Yeah, I think you made this poll too broad for the options allowed.
Anyway, I think the fix would be to increase cycling costs. Cycling 1 in paper is much more costly than cycle 1 in PQ. They typically recognize this inflated mana bias, but in this case they just ignored it. If cycling was scaled like other mana costs in PQ then we would have much less of a problem. I actually don't have drake haven but I don't really think it needs a nerf, it should just be harder to cycle continuously.
Edit: Oh god, if the AI cycled well 90% of the players would have quit in the last month or so. Baral 2.0 indeed.
MADAFAKA said: Rishcar's expertise + post nerf Baral is the most broken combination flying under the radar in this meta and no one mentions.
MADAFAKA said: Why do you want lower ranked players of their more reliable tools to be remotely competitive?To me it fine as it is.The AI isn't using it so that should not be a problem to anyone.Not everyone finds cycling boring. If you do, build something different and challenge yourself.Considering the restriction with standard, cycling the only way for me at least to beat 3.X, not event consistently. Pretty sure may players are in the same boat.
bken1234 said: As it always goes with this game, something new and crazy will come out and people will move on -- or they will bore themselves into quitting and we will be left with those who had the wisdom to explore everything that is wild and wonderful about Standard outside of cycling. In other words, I didn't vote my option, rather I made a measured prediction based on the historiography of MTGPQ.
madwren said: I have said this before, but one has to wonder if, faced with community outcry against Baral, the developers decided to be more subtle this time around. "Let's just make it an overpowered mechanic the AI can't play, then people won't mind". People like their easy buttons.
Firinmahlazer said: You said it yourself. You don't use cycling. So what's the problem? You're complaining about NOTHING. Personally I only use Drake Haven when the objective calls for cycling cards because you're right, it is an easy win. Cycling is what it is. We get a win either way. Again, what is the problem? If you want to complain about the game there is a few legitimate issues at hand that are worth being discussed. Cycling isn't one of them.
The entire block is balanced around the handful of key cycling cards. If you modify those cards, the events need to be retuned. The better solution is what Corn Noodles suggested, make some of the PvP objectives restrict cycling. Perfect scores would then require non-cycling decks.