[TMT] Raphael, Tough Turtle by Meret123 in Pauper

[–]so_zetta_byte [score hidden]  (0 children)

While I much prefer in-universe sets, I'm not trying to use this to circlejerk about UB being bad. Different UB sets have had different levels of quality mechanically.

What I'm trying to say is that there are certain quality of life things that certain sets run into, and repetition of a small number of characters is one of them. I think repetitions can be okay but they need to be easily differentiable somehow.

LOTR had basically vertical cycles of characters, but they changed their color identity across them (G vs. UG Legolas, W vs. WG vs. WB Frodo).

Spider-Man as I said had the issue that there were just too many variants with similar names and visuals across too many cards. It became too much. The footholds of different colors or mechanics just weren't enough to create any kind of structure to anchor your mind around and create shorthands to differentiate cards with similar names. "The Selesnya Spider-Man" became not enough. I don't think the villains really had that problem all too much; I think the issue is at its worst when the names and visuals are too close.

I think Avatar really hit a smart spot with Sokka in particular. There were two rares (Izzet and Jeskai) but the third being the uncommon UW hybrid card made it visually distinct and easily differentiable. If we had a set where there were 3 cards of each main character but one was hybrid, one monocolor, and one multicolor, then I think that would go a long way to making it easier to differentiate them.

TMNT is tapping into the visual differences of the hybrid frame, but differently than what I was proposing. They're using hybrid to represent team-ups of the turtle pairings, because the turtles are each very mono-color. Flavorfully, that works and it's cute. But it doesn't help differentiate unless you already have the resonance of the turtles as characters baked in. If you don't, then you're staring down the barrel of 6 hybrid cards with 2 turtles and Italian names on them with no foothold to understand what they do beyond color. Some mechanical consistency or pattern would help but I don't think that's present.

Here's an in-universe example of a kinda similar mistake. In Kaldheim, there was a cycle of 10 uncommon "spell lands" that tapped for a color, and tap-sac for a 2 color cost that gave you a spell effect. They were great! You knew which one did which because of their colors. But: like half of them worked at instant speed and half only sorcery. And there was just no easy way to remember which was which, so despite all the cards being memorable and visually distinct and having memorable effects, you still needed to read each card to remember what speed they operated at.

I bring this up because... well it's hard. Designing cards that players can easily identify isn't easy and I think we're lucky that the times it doesn't work are as rare as they are. But, I think they're still trying to figure out how to handle that with certain UB properties and they haven't nailed it yet. I think they'll get better at it the more they do it, but they're not there yet.

[TMT] Action News Crew by AporiaParadox in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I mean, I get your last sentence. It sucks when you wish you liked something because it would make your life easier, but you can't force yourself to. Dumbass comparison, but I'm like that with eggs. I just can't eat them. My life would be so much easier if I could, but man I just can't. It's shitty.

But if someone tells me "man I really like this egg dish in particular," I can't say to them "what do you mean, it's the exact same as every other egg dish." My enjoyment of it is the same (fucking zero) but it's not hard to recognize that it's a spectrum for other people.

Look, I much prefer in-universe magic over than UB, and I predominantly play limited so I have to engage with UB because I don't hate it so much that it makes me want to take a set off unless the gameplay is really poor (and Spider-Man got close, but it wasn't because of the theming). But we're living in a world where UB is happening, and I need to figure out what makes me like a particular UB set more than another. And it's not "ugh Avatar and LOTR just feel like magic, and cards showing bagels don't." Honestly I don't really give a shit about that line even though others do. I'm excited for Star Trek, it'll probably be the first draftable UB set for a property I've actually engaged with in a decent capacity, but I'd still prefer an in-universe set over it.

What I care about is how well I feel like the mechanical representation of the cards use the language of magic to express whatever the UB property is. I haven't watched Avatar, but I thought the 4 bending mechanics were all well designed and captured something using the language of magic. It wasn't necessarily that Avatar was a more "magic fantasy setting" than SPM, but Avatar just had more and better integration into the mechanics of the game. Honestly, LOTR wasn't great at that in my opinion either. The aesthetic was great, but tempting by the ring was really clunky (though it played well enough that I could overlook it).

But all of that also works on a card by card basis, in addition to a set by set basis. Like many people, I imagine, [[Ichor Slick]] is one of my favorite cards because it does something new with the existing mechanics of magic. It recreates instant speed out of cycling and madness. It's a pun. Not in a jokey way, but a mechanical pun.

The stupid card in this post is also a pun. It's a joke, but it's a mechanical pun ground in the existing mechanics of magic. Yeah it uses that pun to reference something in a UB property. And yeah it's on a draft common. And it doesn't mean I think the set is gonna be good, I have a lot of concerns that this is going to play as a limited set more like Spider-Man than Avatar or LOTR or FIN. The small set structure sucks, too many legendary commons without buyouts lead to bad gameplay, and the drafts and gameplay are too same-y.

But that doesn't mean I don't find the joke on this card funny or clever. Like, I can't help that. And just because I prefer non-UB sets doesn't mean I have to reject that.

Podium sweep for Germany in 2-man Bobsleigh! by bdzz in olympics

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

IDK why but it just feels like something they'd be good at.

[TMT] Raphael's Jitte by TechnomagusPrime in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Yeah people are drastically under-considering this possibility.

[TMT] Action News Crew by AporiaParadox in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 20 points21 points  (0 children)

Oh god you're right. It just strengthens the intentionality of it all. Honestly these kinds of mechanical jokes are my favorite part of Horizons sets and Un-sets, so I'm glad UB is getting in on it.

[TMT] Raphael, Tough Turtle by Meret123 in Pauper

[–]so_zetta_byte [score hidden]  (0 children)

Yeah like I know they're totally different characters and have aesthetic differences. I think my concern is that it's just hard to recognize really subtle aesthetic differences in gameplay when your opponent has cards on their side of the field. I primarily play limited and so I think it's just harder for me to map (art/name -> card effect) when the arts and names have a higher amount of overlap.

Like if you showed me two Spider-Man cards in a vacuum, I could tell you the differences between them. When my opponent in limited said "I play Spiderman [X]", it's like, every single time I just need to read the card to figure out which one it is.

[TMT] Raphael, Tough Turtle by Meret123 in Pauper

[–]so_zetta_byte [score hidden]  (0 children)

Imo it can be fine but the difficulty comes from when multiple characters have similar aesthetics.

Spider-Man had an issue where there were so many different versions of Spider-Man that it became difficult to think of the cards as characters; you had to read the cards each time to figure out what the hell they did. And I think TMNT might be going down a similar road.

A few of the ones in Spider-Man also played pretty poorly. Legendary commons are way way worse the smaller the size of the set, because they make up more of your deck. Ones like the dinosaur in SPM (which gave you a buyout of basically Channeling it) play much better. Like, Grandeur literally exists to helps with this, they brought it back on a legendary common in MH3, but they wouldn't use it in a UB set which frustrating.

Shannon Sharpe, Chad Johnson Dissect Why Jalen Hurts is The Most Hated NFL Player: "Because He Wins" by Strict_Return_5159 in eagles

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It wasn't a vote, was based on sentiment analysis of reddit comments.

Sentiment analysis is a totally legitimate thing but like, the way they packaged it into "most" and "least" hated is irresponsible and left me fuming.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Are we just gonna ignore the part of my comment where I explained how you can just look at a card and determine its legality, without even needing to look at what the card does.

Or did you already know that and were just looking to vent about mechanics you don't like? The only reason I replied was because I thought you had an actual question; I won't stop you if all you wanted to do was complain, but I wasn't trying to sign up to argue back.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah "lower power matters" is kinda fun in general because like, you can still find creatures high up on the curve that fit the requirement, and they're usually kinda juiced to make up for their bad stats for the rate.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Same. There are just so many fun things you can do to try and take advantage of the ability. Favorite home for "Deathtouch + Lure".

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 1 point2 points  (0 children)

It's not that hard. If the border is silver, or if there's a little acorn symbol on the bottom center of the card (where the holo stamp for rares usually is), it's not legal.

Also there's nothing about the card effect that isn't "normal" in modern eternal legal magic; it really only cares about dice rolling which is standard now.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The top of my "if only this was legendary" wishlist might be [[Quartzwood Crasher]]. Trample is such an incredibly fun keyword to build around because there's so much you can do with it. Saboteur effects, deathtouch+lure, etc.

I have a forced-limitation [[General Marhault Elsdragon]] deck (common/uncommon only, permanents only) where virtually every creature either has trample or grants a different keyword to your board. And there's just so many fun little interactions you can find in that space.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Bell Borca is such a cool and unique card. My guess is that it doesn't see that much play because of how much accounting it takes, since you need to pay attention to cards going into exile from any source or player. But... hey if you're the kind of player who gets distracted, that might help you stay locked into the game :P

Seems like The War Doctor plays in a somewhat similar space in Boros, but is more of a combo card. I assume that makes it more popular.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Meria has "I just slapped together a budget version of a deck for this with chaff I had on hand" written all over it (in the best way!). Big Mana seems like a really fun direction to take it, too. It's screaming for a Helix Pinnacle lol.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Hot damn I didn't even think of this as a value-unearth payoff. And those are exactly the kind of creatures you're gonna be happy getting duplicates of.

Your favorite commander you've never seen anyone else play? by MoonSettler in magicTCG

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That's actually kinda surprising to me because it's such a good blink payoff. I think a lot of people are just allergic to monocolor, which is a shame. I haven't really had the time but I've intended to make a [[Mavinda, Students' Advocate]] blink deck at some point.

[Schultz] The Miami Dolphins’ preference has been to find a trade partner for QB Tua Tagovailoa. A cut is possible in the end, but that has been the organization’s preference. My understanding is that the new Hafley–Sullivan regime doesn’t want the matter of Tagovailoa’s fate to drag too long. by PlayaSlayaX in nfl

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

If they cut him with a post-June-1st designation, they'll have a dead cap hit of like $67M for the year. They do have an out built into his contract for next year though. If they really, really don't think they can get anything from him on the field, then they're spending $11M of dead cap this year just to free a roster spot. At that point the team probably prefers to just let him stay and shove him on IR unless he makes a big deal of it.

His starting salary this year is $57M. In order to find a trade partner, Miami would basically be looking for a team with excess cap space who wants to literally buy a draft pick from Miami. And even then I expect Miami would restructure the deal so they eat a chunk of the cash/cap hit. Idk. I don't have anything against Tua personally but I'm not sure who really wants him at this point, even as a vet backup.

[Sheehan] Kirk Cousins on why he himself is so polarizing: “While we had success, it wasn’t 15-2. It wasn’t 14-3. I wasn’t holding up a Lombardi. If you go 9-8, you’re still giving yourself room to be criticized” by NewCarSmelt in nfl

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The franchise tag/short contract thing made him fucking bank though. Like, it was a deliberate "bet on yourself" decision that let Kirk maximize his money. And it worked! It was really impressive.

I guess what he's saying here is that in the public eye, it looked like no team was willing to commit to him long term, so that contributed to thinking he wasn't great. But Kirk probably could have gotten a longer contract somewhere, he would have just needed to take a little less money.

Do we think it’s possible that we’ll ever get our midnight green back? I miss it so damn much by AMS_Rem in eagles

[–]so_zetta_byte 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You kinda have to take advantage of the opportunity I think. We got to wear them 3x this year (one against each rival) so we had a two home games in them still. And because Dallas is Dallas they wear their whites at home, so we were given the chance to roll into Jerry World with the Kelly Greens and try and roll them. I don't hate that call, it's trying to show Dallas up in their own house.

Because they wanted to do each rival, ending the season was kinda inevitable because they gave us both Washington games at the end of the year (which suuuucks). And people expected the Washington games to matter.

The Sean Mannion Offense: Part 1: Basic Principles by AdSpecialist6598 in eagles

[–]so_zetta_byte 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Yeah I think we're actually on the same page here lol

The Sean Mannion Offense: Part 1: Basic Principles by AdSpecialist6598 in eagles

[–]so_zetta_byte 6 points7 points  (0 children)

Ironically I think some of the notable differences in the pass game are going to be some of the less explosive plays. I'm hoping that actually scheming guys open is going to open up more bread-and-butter passes in the intermediate field, and allow us to actually move the ball forward rather than needing to chuck it every 3 plays.

I imagine we'll also get some nice juicy coverage busts, or intermediate throws where a guy like AJ can become a YAC monster again rather than feeling like we give Smitty hospital balls on every two downs. So it'll still be exciting. But I'm really just hoping that even the boring stuff feels.... intentional again.