Skip to content

MGmirkin#16543

My feedback

23 results found

  1. 15 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  2. 551 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  3. 23 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  4. 3 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  5. 22 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  6. 3 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    Yep, still doing it. Fix Sparky...

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    Jeez, sparky has 4 creatures, I have 3, and Sparky can't make up its mind what to do...

    Ugh... This is dumb. So many games I've had to concede to Sparky today 'cause sparky just sits there stalling.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    And, this time I didn't even have any token-generators in play, just like 7 creatures. And Sparky stalled on her turn for like 5+ minutes until I just had to concede the match. Sparky shouldn't be allowed to stall-cheat... :P

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    Not just Scute Swarm, I guess... Only had Crawling Infestations in play this time, and only about 4 insect tokens and roughly 10 creatures overall.

    Sparky just hung going "Hmm" repeatedly for like 3-5 minutes deciding whether or not to attack on her turn.

    Had to concede the game due to Sparky "stalling" whilst "stalling out." Ugh... Annoying.

    MGmirkin#16543 shared this idea  · 
  7. 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    A-aand it did it again I Stormed my opponent with a "Tendrils of Agony," which hit like 20 times, then I cast Grapeshot as my timer was running down, went to target my opponent with it, got one or two clicks in, the timer ran out, and it Grapeshot **me** 40 times in the face leaving me back at 4 life (I was at 44 life after my Tendrils of Agony went off).

    And my jerk of an opponent took advantage of it, refused to concede, and then killed me the next turn with his own tendrils of agony.

    God I hate this stupid bug... I'm so over this bloody nonsense. Fix this rubbish. Stop shoving my own Grapeshots or Tendrils down my own throat when I'm CLEARLY targeting my opponent. This is stupid. And I shouldn't be losing matches STRICTLY because of this nonsense. #FFS

    MGmirkin#16543 shared this idea  · 
  8. 29 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    With respect to the roping out issue, it's annoying A.F. Especially when people intentionally or unintentionally leave a match before it starts, so you're left sitting through several rounds of timers before they blow up. But also, sometimes you get sore losers who hate losing and will just sit there running down timers, intentionally, and like clicking on something to move to the next step or phase **just before** their timer runs out so they then get a new timer to continue running down.

    In my opinion, the start of game timer situation and some others could be reduced by **not giving people a "grace period"** if they already ran down one timer. During their last step, phase, or turn. Like if they fully ran down their timers to zero. When they move on to the next step / phase / turn they shouldn't get any "extra" "bonus time." Like at the start of the game, if they rand down a timer to zero last turn, currently it gives them a good 15-30 seconds *before* it starts a new timer on them.

    IMO, if they ran it down last turn (intentionally or due to disconnecting [intentionally or otherwise]), it should **immediately start a new timer** as soon as their next turn starts. Only if they're actually present, and actually do active things should that timer go away. Otherwise, make them go boom and let me move on to the next match, not waste five minutes on unnecessary extra timers waiting on someone who's disconnected and not even there.

    Why punish the person who's present and ready to play, making them wait for someone who's not present intentionally or otherwise? I feel like some people do it intentionally to make people concede the match in order to not waste time waiting for timers, and get "free wins," or whatever.

    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  9. 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)
    An error occurred while saving the comment
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    THIS.

    It's lost me several games recently that I should have outright won. Very very annoying...

    When you put a Storm card on the stack, you initially target it **at something** (either opponent's face or their creatures typically).

    If that something is still a valid target when you time out, and the game starts auto-playing, the original target should be the **default** target as long as it's still a valid target.

    ONLY if the original target is no longer a valid target should it randomize the new target(s).

    But, EVEN THEN, it should prioritize blowing up your opponent's face or your opponent's creatures, rather than literally just nuking yourself in the face (losing the game relatively immediately), which no sane HUMAN player would ever willingly choose to do.

    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  10. 14 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  11. 9 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    I too play Storm (Grapeshot & Tendrils of Agony) in an Invasion of Alara + Displacer Kitten deck. The stack stacks high with my shenanigans, including often getting both Tendrils of Agony and Grapeshot on the stack. Both of which start by **you** **choosing** a target.

    However, I've found that when a timer runs out and the game starts "quick-playing" the stack (and ignoring a bunch of targeted or user-input stuff), it buggers-up badly and "randomizes" the targets for the new copies of Storm, **ignoring** your original targeting directive(s).

    In my opinion, if the original target [e.g., your opponent's face] when casting Grapeshot or Tendrils of Agony or other such targeted Storm cards is still a legal target and you run out of time, it should take the original directive as the **DEFAULT** target for all subsequent "Storm" copies if you time/rope out.

    **If** the original target [e.g. a creature] is **no longer** a valid target, then I'm relatively fine with randomizing the other target(s). But, really it should **almost never** target **your own face** or **your own creatures/planeswalkers** unless there is literally **no other legal target.**

    Like why on God's green Earth would I ever nuke my own face or my own board of creatures rather than A) My opponent's face [winning the game, or getting closer to winning the game] -or- B) my opponent's board of creatures [eliminating defenders or offensive threats]?

    There is almost **no circumstance** under which I'd willingly/intentionally nuke my own face with either Grapeshot or Tendrils or Agony.

    It's just ... a **beyond stupid** decision by the algorithm. Please, fix it.

    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  12. 3 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    A similar bug happens with Helm of the Host on Raiyuu, I think? It allowed the opponent multiple attack phases beyond just 2 or 3...?

  13. 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 shared this idea  · 
  14. 8 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    7) to whatever degree possible, "spectating" should not impact game performance for either of the players being spectated. Like, it would be more like a "broadcast" to other players that wouldn't hopefully impact like play or performance of say trigger resolution or other things. Since Spectators wouldn't be part of the game itself, ideally they shouldn't have any impact on it, by and large, if at all possible. More just passively viewing and hopefully not bogging down or lagging the servers, etc., in a way that would negatively impact actual play...

    MGmirkin#16543 shared this idea  · 
  15. 20 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  16. 215 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  17. 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  18. 3 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)
    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  19. 3 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    No, it DOESN'T. And it's NOT SUPPOSED TO.

    https://tappedout.net/mtg-questions/can-you-exile-return-a-token/

    Tokens that leave the battlefield cease to exist and cannot be "returned," unlike physical cards/creatures. Tokens are basically ephemera. If you bounce it, it ceases to exist. If you destroy or exile it, it ceases to exist. So, effects like exile-and-return DO NOT WORK on tokens.

    The functionality of Arena is correct in that respect. This is NOT a bug, it is correct/expected functionality.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    I cast Ixalan's Binding on Draugr Necromancer. My opponent cast Feign Death, the text of which says that if a creature DIES return it to the battlefield tapped with a +1/+1 counter.

    Exile IS NOT "death." Exile never hits the graveyard and does not trigger "dies" effects.

    Destroy? DIES.
    Sacrifice? DIES.
    Exile? DOESN'T DIE, just goes straight into Exile, do not pass go, do not collect $200.

    Lost the game 'cause of that coding error. Feign death SHOULD NOT circumvent Ixalan's Binding (either circumvent it going to exile and/or preventing it from being recast).

    "A creature or planeswalker does not die if a replacement effect sends it to another zone (usually Exile), similar to tokens that are put into a zone other than the graveyard. They cease to exist, but abilities that check if a creature or planeswalker dies do not trigger."
    https://mtg.fandom.com/wiki/Dies

    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
  20. 35 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
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    Another example... Nuked a scute swarm deck. Sadly, his deck had orators which gained obscene life.

    This should not be a "dodge" of losing. They were at 50 life, I was at like 20. I had revenge of ravens, Marauding Blood Priest & Exquisite Blood in play. They attacked triggered revenge, triggered blood priest, triggered exquisite blood, and we were off to the races. Except half way through it cheated me and ended the game a "draw."

    This needs to get fixed. It's bull.

    An error occurred while saving the comment
    MGmirkin#16543 commented  · 

    I just has this BS happen and rob me of a win. Opponent thought he won, I sacked a Lampad to go down to 1 life instead of 0, with Ayara, First of Locthwain in play and Exquisite Blood. Opponent was at 50-some life.

    I top-decked Epicure of Blood and cast it, triggering Ayara to start the infinite combo between Epicure & Exquisite Blood. My life went up, his went down, half way through the slow procession of infinite damage, the match ended in a draw.

    But, it was NOT [should not have been] a draw. I WON. There was a *definite endpoint* at which point my life would have been fifty-something his would have been zero, and I would have explicitly won the game *definitively*.

    It was *not* an "infinite loop" with *no endpoint*. It was an infinite loop with a defined/definite endpoint [barring him having some way to kill my epicure or destroy/exile my Exquisite Blood] where he loses and I win [unlike certain interactions with Polyraptor and whatever the thing is that causes a damage when creatures come into play that goes infinite if you can't break the loop and there is no win condition].

    Had he seen the "infinite combo" and conceded [as most do at that point] I would have *explicitly won*. But he didn't hit the concede button, so the game algorithms robbed me of an explicit win.

    The game need to be smart enough to see when there is a definite endpoint and there *will* be a winner or loser at the end point, if there is nothing in play or hands that will stop the loop until the definite end point is reached.

    You need to fix this bug...

    For that matter, it would be nice if certain multi-trigger things would simply "tally up" and execute all at once if everyone clicks "resolve all." Like with Wildwood Scourge and and Evolution Sage when a land comes into play. Having each trigger have to go one-by-one takes a REALLY LONG TIME. Even when folks click "resolve all" on both ends. It needs to be faster.

    And again, the game needs a way to determine if a loop is truly "infinite" or if there is a defined endpoint. If it's *TRULY* infinite, a DRAW is fine, if there is a defined endpoint, it should not result in a draw.

    I've attached my logs for the latest session, hopefully it's in there...

    -----

    Furthermore: Per Gatherer:

    "If an ability triggers whenever an opponent loses life and causes you to gain life, such as the ability of Exquisite Blood, this will loop until either you win the game or a player takes an action to break the loop."
    https://gatherer.wizards.com/Pages/Card/Details.aspx?multiverseid=485450

    The ruling is clear. This loops should *not* end in a draw. The loop proceeds until you win unless something breaks the loop.

    MGmirkin#16543 supported this idea  · 
← Previous 1

Feedback and Knowledge Base