B/R update!

[Machinus]

Replenish and Mind over Matter are unbanned! Flash is banned, obviously.

Official Announcement (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dci/announce/dci20070601a)

Explanation (http://wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/af173)

[dre4m]

I can breathe again!!!!!!!!

[Di]

I'm almost more excited about Vintage. Unrestricted Gush yayayyy. And fuck you, Gifts Ungiven. I wish they could've unbanned Gush in Legacy though.....and Fastbond.

[freakish777]

Holy Crap, I'm way more surprised by the Vintage updates. I can see Gifts getting the axe, and Voltaic Key coming back, and to a lesser extent Gush, but wtf, Mind Twist and Black Vise are back? O_O

Really I was expecting something similar for Legacy.

[Caboose]

Ding dong, the wicked Flash is banned... :tongue:

EDIT: Gifts Ungiven is restricted. Yay!

EDIT 2: Gush is unrestricted!?! WHAT THE FUCK!? GAT IS BACK!!

EDIT 3: Mind Twist unrestricted!?! WHAT THE FUCK!?

[Cait_Sith]

But Replenish is going to be such great fun. And as soon as some figures out how to cast Mind over Matter... they automatically win the format.

[niknight]

Woo! We get to play actual Magic again.

Now to break Replenish and MoM...

[kirdape3]

GAT was good at a time when it was the best Yawgmoth's Will deck. Now we have Will decks in Vintage that straight up kill you the turn that you'd want to put Quirion Dryad into play.

Gifts getting axed makes a lot of sense in the abstract.

[Nightmare]

GAT was good at a time when it was the best Yawgmoth's Will deck. Now we have Will decks in Vintage that straight up kill you the turn that you'd want to put Quirion Dryad into play.

Gifts getting axed makes a lot of sense in the abstract.It makes sense like... 6 months ago.

Seriously, Gush?

[Aggro_zombies]

We now return you to your scheduled Legacy programming.

Nice bit on the Mind over Matter. Neither of those cards are tremendously playable, imo, but whatever.

[Xero]

I'm relieved that Flash is dead. MoM and Replenish were the most obvious candidates for unbanning, and Replenish might actually do something.

[MattH]

Wow, weird logic on Tax.

I am so happy @ Replenish.

I do not envy Vintage players right now. Everyone who ever said "no format ever had something like Flash dumped on them" can shut the fuck up now. Your government thanks you.

[kirdape3]

I'm a lot less afraid of Gush than I am of even singleton Gifts Ungiven. Like I said, you could just be killing them the turn you make your Dryad.

[caiomarcos]

Can't wait to play City of Traitors, Attunement, Replenish, GG! I know that without Frantic Search it loses a lot, but someone will figure something out!

[Tacosnape]

I think it's hilarious that the entire legacy community has more to say about the Vintage changes than the Legacy ones.

I think the DCI did a fantastic job here with Legacy, though. It shows three very impressive things.

1. They pay attention to Legacy and listen to the people who talk/write about it, without blindly following what they say.

2. They aren't afraid to ban a card that hurts the format. This marks their first banning in Legacy's existence.

3. They aren't afraid to try and unban a couple cards they think won't hurt the format. This marks their first unbanning in Legacy's existence.

It shows they're paying attention, watching, and learning as time goes on. They're human like the rest of us, and while humans can make mistakes, humans can also fix them and learn not to make them in the future.

EDIT:

Can't wait to play City of Traitors, Attunement, Replenish, GG! I know that without Frantic Search it loses a lot, but someone will figure something out!

Yeah for real. One of my best friends and teammates is going to have that deck built in about 30 seconds. Hello Decree of Silences and Moats! :)

[C.P.]

I'm so happy about replenish. I'm on building a deck around it right away.

[Nightmare]

I think it's hilarious that the entire legacy community has more to say about the Vintage changes than the Legacy ones.
I'll be honest, I spent all night testing Vintage. The Legacy changes are self-evident, but the Vintage ones are bound to shake things up quite a bit. Either way, what an exiting time for Eternal Magic players!

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Actually, I was surprised, as that was the strongest argument against unbanning Land Tax that I've heard.

I'm not entirely convinced, but I'm less derisive of it's place there now.

Mind Twist being unrestricted almost makes me want to play Vintage again. That card's so hot. It completely doesn't need to be banned (I think you could unban it in Legacy), it's just a cool card. Love the artwork, too.

Replenish being back is cool. Matt creamed himself a little when I told him.

[Bovinious]

Only thing better they could have done for Legacy is unban Dream Halls also, its just as tame as MoM and Replenish but still good move by WotC for once. Also probably could have taken Enlightened Tutor off Vintage's restricted list but that wouldn't have made any difference anyways. Good B/R update.

[Xero]

I'll be honest, I spent all night testing Vintage.

Blasphemy!

[Tacosnape]

I'll be honest, I spent all night testing Vintage. The Legacy changes are self-evident, but the Vintage ones are bound to shake things up quite a bit. Either way, what an exiting time for Eternal Magic players!

I agree. Legacy has a couple new toys for us to try and re-break (I think Replenish will come a lot closer to seeing play than Mind Over Costed, but you never know.)

And I also agree with Jack. Mind Twist legal in Vintage in four ofs = supreme sexy cake. I don't know a lot about Vintage as I haven't played it since the Psychatog days and early Tinker-Colossus, but this makes me wonder how Moxed up I'd have to get to try getting back into it.

And yes, that was a solid argument backing Land Tax staying banned. It would definitely make the format less fun. Life From The Loam has sort of filled Land Tax's role nowadays anyway. And it's more fun.

[Xero]

And yes, that was a solid argument backing Land Tax staying banned. It would definitely make the format less fun. Life From The Loam has sort of filled Land Tax's role nowadays anyway. And it's more fun.

Couldn't the same argument against Tax be used against Survival though? It seems to me that things like "taking a long time"/"being annoying" shouldn't be enough to keep a card banned.

[Rood]

The rise of Mono black hand Destroy in vintage has a completely new meaning...

[Tacosnape]

Couldn't the same argument against Tax be used against Survival though? It seems to me that things like "taking a long time"/"being annoying" shouldn't be enough to keep a card banned.

Very interesting point.

Survival's at least fun for the player doing it, though. Same with the entire deck of Solidarity. Besides, running Survival has the built-in penalty of having to buy new sleeves more often.

Land Tax isn't all that orgasmic for anyone involved.

[MattH]

Land Tax isn't all that orgasmic for anyone involved.
I dunno, the guy on the card looks like he's having a fucking blast.

[outsideangel]

(If this is in the wrong place, I trust the mods will move it to the appropriate forum.)

So the changes to the Banned and Restricted List have been announced! I know there's already a thread in Community about it, but that one's all "OMG Flash is banned" and "Did you guys see Vintage?" Here we can maybe make some serious metagame predictions?

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dci/announce/dci20070601a

For Legacy:



Flash is banned
Mind Over Matter is unbanned
Replenish is unbanned


Well, it looks like we can have our format back, what with the banning of Flash and all. People have been calling for Mind Over Matter to come off for awhile now, and I'm not really surprised or worried. The one that seems to be the most interesting here is Replenish.

So how do people expect the format to look once these changes go into effect? Will everything go right back to how it was pre-Flash madness? Will Fish be more popular now that more people have picked it up? Will some kind of Replenish deck start turning out numbers? Can we still play with pump-knights?

[Anarky87]

Well, this is all a relief. I'm glad to finally have my favorite format back. But, hang on a sec....



Fuck you, Flash.

That is all.

[Afro]

PandeBurst here I come!

[blacklotus3636]

I think we all knew or most everyone knew the writings on the wall and knew flash was gone but the unbannings while still very conservative do seem interesting. Mind over matter doesn`t seem as though it can or will do much of anything but replenish might mainly because of the new mechanic dredge. I imagine a dredge style replenish list might be about as fast or a litttle slower than TES but overall it seems like it will just be another relatively fast and/or stable combo deck that seems as though it won`t cause any problems. It will be fun experimenting with replenish lists though. What does everyone else think?

As an aside I feel like they may have let loose a few too many cards at once in vintage. The scariest to me looks like gush because I remember the dark days of tog but it may be true as they say that tog isn`t that great in vintage anymore. Restricting gifts seemed pretty obvious to me for a long time and I don`t even really play vintage. I mean for christs sake the card got 4 restricted cards out of your deck putting two of them in the yard and 2 in your hand then you just will everything back. Dumb. I never quite understood why they left gifts unrestricted which was clearly more powerful than fact but banned fact. I`m glad the DCI has finally decided to do something with the eternal formats. Its a breath of fresh air

[Tacosnape]

PandeBurst here I come!

I can feel my Pithing Needles increase in value as we speak.

[C.P.]

I can feel my Pithing Needles increase in value as we speak.

I suspect that penderburst is not all that broken. It dies to GY hate, which everyone and thier dogs runs these days. It requires 4 mana and a setup. I'm more bent to the side of Uwg control replenish. Gifts and Intuition should be pretty hot in that kind of deck.

[Eldariel]

Love the changes. I really like the treatment Vintage got too though. Mind Twist and Black Vise are nice, but the real star of that short list is Gush. Go go Gro-A-Tog!

As for Legacy, I think they coulda been a bit more aggressive in slowing down the format by hacking Lackey and some accelerant, but the obvious things that needed to be done were done. And for that, I thank them.

[Caboose]

I really wish Lion's Eye Diamond would have been banned, but you can't win them all.

Also, fuck Gadiel Szleifer. Fuck him in his rectum. That is all...

[Bardo]

As for Legacy, I think they coulda been a bit more aggressive in slowing down the format by hacking Lackey and some accelerant, but the obvious things that needed to be done were done. And for that, I thank them.

Yeah, I'd have stuck Vial or Lackey on there myself.

Re: Flash. I think we all saw this coming--good to see it in print though. I appreciated Forsythe's thoughts on it too.

Re: Replenish. Meh, I don't do combo--have fun with it I guess.

Re: Mind over Matter. Seems like a casual card, really. Have you seen the casting cost on that thing? UUUU2. Sweet Jesus.

Anyway, it's a good day.


Also, fuck Gadiel Szleifer. Fuck him in his rectum. That is all...

'Might as well spell his name wrong then, no?

[Zilla]

Couldn't the same argument against Tax be used against Survival though? It seems to me that things like "taking a long time"/"being annoying" shouldn't be enough to keep a card banned.
I think slow and annoying alone aren't enough to prevent a card's legality, but adding into that the fact that it punishes players for doing something as fundamental as playing a land on their first turn? Seems like the combination of the two is reasonable justification. Survival is super strong, but it doesn't punish you for playing creatures of your own, for example.

[Pinder]

Whew. I never thought that I'd be glad that Goblins is the best deck in the format. Now that it's back though, Sliver's best matchup is relevant again! Yippee!

As far as unbanning Replenish, I think that's awesome. PandeBurst is far from broken, but it still looks like it would be a blast to re-tune for the modern meta. Off the top of my head, I think TfK will be teh hotness. edit: And by TfK I mean Gifts, or LftL, or any of the other things that are better than TfK.

Mind Over Matter....meh, I can't think of any way off the top of my head to break it. I doubt it will see too much play. Of course, that just means that someone needs to come along and prove me wrong.

As far as Vintage....Key and Vise I can see, and to a lesser extent Gush, but unrestricted Mind Twist? WTF? I dunno. We'll have to see.

I sorta think they could unban Gush in Legacy, too, but maybe I'm crazy.

Glad that they restricted Gifts, though. That thing was everywhere.

[Nihil Credo]

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/2271/bm24np2xc6.gif (http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/2271/bm24np2xc6.gif)

http://img178.imageshack.us/img178/1103/clappingik6.gif
(http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/2271/bm24np2xc6.gif)

http://img296.imageshack.us/img296/41/communistslt8.jpg

[Tacosnape]

Heh. I just remembered. I can't find the old link, but I have to get up Sunday morning and go to church now.

[Cabal-kun]

Flash is banned. Legacy is back. I'm happy.

I have no clue about the Vintage changes, as I don't play that format.

[URABAHN]

The rise of Mono black hand Destroy in vintage has a completely new meaning...

Fuck yes, I'm all about a Workshop deck that'll play 4x Black Vise AND 4x Mind Twist. Isn't that hot?

[Peter_Rotten]

Hey, all this talk about stupid-ass Pandeburst has blindsided you. Anyone remember Enchantress with Replenish? Haven't we seen some recent (but modest) success with Enchantress?

[DeathwingZERO]

That was my thoughts. Enchantress was already on the rise, and Replenish just seems to be the perfect add in. Maybe we'll see it solidifying a spot here.

And I gotta agree, I'm much happier and more looking forward to the new stuff Vintage gets to play with, we didn't get enough toys in Legacy this time around compared to them.

<3 Vise and Mind Twist. Time to go get my Beta's.

EDIT: Oh ya, and "FUCK YOU" Vintage Gift's decks. Good riddance. DRAGON 4L!!

[dre4m]

EDIT: Oh ya, and "FUCK YOU" Vintage Gift's decks. Good riddance. DRAGON 4L!!

Yeah.... about dragon.... is it faster than Vintage Flash.dec? Gogo rectorbargain, or would you rather just win with Hulk?

Flash was clearly not broken enough in Vintage.

[Carlos El Salvador]

Bloody Good show.

But don't you see what wizards is doing??
They unbanned Mind over matter and replenish because they BELONG together...

let the plotting commence... *Beginning to think of an Armastance Enchantress deck with Mind over Matter. Shudders at the pure horror*

[sammiel]

well, its nice to see some changes at least.

Big fuck you to flash and gifts, and we'll see what replenish brings.

Going to be very hard to break mind over matter, with that casting cost and the lack of tolarian academy in the format.


It's good to know I can go back to working on Tier 2 decks that could beat flash maybe 1 or 2 games out of ten.

[Di]

Yeah.... about dragon.... is it faster than Vintage Flash.dec? Gogo rectorbargain, or would you rather just win with Hulk?

Flash was clearly not broken enough in Vintage.

It really isn't. It might see restricting some time in the future, but try comparing Vintage to Legacy in this regard. In Legacy, Flash was completely degenerate because the power level was light years beyond every other deck. In Vintage, almost every single deck is pretty close in terms of power level. The sheer amount of brokenness in the format is absurd. Flash is still good, though.

[greenmage]

Flash: good, that change was necessary.
Replenish: nice, replenish allows for fun decks. Comboes with all kinds of stuff.
MOM: the casting cost is very prohibitive. Could be used with gaea's cradle or high tide.

So, yes, I agree with all the changes for legacy.

[Cait_Sith]

Flash: good, that change was necessary.
Replenish: nice, replenish allows for fun decks. Comboes with all kinds of stuff.
MOM: the casting cost is very prohibitive. Could be used with gaea's cradle or high tide.

So, yes, I agree with all the changes for legacy.

Gaea's Cradle produces Green. MoM has 2 BLUE BLUE BLUE BLUE in its cost. (I think it is one of like 5-6 cards that cost yXXXX in the entire game).

The best way to abuse MoM I can think of is to have Honden of Seeing Winds, 2 others Hondens, and MoM in your graveyard. Resolve Replenish brining them all back. Cast Obliterate. You are drawing 4 cards a turn, so keeping your opponent locked down should be simple.

[greenmage]

I know. I never said it would work in a competitive deck. I am not always thinking in kathegories of competitive and not competitive.

[LGD]

Right, but if you're resolving a Replenish then isn't it better to just win then and there with the pandeburst combo? I too think that Replenish is maybe best used in a control deck or enchantress variant, but Pandeburst might very well be viable, especially since Gifts will conveniently dump both pieces into the graveyard every single time. It is a pretty compact combo package that doesn't rely on the combat phase to win so I can see it fitting into some sort of control-combo deck as its victory condition.

[Cait_Sith]

I was more saying Cradle Cannot cast MoM. Only Turbo Stasis and Relic Orb has the power to really abuse MoM (and cast the dang thing, but even then it is insanely difficult. 6 in a color without good mana accel)

PandeBurst could work, but getting both cards in the... actually never mind. I already know EXACTLY how to do this.

[HPC]

MoM AND Replenish is unbanned?? Finally I can make a combo kill using a Quicksilver Dagger for just 3UUUUUR! Replenish just makes the combo that much easier and resilliant! </sarcasm>

[scrumdogg]

Why would you ever cast MoMa when you have Replenish to cheat it into play? And y'all seem to be forgetting Serra's Sanctum, which also produces a metric fuckton of mana in the right deck (like, say, an Enchantress build....) & could be some good with both Replenish & MoMa.

Thank you Wizards for getting rid of Flash

Fuck you Wizards for having to do so (again) in the first place :mad: You couldn't have waited until 10th Ed. this summer to remove the power level errata for Flash? Of course not........

Vintage almost looks appealing now......

[Horror Business]

When the page loaded up and I saw a big X over Flash I got a little excited :smile:
I'm glad Aaron broached the topic of Land Tax actually proving he and others were paying attention to the Legacy community since it seemed everyone and their mother were flapping their e-mouths about it. I even spent last night playtesting it. Replenish seems like it could find a place in a deck somewhere and I voted for it in the poll.

[umbowta]

I love the changes! Flash was stupid good and can go away now. I could give a shit less about Mind Over Matter coming back because I hate it and will never play it. Replenish is cool for sure. I was really close to picking up a playset off Cardshark last night but decided to sleep on it. Replenish is just so damned good I want to rebuild my enchantress deck.

I really like the unrestrictions in Vintage. I might just have to get into some 10 proxy events in the near future...my inner noob just can't wait to have four Black Vises in a deck again. It's been so long.

My hope is that some of those cards might be allowed back into the Legacy pool after a while. Black Vise, Mind Twist, and Voltaic Key could prove to be at a reasonable power level but not Gush. If gush were legal in Legacy Miracle Gro and GAT would be insane.

[Hoojo]

There was a point Aaron made that I'd like to bring up and see if anyone agrees. He mentioned that not doing an emergency banning and allowing for a GP:Flash raised popularity for Legacy, kind of a controversy ploy. Do you think that could have been part of the plan? Intriguing, but its probably not worth discussing.

[Cait_Sith]

Do you think that could have been part of the plan? Intriguing, but its probably not worth discussing.

Legacy still generates money for Wizards. Not as much as Standard or Extended, but it still generates some. Making a move where you destroy a metagame in favor of a more polarized one has shown to be very bad for business, so I doubt they intentionally did this.

[Atwa]

There was a point Aaron made that I'd like to bring up and see if anyone agrees. He mentioned that not doing an emergency banning and allowing for a GP:Flash raised popularity for Legacy, kind of a controversy ploy. Do you think that could have been part of the plan? Intriguing, but its probably not worth discussing.

They might not have done it on purpose, but I guess it is one of the results.

The regular Legacy players will keep on playing (although it really sucked for those of us testing for over a year), but the buzz about 'this unbeatable combodeck' might have resulted in more people participating in the GP, people who might even stick after Flash is banned.

I'm not sure though, but I know a lot of people have signed up an accound during the days of the GP, if they stick around, GP: Flash might have even been a succes for the format.

[C.P.]

And y'all seem to be forgetting Serra's Sanctum, which also produces a metric fuckton of mana in the right deck (like, say, an Enchantress build....) & could be some good with both Replenish & MoMa.


MoMa cost UUUU, even with sanctum backup. It's not easily hardcasted. About Replenish + MoMa, I think there are better things to do with Replenish.

[Cait_Sith]

MoMa cost UUUU, even with sanctum backup. It's not easily hardcasted. About Replenish + MoMa, I think there are better things to do with Replenish.

Like win the game with PandeBurst or restore your massive board position with Enchantress.

[Slay]

That was a ballsy move. Thanks, Wizards.

I'm off to try and fit Replenish into a Life from the Loam deck.
-Slay

[FoolofaTook]

Mind Twist being unrestricted almost makes me want to play Vintage again. That card's so hot. It completely doesn't need to be banned (I think you could unban it in Legacy), it's just a cool card. Love the artwork, too.

Given the current state of Legacy Mind Twist doesn't need to be on the Banned list. Duress is more damaging to a 4 turn metagame than Mind Twist.

The one place Mind Twist would potentially be broken would be in the hands of a counter-control deck that wanted to win the game turn 5 or 6 with a massive tempo swing. That's kind of what Legacy needs right now if any decks thinking beyond a 4 turn timeframe are to be successful.

[FoolofaTook]

Flash: good, that change was necessary.
Replenish: nice, replenish allows for fun decks. Comboes with all kinds of stuff.
MOM: the casting cost is very prohibitive. Could be used with gaea's cradle or high tide.

So, yes, I agree with all the changes for legacy.

Mind Over Matter could be put in play by Jhoira of the Ghitu. Probably too clunky to think about building a non-casual deck around, although Jhoira-Nethervoid... Hmmm.

[Ewokslayer]

or restore your massive board position with Enchantress.

Couldn't Mind over Matter be part of Enchantress's masive board position?
Tapping Serra's Sanctum multiple times in a turn seems good.

But UUUU probably makes that not likely.
And Enchantress with the Words of Wind "kill" is probably the most annoying version possible.

[freakish777]

And Enchantress with the Words of Wind "kill" is probably the most annoying version possible.

I can vouch for that. Thankfully it's limited by the amount of Green mana the deck can generate in a single turn to bounce and replay Exploration. Maybe Enchantress should start packing a singleton Celestial Dawn to get around that? You'd have 2 Enchantress effects in play as well as Words of Wind and some number of Explorations in play, tap Sanctuum for huge mana, play Celestian Dawn, activate Words for 2 bounces instead of drawing, you choose Exploration and Sanctuum, replay Sanctuum & Exploration, put 2 draws on the stack, replace the first with a bounce choosing Celestial, respond to the second activation by tapping Sanctuum for huge mana again, then choose it as your bounced card.

I might be playing Sanctuum/Exploration there incorrectly, but it seems like with Celestial Dawn allowing you to play Exploration off of White mana, you circumvent being limited by Green mana and can bounce an infinite (or at the very least large enough) number of permanents a turn meaning you wouldn't have to span it out over multiple turns while your opponent just sits there trying to eat your clock time. Essentially you should be able to earn the straight up concession when their entire board is gone in 1 turn.

[Maldur Sven Vedukor]

I'm happy with this change.

[Silverdragon]

I'm so gonna celebrate Flash's banning tonight!
Nice move unbanning Replenish and that other expensive unplayable card too.
Good to know the reason why Land Tax stays on the banned list although I don't like the decision to keep it banned for this reason alone.

[FoolofaTook]

I'm so gonna celebrate Flash's banning tonight!
Nice move unbanning Replenish and that other expensive unplayable card too.
Good to know the reason why Land Tax stays on the banned list although I don't like the decision to keep it banned for this reason alone.

I don't really follow their reasoning on Land Tax. They say that Land Taxes presence changes the way people play the game, by putting a premium on not placing lands in play early on. They say that this creates an unfun dynamic to the early pace of play.

Honestly, looking at Legacy right now there is no fun early play at all. You're always dealing with something that could make or break your game right off the bat, whether that's Lackey or Confidant or a Meddler or Vial or Duress in your face or a Dark Ritual for god knows what.

Land Tax looks almost benign compared to that given that it's restricted to basic lands. Yes it provides the ability to agressively thin the deck early on and reshuffle if you don't like what the Portent or Brainstorm saw down the road. There are so many critical events turn one that are so unpleasant for the opponent that it's just hard to see Land Tax being a deal breaker, either in terms of unpleasantness in play or actual end result.

Edit: Nevermind, I just realized how strong Land Tax could be in a Reanimator deck. The ability to freely discard after pulling 3 lands out of your deck on turn 2 and thereafter is pretty broken.

[sammiel]

well, I still think the reasoning behind leaving tax banned is retarded.

If your deck is full of land taxes, moxes, scroll racks, and basic lands, what exactly are you gonna be drawing that actually has an effect on the game?

Mind over Matter seems pretty meaningless with it's prohibitive manacost, there aren't enough ways to cheat it into play, but Academy was really the only good way to both cheat it into play AND actually benefit from it's ability. The two big mana lands left in legacy are Sanctum and Cradle, neither of which help you cheat MoM into play, and the ability to discard a card to untap them is kind of dubious when you aren't generating lots of blue mana, which is the best kind of mana to have lots of.

I expect to see replenish decks, which won't be T1, but will be very fun and very competitive, and better than people will give them credit for I'm guessing.

[Di]

Given the current state of Legacy Mind Twist doesn't need to be on the Banned list. Duress is more damaging to a 4 turn metagame than Mind Twist.

The one place Mind Twist would potentially be broken would be in the hands of a counter-control deck that wanted to win the game turn 5 or 6 with a massive tempo swing. That's kind of what Legacy needs right now if any decks thinking beyond a 4 turn timeframe are to be successful.

Are you fucking nuts? Mind Twist would be retarded in this format. Turn 2 Dark Ritual, Mind Twist for 3? Oops? Decks like Deadguy would be automatic tier 1 with that. They already run enough disruption turn 1-2 to slow combo down, and then they Mind Twist what's left? That's insane.

[AnwarA101]

Are you fucking nuts? Mind Twist would be retarded in this format. Turn 2 Dark Ritual, Mind Twist for 3? Oops? Decks like Deadguy would be automatic tier 1 with that. They already run enough disruption turn 1-2 to slow combo down, and then they Mind Twist what's left? That's insane.

Oh come on now. Mind Twist would be fun! Its like you would trade hands with your opponent, but that's always a good deal for the player playing black cards! :smile:

[Eldariel]

You trade your hand for opponent's, but unlike your opponent, you've got lands.

[AnwarA101]

You trade your hand for opponent's, but unlike your opponent, you've got lands.

I wasn't actually being serious about bringing Mind Twist off, but its important to note that if you use enough acceleration you might only have 1 land to your opponents none. I guess that's an advantage, but its only an advantage on the play and not on the draw.

[Nightmare]

If Mind Twist got unbanned, I would start running 4x Misdirection in my sideboards.

[Tacosnape]

If Mind Twist got unbanned, I would start running 4x Misdirection in my sideboards.

Fuck that, I'd maindeck it. Because every deck ever would run Twists. Can you imagine it in Survival off like a Rofellos?

[Di]

Fuck that, I'd maindeck it. Because every deck ever would run Twists. Can you imagine it in Survival off like a Rofellos?

Oh gawd. Yeah, we can end the discussion on Mind Twist now. Instead, let's talk about how awesome Gush would be back in this format. Every single aggro-control deck would run it (Threshold, Fish, etc), Psychatog would be viable, and so would Turboland yay!

[MattH]

Oh gawd. Yeah, we can end the discussion on Mind Twist now. Instead, let's talk about how awesome Gush would be back in this format. Every single aggro-control deck would run it (Threshold, Fish, etc), Psychatog would be viable, and so would Turboland yay!

So might Stasis. That's not a risk I'm willing to take.

[sammiel]

yeah, stasis might be decently balanced even with gush, but it's the gayest, most unfun thing to play against. Because theres no guarantee that they will lock you out with any given stasis, so you have to play out the long stupid boring match.

[FakeSpam]

I think the real power of mind twist is in the slower more controllish decks. a deck with deed and mind twist would be a juggernaut. Mind twist is really quite splashable. Landstill with mind twist? Rough.

Of course, none of this matters. I'm gonna go back to staring at replenish.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Are you fucking nuts? Mind Twist would be retarded in this format. Turn 2 Dark Ritual, Mind Twist for 3? Oops? Decks like Deadguy would be automatic tier 1 with that.

I know, dude. All the Deadguy players are running around like, "Dude? You know what's keeping us from being tier 1? That one extra mana on Fugue. If only we could save that one mana."


It's certainly not the fact that discard in general becomes dead against most decks in the middle of the game, and that they can't capitalize on that tempo to begin with.

[Reverend Damaged]

It's funny, just the other day my friend said "Dude, I will start playing magic again as soon as they unban Replenish", in response to me trying to get him to start playing again since he hasn't since Replenish was banned.


Looks like I've got another player for road trips to Vermont legacy.

[Bane of the Living]

I feel happy Flash was banned to some degree. It would've been interesting to just see more powerfull cards come off the list and compensate for the power level surge but oh well. Back to fucking Goblins...

Vintage got a ton of toys and Legacy got two ridiculously over costed sorcery speed cards that both completely suck ass on their own. I just wish that they did something to change our metagame than return it.

[FoolofaTook]

I feel happy Flash was banned to some degree. It would've been interesting to just see more powerfull cards come off the list and compensate for the power level surge but oh well. Back to fucking Goblins...

Vintage got a ton of toys and Legacy got two ridiculously over costed sorcery speed cards that both completely suck ass on their own. I just wish that they did something to change our metagame than return it.

Goblins haven't long to live. There are so many ways to hose them now and people don't have to worry much about turn 1 combo any more.

I built a really mediocre aggro/disruption deck that had a lot of answers to an early Lackey and to a bunch of token goblins and I was splitting against Goblins no problem. One of the more refined anti-aggro decks is just going to own them soon and then they'll be a thing of the past.

[sammiel]

Goblins haven't long to live. There are so many ways to hose them now and people don't have to worry much about turn 1 combo any more.

I built a really mediocre aggro/disruption deck that had a lot of answers to an early Lackey and to a bunch of token goblins and I was splitting against Goblins no problem. One of the more refined anti-aggro decks is just going to own them soon and then they'll be a thing of the past.


Thats been said before, and it's still a badly misinformed joke of a declaration. Goblins just owns face. Yes, the thing to remember is that properly built decks can match up with goblins, but the amount of incredible wins that Goblin's can pull out of midair is insane. The deck has two or three turn three wins, although all of them require lackey connecting. You can vial out a commander EoT and fling tokens at someone's face, then fling more on your own turn. You can have an empty hand and an empty board after a tsabo's decree, rip a ringleader, vial it out, then play warchief + piledriver and swing for 10.

Goblins is not invincible, but the thing to remember that most people forget on messageboards, is that Goblins may be down, but Goblins is never out.

[FoolofaTook]

Are you fucking nuts? Mind Twist would be retarded in this format. Turn 2 Dark Ritual, Mind Twist for 3? Oops? Decks like Deadguy would be automatic tier 1 with that. They already run enough disruption turn 1-2 to slow combo down, and then they Mind Twist what's left? That's insane.

So let's assume that you go with 4 Mind Twist in your deck and 4 Hymns and 4 Duress and then die when you don't draw the ritual and there are goblins eating the cornnuts out of your... Never mind :smile:

My point was that Mind Twist is just not that strong in a format that specializes in dangerous permanents in play very early on. I played against Mind Twist before it was restricted the first time and I never lost to a deck trying to twist me. Mainly because having a big nasty critter on the board beat their turn spent twisting. The reason it was eventually restricted was because it was too strong in control decks that looked to deny/deny/deny and then twist you to drop your hand to zero before they put out their disrupting scepter and waited to draw a Mishra's or Serra to kill you.

The worry that you have about turn 2 ritual and twist for 3 is just not that impactful when the response is going to be Brainstorm to hide the cards you cannot afford to lose. Turn 1 ritual for Duress and Hymn is much more of tempo changer in my opinion. Turn 1 Lotus Petal + ritual for 3 is just trading half their opening hand for half of yours. The difference is they have one land in play.

Just my opinion, but then again I was sorry when they restricted Mind Twist in the first place because it was a pretty much dead card against fast aggro and landkill which were the decks I preferred to play at the time.

[Nihil Credo]

I know, dude. All the Deadguy players are running around like, "Dude? You know what's keeping us from being tier 1? That one extra mana on Fugue. If only we could save that one mana."
"AT RANDOM"

(your other observation was still correct, though)

[FoolofaTook]

Thats been said before, and it's still a badly misinformed joke of a declaration. Goblins just owns face. Yes, the thing to remember is that properly built decks can match up with goblins, but the amount of incredible wins that Goblin's can pull out of midair is insane. The deck has two or three turn three wins, although all of them require lackey connecting. You can vial out a commander EoT and fling tokens at someone's face, then fling more on your own turn. You can have an empty hand and an empty board after a tsabo's decree, rip a ringleader, vial it out, then play warchief + piledriver and swing for 10.

Goblins is not invincible, but the thing to remember that most people forget on messageboards, is that Goblins may be down, but Goblins is never out.

Any permanent based deck is on short notice when a format starts looking at how to kill it. There are just so many easy answers once people say "enough is enough, I'm not losing to that again."

Decks that want to win with creature-based effects in 3 or 4 turns are particularly vulnerable to counter-measures because creatures and small creatures in particular are the most easily removed assets in the game.

So decks will shift to splashing Red for Lightning Bolt, Earthquake and Pyroclasm instead of splashing Black for Duress and Dark Ritual. Goblins get much weaker when that trade-off is made by the meta. And Earthquake and Pyroclasm handle Nimble Mongoose and other untargetable nuisance threats (Argothian Enchantress) early on also.

I would just be shocked if a community as innovative as the Legacy community was still plagued by Goblins this time next year.

[Bane of the Living]

I would just be shocked if a community as innovative as the Legacy community was still plagued by Goblins this time next year.

You still dont get it.. Thats fine seeing as to how your a noob here and all.
Warned for flaming. - Zilla

Aside from just pulling the win out and stealing games constantly, it fights through hate just as effectively as flash did against anti flash.

Its incredibly cheap to build so alot of players opt to throw it together for tournaments as opposed to a deck running 8 duals and FoW's.

It has the highest threat density available to the early game. The two single cards I fear seeing turn one are Lackey and Vial. Maybe Chalice of the Void if Im playing a deck that scoops to it. The thing is even though you can design a deck that has consistant answers to them you need to draw it or mulligan to it. That means they have the default advantage. You're the one taking mulls to hands that answer a 1/1 not them.

Goblins is a tyrant because there isn't another best deck to walk toe to toe with it. Thresh? No fucking way. TES? No where near as much a slut as goblins is. This is one reason I welcomed Flash, people had another 'best deck' to play, and I didnt need to play against the horde quite as much.

[Hoojo]

"AT RANDOM"

(your other observation was still correct, though)


I always felt making your opponent choose the cards to discard was a little better than random, since it forces him to make the correct decision, lending an advantage to better players, but I could be wrong.

I really like having Replenish back, and I am pleased overall with their decisions, though Land Tax would be nice.

[Silverdragon]

I always felt making your opponent choose the cards to discard was a little better than random, since it forces him to make the correct decision, lending an advantage to better players, but I could be wrong.

I really like having Replenish back, and I am pleased overall with their decisions, though Land Tax would be nice.

At random means you can hit lands with your discard spell making it easier to screw them. Their choice means if they need the lands they'll keep them.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It's actually not that relevant.

An even better comparison, for the same place, would be Persecute, which completely wipes out half the decks around, if it resolves.

Is Mind Twist good? In the control mirror, yes. In a Mono-Brack aggro deck? Maybe. That's about it, though. It's hardly busted. It has the same problem as all discard.

Here's a good rule: If you need to invoke Dark Ritual to prove how broken a black card is, it's not that good. You know what black cards are broken with Dark Ritual? All black cards. Because it's fucking Dark Ritual.

[Whit3 Ghost]

It's also rediculously good in Stax.

Being able to drop Chalice/Trini turn one then mind twist for 3-4 next turn is pretty busted.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Yeah, it'd be decent in Workshop-Lite archetypes. Busted? I doubt it. The goal of the deck is to prevent the cards in their hand from being useful. Going after hopefully useless cards isn't the most productive thing in the world.

[Silverdragon]

I agree with IBA that Mind Twist is not broken. I was just saying that hitting random cards is better because early in the game you might hit important lands that your opponent wasn't able to play yet.
My personal opinion is that Gush is far far far more dangerous than Mind Twist because a) it's a blue instant, b) it's (almost) free and c) it draws cards.
In Vintage imagine the following situation: You: Land, Sol Ring, go; Opp: Land, Mox, go; You: Land, Mind Twist for 3, go; Opp: Oh look I topdecked Ancestral...
There are just so many topdecks your opponent can have that totally dwarf the power of Mind Twist. Granted it can be relevant but Duress is relevant too and only costs 1 mana.
I won't even think about what happens when your opponent is able to Drain or Misdirect the Twist.

[sammiel]

im confused, are we talking about twist in legacy or twist in vintage?

[Bane of the Living]

im confused, are we talking about twist in legacy or twist in vintage?

Either way its a waste of time on the source.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I'm talking about Mind Twist, and how it should be legal in Legacy. I dunno what you guys are talking about.

[Blair Phoenix]

Either way its a waste of time on the source.

Isn't that what we do normally on the source anyways? :wink:

[Zilla]

Turn 2 Dark Ritual, Mind Twist for 3? Oops?
So you spent 2 cards to get 3? You spend one with Hymn to get 2. This example just isn't that useful. Mind Twist does very little to address Mono-Black's problems, one of the more important of which is that it taxes your own resources nealy as much as your opponents'. Mind Twist isn't all that different in this regard. And I agree with Jack - I'd rather Persecute on turn 2 off a Ritual than Mind Twist.

It'd be a strong card in certain scenarios, but not so much so that it would strongly impact black aggro's viability one way or the other.

[C.P.]

I'm talking about Mind Twist, and how it should be legal in Legacy. I dunno what you guys are talking about.

I do not agree on the fact that mind twist should be unbanned. One thing about the Twist is that it is infinitely splashable in any deck that can afford a single black mana. When a random aggro control deck, after it runs out of gas, tops a card and taps out to destroy the opposing hand, control is not a very good option anymore. And it is already having a hard time in this format.

Legacy is slow enough to make mind twist broken, I believe.

[hi-val]

In olden times of Vintage, Mind Twist was amazing because you could use Mana Drain mana and effectively pay B to blow 3 cards out of the opponent's hand. That took them off of Library and it usually left you with another Mana Drain or Counterspell up. This strategy was actually so critical that players ran a single Amnesia as well, since they couldn't run two Twists. Without Drain, Twist seems a lot less powerful in this format.

The other traditional argument about Twist/Hymn was that it was at random, and so it could potentially dick someone over before they had their first turn, off the back of a variety of mana accelerants. You could play Mox, Vault (which was unrestricted), Twist you for three. If you were lucky, you'd hit their lands and they absolutely could not recover. The strength of random discard was that it was implicitly a possible double Stone Rain. That's why we didn't see it for ten years.

I think the thought now is whether someone opening with, say, Ancient Tomb, Petal, Twist for 2, with the option of drawing Twists later for even more, is broken. There's the potential to knock someone's lands out, making an unfair game. I see twist for 2B and Hymn at BB to be pretty equal, and the latter is a fair card. On the other hand, you can't scale Hymn up...

[FoolofaTook]

I think the thought now is whether someone opening with, say, Ancient Tomb, Petal, Twist for 2, with the option of drawing Twists later for even more, is broken. There's the potential to knock someone's lands out, making an unfair game. I see twist for 2B and Hymn at BB to be pretty equal, and the latter is a fair card. On the other hand, you can't scale Hymn up...

Any black land, Lotus Petal, Hymn. That's two random cards turn one for the investment of two cards (petal, hymn.)

Any black land, Ritual, Duress, Hymn. That's three cards, including one directed discard in most decks, or maybe even 4 if the opponent is foolish enough to blow a force of will on the duress, for the investment of 3 cards.

Mind Twist scenarios on turn 1 really don't get a lot more broken than what's out there already.

Later in the game Mind Twist can be a golden draw or the worst dreck you've ever gotten short of mana. I can still see the guy's face in the first 128 tournament I won when he drew Mind Twist as his last draw while my Serra was eating him up. It was kind of a sickly, "damn now this comes up" look.

[C.P.]

Later in the game Mind Twist can be a golden draw or the worst dreck you've ever gotten short of mana. I can still see the guy's face in the first 128 tournament I won when he drew Mind Twist as his last draw while my Serra was eating him up. It was kind of a sickly, "damn now this comes up" look.

Any card can be like that. The thing about the Twist is that it gives control a lot harder times than it already has. Of course it is a discard spell, so it shares weakness with every other discard spell in the format, but that does not change the fact that it is too swingy to make control viable option.

[Michael Keller]

Later in the game Mind Twist can be a golden draw or the worst dreck you've ever gotten short of mana. I can still see the guy's face in the first 128 tournament I won when he drew Mind Twist as his last draw while my Serra was eating him up. It was kind of a sickly, "damn now this comes up" look.

Right....but you could also use the same scenario for any other discard spell in either format. Or land. So that is essentially irrelevant. Mind Twist I could see in Legacy. It's powerful no matter how you slice it, though. It's just in Legacy it is hard to realistically cast all that acceleration just to knock out their hand and play in topdeck mode the rest of the way. Generally speaking, the acceleration in Vintage is a little more powerful and plentiful than Legacy. And I wouldn't waste my resources on that.

[Phantom]

I agree that I can't think of completely busted situations with Mind Twist, but the idea of being able to splash 8 quality discard spells is a tad scary. Right now you can splash Duress, run Therapy if you can manage the flashback, or go BB for the big dog.

If it were unbanned, I would bust out that Black Chalice aggro deck. Turn 1 or 2 Negators followed by twists for 4 or 5 sounds intriguing, even against Goblins.

[Machinus]

I think it's acceptable that Twist is banned.

The card is such that at whatever point it becomes good enough to play, it is unfun, inconsistent, and powerful. All of those things mean that it doesn't meet the de facto criterion that the DCI uses for banning, and I think that makes sense. Even if it isn't at that point, it could still be that way in the future, and it may even be that way a small bit right now. The fact is Hymn is probably just better anyway, and I'd rather have superior (but fair) tournament cards and a rigorous B/R policy than the alternatives.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Every card that hurts your strategy is "unfun" to the person being controlled. But control cards serve an important function in the game, and they're perfectly fun to those of us that want to play control.

Mind Twist simply isn't that good. It's not run in T1, and when Sui was a deck it was still just the "Bad Hymn #5". It gives Brown-based aggro a Hymn like effect, but that's about it.

[MattH]

Mind Twist is very, very good with any kind of non-card-disadvantageous fast mana. We don't have too much of that in this format (Rofellos comes to mind), but if Twist came back, it would mean we could never get, say, Grim Monolith back.

This is all pretty hypothetical, though. Does anyone, regardless of they personally feel about Twist, actually expect to see it unbanned any time in the next two years? I sure don't. They have so many more worthy cards to unban before even considering Twist, I wouldn't get my panties in a knot (pun intended).

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I think it's usually better to unban control cards than combo cards. It's much easier to fight control elements.

[Bane of the Living]

I think it's usually better to unban control cards than combo cards. It's much easier to fight control elements.

This I completely agree with. Thats why Land Tax isnt a big deal. Even if it can give you plains advantage they're just plains. Combo cards are the real evil. Im surprised we saw Replenish come off the list before something like Metal Worker.

[umbowta]

Not really, Bane. I'm thinking mono blue Metalworker would be pretty hard to deal with. You get tutoring, draw, counters and combo all in one neat little package. If Worker is unbanned, ever, I will immediately be excessively activating Goblin Cannons for arbitrarily large amounts.

[Cait_Sith]

Remember, they unbanned Mind over Matter BECAUSE Metal Worker (and others like Grim Monolith, Tolarian Academy) was not in the format.

[Atwa]

Remember, they unbanned Mind over Matter BECAUSE Metal Worker (and others like Grim Monolith, Tolarian Academy) was not in the format.

I'm not that sure. There are better ways go get Mind over Matter into play, and IF they ever un-ban Metalworker, Staff of Domination will the weapon of choise, not MoM.

[Bane of the Living]

Worker does nothing on his own. He costs 3 which is fair. If you want to turbo him out your playing brown lands that dont tap for the QUADRIPLE BLUE mana investment for your MoM. He needs to wait till your next turn to activate. Hes small and not untargetable like Mongoose and Enchantress.

You need a hand full of non blue cards to get him to work for you. Aside from that if you really get to use him turn 4 and dump 9 mana into your mana pool the most you'll be doing is Mindslavering someone turn 4 or something else not incredibly game winning.

So if you want to play a brown deck that needs to play Voltaic Key and a whole shit ton of other non threat cards to assemble a combo that creates a bunch of colorless mana go for it. If you get your mana and win with it you deserve to win. Ill be playing Affinity.

Seriously, offer up a decklist that breaks Metal Worker. Didnt we try that a few months ago?

[MattH]

The first place I would try Metalworker would be in a combo/stax deck, with say Mizzium/Vault.

[HPC]

I see a lot of you calling to unban Land Tax but I'm on the fence regarding the power level of the card. Land Tax serves as an excellent land tutor and card advantage engine, but while powerful and potentially abusable it doesn't really do anything on its own and the card advantage you gain is all in basic lands.

For most decks Land Tax may represent a most stable mana base at a lower land count. This is good. And maybe some inventive random combinations would come about like Land Tax + Ideas Unbound in Thresh.

But I think Forsythe might have hit the nail on the head regarding making games agonizing and boring. Bringing Land Tax back would likely mean giving enough power to Turbo Stasis to make it playable again. As a Stasis player I love this ;). A turn 1 Land Tax allows payment on Forsaken City and card advantage essentially drawing the Turbo Stasis player 3 - 6 cards, depending on the amount of land left untapped. Root Maze and Chain of Vapors can lead to a slow, cheap, eventual win. Land Tax would surely replace Howling Mine as the card advantage engine.

[Bane of the Living]

I see a lot of you calling to unban Land Tax but I'm on the fence regarding the power level of the card. Land Tax serves as an excellent land tutor and card advantage engine, but while powerful and potentially abusable it doesn't really do anything on its own and the card advantage you gain is all in basic lands.

For most decks Land Tax may represent a most stable mana base at a lower land count. This is good. And maybe some inventive random combinations would come about like Land Tax + Ideas Unbound in Thresh.

But I think Forsythe might have hit the nail on the head regarding making games agonizing and boring. Bringing Land Tax back would likely mean giving enough power to Turbo Stasis to make it playable again. As a Stasis player I love this ;). A turn 1 Land Tax allows payment on Forsaken City and card advantage essentially drawing the Turbo Stasis player 3 - 6 cards, depending on the amount of land left untapped. Root Maze and Chain of Vapors can lead to a slow, cheap, eventual win. Land Tax would surely replace Howling Mine as the card advantage engine.

Not to rain on your stasis parade but if that deck was one card away from being that powerfull I think we'd already be seeing someone anywhere playing the deck at some point in time..

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Stasis is inherently an unplayable deck. It is very nearly impossible for it to win a single game within time, even if your opponent isn't intentionally trying to run the clock. It is impossible to win two games with it. If you lose a single game with Stasis in a round, the best you can hope for is a draw. 0-0-X rarely makes top 8. Land Tax won't change this.

[HPC]

Not to rain on your stasis parade but if that deck was one card away from being that powerfull I think we'd already be seeing someone anywhere playing the deck at some point in time..


I simply stated that with Land Tax the deck would be playable again -- not Tier 1. Current Stasis decks have to wait until turn 2 to cast a Howling Mine, slowing the deck down a full turn. With Land Tax you can create a one-sided card advantage that comes down turn 1 and provides lands for casting more spells after Stasis is played.

Don't focus on the Stasis deck. We dont' need to waste our time arguing the playability of an imaginary deck. I'm simply providing a situation where Land Tax becomes a powerful 1-mana land fixer and card advantage that stays around all game.

Is this as powerful as something like Goblin Lackey + Ringleader? Almost. In the Stasis example it provides a card advantage, mana fixing and because it's playable turn 1 a slight tempo boost for the deck.

Personally I think Lackey should be banned. This might be the reason I also feel keeping Land Tax banned isn't unreasonable.

[Cait_Sith]

I think Lackey should never be banned. A card with over 10 quality means of dealing with, plus 1 drop creature does, does not a broken card make.

Also, Lackey's existence forces people to make better decks as well as provides a measurable standard for those decks. I think it healthy for the format in assuring the weak deck theories (like Stasis) are quickly stomped out.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Lackey is obviously overpowered. From a balance viewpoint, it was a mistake to ever print it.

On the other hand, I think it actually benefits Legacy to keep the card legal. It puts a constant constraint on combo. Without Lackey, Goblins would pretty much simply be rolled by combo, but with the ability to go turn 1 Lackey, turn 2 get Wasteland/Port active, combo always retains an element of risk against the deck. Meanwhile, as a quasi "combo" deck itself, Goblins' presence makes cards like Silver Knight, Kird Ape, Nimble Mongoose and Watchwolf much stronger in the environment. I think Goblin Lackey is to Legacy what Mana Drain is to Vintage- a completely broken card that defines how broken a card can be without being banworthy, and as a warning device. When Lackey stops being relevant, it's a sign that the metagame is imploding.

[Machinus]

Be careful how you characterize the power of Magic cards. B/R's standards have changed drastically over time. At the moment their idea of appropriate power level and flavor is basically irrelevant to modern Eternal magic. What they think cards should be like now doesn't matter.

Lackey obviosly doesn't meet the modern standards of power level, which involve Inspiration being too good. I really think we can forget about that kind of comparison.

The card definitely has a strong, obvious ability. At the time there weren't too many cards that it could be abused with. Now, there are some, but Legacy and Vintage have stronger cards to respond with.

I'm surprised this debate is even still going on. It's pretty clear that Vial is the best card in the deck, not Lackey.

[URABAHN]

I'm surprised this debate is even still going on. It's pretty clear that Vial is the best card in the deck, not Lackey.

September 2003 B&R Update (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dci/announce/dci20030901a)


Goblin Lackey
The Extended Constructed format has gotten too fast. One of the biggest culprits is the Goblin deck and Goblin Lackey is the most egregious offender. The introduction of the Onslaught block (and especially the Scourge set) has given Goblin decks some extremely high quality Goblins and the Lackey’s ability to put them into play for free is simply too good for a first turn play.

This wasn't about not having enough answers in the format to Goblin Lackey, this was about the badass Goblins in Onslaught block which made Lackey busted. Instead of banning Warchief, they banned Lackey (sound familiar (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=5926))? I remember this format, I remember how busted Lackey was. I don't see why it got the axe back then, but doesn't get the axe now. Seriously, what is it about Goblin Lackey that he's safe in Legacy, but worthy of banning in 2003 Extended?

I'm old enough to remember this shit! I was there, man!

Playing spells for free is something Wizards has frowned upon in the past (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr46)


Dream Halls
This card was inspired by the pitch cards from Alliances. In fact, when I designed it, I called it Pitch World. The idea was simple. It turned every card into a pitch card. Sounds cool, huh? And it was cool.

So what’s the problem? It’s bah-roken. That’s R&D speak for “really, really causes problems in constructed”. A quick aside – This slang came from William Jockusch. During Mirage development, we came across some card (I forget which) that William thought was a problem. To emphasize the point, William stretched out the word “broken”. It was catchy enough that R&D started using the term whenever cards were very problematic.

Why is Dream Halls so bah-roken? Because it breaks a very fundamental rule of Magic. It allows player to play a spell without paying its mana cost. Why is that a problem? Because mana cost is one of the tools R&D has to balance cards. We like making big nasty creatures (and artifacts, enchantments and spells). In order to do this, we have to be able to use mana cost as a balance. This doesn’t mean we can never make cards that get around mana cost, but when we do we have to make sure that they’re harder to use than Dream Halls.

For those of you that have never seen a Dream Halls deck in play, I recommend you take a gander at Brian Selden’s Standard deck performance at the Magic Invitational (then called the Duelist Invitational) in Barcelona. The deck felt like a degenerate Type I deck and it was playable at the time in Standard. Once Dream Halls is out, the game stops being Magic and turns into some new game where mana is completely irrelevant.

The lesson of this card is that the designers have to respect mana cost. Whenever we get around mana cost we have to be extra careful because we’re playing with fire. Dream Halls was just the worst case of us getting burnt.

Speaking of playing spells for free (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/af82)


Aether Vial is a pretty ridiculous card. It costs but one mana, and it makes all of your creatures essentially uncounterable free instants. It messes up permission, combat, you name it. Basically it's like a super Dark Ritual that gives you 17 free mana over the course of a game. Somehow it has survived getting the axe in other formats, but knowing how much of a head start it gives Goblins and Affinity in this format—and how much it cripples control—we can't justify leaving it around.

[Jak]

I think goblin lackey is really good, but how is giblins better than decks like TES, that are getting more resilient and are just fast. Goblins give aggro a chance, which is good. It keeps decks in checks, so they can't just run hate for combo. They have to prepare for aggro and combo (preparing for aggro is more than four wrath of gods). It makes deck building a challenge, but is fun. So I say that lackey is good, but keeps the format in check.

[Tacosnape]

Seriously, what is it about Goblin Lackey that he's safe in Legacy, but worthy of banning in 2003 Extended?


1. Force of Will
2. Swords to Plowshares

[mogote]

1. Force of Will
2. Swords to Plowshares
Exactly.
Legacy is not Extended. Cards like Survival of the Fittest, Lotus Petal, Dark Ritual, Zuran Orb used to be banned in Extended as well but they're not problem cards in Legacy. Newly unbanned Mind Over Matter and Replenish were also banned in Extended but their power-level probably won't resemble a soon to be banned flash in the pan. This is because certain cards were either to old and therefore not available anymore (e.g. Tormod's Crypt) or not yet printed (e.g. Pithing Needle) to combat those cards.

[Zilla]

I'm surprised this debate is even still going on. It's pretty clear that Vial is the best card in the deck, not Lackey.
It's not about what's the most powerful. It's about what's the most format-distorting. No single other card in this format has as much direct bearing on the construction of other decks in this format as Lackey does. The biggest reason to ban Flash was not that it was totally unstoppable (because it wasn't), but because it caused a massive distortion of the metagame. Lackey does the very same thing, albeit to a much lesser degree.

I'm not really sold on a ban one way or the other, but if you're going to ban something in Goblins, it should be Lackey. Again, not because it's the most powerful card in the deck (Vial and Ringleader are both arguably stronger) but because it's by far and away the most format-distorting.

[URABAHN]

1. Force of Will
2. Swords to Plowshares

Force of Will was huge in Extended when Kai won PT-New Orleans, Goblin Lackey was legal at the same time, but wouldn't be banned until Scourge was legal. Swords to Plowshares, which never made a huge impact in Extended (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/rb97) was a casualty of the Format Rotation. In Legacy, where Swords and FoW are perfectly legal, Swords is basically a non-factor as of late (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3996), but there have been plenty of Force of Wills. Since Swords is basically a non-factor, I don't think Force of Will is what makes Goblin Lackey safe in Legacy.

[Machinus]

It's not about what's the most powerful. It's about what's the most format-distorting. No single other card in this format has as much direct bearing on the construction of other decks in this format as Lackey does. The biggest reason to ban Flash was not that it was totally unstoppable (because it wasn't), but because it caused a massive distortion of the metagame. Lackey does the very same thing, albeit to a much lesser degree.

I'm not really sold on a ban one way or the other, but if you're going to ban something in Goblins, it should be Lackey. Again, not because it's the most powerful card in the deck (Vial and Ringleader are both arguably stronger) but because it's by far and away the most format-distorting.

I agree that Lackey happens to affect deckbuilding more than Vial. The significance of this, and/or correctness of it, may be irrelevant to this information.

Force of Will and Swords to Plowshares are two cards that are good enough to be played in almost every deck running blue and/or white. They both answer Lackey. The format also happens to be filled with tons of acceleration, cheap answers, cheap removal, and cheap blockers, in every color.

To argue from the nature of the card pool, Legacy has been the strongest, most dynamic, and most innovative when pushed to answer good decks. This includes Goblins as well as Combo decks and Threshold. Legacy can be very good at defeating Aggro strategies, it just requires attention be paid to the metagame.

To argue from magic theory, a 1/1 creature that makes X/2 creatures is something you should be able to answer with a good deck. The synergy of the rest of the deck is relevant, but this is what the card pool is, and asking for slower decks is arbitrary.

To argue from tournament results, Goblins has tough matchups against Combo and many Aggro-Control decks. The Legacy metagame response cycle is very long. If you don't know this, you might be tempted to attribute long term success to brokenness, but that would be incorrect.

I don't see any good arguments for banning Lackey. I also see good reasons to keep it in the format.

[Tacosnape]

It's not about what's the most powerful. It's about what's the most format-distorting. No single other card in this format has as much direct bearing on the construction of other decks in this format as Lackey does. The biggest reason to ban Flash was not that it was totally unstoppable (because it wasn't), but because it caused a massive distortion of the metagame. Lackey does the very same thing, albeit to a much lesser degree.

I pretty much agree, I just think the 'lesser degree' bit was underemphasized.

Lackey may be huge, but Lackey's in a color that doesn't usually pack a lot of disruption to back him up. Eldariel's attempted to make a deck where Lackey and Force of Will coexist, but it's not catching on just yet. Lackey has this huge drawback, like most goblins, of having to play other goblins. And all but one or two goblins in magic are bad on their own, but amazing in groups. And you have to commit to the Goblins.

Flash, on the other hand, has a very small combo shell that can be stuck into almost any sort of disruption package, ranging from discard to counterspells to, as we saw, Counterbalance.

People were boarding out their entire Flash commitment to turn into Quirion Dryad / Phyrexian Negator aggro-control decks. Some people were even boarding in the Flash combo from non-Flash decks!

You can't get away with running Goblins without committing to it like you could Flash, which is a huge factor. If you're running Goblins, you're running Goblins. You might have some sideboard tech, maybe a couple of Patron of the Akki to get around dedicated hate, but you're still Goblins. Imagine if you could somehow board in Goblin Lackey and the rest of the deck into a non-goblin deck and have the entire deck function as though it were Vial Goblins. Or imagine if people boarded in their plagues only for you to suddenly be playing a different deck entirely. You can't do that with Goblins whereas you could with Flash.

Nothing in the deck needs to be banned. Goblin Lackey is not overpowered. Hell, we have burn decks in my metagame that consistently outrace Goblins. But I agree, if you ever -do- ban a card here, it's Lackey. And if any piece of Goblins gets banned, the deck will completely cease to exist.


Swords is basically a non-factor

You're kidding me, right? Check the top 8's again. Last I checked, UBW Fish, most Deadguy Ales, UGW Threshold, and any Landstill deck running white all pack it, and they're all over the top 8's.

[revenge_inc]

No single other card in this format has as much direct bearing on the construction of other decks in this format as Lackey does. The biggest reason to ban Flash was not that it was totally unstoppable (because it wasn't), but because it caused a massive distortion of the metagame. Lackey does the very same thing, albeit to a much lesser degree.

Sums up my position as well. It is the most format warping card but isn't powerful enough to ban. If Lackey was banned there would just be another format-defining card. (There are already plenty that in my book, rank just below Lackey in format warping-ness-icity)

[MattH]

I agree that Lackey happens to affect deckbuilding more than Vial. The significance of this, and/or correctness of it, may be irrelevant to this information.
I think Vial impacts what's played just as much, but in a much more subtler way than Lackey. Lackey determines what IS played, while Vial determines what ISN'T played.

For example, a resolved Devastating Dreams is almost impossible for Goblins to recover from...unless they have an active Vial. Therefore, we see far fewer DDreams than we would if Vial were not around. Similarly, Vial makes a lot of strategies that would otherwise be strong against goblins pretty weak - strategies like mana denial (DDreams) and counterspells and sorcery-speed removal (Wrath & friends).

Of all the cards that could be lost, banning Vial would do by far the most damage to goblins, by making it fear all these strategies that it can currently ignore. To some, that may be a reason to ban it; to some, it may be a reason to ban something else, or nothing at all.

[AnwarA101]

I think people who think Lackey or Vial needs banning should really do a review of the Top8s from this year. Historical Top8 (http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3996) shows that Goblins hasn't actually won a major tournament since February of this year. Goblins also came in 2nd at GP Columbus because it kept getting paired against Fish or Threshold decks which were overloaded against Flash, but had very little against Goblins. Goblins has problems against Combo and Aggro-Control. Its inefficiencies such as playing 3 mana 1/1s, 2 mana 1/2s, and 4 mana 2/2s often lead to the deck being very slow. Goblins without Lackey or Vial wouldn't even be a competitive deck in my opinion and the deck is losing ground anyway.

[Machinus]

Goblins has problems against Combo and Aggro-Control...the deck is losing ground anyway.

Combo. It beats Goblins. TM

[MattH]

I didn't say Vial needs banning, only describing what would happen if it were banned.

[sammiel]

and goblins does not have problems against aggro control, goblins is favored against aggro control.

goblins has trouble against aggro and combo.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

That depends on the build of aggro control. If you're playing Meddling Mage, you're probably going to lose, I guess.

What aggro deck beats Goblins? I have difficulty thinking of one.

[sammiel]

well noone really plays aggro except goblins.

But pretty much any w/x or r/x aggro deck is gonna mop the floor with goblins most of the time, bigger creatures and cheap spot removal, plus less vulnerable to mana denial than other decks.

[Machinus]

What aggro deck beats Goblins? I have difficulty thinking of one.

I lost to 9-color zoo at TMLO2.

[AnwarA101]

and goblins does not have problems against aggro control, goblins is favored against aggro control.

goblins has trouble against aggro and combo.

If you don't think Goblins has problems with properly built Threshold, CounterSliver, Red Death, or even Faerie Stompy then you should really test those matchups. Its not a walk in the park for Goblins by any means.

[Phantom]

Most of the Chalice Aggro decks have pretty good matchups against Goblins. Fast big creatures + equipment can hit the green men pretty hard.

And, at the risk of self promotion, ERA and that bastardization Pyroclasm.dec are Aggro Control Decks with downright good Goblins matchups.

I'll let you judge the quality of these decks are your own.

[Caboose]

What aggro deck beats Goblins? I have difficulty thinking of one.

Angel Stompy is in Goblin's base, rocking their mind. Nobody plays that deck though :frown:

And after Lorwyn, Elves are going to be in Goblin's world, owning their face. :laugh:

[HPC]

What aggro deck beats Goblins? I have difficulty thinking of one.

I agree. The problem isn't that goblins is perhaps too powerful, but that there's not any other aggro decks that I can think of that perform as well as goblins in an unknown meta. I don't want to see goblins neutered as much as I'd like to see other aggro to have equal acceleration.

Would this be possible if instead of banning Lackey, we unbanned something like Skullclamp? At least then other aggro decks would have access to cards to increase their tempo like goblins does.

[Di]

And after Lorwyn, Elves are going to be in Goblin's world, owning their face.

..and you know this how? Will they print a 1/2 Elven Lackey that will block Goblin Lackey and survive, then attack and allow me to drop Sylvan Messenger?

/dreams


Would this be possible if instead of banning Lackey, we unbanned something like Skullclamp? At least then other aggro decks would have access to cards to increase their tempo like goblins does.

And then Skullclamp goes into Goblins and matches the same tempo swings that those other aggro decks have, but Goblins will flatout beat it with it's better creatures. If anyone else here remembers playing Goblin Bidding with Skullclamp in standard, it was absolutely ridiculous. It'd be even worse in a format that has a much faster version of Goblins with better creatures and mana cheats to completely take advantage of it.

[Tacosnape]

What on earth kind of ridiculous logic is this?

"Goblins is too powerful, so let's unban Skullclamp?"

Brilliant. Truly brilliant. Aaron Forsythe >> This thread.

I don't see why people don't play well-tuned aggro decks like Zoo, Dark Boros, and 4-Deuce. They've all placed well at some point and have at some point or another won a tournament, which is impressive given that you see maybe one Zoo or Boros-style deck for every ten or fifteen Vial Goblins.

Plus, most decks don't pack a lot of hate for true aggro short of Engineered Plague and the occasional Pyroclasm or Solitary Confinement. 4-Deuce has answers to all of that in the form of Wax//Wane and having creatures with high toughness.

Goblins seems to have a mental edge over the world sometimes. Yes, it's very strong. And yes, slow decks will always struggle against the fast red men from time to time. But it's not unstoppable. And other aggro decks exist.

[Zilla]

And if any piece of Goblins gets banned, the deck will completely cease to exist.
I disagree. Goblins could afford to lose Lackey and it would still be a very very strong deck. It would be less swingy and less able to steal random wins due to an unlucky draw on its opponents' part. Basically its positive matchups would remain positive, as its negative ones would remain negative. It would lose some swinginess and speed, but not to the point of being totally neutered. The lack of Vial or Ringleader, on the other hand - that would wreck the deck pretty hard.

Let me reiterate that I'm not actually pushing for a Lackey ban here. I can just see perfectly feasible arguments for doing so. Consider me the devil's advocate on this.

[Tacosnape]

I disagree. Goblins could afford to lose Lackey and it would still be a very very strong deck. It would be less swingy and less able to steal random wins due to an unlucky draw on its opponents' part. Basically its positive matchups would remain positive, as its negative ones would remain negative. It would lose some swinginess and speed, but not to the point of being totally neutered. The lack of Vial or Ringleader, on the other hand - that would wreck the deck pretty hard.

Let me reiterate that I'm not actually pushing for a Lackey ban here. I can just see perfectly feasible arguments for doing so. Consider me the devil's advocate on this.

Fair enough. You're fun to debate with anyway.

Goblins as we know it would cease to exist. It would evolve into being some form of aggro-control deck, probably with black discard, as that would fill up the 1-slot well. It couldn't compete consistently without ever having a turn one Lackey potentially. Aggro decks that don't get their attacks going until turn 3-4 can't hack it in today's fast combo and quickly-stabilizing control format.

I see your arguments. And Lackey is certainly format-shaping. But the difference is, I see Lackey as a good format-shaper whereas Flash was a bad format-shaper. Lackey forces you to not play bad decks or change your bad decks to handle them. Flash forced you to play cards that have no business in normal magic games. Lackey is also solveable by far more all-purposely good cards than Flash, and Lackey can be solved moderately effectively by something in every color.

Evidence? Sure. Let's compare anything that can be played with one mana or less, and assuming Lackey came down (or attempted to) on the play.

GREEN:
Versus Lackey: Nimble Mongoose, Sandstorm (Possibly a reach, but maybe not with ETW so big), any 1-drop sometimes.
Versus Flash: ...?

RED:
Versus Lackey: Lightning Bolt, Chain Lightning, Pyrokinesis, Mogg Fanatic, any 1-drop sometimes.
Versus Flash: REB/Pyroblast

BLUE:
Versus Lackey: Force of Will, Stifle (If you've got a followup next turn), Hydroblast/BEB, any 1-drop sometimes.
Versus Flash: Force of Will, Daze, Stifle, Spell Snare

BLACK:
Versus Lackey: Dark Ritual-into-threat, Contagion, Carnophage, Sarcomancy, Darkblast, any 1-drop sometimes.
Versus Flash: Dark Ritual-into-Discard, Duress, Cabal Therapy, Unmask

WHITE:
Versus Lackey: Swords to Plowshares, any 1-drop sometimes.
Versus Flash: Swords to Plowshares (Kiki version only, not always effective), Children of Korlis (Disciple version only)

Three colors, Green, Red, and White, are not equipped to deal with Flash. All five colors have at least one guaranteed Lackey remover that's quite useful and playable against other decks. Black actually comes out the worst in this deal, a fact more than made up for by the fact that Plague exists.

This also isn't factoring in the fact that Lackey can hit you and you can still win. If you factor in this, you can start adding things like Pyroclasm, Engineered Plague, Infest, and the combo of small chump-blockers and Wrath/Damnation. You can even add in the fact that periodically Lackey will hit you and not drop anything game-ending.

My conclusion I draw from it is this: Every color has a solid, maindeckable answer to Goblin Lackey, even when going second, that is solid and playable against several other decks in the format. Green has Mongoose (Arguably the worst of the group as he doesn't fit in every green deck), Red has Lightning Bolt. White has Swords to Plowshares. Black has 2/2 Zombies and Dark Ritual. Blue has Force of Will. In addition, there are substantial numbers of sideboard cards which can do the same thing, and there are several cards which allow the Lackey to hit and not win the game. Furthermore, the more disruption a deck with Goblin Lackey packs to ensure he connects, the less effective Goblin Lackey is when he does connect.

Flash can't say the same thing. Red, Green, and White do not have consistently effective maindeckable answers to both versions of Flash. And even blue and black, if they don't get their answers, lose immediately. And Flash can pack 12-16+ cards of pure disruption with little trouble at all without diminishing the effectiveness of it at all.

There's my argument for Goblin Lackey not being banned.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Would this be possible if instead of banning Lackey, we unbanned something like Skullclamp? At least then other aggro decks would have access to cards to increase their tempo like goblins does.

Basically, no. The Goblin deck with Skullclamp would be better than the other decks with Skullclamp, except possibly Raffinity, and we'd be back where we started, except control would be a lot worse.

[URABAHN]

Taco, I'm not sure I understand, are you saying that Flash forced us to play with subpar cards to deal with Flash and if you want to deal with Lackey, you may have to play with subpar cards?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I think he's saying that Lackey is slower, more disruptible, not as powerful, and far weaker in the mid to late game, so not really anywhere near as influential. Lots of decks just ignore Lackey entirely and win their rounds against Goblins anyway. Goblins only has a 50% shot of being on the play and a 40% shot of having Lackey in their hand anyway.

[Goblin Snowman]

When Lackey is errated to "When Goblin Lackey deals damage to a player, win the game", it will be as broken. Oh, and ban every 1cc creature.

[cdr]

That depends on the build of aggro control. If you're playing Meddling Mage, you're probably going to lose, I guess.

What aggro deck beats Goblins? I have difficulty thinking of one.

Er, white weenie?

I can't remember the last time I saw goblins win that match.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I meant aggro-control that was actually capable of controlling anything besides goblins.

I've not found decks like Faerie Stompy to be very good against Goblins. Or much of anything, really.

[sammiel]

If you don't think Goblins has problems with properly built Threshold, CounterSliver, Red Death, or even Faerie Stompy then you should really test those matchups. Its not a walk in the park for Goblins by any means.

Red threshold maybe, but goblins has consistently beaten white threshold, both from online reports and from matches I've witnessed.

Yes, slivers wrecks goblins, but slivers would wreck goblins as an aggro deck too, diluting it's threat base to add counters worsens its goblins matchup, just not enough to mean anything. I more meant aggro-control in general.

lol @ faerie stompy. Maybe if you god draw into a turn 1 sea drake and get it equipped by turn 3, but goblins can still race you.

I don't consider red death to be aggro-control, but an archetype I refer to as aggro-disruption. Red death is the only aggro-disruption deck I consider to have a winnable matchup against goblins without making substantial changes to the maindeck. I'm not saying that the deck is bad or that it can't beat goblins, I'm saying that I think you are a better player than most of the goblin players you've come up against.

[C.P.]

I don't consider red death to be aggro-control, but an archetype I refer to as aggro-disruption.

What is distinction between them? Both puts opponent off balence and try to win in short time. They share a same basic plan.

On lackey, I think it should stay. Having a creature based deck as the best deck is a lot healthier than having some control or combo deck as the best deck, and recent Flash fiasco proved it to us.

[Goblin Snowman]

Most of the Chalice Aggro decks have pretty good matchups against Goblins. Fast big creatures + equipment can hit the green men pretty hard.


I'm just going to toss out that this is false from my testing/playing. Sure, I've had crazy draws, but a shared weakness all Chalice Aggro decks have is how poor they are on the draw. Faerie Stompy can have a turn one Drake, followed up by a random Faerie, and still lose. If it goes to the later game, Goblins out draws you with SCG eating your guys and Ringleader/Matron providing massive card advantage. Unless you're MDing mulitple sweepers (Dragon Stompy) you won't have a better than 50/50 game against them.

[AnwarA101]

Red threshold maybe, but goblins has consistently beaten white threshold, both from online reports and from matches I've witnessed.

Yes, slivers wrecks goblins, but slivers would wreck goblins as an aggro deck too, diluting it's threat base to add counters worsens its goblins matchup, just not enough to mean anything. I more meant aggro-control in general.

lol @ faerie stompy. Maybe if you god draw into a turn 1 sea drake and get it equipped by turn 3, but goblins can still race you.

I don't consider red death to be aggro-control, but an archetype I refer to as aggro-disruption. Red death is the only aggro-disruption deck I consider to have a winnable matchup against goblins without making substantial changes to the maindeck. I'm not saying that the deck is bad or that it can't beat goblins, I'm saying that I think you are a better player than most of the goblin players you've come up against.

Red Threshold is very good against goblins as pyroclasm post-board changes the dynamics of that matchup. White Threshold while worse doesn't have to be overly bad against Goblins. If you don't run maindeck Meddling Mage and a better cantrip engine you can really do okay against Goblins. I'm not saying its great for White Thresh, but even if its 50/50 that says alot about Goblins not being all that great against aggro-control.

I've tested Faerie Stompy vs. Goblins and I get about 50/50 or maybe 40/60 (I don't remember the exact results) and while that's not great for FS it still points to the fact that Goblins can have issues with decks that come out of the gate fast with some disruption.

I thank you for your compliment. I've always done very well against Goblins in real tournaments with Red Death. Many people are puzzled by this fact. Perhaps I am better than my opponents (though I never assume I am), but I think its also very possible that Red Death is very well equipped to deal with Goblins. The fact that Red Death is good against Goblins still shocks me, because in theory it seems like a terrible matchup. But when your opponent is trying to resolve a 4 mana spell (Ringleader) through Wasteland, Sinkhole, Hymn to Tourach, and Hypnotic Specter it can be very difficult. Often Goblins loses when it doesn't get an active Vial and Lackey is answered. The next few turns turn into I hope I make my land drops.

Don't take my comment about aggro-control the wrong way. I'm not saying aggro-control is favored against Goblins, but that going 50/50 with Goblins means that Goblins has a difficult matchup (its difficult for both players). The thing is that the aggro-control decks are really good against combo something Goblins can't really claim to be.

[Tacosnape]

Taco, I'm not sure I understand, are you saying that Flash forced us to play with subpar cards to deal with Flash and if you want to deal with Lackey, you may have to play with subpar cards?

No. I'm saying Flash forced us to play with subpar cards to deal with Flash.

Lackey, on the other hand, can be dealt with by playing cards that are good.

Nimble Mongoose is good.
Swords to Plowshares is good.
Lightning Bolt is good.
Force of Will is good.
Dark Ritual is good.

There's an answer to Lackey for every color. None of which are particularly awful.

[Ewokslayer]

All this talk seems fairly silly. Cards aren't Good or Bad except in context to the metagame and other cards available in the format.
The difference between Flash and Lackey is simple.
Flash can win the game Turn 2 or Turn 1.
Lackey can swing for 1 on turn two and create a very favorably board position.
Flash can be answered by primarly Blue and Black cards.
Lackey can be answered by every color and by most creatures at a casting cost of 2 or less.

[AnwarA101]

No. I'm saying Flash forced us to play with subpar cards to deal with Flash.

Lackey, on the other hand, can be dealt with by playing cards that are good.

Nimble Mongoose is good.
Swords to Plowshares is good.
Lightning Bolt is good.
Force of Will is good.
Dark Ritual is good.

There's an answer to Lackey for every color. None of which are particularly awful.

I think the better word here would be narrow cards. Flash forced you to run narrow cards that were essentially limited to two colors and did very little when your opponent wasn't playing Flash.

Goblin Lackey doesn't require you to run narrow cards to answer it, that are terrible if you aren't playing against Goblins. You are welcome to run narrow cards to answer Lackey, but it isn't required. You don't even have to answer Goblin Lackey at all if you play combo.

[Finn]

Goblin Lackey doesn't require you to run narrow cards to answer it, that are terrible if you aren't playing against Goblins. You are welcome to run narrow cards to answer Lackey, but it isn't required. You don't even have to answer Goblin Lackey at all if you play combo.This statement is not your best stuff, Anwar.

Nimble Mongoose is bad against combo.
Swords to Plowshares is bad against combo.
Lightning Bolt is bad against combo.
Force of Will is good, even against combo.
Dark Ritual is not particularly relavent here.

Leyline is bad against aggro.
Stifle is bad against aggro.
Duress is bad against aggro.
Force of Will is good, even against aggro.
Dark Ritual is not particularly relavent here.

Every card is narrow against the wrong deck.

Combo does not concern itself with answers to anything, so that statement is utterly hollow. As soon as it does it has an element of control in it. You see, control does need answers. And Goblins is a control deck's worst nightmare. It completely dominates card parity. Ever wonder why Truffle Shuffle loses to Goblins? Jack and his minions refuse to run narrow cards to preserve a chance against combo. Control without narrow cards loses to Goblins. And that is why it is so hard to build it in Legacy.

[Ewokslayer]

Every card is narrow against the wrong deck.


You seem to be combining being useless and not being amazing as being narrow.
There is a huge difference between using Nimble Mongoose as an answer to Goblins and using Leyline of the Void as an answer to anything.

Nimble Mongoose is not bad against combo in that for most decks that run the card it will be the thing that kills the combo player. Granted it isn't disrupting the combo but it is winning the game.

Lightning Bolt does 3 damage no matter what the opponent is running.

STP disrupts a number of potential creature combos

Leyline of the Void is useless against any deck that isn't reliant on the graveyard.

[AnwarA101]

This statement is not your best stuff, Anwar.

Nimble Mongoose is bad against combo.
Swords to Plowshares is bad against combo.
Lightning Bolt is bad against combo.
Force of Will is good, even against combo.
Dark Ritual is not particularly relavent here.

Leyline is bad against aggro.
Stifle is bad against aggro.
Duress is bad against aggro.
Force of Will is good, even against aggro.
Dark Ritual is not particularly relavent here.

Every card is narrow against the wrong deck.



Leyline and Stifle are more likely to be dead against a non-Flash opponent than something like Nimble Mongoose or Lightning Bolt are against a non-Goblin opponent. Mongoose can swing for the win against combo and Lightning Bolt can speed up your clock. But what does Leyline do against Aggro? Nothing is the answer.

If you are saying that a deck can have suboptimal cards in certain matchups then that is definitely the case. The question is what if the cards that it runs in the maindeck are so skewed to answer one deck that they are essentially dead in other matchups. That's the difference between Flash and Goblin Lackey. Goblin Lackey while requiring answers doesn't cause you to play cards that when played against other decks are completely awful. Mongoose and Lightning Bolt are useful in non-Goblin matchups. How often is something like Leyline good against a non-Flash opponent?



Combo does not concern itself with answers to anything, so that statement is utterly hollow. As soon as it does it has an element of control in it. You see, control does need answers. And Goblins is a control deck's worst nightmare. It completely dominates card parity. Ever wonder why Truffle Shuffle loses to Goblins? Jack and his minions refuse to run narrow cards to preserve a chance against combo. Control without narrow cards loses to Goblins. And that is why it is so hard to build it in Legacy.

You are only pointing out the problem with playing Control in Legacy. Yes decks like Truffle Shuffle lose to Goblins because it can't answer Lackey and still be decent against non-aggro decks. But isn't that the problem with Control? Why should such a deck exist? Is there something common about Goblins and Combo that should let a Control deck beat them both? That's the problem with always playing answers. You are bound to be playing the wrong ones against the wrong deck.

[Finn]

You seem to be combining being useless and not being amazing as being narrow.I don't think I am. I am merely pointing out the error of the line of thinking that Flash creating a meta of overly narrow answers is somehow a new thing. While it does do exactly that, Goblins has been doing it for years, and people complained, but life went on. Flash just did it way better.


Leyline of the Void is useless against any deck that isn't reliant on the graveyard.I love this game.

STP is useless against any deck that doesn't rely on creatures.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Creatures are the primary kill condition of the game. The vast majority of decks rely on creatures. The vast majority of decks do not, however, rely upon their graveyards.

[Finn]

Creatures are the primary kill condition of the game in an aggro meta. The vast majority of decks rely on [attacking] creatures in an aggro meta. The vast majority of decks do not, however, rely upon their graveyards in an aggro meta.Hey, you are right!


Mongoose and Lightning Bolt are useful in non-Goblin matchups. How often is something like Leyline good against a non-Flash opponent?

Thresh
Goblins
Landstill
Survival
Enchantress
TES
Aluren
Life from the Loam

This is every deck in the metagame forum. Only Gobs, TES, and Aluren have no use for the graveyard. BTW, unless you are also playing counters, STP is useless against TES - and Enchantress.

You are only pointing out the problem with playing Control in Legacy. Yes decks like Truffle Shuffle lose to Goblins because it can't answer Lackey and still be decent against non-aggro decks. But isn't that the problem with Control? Why should such a deck exist? Is there something common about Goblins and Combo that should let a Control deck beat them both? That's the problem with always playing answers. You are bound to be playing the wrong ones against the wrong deck.Thanks for restating my point. Control can't exist in this format and beat Goblins unless it runs narrow answers. The difference here is that aggro-control can. The narrowness of the cards isn't the problem. It's the fact that Flash played control elements without hurting the combo. That made it more resilient to hate, and therefor forced you to play more of them. Gobs doesn't counter your STP, so you have more slots available for broad cards and win conditions.

[Machinus]

Control being bad isn't a problem.


Anyway, this debate isn't going to be settled now. The people that can't beat Goblins are going to complain about it forever. Everybody else is going to enjoy the format as it develops.

In case you're so weak that this sounds rude to you, go count the number of pro tournaments it took for pros to figure out how to beat Goblins. Then count the number of non-pro tournaments it took everyone else.

[Mad Zur]

Thanks for restating my point. Control can't exist in this format and beat Goblins unless it runs narrow answers. The difference here is that aggro-control can. The narrowness of the cards isn't the problem. It's the fact that Flash played control elements without hurting the combo. That made it more resilient to hate, and therefor forced you to play more of them. Gobs doesn't counter your STP, so you have more slots available for broad cards and win conditions.Is that an argument that something in Goblins should be banned, or are you just pointing out the weaknesses of control in Legacy?

[AnwarA101]

Thanks for restating my point. Control can't exist in this format and beat Goblins unless it runs narrow answers. The difference here is that aggro-control can. The narrowness of the cards isn't the problem. It's the fact that Flash played control elements without hurting the combo. That made it more resilient to hate, and therefor forced you to play more of them. Gobs doesn't counter your STP, so you have more slots available for broad cards and win conditions.

This is exactly why I think Aggro-Control is just better in many ways than Control. It can beat Goblins because its less expensive cards happen to answer both Goblin Lackey as well killing their opponent in a timely manner. The fact that Control has a hard time existing doesn't bother me much. I don't look forward to the day where Legacy tournaments are Truffle Shuffle, Rifter, Wombat, Landstill, Life from the Loam, Train Wreck, etc. Why does these needs decks need to exist? They have problems beating Combo and Goblins. They just seem poor. I guess you have a problem with Control not being competitive, but I just view them as decks that can't handle the better decks of Legacy.

[Finn]

Mad Zur, I don't know what freaking side I am on. I don't give a rat's ass about control. And I am glad as hell that Flash is dead. I don't even think Goblin Lackey is a problem. I'm bored at work. I was just feelin' kinda Elgin, so argued.

Machinus, don't be nasty. The only thing rude is the weak comment, not the crap before it.

[Whit3 Ghost]

Hey, you are right!



Thresh
Goblins
Landstill
Survival
Enchantress
TES
Aluren
Life from the Loam

This is every deck in the metagame forum. Only Gobs, TES, and Aluren have no use for the graveyard. BTW, unless you are also playing counters, STP is useless against TES - and Enchantress.
Thanks for restating my point. Control can't exist in this format and beat Goblins unless it runs narrow answers. The difference here is that aggro-control can. The narrowness of the cards isn't the problem. It's the fact that Flash played control elements without hurting the combo. That made it more resilient to hate, and therefor forced you to play more of them. Gobs doesn't counter your STP, so you have more slots available for broad cards and win conditions.
TES uses the graveyard with IGGY kills.
An important part of Aluren is Therapy recursion and Witness tricks.

Leyline is narrow because against everything you listed but Thresh and sometimes TES/Aluren it won't do much. It may have it's occasional moment of worth, but against the brunt of the decks listed's strategies it will have very little effect on the game state.

[Phantom]

In case you're so weak that this sounds rude to you, go count the number of pro tournaments it took for pros to figure out how to beat Goblins. Then count the number of non-pro tournaments it took everyone else.

Is this talking about another format? Because the two pro level events in America for Legacy have had Goblins come in first and second respectivly, right?

Edit: Maybe I'm just misunderstanding your statement.

[Finn]

Yep, my bad. Every deck except Gobs is affected in some way by the narrow Leyline.

[Caboose]

Yep, my bad. Every deck except Gobs is affected in some way by the narrow Leyline.

Dear Finn,

Why does your tag say "whipping girl" when you are a male? Don't answer it. It's a rhetorical question. You are a Douche McFag.

Sincerely,

Caboose

Warned for flaming. - Zilla

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Hey, you are right!

Or Aggro-Control, or Control, or Survival, or a number of combo decks like Gamekeeper. But hey, why bother with facts when you can be irrational?



This is every deck in the metagame forum. Only Gobs, TES, and Aluren have no use for the graveyard. BTW, unless you are also playing counters, STP is useless against TES - and Enchantress.

Leyline sucks noodles against Enchantress and Landstill. Also, almost every random deck cares about StP. Very few care about Leyline.


Thanks for restating my point. Control can't exist in this format and beat Goblins unless it runs narrow answers.

Your point is without merit. StP and Lightning Bolt are not narrow cards; that's why they've been heavily played in every metagame they were legal in, ever. Leyline? Not so much.

[Slay]

Can someone tell me why it matters if traditional control isn't powerful enough in the format?
-Slay

[URABAHN]

Goblin Lackey while requiring answers doesn't cause you to play cards that when played against other decks are completely awful.

We love it when people play with Wrath of God, StP, Damnation, and other expensive creature removal.

Signed,

IGGy Pop, TES, CRET Belcher, Solidarity, and all the other combo decks in the format that don't play Creature spells.


The fact that Control has a hard time existing doesn't bother me much. I don't look forward to the day where Legacy tournaments are Truffle Shuffle, Rifter, Wombat, Landstill, Life from the Loam, Train Wreck, etc. Why does these needs decks need to exist? They have problems beating Combo and Goblins. They just seem poor. I guess you have a problem with Control not being competitive, but I just view them as decks that can't handle the better decks of Legacy.

Control is a natural part of every freakin' metagame, it should be allowed to exist and thrive just like combo, just like aggro, just like aggro-control, and whatever I've left out. To wave your hand dismissively and pooh-pooh Control really doesn't help out people who want to further that part of the Legacy metagame. In Finn's interview with Deep6er (http://mtgsalvation.com/584-what-next-gearhart.html), Deep6er touches on what effect that kind of thought can have


Living on the East Coast in Northern Virginia has been a huge boon to my Legacy skills, and is directly responsible for my involvement in the Legacy format. However, as Jack [Elgin] touched upon, we're all a bunch of jerks. I've come up with probably around a hundred different decklists. Many of which were completely new ideas. However, living where I do (and being who I am), the most likely reception to a new idea is derision.

Just because you think something is bad, poor, awful, or seems like it is, doesn't mean it is. Seriously, can all the haters drinking their HATERADE try to be just a little more accepting? I remember when Anwar and Krieger helped test Rifter right before Kadi's 1st DLD. Rifter was having a terrible time against experienced Goblins players, but with their addition of Starstorm, Rifter with Starstorm made Top 8 at that tournament. It's that kind of forward thinking that made the deck better. It's that kind of foward thinking that makes the entire format better.

This kind of thinking borders on HATE and will only make the format worse (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=136715&postcount=169).

[AnwarA101]

Just because you think something is bad, poor, awful, or seems like it is, doesn't mean it is. Seriously, can all the haters drinking their HATERADE try to be just a little more accepting? I remember when Anwar and Krieger helped test Rifter right before Kadi's 1st DLD. Rifter was having a terrible time against experienced Goblins players, but with their addition of Starstorm, Rifter with Starstorm made Top 8 at that tournament. It's that kind of forward thinking that made the deck better. It's that kind of foward thinking that makes the entire format better.

This kind of thinking borders on HATE and will only make the format worse (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=136715&postcount=169).

I don't see how my belief (and it is just a belief) that Aggro-Control is better for the modern metagame than Control can be labeled hate. I'm not saying all Control is unviable just that the problems that exist for it in the metagame have to be resolved. Ofcourse I believe those problems are massive and could be very difficult to solve. Realizing why decks have problems is one of the best ways to a make format better. Why not play Rifter anymore? Because it auto-loses to combo? Is it just poor in the modern metagame? I haven't investigated why Rifter disappeared, but there are reasons why people stop playing certain decks. Its because they aren't able to win anymore. I'm not telling you to give up on Control, but I am telling you why it has problems.

[URABAHN]

I don't see how my belief (and it is just a belief) that Aggro-Control is better for the modern metagame than Control can be labeled hate. I'm not saying all Control is unviable just that the problems that exist for it in the metagame have to be resolved. Ofcourse I believe those problems are massive and could be very difficult to solve. Realizing why decks have problems is one of the best ways to a make format better. Why not play Rifter anymore? Because it auto-loses to combo? Is it just poor in the modern metagame? I haven't investigated why Rifter disappeared, but there are reasons why people stop playing certain decks. Its because they aren't able to win anymore. I'm not telling you to give up on Control, but I am telling you why it has problems.

Now we're pretty much in agreement, on the following

1. Aggro-Control is probably better for the modern metagame.
2. The problems that exist for Control in the metagame have to be resolved.
3. Those problems could be very difficult to solve.
4. People, don't give up on Control!

This post of yours sounds so much nicer and friendlier to Control! Instead of "WHY DOES CONTROL HAVE TO EXIST?" and "COMBO SEEMS POOR!" We have harmony.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

We love it when people play with Wrath of God, StP, Damnation, and other expensive creature removal.

Signed,

IGGy Pop, TES, CRET Belcher, Solidarity, and all the other combo decks in the format that don't play Creature spells.

We love your first turn Empty the Warrens.

Signed,

Dark Ritual and Engineered Plague.

Allen, I'm not sure what you're on about. In what way do you imagine that this discussion qualifies as hate? Even if someone thinks control is no good in the current metagame, let them. That's their opinion. Every archetype isn't equally viable at all times. If you want to argue, do so with actual points, not just accusing them of being haters.

Edited for confrontational content. Ironic, no? - Zilla

[Tacosnape]

I think the use of terms such as "Narrow" and "Broad" are absolute crap. Some cards, like Force of Will, Dark Ritual, and Swords to Plowshares are good. Period. You run them in decks where they belong. All this chatter about defining "Good" and "Bad" does nothing more than make us lose the topic in a vast sea of pointless rhetoric and prevents any sort of intelligent conversation from taking place.

STP's dead against certain decks without creatures. So what? Force is dead if you don't have a blue card in your hand or five mana on the board. Duress is dead if the opponent has all lands/creatures or has Hellbent. Dark Ritual's dead if you have nothing to play with it. All of the best cards in magic are dead in certain circumstances. You still play with the good ones.

Leyline of the Void being compared to Swords to Plowshares is crap, too. There are far more decks that rely on creatures to kill you than rely on the graveyard to kill you. Even a lot of ones that rely on the graveyard to kill you rely on creatures to do it with, such as Reanimator, Survival, Dredge, and so forth. The neat part about Swords? It'll keep a creature from going to the graveyard, too.

Swords to Plowshares is a better card than Leyline of the Void. Period.

Dream up all the scenarios to the contrary you want. You can name any two cards in magic and I can list you a scenario where one is better than the other.

[Machinus]

Is this talking about another format? Because the two pro level events in America for Legacy have had Goblins come in first and second respectivly, right?

I'm not sure why you choose to restrict your format discussion based on geography. Is that significant in some way?

Just in case, here's (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/gplill05/welcome) the relevant information.

[Obfuscate Freely]

Control is a natural part of every freakin' metagame...
This statement is inane and almost certainly fallacious. The balance of proactive and reactive decks in a metagame changes as that metagame evolves, and there is no reason to believe that there is any sort of "natural" or "ultimate" form for a metagame to assume.

Flores wrote a fine article (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/11366.html) on this subject, and he included actual data to bolster his analysis. Note that the data presented in the article is incomplete; it is the comparison of Pro Tour results (provided) and results from the corresponding PTQ season (not provided) that are perhaps the most interesting.

Basically, "open" formats favor decks with proactive strategies by a huge margin, which makes sense. True control decks are necessarily metagame decks, and therefore are impossible to build without an extremely well-defined environment. Only once a format reaches a state with fewer decks being played (a clear best deck is probably necessary, as well) can a control deck be built to prey on those decks. This is why reactive strategies seem to fare better in PTQ formats than at the Pro Tours preceding them.

However, Flores postulates that this evolution is not terminal, but rather, cyclical. He points to Friggorid appearing in Extended and usurping Psychatog, which had previously pushed out Boros (which had replaced Affinity before it).

The point is that there is no reason to see anything wrong with control sucking. In fact, with Legacy being as wide open as it is right now, I would find it quite worrying if there was a control deck that was any good. The answer cards that deck would need would have to be absurdly powerful.

Until Legacy gets to a point that the gauntlet of played decks shrinks to something you can effectively metagame against, control decks will (and should) continue to be poor.

Goblin Lackey doesn't really have much to do with this.

[URABAHN]

This statement is inane and almost certainly fallacious. The balance of proactive and reactive decks in a metagame changes as that metagame evolves, and there is no reason to believe that there is any sort of "natural" or "ultimate" form for a metagame to assume.

Has there ever been a time in Magic when Control decks did not exist?


Basically, "open" formats favor decks with proactive strategies by a huge margin, which makes sense. True control decks are necessarily metagame decks, and therefore are impossible to build without an extremely well-defined environment. Only once a format reaches a state with fewer decks being played (a clear best deck is probably necessary, as well) can a control deck be built to prey on those decks. This is why reactive strategies seem to fare better in PTQ formats than at the Pro Tours preceding them.

I'll say it again, has there ever been a point in Magic where control decks didn't exist? I agree with Mike, but I fail to see how this applies to what I said. Control decks always have and always will exist and I consider that natural. Maybe I should've defined what I meant by natural.


The point is that there is no reason to see anything wrong with control sucking. In fact, with Legacy being as wide open as it is right now, I would find it quite worrying if there was a control deck that was any good. The answer cards that deck would need would have to be absurdly powerful.

Oh, you thought I was taking issue with Control sucking? I'm not taking issue with Control having problems in the current metagame, I took issue with Anwar's harsh views on Control. I didn't think it was appropriately worded. He would later take a softer approach.


Until Legacy gets to a point that the gauntlet of played decks shrinks to something you can effectively metagame against, control decks will (and should) continue to be poor.

And there's nothing wrong with that, but Control decks aren't going away just because the metagame isn't well-defined.


Goblin Lackey doesn't really have much to do with this.

Control decks would blossom in Lackey-less Legacy.

[FoolofaTook]

Can someone tell me why it matters if traditional control isn't powerful enough in the format?
-Slay

The merits of straight control used to be that it was the main check on decks that made a 4 to 5 turn investment to win and then petered out thereafter. The metagame is so fast right now that I'm not sure that those same merits apply.

It is true that control (in the form of MD Leylines) and early permission (the no mana counters) were the main checks on Flash at GP Columbus, however the control and permission in play there against Flash were just as ephemeral and likely to disappear as Flash was to fail to go off. The main reasons being that none of the decks playing Leyline MD had a prayer of actually recasting one if the Flash player successfully removed the one laid on the board at game start. Similarly all the permission in play came at great cost, either in card advantage with Force of Will or in mana tempo with Daze.

[Obfuscate Freely]

Has there ever been a time in Magic when Control decks did not exist?

...

I'll say it again, has there ever been a point in Magic where control decks didn't exist? I agree with Mike, but I fail to see how this applies to what I said. Control decks always have and always will exist and I consider that natural. Maybe I should've defined what I meant by natural.
Sure, Legacy has control decks. They are metagame decks without the metagames they are designed to beat. They are answers to questions no one is asking. They suck.


Oh, you thought I was taking issue with Control sucking? I'm not taking issue with Control having problems in the current metagame, I took issue with Anwar's harsh views on Control. I didn't think it was appropriately worded. He would later take a softer approach.
Anwar was saying that aggro-control decks are generally better than control decks. I think what he is getting at is that pure control decks are usually worse than hybridized decks that incorporate proactive elements into their reactive shells.

In fact, if you look over the Pro Tour Top 16s that Flores lists in that article, you'll find that almost all of the decks he catagorizes as "reactive" actually do contain proactive elements. Among them are some of the most powerful threats in the game, including Psychatog, Oath, and Scepter-Chant.

None of those decks are purely reactive; they are all strategically hybridized, and to a much greater degree than Landstill or Truffle Shuffle. I think that is what Anwar was trying to say.


And there's nothing wrong with that, but Control decks aren't going away just because the metagame isn't well-defined.
What do you mean by "going away?" Like I said, they exist, but they suck.


Control decks would blossom in Lackey-less Legacy.
I'm pretty sure this is flat-out wrong. However, if it were true, I could only conclude that Lackey is good for the health of the format. Like I said before, a true control deck would have to be greatly overpowered to compete favorably in a format as open as Legacy.

[Bane of the Living]

Like I said before, a true control deck would have to be greatly overpowered to compete favorably in a format as open as Legacy.

Mana Drain much?

[Illissius]

I'm pretty sure this is flat-out wrong. However, if it were true, I could only conclude that Lackey is good for the health of the format. Like I said before, a true control deck would have to be greatly overpowered to compete favorably in a format as open as Legacy.

I call bullshit. Extended in the last season was at least as wide open and diverse as Legacy, and yet control decks -- notably U/W Tron -- existed and prospered. Was it powerful? Sure. That's a requirement for being competitive. Overpowered? Obviously not.

I think people are confusing diverse formats and unexplored ones. The adage about proactive strategies doing well and control poorly applies to the latter -- it's necessarily difficult to build a deck to control the entirely unknown. Diverse formats are far more manageable, as long as large swaths of the metagame are fairly similar (which they nearly always are -- what works against one combo deck will also work against most others).

Also? BHWC Landstill sounds like a control deck to me, and it's been putting up respectable results. So I'm not sure what we're arguing about. Control has a difficult time in Legacy, sure, but it's certainly not dead. And any of the major archetypes can have and have had a difficult time in any given format; currently, in Legacy, it happens to be control. I don't think this is abnormal. (It doesn't, however, mean I like it.)

[Obfuscate Freely]

I call bullshit. Extended in the last season was at least as wide open and diverse as Legacy, and yet control decks -- notably U/W Tron -- existed and prospered. Was it powerful? Sure. That's a requirement for being competitive. Overpowered? Obviously not.

I think people are confusing diverse formats and unexplored ones. The adage about proactive strategies doing well and control poorly applies to the latter -- it's necessarily difficult to build a deck to control the entirely unknown. Diverse formats are far more manageable, as long as large swaths of the metagame are fairly similar (which they nearly always are -- what works against one combo deck will also work against most others).

Also? BHWC Landstill sounds like a control deck to me, and it's been putting up respectable results. So I'm not sure what we're arguing about. Control has a difficult time in Legacy, sure, but it's certainly not dead. And any of the major archetypes can have and have had a difficult time in any given format; currently, in Legacy, it happens to be control. I don't think this is abnormal. (It doesn't, however, mean I like it.)
Honestly, I know that describing control as "sucking" is hyperbole. What I mean is that decks like BHWC Landstill, Truffle Shuffle, and Landstill, while clearly viable, are nowhere near being the best deck. I might test against these decks, but I won't expect them to be the best choice to play in a tournament.

The difference between a diverse format and an unexplored format may be relevant, but I'm not sure. Which do you think Legacy is?

I admit to not knowing much about the last Extended season. Were the UW Tron decks not hybridized? I thought most Tron decks just seek to stall the game long enough to play out their own powerful (and mostly proactive) spells.

[AnwarA101]

Now we're pretty much in agreement, on the following

1. Aggro-Control is probably better for the modern metagame.
2. The problems that exist for Control in the metagame have to be resolved.
3. Those problems could be very difficult to solve.
4. People, don't give up on Control!

This post of yours sounds so much nicer and friendlier to Control! Instead of "WHY DOES CONTROL HAVE TO EXIST?" and "COMBO SEEMS POOR!" We have harmony.

If my tone was inappropriate, it wasn't meant to be. I was just responding to notion that Control should be viable in a way that I thought would make sense.

In all honesty I find very little reasoning behind playing Control decks. In my mind Control decks come in two basic flavors in Legacy. One is overcommitted to beating the most-popular deck in Legacy (Vial Goblins) at the expense of almost every other deck. These were older decks like Rifter and Wombat. While they were very favored against Goblins, they became much more unreliable when played against other decks especially Combo decks where they had almost no chance.

The other type of Control decks try to brake away from being a Goblin hate deck and try to be a general control deck. The problem comes that either these decks end up not being good enough against Goblins or they simply aren't good enough against Combo decks. They end up in this middle ground where they aren't quite good enough against anything. I think Landstill is a perfect example of the latter.

By contrast, Aggro-Control is actually better at dealing with both Goblins and Combo . They have the ability to disrupt and kill both Goblin players and Combo players before they have time to recover. I believe this is the case because Aggro-Control decks by their nature have to run cards that cost less mana, but still make a large impact on the game. This makes it natural for them to be able to answer Goblin Lackey without having to twist their strategy, because their strategy involves these types of cards. Nimble Mongoose is a perfect example of this. A 1 mana creature that can become an untargetable 3/3 is good against combo and Goblins. Its even good against Control as its untargetable and requires some type of mass removal or some type of blocker to take it down.

[MattH]

It's been the general trend across all formats since about 2002* that using control elements to protect your own game-winning plan is a fundamentally sounder strategy than being a "true control" deck.

In Vintage, using Force and Drain to protect and accelerate a control spell like Moat has been shown to be worse than using them to protect and accelerate into a kill - first Morphling, then Psychatog, then Mindslaver, then Gifts, but always it was better to use your resources to Just Win instead of trying to stop the other guy. The same thing has applied to smaller formats like Extended (stop the other guy until Tron starts dropping Slavers and Sundering Titans on you) and even standard (the U/r decks that would just tap out on turn 5 for Meloku/Keiga).

*You could even go back further than 2002 in extended and watch the evolution of Force of Will: first it was used in decks like Stasis, then it was used to protect Morphling and win with that, then to protect Survival and win with that, then to protect Necropotence and win with that. The threats themselves got better and better but the basic plan stayed the same: the best FoW decks all used it to force through some game-winning threat, not to simply stop an opposing spell or protect a Moat or similar. But 2002 really put the whole issue in focus with the printing of Psychatog, though it was almost another year before it all came into focus with GAT in vintage.

For a control deck to work requires a certain confluence of events, the first being the existence and legality of cards which can be effective at controlling a wide enough slice of the metagame. Wrath of God wasn't cutting it in Legacy anymore, so Landstill switched to Pernicious Deed (and Stifles, which were effective against both goblins and storm combo) and suddenly began not-sucking once more.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I would've thought that the fact that control is better with actual win conditions was obvious. Aside from Stasis and the occasional terrible Gaea's Blessing recursion plan deck, did anyone dispute this?

Although the nature of what is or is not a "proactive" threat here seems to be very arbitrary. Every deck has both proactive and reactive cards, or almost every deck does, but a control deck is one where the greater majority of cards work to control the game, and a few cards are used to actually win. Such is the nature of control that these cards are usually bombs- that's one of the sources of it's card advantage. Whether Mindslaver, Darksteel Colossus, Decree of Justice, Haunting Echoes or something else beefy, as long as you're stalling unto infinity anyway, it doesn't make much sense to run Isamaru are your kill if you're going to see turn 20 anyway.

[FoolofaTook]

I would've thought that the fact that control is better with actual win conditions was obvious. Aside from Stasis and the occasional terrible Gaea's Blessing recursion plan deck, did anyone dispute this?

Win conditions for control used to be very limited in the deck, allowing for denial and permission to be present in overwhelming numbers. Typical win conditions for U/W/x control as of 1996 were 2 Disrupting Scepters and 2 Serra Angels or maybe 3 Millstones and Demonic Tutor. Jester's Cap was the first step to pithing control. These days there are so many ways to go get a few cards and yank them from the game that any deck that needs 10 turns to get them in play is probably hosed if there are only a couple of win conditions available.

[Nihil Credo]

I would've thought that the fact that control is better with actual win conditions was obvious. Aside from Stasis and the occasional terrible Gaea's Blessing recursion plan deck, did anyone dispute this?
Landstill traditionally relied on Mishra's Factories as its primary win condition. It is significant that the deck improved greatly when it adopted the much faster Nantuko Monastery.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Landstill traditionally relied on Mishra's Factories as its primary win condition. It is significant that the deck improved greatly when it adopted the much faster Decree of Justice.

Fixed.

[Di]

No, not fixed. Decree of Justice is slow as balls without Mana Drain. Nantuko Monastery can be online by turn 4-5 and win the game before turn 10. Decree of Justice does not win that fast, and also doesn't allow you to cast Wrath of God in between.

[mikekelley]

I have never really liked DoJ as a win condition. Clunky, slow, just doesn't cut it in my opinion.

[Cait_Sith]

And a card that dies to Wasteland is?

[Di]

And a card that dies to Wasteland is?

..protected by Stifle, or Crucible of Worlds? Considering they are the norm in Landstill builds, I don't see Wasteland as being much of a threat to my win condition. If I were playing Landstill, I'd be more afraid of Wasteland within my first few turns, not the turns I'm killing them.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

If you claim to get to Threshold on turn 4 with Landstill, I respectfully posit that your position is unsustainable by tangible evidence, sir.

Monastery is part of this endemic need of Landstill players to make this manabase atrociously bad. It's nowhere near as good as DoJ, which is, as a matter of fact, the best fucking manland ever.

Also, your assertion that you're attacking with Landstill as early as turn 6 seems highly questionable, my esteemed collegue. You haven't even nearly secured the game at that point. The deck naturally stalls til at least turn 11, at which point you DoJ for bunches EoT and win the game in a couple turns, or take out an entire attacking army. Not to mention dropping triple or quadruple 4/4 beatsticks.

[Di]

If you claim to get to Threshold on turn 4 with Landstill, I respectfully posit that your position is unsustainable by tangible evidence, sir.

Monastery is part of this endemic need of Landstill players to make this manabase atrociously bad. It's nowhere near as good as DoJ, which is, as a matter of fact, the best fucking manland ever.

Also, your assertion that you're attacking with Landstill as early as turn 6 seems highly questionable, my esteemed collegue. You haven't even nearly secured the game at that point. The deck naturally stalls til at least turn 11, at which point you DoJ for bunches EoT and win the game in a couple turns, or take out an entire attacking army. Not to mention dropping triple or quadruple 4/4 beatsticks.Brainstorm, Force of Will, Counterspell, Swords to Plowshares, fetchlands, Wasteland, Standstill, Wrath of God, Engineered Explosives, etc. It's certainly not all that common, but I've done on more than one occasion. I would say generally turn 5-7 threshold is gotten.

As far as Monastery being bad, whoever said I was playing with 4 colors? Or do you automatically assume that because Monastery is in a list, it is crammed into a Ubg build?

As far as beating turn 6 with Landstill, perhaps the combo matchup? Shit, any matchup where you can assume control by then. Cast Standstill, a Force of Will or two, Wrath the board away, and all of a sudden you're staring at an empty board with a few cards in hand and a Monastery in play. I know you favor a slower control strategy, but in reality when you're in decent position of the game and have the opportunity to attack, you do. By jove, the deck is nothing but answers. If you don't have the game controlled by then, I question your methodology and request further elucidation on the subject.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

As far as Monastery being bad, whoever said I was playing with 4 colors? Or do you automatically assume that because Monastery is in a list, it is crammed into a Ubg build?

I assume that if you run Monastery, Factory, and Wasteland in a deck that needs :u::u:, :w::w:/:b::g:, much less with Engineered Explosives, that your manabase is terrible, yes.

What if they don't break the Standstill? How do you kill them with Monastery when you can't actually give yourself Threshold?


Of course, I know you favor a slower control strategy, but in reality when you're in decent position of the game and have the opportunity to attack, you do. By jove, the deck is nothing but answers. If you don't have the game controlled by then, I question your methodology and request further elucidation on the subject.I know you live in New York, but good players don't just give up and die against Landstill turn 5-6. They don't over-commit into WoG or Deed either.

[Zilla]

I want to commend you both on remaining civil, despite your disagreement on this matter.

[Tacosnape]

What if they don't break the Standstill? How do you kill them with Monastery when you can't actually give yourself Threshold?

I know you live in New York, but good players don't just give up and die against Landstill turn 5-6. They don't over-commit into WoG or Deed either.

You can play draw, discard, go.

Actually, this is exactly why I like Monestary. I've never run Monestary for the speed. I run it because it forces the opponent to over-commit into boardsweepers. Very very little in this format can swing through a 4/4 First Striker. What little can, you remove with pinpoint removal.

I generally disagree with the concept that Monestary is a fast kill, though. What it is, is a kill that gets through with the minimal number of swings. Meaning when you've spent six to ten turns with Landstill defending and setting up your board, he kills without giving the other guy as many turns to rebound.

[MattH]

I would've thought that the fact that control is better with actual win conditions was obvious. Aside from Stasis and the occasional terrible Gaea's Blessing recursion plan deck, did anyone dispute this?

I can't tell if you're intentionally mischaracterizing the point or not, but no one was ever arguing for zero-win-condition decks. The point is that across almost all formats, the winning trend in the last half-decade has been for 'control' decks (I include combo-control and aggro-control) to have their own Win The Game plan that can come online much faster than the turn 11 or whatever you're talking about.

Control decks have been moving AWAY from slow kills like Factory and Decree and towards builds that, as soon as the opponent stops pressuring them, start to win the game - and not in some abstract way, but actually killing the opponent. Instead of spending turns accumulating a hand/board position the opponent can't win through, they win themselves.

If the opponent gets a weak hand and stalls out, a Decree is still not going to do anything worthwhile until turn 7 at the soonest, whereas a Fish or Trix or Tog or Severance/Belcher or UWTron deck will probably have already won by then. That's a big difference from the old model, where control decks used to use slow, grinding kills such as 1 Rainbow Efreet+4 Stalking Stones or Kjeldoran Outpost or 2x Morphling.

Virtually every control deck has gone into "aggro-control" mode (protecting your threat just long enough to win) at some point in the game, but the difference between Tog and Keeper, to take one example from Vintage couple years back, is that Tog could do that starting as soon as turn 3 if the opponent wasn't putting on enough pressure. 'Modern' control decks are usually much more able to capitalize on openings than they were a few years ago.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I can't tell if you're intentionally mischaracterizing the point or not

It was intentional.

Your point is silly. DoJ and Morphling and Haunting Echoes are no slower than Mindslaver or Exalted Angel or Scepter-Stick; the specific kill condition depends upon what the deck looks like and what it's facing. You're simply arbitrarily labeling kill conditions that've met with more recent success (although DoJ and H. Echoes should be there under that categorization, too) as being somehow, artificially more "proactive" to prove some completely fictitious point. All these kill conditions are pretty slow. What they do have in common as that unlike Blessing or Factory, they win quickly after actually coming down. But this isn't new or exciting.

Note that U/W Tron also runs DoJ, incidentally.

[MattH]

You're simply arbitrarily labeling kill conditions that've met with more recent success (although DoJ and H. Echoes should be there under that categorization, too)
If I was really doing what you say, and calling recently-printed kills 'fast', I would have included those two. However, I was NOT arbitrarily categorizing them, as is shown by my not including DoJ and Echoes.


as being somehow, artificially more "proactive" to prove some completely fictitious point. All these kill conditions are pretty slow.
Tog, Trix, and others I named are not slow. They can and do win as early as turn 4 when unopposed or only lightly opposed, which was my actual point. Moreover, the aggro-control family (which I also included, albeit not by name, but you ignore) are also not slow to start winning when given an opportunity to do so.


DoJ and Morphling and Haunting Echoes are no slower than Mindslaver or Exalted Angel or Scepter-Stick
Did it never occur to you to refute the examples I actually used, instead of making up strawmen? I cited NONE of these as fast kill conditions*.

Certainly being fast once you cast a kill is important, but it's not the whole story. "Demonfire for 20" kills immediately once you play it, but it's terrible because you have to wait 25-30 turns before you can use it. That's an extreme example, but illustrates the point - it's usually better to play the faster, more vulnerable kill than to play the slower, inevitable one.

*UW Tron in extended uses some of these (I think? I'm not an extended expert, I just glance at decklists for tech) but the Tron engine lets you play them much faster than usual. Also, AFAICR, Tron decks eventually evolved to using Trinket Mage too, which would give them an additional "I'm not forced to wait around to kill you" plan.

[JACO]

If you claim to get to Threshold on turn 4 with Landstill, I respectfully posit that your position is unsustainable by tangible evidence, sir.

Monastery is part of this endemic need of Landstill players to make this manabase atrociously bad. It's nowhere near as good as DoJ, which is, as a matter of fact, the best fucking manland ever.

Also, your assertion that you're attacking with Landstill as early as turn 6 seems highly questionable, my esteemed collegue. You haven't even nearly secured the game at that point. The deck naturally stalls til at least turn 11, at which point you DoJ for bunches EoT and win the game in a couple turns, or take out an entire attacking army. Not to mention dropping triple or quadruple 4/4 beatsticks.
I've probably played more Landstill matches in the past 3 years than you will play in your lifetime, so please follow along closely and take this to heart when I say this. Decree of Justice, in a format with regularly played first turn Goblin Lackeys, Goblin Charbelchers, Empty the Warrens, and other fast threats, is unplayable. 4C Landstill used to play them, and we dropped them altogether because the format gets faster and faster and better every few months. If we were playing in a format without Goblin Lackey, there would be very little reason not to play 4C Landstill tuned to beat combo and aggro-control, and just smash every mid-range control and aggro deck, and be able to afford to play "slow as balls" cards like Decree of Justice. The role of Factory and Monastery are to allow you to go aggro when you need to, and to tie up the ground when you don't, so you have time to get your Fact or Fictions online. Decree of Justice is a really nifty card, but unfortunately it's just too slow and mana intensive to be sitting in your hand half the game when you could be using that mana to greater effect with other spells.

As an aside, almost none of the good Landstill builds play Wrath of God or Damnation. There is no need to, and the double-white or double-black is just an unnecessary headache.

Pretty much everything you've stated about Landstill in this thread has been off the mark.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Did it never occur to you to refute the examples I actually used, instead of making up strawmen? I cited NONE of these as fast kill conditions*.


In Vintage, using Force and Drain to protect and accelerate a control spell like Moat has been shown to be worse than using them to protect and accelerate into a kill - first Morphling, then Psychatog, then Mindslaver, then Gifts, but always it was better to use your resources to Just Win instead of trying to stop the other guy. The same thing has applied to smaller formats like Extended (stop the other guy until Tron starts dropping Slavers and Sundering Titans on you) and even standard (the U/r decks that would just tap out on turn 5 for Meloku/Keiga).

I suppose Keiga's faster than Scepter-Stick. Technically.

Also,


For a control deck to work requires a certain confluence of events, the first being the existence and legality of cards which can be effective at controlling a wide enough slice of the metagame. Wrath of God wasn't cutting it in Legacy anymore, so Landstill switched to Pernicious Deed (and Stifles, which were effective against both goblins and storm combo) and suddenly began not-sucking once more.

"Sucking" must be German for, "Consistently Top 8'ing at major Legacy tournaments despite being very underplayed".


Certainly being fast once you cast a kill is important, but it's not the whole story. "Demonfire for 20" kills immediately once you play it, but it's terrible because you have to wait 25-30 turns before you can use it. That's an extreme example, but illustrates the point - it's usually better to play the faster, more vulnerable kill than to play the slower, inevitable one.

Tournament success disagrees with you. In actual control decks, which we'll define as decks where the control elements greatly outweigh the kill elements, invulnerable beefy kills have worked, and fast ones have not. No one has built a Tog list that was successful in Legacy in three years. Three effing years. This is not Vintage. People play StP.


I've probably played more Landstill matches in the past 3 years than you will play in your lifetime,

Even if this were so? It wouldn't matter. I still trust my ability to interpret information from a slightly more limited set of data far more than I trust yours.


Decree of Justice, in a format with regularly played first turn Goblin Lackeys, Goblin Charbelchers, Empty the Warrens, and other fast threats, is unplayable.

I could highlight all the numerous reasons that you're wrong, and that DoJ is virtually the ideal finisher for control. But why waste time rehashing arguments when I can just unequivocally destroy your point with empirical data?

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/gplill05/t8decks (I like this one, as fully a quarter of the top 8 is running the card)

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/gpphi05/welcome#1

http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=127858&postcount=392

http://mtgthesource.com/forums/showpost.php?p=118702&postcount=1

http://www.planetmtg.de/articles/artikel.html?id=2640

http://www.planetmtg.de/articles/artikel.html?id=2572

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgevent/gernat06/welcome#12


4C Landstill used to play them, and we dropped them altogether because the format gets faster and faster and better every few months. If we were playing in a format without Goblin Lackey, there would be very little reason not to play 4C Landstill tuned to beat combo and aggro-control, and just smash every mid-range control and aggro deck, and be able to afford to play "slow as balls" cards like Decree of Justice. The role of Factory and Monastery are to allow you to go aggro when you need to, and to tie up the ground when you don't, so you have time to get your Fact or Fictions online. Decree of Justice is a really nifty card, but unfortunately it's just too slow and mana intensive to be sitting in your hand half the game when you could be using that mana to greater effect with other spells.

I think the viability of 4C Landstill is disputed somewhat by the fact that the only person to do really well with it is a proven cheater. I look at that atrocious mana base, and I now have a hard time convincing myself that those wins are anything but a result of such cheating, because, shit man, how many colorless sources do you think you could possibly need in a four-color mana base?


As an aside, almost none of the good Landstill builds play Wrath of God or Damnation. There is no need to, and the double-white or double-black is just an unnecessary headache.

You have some kind of funny definition of the word "good" that isn't used a lot around here. Check the above links.

[Tacosnape]

I think the viability of 4C Landstill is disputed somewhat by the fact that the only person to do really well with it is a proven cheater. I look at that atrocious mana base, and I now have a hard time convincing myself that those wins are anything but a result of such cheating, because, shit man, how many colorless sources do you think you could possibly need in a four-color mana base?

While I agree with almost every point you made, including that U/W Landstill is indeed a strong and underrated deck, allow me to make a couple points in defense of 4C Landstill.

1. No skilled Landstill player has yet, to my knowledge, attempted to pilot 4C Landstill without Wasteland, the correct build, at a major tournament. 4C Landstill sans Wasteland, with either 12 Duals and 5 Fetches, 11 and 6, or 12 and 6 with only 2 Monestaries is the superior build. I would be quite confident taking a mana-improved 4C Landstill into a decent-sized tournament.

2. Nick Trudeau's successes being attributed to sheer cheating doesn't invalidate the deck. In my mind it invalidates his personal results, and leaves 4C Landstill as very much a deck with something to prove results-wise, but it doesn't invalidate the deck itself. It's my belief that very few people play 4-Color Landstill because they're terrified of the manabase. The base is pretty strong, however, without Wasteland and with a dedication to making it function. What's more, as anyone who plays 4C Landstill knows, the deck is ungodly strong once you hit all your colors.

If Trudeau's disqualification leaves 4C Landstill without a champion, I'll gladly step in to that role. It's the strongest deck I own, and when playtested against my other 5 (Goblins, Survival, Solidarity, Sui Black, and Faerie Stompy) has yet to go worse than 3-2 in matches.

[Artowis]

I know taking stuff out of context is cool and all, but Mindslaver in Vintage, as Matt was alluding too, is a fast kill. If undeterred it could win on turn 2 (or 1 on occasion) and I know Shay could do it pretty consistently on turn 3 all the time if he didn't meet heavy resistance.

You may now return back to the whole 'hay, control in Legacy likes slow invulnerable kills' vs. 'lawlz, every other format doesn't though!' now.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I know taking stuff out of context is cool and all, but Mindslaver in Vintage, as Matt was alluding too, is a fast kill. If undeterred it could win on turn 2 (or 1 on occasion) and I know Shay could do it pretty consistently on turn 3 all the time if he didn't meet heavy resistance.

You may now return back to the whole 'hay, control in Legacy likes slow invulnerable kills' vs. 'lawlz, every other format doesn't though!' now.

What you may have inadvertently missed is that no other format does have fast "control" decks as in Vintage, because in any other format dumb cards like Yawgmoth's Will, Black Lotus and Mana Drain are banned. Aside from the occasional antiquated Extended deck from the 90's, this has been the pattern of control in every format other than Vintage consistently. The closest thing to an exception was certain Tog lists, but really, Tog could only win earlier than turn 7 with ridiculously good hands and through no disruption in normal formats. Mindslaver in Extended, on a good day, goes active turn 6. And that's hardly an auto win in most situations.

[JACO]

I'm not sure why you and I always get stuck arguing, but it's fun.
Tournament success disagrees with you. In actual control decks, which we'll define as decks where the control elements greatly outweigh the kill elements, invulnerable beefy kills have worked, and fast ones have not. No one has built a Tog list that was successful in Legacy in three years. Three effing years. This is not Vintage. People play StP.Wrong. I split 50 duals (40 for 1st, 10 for second) at the GenCon SoCal tournament last year with DredgeATog. (http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=25643.0) If anybody with skill had actually bothered to test this list, and stop playing bad cards in DregeATog like Golgari-Grave Troll and Nimble Mongoose, they would realize the raw power of Intuition and Life From the Loam. It is seriously kind of degenerate. I'm not saying this is the greatest list ever. What I'm saying is that Psychatog can be built to be successful, powerful, and play more than the Control role, especially in the Modern Legacy format.


I could highlight all the numerous reasons that you're wrong, and that DoJ is virtually the ideal finisher for control.As I stated before, in a format that was slower and allowed for such cards as Decree of Justice, it IS a great finisher. I'm not disputing that. What I am disputing is that it's a great finisher in the modern era of Legacy, where it's a dead card in your hand against Goblins and virtually every combo deck, which are more and more prevalent and will continue to be. When people say Control is dead in Legacy, that's because "slow as balls" kill conditions like Decree of Justice are going extinct. For control to be able to succeed in Vintage and Legacy, it needs to be able to switch roles (to either Combo or Aggro) when there's an opening. The most successful decks in Eternal formats over the past few years are hybridized decks. The cards you spoke of earlier (Mana Drain, Yawgmoth's Will, etc.) allow decks to do this is Vintage. Cards like Wasteland & Rishadan Port & Gempalm Incinerator allow Goblins to play the control role role in Legacy, while all of their creatures beatdown. Threshold controls the board through blue and white spells while all of their creatures beat down. DredgeATog controls the board via black and blue spells and then beats down. 4C Landstill tries to keep an opponent off balance long enough to have overwhelming card advantage or to sneak 2, 4, 6, or 8 points of damage through at a time. The key characteristic of these decks is the ability to switch roles based on the game state.


I think the viability of 4C Landstill is disputed somewhat by the fact that the only person to do really well with it is a proven cheater. I look at that atrocious mana base, and I now have a hard time convincing myself that those wins are anything but a result of such cheating, because, shit man, how many colorless sources do you think you could possibly need in a four-color mana base?As a brief aside, and not something I'm going to continue to discuss, just because someone made a terrible decision once in a tournament setting does not mean they are a bad person or a cheater all the time. You of all people should know this. I have known Nick for over 4 years now, and have even lived with him, and I can honestly say that behavior was totally out of character for him, and he knows it was wrong, and realized it was wrong as soon as he did it. But that will be addressed by him in the very near future I suspect, and is a discussion for another time.

[MattH]

I suppose Keiga's faster than Scepter-Stick. Technically.
Keiga WAS the fastest kill slot for the Standard format at the time in which U/r Keiga-using decks were at the top. Scepter was not legal in that format, which makes this a useless comparison.


What you may have inadvertently missed is that no other format does have fast "control" decks as in Vintage, because in any other format dumb cards like Yawgmoth's Will, Black Lotus and Mana Drain are banned. Aside from the occasional antiquated Extended deck from the 90's, this has been the pattern of control in every format other than Vintage consistently. The closest thing to an exception was certain Tog lists, but really, Tog could only win earlier than turn 7 with ridiculously good hands and through no disruption in normal formats. Mindslaver in Extended, on a good day, goes active turn 6. And that's hardly an auto win in most situations.
Turn 6 in extended is still much faster than other available alternatives, which is the point here (and it doesn't have to be Slaver - it could be Trinket Mage beatdown, or Sundering Titan, or whatever those decks run). Tron decks COULD kill with Eternal Dragon if they wanted to, which would be slow and inevitable, but they don't, because kills that come online faster are better.

Trying to refute the argument "modern control decks do better when they use the faster available kills" by saying "butbutbutbut other control decks in other formats have even faster kills!" is not going to convince.


What you may have inadvertently missed is that no other format does have fast "control" decks as in Vintage, because in any other format dumb cards like Yawgmoth's Will, Black Lotus and Mana Drain are banned. Aside from the occasional antiquated Extended deck from the 90's, this has been the pattern of control in every format other than Vintage consistently. The closest thing to an exception was certain Tog lists, but really, Tog could only win earlier than turn 7 with ridiculously good hands and through no disruption in normal formats. Mindslaver in Extended, on a good day, goes active turn 6. And that's hardly an auto win in most situations.
Apparently you missed the YEARS in which Tog was either a major player or at the top of the Extended format. Also, winning turn 7-8 was still much faster than, say, winning on turn 15 with Morphling.

P.S. besides JACO's deck, Kyle Dorgan made T2 in the last D4D with Tog, IIRC.


Tournament success disagrees with you. In actual control decks, which we'll define as decks where the control elements greatly outweigh the kill elements, invulnerable beefy kills have worked, and fast ones have not. No one has built a Tog list that was successful in Legacy in three years. Three effing years. This is not Vintage. People play StP.
You are attempting to define the issue out of existence by limiting the discussion to only those control decks that support your views, whereas my fundamental point is the inherent advantages of hybrid XXX-control over 'pure' control.

JACO put it well: for control to succeed, it needs to be able to switch roles as soon as possible when given an opening. That quality - being able to 'turn on a dime' - has been more and more prevalent in every vaguely controlling deck, across multiple formats, across a span of years.

If you want to argue that, for whatever reason, this isn't true and isn't going to be true of Legacy, go ahead, but that it is happening/has happened in most every other format is not really debatable.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

I split 50 duals (40 for 1st, 10 for second) at the GenCon SoCal tournament last year with DredgeATog. (http://www.themanadrain.com/index.php?topic=25643.0) If anybody with skill had actually bothered to test this list, and stop playing bad cards in DregeATog like Golgari-Grave Troll and Nimble Mongoose, they would realize the raw power of Intuition and Life From the Loam. It is seriously kind of degenerate. I'm not saying this is the greatest list ever. What I'm saying is that Psychatog can be built to be successful, powerful, and play more than the Control role, especially in the Modern Legacy format.

Why is your success relevant, but the success of many other people running cards like DoJ and Eternal Dragon isn't?


As I stated before, in a format that was slower and allowed for such cards as Decree of Justice, it IS a great finisher. I'm not disputing that. What I am disputing is that it's a great finisher in the modern era of Legacy, where it's a dead card in your hand against Goblins

DoJ is very good against goblins in control, where hordes of little Spartans pop out of the ground to take out a second wave after Wrath and StP and counters have cleared away the first attack. In fact, some time ago I want 6-0 in testing against Matt with UW Landstill against his Vial Goblins, and one of his complaints was that it wasn't that relevant because I was running DoJ (not that common at the time), which completely wrecked him several of those games.


and virtually every combo deck, which are more and more prevalent and will continue to be.

DoJ isn't that great against combo, but this is true of any good control creature that isn't Psychatog. And Psychatog has been unpopular for a reason; it's ludicrously vulnerable to StP and can't block Piledrivers. Not what you usually want in your fatties.

Edit: I'm going to pre-empt a counter point. Yeah, cards like Exalted Angel, Meloku, Eternal Dragon, etc, can be StP'd too. The difference is that if they StP my Eternal Dragon at a bad time, my next Eternal Dragon isn't going to be a fucking Squire.


When people say Control is dead in Legacy, that's because "slow as balls" kill conditions like Decree of Justice are going extinct. For control to be able to succeed in Vintage and Legacy, it needs to be able to switch roles (to either Combo or Aggro) when there's an opening.

When people say that Paris Hilton is one of the greatest personalities of our time, I ignore them. Or push them down a flight of stairs if the opportunity presents itself. It doesn't matter if people say control is dead, they're wrong. Control is the least played archetype and it still more than holds it's own at the top tables.


The most successful decks in Eternal formats over the past few years are hybridized decks. The cards you spoke of earlier (Mana Drain, Yawgmoth's Will, etc.) allow decks to do this is Vintage. Cards like Wasteland & Rishadan Port & Gempalm Incinerator allow Goblins to play the control role role in Legacy, while all of their creatures beatdown. Threshold controls the board through blue and white spells while all of their creatures beat down. DredgeATog controls the board via black and blue spells and then beats down. 4C Landstill tries to keep an opponent off balance long enough to have overwhelming card advantage or to sneak 2, 4, 6, or 8 points of damage through at a time. The key characteristic of these decks is the ability to switch roles based on the game state.

Again, welcome to the game. Every viable deck in every format for many years has played a mix of offense and defense. Dragonstorm plays Remand and Gigadrowse, and Bogardan Hellkite itself can be a control element. Ichorid plays Cabal Therapy and different other cards depending on the format. Hell, even CRET Belcher can Burning Wish for answers or lock up the board with 1/1s long enough to find a more lethal solution to a bad board position. Yes, control switches to actually kill the opponent, whether that be with Eternal Dragons or DoJs or a Mindslaver that wipes out their plan with any luck, or a Haunting Echoes that essentially destroys their library. Control becomes the aggressor at a point- after it's controlled the game. Tournament results show that E. Dragon and DoJ and Haunting Echoes, amongst other kill conditions, are not too slow to this end.


As a brief aside, and not something I'm going to continue to discuss, just because someone made a terrible decision once in a tournament setting does not mean they are a bad person or a cheater all the time. You of all people should know this. I have known Nick for over 4 years now, and have even lived with him, and I can honestly say that behavior was totally out of character for him, and he knows it was wrong, and realized it was wrong as soon as he did it. But that will be addressed by him in the very near future I suspect, and is a discussion for another time.

If he realized it was wrong as soon as he did it, he shouldn't have continued insisting to the judge that he had won the round in question. Regardless, my point isn't to nail the guy to the wall- I assume he'll be receiving a hefty penalty from the DCI anyway. But to cheat in so obvious and stupid a way suggests to me that the person in question is simply so used to getting away with it that he has lost track of where the line of "blatantly, stupidly obvious cheating that you're going to get called out on" is. This is relevant to tournament results, as I'm not aware of anyone else doing amazingly well with the deck. I'd agree that the deck itself still looks strong if the mana base were fixed, and it's not that I'm inherently opposed to Nantuko Monastery as a primary kill condition, but it's not exactly buying my confidence when advocates of the deck are talking about how successful they've been without DoJ and how terrible the card is.


Keiga WAS the fastest kill slot for the Standard format at the time in which U/r Keiga-using decks were at the top. Scepter was not legal in that format, which makes this a useless comparison.

This is blatantly false, and it highlights exactly the problem with a discussion. What do you mean by "fastest kill slot"? Keiga wasn't tearing up aggro decks; he's a fucking six mana dragon. Legendary, no less. Any smaller, more aggressively costed creature would be faster in theory. What do you mean by this? That Keiga was the best option available to control? But then why weren't the other options part of control's strategy? Is it because running a more aggressive creature base would detract from the deck's control elements, weakening it's game plan? Is it because, with so few kill slots, it needed creatures that were very efficient in order to survive? Did it want it's creatures themselves to serve a secondary kill condition? I would wager that there are the reasons you would give for Keiga; he, by himself, affected the board so as to demand answers from aggro decks trying to break through, and was another answer even upon death, as was Ryusei. He was fat and difficult to deal with. It didn't matter that he was slow; the deck's entire game plan de-accelerated the opposition, and running a creature that was inherently superior to anything that could be expected in an aggro deck was itself a form of card advantage.


Turn 6 in extended is still much faster than other available alternatives, which is the point here (and it doesn't have to be Slaver - it could be Trinket Mage beatdown, or Sundering Titan, or whatever those decks run). Tron decks COULD kill with Eternal Dragon if they wanted to, which would be slow and inevitable, but they don't, because kills that come online faster are better.

Again, this is wrong. Mindslaver is not faster than the alternatives; it's simply difficult to answer effectively with cards other than counters, Stifle, and Gilded Light. And even when it can't help kill the opponent, it is itself a powerful control tool.


Trying to refute the argument "modern control decks do better when they use the faster available kills" by saying "butbutbutbut other control decks in other formats have even faster kills!" is not going to convince.

Then I'd better not make any such arguments, hadn't I?


Apparently you missed the YEARS in which Tog was either a major player or at the top of the Extended format. Also, winning turn 7-8 was still much faster than, say, winning on turn 15 with Morphling.

Apparently you missed everything that has happened since then. The only cheap creature to even come close to Psychatog's power as a finisher in control is Serra Avenger, and she is delegated pretty much to Standard. Psychatog is the closest to an exception; yet even here it is less than you might imagine, and more a product of his environment. It was Upheaval that made him a terror in Standard and Block, which was a turn 11 kill if you didn't miss a land drop; Upheaval-Tog could never be described as an aggressive deck. Certain Extended builds were faster, although some also went for the "combo" with Upheaval, but this was in a format without Sudden Shock, Condemn, Tormod's Crypt... or, ironically, Decree of Justice, which was one of the cards that broke Upheaval-Tog's power.


You are attempting to define the issue out of existence by limiting the discussion to only those control decks that support your views, whereas my fundamental point is the inherent advantages of hybrid XXX-control over 'pure' control.

But your point is still irrelevant. Every control deck is "hybrid" in that they all run kill conditions. But in a deck that can run very few actual threats and maintain it's game plan, those kill conditions which are not easily dealt with have proven themselves time and again, in numerous formats and numerous top 8's. You merely seek to ignore their existence, or somehow twist them into your camp of "hybrid" control decks, a term without meaning.


JACO put it well: for control to succeed, it needs to be able to switch roles as soon as possible when given an opening. That quality - being able to 'turn on a dime' - has been more and more prevalent in every vaguely controlling deck, across multiple formats, across a span of years.

Agreed. Examples: Producing an army of 1/1s out of thin air, unkillable 6/1s, removing every relevant card from their deck, gaining control of their turn and turning their own spells against them. All of these are inclined to move you from "trying to get out from under a control lock" to, "getting pummeled in the face" rather quickly.


If you want to argue that, for whatever reason, this isn't true and isn't going to be true of Legacy, go ahead, but that it is happening/has happened in most every other format is not really debatable.

See above. It's not that you're wrong, it's more that you're not right in any kind of a relevant or meaningful way.

[hi-val]

This is blatantly false, and it highlights exactly the problem with a discussion. What do you mean by "fastest kill slot"? Keiga wasn't tearing up aggro decks; he's a fucking six mana dragon. Legendary, no less. Any smaller, more aggressively costed creature would be faster in theory.


I'm not sure I follow here. As an experiment, why not look at what was available in Standard at that time. The most aggressive beater I can think of in the format was Kird Ape. So, dropping it on turn 1 looks like:

Turn : Opponent's life
1 20
2 18
3 16
4 14
5 12
6 10
7 8
8 6
9 4
10 2
11 dead


Where dropping Keiga on turn 6 looks like:

6 20
7 15
8 10
9 5
10 dead

So, simplistically, Keiga would kill a full turn faster than a Kird Ape. I'm sure your argument is more sophisticated than that, however.

And Keiga wasn't just a control card; Keiga was a "you run blue? Run this" card, alongside Meloku. Critical Mass was an ostensibly aggro deck that just aimed to accelerate up to Keiga and didn't run control elements of the kind control might. Keiga and Meloku were sufficient enough aggro threats that you didn't need to play out weenies to win, you could ramp up and ride Jitte and Blue Legends to win. Keiga had the ability to void entire aggro strategies upon appearance for an excellent price and big size.

Just a little history...

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Where dropping Keiga on turn 6 looks like:

6 20
7 15
8 10
9 5
10 dead

So, simplistically, Keiga would kill a full turn faster than a Kird Ape. I'm sure your argument is more sophisticated than that, however.

Turn 5 Frost Ogre:

Turn 5: 20
6: 15
7: 10
8: 5
9: Dead!

Look, Frost Ogre was a whole turn faster than Keiga. Why didn't U/R Tron run that instead?

Jack, if you have a point, make it. There is no need to be snide and cute about it.

-PR

[JACO]

Warned for flaming.

-PR

[Peter_Rotten]

Things seem to be heating up here. If we don't continue this discussion in a polite manner, then I'll lock the thread.

And put you all in time-out without any supper.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

The question was not rhetorical. Why did Tron run Keiga over Frost Ogre? Frost Ogre was a turn faster in a vacuum.

Is the answer that, although Frost Ogre was faster, Keiga was more resilient and reliable?

[dre4m]

The question was not rhetorical. Why did Tron run Keiga over Frost Ogre? Frost Ogre was a turn faster in a vacuum.

Is the answer that, although Frost Ogre was faster, Keiga was more resilient and reliable?

Keiga also had a badass leaves-play ability.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Which was part of it's resiliency. It could still you another kill condition if it died. Which is why it was more commonly played than Ryusei.

[Nightmare]

The question was not rhetorical. Why did Tron run Keiga over Frost Ogre? Frost Ogre was a turn faster in a vacuum.

Is the answer that, although Frost Ogre was faster, Keiga was more resilient and reliable?Because things don't happen in a vacuum. Stop baiting people on this highly irrelevant issue, Jack.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

No, they don't. You might almost say that since Control has so few slots to devote to kill conditions, and since you're not fighting Goldfish, it's desirable to have hard-to-kill or resilient kill conditions, instead of simply the fastest ones.

[hi-val]

Are we still talking about Psychatog? If we are, it's important to note that Tog isn't just a fast kill, it's also a very tactical defensive strategy. Across all formats it is played in, as far as my memory serves, Psychatog is also Moat for 1BU. Hulk would play it out against Sligh or Suicide Black or Fish and just sit on it early in the game while casting draw; Sui isn't going to be ramming Negators into a 5/6 creature, nor is Fish going to risk its glassjaw men in a fight with it.

Keiga was neither hard-to-kill nor resilient in ways that other x/5s were not, but its ability made it a fine game-ender. Isao was far more resilient and harder to kill, but he didn't make quite the splash that Porn Star did.

[Hoojo]

No, they don't. You might almost say that since Control has so few slots to devote to kill conditions, and since you're not fighting Goldfish, it's desirable to have hard-to-kill or resilient kill conditions, instead of simply the fastest ones.

I would also say versatility is disirable. DOJ fits both resilient and versatile. Multiple 1/1 troops are hard to deal with coming from a deck with established control, and a few 4/4 Flyers are fast and beefy.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Are we still talking about Psychatog? If we are, it's important to note that Tog isn't just a fast kill, it's also a very tactical defensive strategy. Across all formats it is played in, as far as my memory serves, Psychatog is also Moat for 1BU. Hulk would play it out against Sligh or Suicide Black or Fish and just sit on it early in the game while casting draw; Sui isn't going to be ramming Negators into a 5/6 creature, nor is Fish going to risk its glassjaw men in a fight with it.

Moat can't be StP'd, and Moat can deal with Piledriver. Psychatog fails on both accounts.


Keiga was neither hard-to-kill nor resilient in ways that other x/5s were not, but its ability made it a fine game-ender.

Here's what you just said:

"Keiga wasn't hard to kill or resilient against removal, although it's leave play trigger of course made killing it a very bad idea, making removal not good against it."

Byah?

Keiga was better than Mahamoti Djinn because of the leave play trigger that made it resilient to removal. Otherwise you would just run Mottie and avoid trading with your fellow Dragon Legends.

[hi-val]

Tog can come down a turn earlier, pitches to FOW and is useful in multiples. Moat fails on those three counts.

EDIT: How did I even get drawn into a debate! I posted a historical note to point out that Tog has tactical purposes other than just killing the opponent. That's all. I have better things to do than compare Tog and Moat, two cards that don't get played anyway.

[chmoddity]

I would gladly play Moat if I thought I could afford even one. Seriously, that card should be as good today as it ever was.

[Bane of the Living]

What a waste of time the past couple pages have been. The arguement has little to nothing to do with the B/R update. It's basically an arguement over DoJ vs Monastary. Take that crap to the Landstill threads.

I think if anything changes in the meta from the update it will be a bit of staying power for fish decks. Alot of people and their mothers picked up Dark Confidant and Serra Avengers to give Flash the smackdown. It's still quite playable.

Has anyone given the black "pro white" decks a try? I wonder if they'll get popular at all.

[hi-val]

What a waste of time the past couple pages have been. The arguement has little to nothing to do with the B/R update. It's basically an arguement over DoJ vs Monastary. Take that crap to the Landstill threads.

I think if anything changes in the meta from the update it will be a bit of staying power for fish decks. Alot of people and their mothers picked up Dark Confidant and Serra Avengers to give Flash the smackdown. It's still quite playable.

Has anyone given the black "pro white" decks a try? I wonder if they'll get popular at all.

That black aggro deck in the T8 of the GP ran CRYPT CREEPER!!! Rizzo would be so happy!

I'd considered running Ebon Hands in Vintage as anti-Fish tech; they're huge threats.

[MattH]

Control becomes the aggressor at a point- after it's controlled the game. Tournament results show that E. Dragon and DoJ and Haunting Echoes, amongst other kill conditions, are not too slow to this end.
Welcome to the discussion at hand, which is that it is valuable (and quite so) to not have to wait to control the game before going on the offensive. It has much less to do with how long it takes to win once you DO go on the offensive. See my previous example: Demonfire for 20. Kills instantly. Nigh-impossible to stop. Is terrible. Why? Because you have to wait so long to use it.

We've been over this three times now; if you don't get it by now, I can't help you.


Keiga
Once again, you've missed the point entirely, which was that the correct play was (more often than not) to just run Keiga out there as soon as you could pay for it, NOT to wait until you could play it with double or triple counter-backup. THAT is the difference between Keiga in 2006 and Morphling in 2001.


But your point is still irrelevant. Every control deck is "hybrid" in that they all run kill conditions.
The point is not irrelevant; you've simply missed the point.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Welcome to the discussion at hand, which is that it is valuable (and quite so) to not have to wait to control the game before going on the offensive. It has much less to do with how long it takes to win once you DO go on the offensive. See my previous example: Demonfire for 20. Kills instantly. Nigh-impossible to stop. Is terrible. Why? Because you have to wait so long to use it.

Your example is absurd. I might as well use Rogue Elephant as an alternative for fast win conditions. Cards like Morphling, Gigapede, Eternal Dragon, Decree of Justice, Mindslaver and Haunting Echoes do not take 21 turns to win you the game, a distinction that might've inadvertently escaped your attention. Most of them can still be used as defensive elements, another point you've ignored. Really, what are you trying to argue here? That Psychatog is the best control critter, despite all the tournament results to the contrary? Good luck with that one.


We've been over this three times now; if you don't get it by now, I can't help you.

That might simply be because you've insisted on being wrong three times.


Once again, you've missed the point entirely, which was that the correct play was (more often than not) to just run Keiga out there as soon as you could pay for it, NOT to wait until you could play it with double or triple counter-backup. THAT is the difference between Keiga in 2006 and Morphling in 2001.

In type 2, there weren't actually many relevant answers to Keiga, so it could often be slapped down. Zoo and Gruul and Black-White aggro decks generally had no good answer for it, so it could certainly be brought down as soon as possible against the decks fast enough to make you want to drop it. Good players didn't, however, intentionally walk it into those answers if they could wait and keep counter magic open, or unless they had a second kill condition to follow- if they Faith's Fetters your Keiga and attack in with Yosei or Hierarch, for instance, you can still play a second Keiga and gain control of their creatures.

[Illissius]

I think the point Matt is trying to make is that, once the control deck first gains control, the trend has increasingly been for it to start winning immediately, as opposed to gaining even more control and winning as an afterthought.

Example of the latter: The Deck survives the early turns, gets Jayemdae Tome and/or Disrupting Scepter online, and spends many turns simply gaining a tremendous amount of card advantage. Eventually it draws a Serra Angel and wins, but the opponent is by this point completely helpless anyways.

Example of the former: Tron survives the early turns, drops Keiga, and starts swinging.

The difference here isn't so much in win conditions as in strategy. The Deck doesn't plan to immediately drop a Serra Angel after surviving the initial onrush (it only runs two); most modern control decks, by contrast, do.

As for how this relates to Decree of Justice, I'd assume the relevance is that you generally gain control around turns 5-7, while Decree of Justice doesn't become truly great until much later, and hence doesn't let you effectively execute the aforementioned strategy.

[hi-val]

I'm reminded of Stax here; for awhile in Vintage, it didn't even run Triskelion or Sundering Titan or any big "finishers". The win condition was either the concession or welder beatdown. In the time of Trinisphere, this was certainly an option. The "best" control decks don't even devote slots to their kill conditions-- think of 5cBlue recurring its Blessings!

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

That strategy has been uncompetitive since pretty much the dawn of serious tournament Magic, and trying to equate cards like Eternal Dragon or DoJ to that school of win condition is facetious. The entire reason to run Dragon or DoJ in Landstill is that you don't have to protect them with counters, because they're hard to deal with on their own. And Landstill lists running DoJ or Dragon are also still running Factory; it's not a grand total of 2 kill slots in the deck that need heavy protection. The deck can beat down with Factory for the win if need by, or supplement more efficient Dragon or soldier beats (for the record, I've found turn 7 to be exactly when DoJ starts being really powerful. Enough dudes to kill a Werebear and draw a card, or a five-turn clock). Is Monastery better than Factory there? Probably, although it makes the mana base shakier. If you cut Wasteland, you could even fit in both, but I don't think it's an argument to cut DoJ, which is a complete wrecking ball of a kill condition, unlike Factory or even Monastery. E. Dragon is an easier cut, although still a very solid win condition. Arguably worse than a 1x Gigapede in such a build, though.

[MattH]

I think the point Matt is trying to make is that, once the control deck first gains control, the trend has increasingly been for it to start winning immediately, as opposed to gaining even more control and winning as an afterthought.

Example of the latter: The Deck survives the early turns, gets Jayemdae Tome and/or Disrupting Scepter online, and spends many turns simply gaining a tremendous amount of card advantage. Eventually it draws a Serra Angel and wins, but the opponent is by this point completely helpless anyways.

Example of the former: Tron survives the early turns, drops Keiga, and starts swinging.

Aiiieee, no, that's not what I was talking about, although it is true. That's what Jack pretended I was talking about so he had something to argue, but he's wrong.

What I am talking about is this: a classical control deck cannot fully capitalize on the opponent's weak draws, where a hybrid aggro-control or combo-control deck can, and that is a significant advantage for the latter compared to the former. Sometimes, I suppose, the variances of the format might conspire to override this and make those decks less than ideal, but the advantage is an inherent one.

Example: My goblins opponent had a bad hand and mulliganed to this six: land, land, land, SGC, Matron, Gempalm. If I'm playing a classical control deck, I still have to fight through his whole deck. The extra turns of setup do favor me, but the burden is still on ME to stop HIM. If I'm instead playing Threshold, I can be the aggressor starting on turn 2, shifting the game immediately to the stage where I am attacking and the opponent is forced to stop ME. If I'm playing some kind of combo-control, I can even let many of his spells resolve, sure in the knowledge that they won't be sufficient to stop me before winning.

Modern decks can still control the game, when they have to. But they also can go on the offensive when the opponent gives them that chance, not merely when their own cards let them.


Your example is absurd. I might as well use Rogue Elephant as an alternative for fast win conditions. Cards like Morphling, Gigapede, Eternal Dragon, Decree of Justice, Mindslaver and Haunting Echoes do not take 21 turns to win you the game, a distinction that might've inadvertently escaped your attention. Most of them can still be used as defensive elements, another point you've ignored. Really, what are you trying to argue here? That Psychatog is the best control critter, despite all the tournament results to the contrary? Good luck with that one.
It is common practice to use an extreme example to illustrate a general point. I know you know this, because I've seen you explain this to someone else, elsewhere on this site. I can now only conclude that you're being obstinate for its own sake and arguing in bad faith, and I see no reason to waste any further time on such a person.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It is common practice to use an extreme example to illustrate a general point. I know you know this, because I've seen you explain this to someone else, elsewhere on this site. I can now only conclude that you're being obstinate for its own sake and arguing in bad faith, and I see no reason to waste any further time on such a person.

Apparently you did not follow my explanation to it's full conclusion.

Reductio ad absurdum is a valid debate tactic; It applies when you take an expressed philosophy or idea to it's furthest possible conclusion in order to expose holes within it.

However.

Reductio ad absurdum only applies when the extreme example is actually a possible conclusion of following the state idea or logic perfectly; and even then it does not destroy the argument, it merely requires that it be modified.

For example:

Sum Gai: "We should have a law against going around naked. I don't want to see some fatso without clothes on!"
Master Debater: "So should we also have a law requiring ugly people to wear paper bags over their heads? And outlaw ugly clothes, because I don't want to see that either? What if I don't want to see black people?"

This is reductio ad absurdum used properly. Here is an example of improper usage:

Master Debater: There ought to be a law against smoking inside public buildings.
Sum Gai: Oh, sure! Why don't we just make it illegal to smoke anywhere and barge into peoples' homes and make sure they're not doing it!
Master Debater: Because that law would be impractically expensive to enforce, violates important Constitutional rights, and of course, people smoking inside their own private residences don't affect the lungs and health of innocent people who just happen to be out in public.
Sum Gai: .... Ah. I see.


There is a real and important distinction between a spell that can only kill someone if you have 21 mana and an empty hand, and creatures that can go the entire distance themselves much earlier, say, within time to finish the round, for instance. Hence, your example is irrelevant.

QED.