Farewell, . . . nothing?!

Aquatic Alchemist card art

Each year that I have maintained this blog, September is dedicated to the four sets rotating out of Standard. I look at the cards I liked, the ones I didn't, and the sets as a whole. (Here is my first post on the subject, and another which explains the Standard format and set rotation.) So, first up this month is: 

nothing.

That's right, no sets are rotating out of Standard this year. Wizards announced in May that they were changing Standard rotation to every three years. Why? They explain in the article; I present the highlights below.

- tabletop Standard is key to local game stores

- this format (again, on tabletop—in person vs. online) hasn't kept pace with other Magic formats

- shifting to a 3-year rotation cycle does the following (italics is quoted from the article):

• This will give current Standard cards more longevity. 
• It will allow mechanics and archetypes to be more effectively built on over time. As we moved away from the block model, we gained a lot of flexibility, but we also lost some ability to build on mechanics and themes within a set. With a longer window, we can find more opportunities to build up or revitalize archetypes. 
• It also gives us stronger tools to create an environment where decks are more "color(s) and mechanic" (like Green-White Toxic or Blue-White Soldiers) and less midrange. 

In the end, "we believe this will give Standard more stability, more vitality, and strengthen it for local game stores." Time will tell if this is the case.

I have no strong feelings one way or the other about this change. On the one hand, I get it. Based on release dates, some sets enjoyed only 15 months in Standard, which seemed too short (and unfair compared to the sets that were in for all 24). On the other hand, a card pool of such large size (and duration) might overwhelm players and/or dissuade new ones from jumping in. 

One comment intrigues me: Wizards wants "more 'color(s) and mechanic' (like Green-White Toxic or Blue-White Soldiers) and less midrange." From my decks page, midrange is a deck type that uses efficient spells. It can potentially take on both aggro, control, and combo decks. I am guessing that Wizards is saying "we want decks with a theme, not just a collection of efficient cards that can win games without synergy." I'd love to learn more about that.

Whatever you think about this change, it will be fun to enjoy the cards for longer.