What do you think of the new Standard Rotation?

Mburn7

In case you missed the blog post, the new Standard rotation will be as follows (as best as I can tell, as usual it isn't explained well):

New sets will be added to Standard as they come out with no sets rotating out until there are 8 non-Origins Standard sets
Once the 9th non-Origins set is released, the 4 oldest non-Origins Standard sets will rotate out together (so the next rotation will make us lose IXN, RIX, DOM, and M19 simultaneously)

Basically this means Standard will fluctuate between 6 and 9 sets, and we will get about a year extra time with each set.

So, what do you all think?

Laeuftbeidir

This is fine, I guess

Time to re-evaluate my spending strategy. I might - depending on grn - stop chasing anything before that.. Or even invest in missing ixl mythics..

Tremayne

I lack an option, specifically the “not sure yet” option.

It seems that M19 will only be in standard for half the time that IXN. I think that the ramifications of this needs to be pondered a bit more before I cast a vote.

Mburn7

This is fine, I guess

Tremayne said:

I lack an option, specifically the “not sure yet” option.

It seems that M19 will only be in standard for half the time that IXN. I think that the ramifications of this needs to be pondered a bit more before I cast a vote.

Oops, sorry I missed that option.

And yes it does appear that the 4th set will have the shortest lifespan while the first one will have the longest. 

But it does mean that M19 will still be in rotation ~3 months longer that it otherwise would be (since it rotates out at the 5th set after it comes out instead of the 4th like it would now).

The more severe change is that now Ixalan will be in standard ~15 months longer than it would be now.  That is huge.

Froggy

This is fine, I guess

It’s hard to make a decision on this just yet. I’m sure there will be all sorts of complaining by some. Much of it might even be valid. Others will love it as they will have time to keep up with standard. It could be a good solution to the constant problem of new players never really getting enough time to catch up (maybe).

For me, that just means I will have an easier time keeping up (need about 6 masterpieces to complete current standard - have been insanely lucky!).

I guess the best part of this is that Oktagon have set a good simple guideline so players don’t need to keep guessing. It is no longer left up to whim. For this fact alone, I think it is good news. We can finally predict and don’t need to bother them about this any longer.

TomB

This is fine, I guess

You sure this isn't just on a "whim"? I mean, wasn't it supposed to be one set in, one set out? Not that I'm complaining...I actually like it. But I don't think anyone knew this was the plan till now.

I do find it somewhat exhausting having to rebuild my Standard decks every time a new set comes along, so at least this will reduce that inconvenience to only once a year, kinda like it was when Standard was first introduced in paper. It'll still change the competitive dynamic when it happens, just like it will when a new set is introduced, but it won't be as drastic as it would be otherwise.

In fact, as I see it, the only real problem is it'll be MUCH longer that something we hate stays in Standard...It'll seem like FOREVER...

Bil

This is fine, I guess

Froggy said:

I guess the best part of this is that Oktagon have set a good simple guideline so players don’t need to keep guessing. It is no longer left up to whim. For this fact alone, I think it is good news. We can finally predict and don’t need to bother them about this any longer.

   This is right ... But in a year, they can still change their mind. (Wotc loves to soooo ... ).
   It is still hard to make plans on the long term but the fact that sets remain longer in standard is good for everyone i guess.
   As a sidenote it will allow players to skip entire sets if they don't like their flavor without being too harmed in standard ... Which is particularly interesting for players that have low currency incomes.

madwren

This is fine, I guess

It's fine, really, but it does mean that toxic or poorly-designed cards will have that much more time to influence the meta.

Mburn7

This is fine, I guess

madwren said:

It's fine, really, but it does mean that toxic or poorly-designed cards will have that much more time to influence the meta.

True.  An extra 9 months or so of StV, Ghalta, Etali and co is going to be interesting.

Maybe they'll do more card balancing while sets are standard to compensate?

GrizzoMtGPQ

This is bad

I don't like how the sets stay for diminishing amounts of time. It skews how you buy/invest in cards. I liked how we just kept dropping the last set. I also do not like how important XLN has suddenly become. Chasing it is now as important as chasing Origins. Seems wrong. If we were going to keep a set for a year, I'd rather we got to keep HOU.

Tilwin90

This is GREAT!

I seem to be in minority but I have been crusading for a mirror of the alignment of rotation with paper magic for quite some time. Let me explain this. 

Wizards carefully plan card designs and mechanics around rotations. The design team or however they are called try to think of mechanics that would synergise, complement and diversify matters enough. The last Liliana for instance got to shine for a bit with zombies from amonkhet block being around for a bit for instance. Tribals such as wizards find a lot of love in izzet too so it's not only a dom thing. Blocks in the past also made more sense to enter and exit standard together. 
The future future league focuses on balance. This can lead to answers of potentially problematic cards or against specific strategies. There is a reason no strong artifact removal existed in kaladesh but then amonkhet brought by force, abrade and forsake the worldly.

Now this all depends on how things get translated in MTGPQ of course as translations are not one on one. Format warping cards can find answers either in nerfs or answer cards being released (the latter being preferred)

Sure some sets live longer than others, and that fourth set is always going to draw the shorter straw, but given the current time span in standard I think that's still loads of time to enjoy those cards. 

Finally I am excited for the new players who had a huge problem with sets rotating too fast. Very new players don't feel this immediately but once you start to get somewhere there in the middle with your card collection losing a good portion of powerful cards and getting stuck in a competitive tier can be very punishing.

So yes, I am thrilled with this option. Sure this may lead to potential issues that will need to be addressed but overall I still think it's a positive adjustment. 😊

Mburn7

This is fine, I guess

GrizzoMtGPQ said:

I don't like how the sets stay for diminishing amounts of time. It skews how you buy/invest in cards. I liked how we just kept dropping the last set. I also do not like how important XLN has suddenly become. Chasing it is now as important as chasing Origins. Seems wrong. If we were going to keep a set for a year, I'd rather we got to keep HOU.

I think technically the new system would make GRN as the most important set, since it will stay in the longest once it comes in (since it will be the oldest remaining set once the next rotation happens next year).

But yeah, we haven't had a set last this long in events (besides Origins) since BFZ.  Definitely feels weird

NinjaE

This is GREAT!

I like it. A lot.

madwren

This is fine, I guess

Mburn7 said:

madwren said:

It's fine, really, but it does mean that toxic or poorly-designed cards will have that much more time to influence the meta.

True.  An extra 9 months or so of StV, Ghalta, Etali and co is going to be interesting.

Maybe they'll do more card balancing while sets are standard to compensate?

My hope has always been that balance would be an ongoing, iterative process, but that hasn't really come to fruition. Don't get me wrong, though. Of your mentions above, only Vault gives me pause as something that breaks the color pie and has too much power for its own good--and this isn't an attempt to start THAT argument again.

Also, I think it's a positive thing for PQ that people's cards aren't constantly rotating out, considering how difficult it can be to acquire cards or currency.  Fast rotation is an active deterrent to purchasing decisions, which can't make d3go happy. Thus, it's beneficial to both players and The Powers That Be.

However, it means that from a competitive standpoint:

1. Current and future overpowered cards will have a significantly longer influence on the game.

2. With more sets in Standard, design space will become even more limited. The shining example of this would be Gaea's Revenge, which forever sets an extremely high bar for green's go-to theme, "large, dangerous creatures". Every big green creature that comes into the game, you have to ask yourself, "is it worth using this creature over Gaea's Revenge?" and the answer is usually "no". That's extremely restrictive for both designers and players, as we don't have the luxury of building decks in the same way as paper.

And yes, I fully realize that this is coming from a Spike perspective, but you know, I am who I am. 

wereotter

This is unnecessary

Tilwin90 said:

The future future league focuses on balance. This can lead to answers of potentially problematic cards or against specific strategies. There is a reason no strong artifact removal existed in kaladesh but then amonkhet brought by force, abrade and forsake the worldly.

Now this all depends on how things get translated in MTGPQ of course as translations are not one on one. Format warping cards can find answers either in nerfs or answer cards being released (the latter being preferred)

Exactly, and MTGPQ has a pretty solid history of over powering cards that seem under powered when released only to have the cards be badly broken either immediately or when their counterparts are released resulting in nerfs of the cards upsetting players, or no nerfs at all resulting in skewed metas and also upset players.

If they're going to mirror the paper release rotation, Puzzle Quest has an imperative to more closely mirroring the cards EXACTLY as Wizards releases them. No more powering up cards because they seem lackluster and they want to justify upshifting rarity.

So, obviously, I'm cautious about how they're going to balance the cards against each other for Standard. Beyond that, I'm only upset that I'm going to have to see Etali even longer....

stikxs

This is GREAT!

madwren said:

It's fine, really, but it does mean that toxic or poorly-designed cards will have that much more time to influence the meta.

This is a good point. And means that devs fixing broken cards will be more important (and hopefully faster-acting).

I like the change personally as it lessens the penalty for chasing top tier cards not in the most recent set (of each group of 4). It will also be nice to not have to reevaluate decks for all my PWs every new set because and old one went out. One major deck overhaul/year with a couple substitutions per set sounds nicer.

Tremayne

Mburn7 said:

Tremayne said:

I lack an option, specifically the “not sure yet” option.

It seems that M19 will only be in standard for half the time that IXN. I think that the ramifications of this needs to be pondered a bit more before I cast a vote.

Oops, sorry I missed that option.

And yes it does appear that the 4th set will have the shortest lifespan while the first one will have the longest. 

But it does mean that M19 will still be in rotation ~3 months longer that it otherwise would be (since it rotates out at the 5th set after it comes out instead of the 4th like it would now).

The more severe change is that now Ixalan will be in standard ~15 months longer than it would be now.  That is huge.

No problem

Exactly, this is most annoying for me - having called Ixalan “the missing set”, since I have gotten so few Mythic cards from Ixalan.

I am leaning toward fine I guess.

Thésée

This is bad

madwren said:

It's fine, really, but it does mean that toxic or poorly-designed cards will have that much more time to influence the meta.

It seems a bad choice to me, for this reason. Legacy is broken, well ok, this will never change I guess. At least with a 4 sets Standard format we knew overpowered cards would slip there after one year

IM_CARLOS

This is fine, I guess

It's okay to have more for a buck. But when cards like baral or cycling kicks in and nerft after rotation they are poisoning the meta way longer. 
So nice, but... 

ElfNeedsFood

This is fine, I guess

I’m glad this came after cycling rotated out. I think it might create a new Revolt Against the Update when 50% of sets rotate out as a block again. 

span_argoman

People are saying this is good for new players who face the problem of having cards rotate out too soon. I'm not so sure.

Under the old system, a new player procuring cards from the latest set would have some 9 to 12 months to use those cards in Standard. If they acquired cards from the second latest set there would still be some 6 to 9 months to use the cards.

I'm not sure what the others consider a new player to be here but if someone is 9 months into the game, I don't think they are really all that new.

The second concern is that new players start from a point of having to catch up with the collection of existing players in terms of the cards they can play in Standard. So now instead of having to catch up to Origins + the 4 latest sets, it becomes Origins + the 5 to 8 latest sets. That's a lot more ground for a new player to cover.

The other concern is that new players have to accustom themselves to and account for many more mechanics in Standard under the new system. Almost every set comes with new mechanics, so increasing the number of sets in Standard will increase the learning curve for newer players.

As a frame of reference, MtGPQ is only just creeping up onto its 3rd anniversary. Having essentially what is a two year rotation is a much longer time than one might think.

I think if the concern was that XLN was only going to be in Standard for 9 months due to its delayed release and the rapid release of the sets following it, a better option would have been to announce that it stays in Standard even after GRN is release but would rotate out together with RIX when the following new set is released.

There's an argument that it matters more what a player can play rather than what their opponents can since there's no real PvP and the AI is pretty weak. But I think that should at best be a consolation and definitely be something to avoid building core aspects of the game around.