Comments on: Sam Stoddard on Proxies in Eternal Formats

By: Mike

Mike — Fri, 24 Jul 2015 04:21:08 +0000

In reply to drakspar. Here's a solution. Chinese counterfeits. There are consequences to every action or inaction and that's the consequence so if wizards owes me nothing then I owe them nothing and look forward to the arrival of my shiny new counterfeit cards.

By: drakspar

drakspar — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 20:39:21 +0000

I still have never heard of strict proxy system that seems fair to both collector and player.Either the players have to give up playing a format, or change the format to give up cards they don't own (like playing legacy instead of vintage.) There are plenty of other formats beyond eternal – if you don't have the cards, then switch.Unfortunately Magic costs money to play. A lot of money. Whether its $15 for a draft, $10 for a preconstructed deck, or $1500 for the Power 9. You either shell it out, or stay at the kitchen table.Magic (Wizards of the Coast) doesn't have to pander to the best players. It doesn't need to include everyone. It's a product. You buy it. WotC owes you nothing beyond what's on the sales counter.In the end WotC will side with whoever pays them. So unless you've got a real argument that they are getting less money because people have to buy their cards, try to think of a solution that's best for players AND best them.When God gives you lemons, find a new God.

By: 4wallz

4wallz — Thu, 14 Jan 2010 18:07:36 +0000

I did mean 1k. Sorry about the confusion. My point still stands. Forget proxies. Give us some reprints!

By: Richard

Richard — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 22:31:29 +0000

I have to weigh in on this one. Before I start let me say I have an 1832 Eternal rating mostly from playing a ton of Vintage. I have been a booster of Vintage in Colorado for years and I am a fan of the format. Proxies are terrible. Part of Magic is that it is a collectible card game. This means that sometimes you do not have the cards you need. Fact is the gathering of the cards for eternal formats is PART of the game. And an important part. By allowing proxies you invalidate the actual cards and the work that goes into getting them. You also take away an important part of the metagame. Some decks are built a certain way specifically due to the lack of power cards. (fish and goblins are good examples)The best way to handle the card shortage is to print more cards. This will have a small impact on the original cards values, but if done right, can help the community more than it hurts. From the Vault exiled is the best example of this. Boxed sets with specific cards in them that have limited print runs. It's even better if the new cards look really lame. If they look bad the older cards will hold more value. I have always thought that the Eternal formats could use an injection of cards. It's just finding the right manner to do it.

By: danielvinson

danielvinson — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 20:11:27 +0000

All of you guys are missing a key point – proxies would increase that standard of play in tournaments by removing the financial aspect from deck choices. It would allow more people to play more, better decks. The related metagame shift would be inconsequential because wizards does it already every time a new set is released.I am one of the players who would play a lot more magic if it weren't for the huge cost involved. I dont mind spending $50 in gas to get to an event, but asking me to invest $400-$500 to play in that event is way over the top. I am sure, especially with the current economy, that there are thousands of other people in the same boat as me. I still end up playing standard (I have a full set of fetches from drafts once a week since ZEN came out, and have never bought a card that was more than $5). Sure, I can't play Junk or something with Baneslayers, but I still can make 90% of competitive decks, and that definitely hasn't stopped me from winning a few tournaments.If the players like me could play extended, legacy, even vintage (actually, Ive played 15 proxy vintage – its like $20 for a deck) there would be a new age of great players and amazing decks. No competitive player could logically say that is a bad idea.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 17:34:10 +0000

He almost certainly meant $1000. Don't get all up in his grill over a typo.

By: Steve

Steve — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 09:39:34 +0000

I'm sure if you did the math the average price of a Legacy deck pushes $100 or more.You're kidding, right? The average Standard deck is well over $200. Boros plays 12 fetchlands at $15/ea. Some decks play 4x Baneslayer, which is currently pushing $60.Mono-red Goblins is a competitive Legacy deck and can be made under $200, but that's "cheap" for Legacy. An average Legacy deck will be closer to $500, but the appeal is that Legacy staples never rotate. Harder to get into it, easier to stay current. Tropical Island's good forever.The real problem is not the Legacy staples so much as the corner cases. Justifying the purchase of 4x Underground Sea is the fact that you'll use it for any and all B/U decks. Moat and Tabernacle both are expensive and also only see play in one deck each. That's a lot harder to handle.

By: James

James — Wed, 13 Jan 2010 08:43:13 +0000

I've said it before : Kill the reserved list. This presents opportunities to reprint Legacy staples in order to stay off this tide.Their 15 year old 'promise' will put a knife in Legacy and Vintage faster than the rising values would ever hope to.

By: 4wallz

4wallz — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 17:23:52 +0000

I know wizards has a strict policy on reprinting cards. But lets face it, the older card formats are outrageous. I'm sure if you did the math the average price of a Legacy deck pushes $100 or more. This eventually will lead to the slow down and maybe even the eventual dissoultion of different formats. Personally I was intrigued by the EDH format but then once I watched a tournament I was cured. It's just too expensive. I'll stick with standard thanks.I'm not saying they should reprint the power nine or anything but what about reprinting Force of Will? Older cards like that. Just reprint them with a white border or something to make them less collectible than the originals.Who knows what the real answer is. But it definately is a real problem.

By: redsai

redsai — Tue, 12 Jan 2010 16:15:16 +0000

So you're saying you'd rather "print" out-of-print cards than re-print out-of-print cards? No matter how you slice it, you're depressing the value of the original cards. Keep it something not complicated. Print new versions that are distinct from the old. The old copies are valuable for rarity, both copies are valuable for utility.Direct cash-based meta-gaming? In-game incentives incurred by using functionally equivalent items? How would Standard players feel if you could buy sideboard slots for 5$/card ? This is pretty flagrant.Reprint replacement for any copy of the old cards? You didn't suggest this in your article, but it would get more copies into circulation, and raise the value of the old cards? Maybe you could give two copies to extremely well-kept copies. Kind of like stock "Splitting."