quote:

---

Originally posted by Volcanon:
I don't like any of those changes. Was counterfeiting new cards really such a big issue that they had to put an ugly sticker on all of the rares?

---

+1

None of these changes make any sense.

__________________
"Message to women worldwide: Girls....we're stupid. We don't like games. We don't know games. We can't read minds. Say it like you mean or STFU." -rockondon

quote:

---

Originally posted by ryan2754:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/281

---

Ewwwwww.

I don't care about the font, but the border is rather jarring (and I don't care for it), and I'm not a fan of the "holofoil" bird poop.

EDIT: Also, this gem:

quote:

---

One thing that didn't go exactly as planned with these latest Commander decks is the imbalance in availability caused by the presence of a highly sought-after Legacy card—True-Name Nemesis—in one of them. While I don't regret printing cards in products like these that are powerful enough to show up in Constructed decks in Eternal formats, I don't like that the decks offer such different value propositions when there's an imbalance like there is here. We'll be doing our best to maximize equality in fixed products going forward!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by ryan2754:
http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/281

Absolutely despise the font change. Also don't like the circular black fade at the bottom (see wall of fire). Why not just go across horizontally?

---

Yeah, I really don't like that fade out of the color either. However; I was a lot more annoyed at the border colors of artifacts and red spells when they redid the frames the first time, and thankfully those have changed over time.

That said, it is what it is, and won't really impact players much once people are used to it.

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Goaswerfraiejen:
Ewwwwww.

I don't care about the font, but the border is rather jarring (and I don't care for it), and I'm not a fan of the "holofoil" bird poop.

EDIT: Also, this gem:

[QUOTE]One thing that didn't go exactly as planned with these latest Commander decks is the imbalance in availability caused by the presence of a highly sought-after Legacy card—True-Name Nemesis—in one of them. While I don't regret printing cards in products like these that are powerful enough to show up in Constructed decks in Eternal formats, I don't like that the decks offer such different value propositions when there's an imbalance like there is here. We'll be doing our best to maximize equality in fixed products going forward!

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by rats60:
The easiest way to fix this would have been to put the high demand card in multiple decks or announce that it would soon be reprinted. You can't print a card that you know will be a legacy staple and keep the quantities low. Legacy is still one of the most, if not most popular format. If TNN had been in all the blue decks, it's price would have been manageable and it would have been easy to load up the other two decks with equal value.

---

First off - they should have known this would happen because it already happened to some extent with Scavenging Ooze two years ago. If they had announced TNN would be in Born of the Gods the deck would still be selling out until BoG release because legacy tournaments are still happening.

You can't just try to make the average value of each deck the same. If True Name Nemesis were the only card in that deck it would still be consistently sold out because the MSRP of the product is below the secondary market value for that one card.

They have a few basic ways to go about this in the future:

1. Put something equally good in all the decks.
2. Don't try to put unique legacy staples in these products.
3. Include all the "new" cards in every deck. Kinda a mini Commander's Arsenal. (I like this strategy)
4. Make the "legacy card" a land or artifact and include it in every deck.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pail42:
3. Include all the "new" cards in every deck. Kinda a mini Commander's Arsenal. (I like this strategy)

---

Wouldn't that mean that only lands and colorless artifacts can be "new" cards? Or would they be including cards not playable in some of the decks, which would be confusing to new players? Either way seems pretty bad to me.

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by nderdog:
Wouldn't that mean that only lands and colorless artifacts can be "new" cards? Or would they be including cards not playable in some of the decks, which would be confusing to new players? Either way seems pretty bad to me.

---

Idea 4 was the land/artifact thing. The idea here was every commander deck could come with the same "arsenal pack" which contained cards of every color - not necessarily every new card, but at least all the new cards that might have exceptional value due to play in legacy formats.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pail42:
Idea 4 was the land/artifact thing. The idea here was every commander deck could come with the same "arsenal pack" which contained cards of every color - not necessarily every new card, but at least all the new cards that might have exceptional value due to play in legacy formats.

Commander is already a really terrible product for new players. It's vastly more complex than any other instantly-playable product. They could attempt to explain the cards with a packaging insert, but since it's already so complex maybe they shouldn't worry too much about it.

---

The format is complex, sure, but even then, throwing in some cards that are completely unrelated to the deck seems like a really terrible way to try to address a value issue and will make it even more confusing for no good reason. The complicated nature of the format means they should be doing more to make it easy to follow, not adding useless items in that have no purpose other than some perceived cost-balance.

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by nderdog:
not adding useless items in that have no purpose other than some perceived cost-balance.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pail42:
Wizards cares about value balance. Wizards cares about printing legacy cards in supplemental products. These are just methods that they could used to address the balance of value (and except for #2 still impact legacy).

---

Sure they do, but that doesn't mean that they value those over and above the actual point of the product in question. Alternating between an arsenal product and playable decks is much better than trying to do both things at once. While including unplayable cards in a deck intended for play may meet an ancillary goal, if it detracts from the purpose of the product then it doesn't really do anyone any good.

__________________
There's no need to fear, UNDERDOG is here!

All your Gruul Nodorogs are belong to me. Trade them to me, please!

Report rules violations.

quote:

---

Originally posted by nderdog:
Sure they do, but that doesn't mean that they value those over and above the actual point of the product in question.

---

I think we all agree that creating 5 unique cards of approximately equal value is essentially impossible, so if putting all the "value" cards in each deck is also out then we aren't left with many options

quote:

---

2. Don't try to put unique legacy staples in these products.
4. Make the "legacy card" a land or artifact and include it in every deck

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by choco man:
Another option would have been to make true name nemesis an uncommon and put it in three of the decks.

---

You're still looking at two decks that are $10-$20 less valuable (at a $30 MSRP) than the three decks that have TNN. That's much much better that what we have today, but it's not exactly what I'd call a good solution.

quote:

---

Originally posted by choco man:
Another option would have been to make true name nemesis an uncommon and put it in three of the decks.

Seems to me that would have been the better option anyway since true name scales so horribly in multiplayer. If you had all five commander decks vs each other straight out the box, that would be interesting to see on the battlefield.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by hilikuS:
Why does it matter what rarity you put it at? They are essentially all the same rarity except for the basic lands.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by psrex:
For the Commander decks a common is in every deck (5), the uncommons are in each deck that runs that color (3), and the rares/mythics are only in one deck.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pail42:
Sol ring is an uncommon and is in every deck...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by psrex:
For the Commander decks a common is in every deck (5), the uncommons are in each deck that runs that color (3), and the rares/mythics are only in one deck.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Pail42:
Sol ring is an uncommon and is in every deck...

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by mikeyk135:
To be fair, he did say the uncommons are in every deck that run that color. Sol Ring is colorless therefore is in every deck.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Volcanon:
Another option would have been to not print such a bad card. It's awful in EDH and broken in everywhere else. Now we're going to have to suffer through cubing where the usual "best stuff" cubes always have TNN in it.

---

Well, that's a whole other issue, I thought we were talking about better ways to balance the values of each of the five commander decks. And I don't think it's so bad for the three blue decks to be $10-15 more than the non-blue ones. That's so much better than having one deck be sold out, one be over MSRP, and three not worth MSRP. Besides, it's not realistic for all of the decks to be the same price. I just don't like that the imbalance is so blatant that it's practically impossible to get Mind Seize.

I don't see TNN being any more horrible than tarmogoyf, stoneforge, emrakul (a true abomination), delver, griselbrand, or deathrite.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Volcanon:
Now we're going to have to suffer through cubing where the usual "best stuff" cubes always have TNN in it.

---

Well take it out. Problem solved.......

quote:

---

Originally posted by choco man:
And honestly, you shouldn't ever complain about wotc and any card in the context of cube.

---