• Marvin Sürig

    I think it’s bad that we have both cards as doublefaced cards and they turn into a card which is optical designed as B.F.M.. This makes it harder to gain the right cards and one needs more placeholder cards.

    • Melissa Juice

      Bummer. I love the Meld mechanic.

  • Blahblahblahbla

    7 mana and two cards to get to this? Mmmm.. Don’t think this mechanic is going to work out..

    • Jacob Kodicovic

      If you don’t like it, an article said that there were only going to be three pairs of cards that could meld, all of them spoiled

    • ye

      This is the common variant, so it’s balanced for limited play. A 5/6 menace haste that gives your whole team menace and +1/+0 is game-ending in limited, so it’s definitely worth the 7 mana and two cards from the standpoint of an average limited deck.

    • Gareth Martin

      Well you aren’t paying 7 mana upfront. you get a 5/6 haste menace and gives all attacking creatures +1/+0 ad menace themselves seems strong to me

  • kmk888

    Okay. I actually have no problem with the cards combining to flip into a extra large removal target. In general, it seems like a totally functional concept and potentially fun mechanic. I do have 2 problems with the implementation though.

    First, I hate that it’s spread across half of the back face of both of the cards. I wish that you just exiled one underneath the other. I don’t like the extra large card and I don’t like rotating both cards when attacking. It just seems like a complicated and bad implementation of a fine mechanic.

    Second, why would they only print 6 meld pairs total?? Only 3 melded eldrazi and only 1 at common? A card that is basically just a bad rare in limited (Hanweir Battlements) without also pulling a specific second rare? It’s like they were so scared that this mechanic wouldn’t work they weren’t willing to take ownership of it. Give me 5 pairs with more at common or uncommon for the sake of limited play and I’d be happier.

    • eltratzo

      these are all double faced cards. if we go up to five pairs that’s 10 dfc slots occupied. meld tales over the dfc sheet absurdly quickly. so it’s basically an “all or nothing” choice for wizards: either they only print very few melds (and the combining aspect means it well alway feel like there are even less of them) or make most of the dfcs meld cards. I’m guessing they didn’t go that route because of limited concerns.

      the complaint about the clunkyness of the melded card is entirely valid. i think they did it this way in order to have the result feel more physically imposing by actally being larger than the others. I would have to play with the melded cards to really be sure which side of that argument I’m on.

      Lastly, as you can seein the comments on this site. people are very divided on wether three pairs is too few or three too many ^^ which tends to indicate that wizards were at least in the right ballpark. We should probably wait until we can play with the set before making a final judgement here as well.

    • Vizzerdrix

      you know what would have been cool, granted same issue, is if they were the kamigawa flip style so they were regular backed and flipped differently but then you have a bfm 2 card portrait layout instead of 2 landscapes. no real good way of doing but im sure ebay will have foil proxy meld cards if anything is playable and those would work well if you dont mind anime tits