Card/Deck Single Card Spotlight
- Thread starter Dom Harvey
- Start date
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I can attest to it being a fun card
How does it fare vs. Staff of Domination?
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I think those are only superficially alike. I mean, they're both artifacts with multiple tap abilities that untap themselves, but that's where the similarities end. Retrofitter Foundry makes creature tokens, Staff of Domination is more of a slow attrition card, with its life gain, tap, and draw abilities. The token making ability can sort of emulate the tap ability, as long as you can block the attacking creature. I like Retrofitter Foundry better, since it's more proactive. You're actually building an army that can win. It's also a bit cheaper to get going.
Wizards doesn't have to
Agreed. It’s one of those ancient traditions that is just as pointless as many of the flaws by Power Max Cubing which we are trying to get rid of here on Riptidelab.
Only include a card into your cube if it has a higher power level than the card it replaces = Always reprint all 5/10 cards of a cycle in a set
Only include a card into your cube if it has a higher power level than the card it replaces = Always reprint all 5/10 cards of a cycle in a set
Chris Taylor
Contributor
I'm on mobile here so it's hard to check my work, but is this something they only do with lands? (which I at least agree with from a design perspective. I'd look sideways at a cube where UG and RW were both supported archetypes, but one pair had more fixing than the other)
Like how many printings does incindiary command have compared to cryptic command? (minus Commander products where you might not reprint them all for other reasons)
I've become more of a fan of meeting wotc on their terms. I'm never going to be pro reserved list, pro sets-with-no-manafixing - below-rare, or adding extra lines of text onto cards because they're mythic (Trostani discordant), but I at least understand why they do these things and that they have different priorities than I do.
Like how many printings does incindiary command have compared to cryptic command? (minus Commander products where you might not reprint them all for other reasons)
I've become more of a fan of meeting wotc on their terms. I'm never going to be pro reserved list, pro sets-with-no-manafixing - below-rare, or adding extra lines of text onto cards because they're mythic (Trostani discordant), but I at least understand why they do these things and that they have different priorities than I do.
Oh but we’re not debating the amount of fixing support for each Guild combination but the actual cycles.
There is nothing stopping Wizards from replacing a Stirring Wildwood with a Temple Garden in a Masterpiece set.
Each Guild should have the same amount of fixing to a certain degree but they should not be forced to create a Masterpiece of a specific card just because other cards were also Masterpieced (yup, a word now)
There is nothing stopping Wizards from replacing a Stirring Wildwood with a Temple Garden in a Masterpiece set.
Each Guild should have the same amount of fixing to a certain degree but they should not be forced to create a Masterpiece of a specific card just because other cards were also Masterpieced (yup, a word now)
Only include a card into your cube if it has a higher power level than the card it replaces = Always reprint all 5/10 cards of a cycle in a set
That's not the same thing at all.
The consequences of the first rule has been discussed extensively here. The second has other consequences:
- When a piece of a cycle is seen, a drafter can assume the other parts are there too.
- It takes less mind space to know what a 5-card cycle does than 5 individual cards. This is especially noticeable in land cycles.
- A flat power level isn't necessarily good. Most cube designs here aim for flat power levels, but there are legitimate reasons to have power imbalances.
- The drafters are not stirred towards strategies by design. Azorius Chancery and Llanowar Wastes without their respective cycles could be the best choices for those color combinations and even signal, but you take out of a drafter the satisfaction of drafting the right land for your strategy when all options are correct. Also, you skew the environment towards the decks you've designed, hampering the possibility that creative decks you have not seeded emerge (UW tempo, BG control)
If you take anything out of context you can make it sound funny. Please quote properly in the future (unless if you are trying to undermine me. If that be the case then go ahead ) Otherwise I believe people’s opinions are viewed and read best in their full length as they were intended by the writer.
I am sorry I do not quite understand this one. Can you please elaborate? Thanks
) Otherwise I believe people’s opinions are viewed and read best in their full length as they were intended by the writer.
They shouldn’t. We should have evolved from that basic starting point. Signaling is important but (and this is just an example) an unplayable manland shouldn’t be included in a set just to satisfy some old tradition. In other words: Imagine an absolutely unplayable manland in a cycle of 9 other excellent manlands. What is the difference between printing 9 functional lands and 1 unplayable land and just printing 9 functional lands? Not much other than tradition. In that case we should strive towards giving each Guild combination the same filtering or some something along those lines instead. Having all 5 lands be activatable into creatures should not be the requirement and more important than actually giving all players access to fun games where they often can cast their spells.
That can be debated but if we assume you are correct: Are we going for Hearthstone situations where skill matters so very little compared to MtG games? It is possible to dumb anything down but is that the goal?
Super agreee!
I do not see this being a topic at all because this has been my opinion for more than 10 years.
I am sorry I do not quite understand this one. Can you please elaborate? Thanks
Grillo_Parlante
Contributor
Yeah, I thought Velrun was just saying WOTC was being overly dogmatic with their cycle reprint rules in this instance, which seems fair considering that its supposed to be a premium set aimed at whales.
I get the conversation started about the manland cycle in UMA. In that case I actually agree it's bad to have the whole cycle just for the sake of having it. However I don't have the same opinion about cube design, as the biggest drawback is the monetary value of some cycle components being so far below others. I quoted the part of your post that talks about cube design to make that differentiation, and not to take it out of context. Apologies if you think I trying to ridicule you, that was not at all the intention.
Elaborating more on my last point, let's look at two different manabases for a cube:
Manabase A: Full cycle of 10 Painlands, full cycle of 10 Bouncelands.
Manabase B: 20 non-basic lands, mixing different cycles of lands, giving slower lands - like bouncelands - to color combinations deemed "control" and aggro lands - like painlands - to color combinations deemed "aggro".
The effect that Manabase B has is that it consolidates the roles the cube designer has attributed to the color combinations. Azorius tends to be more controllish if its lands are Azorius Chancery and Temple of Enlightenment. It's a positive feedback mechanism - the designer sees it as a control combination, they add lands good for control decks, the Azorius control decks have better manabases than Azorius aggro decks, and have more success - so the designer sees it more as a control combination. This reinforces the decks the cube designer is seeding. Which is not, in itself, a bad thing! It's a useful tool.
Manabase A would make Azorius control weaker relative to Manabase B, since only one of the lands fits the deck well. Knowing that Azorius Chancery > Adarkar Wastes is a small edge in drafting, as a good drafter knows to prioritize the former. Azorius tempo, though, wants the Wastes and its presence rewards players for trying out an archetype that was not designed/seeded. In fact, the fact that it goes late rewards a drafter for trying out an archetype that wasn't designed. That opens up space for creativity from players to find decks the designer did not seed, using natural draft self-balancing mechanisms to make those decks a bit better. Using this tool too much creates too many unpickable cards, but lands are great because they are more modular and don't take the space of a spell, so they are less likely to be left in sideboards even when they are not in their ideal deck.
Elaborating more on my last point, let's look at two different manabases for a cube:
Manabase A: Full cycle of 10 Painlands, full cycle of 10 Bouncelands.
Manabase B: 20 non-basic lands, mixing different cycles of lands, giving slower lands - like bouncelands - to color combinations deemed "control" and aggro lands - like painlands - to color combinations deemed "aggro".
The effect that Manabase B has is that it consolidates the roles the cube designer has attributed to the color combinations. Azorius tends to be more controllish if its lands are Azorius Chancery and Temple of Enlightenment. It's a positive feedback mechanism - the designer sees it as a control combination, they add lands good for control decks, the Azorius control decks have better manabases than Azorius aggro decks, and have more success - so the designer sees it more as a control combination. This reinforces the decks the cube designer is seeding. Which is not, in itself, a bad thing! It's a useful tool.
Manabase A would make Azorius control weaker relative to Manabase B, since only one of the lands fits the deck well. Knowing that Azorius Chancery > Adarkar Wastes is a small edge in drafting, as a good drafter knows to prioritize the former. Azorius tempo, though, wants the Wastes and its presence rewards players for trying out an archetype that was not designed/seeded. In fact, the fact that it goes late rewards a drafter for trying out an archetype that wasn't designed. That opens up space for creativity from players to find decks the designer did not seed, using natural draft self-balancing mechanisms to make those decks a bit better. Using this tool too much creates too many unpickable cards, but lands are great because they are more modular and don't take the space of a spell, so they are less likely to be left in sideboards even when they are not in their ideal deck.
Oh, I just realized you said specifically "reprinting". Sorry about that. I thought that was about including cycles in cubes, not in the masters sets.
For printed sets I actually like having full cycles, treating all combinations as the same for reasons mostly overlapping with my previous post. However, for this masters set, it was a bad decision. Actually, the whole Ultimate Masters price point hike was, in my opinion, a terrible decision that puts pressure on having consistent value.
For printed sets I actually like having full cycles, treating all combinations as the same for reasons mostly overlapping with my previous post. However, for this masters set, it was a bad decision. Actually, the whole Ultimate Masters price point hike was, in my opinion, a terrible decision that puts pressure on having consistent value.
Onderzeeboot
Ecstatic Orb
I don't even mind the creatureland cycle in Ultimate Masters, I mind that they included the whole cycle in the box toppers.
Well then we perfectly agree
I prefer Manabase B where the cube-owner for his cube or Wizards of the Coast for their set is not forced into including a certain card of a cycle (even when it comes to mana cycles) just because other cards from a cycle has been printed. I adore the freedom. Better synergy to the supported archetypes, better artwork and more interesting gameplay.
Also agree with Ondezeeboot. Wizards is forcing yet another tradition down our throats by making the Box Toppers and the actual set have exactly the same lands. This shouldn’t be a rule. I was crazy about Kaladesh Inventions because it made flavorful sense and it showed artifacts from all over the multiverse in a single plane.
I prefer Manabase B where the cube-owner for his cube or Wizards of the Coast for their set is not forced into including a certain card of a cycle (even when it comes to mana cycles) just because other cards from a cycle has been printed. I adore the freedom. Better synergy to the supported archetypes, better artwork and more interesting gameplay.
Also agree with Ondezeeboot. Wizards is forcing yet another tradition down our throats by making the Box Toppers and the actual set have exactly the same lands. This shouldn’t be a rule. I was crazy about Kaladesh Inventions because it made flavorful sense and it showed artifacts from all over the multiverse in a single plane.
Some Payoffs:
Some Sacrifice Outlets:
Thanks for suggestions. I think I will try out Ninth Bridge Patrol since it also grows from when creatures are being blinked.
Chris Taylor
Contributor
It's not Multicolour, but I love fallen angel for that sort of thing
It's good at ending games, though
But if your format is at a power level, that it doesn't forgive a 5-drop that needs a bit of set up, than maybe it's suddenly not good enough
Better than Overrun which is equivelent to sacrifice 3 + trample to everything?
Minus the 3/3 body.
Maw is something of a mascot for me right now! I even did a write up on her for the land of bad cube takes here.
the overrun scenario is something like this:
>Opponent is tapped out
>You have seven creatures in play, they have four
>Cast Maw, attack out
>Feed the four blocked creatures to Maw
>Feed Maw to Maw
>Unblocked three now have +5/+5
Which is a pretty narrow situation, but still counts as upside when comparing Maw to something like Fallen Angel.
What Maw mostly does is make combat a nightmare for opponents. And big picture, turn your WB board clogging garbo into a resource and a threat
the overrun scenario is something like this:
>Opponent is tapped out
>You have seven creatures in play, they have four
>Cast Maw, attack out
>Feed the four blocked creatures to Maw
>Feed Maw to Maw
>Unblocked three now have +5/+5
Which is a pretty narrow situation, but still counts as upside when comparing Maw to something like Fallen Angel.
What Maw mostly does is make combat a nightmare for opponents. And big picture, turn your WB board clogging garbo into a resource and a threat