If you could, how would you improve Standard?

[Mnemosyne]

Interested to know what you guys think of this! Please vote, and comment on your choices, if you wish.

[CardAgain Sweater]

I only voted for one: encourage creativity by rewarding deck diversity - but I'm not sure how that gets done. All the reward I need is already there - I don't find a whole lot of fun in downloading a decklist and playing it as is. Also, I believe a lot of players would feel the opposite and be perfectly happy running some combination of cards someone else had to sweat and scheme and practice/test.

The internet is great for researching cards and learning tips and rule interpretations, but it has lead to some degree of lazyness in deckbuilding imo. If 80% of the players think "If I wanna win, statistics say I have to play one of these three decklists to have a chance", it makes sense that 80% of the top 8 finishers at the highly publicized and followed pro events will have a large % (maybe around 80%, all things being equal?) of players who played one of those three decks. When what those statistics usually say is "those three decks give a slightly better chance, all things being equal, and considering only the ten or so decks you are most likely to face".

It's been less than two months since The Worst Deck Ever was banned (one particular cat, anyway). Doesn't it seem waaaay too early to ban a card like marvel or scrounger? There are several one card solutions in standard, most of them useful in plenty of other matchups.

Maybe each new large set should live in a probationary period while it is played limited only (at sanctioned events). Then it could get released to standard, then modern after it's block rotates - if no terrible interactions are found with too few chances available to disrupt in each format. Of course, that would probably mean much lower sales on new sets as older format players wouldn't be able to use the cards for some time, so that is only a 'wouldn't it be nice if they could' idea. I guess the whole ban thing is a gamble now, so perhaps it wouldn't be so different.

Anyway, I like the idea of there being more reward for a diversity of decks that a majority of players have fun playing. Can't see a negative to that for anyone.

[CardAgain Sweater]

  Doesn't it seem waaaay too early to ban a card like marvel or scrounger? There are several one card solutions in standard, most of them useful in plenty of other matchups.

Well, shet ma mouf.

[Mnemosyne]

I only voted for one: encourage creativity by rewarding deck diversity - but I'm not sure how that gets done. All the reward I need is already there - I don't find a whole lot of fun in downloading a decklist and playing it as is. Also, I believe a lot of players would feel the opposite and be perfectly happy running some combination of cards someone else had to sweat and scheme and practice/test.

The internet is great for researching cards and learning tips and rule interpretations, but it has lead to some degree of lazyness in deckbuilding imo. If 80% of the players think "If I wanna win, statistics say I have to play one of these three decklists to have a chance", it makes sense that 80% of the top 8 finishers at the highly publicized and followed pro events will have a large % (maybe around 80%, all things being equal?) of players who played one of those three decks. When what those statistics usually say is "those three decks give a slightly better chance, all things being equal, and considering only the ten or so decks you are most likely to face".

It's been less than two months since The Worst Deck Ever was banned (one particular cat, anyway). Doesn't it seem waaaay too early to ban a card like marvel or scrounger? There are several one card solutions in standard, most of them useful in plenty of other matchups.

Maybe each new large set should live in a probationary period while it is played limited only (at sanctioned events). Then it could get released to standard, then modern after it's block rotates - if no terrible interactions are found with too few chances available to disrupt in each format. Of course, that would probably mean much lower sales on new sets as older format players wouldn't be able to use the cards for some time, so that is only a 'wouldn't it be nice if they could' idea. I guess the whole ban thing is a gamble now, so perhaps it wouldn't be so different.

Anyway, I like the idea of there being more reward for a diversity of decks that a majority of players have fun playing. Can't see a negative to that for anyone.

I think that is well reasoned. Some people enjoy building others don't...
I would love to see people build more decks so the top8 meta isn't consumed by 3-4 decks only.
People find a formula and stick to it, stifling creativity.
I personally would like to most of the above implemented somehow, improving general research is important, so that people don't find an exploit and abuse it. There are ways to reward creativity, for those who can come up with something that is different and yet yields good results. Perhaps giving buys to players that have deck lists or archetypes that are different to the mainstream decks seen. In this case I am talking about tournaments, opposed to local meta.

[acidzero]

Wish I could have selected more than 2! lol

Big ones for me are encouraging creativity in deck building.  I really feel that top tier decks dominate so much because of a lack of creativity in deck building.  I also feel like having answers printed (Been saying since kaladesh we needed to have a way to interact with an opponents energy was needed, this would have possibly prevented banning of marvel too)

I would have loved them to stick to the new old rotation a bit longer - the 18 month rotation kept standard fresher.  Right now we are hitting the issues of things should not only have rotated in their plans but there are too many cards in standard.  Having a smaller card pool allows the sets in standard to shine more versus a powerful card overshadowing things for up to 2 years not allowing sets to shine on their own.

[CardAgain Sweater]

Addendum: I agree that Wizards had a big miss when they introduced energy.  It is a stand in for mana in that it powers activated abilities. You can't steal / destroy mana once it has been gained.

You can make things cost more mana, though. This was were Wizards missed a big opportunity to allow for disrupting an opponent's energy-centric strategy. If it was possible to make Marvel more expensive, it wouldn't have had the perception - whether deserved or not - of being unapproachably unbeatable. Another way to increase the cost of those strategies would be to not let creatures and artifacts untap next untap step after using an activated ability that has the tap symbol and costs energy. Depending on the power of this it could be a global enchantment, target opponent, or target creature/artifact. Instants wouldn't work on activated abilities.

EDIT: Thought of a way to have it be an instant - tax the use the next time it is used. Make it cost 1 or 2 more energy, maybe scale it so energy costs 3 and under cost 1 more, energy costs 4 and higher cost 2 more. They even could have called it "Tezzeret's Taxation", or simply "Aether Tax" It could be "Choose one: next use of energy activated ability of target card costs 2 more energy - all energy activated abilities cost 1 more until end of turn".

Another way to go maybe capping total energy stored at opponent's end step, or capping amount that can be gained per turn. As it stands one can do some wacky things to get 50 energy in a single turn if one is so inclined.

The Marvel ban was somewhat influenced by the fact that the big cheater creature that was about to rotate out will just be replaced by Bolas - and now we know about Legendary Dinosaurs - but I am hoping it also points to energy being a mechanic they are going to return to before Marvel would have rotated out. Last thing the haters/complainers needed was to have to compete against Marvel Decks that don't need to play subpar cards just to get enough energy.

[G. Moto]

That's why I think that there should be a separate duelist league. Maybe like a non-professional duel circuit where your rank and how well you do is influenced by the creativity of the deck. For example, each circuit could have a particular task such as  "Gain 50 life during the course of the duel" or "deal 20 points of damage outside of combat". Having goals or tasks for the competitors to achieve during their matches would create a new environment and open up hundreds of deck building ideas.

[CardAgain Sweater]

So, we got the card that can finally mess with an opponent's energy coming in HOU; the marvel ban seems even less justified now.

Anyhoo, I was thinking about Standard being the 4 most recent blocks and the change Wizards made in that new blocks may be 1, 2, or 3 (or more, I guess) sets, not the basic one large set and one smaller set that we currently have in standard: BattleZendikar/OathGatewatch, ShadowsInnistrad/EldritchMoon, Kaladesh/AetherRevolt, Amonkhet/HourDevastation.

With blocks that may have odd #'s of sets, will the four block rule mean that at rotation the number of cards in standard can shift significantly? If we have 4 blocks with: 1 set, 2 sets, 1 set, 3 sets - that would be about 200-300 cards less than standard right now, all things being close to equal. Maybe thats why they needed the core sets.

[Soren841]

I would improve Standard by making it Legacy

[CardAgain Sweater]

I would improve Standard by making it Legacy

Awesome. That doesn't further the conversation regarding standard as a format at all.

Sorry to be a buzzkill, but take that to reddit if you want the lulz. This is a website that barely gets any active comment traffic, so any comedic gold is wasted here. No one got time to wholeheartedly and genuinely respond to something like that - but since I did, how would changing standard format to legacy format improve the format of standard?

[Soren841]

Standard is boring Dx too few cards I don't find it fun

[G. Moto]

 So increasing the card pool for standard then? This would be done by increasing the length of time that sets stay in standard longer. This might not be the best idea because some over-powered decks that make the game unfair would stay around longer. Speeding up the set rotation out would cause people to be more creative with their deck builds on the fly. But it may make cards cost more and prices shoot up since the value of cards will be higher due to their demand.

[CMiller]

I would like it if WoTC tested out card synergies like Aetherworks Marvel and Ulamog, the Ceaseless Hunger so certain decks don't dominate Standard.

[Soren841]

The overpowered decks wouldn't be so overpowered, because of the higher amounts of cards there would be more viable strategies and more ways to experiment

[NolanMiller]

Making two separate leagues would be both good and bad. Pros: Noobs won't instantly get crushed by more experienced players. Cons: If you are at the top of your league, you might stay there.