View Poll Results: Most bannable card in Legacy? (not that they will touch it)

Voters
192. You may not vote on this poll
  • Brainstorm

    16 8.33%
  • Force of Will

    4 2.08%
  • Lion's Eye Diamond

    35 18.23%
  • Counterbalance

    34 17.71%
  • Sensei's Divining Top

    103 53.65%
  • Tarmogoyf

    46 23.96%
  • Phyrexian Dreadnaught

    2 1.04%
  • Goblin Lackey

    4 2.08%
  • Standstill

    6 3.13%
  • Natural Order

    8 4.17%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 1017 of 1178 FirstFirst ... 175179179671007101310141015101610171018101910201021102710671117 ... LastLast
Results 20,321 to 20,340 of 23542

Thread: All B/R update speculation.

  1. #20321
    Some dipshit of a Moderator.
    Dice_Box's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    A Tabernacle in some random Valley.
    Posts

    4,843

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    Strangely I saw this objection coming and the answer is already there, in the names and tournaments results: those deck were chosen by strong players and piloted to strong finish in big events.
    Your always going to have outliers, that's why we notice them. The idea when using data is not to hand pick points, but to look at trend lines. I can agree each of these decks individually in the hands of skilled individuals did well, but again, single points of data do not an argument make or help anyone in isolation.

    I can hand pick data to make a point too, look at the times Lands had done well to argue its the best deck in the format. If you ignore all the other data points it would seem I am right. But I would be wrong. It's a good deck but, regardless of my desire for it to be, it's not the best.
    It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spam View Post
    Do not make fun of lands masters, they've spent many years mastering the punishing fire technique in the secret loam monastery. Do not mistake them with the miracles masters, eternal rivals, they won't like it.
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    Something about how fun it is pulling the wings off flies and microwaving the neighbors cat?

  2. #20322

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    I can hand pick data to make a point too, look at the times Lands had done well to argue its the best deck in the format. If you ignore all the other data points it would seem I am right. But I would be wrong. It's a good deck but, regardless of my desire for it to be, it's not the best.
    How can you refute the point that "these decks are unplayable" without handpicking data? It's not argued that they are the best decks, its argued that the statement that they are unplayable are false.

  3. #20323
    Member
    talpa's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2016
    Location

    Italy
    Posts

    141

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    The idea when using data is not to hand pick points, but to look at trend lines
    First of all, as already said by JosefK, when you are willing to refute a universal proposition you need just one counter-example.
    The whining was "you can't play this deck and have success" (hell, it was even worse, it was "it doesn't exist a deck in this color-pair") and showing that the deck can win a big tournament is enough.

    Then, as I said, I don't believe in trends: people follow personal tastes, fashion etc. and is limited by deck availability. So the fact that a deck is more played than another doesn't strictly demonstrate anything. For example, in Europe we knew how strong miracle was (and how the ponder list was the better) ages before US people realized that. Also, why are european, american and asian metagames so different if the format is the same? :D
    Why is online magic different than paper one? Because a deck "strength" isn't the only parameter (nor it even has meaning in a vacuum without considering the metagame).

    Last but not least, you actually don't have data to infer a deck strength if you can only look at top lists. Without considering the skill of a player, if you wanted to assess "a deck" performance, you should have access to all results. Which only wizard can do, on MTGO.
    If you instead look only at the "winners" and can't compare who they are with "how many of them there were in the metagame", you have a distorted perception. Because if the metagame in a certain tournament was dominated by a deck, it could have a predominance in the top by mere chance (big numbers) and not because it was strong.

    I know some people that do this kind of analysis when they have access to ALL decklists in a certain tournament... and as I said, the last big tournament in Italy showed a WORSE result for miracle and grixis than others archetypes (average points of all players aggregated by deck type).
    And yes, Lands is a strong deck in general, won that tournament in particular and even had a good average point between all those who played it.

  4. #20324

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    LOL the biggest epic fail
    There are tier decks for this color combinations
    Also I'd love to understand what difference do you mean to underline between "white green" (2nd in your list) and "green white" the last in your list

    WR - Red Taxes - example list Nick Tucker 18th/810 SCG Open Worcester
    WG - Maverick - example list Tristan Pölzl 6th/194 MKM Series Paris
    WB - Deadguy Ale / Pikula - example list Owen Watson 16th/187 SCG Duel for Duals
    So...um...to clarify...all a deck has to do in order to be considered competitive with miracles etc. in your opinion is get 16th/187 at 1 event? I've got a sweet competitive deck then for you to crush your next event with: https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=19908&d=328765 .
    Quote Originally Posted by Laser Brains View Post
    With the printing of Gigantosaurus, Thrashing Brontodon and Steel Leaf Champion the deck has evolved from good to very competitive. Anyway, give it a few play tests if you are interested and let me know what you think.

    Winter Maze
    Quote Originally Posted by CptHaddock View Post
    With veteran explorer I know that I 100% will not enjoy a 30 minute grindfest against someone who can barely afford dual lands and believes that their deck can cast a 10 mana 8/8.

  5. #20325
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    704

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by kinda View Post
    So...um...to clarify...all a deck has to do in order to be considered competitive with miracles etc. in your opinion is get 16th/187 at 1 event? I've got a sweet competitive deck then for you to crush your next event with: https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=19908&d=328765 .
    Agreeing with your point, of course..

    I think we can all agree, after a little bit of reasoning, that the competitiveness of a deck is not defined by its ability to be good on a single occasion, but rather to be consistently good. Of course a deck with 20 Forests and 40 Grizzly Bears could win a 15 round tournament vs decks with 20 lands and 40 spells if these decks only draw their spells and no lands. It just needs to get lucky. Winning a single tournament, maybe once a year even, is not a necessarily a testament of a deck's strength and competitiveness. Regularly winning tournaments, on the other hand, is. This is also a large part of the reason why Brainstorm defines most competitive decks in the format.

    Quote Originally Posted by MorphBerlin View Post
    I respect your efforts, but the ban-everything-until-maverik-is-great-again crowd will never stop bitching how unfair good blue is. (You can also insert another bad pet deck there)
    I don't know but I have the impression that only a subset of the people who want to improve format diversity are longing for a travel back in time in terms of meta changes. There are some who do, I for example don't see it that way.

    I mean do these people now 4c-Loam? It's like a competitive, good maverick But I guess it's too unfair because of Mox Diamond and Chalice, these people only enjoy the pure Maverick expirience.
    I don't know why, I could guess that if you want a Chalice strategy then Eldrazi is better and if you want a Loam strategy then Lands is better. Personally I like Maverick better, it seems to me that it should be more consistent and maybe unique and in my view more fun, but none of that really matters in this context.

    Edit: The denial of the competitiveness of the decks you lsitet even when you provided data of TopX finishes at big events made me laugh as well Ban everything until this one guy, how probably just sucks at magic can top 8 an event with his pet deck
    See my comment above! This is, in my view, a misunderstanding of what competitiveness means.

    Also no word about D&T which has always been competitive and get's new playable creatures in like evey set... Also to unfair because of the Taxing/Controlling Elements I guess.
    There has been plenty of word about D&T in relation to Brainstorm. Thalia is often referred to as one of the few cards that can interact in a meaningful way with Brainstorm.

  6. #20326
    Member
    talpa's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2016
    Location

    Italy
    Posts

    141

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by kinda View Post
    So...um...to clarify...all a deck has to do in order to be considered competitive with miracles etc. in your opinion is get 16th/187 at 1 event? I've got a sweet competitive deck then for you to crush your next event with: https://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=19908&d=328765 .
    What do you mean with the phrasing "competitive with?" As strong as X? Good against X?
    I'm not doing comparisons (like in more (less) competitive than). I'm simply saying that a deck that makes top16 in a big event is "competitive", by the very definition of "competitive" as "being able to win". Even more so if few people play it. You just CAN'T BE LUCKY FOR 15 ROUNDS CONSECUTIVELY with a "non competitive" deck
    Also, as we already explained, we weren't "saying" anything. We were just "refuting" an obvious idiocy (choose yours: "a legacy GW deck does not exist", "maverick is not a deck", "maverick can't win a tournament" etc etc).
    EDIT: Oh! And of course I like the deck you linked.


    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    I think we can all agree
    No I don't. And I think you are purposely denying the evidence and choosing a straw man to fight with.


    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    Of course a deck with 20 Forests and 40 Grizzly Bears could win a 15 round tournament
    Really? Please show me the historical record. I think this actually proves MY point.



    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    Regularly winning tournaments, on the other hand...
    ...depends (not only, but surely also) on how many people play it.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    the competitiveness of a deck is not defined by its ability to be good on a single occasion, but rather to be consistently good
    No, this is a definition of how consistent a deck is.
    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    This is also a large part of the reason why Brainstorm defines most competitive decks in the format.
    Yes, Brainstorm gives consistency. Not competitiveness. (Brainstorm is not the only way to have consistency, but it is a [very] good one).
    A deck that has consistency and strength is more likely to put up results. A deck that is consistently bad just looses. Plenty of way to put 4 brainstorm in a shitty deck and make it shittier.
    Also if you were the best player of the world and were playing the most competitive and consistent deck in a Grand Prix and I had to bet between you winning it, or anyone else of the other 800 players winning it I'd bet against you. If everybody plays brainstorm, of course brainstorm shows up in top8.
    (I'm not saying brainstorm isn't good of course; why everybody is playing brainstorm is a completely different question. But when someone doesn't, he can still win; and of course we had two dragon stompy in birmigham, didn't we? How many brainstorm deck do you think were there and how many dragon stompy?)

  7. #20327
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    704

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    It's always funny how Italian people seem to like to be provocative, or I think they like it, well I like it too.. ;)

    I think some of your arguments fall all by themselves, like Brainstorm not being related to competitiveness is a point I think you will have a hard time driving home among anyone playing this format for a couple of years.

    When it comes to competitiveness, we can consider different levels or types of competitiveness. Splitting hairs like this is however not meaningful for this discussion. If you want to define every deck that ever won a tournament as competitive, that is fine, I think 99.9% of the users in this forum will have a different perspective than you. You can have that perspective, it just isn't very useful when discussing the format. I'll provide two links below to threads where you can read up on decks that the forum in general considers competitive, these are two methods for deciding on competiveness of decks and probably the best ones we have access to right now with the limited data we have. I suggest you ask them to add your definition of competitiveness in these threads and see how they respond.

    http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...-Probe-Banning

    http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...Deck-Selection

  8. #20328
    Member
    talpa's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2016
    Location

    Italy
    Posts

    141

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    I think 99.9% of the users in this forum
    Don't care. When everybody says 1+1=3 everybody is just wrong.
    Also maybe that's precisely why this forum doesn't have any more real interesting contents on the competetive threads.
    Oh, and by the way I'd bet you are speaking of those WHO WROTE, not of "everybody who plays legacy" LOL

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    these are two methods for deciding on competiveness
    No, as I already said these can define which decks are winning, which doesn't mean ANYTHING if you don't know the distribution of how many of each one was playing in the first place.


    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    I think some of your arguments fall all by themselves
    Yeah, yeah. Refute them. No, you are just shifting the discussion from "maverick is not a deck" to "brainstorm is good" which was not the question.

  9. #20329

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    I don't think the historical record reflects the idea that the Blue was ever not the best color in Magic.
    I agree, but historically that dominance was on the back of it's spells, and it's creatures were generally pretty meh.

    Now, that dominance is on the back of it's new creatures and it's old spells.

    That was pretty much my entire point. If other colors had spells to the level of blues spells, then blue wouldn't be dominant, because the creatures are all about the same now, and are waaaay ahead of what they used to be.

  10. #20330

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bithlord View Post

    It is what it is, but I'd just once like to see them make an "oops that was way too powerful" mistake that *isn't* blue.

    Edit: que argument over whether DRS was one such mistake :P.
    This was an interesting statement to me - I wonder if part of the reason this never seems to happen is that it is much harder to make a creature in other colors that is extremely powerful, but not in an obviously busted way, and not in a way that would break standard.

    This sort of thing came up in the Shitty Card Creation thread the other day - if the prompt is, "design a guy that would make Plateau competitive," the things that would come close are just completely unprintable on first reading, like:

    RW, 5/5, Human Knight; Haste, Vigilance, Creatures and Lands your opponents control enter the battlefield tapped. Non-creature spells your opponents control that target ~ cost 1 more to cast.

    Like, that card maybe could be good enough for a Legacy beatdown deck, but it can still get countered, plowed, pushed, etc., and BUG would probably still be the place to be. Like an earlier poster said, many of the playable cards in Legacy are the "mistakes," and the mistakes that would follow the color pie in non-blue colors are just much more obvious, and less likely to make it through development. By contrast, R&D looks at something like Delver and figures, "man, this is pretty hard to flip, right? Seems fine" without ever trying it with brainstorms/forces/dazes in their deck, or looks at TNN and goes "Oh yeah people will have three opponents with 40 life when they play this guy, surely one of the other two will help out?"

    Deathrite Shaman may have been the perfect example of this phenomenon: they figure, "oh, lands are rarely in the grave, this might fix once in a while" and "two damage a turn isn't all that much, we print guys with much bigger power than that, plus you need instants and sorceries and there aren't a ton of those either" and then it turns out to be nuts in formats where neither of those assumptions hold.

    All that being said, I feel like it's only a matter of time before they print, "1W, 2/2, Human Advisor; Your opponents can't play noncreature spells." Someone at wizards has a huge boner for hatebears...

  11. #20331
    Hymn-Slinging Mod
    H's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2008
    Location

    The U-easy-anna
    Posts

    3,413

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bithlord View Post
    I agree, but historically that dominance was on the back of it's spells, and it's creatures were generally pretty meh.

    Now, that dominance is on the back of it's new creatures and it's old spells.

    That was pretty much my entire point. If other colors had spells to the level of blues spells, then blue wouldn't be dominant, because the creatures are all about the same now, and are waaaay ahead of what they used to be.
    A fair point, but Wizards is not going to forsake Blue in every other actually supported format, just for the sake of Legacy.

    Not to mention that if Blue creatures weren't any good, Blue decks just use other color's creatures, just like they did pre-Innistrad and even all the way back to the original Thresh decks. See this very thread years ago about how Tarmogoyf should be banned as well.

    The only solution is to ban nearly every cantrip that is worth playing. And honestly, that is a shitty solution, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which is that there are actually people who like them. It doesn't really matter if you frame it as people like liking OP shit, people like powerful cards in any Constructed format. There is even a whole format predicated on the idea that people like to play degenerative stuff, because it's powerful (Vintage). If you don't, then you play Limited.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  12. #20332
    Some dipshit of a Moderator.
    Dice_Box's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    A Tabernacle in some random Valley.
    Posts

    4,843

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by JosefK View Post
    How can you refute the point that "these decks are unplayable" without handpicking data? It's not argued that they are the best decks, its argued that the statement that they are unplayable are false.
    You show trends. On a technical level they are all playable, they are legal in the format. My issue is not with the point but with picking out single data points and arguing they mean anything in isolation. That is not have stats work. You want a large sample size and then find the trends. We have a very large sample size (The amount of games we see reported is very high) with no trend towards these decks seeing any kind of widespread success. (Other than Lands.) WR DnT was a thing, then they got a White Recruiter and it went away.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    Then, as I said, I don't believe in trends: people follow personal tastes, fashion etc. and is limited by deck availability.
    You what? Really? Yes, there are limits due to external factors, but you really want to debate trends? I would suggest that the price of Tabernacle shows a trend in the uptake of Lands upon its success. The spike in City after Eldzari hit it big... People follow these trends. I get what your saying, that external factors play a large part in peoples choice and directions, but trends are a thing. Like, you don't have to believe in them, wont stop them any. I don't have to believe in cars, I think its best that I still should check for them before I cross the road.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    I know some people that do this kind of analysis when they have access to ALL decklists in a certain tournament... and as I said, the last big tournament in Italy showed a WORSE result for miracle and grixis than others archetypes (average points of all players aggregated by deck type).
    Got a link for that? Sounds like my kind of time waster for tonight. Would be cool to dig though. Thanks.
    It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spam View Post
    Do not make fun of lands masters, they've spent many years mastering the punishing fire technique in the secret loam monastery. Do not mistake them with the miracles masters, eternal rivals, they won't like it.
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    Something about how fun it is pulling the wings off flies and microwaving the neighbors cat?

  13. #20333
    Administrator

    Join Date

    Sep 2009
    Location

    Vienna, AT
    Posts

    470

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    The fact that cantrips and card selection (and, more broadly speaking, "draw cards"-abilities) only really and relevantly exist in Blue is a problem that eternal formats will have to live with, I guess. But that problem is compounded by the fact that the other "best" abilities and effects in the game are also to be found in Blue, or have been absorbed/cannibalized by Blue, over the last years. The original sin is, of course, stack interaction/being able to counter spells and abilities. Unless instant speed discard (quite ridiculously only to be found in Blue via Piracy Charm) becomes a thing, there's no better way to not make your opponent fuck you up with a single, yet crucial spell, that the other colours simply cannot match. WotC's answer to that - printing "can't be countered" bioler-plate on various cards - is a shitty band-aid "solution" for that particular problem, although I admit don't know how to fix it either. That cat's been out of the bag for too long already. However...

    Blue has superior protection and evasion (True-Name Nemesis and all the "can't be blocked"-shit), often comes with Flash and Flying tacked on, and has hexproof on some of its critters to boot. What do the other colors get that blue won't? Haste, First and Double Strike, Trample, mana production built-in, Delve (ignoring the banned U clusterfuck of cards from a few years ago, Blue still gets the "better" kind of Delve on one of its fatties: on Cryptic Serpent). Did I forget anything relevant?

    I think something's gotta change in how properties that WotC perceives to be OK on Blue cards are distributed over the colour pie, historical precedent be damned. And they need to do so in a way that precludes (predominantly) Blue decks from splashing those cards.

  14. #20334

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Honestly, there's lots of "cute" attempts to make a force of will cycle that gives each other color the ability to counter things it's good at fighitng against. But, you know what/ F that.

    We need a legit "force of..." cycle.

    Force of hate: 3BB. You may discard a black card and pay one life to play this spell without paying it's cost. Counter. Target. Spell.
    Force of fire.
    Force of unity.
    Force of (nature is already taken).

    hell, you want to show how "superior" blue is, fine. Take away the casting cost, and may the discard and pay life the only way to cast it. Literally nobody casts force for 5 mana anyway...

    But, like you noted, stack interaction AND card draw are "locked in" to blue's part of the pie. So, while blue gets to eat little bits of everybody elses pie, nobody gets to share in blue's part.

  15. #20335
    Member
    talpa's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2016
    Location

    Italy
    Posts

    141

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    On a technical level they are all playable, they are legal in the format
    Well, that's a way of understating it. Are they "just legal" in the format as it would be something like 20 forest and 40 2/2s for two mana, or can we agree they are just a tiny bit better?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    You what? Really? (...) I get what your saying, that external factors play a large part in peoples choice and directions
    So we understand each other. Let's avoid pretending the contrary.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    Got a link for that? Sounds like my kind of time waster for tonight. Would be cool to dig though. Thanks.
    No I don't. I can post an image with the elaboration, though
    https://imgur.com/a/p4613LV

  16. #20336

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bithlord View Post
    Literally nobody casts force for 5 mana anyway...
    Hasn't played enough miracles.
    Lands, MUD, Stax, and Miracles.

  17. #20337
    Some dipshit of a Moderator.
    Dice_Box's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    A Tabernacle in some random Valley.
    Posts

    4,843

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    So we understand each other. Let's avoid pretending the contrary.
    Your looking at half of what I am saying. Your claiming people don't follow trends, they just play entirely on external factors. I am saying that I agree those factors exist, but that also trends matter. Regardless of your personal belief in them.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    No I don't. I can post an image with the elaboration, though
    https://imgur.com/a/p4613LV
    Thats good enough, thanks.
    It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spam View Post
    Do not make fun of lands masters, they've spent many years mastering the punishing fire technique in the secret loam monastery. Do not mistake them with the miracles masters, eternal rivals, they won't like it.
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    Something about how fun it is pulling the wings off flies and microwaving the neighbors cat?

  18. #20338
    Member
    talpa's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2016
    Location

    Italy
    Posts

    141

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    Your looking at half of what I am saying. Your claiming people don't follow trends, they just play entirely on external factors. I am saying that I agree those factors exist, but that also trends matter. Regardless of your personal belief in them.
    No, I was implying that I was exaggerating when saying trends don't exist at all. I just think that the REAL trends in magic are way more difficult to exactly identify than someone seems to think

  19. #20339

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    All Talpa argument's are personal arguments, theory that has to be proven (italy metagame data where are? prove wiht an aggregate data please) and his own percpetion so it's just moving the focus from the point.



    At the moment the point is:

    Is blue shell always in more than 50% of the top8? why?
    Is blue shell chosen by more player than other shells? why?
    Is the format wrapped around blue shell? why?

  20. #20340
    Some dipshit of a Moderator.
    Dice_Box's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    A Tabernacle in some random Valley.
    Posts

    4,843

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    No, I was implying that I was exaggerating when saying trends don't exist at all. I just think that the REAL trends in magic are way more difficult to exactly identify than someone seems to think
    No, I don't think so. Not to sound like I am against you on everything, I just, I don't think so.

    Avacyn Restored comes out May of 2012. Miracles gets 163 points that month (Its more Countertop Control then real Miracles). Mav and Threash get the lion share. This holds kind of steady for long time, no one really having worked out the best shell for the deck. Early 2014 this changes. People know what the build is, shit turns and the trend picks up. The deck flys and it will leave the DTB totals twice until the removal of Top from the format. You can see where the tread starts, where it picks up and where it is adapted.

    That was not hard for me to work out, I just opened my spreadsheet and had a look. Trends in Magic are not hard to spot. Card Prices, deck retention, win percentages and other decks dropping off are all really easy to see in the data. Because we have so much of it. Would you like a copy of what I have? You might find it all useful.
    It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spam View Post
    Do not make fun of lands masters, they've spent many years mastering the punishing fire technique in the secret loam monastery. Do not mistake them with the miracles masters, eternal rivals, they won't like it.
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    Something about how fun it is pulling the wings off flies and microwaving the neighbors cat?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1089 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1089 guests)