Baral is too good but Omniscience is not?

Options
245

Comments

  • Sirchombli
    Sirchombli Posts: 322 Mover and Shaker
    Options
    Welcome to mtg. Since the dawn of all things mtg, free mana has been an issue. This game is no exception. Everybody loves doing broken things, but nobody wants to play against broken things. This particular issue is especially lopsided. I'm in platinum and can count on one hand the number of times I've encountered it in the wild. I don't really have a problem with it. There are a lot of cards in the environment that can lead to quasi infinite loops, but aren't prominent enough to do anything about. I grow really tired of the constant cries for cards to be nerfed due to the current state of the dev team. Honestly, this is still mtg. Why not enstate a ban list? The card really isn't out there enough for a nerf, and then how do we nerf it? It's supposed to cast things for free. That's just what it does. Raise the cost? Turn it into a different card? Baral made the ai take 10 minute turns that didn't always go anywhere. Omni is either going to kill you or be a Christmas tree ornament. Ban it in the limited format, everybody that doesn't have it wins. Everybody that does will be mad. It's obvious that there's no middle ground, though. 
  • Caeman
    Caeman Posts: 65 Match Maker
    Options
    Omniscience has a finite on-board lifespan, Baral was just a never ending loop. Omniscience is being pushed down a flight of steps while Baral is being pushed down an escalator going up. No matter how long the staircase you will eventually get to the end of them; the other will just keep manufacturing more on your way down. 
  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Gunmix25 said:
    bken1234 said:
    The difference between Baral and Omni is that one is a mythic and one is a masterpiece — I maintain masterpieces should be more powerful than mythics and they shouldn’t be compared as to which is more broken. Also again — Omni is only broken if you have other key cards to make it sing — and also if you pull it. I have insane Omni decks that have lost simply because they depend on it and it wasn’t pulled. 
    WotC learned that rarity is not a good reason for power. So power is now balanced by mana rather than by rarity. I do stand that "unique" cards can be rare due to some specialized effect ... but not because it is so powerful it can make a player call it "daddy" by the end of the match. haha
    They actually learned that after they found out players could trade their rares. This isn't following in the exact footsteps. This is try #2 after eliminating the thing that made try #1 a failure.

    Problem with try #2 is that it's too easy to get these "rares" by yourself.
  • span_argoman
    span_argoman Posts: 751 Critical Contributor
    Options
    Maybe just reduce Omniscience's shield strength to 2 from the current 4? Then it has to be a conscious effort to maximise the value of Omniscience.
  • Furordraco
    Furordraco Posts: 142 Tile Toppler
    Options
    to be honest i havent seen it a lot in the decks i fought in hod or now in toa. But thats prolly because only plat players have it :D
  • wereotter
    wereotter Posts: 2,064 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    shteev said:
    wereotter said:
    Omniscience in this game is, interestingly, weaker than its paper counterpart as in paper magic it just makes every card you play free until the enchantment goes away (or support in this case). It doesn't get weaker based on how many spells you cast for free.
    It's stronger in paper MTG if you ignore the fact it costs 7UUU. Which, I guess, you can do with Vintage/Legacy cards like Show and Tell. Does Omniscience see any play in Modern?
    Couldn't say, as I don't play either format. But as a commander player, I can say it does see play there.
  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    wereotter said:
    shteev said:
    wereotter said:
    Omniscience in this game is, interestingly, weaker than its paper counterpart as in paper magic it just makes every card you play free until the enchantment goes away (or support in this case). It doesn't get weaker based on how many spells you cast for free.
    It's stronger in paper MTG if you ignore the fact it costs 7UUU. Which, I guess, you can do with Vintage/Legacy cards like Show and Tell. Does Omniscience see any play in Modern?
    Couldn't say, as I don't play either format. But as a commander player, I can say it does see play there.
     I don't think it's a controversial opinion to say that commander isn't a competitive format :)
  • Tilwin90
    Tilwin90 Posts: 662 Critical Contributor
    Options
    I couldn't have disagreed more that masterpieces should be blatantly overpowered just because they are masterpieces. Especially when they can be format warping like omniscience. 
    Imagine that very few people will grab a masterpiece being so rare. Even chasing mythics is crazy yet much more doable... This puts much more of your fate in the hands of the Rng. And with much slimmer chances.
    People might not see this as dangerous as power creep, but it actually is. Power creep increases the overall power level of the game without adding interesting dimensions and diversity. Everything plays the most powerful things, who drops them earlier wins. Not fun...
    On the other hand with very rare format warping cards you give this chance to a handful of people only. This is even worse because although exciting those players for a short time, it will impact their diversity in competitive formats while also frustrating many others just because the shiny toy is completely unattainable.
    As for comparisons with paper magic, in MTGPQ mana cost is much less relevant (I can generate 20+ mana turn one with Kiora no problemo, can't generate 11 mana on turn 1 in modern/standard in paper). Paper Omni gives another pair toy to show and tell without truly overpowering the deck by accelerating it or giving it new diverse tools - it's actually an alternative to other power cards you could put  on the like emrakul. 
  • shteev
    shteev Posts: 2,031 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    Tilwin90 said:
    I couldn't have disagreed more that masterpieces should be blatantly overpowered just because they are masterpieces. Especially when they can be format warping like omniscience.
    Agreed. It definitely favors people who spend cash on bundles which include jewels, as well as people who might receive cards as rewards for performing services for D3.
  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    You need to work on your opacity shteev.
  • blacklotus
    blacklotus Posts: 589 Critical Contributor
    edited November 2017
    Options
    i beg to differ though. Omniscience being a support is not going to be high on the stupid AI priority of cards to cast. Similar to Deploy the gatewatch, the only time it will cast if there is no critter cards in its hand.

    Playing against the stupid AI isn't much of a challenge. Cards like Omniscience and Deploy the Gatewatch just might give the AI a winning chance.

    The times it might win is because it got lucky and manages to cascade enough mana to cast these expensive cards.

    And I say might, because the AI still loses 99% of the time anyway.

    The 1 time it won is the time somebody start a post and claim some card is OP or some PW is OP and deserves to be nerfed. 
  • Matthew
    Matthew Posts: 605 Critical Contributor
    Options
    I agree with @blacklotus on this one. I've encountered it a dozen or so times, and I didn't lose any of those matches. The AI would play the card, and then its effects would fizzle once the shield count dropped to zero. Perhaps I've been a little lucky. Perhaps not. But considering how stupid the AI is on hand prioritization, I'm inclined to doubt that it can be chalked up to luck.
  • blacklotus
    blacklotus Posts: 589 Critical Contributor
    Options
    Disclosure: I got a virgin Omniscience that haven't been used in any decks or events yet. :)
  • Thésée
    Thésée Posts: 238 Tile Toppler
    Options
    blacklotus said:
    Disclosure: I got a virgin Omniscience that haven't been used in any decks or events yet. :)


    Lol :-) That explains everything !

    I think it is not only a question of the card being really powerful in the hands of the AI (when he is able to cast it, I agree), but a question of game balance in general. Maybe if the AI loses 99% of the time it's because there are cards (or mechanisms, like cycling) that are too powerfull for the players' side.

    And of course, I might reconsider this opinion the day I'll pick Omni :-)

  • span_argoman
    span_argoman Posts: 751 Critical Contributor
    Options
    Matthew said:
    I agree with @blacklotus on this one. I've encountered it a dozen or so times, and I didn't lose any of those matches. The AI would play the card, and then its effects would fizzle once the shield count dropped to zero. Perhaps I've been a little lucky. Perhaps not. But considering how stupid the AI is on hand prioritization, I'm inclined to doubt that it can be chalked up to luck.
    You're lucky you didn't face a Dovin who threw out Omniscience into Panharmonicon into Whir of Inventions and Deploy the Gatewatches into Angel of Sanctions, Heart of Kirans and Angel of Inventions (there are of course worse creature combinations but that wasn't what I faced).

    All that on turn 2.

    Of course that can be attributed to bad luck. But the potential for abuse is quite clearly there for Omniscience as with any of the other cards making a significant proportion of your deck free. It just needs more complementary cards to come along.

    Deploy the Gatewatch is a prime example, fetching and making your next 3 creatures free. Hazoret's Undying Fury too, fetching and making your next 4 spells free.

    The mana cost of a card is undoubtedly a factor in controlling the power level of a card. When you add in cards which make other cards free, you are removing that aspect of card balance which if not now, will eventually lead to some ridiculous shenanigans.
  • Fiddler
    Fiddler Posts: 251 Mover and Shaker
    Options

    I have had crashes cost me points (when it mattered) many more times than I've faced the 'infinite engines'.

    And I've been on these forums long enough that if it's not one card getting blamed it's another. Nerf Omniscience and someone will start talking about how Drowner of Hope + From Beyond is overpowered because of its auto-lockdown. Or whatever the current power card or power couple is.

    Remember when Kiora got nerfed? Koth took her place.

    This gets a little stale.  

  • Ohboy
    Ohboy Posts: 1,766 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    babar3355 said:
    I got 1-shotted in TotP by @boopers Omniscience, Swarm, Whir, AotSS, etc.  Greg managed to drop Omni on turn 2 and I didn't get another turn.

    He didn't get a ton of crazy match 5 cascades.  The deck simply looped AotSS until I was dead.  You guys can argue it is balanced all you want until you face something like that in an event that actually matters.  Then you will realize the error in your judgement and come screaming on the forums.

    The broader point has already been touched on.  Nothing in the game should be an infinite engine in a players hands regardless of if the AI can pilot it or not.  Pseudo-infinite cycling shouldn't be a thing, Baral 1.0shouldn't be a thing, Gonti 1.0 shouldn't be a thing, and Omniscience/SI/Whir shouldn't be a thing.

    And at a more micro level, the card is simply too powerful even if it isn't abused in a looping deck.  If you banned SI and Whir you would still have a card cast 4 cards for 17 mana.  This makes the ramp provided by RX look minuscule and most agree that Rishkar's Expertise is broken.  I would also argue that HuF is pretty broken in its current form for the same reasons.

    I've had kiora draw ramp one shot me long before this was a thing. It's irritating sure, but balance isn't argued based on how badly you lost to something.

    Based on your criteria(infinite cycling), lots of things shouldn't be things. Rashmi for example was initially thought of as the worst mythic ever despite her obvious infinite loop potential. Then there's greenwarden of Marusa that has been the source of my fun loops forever. No one ever complains about him. Prism array was another candidate. Green card draw with Nissa's revelation? That's infinite material right there. Not to mention the entire cycling mechanic. 

    Infinite loops take time to set up. The ai especially requires a lot more time(and luck). Baral was imbalanced because the loop occurred the turn it comes into play with no warning or chance to retaliate. 

    Your loop is one that's usually telegraphed a mile away. Don't confuse "I lost to it" with "unbeatable". Omniscience could do with some nerfs, but it's not because it can possibly be an infinite loop. 
  • Gunmix25
    Gunmix25 Posts: 1,434 Chairperson of the Boards
    Options
    babar3355 said:
    I got 1-shotted in TotP by @boopers Omniscience, Swarm, Whir, AotSS, etc.  Greg managed to drop Omni on turn 2 and I didn't get another turn.

    He didn't get a ton of crazy match 5 cascades.  The deck simply looped AotSS until I was dead.  You guys can argue it is balanced all you want until you face something like that in an event that actually matters.  Then you will realize the error in your judgement and come screaming on the forums.

    The broader point has already been touched on.  Nothing in the game should be an infinite engine in a players hands regardless of if the AI can pilot it or not.  Pseudo-infinite cycling shouldn't be a thing, Baral 1.0shouldn't be a thing, Gonti 1.0 shouldn't be a thing, and Omniscience/SI/Whir shouldn't be a thing.

    And at a more micro level, the card is simply too powerful even if it isn't abused in a looping deck.  If you banned SI and Whir you would still have a card cast 4 cards for 17 mana.  This makes the ramp provided by RX look minuscule and most agree that Rishkar's Expertise is broken.  I would also argue that HuF is pretty broken in its current form for the same reasons.

    Which PW were you?

Categories