New MtG format

>>48434731
>Collected Company
someone's mad

>>48434731
You mean Extended. With a smaller card pool.
Try again in 10 years when the cardpool is big enough to warrant being a non-rotating format.

>>48434731
> Ban fetches

Literally why? Certainly, you cant be butt-blasted about consistent mana bases.

>Ruse cruise
>Dtt
>CoCo

You have to be a complete idiot.

>>48434731
I might if not for that retarded banlist.

>>48434848
Actually 8th was only 8 years old when Modern came out.
So, we could have neo-modern as early as 2022! Better get brewing!

File: 1467630752990.jpg (7KB, 172x225px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 172x225px

>>48434731
No. Banning the fetchlands would reduce deck variety. It's not fun to play against the same deck every time.

>>48434731
Stupid banlists aside, I'd probably hazard a bet that Ultra Modern is going to happen sooner or later, depending on the progress of conterfeiters. Especially since Wizards has practically cut ties with Modern by now and the format has pretty much failed to achieve any goal they stated for it.

>>48434882
>The year is 2022
>WotC still refuses to abolish the reserved list
>Legacy staples have reached 2000 a piece
>Vintage staples are practically as rare as Richard Garfield promos
>Modern has been abolished in favor of Neo-Modern, spanning from M15 forward
>Making all Modern staples that didn't cycle into Neo-Modern crash in price overnight
>However, large stores had large Modern sales just a few moths ago, unloading most of their Modern staples before the crash
>Because of the Unregistered Goods Trading Act of 2019, this was ruled as Insider Trading by federal court
>Hasbro has officially dissolved its WotC division and is currently dealing with numerous lawsuits
>Upperdeck Entertainment has purchased the rights to the popular card game
>They have no plans to continue the TCG at this time
>At least we finally have flying cars
>Traffic is still horrible

>>48434858
>>48434892
Not OP, but all the shuffling get old really fast.

>>48434731
>banning fetches
No. Mana fixing is fine and only shit players complain about it because shit players need their opponent to not play the game in order to win.
>banning cruise/dig
again, if you're bad you need these banned to prevent your opponents from consistently playing the game every turn.
>banning coco
I'm biased because I'm inundated by Gx and bant coco decks at my LGS but I'd agree with this.

>>48434731
>Neo Modern
Can we let this meme die in peace already?

>>48434948
That's mainly cause wizards hasn't fucking tried to reduce the prices of cards in modern

>>48435014
at least Trump got re-elected.

Ditch the random fetch bans and I'd play it.

Really though any new format can be pushed if there is a consistent enough tourney schedule for it. If someone ponied up for a big enough location and a decent price pool we could see a format that's only made of Fallen Empires, Homelands, and Un-sets.

>>48435122
And as long as the current management is here, they never will.
And as long as MtG continues to grow, the management won't change.

>>48435247
Didn't they just get a brand new CEO like a few months ago?

I understand the fetch banning. It's more for a financial reason than a mechanical one.

It's literally just a 'you have to pay this much to have a consistent mana base and not be the victim of dumb luck' pay wall. It's a question of banning fetches and destroying consistent land bases or keeping fetches and enforcing a strict pay wall.

>>48435307
I'm my opinion, pay walls are a good thing.

The people who pay 40 bucks for a single card are people who actually care about the game. They love it, want to spend disposable income on it, and want to support it in the future. It's a hobby, and while you can enjoy the game with a bunch of penny commons, if you care about it enough, you spend money.

Now, are card prices absurd? Absolutely. There should br no reason any card exceeds $10. But having a basic entry fee that you only pay if you are passionate about tournament play is a good thing for the health of a competitive game.

>>48434731
i would say start without bans, see if anything is overpowered then ban that

>>48435263
I'm pretty sure that he didn't say anything about changing the course, so...

>>48435419
>~10 dollar price cap for singles

Very agreed. Any card that costs more than around 10 dollars is a complete scam and destroying this game. I believe that, for a top tier deck, a player should be able to spend ~$150 to get a tournament grade deck.

As for the formats, Standard should last longer and rotate set by set instead of block by block. 8 sets in standard, and one set rotates at a time.

Supermodern can totally work, they just have to reprint staples a fuckton to maintain a safe price point. Cards CAN be good, but they dont have to be expensive. Foils? Sure, those are shiny and more valuable. Regular print cards should be less than 10 at all times.

>>48435670

Why not just go full tilt and make a $10 dollar and under format?

You don't even need a very extensive ban list, since if the demand of a card spikes too high it will rise in price and thus become softbanned.

>>48435014
>They have no plans to continue the TCG at this time
And at last we are free.

>>48435701
Pauper, then?

File: temple.jpg (177KB, 659x1008px) Image search: [Google]

177KB, 659x1008px

New MTG format: You play with two Libraries, one of 40 spells and other of 20 lands. Every time you draw you may choose between them.
Discard piles are separated.
No more Landflood, no more Manascrew, Fetches aren't that good anymore.

>>48435964
you should get good at shuffling

>>48435964
What about, go full retard and make your land deck any size (20 max?), just draw from spell deck and gain a land per turn off the top hearthstone-style?

>>48435964
Magic was made with this mechanics and the possibility of dryspells or drawing one land after the other in mind. It's balanced around it. Ensuring a land drop 100% of a time would completely fucking wreck the balance of the game, how the fuck are people not getting this?

>But FoW?
Force of Will is a different game, hopefully balanced around the fact that there is a mana deck.

>>48435964
I've seen some retarded shit on this board but this is pretty up there

>>48434731
>New Modern
I'd love it. Modern is already a very well developed format where lots of the newer cards don't see play regardless wether they are good or not due to fierce competition. A new Modern with a younger, developing meta would be fun because it'd ahift very quickly as each new set would have a greater impact.

>Ban Treasure Cruise & Dig through Time
Those are already banned in Modern, so tey have no business being legal in this new format.

>Ban Collected Company & fetches
Now you are being retarded. Fetches enabled the 4 colour rally decks, but they are also the base of 3 colour decks. Without them, all t1 decks would be bicolor no doubt.

Collected shouldn't be banned either. What's the point of a new format if you won't allow power cards in it?

>>48434892
It would increase variety since decks would start to need making compromises in their card choices instead of all running the same "best" choice that's only drawback is having a color dense casting cost.

>>48435964

Go back to Hearthstone.

Modern needs more cards, not less. Masques, Tempest, or Alliances forward might actually be interesting.

>>48434731
>Banned cards:
>Treasure Cruise
>Dig through Time
>Collected Company
>Flooded Strand, Polluted Delta, Blooded Mire, Wooded Foothills, Windswept Heath
Nope.

>>48435419
Pay Walls aren't good, many people might be interested in the game might be put off by the fact the staples are high priced. From what it sounds like, it's sounds like a "Secret Club" thing.
>>48435936
Pauper is pretty expensive, it's only "budget" when compared to other formats.

If it wasn't banned in standard.
No ban in this format.

>>48435964
I play balustrade spy, targeting your non land deck. I win

>>48434731
That's a dumb time to start it.

It's clear that new modern will start at Magic Origins.

File: 1358482518551.jpg (11KB, 250x250px) Image search: [Google]

11KB, 250x250px

>>48436221
>Force of Will is a different game, hopefully balanced around the fact that there is a mana deck.
>Force of Will
>Balanced
Force of will is balanced by the devs failing to reign in power creep and accidentally giving broken things out to every color. After all, this is the game, that dropped standard in favor of block constructed due to standard being too degenerate to fix.

>>48438582
Well, that would make OP's banlist a reality, but there's no way anyone would play that for a few more years. You'd at least want to wait until the carpool is larger than standard.

>>48438758
But the card pool would be m15, khans block, origins, zendikar return block and new innistrad block.
Then in 6 months kaladesh block.

>>48438807
>It's clear that new modern will start at Magic Origins.
It's hard to have a discussion when people don't read the posts being discussed.

>>48438143
Just how much exactly is "expensive" to you?

>>48438908
Depends on how one looks at it and what you really want to play. One can make a rouge deck out of junk commons and stuff lying around and that can vary, and certain competitive decks are 40$+

It's a good amount of money if looking at some of the good cards and decks, but compared to the other formats it's very cheap.

>>48438728
>and accidentally giving broken things out to every color
More like giving only one color broken stuff.

>>48438908
I you can't build it for less than 5 ticks on mtgo.

People pushing back against 'no fetches' don't play enough paper magic. The first five-ten minutes of every game being shuffle/cut/mulligan fetch+shuffle a few turns in a row from each player is some of the most cancerous shit a physical game can possibly have.

m15 border+ needs a few more sets to be interesting, IMO.

>>48438908
My G stompy deck cost like $40 tops, including the full art forests, kek. Some of you are real penny-pinching fucking jews.

I can understand the CoCo ban, considering it's one of the most standard-warping noncreature spells of all time.

>>48438728
I know fuck-all about FoW, hence
>hopefully balanced

>>48438908
Anything below 100 bucks should be acceptable, with 100 bucks being pretty much the point where prices for TCG decks become degenerate.

>>48435071
Ok, so fuck you
It isn't eggs, grow up

>>48434731
Only if they made it so no card could be banned.

>>48440265
Even Force of Will decks can run over 100
250 is the standard
As long as most people make tcg's over lcg's, you're going to get assfucked in price

>>48435014
>They have no plans to continue the TCG at this time

Why would you buy something then not profit from it?

>>48440816
It could reach the point that Games Workshop has, where MtG's IP is far valuable than the actual product that was originally produced for it.

>>48434731
Wizards would start a new non-rotating format from BFZ. That way they'd be 1) excluding fetchlands, 2) excluding butthurt design mistakes like Delve and Meme Rhino, and 3) have a nice coherant starting point at their 2 set blocks. They'd also get to exclude Lightning Strike, which is far too powerful for Magic.

>>48440265
>100 bucks is where they become degenerate
>A fucking digital Vintage deck is around 700

I still have no fucking clue why the fuck they made MTGO Vintage so stupidly expensive. I get that they can't do anything about paper, and paper Vintage+Legacy are largely dead as fuck because of that. But there's nothing stopping you from making your stupid online game somewhat reasonably affordable.

>>48440863
Ok. But if you dont do something with it its wasted money.

Banking fetches and CoCo? What a bunch of cry babies.

>>48440877
>Lightning Strike
>too powerful

Wut

>>48440961
2 mana to deal 3 whole points of damage, Anon! Why, with broken cards like this lying around, red might actually stand a remote chance of making a top 8 in a Standard event. Can't be having that now, can we?

>>48434731
>Only rule is M15 border and onwards
>EMA, MM2, Commander series, Duel decks
>Force of Will, Brainstorm, Daze, Price of Progress, Chain Lightning, Lightning Bolt, Shardless Agent, Baleful Strix, Sinkhole, Vindicate, Tarmogoyf

Sounds fun

>>48442214
It'd be weird, it has a ton of legacy power cards but nothing like delver to make as much use of it

>>48442280
Mom and STP is probably enough for a lot of white-based decks to do well. Sinkhole, Wasteland, and POP punish the 4-5 color boogeyman standard that was Khans-BFZ.

>>48442354
Miracles wouldn't exist. I imagine some version of Shardless BUG would start to dominate really quickly since it has sinkhole, goyf, strix

>>48441854
Nigga I say the whole game should revolve around Bolt being just an acceptable card. Just bring the rest of the game up in powerlevel since 2 mana 3 damage is to weak and 1 mana 3 damage is to powerful.

>>48434731

I would be all for it since I started with Origins to begin with.

>>48435218
Lets see if we can get LRR behind it

>>48435419
I disagree with paywalls being a good thing, but I do agree with 10 dollars being a good cut off point

So basically Four Color Hell?

I'd play it, but it's probably going to be too similar to that particular Standard rotation.

It would suck without the fetchlands though. The M15+ manabase is completely shit without them.

>enemy painland
>allied fetchland
>allied battleland
>enemy creatureland
>allied shadowland

File: images(7).jpg (18KB, 402x366px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 402x366px

>new border cards only
>2014+ commander decksare legal
>mfw daretti spaghetti never forgetti is a 4 of in my UR robots deck

>m15 border cards
>Eternal masters and mm15 are legal
>every deck is 4x wasteland 4x mana crypt 4x mox
>eldrazi decks now have eye and temple and access to legacy staples
Format dun goofed

>>48448372
>implying EMN is legal in neo-modern

Nice try, EMN is a reprint set only.

>>48448452
There was one card in EMN that had never been printed in a set before, so in a way it wasn't ALL reprints.

>>48448452
EMN is m15 border, so is mm15, some of the FTV sets, commander 2014 and 2015 ergo all legal in a format with m15+ border cards

>>48448536
Its not cards with an M15 border, its mainline sets with an m15 border we're talking about here. Reprints of cards in sets that are legal in the new format are legal, but cards created and printed before m15 and outside of the block progression afterward are banned.

>>48448616
Ops post
>A 'new-modern' constructed format where only cards that use the M15 card border are acceptable. So, cards from M15 and all sets released afterwards. All the typical rules apply (fifteen card sideboard, sixty or more card main deck, only four of each card excluding basic lands, etc).

>movinggoalposts.jpg

>>48440745

Nigga he's right, shuffle 2-3 times per game is fine

this is the perfect time to state that the mentioned boarder is the worst in mtg history

>>48434731
No. I wouldn't. Too small a card look, as others have mentioned. However :

New format:
>all sets are allowed
>legacy banlist
>anything in the reserve list is also banned.
>60 cards.
>Singleton, or maybe doubleton
>decks are broken into tiers based on total price, like weight classes in boxing. Something like:
<$25, <$50, <$100, <$200, <$300, <$400, <$500,<$750,<$1000,<$1500,<$2000.
With card prices for this purpose being based on the cheapest English printing, not the particular printing in your deck

I'd play the shit out of that format.

>>48448953
Card pool*

>>48448953
Alternatively, Wizards bit the fucking bullet and abolish the reserve list, making more money off selling Reserved Masters than they could ever lose to a lawsuit, making the already fun and diverse eternal formats actually affordable, thus not dead.

>>48449183
>nevergoingtohappen.png
And, having played with proxies of reserve list stuff, i *definitely* have more fun when nobody has them.

But the fact that the necessary cards are unreasonably expensive is definitely part of why those formats have few players.

Though in my case, your "solution" would not make me want to play legacy again. The speed / power level of competitive legacy simply results in gameplay i don't find enjoyable, and at the moment is basically the only format with older cards.

Hence banning reserve list, less than quadrupleton, and breaking the format into price tiers.

Your card pool is going to be very different with a $50 legacy card pool budget than what you see in legacy now.

>>48449336
But the point, many would argue, of legacy/vintage, is to play with the fun and broken older cards.

Also, just noticed >>48448953
>singleton/doubleton
ew, that takes away all consistency.

>>48449345
>The point of legacy is the brown cards!
In a competitive format with them in it, you almost *have* to use them. Yes.

In my case I happen to enjoy a lot of cards from the older sets, which i can't use in modern, and I can't play them in legacy due to them not being high enough tier to keep up.

What i want is a less broken eternal format with all the sets, and a low barrier to entry for newbies without getting trounced by someone because they've spent 2k on a deck.

You want to use a 2k deck? Use it against someone else with a 2k deck.

As for consistency? I think 60 card quadrupleton constructed is too predictable/repetitive.

I don't necessarily want everything as inconsistent as edh, but 60 quadrupleton is too consistent.

>>48449395
>Low barrier to entry to actually get to compete, bringing in new players (who can get into more expensive tiers/formats as they build up their collections).
>Longer more tactical matches than legacy.
>Less monotonous than normal constructed.
>you can make use of most of your card collection, in at least one price bracket or another, and actually get to play them without always losing, not always being restricted to using the best cards you own.

>>48442354
Mom dies to devoid shock. I think that would keep her in check.

>>48449510
>>48449395
This might actually get me to play something other than draft/sealed again, and get me back into the game regularly.

>>48449658
Another variant on that which might be fun:

As >>48448953, plus
>your deck can only contain cards which were printed within 2 years.

So, your deck would have had to, at one point, also been legal in standard.

This is not as an "instead of", just a "this could also be fun".

>>48449510
>he guys, let's make SCG have the power to soft ban decks by price gouging their staples!

>>48449766
If a card is only played in 10$ or cheaper, that means it's too weak to be in 50$ to 100$ decks.
So if it increase in price, people will stop playing it and buying it, cause it won't be played anymore.

>>48449766
1. It should be based on more than just the scg prices. There are other stores too. Hell, maybe mtgo prices could somehow factor in.
2. If the prices of the cards in your deck went too high, it would bump you up a price tier, yes. Then you'd be playing against tougher decks. Presumably the reason the cards are going up in price is because they're good and lots of people are using them.
3. To avoid weird fluctuations the people maintaining the format could use the average prices of cards over a couple months, along with updating their prices monthly or every couple months, rather than daily. That way, if you've got a tournament you're going to that's in this format for some reason, your deck likely isn't ever going to change tier right beforehand.

There would be logistics, but they wouldn't be terribly difficult to figure out. A basic computer program could handle this automatically and you wouldn't have to do any manual adjustments that way.

>>48449837
Exactly.

>>48449837
Or if it's really good in the $10 tier, but not good enough to see much play in the $25 tier, you will have to determine what to cut if you want to fit it in.

Seriously would play the shit out of this if someone did a decent job implementing it.

>>48449854
>>48449867
But this
>>48449837
Would lead it's price getting lower again, cause demand goes away.

>>48434858
>Literally why? Certainly, you cant be butt-blasted about consistent mana bases.

>Not OP
I certainly can. Streamlines the deck types waaay too much.

>>48449875
Sure.

Fluctuating card demand would balance the formats until they found their niche and correct price point and stabilized. That's largely the point.

Whoever did it could scrape their pricing data from mtgptice.com, and calculate an average price over the last few months, pretty quickly.

Then once a month (or two months, whatever the format manager decides), a batch script recalculates the values using updated price trend data.

>>48449930
Ideally:

If a deck is dominating a tier, demand of the important cards goes up, your deck either lands solidly in the next tier or just barely goes over the top of the current tier, and you have to either cut something to stay in-tier, or make your deck better so it can compete in the next tier.

The end result should be a wide variety of competitive decks in the meta, not just a couple of decks everyone has to play to stand a chance.

And (odds are, since you likely have the cards lying around anyways) you'll have decks for several different tiers kicking around.

I mean, I'm not suggesting you get rid of the existing formats. Clearly some people like them.

But im not a fan of any of the constructed formats these days, which is why i thought up "what's a constructed format that might actually be fun?"

>>48449991
Being able to actually use more of my card collection, and being easy to get new people into mtg would be a bonus.

>>48450006
The meta for each tier would be different, and eventually you might determine you don't like playing some particular tier and decide to build for the other ones instead.

If it turns out I like something that plays more like limited, maybe I'm building lots of cheap decks, and playing in a meta i actually enjoy.

And if i like lightning fast well oiled gameplay, i can use a more expensive tier with more tutors and stronger mana bases and stronger cards, and it would run closer to legacy or highlander.

>>48449854
You can't scrape scgs prices anyways.

Tcgplayer has an api you could use, however, which is way easier.

>>48434731
Ruse Cruise and Dick through time are retarded bans. We have zero good cantrips, cheap spells etc to fuel delve. Also what combo pieces would you dig for? They are good control cards in "neomodern" and nothing more. Even banning memerhino has more merit.

>>48450239

I still keep my abzan deck just in case of neomodern appearing in the next 3-4 years.

>>48434892
Lolwhat. Did you even play last standard?

>>48434892
5color goodstuff isn't deck variety, anon.

>>48435964
>Burn players start with 2 land and never draw another for the rest of the game
Yeah you don't know anything about how this game is balanced.

File: uncomfterble.jpg (30KB, 480x490px) Image search: [Google]

30KB, 480x490px

>>48448170
>Sol Ring

File: wait a minute, that card.png (146KB, 323x265px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 323x265px

>>48448474
>There was one card in EMN that had never been printed in a set before
You mean mana crypt?

>>48436352
>A new Modern with a younger, developing meta would be fun because it'd ahift very quickly as each new set would have a greater impact.
I believe the Standard thread is over there.

>>48435071

Fine let's do a rule change. Minimum deck size becomes 50 and every player has a manapool of 10 set aside that can only be utilized via fetch abilities.

>>48453294

I think it's sensible to restrict modern to the last decade of cards.

There comes a point where these aren't "modern" cards anymore.

File: 1468765158701.jpg (22KB, 500x376px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 500x376px

>>48434731
>No color fixing
>No good card draw
>No good toolbox card
Is like if you didn't like Magic, what's next, no good counterspell?

>>48453395
You know nobody is stopping ya from playing standard

>>48453462

Standard is drastically smaller than modern.

And you can't deny that a revolving modern would do wonders to card prices. They can either do it by block or by year. Either works, but keep it within the latest decade. If they did year maybe they could incorporate Modern Masters as always legal within that timeframe.

So for the price based format, you basicly need an online platform that keeps track of prices and let's you register your deck.

You'd have your serverfarm take in prices from several sources and calculate the average cost of a card, then check what a given deck costs.

I know that xmage can download images from MTGO, and cockatrice used to let you upload to a german site that listed prices, so technically this should be doable. mtg goldfisch also shows prices of decks, all you really need is a program that patches all the things together.

But I'm just a trainee webdev, so don't take me too serious.

>>48453512
>a revolving modern would do wonders to card prices
The entire argument against rotating formats is that rotating formats are cheaper to buy into but more expensive over time. And we just came out of a standard where a competitive deck was $700+.

>>48453512
>Hey i bought my snapcasters at 100$
>Now they are banned, don't worth anything and their replacement is 100$
Sure bro

>>48453815

Not much different than something coming and making them worthless to begin with, or if they were to get reprinted and suddenly plummet. You can be out money at any moment.

Besides, if you were to include Modern Masters into the sets then chances are a lot of staples would get reprinted in order to remain in the game.

>>48453911
>Not much different than something coming and making them worthless to begin with
I'd MUCH rather Wizards came forwards and said, "Look guys, Modern is more expensive to get into than we'd like, so we're going to reprint heavily." than just sat quietly while the format died a slow undignified death like a WW2 veteran in a carehome.

It's not like they flat out refuse to ever reprint expensive cards. I mean, Mutavault, Thoughtseize, and Fetchlands were very pricey when their reprints came. They just won't print money for no good reason.

>>48453512
Rotating modern was called extended and they killed in in favor of modern.

You people really want 2 more years of siege rhino with this new modern shit.

>>48454237

Extended was a 4 year block.

I'm talking a 10 year block. It would be drastically different than just a slightly larged version of Standard. At the moment it would be the same as now but would remove cards prior to 9th Edition with the exception of cards reprinted in Modern Masters.

I think that's pretty fair.

>>48435102

>ban coco but not delve draw

Biased as fuck, shit eating hypocrite

>>48438143
If you don't have money to spend on the game then you are not a part of the target audience of the game. Deal with it.

>>48454318

>remove boil and other hosers because it gives me feels bad.

>>48454487

They could always be reprinted in a Modern Masters if it's that big of an issue.

I'm just suggesting a way to make the term Modern more fitting with the definition, and to force Wizards to reprint expensive cards every so often. Not to mention it would add some nice variance to the format.

It's not like Vintage and Legacy don't already exist as eternal formats.

>>48436479
>>48445138
You niggers are thinking on standard terms. Standard is always goodstuff memedecks because they purposedly design other archetypes to be incomplete. But in a non-rotating world those incomplete archetypes find the cards they were missing in standard and get to work. That's why there's no real 4-color-goodstuff deck in modern despite having the second best manabase ever.
>>48442214
Now this would be fun, extreme power on imperfect manabases, no overpowered combo and without all the "lol I win" silver bullets.

>>48449336
I play Stoneblade and the only matches that last less than six turns are Dredge and Omnishow godhands. That's more gameplay than the Modern average of 5 turns, on a much more open and fun metagame.

You either don't have first-hand experience with Legacy or have the extreme bad luck of having and all shit combo metagame.

>>48442214

This actually could be ideal, high power format but very few truly expensive cards

>>48454318
10 years takes away Mirrodin, Kamigawa, Ravnica and Time Spiral.

>>48434731
Would be an interesting format. Lets look at the ban list.

>treasure cruise
Yea, this card broke modern and legacy and made aggro decks splash blue just for it, it deserves a ban.

>Dig through Time
Questionable, the power level of this format might be low enough where aggro decks would still use this, but double blue is awkward. If fetches remained banned, I could see this card being fine.

>collected company
A strong card in modern and current standard. Would likely be an all star in the format, but this might lead to the format stagnating like the last standard format did. I'd keep it on the ban list.

>fetches
Make mana bases much more consistent and in a low power format like this, would probably lead to four to five color monstrosities being top tiered. Would ban them just so there is some diversity in the format.

>>48454794
My experience with legacy is indeed that the metagame is all shit combos.

>>48454940

And next year would remove Lorwyn and Morningtide along with Tenth Edition.

That's kind of the point.

But any card that was reprinted in Modern Masters could stay in. Any card leaving could be reprinted in either Modern Masters or Standard. That's the benefit of this rotation, getting reprints to drop the price of some of these cards.

>>48435964
To argue in favor of this, this could actually create a higher skill ceiling for a lot of decks. Sure decks like burn are still easy to play as you only draw 2-3 lands, but what about every other archetype? You'd have to figure out how much land you need and how many spells you need for your deck to be optimal as opposed to it being to chance.

>>48455085
>have not played against miracles, enchantress, grixis delver, mud,eldrazi, dredge
what did you played, a match against belcher?

>>48435964

I would be okay with a pauper version of magic that did this.

It might be a fun little side-game.

>>48455085
...
Did you actually lose to Opps All Spells?

>>48455188
I don't remember what i played against specifically.

A bunch of different stuff, but I stopped playing legacy in like 2008.

I do remember most games not lasting past turn 3, and decks playing basically the same every time due to very high levels of consistency.

Then i played modern for a little while, and it's alright but still a lot more consistent/repetitive than I'd like (and I'd still like to occasionally play a lower power format from time to time, and i can't always find the people /the time to draft/sealed).

Since then i play edh in a meta that sometimes goes 1 the same decks and uses both ban lists concurrently (it's alright, but typically not consistent enough).
In addition to cube/draft/sealed.

He be the idea of a new formats specifically designed to be different in the areas in not satisfied with existing formats.

>>48455361
Sometimes goes 1v1

>>48455361
Wow. My phone mangled the crap out of that post.

A bunch of the words are wrong, go by context. Sorry.

>>48455361
Legacy in 2008 was all Survival decks.

>>48440170
I am bored at work and haven't played MTG in years. Why is Collected Company worthy of that description? I looked at the ruling for it, and while it's quite good, I don't see what makes it warp a metagame unless cascade is still a thing in modern.

>>48455524
Maybe I'm being too generous with when I stopped, or had a weird ass local meta.

I couldn't tell you which. I just remember what the things i Didn't like about it were, and why i lost interest. I didn't just not have fun when i got stomped, first getting into it, i often wasn't having fun when i was winning either.

But some of my gripes with legacy are also gripes i have with modern and standard, which is why i mostly play draft /sealed these days, and sometimes edh.

But no need to get defensive. Just because I didn't enjoy something doesn't mean I'm saying it's shit. Just that I didnt enjoy it.

>>48455632
Modern allows everything back to 2003 when 8th came out.

>>48455716
That would explain it in modern. Why is it a thing in standard?

>>48453385
Like I say to all of your kind, go play Force of Will.

>>48455683
(aside from two edh decks i don't have a constructed deck anymore).

I always wanted a mode with a limit on rare and mythic cards. Like imagine a 10 rare/mythic limit on a deck. Sort of a cross between modern and pauper without sacrificing some really cool cards.


Basically a more constructed draft format

>>48456189
>Like imagine a 10 rare/mythic limit on a deck
4 Goblin Guide
4 Eidolon of the Great Revel
2 Grim Lavamancer

There's my 10 rares. I'm playing mono R burn.

GOOD LUCK HAVE FUN n_________n

>>48435419
> pay walls are a good thing because it shows the player cares and wants to support the game

...by giving money to the secondary market? How does this benefit the game?

>>48456462
This.

Sealed and draft support the game.

Unless wotc starts selling print on demand singles, buying singles of anything outside of the newest set isnt supporting the game.

>>48435419
This is so retarded post. Paywall is never a good thing for continuation of the game, see legacy and why it's dead in most of the places. No, occasional big tournaments doesn't make it healthy format, it's pretty fucking dead.

Price point of cards in a deck is already around 10$. That's why average modern deck cost 700-800$. Of course some a bit more and some a bit less, but 10$ cut off point doesn't make any sense. You are technically paying it already if you are going for optimal builds.

>>48456550
FTV: Modern

>>48456618
>FTV: Modern

Oh god no. Those foils are fucking horrendous and completely unplayable in any tournament.

What we need is modern event decks..... The ones that don't suck monkey balls.

>>48455742
Because standard is so shit that anything that allows you to put more of the very few good cards (that happen to be creatures targetable by CoCo) for less mana than they're worth is godly. Specially at instant speed.

>>48456618
Yes, buying a set of modern masters supports wotc.

Buying singles instead? Not so much. You're sending your money to scg (or wherever) for stuff they've had sitting in a warehouse for 5 years, not to wotc for making new product.

>>48456655
Instead of banning the decks that won the Pro Tour, they should have made a tournament-playable Champion Deck Series.

>>48456747
Not a bad idea, as a point of modern was to be accessible for new players and not suck ass like it does today.

>>48456189
This is retarded, it does nothing to overall game balance. Combo decks become only barely less consistent while aggro and control will suddenly have to make huge compromises just to maintain any reasonable quality of cards. Not to mention with a limit like 10 rares/mythics you've essentially destroyed the land base of every deck in every constructed format.

Limiting rarity makes no fucking sense when you've got commons like Lightning Bolt and Serum Visions and rares like Providence or Bloodletter

>>48456747
But anon, the non-tournament legal championship decks sold poorly!!!

>scalpers but them en masse and slowly release the singles again in the secondary market.
This is what would happen. Unless you could preorder them, you wouldn't get them.

>>48457059
>Serum Visions
>Good
It's sad that we have to settle for the 5th best draw spell in the Modern card frame.

>>48456655

They literally just need to reprint everything and never stop like YGO

>>48457093
That only happens when you try and limit the reprints to keep value of cards, which ruins the point, or screw up like Amiibo.

>>48457093
That still lowers prices and increases sales.
Feeling like something is easier to get is more important to customers than it actually being easier to get.

What would the best deck of new modern be? Siege rhino decks?

>>48460487
Probably Aristocrats.

>>48457178
At least Sleight of Hand gets some love

>>48448743

Nah bruv. Future Sight always reigns supreme.