26 Topic by jambarama

(8 replies, posted in Rochester NY MTG)

In case you missed it, M14 will institute new changes: http://wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Artic … ature/248e

Here's an explanation: the legend rule applies to each player - so you can't have two Geist of Saint Traft on the board - but the legend rule won't apply across players - so you and I can both have a Thrun, the Last Troll.  Same with planeswalkers, we can both have Jace, but neither of us can have two. 

If at any time you do end up with two of the same legend, or two Jaces, you choose *one* of the legends or planeswalkers to send to the graveyard as a state based action (e.g. doesn't use the stack, it just happens).  Previously both would die.  This means you can't kill legendary creatures with a clone, phantasmal image, phyrexian metamorph, or other clone effect.  It also means you can't kill JtMS with baby Jace, which used to be a thing. 

All of which makes Sigarda, Host of Herons and some of the other legends I mentioned a lot harder to deal with apart from Merciless Eviction or All is Dust (which still doesn't hit Sigarda) or something of the like.

Personally, I don't like the change.  While it may be counter-intuitive that a clone could kill your opponent's legend, there not much else you can do to stop Geist smashing for at least 4 on T3 or T4.  I also think this screws up EDH, and makes voltron generals - like Uril or Sigarda or - way too strong.  Just IMO. 

EDIT: Sideboarding changes.  Currently you have to pick 0 or 15 cards for your sideboard, as of M14 you can pick up to 15.  Now you have to stay exactly at 60 cards after sideboarding, as of M14 you can be anywhere from 60 to 75.  Seem like straightforward improvements to me.

EDIT2: Land drop changes.  You would no longer have to specify which rule/effect lets you drop your land (e.g. this is my one-turn land drop, this is a second land drop thanks to my Oracle of Dul Maya).  Now you'll count permissible land drops over a turn. 

Keyword changes.  Indestructible is a keyword, unblockable is not. 

Thoughts?

Go to forum: Rochester NY MTG

27 Reply by jambarama

(10 replies, posted in Rochester NY MTG)

skyth wrote:

I thought Worldfire was banned in EDH.

It is indeed.  I think that's a good example of what I was trying to say.  Worldfire is definitely designed for EDH because it is unusable in any other format.  That's a good example of the stupid powerful spells they're printing for EDH, without realizing or caring how much they warp EDH games.

Go to forum: Rochester NY MTG

28 Reply by jambarama

(10 replies, posted in Rochester NY MTG)

woodmster123 wrote:

you could proliferate the ring of three wishes counters!!! then OP!!!

Permanents that proliferate would give you a tutor every turn, but I mean it already gives you 3 demonic tutors, albeit at 20 mana.  3 tutor effects are probably enough to end any game on their own. 

I'm a little concerned with some of the EDH cards they've been printing lately.  They're printing huge splashy effects - Omniscience, Enter the Infinite, Worldfire (which would've been fine if it emptied your mana pool) - and some of these new cards like Rise of the Dark Realms, Ring of Three Wishes.  Yet more stuff that pretty much ends the game on the spot. 

Seems to me it pushes everyone else towards more control - tons of board wipes, tons of counters - and makes colors without control much weaker (red/green for sure, white/black less so).  As if the many many combos out there wasn't enough to push everyone to control.

I guess the politics of the game solve some of these problems - in a previous playgroup there was a guy with a Jhoira of the Ghitu deck that would just suspend Jokulhaups (or its many imitators) and then a fattie creature.  So everyone just killed him first, until he brought a deck that was more at our power level. 

The French EDH rules solve this by starting at 30 life which makes aggro viable, so you never get to cast these game-ending bomb spells.  But regular EDH seems to be more and more "who gets to resolve the game-ending spell" first.  And these new spells are pushing in that direction. 

Sorry about the rant, just got thinking.

Go to forum: Rochester NY MTG

29 Topic by jambarama

(10 replies, posted in Rochester NY MTG)

Since so much of M14 has been spoiled already, just curious what your thoughts are: http://www.mythicspoiler.com/m14/index.html

The slivers are straight up scary. +3/+3, doublestrike, +2/+0, hellrider sliver, haste, first strike.  I hope it makes slivers competitive in standard. 

Scavenging ooze in standard?  That is awesome, that card is too good and it'll bring the price down.  Hopefully something keeps a lid on deathrite shaman and reanimator strategies.

Some awesome EDH cards there too - devout invocation is like the best hellion eruption yet.  Rise of the dark realms is a grimoire that can't be shattered.  Ring of three wishes is 3 tutors in one card. Primeval bounty is nuts.  Ajani's Chosen is something like Kemba for enchantments. 

Ogre Battledriver is probably supposed to be a replacement for hellrider in RDW when it rotates.  A turn slower, but it might be OK.  We got a cheaper/weaker guttersnipe and much weaker grave titan.

Any thoughts or standouts?

Go to forum: Rochester NY MTG

30 Reply by jambarama

(9 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

Sorting/filtering based on "last seen online" would be a huge improvement. 

Other sort/filter ideas:

* "will trade cards" (local, my country, worldwide);
* location (same country, same state, same location);
* number/value of cards the user wants off your tradelist;
* number of trades (zero trades often means unwilling to trade)
* "last completed trade" would be even better - many join, do a few trades, then stop


Looking forward to the improvements!

Go to forum: Site Discussion

31 Reply by jambarama

(13 replies, posted in Rochester NY MTG)

Has someone mocked this up & suggested it as a feature request?  The list on your homepage is a start in that you can see the overlapping quantity of haves/wants, seems like it could be done intelligently, though I'm not sure what it'd look like.

Go to forum: Rochester NY MTG

32 Reply by jambarama

(13 replies, posted in Rochester NY MTG)

Biggest problem I have with the tradelist thing is that most of the users on there are inactive on deckbox or don't trade (and have zero trades).  Any chance the tool could filter out that type of individual?

Go to forum: Rochester NY MTG

33 Topic by jambarama

(8 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

Prices are too easily influence by one high listing.  For example:

One high listing on TCGplayer, the "average" price on each card has jumped 5x from $.50 to $2.50.  At one point a vendor was listing Avacyn for ~$1000 and that alone brought the average price from $10 to $25 for a few days.

I know the prices come from TCGplayer and you can't directly fix this problem.  I've contacted them about using MEDIAN rather than MEAN prices for "average" but they've not responded.  I don't know if you, as site administrators, would have any more pull. 

In the mean time, I've tried using minimum prices, but the trade interface still adds total value based on the average prices and many trade partners initially think I'm trying to hustle them.  Could we get an option in the trade interface for both parties to agree on low/average/high price set? 

It'd also be really nice if cards added to the trade interface reflected any condition/foil/set annotations.

Go to forum: Site Discussion

34 Reply by jambarama

(4 replies, posted in Site Discussion)

I'd love it if the search options supported boolean operators or lazy searching.  If I want to see all the cards in my inventory that destroy lands, I have search individually for every syntax I can think of - "destroy target land," "destroy target nonbasic land," "destroy all lands," etc - and that still doesn't catch stuff like aftershock. 

Alternately, allow me to add more than one box of the same filter type.  So one row says "rules text" and has something in it.  The next row would also be "rules text" filter, but I'd put different requiremetns.

Go to forum: Site Discussion