that mirrors 99% of my own feelings on the matter you can find one here: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=6105155&postcount=83


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-07 10:43 am 

Joined: 2008-Sep-09 9:54 am
Age: Dragon
Location: New England
commanderSucks wrote:
If anyone would care to read a very discerning post that mirrors 99% of my own feelings on the matter you can find one here: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=6105155&postcount=83


I think you're confusing the word "discerning" with the word "inflammatory", but I digress...

What I'm reading here is that the OP thinks this is two things:

1. A blatant Hasbro cash-grab, and
2. A way for Wizards to take credit for something they didn't have a hand in, by way of offering up a few trinkets and baubles of negligable value in return. It also suggests that the current EDH Board Of Directors is too blinded to notice this is happening.

From there, we see that the only reason this is a good thing is the inclusion of new potential generals, thus opening up new design space. In the next breath, however, we also see that the OP thinks that nothing that comes out of this will be more than mediocre due to the dedication to the design concept of "New EDH cards", rather than just "new cards in general."

Finally, we see the real meat of the argument, which is that the only way this EDH offering would be worthwhile would be if R&D chooses to *completely ignore* the stated purpose and instead use the opportunity to design functional reprints (or close reasonable fascimilies) of playable Vintage and Legacy staples, with the express goal of bringing down the entry barrier for those competetive formats.

Did I miss anything?

In that case, I do get why you're disappointed with this whole thing. It's because you're looking at an apple and complaining that it isn't a Ferrari.

To which I would suggest you stop shopping for Italian supercars in the produce section.

--->DJ

_________________
General Damage Control - Magic: The Gathering. Elder Dragon Highlander/Commander. No Pulled Punches.

Co-Author, Dear Azami - StarCityGames.com


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-07 12:10 pm 

Joined: 2009-Jan-23 11:34 am
Age: Elder Dragon
DJ Catchem wrote:
...

In that case, I do get why you're disappointed with this whole thing. It's because you're looking at an apple and complaining that it isn't a Ferrari.

To which I would suggest you stop shopping for Italian supercars in the produce section.

--->DJ
:lol:
I think I just poo'd myself a little.

_________________
Spekter wrote:
niheloim wrote:
Aggravated Assault + Bear Umbra = My attempt to make my group move to ban Uril.
That's not ban-worthy, that's the spirit of EDH. Three-card combo involving the combat phase? Awesome.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-07 12:28 pm 

Joined: 2010-Dec-02 9:25 am
Age: Wyvern
DJ Catchem wrote:
I think you're confusing the word "discerning" with the word "inflammatory", but I digress...

No, I think that the post was very well thought out and written. It had very coherent points and argued them in a very clear manner. I saw nothing inflammatory about the post or the way it was written.

DJ Catchem wrote:
What I'm reading here is that the OP thinks this is two things:

1. A blatant Hasbro cash-grab, and
2. A way for Wizards to take credit for something they didn't have a hand in, by way of offering up a few trinkets and baubles of negligable value in return. It also suggests that the current EDH Board Of Directors is too blinded to notice this is happening.


While you are referring to the poster that I liked to, I agree with that poster 100% if your two points were condensed to: "A blatant Wizards cash-grab for something they didn't have a hand in, by way of offering up a few trinkets and baubles of negligable[sic] value in return". I would also suggest that it seems most of the EDH community (seriously, I am not trying to be offensive or attack everyone - this is just how I see it) is too blinded by the announcement (and perhaps trust in transparency that isnt there on both Wizards and the RCs part??) to notice. I understand that everyone is excited that this news will bring new players into the EDH fold. From my experiences, however, it was never difficult to bring them into the fold to begin with!

DJ Catchem wrote:
From there, we see that the only reason this is a good thing is the inclusion of new potential generals, thus opening up new design space. In the next breath, however, we also see that the OP thinks that nothing that comes out of this will be more than mediocre due to the dedication to the design concept of "New EDH cards", rather than just "new cards in general."



The poster to which I linked was clarified in a later post (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=6107374&postcount=89) that they did not mean to suggest that the design would be restricted due to the cards being "New EDH cards" but rather that all cards are already designed for EDH since they are designed to be played in normal magic.

DJ Catchem wrote:
Finally, we see the real meat of the argument, which is that the only way this EDH offering would be worthwhile would be if R&D chooses to *completely ignore* the stated purpose and instead use the opportunity to design functional reprints (or close reasonable fascimilies) of playable Vintage and Legacy staples, with the express goal of bringing down the entry barrier for those competetive formats.

Did I miss anything?

...

--->DJ


As for this point, here I disagree with the poster. Getting any new cards though a channel outside of the expansion system in place is bad. Getting, essentially, restricted list reprints would probably be about as bad as it could possibly get. My hope is that the cards are, at best, all just mediocre cards that didnt make the cut in the past few sets (Death by Dragons seems like a Jund card to me that missed Alara Block). That way no one has to worry to much about anyone actually playing any of the new cards that are in this product.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: Speculation on EDH announcement
AgePosted: 2010-Dec-07 1:07 pm 

Joined: 2008-Sep-09 9:54 am
Age: Dragon
Location: New England
commanderSucks wrote:
No, I think that the post was very well thought out and written. It had very coherent points and argued them in a very clear manner. I saw nothing inflammatory about the post or the way it was written.


I'll give you thought-out and well written. But referring to WotC as "Big Daddy Wizards"? And I particularly like this whole section where the OP puts words into the EDH Boards' collective mouths:

Simplistic1 wrote:
"...We called up and leaned on them [R&D} a bit, a privilege that comes from developing a massive worldwide following without significant corporate support or ANY MARKETING OR PROPRIETARY PRODUCTS. We offered the a chance to jump on this train YEARS after it left the station...that way, the game we love could derive slightly more direct financial benefit from our years of uncompensated labor."


Or how about discussing the emminent failure of the new cards:

Simplistic1 wrote:
"...Wizards may not be taking over the RC but they will be handing them headaches when their hamfisted attempts at multiplayer card-making start making splashes...or flop for low power level...leaving the RC and EDH community to clean up the lost credibility and integrity of the format long after Wizards has cashed its checks..."


Nah...no inflammatory coments here. You're right.

commanderSucks wrote:
While you are referring to the poster that I liked to, I agree with that poster 100% if your two points were condensed to: "A blatant Wizards cash-grab for something they didn't have a hand in, by way of offering up a few trinkets and baubles of negligable[sic] value in return". I would also suggest that it seems most of the EDH community (seriously, I am not trying to be offensive or attack everyone - this is just how I see it) is too blinded by the announcement (and perhaps trust in transparency that isnt there on both Wizards and the RCs part??) to notice. I understand that everyone is excited that this news will bring new players into the EDH fold. From my experiences, however, it was never difficult to bring them into the fold to begin with!


It still baffles me that you keep approaching from this angle. Dedicated EDH players love nothing more than new cards to experiment with and new generals to build around. Wizards is offering this exact thing for a fixed price...where's the issue again? WotC makes profit on a selection of five pre-constructed decks; players get to benefit from the time and energy it took for R&D, Marketing, production, and distribution to happen. Stores will get to make more money and attract more players to the game. The format stands to grow. Where's the problem? Why should players be turned off by new cards and more copies of EDH staples floating around? How is any of this negligable?

Is it a blatant cash grab when a new expansion is released? Should Standard players be outraged that WotC *dares* to make them <gasp> SPEND MORE MONEY to enjoy their format? WotC/Hasbro are a business...they make this game in order to profit. How is this any different than the norm at all? Honestly, the worst part of this whole thing seems to be that a majority of people don't like the name change.


commanderSucks wrote:
The poster to which I linked was clarified in a later post (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showpost.php?p=6107374&postcount=89) that they did not mean to suggest that the design would be restricted due to the cards being "New EDH cards" but rather that all cards are already designed for EDH since they are designed to be played in normal magic.


So essentially the argument is that it's not fair that WotC is making cards that EDH players get that Standard (or Limited) players don't, because it doesn't work the other way around. You seem to think there's some unwritten gentlemen's agreement the WotC has made to cater to the entirety of the masses through releases that strictly adhere to the Core Set/Expansion release pattern. There's nothing like that in place...in fact, there's actually a scheduled yearly product plan that speaks to the contrary. WotC is creating a value-add to fans of the game by tossing out something that is new and different. They can do that. They're allowed to cater to whomever they want.

There doesn't need to be one single product that fits the mold for Standard and Limited, aids Eternal, and filters down to everyone else. Besides, how angry are you as a drafter when you open Death By Dragons, and I sit next to you and open Jace 2.0? The limited crowd starts screaming that R&D piled a bunch of unplayable crap into the format. Standard guys follow suit. Why *can't* it work the other way around once in a while?

commanderSucks wrote:
As for this point, here I disagree with the poster. Getting any new cards though a channel outside of the expansion system in place is bad. Getting, essentially, restricted list reprints would probably be about as bad as it could possibly get. My hope is that the cards are, at best, all just mediocre cards that didnt make the cut in the past few sets (Death by Dragons seems like a Jund card to me that missed Alara Block). That way no one has to worry to much about anyone actually playing any of the new cards that are in this product.


In this we at least somewhat agree. It would be a disaster if the pre-cons were littered with competetive reprints...financially and availability-wise. But again, I see no issue in cards making their way into the overall cardpool through whatever means WotC desides to use. And I also offer you my condolences; you're going to be seeing a lot of what comes out of those boxes, mediocre or not. Get ready.

--->DJ

_________________
General Damage Control - Magic: The Gathering. Elder Dragon Highlander/Commander. No Pulled Punches.

Co-Author, Dear Azami - StarCityGames.com


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 127 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 56 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: