babar3355 said: Can't we just linearly scale the PW deck restrictions for each tier?So for your Ob Example:8/8/8 Bronze,8 * (12/10) = 9.6 so 10/10/10 Silver8 * (15/10) = 12 so 12/12/12 Gold 8 * (20/10) = 16 so 16/16/16 PlatinumSeems pretty simple to me. If you apply the same formula to PWs regardless of level you would get a similar result. Just round up anything .5 or greater and down for anything less
Can't we just linearly scale the PW deck restrictions for each tier?
So for your Ob Example:
8/8/8 Bronze,
8 * (12/10) = 9.6 so 10/10/10 Silver
8 * (15/10) = 12 so 12/12/12 Gold
8 * (20/10) = 16 so 16/16/16 Platinum
Seems pretty simple to me. If you apply the same formula to PWs regardless of level you would get a similar result. Just round up anything .5 or greater and down for anything less
ElfNeedsFood said: As it is, it makes Desert of the Mindful and a few other spells cast for free.
Mainloop25 said: I always thought that cycling would be toned way down if you couldn't use the mana on the cycling card to cycle it. If you had to use a different card's mana to cycle it, you would run out of mana. It would feel like how I used to have to cycle stuff before I got New Perspectives. Better yet, just nerf New Perspectives while you're at it.
Thuran said: wereotter said: babar3355 said: Interesting question. One thing that would make the game more nuanced would be to increase the deck size from 10 cards to something greater. I understand the challenge for newer players so perhaps you could scale the decks based on the player level. Something like: Bronze - 10 card deckSilver - 12 card deckGold - 15 card deckPlatinum - 20 card deck Tagentally related, this could be a solution to duplicate cards. Make it a 40-card deck and you have to individually fill all 40 slots. So want 4 Onnicience in your deck? You better have 4 copies of it. Would make bomb mythics still good but not game breaking, and create more of a reliance on lower rarity cards. It would literally destroy certain decks, yes, but it would also shake things up in a way the game desperately needs.As as far as cycling, at least for PvP events, put a hard limit on the 40 cards. Once you run out of deck, you lose. That would make other cards suddenly more valuable too, like Aven Mindcensor and Winds of Rebuke since they could be part of your win condition. I love the idea, but keep in mind paper mtg doesn't use 40 cards, but typically 36 or 23, since lands are not a thing in mtgpq. So, I'd say maybe 30 cards, to more closely reflect paper deck building, and still have a round number? At least for a version with unlimited deck size.Another option is the one magic duels used, restrictions are: 1 of each mythic, 2 of each rare, 3 uncommon and full 4 copies of commons.
wereotter said: babar3355 said: Interesting question. One thing that would make the game more nuanced would be to increase the deck size from 10 cards to something greater. I understand the challenge for newer players so perhaps you could scale the decks based on the player level. Something like: Bronze - 10 card deckSilver - 12 card deckGold - 15 card deckPlatinum - 20 card deck Tagentally related, this could be a solution to duplicate cards. Make it a 40-card deck and you have to individually fill all 40 slots. So want 4 Onnicience in your deck? You better have 4 copies of it. Would make bomb mythics still good but not game breaking, and create more of a reliance on lower rarity cards. It would literally destroy certain decks, yes, but it would also shake things up in a way the game desperately needs.As as far as cycling, at least for PvP events, put a hard limit on the 40 cards. Once you run out of deck, you lose. That would make other cards suddenly more valuable too, like Aven Mindcensor and Winds of Rebuke since they could be part of your win condition.
babar3355 said: Interesting question. One thing that would make the game more nuanced would be to increase the deck size from 10 cards to something greater. I understand the challenge for newer players so perhaps you could scale the decks based on the player level. Something like: Bronze - 10 card deckSilver - 12 card deckGold - 15 card deckPlatinum - 20 card deck
Interesting question.
One thing that would make the game more nuanced would be to increase the deck size from 10 cards to something greater. I understand the challenge for newer players so perhaps you could scale the decks based on the player level.
Something like:
Bronze - 10 card deck
Silver - 12 card deck
Gold - 15 card deck
Platinum - 20 card deck
Kinesia said: Part of the reason this game is more accessible to some people is that it's limited to 10 cards. Increasing it more would actually scare some people off.I understand the desire, but deck restrictions breed creativity, trying to fit in what you what into just 10 cards is actually good for you.
See I see it the other way. All my blue decks have pull from tomorrow unless I cant cast spells. All of my green decks have Rx and Shefnet. All of my white decks use deploy in legacy. Virtually all of my decks include Heart of Kiran and Metalworks Colossus. Pretty much all of my decks have not changed in two months unless I was just screwing around. That's not healthy for the game.
I do think you should increase the deck size slowly and perhaps 20 cards is too much in platinum. However, increasing deck size would add variability that would make the game more difficult.
But yeah, if they wanted to start by just increasing the deck size to 12 cards in TotP or a single event to get a gauge of the player reaction I think that would be a positive step.
shteev said: Cycling is broken. Not efficient, not powerful, not overpowered, actually broken.The only reason we, the players, did not call it as broken before release is because Hibernum didn't explain to us how it worked then. "Surely", we thought, "Surely it won't simply be a case of paying 1 mana a pop to go through your deck looking for your other broken cards? That would be ludicrous!! Let's wait and see how it actually works".