Both are good summaries, different things click for different people.

Does anyone know when we'll start hearing about Commander 2015?

I do not know when the news begins on new Commander sets.

But, I am pretty keen on finding out what's going to happen with C15 and when it might get sold.

@doppelgreener As far as I can tell, it hasn't even been announced yet

Yeah, I can find no mention of it in the googles except for people speculating on it back in March and February.

And they aren't even going to start spoiling BFZ until September

Hm. Both C13 and C14 came out in November, now that I check.

So, maybe

It's weird. It feels like C14 just came out, but I also know that we're most of the way into 2015

It sorta feels like that to me too, but the feeling's fading. My group never got C14 because we still hadn't gotten much out of our C13 decks, but now in retrospect I see they played around with a bunch of new cards specifically for interacting with other players which can be used to forge tentative alliances or bolster up a weak player you'd like to hang in there a bit longer (so that they can weaken your enemies).

That's a very different kind of interaction to C13's Tempt cards.

Plus, C14 seems more combat-heavy like the current standard, C13 is more sorcery- and instant-heavy like I hear the game used to be. It's based on the Shards of Alara which was from 2008, but I remember a developer saying they only actually got creatures right around 2010.

I may have that 2010 date wrong, but what I recall is there was a point where in Magic where creatures were generally the weaker ways of getting things done, and the more powerful cards were instants and sorceries, and they were what won the game, and combat wasn't so significant. Then they finally got creatures hitting a nice point somewhere along the way and they became useful in their own right, and nowadays the game is deliberately designed to emphasize combat as a primary mode of victory.

I think that's really just been a general trend for the last several years

Creatures got stronger and spells got weaker

Yeah.

It might be easier to avoid making a broken creature than a broken spell, especially if the ability revolves around combat which (almost always) happens only once per turn

I really can't remember what set it was or where I read it... but I do remember one of the archive articles pointing out a specific edition or year where the dev felt that Wizards actually got creatures right, i.e. they began to equal or exceed spells in terms of power and become significantly valuable.

@murgatroid99 Yeah. Also, creatures can be removed by every colour. Only blue can really deal with spells.

I'm also thinking of mechanics that seem relatively reasonable, but are completely broken when you build a deck around them.

Like Storm

Oh yeah. @_@

I remember now there are decks designed to do insane things with Grapeshot.

I somewhat recently got a chance to play a Tendrils deck

It's insane. Consistent wins within the first few turns, through countermagic

Wow. @_@

Basically, i think they didn't consider spells that generate mana and spells that draw cards when they made storm

On the other hand, Infect is a good example of a broken combat ability, but that's from Scars, which fits with the 2010 timeframe you mentioned

@murgatroid99 Was it really broken? :O

I recently built a Modern Infect deck on MTGO for less than a dollar, and I got a turn 2 kill one game

Wow. @_@

That's... that's nuts.

I have never seen it in action, but it seemed like the Scars of Mirrodin and New Phyrexia blocks were fast-paced, very lethal, and encouraged surrendering chunks of life (which meant you'd also get defeated faster by anyone not relying on Infect).

I still remember the combo. Turn 1 Glistener Elf, Turn 2 Mutagenic Growth + Giant Growth + Groundswell

I think almost every card in that deck was in Standard simultaneously

The single exception being Predator's Strike, and that could easily be swapped out for something else

Yeah, Scars block was fast, and in every draft the primary choice was "Do I go Infect, or not?"

But Infect is dumb because it's equivalent to having your opponent start at half life and getting a free unremovable Everlasting Torment

Except that you can still gain life

and you can still gain life and it won't matter? :P

I mean, having your opponent dealing you damage in the form of Poison counters is effectively the same as being unable to gain life

Unless for some insane reason you have Leeches in your deck

That card is notable primarily because it is the only card ever printed that can remove Poison counters

and that is all it can do and usually isn't worthwhile, I imagine?

Yeah, all it does is remove all your (target player's) Poison counters, and you lose that much life. Basically, it's from Homelands, and it's not usually listed among the playable Homelands cards.

Melira is a card that exists : p

That is a true statement

And is very much a playable card, although less of a sideboard card.

A: I'm not sure why you would maindeck Melira. B: what's your point?

A. Because Melira combo is a very real deck, especially with collected company, although Anafenza is more commonly run. B. No point, you simply said Leeches was the only way to deal with poison counters.

@Waterseas I didn't. I said it's the only way to remove poison counters

Fair enough

Karn Liberated technically can XD

If only Hex Parasite could target a player...

<3 Hex Parasite, just because tis hilariously relevant at unexpected times in games sometimes.

Wow I just figured out that proliferate can add a counter to an opponent's suspended spell (or your own, but why would you do that?)

Also can proliferate poison counters. Neat

@Rainbolt No it can't, proliferate only works on players and permanents, not cards in any other zones that have counters

I cannot connect to main or meta for some reason

@diego Oh, I must have misread this then

community.wizards.com/comment/33332126#comment-33332126

Yea, I read it backwards

I can connect to main and meta now