Skip to content

Tocs Redle#81388

My feedback

9 results found

  1. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Tocs Redle#81388 shared this idea  · 
  2. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Tocs Redle#81388 commented  · 

    You are correct. My misconception that it applied to any White spell. Thank you for pointing out my error.

    Tocs Redle#81388 shared this idea  · 
  3. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Tocs Redle#81388 commented  · 

    Referencing 113.7a - The problem with your response is this:
    Player A wishes to tap a permanent so as to cause a triggered event.
    Player B responds with an instant, prior to the object being tapped, destroying the permanent. Since the object is no longer on the battlefield, it cannot be tapped causing the triggered effect.

    Reverse the stack, Player B casts a spell to destroy a permanent.
    In response, Player A taps the permanent resulting in a triggered effect. That effect is on the stack now, independent of the permanent that is pending destruction. The triggered effect will then happen.

    This is the the reason there is a stack and timing rules. Both players have the option to respond to any intended action, thereby, possibly preventing the intended action from taking place.

    Further evidence of the timing issues that plague Arena are as follows:

    Electrostatic Infantry gains a +1/+1 if you cast an instant or sorcery. Controlling Player attempts to cast an instant.
    Opposing Player cast a Counter spell, negating the instant that was cast.
    Electrostatic Infantry still gets the +1/+1 even though the spell was never successfully cast. This all should resolve in order of the stack and the creature should not get the counter.

    Tocs Redle#81388 shared this idea  · 
  4. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Tocs Redle#81388 shared this idea  · 
  5. 1 vote

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Tocs Redle#81388 shared this idea  · 
  6. 5 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Tocs Redle#81388 supported this idea  · 
  7. 4 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Tocs Redle#81388 supported this idea  · 
  8. 2 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    Tocs Redle#81388 shared this idea  · 
  9. Algorithm Improvement

    908 votes

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)

    We’ll send you updates on this idea

    How important is this to you?

    We're glad you're here

    Please sign in to leave feedback

    Signed in as (Sign out)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    Tocs Redle#81388 commented  · 

    Please review your algorithm that shuffles (randomizes) the deck. I consistently either draw no lands or only draw lands. Many times I have had matches where I drew 10 land in a row, only having 5 spells the entire match. My deck ratio of lands is 1:3. I should be drawing a land every third card, not 10 lands in a row, or conversely, no lands in 10 or 11 turns.

    Tocs Redle#81388 supported this idea  · 

Feedback and Knowledge Base