A Veteran Paper Player's Thoughts On This Game

[swagen2167]

First some background so I'm not just some noob new to Magic.

I started playing around Revised. I think it was late 1994. I graduated from Standard to Legacy when Standard started to bore me. Was able to hold my own against most opponents and won quite a few tournaments. Okay, I know how to play Magic.

So far, I'm finding playing this game itself easy. I win most of my matches. Of course I run into a lot of opponents who seem to scoop, sometimes before they even play a land. I'm not sure I understand that, but whatever.

For the most part, I like this game. Of course I love playing Magic itself so I am quite biased.

Having said that, there are things about this game that bug me a little. Not enough to stop playing but enough that I felt the need to vent just a little.

1. It's obvious that opening hands are somewhat rigged. People here call it hand smoothing. I call it a shame. Not every hand should be playable. Sometimes, in the real world, you just get no land or too much land. That doesn't happen here. Some people would say that's a good thing. I'm not so sure I agree. Deciding whether or not to mulligan should be harder than it is here. I had to mulligan ONCE in all the games I've played. I think a realistic hand draw based on real probability and not on some algo would make this a better game,

2. The reward system discourages playing this game a lot. I sometimes run out of things to shoot for early in the day long before I want to stop playing. But what's the point when a win gets you nothing at some point?

3. The rewards themselves, for free players, are almost meaningless. With all the cards I've won (most early on) only 2 were worth putting in my RW deck and those 2 marginally made the deck better. In fact, it's arguable if they even DID make the deck better. As they are one ofs, I've yet to use them. Mostly because this deck is so fast that the game ends usually before those cards are even drawn, let alone cast.

4. Then there is the player base itself. Sometimes I get the feeling that I'm playing against a bot. Two matches today, it took way too much time for them to decide whether to mulligan or not. And the one player scooped on his turn before he even played a card and even knew what I was playing. This leads me to believe that they know that most decks in this format (Standard) are very fast. In my experience, they are lightning fast. Some are even faster than my deck. The ramp I've seen on some of these decks is insane. Point is, I've played some matches where I didn't feel I deserved to win based on how quickly some players quit.

Having said all that, Magic The Gathering has been my favorite game for over 30 years. I have some good memories. I spent a lot of money on cards and at one point owned every legal Legacy top tier deck. Those were incredibly fun days. Every week I would bring a different deck to our Legacy shop. When they closed, I cried. Literally.

I eventually sold all my cards for a crap ton of money simply because there was no place left to play around me. I don't even know what the state of Magic is these days as I haven't really followed either the Standard or Legacy meta in a long time. I'd like to think the game is still healthy but it wouldn't surprise me to find out it's not. Like I said, I'm biased but I can understand if people don't like the current Standard meta. Some of these decks are insane. I don't think the best Legacy decks could keep up with them.

In closing, I think the reward system needs to be seriously revamped so as not to discourage f2p players. Though it is doubtful that will ever happen.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on all this. What I said that you agree with as well as what I said that you don't agree with.

[anaris]

also I have multiple decks I love including the one I play in Diamond with and I've got like 400 hours over four months lol it definitely doesn't take a year

[SaltyWeasel]

Nguyên văn bởi Kurt Angle's Neck:

Nguyên văn bởi SupaFly:

Wouldn't it just make more since to base line fairness instead of hand smoothing here and not there?

The idea behind it is that in an unranked Bo1 environment, where conceding doesn't have any cost, a lot of players are going to just scoop if they have an opening hand that sucks, so the smoother was implemented to significantly reduce the amount of times that happens.

Which is an other word for rigging the game, but anyways aren't you the person that keeps saying that the game isn't rigged? What happened to that statement?

[anaris]

"rigged" in Kurt's discourse means something like "unfairly structured so that certain people are more or less likely to win than others".

It would be hard to imagine any other meaning for it, tbh. "fairly prevents nongames for both players" is not rigging in any sensible sense. At no point has his position been anything even close to "the hand smoother doesn't exist", as you imply.

[$tump]

Nguyên văn bởi swagen2167:

First some background so I'm not just some noob new to Magic.

I started playing around Revised. I think it was late 1994. I graduated from Standard to Legacy when Standard started to bore me. Was able to hold my own against most opponents and won quite a few tournaments. Okay, I know how to play Magic.

So far, I'm finding playing this game itself easy. I win most of my matches. Of course I run into a lot of opponents who seem to scoop, sometimes before they even play a land. I'm not sure I understand that, but whatever.

For the most part, I like this game. Of course I love playing Magic itself so I am quite biased.

Having said that, there are things about this game that bug me a little. Not enough to stop playing but enough that I felt the need to vent just a little.

1. It's obvious that opening hands are somewhat rigged. People here call it hand smoothing. I call it a shame. Not every hand should be playable. Sometimes, in the real world, you just get no land or too much land. That doesn't happen here. Some people would say that's a good thing. I'm not so sure I agree. Deciding whether or not to mulligan should be harder than it is here. I had to mulligan ONCE in all the games I've played. I think a realistic hand draw based on real probability and not on some algo would make this a better game,

2. The reward system discourages playing this game a lot. I sometimes run out of things to shoot for early in the day long before I want to stop playing. But what's the point when a win gets you nothing at some point?

3. The rewards themselves, for free players, are almost meaningless. With all the cards I've won (most early on) only 2 were worth putting in my RW deck and those 2 marginally made the deck better. In fact, it's arguable if they even DID make the deck better. As they are one ofs, I've yet to use them. Mostly because this deck is so fast that the game ends usually before those cards are even drawn, let alone cast.

4. Then there is the player base itself. Sometimes I get the feeling that I'm playing against a bot. Two matches today, it took way too much time for them to decide whether to mulligan or not. And the one player scooped on his turn before he even played a card and even knew what I was playing. This leads me to believe that they know that most decks in this format (Standard) are very fast. In my experience, they are lightning fast. Some are even faster than my deck. The ramp I've seen on some of these decks is insane. Point is, I've played some matches where I didn't feel I deserved to win based on how quickly some players quit.

Having said all that, Magic The Gathering has been my favorite game for over 30 years. I have some good memories. I spent a lot of money on cards and at one point owned every legal Legacy top tier deck. Those were incredibly fun days. Every week I would bring a different deck to our Legacy shop. When they closed, I cried. Literally.

I eventually sold all my cards for a crap ton of money simply because there was no place left to play around me. I don't even know what the state of Magic is these days as I haven't really followed either the Standard or Legacy meta in a long time. I'd like to think the game is still healthy but it wouldn't surprise me to find out it's not. Like I said, I'm biased but I can understand if people don't like the current Standard meta. Some of these decks are insane. I don't think the best Legacy decks could keep up with them.

In closing, I think the reward system needs to be seriously revamped so as not to discourage f2p players. Though it is doubtful that will ever happen.

I'm curious to hear your thoughts on all this. What I said that you agree with as well as what I said that you don't agree with.

I just came to say; Fix Mana.
It's amazing to have a balanced 40% mana deck and play for hours only to have repeat mana floods, and after an hour of playing the flood ends to becomes an hour drought for the next 6 games. There is absolutely no sense in the shuffling in this game, and at times it feels like the enemy is cheating with how poor climb rate is on these shuffles.

I have no quams losing games repeatidly, but to have a short session of good matchs sandwhiched with hours of floods and droughts is plain rediculous. The games fun when the mana doesn't play you...

END THE PAY WALL FOR MANA
-we all see it and are aware of it, and it is obviously ruining the game.

[Zlehtnoba]

I'm at a loss to understand you. What paywall? On Arena, lands cost a wildcard, same as any other card. And what has this perceived paywall got to do with mana flood/draught? I can see better lands making your mana base better when you draw them, but not mitigate draught (the cycling ones can help with flood).

[anaris]

tbf two and three colour manabase is expensive in terms of wildcards, but since wildcards are available for free and decks are matched based on the depth and quality of their manabase among other things, it's never been a major problem for me. I ran an aggro deck with all taplands when I first started, it worked just fine.

[swagen2167]

Nguyên văn bởi anaris:

also I have multiple decks I love including the one I play in Diamond with and I've got like 400 hours over four months lol it definitely doesn't take a year

Let me make something clear and I probably should have clarified this from the start. I personally don't have a problem with this game. I got a whole bunch of cards for free so it's difficult to complain about free cards. The problem is with building a specific deck where you have to buy certain cards. Go look at what those cards cost on Ebay and then go look at what they cost here. IMO, they're not worth it. And yes, it's just my opinion. The bottom line is this. If I want to compete here, I need to spend a lot of time playing. You talk about 400 hours like it's nothing. Right now I have about 20 hours in this game. You have any idea how long it'll take me to make 400 hours. Unlike some people, I have a life and other things to do. I can't sit here all day playing magic. Anyway, this is all moot. The system is what it is and it's not going to change. So there's no point in complaining about it.

[anaris]

Go look at what those cards cost on Ebay and then go look at what they cost here

Ebay: 100000 dollars
here: free

what's the problem exactly?

[anaris]

Nguyên văn bởi swagen2167:

Unlike some people, I have a life and other things to do. I can't sit here all day playing magic.

...i play like two hours every three days

[T1g3r]

MTGO > MTG Arena

Upcoming Aetherdrift set looks fire

I suggest playing EDH (or maybe also Vintage draft from time to time) on MTGO

[Gryfn]

Nguyên văn bởi anaris:

tbf two and three colour manabase is expensive in terms of wildcards, but since wildcards are available for free and decks are matched based on the depth and quality of their manabase among other things, it's never been a major problem for me. I ran an aggro deck with all taplands when I first started, it worked just fine.

I looked at the spreadsheet with the weights at the time. Rare lands that only produce mana like the Ravnica shock lands (Hallowed Fountain, Steam Vents, Stomping Ground, etc.) were given 0 weight. Basic lands were also weighted 0.

Remember that MMR + deck strength is used for matchmaking purposes in bo1 Play (Unranked) and Brawl formats. Deck strength is NOT used in bo3 or Ranked (bo1 or bo3).

[anaris]

Nguyên văn bởi Gryfn:

I looked at the spreadsheet with the weights at the time.

they're only applicable to brawl, we don't know if the same weights are used for other formats. brawl is super slow and a lot of play occurs when one has like ten lands on the field, so they're not as powerful/necessary.

Remember that MMR + deck strength is used for matchmaking purposes in bo1 Play (Unranked) and Brawl formats. Deck strength is NOT used in bo3 or Ranked (bo1 or bo3).

So? you can't win ranked timeless when u first start but that doesn't mean you can't play the game at all.

[Gryfn]

First, the matchmaking we're discussing today only applies to the Best-of-One play queues (and occasional pass events, like Midweek Magic, where you get to play for a timed duration instead of a set number of matches), and does not apply to Ranked play, Best-of-Three play, premier events, or events that have win/loss targets.
...
For Brawl (and Standard Brawl), the system looks at both your Commander and your deck, roughly evaluates the combined power level, with an emphasis on the Commander, and then tries to match you against decks of similar power level. If it is taking too long to find a good match, the system periodically increases the acceptable power level discrepancies until you are paired. As a rule of thumb, we're hoping players are never waiting more than a minute or two for a match. For non-Brawl matches, the process is the same, but without the commander.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/mtg-arena/mtg-arena-announcements-june-3-2024

The thing that stood out was the weighting of the commanders. The strongest commanders (like Teferi, Hero of Dominaria) were weighted at 1800, whereas the strongest non-commander cards were weighted at 45. Cards like Teferi, Hero of Dominaria which could be a commander and a non-commander had a commander and a non-commander weighting of 1800 and 45 respectively.

[anaris]

Nguyên văn bởi Gryfn:

First, the matchmaking we're discussing today only applies to the Best-of-One play queues (and occasional pass events, like Midweek Magic, where you get to play for a timed duration instead of a set number of matches), and does not apply to Ranked play, Best-of-Three play, premier events, or events that have win/loss targets.
...
For Brawl (and Standard Brawl), the system looks at both your Commander and your deck, roughly evaluates the combined power level, with an emphasis on the Commander, and then tries to match you against decks of similar power level. If it is taking too long to find a good match, the system periodically increases the acceptable power level discrepancies until you are paired. As a rule of thumb, we're hoping players are never waiting more than a minute or two for a match. For non-Brawl matches, the process is the same, but without the commander.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/news/mtg-arena/mtg-arena-announcements-june-3-2024

The thing that stood out was the weighting of the commanders. The strongest commanders (like Teferi, Hero of Dominaria) were weighted at 1800, whereas the strongest non-commander cards were weighted at 45. In a normal non-commander deck, cards like Teferi, Hero of Dominaria were weighted as 45. So cards like Teferi, Hero of Dominaria which could be a commander and a non-commander had a commander and a non-commander weighting.

You have badly misread what that says.

[anaris]

hint: "the process" is not "the values derived from testing in an artificial situation in brawl".

I am not quite sure why you're bringing up the specific numbers; it's pretty clear that the 100 and the commander aren't weighted on the same scale but that's not really relevant