@Hugo Allard: The advantage this shell has over burn is that, assuming you are looking to eventually get the more expensive staples, they are immediately usable and impactful here. Also, once you do get your hands on Tarns, Volcs, and Forces, you can easily build out into RUG, UWR, or Miracles. If you are looking for an immediate payoff, however, then I agree that Burn is hands down the best option.
Also, I'm not convinced that this exact list is the best possible version you can get for cheap. I think you can do a lot better than the Splinter Twin combo. I can see it being a nice surprise, but neither Twin nor Perstermite actually does anything on their own and you can't afford to be running conditionally dead cards in an already underpowered deck. Additionally, the money saved should allow you to get a head start on the long term plan by getting other format staples with your initial investment.
As for the maindeck, I feel that 4 Gitaxian Probes are a must have. It's a free spell for Young Pyromancer and the information gained is invaluable to someone who is new to Legacy. I don't like Mana Leak much at all, nor would I play 4 Counterspell. Some number of Spell Snares, Flusterstorms, or even REBs/Pyroblasts would probably work better. Overall, I would feel much better running this list...
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
2 Grim Lavamancer
The whole thing comes out to $98.76 on MTGO Traders. Not only do I think it's an overall improvement, but instead of dropping $28 on the, IMO, unplayable-in-Legacy Splinter Twin combo, you get format staples in Gitaxian Probe, Flusterstorm, Pyroblast, Dismember, Blood Moon, and Submerge.
The cards in HD might physically look better pixel-by-pixel, but making their maximum size extremely small - much smaller than v3 - does NOT make them look better overall. I shouldn't have to have two monitors or a giant screen to be able to see the cards as is on the playmat.
It's without an alternative as no Paper magic here and I do Not want to leave the Game I love, though yesterday my lady looked At the screen and said, what is that? Are you switching to some Japanese kiddy Game?
I'm sympathetic to the points raised by Felorin and those raised by Kumagoro42. I think Felorin's basic point -- that it was unnecessary to change the aesthetics of the new client so radically and that this radical change approach probably alienated people more than was necessary -- stands very well. I also agree with Kumagoro42 that a lot of the complaining is simple resistance to something new and a degree of ignorance about the advantages of the new client.
I initially hated v4, but now that I have had some more time with it I have grown to like certain aspects. I still think that the overall aesthetic of the client is really bad, and I wish there were more obvious options to make it more similar to the old client.
Most importantly though, Kumagoro42's point about the relative quality of v4 compared to the initial release of v3 is very important. V3 was truly awful when it first came out. If Wizards can improve on v4 in the way that they improved on v3, the client will likely become a lot better over the next year.
Server side issues relating to how the clients interact with the servers. This was stated way long ago when they announced theyd be not adding new features until the beta was live. They cited server stability and backend conflicts.
I think a fancy title, 32 years of experience in the field that we're discussing and having a world record for longest MMORPG in the field we're discussing all validates his criticisms.
His arguments are very good, and I think they would carry more weight from someone so established in the world of game design, than had they come from me, who is just a person without the experience.
:I don't like the chat window not being on the side
This annoyance can be readily corrected. The chat window is dockable, simply drag the window over to the side you want it on, then a square sort of icon will pop up near the middle of that side of the screen. Release the button while your mouse is over this icon, and it will dock on the side and look the way it used to. This setting is saved.
I can't speak for anyone else, but personally for me, I don't like the way that lobbies look, its hard for me to follow certain games, but maybe that's just because its new. I don't like the bland playmats, personally the cards looked better in v3 then in v4 IMO, I don't like the chat window not being on the side and I'm still annoyed how in an edh game, you can't tell who's being attacked correctly because the arrows are always pointing to you.
I am one of the people who have said that they made v4 come out way to soon. If it's a matter of, without v3 around, they now get to focus only on 1 client and make it better, I don't see why they couldn't keep v3 out until v4 was officially ready, memory leak/lag free etc.. I don't see it, I am sure there are reasons, but I don't see them.
This is why when I complain about v4, I am always quick to say, I could be wrong etc.. Because I don't really know anything about running a business or programming (I haven't even attempted to use c++ in years). I am also willing to believe I am just angry that its something new and I can't see it, but then again thats just human nature, but I also honestly just don't like a lot of things when you compare v4 to 3.
What Procrastination said, plus it was REALLY an old piece of software. You can't keep updating an old architecture, it's like trying and building a hi-tech skyscraper on the foundation of an old house. I also think there was some built-in upper limit on the number of things (players?) V3 could handle, due to the fact that it was programmed back when the MTGO population was one third of what it's now or so.
By the way, what's this thing about V4 looking bad? The cards never looked better on my PC, and I don't even have a proper graphics array! it's like they were low-res before, they're hi-res now, and they resize greatly without the crappy effect V3 was doing.
At some level, all this "why, why, WHY?!" (which I also experienced at first), it's like people are working through the stages of grief. You know, denial, anger? I'm already in acceptance mode. I'm trying to find what's good, and I'll help WotC people fix stuff as best as I (and they) can. (I just saw a representative answering to someone in the forum and saying that some proposed change was good and it will be kept in mind for implementation down the line).
Other than venting personal frustrations, people who just keep repeating, "It's crap it's crap it's crap, they shouldn't have they shouldn't have they should have" don't really help anybody. It certainly doesn't feel like helping to me. I've currently filled 4 pages worth of bloc notes with things that need fixing. I take notes every time I use the client. I'll do a post simply listing them, maybe another article at some point. That's what feels like helping to me.
Your pretty much hit the nail on the head with this line, "Now, did they have to re-invent so much of the wheel at one time?". That is the big question I personally am asking.
I also did not know the programming for version 3 was that rigid or coded so horribly that added more to it would up its death clock, Like I said, I am not a programmer. Thank you for your rely though, it clears a few things up for me.
Wasn't it always implied that the programming in V3 was too rigid for future development? There is a point with some programs that starting from scratch is easier than trying to mix and match lines of code. New software has enabled features like the multi-player minimizing and even simple things like "Attack All" which V3 probably couldn't incorporate. (That last one is almost sad if true...)
The number of changes they have made in the last few weeks gives the appearance of "flexibility", but they could also be under a lot pressure at this critical juncture to "appease the masses" as quickly as possible. Only time will tell.
Maybe this new software was also necessary for future plans such as MTGO on a Mac, or to make a mobile version? Who knows?
Now, did they have to re-invent so much of the wheel at one time? The article and many users are scratching their heads on that one. There might never be a definitive answer for that question.
I disagree. Showing people you are criticizing, your pedigree, and where you are coming from mentally is both respectful and on point. It isn't about braggadocio or propping up arguments with a "you should listen to me, I'm an expert". It is setting the record straight so what is said is taken in that light instead of random ramblings from disgruntled passerby.
Not defending anyone. But what is to stop a person from saying, "do you have any experience being a programmer ? No ? Then who cares what say?". Him pointing out that he has 32 years of experience seems like he was trying to prevent that. I think that's all he was trying to do. I don't think he was trying to sound cocky or anything of the sort, but I could easily be wrong.
Kuma, I still don't understand why they had to throw away v3, instead of keeping it and fixing the problems it had, while also adding new things to it. It's honestly not a matter of learning new things (for me it isn't, I don't speak for others) it's about the fact that v3 looked and felt pretty good and v4 just looks and feels bad. Do I think v4 has some new features that are good? Yes, I will admit I do, but why couldn't they be added and programmed into v3? Now understand I am not a programmer and I do not run a business, so if there are perfectly good reasons to create a new client that looks like v4 I want know.
Oh no, a few things I lamented here have been fixed, contrary to popular belief (and the "sky is falling" mentality of MTG players, which I personally abhor). Or I just didn't find the way to do what I wanted to do when I wrote this (the "hidden", "secret" nature of some shortcuts is a whole different criticism, but that was true of V3 as well. Better to have to work a little to find that a solution to your problem exists than not having one at all).
You gave me the occasion to update this article.
"the cards in the decks aren't linked to the card in the pool"
This is technically still true, but it's not such a big concern as I thought it was, because there are new cool options that sort of make up for it. For instance, if you want to add an additional copy of a card you already have in your deck, you don't have to search for the card again, you can right-click on it and choose to add 1-3 additional copies. (The trouble is still there if you removed the last copy and want it back.)
You can update card versions, which is really cool and useful. For instance, I just sold old versions of cards and re-bought them as cheaper VMA versions. If I open a deck that has a card marked as no more in my collection, with just one right-click I can have the client automatically update ALL instances of it with those in my collection.
This is particularly useful for lands, if you manage your collection properly. I only own Unhinged lands. Say I want to add 10 Forests to my deck. With V3, I needed to go to Forest (usually by typing "Fore..." with the mouse hovering on the pool), then scroll until the Promo Unhinged version was shown. With V4, I just have to add basic lands with the automatic "draft-like" button, then click on one of the Forests and tell the client to replace them all with those in my collection, that are the right ones. Much much quicker, for once.
"the cards can't be enlarged outside of the preview window"
They can. You can zoom on them with the right mouse button as before. My bad.
"the large preview card gets in the way (I don't even try to have it active)"
Considering the zoom on the card is there, and quicker, the preview window is totally useless and can remain hidden, so no problem there.
"the decks can't be saved locally"
They can. And very easily. Right click on the deck's name (the right mouse button will save us all!), then choose Export. Compared to V3 this process has become much quicker, because the deck files come pre-named with the same name they had in the client, so you don't have to write down a name anymore.
It's also easy to keep the decks stored in the hard disk and use the "import" function just in the same way you would use the "load" function in V3.
The need to flash a fancy title and tell that you have 32 years of experience significantly reduces the value of your arguments to me. If your arguments were good enough to stand alone then there would be no need for that other stuff. But I see that wasnt the case.
I'm afraid you lost me when you started enumerating specific "things that don't work in V4". Because at that point your approach devolved into a simple, and too common, "I don't want to have to learn new things" mindset. Which, it's everyone's right to have. But if everybody had this approach, we all still be using Netscape Navigator and typing commands on MS-DOS, I guess.
I'm critical of all the many aspects of the V4 that need work. Very critical. For instance, you can find an article of mine here where I demolish the entire editor. But you know, to do that, I spent actual time making tests. And then tests. And then some more tests. I'm (among other things) a film critic. I don't write a review of a movie without sitting through it. All of it. Sometimes twice. That's how you make your criticism on point. (And by the way, a few of those things I lamented has been fixed in the meantime. They've been fixing stuff like crazy in the last few weeks.)
"Smileys are gone. The trophy, the mana symbol icons, the actual little smile. Vaporized."
Nope. All this stuff is still there. I know because I needed them to run events, so I opened a chat room and tried all them out. They're the same codes as before. Trophy is [sD], mana symbols are [sW], [sU], [sB], [sR], [sG], smile is [sS] (and so on: [sT] is the tap symbol, [sJ] is the untap symbol, etc.). The set symbols are gone, and the links to the cards are gone. I'm pretty sure it was just low priority to implement, once some things are here, the others will follow.
The real reason why the chat is currently abominable is that it's the least dynamic chat I ever seen. No up arrow to repeat the last mex. No copy/paste. You can't even SELECT text! A guy gave me his email address, I couldn't copy it, so I had to type it down by hand. Welcome back, 1995.
"I went to watch a Commander game, and saw two players. What the heck? Oh, the others were MINIMIZED, clicking + let me see them."
See, this feels like criticizing an improvement only because it's different to what you were used to, so you didn't recognize it as an improvement (or at least, the first implementation of an improvement). As I think you know, I run a multiplayer Commander event since almost 2 years. When my players found out that now you can recycle dead players' space by minimizing them, with just one click, they rejoiced. That's really one of the few things that made people say "good job Wizards" (were you watching other people's games with V3? Because I was, and after someone died it became a nightmare of switched names and assorted bugs. With V4 is actually possible to watch multiplayer games).
Commander in general is having a blast with V4. No more tokens filling the entire battlefield: now they are stacked into piles. No more losing 5 minutes clicking on each of your 324 tokens: now you just click "attack with all" (and you can still leave something out by unclicking it). No more tapping each mana singularly: now you can tap piles of mana at once. If you press M when you tap a land with multiple mana choices, it automatically adds the first mana it can produce. And so on. (I'm sure there are plenty of other "hidden" shortcuts. V3 was filled with them.) (I'm also sure a large percentage of V3 users didn't fully exploit V3).
I'm using it since 10 days, and I, for one, would never want to go back to how it was, where Commander is specifically concerned.
And by the way, if you have a big monitors (or two) you can set the size of the cards to keep them always large (options button, move the slider).
When V3 started, it was essentially unplayable. It took years to get to roughly the same level of functionality the V4 already started with. I came to MTGO in 2009, and people was still losing games because V3 registered your click on "OK" twice and you ended up skipping the combat phase as a result.
V4 is flawed, needs a lot of work, but it's something that feels from the late 2000s. V3 was something that felt from the 1990s. We're in 2014. It was time to change decade.
You should trust yourself first and foremost instead. Like, by trying to do the stuff this article says doesn't work, to find out it, in fact, does.
(I can say the same for stuff I wrongly criticized myself in forum posts and articles, and I was proven wrong, or they fixed it since).
I gave up on MTGO. I no longer "own" any digital cards at all. I've gotten back into paper magic and to be honest I had forgotten how much fun it is to just rip packs. You'd don't "just rip packs" on MTGO. Each pack is a precious resource.
I'd forgotten what it's like to interact with an actual human across the table. I'm enjoying Magic again for the first time in a while.
As for WOTC, I've interacted with some people from the company and every time I tried to express my concerns, all I got seemed like, "We know what we're doing, we're the experts. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."
MTGO is a real cash cow and as long as they can keep new blood coming in they will see no need to listen to anyone.
Side note about ripping packs: the store I buy singles from has some young guys who play a game called "flip and rip." They open packs and randomly choose a card from that pack and rip it in half before checking to see what it is. Recently two guys ponied up $200 each to buy a box of Modern Masters. The old flip-and-rip game hit a Tarmogoyf and a foil Cryptic Command.
Every time I walk in the store and see those cards stapled to the bulletin board I want to throw up.
This article pretty much sums up my feelings about wizards and v4. I mentioned your forum post on commanders hq and I was hoping to see an article from you. Personally I liked v3 and wish they would revert back to it and just fix all the damn things that should have been fixed for years. But sadly I've come to terms with wotc not giving a crap about what anyone has to say about one of their products. I love edh and mtgo is my main way if playing it, but my time playing edh on the v4 client and even just playing anything on the v4 client is highly limited. Sadly though, many still play on it and stream with the client, so wotc has no reason to listen I guess? Though I am perfectly willing and hoping I am wrong.
I'm really surprised Vault key is legit in Heirloom. Also it seems like trinket mage would be better than Captain of the mists. Is it legal in Heirloom? (imho you should link a legal list to every heirloom article you do and probably the heirloom site if that is still actively maintained.
I don't think that Blue Based Tempo is a thing. That isn't to say that there aren't Blue tempo decks, but that these decks tend to use Blue as the support color rather than the base color. I will be covering W/u, B/u, and R/u variations under the relevant articles.
The main reason why there is no real Blue Based Tempo deck is that the Blue creature base doesn't support it. Blue has no real two drop outside of Aquamoeba, which isn't really where you want to be in an aggressive, non-madness strategy. Sea Drake, Serendib Efreet, and Skywing Aven are all fine beaters but your curve can't start at three and you can't rely on the first two as they are uncommon.
That said, you'll be seeing plenty of love for the tempo crew (Man o' War, Repel, and Choking Tethers) in the other articles!
@Hugo Allard: The advantage this shell has over burn is that, assuming you are looking to eventually get the more expensive staples, they are immediately usable and impactful here. Also, once you do get your hands on Tarns, Volcs, and Forces, you can easily build out into RUG, UWR, or Miracles. If you are looking for an immediate payoff, however, then I agree that Burn is hands down the best option.
Also, I'm not convinced that this exact list is the best possible version you can get for cheap. I think you can do a lot better than the Splinter Twin combo. I can see it being a nice surprise, but neither Twin nor Perstermite actually does anything on their own and you can't afford to be running conditionally dead cards in an already underpowered deck. Additionally, the money saved should allow you to get a head start on the long term plan by getting other format staples with your initial investment.
As for the maindeck, I feel that 4 Gitaxian Probes are a must have. It's a free spell for Young Pyromancer and the information gained is invaluable to someone who is new to Legacy. I don't like Mana Leak much at all, nor would I play 4 Counterspell. Some number of Spell Snares, Flusterstorms, or even REBs/Pyroblasts would probably work better. Overall, I would feel much better running this list...
4 Delver of Secrets
4 Young Pyromancer
2 Grim Lavamancer
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Ponder
4 Preordain
4 Lightning Bolt
4 Chain Lightning
4 Spell Pierce
2 Spell Snare
2 Flusterstorm
2 Blood Moon
4 Steam Vents
10 Island
6 Mountain
Sideboard:
4 Pithing Needle
4 Pyroblast
1 Grim Lavamancer
1 Dismember
1 Submerge
3 Tormod's Crypt
1 Sower of Temptation
The whole thing comes out to $98.76 on MTGO Traders. Not only do I think it's an overall improvement, but instead of dropping $28 on the, IMO, unplayable-in-Legacy Splinter Twin combo, you get format staples in Gitaxian Probe, Flusterstorm, Pyroblast, Dismember, Blood Moon, and Submerge.
The cards in HD might physically look better pixel-by-pixel, but making their maximum size extremely small - much smaller than v3 - does NOT make them look better overall. I shouldn't have to have two monitors or a giant screen to be able to see the cards as is on the playmat.
It's without an alternative as no Paper magic here and I do Not want to leave the Game I love, though yesterday my lady looked At the screen and said, what is that? Are you switching to some Japanese kiddy Game?
Oh ill try doing that, thank you longtime.
I'm sympathetic to the points raised by Felorin and those raised by Kumagoro42. I think Felorin's basic point -- that it was unnecessary to change the aesthetics of the new client so radically and that this radical change approach probably alienated people more than was necessary -- stands very well. I also agree with Kumagoro42 that a lot of the complaining is simple resistance to something new and a degree of ignorance about the advantages of the new client.
I initially hated v4, but now that I have had some more time with it I have grown to like certain aspects. I still think that the overall aesthetic of the client is really bad, and I wish there were more obvious options to make it more similar to the old client.
Most importantly though, Kumagoro42's point about the relative quality of v4 compared to the initial release of v3 is very important. V3 was truly awful when it first came out. If Wizards can improve on v4 in the way that they improved on v3, the client will likely become a lot better over the next year.
Server side issues relating to how the clients interact with the servers. This was stated way long ago when they announced theyd be not adding new features until the beta was live. They cited server stability and backend conflicts.
I think a fancy title, 32 years of experience in the field that we're discussing and having a world record for longest MMORPG in the field we're discussing all validates his criticisms.
His arguments are very good, and I think they would carry more weight from someone so established in the world of game design, than had they come from me, who is just a person without the experience.
:I don't like the chat window not being on the side
This annoyance can be readily corrected. The chat window is dockable, simply drag the window over to the side you want it on, then a square sort of icon will pop up near the middle of that side of the screen. Release the button while your mouse is over this icon, and it will dock on the side and look the way it used to. This setting is saved.
I can't speak for anyone else, but personally for me, I don't like the way that lobbies look, its hard for me to follow certain games, but maybe that's just because its new. I don't like the bland playmats, personally the cards looked better in v3 then in v4 IMO, I don't like the chat window not being on the side and I'm still annoyed how in an edh game, you can't tell who's being attacked correctly because the arrows are always pointing to you.
I am one of the people who have said that they made v4 come out way to soon. If it's a matter of, without v3 around, they now get to focus only on 1 client and make it better, I don't see why they couldn't keep v3 out until v4 was officially ready, memory leak/lag free etc.. I don't see it, I am sure there are reasons, but I don't see them.
This is why when I complain about v4, I am always quick to say, I could be wrong etc.. Because I don't really know anything about running a business or programming (I haven't even attempted to use c++ in years). I am also willing to believe I am just angry that its something new and I can't see it, but then again thats just human nature, but I also honestly just don't like a lot of things when you compare v4 to 3.
What Procrastination said, plus it was REALLY an old piece of software. You can't keep updating an old architecture, it's like trying and building a hi-tech skyscraper on the foundation of an old house. I also think there was some built-in upper limit on the number of things (players?) V3 could handle, due to the fact that it was programmed back when the MTGO population was one third of what it's now or so.
By the way, what's this thing about V4 looking bad? The cards never looked better on my PC, and I don't even have a proper graphics array! it's like they were low-res before, they're hi-res now, and they resize greatly without the crappy effect V3 was doing.
At some level, all this "why, why, WHY?!" (which I also experienced at first), it's like people are working through the stages of grief. You know, denial, anger? I'm already in acceptance mode. I'm trying to find what's good, and I'll help WotC people fix stuff as best as I (and they) can. (I just saw a representative answering to someone in the forum and saying that some proposed change was good and it will be kept in mind for implementation down the line).
Other than venting personal frustrations, people who just keep repeating, "It's crap it's crap it's crap, they shouldn't have they shouldn't have they should have" don't really help anybody. It certainly doesn't feel like helping to me. I've currently filled 4 pages worth of bloc notes with things that need fixing. I take notes every time I use the client. I'll do a post simply listing them, maybe another article at some point. That's what feels like helping to me.
Your pretty much hit the nail on the head with this line, "Now, did they have to re-invent so much of the wheel at one time?". That is the big question I personally am asking.
I also did not know the programming for version 3 was that rigid or coded so horribly that added more to it would up its death clock, Like I said, I am not a programmer. Thank you for your rely though, it clears a few things up for me.
Wasn't it always implied that the programming in V3 was too rigid for future development? There is a point with some programs that starting from scratch is easier than trying to mix and match lines of code. New software has enabled features like the multi-player minimizing and even simple things like "Attack All" which V3 probably couldn't incorporate. (That last one is almost sad if true...)
The number of changes they have made in the last few weeks gives the appearance of "flexibility", but they could also be under a lot pressure at this critical juncture to "appease the masses" as quickly as possible. Only time will tell.
Maybe this new software was also necessary for future plans such as MTGO on a Mac, or to make a mobile version? Who knows?
Now, did they have to re-invent so much of the wheel at one time? The article and many users are scratching their heads on that one. There might never be a definitive answer for that question.
I disagree. Showing people you are criticizing, your pedigree, and where you are coming from mentally is both respectful and on point. It isn't about braggadocio or propping up arguments with a "you should listen to me, I'm an expert". It is setting the record straight so what is said is taken in that light instead of random ramblings from disgruntled passerby.
Not defending anyone. But what is to stop a person from saying, "do you have any experience being a programmer ? No ? Then who cares what say?". Him pointing out that he has 32 years of experience seems like he was trying to prevent that. I think that's all he was trying to do. I don't think he was trying to sound cocky or anything of the sort, but I could easily be wrong.
Kuma, I still don't understand why they had to throw away v3, instead of keeping it and fixing the problems it had, while also adding new things to it. It's honestly not a matter of learning new things (for me it isn't, I don't speak for others) it's about the fact that v3 looked and felt pretty good and v4 just looks and feels bad. Do I think v4 has some new features that are good? Yes, I will admit I do, but why couldn't they be added and programmed into v3? Now understand I am not a programmer and I do not run a business, so if there are perfectly good reasons to create a new client that looks like v4 I want know.
Oh no, a few things I lamented here have been fixed, contrary to popular belief (and the "sky is falling" mentality of MTG players, which I personally abhor). Or I just didn't find the way to do what I wanted to do when I wrote this (the "hidden", "secret" nature of some shortcuts is a whole different criticism, but that was true of V3 as well. Better to have to work a little to find that a solution to your problem exists than not having one at all).
You gave me the occasion to update this article.
"the cards in the decks aren't linked to the card in the pool"
This is technically still true, but it's not such a big concern as I thought it was, because there are new cool options that sort of make up for it. For instance, if you want to add an additional copy of a card you already have in your deck, you don't have to search for the card again, you can right-click on it and choose to add 1-3 additional copies. (The trouble is still there if you removed the last copy and want it back.)
You can update card versions, which is really cool and useful. For instance, I just sold old versions of cards and re-bought them as cheaper VMA versions. If I open a deck that has a card marked as no more in my collection, with just one right-click I can have the client automatically update ALL instances of it with those in my collection.
This is particularly useful for lands, if you manage your collection properly. I only own Unhinged lands. Say I want to add 10 Forests to my deck. With V3, I needed to go to Forest (usually by typing "Fore..." with the mouse hovering on the pool), then scroll until the Promo Unhinged version was shown. With V4, I just have to add basic lands with the automatic "draft-like" button, then click on one of the Forests and tell the client to replace them all with those in my collection, that are the right ones. Much much quicker, for once.
"the cards can't be enlarged outside of the preview window"
They can. You can zoom on them with the right mouse button as before. My bad.
"the large preview card gets in the way (I don't even try to have it active)"
Considering the zoom on the card is there, and quicker, the preview window is totally useless and can remain hidden, so no problem there.
"the decks can't be saved locally"
They can. And very easily. Right click on the deck's name (the right mouse button will save us all!), then choose Export. Compared to V3 this process has become much quicker, because the deck files come pre-named with the same name they had in the client, so you don't have to write down a name anymore.
It's also easy to keep the decks stored in the hard disk and use the "import" function just in the same way you would use the "load" function in V3.
The need to flash a fancy title and tell that you have 32 years of experience significantly reduces the value of your arguments to me. If your arguments were good enough to stand alone then there would be no need for that other stuff. But I see that wasnt the case.
I'm afraid you lost me when you started enumerating specific "things that don't work in V4". Because at that point your approach devolved into a simple, and too common, "I don't want to have to learn new things" mindset. Which, it's everyone's right to have. But if everybody had this approach, we all still be using Netscape Navigator and typing commands on MS-DOS, I guess.
I'm critical of all the many aspects of the V4 that need work. Very critical. For instance, you can find an article of mine here where I demolish the entire editor. But you know, to do that, I spent actual time making tests. And then tests. And then some more tests. I'm (among other things) a film critic. I don't write a review of a movie without sitting through it. All of it. Sometimes twice. That's how you make your criticism on point. (And by the way, a few of those things I lamented has been fixed in the meantime. They've been fixing stuff like crazy in the last few weeks.)
"Smileys are gone. The trophy, the mana symbol icons, the actual little smile. Vaporized."
Nope. All this stuff is still there. I know because I needed them to run events, so I opened a chat room and tried all them out. They're the same codes as before. Trophy is [sD], mana symbols are [sW], [sU], [sB], [sR], [sG], smile is [sS] (and so on: [sT] is the tap symbol, [sJ] is the untap symbol, etc.). The set symbols are gone, and the links to the cards are gone. I'm pretty sure it was just low priority to implement, once some things are here, the others will follow.
The real reason why the chat is currently abominable is that it's the least dynamic chat I ever seen. No up arrow to repeat the last mex. No copy/paste. You can't even SELECT text! A guy gave me his email address, I couldn't copy it, so I had to type it down by hand. Welcome back, 1995.
"I went to watch a Commander game, and saw two players. What the heck? Oh, the others were MINIMIZED, clicking + let me see them."
See, this feels like criticizing an improvement only because it's different to what you were used to, so you didn't recognize it as an improvement (or at least, the first implementation of an improvement). As I think you know, I run a multiplayer Commander event since almost 2 years. When my players found out that now you can recycle dead players' space by minimizing them, with just one click, they rejoiced. That's really one of the few things that made people say "good job Wizards" (were you watching other people's games with V3? Because I was, and after someone died it became a nightmare of switched names and assorted bugs. With V4 is actually possible to watch multiplayer games).
Commander in general is having a blast with V4. No more tokens filling the entire battlefield: now they are stacked into piles. No more losing 5 minutes clicking on each of your 324 tokens: now you just click "attack with all" (and you can still leave something out by unclicking it). No more tapping each mana singularly: now you can tap piles of mana at once. If you press M when you tap a land with multiple mana choices, it automatically adds the first mana it can produce. And so on. (I'm sure there are plenty of other "hidden" shortcuts. V3 was filled with them.) (I'm also sure a large percentage of V3 users didn't fully exploit V3).
I'm using it since 10 days, and I, for one, would never want to go back to how it was, where Commander is specifically concerned.
And by the way, if you have a big monitors (or two) you can set the size of the cards to keep them always large (options button, move the slider).
When V3 started, it was essentially unplayable. It took years to get to roughly the same level of functionality the V4 already started with. I came to MTGO in 2009, and people was still losing games because V3 registered your click on "OK" twice and you ended up skipping the combat phase as a result.
V4 is flawed, needs a lot of work, but it's something that feels from the late 2000s. V3 was something that felt from the 1990s. We're in 2014. It was time to change decade.
You should trust yourself first and foremost instead. Like, by trying to do the stuff this article says doesn't work, to find out it, in fact, does.
(I can say the same for stuff I wrongly criticized myself in forum posts and articles, and I was proven wrong, or they fixed it since).
I gave up on MTGO. I no longer "own" any digital cards at all. I've gotten back into paper magic and to be honest I had forgotten how much fun it is to just rip packs. You'd don't "just rip packs" on MTGO. Each pack is a precious resource.
I'd forgotten what it's like to interact with an actual human across the table. I'm enjoying Magic again for the first time in a while.
As for WOTC, I've interacted with some people from the company and every time I tried to express my concerns, all I got seemed like, "We know what we're doing, we're the experts. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain."
MTGO is a real cash cow and as long as they can keep new blood coming in they will see no need to listen to anyone.
Side note about ripping packs: the store I buy singles from has some young guys who play a game called "flip and rip." They open packs and randomly choose a card from that pack and rip it in half before checking to see what it is. Recently two guys ponied up $200 each to buy a box of Modern Masters. The old flip-and-rip game hit a Tarmogoyf and a foil Cryptic Command.
Every time I walk in the store and see those cards stapled to the bulletin board I want to throw up.
This article pretty much sums up my feelings about wizards and v4. I mentioned your forum post on commanders hq and I was hoping to see an article from you. Personally I liked v3 and wish they would revert back to it and just fix all the damn things that should have been fixed for years. But sadly I've come to terms with wotc not giving a crap about what anyone has to say about one of their products. I love edh and mtgo is my main way if playing it, but my time playing edh on the v4 client and even just playing anything on the v4 client is highly limited. Sadly though, many still play on it and stream with the client, so wotc has no reason to listen I guess? Though I am perfectly willing and hoping I am wrong.
Wow nice double post in editing there pure. :) (Sorry for the double post.)
I'm really surprised Vault key is legit in Heirloom. Also it seems like trinket mage would be better than Captain of the mists. Is it legal in Heirloom? (imho you should link a legal list to every heirloom article you do and probably the heirloom site if that is still actively maintained.
Thanks!
I don't think that Blue Based Tempo is a thing. That isn't to say that there aren't Blue tempo decks, but that these decks tend to use Blue as the support color rather than the base color. I will be covering W/u, B/u, and R/u variations under the relevant articles.
The main reason why there is no real Blue Based Tempo deck is that the Blue creature base doesn't support it. Blue has no real two drop outside of Aquamoeba, which isn't really where you want to be in an aggressive, non-madness strategy. Sea Drake, Serendib Efreet, and Skywing Aven are all fine beaters but your curve can't start at three and you can't rely on the first two as they are uncommon.
That said, you'll be seeing plenty of love for the tempo crew (Man o' War, Repel, and Choking Tethers) in the other articles!
Actually, I think this sums it up perfectly! :)