Rotation Sucks
Standard forum
Posted on July 30, 2015, 6:45 p.m. by Zaiato
I am not bitch or complaining I know why rotation is necessary but it still sucks, I like to try and make new meta decks at my local FNM and sometimes they work but even if they don't they are still fun but then rotation come along and ruins my fun by taking the decks I love playing out of standard.
Its hard to really love a deck because you know deep down one day it will be gone.....like my Elf deck I just made with Origins Ill have almost 2 years with it but someday it will leave me to.
So what is your opinion on rotation post your stories and feelings here just to share.
Its definitely frustrating at first, especially money wise, but I never have trouble finding some other dumb deck to play around with.
July 30, 2015 6:57 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #5
This thread was moved to a more appropriate forum (auto-generated comment)
July 30, 2015 7:02 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #7
Although I understand the frustration and disappointment that come with losing access to your preferred decks or cards, the function of Standard in the Magic community is to provide a dynamic environment that showcases lots of decks, cards, and strategies in a way that static formats can't really match. The fact that it rotates annually (soon to be biannually; rotations will be happening twice per year starting with Theros going out in a few months) is what gives it that dynamic element.
Standard is, in a way, the Commander of 60-card formats. A lot of cards only see action in Standard because they're not up to scratch in the other formats, and that's part of what makes Standard interesting to play and watch. This is owed to the fact that Standard includes only very recent sets.
July 30, 2015 7:09 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #8
On a slightly disconnected linguistic note, it stinks that biannual has 2 distinct meanings that are in a way incompatible. It makes since as its primary meaning as a synonym for semiannual. But because of homophones and common usage it also is a synonym for biennial.
On topic, play a non-rotating format if you like to be able to keep your decks. Standard is the format for people that enjoy constantly pouring money into the hobby. If you just want to buy a deck once and play the same deck until it gets banned play modern or legacy.
July 30, 2015 7:24 p.m.
TheNinjaJesus says... #9
I believe you're speaking of two distinct terms that people act like they're the same. Biannual means twice a year. Biennial means every two years.
July 30, 2015 7:29 p.m.
Play vintage. You only have to buy the cards once. Nothing is going to get banned, and they'll never print anything that'll replace the big cards in your deck.
July 30, 2015 7:30 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #12
The correct usage of biannual is different from the correct usage of biennial, hence my choice. I suppose "biennial" isn't part of everyone's vocabulary, though.
Also, I have mixed feelings about the notion that playing Standard necessarily requires you to continually invest. You can, if you're savvy, trade Standard staples at appropriate times and simply shift your value before you lose it. However, it's a complicated process for most traders and doesn't always hold up in practice. I think what's more unfortunate than the decks rotating is the value loss that accompanies rotation. That's really what makes Standard taxing: the economic cycle, not the release cycle. That said, Standard is cheaper to play than other 60-card formats; the top decks in Standard tend to cost less on average (and at peak) than the top decks in Modern and Legacy. So it's basically the buying vs. renting dilemma: do you front a larger cost for more enduring access, or do you pay in a little every now and then for temporary access?
July 30, 2015 7:34 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #13
I wasn't commenting on your usage of it since it is used correctly and via the more intuitive way. I was just making the comment in general. Much the same way that "literally" means 2 opposite things now since common usage, Biannual means 2 incompatible things. I will however provide sources when people tell me I'm wrong in my observations.
July 30, 2015 7:42 p.m.
IvoryFrost says... #14
So cards go from having a 2 year life to 18 months.
I avoid standard because nothing really caught my eye, and knowing cards would be rotating out, loosing money I invested really left a bad taste in my mouth. Then elves show up, so I'm now going to try it out. I know eventually they'll be gone but I'll enjoy the fun, for now.
July 30, 2015 7:52 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #15
Biannual's "second" definition is proscribed at best. Biannual means twice per year. It's commonly confused with biennial, and that confusion has reached the point where people use them interchangeably, but the actual (read: literal) meaning of biannual is not biennial.
When it comes to technical application of language, I'm a prescriptive linguist. I tend to write with very accurate, traditionally correct word choice because that's the most consistent way to convey a defined and unambiguous message. A descriptive linguist would agree with the adopted (but incorrect) second definition.
With all of that, we're now off topic.
July 30, 2015 7:52 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #16
To make up for the digression, here's a better explanation of how the new rotation is going to work. (Source is WOTC's article on the new rotation schedule.)
July 30, 2015 7:54 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #17
I see in no way how biannual's second meaning is forbidden, banished, or censured.
As a prescriptive linguist you have to have some authority to which you hold language. If it is MW I have provided the link already that shows that Biannual means Biennial. If you are an Oxford follower then you are correct and they still have distinct meanings. It just depends on what authority you want to cite. I went with the one that I use most often. I recognize that other authorities exist and will not dispute that the biennial=biannual is something that came about because professional linguists are mostly descriptive in their approach.
July 30, 2015 9:10 p.m.
notamardybum says... #18
You're all getting caught up and not saying what needs to be said. Drop standard, say hello to modern. No rotations.
July 30, 2015 9:46 p.m.
Serendipitous_Hummingbird says... #19
Let's be fair, modern DOES rotate, just at a much slower pace. If a deck becomes too dominant, it WILL get banned/nerfed. That being said, modern is MUCH cheaper to play than "true" eternal formats. A modern deck will last you many years, potentially forever. It is just worth noting that WoTC is fully comfortable with banning archetypes that become too oppressive (Birthing Pod, Punishing Fire, Bloodbraid Elf, Deathrite Shaman, etc.)
Play pauper. Helluva lot of fun. Tier 1 decks are like $30-$50, and the format is surprisingly competitive and strong.
July 30, 2015 10:09 p.m.
Gidgetimer says... #20
Real Talk: Where is there an actual competitive paper pauper scene?
July 30, 2015 10:17 p.m.
Epochalyptik says... #21
Banning and rotating are two different things. Modern does tend to be more actively regulated than Legacy, but I wouldn't say that makes the format function as though it rotates. Rotation is a no-exceptions lifecycle for each deck in the format.
July 30, 2015 10:19 p.m.
Serendipitous_Hummingbird says... #22
Gidgetimer not at my LGS but I've heard other people talk about it, so I'm hoping it is spreading.
If that's the case, buy your Oubliettes now
July 30, 2015 10:20 p.m.
Standard just rotates entirely too fast. I gave up hope on FNM a long time ago. Plus I can't bare spending 20 to 40 on a card just because its standard legal, when in all reality it is maybe a .50 card otherwise. If you've got the money to spend on modern then that is where you want to be, but I'll play EDH and casual 60 card to my hearts content for a fraction of the price. And for what its worth, I get more enjoyment out of an EDH game or a cleverly constructed casual game than any meta driven net deck head bashing at the local FNM. Guess thats my opinion. It has its place, but the current atmosphere of standard has sort of lost a lot of the old magic for me, no pun intended. Creativity is lost in the rush to perfect a tournament caliber deck within the time allotted to actually use the cards you shelled out your tuition money for. Again, in my opinion, if you want to make a deck that you can put your heart and soul into and be like yes this is my baby every time you pull it out of the box, play EDH.
July 30, 2015 10:51 p.m.
Rasta_Viking29 says... #24
Rotation is fun. Popping your cherry is always rough but you'll learn to enjoy it. As you can see some get gun shy and scrub out to Modern :P
July 30, 2015 10:56 p.m.
jackanukealty says... #25
Modern is good if you don't like rotation, it's why I never spend much money at all on standard, it's too volatile for me. EDH is ALWAYS fun. Except games with my LGS owner's Kaalia of the Vast deck. Hell, play Legacy if you wish (I won't, too 'spensive). There is a reason why standard rotates, and it is hella popular. If you don't like it, come try out modern, you don't have to shell out a ridiculous amount for a competitive deck.
July 30, 2015 11:53 p.m.
Modern costs a lot to start. Lands are all 10+ bucks just to start, and the staples such as Tarmogoyf, Abrupt Decay, Goblin Guide, and such are all super expensive cards that you need multiples of.
July 31, 2015 1:39 p.m.
TheNinjaJesus says... #27
Abrupt Decay is just about the cheapest it's ever been. Ditto for shocks. About the only thing insanely priced is the Goyf, because Goyf.
July 31, 2015 2:46 p.m.
Not true on Abrupt Decay, I got em while they were still standard for 7 bucks each. They jacked up like crazy upon rotation of rtr.
July 31, 2015 4:29 p.m.
TheNinjaJesus says... #29
Oh, were they? I had the luck to pull two plus a foil, which I parleyed into six more (the buyer had a massive hard-on for Commander). I thought they were 20ish in Standard, and they went up to 27, and then back down to 17. My mistake.
July 31, 2015 4:33 p.m.
Yeah, at the end of dragons maze around, I bought a playset of them super cheap.
July 31, 2015 4:41 p.m.
jackanukealty says... #31
You can say modern costs a lot to start, but that's at the top tier. There are many effective modern decks which can be had for $300-$400 and that is about the same as a Top Tier Standard Deck
July 31, 2015 6:18 p.m.
Burn is the only cheap deck that is really viable in modern, unless you play some jank like hate bears. Sideboard cards in modern are ruthlessly backbreaking and the more expensive cards simply outclass and outperform the cheaper options.
July 31, 2015 7:29 p.m.
jackanukealty says... #33
Blue Tron is a thing, yes, HateBears is a thing, I made a decent Tezzeret deck for about $300, Infect is a thing. I suppose burn is a "proven" strategy, but some of us just want to have fun in constructed at our LGS without having to constantly change our deck biannually. Yes, Modern sideboards can be really expensive, (Looking at you, Blood Moon) but, you don't need Tarmogoyfs, Dark Confidants Mox Opals, Karn Liberateds or Liliana of the Veils to play Modern
July 31, 2015 9:17 p.m.
ComradeJim270 says... #34
I'm just straight up switching to Modern because of this very issue. Can get some store credit that way and dip into standard occasionally, but I don't plan on keeping up with rotation.
"Budget" decks in Modern are still usually hundreds of dollars, but you don't have to build a new one every year or so; getting into that format is costly but in the long run it's probably a cheaper format. You spend more up-front but less overall. The cards also hold value, unlike most cards in Standard.
TheNinjaJesus says... #2
There's more formats than Standard. Play one of those formats instead.
July 30, 2015 6:54 p.m.