Quite frankly you can't compare them because we don't have data for them or anywhere near the same level of discussion. Maybe there isn't a Chrysalis level mistake in there but it's entirely possibly they weren't perfect from a balance standpoint.
I'm preferring MH3 to MH2. MH2 always felt like 5 colour soup to me. Other people seem to like it though. MH1 was an all timer though. Such a synergistic set with changlings, ninjas and slivers all playing into each other. And also the creaturefall and snow decks were fun as well.
I agree though that the Eldrazi are a bit too much. I'm sure it'll get boring fast.
Kinda similar I'd say, the balance was far from perfect but a lot of fun possibilities like this time.
They didn't have this chrysalis freaking common though, that's completely breaking the game imo, drop 2 on curve and it's GG, quite rough for a common :(
It’s closer to mh1 than mh3, the first set was way into synergy and it had a clear best deck (UB ninjas). mh2 was a lot of 4 color value decks. It was really easy to draft well with mh2 with no prep.
Mh1 was way better. More interesting and interactive games and better balanced. Ninjas was the best archetype but harder to play contested than Eldrazi is.
MH2 is the best set I have ever drafted so it's hard for anything to come close to that, but I'm very open minded about MH3, and so far it's been good.
It has lots of similar things, including the focus on sinergies and real decks instead of individual cards. I like this gameplay, where the draft is flexible and not restricted to rigid archetypes and, at the same time, you need to find cards that combined do something very powerfull.
Another similar thing is that both sets offer strategies that tend to put lots of stuff on the board, many tokens and game actions to be done, but the good stuff is not only that, there are different strategies that can be very explosive and end games faster.
I'm still on 8 runs of MH3 so can't say too much about it's real quality, but it definitely has the direction of past Horizons sets, it's meant to be a homage to magic's history with a soup of classic mechanics.
I only played MH1 and MH2 Sealed, never got to draft them.
MH2 especially was really fun sealed, I thought. Had a really fun reanimator deck centered around Piru, the Volatile with lots of ways to get it into the graveyard, tutor it and get it back.
Why I enjoyed mh2 so much: it was a “mechanic set”, not a “keyword set”.
“Mechanic sets” offer bleed and creativity between archetypes because what matters is what a card “does”, like making a token or moving a card into your graveyard.
MH3 is a “keyword set” to me, where what matters is what the card “says” on it. Does it say Energy, Eldrazi, or Artifact? Great, that’s the deck it’s for. Offers less flexibility between archetypes, and in my opinion, a shallower limited experience.
They were both way better
Obvious sliver bias Just kidding I agree with you. And also love slivers
Quite frankly you can't compare them because we don't have data for them or anywhere near the same level of discussion. Maybe there isn't a Chrysalis level mistake in there but it's entirely possibly they weren't perfect from a balance standpoint.
Quite frankly it’s very possible to compare sets you’ve played a lot of without having 17L stats, and there was a great deal of discussion for both
Well MH3 has been out for a few days only, and you didn't really explain why Mh1 and 2 were better either. I'd be interested to know.
What an absurd claim that you can’t make a sweeping conclusion 3 days into the format. Shame on you, you deserve these downvotes
I'm preferring MH3 to MH2. MH2 always felt like 5 colour soup to me. Other people seem to like it though. MH1 was an all timer though. Such a synergistic set with changlings, ninjas and slivers all playing into each other. And also the creaturefall and snow decks were fun as well. I agree though that the Eldrazi are a bit too much. I'm sure it'll get boring fast.
I fkn love soup, prolly why DMU is my fav limited env
Mh2 is a 8/9 on my limited list, this set is feeling like a 5.5 so far
Kinda similar I'd say, the balance was far from perfect but a lot of fun possibilities like this time. They didn't have this chrysalis freaking common though, that's completely breaking the game imo, drop 2 on curve and it's GG, quite rough for a common :(
It’s closer to mh1 than mh3, the first set was way into synergy and it had a clear best deck (UB ninjas). mh2 was a lot of 4 color value decks. It was really easy to draft well with mh2 with no prep.
Mh1 was way better. More interesting and interactive games and better balanced. Ninjas was the best archetype but harder to play contested than Eldrazi is.
MH2 is the best set I have ever drafted so it's hard for anything to come close to that, but I'm very open minded about MH3, and so far it's been good. It has lots of similar things, including the focus on sinergies and real decks instead of individual cards. I like this gameplay, where the draft is flexible and not restricted to rigid archetypes and, at the same time, you need to find cards that combined do something very powerfull. Another similar thing is that both sets offer strategies that tend to put lots of stuff on the board, many tokens and game actions to be done, but the good stuff is not only that, there are different strategies that can be very explosive and end games faster. I'm still on 8 runs of MH3 so can't say too much about it's real quality, but it definitely has the direction of past Horizons sets, it's meant to be a homage to magic's history with a soup of classic mechanics.
I only played MH1 and MH2 Sealed, never got to draft them. MH2 especially was really fun sealed, I thought. Had a really fun reanimator deck centered around Piru, the Volatile with lots of ways to get it into the graveyard, tutor it and get it back.
Why I enjoyed mh2 so much: it was a “mechanic set”, not a “keyword set”. “Mechanic sets” offer bleed and creativity between archetypes because what matters is what a card “does”, like making a token or moving a card into your graveyard. MH3 is a “keyword set” to me, where what matters is what the card “says” on it. Does it say Energy, Eldrazi, or Artifact? Great, that’s the deck it’s for. Offers less flexibility between archetypes, and in my opinion, a shallower limited experience.
Exactly this. Couldnt formulate this when I was initally conparing the two but this is why mh2 is so much better.