Brainstorm
Force of Will
Lion's Eye Diamond
Counterbalance
Sensei's Divining Top
Tarmogoyf
Phyrexian Dreadnaught
Goblin Lackey
Standstill
Natural Order
They're getting a little better at printing spells. Fatal Push is well received. Kolaghan's Command doeth all things well.
It's just the logical extension that if it's worth playing once, then it's worth playing twice, so let's throw some Snapcasters in there. But then we're stretching our colors a bit aren't we? Nah just toss in some DRS and we'll be fine. Goodstuff! This is just the natural evolution of having the best at everything.
I think, that hinting at the fact, that a 1-mana "Planeswalker" is fine to be printed but 2-mana counterspells are "too good" (topic: Mana Leak) would have been sufficient as example to show that there is a massive misbalance between "threats" & "answers" in modern set design.
If removal & counters are more expensive than the cards removed, they are getting pointless and people rather "trump" enemy threats with even bigger ones. It's the natural development we have witnessed during the times of Cancel & Murder.
The development of creatures compared to other card types is easiest to see in Vintage, a format which had only a few viable creatures like 11 years ago and now looks like a whole different format.
But don't let me derail the discussion here :)
www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!
Join us at Facebook!
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!
Join us at Facebook!
In fairness, the recent Fatal Push is one of the best removal spells of all time.
100% right
You're exactly right, and I agree that just means the format would adapt.
I think the difference is one of perception. No fetches would still mean people having access to :
- ABUR Duals
- Shocklands
- Painlands
- Filter lands
- the ones that enter tapped if you do/don't control the corresponding land type (note they don't require a basic land, so duals and shocks tick the box)
- City of Brass
- 3-color taplands
- TE & EW
- ... and I'm probably forgetting some
In such a format, reliably getting 4+ colors is still quite achievable - you just can't get it without a noticeable drawback, a balancing mechanic that is at the very basic foundation of the game. Note you have an abundant number of tools/options on how you elect to pay this bill (being more exposed to non-basic hate, and/or a tempo loss, and/or additional life payment, and/or...).
So, I don't think it would be fair to say that removing the fetches from the format would make the fixing "suck". Far, far from it. I think, at the absolute worst, it would make the available fixing fair (and I do mean at the absolute worst).
The fact that Wizards has dedicated the introduction of fetchlands an own spot in their recent timeline of magic due to the upcoming M25 set imo suggests that they are well aware that these lands have had a huge impact on the way the game works, especially with respect to the validity of color borders and the color pie and that they have probably considered removing them at some point.
You make a good point about how color was intended as a means of balancing mechanics by splitting them up. I also agree that there's no shortage of options to keep multicolored decks viable, but I feel like people are more likely to gravitate toward running more dual lands than they are to play stuff that comes into play tapped. My main worry is that this would price people (like me) out of the format and would give certain tempo builds even greater effectiveness in the absence of easy fixing for other archetypes.
Also, though the format would evolve, I think this would be a pretty fundamental change that would have enormous repercussions all around, not just for 4–5c Chock Full'o'Duals builds. I'm fine with changes, but I like my decks, and I think some of them would become unrecognizable or positively unplayable if such a change were to happen. Of course, on the flipside, I could still play Burn, Dredge, Charbelcher, and Poops without any detrimental effect; would a rise in those decks be good for the format, though?
I think you're probably right, but the fact that they keep printing them indicates that they don't want them gone. Of course, Invocation Counterbalance was pretty indicative of poor planning (as was Invocation Blood Sun—er, Moon), but knocking fetches right after printing them would be a slap in the face of a whole lot of players across formats.
This doesn't have any bearing on the argument, but how weird would it be for Modern to have better fixing than Legacy?
All Spells Primer under construction: https://docs.google.com/document/d/e...Tl7utWpLo0/pub
PM me if you want to contribute!
Maro has said that if "Frontier" ever became a sanctioned format it would not have Fetches in it. More or less says it all imo.
http://markrosewater.tumblr.com/post...-the-idea-of-a
We get it, but none of us want to play without our fetches man. You will not win anyone over, no matter how much you make sense, I don't agree with that trash! Good points, but no way, Jose. How bout banning duals? Would force you to fetch shocklands. That could maybe push aggressive strategies over the edge, the extra 2-6 life lost a game by multicolored decks, to the point that we see an actual shake up: aggros return.
This was mentioned from the start, but I'm not sure anyone would get really priced out of the format. 4c/5c just can't be built by only piling up on Duals - you're forced to run rainbow lands like City of Brass which are basically free (and accept folding up no questions asked to any Moon effect). Basically, they'd probably be playing a few more duals than today (something like 12), but a typical Czech Pile list will run ~9 today, so the difference is not that high. Additionally, it would so fold to Wasteland and Blood Moon that it either would be a moot point or they'd find another more resilient way to adapt, probably accepting some tempo loss (eg playing TE/EW or the slow fetches, where in both cases "more duals" wouldn't be a real solution).
2c decks are almost unaffected from the change (and 1c obviously don't care), so I feel only 3c decks would be "at risk" of seeing their optimal manabase turning into running 2-3 more duals than today while still be able to survive as-is. On the other hand, they'd be playing 6-8 fetches less, so the actual price difference is probably more in the ~1.5 dual range. It's not nothing, but it's not a different world. That's also supposing people don't turn to other solutions for their manabases (eg maybe green decks run a 5-6 mix of BoP/NH instead of 4 DRS - or don't at all, don't know).
That's not what he said. He says that "I wouldn’t have included Khans block because I don’t think you want fetches in the format" i.e. that it is his own personal opinion and not necessarily that of WOTC. I don't think he's even particularly involved with the development side of things, which I believe would be the ones tasked with making such a format.
Although, the idea of starting later than Khans of Tarkir is a bit amusing because that would mean (right now) you'd have it be composed of nothing other than really unpopular Standard formats.
I would like to see brainstorm banned since the 18000 card legacy format is now 3 overarching archetypes:
1) Brainstorm plus ponder and/or fow decks. This is literally the majority of the format per mtgtop8.
2) Prison decks to hate out the above (chalice and thalia decks plus lands)
3) Glass cannon combo (br reanimator/elves/dredge etc.)
Now I get the argument that there are many different decks within the three including the brainstom decks...but I think the format could be much more diverse without it. After the brainstorm shell you are really just picking your win cons and favorite protection spells.
Would you please elaborate? What would we be seeing in their stead? It seems a bit too easy to say “all these decks that use the best cards are keeping all the other decks out” without elaborating on what we’re missing out on and quantifying just how many more viable decks there’d actually be.
And why is even more diversity desirable? Isn’t the current environment overall rather healthy, with decent sideboard plans for most decks against most other decks?
Would also like to better understand what the diversity would be.
The blue almost needs to exist to keep the unfair decks in check.
-rob
No one is arguing for a ban of FoW, Daze, Pierce or whatever. The point is that banning brainstorm could be a first step to create parity between the colors in terms of card selection and randomness management. As long as BS is legal decks that can't play it will always fight an uphill battle and if you actually want to win at games it will always be silly to play without it. If BS was banned, blue would still have an advantage in this regard because there are so many other cantrips that could replace it so you blue fanboys could still be happy.
no reason to get personal here. i haven't competitively used brainstorm since around 2010-2012, and that was with doomsday. i've pushed quite a few decks that have no brainstorm/ponder.
anyway -
http://mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE&meta=39
if you take a look at the breakdown on the left, it's pretty diverse already.
what cards do you want from the other colors that are not being played but would get played if brainstorm were banned? what other decks are you looking to play?
the best cards of each color are roughly already being played. sometimes if you want to have consistency outside of blue, you need to find synergies. is that fair? maybe not, but the brainstorm decks also can then get preyed upon by chalice and taxing decks.
the argument really isn't brainstorm, there are enough cantrips in blue so that every deck that wants to xerox to death will still be able to. at this point the game is getting so complex that the only way to stop this kind of strategy is hate against it.
thalia, chalice, thorn, eidolon are all great examples of ways to beat this kind of strategy. this is also why aether vial, blood moon, wasteland, and to a lesser extent port have a strong effect on decks that try to maximize efficiency.
you have to choose what kind of strategy you want to play. if you want to get around the blue, then you'll have to approach the game differently. it can be done, and sometimes sacrificing a little consistency can be well worth it.
just because you may be facing a brainstorm deck doesn't mean that you're an underdog. there's such a range of those decks that you can be a heavy favorite in some and a huge dog in others.
i'm not sure what you're trying to get out of it.
(just a quick edit, i've been playing competitively since tempest came out and i've seen the huge range in decks from old t2, 1.5, 1x and the current formats as well. i'm not really sure what people are expecting will develop if things are banned to reduce consistency).
-rob
Not a chance.
Brainstorm could be banned tomorrow, and in no time at all people would be bitching about DRS, CotV, S&T, Ponder, or whatever else rubs them the wrong way.
What this thread is 90% "about" is ranting and whining that Legacy isn't everything some of us want it to be.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
There are currently 3046 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3046 guests)