Author
|
Topic: New Mulligan Rule (check the date, it isn't April 1st!)
|
LandDestroyer Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 07:58 AM
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/changes-starting-pro-tou r-magic-origins-2015-06-29"The key change is that last sentence. Then, beginning with the starting player and proceeding in turn order, any player whose opening hand has fewer cards than his or her starting hand size may scry 1." It may be time to play combo more frequently now... but "This rule will make its debut at Pro Tour Magic Origins, which takes place July 31–August 2. This is the only tournament during which this rule will be in effect for now. After the Pro Tour, we will have more information regarding when this rule will be implemented everywhere else."
[Edited 1 times, lastly by LandDestroyer on June 29, 2015]
|
dfitzg88 Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 08:28 AM
quote: Originally posted by LandDestroyer: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/changes-starting-pro- tou r-magic-origins-2015-06-29"The key change is that last sentence. Then, beginning with the starting player and proceeding in turn order, any player whose opening hand has fewer cards than his or her starting hand size may scry 1." It may be time to play combo more frequently now... but "This rule will make its debut at Pro Tour Magic Origins, which takes place July 31–August 2. This is the only tournament during which this rule will be in effect for now. After the Pro Tour, we will have more information regarding when this rule will be implemented everywhere else."
Wow, that's a big change. To be honest, I like it. Increased consistency helps every deck I can think of. There's no one deck I feel would get a huge advantage over others in modern/standard given that both players have the option. The fact that you have to choose to keep before you can scry makes it hard to abuse. I can't argue with shaking up competitive play. I hope the test goes well and this gets expanded to every game of magic. Edit: the video coverage rule was also a long time coming. I think it should be mandatory to use video coverage to aid in investigations, assuming that the coverage can be accessed in a timely manner. Giving judges the option will lead to inconsistent application, and may result in more problems than having a strict "no" or "yes."
[Edited 1 times, lastly by dfitzg88 on June 29, 2015]
|
LandDestroyer Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 08:43 AM
quote: Originally posted by dfitzg88: Wow, that's a big change. To be honest, I like it. Increased consistency helps every deck I can think of. There's no one deck I feel would get a huge advantage over others in modern/standard given that both players have the option.The fact that you have to choose to keep before you can scry makes it hard to abuse. I can't argue with shaking up competitive play. I hope the test goes well and this gets expanded to every game of magic. Edit: the video coverage rule was also a long time coming. I think it should be mandatory to use video coverage to aid in investigations, assuming that the coverage can be accessed in a timely manner. Giving judges the option will lead to inconsistent application, and may result in more problems than having a strict "no" or "yes."
it's the same mulligan rule ive joked about for years but seems like giving a free scrye to combo decks...or heck...even burn...is very very powerful. makes leylines a little better b/c mulligans don't hurt *as bad*
|
Pail42 Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 09:26 AM
quote: Originally posted by dfitzg88: I think it should be mandatory to use video coverage to aid in investigations, assuming that the coverage can be accessed in a timely manner. Giving judges the option will lead to inconsistent application, and may result in more problems than having a strict "no" or "yes."
Since the option exists it is essentially mandatory unless there's some pressing constraint that prevents its use. Any judge that doesn't use video coverage will immediately be crucified by the community.
|
Eatatjoes Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 10:16 AM
I'm glad they are finally cracking down on all the Adrian Sullivan's of the world.
|
iccarus Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 10:36 AM
quote: Originally posted by Eatatjoes: I'm glad they are finally cracking down on all the Adrian Sullivan's of the world.
Is there really anyone else doing this? __________________ Wisconsin - smells like dairy air!I collect Granite Gargoyles. Send them my way.
|
AGO Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 12:24 PM
The new scry is a trap. It will make bad players keep bad hands!. Will make good players think about keep bad hands.
|
mm1983 Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 01:21 PM
Does the scry rule affect all formats? Commander already allows for partial mulligan depending on which commander format which means you can put part of your hand back and draw that many from the top minus 1. On a side note I feel like delver decks will benefit greatly with a before game start scry effect.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by mm1983 on June 29, 2015]
|
hilikuS Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 01:25 PM
quote: Originally posted by AGO: The new scry is a trap. It will make bad players keep bad hands!. Will make good players think about keep bad hands.
My thoughts exactly.
|
aethertech Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 01:36 PM
quote: Originally posted by iccarus: Is there really anyone else doing this?
I guess I'm guilty.
|
dfitzg88 Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 07:24 PM
The point of the scry is to decrease the number of games that end without interactivity, not to entice you keep a bad 6.MTG Goldfish: DTK FRF Draft Statistics While I couldn't find any data on Constructed events, this certainly at least shows that taking a mulligan drastically reduces your odds of winning in limited (this data holds up over multiple draft formats, if you click around a bit, including the holiday cube 2014). Magic is a lot less fun when you don't get to play a single spell. The scry rule will most likely create a better experience in the long term if applied intelligently.
[Edited 1 times, lastly by dfitzg88 on June 29, 2015]
|
Pail42 Member
|
posted June 29, 2015 09:17 PM
quote: Originally posted by mm1983: Does the scry rule affect all formats? Commander already allows for partial mulligan depending on which commander format which means you can put part of your hand back and draw that many from the top minus 1. On a side note I feel like delver decks will benefit greatly with a before game start scry effect.
The new scry rule is only for some upcoming professional REL events. It will probably go into effect everywhere if it works well in its upcoming trial run.
|
coolio Member
|
posted July 02, 2015 04:54 AM
anyone who thinks the scry 1 post mulligans is a trap doesnt have a clue what it's like to play at the top levels.. sure some people will gamble.. but this is gonna be a trial run at a pro tour.. do tell.. where you will see your example of "bad players will keep bad hands, and make good players think about keeping bad hands".. I dont see it. basically, it will bring a higher chance of having an interactive game.. and the decision is highly praised by basically the entirety of the pro players.. so... it's everyone with experience playing at the very top levels completely disagreeing with your view on the post mulligan scry.. © __________________ Since it is obviously inconceivable that all religions can be right, the most reasonable conclusion is that they are all wrong. -Christopher HitchensReligion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by the rulers as useful. -Seneca the Younger
|
LandDestroyer Member
|
posted July 02, 2015 07:35 AM
quote: Originally posted by coolio: anyone who thinks the scry 1 post mulligans is a trap doesnt have a clue what it's like to play at the top levels.. sure some people will gamble.. but this is gonna be a trial run at a pro tour.. do tell.. where you will see your example of "bad players will keep bad hands, and make good players think about keeping bad hands".. I dont see it. basically, it will bring a higher chance of having an interactive game.. and the decision is highly praised by basically the entirety of the pro players.. so... it's everyone with experience playing at the very top levels completely disagreeing with your view on the post mulligan scry.. ©
Coolio making friends as always :-p i think it's an exciting thing to try out but I feel it needed to be tried out at a modern or legacy event...not what WOTC cares about those formats
|
hilikuS Member
|
posted July 02, 2015 08:48 AM
Right, it makes keepable hands better on a mulligan, but a lot of players will use it as an excuse to keep a bad hand. Which is a trap.I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it will happen. At a big tournament? Naw probably not, but at like FNM level stuff, yeah.
|
mm1983 Member
|
posted July 02, 2015 09:30 AM
quote: Originally posted by hilikuS:
Right, it makes keepable hands better on a mulligan, but a lot of players will use it as an excuse to keep a bad hand. Which is a trap.I'm not saying it's a good idea, but it will happen. At a big tournament? Naw probably not, but at like FNM level stuff, yeah.
Agreed as far as the FNM level goes, especially limited play. There will be a lot people who will keep a 1 land hand that would have a good hand if they had 2 lands or opposite with keeping hands that have 4 or 5 land and then using scry to put another land on the bottom of their library just to hope to get to something good in their deck instead of more land. Sure it helps for a better game play experience but it doesn't completely solve the problem of drawing bad cards. All in all it's not really a major rule change that will affect most major tournaments.
|
Volcanon Member
|
posted July 02, 2015 11:33 AM
quote: Originally posted by mm1983: Agreed as far as the FNM level goes, especially limited play. There will be a lot people who will keep a 1 land hand that would have a good hand if they had 2 lands or opposite with keeping hands that have 4 or 5 land and then using scry to put another land on the bottom of their library just to hope to get to something good in their deck instead of more land. Sure it helps for a better game play experience but it doesn't completely solve the problem of drawing bad cards. All in all it's not really a major rule change that will affect most major tournaments.
To be honest I'd say a better rule would be: Mull to 6 - scry 1 Mull to 5 - scry 2 Mull to 4 - scry 3 And so on. Going less than 5 is the kiss of death anyway, so you might as well at least be able to play something before you get demolished.
|
jamestosetti Member
|
posted July 02, 2015 08:18 PM
We've been testing this rule in Vintage on Cockatrice, and it is awesome!
|
daner Member
|
posted July 05, 2015 08:54 PM
While this rule does not bother me inbthe slightest, I honestly dont care if it stays or goes, Ill say exactly what I think about it. I think its pretty stupid. I understand all arguments for it, I just dont agree with it.I dont agree with it bc IMO, I play poker, and I do not believe poker is a gambling game. Much like magic poker comes down to making the right line of play, but also having a small amount of luck involved. Poker, just like Magic, involves a little bit of luck every niw and then. Sometimes you get delt Aces...but they can get cracked. Just like sometimes you gotta mull, or brick off for 5 turns....it happens, its a part of the game. But much like poker,if you play enough magic/poker the better player will over time come out ahead. The "luck" is taken away and play is rewarded. The problem is everyone remembers the bad luck, or times they get cracked, or times the game wasnt interactive.....but nobody remembers the times they had a little luck, out outplayed someone on a mulligan. People wanna bitch that magic is sometimes non-iteractive....doesnt make it any less of a skill game. Same as poker...but you gotta have a little bit of luck factored in. Otherwise Id never lose with aces, or a mull to 5 would never beat my 7...but those times DO come up. So now what? You want more mulls beating my 7 card keepers? I feel like they are manipulating a factor of the game they shouldnt. Like I said, sometimes you gotta get lucky. Sometimesbyou need that King to show up to crack them aces, or you need your opponent to take a mull in game 3 in an unfavorable matchup. **** happens....its a game of skill that also has a bit of luck involved, but its still probably 90% skill based. I just dont like it...Im not opposed to change but I dont like they keep catering to the newb. Whats next? Stack your opening hands to the perfect 7 then random shuffle? Like I said Im open to the idea of change and I havent had any issues with the rules being changed. The new combat rules have made perfect sense in a flavor way....why would a dead creature be able to do something? I mean...one day Id like to see a mechanic much like "dead mans hand" in COD had. Where a powerful effect was keyworded to an entire set based on creatures dying....but anyway, yea sorry, cant get behind this change. Magic is and always will be a game of skill...but sometimes you just get unlucky, much like poker. If you wanna reduce random luck then play more. Play better. Eventually the variables become less and less relevant and good play is rewarded.
|
thror Member
|
posted July 05, 2015 09:36 PM
im going to cut and paste something that another poster found from MTGO stats, just so you guys realize how bad mulligans are for your win %" In Standard, from a sample of over 85,000 tournament games in June, the winrate for those mulliganing to 6 was 37%. Mulligan to 5? A ghastly 20% on the play, and only a bit better at 24% on the draw. " daner, you say you play poker. you want to throw away 13% from a 50/50 position? a single scry is not going to give anywhere near that much back, maybe 2-3%. yes, a mulligan is a powerful tool to use to combat some randomness. but, from wotc's point of view, the penalty right now is too high. __________________ "He fights you not because you have wronged him, but because you are there."<crypticfreak1> jazaray got ahold of me. he also had a hard time finding the email. <Jazaray> She...
[Edited 1 times, lastly by thror on July 05, 2015]
|
Volcanon Member
|
posted July 05, 2015 10:26 PM
quote: Originally posted by thror: im going to cut and paste something that another poster found from MTGO stats, just so you guys realize how bad mulligans are for your win %" In Standard, from a sample of over 85,000 tournament games in June, the winrate for those mulliganing to 6 was 37%. Mulligan to 5? A ghastly 20% on the play, and only a bit better at 24% on the draw. " daner, you say you play poker. you want to throw away 13% from a 50/50 position? a single scry is not going to give anywhere near that much back, maybe 2-3%. yes, a mulligan is a powerful tool to use to combat some randomness. but, from wotc's point of view, the penalty right now is too high.
The win rate for mull to 3 was 0%.
|
Vegas10 Member
|
posted July 06, 2015 04:27 AM
quote: Originally posted by coolio: anyone who thinks the scry 1 post mulligans is a trap doesnt have a clue what it's like to play at the top levels.. sure some people will gamble.. but this is gonna be a trial run at a pro tour.. do tell.. where you will see your example of "bad players will keep bad hands, and make good players think about keeping bad hands".. I dont see it. basically, it will bring a higher chance of having an interactive game.. and the decision is highly praised by basically the entirety of the pro players.. so... it's everyone with experience playing at the very top levels completely disagreeing with your view on the post mulligan scry.. ©
Start off by saying that this new rule seems like a great idea to me and I hope testing with the pros pans it out that way. Coolio I don't think the trap comment was likley meant about high level players, but more your "average Joe" player or worse that comes to alot of tournies being convinced to keep hands one shouldn't because of this rule maybe. But one could argue thats already in their blood without this rule and therefore not a good argument against this new rule.
|
MagicPatty Member
|
posted July 06, 2015 04:53 AM
quote: Originally posted by Volcanon: The win rate for mull to 3 was 0%.
Don't worry, scry 1 should fix that.
|
AGO Member
|
posted July 06, 2015 12:03 PM
quote: Originally posted by coolio: anyone who thinks the scry 1 post mulligans is a trap doesnt have a clue what it's like to play at the top levels.. sure some people will gamble.. but this is gonna be a trial run at a pro tour.. do tell.. where you will see your example of "bad players will keep bad hands, and make good players think about keeping bad hands".. I dont see it. basically, it will bring a higher chance of having an interactive game.. and the decision is highly praised by basically the entirety of the pro players.. so... it's everyone with experience playing at the very top levels completely disagreeing with your view on the post mulligan scry.. ©
Of course I don't have a clue. Neither does there other 99.99% of players who are not at the top levels. My example of bad players keeping bad hands is at my LGS every FNM LOL. This is a trap for the casual player at it's finest. Will this scry rule stick. Most likely because it is being tested by the pros. I am totally for this new rule because I can now justify my ****ty hands with a **** IT I GET A SCRY YOLO!
|
daner Member
|
posted July 06, 2015 11:02 PM
quote: Originally posted by thror: im going to cut and paste something that another poster found from MTGO stats, just so you guys realize how bad mulligans are for your win %" In Standard, from a sample of over 85,000 tournament games in June, the winrate for those mulliganing to 6 was 37%. Mulligan to 5? A ghastly 20% on the play, and only a bit better at 24% on the draw. " daner, you say you play poker. you want to throw away 13% from a 50/50 position? a single scry is not going to give anywhere near that much back, maybe 2-3%. yes, a mulligan is a powerful tool to use to combat some randomness. but, from wotc's point of view, the penalty right now is too high.
Ok. You realize in a major tournament your going to get bad hands, and when playing long enough in a poker session your going to get coolerd. It happens. Its a part of the game, over time I bet its about even the amount of times it helps/hinders you. For the most part magic, just like poker, is still going to be about making the right line of play. Id bet money nobody who ever won a PT or GPT has never had luck on their side for a round...it happens. This will probably have zero to little effect on pro tours, maybe a slight difference on day two gps...the big change will be fnm..so really IDC. You can spit out numbers, but whats next? People bitching about drawing 5 lands in a row? It happens....just like having to take mulls.
| |