|
|
| What do you think WOTC will ban in standard in the next announcement? |
| Delver of Secrets |
|
18% |
[ 7 ] |
| Snapcaster Mage |
|
10% |
[ 4 ] |
| Ponder |
|
16% |
[ 6 ] |
| Other |
|
5% |
[ 2 ] |
| Nothing, format is healthy |
|
48% |
[ 18 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 37 |
|
| Author |
Message |
Pokemaster
Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 40
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
xJudicatorx
Joined: 27 Aug 2007
Posts: 578
|
 Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 10:40 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| The option "Nothing, format is healthy" doesn't really fit. Format is definitely not healthy, but they still won't ban anything. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ashmatan
Joined: 21 Dec 2006
Posts: 116
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ok people. if u werent around b4 when we had this "problem", the reason theres so much delver, is cuz people are playing too much delver!!!!! honestly, i think it's an addiction to winning. To be 100% honest, i have never gone out of the way to put a delver deck together. never. the card is good, but its only GOOD. not great. it would be great if it transformed into a 3/3 flier (which im quite friggin sure wotc worked out in testing). There are so many answers to delver out there and i think people are just too damn lazy and afraid to lose in the meantime to find them and make a competetive deck. I went 5-2 in the master (should have been 6-1, and u know this jud XD lol) with a non-delver, non-RG deck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EMA
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 189
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 2:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I really don't get these "zomg I won one game vs delver with my brew" comments.
Nobody is saying delver is unbeatable anyway.
It's just that its existance makes every other deck choice suboptimal, that's the problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pokemaster
Joined: 16 Sep 2007
Posts: 40
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Great you beat delver and then lose to another deck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
LuckyDucky
Joined: 14 Jan 2012
Posts: 165
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 4:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| What were the deck %s for T2 when Wild Nacatl, Bitterblossom, etc weren't banned? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AxiomBlurr
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Posts: 276
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 6:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I am quite sure Nacatl didn't get ran in its T2 environment as that scene didn't have fetch lands. Bitter certainly saw heavy play but if I remember correctly 4cc was the stronger deck in bitter's T2 environment.
As for the banning hammer; all changes are welcomed by me, change opens up new options that were not viable previously - but I seriously doubt any of the cards that you mentioned will be banned as none of them are truly format warping - IMO.
The thing about Delver for me is that it is an amazingly designed uncommon or even rare. When I first saw it was common I lost a great deal of faith in the mtg designers. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Dipiano
Joined: 06 Aug 2006
Posts: 3
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| i remember i played a tourney with faeries and the only games i drew bitterblossom i actually lost |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Burton911
Joined: 09 Jun 2007
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 04, 2012 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Dipiano wrote: | | i remember i played a tourney with faeries and the only games i drew bitterblossom i actually lost |
thats the awkward part where faeries was more than thoughtseize > Mutavault > Bitterblossom > Sprite > Clique ....
Draw your own conclusions ...
You can also lose if you flip your delver on turn 2, but it does not change the fact that this just shouldnt happen cause blut should not have essentially free 3/2 flyers .... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pg8
Joined: 27 Feb 2011
Posts: 264
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 3:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AxiomBlurr wrote: | | The thing about Delver for me is that it is an amazingly designed uncommon or even rare. When I first saw it was common I lost a great deal of faith in the mtg designers. |
I'm trying to figure out why rarity has anything to do with constructed Magic. Also why you think it's okay for rares to be undercosted beatsticks but commons have to be 2/2 for 2. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EMA
Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Posts: 189
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 4:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pg8 wrote: |
I'm trying to figure out why rarity has anything to do with constructed Magic. Also why you think it's okay for rares to be undercosted beatsticks but commons have to be 2/2 for 2. |
+1
Rarity just affects limited and the secondary market. It's ok as a common since delver wasn't good at all in isd-isd-dka. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
AxiomBlurr
Joined: 11 Jul 2010
Posts: 276
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
| pg8 wrote: | | AxiomBlurr wrote: | | The thing about Delver for me is that it is an amazingly designed uncommon or even rare. When I first saw it was common I lost a great deal of faith in the mtg designers. |
I'm trying to figure out why rarity has anything to dDelver easily croaso with constructed Magic. Also why you think it's okay for rares to be undercosted beatsticks but commons have to be 2/2 for 2. |
Rarity has nothing to do with constructed, nor did I say it did- rarity is just a design parameter-there are fuzzy limits on the power level a common can have-I think Delver easily surpasses those limits-this was my point. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Burton911
Joined: 09 Jun 2007
Posts: 172
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 10:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| AxiomBlurr wrote: | | pg8 wrote: | | AxiomBlurr wrote: | | The thing about Delver for me is that it is an amazingly designed uncommon or even rare. When I first saw it was common I lost a great deal of faith in the mtg designers. |
I'm trying to figure out why rarity has anything to dDelver easily croaso with constructed Magic. Also why you think it's okay for rares to be undercosted beatsticks but commons have to be 2/2 for 2. |
Rarity has nothing to do with constructed, nor did I say it did- rarity is just a design parameter-there are fuzzy limits on the power level a common can have-I think Delver easily surpasses those limits-this was my point. |
If you take that train of thought and push it a little further you see that they simply underestimated the power of delver.
@EMA: Delver was an ok card in Limited, but it is obviously a lot harder to build a dedicated deck. Mostly it shone in some combination of U R and B. Especially in Triple ISD where you could get up to 4 Delvers sometimes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DrFueng
Joined: 17 Aug 2005
Posts: 190
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 6:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bump. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Tao
Joined: 22 Dec 2007
Posts: 863
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 05, 2012 9:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| EMA wrote: | | pg8 wrote: |
I'm trying to figure out why rarity has anything to do with constructed Magic. Also why you think it's okay for rares to be undercosted beatsticks but commons have to be 2/2 for 2. |
+1
Rarity just affects limited and the secondary market. It's ok as a common since delver wasn't good at all in isd-isd-dka. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
