I have gotten the green light for an interview with WoTC regarding the momentous Shards of Alara changes and looking to see what questions you like to see asked!
So, go ahead and post away and I will post once I know more about the specific date of the interview.
1. Will Design make cycles of cards at each rarity Common, Uncommon, Rare, and Mythic Rare? Will the new rarity dictate a design change or encourage new designs?
2. While the number of commons per block will remain the same, what will happen to all the uncommons and rares we are missing in future blocks? Can you give an example of an uncommon that would not make the 'cut' if say, Lorwyn was only 249 cards?
3. Will the Core Set be redesigned with a new focus or will it still carry some of the weakest examples of magic (sorry Grizzly Bear) in order to teach new players with basic creatures? Can you give an example from Xth of what a core set mythic rare would be?
1) Could you give examples of both Mythical rares and regular rares from the Lorwyn/Shadowmoor block?
2) The smaller sets for ALA seem like a temporary idea to fix the huge cardpool in Standard right now. Will larger sets exist in the future again?
3) If there was a situation where a Mythical rare became a staple four of a kind tournament card and skyrocked in price on the secondary market would WotC ever re-issue the card in the next expansion set as a rare to remedy this situation?
1. Most of these major changes appear to be directly aimed at recruiting new players. What type of marketing campaign will accompany the changes, to let new players know about it? It's all and good to have hardcore players debate the changes on forums months before they happen, but what is the use if no one else knows about it?
2. Will the price of booster packs remain, despite the (admittedly marginal) drop in value due to the inclusion of a basic land?
1. With all these new changes aiming towards new players, are there any plans that cater towards veteran players?
2. The lost of 1 common a pack and inclusion of 1 basic land seems to have a weak justification. Please bring up that new players do not buy boxes of packs, and even if they do, they only get 36 random basic lands or so, and that's hardly enough to make a 2 color deck. Please press hard on this topic.
1) Inclusion of Mythic rares seems, to some, to serve nothing but drive up demand for packs. What guarantee, if any, that you'd actually use mythic rares to improve card design/game playability and not just becomes chase rares+1?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Did you predict a large backlash from the implication of mythic rares? (Seems like there has been a large backlash)
A large backlash on the internet does not imply a large backlash in absolute terms. Many Magic players don't post on forums. The internet is not the whole world.
1) Inclusion of Mythic rares seems, to some, to serve nothing but drive up demand for packs. What guarantee, if any, that you'd actually use mythic rares to improve card design/game playability and not just becomes chase rares+1?
I hereby second that first question
But, in all seriousness, @ WOTC: Hypothetically, if a mythic rare slips under your rader like skullclamp or tarmogoyf did, what steps, if any, would you take to alleviate the financial burden on competitive players who must have the card to stay competitive? Restriction? Banning? Printing hosers?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Many thanks to ChibiSwan of The Ugly Swan for the great banner!
Quote from CherryBoom! »
It mostly consists of a napalm filled trench around my house and a stack of 1994 pornography in my basement.
Quote from HandwrittenHero »
As much as I'm against the OTT view that this card is going to solo tournaments, cure cancer and make Susan Boyle attractive I'm not really a fan of the opposing camp who think it slaughters puppies and sired Justin Bieber.
Will the basic lands in the boosters be special in any way (like, Un-type lands for example), or will they be standard basics from the set?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
MTGS: Where criticism of staff is a bannable offense.
Quote from Blinking Spirit »
Quote from TheButt »
My sig is not trolling. And it's not opinion, it's fact.
And I'm not changing it. I'm not gonna be browbeated by a moderator, simply because you don't like the fact that I'm bringing to light that the staff suspends half-decent posters, while allowing trolls to run rampant.
Well, you've still got about fourteen hours before you're infracted for noncompliance. Talk to whomever you want.
1) Do new players obtain most of their cards via boosters or the secondary market?
2) Do veteran players obtain most of their cards via boosters or the secondary marktet?
I think these questions are relevant because if most people buy boosters instead of singles, then most people wouldn't be affected by high prices for mythic rares. I know a lot of people buy singles, but don't know if that's the norm.
Are you concerned that the new Intro Packs may be a little misleading to new customers, since there are not enough cards included to construct a full, tournament-legal 60-card deck?
1. How are mythic rares distributed in tournament packs? Do they come 1 to 3? I must say I've always considered the holofoil distribution in tournament packs to be unfair. You will always end up with less foils than boosters.
2. What influenced the change to add a basic land to each booster? Will the tournmanet pack composition go unchanged? If so, a TP gives 3 more commons than buying 3 booster packs!
3. I love the new intro decks. But what will become of the core set? Core Set should get intro decks too. The current Starters suck.
@ People complaining about basic lands
The answer the question of the basic land replacement in boosters is quite obvious. Because the set size has become smaller, a basic land is inserted in place so that it won't be as easy to complete the full set of common cards. This problem is very apparent in Yu-Gi-Oh! Buying just 5 boosters will net you a bunch of repeat commons and not even a significant portion of the total number of normal rares in the set.
1. Will the inclusion of mythic rares be a way that the reprint policy will go away?
2. Mythic rares is not new(r1,r2, etc was around in the early days of magic) What was the decision to go back to this format? Design? Money? or just make a change to make a change?
3. Smaller sets. I welcome smaller sets, but can't they have a negative effect? If so, what do you see that as?
Private Mod Note
():
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I have gotten the green light for an interview with WoTC regarding the momentous Shards of Alara changes and looking to see what questions you like to see asked!
So, go ahead and post away and I will post once I know more about the specific date of the interview.
Cheers,
Tom of MTGCast
MTGCast Facebook Group
MTGCast Twitter Feed
2. While the number of commons per block will remain the same, what will happen to all the uncommons and rares we are missing in future blocks? Can you give an example of an uncommon that would not make the 'cut' if say, Lorwyn was only 249 cards?
3. Will the Core Set be redesigned with a new focus or will it still carry some of the weakest examples of magic (sorry Grizzly Bear) in order to teach new players with basic creatures? Can you give an example from Xth of what a core set mythic rare would be?
2) The smaller sets for ALA seem like a temporary idea to fix the huge cardpool in Standard right now. Will larger sets exist in the future again?
3) If there was a situation where a Mythical rare became a staple four of a kind tournament card and skyrocked in price on the secondary market would WotC ever re-issue the card in the next expansion set as a rare to remedy this situation?
2. Will the price of booster packs remain, despite the (admittedly marginal) drop in value due to the inclusion of a basic land?
2. The lost of 1 common a pack and inclusion of 1 basic land seems to have a weak justification. Please bring up that new players do not buy boxes of packs, and even if they do, they only get 36 random basic lands or so, and that's hardly enough to make a 2 color deck. Please press hard on this topic.
2) can I have some of it?
But, seriously:
1) Inclusion of Mythic rares seems, to some, to serve nothing but drive up demand for packs. What guarantee, if any, that you'd actually use mythic rares to improve card design/game playability and not just becomes chase rares+1?
"Sometimes, the situation is outracing a threat, sometimes it's ignoring it, and sometimes it involves sideboarding in 4x Hope//Pray." --Doug Linn
Did you predict a large backlash from the implication of mythic rares? (Seems like there has been a large backlash)
2. Is the book removal the reason you added two packs? They equal about the same.
A large backlash on the internet does not imply a large backlash in absolute terms. Many Magic players don't post on forums. The internet is not the whole world.
I hereby second that first question
But, in all seriousness, @ WOTC: Hypothetically, if a mythic rare slips under your rader like skullclamp or tarmogoyf did, what steps, if any, would you take to alleviate the financial burden on competitive players who must have the card to stay competitive? Restriction? Banning? Printing hosers?
Many thanks to ChibiSwan of The Ugly Swan for the great banner!
2) what kind of effect do you expext mythic rares to have on the secondary market?
3)Do you expect mythic rares to be chase rares(and thus high on the secondary market)? or would you design the sets so that this doesnt happen?
and a non-alara question
4) Does wizards monitor the secondary markets prices and adjust the game accordigly?
Epic sig banner Made by HotP
Pluagebearer of Nurgle
2) Do veteran players obtain most of their cards via boosters or the secondary marktet?
I think these questions are relevant because if most people buy boosters instead of singles, then most people wouldn't be affected by high prices for mythic rares. I know a lot of people buy singles, but don't know if that's the norm.
2. What influenced the change to add a basic land to each booster? Will the tournmanet pack composition go unchanged? If so, a TP gives 3 more commons than buying 3 booster packs!
3. I love the new intro decks. But what will become of the core set? Core Set should get intro decks too. The current Starters suck.
@ People complaining about basic lands
The answer the question of the basic land replacement in boosters is quite obvious. Because the set size has become smaller, a basic land is inserted in place so that it won't be as easy to complete the full set of common cards. This problem is very apparent in Yu-Gi-Oh! Buying just 5 boosters will net you a bunch of repeat commons and not even a significant portion of the total number of normal rares in the set.
2. Mythic rares is not new(r1,r2, etc was around in the early days of magic) What was the decision to go back to this format? Design? Money? or just make a change to make a change?
3. Smaller sets. I welcome smaller sets, but can't they have a negative effect? If so, what do you see that as?