Why we are disappointed in Ixalan's cards

Magic: The Gathering - Puzzle Quest MtGPQ General Discussion
1

First, I appreciate the efforts that Oktagon has put in to try to get their hands around someone else’s coding/mechanics/etc. Also, love the communication and willingness to make changes to try to create a more fun experience (6 hour recharges on RotGP anyone?). I also realize this is their first foray into MTGPQ, so perhaps we should give them a bit of a break.

But I couldn’t help but notice some really disappointing aspects of the new Ixalan set. This post is intended to help them better understand the game design from players perspectives.

  • Our approach to rarity is one in which the gap in power between Masterpieces and Mythics should be close to one another, same as the Rare/Mythic gap with the real difference being the variation in complexity and mechanics. The higher we move up the rarity pole, the cards’ abilities get more interesting, however they are not necessarily stronger in a vacuum.
  • Stat-wise (Power/Toughness/Shield), cards in the top brackets of rarity should be somewhat stronger than commons and uncommons, but not with a gap as large as we have today.
    Did they execute?

Colossal Dreadmaw
Common for 17 mana, 6/6 with trample

Charging Monstrosaur
Uncommon for 17 mana, 6/6 with trample and haste

Burning Sun’s Avatar
Mythic for 17 mana, 6/6, NO TRAMPLE OR HASTE, and deals 3 dmg to opponent and one creature on ETB

They made the rare card worse than the common card. Even though they scaled the creatures cost up from 6 in paper to 18 in PQ they left is’ power, toughness, and ETB effects exactly the same. You guys do realize that the average PW has more like 100 life and the average creature played probably has a body of 2-3X those in paper. I mean honestly… even if you want to keep him at a 6/6 you need to have his ETB effects do 2-3X more damage to make him playable.

This seems like the same type of error that Hibernium would make. They scale one thing but don’t scale the other relative to the game

  1. Not understanding basic features:

Vigilance: Ok, some of you will argue that you can give things first strike to make Vigilance a positive for cards like Vona, Butcher of Magan and Gishath, Sun’s Avatar. I think its a bad argument because there are plenty of other big creatures with blocking or vigilance where you don’t want to rely on enablers to be at risk.. But can someone please explain to me Glorifier of Dusk?

Glorfier of Dusk: Activate 2 white: This Creature Gains Vigilance until end of turn. Lose 1 life.

Yes, you gain blocking… UNTIL THE END OF YOUR TURN??? At least it only costs 1 life…

  1. Three creature limit:

Specifically in relation to the vampires in this set. They are trying to fix the problem of 3 creature limits by introducing more things that enable reinforcements.. but does this get the job done? Not at all. Because the ramp from creatures such as Marven Fein is way too slow. Because now a single remover acts like a sweeper. If the token stack caused reinforcement based on the tokens reinforcement the card would be interesting and good. but still beatable… in its current state it is utterly bad.

Other cards show the same issue in this set.

  1. The total bombs that occasionally show.

River’s Rebuke - Return all creatures and non-land supports to their owners hand and double their cost. - You now gave blue (who is weak against supports) the strongest support sweeper in the entire game.

Legion’s Judgement - You gave white a kill spell that is nearly as good as the masterpiece Vindicate for all practical purposes.

Anyway… this is not the post I wanted to make after the set reveal. I was prepared to defend Oktagon and support the removal of power creep. But there are many many cards that just show a lack of understanding about the metagame of PQ, or frankly even the basic functionality and gameplay. Here is to hoping you guys can get it together soon.

2

I read it as increase the cost by 2 mana, not double.

3

Ah true, but honestly the cost increase is nearly irrelevant.. its a 1-sided sweeper of both creatures AND supports in blue…

4

Take my creatures, taking away all my supports is just devastating.

Edit: I’m not surprised that a blue card is once again the strongest card in a set. Seems like it took paper magic a long time to reign in blue’s power level.

5

River’s Rebuke removing supports is an utter travesty. The card should be removed from the set. It will be a complete menace. It goes against everything that blue is supposed to be about.

Legion’s Judgement is in the same vein. You cannot give white a card like that. It goes against the fundamentals of what White is about.

Oktagon, what were you thinking?

6

River’s Rebuke is accurate to the paper version, which returns all non-land permanents to a targeted player’s hand. I couldn’t find the other one easily enough to check it too.

7

Legion’s Judgement is destroy a creature 4 or bigger in paper, so a fair translation. White has always had some removal.

8

White has Humble the Brute, Smite the Monstrous, Declaration in Stone, Anguished Unmaking, and Skywhaler’s Shot. The common theme is that they are all costed much higher than removal in other colors and often come with some penalty. Legion’s Judgement throws that out and brings down the cost to red/black territory. I don’t like an out of tenor card.

In paper you might have a way in blue to deal with permanents but here blue does not. It’s a weakness and a good one. It’s bad to mess with the fundamental power balances. Blue is too strong already giving it support removal is not good for the game. Kiora decks in the hands of the AI with River’s Rebuke will be unfair and unfun to play against. Just watch.

9

The paper card is 2w which is cheaper than most black removal. It probably should have been 6 or 7, but it’s not crazy underpriced. The problem is, they jacked up creature costs and left removal cheap. Not balanced.

10

River’s Rebuke is possibly the strongest card in the set. Something like HUF was for HOU (really? red getting free spells didn’t feel right, although I have stopped playing paper MtG years ago). First I had read it as return all creatures and supports to owner’s hand and if that was the case, would be good but not broken, as it would also affect the caster. The way it is, really a card that gets an entry in almost all (to not say all) blue decks.

That said, I’m not THAT worried, because most support based decks are (guess what) blue, so you can always nulify it (with Insidious Will, Jace’s Defeat, etc.), disrupt its mana (plenty options), force opponent to discard (using black), etc. I would like to see the effec of this card in game first. Crush of Tentacles return all creatures already and gives a 16/16 with Reach for around the same cost, and I have never seen it played against me (of course, it’s a mythic from legacy, so chances are smaller).

Legion’s Judgement doesn’t really worry me at all. Of course it’s a good card. But it’s just a creature removal. White is supposed (like said, have stopped playing paper MtG years ago, so this could have changed) to be the 2nd best color about creature removals (after black - attention, direct damage is red related, but not really creature removal, as damage may be insufficient), and I see it fits the other cards we have. Like:

Skywhaler’s shot (13): creature 3+ power + draw.
Smite the monstrous (8): creature 4+ power, legacy
Humble the Brute (8): Creature 6+ power + possible draw, legacy
Declaration in Stone (10): any creature + possible draw for opponent, legacy.
Legion’s (5): creature 6+ power

Not really considering Unmaking in the comparison, as it also adds support destruction to black.

Fact is: white needs more removals for standard. This is a good one. Would work for 7, maybe 6. So, it’s a very good card for 5, even more being a common. Broken? No. Problem? No. I would let it be.

11

Aaaand here we go again. From the most underwhelming set in the short history of mtgpq, we still managed to pick the few good cards (a very rare sight in this set) and go overboard about how they are too powerful. I blame comments like those for the current fiasco. (that and devs inability to wrap their heads around this game’s card design)

There’s already mass support removal in the game. We will survive River’s Rebuke. As for it not being blue… well it is technically bounce.

12

I’m really not worried about cards that are too strong like River’s Rebuke. There have to be powerful cards and sometimes maybe absurdly so. Something like Glorifier of Dusk (that no one else came back to) worries me much more. Like you tried to explain, its first ability essentially doesn’t do anything but lose you life. How can a card like this happen? Burning Sun’s Avatar is a similar case for a card transported to this game as if its paper magic. A single 3 damage to your opponent is nothing in MTGPQ and even less something you pay 17 mana for on a mythic. I wouldn’t say it’s worse than the common but worse than the uncommon at least because haste is more relevant than trample.

13

Cards are overcosted compared to what existing standard/legacy cards already do.
River’s Rebuke is totally fine and we need something similar for black.
Lack of support removal makes Mono blue and mono black PWs not competitive and extremely unreliable in this game.
@ZW2007 Blue is not the strongest when its mono. Facing a mono black or blue is free in both standard and legacy. Playing them is risky due to support removal disadvantage (a big one). For this reason, its hard for instance to chose Jace 2 over kiora, saheli or dovin despite good mana gain and abilities.

14

Another thing though. For all their talks of explore and enrage and merfolks caring about buffed creatures, I don’t see that many cards with those key words. I dont see any terribly interesting cards designed around those mechanics. What happened devs? What was that all about?

15

I honestly don’t know that they could even make a card that some of you would consider overpowered. Blue has always been intentionally deprived of good support control because it excels in so many other areas. Now they have the best support removal in the entire game, as a rare. Would we consider it OP if it also had cycling 1 and convert 20 gems to blue if you cycle this card? And no mono-color walkers see play in virtually any event. Why would you ever choose a mono-walker above a dual or tri unless they have far better loyalty/mana gains. By definition you wouldn’t because you are restricting your own card pool.

But, we have gone down a rabbit hole. The core point is the developers seem to completely not understand the differences between PQ and the paper version, nor have a fundamental understanding of PQ’s mechanics or meta-game. I just don’t understand how this can be the case… @Oktagon would you like to join us on one of the slack/discord servers to actually get some constructive conversation going? Must we have this giant gap between players and developers that results in time wasted and disillusionment ?

16

This is a brilliant idea, and would go a very long way in proving to the player base that you are listening.

17

Elite/Masterpeice cards are the most rare in the game. Many long time players still don’t have a single one. I don’t know a single player who has even half of these cards. They are also throwbacks to some of the best and most exciting cards in MTG history. These cards should be equally as exciting to play in PQ! Yet, before the Ixalan release many of these cards were awful to the point of unplayable. (Lightning Greaves, Sunder, Counterspell, etc)

With the release of Ixalan we get 10 more generally AWFUL elite cards. I will walk through the biggest offenders and give insight into how I think they could be adjusted to make them viable but not overpowered.

  1. Aether Vial: (7 mana - colorless- support) At the beggining of your turn, this support gains 1 shield. At the end of your turn, the first creature in your hand gains mana equal to this supports shield. Destroy this support when you cast a creature.
    Problem: Unless this card comes into the battlefield with 7+ shields on it, there are very few circumstances where it would be decent. It is susceptible to support removal, gem matching, etc. And the payoff is 1 creature before it self destructs… Most times it would be better just to put the 7 mana towards the actual creature. Also, the effect at the end of turn makes it even worse.

Solution: Don’t have it self destruct. It would then be like an accelerating shrine/pyramid that only adds mana to creatures. You could focus on controlling the board state while working towards getting creatures onto the battlefield. A solid, somewhat niche, but interesting design.

2.Curse of Predation: (13 mana - green - support) Whenever a creature you control deals damage to your opponent, that creature gets +1/+1 and this support loses 1 shield.

Problem: The +1/+1 addition to each creature is miniscule in a format where PWs and creatures have so much life. Additionally, there is no reason for these counters to cause shields to be removed. No idea why this support self destructs.

Solution: Increase the damage counters from +1/+1 to +3/+3 and remove the self-destruction feature. This could be a cool ramping support for a green tokens/weenies deck. Solid but not OP by any means.

  1. Electrolyze: (7 mana - blue/red - spell) - Deal 2 damage to target creature then deal 2 damage to that creature for each time it was reinforced. Perform this action 2 times, then draw a card.

Problem: The language is a bit confusing but I am assuming the first copy does not count as “reinforced” Thus, it will do 4 damage to a creature that has not been reinforced. That is way too little damage to kill most of the creatures that people actually play… not even remotely masterpeice quality and will likely never get played. (It is far better to run Galestrike to bounce the creature to the opponents hand and draw a card, which is an uncommon for 6 mana)

Solution: Make it worthy of masterpeice status. Make it do 8 damage + 8 damage per reinforce + draw a card. An interesting red blue kill spell that isn’t concerned about a 2-3 stack of Avaricious Dragon, unlike most red removal.

  1. Fluterstorm: (14 mana - colorless - support): At the end of your opponent’s turn, drain 2 mana from all the cards in your oponent’s hand for each card you played last turn and this support loses 1 shield.

Problem: Where do I start? Draining 2 mana is practically nothing, rarely will any card but the first have mana to drain, the mana isn’t drained until the end of the turn which means it doesn’t hurt them in a timely manner, and it self destructs for no apparent reason.

Solution: Scrap the idea that mana drain is an effective interpretation of counterspells. It isn’t. Mana drain is really weak in PQ. Perhaps make a mechanic where you can keep the card in your hand, full of mana. When the opponent casts their next card you get a 70% chance to counter that spell. Not sure this is feasible with the coding. Alternatively, you could do something with trap gems that might get a similar outcome.

  1. Sanguine Bond: (15 mana - black - support) - Whenever you gain life, your opponent loses life equal to that amount and this support loses 1 shield.

Problem: This card is actually pretty cool and would be fun in some niche strategies. EXCEPT it has the stupid self-destruct feature that seems to be a new (and bad) feature of Oktagon supports.

Solution: Remove the self-destruction.

I will leave the creatures alone for now. Some of them seem like they need some substantial work, but they are at least playable. Also, swords to plowshares is perfectly executed.

Please @Oktagon… we have been playing this game for 2+ years. We understand what works and what doesn’t. Please join us in one of our slack/discord servers and engage us with meaningful discussions around card design and balance. There really seems to be a big gap when you guys don’t understand that the above ELITE cards are unplayable. Feel free to message me to get involved with real time discussions via Slack/Discord. PLEASE!

18

Indeed. This self-destruct mechanic on the supports needs to be removed, most certainly on the Masterpieces. Curse of Predation is a nasty card with paper and they somehow managed to ruin it with that mechanic. I also agree that it needs to give more than +1/+1 in PQ due to health differences.

I actually think Electolyze is a nasty card if used against say, the new Ixalan vampires (you know, if anyone actually tries running them with Reinforcement being a joke with all the removal available to completely ruin it). I feel Anger of the Gods would have definitely been the better spell choice to give us in the set.

19

I see your point, but a masterpeice deserves better than to be a practical sideboard against a specific style that will only be relevant as long as a specific event is running. Buff it way up and it will still be good against vampires =)

20

I’m so happy Sanguine Bond is in! I just wish it did not self-destruct… Hope it comes with at least 10 shields the way it is now. If the self destruct mechanism is removed, it could just have 2 shields and be perfect.