Meaning who gives in or backs down first in a confrontation or negotiation. The phrase doesn't refer to the literal act of blinking, but rather to a situation where someone is waiting for the other person to yield or concede.
"We both have an ok trade if we don't do anything, but maybe I want to use this trick to change the outcome, but if I wait you might mess up and cast it first" stalemate situation today after not playing for a bit.
In case someone isn't aware, during combat phase BOTH players can cast their spells at any point. Often it doesn't matter because one player clearly blocked with the intent to use a combat trick, but sometimes it plays out super awkwardly.
For example, Player 1 is attacking with a 2/2 and is blocked by Player 2's 2/2. Both players have Finest hour AND Torch in hands. In this case, both players may want to Finest Hour to win the trade (let's say, they are both low on creatures and need one to finish the game). The issue is that whoever casts Finest Hour first gets blown out by opposing Torch. This means that the optimal play is to wait until the very last second of the combat phase and hope your opponent blinks first. Or simply accept that you never cast your spells in an even trade situation. It's weird.
In a game like Magic (as devs are obviously aware), active player (attacking player) has to pass priority first and then if their opponent passes it back, neither player can cast anything before combat damage happens. So there's a risk involved and one player has the advantage defined by the rules.
I get that devs want to lower the amount of phases in the game, but goddamn, if you played a tourney and people were tryharding, it would be 100% correct to always wait the timer out. Even if it may not be relevant right now, this is just such a big hole design-wise it legitimately annoys me.
who blinks first
Meaning who gives in or backs down first in a confrontation or negotiation. The phrase doesn't refer to the literal act of blinking, but rather to a situation where someone is waiting for the other person to yield or concede.
"We both have an ok trade if we don't do anything, but maybe I want to use this trick to change the outcome, but if I wait you might mess up and cast it first" stalemate situation today after not playing for a bit.
In case someone isn't aware, during combat phase BOTH players can cast their spells at any point. Often it doesn't matter because one player clearly blocked with the intent to use a combat trick, but sometimes it plays out super awkwardly.
For example, Player 1 is attacking with a 2/2 and is blocked by Player 2's 2/2. Both players have Finest hour AND Torch in hands. In this case, both players may want to Finest Hour to win the trade (let's say, they are both low on creatures and need one to finish the game). The issue is that whoever casts Finest Hour first gets blown out by opposing Torch. This means that the optimal play is to wait until the very last second of the combat phase and hope your opponent blinks first. Or simply accept that you never cast your spells in an even trade situation. It's weird.
In a game like Magic (as devs are obviously aware), active player (attacking player) has to pass priority first and then if their opponent passes it back, neither player can cast anything before combat damage happens. So there's a risk involved and one player has the advantage defined by the rules.
I get that devs want to lower the amount of phases in the game, but goddamn, if you played a tourney and people were tryharding, it would be 100% correct to always wait the timer out. Even if it may not be relevant right now, this is just such a big hole design-wise it legitimately annoys me.
加拿大是美国多年的盟友，床铺跟加拿大较劲没有任何道理。如果不满意别国的事，就老美这暴脾气，炸他，找人推翻他，直接开战就是了，就这什么掉毛税务战或者贸易战，纯粹是瞎JB浪费时间，磨磨蹭蹭的不见效，而且更重要的是两败俱伤。床铺这东西特擅长社交媒体上造势起哄搞噱头，但是治理国家解决问题方面他根本不行。
我感觉吧，谁先让步谁先眨眼不是主要的，这不是打架这不是赌钱，考验谁的胆量，这不是谁胆子大谁豁得出去的事。这事需要高超的政治智慧