All B/R update speculation.

[Secretly.A.Bee]

Turbo Xerox/Cantrip Cartel/whatever you want to call it is an engine, it's just a bit more flexible than other engines (or your ability to commensurate with another person's perspective). It still perpetuates itself by having the ability to use the cantrips to string them together, or to get a fetchland. If they find a reason to break the chain (found threat/answer/land/build storm count sufficiently) their engine stops firing and begins again when another chain starts via a Cantrip being cast.

[simdude]

I would love to take a glimpse into the world where there are no fetches in legacy but I do not want to be the world to test it out. I think it would be wildly interesting but it just seems like too fundamental of a change to even take a reasonable guess at what would happen.

[apple713]

But most of all, I'd really like if the ban-fetchland supporters cared to answer just a single question, in regard of "format diversity": do you think canadian threshold, show and tell, miracles, reanimator, aggro loam, elves, ANT are each the same and equal to one another? Do they all have the same gameplan, do you have the same game experience playing with or against each one of them as if they were all identical?

If not (and I can't see how you can seriously mantain the contrary) you cannot arbitrarily divide the metagame in "decks with fetchlands" and "decks withouth fechlands" because there are many other things that define a deck build and strategy.
So, you have no solid ground to say that fetchlands decrease the format diversity, even less so when you can't accurately predict what a format withouth them would be.

To say that they diminish the format diversity using only their number as an argument, is like saying that vintage diversity is diminished because everybody (except dredge) plays black lotus (not only turbo xerox but even workshop decks). So, should they ban black lotus? Or maybe you can accept that vintage is DEFINED as a FORMAT by the fact that you get to play the most broken cards ever printed. In the same way, LEGACY IS DEFINED by the fact that you can play brainstorm (fetchlands, force of will, wasteland). You should just accept that, or go play another format instead of trying to ruin it for the ones that enjoy that.
(Not that you can succeed in that; and before you start again accusing me of liking turbo xerox: of course, but you don't see me arguing that WOTC should ban blood moon, magus of the moon, chalice of the void, trinisphere and sol-lands. I accept they are part of what the format is).

Your comment above clearly indicates your lack of understanding as to why fetch lands hinder diversity. It doesnt have to do with a decks ability to play different strategies. It has to do with a decks ability to be so efficient that it doesnt allow other decks to flourish. It sets the ceiling higher than necessary.

For example, assume that with fetchlands there are 10x tier 1 decks. Without fetchlands, all of those tier 1 decks become tier 2 decks and there are no tier 1 decks. A deck that was tier 3 that did not use fetchlands will now have a much better chance against tier 2 decks whereas they wouldnt really stand much of a chance against those 10 decks as tier 1 because there are 2 tiers between them. The ceiling is considered lower because everything that was tier 1 is now tier 2. Also now that fetchlands are gone, there are 20x decks that are tier 2 (the 10 from before fetchlands were banned, and 10 that moved there from tier 1).

This example is not perfect and there are flaws. It assumes that fetchlands create efficiencies that separate decks win rates. I think we all agree that it does (try playing a 3 color deck with fetchlands and then without).

Probably not the best example but jesus, understand the issue that is being discussed.

[phonics]

Your comment above clearly indicates your lack of understanding as to why fetch lands hinder diversity. It doesnt have to do with a decks ability to play different strategies. It has to do with a decks ability to be so efficient that it doesnt allow other decks to flourish. It sets the ceiling higher than necessary.

For example, assume that with fetchlands there are 10x tier 1 decks. Without fetchlands, all of those tier 1 decks become tier 2 decks and there are no tier 1 decks. A deck that was tier 3 that did not use fetchlands will now have a much better chance against tier 2 decks whereas they wouldnt really stand much of a chance against those 10 decks as tier 1 because there are 2 tiers between them. The ceiling is considered lower because everything that was tier 1 is now tier 2. Also now that fetchlands are gone, there are 20x decks that are tier 2 (the 10 from before fetchlands were banned, and 10 that moved there from tier 1).

This example is not perfect and there are flaws. It assumes that fetchlands create efficiencies that separate decks win rates. I think we all agree that it does (try playing a 3 color deck with fetchlands and then without).

Probably not the best example but jesus, understand the issue that is being discussed.

I think his main argument is flawed in that he considers fetchlands to provide a symmetrical benefit to all colors, when they clearly dont. This is the main crux of the argument for banning fetches, because fetches are much more beneficial to colors that are able to manipulate the top of their library. Without top, that ability is almost exclusively blue (outside of exceptions like sylvan library). The rest of his arguments are essentially made exclusively for blue decks and ignore the fact that every non-blue based deck already has to deal with issues of inconsistency that he claims would hurt the format.

[talpa]

It's fine to have a different opinion, but you have failed to lay out a logical basis for your claim. (...) In the same post you expect us to listen to your expert opinion predicting legacy implications based on a standard deck you played? really?

I shouldn't even reply to you since you keep with offensive tones. I spent time explaining myself; of course you can disagree, but you can't keep distorting what I said.
And by the way, I am able to listen to a different point of view, that's why I reply with quotes, which most of you keep refusing to do. But if somebody states as a divine revelation something that has no ground, I will keep answering.

Your comment above clearly indicates your lack of understanding as to why fetch lands hinder diversity. It doesnt have to do with a decks ability to play different strategies. It has to do with a decks ability to be so efficient that it doesnt allow other decks to flourish. (...)
For example, assume that with fetchlands there are 10x tier 1 decks. Without fetchlands, all of those tier 1 decks become tier 2 decks and there are no tier 1 decks. (...) Also now that fetchlands are gone, there are 20x decks that are tier 2 (the 10 from before fetchlands were banned, and 10 that moved there from tier 1).
Probably not the best example but jesus, understand the issue that is being discussed.

(I'd like to note that there exist non cantrip fetchlands decks and, again, that it's completely arbitrarily and bad-founded to divide the metagame in fetchland and non-fetchland decks).
I can follow this line of reasoning (it's still an hypothesis and I don't agree, because it's not proven et cetera, but let's follow it). But you have to note that it's not me that I don't understand the issue; it's you that have changed the topic.
If you say that fetchlands hinder diversity, the meaning (maybe being a non native english speaker matters) is "there are too few different decks in the format". That's plainly false. Indeed, now you change your topic and say "no, all that I want is to weaken the fetchlands archetypes, in order to power up tier 2 decks". (I'd like to note that I was accused of being disonhest suggesting that someone could have a different hidden agenda).
Different thing. I will fight you, I think that's a symptom of your hate against some kind of decks, may be the same hate that some have against "the cantrip cartel". But at least it's honest. Somebody else in this thread wasn't as honest as you, and said very different things. Somebody said that it's not a matter of preference but an indisputable FACT.
Now is it or is it not exactly a matter of personal likes and dislikes wanting current tiers to be weakened?

I think his main argument is flawed in that he considers fetchlands to provide a symmetrical benefit to all colors, when they clearly dont. This is the main crux of the argument for banning fetches, because fetches are much more beneficial to colors that are able to manipulate the top of their library

actually, in this thread I saw people saying that the main trouble with fetchlands was that they enable delve. Since there is plenty of different reasons stated by the "ban the fetchlands" supporters, many competing for the most crazy one, it's difficult to reply to each one. A few of them have a logic behind them and I have no problem to discuss with someone like apple713 here.
I have no problem admitting the very obvious thing that brainstorm is more powerful when you have access to a fetch. But I will not accept that fetchlands are not beneficial to any color, because they are, and I also took in consideration in my list some non-blue decks.
The fact that blue decks tend to perform better than non-blue decks is an entire different thing, and again, I mantain that it would be true even with fetchlands gone. This game is blue since its very beginning, you should deal with it. If you don't like this you can play another game, or a tier2, or hell, even continue with your crazy crusade against the "cantrip cartel", but at least aknowledge that fetchlands have very little to do with that.



PS

It doesnt have to do with a decks ability to play different strategies. It has to do with a decks ability to be so efficient that it doesnt allow other decks to flourish

If that's your objective, fetchlands or not, you have no hope. For every format, there will always be a moment when the metagame is "solved" and tiers that "push out" less performing decks emerge. That's why for me the healthiness of a format has to be measured by the number of different strategies that can be played (and by the experience you have).
Of course we can't agree if we pursue different objectives. That's why it's important being honest with what each of us desires.

[Lemnear]

I shouldn't even reply to you since you keep with offensive tones.

That's coming from someone who cant write a post without any insult or personal attack. Hilarious.

In this thread I saw people saying that the main trouble with fetchlands was that they enable delve.

I see that you still haven't bothered with the arguments, but opt to keep using strawmen. This goes in line with your "You all just dont like Fetchlands" and "Fetchlands are no engine".

But I will not accept that fetchlands are not beneficial to any color, because they are, and I also took in consideration in my list some non-blue decks.

They are not equally beneficial to each color. It has been outlined several times in thus thread, because Tournament data obviously is not good enough for you for whatever reason.

The fact that blue decks tend to perform better than non-blue decks is an entire different thing, and again, I mantain that it would be true even with fetchlands gone.

It's pure irony that you mock people for being unable to reliably forecast a hypothetical fetchless metagame, yet you make a baseless claim here yourself. There is the chance that Preordain/Serum Visions/Ponder + FoW will form a backbone for blue decks, but there is no chance we can guarantee that it remains superior to non-blue cores running on the back of Dark Confidant, Loam, Zenith, Explorer, etc.

[talpa]

Hello Lemnear, thanks again for shitposting!
Are we in a race for the first to reach page 1.000 of this thread, that should change name into "a place for people to complain?"

Yes, I already said that I respond to trolls by trolling, that's all you can get.
But I don't misinterpret on purpose what others say. I never said that I am able to do a perfect prediction. I am not english native speaker, so beg your pardon if when I write "I mantain" it's not clear that I am simply stating that I don't change my opinion. I'm not the one who mistakes facts for interpretations.

Yes, I still think the vast majority of "ban fetchland" simply don't like them. Some of you even admitted it: it's not that the format lacks diversity, if with "diversity" we intend the number of archetypes playable. It's just that you really, reeeaaaly would like turbo xerox to die, beg your bardon again, present tiers1 to become tiers2. By some huge leap of (non)logic, you think that banning fetchland would accomplish this.

If you want to make a crusade against brainstorm, or turbo xerox, or against blue as a whole (I find it even more stupid) at least be honest and don't use fetchlands as a straw argument.

The definitive answer to your argument was given by someone else, who tried to explain to you that if you switch from rock,paper,scissor to rock,paper,scissor,lizard,spock you haven't accomplished anything. Can I be sure that banning fetches this would be what happens? Of course not. But neither can you. So when I say that turbo xerox will still reign, I'm simply making an hypothesis, just like you all. But I think all the data and all the "rational arguments" as you call them point in this very direction.
I'd say to you "just try it"... but unfortunately (for you) I don't think WOTC is particularly listening to your complains. You can always try to put a road sign in their parking. But given they say that most people love brainstorm... I think you should start considering that people who thinks like me are a majority, you are only more vocal.

Have fun

PS. if you really want to have a constructive discussion,

I see that you still haven't bothered with the arguments

make a "definitive" numbered list. I'll respond point by point telling in my personal view what I agree with, what I don't, and what according to me simply doesn't make sense.
But then, you'll have to agree to answer in the same way, point by point, to my numbered list.
Also, to be clear, first of all define what you consider "healtiness" of the format and what exactly you want to accomplish.

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Sorry I left my copy of Robert's Rules of Order at home so you'll just have to deal with paragraphs.

[kirkusjones]

Long time lurker, second time poster (at least in this thread). So, I've been doing some research and I believe what's happened is that a few of the frequent posters in this thread have unintentionally conjured up a tulpa. For the uninitiated, the tulpa is a being created purely from thought, often referred to in esoteric texts as a "thought form" or "emanation".

These creatures, with enough of the original train of thought to feed upon may begin to believe that they are free and independent entities and will, as a way of justifying this and their own continued existence, begin to take up contradictory positions to both generate the thought energy necessary for the tulpa's survival and to again prove to those that may have unwittingly called it into existence that it is truly human. Once conjured and fed, tulpas can be incredibly hard to banish back to the realms of pure thought, especially when fed with significant amounts of vitriol and invective.

One common way to exorcise the tupla is to confront it with a true human consciousness so recalcitrant and self-assured, so delusionally certain its opinions are facts that the tulpa is vaporized in the white-hot intensity of pure, true personality. My friends, the time is now. He may not be the hero we deserve, but he is the one we need. #freenedleeds

[Lemnear]

make a "definitive" numbered list. I'll respond point by point telling in my personal view what I agree with, what I don't, and what according to me simply doesn't make sense.

Nice, that you request a list which we have had 2 or 3 of already. Your constant lack of attention for the ongoing discussion really amazes me.

[talpa]

Nice, that you request a list which we have had 2 or 3 of already. Your constant lack of attention for the ongoing discussion really amazes me.

That's fun, because
1) demonstrates once and for all (as if we needed more proof) that the one who is trolling is you, because you refused to post this (inexistent) list. It's been 10+ pages that you keep saying "we already listed plenty of reasons" while giving none.
2) because I just took time to re-read again the last 20 pages, and still haven't found a single real motivation in favour of the fetchland ban except "diminshing the time lost to shuffle".

This one I can agree it is real, I just think it's not so relevant (after all, we almost always get to end our 3 games in time even in paper events) and that's not enough for motivating a ban; more so because it would have plenty of other "side effects".
When I say it's the only "real" reason I found, I mean a reason to ban fetchlands "per se", without a hidden agenda like "I don't like tri-color decks" or "I hate brainstorm".

Fortunately, I can do the recap for you.
Humprey, 2018/07/02 "with fetchlands banned, deathrite could have stayed".
That's not an argument in favour of fetchland ban. Who says deathrite SHOULD stay?

SecretlyABee, 2018/07/03 (paraphrase) "brainstorm without fetchlands is much a worse card"
So you want to ban fetchland because you'd want brainstorm banned but since Forsythe said it's a pillar of the format you have to try to reach the same goal by pointing to a different target.

Apple713, 2018/07/03 (paraphrase) "damn, Forsythe, why don't you shut up?"
Apple713, 2018/07/04 "I don't hate brainstorm, it's just that it diminish the diversity of the format"
Definition of diversity unclear, since we have 80+ playable archetypes (source tcdecks). The paraphrase is as we saw a few post before "I want tier2 decks to be more powerful"

bruizar, 2018/07/04 with fetchland ban
1) duals diminish their prize
2) other lands could be playable
3) brainstorm loses
1) plenty of people immediately had a laugh (hell, even Lemnear himself) since with our supernatural predictive power we think it would be quite the opposite
2) who cares to play with celestial colonnade in legacy
3) again, it's a "ban brainstorm" bandwagon masqueraded as a "ban fetchland"

Finn, 2018/07/05 "without fetches, brainstorm would be weakened"
Wow, that tweet of Forsythe must have really shocked you all.

MrSafety, 2018/07/05 "[the ban would] fix brainstorm, the delve mechanic (somewhat) and reduce the time lost to shuffling"
Again "who said brainstorm need fixing".
I'd agree to take in consideration the third argument. As for the second one, it is sound but admittedly could not be enough, since the honest use of somewhat. I think cantrips without fetchlands by themselves would be too much to safely unban TC and DTT. Anyway, even if it was sound, who said that we are better with TC and DTT withouth fetchlands than we are with fetchlands and without TC and DTT? ban 10 cards to unban those two (and maybe top and deathrite)? Who said that top without fetchland wouldn't still be too powerful? I'd say it would.

Barook, 2018/07/05 "I forgot to say blue would still be the best color"
Not a reason, but nice to see someone who is "neutral to the banning of fetchland" see the things the same way I do.

Lemnear, 2018/07/05 "fetchlands allows you to 1) shuffle chaff away 2) avoid wasteland/blood moon 3) free fill graveyard 4) access any color
Almost accurate description of what they DO; nothing said about why we all should agree that's BAD.
Also, only almost accurate, because 1) can't work without a brainstorm 2) if you fetch a dual, you are still exposed, and you are exposed to stifle; you are still exposed to blood moon t1.

Andy Prime, 2018/07/05 "it would cut the chances of cheating"
plenty of people already answered that find the cheaters should be a priority anyway (and fetchlands are not the only occasion to shuffle, even less so the only occasion to cheat)

Lemnear, 2018/07/06 "it has become a running joke to ban everything but fetches, brainstorm and ponder
Forsythe, I'm starting to love you. You hurt these people bad. Also as somebody else immediately answered "that running joke is the VERY DEFINITION of WHAT LEGACY IS"

Finn, 2018/07/06 "it would be 2005 all over again"
Not that this is an argument for banning fetchlands, but I have a soft spot for nostalgia. But we just had a deathrite ban, you can enjoy freshness for a while.

birds of paradise, 2018/07/06 "they allow to find any of seven color pairs"
seven? SEVEN? when were three of the fetches already banned? which ones are those?

apple713, 2018/07/08 "fetchlands make more colors too easy"
So what? we should all love only mono- and bi-colored decks?
What's the definition of "too" easy? (tricolors decks still lose to stifle+wasteland)

Then I started posting saying the only reason you all wrote was "ban them because I don't like em"
I think the above list speaks for how good or bad my impression was with regards to the quality of the arguments.

Regards.

[Tittliewinks22]

Unban earthcraft.

[Megadeus]

Have there been many large paper events since the bans? Interested in seeing if DRS fueled archetypes are still good enough without

[FourDogsinaHorseSuit]

Have there been many large paper events since the bans? Interested in seeing if DRS fueled archetypes are still good enough without

I believe scg is on day two of a team event with over 100 teams.

[mistercakes]

I think the main argument for fetchlands and cards like brainstorm/Ponder/SDT etc is less about diversity and more about consistency.

I think it's less about banning specific cards and more about printing better cards in other colors.

It was unfortunate that top got banned as it + fetchlands gave other decks a way to manipulate their draws as well despite the best one (miracles) being blue.

I enjoy the format as it is, and don't mind waiting around for some new tools. The blue decks are heavily optimized already (same with ant/tes/elves etc).

Legacy always is more enjoyable for me when new cards come out that can help the niche decks, but don't align with the optimized other decks.

Time will come when other colors can add some consistency. The game is always evolving. Sometimes you have to approach the game from a different angle to get some wins in.

It is safer to play the blue cantrips and fetches instead of other methods, but how many people here are playing outside of locals that are greater than 4 rounds? If so, how many times per year?

I play mostly the weekly events which don't last more than 4 rounds. When I was playing modo I did do a lot a leagues. Both of these venues are great for jamming any kind of deck.

[non-inflammable]

EPIC...

One common way to exorcise the tupla is to confront it with a true human consciousness so recalcitrant and self-assured, so delusionally certain its opinions are facts that the tulpa is vaporized in the white-hot intensity of pure, true personality. My friends, the time is now. He may not be the hero we deserve, but he is the one we need. #freenedleeds

[Mr. Safety]

#freenedleeds

[Scott]

Have there been many large paper events since the bans? Interested in seeing if DRS fueled archetypes are still good enough without

A 140-player SCG classic just finished in Worcester. Of the top 16, it looks like only 2 are decks that were previously fueled by DRS, the two Death's Shadow ones, three if you include Dark Depths.

1. Big Eldrazi
2. U/W Stoneblade
3. RUG Delver
4. Goblins
5. Dark Depths
6. UWR Stoneblade
7. B/R Reanimator
8. Grixis Death's Shadow
9 . UWR Delver
10. Miracles
11. Death & Taxes
12. Sneak & Show
13. Death & Taxes
14. Infect
15. Grixis Death's Shadow
16. U/W Stoneblade

There was also a Team Open with 270 teams, and the Top 26 had two Grixis Delver decks, one Grixis Control deck, and one BUG Control deck, but because it's a Team Open, we don't know exactly how well the Legacy decks did.

[luckme10]

999 Pages. Wow. I wonder how many hours that translates to. We're talking human genome project hours here. You've unraveled the mysteries of the universe. Congratulations to everyone on a job well done.

[BirdsOfParadise]

birds of paradise, 2018/07/06 "they allow to find any of seven color pairs"
seven? SEVEN? when were three of the fetches already banned? which ones are those?

Each fetch land can obtain any one of seven color pairs. That's what I said. I'll explain the math to you if you still don't understand it.