MTGNexus

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... nouncement

Standard: Oko, Thief of Crowns, Once Upon a Time, Veil of Summer are banned
Brawl: Oko, Thief of Crowns is banned
Legacy: Wrenn and Six is banned
Vintage: Narset, Parter of Veils is restricted

Well...I think it's easy to see what the Pioneer B&R announcement could be including this afternoon

Dusk wrote: ↑

4 years ago

Well...I think it's easy to see what the Pioneer B&R announcement could be including this afternoon

Oh yes, the writing is on the wall. Veil of Summer is even ALREADY gone in Pioneer!

If I was working on Play Design, I would feel so ashamed at this announcement. I think the Standard bannings were a correct decision on their part, but to think Play Design was created precisely to avoid these issues… and now we have four cards banned in Standard. Talking about poor work.

Maluko wrote: ↑

4 years ago

If I was working on Play Design, I would feel so ashamed at this announcement. I think the Standard bannings were a correct decision on their part, but to think Play Design was created precisely to avoid these issues… and now we have four cards banned in Standard. Talking about poor work.

I have not read the article as a whole, but they did post this about play design on the mothership: https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/a ... 2019-11-18

They admit that they missed the mark on Oko's power, and address other things. They recognize what happened and have learned. What will come from that, we will see. Also, I don't expect to see these lessons come into play in the next couple of sets. They say you learn more from failure than victory, so lets see what happens.

So the play design article on the mothership makes me feel worse, not better.

So they are deliberately trying to power up standard, is a bit of a shaky concept. I get that they want cards that are relevant in more than a single format, but I'm not sure I agree with them that powerlevel misses are more egregious when the overall powerlevel of the format is low. I don't know that having a higher baseline makes the misses less problematic, especially since that higher baseline means you are likely missing even higher.

The complete lack of discussion on Once Upon a Time is surprising to me, as that seems like it should have been even more obviously a problematic design.

Th article reads like they think they have a good gameplan, they just fumbled a few things on execution. and I'm not sure that's the case. I can't remember ever seeing a format with 65+% of the pro tour on the same deck (with minor variations). They banned a card, everything got significantly worse, and they had to ban 3!! more. That's not a minor miss. Missing the Saheeli Rai - Felidar Guardian combo was a minor thing; an understandable oversight. This feels major.

The only good thing about the article was the mention of Teferi, Time Raveler - it's good that they know how problematic and dangerous that guy is, even if he doesn't end up on the banlist.

Maluko wrote: ↑

4 years ago

If I was working on Play Design, I would feel so ashamed at this announcement. I think the Standard bannings were a correct decision on their part, but to think Play Design was created precisely to avoid these issues… and now we have four cards banned in Standard. Talking about poor work.

Often time it takes players (who spend more time on using cards than making cards) to see how powerful a card is. I wouldn't blame the designers for this.

That said, I can finally pick up an Oko or two for my commander decks!

My issue is with how linear and easy setup these cards and shell were. Maybe they didnt think people would play Green? Its just kind of hard when you have the mana dork into Walker into counter protection (in green no less) into redraws. With a possible free refilter and a couple more pushed cards (nissa,krasis,teferi,fae tutor and the like) the deck builds itself and has a high win and consistency rate. Nobody in play design built this deck?
None the less it was mostly expected and only my newly pulled ext border OuaT will cry.......

Of these I only pay attention to standard / brawl but I think these things all needed to happen. It just.......... needed to happen much sooner than it did. Hopefully it breathes some life back into the format because it was so completely horrible that it drove me to uninstall Arena.

That announcement was oddly satisfying.

.... and nothing done in pioneer. As a modern player, I guess I'm glad if they fumble pioneer as it competes with modern as the go-to eternal format.

Haters gonna hate. Always finding something to complain about. To them, the set is either worthless and weak or overpowered with overpriced singles, the format is either stagnant or imbalanced. We can either have a safe, weak, boring game without risk of banning. Or we can have a novel, empowering, exciting game with risk of bannings. I choose the latter. WotC is doing an excellent job.

Farewell elks. You will be missed.

I'm just happy to see that they are willing to ban a planeswalker in Standard rather than let it run wild just because they made the card type the face of the game.

Maybe they'll finally stop pushing them this far at some point.

pierreb wrote: ↑

4 years ago

.... and nothing done in pioneer. As a modern player, I guess I'm glad if they fumble pioneer as it competes with modern as the go-to eternal format.

Taking a week or two off from bannings isn't exactly a fumble. Personally, I'm cashing out of Modern. Pioneer's existence alone is another signal that they're not willing to provide the necessary reprints to make Modern accessible. A c-note for a single land is asinine.