MTGPQ Player Survey

shteev

First Strike? What the heck was First Strike?

octal9

Took a bit of searching for me, but I found it - it was the OGW PvE event, with Inverter of Truth, Kozilek, etc: https://d3go.com/big-magic-puzzle-quest-1-5-update/

shteev

Question 9 interests me greatly.

'From the selection below, which of these Magic: The Gathering TCG cards do you want to see next in MTGPQ?

- Force of Will
- Mental Misstep
- Thoughtseize
- Mishra's Workshop
- Time Walk
- Black Lotus'


With the exception of Thoughtseize, the printing of each of these cards was a huge mistake in paper MTG, and the designers of the game will admit as much.

bk1234

octal9 wrote:

Took a bit of searching for me, but I found it - it was the OGW PvE event, with Inverter of Truth, Kozilek, etc: https://d3go.com/big-magic-puzzle-quest-1-5-update/

Wish I hadn't of submitted -- I liked that event; well not Inverter of Truth -- but in general it was a good one.

Abenjes

question 9 worries me if it indicates a general direction the game will take the last thing we need is more OP blue. especially counterspells TK that TK....

I picked thoughtseize as I'd love to be able to view an opponents hand as a mechanic and the above terrifies me.

madwren

Yeah, that question was very opaque, which is the last thing you want in a customer survey. It's hard to believe they would actually bring out-of-print cards into the game, so I've been working under the theory that they're seeing what type of mechanics we are interested in. Of course, if that were the case, they should have just asked what mechanics we were interested in.

blacklotus

shteev wrote:

Question 9 interests me greatly.

'From the selection below, which of these Magic: The Gathering TCG cards do you want to see next in MTGPQ?

- Force of Will
- Mental Misstep
- Thoughtseize
- Mishra's Workshop
- Time Walk
- Black Lotus'


With the exception of Thoughtseize, the printing of each of these cards was a huge mistake in paper MTG, and the designers of the game will admit as much.

I chose black lotus.

Tilikum

Creepy Survey wrote:

What elements of paper MTG would you like to see in the PQ version?

Anyone else say "the same amount of bugs"?

LakeStone

shteev wrote:

First Strike? What the heck was First Strike?

We quickly noticed that just listing First Strike may be a little confusing so we updated the name to First Strike: Oath of the Gatewatch in the survey.

EDHdad

With the exception of Thoughtseize, the printing of each of these cards was a huge mistake in paper MTG, and the designers of the game will admit as much

Mark Rosewater is of the opinion that reprinting Thoughtseize in Theros was also a mistake, which is why there are so few Modern staples reprinted in Standard legal sets these days. Also why there are so many more supplemental reprint products popping up.

But, so what? Nearly every card in every deck in every Modern / Legacy / Vintage deck ever played is a design mistake. Some of the most popular cards in Magic are design mistakes.

Usually the mistake is that the card costs too little mana for its effect. In paper, they can't do anything about that. In this game, they can fix things.

Time Warp has the exact same effect as Time Walk, but it costs more mana, so it isn't banned or restricted in any format.

Gilded Lotus and Lotus Petal are examples of a fixed Black Lotus. Neither one is particularly broken.

There's a 20 cent common called Distress which does the same thing as Thoughtseize, but it costs 2 mana so nobody plays it outside of Pauper.

In paper Magic, Day's Undoing is a fixed version of Timetwister. However, in Puzzle Quest, it's actually a stronger effect than Timetwister, because it also gives you 15 mana toward the cards you just drew. Day's Undoing was bonkers when it first came out and it only cost 6 mana. Now it costs 10 and you rarely see it played anymore.

If Puzzle Quest had called Day's Undoing "Timetwister", then maybe people would have ogled over it a bit more, but it would still be the same card.

In this game, there's already a support that generates 3 mana per turn, so it could just as easily be called Mishra's Workshop. There's a support which, when it dies, generates 6 mana, so that could easily be called "Black Lotus", or a similar support costing 0 which generates 3 mana when it is destroyed could be called "Black Lotus". Mental Misstep and Force of Will are just counterspells with alternate casting cost. Meanwhile, actual Counterspell was a common which only cost 2 mana back in the day, and the present day fixed versions cost 3.

It isn't automatic that Mental Misstep and Force of Will in this game would be broken, since there isn't any way to react to your opponent at instant speed anyway. The Puzzle Quest version of existing counterspells sometimes return things to hand, sometime drain the opponent of mana, but none of them are as egregious as Infinite Obliteration or even Liliana's first ability.

Anyway, just because something is broken in Paper Magic, it doesn't mean it will be broken in Puzzle Quest. I'm intrigued by the idea of adding classic cards from Magic's past, even though they'll probably try to charge way too much money for them and the actual cards will probably be just OK.

EDHdad

BTW, if they are going to reprint classic Magic cards in Puzzle Quest, then please please please:

Naturalize - 3-ish mana in Green: destroys a support.

Disenchant - 3-ish mana in White: destroys a support

Shatterstorm - low cost red spell that destroys all supports

Vandalblast - red spell which destroys all supports you don't control.

Epic Confrontation / Pit Fight / Hunt the Weak / Prey Upon : Green spells which have your creatures fight their creatures (this is green's main method of creature removal).

Steeme

EDHdad wrote:

BTW, if they are going to reprint classic Magic cards in Puzzle Quest, then please please please:

Naturalize - 3-ish mana in Green: destroys a support.

Disenchant - 3-ish mana in White: destroys a support

Shatterstorm - low cost red spell that destroys all supports

Vandalblast - red spell which destroys all supports you don't control.

Epic Confrontation / Pit Fight / Hunt the Weak / Prey Upon : Green spells which have your creatures fight their creatures (this is green's main method of creature removal).

Some of the supports in this game are hugely OP if you cannot remove them, so I agree that everyone should have access to some efficient type of support removal. For Liliana II, right now I have to **** my deck with Mockery of Nature (which costs 16 and a creature spot) just for support removal, because I don't have Anguished Unmaking and I need a way to remove a Hixus lockdown when the AI places its support in an impossible location. Not to mention we can't choose which supports get destroyed, so if there are multiples out there, then you are just throwing darts.

Stormbringer0

Steeme wrote:

EDHdad wrote:

BTW, if they are going to reprint classic Magic cards in Puzzle Quest, then please please please:

Naturalize - 3-ish mana in Green: destroys a support.

Disenchant - 3-ish mana in White: destroys a support

Shatterstorm - low cost red spell that destroys all supports

Vandalblast - red spell which destroys all supports you don't control.

Epic Confrontation / Pit Fight / Hunt the Weak / Prey Upon : Green spells which have your creatures fight their creatures (this is green's main method of creature removal).

Some of the supports in this game are hugely OP if you cannot remove them, so I agree that everyone should have access to some efficient type of support removal. For Liliana II, right now I have to **** my deck with Mockery of Nature (which costs 16 and a creature spot) just for support removal, because I don't have Anguished Unmaking and I need a way to remove a Hixus lockdown when the AI places its support in an impossible location. Not to mention we can't choose which supports get destroyed, so if there are multiples out there, then you are just throwing darts.

I have no problems with supports. I don't play support removal, because I never struggle with any OP support there is. Can you give me some card names?

Nissa shouldn't have that much problems with supports anyway. With lots of gem control, you easily hit one or another support with landfall moves.

Alve

Stormbringer0 wrote:

I have no problems with supports. I don't play support removal, because I never struggle with any OP support there is. Can you give me some card names?

Hixus? Hixus + Starfield of Nyx? Silverstrike + Starfield of Nyx? Hixus is nothing special if you manage to match him in the next two turns, but quite often it falls into a corner and you're basically done. In QB, if Hixus is played and I can see it won't be easily removed, I just quit. And if the opponent reinforces it, which is pretty damn easy with a 6-mana card, the chances of seeing it gone dwindle even further. The same could go for Claustrophobia and Supression Bonds - for me those are worse than kill spells, since they basically lock my first creature slot until they're removed. But while I can live with one creature slot less, winning the game without creatures is tough. Especially since while you struggle to go around this stupid support, the enemy attacks you as normal. Add the Starfield of Nyx to the mixture if you really like getting screwed. Hixus should be a creature. It can be a 6-mana 3/3 that disables all your creatures - a strong effect, but with a number of possible workarounds.

Tilikum

shteev wrote:

Question 9 interests me greatly.

'From the selection below, which of these Magic: The Gathering TCG cards do you want to see next in MTGPQ?

- Force of Will
- Mental Misstep
- Thoughtseize
- Mishra's Workshop
- Time Walk
- Black Lotus'


With the exception of Thoughtseize, the printing of each of these cards was a huge mistake in paper MTG, and the designers of the game will admit as much.

The last answer was "I'm not familiar with any of those cards." I kinda think it's a dressed up way of seeing how into MTG the survey taker is.

Edit: Actually, I think the first question just straight up asks "how into MTG are you". lol so scratch that.

alextfish

My reaction to Q9 was "Gah! What the heck? None of the above!"

Interestingly, though, when thinking about which features of paper Magic I'd most like to see in MTGPQ, I realised some kind of limited event is much, much better than trading/crafting. Because with trading/crafting people will just end up with *more* of the OP frustrating mythics. Imagine if every blue deck you played had Crush, Drowner, Welcome, Exert *and* Day's Undoing. Shudder. The inability for anyone to get most mythics is actually a benefit, with the current absurd power levels of mythic cards.

So before they can add trading/crafting, they need a serious rebalancing effort to reduce the dominance and frustration of a large number of mythics. And somehow I doubt that's going to happen.

But limited events (draft, league, Hearthstone's Arena, that kind of thing) are another way to even the playing field, and ensure that most people don't have the aggravating mythics. Something like that would be a great way to encourage people to use commons and uncommons.

rob443

My actual point of interest is: Does this question mean there is something like a Vintage / Oldschool set coming up?

Stormbringer0

alextfish wrote:

But limited events (draft, league, Hearthstone's Arena, that kind of thing) are another way to even the playing field, and ensure that most people don't have the aggravating mythics. Something like that would be a great way to encourage people to use commons and uncommons.

Drafts or arena like mode would by incredible awesome! In that way, everyone can play at their own speed and don't need to compede with others regarding prices. Plus the thrill of creating a deck out of several new cards every time. Devs, PLEASE READ THIS!

Tilikum

Creepy Survey wrote:

Any additional feedback?

Have more faith in the games design and enjoy-ability on its own. Restricting the content to a strictly competitive environment and exploiting people's addictive personalities to try and sell crystals is really unnecessary. This game in itself is amazing, it doesn't need all those lowlife marketing schemes. I promise, you'll make money if we didn't have to gamble to get cards.

tiuffw

Abenjes wrote:

I picked thoughtseize as I'd love to be able to view an opponents hand as a mechanic and the above terrifies me.

The problem with implementing Thoughtseize is they wouldn't put any effort into how the AI plays it.. so a bigger gap would open up between human players and the AI, and that would result in even bigger draws for 1st place in events.

Corn_Noodles

tiuffw wrote:

Abenjes wrote:

I picked thoughtseize as I'd love to be able to view an opponents hand as a mechanic and the above terrifies me.

The problem with implementing Thoughtseize is they wouldn't put any effort into how the AI plays it.. so a bigger gap would open up between human players and the AI, and that would result in even bigger draws for 1st place in events.

I picked Thoughtseize as well for the possibility of a new mechanic, but I did wonder how it could be applied properly when the AI is using it. In general, I would like to see more paper mechanics make their way into MtG:PQ.