Sets (MoM) April of the Machines Previews
- Thread starter Velrun
- Start date
Exactly this.Oh god..
What have you done..
So is that an additional 5? “Protection from white and colorless. This doesn’t unattach Sword of Sun and Stone.”
landofMordor
Administrator
“I declare a battle! Creatures, go seize that hill/fort that the opponent is defending!”The battlefield was always defended by the opponent; you’re just a wizard spending mana to analyze the battlefield and discover new tactics.
but yeah it’s a “square circle” thing as Zoss and Mapi said.
I think there might be some rose colored glasses here. 1997 magic players be like “Please explain what Instant (n.) is, and how I’m supposed to assume that Instant (n.) connotes small s sorcery when Sorcery (n.) already exists.” And “If you’re making Equipment why aren’t we errata’ing Helm of Awakening, isn’t that obviously a piece of equipment?” Not to mention “wait you mean this Planeswalker gets less loyal to me the cooler its spell is? Jace is keeping track of my tab in the middle of this battle? seriously?”
Not saying you suddenly have to like battles or hate instants, just offering another perspective.
Chris
I love double faced cards as a concept. To answer your question.
However I always hope to see the back side of a double-faced card to be a very simple one. Tapped land. Volcanic Hammer. A 4/4 flying Dragon. Let them be SO EASY to remember after reading them a single time. A Glorious Anthem.
I am open to battles. Let’s see what they can do to the gameplay. And let’s see what other subtypes they have waiting for us.
I think it is a good thing that you, the owner of the battle, has planned for the battle to be defeatable when you put cards into your deck. Sometimes an opposing planeswalker is near impossible to best because you didn’t plan for it.
I love double faced cards as a concept. To answer your question.
However I always hope to see the back side of a double-faced card to be a very simple one. Tapped land. Volcanic Hammer. A 4/4 flying Dragon. Let them be SO EASY to remember after reading them a single time. A Glorious Anthem.
I am open to battles. Let’s see what they can do to the gameplay. And let’s see what other subtypes they have waiting for us.
I think it is a good thing that you, the owner of the battle, has planned for the battle to be defeatable when you put cards into your deck. Sometimes an opposing planeswalker is near impossible to best because you didn’t plan for it.
Last edited:
I would love the conception of battles where you put them in the middle of the battlefield for all players to "win", like a specific part of the field of battle overall where there's a prize to be won. By being the player of the battle, you get first crack at it, and the ETB effect at least. It presents the kind of feedback WotC seems to avoid - giving your opponent stuff is not a downside they're terribly hot on these days - but it flavorfully makes more sense to me than giving your opponent...your siege?
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
Tribal is still a card type, as confirmed by MaRo here. It is still a 9 on the storm scale so don't expect to ever see it again, except in very special circumstances
Out of all of this I mostly think 'loyalty' is badly named. Full agree that battles are awkward flavor-wise and don't feel like battles. Maybe the mechanics are solid enough to justify. One of the best things about Netrunner was that everything could be "attacked", so more permanents that interact with the combat step is a plus in my books.
landofMordor
Administrator
additional design thoughts about battles:
1. Attacking a planeswalker allows you to trade Damage for (virtual) Card Advantage. Attacking your Battle allows you to trade Damage for Mana Advantage (in the form of that 0-mana thing that's usually worth more than what you paid for the battle).
2. I keep wondering whether that trade will be worthwhile, especially on the 4- and 5-defense Battles. Is the mana advantage worth 20-25% of the opponent's life total? On battle back-sides like the Enchantment that slowly gives you 2/1 Spirits, that calculus seems pretty unfavorable.
3. Then I remember that some people are evaluating the Defense number as 3-4% of their opponents' -- plural -- life total (3 opponents with 40 life). That... really changes things.
that actually gives me a little more confidence in the card type. If the numbers are flexible enough to be priced for EDH or 1v1, that's a good sign. Also makes me feel more comfortable evaluating the 4- and 5-defense battles based on their front face, with the backside as free-but-situational upside in 1v1.
1. Attacking a planeswalker allows you to trade Damage for (virtual) Card Advantage. Attacking your Battle allows you to trade Damage for Mana Advantage (in the form of that 0-mana thing that's usually worth more than what you paid for the battle).
2. I keep wondering whether that trade will be worthwhile, especially on the 4- and 5-defense Battles. Is the mana advantage worth 20-25% of the opponent's life total? On battle back-sides like the Enchantment that slowly gives you 2/1 Spirits, that calculus seems pretty unfavorable.
3. Then I remember that some people are evaluating the Defense number as 3-4% of their opponents' -- plural -- life total (3 opponents with 40 life). That... really changes things.
that actually gives me a little more confidence in the card type. If the numbers are flexible enough to be priced for EDH or 1v1, that's a good sign. Also makes me feel more comfortable evaluating the 4- and 5-defense battles based on their front face, with the backside as free-but-situational upside in 1v1.
And Invasion of New Phyrexia shows Teferi's assault on New Phyrexia with his forces from Zhalfir in his devious plot to attempt to steal Phyrexia's Teferi?
I am extremely confident in saying that you are way off the mark. All of the Invasion battles represent the caster as the defender in the battle; all of the backsides display a triumph against Phyrexia.
Phyrexia’s largest goliaths stormed Ikoria, ready to challenge the world’s great monsters. Zilortha was unimpressed.
Shandalar’s wild magic stripped away the unnatural Phyrexian carapaces, reclaiming the true forms hidden underneath.
“The Phyrexians are fools if they believe they can weather such a storm.”
—Sarkhan Vol
If the battles actually had a Phyrexian POV the backside would have converted zombie robots, not inspirational quotes about how much of a failure you are.
Love this design. Seems like a cool prowess payoff with legs in other archetypes. Maybe this is an Eggs card?
I loove the "if you've cast two cards or more" clause on cards
I love that Surveil is deciduous now!
I think this is probably good enough for my main Cube, but green 2s are a bit stacked. I will wait to see how much this costs, as I will definitely be picking it up if it ends up being bulk priced.
@landofMordor another card for Pulp Cube//Theseus?
@inscho GCC card?
Last edited:
And don't even ask Merfolk Traders
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I think they (incorrectly) expected Atraxa to see play in Standard mostly, and tribal is a really old card type that is (probably) never going to be relevant in Standard anymore. Including it in the reminder text would probably confuse newer players more than leaving it off confuses enfranchised players, I guess.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
Those are rookie numbers man, you gotta pump those up!
I....you want all these cards to just be bad? You just want them to print more cards you can't use?
All Sieges work the same like the battles we've seen, but given the siege subtype I can absolutely see this in the next commander product.
2RR, battle - Melee
ETB Goad all creatures, 8 hp
Whoever wins the battle gets an enchantment with "creatures not attacking me have double strike"
Boom, done. Not for me, terrible in 1v1, but
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I <3 this, and considering that I'm already running Jolrael, Mwonvuli Recluse and Faerie Vandal, and this makes me want to go a little deeper into this theme in
with cards like Minn, Wily Illusionist, Thopter Mechanic, Gurgling Anointer and/or Gixian Puppeteer, and include slightly more cantrips in these colors, maybe.