Bad prints in standard
Standard forum
Posted on March 3, 2015, 10:34 a.m. by IndepenentMeta
Idk if some of you guys noticed yet but everytime wizards releases a new mechnaic they always out outrageous mana cost on it. Wen bestow got introduced even a card that just gave 2/1 had a mana cost of 4-5. Wen delve hit the board there's nothing less than 4. And now there's two got card that got spoiled that had the potential to be staples but now because of the new cmc they cost too much to see any playtime in standard. My concern would be if the rumors are true and they do get rid of core sets or any expansion between blocks there will be no staples to run other than those cards. Which have really bad cmc and could lead to some terrible games of magic. Idk what do you guys think bout it
lemmingllama says... #3
Not all cards are playable. Some are pretty bad in everything except limited, and some are so wonderful that they will be used in every deck that can support them.
Still, remember that each set is designed for the limited experience first. Even if a card isn't standard playable in comparison to Siege Rhino, it might still be good in limited. Cards like Aerie Bowmasters aren't supposed to see a lot of constructed play, but its a solid blocker/attacker in limited that can kill their flying dragons. If it only cost 
to flip, it would be way too strong and would have it's rarity increased, meaning there would be less things that actually deal with the flyers. They each have a purpose, even if they are overcosted.
Also if you really want staples, you should look to Modern, where the staples will never lose value unless something better is printed.
March 3, 2015 10:46 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #4
I really don't think you play those cards. Cause no one in the right mind would thnk those cmc "balance" things out. Yes I ve heard that about bestow. They don't allow bestow on the field because it could crate infinites blah blah blah. But when you get down to playing the cards the fact that it could go infinite does not outweigh the fact that it can be easily taken off the board. Banishing light, sultai charm, and he'll even death touch puts a strain on the bestow mechnaic. No need for such stuff to "balance" things out.
Although delve can be easily put on to the battlefield. dnt think there's endless resources for it. Eventually it starts putting a wear on your yard. And sometimes people hard cast it. It's not a big deal with cards like dig through time. But idk some of the other delve cards that don't get play time would've been great for standard. I'm not saying tasigur, murderous cut, dig, have bad cmc it's just when your running multiple copies of those cards you could waste all your delve making impossible for other stuff to be drops.
March 3, 2015 10:51 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #5
I've heard that before and I think that's the lamest excuse in meta today. The reason as to why their unuseable is because the orginal print was made so it would be labeled as unusable. Which in my opinion is really unnessicary. It's like I stated before in a format where you are limited to two blocks. There's only a hand full of cards you can use and if all the cards that had staple potentional get nerfed then what would we use as staples?
And yes I have heard o theres other formats but that doesn't fix the problem for the people who wanna play say it with me now. Standard....
March 3, 2015 10:55 a.m.
Wow, that is no way confusing to read :)
Anyways, no, we saw a lot of commons and rares. Several points:
1/ New world order - complexity of commons is reduced to help newer players, so you will naturally see cards that seem overcosted for what they do.
2/ Limited - limited is the second most profitable revenue stream for wizards, it is natural that they design cards aimed at it. Not every rare/mythic has to be a bomb in constructed.
3/ Age-old MaRo quote goes something like this: "If you do not like a card, it is probably not made for you."
4/ "My concern would be if the rumors are true and they do get rid of core sets" - this year's core set is the last one and this is a fact.
5/ "there will be no staples to run other than those cards" - i sincerely doubt wizards will kill their own game like that.
6/ You have seen a single elder dragon that you are complaining about - overreaction much?
7/ "Which have really bad cmc and could lead to some terrible games of magic" - same as number 5.
8/ "Wen delve hit the board there's nothing less than 4." - is there a point to delving otherwise?
9/ "Wen bestow got introduced even a card that just gave 2/1 had a mana cost of 4-5." - that was in the second set, Born of the gods, with the black eidolon, a common specifically aimed at the limited environment. Refer to the previous points.
March 3, 2015 11 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #7
You guys do know they tell you guys that so you can see the excuses through their eyes right? I mean for wat other reason would they say something like "it's designed for sealed/draft play" if it had the right cost it could still be used for "sealed/draft play" but most of the time players don't bother to question such moves. Due to the fact that they take comfort in what wizards say. Then when they re in the situation I'm talking bout suddenly it becomes "all man this is all wizards fault blah blah blah" I'd say at least I recognize the problem. And I don't take lame excuses like "it's for sealed/draft play" as valid excuses.
March 3, 2015 11:09 a.m.
lemmingllama says... #8
Well, the state of Standard is currently pretty solid, with a fairly diverse meta. There are playable cards in every set, and although there may be only 40 playables in a 250 card set (not including lands), that is still 200+ playables that are absolutely fantastic, and then some subpar cards that can fill in the gaps as needed. I'm happy to let Wizards design sets, and if the set is absolutely terrible then I simply won't buy any of it.
March 3, 2015 11:21 a.m.
Please try make your points more clear and do not keep reiterating your own points, try to have a discussion.
"so you can see the excuses through their eyes" - no one is arguing that at all. Everything in the game is subject to the inherent problems of any card game - in order to make a good card, there has to be cards that are subjectively bad. Otherwise, it is impossible to have good cards, simple as that.
March 3, 2015 11:22 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #10
@lemming that's a pretty valid answer man
But idk 1/6 cards are playable sound kinda really how do I say this low? I think wizards should consider bumping that number up a bit. I know that their already starting to do that with some cards that look unplayable may actually have a function. Idk.
March 3, 2015 11:38 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #11
Lol wut? Dude even if we tried to fix the cmc on every card from here on there still will be bad cards. Or cards that fall sort to what we know as meta. To some extend you are right. But to a greater extend your are wrong. You dig?
March 3, 2015 11:40 a.m.
notamardybum says... #12
most of the bs you're talking about is for limited. that's that.
March 3, 2015 12:30 p.m.
ChrisHansonBiomancin says... #14
Sorry bud, you live in a world where different people have different interests, and even people who like something niche like Magic prefer to play different formats.
In other breaking news, Subway will continue to have a different daily special despite how much I love the philly cheese steak.
March 3, 2015 2:33 p.m.
We've dealt with your trolling before, and you really need to understand that not every card can be playable in Constructed. Also, some cards would be completely busted if they were to cost less than they do. There's a reason why Stone Rain hasn't been reprinted but Demolish has. At 3 CMC "destroy target land" is too good, and at 4 CMC it's pretty bad.
Go listen to Mark Rosewater's "Drive to Work" podcasts about game design and then come back and discuss the costing of spells and abilities.
As an example, I don't want the new Shaman of Forgotten Ways' ability to cost less than 11. It maybe could cost 
, but I trust that Wizards put it at 
for a reason.
March 3, 2015 2:44 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #16
Not really most people just think everything is busted. I've test played a few things that aren't that broken such as perfect tri colored lands, what's call unnerfed cards, and some commander bullshit. Cards that are broken are cards like in yugioh where you can't target and can't be destroyed by battle or stuff that floats in the graveyard with limited to no access of stopping such plays. IMO the word broken has been used to offend just to make people sound like they know what their talking bout but you never know what's what until you take a step in the different direction. And I know it seems like I'm trolling to the untrained eye but I assure i believe and know what I'm talking bout %100 percent. Otherwise I wouldnt keep posting the same things...
March 3, 2015 3:48 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #17
I play different formats from magic too man don't think I'm only standard. I've been playing magic for almost a year now. And I've seen most of the meta in each format. Sometimes I'm impressed sometimes I'm not. But it's a pretty fun game either way. If the cards would improve from here on to where they make the right cmc that will only add to other formats. So basically
"those cards are made for limited"
"not all the cards can be playable"
"there are other formats"
And my personal favorite
"wizards doesnt plan cards"
Are all invalid arguments....
March 3, 2015 3:54 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #18
Yeah I'm moving to modern after rotation I already asked one of my friends to see if he can work with me on getting me moved to modern.
March 3, 2015 3:55 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #19
He also wants me to play legacy but I told him imma Need more practice for that
March 3, 2015 3:56 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #20
My example would have to be something like
Unmake the graves
If this card brought two creatures onto the battlefield we would have had another card that could make a format on its own.
I know there's something like endless obedience
But it has as bad side such as bring one creature and a high cmc
March 3, 2015 4:14 p.m.
ChrisHansonBiomancin says... #22
The way I see it, you have 3 options:
1) quit playing Magic
2) buy so many copies of the "staples" you like that WotC takes notice and changes their entire methodology of card creation to cater to your purchasing power
3) Learn to deal
March 3, 2015 5:39 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #23
How is the Limited-oriented design not a valid argument? The Limited environment is entirely different from the Constructed environment. Cards that are bombs in Limited could well be terrible in Constructed.
The fact of the matter is that Limited is WOTC's primary design concern. Sets are designed for the Limited environment. The impact of Card X or Mechanic Y in Format Z may be considered, but it isn't the primary focus. And it doesn't need to be. Not every card can be a bomb in every format. WOTC prioritizes Limited from a design perspective because that choice makes the most sense, and they support the other formats by considering the cross-format viability of various cards and mechanics.
Let's take bestow, for example. Bestow as a mechanic is an absolute beast in Limited because it's all value. Unless your opponent is holding a counterspell or an enchantment removal spell, you're eventually getting a creature. And you have a very good chance of getting an enchanted creature before that (and you have the choice to bestow or not to bestow), so you're getting extra value there.
To balance that out, the bestow cost is generally between 4-7 mana, and the mana cost is generally between 2-4. Sure, you pay extra for the added value. All value-add mechanics work like that.
The fact that you think Nimbus Naiad (for the sake of example) isn't viable in Standard doesn't change the quality of the design of the card itself.
March 3, 2015 5:48 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #25
I mean in which case why not make a pack or introduce a block strictly for limited play? So it doesn't mess with anything for standard players? I'd figure with so many creative minds such as Chris Hanson and Pepsi someone in the office would've thought of such a thing...
March 3, 2015 6:51 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #26
You do realize that every set is designed for Limited, right? Sets aren't designed for Standard or Modern or Limited. The set is sold as a set. And the reason stores buy so many boxes in the first place is to fuel Limited play, which requires booster packs. If WOTC didn't prioritize Limited, they wouldn't sell cases like they do, and they wouldn't keep the market fresh with new product.
And don't take this personally, but anyone who says they're 100% sure about something, then says they've been playing for a year, then asks what the rules for Limited are doesn't exactly strike me as an authoritative or objective source of analysis for something like this.
March 3, 2015 7:05 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #27
Hell, even Modern Masters was designed with Limited in mind for the complete package. It was full of staples, but the reason it included cards like Mercenaries (which don't even see fringe play as a tribe) was to facilitate a better, more complete Limited experience. But not every set should be a Modern Masters. When you look at regular releases like Innistrad, you get the full flavor of the set's lore backed up by the immersive experience of the set's Limited environment. That's a large part of the game, and many people write it off because they're only concerned about a specific Constructed format.
March 3, 2015 7:08 p.m.
PepsiAddicted says... #28
"anyone who says they're 100% sure about something, then says they've been playing for a year, then asks what the rules for Limited are doesn't exactly strike me as an authoritative or objective source of analysis for something like this"
made my day +1
March 3, 2015 7:10 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #29
I'll Reiterate that I don't mean that offensively. But it's true. I see a lot of people here and on MTGS (on the few occasions I venture over there) saying "this should be banned," or "why is X so overpowered?" or "why doesn't Wizards do Y?" but then I look at their profiles and decks and see they've only been playing for six months or a year or two and they really don't understand all of the factors at work here. There's a lot that goes into set design and marketing and format balance, and much of nuance is something that players only come to realize with time (if at all).
March 3, 2015 7:14 p.m.
omnipotato says... #30
>Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time are OP in Modern and Legacy and get banned because delve is so powerful
>mfw this thread
March 3, 2015 7:16 p.m.
FreddyFlash311 says... #31
Creatures are way under costed now compared to years past in magic. If you see your opponent play a Shivan Dragon or Serra Angel now you'd probably laugh, right? But they used to be constructed bombs. Same with like Force of Nature and Royal Assassin. A T1 ritual into Hypnotic Specter used to be some insane game.
When Killer Bees and Carrion Ants were reprinted in Fourth it was a big deal (for a lot of reasons, really). Look at them and tell me how you'd feel if you cracked either in a pack of DTK.
The cards they're printing now aren't all 100% broken, sure, but they're sure as hell raised the bar for creatures over the years.
March 3, 2015 8:34 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #32
Yeah that's prolly why I'm saying that limit should have a different pack. So they can actually focus on limited play. If you ask me I think most stores get their money from standard play.. Where I'm from most people play standard. Although the modern and legacy scene isnt short.
My point limit sets for limited standard sets for standard and modern sets for modern simple really?
March 3, 2015 10:15 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #33
They got banned because supposedly UR delver was taking too many tourney and now we see splitter twin taking its fair share the point is delve only added diversity. And I'm not talking bout those delve cards being bad I'm talking bout the actual bad ones
March 3, 2015 10:17 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #34
Lol trust me at the beginning of this format I was trying to use Sengir vampire. It had its hit and misses but over all I liked it. Won a few games vs my brother mirror match sultai. And I got to use cards like abhorrent overlord. I like those kinda cards. The point is don't make every card broke but making them playable would be a ice change in magic
March 3, 2015 10:25 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #36
First, what the stores make money on is irrelevant. WOTC is the entity designing the game, and they make money by selling sealed product. Part of how they market sealed product is by supporting Limited through set design.
Second, how would a Limited pack even work? The set is designed for Limited. All sets are. What does "Standard set" even mean? Or "Modern set," for that matter? Sorry to have to tell you, but not every card in every pack can be a Siege Rhino or a Snapcaster Mage. You can't just wish for a set full of random bombs for just one format.
At the end of the day, some cards will be useless in some formats. You know what you do? You don't play those cards. I don't see why you not wanting to open unplayable cards means the fundamental design of the game should change. If you want a guarantee that what you're buying is playable, buy singles.
March 3, 2015 11:55 p.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #37
Make cards that meet the mean of limited play. Same as commander there are cards for specifically for that format no? Making bad cards isn't fundamental to the game it's just a waste of ink and card space IMO. Just take ponyback brigade for example do you honk that would've seen more standard play if it had been a 4 drop? Or would sandsteppe mastodon rival siege rhino if it had been a 5 drop? Friday night magic is basically standard every Friday limited tourneys modern or any other format happen at least once to twice a month. Or very Thursday for modern where I'm from. The point is there's nothing wrong with making a bunch of cards more playable. Deck lists could change and they could differ if their was more options. Almost every decklist In every format look the same in every format. Even in modern where you have like 12 different blocks to chose from. Wanna know why is that? Because only 1/6 of the cards in every expansion are playable the other 5/6 of the pack goes for a format no one even plays. I know I just came into this game a year ago but I feel as if thou I can grasp different concepts better than most people at my range. Or even some of your vets. There's a reason why I say I know what I'm talking bout
March 4, 2015 12:51 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #38
The cards "specifically" for Commander number maybe 30-40 or so. The vast majority of cards included in Commander precons are existing cards. Plus, a preconstructed deck for Commander is vastly different from a complete set or even a preconstructed deck for a 60-card format.
And tell me this: if we got rid of all of the Chimney Imps, what would be the next weakest card? And the weakest one when we got rid of that one? There will always be weak cards because cards are weak by comparison to other cards. You don't get around that by eliminating some of the chaff. The best decks will always play the best cards because they want the best chances of winning. Whatever isn't good enough to maximize that chance is suboptimal by comparison. That's the reality of competitive play in this game. Or in any nonuniform game, really. Not every option will be the best option or even a good option.
I caution you against saying "no one even plays" Limited, considering every prerelease and release event is Limited, many major events are based around Limited, and Limited side events are one of the biggest draws at any non-Limited event.
You might say that you know what you're talking about, but it's becoming more and more apparent that what you actually know is quite, well, limited.
March 4, 2015 1:10 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #39
I'm saying if you made chimney Imp a 3 drop with those stats it be better than a five drop right? Limited play is just kinda lame man everyone always looks for the events that matter. Standard, modern, and legacy. I always see people playing sealed/draft whenever their trying to get more cards for their standard/modern deck. Or on magic online it's to pick up their collections. Nothing else. Before you post anything else just answer the question would chimney imp be better if it was a 3 drop?
March 4, 2015 1:23 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #40
That's another point I was trying to tell you The tier cards would stick out rather than the bad cards that will fall short. So why print cards that you know won't do shit for the format it's a waste of space. And I would suggest those professionals at the office take a different approach to making cards. Instead of going about it through limited go about it through the good stuff the standard. The block that brings in your money.
March 4, 2015 1:27 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #41
Plus my deck folders are like
https://c1.staticflickr.com/7/6119/6267881492_248bcd95c9.jpg
March 4, 2015 1:36 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #42
I suppose you're not aware that over half of the Grand Prix and Pro Tour events leading up to the December 2014 World Magic Cup were Limited, not counting any mixed-format events.
And yes, Chimney Imp would be better, in a vacuum, as a three-drop. Does that mean it should be a three-drop? Not necessarily. Limited involves a number of different factors, including the overall curve of the set, the relative value of certain mechanics (ever notice how additional abilities tend to raise the mana cost of a card?), the saturation of certain costs, and much much much more. In Limited, Chimney Imp offers a flying body that also Time Walks your opponent's draw. Card advantage is extremely important in Limited, and there isn't an abundance of it. At common rarity, Chimney Imp would probably be too powerful as a three-drop. So the choices are to raise the cost or to up the rarity.
And rarity itself is another tool used to balance Limited. Yeah, you probably aren't too happy that your rare is a worthless Stormtide Leviathan, but that card is rare because it can't appear at the uncommon or common level in Limited. It wouldn't be conducive to a healthy format.
Now, you can continue to argue about "Oh, well card X would be better if it cost less or if it did this" without understanding any of the context influencing these design choices, or you can try to understand the design goals and environment influencing the game you claim to understand so well. If you choose the latter, it should become clear to you exactly why the design choices you wish had been made weren't made after all.
March 4, 2015 1:39 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #43
Regarding post #2:19,
You still either don't understand or don't accept that sets are designed for Limited. Now, it's very tempting to just write "sets are designed for Limited" in all caps, 108-point font, but I'll resist the urge in the hopes that I don't need to insult anyone's intelligence on the matter.
Anyway, sets are designed for Limited. Individual cards play a role in shaping the Limited environment. Ever wonder why sets contain between 130-250 cards on average? It's because that allows for a diversified Limited environment. Not all of those cards have a significant impact on the format as a whole, and comparatively few of those cards have a significant impact on other formats.
As for Standard, WOTC makes less money off of Standard. I don't know if you realize this, but WOTC doesn't get kickbacks from the entry fees of your LGS's Standard nights. Standard doesn't sell sealed product. Modern doesn't sell sealed product. Maybe you'll get an increase in personal preorders, and therefore in store orders (although stores seem to be allocated certain maximum initial orders, so probably not), if a set shows a higher number of promising Standard/Modern/eternal cards, or maybe you'll have the rare Modern Masters example, but the average set is sold on its own to stores. And what do stores do with their shipments? They open some of them to stock their display cases, they sell some of them still sealed, and they open the rest to supply Limited events, including prerelease and release events. WOTC doesn't make different amounts of money for these uses. WOTC just makes the product and sells it to distributors. The distributors, under WOTC's guidance, decide how much each store can order. The stores place the order and then do whatever they like with the product.
WOTC doesn't see a single cent from the product after that. They don't see any money from booster pack sales. They don't see any money from the singles market. Nothing. They simply make the product and sell it sealed.
Plus, Standard isn't a block.
March 4, 2015 1:48 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #44
Trust me it's something I understand. it's been repeated to me this entire time I've been playing standard. I just don't agree with it. I've played I think it was 1-4 limited tourney and sometimes it does surprise you how good a bad card can be in limited but I don't see that as a reason to print out 5/6 of a pack as bad cards. I mean if sandsteppe was a 5 drop it still be good in limited play right? It would magically spoil it because it became more playable in a standard format. The thing is I understand card designs and where you guys are coming from but try to understand me. We can have some of these cards in every block too if you don't wanna make an entire block for it. Like let's say we pick an artist or two to make a good 2/6 of the cards for limited play. Don't you think that would be equally as fun? Like hey rumor has it that that card was the artist choice for limited play. While we have a good 4/6 of the cards being staples, not haymakers, staples for the game.
March 4, 2015 2 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #45
Sandsteppe Mastodon as a 5-drop would be too powerful in Limited and Standard. As it is, a 5/5 reach that gives you another +5/+5 on board for 
is very good. You may not be able to play it in Standard, but you aren't why the card was designed.
And I have to ask, because you seem serious about the proposal, whether you understand the logistics of printing a set where 66% of the cards are staples. First, that really isn't possible because the format will not have that many staples that often (we get four sets per year). Second, you would turn power creep into a power space program. Third, you would destroy the collectible value of the game. CCGs are based on limited supply (that the word "Limited" comes up so often is no coincidence) and disparities in card power. The secondary value of any given card is dependent on those variables.
And an artist? Artists don't design cards. They're commissioned to do art for cards. Most of them probably don't even play the game, and none of them have design input. They get, at most, a message from WOTC with an outline of the card's flavor and maybe a basic request ("give us a steampunk goblin" gets you Goblin Flectomancer).
March 4, 2015 2:12 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #46
Additionally, 33% of a set is not sufficient to support Limited, since Limited is based on using the entire set as potential deck material. Are you going to maintain the health of Limited on the back of 40-70 cards per set?
March 4, 2015 2:15 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #47
Well I think is. I mean let's think bout the big picture here it wouldn't be limiting limited play more like adding more structure to the format. Have you ever been in a draft where the guy doesn't pack anything good. So he try's to make a deck out of all the crap that was given to him. And fell short due to some people packing better? My logic behind throwing that number around is due to the fact that we would have more staples in limited play while having a few good sealed cards like mardu rough rider in limited play? Idk if I worded that right
March 4, 2015 2:31 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #48
You cannot be serious.
You're arbitrarily proposing 40- to 70-card Limited with only strong cards? Simply because someone could get screwed by drafting poorly?
That's not even a format. That's six people playing the same deck against one another. Or maybe two groups of three people drafting the same deck next to one another.
March 4, 2015 2:42 a.m.
Epochalyptik says... #49
Oh, and there won't be any themes or subthemes in a card pool that small. It's just goodstuff.
March 4, 2015 2:45 a.m.
IndepenentMeta says... #50
Just don't put the cards with high cmc that's all I'm sayingim not saying limit the packs, I'm not saying destroy draft, I'm saying don't over cost cards that you know should cost a little less that's all
Epochalyptik says... #2
The mana costs are for balance. Consider that delve is extremely easy to pay and that bestow is basically a fail proof 2-for-1. Even if the bestow target dies, the bestowed card becomes a creature (even as a spell!).
March 3, 2015 10:41 a.m.