Author Topic: Set Rotation food for thought (Read 19727 times)

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #50 on:** May 08, 2018, 09:29:31 AM »

Quote from: Red on May 08, 2018, 09:27:09 AM

Quote from: Kevinthedude on May 08, 2018, 09:25:03 AM
Quote from: Red on May 08, 2018, 09:14:54 AM
Redemption is not Vintage. Also, Vintage is not a bad format.

It's the equivalent in that it allows every set in the game's history and strives to never have a real ban list. Vintage may not be a bad format but I believe most people would tell you they prefer Modern even if it weren't for the restrictive cost factor of Vintage. Card designers get better as they get more experience and develop more clear visions for the best way to play the game and new formats, whether they be rotating like Standard or static but limited by a certain date of sets like Modern. Maybe the best route for Redemption is to be more like Modern and just set the cutoff at I/J like planned and never rotate again after that, maybe the best route is standard as has received so much discussion lately, but I really can't see that the best route for Redemption is to stay Vintage forever.
I can see the argument, I just want to play Vintage (At Nationals) forever. If I can do that, I reckon I'll be good.

Would you be good if Vintage and Standard were official tournament formats and hosts could pick whatever their playground wanted? I'd assume in this world Vintage T1 and Standard T1 are both categories offered at Nats.

Red · « **Reply #51 on:** May 08, 2018, 09:33:01 AM »

Quote from: Kevinthedude on May 08, 2018, 09:29:31 AM

Quote from: Red on May 08, 2018, 09:27:09 AM
Quote from: Kevinthedude on May 08, 2018, 09:25:03 AM
Quote from: Red on May 08, 2018, 09:14:54 AM
Redemption is not Vintage. Also, Vintage is not a bad format.

It's the equivalent in that it allows every set in the game's history and strives to never have a real ban list. Vintage may not be a bad format but I believe most people would tell you they prefer Modern even if it weren't for the restrictive cost factor of Vintage. Card designers get better as they get more experience and develop more clear visions for the best way to play the game and new formats, whether they be rotating like Standard or static but limited by a certain date of sets like Modern. Maybe the best route for Redemption is to be more like Modern and just set the cutoff at I/J like planned and never rotate again after that, maybe the best route is standard as has received so much discussion lately, but I really can't see that the best route for Redemption is to stay Vintage forever.
I can see the argument, I just want to play Vintage (At Nationals) forever. If I can do that, I reckon I'll be good.

Would you be good if Vintage and Standard were official tournament formats and hosts could pick whatever their playground wanted? I'd assume in this world Vintage T1 and Standard T1 are both categories offered at Nats.

If that was how it would be, I personally wouldn't mind.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #52 on:** May 08, 2018, 09:36:16 AM »

Quote from: SEB on May 08, 2018, 07:45:26 AM

Also, speaking from a "new player" prospective (let's face it after this many years, im basically new), a rotation format is very attractive. I dont have to learn as many cards to get to a competitive level,

Serious questions, what are you considering older cards that could be rotated out? How many cards in those sets actually see play at a competitive level?

Quote

friends and family who I want to introduce to the game may have an easier point of entry,

Why is the entry point easier? Are you saying when you introduce friends and family to the game that you expect them to want/need complete sets of older basically unplayable (e.g., Unlimited and Apostles) packs? What point would that serve?

Does anyone really believe someone like Red would have a competitive advantage over a newer player because he has access to cards like Doeg or Angel Food?

Crashfach2002 · « **Reply #53 on:** May 08, 2018, 09:46:09 AM »

When set rotation first came out, I was completely opposed to it. Because the line of thinking behind this is: well all those old cards that you spent thousands of dollars on, and have over 50,000 of, and give away to your new players; well those don't matter anymore! Sorry, you have to have new cards or you can't play. This is not helpful for anyone, especially the players who have been playing a very long period of time and are trying to get new YOUNG players into the game.

But if we are talking about having the rotation set up two separate categories, I'm totally fine with it! I will say, that I'm almost inclined to do that, for a few different reasons. The first being that (if feel) most of the "competitive" players will want to play with the new cards, so that would allow younger players to have a chance to win cards when they normally wouldn't. Also, due to the relative costs for the cards, it would be very easy for a new player to have a competitive deck simply given to them for a "legacy" type tournament. While you obviously have to worry about old wording for new players, the fact that they (could) get free cards and have a chance to win would probably mitigate that for the most part.

Also, for those worried about not having "fair play" between brigades: that is what the Legacy Rares are for! If set rotation is really looking like it is going to become "a thing," then the Elders simply need to crank up the amount of Legacy Rares included in sets, and focus on the brigades that need the most help (looking at Teal specifically). I don't see any reason why "balanced" and "quality" cards can't be part of both sets, as this game does have limited resources compared to others.

All in all, I think IF this idea comes into play, it will be for the better of everyone. Collectors won't lose out on the money they spent because all the cards they have can still be played (just maybe not all together). New players can decide which category they get involved in, with money being the main deciding factor. If the "legacy" gets a lot of attention, it will actually bring back some relevance to the older cards too.

Honestly, if this the direction we are heading, it is really a win-win for everyone involved. We just need to look at it slightly differently, and get past the "I don't like change" argument (I can say that, I'm currently a minister at a Southern Baptist Church!).

SEB · « **Reply #54 on:** May 08, 2018, 09:49:24 AM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 08, 2018, 09:36:16 AM

Quote from: SEB on May 08, 2018, 07:45:26 AM
Also, speaking from a "new player" prospective (let's face it after this many years, im basically new), a rotation format is very attractive. I dont have to learn as many cards to get to a competitive level,
Serious questions, what are you considering older cards that could be rotated out? How many cards in those sets actually see play at a competitive level?

Quote
friends and family who I want to introduce to the game may have an easier point of entry,
Why is the entry point easier? Are you saying when you introduce friends and family to the game that you expect them to want/need complete sets of older basically unplayable (e.g., Unlimited and Apostles) packs? What point would that serve?

Does anyone really believe someone like Red would have a competitive advantage over a newer player because he has access to cards like Doeg or Angel Food?

With the development of the new cards, most have simply "out-classed" their older counterpart. So, yes the unlimited packs arent doing much in this conversation, but what about in 5 more years of expansion like we have had for the last five years. If the card designers keep doing their job properly, the game should build out with new strategies and not up on old cards (to be clear this is a pat on the back not a slap in the face).

What I mean by "easier entry point" is the player is not bombarded by a "N" number of expansions; they can focus on a few, get familiar with the game and gradually learn about the older sets and eternal formats. It's great for marketing. It's great for the card designers because they can focus on continuity within a few sets, knowing that the eternal format is a larger beast that doesnt move so fast.

Finally, with the advent of "phone games" the average consumer is used to rotations to keep things "fresh." Adaptation to the market, while keeping the game's core in tact, is only a positive thing, I would imagine

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #55 on:** May 08, 2018, 10:20:02 AM »

Quote from: SEB on May 08, 2018, 09:49:24 AM

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 08, 2018, 09:36:16 AM
Quote from: SEB on May 08, 2018, 07:45:26 AM
Also, speaking from a "new player" prospective (let's face it after this many years, im basically new), a rotation format is very attractive. I dont have to learn as many cards to get to a competitive level,
Serious questions, what are you considering older cards that could be rotated out? How many cards in those sets actually see play at a competitive level?

Quote
friends and family who I want to introduce to the game may have an easier point of entry,
Why is the entry point easier? Are you saying when you introduce friends and family to the game that you expect them to want/need complete sets of older basically unplayable (e.g., Unlimited and Apostles) packs? What point would that serve?

Does anyone really believe someone like Red would have a competitive advantage over a newer player because he has access to cards like Doeg or Angel Food?

With the development of the new cards, most have simply "out-classed" their older counterpart.

Which is precisely the opposite issue that MtG faced early on which was the initial force behind rotation in that game.

Quote

So, yes the unlimited packs arent doing much in this conversation, but what about in 5 more years of expansion like we have had for the last five years.

The last five sets (Disciples, TEC, TPC, CoW, RoJ) have had < 700 cards in them. They are also horribly unbalanced brigade-wise.

Quote

What I mean by "easier entry point" is the player is not bombarded by a "N" number of expansions; they can focus on a few, get familiar with the game and gradually learn about the older sets and eternal formats. It's great for marketing. It's great for the card designers because they can focus on continuity within a few sets, knowing that the eternal format is a larger beast that doesnt move so fast.

MtG has few issues marketing itself or getting new players involved in the game. The MtG Standard format has ~1500 legal cards. For Redemption a cut off for a similar number of cards would put us back to Angel Wars. Is this where you feel the cut off should be? If not, I still do not understand your "new player barrier of entry" concern.

SEB · « **Reply #56 on:** May 08, 2018, 11:22:24 AM »

Quote

Which is precisely the opposite issue that MtG faced early on which was the initial force behind rotation in that game.

There was a lot of quotes within quotes there. To what point did you feel that MtG had an "opposite" issue? thanks for the clarification

SEB · « **Reply #57 on:** May 08, 2018, 11:39:22 AM »

Quote

So, yes the unlimited packs arent doing much in this conversation, but what about in 5 more years of expansion like we have had for the last five years.

The last five sets (Disciples, TEC, TPC, CoW, RoJ) have had < 700 cards in them. They are also horribly unbalanced brigade-wise.

I expect that there is "unbalance" because there was not consideration for rotation. aka why balance Teal because every printed card is available. This would need time to get smoothed out.

Quote

MtG has few issues marketing itself or getting new players involved in the game. The MtG Standard format has ~1500 legal cards. For Redemption a cut off for a similar number of cards would put us back to Angel Wars. Is this where you feel the cut off should be? If not, I still do not understand your "new player barrier of entry" concern.

1a) MtG is currently having marketing issues because of phone games. They specifically made a format for phones: The Arena. It's even more limiting than standard.
1b) could one make the argument that the Standard rotation is a tool to help bring new players to MtG? I would say it is

2) MtG's 1500 standard legal cards is not exactly "fair" because they have many more formats to consider and print for then Redemption does.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #58 on:** May 08, 2018, 12:07:46 PM »

Quote from: SEB on May 08, 2018, 11:22:24 AM

Quote
Which is precisely the opposite issue that MtG faced early on which was the initial force behind rotation in that game.

There was a lot of quotes within quotes there. To what point did you feel that MtG had an "opposite" issue? thanks for the clarification

MtG was initially pushed towards rotation because there were a set of early cards that were horribly OP (looking at you, Black Lotus). Because they were soooooo good, obtaining them made competitive difference and they became very expensive. That definitely does create a barrier for new players entering the game. Redemption does *not* have that issue.

As you noted most older Redemption cards are "out-classed" by the newer sets. There or very few cards (I am tempted to say *no* cards now that the Liners are banned) that a new player would be required to have from early sets to be competitive. Heck, there are probably only a few dozen or so prior to Priests that see any play and most of those are given out as filler in the new packs.

Quote from: SEB on May 08, 2018, 11:39:22 AM

I expect that there is "unbalance" because there was not consideration for rotation. aka why balance Teal because every printed card is available. This would need time to get smoothed out.

So do you think that rotation shouldn't be considered until this issue can be smoothed out?

After all of this, I still do not understand why you feel that the existing system throws up a barrier for new players to get started.

Daniel · « **Reply #59 on:** May 08, 2018, 12:11:07 PM »

Quote

The MtG Standard format has ~1500 legal cards. For Redemption a cut off for a similar number of cards would put us back to Angel Wars.

Only a small fraction of those 1500 cards are designed to be playable though, the rest are designed for draft.

EmJayBee83 · « **Reply #60 on:** May 08, 2018, 12:16:48 PM »

Quote from: Daniel the Creator on May 08, 2018, 12:11:07 PM

Quote
The MtG Standard format has ~1500 legal cards. For Redemption a cut off for a similar number of cards would put us back to Angel Wars.

Only a small fraction of those 1500 cards are designed to be playable though, the rest are designed for draft.

How many of the 1500 Redemption cards are "playable" though?

In any event, the point I was trying to make is that having 1500 legal cards at a time does not appear to cause any impediment to getting new players into the game.

SEB · « **Reply #61 on:** May 08, 2018, 12:23:49 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 08, 2018, 12:07:46 PM

Quote from: SEB on May 08, 2018, 11:22:24 AM

Quote
Which is precisely the opposite issue that MtG faced early on which was the initial force behind rotation in that game.

There was a lot of quotes within quotes there. To what point did you feel that MtG had an "opposite" issue? thanks for the clarification
MtG was initially pushed towards rotation because there were a set of early cards that were horribly OP (looking at you, Black Lotus). Because they were soooooo good, obtaining them made competitive difference and they became very expensive. That definitely does create a barrier for new players entering the game. Redemption does *not* have that issue.

As you noted most older Redemption cards are "out-classed" by the newer sets. There or very few cards (I am tempted to say *no* cards now that the Liners are banned) that a new player would be required to have from early sets to be competitive. Heck, there are probably only a few dozen or so prior to Priests that see any play and most of those are given out as filler in the new packs.

Yes the Power 9 does eventually get over powered, but it wasnt psycho crazy in '95 (which is when MtG announced Standard), and Standard was 2 Mtg Expansion + the core, that is a little more than 700 cards. As the game developed and new formats introduced, standard slowly became bigger and bigger.

I think a rotating format would be a healthy tool for Redemption, but the "eternal" format needs to be alive and well too.

SEB · « **Reply #62 on:** May 08, 2018, 12:34:43 PM »

Quote

So do you think that rotation shouldn't be considered until this issue can be smoothed out?

The point of a rotating set is to limit the deck choices for the players. The initial beginning may be a little awkward but If you get a decent enough starting point, I think it would be fine (this of course needs to be tested thoroughly) even if there is some "unbalance" at first. I guess if you never start it will never be balanced?

Quote

After all of this, I still do not understand why you feel that the existing system throws up a barrier for new players to get started.

Maybe I am playing football with a golf club..., but my experience is that people can digest more when something of large amount of data (even if it's data they dont need) is in smaller chunks. You know that new players dont need to know old card from old sets, but they dont.

Maybe this will help: I didnt learn to ride a bike with training wheels, I hopped on and went down a big hill, but most people use training wheels. Do they technically need them? Nope, but it sure helped bike companies move product.

Kor · « **Reply #63 on:** May 08, 2018, 12:46:28 PM »

I hope at the very least a set rotation is a few years away and isn't rushed into existence.

Some things to consider before it takes place:

1. Color Balance and variety
As has been pointed out, the last few sets have not had a good balance between the brigades. With a few more sets, this can probably be smoothed out.

2. Cost to players
I know that on the surface, it seems like cutting out all the old expansions should be great for reducing the cost to get into and be competitive quickly. I believe this to be false. Most of the powerful cards from old sets are easily available, and not expensive. The prohibitively expensive cards (three woes, second coming, shipwreck) are all from sets that will not be rotating. Just taking Second Coming as an example, can you imagine what the price of that would be if New Jerusalem rotated out? What do new or budget players have as an option then? And yes, New Jerusalem could be a future Legacy Rare. And I was excited about the use of Legacy Rares as a method of keeping old cards in the card pool until it was revealed that ONLY the reprints would be legal for play and not the originals! So if the current method of printing Legacy Rares is kept, New Jerusalem will be even more rare than Second Coming as there will only be 1 in about 4 boxes. I don't really like the idea of needing to buy a new version of a card I already have bought to be able to use it, so hopefully this is reconsidered or the Legacy card system is changed drastically.

3. Old Time Players (semi-retired)
I guess it is a bit tied to cost but separate enough to make a different point. There is another difficulty, at least for some players in my playgroup. We have several old players that do not buy new cards, an just play with the old stuff, or maybe what they can get in the occasional draft. While this definitely makes them less competitive, they still enjoy coming, and a set rotation would make it impossible for them to play.

Daniel · « **Reply #64 on:** May 08, 2018, 02:09:31 PM »

Quote from: EmJayBee83 on May 08, 2018, 12:16:48 PM

Quote from: Daniel the Creator on May 08, 2018, 12:11:07 PM
Quote
The MtG Standard format has ~1500 legal cards. For Redemption a cut off for a similar number of cards would put us back to Angel Wars.

Only a small fraction of those 1500 cards are designed to be playable though, the rest are designed for draft.
How many of the 1500 Redemption cards are "playable" though?

I don't think there's been fluff cards since Priests, every card in Redemption is designed to be competitive, right?

Isildur · « **Reply #65 on:** May 08, 2018, 02:54:51 PM »

I will play devil's advocate here.

I am fully a proponent for set rotation. I personally think the game either needs to have a significant number of sets rotated out or the game needs to go in a 2.0 direction.

That said... the Redemption community is very small. Nationals every year get somewhere between 70-150ish people every year. If we split the game into "standard" and "modern" for both Type I and Type II... I don't think the game will survive that. The community is just too small to warrant having 4 separate constructed competitive game types.

To put this in prospective MTG has Standard, Modern and Legacy for constructed competitive game types. Their community is quite a bit larger... much larger. Players in MTG are very divided on what game types they participate in and most only play one game type.

Isildur · « **Reply #66 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:01:10 PM »

Double post! This is two separate ideas so I figured it warranted a separate post.

Something to remember with Set Rotation and 2.0 ideas is that say we did pick the last 5 sets to be the start of the new "standard". The packaging for the last 5 sets has been "reflections" style packing where packs have 2-4 new cards and 10+ old cards.

If we implement set rotation many players will be confused and upset as to why their packs literally only contain 4 cards they can use for the new format.

To respond to another comment if we did start standard after the past 5 sets the brigade discrepancy can easily be fixed. The game would just need to have a new "core" aka "blue pack" set released that would rebalance the set for the new "standard" game type. Legacy Rares is not the fix to this problem. Those are chase reprint cards not a way to rebalance the game.

SEB · « **Reply #67 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:03:25 PM »

Quote from: Isildur on May 08, 2018, 02:54:51 PM

I will play devil's advocate here.

I am fully a proponent for set rotation. I personally think the game either needs to have a significant number of sets rotated out or the game needs to go in a 2.0 direction.

That said... the Redemption community is very small. Nationals every year get somewhere between 70-150ish people every year. If we split the game into "standard" and "modern" for both Type I and Type II... I don't think the game will survive that. The community is just too small to warrant having 4 separate constructed competitive game types.

To put this in prospective MTG has Standard, Modern and Legacy for constructed competitive game types. Their community is quite a bit larger... much larger. Players in MTG are very divided on what game types they participate in and most only play one game type.

That's a great point (splitting the community = very bad!).
Counterpoint: historically, the largest population of competitive magic players play Standard (rotation set) - yes there have been a few rough patches for Standard from time to time, but most are in that category. So, if a rotation set is done well in Redemption, could that bring in new players to bolster numbers? Could those new player begin to rub shoulders with existing players? I think that would be the goal

You could also "fill" packs with the new core, or just have new cards in the packs. (as a personal preference, i dont open Redemption packs because there are cards not from the set in them).

Gabe · « **Reply #68 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:09:34 PM »

This is a great discussion! There are concerns, questions and problems being presented that John, Justin and I have already thought through and believe we can adequately address. Because a future set rotation is not certain we haven't gone into much detail about our plans before now. When the time is closer we will cover this in detail with the rest of the elder team before presenting a plan to Rob. I'd like to see this discussion continue. It can probably be done in a more productive way if you know some of what is going on behind the scenes.

The idea of set rotation first came up on the elder team when we were testing I/J and it was revealed that the new card face would be implemented. It almost seemed like a passing comment at the time, a dream so far into the distant future that we might never see it. The idea that some day there would be a format that only used the new card face was born but quickly forgotten about.

Fast forward to early in the FoM testing. We were looking for solutions to some of the games strongest card interactions, Hypocrisy+Mayhem, Liners+lots of cards, Children of Light offenses, Besieging the City (and friends)+Mayhem...

Dealing with past cards in combination with the introduction of Legacy Rares led us to revisit the idea of set rotation. Is it healthy? Is it feasible? We believe the answer is yes, eventually, but as many of you have already noticed there are a lot of barriers to get past. We discussed this idea in detail and feel that we've found answers to many of the questions we came up with.

Q - The current pool of cards using the new face (since I/J and tin XXVI) doesn't create a very balanced environment. Will the format would mostly consist of offenses and defenses made of a select few brigades?

A - Before this topic started we had a plan to revisit neglected brigades and themes over the course of the "Christ Centric" block. We believe that when we reach the end of this block of sets the card pool will be large enough and brigades will have enough depth that we will have a healthy diverse format. We don't expect to pursue a rotation before then.

Q - What about all of my old cards? I spent a lot of money on those and have a huge collection! Will they be worthless now?

A - We have no plan to stop supporting the current formats. Our desire is to introduce a new option that involves a smaller card pool. Hosts can pick and choose which type of play they want to use at tournaments. They might choose the "new" format for their T1 players and choose the "old" format for their T2 veterans.

Q - If a card is reprinted as a Legacy Rare will I be able to use my old version in the "new" format?

A - This is completely undecided right now. My instinct is "no". While it's convenient for you not to have to get a new version, that is outweighed by the benefits of only using the new card faces in a format where only those are supposed to be legal. The benefits of only allowing new card faces are 1) uniformity of the special ability wording, 2) consistency at deck check in for hosts and 3) ease of reading the abilities for all players at the table.

Q - Isn't this going to make certain Legacy Rares and National Winner Promos have a really high price on the secondary market?

A - Possibly. It's too early to tell the value of Legacy Rares or how a rotation will impact their prices. If we get close to implementing a set rotation we have strongly considered releasing a set that consists of mostly old (as in old card face) staples that we feel are healthy for the game. It's extremely likely that many (or all) of the Legacy Rares and cards used as National Winner promos will also be included in that set, only with a more standard look (meaning not full art). The idea is to add staples to brigades and themes that need them while making all "new" cards more easily accessible to the player base.

Q - If a set rotation happens, which format will be used at Nationals?

A - It's WAY too early to tell. I could see us running more formats simultaneously to allow all formats to be played. Trimming down an 80 player T1 pool to roughly 40 in "T1-new" and 40 in "T1-all" could make things run smoother for everyone.

In summary...

If you don't like the idea of set rotation, don't worry, there aren't any concrete plans to make it happen! If it does happen it's still a few years away. A lot can happen between now and then!

If you believe the game needs set rotation, don't worry, it might happen in a few years! Decisions are being made now to make sure it's possible and done in a healthy way.

We've considered a lot of things but it's likely that we've overlooked things too. What potential problems do you see with our plan? What have we completely missed? Is there something you think we could do better?

jesse · « **Reply #69 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:32:13 PM »

This is super helpful info and I really agree with the thought process going on. Personally, I feel it would be cool for T2 to have all the cards available (except banned cards).

My question is, would it be helpful for the elder team for the community to start suggesting cards from sets pre-I/J that we think should be kept in the game post-rotation (so, reprinted on the new card face)?

SEB · « **Reply #70 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:33:51 PM »

Thanks Gabe.

thought for reprints:
As by way of reference, other games have dealt with similar issues. Players are permitted to play with the older version of the card IF they can present a correct version of the card to any opponent who asks (so, Jimmy ask me what that card does, I can pull out the newer copy to show him. Alternatively, Jimmy can ask a judge to show him the ORCID version on an app).

I would suggest that Promos be considered more like a LR (if you do what I recommend above). If you want to use a promo, there must be a legal copy of the card in an expansion of the "rotation format."

The Guardian · « **Reply #71 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:38:09 PM »

Quote from: jesse on May 08, 2018, 03:32:13 PM

This is super helpful info and I really agree with the thought process going on. Personally, I feel it would be cool for T2 to have all the cards available (except banned cards).

My question is, would it be helpful for the elder team for the community to start suggesting cards from sets pre-I/J that we think should be kept in the game post-rotation (so, reprinted on the new card face)?

You mean like this...

jesse · « **Reply #72 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:42:01 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on May 08, 2018, 03:38:09 PM

Quote from: jesse on May 08, 2018, 03:32:13 PM
This is super helpful info and I really agree with the thought process going on. Personally, I feel it would be cool for T2 to have all the cards available (except banned cards).

My question is, would it be helpful for the elder team for the community to start suggesting cards from sets pre-I/J that we think should be kept in the game post-rotation (so, reprinted on the new card face)?

You mean like this...

Similar- that particular thread seem to focus more on fixing old cards that were problematic, whereas I was thinking more of just a straight list from each set of cards that we think should be reprinted as-is (with updated wording).

Kevinthedude · « **Reply #73 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:42:57 PM »

Quote from: Gabe on May 08, 2018, 03:09:34 PM

Q - If a card is reprinted as a Legacy Rare will I be able to use my old version in the "new" format?

A - This is completely undecided right now. My instinct is "no". While it's convenient for you not to have to get a new version that is outweighed by the benefits of only using the new card faces in a format where only those are supposed to be legal. Those are 1) uniformity of the special ability wording, 2) consistency at deck check in for hosts and 3) ease of reading the abilities for all players at the table.

Huge fan of this post and that you guys are actively thinking about this sort of thing and designing for the future. I do want to offer my

about the subject in the quote while it's still undecided. I believe that any version of a legal card should be legal for tournament play. I understand the counter arguments that you mention and I can see the decision going the other way but I believe there are various different ways old versions could be allowed and certain policies that would lessen the cost of doing so. All, none, or some of these things can be implemented:

1. Require players using old versions to own an updated version that they can show their opponent on request. This is the most heavy handed and would still result in players complaining about being required to obtain cards they already own but at least they would get some amount of value from their old cards.
2. Only allow old versions of cards that have never received errata. This immediately removes the biggest issue with old versions in that cards like CoL and Mayhem now function drastically differently than their original versions.
3. Only allow old versions who's text is exactly identical to the updated version. This would limit the pool of playable old versions to an extreme but is IMO still better than not allowing them all.

I would prefer none of these restrictions but if I had to pick one it would be just #2. Players really love being able to play old cards whether it be for bragging rights, nostalgia, or simply preferring the old art. I hope you'll strongly consider allowing it.

Edit: A 4. I would add after seeing a post made while writing this is only all old versions in Type 2. I don't play T2 primarily because getting multiple copies so many cards is daunting and if I had managed to build a T2 collection I would be quite peeved to have to once again collect several copies of cards I already own.

Gabe · « **Reply #74 on:** May 08, 2018, 03:43:20 PM »

Quote from: The Guardian on May 08, 2018, 03:38:09 PM

Quote from: jesse on May 08, 2018, 03:32:13 PM
This is super helpful info and I really agree with the thought process going on. Personally, I feel it would be cool for T2 to have all the cards available (except banned cards).

My question is, would it be helpful for the elder team for the community to start suggesting cards from sets pre-I/J that we think should be kept in the game post-rotation (so, reprinted on the new card face)?

You mean like this...

I think there might be a difference between what Jesse is asking and what Justin pointed to, but both are needed and useful!

Jesse might be asking about cards that don't need changes but make a good candidate to be done in Legacy Rare style - an exact reprint. If so, we have a pretty big list we've compiled already. But it's not complete and we could overlook something. Feel free to start a new post and suggest away!

What Justin pointed to is a list of cards that we'd like to print in a "fixed" version. Both those and standard 1 to 1 reprints will probably appear in a future set eventually.

News:

Author Topic: Set Rotation food for thought (Read 19727 times)

Daniel

Daniel