Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

So recently I fought some Legacy players for fun and was kinda shocked at how insane their decks was. I didn't really get to do anything with my deck while they keep slamming out even more cards onto the "battlefield" and this was with my deck that people I usually play with thought was "annoying to fight/to good" (this was my first deck and hence now the reason I try to build more casual decks).
Anyway this got me thinking and after some time playing with different ideas I found out that if spent alot of money I too could get a insane deck. So I wonder when it comes to none casual decks for like legacy or modern how much "pay to win" is there? Since for me it seems that I can simply buy any deck from the net in an instant (if i have the money) and now I have a high chance of winning even against seasoned veterans.

I really like mtg but more the casual games with friends (maybe over some beers or so) and have no real interest in competitive play so i'm just curious to know how much skill really is required in tournaments or if its mostly "pay to win". Not trying to offend anyone I just want the opinions of people who actually know what they are talking about and not just my theories

There's no such thing as 'casual' magic.

Case in point. Everyone on my dormfloor a few years ago realized that basically everyone else either played or had played MtG. So, it started out with old cards and the free decks we nabbed from the FLGS nearby.

And then people started to buy packs.

And then they started to go to eBay.

And then they started going to specialty website to construct decks and buy specific cards.

Eventually, it ended up with me and a few others escaping out the windows of the 11th floor with tied-together bedsheets before the bomb went off.

Also, you were playing with the Legacy guys. That's basically the 'everything goes' format. Hit up your local FLGS on Friday nights for some FNM, and you'll find the balance is usually better.

There is casual magic, it's that short period of time at the start of a new group. Then it's gone.

There is a lot of pay to win in MTG. Period.

I was going to say that even as a non-magic player (I tried to get into it a long while ago when I was 13 or something, bought a 2-player starter set but soon fell out of love, just not my cup of tea really) the image i get of MtG is:
buy starter box, learn rules
buy 1 or 2 boosters
buy a netlist deck of the net for a ridiculous sum

and any path that deviates from this is doomed to fail

I used to play magic like 10 years ago, but got out of it around the middle of Kamigawa. During that time we had 5 people that played in our group: The brothers that would get packs for xmas, etc.. and have decent decks, and could share cards if one had something the other didn't, my one friend, the hand-me down cards. He would get cards from friends, brothers, etc... and just play with what he had. Then there was me, who would buy packs, play games, and build decks based on the cards I had. Then there was my other buddy. He would go to tournaments, FNM, you name it. His decks could beat ours without much issue, it got to the point that if he would play us, we'd have to have at least 2 people go against him, and then he still usually won. I've found out he's still the same way, but plays far more casually, going for the Commander style of play (100 card decks, 1 of each card but lands, and a "general" for the deck)

About a month ago (A week after Ravnica's pre-release) I was giving malifaux demos, and since it was a slow night i.e. no one showed up, I volunteered my time and money to help the mtg kids play in a sanctioned tournament. I was the ringer, and I used the store owner's deck, and at the end of it all, I got one of the deck builder boxes for Ravnica (9 boosters and some langs). I built a few decks with the cards I had, and played them against some college friends, and proceeded to get stomped.

I then bought pre-constructed Ravnica decks, an extra pre-release deck, some boosters, etc...

You can't just throw cards together and call it a deck and hope to play casually... With netlists, the ability to buy specific cards online, etc... There is no casual Magic, there is just Tournaments and Tournament Practice.

I remember, back when I played MtG, the first time I saw the secondary card market and thought, wow, who'd pay $10 for a card.

Then I ended up paying for some cards...

Usenet, circa 1994 wrote:
MTG:UNLIMITED AUCTION
This auction will end Monday night, Jan. 23

COND: CARD: BID: BIDDER:
------------------------------------------------
1 ancestral recall $53.00 ths...@iitmax.acc.iit.edu
3 berserk $13.00 hseof...@aol.com
1 blaze of glory $30.00 fe...@sequoia.northcoast.com
3 chaos orb $35.00 cali...@aol.com
1 cyclopean tomb $32.00 blak...@escape.com
3 forcefield $44.00 tcz...@iastate.edu
4 gauntlet of might $44.00 tcz...@iastate.edu
3 ice storm $7.00 hseof...@aol.com
4 icy manipulator $35.00 smpatterson.ualr.edu
2 illusionary mask $21.00 blak...@escape.com
2 lich $32.00 smpatterson.ualr.edu
1 natural selection $21.00 cali...@aol.com
1 psionic blast $8.00 hseof...@aol.com
1 raging river $24.00 blak...@escape.com
1 time vault $26.00 hseof...@aol.com
3 time walk $65.00 fs...@camelot.acf-lab.alaska.edu
2 timetwister $48.00 ths...@iitmax.acc.iit.edu
4 word of command $26.00 syn...@cube.net

(Bolds were me)

Those cards list for several hundreds of dollars several years later...

But all of this makes for an extremely balanced game system, not like Warhammer or anything like that....

/sarcasm

Based upon waaay back when I played Magic, the game seemed pretty much designed to be an eternal arms race.

That is to say: it's inherently "pay to win".

It's a CCG, they're all pay to win unless they restrict you to specific decks.

I would argue that you can play casually still. It is all about the people you play with. I've been playing off and on since the dark or so. We generally play garage games and pick up games with friends. Some people put more money into it than others but there is very little 'escalation' of the type described in the thread.

Maybe I'm just an outlier.

Sure, you can play casually. But, because it is a CCG which lets you design your own decks, and has random booster packs, it's always going to be pay to win. Unless your friends agree to only ever use starter packs or something.

You can find yourself in a situation where it's a league: 1 starter and x boosters and that's it for the duration. Then there's some trading and we'd usually have a bid card that went to the winner. But everyone effectively paid the same amount.

 SoloFalcon1138 wrote:
But all of this makes for an extremely balanced game system, not like Warhammer or anything like that....

Actually, yes. Because there's more than rarity of cards and acquisition involved, and even the rarer (more expensive) cards are still balanced with the rest of the game in mind. If you want to play a specific type of deck, you may have to shell out for some specific cards, but weenie hordes and cheap burn will always have a place.

I think another primary difference is that MtG has different formats in which different cards have different value. I haven't played competitively in ages, but when I did, something like a 5/5 monster was generally considered too slow for constructed formats where your opponent would have a tightly focused deck. But, in a sealed-deck format, that same 5/5 monster would win you games. Both Sealed Deck and Draft formats have different power curves than constructed, and are as far from pay-per-win as you can get as you're limited to a set number of packs by the format.

 Melissia wrote:
Sure, you can play casually. But, because it is a CCG which lets you design your own decks, and has random booster packs, it's always going to be pay to win. Unless your friends agree to only ever use starter packs or something.

I don't really buy cards too much and do really well against my friends who
1) Goes to FNM and Drafts and buys a ton of cards
2) Buys occasionally and has a mix of old (5-10 year) and new
3) Doesn't buy and uses mostly old 5-10 year old cards

I think I was 7 wins, 4 losses last weekend. In general, we go back and forth and I would imagine it is close to 50/50 on win/loss between us.

Sadly, you have an extremely limited scope of play field... You probably know how your friend plays and can generally predict what or how he might play, especially if he doesn't buy many cards, but does go to drafts and FNM.

Sad to hear and I fear that for the moment the biggest thing holding back our group abit from going all out super decks is the money issues people seem to be having so buying new cards ain't really an option.
But I guess time will how the "eternal arms race" (liked this comment) goes.
One thing for sure is that I wont enter in any tournaments anytime soon.

 Alfndrate wrote:
Sadly, you have an extremely limited scope of play field... You probably know how your friend plays and can generally predict what or how he might play, especially if he doesn't buy many cards, but does go to drafts and FNM.

Well, I agree that it is a small play field. I was mostly disagreeing with the idea that every play group turns into a cash driven arms race. Some are just casual.

One of the most fun formats, IMO, and one which completely eliminates any element of "pay to win" is drafting. Where a group of players each gets a certain number of new sealed booster packs, you open, pick one, and pass the pack to the left. You go around the table (pass right on the second pack) drafting cards like this and then build 40 card decks with the results (and take whatever lands you need from a box of extra land), and play a little tournament among yourselves.

To reduce the cost, Google "drafting cube". The concept is basically that one player (or a group could share) assembles the pool of cards out of their existing collection, instead of using new sealed packs, so you don't have to buy new cards every time you draft.

We have definitely done 3-4 man drafts. They've been a lot of fun. I hadn't heard of drafting cubes though. That's a good idea.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Also, you just reminded me of the rather massive magic games we had around the big table at Mast Road.

Those ridiculous group games...

Although group games are another way to balance out the impact of money. Playing formats like Two Headed Giant, or Archenemy, or even just "Attack left, and whoever has the most kills at the end is the winner", are good variations too.

Yeah, we play a lot of attack to the left and THG nowadays.

On a separate note, we started a 'league' as an alternative to D&D for a while. We split up our gaming group into three teams of 2. Every game we play gets the winner X points where X is the number of participants. It has made for a very fun dynamic. Magic has been dominating, but the multi-player games have a lot of impact (Smallworld, Risk, even Jenga or Ten Thousand). It definitely helped with a magic resurgence.

This is going to sound unusual, and will probably be instantly debunked by those more experienced with the game, but I've always thought that with games like MtG where victory relies heavily on deck composition, it should be possible to accurately predict the winner algorithmically, based on a truly random shuffle and probability of cards being drawn based on their numbers relative to deck size. (admittedly we must assume that both players are playing to the best of their ability).

I'll agree with that somewhat...

Just like in making the perfect 40k army list. You find what is cheap, what works, etc... and then you try to make it very redundant to make your chances of getting what you need better...

Deck composition is a major part of the game.

When I played, that was only partially true.

What I mean is, if you make an inept deck, you're going to lose. So, in that sense, deck composition matters. However, given two players with different, yet reasonable decks, player skill is more likely to be the determining factor.

There are skills to master (do I take a few points of damage now but save my destruction spell for something more important, what's worth countering, identifying what your opponent is trying to accomplish, recognizing what part of their combination is the vulnerable part, even counting cards) and, like 40k, players who master the skills will tend to beat players who do not, assuming decks that are somewhat on par with each other.

Such an algorithm would be complicated, there are a lot of cards with complex interactions. Some cards look weak until they offer an exploit by other means, sometimes a card will be largely ignored in one set but a year later will suddenly be one very useful indeed.

I only buy cards occasionally and I avoid the valuable ones. The most I would usually pay for a card is £2, I usually buy cards to complete sets of commons and uncommons. I get all my cards from boosters and trades and do just fine. I wouldnt play legacy though because the cards are much older and carry extremely high prices, in part because of their age making them increasingly scarce, but also because some are extremely powerful.

Standard is just easier to get into as all the cards are in print and readily available, and now that I've seen a few sets go by I'm familiar with most cards in print. When playing commander I'm seeing new stuff all the time, it's like trying to start watching a TV programme having not seen the first 10 years.

As for 'pay to win' do just fine with decks I've only traded to complete, made it quite far on game days and the like. Yes you can just look up the top decks online and buy them, but it isn't the only way to play successfully.

Haha yes, just a bit of pay to win. At least draft kind of evens the odds. As for casual magic, that is tough to accomplish. I casually get housed by the one guy who buys a playset of every set on a routine basis does that count? Just makes the wins I get against him all the more satisfying, though rare (he is also brilliant with the game).

There is a whole gak-ton of pay-to-win in magic. Fortunately, back when we played, my group would criticize anyone who net-listed. Because of this, using a tactic/deck that was found online and flagged as "Type 1 worthy" was immediately criticized. We still played our usual FFA 4-6 person matches though. due to this, we developed some awkward (not necessarily successful) strategies for FFA play. Playing these larger matches helped reduce the effectiveness of some type 1 decks.

My favorite deck is my Red/Blue "Land Hate" deck.

It does NOT destroy lands. Instead, it spams the hell out of cards like Citadel of Pain, Psychic Venom, Twiddle, Aether Sting, and Confiscate/Mind Control with a decent amount of Alara-artifact mana sources and Ursa's Armor to prevent self-stabbing. It also features counter-spells and redirects for anti-spell . It's so trololol but so very unsuccessful all at the same time.

Criticizing net-listers is just silly and annoying. There is a very developed competitive Magic scene and no use re-inventing the wheel. Either decide you want to play casual and make your restrictions, or play competitively. But don't browbeat those who want to win. Even in a restricted environment, there will be optimal strategies and builds.

Magic is pay to win. It's an inherent part of the ccg model. But you can reduce some of the expense as outline above.

 jmurph wrote:
Criticizing net-listers is just silly and annoying. There is a very developed competitive Magic scene and no use re-inventing the wheel. Either decide you want to play casual and make your restrictions, or play competitively. But don't browbeat those who want to win. Even in a restricted environment, there will be optimal strategies and builds.

Magic is pay to win. It's an inherent part of the ccg model. But you can reduce some of the expense as outline above.

We criticized people who didn't go through the effort of making their own strategy/deck (as this is literally 1/2 the game). Going online and getting a known successful deck/strategy and winning is akin claiming to be good at math because you have a calculator.