4 ms·

As part of rebalancing they've buffed creatures and nerfed non-creature spells. It's simply not true that all cards have gotten more powerful, it's just that ea

As part of rebalancing they've buffed creatures and nerfed non-creature spells. It's simply not true that all cards have gotten more powerful, it's just that early creatures were garbage and early spells were too good. Nothing we've gotten in the last few sets compare to the original Dual lands, Channel, the Moxen, Ancestral Recall, Counterspell, or even something as innocuous as Dark Ritual.

Beltiras 12y ago
Hypnotic Spectre, Hymn to Tourach, Sinkhole. I remember the days when you could empty your hand with Suicide Black (Type I) on the first turn. Not fun being on the receiving end of 2*ritual, spectre + hymn, losing 2 random cards and looking your doom in the face and your only action so far was losing a coin toss.
JoeAltmaier 12y ago
Well, they're garbage if everything that comes after is inflated. That's my point.
- negativeview 12y ago
  You said that they release more and more "to obsolete the old." My point is that was not their goal. Their goal was always to have spells and creatures roughly balanced. Their original thinking was that creatures were a repeatable source of damage and thus should be costed as such. Turns out they overestimated how much rarity mattered and underestimated the power level of creatures. As a result, we get pretty mediocre creatures and ridiculously powerful rare spells. If every set were trying to outpower the last, then we wouldn't still get functional reprints of Llanowar Elves or Grizzly Bears, both of which were in Alpha. Really, the power creep from year 1 to year 10 or so was a desire to see creatures played in competitive magic and a desire to see more actual games of magic (if your opponent wins the coin flip and goes Mountain, Black Lotus, Channel, Fireball then no actual magic was played). Since then they've actually been doing a sort of power oscillation. Different parts get more powerful over time, then go back to weaker again. They mostly focus on Standard and Limited where the power level of older cards matter less. In summary (I've already written too much) there's simple proof that the power level isn't endlessly increasing: look at Legacy and Modern. Every set that comes out adds between 0-3 cards that see Modern play and 0-1 cards that see Legacy play. If power level were just flat going up, that number would be much much higher.
  - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
    Ok, rather than simple inflation they've invented a way to 'pump' the cards, alternating powerful and weak by category. Even better profits! You don't have to be the least bit creative to do that; you just wait for the old cards to get worn out then reprint them in cycles. Great.
    - negativeview 12y ago
      Yes, they make profit. No, they aren't somehow evil, vindictive, or manipulative while doing so. This line of conversation is not at all productive. You're convinced that they're evil incarnate and will switch from one ill-informed claim (endless inflation) to another (just mindlessly reprinting old cards) on a whim. I'm not interested in getting into an endless Internet argument.
      - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
        Sorry if my tone is harsh; the frustration of the young people in my club has rubbed off on me. The evil part is all projection. The objection I (we) have is with the apparently manipulative program of cycling cards to make you keep buying new ones. Its not a mistake to think this is happening - its the process you describe. We're not the only ones to think this way - the game designers felt the need to defend themselves against the accusations as you so helpfully pointed out. Thus we can't be the only ones to be frustrated in this way. You're convinced all the marketing is ok, not an problem. Fine, you have the money to sink into it. But we're not all like that, we're not all apologists for the company. And some of us have done something about it. Do you blame us? Is it wrong to find another way to deliver a card game that solves some of the admitted problems with existing ones?
        negativeview 12y ago
        You only "need" to upgrade your deck if you want to play competitively. The vast majority of Magic players (according to Wizards' own research) play casually with no format restrictions. On top of that, Wizards supports Modern, which is non-rotating, and (to a lesser degree, because of the reserve list) support Legacy and Vintage as well. If you want to draft without dumping money into it, there's Cube. There's a million different ways to play Magic, and only some of them have the "problem" you describe. I put quotes around problem because the rotation is actually a solution to a different problem: staleness. In Modern, Melira Pod has been one of the top decks for several years. There are a group of people that do not want to play against the same deck all the time, hence rotation. Wizards does plenty to support those that want to play a non-rotating format. I'm not an "apologist" I'm just using my knowledge of the facts (ie, Modern exists and is supported) and common sense (what's the alternative to printing more cards? just ... stopping?).

Beltiras 12y ago

Hypnotic Spectre, Hymn to Tourach, Sinkhole. I remember the days when you could empty your hand with Suicide Black (Type I) on the first turn. Not fun being on the receiving end of 2*ritual, spectre + hymn, losing 2 random cards and looking your doom in the face and your only action so far was losing a coin toss.

JoeAltmaier 12y ago

Well, they're garbage if everything that comes after is inflated. That's my point.

negativeview 12y ago
You said that they release more and more "to obsolete the old." My point is that was not their goal. Their goal was always to have spells and creatures roughly balanced. Their original thinking was that creatures were a repeatable source of damage and thus should be costed as such. Turns out they overestimated how much rarity mattered and underestimated the power level of creatures. As a result, we get pretty mediocre creatures and ridiculously powerful rare spells. If every set were trying to outpower the last, then we wouldn't still get functional reprints of Llanowar Elves or Grizzly Bears, both of which were in Alpha. Really, the power creep from year 1 to year 10 or so was a desire to see creatures played in competitive magic and a desire to see more actual games of magic (if your opponent wins the coin flip and goes Mountain, Black Lotus, Channel, Fireball then no actual magic was played). Since then they've actually been doing a sort of power oscillation. Different parts get more powerful over time, then go back to weaker again. They mostly focus on Standard and Limited where the power level of older cards matter less. In summary (I've already written too much) there's simple proof that the power level isn't endlessly increasing: look at Legacy and Modern. Every set that comes out adds between 0-3 cards that see Modern play and 0-1 cards that see Legacy play. If power level were just flat going up, that number would be much much higher.
- JoeAltmaier 12y ago
  Ok, rather than simple inflation they've invented a way to 'pump' the cards, alternating powerful and weak by category. Even better profits! You don't have to be the least bit creative to do that; you just wait for the old cards to get worn out then reprint them in cycles. Great.
  - negativeview 12y ago
    Yes, they make profit. No, they aren't somehow evil, vindictive, or manipulative while doing so. This line of conversation is not at all productive. You're convinced that they're evil incarnate and will switch from one ill-informed claim (endless inflation) to another (just mindlessly reprinting old cards) on a whim. I'm not interested in getting into an endless Internet argument.
    - JoeAltmaier 12y ago
      Sorry if my tone is harsh; the frustration of the young people in my club has rubbed off on me. The evil part is all projection. The objection I (we) have is with the apparently manipulative program of cycling cards to make you keep buying new ones. Its not a mistake to think this is happening - its the process you describe. We're not the only ones to think this way - the game designers felt the need to defend themselves against the accusations as you so helpfully pointed out. Thus we can't be the only ones to be frustrated in this way. You're convinced all the marketing is ok, not an problem. Fine, you have the money to sink into it. But we're not all like that, we're not all apologists for the company. And some of us have done something about it. Do you blame us? Is it wrong to find another way to deliver a card game that solves some of the admitted problems with existing ones?
      - negativeview 12y ago
        You only "need" to upgrade your deck if you want to play competitively. The vast majority of Magic players (according to Wizards' own research) play casually with no format restrictions. On top of that, Wizards supports Modern, which is non-rotating, and (to a lesser degree, because of the reserve list) support Legacy and Vintage as well. If you want to draft without dumping money into it, there's Cube. There's a million different ways to play Magic, and only some of them have the "problem" you describe. I put quotes around problem because the rotation is actually a solution to a different problem: staleness. In Modern, Melira Pod has been one of the top decks for several years. There are a group of people that do not want to play against the same deck all the time, hence rotation. Wizards does plenty to support those that want to play a non-rotating format. I'm not an "apologist" I'm just using my knowledge of the facts (ie, Modern exists and is supported) and common sense (what's the alternative to printing more cards? just ... stopping?).