[The Magic Show] Legacy at Worlds [Archive]

calosso

12-13-2007, 05:08 PM

Chapin seems to have a head on his shoulders, although he's way off on the development point. We've sunk our teeth deep into this format, and just because Pros choose to play a deck we've put minimal effort into, doesn't exactly mean it's something new and innovative. MonoWhite stax is an example. On the other hand, sometimes pros do come up with a new deck, such as BW Pikula.

Props to whoever stole Calosso's hat. He got to dance like a baby on internationally broadcast video. The whole world is laughing at you.

I gonna kill shaheen soorani and Star wars kid.

Horror Business

12-13-2007, 05:09 PM

When asking about a Legacy PT did one of the guys refer to the players as Vintage.
Referencing Imperial Recruiter in terms of card availability especially when from Brazil makes no sense. Of course getting a limited Portal card is going to be hard regardless of where you are.
I hope Chapin was talking about maybe putting together multiple decks for $1,000 and not just one deck.
Cool segment...

Kronicler

12-13-2007, 05:31 PM

Zach Tartell

12-13-2007, 05:34 PM

I, for one, am glad that they got around to innovating Enchantress so I could make a time machine, go back to February, and PWN all your asses.

Bovinious

12-13-2007, 08:50 PM

Yeah, Chapin was definitely the most correct about legacy out of the pros that were asked about it, but it still makes me angry that people think we are all a bunch of casual players that never innovate anything bla bla bla. And god damn, some of those pros were as dumb as doorknobs when it came to legacy. The big 3 are thresh, and gobos, and LIFE?!??! Worlds forced pros to really innovate legacy?? Gawd, soo wrong. I was definitely interested by the fact that the pros had a hard time getting cards for legacy though. I guess I just assumed that because they are pros they can get any cards they want, but in retrospect that is a horrible assumption to make and most of the comments made about the limited card availability and large price were completely correct.

Kronicler

I agree that its wrong pros and WOTC thinks were are all casual players and that the pros "innovated" decks for Worlds, like someone in the show said they all basically netdecked. I even wrote an email to Brain David-Marshall about WOTC wrongfully attributing Dragon Stompy and Pitch World to "professional innovation" rather than pre-existing Legacy decks...

Please clean up some grammar. This post is a difficult read. Verbal warning.

-PR

Hoojo

12-14-2007, 11:28 AM

Pat Chapin said the only thing that I could agree with. Seems that Professional players might have been able to utilize online stores to get the cards they needed, unless I suppose, they can't read english. I would guess someone like StarCityGames would be willing to work out a deal the a lot of the players, simply because they're Pros.

Cabal-kun

12-14-2007, 11:40 AM

Not to add onto an already well discussed topic, but it's starting to seem that WotC is spoon feeding it's 'Pro's' praise in everything they do (ex: Innovating Legacy). I wonder what the next step will be. Innovating Vintage?

APriestOfGix

12-14-2007, 11:54 AM

Legacy is a very untested format, and nobody really knows anything about it.
Bullshit!

You get to see if the pros have any innovations the legacy crowd may not have come up with.
The answer is NO!

A lot of new decks came out of it.
Name 1

The pros were lazy, and slacked off, and didn't really try to innovate a whole bunch, and you just saw a bunch of theshold, threshold, threshold decks
Thank you, first true quote so far.

I would actually rather see a legacy pro tour.
WOOT! +1

See if the format gets broken
Not by pro's

Not a good idea right now, cause it's not being developed as much as it could be right now.
Because pro's are lazy netdeckers who have no innovation. We are working our asses off here at the source.

It gets broken by pros figuring out things that most of the rest of the community don't figure out
Really name one GP/Worlds when that happened (you already exempted flash) oh right, pros only play netdecks!

Anarky87

12-14-2007, 03:14 PM

What I don't get is how WOTC/Pro's continually talk about how, while Legacy players know Legacy, the players basically haven't done anything for the format and that Pro's are needed to break the format, because the players are too stupid.

-Legacy becomes a format at Worlds. Pro's attempt to break the format. Except by 'Break the format,' I mean, "Savagely net-deck and then whine like bitches"-

We didn't have time to innovate.Except the format was known for a long time.

We just couldn't get the cards. Seems like a cop out to me. Unless you're looking for some ubertastically rare card.

The format is just too broad and open.Apparently Legacy players didn't know this, because, ya know, we're just a bunch of novices.

So basically Pro's didn't back up anything they've been claiming. If by innovating you mean they took a bunch of established decks and then tagged their name on it or added a few awful cards, then yeah, tons of innovation was to be had. But to be honest, I believe Pro's spent more time bitching about having to play Legacy then actually getting into the format. Epic fail.

Ebinsugewa

12-15-2007, 04:52 AM

Thumbs down to Tiago Chan for not enjoying our fair format. Cheon makes a good point in that Legacy dropped pretty close to Worlds, and pros are lazy when it comes to actually having a list and cards before getting to an event. PV can shut his trap though, he knows one of the biggest Magic dealers in the world. I think the problem isn't so much card availability as card liquidity - alright so you get your 8-12 duals and a few other Legacy specific cards, and what happens to them if you're a pro? They just sit there wasting space and money, so you sell them until the next scramble happens before the next Legacy/Vintage sanctioned event. I also agree that a Legacy PT would produce the results we were probably hoping for. I disagree with Chapin, which is rare, when he says that innovation only happens pre-GP or Worlds. Yeah, by us. Not by pros. Nothing (except Flash, obviously) has ever happened pre-GP in terms of figuring out a format since Threshold. ALMOST THREE YEARS AGO.

As an aside, when did Rebecca Guay become a social butterfly? I've seen her at three events in the last four months. IIRC she had a falling out with WOTC, did that get fixed?

EDIT: One of the donators is named Richard Johnson. SCORE! Also, does anyone have backstory on the Chapin-Nassif situation? I'm lazy and don't want to actually research it.

TheAardvark

12-15-2007, 02:09 PM

As an aside, when did Rebecca Guay become a social butterfly? I've seen her at three events in the last four months. IIRC she had a falling out with WOTC, did that get fixed?

Yeah, it's been "fixed" for like 3 years. The story is that the Art Director at the time was really starting to push for more "aggressive" artwork (Onslaught-Mirrodin era), and that her style didn't translate to that mandate, so they told her that her services were no longer required. This info was released to the public (probably by her), and the response was overwhelmingly negative towards WotC, and dozens of petitions went up overnight. WotC relented and welcomed her back. IIRC, she had no cards in Legions, Scourge, Mirrodin, Darksteel, or Fifth Dawn due to this.

Illissius

12-15-2007, 02:23 PM

Team-Hero

12-15-2007, 04:42 PM

Hah. Aggressive artwork for the suck. It's no wonder I hated Onslaught era artwork; it seems making it horrible was their goal. Mirrodin was pretty good, though. Shrug.

Lorwyn is a refreshing change of pace, either way.

I really hope the artwork following Morning Tide is designed to be dark as the rumors say it is.

Nihil Credo

12-15-2007, 05:32 PM

I really hope the artwork following Morning Tide is designed to be dark as the rumors say it is.
Ditto. It may be my gothic side speaking, but The Dark had the best flavour of 20th-century MtG.

Ebinsugewa

12-15-2007, 05:43 PM

Hah. Aggressive artwork for the suck. It's no wonder I hated Onslaught era artwork; it seems making it horrible was their goal. Mirrodin was pretty good, though. Shrug.

Lorwyn is a refreshing change of pace, either way.

I actually prefer Onslaught art to Lorwyn. I prefer realistic or abstract to this fantasy Lorwyn bullshit.

MattH

12-15-2007, 06:29 PM

I actually prefer Onslaught art to Lorwyn. I prefer realistic or abstract to this fantasy Lorwyn bullshit.

Which particular cards in Onslaught look "realistic" to you?

Illissius

12-15-2007, 06:32 PM

Yeah, dark would be cool. Realistic is fine too. Aggressively ugly isn't.

Ebinsugewa

12-16-2007, 01:01 AM

Which particular cards in Onslaught look "realistic" to you?

Okay, here I'm definining "realistic" as "not actively cartoonish" a la Kithkin.

Isamaru

12-16-2007, 01:12 AM

I am so glad that the people on the Source are responding negatively to this, because apparently the people over at MTGSalvation are still not getting this. A lot of new posters are paying attention to the decklists as if they are breaking news.

I am finally convinced that the Source has the highest concentration of Legacy players that know what the format entails.

I don't mean to complain and rehash old issues, but come on, Wizards, can't you do some research on this format for once, so that when it comes time to report on it, you at least know what decks are new to your eyes and what decks are actually new (though probably very few if any ever)?

Which particular cards in Onslaught look "realistic" to you?

Most of the Donato Giancola art matches that description. It is more human-ish, at the least. Goblin Piledriver, Kamahl Pit Fighter, and especially Annex come to mind.

As a side question, who was allowed to play in Worlds? Was there some qualifier, or did you have to have pro points or something?

zulander

12-16-2007, 01:23 AM

I like how someone was asked about a Legacy PTQ and the guy responded saying someting about how if that happend the pro's would break vintage.

GG retards.

DeathwingZERO

12-16-2007, 01:29 AM

I like how someone was asked about a Legacy PTQ and the guy responded saying someting about how if that happend the pro's would break vintage.

GG retards.

Not only do I find that absolutely hilarious that they can't even get their formats right, but that if they honestly meant they think they can do better than what Vintage has.

I believe Mr Mennendian, Team Meandeck, Team Shortbus, all of Europe, and Shay would like to have a few words with them, just to name a few.

Cabal-kun

12-16-2007, 10:19 AM

I am so glad that the people on the Source are responding negatively to this, because apparently the people over at MTGSalvation are still not getting this. A lot of new posters are paying attention to the decklists as if they are breaking news.

I would have to say that this is only partially correct. A few people, myself included, see nothing in these decklists. Unfortunately, people don't seem to be understanding our arguments.

Isamaru

12-16-2007, 12:16 PM

I would have to say that this is only partially correct. A few people, myself included, see nothing in these decklists. Unfortunately, people don't seem to be understanding our arguments.

Agreed.

I feel for the first time that Mark Rosewater actually did sort of care, and he seemed sincere. (At least that was good to see, amid all the other crap surrounding Legacy Worlds this year.)

Solpugid

12-16-2007, 01:25 PM

Most of the Donato Giancola art matches that description. It is more human-ish, at the least. Goblin Piledriver, Kamahl Pit Fighter, and especially Annex come to mind.

Wait a second...

Giancola didn't do any art in Onslaught. Piledriver is Cavotta's and Annex is Avon's. I have no idea who did Kamahl Pit fighter, but that card isn't even in Onslaught, it's in Odyssey. What was your point again?

I rather like Lorwyn art, myself. I was getting super-sick of the dreariness of cities and post-apocalyptic wastelands, so seeing swamps with flowers kinda made me happy.

And to keep on topic: how can pros expect to understand (and thus know if they like/dislike) a format after playing it in one tournament. Legacy has so many cards in it that I think they felt overwhelmed. That's all fixed by a little effort, which most were apparently unwilling to commit to. I think it Wizards wants to promote Legacy more in the future (multiple Pro Tours, etc.), they should state that clearly. Then maybe some of the pros would feel more comfortable spending money on Legacy cards, since they'd have more chances to use them.

Pinder

12-17-2007, 03:44 AM

I am finally convinced that the Source has the highest concentration of Legacy players that know what the format entails.

Finally? What part of 'The Source: Your Source for Legacy' did you miss? Not to flame, but I would think that would be fairly obvious. One of the things I like best here is that the whole site is devoted to a single format, and isn't just some subforum of a larger board. I think that sort of focus is really beneficial to format development, and you'd be hard pressed to find someone who knows the ins and outs of Legacy as much as you're average Sourcer.

Back on topic. Pros are dumb when it comes to Legacy. Oh well.

bruno_tiete

12-17-2007, 07:43 AM

Referencing Imperial Recruiter in terms of card availability especially when from Brazil makes no sense. Of course getting a limited Portal card is going to be hard regardless of where you are.

Actually, there are reasonable quantities of Eternal cards in Brazil. This happens because Brazil is printing Magic since 4th Edition, back in 1995. We used to have near infinite Forces of Will and a pretty fair share of revised dual lands, mainly italian ones. I even played Sealed with Revised material years ago. What happened is that, as soon as duals and FoW rotated out of Extended, their price dropped here, so our dealers bought them by the dozen and exported them.Still, there is a pretty solid group of Eternal players, who know the formats (which are, unfortunately, a lot less dynamic than elsewhere) and own cards.

PV complains about Imperial Recruiter because he and Willy Edel though about playing Aluren. What happened is that there was not a single copy of that card available. Had they needed Sea Drakes, or Power, or Drains, or whatever card that actually EXISTS, we could lend them. We even told them to buy their playsets at Worlds and then sell them to us after the tournament, but I guess dealers where out of it.

Not trying to change the subject of discussion, but I think wizards should fix availability problem which can be easily fixed. Printing Drakes or Recruiters or Seals in regular sets is not that absurd, as those cards should not cost 10% of what they cost only because of ridiculously small printings.

Regarding the video, I am glad they did not break our format. Mainly because it shows we are not as dumb as they assume we are. That Gencon line by Pat Chapin had me smiling.

SilverGreen

12-18-2007, 02:25 PM

Actually, there are reasonable quantities of Eternal cards in Brazil. This happens because Brazil is printing Magic since 4th Edition, back in 1995. We used to have near infinite Forces of Will and a pretty fair share of revised dual lands, mainly italian ones. I even played Sealed with Revised material years ago. What happened is that, as soon as duals and FoW rotated out of Extended, their price dropped here, so our dealers bought them by the dozen and exported them.Still, there is a pretty solid group of Eternal players, who know the formats (which are, unfortunately, a lot less dynamic than elsewhere) and own cards.

PV complains about Imperial Recruiter because he and Willy Edel though about playing Aluren. What happened is that there was not a single copy of that card available. Had they needed Sea Drakes, or Power, or Drains, or whatever card that actually EXISTS, we could lend them. We even told them to buy their playsets at Worlds and then sell them to us after the tournament, but I guess dealers where out of it.

Not trying to change the subject of discussion, but I think wizards should fix availability problem which can be easily fixed. Printing Drakes or Recruiters or Seals in regular sets is not that absurd, as those cards should not cost 10% of what they cost only because of ridiculously small printings.

Regarding the video, I am glad they did not break our format. Mainly because it shows we are not as dumb as they assume we are. That Gencon line by Pat Chapin had me smiling.Agree. And more: I simply don't understand why PV, Edel and others were so stubborn in playing a particularly bad deck like Aluren, with so many stronger and easier to build decks around. They gained a lot of help and advice from the community, but it seems they didn't pay attention to them. An ordinary BW Deadguy or a Rockguy, for example, would be more solid and simple choices. PV, although a great player, is a notorious Legacy hater, and as Pros seemed put their Legacy matches on luck's hand, it even lets me think he chose to play that bad and difficult-to-build deck just for better justify his aversion later. They had lots and lots and lots of options, but chose just the only unavailable one.

And Bruno, do you know which deck did they end playing?

freakish777

12-18-2007, 02:46 PM

Not only that, but Aluren is 100% playable without Recruiters (Cavern Harpy + Raven Familiar), it just becomes a 3 card combo that has pieces that don't suck on their own (because you can actually cast them, actually pitch them to Force of Will, etc), and doesn't flat out lose to removal (because you can always respond by paying a life to Cavern Harpy to bounce your guy).

diffy

12-18-2007, 03:10 PM

Recruiter Aluren loses to removal.

This isn't true, especially not for P. Chapins Innovater Aluren (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/14363.html) lists because they can just go:
Recruiter -> Recruiter -> Recruiter -> Dreamstalker -> (Bounce Recruiter) -> Recruiter -> Man-'o-War -> (Bounce Recruiter) -> Recruiter -> Cavern Harpy -> (Bounce Man-o'-War) -> Man-o'-War -> (Bounce Recruiter) -> Recruiter -> Spike Feeder -> Game.
Also, some lists actually splash red which leads to a slightly worse mana base (but the mana base isn't the best in the first place) which turns Imperial Recruiter into a pretty strong choice.
Mind you, all this is comming from a person that has played the 'normal'/french list for a rather long time.

@Topic:

I don't know why people are complaining all that much. I'd rather be flattered that the pros actually trust us random scrubs enough to blindly netdeck our lists.
Also saying that there was no innovation at worlds is simply not true... take Zvi's list for example. Its wonderfully thought out and very strong combining the strenght of Landstill with one of the most powerfull engines in Legacy (Balance).

The card availability excuse is pretty lame though.

freakish777

12-18-2007, 03:17 PM

This isn't true, especially not for P. Chapins Innovater Aluren (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/14363.html) lists because they can just go:
Recruiter -> Recruiter -> Recruiter -> Dreamstalker -> (Bounce Recruiter) -> Recruiter -> Man-'o-War -> (Bounce Recruiter) -> Recruiter -> Cavern Harpy -> (Bounce Man-o'-War) -> Man-o'-War -> (Bounce Recruiter) -> Recruiter -> Spike Feeder -> Game.
Also, some lists actually splash red which leads to a slightly worse mana base (but the mana base isn't the best in the first place) which turns Imperial Recruiter into a pretty strong choice.
Mind you, all this is comming from a person that has played the 'normal'/french list for a rather long time.

If the combo you listed used nothing but Dream Stalkers to return Recruiters to your hand, then you'd be right. The problem is as soon as you target a Recruiter with Man-O'-War (before you have Harpy in hand), you open yourself up to losing to removal.

diffy

12-18-2007, 03:25 PM

Err, yeah sorry. I remembered that part of the combo incorectly, haven't played it in a while.
Here's what you have to do:

Recruiter --> Recruiter --> Recruiter --> Dream Stalker.
He comes into play and his ability triggers. I kill a Recruiter, you bounce a different one. I kill the Dream Stalker, you bounce Recruiter and find a new one. Here you need a Stifle to disrupt the combo. Dream Stalker bounces Recruiter, he gets Dream Stalker, which bounces Recruiter, which gets Cavern Harpy, then Recruiter gets the rest of your combo.

Doesn't change a lot: the Recruiter version is able to combo through creature removal!

Bovinious

12-18-2007, 03:31 PM

Why do you need to fetch out 4 recruiters for that to work?

Nightmare

12-18-2007, 03:51 PM

Not the place for this discussion.

frogboy

12-18-2007, 08:52 PM

1. Nobody really cares about the nomenclature if everyone knows what you're talking about.

2. Due to the multiformat nature of the event, people didn't really focus on innovation in any format with the exception of Dragonstorm.

3. Saying card availability isn't an issue is lol.

4. This topic makes everyone on this board come off like a xenophobic idiot.

Lothian

12-18-2007, 09:50 PM

hmm.....

I didn't see the video as yet, but now it's quite clear we won't see Legacy much more in Worlds...

However, here few points I think interesting to consider:

- How can you consider World champion if you don't know Legacy??? I mean important cards in the game (FOW, StP, Dark Ritual, etc...) Saying "We were not prepared for the format" means you are a very "bad" pro who cannot make right out of 5 formats ??? (T1 T1.5 T1.X T2 T3)

- Now comes the problem of calling those guys "pro". They are all great players, but can hardly make a life out of it, even the best money-award winning can hardly fetch 20k$ in 1 year, with 50K$ max for PT winners. With your average Pro player being probably in the red...

When it comes to affordability, I always thought guys had all the collections of major cards x 4. But no, they need to find cards.. They're just young guys/students fighting mostly for glory. Pat Chapin saying spend 1000$ (expensive T1.5 deck) is not worth it for PT? That's just true and shows the small reward you get after all..

A real World Championship would be spread on a week with all formats included with probably seeds and groups. But for that you would need much more media exposure to afford having so many guys not working, just playing "Pro", training themselves all year round with all formats, trying to break them following new release etc...

But look at this site, possibly the most accomplished for the legacy community. "Most users ever online was 183, 06-26-2007". Not even 1 ad...

I love it like that, but we are such a small community, playing an obscure game unable to get a real pro league in place.

http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=protour/default/prizesawarded

Prices awarded in 2006 are way less that in 2001. Is the $ that high at the moment? :tongue:

"Pro" saying they can't afford to play their sport is frankly a joke...

hmm..

Enough with my flooding :cool:

Lego

12-19-2007, 01:06 AM

T3

Someone had to say it... WTF?

Bovinious

12-19-2007, 01:58 AM

Yeah what if anything is type 3? I know type 4 is like infinite mana, one spell a turn with a pile, is type 3 some old ass name for limited or another format?

Cabal-kun

12-19-2007, 07:42 AM

Yeah what if anything is type 3? I know type 4 is like infinite mana, one spell a turn with a pile, is type 3 some old ass name for limited or another format?

If there is a T-3 and T-4, WotC will need to make a T-101, T-1000, and a T-X (T-1.X is different).

SilverGreen

12-19-2007, 08:44 AM

If there is a T-3 and T-4, WotC will need to make a T-101, T-1000, and a T-X (T-1.X is different).Type 3 (T3) is an old and obsolete definition for Limited. Vintage was T1; Legacy (the old one) was T1.5; Extended, T1.X (some called it T4 or even T1.7); and Standard, T2. This nomenclature may be unfamiliar to most newer players, but the older ones remember it well. I played a lot the old T1.X with The Dark and Fallen Empires cards by the time of Mirage. Good ol' days....

caiomarcos

12-19-2007, 09:34 AM

Yeah what if anything is type 3? I know type 4 is like infinite mana, one spell a turn with a pile, is type 3 some old ass name for limited or another format?

WTF? Isn't T4 Extended? :eek:

Clearly PV and the BR crew asked for recruiters in order to TEST it and have Aluren as an option. Like we all know, 'pros' decide what deck to play at the last moment.

I agree with whoever said that this topic makes us look like xenophobics.

Theres no need to bitch SO MUCH for what happened. We should be somewhat thankful for it. Legacy (T1.5) at Worlds?? Who would ever think of it one year ago? Of course there were mistakes and all, but being it the first of many to come (I hope), there's enough time to correct the mistakes for future events.

Bovinious

12-19-2007, 10:52 AM

Type 3 (T3) is an old and obsolete definition for Limited. Vintage was T1; Legacy (the old one) was T1.5; Extended, T1.X (some called it T4 or even T1.7); and Standard, T2. This nomenclature may be unfamiliar to most newer players, but the older ones remember it well. I played a lot the old T1.X with The Dark and Fallen Empires cards by the time of Mirage. Good ol' days....

Yup, I still try to use the Type 1/1.5/2 nomenclature because I think the new names are dumb but always thought Type 1.X for Extended was dumb...maybe Ill start calling it Type 1.7 LOL. Type 3 for Limited seems dumb as well because just saying Draft/Sealed is actually descriptive of what youre physically doing when playing the format.

cheddercaveman

12-19-2007, 11:29 AM

Pros are saying they couldnt find cards, the problem is they don't have collections, they have some backpack dealer sponser them, so they get the cards, charge a fee, etc. So, the problem is that they dont *plan* to test in advance, or get cards in advance. They talk to their guy and say "Hey, I think this is what I'm going to play and here's a list" and since normally they're shipping a standard list (maybe block or extended) the vendors have no problem coming up with the cards. Then they maybe test for a week or 2 and then they go to the tournament.

Personally, this doesnt work with Legacy. They did NOT innovate any decks, maybe changed a few cards here and there at best. Furthermore, they had absolutely no chance of innovating the format when they are only testing for a week or 2, none whatsoever. The format is too big, too many potential decks to test, you need to spend more time playing the format, and *gasp* maybe actually becoming good at playing it. I think my local metagame has probably a half dozen or so guys that very well would have outplayed the pros just knowing the metagame of the entire format better. The other problem is that 2 weeks is just not enough time for dealers to come up with things like Imperial Recruiter for instance, its a very rare card, and they'll probably not want to spend full price to buy it, so it'll take longer.

Anyways, I digress. I think that Legacy is by far one of the most established and fun formats. The players in the format are much more serious than the standard/extended players and many times these players have been around the game a long time. I get tired of hearing how the Pros were whining and complaining about playing in a wide open format where supposedly they could innovate, but i reality they proved that they really can't innovate when they actually could have gotten the biggest advantage from doing so.

nastynate

12-19-2007, 01:51 PM

The pros are excellent players, but not always excellent deck builders and/or innovators. Most pros simply netdeck, playtest, and tweak their deck of choice to taste. It's really only a handful of individuals (who are not necessarily pros themselves) and their teams that build truly innovative decks. All it takes is one or two strong showings at any large event and a "new" deck is born, and then quickly embraced by the MTG community.

Most pros also probably thought that acquiring the cards for a deck (either by borrowing them or getting them from dealers) wouldn't be much challenge, since this is business as usual for the bigger formats. Much to their surprise, this isn't quite as easy with Legacy as they imagined.

The reason why the pros didn't do anything impressive in the Legacy portion of the World Championships is because it's difficult to accurately playtest a format that you are not intimately familiar with, especially one like Legacy which has such a deep card pool, numerous viable and mutable archetypes and some notably expensive and/or rare staples. Try coming up with a deck concept that destroys the metagame when you don't actually know the metagame...good luck with that.

In an unknown metagame against largely unknown decks it was simply easier to netdeck a few proven Legacy decks and hope that playskill and sound knowledge of MTG fundamentals would make enough difference to win.

The only way the pros were going to innovate was if they had teams or individuals with a good understanding of Legacy helping them. Other than Pat Chapin who had some tips from Meandeck, SCG connections, and experience in the format, there simply weren't too many pros present with the tools necessary to "break" the format. Chapin, however, didn't need to "break" Legacy in order to go far in Worlds, since he already had the edge in experience and knowledge of the format (which most of his peers lacked). Chapin's efforts were better spent gaining the edge in another format with an identifiable metagame (standard) were innovation and surprise really could tip the scales in his favor; gaining an edge in Standard gave him a real leg-up on the competition, tipping the scales of both Legacy and Standard in his favor...his second place finish seems to indicate that it worked.

Now, if there were a Legacy pro tour (which is highly unlikely), then we might be see some innovation. Only if the entire pro tour hinged upon the mastery of the Legacy format, would the pros invest the time and money (Legacy ain't cheap) to make something new. Until then, it'll be up to the everyday legacy players to build, test, tweak, and prove the viability of the decks of the format. The pros won't work on a format that they have no incentive to concentrate their efforts on.

Lothian

12-20-2007, 02:50 PM

Yup, I still try to use the Type 1/1.5/2 nomenclature because I think the new names are dumb but always thought Type 1.X for Extended was dumb...maybe Ill start calling it Type 1.7 LOL. Type 3 for Limited seems dumb as well because just saying Draft/Sealed is actually descriptive of what youre physically doing when playing the format.

Well, don't go mad on flames, it does make sense except for T1.X indeed which stands for eXtended, so they called it T1.X, which could be called now probably 1.7

In the first place there was only T1, so no type

Then they differentiated T2 and T1 for tournament legal cards

They they rotated out some of the cards, so it was Extended

and Then Legacy was born...

T3 is draft, as opposed for having a less large card pool than standard

in the end, regarding card pool size:

T1 > T1.5 > T1.X > T2 > T3

Doesn't sound that hard to understand does it?

And yeah, that was the good old days with the Black summer, when you could pack your deck with 4 Necropotence. The real and only Black sui ever!

Nihil Credo

12-21-2007, 06:03 AM

Huh... if anything should be called T3, it's Block Constructed.

SilverGreen

12-21-2007, 06:39 AM

Huh... if anything should be called T3, it's Block Constructed.

Type 3 (T3) is an old and obsolete definition for Limited.

Ebinsugewa

12-21-2007, 05:33 PM

3. Saying card availability isn't an issue is lol.

4. This topic makes everyone on this board come off like a xenophobic idiot.

I just want to address these real quick. Saying card availability IS an issue is absolutely retarded. It's not like we have the internet or anything. There are at least hundreds of Legacy staples on any of the world eBays at any one time, and at least two to three dealers with prominent online presence who can find these cards easily in America. As someone who works in Magic, hearing PV say he can't find cards actually made me dislike him even more. He personally knows one of the American dealers whom I work for and all he had to do was ask. We generally always have hard to find stuff like Sea Drake and Recruiter on the eBay store or waiting to be bought by wholesale customers. Also, what about this thread makes us seem xenophobic? As someone who has experience in both Vintage and Legacy, this board is far less elitist/xenophobic than the Drain. Legacy is a friendlier and more accessible format in terms of the internet community; I know at any one time I can send a PM to ten of the most established Legacy players and have them respond to me. Vintage, I can't say that. The only "pro" who has ever responded is Dxfiler, and that's only because I know him through Legacy. If money is the problem, do what I and I'm sure a lot of other Legacy players did and spread your staple purchases over time. I acquired my Magic collection over six or seven years of nothing but allowance and good trades. Assuming that this format takes no preparation I believe is what leads the naysayers to talk about card availability.

Are we so wrong for wanting our format to be treated with the same interest and love that we have for it? I think not. Our standards are not so high to ask people to have at least some deck familiarity in terms of coverage. This happens without question for Standard: Buehler and BDM talk about "Sea Stompy" and "Dralnu", and the top lists are easily accessible through Karsten's articles or the SCG Standard forum, which stickies the top decks not unlike the Source's DTB forum. Xenophobia has nothing to do with it; if anything we wanted to see pros back up their claims of innovation made through SCG articles and the like, starting all the way back with Xaxson. If pros put in the effort the community has (akin to Chris Pikula, Lam Pham, or Ridiculous Hat, there was nothing but healthy community response to their innovations), we would welcome them with open arms. In fact, Pat Chapin has shown himself to be one of those sort of guys, and it seems to me like the community is genuinely interested in what he has to say.