And that's just the fucking spirit one and I'm missing cards that are both dope and playable.
Is it good here yeah you know what else it's good it sphinx tribal another deck type that people wanted a commander for that makes it pretty ok a commander that doubles them hell yeah. More aptly did anyone actually look at those new spirit cards I'm sorry any non legendary flyer for 2 please. And holly shit a playible spirits deck that factors all of the spirit mechanics we have so far into a commander that can use them and befits both from them and for them. Instead of going jesus turn 3 1/1 flying ulamolg the ceaseless hunger. It bothers me that everyone is like OMG the reprints are trash why cant we get anything good. Which is of course is another complaint of the commander players that nothing good ever enters the pool that's not super overpowered or green well congrats we got non green playable but not overpowered in a deck and people are unsurprisingly bitching about it. Also precons are NOT the place for reprints if you fill the deck with reprints then the deck would be pointless as no new cards would ever enter circulation that are commander exclusive and interesting. On that note the spirit deck is 96 dollars on cardkingdom and 88 on TCGplayer so you are at minimum making double profits which is pretty fucking good. You bitching about the spirit precon not being up to standard wont help the situation at all. Should we stop the predatory tactics yes. You think you not buying these effects their bottom line? It doesn't, they make most of their money on set/collectors boosters and every other specialty you cant get it anywhere else bullshit. The conversation isn't pointless just because it isn't using "perfect objective facts." But starting an argument about how much better of evidence you have because it's numbers instead of stories is pretty pointless, especially when the person you started it with acknowledged that their evidence was only anecdotal. Data from EDHrec is valuable if you understand its limitations, in the same way that anecdotes are valuable if you understand their limitations.
Consider that if you're going to enter into a discussion and throw out statistics to disprove other people's experiences, you should be prepared to have those statistics, their sources, and the assumptions you're making challenged. Not every conversation needs airtight statistics to make it valid or meaningful. All of it is meaningless and pointless." And that complete misread of my point is only possible if you presume that any and all discussion of anecdotal evidence is useless. See, this attitude only holds up if you assume what I said was "imperfect data sources are absolutely useless just like anecdotal evidence.
0 kommentar(er)
