Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Zen fetchlands are rumored to be in, as is Rishadan Port, as is Stoneforge Mystic.
Sets [EMA] Eternal Masters Spoilers Thread
- Thread starter Onderzeeboot
- Start date
I'm curious to see how the set will manage to disappoint me. Overpriced for its contents? Too scarce? Horrible art direction for reprints? Nothing worth adding to my cube? The possibilities are endless!
It's pretty bad optics for them that Port costs more online than Black Lotus. I'd say it's all but guaranteed.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
I will admit it dosen't feel right for fow to be a mythic.
I agree. I also think that Tarmogoyf is an uncommon at best (just a cheap pile of stats) and don't see the point of printing critical mana fixing at rare (other than to sell packs).
Seeing FoW and wasteland gives me hope on the art end of things
(and on the contents quality tbh).
Yeah, I don't see FoW warping draft so much that it's a problem at rare.... it's just a counterspell, sometimes with card disadvantage, in limited.
And being a limited run, they've never had to worry about this because they sell them all! They might sell out faster if Tarmo/FoW was a rare or something because people would have more hope they'd get one.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
I would like to see snapcaster mage at rare, goyf at uncommon, serum visions at common, inquisition at uncommon, fetches at rare, FOW at rare (or uncommon?). The more times they reprint wasteland at rare, the better. I would also love to see inkmoth reprinted.
Honestly, they've managed to work themselves into a corner with modern, and one of the ways out is for them to start using these sets to aggressively reduce the single prices of key staples.
Honestly, they've managed to work themselves into a corner with modern, and one of the ways out is for them to start using these sets to aggressively reduce the single prices of key staples.
Modern Masters and Vintage Masters have set a pretty strong precedent that almost all the commons and a good chunk of the uncommons are going to be dedicated toward crafting a draftable format. It's possible they'll let some chase commons and uncommons guide what limited archetypes they bake into the set, much like Rift Bolt likely helped lead them toward suspend/storm in the first MMA. I wouldn't worry about Eternal Masters having too small of a print run as you can still pick up MMA '15 packs today.
Selfishly, I'm hoping to see some old bulk rares bumped down in rarity for the limited format that I can use guilt-free in my peasant cube.
Selfishly, I'm hoping to see some old bulk rares bumped down in rarity for the limited format that I can use guilt-free in my peasant cube.
Just break the restriction dude! o_O
I think doing it like this is important to actually make the product fun in of itself. MM was/is actually fun to draft, so there's incentive to use it beyond "reducing scarcity of all modern/legacy staples". They are a company working to build a happy audience. That audience includes people who don't give a rat's ass about modern but who do love drafting or collecting. Also casual players who just want some cooler stuff than normal for their pile o' goods they play with on the coffee table against their siblings.
I don't think averaging the price of the rares is a good way to estimate the number of bulks, since a few hyper-inflated cards (noble hierarch) or used-to-be-mythics (like the hydra, which I have no doubt would've been bulk as a rare) can bring the average up. Comparing pre-prices is a good way to estimate its effect on the price of the format / decks in general, but it's not really fair to gauge a product's value with. Who opens a pack, gets a hydra, asks what it's worth and is told "next to nothing but before that printing it was almost ten bucks!" and is happy about it?
*using TCGMid*
There are 53 rares in MMA2015. 14 of them still get played. (Getting a 3USD etched champion or hurkyl's recall still sucks out of a 10USD pack of cards, but that's beside the point) 3 are >1USD despite seeing no play, and the rest (36) are all sub-dollar. 19 are sub-half dollar.
Using the actual-lowest prices, including shipping (in the US) you can get a single copy of 37 of the rares for under a half-dollar.
I'd be a lot less salty about things that were a couple bucks becoming bulk (mystic snake, scute mob) if there weren't four times as many already-bulk cards (argent sphinx, inexorable tide, lodestone myr, all suns' dawn etc)
They can't really control cards whose price was based solely on their supply/demand being off (hydra, creakwood liege etc), so those instances can't be blamed / are actually good, but more than a third of the rares being bulk before their reprint just isn't acceptable from a premium product.
If you read closely, you'll see my usage of the median just a few short words later. 1.75 is certainly lower than 7. Both are lower than 10. I probably couldn't find you a set in existence where the average value isn't lower than the pack price. Why is price comparison not a good metric? Did people not want it to lower prices? I'm not sure why you find it unfair. The set worked in the only regard to which I was focusing my post. People don't think it did lower prices, but it actually DID. Increased interest because of modern masters may raise other prices, but actually figuring that out would take ages.
TCGmid is the stablest of the three to use on comparison, again because of that pesky median function, which makes it much more robust against rando fluctuations, someone temporarily trying to undercut, etc. Also more likely what you are paying in a physical store.
I don't see why having "bulk rares" in a set they explicitly wanted to be a draft format is bad... makes the format a better one overall. If that's not in your expectations of what the supplemental set is for, you'll have to show me a summer product they've made that didn't focus on playability and having fun. Almost no commander deck, excepting a few, are worth their price tags in cards, but they still make fun bases for actually good commander decks, just as an example. It's a way to spend a few extra bucks to get a higher power draft format than you'll ever get in std, and with some cooler cards than normal to boot. One foil per pack, for instance. And your junk rare will be worth $1 instead of $0.1.
Like, honestly, Wizards has even pointed out that MM wasn't for devaluing. They've stated that the runs would be fractions of the existing, and would bring a fun draft format. They literally didn't design MM to be a "staple price lowering reprint format" but a "All of modern legality reprint format", but it still lowered a lot of exhorbitant prices. Just was making my above post to have data the next time someone complains that MM15/EMA/whatever didn't affect prices at all.
EDIT: I did just read up more on the topic, notably here. They point out the high number of bulk too. Talking about the expected value of a box of MM15, seems like WotC nailed it. One box = one box worth of value. I back this up with the box plus I opened a while back, ending up almost exactly even myself. You are getting what you pay for.
Putting aside all price comparisons for a second, I think that there's a huge difference between a bulk rare that's good for the draft format, and a bulk rare that's simply completely useless. In normal retail products, I can put up with some amount of bulk rares in both categories, because often the ones that don't work out were experiments where they were aiming for something, but perhaps fell a little short. However, in an expert-level set specifically designed to be drafted, I have very little tolerance for bulk rares that don't do anything whatsoever. We all carefully curate our own cube lists such that there are no undraftable cards, and in a set where they're charging us $10 a pack, I don't think it's unreasonable to expect Wizards to do the same.
For Modern Masters 2, 'good' bulk rares, that can help a draft archetype:
'Bad' bulk rares, that rarely contribute meaningfully:
To be fair to "normal sets", all sets are expert-level, and specifically designed to be drafted. They have the same amount of time to test out this set as any other. Does that mean they should be charging 7.50? 6.50? 5? Maybe.
Still, the format works. Jesus, I didn't think yall get worked up over the one sentence about bulk rares, and not the carefully crafted post about the 25% decrease in price of cards from the set.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Times change though, and now they've backed themselves into a corner. They designed the modern format on the basis that they were going to produce a certain style of format, distinct from the way eternal formats normally work, and to achieve this wizards had to introduce an extensive banlist. The problem with this approach, is it means that they now have to use the ban hammer to keep the format within specs, and the cards are very expensive. A more extensive breakdown of this dilemma are laid out here. It doesn't even matter whether it lowers prices somewhat on modern staples, it has to lower them enough where the decks won't cost you $1,000 in paper for tier 1 decks that last as long as a standard rotation.
Modern is an important format for the health of the game. Not only is it a currently a pro tour format, but it also helps justify investing in standard on the premise you will still be able to play at least some of your cards post rotation.
Regardless of what their business practice may have been, it might be time for them to adapt.
Sure, but your main point (the one not in parenthesis) was the one I was addressing. If it's a dud statistic, don't use it yo.
Because we're (the consumers) concerned with what the product is worth when we buy it, and the prices of the (all reprinted) cards before their reprints is irrelevant. Hence my hydra example. Like I said in my post, it's a fine way to see what the product did to card prices, but it's not useful for determining whether or not you want to buy any.
Ah, I actually had a line that I agreed with your post except for the part I quoted about the bulk rares, but I had to retype after an accidental refresh and must have skipped that bit. I agree that the set reduced prices and was overall a good thing, but only compared to nothing. It could have been better, but since it worked for like eighteen cards in the entire format I'd still rather it exist than not.
I don't think you can compare MMA, a triple-priced set of boosters, to things like commander and planeschase, where actual decklists are spoiled before the product releases. You know EXACTLY what you are getting when you buy a precon of any sort, and they STILL largely sell out / inflate quickly. The closest comparison would be Conspiracy, a normally-priced set, which had about a dozen pricey cards reprinted- but the main difference between MMA and all of these products is NEW CARDS. Wizards doesn't really know how new cards will perform in the secondary market, but they can make pretty good guesses with targeted cards. With all-reprint sets they have complete knowledge of the market- there's no reason they would ignore it when making choices, and with things like noble hierarch, spellskite, fulminator mage, etc. (not exactly archetype tie-togethers) at high rarities, saying "we didn't reprint things to make them easier to get" is just outright PR to calm people mad about their collections losing value.
All I'm saying is for a triple-priced product, there is a LOT of chaff where value is expected. The bulk rares aren't even that interesting (or good, sometimes) in the format! The worst are cards like argent sphinx and battlegrace angel, which no one wants to open to keep, but anyone would slam and pick up free games with. I expect more, either a better format or better cards, when I pay triple (which isn't 'a couple bucks' like you put it) and wizards hasn't been giving it.
Edit:
It's kinda because it sounds like you're defending an awful product as a whole because it helped maybe 20 significantly-priced cards be cheaper, and not all of those cards are significant. You aren't wrong about some stuff getting cheaper, but you also ignored things that went up because they weren't reprinted. But that's a whole other set of significantly-harder-to-dig-up numbers.
It seems that the logical solution is to introduce another extended format, which is how they addressed Legacy back in the day (give another outlet besides legacy). Want to have your standard cards retain value? Easier if there's "Post-modern", which has been popularly going around the internet as M15 and forward (new frames). Also, the idea of modern was to be non-rotating just like any other eternal format, if anything the weird banning schedule is to blame more than what they "wanted modern to be".
I'm not sure what you want them to do differently to "fix" their "mistakes". It seems to almost entirely revolve around the use of modern in PT's.
Interesting that birthing pod was banned weeks before PT Fate Reforged, and Splinter Twin weeks before PT OGW.....
That may well be the case, but as we all know, regular retail sets serve many masters. They need to cater towards the casual crowd, and introduce fun Timmy rare with splashy effects, along with quirky, build-around Johnny rares. They need to throw in a few multi-colour legends for the EDH folks. They need to introduce new Standard staples, some of which can warp a limited environment, and some of which outright don't do anything in draft. And then, of course, they need to make the set draftable.
Modern Masters has far fewer design constraints. The set needs to be draftable; and it needs to reprint much sought-after Modern staples. That's it.
So, really, what's their excuse for reprinting Inexorable Tide? It's not a hard card to find; I've got a pile junking up my binder. I once let my friend's baby eat one because even in 2010 it was worth pennies. It doesn't contribute to any draft archetype that I'm aware of in the set. It's just clutter.
The format "works", sure, but you could say the same about sets like Fallen Empires and Homelands. Shouldn't we set our expectations a little higher, when it costs us each $30 to participate in a draft? To be clear, my opinion on Modern Masters 2 is that it's fine as a set to draft, but has a lot less replay value than you'd expect for a set specifically catering to long-time Magic veterans.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
They kind of have to follow some banning schedule though, regardless of the pro tour. Eternal formats are usually very much "anything goes" unsupported formats with minimal bannings. Modern came out the gate with a specific vision as a "turn 4 format" where blue wasn't going to be the dominate color, and things weren't going to trend towards the degenerate.
When you have narrow format specs like that, the only way you will ever be able to maintain them is via the ban hammer. I don't see any other way. The good news is that those format specs have made modern a very popular format (which is why its so expensive) and all the answers to those problems are supply side issues firmly under wizards own control.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
https://mobile.twitter.com/Vendorleak
Apparently the set has already leaked to multiple vendors. Trading with prior knowledge, heavy shit. Curious to see Wizards' reaction.
Apparently the set has already leaked to multiple vendors. Trading with prior knowledge, heavy shit. Curious to see Wizards' reaction.
You guys sure are fun to bash heads with on a rainy day.
You assume there are fewer constraints. And maybe there are. Still, opening X amount = X dollars worth of value according to MTGgoldfish's EV, so we don't lose money buying it, the drafting is pure gravy already.
I don't have any Inexorable Tides, would be a cool card to find. It helps out a GU or UB deck with Graft, bloodthirst and the fairly obvious +1/+1 (and -1/-1) support in those colors. It doesn't have to support a Tier 1 archetype to still be useful in some section of the draft. Is it more useless than other cards? Oh probably, but it's also certainly in the set for a reason.
Neither of those sets were designed for drafting afaik. Sure we should expect more (I guess), but we also shouldn't be hopelessly negative about an obviously cool and widely appreciated product. That we assume is catered to some audience or other. The only hint I have at that is the phrase "added to your favorite Modern-format decks", which indicates that someone might already have a deck. Doesn't mean they are veterans.
If anything I'm just trying to show some positives about this cool thing, trying not to all in with negativity. It does pretty well what we want it to be doing, and if you don't want to gamble on packs it seems to lower card prices, making single acquisition easier.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Legacy has as many or more non-conspiracy/ante cards banned. List is >70, as opposed to ~35 for modern. They don't have to cyclically ban things to get a T4 format. They ban things < T4, things settle. You've argued against their recent bans so I'm sure you are aware of this. They do not need to ban cards the way they do. Was pod a T2 deck? Was Twin? The bannings are not living up to what you are saying the rules or modern are. Blue was definitely not dominant with Twin in, so that wasn't the problem.... With pod, blue wasn't really a big color in the deck so definitely not there, and did a great job keeping step with U decks...... what gives? Dig and Cruise, on the other hand were banned right away because of meta problems.... that's a ban because of problems, pod/twin because of....?
I dunno. They can try and print limited run sets all they want, but if people want modern to be affordable, the bannings are the problem. ~500 every year >>> ~1100 once every 3-5 years or more. They are doing a great job with MM style sets imo.
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
How do you maintain an eternal format, with a non power max foundation, without bans.
Bans are obviously important.
I think the important question is whether an eternal non-power-max environ can exist without seemingly arbitrary bans. Yes, 100%.
You yourself have argued that Splinter Twin was a bad ban. If they hadn't banned twin, our format wouldn't have taken a weird inverted loop twist. If the Eldrazi deck still dominates even with twin, then another easy ban to maintain format health is in order, stable meta continues.... (same with Summer bloom. That deck violated T4, so ban = yay. Buying into that was taking advantage of the situation so poo poo).
Speaking of assumptions. Who out there's saying Modern Masters 2 is "obviously cool and widely appreciated"? The most I've ever heard are that it's "okay", "fine", and "has some redeeming qualities". It's also not very deep when it comes to drafting, and has a lot less replay value than you'd expect for a set that costs $30 a pop to try. Are there actually folks out there who are raving about its supposed virtues?
If you want to talk about assumptions, here's another one. You're making the assumption that opened product is worth the same as sealed product, based on some dollar amounts from vendor price lists. What your assumption overlooks is the fact that bulk rares are essentially non-liquid - good luck getting anyone to give you a quarter for that Inexorable Tide. What's more, EV is really only applicable when you open large numbers of boxes; otherwise, individual pack EV and even box EV is highly variable, and more akin to playing the lottery. Sure, you might open that foil Tarmogoyf to make back your money and then some; but chances are, that outcome's not in the cards for you. So, who are these casual players cracking reams and reams of Modern Masters 2 product, leaving draft value that's just "gravy" on the table?
If your argument is simply that the set increases supply for dealers opening case after case, thereby lowering the barrier to entry into Modern, you'll get no argument from me. But let's not go overboard and deliver praise where it isn't due. Aside from meeting that goal - and I'd also buy the argument that the set missed that goal, by skipping easy, obvious reprints like Serum Visions, or dumping twenty of the bulk rares that aren't draftable for cards desperately in need of a reprint - the set was merely adequate at best, and a major disappointment at worst, especially after how well the first Modern Masters played.