abilities being shown

[Shinoskay]

I really hate some abilities are highlighted.

Like, it was annoying when they flashed the card whos ability was doing a thing for you (Like when I used a pact weapon that allowed me to not lose when I had negative health). but now the cards show symbols or some crap... showing, constantly, they have an ability that does a thing.

yet. its not like that for all abilities. I just got beaten because I didnt realize someones card caused abilities to trigger twice.

Yet, when I put down a reach card it showed my enemy (who had ALL flying creatures) who to use their spells on. it was a pain in the ass.

I prefer when people knew to check cards being put down (or to know what the cards have through memory). it was even, fair, and encouraged regular checking and mindfullness (or constant loss).

the new crap is dumb

[kingjames488]

well they *would* know in the game of magic...

you'd be like "I'm using my enchant on ____"
and you're opponent would be like "nono, I'm using removal on ____"

likewise when they play a creature they say "I'm playing _____"
they aren't required to monologue about what it does or their ultimate plans for you...
it's your responsibility to ask for clarification if you don't know what the card does.

[Senditu]

sooo, ehm,... i dont know how to tell you this... but.... you still can cehck cards? i mean reading the card explains the card. every card (aka meta deck cards) i dont know by haeart i check. and i even check cards double i am certain i know what they do, just to be 100% sure. i mean its not like they patched out for you to hover over cards or right click them.

so that all to say... get gut

and here a free jester for you if thats what you wanted, you did a good one *pats head*

[Shinoskay]

Originally posted by kingjames488:

well they *would* know in the game of magic...

you'd be like "I'm using my enchant on ____"
and you're opponent would be like "nono, I'm using removal on ____"

likewise when they play a creature they say "I'm playing _____"
they aren't required to monologue about what it does or their ultimate plans for you...
it's your responsibility to ask for clarification if you don't know what the card does.

except not always.

A: "I cast tree dweller"
B: "ok, and now I attack with my roc"
A: "Tree dweller stops that"
B: "its a flier and tree dweller doesnt have flying"
A: "but it has reach"

or, like with the pact weapon.
A: "I cast this weapon. then pay to equip it"
B: "thats fine, you have 2 health"
A: *says nothing
B: attacks, then declares theyve won.
A: "not quite, my weapon keeps my alive so long as its in play."

no, there are plenty of times you dont have to announce it.

In the digital, you cant say all that... so the whole flashing thing, annoying as it may be, I got it... but the new thing where ♥♥♥♥ glows forever and some get certain symbols is stupid as hell.

Originally posted by Senditu:

sooo, ehm,... i dont know how to tell you this... but.... you still can cehck cards? i mean reading the card explains the card. every card (aka meta deck cards) i dont know by haeart i check. and i even check cards double i am certain i know what they do, just to be 100% sure. i mean its not like they patched out for you to hover over cards or right click them.

so that all to say... get gut

and here a free jester for you if thats what you wanted, you did a good one *pats head*

you are trying to talk down at me about something that is completely irrelevant to my comment.
yes, people can still check cards... but you are less encouraged to now because half the ♥♥♥♥ just shows up as symbols and such. literally, your comment added nothing but mockery to this thread.

Like, the two of you are clearly the kinds of people these changes were made for...

[kingjames488]

Originally posted by Shinoskay:

Originally posted by kingjames488:

well they *would* know in the game of magic...

you'd be like "I'm using my enchant on ____"
and you're opponent would be like "nono, I'm using removal on ____"

likewise when they play a creature they say "I'm playing _____"
they aren't required to monologue about what it does or their ultimate plans for you...
it's your responsibility to ask for clarification if you don't know what the card does.

except not always.

A: "I cast tree dweller"
B: "ok, and now I attack with my roc"
A: "Tree dweller stops that"
B: "its a flier and tree dweller doesnt have flying"
A: "but it has reach"

or, like with the pact weapon.
A: "I cast this weapon. then pay to equip it"
B: "thats fine, you have 2 health"
A: *says nothing
B: attacks, then declares theyve won.
A: "not quite, my weapon keeps my alive so long as its in play."

no, there are plenty of times you dont have to announce it.

In the digital, you cant say all that... so the whole flashing thing, annoying as it may be, I got it... but the new thing where ♥♥♥♥ glows forever and some get certain symbols is stupid as hell.

it only indicates things according to the rules... the rules don't require your opponent to tell you what their cards do.

[Kolarahidumgarabashtelarimdugarn]

I prefer winning due to my skill rather than due to opponent forgetting about some fine print on a card. But everyone is free to have own preferences.

[kingjames488]

Originally posted by Kolarahidumgarabashtelarimdugarn:

I prefer winning due to my skill rather than due to opponent forgetting about some fine print on a card. But everyone is free to have own preferences.

the discussion isn't about winning though, it's about if the game should have an indication for every conceivable thing.

[Ripshot Blue]

Originally posted by Shinoskay:

A: "I cast tree dweller"
B: "ok, and now I attack with my roc"
A: "Tree dweller stops that"
B: "its a flier and tree dweller doesnt have flying"
A: "but it has reach"

or, like with the pact weapon.
A: "I cast this weapon. then pay to equip it"
B: "thats fine, you have 2 health"
A: *says nothing
B: attacks, then declares theyve won.
A: "not quite, my weapon keeps my alive so long as its in play."

Saying nothing in a paper match is mostly fine considering its an equip & not doing a trigger at that moment, If information is wanted about an equip or something that is on the field not actively doing an effect, its on the player who wants to know to either ask or check the card themself. In your hypothetical example, the first shows there is communication for a keyword effect that is always active (reach), the other is for an equip that has a passive anti-lose that has a condition to trigger (health must be at 0 or less & equip must be active) but is not asked about or checked. UI information like Reach is to replace the need for communication like Paper has to get active information you need. If an effect like pact weapon prevents someone from losing, the card will have a moment of an effect to state "this card is doing something to prevent what just happened from happening" (red circle ping effect when health drops lower then 0 on the card that prevented the loss for a moment), Its completely on you for not noticing. Same effect is played when a card that prevents health gain is in play & a source that would normally heal, fails to do so, the effect will show on the card preventing the heals. I am not saying that the UI elements or effects are by any means good, but the information you are saying that isnt there, is there, its just not constantly in your face like an active keyword effect like Deathtouch or Ward is.

[Kolarahidumgarabashtelarimdugarn]

Originally posted by kingjames488:

the discussion isn't about winning though, it's about if the game should have an indication for every conceivable thing.

Technically you're right. But from my perspective, if a person who want the opponent to be more likely to lose the game because of overlooking something, then most likely he just wants to increase the chance for winning. But it doesn't necessarily have to be that case. There are also people who have attitude like "if I've suffered so many years, then you also have to suffer like me to make it fair", which is even more toxic in my opinion. Technically such thread could be also created by someone who just enjoys slowing down games by any possible formality (like forcing opponent to carefully read every card instead of letting the UI to intuitively display the most important information), but it just sounds so pointless to me - it wouldn't be for own benefit or a sense of justice, it's just a waste of time without any purpose.

So that's why I assumed OP just wants to win more. The least toxic option out of 3 that came to my mind, so I went optimistic here.

[Tom the Mime Artist]

"Back in my day we had to remember our own triggers and we had to walk to the local game store through the snow, uphill both ways"

But seriously, a card flashing telling you that this is what caused something just speeds things up. If you don't win when your opponent reaches 0 life, most people are just going to read through the cards until they find the cause. Those who don't and keep playing as if they just need to do 1 more damage and then it'll work? I wouldn't really take much satisfaction from that sort of win.

And for things like asking "are you sure?" when you try to counter a spell cast with cavern of souls? We already have enough people on the forum confused about why they couldn't counter a spell when that happens and that's with the warning.

[kingjames488]

Originally posted by Tom the Mime Artist:

"Back in my day we had to remember our own triggers and we had to walk to the local game shop through the snow, uphill both ways"

it's good for ya!

learn ya not to copy meta decklists!

[John-Silver]

People complained nonstop for more abilities icons, and now we got this.

[Shinoskay]

Originally posted by John-Silver:

People complained nonstop for more abilities icons, and now we got this.

you know what would solve that?
if companies stopped just doing what the loud minority wanted.

if they got those complaints and turned around and ran an in game poll or something "hey, we heard there was x want, how many of you actually want this?"

Originally posted by Kolarahidumgarabashtelarimdugarn:

So that's why I assumed OP just wants to win more. The least toxic option out of 3 that came to my mind, so I went optimistic here.

I want the intelligent game I started with. you all want 'walked 10 miles, in the rain, up hill both ways' then let me tell you about how 4/4's use to cost 5 or 6 mana as a standard balance... no special abilities... and 2/2's cost 3 mana before abilities... this new ♥♥♥♥ where you have 2/2's, with abilities, at 1 mana cost is just crazy. 1/2 with regen (or destroy) feels like it should be the strongest 1 mana card. or 1 mana sac kill... or 1 mana -/+ 2/2 instants.

♥♥♥♥♥ crazy these days.

Originally posted by kingjames488:

Originally posted by Kolarahidumgarabashtelarimdugarn:

I prefer winning due to my skill rather than due to opponent forgetting about some fine print on a card. But everyone is free to have own preferences.

the discussion isn't about winning though, it's about if the game should have an indication for every conceivable thing.

but this is indeed the disucssion I'm bringing up. because I dont think it should.

Reach isnt an 'active' thing. its not constantly impacting others any more than pact weapon...

when they had the card whos affect activated flash a red border... that probably was fine even though I figured it was annoying. people still needed to look to figure out the details of what actually was going on but it didnt arbitrarily show some things and not other things. Magic has a LOT of abilities floating around these days... its not really feasible to make big glowy emblem art for all of them (especially overlaying glowy emblems).
especially especially since theres lots of ways to add abilities.

it's a mess... A mess I'd rather not see.

[kingjames488]

Originally posted by Shinoskay:

Originally posted by kingjames488:

the discussion isn't about winning though, it's about if the game should have an indication for every conceivable thing.

but this is indeed the disucssion I'm bringing up.

oh sorry to give you the benefit of the doubt then... you're just bad at the game.

[Shinoskay]

Originally posted by kingjames488:

Originally posted by Shinoskay:

but this is indeed the disucssion I'm bringing up.

oh sorry to give you the benefit of the doubt then... you're just bad at the game.

XD if you say so bro... I've dominated plenty of times... magic the gathering online was my favorite.... madness was an amazing mechanic. couple it with a sac and take control deck.... throw some karn... everything becomes YOUR resource. their hand, their graveyard, their exile, sometimes even their library.

nah man. I've kicked ass a many times. but you, you are the one quitting because you think you beat magic the gathering. *shrug

[kingjames488]

Originally posted by Shinoskay:

Originally posted by kingjames488:

oh sorry to give you the benefit of the doubt then... you're just bad at the game.

XD if you say so bro... I've dominated plenty of times... magic the gathering online was my favorite.... madness was an amazing mechanic. couple it with a sac and take control deck.... throw some karn... everything becomes YOUR resource. their hand, their graveyard, their exile, sometimes even their library.

nah man. I've kicked ass a many times. but you, you are the one quitting because you think you beat magic the gathering. *shrug

what do I need to do? pay 12 grand for a black lotus?

the game obviously isn't what it used to be and I've beaten what it is now... maybe foundations will be different... I sure hope so because duckmourn was cheasy and easy.

my deck had like... must have been 90+% winrate til I stated running into people with decks that are almost totally mythic planeswankers.