Show enemy's deck colours before Mulligan

[GuudBooi]

There is no way of knowing which deck the enemy is playing before either a land is put down, and while going first is already an advantage the absence of knowing which deck the enemy is playing favours certain strategies more than others especially in the mulligan phase.

Legends of Runeterra shows the region an enemy is playing and the champion, so if you are control you can at least perceive if you are facing an aggro deck or a control and try to at least mulligan properly based on it.
A deck that can at least try to counter an aggro deck without this feature can't mulligan properly and therefore it's put in an already bigger disadvantage.

You can already try to do this somewhat by trying to see enemy Avatar and Sleeve cause usually people tend to pair cosmetic to the theme of the deck so you can somewhat perceive your opponent deck already but in this way it is simply bad compared to a properly inside the system method.

[Winter Wolf]

I never got into LOR's pvp system as I already play enough card games in general but the adventure roguelike mode is very intriguing. I've definitely enjoyed that several times. However., LOR is really based on an entirely different style of gaming and ideas about what effects can be played/used when and how. Instant speed is not a thing there really. Also each player's mana base ramps up incrementally (with perhaps some help from the battlefield, their deck or even just when they go in a turn. And players get mana refills on each turn not just their own. The whole strategy of when to attack/defend and how change dramatically in LOR compared to MTG, etc.

Magic is so entirely different from that I don't think you can draw useful comparisons (good or bad). They are as different as poker and chess are to each other. The thing they have in common is randomness (to some degree) and deck sculpting (or in the case of pvp actual building). That is a good thing for one card game player to cross over to another but it isn't really overall that similar a set of gaming skills.

Also I think new ideas are great to play with but Arena isn't where they are going to get implemented. Even MTGO shucked the very cool rules changing Vanguard system (Where we got the Momir event from if you are curious btw). And that was a much more likely to spawn a variant type of M:TG client than MTGA is.

Also while some people might disparage your posts with "skill issue" or "git gud!" type comments that is just gamer speak for "we don't like what you said but we don't know how to talk about it honestly and without rancor". I am glad you are posting your ideas even as they get shot down. Keep posting!

[GuudBooi]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από Winter Wolf:

I never got into LOR's pvp system as I already play enough card games in general but the adventure roguelike mode is very intriguing. I've definitely enjoyed that several times. However., LOR is really based on an entirely different style of gaming and ideas about what effects can be played/used when and how. Instant speed is not a thing there really. Also each player's mana base ramps up incrementally (with perhaps some help from the battlefield, their deck or even just when they go in a turn. And players get mana refills on each turn not just their own. The whole strategy of when to attack/defend and how change dramatically in LOR compared to MTG, etc.

Magic is so entirely different from that I don't think you can draw useful comparisons (good or bad). They are as different as poker and chess are to each other. The thing they have in common is randomness (to some degree) and deck sculpting (or in the case of pvp actual building). That is a good thing for one card game player to cross over to another but it isn't really overall that similar a set of gaming skills.

Also I think new ideas are great to play with but Arena isn't where they are going to get implemented. Even MTGO shucked the very cool rules changing Vanguard system (Where we got the Momir event from if you are curious btw). And that was a much likely to spawn a variant type of M:TG client than MTGA is.

Also while some people might disparage your posts with "skill issue" or "git gud!" type comments that is just gamer speak for "we don't like what you said but we don't know how to talk about it honestly and without rancor". I am glad you are posting your ideas even as they get shot down. Keep posting!

Thank you for this post and yhea just right now I was thinking about LoR and you are totally right, if we want to draw comparison they are totally different worlds.

I like the idea of accumulating mana, much more than hearthstone approach of giving you a coin, and was just thinking if both those two suffers from "going first aggro" mtg who has none of the two how does it survive ?
But I came to the conclusion that their power system ( conception of removal etc... are totally different) for example one of the best removal in LoR is 2 mana deal two where in black in magic you have LOR's vengeance for 3 mana.

But Lands in magic do not equal mana in other games, i think removal in LOR is a much bigger commitment than in magic although they work for their own system and power system but I do not have enough knowledge in magic to understand it perfectly.

I tried to put my focus more on "outside balance" which impacts those type of game no matter how different they are, i think, and magic has a big contrast in the element of mulligan and enemy s deck knowledge, which although the challenge of implementing fixes for those two, for me are quite an head scratcher to think about cause I think those elements are consistent hidden problematics that are always present no matter the card games but as lomg as they have a aggro-midrange-control so it makes me both a bit curious because,personally and from what I think those things in the way they are implemented in magic should definitely cause problems and i fail to think about possible reasons aside limitations of why wanting to keep it ( aside from the fact that lands and colours identify are potentially not easy to put and easy to deceive, as another commentator told me cause i did not realize this potential issue before)

Also, what is the Momir event that you mentioned ?

[Winter Wolf]

Momir is an event that shows up sometimes at Midweek Magic (Tuesday evening's event that lasts till Thursday evening.) Each player gets an emblem that they can use once per turn on their own turn. When you use it you can spend any amount of mana and discard a card to create a random creature token equivalent of that mana value so if you spend 7 mana you might get Elesh Norn, or VaultBorn Tyrant or something absolutely terrible. There is a risk at each mana value and you start with a full hand of land (usually the deck is only lands) so there is some strategy to how to spend your lands vs play them. as well as what mana cost to spend them at.

It can be great fun if you embrace the idea of randomness. If randomness bothers you and you tend towards bad luck, stay away. :d

RE: Philosophy of magic. Keep in mind this game has evolved over 3 decades by some of the brightest minds in the world. Not always for the better, but always evolved in some sense. And the brightest minds (like everywhere) do not always have the prevailing decisions but in general the game has profited greatly by being played for so long.

30 years ago tapping a land or two for a merfolk was considered pretty much tech.

I think magic's elegance is also its downfall. Sometimes it is huge fun and sometimes it just ends fun immediately.

Mulliganing (why sometimes a hand looks good but is a loser for example), Sideboarding (when it matters and what to even put in your sideboard), Topdecking -- especially learning how to maximize the benefit of a good top deck (aka playing to your outs), Understanding your Opponent and Outplaying them, these are all essential skills to have in in M:TG on top of the usual strategic elements of how to build your decks and who to team up with to get an edge in discovering the best cards and their hidden uses and of course the basic tactics of combat which may seem obvious and simple at first but can become quite convoluted.

LOR has some of that but it isn't the same thing imho. Even in the most meta view both games are too different to compare well.

[Namdoolb]

Gotta say; don't like this idea.

First and foremost, it diverges arena further from the pen & paper game (which I am staunchly opposed to).

Second: it's a relatively easily gamed system.
What's the criteria we base colour information on? Lands in deck, colours of nonland cards in deck? Either way it's not too difficult to spoof the system and force additional colours that are not actually in your deck to show up.
For example, a red deck could stick in a couple of dual lands that branch into other colours, or play some of the multicolour adventure cards from wilds, or play hybrid mana cards.... all of which would cause additional colours to be shown when the deck is in fact just mono red.

Thirdly, whilst there is some correlation between chosen colours and strategy, it's nowhere near foolproof or reliable. I'd prepare yourself to be making snap judgements about deck composition based on colour, and then being angry when you realise that you called out their deck archetype completely wrong.

And fourth: this isn't going to help people's matchup against mono red, don't forget that they get the same "benefit" from this as you do.

For the TLDR, I feel that this unnecessarily diverges mtga from mtg for no good reason & without really providing any tangible benefit to anyone.

[ZAP]

This is the original card game. There's zero chance any rules will change significantly.

[GoddessofEternity]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από ZAP:

This is the original card game. There's zero chance any rules will change significantly.

This

[ʍolɟ ǝɥʇ ǝsɹǝʌǝɹ]

It's pretty easy to tell if they play a land

[extreme pwnership]

Say it slowly in the mirror with me. Skill issue.

[Badadook]

Imo mulligan is the worst thing about Magic. I love everything about Magic EXCEPT the starting hand and mulligan.
I think land as a mana system is cool and fun, however the initial starting position almost always feels bad. Especially in limited.
Not having mana or having to much mana in the opening hand is so backbreaking. London mulligan sure helped a bit, but I would like to see some more adjustment.
Just give the starting position some more love, I dont know what. But reduce the amount of non-games a bit more and I think it would be great.

Nothing more unfun than not being able to play the game.

[M3rett0]

LoR is a failed pvp game. Surely you shouldn't use it as an example of good design.

[GuudBooi]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από M3rett0:

LoR is a failed pvp game. Surely you shouldn't use it as an example of good design.

There are a lot of intrincansieces that puts a game to failure that are not gameplay reason, especially in a market extremely hard to mantain player retainces without FOMO tactics such as the card games genre.
Gameplay wise LoR was extremely well done and polished.

The design decision that i am talking about tho are not only part of LoR, but they are samely implemented in hearthstone and possibly in other card games, this is the first time I find this type of mulligan in a card game.
Pokemon everytime you mulligan, your opponent has the chance to get an additional card.

What I am saying is harsh punishment on mulligan in games focused on mana, simply disincentivize interaction betweeb players and simply forces the players to have a generic okay starting hand which works much better for aggro since their mana costs are usually never high so they may hardly result in getting bricked from a full mulligan compared to others at least and also not knowing your opponent means having more access to a "without threat" potentially early game compared to what could be an early game where your enemy knows you are playing aggro and can shuffle properly.

Only yugioh has no mulligan, but that because it has no mana/land system so being able to manuver your win condition would be much more extremely broken cause you have no limitation on the cards to play.

Now that I think about it, maybe the problematic especially with black control, is that it is extremely easy to remove threats with low mana cost compared possibly to the other games, simply for how removal is imagined in magic which is much more effective ( i am not sure about this, just thinking about it now) but still it sadly leaves a problem out which maybe for how the game is made is not easy to tackle and resolve

[Drakeeper]

I remember a time when mono red aggro decks often ran Teferi avatar.

[ZAP]

With paper you can just ask what they're playing or even look at the deck.

[ʍolɟ ǝɥʇ ǝsɹǝʌǝɹ]

Just play Bo3

[Namdoolb]

Αναρτήθηκε αρχικά από ZAP:

With paper you can just ask what they're playing or even look at the deck.

If you're playing casually or maybe even at a small/mid sized fnm then sure.

fnm is pretty chill; they'll probably tell you if you ask. And you might not even need to ask - chances are you've seen them playing in a previous round or on a previous week & you already have a pretty good idea of their deck.

If you have any kind of a large or competitive event then this goes out of the window. For the most part you're gonna be playing people you don't know. & there's not much chance of them volunteering information that would put them at a disadvantage (their deck).
Now as the event goes on there's a chance you might be able to do a little scouting; you should be able to link at least a few players up with their respective decks, & you might even get paired against one or two of those players in the later rounds.
But it's by no means a certainty.