Would control be viable in legacy were it not for storm based combo?

[SuckerPunch]

People are coming up with all sorts of reasons for why control isn't viable in legacy.

But I see one and only one clear cut reason why control fell out of favor, the storm mechanic. I am not saying that's a bad thing. I'm not trying to place any value judgments on what happened, I am just saying what I think are the facts.

The storm mechanic lets every combo deck run a one card combo, a combo card that also happens to be impossible to counter except by narrow cards (stifle and trickbind) that do nothing for control outside of the combo matchup.

I think that's all there is to it. Before it was aggro>control>combo>aggro

Now storm combo> aggro and > control. The storm mechanic was exactly the foil combo decks needed against control strategies of all sorts. Throw in a little bounce in the extra slots freed up by having a one card combo and the storm based decks become extremely resilient.

Neither pure aggro nor pure control are viable. The only non combo decks that are viable are aggro control decks.

Think about it, every viable deck in legacy that's not storm based runs a heavy disruption suite along with a fast clock. Every viable non storm deck can be classified as aggro control.

Can you guys think of any exceptions?

Or is my assessment right on the money?

[Bryant Cook]

I agree with some of which you said. However, because of Storm combo control is on the rise once again.

TES/Belcher and Goblins pushed Solidarity out of the format, this allowed Landstill to return.

Combo naturally smashes aggro (Goblins) which makes goblins weaker and less played.

With less goblins, decks like Landstill become stronger.

Control's combo matchups really depend on each deck (TES, SI, Belcher, ect..) and which build. Because there are soo many viable combo decks its hard to hate on combo as a whole.

[outsideangel]

Ichorid rocks control, and the only answers to it are even more narrow than Stifle. I'm no Spring Tide player, but I've seen current incarnations kill with Stroke as often as I've seen them kill with Freeze.

And you're forgetting Goblins. Between the mana denial of Wasteland and Port, the tempo generating and counter-dodging Aether Vial and Goblin Lackey, and the bombs like Ringleader and Seige-Gang that can turn a game around, decks like Landstill have a hard enough time keeping what is "supposed" to be a good match under control.

Lots of things beat control in Legacy.

[frogboy]

It's really easy to build a control deck that will crush aggro decks. It's really easy to build a control deck that will crush combo decks. It's really easy to build a control deck that will crush other control decks.

It's really hard to get two archtypes crushed, much less three.

[Xero]

Control is viable in Legacy. In fact, the most important control deck in Legacy (Landstill) is becoming more popular because of the rise in Combo decks.

[Citrus-God]

Control is viable in Legacy. In fact, the most important control deck in Legacy (Landstill) is becoming more popular because of the rise in Combo decks.

So if Landstill comes back, does that mean Solidarity will appear again? That's a control deck...

[Bryant Cook]

So if Landstill comes back, does that mean Solidarity will appear again? That's a control deck...

No. Solidarity is combo with controllish attributes.

[Xero]

I would guess not, unless their was a rediculous Landstill explosion. Solidarity still has to contend with Aggro-Control decks and other combo decks.

[Iranon]

First, Storm spells are not a '1-card-combo' as such because they force they require that the deck is essentially one big engine. You might as well call sufficiently huge creatures a 1-card-combo.
Goblin Charbelcher fits the term a lot better.

Storm combo decks with a lot of disruption tend to be outclassed by their non-storm competitors. Storm needs an engine that's either large or plain terrible, while there are some very compact combos out there that will do an adequate job.
If you run a lot of disruption, but dilute your engine you don't care if the win condition is counterable or not: Your opponent would need to attack your business spells instead of waiting for your win condition anyway.
In short, it's not a matter of storm decks not needing a lot of disruption, it's a matter of them sucking at implementing it.





Control strategies simply don't always work as they should; storm spells being uncounterable is but one example.
Goblins runs 8 1-drops that pansify any counter-based strategy if they resolve.
You can sweep the board and still be clobbered by hordes of goblins/zombies+ichorids next turn.
If High Tide has permanents at all, they will have served their purpose already. They are more than adequate at dealing with counters... an uncounterable win condition is just the icing on the cake.

Control decks need to take a more proactive route these days. I believe that is possible without turning into either Aggro/Control or Prison, but few people even try.

[Illissius]

Control (meaning mostly any slow deck with countermagic in it) doesn't really lose to Storm. It's a worse matchup than something like Fruity Pebbles might be, sure, but still quite positive. What control loses to is Solidarity and (to a lesser extent) Goblins, both of which are fucking obnoxious. Solidarity is a combo deck which autowins against asstonsofcountermagic.dec, which is quite simply ridiculous, while Goblins is an aggro deck which (again, to a lesser extent) wins against many variations on asstonsofremoval.dec (Truffle Shuffle and some versions of Landstill, for example, but not Rifter).

Recently, Belcher and TES have pushed Solidarity out of the metagame and significantly diminished Goblins, and accordingly, Landstill has seen a marked uptick in popularity and success.

[Tacosnape]

Why are some members of the Legacy community stuck in the narrow-minded perception that control isn't viable in Legacy? Landstill, Loam, and controllish Survival builds T8 all the time.

[Anarky87]

Why are some members of the Legacy community stuck in the narrow-minded perception that control isn't viable in Legacy? Landstill, Loam, and controllish Survival builds T8 all the time.

This is true. For as much as people talk about Control's depressing situation in Legacy, it sure does seem to be T8ing quite a bit. With the way some people are laying out the format, why play anything but Goblins and Storm combo?

Ya know, Goblins doesn't draw 3 Wastes, 2 Ports, 3 Lackeys, 2 Vials, 2 Ringleaders, and 3 Siege-Gangs in every opening hand in every game, which is apparently how people think every Goblins match plays out. And sometimes Combo doesn't have a strong enough hand or Control's is just better and they lose. Control also has a leg up against aggro-control. I'd say Control is just fine in Legacy, and the tournament results have been proving this.


Lots of things beat control in Legacy.

And Control beats lots of things in Legacy, so the cycle continues.

[Tacosnape]

Agreed. Everything loses to something.

For example, my 4C Landstill handles both Goblins and Storm Combo (Not flawlessly, but favorably), despite the two being somehow mysteriously hailed as the reason Landstill is unviable. It also smashes through most blue-based aggro control, most black-based aggro control, can edge through most other combo decks, and demolish most random jank anyone can come up with.

However, if I come across a match with another Landstill deck (That runs Wasteland, Decree, or one of 6 billion other ways to win a Landstill mirror), or a control deck with a stronger lategame, I capitulate completely. I have very little hope, if any.

Similarly, just like some combo decks lose to different things than other combo decks (Cephalid Breakfast isn't thrilled to see Goblins, but Epic Storm certainly is!), different control decks lose to different things. Some Landstill lists are designed to smash control mirrors and combo decks and capitulate to goblins and certain other aggro. Some control decks aim to beat control and aggro, like most mono-white or white-based ones, while struggling against combo. And some, like 4C Landstill, aim to beat Combo and Aggro, and lose to control.

I think the mark of a strong control deck in Legacy is being able to handle two of the three archetypes very efficiently, or to decimate one completely and be fair against the other two. And I think many of the current control decks do that quite well.

[Phantom]

Why are some members of the Legacy community stuck in the narrow-minded perception that control isn't viable in Legacy? Landstill, Loam, and controllish Survival builds T8 all the time.

I completely agree with this, but I would say it's because they don't WIN. Control decks have 0 T1's in the T8 thread (US at least).

Once again, i'm not defending this view, just pointing out one of the ways it is perpetuated.

[Bryant Cook]

Agreed. Everything loses to something.

For example, my 4C Landstill handles both Goblins and Storm Combo (Not flawlessly, but favorably), despite the two being somehow mysteriously hailed as the reason Landstill is unviable. It also smashes through most blue-based aggro control, most black-based aggro control, can edge through most other combo decks, and demolish most random jank anyone can come up with.

However, if I come across a match with another Landstill deck (That runs Wasteland, Decree, or one of 6 billion other ways to win a Landstill mirror), or a control deck with a stronger lategame, I capitulate completely. I have very little hope, if any.

Similarly, just like some combo decks lose to different things than other combo decks (Cephalid Breakfast isn't thrilled to see Goblins, but Epic Storm certainly is!), different control decks lose to different things. Some Landstill lists are designed to smash control mirrors and combo decks and capitulate to goblins and certain other aggro. Some control decks aim to beat control and aggro, like most mono-white or white-based ones, while struggling against combo. And some, like 4C Landstill, aim to beat Combo and Aggro, and lose to control.

I think the mark of a strong control deck in Legacy is being able to handle two of the three archetypes very efficiently, or to decimate one completely and be fair against the other two. And I think many of the current control decks do that quite well.

I couldn't agree more.

[Tacosnape]

I completely agree with this, but I would say it's because they don't WIN. Control decks have 0 T1's in the T8 thread (US at least).

Once again, i'm not defending this view, just pointing out one of the ways it is perpetuated.

In the US thread, perhaps. But in the European? Control galore.

And after playing in The Source tournament, I don't for a minute accept any notions that the US has a superior player base on the average. Nor do I accept that the metagame should fundamentally be all that radically different. We all have access to the internet, ebay, and we're all building decks using the same cards. It's still Legacy.

[Phantom]

And after playing in The Source tournament, I don't for a minute accept any notions that the US has a superior player base on the average. Nor do I accept that the metagame should fundamentally be all that radically different. We all have access to the internet, ebay, and we're all building decks using the same cards. It's still Legacy.



Then why IS it different?

(Edit: Maybe I should expand. I would guess it's different because of less combo and Goblins.Any chance that is true? Do they play control better? Do they enter control in higher numbers? Or is it just an amazing anolmoly that the control decks that never win a big event here, win big events there?)

[Anarky87]

Then why IS it different?

(Edit: Maybe I should expand. I would guess it's different because of less combo and Goblins.Any chance that is true? Do they play control better? Do they enter control in higher numbers? Or is it just an amazing anolmoly that the control decks that never win a big event here, win big events there?)

I thought it was that they have a higher combo presence, so therefore an even higher aggro-control presence, which pushes Goblins out, but makes for a good environement for Control. That's what I've heard anyway.

[Bryant Cook]

In the US thread, perhaps. But in the European? Control galore.

And after playing in The Source tournament, I don't for a minute accept any notions that the US has a superior player base on the average. Nor do I accept that the metagame should fundamentally be all that radically different. We all have access to the internet, ebay, and we're all building decks using the same cards. It's still Legacy.

I disagree here, not that we have a better player base or whatever. But in the fact that it's the same, the two metagames are dramatically different. For instance, the European metagame lacks combo for whatever reason. Here in America (or atleast the east coast) it's combo summer (as I predicted). It's hard to relate metagames that are dramatically different.

[Tacosnape]

Then why IS it different?

(Edit: Maybe I should expand. I would guess it's different because of less combo and Goblins.Any chance that is true? Do they play control better? Do they enter control in higher numbers? Or is it just an amazing anolmoly that the control decks that never win a big event here, win big events there?)

Anyone who's ever watched the anime Dual or read similar sci-fi stories is familiar with the concept that Parallel Universes are often created by a choice. In Dual, the choice is whether or not the artifact found at the construction site is pocketed or thrown away.

In Legacy, I personally think it was the choice to give up on UW Landstill. The American Legacy community gave up on it, The European Legacy community didn't. What you see might be two alternate realities of the evolution of Legacy's metagame based on whether or not Landstill was present for quite some time.

In any case, as communities like The Source grow and span continents and people from across the world share tech, eventually the two metagames should balance back out. After all, it -is- still the same game, same rules, same card pool.

Chess used to have its openings and midgame theories vastly divided by regions, but the vast sharing of modern chess information thanks first to books and then to the internet has diminished this. While Magic is a vastly more complicated and intricate game and will thereby take longer to undergo the same process, this is still the most likely course of events.

[Phantom]

In any case, as communities like The Source grow and span continents and people from across the world share tech, eventually the two metagames should balance back out. After all, it -is- still the same game, same rules, same card pool.


This may be true, but it also might not be. Poker has globalized to an insane extent, and players from certain areas still play differently (or at least that's the stereotype). Still, I'm glad to see a healthy discussion on the topic.

[outsideangel]

Remember, though, people don't always play what's good. In fact, I'd hazard a guess and say that most Legacy players don't actually play whatever is 'objectively' the 'best' deck every time they go to a tournament.

Deck choice is influenced by what we like, what our friends like, what we're comfortable with, what we've practiced with, who we're testing against, what cards we have and can borrow in time, and a whole slew of other variables.

Example: I played Ichorid at the last two tournaments I attended. I was fully convinced, at the time, that Breakfast was the best deck in the format. But I like Ichorid. I enjoy playing it, and I'm pretty comfortable with it. Also, I could get it together without having to borrow cards from twenty different people, as I would have had to do with Breakfast.

I'm willing to play Ichorid even knowing it's not the 'best', because playing it is fun. On the other hand, I wouldn't sit through a Landstill or Solidarity mirror if you paid me. Even if they were the 'best' decks in the format, I probably still wouldn't play them because I just don't enjoy it.

In a format like Legacy, where the 'best' deck is rarely apparent, deck choice usually comes down to a matter of taste. There could be significantly more UW Landstill in Europe simply because more people over there like the deck.

[APriestOfGix]

Remember, though, people don't always play what's good. In fact, I'd hazard a guess and say that most Legacy players don't actually play whatever is 'objectively' the 'best' deck every time they go to a tournament.

Deck choice is influenced by what we like, what our friends like, what we're comfortable with, what we've practiced with, who we're testing against, what cards we have and can borrow in time, and a whole slew of other variables.

Example: I played Ichorid at the last two tournaments I attended. I was fully convinced, at the time, that Breakfast was the best deck in the format. But I like Ichorid. I enjoy playing it, and I'm pretty comfortable with it. Also, I could get it together without having to borrow cards from twenty different people, as I would have had to do with Breakfast.

I'm willing to play Ichorid even knowing it's not the 'best', because playing it is fun. On the other hand, I wouldn't sit through a Landstill or Solidarity mirror if you paid me. Even if they were the 'best' decks in the format, I probably still wouldn't play them because I just don't enjoy it.

In a format like Legacy, where the 'best' deck is rarely apparent, deck choice usually comes down to a matter of taste. There could be significantly more UW Landstill in Europe simply because more people over there like the deck.

+1
Add more content to your posts.
-TOOL

[Pale Moon FTW]

I couldn't agree more with you saying that Landstill has been a victim of negative hype.
I can't speak for the whole of Europe but where I'm playing (Denmark) the meta has become 50-60% control. Last tourney I went to it was 3 of 4 decks would be a Landstill, Fish or Stax variant. The meta used to be almost 100% aggro and no combo at all. Then as people began to realize that beating the shit out of aggro is teh tech in an aggro meta, aggro has been hated out by TruffleShuffle (which is like a DTB here) and Landstill decks packing 10+ removal.
ATM Landstill is the DTB while decks like TES and CRET Belcher are completely unknown and unplayed. Landstill right now includes oldschool UW landstill with DoJ, UWb landstill and 4C landstill. But eventually people will probably grow tired of playing control all the time. Playing in a turney with control facing nothing but control except maybe a single goblins should bore most people enough to shift deck. And the very few people who do play combo plays old subpar decks like SpringTide, IggyPop and Bg belcher with spoils. Oh and BTW noone plays ******** either.

It seems that the meta in both US and Europe are extreme with combo ruling US and control ruling Europe. Americans need to pick up Landstill and Europeans need to play good decks that aren't control I guess.
But then again the European meta is very diverse and this might not at all apply to Germany/France/Monaco/What ever.

[FoolofaTook]

Chess used to have its openings and midgame theories vastly divided by regions, but the vast sharing of modern chess information thanks first to books and then to the internet has diminished this. While Magic is a vastly more complicated and intricate game and will thereby take longer to undergo the same process, this is still the most likely course of events.

Not to pull the thread off course, but Chess is a fixed game with fixed rules and assets. Magic is an ever evolving game in which both the rules and the assets change remarkably over time. I would not be surprised to see the overall Legacy Magic meta stay fairly wild and woolly with vast regional differences as different communities pickup on and use different concepts depending on what is in favor in the local meta.

Now, if a truly world-beating deck could be developed, a beat all comers with no questions asked, then this would likely change. However WoTC and the DCI would put that deck out of commission fairly quckly once they figured out what the problem was (Balance, Necropotence, etc) and banned the enabling card(s).

I think WoTC made an enormous mistake a dozen years ago when they decided not to refine the game of Magic and make it as close to perfect as possible in a relatively limited card set. That's what would have made it comparable to Chess and possibly to survive for a thousand years.

The long vision would have been make more Magic players to grow the business, not make more cards to sell to the same limited community for a generation.

[Shriekmaw]

If storm based combo was not in Legacy, then control would be very viable in the format. I believe aggro decks will be on the rise, which would lead to more control decks in the format.

I believe if this scenario every comes to reality, then the best deck in Legacy would be hands down R/W Rifter. Wow, that would be pretty awesome.

[Bryant Cook]

Then we all play Anwar's "Sixteen Candles" deck.

[Citrus-God]

If storm based combo was not in Legacy, then control would be very viable in the format. I believe aggro decks will be on the rise, which would lead to more control decks in the format.

I believe if this scenario every comes to reality, then the best deck in Legacy would be hands down R/W Rifter. Wow, that would be pretty awesome.

Well, so far, the most successful White Control deck that might be viable in this current metagame would probably be the newer Wombat builds with the "Thresh" plan. Rifter is probably better against Landstill and more heavy aggro decks like Goblins. Of course, Wombat's Combo match-up is probably about 50/50....