What do you think of the new objectives?

Mburn7
Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
in MtGPQ General Discussion
With the 2.7.1 update there are some major changes to secondary objectives, making them much more deckbuilding-focused and less gameplay focused.  What do you think?

What do you think of the new objectives? 51 votes

Yes this is Great!
33%
bk1234madwrenandrewvanmarlekhurrambabar3355GrizzoMtGPQGunmix25tfg76ElfNeedsFoodManiiNamesThuranKinesiaWolfteethTheExaminerjsabotinWolfbaneXenagos 17 votes
No this Sucks!
1%
Mark_Tedin 1 vote
I like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
45%
VolrakTherosMainloop25DodecapodspeakupaskanswerStormcrowboblpoblGilescloneLaeuftbeidirBeyKlawFroggyMburn7FirinmahlazerDBJonesjoergingerBrakkisRhasgetRasalghulEnygma6WulFgaR77 23 votes
I don't like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
5%
FindingHeart8Tilwin90Beclas 3 votes
Meh
13%
EDHdad__AdamTomB[Deleted User]HarryMasonElektrophorusMiyagiDojo 7 votes
«1

Comments

  • Mburn7
    Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
    I like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
    Starting it off, I personally think these are going to be pretty fun to play with.  I do always preach caution for early assumptions, though.
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Mark_Tedin
    Mark_Tedin Posts: 167 Tile Toppler
    edited July 2018
    No this Sucks!

    I do not like this. I'll spend more time to build the decks. If it is a long event (BoFT) it will be even worse. that's why we spent 20k runes in an extra deck slot  (to save time and not build another deck again).
  • wereotter
    wereotter Posts: 2,070 Chairperson of the Boards
    It’s definitely different. I think it’ll be good for us to take a second look at cards we might have never considered before. Though if it’ll actually be fun to play, I’ll wait and see. Also it appears to just be PvE which is important. If in PvP I’m playing pauper against a deck of all mythic and masterpiece cards, I’m going to get stomped. 
  • Mburn7
    Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
    I like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
    Mark_Tedin said:

    I do not like this. I'll spend more time to build the decks. If it is a long event (BoFT) it will be even worse. that's why we spent 20k runes in an extra deck slot.
    I'm a little lost.  If you don't like spending time deckbuilding, then why do you play?  Like 80% of the fun of a CCG is funky deckbuilding.
  • madwren
    madwren Posts: 2,259 Chairperson of the Boards
    Yes this is Great!
    I think the changes are excellent. They seem to be a a good approach to retaining deckbuilding challenges and limitations while reducing the dependency on opponent decks (e.g., having to achieve kill objectives against creatureless decks).

    I disagree that they move focus away from gameplay, though. I think it's the opposite. Forcing a person to wait tediously for their opponent to summon creatures, or their own life to be whittled down below a certain threshold, for example, are counter-intuitive gameplay. Often you're just forced to wait..and wait..and wait.

    While these new objectives don't mitigate that completely, many of them would seem to allow the player to proceed at a more natural pace. Just looking down the RotGP list, I find it very refreshing that many of them are ones I can play without having to sit on my heels all game waiting for something to happen.


  • GrizzoMtGPQ
    GrizzoMtGPQ Posts: 776 Critical Contributor
    Yes this is Great!
    Agreed, building and experimenting with decks IS the game for me. I can see how others might want to just use pre-constructed decks. Maybe that is an avenue for exploration for Oktagon.
  • Laeuftbeidir
    Laeuftbeidir Posts: 1,841 Chairperson of the Boards
    I like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
    I'd really like to see something totally new instead of adding different icing on the same two cakes regulary.
    Still, the new objectives look interesting and challenging from a deck building perspective, so I'm sure I'll enjoy them
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    I don't like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
    There should be a "I was lazy and didn't read them," option...

    *sigh* fiiiiiine, I'll go back and read them.
  • khurram
    khurram Posts: 1,090 Chairperson of the Boards
    Yes this is Great!
    Waiting for them to implement the pauper objective for one of those high stakes competitive events, in future.  ;)
  • FindingHeart8
    FindingHeart8 Posts: 2,731 Chairperson of the Boards
    I don't like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
    okay, I've looked them over now.

    Just feels like an obligation to remodel all of our decks for the same results.

    Maybe I'll like the remodeled version a bit better, but with the same opponents and the same rewards it just feels like a chore.
  • tfg76
    tfg76 Posts: 258 Mover and Shaker
    Yes this is Great!
    It'd be great to explicitly know what an "Enchanment" is though. I can guess, but why not announce it?
  • Mburn7
    Mburn7 Posts: 3,427 Chairperson of the Boards
    I like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
    tfg76 said:
    It'd be great to explicitly know what an "Enchanment" is though. I can guess, but why not announce it?
    I believe "enchantment" here is just a subtype on a support, similar to "land" and "artifact"

    Practically speaking there is no difference yet, but I assume it will allow greater freedom with future card design (like how demystify is "destroy a non-land support" which is usually more useful than "destroy a support")
  • Unknown
    Unknown
    edited July 2018
    This content has been removed.
  • Enygma6
    Enygma6 Posts: 266 Mover and Shaker
    I like them, but want to play some events with them before making my opinion
    “Enchantment” will need some clarification before implementation as an objective target.  Looking through my collection in-game, that term does not show as a keyword or subtype for any card.  Aura does, and I suspect that could be what is meant.  
    Or they could add “enchantment” to a reasonable number of cards with the 2.7.1 release.
  • jtwood
    jtwood Posts: 1,285 Chairperson of the Boards
    Where can I see these updates?
  • ElfNeedsFood
    ElfNeedsFood Posts: 944 Critical Contributor
    Yes this is Great!
    FindingHeart8 said:
    okay, I've looked them over now.

    Just feels like an obligation to remodel all of our decks for the same results.

    Maybe I'll like the remodeled version a bit better, but with the same opponents and the same rewards it just feels like a chore.
    It would be interesting if they swapped the decks around on us too. It has happened some in the past...
  • ElfNeedsFood
    ElfNeedsFood Posts: 944 Critical Contributor
    Yes this is Great!

    jtwood said:
    Where can I see these updates?
    Release notes. 
  • Kinesia
    Kinesia Posts: 1,621 Chairperson of the Boards
    Yes this is Great!
    ElfNeedsFood said:

    jtwood said:
    Where can I see these updates?
    Release notes. 

    That sounds like a terrorist threat "Release notes."  or what? And who is notes? Are they your bunny?
  • ElfNeedsFood
    ElfNeedsFood Posts: 944 Critical Contributor
    Yes this is Great!
    Kinesia said:
    ElfNeedsFood said:

    jtwood said:
    Where can I see these updates?
    Release notes. 

    That sounds like a terrorist threat "Release notes."  or what? And who is notes? Are they your bunny?
    Lol...  Here's the link....  :)

    https://forums.d3go.com/discussion/73770/2-7-1-pre-release-notes-7-2-18/p1

Categories