If you could erase one support objective from RtO, which one?

DumasAG

And what would you replace your least favorite with?

DumasAG

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

I would change it to something new and creature focused: include creatures of only one type in your deck. That would at least force mildly interesting decisions on theme with the event. Or if we wanted to keep the kill 4 creatures, why not have the support for the green node somehow give creatures to the opponent? Like, when you summon two creatures in a turn, your opponent gets a plant?

Sirchombli

I find kill x or more objectives really lame. I find them even more lame on a node with a speed objective. You basically have to give them creatures to get both objectives reliably. Completely new objectives would be really really nice. I feel like we're just constantly rearranging the same objectives . The static supports make things a little interesting, they just don't feel very fleshed out. Especially the black node .

Gilesclone

Finish the match with 40 or less life

I don’t care about take 30 or less, but I hate the other 2.

Brakkis

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

The 40 or less life and the 30 or less damage ones are challenging, but not infuriatingly so. You can certainly fail the 30 damage one if the deck you're face is running certain cards which makes it worse, but still...

Any PvP event that requires you to Kill x or more creatures in it pisses me off. 

The entire events secondaries need to be scrapped in favor of actually rewarding you for playing tribal decks. Summon x or more pirates/dinosaurs/vampires/merfolk/something in the fifth node because there isn't a fifth tribe.

DBJones

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

The biggest thing that annoys me about this objective is just how much it favors anyone with Turn to Frog and/or Dowsing Dagger. Having good cards giving you a big advantage on an objective is fine, that's how the game works. Needing one of two specific rare cards to be able to achieve an objective consistently is ridiculous though.

UweTellkampf

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

There is (to my knowing) one secure way to secure both objectives. In a game with countless possibilities to build decks and countless strategies, one should never be forced to achieve goals in only one way. Now, maybe there is another one, I am unaware off. But it definitely wont be as easy and as mindnumb as cycling plus frog.

Toodles

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

The life achievements are tricky but attainable with proper deck construction. The destroy/don’t lose X creatures are subject to what your opponent is playing (ie: creatureless) and as far as I know there is only one card that creates creatures under your opponent’s control. These creatureless decks are generally loaded with removal, also, which makes the Lose 5 or less creatures sometimes impossible as well.

I would like to see something new and creative like ‘reinforce a creature 10 times’ or ‘control 8 supports at once’. Maybe ‘win the game with no cards in hand’ or ‘defeat your opponent with only one creature under your control’

Toodles

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

Brakkis said:

The entire events secondaries need to be scrapped in favor of actually rewarding you for playing tribal decks. Summon x or more pirates/dinosaurs/vampires/merfolk/something in the fifth node because there isn't a fifth tribe.

Humans

TheF3C3SK1ng

Finish the match with 40 or less life

Would prefer it gets replaced with something creature themed ( summon x or more rats, zombies, pirates ) or anything you can achieve regardless of the opponents deck. Quite annoying to be forced to take damage against greg when he can't use non-creature decks or cycling exclusive decks. 

Also hate the tinykittying kill x or less creatures ones 

Quantius

Finish the match with 40 or less life

I hate the 40 or less life one. Spending most of the match killing my own creatures and dealing damage to myself doesn't really feel like the right way to play.

Also, I would like to point out that Reclaim apparently doesn't contribute to  "destroy 4 creatures" even though the card text says "destroy" and the objective doesn't explicitly state that they have to be your opponent's creatures.

IM_CARLOS

Finish the match with 40 or less life

Kill x creatures is managed with turn  to frog easily. For creatureless opponents insert dagger.

30 or less damage: be fast. 

But 40 or less hp is annoying. Manage slow down  your own  pace, control enemy pace and then win fast manageable, but annoying.  

Thuran

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

Out of those three, this is the only one you can lose before the match even begins, with no chance at all to get it.

Such an objective should not exsist! Furthermore, it leads to long drawn-out games where you sit around doing nothing while waiting for your opponent to finally cast something you can kill.

The alternative, is cycling for 4 copies of turn to frog, which most people rely on as it is the best way to guarantee you meet it, and still manage to win in less than 12 turns....and anything which encourages cycling should raise red warning flags.

Mainloop25

Finish the match with 40 or less life

Actually I change my mind to Destroy 4 or more creatures. Mostly because speed and creature destroy are weaknesses of green a lot of the time  I don't like low hp objectives in principle because it encourages bad gameplay, but in this event  the green node is worse. 

IM_CARLOS

Finish the match with 40 or less life

I think with N3 cycling added frog the green node is a no-brainer. For creatureless jist add the dagger.

Okay there os still a chance to lose an objective, but it's more likely to lose on black node, when greg cascading like hell or you miss to find the right card after a couple of  turns. 

40hp is just annoying and time consuming. I don't like this. 

FindingHeart8

Finish the match with 40 or less life

if I complete the 40 or less life objective, it's merely because the game was a close match.  I never actually try to get that objective because it's too easy to just lose at that point.

Bullvinne

Finish the match with 40 or less life

Any "Less than X Life" objectives I just ignore. They are stupid. I hate them so much. I have lost too many matches in the past trying to get it, no reason to lose the whole match over one stupid objective.

Blazer

Finish the match with 40 or less life

I cant stand stalling the most, shouldn't be a part of any match 3 game

nexus13

Finish the match with 40 or less life

The less than X life objectives need to be relegated to the PVE events that you can play as many times as you like.  They are horrible where every match counts.

Brakkis

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

IM_CARLOS said:

Kill x creatures is managed with turn  to frog easily. For creatureless opponents insert dagger.

An objective that can only be achieved by having a single rare card if your opponent decided to play creatureless is not a good objective. On top of needing that one single card, you then need to have either Kiora/Nissa 3 and another rare card, or you need to have Vraska and be running kill spells, to be able to then kill the creature spawned by that card. Add to this the need to do that 4 times while winning within 12 rounds and you reach a new level of frustration.

The other two objectives can be achieved by multiple planeswalkers running multiple decks using multiple strategies. Are they good objectives? Not really. But they aren't a steaming pile of garbage like the Kill x or more Creatures objectives.

//Removed Profanity -Brigby

tfg76

Destroy 4 or more enemy creatures

Both of the top two limit deckbuilding severely and should be removed. For kill X creatures, you need Dowsing Dagger/TTF, For 40 life, you either need to play a low-level PW or add lots of damage-to-yourself cards. None of this is fun.