What is the best resource mechanic you have seen in a card game?

I'm pretty sure most LGSs would just straight up give you some basics if you asked.

One benefit to lands is that it opens up and entirely new permanent type for design and interaction. Utility lands, man lands, lands with unique effects, cards that interact with lands, etc. are a huge part of mtg and add a completely different style of play than other tcgs. This of course comes at the cost of screw/flood like you mentioned, but that is really only an issue in limited and in some standard formats. Decks in higher powered formats usually have a lot of ways to either mitigate randomness in mana, operate with very little mana, or make use of mana flood.

one color decks are almost never competitive

I hate what lands does to you when it fucks up, but I love the deckbuilding potential that Wizards has. And it just isn't possible in the same way when you either go resourceless or spells-as-resources or take it out of player's hands like Hearthstone.

Richard Garfield actually has a great talk about it, I think it was called dice chess or something? He goes over a bit why the inherent luck factor makes the game more accessible to beginners, and I *think* talks about land count as well?

Sligh would like a word.

I think they are trying to gradually lower prices. Both sets of fetches were recently reprinted. I remember when deltas were over $100, now they are like $20, but nobody got mad. Everybody liked that the expensive cards got reprinted and khans sold a ton. The only thing they can't (or won't) change is the original duals, which is unfortunate but chinamen fakes will crash them sooner or later.

For a counterpoint to this, I love seeing four and five color decks now and then, and three colors should run somewhat smoothly. The problem is the availability of Mana fixing. It always bugged me as a child that I couldn't reasonably play as some arch wizard badass who had mastered all five colors without selling a kidney for special land cards. I like all the new lands and think they should make more. The problem is their lack of availability and the lack of different incentives to build mono or dual color.

Sligh hasn't been a thing in a long time.

mono-red is one of the best standard decks right now. mono-black and mono-blue devotion were some of the best decks in their format. In modern you could play burn, death and taxes, or pox. You could also play basic heavy decks like storm or UW control. There are definitely decks you can build in multiple formats with cheap mana bases

>Utility lands,
>Lands with unique effects
As I said, Wow solved this with Quests. Basically, every card was also a Land, but you could have cards that are basically special lands.

>cards that interact with lands
There's room for this in all the games I mentioned as you are still using cards as resources. DBS even has cards that interact with energy (Senzu bean untaps 2 energy, There's one character who forces your opponent to destroy lands.)

>man lands,
Not sure what this is unless you mean lands that can become creatures. If I am right, then fair enough, it's hard to do that without specific energy cards.

>This of course comes at the cost of screw/flood like you mentioned, but that is really only an issue in limited and in some standard formats. Decks in higher powered formats usually have a lot of ways to either mitigate randomness in mana, operate with very little mana, or make use of mana flood.
Fair enough, I've never played at a competitive level, but it still strikes me as playing around an inherent flaw in the game.

I think I covered that in my response to the other post, but if you've got something to add let me know.

>Richard Garfield actually has a great talk about it, I think it was called dice chess or something? He goes over a bit why the inherent luck factor makes the game more accessible to beginners, and I *think* talks about land count as well?
I've seen that talk, and I agree with the role luck plays in a good game. But I feel like Lands are a flawed mechanic.

having the powerful lands at rare always mystified me. Besides manlands, none of them have the inherent draft powerlevel to break the limited format any more than Wizards already does.

>Not sure what this is unless you mean lands that can become creatures. If I am right, then fair enough, it's hard to do that without specific energy cards.
Indeed.

$$$

Right? I get having some at rare for the same reason as any other card because ooo great mystical fountain or whatever, but basic fixing? Let Timmy and Tammy play their fancy cards before they get mana screwed too many times and quit. Everyone should be able to play five color if they want to, and dual or monocolor can be reincentivized by even more effeciency and or devotion mechanisms. Gah!

Best was World of Warcraft trading card game. I believe you could turn any card face down to use as a resource plus they had quest cards whose main use was for a resource and if you fulfilled requirements you'd get a reward from them.

I really like Netrunner's clicks. I'm less fond of Netrunner's credits.

>Any deck can easily do 3 colors
That's the fault of WotC's current design philosophy rather than the game mechanic itself. In fact, the land mechanic at its simplest encourages you to play mono-colored decks. WotC, however, wanting to encourage more variety has decided to print a cycle of dual lands every block which leads to an oversaturation of them and three- and four-colored decks constantly being playable, as compared to about ten years ago and earlier when dual lands where only printed in blocks where it made sense. Back then which colors to play was an actual consideration.

They have the devotion mechanic, they should bloody use it. I want a practical reason to build a mono green druid deck beyond being poor. (Obviously because green is awesome, but that's subjective)

All colors can be encouraged rather than using denial of access as some kind of fucked up balancing mechanic.

>What is the best resource mechanic you have seen in a card game?
the spoils. at the beginning of your turn you have to choose between drawing or playing a "land", you can play face down creatures or spells as lands like many other games. The difference between a real land and a face down creature is that cards have a cost which is how many resources you have to tap and a threshold in lands. So for example if you control 2 greed lands and 10 face down cards, you can tap for twelve playing cards any amount of cards which require 2 or less greed.
>What is the worst resource mechanic you have seen in a card game?
Has to be Yu Gi Oh

WoW TCG had the best resource system. You could either place any card of your hand facedown from your hand, but there were also quest and location cards which gave which have different effects.

>That's the fault of WotC's current design philosophy
with current you mean since the beginning when MTG had the free dual lands or since onslaught when the dual lands were joined by fetches?

Since original Zendikar about as that's the point since they have included a dual land cycle in every block.

This. Recently though they've been pushing it down a bit in power level, mostly by making the duals not come in untapped but have some other utility. Again, without Aether Hub I doubt standard could handle 3 color manabases outside of hard control decks that would want 12 cycle lands and potentially shit teir tribal decks with thag one land in Ixalan.

>in the formats that matter
I feel like you're saying this specifically to exclude Pauper, which seems pretty dumb. Both of the problems you mention don't exist in Pauper, but you ignore it because it "doesn't matter". Why not play the format that addresses your problems with the game?
Unironically, Pauper is Magic the way Richard Garfield intended.

earlier than that even, I think there has been dual land cycles in every block since ravnica

Duel Masters
Hearthstone

Kamigawa had duals too, they were just dogshit.

If they were mad enough to reprint Ancient Ziggurat I wouldn't be surprised to see merfolk stand up to 4C Energy.
And that's, ultimatedly, the problem. The line between lands, spells and creatures/artifacts/enchantments has been breached. Fucking Siege Rhino would have gotten banned during Urza's block. But nowadays it's not even good enough for Modern, hell it's not even played in Frontier.

Do nonrare cycles even count? not like anyone wil play the gainlife lands in standard ever and even if they do it's a real cost.

No. Alara didn't have one.

Pauper has less players than Legacy and you can't do anything fun.

...

>and you can't do anything fun.
Sorry but pauper is a place where atog is a viable card so you can just get out of my face.

Atog doesn't do anything unique or special, you cpuld be playing with an arcbound ravager instead which is better.

Yugiohs resource system is called "card advantage" and "tempo". The problem the lack of a traditional resource system is that it throws game progression, meaning from the beginning decks can come come out at top speed, and it makes cards way less granular and makes value flatter. A 1 drop 2/1 isnt a great card, but in certain decks its just what they need because its cheap.

>vtes, main resource is your own life pool
>mtg, maybe not the worst, but atleast boring as crap

>Its not a unique effect so it isnt fun
I hope you dont play magic considering how derivitive 90% of cards are at this point, if you cant have fun unless cards are 100% totally unique

I really loved Alteil resource system.

>you begin the game with 3 mana
>get 2 mana/turn
>can spend mana on raising your "spheres" (this is permanent) or playing cards
>you need to have high enough spheres to play a card (equal to the level of the same color; so to play a level 3 red card you need to have 3 in red sphere)
>you can play 1 card/turn
>monster cards when they die refund your mana, but you lose 1 life
>you can revive monster cards for 1 mana, but the mana is gone (isn't refunded on death)

Lead to a very nice game-flow.

This seems obscenely complicates.

I think land has a lot of upaides tjst blansce and outweigh its downsides so I think its a fine system overall, but theres some things about it that doesnt get talked about a lot that I think are some cons.

One, the one land a turn rule is tough to track in paper. Its actually easy enough in the beginning, but around the midgame imo is where it starts getting annoying to remember, when people start missing land drops. Its easy to take for granted but just think about all the times playing commander or something where you have to ask "has a land been played this turn?" I learned about this being an issue playing Shadowverse. I think you could do evolves in a paper game, but the issue is remembering how many evopves you have and hownmany you have left. Digital makes it nothing you to worry sbout, but paper Magic doesnt have an indicator of if you played a land or not.

To clarify, the game starts with 30 pool, 1st player has 1 point to transfer, 2nd 2, 3rd 3, 4th 4, 5th 4, then it stays at 4 for the rest of the game. The minions cost from 1 to 11 and they in turn use their own blood to fuel their actions. This brings about a neat mechanic of having to balance your momentum and usually use some sort of sustain.

Not that, I'm just saying he doesn't make your deck any different or interesting. Take a deck like lantern, or stax, or manaless dredge and so on, decks way more expensive than pauper, but their game plan actually tries to do something unusual and fun instead of Atog being just a weaker common.