Pick your Poison: Constructed or Limited
General forum
Posted on May 13, 2013, 10:09 p.m. by SnowCoveredRevenge
Which do you prefer?
For me, nothing beats the anxious countdown to midnight four times a year when your handed six packs and you crack with 40 other people around you. That fresh pack smell, ahhhh it is almost MAGICAL.... YEAAAAAAAAH.
However each side of this coin argues that the counter "Takes no skill." I do not want to hear any of that,
Constructed is the place where you get to show off your awesome ideas, or roll out that format defining powerhouse.
Limited is a non-repeating experience where you see new cards and new interactions.
so let us see a debate, semi-cordial, about which is supreme limited or constructed.
+1 limited
i enjoy both, limited is fine, but i like the draft format more than the sealed, constructed i am a fan of standard modern and legacy, i do love vintage, just out of my price range.
i will say this, limited is much more of a deck builders format, where constructed is much more of a deck tuners format.
i like to think about it this way,limited is like a new shirt, wonderful clean and something new to look at and show off, sometimes it can fit a little awkward but you still strut your stuff.
constructed is like an old sweater you have had for ages, it just fits right all the time and is so comfortable to toss on.
May 13, 2013 11:20 p.m.
Limited is way more fun.
The problem with Constructed is it all revolves around the $$$. Don't get me wrong, skill is a HUGE factor, but he with more money spent on his/her deck has a better chance of winning just off of sheer card power.
Also, Constructed to me feels so.... limited (haha i amuse myself sometimes), but in all honesty it feels like "Play this certain types of decks (Naya Blitz, Bant, etc) or lose." There seems to be no room for creativity.
With Limited, you have suddenly evened the playing ground by a lot. Sure people can get super lucky and pull awesome cards (both in draft and sealed), but all in all Limited is about how well you can put a deck together, know your cards, recognize combos, and basically play with what you have. Limited is the ultimate equalizer, and, in my opinion, takes more thought than playing a deck like Naya Blitz in constructed and just slapping cards on the table until your opponent dies.
May 14, 2013 12:28 a.m.
IAmKingTony says... #5
Limited is by far my favorite format. Way more fun, imo.
May 14, 2013 2:51 a.m.
Really depends on which Constructed format and, to some extent, which Limited format. Vintage and Legacy are far more exciting to me than Drafting, but I like Drafting more than Standard and Modern.
Sealed is probably my least favorite format because it's often about making the best out of a bad situation. I don't like winning because my opponent opened no two drops or losing because my commons were unplayable.
All of this really depends, though, on what sets are available. Kamigawa through Time Spiral was probably my favorite period to play Standard, followed by Mirage through Tempest. I disliked Lorwyn and hated the original Mirrodin for Standard. I also felt as though Lorwyn and Kamigawa were terrible limited formats. Lorwyn was dominated by Faeries and Goblins in Limited, while Kamigawa depended too much on getting decent legendary uncommons and rares.
May 14, 2013 7:45 a.m.
I like to have a mix of both.
At my LGS, after a new release there tends to be a month of Draft before they go back to Standard.
After that, they alternate between Draft and Standard. I like the alternation, as it gives all players options, and those who like both will simply come to both.
Of course, there are a number of players wanting to have more Modern and even Vintage/Legacy tournaments... I don't think they see the fact that there just currently isn't the numbers for it. They are lucky to get 8 people to enter
May 14, 2013 8:14 a.m.
IAmKingTony says... #8
Sure in Standard you can be "creative" but don't expect to win very often doing so. Not when most players are lazy and just netdeck.
May 14, 2013 1:02 p.m.
SnowCoveredRevenge says... #9
I don't think that is necessarily true. Many of the main archetypes are well known simply because there is such a small number of cards in standard and there are combinations that prove better, and I have been stopming heads in with my boros burn deck. I 5-0'd and got first each of the last two weeks with it.
you can brew and still be successful if you use good cards
URW Humans
equals all the lolz
May 14, 2013 2:56 p.m.
I agree with SnowCoveredRevenge. People aren't lazy, it's because there's only so many good cards in Standard. For example, say I want to come up with a zombie deck all on my own without looking online. Already, I have four Diregraf Ghoul , four Gravecrawler , and four Geralf's Messenger in my deck. Considering I need 20 to 24 lands, that means 32 to 36 of my 75 are practically chosen for me. In other words, my home brewed zombie deck starts to look like every other zombie deck posted online.
This is why I hate Standard. The small card pool doesn't let you do much.
May 14, 2013 6:02 p.m.
SnowCoveredRevenge says... #11
I do not hate standard because of it, but I definitely do not like it.
Also netdecks are netdecks for a reason, they are good, however you can build "Assassin Decks" which are pieces of tech designed to take down parts of the metagame, by exploiting weakness of major archetypes at the expense of utility and flexibility
Jimhawk says... #2
I enjoy limited more because I don't play it often, so it's a rush doing something new. I'm much better at constructed, though, so I play it more to get maximum output from my input (i.e. Top 8 all day err' day).
May 13, 2013 10:25 p.m.