This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
My understanding is that Extended has nothing to do with the number of sets, it's just basically everything after IPA created specifically for MTGO. Am I wrong? Cyberodin
The name of the set is a bit weird, but what I mean is, why did they decide to "finish" the ICe Age block, when it was technically already finished? Homelands was considered by many and I believe by Wizards themselves to be the third/second expansion of the Ice Age block; so it was finished. So what made them replace Homelands with Coldsnap? I don't buy the "Ice Age was not finished so we had to finish it" argument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.51.27 ( talk • contribs)
I wonder of Braid of Fire ought to be mentioned here? This seems pretty unique to me, another neat demonstration of what Coldsnap is doing with upkeeps.
"1R (2), Enchantment
Cumulative upkeep-Add {R} to your mana pool."
-- Dchudz 03:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I would just like to ask on why half of the notable cards present on previous edits are now gone. And this case of removing notable cards hasn't appeared throughout the days of Ravnica block (that is the farthest I can remeber). Could someone explain on this? If no explanation present I would like to suggest putting them back, thanks. ~~ Wakipudeo ~~
Hm... very well, I can agree to your reasons. Thanks for explaining.
Though, you may want to browse through other MTG expansion topics to recheck the notable cards present; who knows, a topic of a particular set may have too many or too few interesting cards. Thanks. ~~ Wakipudeo ~~
The article forgot to mention that Coldsnap is also legal in Coldsnap-ONLY limited tournaments (like sealed deck or draft tournaments); I think Mark Rosewater spoke of this and the reasons for it not too long ago (could have been someone else). So it's kind of a Coldsnap Expansion format; it's different from the Ice Age Block format. Can someone add this; or correct me if I'm wrong?
I changed the set breakdown to match the actual distribution of commons/unc./rares, instead of the incorrect figure which was in a wizards pre-release announcement. Actual set breakdown is 40R/55U/60C, incorrect figure was 40R/50U/65C.
I don't think most of the cards listed as "notable cards" are actually notable; Haakon isn't listed and several of them aren't really "notable" in that people don't pay much attention to them. Who came up with the list anyway? Titanium Dragon 08:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
"It was also released on Magic: The Gathering Online on August 14, becoming the first expansion ever to be legal for Constructed tournament play on Magic Online before its paper version was."
This is false, it takes a month once a set is released on Magic Online for it to become tournament legal.
Only thing it needs to solidify C-class is the addition of <ref></ref> tags. Cheers. -- lifebaka ( talk - contribs) 00:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||
|
My understanding is that Extended has nothing to do with the number of sets, it's just basically everything after IPA created specifically for MTGO. Am I wrong? Cyberodin
The name of the set is a bit weird, but what I mean is, why did they decide to "finish" the ICe Age block, when it was technically already finished? Homelands was considered by many and I believe by Wizards themselves to be the third/second expansion of the Ice Age block; so it was finished. So what made them replace Homelands with Coldsnap? I don't buy the "Ice Age was not finished so we had to finish it" argument. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.51.27 ( talk • contribs)
I wonder of Braid of Fire ought to be mentioned here? This seems pretty unique to me, another neat demonstration of what Coldsnap is doing with upkeeps.
"1R (2), Enchantment
Cumulative upkeep-Add {R} to your mana pool."
-- Dchudz 03:42, 30 July 2006 (UTC)
I would just like to ask on why half of the notable cards present on previous edits are now gone. And this case of removing notable cards hasn't appeared throughout the days of Ravnica block (that is the farthest I can remeber). Could someone explain on this? If no explanation present I would like to suggest putting them back, thanks. ~~ Wakipudeo ~~
Hm... very well, I can agree to your reasons. Thanks for explaining.
Though, you may want to browse through other MTG expansion topics to recheck the notable cards present; who knows, a topic of a particular set may have too many or too few interesting cards. Thanks. ~~ Wakipudeo ~~
The article forgot to mention that Coldsnap is also legal in Coldsnap-ONLY limited tournaments (like sealed deck or draft tournaments); I think Mark Rosewater spoke of this and the reasons for it not too long ago (could have been someone else). So it's kind of a Coldsnap Expansion format; it's different from the Ice Age Block format. Can someone add this; or correct me if I'm wrong?
I changed the set breakdown to match the actual distribution of commons/unc./rares, instead of the incorrect figure which was in a wizards pre-release announcement. Actual set breakdown is 40R/55U/60C, incorrect figure was 40R/50U/65C.
I don't think most of the cards listed as "notable cards" are actually notable; Haakon isn't listed and several of them aren't really "notable" in that people don't pay much attention to them. Who came up with the list anyway? Titanium Dragon 08:50, 31 October 2006 (UTC)
"It was also released on Magic: The Gathering Online on August 14, becoming the first expansion ever to be legal for Constructed tournament play on Magic Online before its paper version was."
This is false, it takes a month once a set is released on Magic Online for it to become tournament legal.
Only thing it needs to solidify C-class is the addition of <ref></ref> tags. Cheers. -- lifebaka ( talk - contribs) 00:12, 23 July 2008 (UTC)