DOM Cards That Need Buffs

12467

Comments

  • Gilesclone
    Gilesclone Posts: 735 Critical Contributor
    It’s not Dom, but Mox Opal could use a buff.  Ever lose a game because someone played Opal against you.  I didn’t think so.  10 mana plus 2 additional supports is too big an investment for what you get out of it.
  • khurram
    khurram Posts: 1,090 Chairperson of the Boards
    Mox Amber is **** and that's just it.

    @bken1234
    do post the decklist here please
  • gogol666
    gogol666 Posts: 316 Mover and Shaker
    Lands!
    Dominaria has a few very interesting land synergies, but lands are too expensive in dominaria.
    In particular, memorial lands cost 13, which requires 2+ gem matches for a very late payoff.
    A cost around 8/9 should be ok. Not good for a rare but acceptable.
    Dual lands cost 10 and have a threshold. Either remove the threshold, or make it a cap (convert only if there are fewer than 10 gems of a given color), or make them cost 5/6.

    If it was already proposed, sorry, I didn't read the whole post
  • Mburn7
    Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
    @FindingHeart8 I just pulled your buddy Traxos from an ep.

    My 2 pulls from this set are not Traxos and Haphazard Bombardment.  My luck never ceases to amaze me.

    I'll toy around with it a bit and see if I can get it rolling.
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    Mburn7 said:
    @FindingHeart8 I just pulled your buddy Traxos from an ep.

    My 2 pulls from this set are not Traxos and Haphazard Bombardment.  My luck never ceases to amaze me.

    I'll toy around with it a bit and see if I can get it rolling.
    gaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah I hate that card.  So much.  Worst.mythic.ever.

  • Quantius
    Quantius Posts: 228 Tile Toppler
    Alrighty, here's muh list:

    Haphazard Bombardment - Too costly for a self destroying RNG support destroyer. Either it needs to prioritize opponents supports or it needs to be much cheaper. If it's going to stay as an RNG support killer, then have it cost 5 or 6.

    Mox Amber - No reason for this card to cost so much when it relies on having casted a bunch of other stuff first before it's useful. Maybe it can cost X less for each historic card and reinforcement you have in play? Or it can just cost 0 as it should. It's a Mox. They should cost 0. It's kind of a thing.

    Multani, Yavimaya's Avatar - Reach (and Vigilance) just don't work the same in a game where you can't declare blockers. He not only needs his cost reduced but it would be great if he gained Reach after he his a threshold, "If this creatures power is 10 or more, gain reach."

    *Side note for vigilance - How about vigilance just makes creatures immune to disable effects? Otherwise, Defender already exists, and creatures already don't tap to attack, so vigilance needs to do something.

    Traxos, Scourage of Kroog - Costs 12, is an 8/8 that can't attack. History of Benalia costs 12, creates an 8/8 first striker (which is available on the first turn it can attack) and then become a 10/8 first striker the following turn with no attack restriction . . . Traxos should cost 8 or he should be a 16/16.

    Pernicious Deed - seriously can MP's actually be MP's? The effects are fine, but it should be indestructible or at the very least immune to it's own support destruction effect.


    Lands - You guys fundamentally misunderstand lands in MTG. What is going on here? Why are they so ridiculously expensive? Nissa's Pilgrimage costs 3 and converts 3 green gems per turn and it hasn't collapsed the game from being so OP, it's not even an auto-include. So what's up with 10-13 cost lands?

    Here's how lands should work:

    Tap lands (aka, lands that "come into play tapped") - They should cost around 6 and convert 1 gem of each color (if dual colored) or 2 gems of a color. With the effect: "your mana bonuses are reduced by 1 (maybe 2)  until the end of your next turn". The point of tap lands is to give up a bit of tempo for casting ability in later turns.

    Check lands (aka, lands that have a conditional statement) - They should cost 10 or 12! BUT! "If there are X number of [ ____ color] gems on the board, this card costs half as much to cast." They can convert 2 of each color that they represent.

    On-use lands (aka, lands that have an ability) - Usually work similarly to Tap lands for their downside, they should convert 2 gems of their color each turn, and their trigger should be an activated gem.
  • ManiiNames
    ManiiNames Posts: 213 Tile Toppler
    Mburn7 said:
    @FindingHeart8 I just pulled your buddy Traxos from an ep.

    My 2 pulls from this set are not Traxos and Haphazard Bombardment.  My luck never ceases to amaze me.

    I'll toy around with it a bit and see if I can get it rolling.
    I pulled two Traxos and a Bombardment as my three elite pack draws from this set.  Bah.
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    edited June 2018
    ManiiNames said:
    Mburn7 said:
    @FindingHeart8 I just pulled your buddy Traxos from an ep.

    My 2 pulls from this set are not Traxos and Haphazard Bombardment.  My luck never ceases to amaze me.

    I'll toy around with it a bit and see if I can get it rolling.
    I pulled two Traxos and a Bombardment as my three elite pack draws from this set.  Bah.
    how many tables did you flip?  I would have flipped all of them.

    but seriously though, if an absolutely useless mythic is one of the more likely elite pack pulls, this is a problem that should be brought to the developers attention for changing.
  • Mburn7
    Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
    UPDATE:  I made a fun Traxos deck.  Don't want to give it away (its still being refined), but the key appears to not try to attack every turn.  He has other uses, after all...

    @FindingHeart8
  • ZW2007-
    ZW2007- Posts: 812 Critical Contributor
    Quantius said:
    @ZW2007 I think you're using it wrong. It is an expensive card to get into play, and I do think that misses the point of moxes in MTG as a whole, but it works off reinforcements in general, not just historic cards.
    What cards are you using it with that it is counting reinforcements in general? If it is actually counting those, it's not working as intended. It should only count historic cards and reinforcements of historic cards. I've played it again since my original post and it does seem to be counting reinforcements but the amount of mana it gives is not always accurate. I've had it give 6 mana, then 7, then 5 with absolutely no board state changes.
  • khurram
    khurram Posts: 1,090 Chairperson of the Boards
    Mburn7 said:
    UPDATE:  I made a fun Traxos deck.  Don't want to give it away (its still being refined), but the key appears to not try to attack every turn.  He has other uses, after all...

    @FindingHeart8
    Pics or did not happen. :|
  • Mburn7
    Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
    khurram said:
    Mburn7 said:
    UPDATE:  I made a fun Traxos deck.  Don't want to give it away (its still being refined), but the key appears to not try to attack every turn.  He has other uses, after all...

    @FindingHeart8
    Pics or did not happen. :|
    Can't send pics right now (I may or may not be at work) but it is roaming TG Platinum, so you may find it in the wild.

    The basic gist is Traxos as the only creature, Reason, Evolutionary Leap, and Mantle of Webs, and a couple cheap historic artifacts.  I get a big beefy defender and then swing for game.  Needs some work, but its pretty fun so far.
  • Bil
    Bil Posts: 831 Critical Contributor
    edited June 2018
    ZW2007- said:
    Quantius said:
    @ZW2007 I think you're using it wrong. It is an expensive card to get into play, and I do think that misses the point of moxes in MTG as a whole, but it works off reinforcements in general, not just historic cards.
    What cards are you using it with that it is counting reinforcements in general? If it is actually counting those, it's not working as intended. It should only count historic cards and reinforcements of historic cards. I've played it again since my original post and it does seem to be counting reinforcements but the amount of mana it gives is not always accurate. I've had it give 6 mana, then 7, then 5 with absolutely no board state changes.


    Could it be because it also considers support reinforcement?
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    Mburn7 said:
    khurram said:
    Mburn7 said:
    UPDATE:  I made a fun Traxos deck.  Don't want to give it away (its still being refined), but the key appears to not try to attack every turn.  He has other uses, after all...

    @FindingHeart8
    Pics or did not happen. :|
    Can't send pics right now (I may or may not be at work) but it is roaming TG Platinum, so you may find it in the wild.

    The basic gist is Traxos as the only creature, Reason, Evolutionary Leap, and Mantle of Webs, and a couple cheap historic artifacts.  I get a big beefy defender and then swing for game.  Needs some work, but its pretty fun so far.
    hmmmmmm.

    FIrst off, props for the effort of trying to salvage the card. :)


    But how long does it take to set up the defense?  And then the following offensive capability?  Do you have a way to give it protection from removal (aka half of the Dusk Rose's deck)?

    It sounds interesting if this was MtgPQ Tower Defense ;)
  • Mburn7
    Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
    FindingHeart8 said:
    Mburn7 said:
    khurram said:
    Mburn7 said:
    UPDATE:  I made a fun Traxos deck.  Don't want to give it away (its still being refined), but the key appears to not try to attack every turn.  He has other uses, after all...

    @FindingHeart8
    Pics or did not happen. :|
    Can't send pics right now (I may or may not be at work) but it is roaming TG Platinum, so you may find it in the wild.

    The basic gist is Traxos as the only creature, Reason, Evolutionary Leap, and Mantle of Webs, and a couple cheap historic artifacts.  I get a big beefy defender and then swing for game.  Needs some work, but its pretty fun so far.
    hmmmmmm.

    FIrst off, props for the effort of trying to salvage the card. :)


    But how long does it take to set up the defense?  And then the following offensive capability?  Do you have a way to give it protection from removal (aka half of the Dusk Rose's deck)?

    It sounds interesting if this was MtgPQ Tower Defense ;)
    I have Journey to Eternity, so that's my death protection.  And I also have Frog and Rebuke for extra defense.
    With a couple draws and some ramp its fairly consistent.  Just added In Bolas' Clutches for extra fun.

    Like I said, it needs some tweaks.  But its certainly better than expected.
  • ZW2007-
    ZW2007- Posts: 812 Critical Contributor
    Bil said:
    ZW2007- said:
    Quantius said:
    @ZW2007 I think you're using it wrong. It is an expensive card to get into play, and I do think that misses the point of moxes in MTG as a whole, but it works off reinforcements in general, not just historic cards.
    What cards are you using it with that it is counting reinforcements in general? If it is actually counting those, it's not working as intended. It should only count historic cards and reinforcements of historic cards. I've played it again since my original post and it does seem to be counting reinforcements but the amount of mana it gives is not always accurate. I've had it give 6 mana, then 7, then 5 with absolutely no board state changes.


    Could it be because it also considers support reinforcement?

    It was counting my support reinforcements, as was I. Keep in mind that doesn't mean support shields either.
  • Quantius
    Quantius Posts: 228 Tile Toppler
    ZW2007- said:
    Quantius said:
    @ZW2007 I think you're using it wrong. It is an expensive card to get into play, and I do think that misses the point of moxes in MTG as a whole, but it works off reinforcements in general, not just historic cards.
    What cards are you using it with that it is counting reinforcements in general? If it is actually counting those, it's not working as intended. It should only count historic cards and reinforcements of historic cards. I've played it again since my original post and it does seem to be counting reinforcements but the amount of mana it gives is not always accurate. I've had it give 6 mana, then 7, then 5 with absolutely no board state changes.
    Saprolings! And from the way it reads it seems like it's not a bug.

    "Activate 3: Gain X mana, where X is the amount of Historic cards and reinforcements you control."

    I'm considering that to mean historic cards as one category and reinforcement as a separate category. But I'm not one of the devs.
  • EDHdad
    EDHdad Posts: 609 Critical Contributor
    Haphazard Bombardment would be a blast if it was basically 3 Demolish for the price of about 3 Demolish.  Say, 8 to 10.

    It should have an immediate impact on the board.  When it enters the board, it should immediately trigger, like a Demolish.  Then, it should trigger again on your upkeep if it's still around. 

    Possibly it would come in as a 3-shield support that loses a shield every time it does its thing.  If it does its thing to itself, it should just lose one shield, not destroy itself.  If there are no other supports in play, it should blow up 9 gems and lose one shield.  It should lose the clause about blowing itself up when there are no other supports.

    Also, it would be nice if it actually blew up 9 gems.  If the support it's targeting is in the corner or on the edge, it should still blow up 9 gems.

    As it is, I can blow up random gems with an uncommon Volcanic Rambler for 8 and still get a 5/3 body.  Or I can blow up gems whenever I attack with Sword of the Animist and get a +2/+2 buff.  Or I can blow up a support and 9 gems with Demolish for 3.  Or I can blow up a whole bunch of gems with Abbot of Keral Keep, or with Chandra 1's first ability.

    If Haphazard Bombardment worked properly, it would be great to build a red blow-up-all-the-gems deck.  As it is, it's a lame card that I will never play, even when facing a level 500 boss who creates supports every turn.
  • EDHdad
    EDHdad Posts: 609 Critical Contributor
    Karn's Temporal Sundering is a disaster.  I can bounce a creature for as little as 4, achieve non-targeted bounce for 5, bounce it to the top of the library for 6, with just commons and uncommons.  For 10, I can bounce a creature with Harbinger of the Tides and make it cost 6 more.  Or for 21, I can bounce nearly every dang thing the opponent controls, if I had a River's Rebuke.  Which I don't.  And I'm pretty salty about that.

    But with Karn's Temporal Sundering, I have to pay 12.  And I have to have a Legendary Creature in play.  And I have to target.  Then I get to take an extra swap.  Which might get me some of the 8 extra mana I had to pay if I had just used Unsummon.

    As a larger issue, gaining an extra swap is not even slightly in the same league as taking an extra turn.  With an extra turn, I would have an extra draw step, an extra attack step, and an extra upkeep step for things that trigger at the beginning of the turn.  With an extra swap, I might get 3 to 6 extra mana, and maybe one extra loyalty.  This is not a Mythic level card.  If it was a common, I wouldn't even play it except to get Spell Mastery.
  • Bil
    Bil Posts: 831 Critical Contributor
    ZW2007- said:
    Bil said:
    ZW2007- said:
    Quantius said:
    @ZW2007 I think you're using it wrong. It is an expensive card to get into play, and I do think that misses the point of moxes in MTG as a whole, but it works off reinforcements in general, not just historic cards.
    What cards are you using it with that it is counting reinforcements in general? If it is actually counting those, it's not working as intended. It should only count historic cards and reinforcements of historic cards. I've played it again since my original post and it does seem to be counting reinforcements but the amount of mana it gives is not always accurate. I've had it give 6 mana, then 7, then 5 with absolutely no board state changes.


    Could it be because it also considers support reinforcement?

    It was counting my support reinforcements, as was I. Keep in mind that doesn't mean support shields either.
       Of course. Well, then i suppose the explanation is out of our range (mine at least). 
      I also noticed that the mox was a legendary and an artefact ... Does it count twice then? (That wouldnt explain the variation anyway).

Categories