Login | Register


All times are UTC - 7 hours


It is currently 2019-Dec-05 1:00 am




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 3:35 am 

Joined: 2019-Jul-18 7:14 am
Age: Drake
Who determines what a 'reasonable' price for a Magic card is other than the market? Goyf has been reprinted many times and is at the price the market determines to be reasonable. I won't pay it. There is no shadow group of collectors keeping all the cardboard locked up away from me or you.

Unreasonable people think a reasonable price for scalding tarn is $5-10. That makes no sense for WOTC. As a player, I'd like lots of cool, cheap cards. That just isn't the business model. Chas Andres has written many good articles talking about how valuable reprints are to the business.

To the point that Juzam has been reprinted in other forms, you're basically making my point. It is the most expensive card in AN now even though LoA has a more unique effect. Juzam is popular in Old School, which has grown a lot in recent years. Magic Fest Vegas had a big Old School event.

That time machine format cares a lot about the look and feel of the game. That demand may be relatively small compared to modern, but it is putting a big pressure on these old cards. Maybe its under your radar and you're missing what is happening. Those players have the interest and the money to drive the market up. It is reasonable that their interest makes a card that was cheap like City in a Bottle quite expensive now. The same thing is true of LoA. There is probably 4 times the demand now compared to when it was $300.

For me, I'd like to have a moat for one of my decks. I am not going to pay what it costs so I go without. The price of the card is reasonable though. There is no manipulation trying to force me to pay more than what the market sees as fair. Its just not a price for me. All the hate and phantom forces making card prices 'unreasonable' is just not helpful.

If you want to blame greedy investors on why more enfranchised players can't have LoA, blame those greedy Hasbro stockholders that want to have a nice retirement. I wouldn't be surprised if many have Hasbro in funds and don't even know what WOTC is, let alone LoA.


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 4:57 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Dee123 wrote:
Who determines what a 'reasonable' price for a Magic card is other than the market?

Again, I'm pretty sure you and I are using different interpretations of 'reasonable'. You're not recognizing my point of view on this and holding to your own definition even though if something is reasonable or not is subjective. Especially when it gets to prices of anything.

What the market determines is the price that buyers will bear. That doesn't mean it's reasonable, it means they're willing (through an unknown amount of duress) to pay for it.

Dee123 wrote:
Goyf has been reprinted many times and is at the price the market determines to be reasonable. I won't pay it.

Right, so in your own words: Market considers it a reasonable value, you do not. See how what is reasonable can vary? Market value does not equate to being always reasonable value, but you keep doing so. (and yet, also showing that you don't consider it to be reasonable.)

Dee123 wrote:
There is no shadow group of collectors keeping all the cardboard locked up away from me or you.
I'd just like to point out that you state that, but have done nothing to prove it. Also you try to demean it by using descriptors such as "shadow group" - of which nothing was implied when I talked that some collectors take copies out of the market thus (unnecessarily IMO) driving up the market price of the card. Also please note that I never said that was the only reason -- on that it is yet another factor doing so (and one that I feel is an unreasonable contribution to the price of the card.) The factors of people playing vintage, wanting non-proxy cards for cube, and playing Old School are certainly factors increasing the price. I never argued against that. But that you start to use loaded terms when arguing against my point seems to in

Dee123 wrote:
To the point that Juzam has been reprinted in other forms, you're basically making my point. It is the most expensive card in AN now even though LoA has a more unique effect. Juzam is popular in Old School, which has grown a lot in recent years. Magic Fest Vegas had a big Old School event.
But you're also completely ignoring what the other poster was saying. The same effect is worth (lets say) $1 on another card. Yet Juzam is over $2k. Same stats. Is that reasonable?


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 7:34 am 

Joined: 2019-Jul-18 7:14 am
Age: Drake
We are using reasonable/unreasonable differently. Magic is a big ecosystem, and sometimes there are competing interests. I find the turf wars unhelpful. Sometimes, other people want what you do and can out-compete you for it. Those people are not bad people because of it.

Collectors are not bad, and players are not good. Players' interests are not more important. Casual players are allowed to spend their money on dual lands to play unsanctioned Magic instead of sanctioned Magic. It isn't some Legacy players' right of first refusal situation. They can view it as a zero sum game, but the rules just don't justify it. Magic is for all those groups equally.

To address why Juzam is worth thousands while the stats are worth a buck: Juzam isn't just the stats. You can view it that way, but others don't. Others view it as one of the most iconic cards in the game. If that is worth thousands of dollars to someone to own/play an authentic copy of a card that has been the face of the game, then it is none of my business what that person does with their money. If they felt it was reasonable and are happy with their purchase, then it is reasonable.

After all, if my car is dying, that money was never going to be spent buying me a newer, more reliable car anyway. What we 'feel' is reasonable or unreasonable passes along a judgment that is either steeped in jealousy or based on a notion that my needs are more important that the person that acquired what I wanted. It just isn't helpful. Magic can be expensive, and it is helpful to accept why that is.


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 11:09 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2006-Dec-31 12:26 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Dee123 wrote:
We are using reasonable/unreasonable differently.

Excellent. I now know I can safely ignore you... as I've being saying this very thing in the last two posts I had. That you are now stating it means you weren't actually reading what I said. That's just wonderful to know.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 11:31 am 

Joined: 2019-Jul-18 7:14 am
Age: Drake
I was reading what you were writing. Its just clear you just like to argue for the sake of arguing. Why do you care what LoA costs? It doesn't matter. Who cares if it is unbanned in Commander and is worth the cost of a Lexus? If people pay it and are happy, it doesn't really matter.

My entire point, that you ignored and didn't read was claiming in the op that LoA being unbanned would be a just a Commander card when it is already a vintage, cube, and Old School card. The unreasonable price part was less the point than the rest is just wrong as a matter of fact. Clouding that the way it was done using unreasonable is also not helpful.

If your friend with a gently used Bentley shows up to game night with no Bentley and a big grin, assuming you were never getting close to the car, why do you care what your friend traded to play a card at your game night?


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 11:48 am 

Joined: 2014-Jul-26 11:35 am
Age: Elder Dragon
Let's not use the word reasonable, being that it is a point of contention, the reason LoA is banned is because it is seen as a barrier for people joining commander. Library is at minimum $1000. If a player interested in playing commander looks around the internet at some lists and they see several decks containing this card, many will become disheartened as this is an achievable goal for them to get to.

LoA is exactly the same as power 9 with regards to commander. They're not too powerful, but they are very powerful, and if they were available to the general populace they would be played extensively. Because they would be played widely the view would be that if you play commander you have to spend a lot of money, which drives people away. Vintage, Old school and Power Cube players are a dedicated but small group. Everyone knows that if you want to play vintage you are going to have the be prepared to fork out big dollars.

The RC does not want that view for commander, so cards that are vintage icons that are worth those large amounts are banned.

_________________
Favourite Deck:
Ghost Council of Orzhova

Playing Online:
Noyan Darr & Sedris Zombie Guy


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 12:53 pm 

Joined: 2019-Jul-18 7:14 am
Age: Drake
specter404 wrote:
Let's not use the word reasonable, being that it is a point of contention, the reason LoA is banned is because it is seen as a barrier for people joining commander. Library is at minimum $1000. If a player interested in playing commander looks around the internet at some lists and they see several decks containing this card, many will become disheartened as this is an achievable goal for them to get to.

LoA is exactly the same as power 9 with regards to commander. They're not too powerful, but they are very powerful, and if they were available to the general populace they would be played extensively. Because they would be played widely the view would be that if you play commander you have to spend a lot of money, which drives people away. Vintage, Old school and Power Cube players are a dedicated but small group. Everyone knows that if you want to play vintage you are going to have the be prepared to fork out big dollars.

The RC does not want that view for commander, so cards that are vintage icons that are worth those large amounts are banned.


Time twister is an amazing card. It is not banned. I disagree with your last statement, but I understand why people don't like it. It is worthy of power 9 status because it is power 9. I'd suggest in Commander Mox Emerald is probably the 'worst' but who knows. It isn't tested.

The supply and the demand of LoA doesn't really care what it costs. It is out of reach of most people. Arguing over price of some rare, old card that is either legal or not just doesn't matter to most people. If all copies were played in Commander, most people would never see one.

Also, I never, ever said the card should be unbanned. There is no real sharing of ideas much anymore. Everyone has to be first at yelling 'get off my lawn' like that other guy.

The barrier to entry thing has changed too, both in rules and practice. There is no possible way supply-wise LoA can affect the game that way now. It is other cards really. If you are worried about actual barriers to entry, mana crypt is the problem. It is cheaper and more readily available than LoA and gases up the format really fast. LoA is slow. Since there are precons, people are talking about updating them on budgets less than just saying 'Add crypt' works.

I also don't think mana crypt needs banned. Those players know what they are doing and are happy. The thing about money is it is a red herring. I have old Legends that are worth a lot. You really don't know if my Hazezon deck is more powerful than your Derevi deck out of the box. My Guardian Beast is a unique, expensive card, but does it make me win more than cheap cards? No one cares about context anymore.

The RC hardly talks here, and the CAG, whoever they are, seem to have no presence here. Its just old farts yelling get off my lawn until people do.


Top
 Online Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-05 1:25 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Feb-07 4:15 pm
Age: Elder Dragon
Dee123 wrote:
Time twister is an amazing card. It is not banned

Timetwister is a pretty far cry from "amazing" in most multiplayer formats, EDH especially. Heck, depending on the deck I'd argue it's outright bad.

Symmetrical draw is worse in multiplayer formats than in 1v1 because the math of the card advantage it provides is messed up. In normal Magic, it gives you 7 cards for your opponent's 7, a 1-1 ratio. In EDH, it gives you 7 cards for your opponent's 7, your other opponent's 7, and on and on, making the ratio 1-2 or worse.

Its closest point of comparison is Wheel of Fortune, which is IMO severely overrated on its own merits but also far better than Timetwister for quite a few reasons:
1. It's in red, a color which is much more likely to be in topdeck mode than blue. Hell, most of the blue decks that I run tend to have too many cards in hand and Timetwister would actually be card disadvantage for them.
2. Many decks in EDH (I dare say more decks than not) like having a nice fat graveyard. Wheel effects go well with that goal, Timetwister effects actively fight it.
3. Wheel effects thin out the deck. You don't like your hand and really wish you had answer X? Wheel gets rid of those bad cards and makes it more likely you'll draw the good one. Timetwister adds everything back into the deck so you're less likely to get the cards you want and more likely to draw the same crap you had before.

Currently owning both cards, I can say that Wheel has been a lot worse than advertised but still usually finds a home somewhere, where Timetwister has largely gone without a deck to hold it. The one deck where it did find a home was my Shu Yun blitz aggro deck, but that was designed for 1v1 anyway.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-10 8:41 am 

Joined: 2019-Apr-29 9:42 pm
Age: Drake
Uktabi_Kong wrote:
Dee123 wrote:
Time twister is an amazing card. It is not banned

Timetwister is a pretty far cry from "amazing" in most multiplayer formats, EDH especially. Heck, depending on the deck I'd argue it's outright bad.

Symmetrical draw is worse in multiplayer formats than in 1v1 because the math of the card advantage it provides is messed up. In normal Magic, it gives you 7 cards for your opponent's 7, a 1-1 ratio. In EDH, it gives you 7 cards for your opponent's 7, your other opponent's 7, and on and on, making the ratio 1-2 or worse.

Its closest point of comparison is Wheel of Fortune, which is IMO severely overrated on its own merits but also far better than Timetwister for quite a few reasons:
1. It's in red, a color which is much more likely to be in topdeck mode than blue. Hell, most of the blue decks that I run tend to have too many cards in hand and Timetwister would actually be card disadvantage for them.
2. Many decks in EDH (I dare say more decks than not) like having a nice fat graveyard. Wheel effects go well with that goal, Timetwister effects actively fight it.
3. Wheel effects thin out the deck. You don't like your hand and really wish you had answer X? Wheel gets rid of those bad cards and makes it more likely you'll draw the good one. Timetwister adds everything back into the deck so you're less likely to get the cards you want and more likely to draw the same crap you had before.

Currently owning both cards, I can say that Wheel has been a lot worse than advertised but still usually finds a home somewhere, where Timetwister has largely gone without a deck to hold it. The one deck where it did find a home was my Shu Yun blitz aggro deck, but that was designed for 1v1 anyway.



I mean I pley comit // memory and timesprial right now because I can’t afford timetwister. I think I might drop trinket mage and silent gravestone just to run it as better gravehate/ combo generator. Usually I hit my opponents with a good one, two or left, right using such effects with notion thief but that’s to put a pin in the game and end it. Even if I’m doing this on turn 7/10 we still had a game and there was some tension of who was going to win. Sometimes there still is that tension when I don’t have a good board state to finish them off with.

I think your point is valid but of the 80% Of decks that can’t run or outta not run timeswister the few that can are ‘problematic’, a word I’d hate to use commonly but works best for this situation.

Survival is also an issue card because it makes decks so consistent and imo edh is more about having some similar things happening in a game not having the same things happening every game, but of all the cards that might do that survival might not be the worst offender. Then again many mono black list will run all the best tutors in an attempt to reach their pieces and run multiple cards to keep themselves in the game. It’s just something I fundamentally dislike in the game, but I see no way of dealing with those sorta decks other then making fundamentally aweful by playing cards like possbility storm.

Which leads me to the whole point of the conversation of “dies to removal”. I think most problems in the game are answerable in the game using other powerful effects. The game itself is an inevitable armsrace of who can figure out how to dismantle their opponents plans. These usually include the following. Gravehate, artifact/enchantment removal, creature removal, utility land removal, and hand disruption/deck disruption.

As is such much of the more casual community wouldn’t like a mindslaver effect of emrakul or getting their hand discarded by mind slicer but these powerful effect combat other powerful effects like consecrated spinx and omniscience.

So when It comes to bans and unbans it should follow some theory to what are things people outta be running anyways as a community to allow these cards to exist as intended in the game overall. It’s part of the reason why protein hulk was unbanned because gravehate is prevalent in the format.

I think that in this philosophy one could imagine the wishes being usable ingame for things that were removed from the game. This could be a house rule people try but ultimately shouldn’t be debilitating to the game overall and will help with some of the issues the game faces now. Ie people exiling my commander with emrakul.

Sorry for the wall of text just had to get that off my mind. Thanks for reading and posting btw :)

_________________
Deck list Thraximundar midrange/control

Deck list Jund creature combo (not updated)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-10 8:50 am 

Joined: 2019-Apr-29 9:42 pm
Age: Drake
kirkusjones wrote:
Prophet gives ALL of your creatures flash in addition to having Seedborn Muse's static ability. There's a pretty big gap between the two cards, as Prophet gives you a lot more options for using the mana you now have access to every turn.


Prophet only untap lands seedborn muse is all things. In this seedbornmuse is more powerful when using other non land permanents to produce mana. Also looking for flash in blue and green is not difficult so the difference is laughable, but seedborn muse is arguably better because it untaps everything and can enjoy flash effects from the deck to boot dodging critism due to its lack of ‘additional effects’ both cards are issues because they provide players with more turns their their opponents. If I get to have 3* the amount of turns and flex my way to victory due to that maybe the card is just that way too powerful. The only thing that comes close to thode cards is lighthouse chronologist fully leveled up.

_________________
Deck list Thraximundar midrange/control

Deck list Jund creature combo (not updated)


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-10 8:56 am 
User avatar

Joined: 2014-Jul-28 8:30 am
Age: Dragon
Image

RTFC, friend. Prophet does not untap artifacts, I'll give you that. Flash is not that trivial an ability to come by for your whole team, please stop acting like two cards are somehow equivalent to one that fulfills two very powerful roles.

_________________
specter404 wrote:
Basically, when it comes to commander, I want you to stab me through the heart, not cut off my balls.

Gath Immortal wrote:
Twenty Kavus and a Dream is not a legacy deck.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-12 5:47 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
specter404 wrote:
Let's not use the word reasonable, being that it is a point of contention, the reason LoA is banned is because it is seen as a barrier for people joining commander. Library is at minimum $1000. If a player interested in playing commander looks around the internet at some lists and they see several decks containing this card, many will become disheartened as this is an achievable goal for them to get to.

LoA is exactly the same as power 9 with regards to commander. They're not too powerful, but they are very powerful, and if they were available to the general populace they would be played extensively. Because they would be played widely the view would be that if you play commander you have to spend a lot of money, which drives people away. Vintage, Old school and Power Cube players are a dedicated but small group. Everyone knows that if you want to play vintage you are going to have the be prepared to fork out big dollars.

The RC does not want that view for commander, so cards that are vintage icons that are worth those large amounts are banned.

Library WAS banned because of the perceived barrier to entry. It remains banned because at this point there is no good that comes from unbanning it due to its price tag. However, from a pure power standpoint the card isn't going to hurt the format and would be legal in a hypothetical world where it was not RL and as available as something like Relequary Tower.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-12 10:24 am 

Joined: 2012-Apr-11 7:17 am
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
Library WAS banned because of the perceived barrier to entry. It remains banned because at this point there is no good that comes from unbanning it due to its price tag. However, from a pure power standpoint the card isn't going to hurt the format and would be legal in a hypothetical world where it was not RL and as available as something like Relequary Tower.

Is there some data showing this interaction, or is this an opinion?

_________________
sir squab wrote:
My... history of buying Magic cards is probably a tapestry of bad financial decisions >_>
niheloim wrote:
No, I think he's right. I'm just all butt-hurt over prophet.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-12 10:54 am 

Joined: 2012-Mar-31 11:52 am
Age: Elder Dragon
MRHblue wrote:
cryogen wrote:
Library WAS banned because of the perceived barrier to entry. It remains banned because at this point there is no good that comes from unbanning it due to its price tag. However, from a pure power standpoint the card isn't going to hurt the format and would be legal in a hypothetical world where it was not RL and as available as something like Relequary Tower.

Is there some data showing this interaction, or is this an opinion?

What interaction? That the price is so high that unbanning it creates a feel-bad for 99% of players, or that if it weren't RL and were widly available it wouldn't be banned?

There might be forum posts somewhere, but I've talked about the card with all of the RC at one point or another. They definitely aren't interested in unbanning it because of the price/availability combined with the perception that it would be an auto-include. For the latter, they are divided on the actual power level, just as most people on the forums are. So I guess I can't say it WOULD be unbanned, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was.


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: So silly question about old bans...
AgePosted: 2019-Sep-12 10:20 pm 
User avatar

Joined: 2012-Dec-03 3:16 am
Age: Elder Dragon
cryogen wrote:
MRHblue wrote:
cryogen wrote:
Library WAS banned because of the perceived barrier to entry. It remains banned because at this point there is no good that comes from unbanning it due to its price tag. However, from a pure power standpoint the card isn't going to hurt the format and would be legal in a hypothetical world where it was not RL and as available as something like Relequary Tower.

Is there some data showing this interaction, or is this an opinion?

What interaction? That the price is so high that unbanning it creates a feel-bad for 99% of players, or that if it weren't RL and were widly available it wouldn't be banned?

There might be forum posts somewhere, but I've talked about the card with all of the RC at one point or another. They definitely aren't interested in unbanning it because of the price/availability combined with the perception that it would be an auto-include. For the latter, they are divided on the actual power level, just as most people on the forums are. So I guess I can't say it WOULD be unbanned, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was.


Isn't it ALL opinion? Fun is subjective and so when you are banning things because of how it affects fun, that is why you have people that are all over the map on what should or should not be banned.

_________________
Shabbaman wrote:
The usual answer is "the social contract", but I guess that is not what you are looking for. Try house rules.


With perfect mana, reasonable removal, disruption, and card advantage, we're back to pitchforks and torches. And it's about to get worse for those who do not enjoy the game as Richard Garfield intended, playing as few win conditions as possible and prompting concession after all hopes (and spells) are lost. - Shaheen Soorani


Top
 Offline Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

All times are UTC - 7 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Dee123 and 31 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum

Search for:
Jump to: