Overall, I found this guild fine, but not great.
And if they want to, warriors are welcome in. It wants to lock the ground with beefy butt creature and kill what is problematic and can’t be handle by the board. It want to fly and put counter on its evasive creatures. It’s white half (even if it has some decent removals, and the best one in Sword to Plowshares), is not the deepest in the set in that matter, while its blue half is even least equipped.Īll in all, I’ve conclude this guild does want a little of everything. Otherwise, I found the guild lacks in removals spells. It also has few things that want to die in Doomed Traveler and Riptide Crab. However, I’ve fail to put my finger on the main focus. I’ve notice that a warriors theme is going on a little bit, as is a flyers theme. This guild looks weird to me, since I’ve kind of fail to identify what it’s trying to do other that just defend and have big butt out there. I do.Īnyhow, here’s my overview of all ally guilds in Battlebond: In the scenario, I found it quite hard to believe a strong GB deck could emerge. For example, in order to ensure a 6 packs per team Sealed format is functional, a specific pack could be filled up with, let’s say, mostly GW cards counters theme and few neutral cards like removals, artifacts and stuff, while another specific packs could be loaded with mostly RB warriors theme card and bunch of other neutral stuff. I just don’t know any more if we are going to be permitted to play enemy guild that much. Otherwise, I would have said GB looks like the best one (like I previously mentioned in a thread reply just below). I’ve no problem to evaluate individual cards, put trying to figure out what could be the best decks, while WotC is doing secrets stuff in backstage, is not something I don’t fell really confidant about.įor that reason, I’ll keep my overview of the set quite simple and I will only be analyzing briefly each on the ally guild, which in fact are the (only) ones WotC wants us to play. Like I said though, it seems like WotC R&D crew have a surprise for us and that alone makes me really nervous to put out there my general overview of the set before actually play the set. If Battlebond booster packs were normally design (I mean, if there was no secret track printing shenanigans involve, which seems to be the case) I think I would had a pretty good idea of what are actually the best guilds and strategies in this format. Afterward, I will talk about team combination. First, I’m going to rate every playable guilds. I’ll do my overview if the set in two times.
For my part, I won't be grading rares and mythics, so average rate should be higher than normal since I would consider the greatest commons and uncommons as possible 5/5. Also, I'll grade every card from 0.0 to 5.0, like LSV use to do on his CF serie of articles. Note that those reviews will reflect mainly an analytic point of view of a Limited Sealed format. So there it is : Battlebond Limited Review.īy friday June 1st, I'll be completing here (at least one per day) multiple thread replies that will include the review of all commons and uncommons of each color in the Battlebond set. Anyway, since there isn't anywhere we can find a good pro-level review of the set, I decided to give a shot myself. I don't know if this has anything to do with the weirdness of the format itself (made for Two-Headed Giant only) or just because, to some people, the set looks boring (lot of reprints, synergies trying to shoot in every direction, lack of good arts, etc.). It seems like nobody's doing any Limited review of the most recent MTG set, Battlebond.
0 kommentar(er)
