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 1056 of 1069 FirstFirst ... 56556956100610461052105310541055105610571058105910601066 ... LastLast
Results 21,101 to 21,120 of 21365

Thread: All B/R update speculation.

  1. #21101
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    I read through the recent discussion and again I get the impression that posts represent two groups of players: those who care more about how games play out and a bit less about format diversity, and those who care more about format diversity and a bit less about how games play out.

    When players who like one aspect don't understand the qualities asked for by another group, then we get a detailed discussion on technical aspects that don't consider the greater picture.

    Edit: every deck does what it can to reduce its variance, or rather to control its variance. Be that Brainstorm, GSZ, Gamble, 35 Merfolk or whatever. That's fine, or well up for discussion, but when one consistency tool (any tool really as indicated by Deathrite, though there were options) ends up ruining deck diversity it is probably not fine.

    The aspects I mentioned above, format diversity and how games play out, can be detailed and expanded on. For example, play experience is another aspect, how different decks feel when they play out their strategies.

    ...

    Now just an observation, a bit long, but this is just peripheral to my main point which is above. Not sure about its relevance, but it's providing a perspective on the discussion. I think that players who enjoy playing a current dtb are probably more inclined to enjoy the tactical and technical aspects of playing, we can compare it with chess-like qualities, they probably play a cantrip shell, and the players who value format diversity, creativity and strategy of the game they tend to play some decks that are not in the dtb section (these qualities are not covered by poker or chess it seems). If you play a dtb then you are enjoying your games because you get what you want out of the game and you have a good shot at doing well in a competitive setting such as a GP and you keep winning over non-dtb's. While if you are in the second group, you are likely playing a less competitive deck and you may be less content with how your efforts at deck building tend to lead to losses to the dtb's.

    This is a natural relationship between dtb's and other decks, but the question is maybe how static those dtb's are, and how large the gap is to the non-dtb's. Like, how often does a non-dtb top8 or win a large tournament? Also, if the gap is too large, will group 2 decrease as people give up on playing non-dtb's? How will this affect the enjoyment of games for group 1 players? If everyone plays grixis control, grixis delver, miracles, ant, elves, eldrazi and turbo depths, for example, is this a problem for the format? I think actually, we probably were approaching that, the convergence of dtb's, with grixis control and grixis delver before the deathrite ban, only the hardcore group 1 players seemed to be enjoying the constant deathrite mirrors and the format was not enjoyable for a large group of players. Similarly Countertop Miracles was too dominant for too long in my view.

    Hmm, I'd argue that the convergence of dtb's being an unpleasant experience for most players illustrates that an opposite development, with a substantial widening of the dtb's, would be very enjoyable for most players.
    While i appreciate this post and your perspective, there is still a small but noticable point you left out. One section accepts what legacy is and the other is trying to argue that legacy should be something else. The 2nd group has some people that have actually left the format. The 1st group soldiers on and attempts to reconcile how the format works. One is engaged and will likely continue to be engaged. The 2nd is unengaged and is likely to continue in that direction. I have immense respect for people with tenacity. I don't look down on people leaving the format, quite different actually. I feel sad, almost melancholy, because when they leave they take their experience away from the community. I understand its about appraoch to the format, but there is a practical effect as well.
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  2. #21102
    Member
    mistercakes's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2009
    Location

    Berlin
    Posts

    1,743

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Megadeus View Post
    So basically decks that have been powercreeped out of the format either by raw efficiency of the cantrip decks or by the power level of blue non cantrip cards.
    Nonóblue powered decks tend to be pretty easily hated out after sb. For everything else, isnt that why people are still on this thread?
    -rob

  3. #21103
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    425

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Well thanks for your comments, I definitely appreciate both of yours too! I appreciate all polite comments really.. Sorry for slow answering, whenever I make a long post a part of me regrets using my time for that and I stay away a while. (Love the discussion though)

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
    One section accepts what legacy is and the other is trying to argue that legacy should be something else. The 2nd group has some people that have actually left the format.
    Well, I must respectfully disagree with this reappearing description (maybe it's not what you meant here, sorry then, but I'll take the opportunity to address it now) that people who want to make small changes to the format are somehow less entitled to this than those who want a status quo; this is what WotC do repeatedly to improve the format (most players even seem to like most of it once it's a fact) and actually I think every change they have made has been protested when discussed here prior to bannings using this argument that people who want to improve the format don't belong and should play something else (well this was certainly not in your post). If anything, WotC's constant rearrangements of the format should indicate that people who want to keep oppressive cards in the format are actually the ones who are out of touch with what the format represents. Tl;dr: just let people argue for what they think is good for the format (whether that is change or not).

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety
    The 2nd group has some people that have actually left the format. The 1st group soldiers on and attempts to reconcile how the format works. One is engaged and will likely continue to be engaged. The 2nd is unengaged and is likely to continue in that direction.
    I think you are introducing a third group here, right, the players who actually left due to discontent with format management. Lots of players from group 2 stay and innovate in the face of seemingly unbeatable decks (well it is relatively fine now, but there have been previous times with more uphill battles vs certain dtb's). And I imagine some players from group 1 leave due to getting bored with the format too.

    Quote Originally Posted by Zombie
    tl;dr I love engines and the engine counts from mistercakes' listing are miserable:

    116 Cantrips
    13 Knight of the Reliquary
    11 Redundancy
    8 Vial
    7 Loam
    6 Ancestral/Cascade
    4 Elves
    4 Oddball
    3 Standstill
    3 Dredge
    Without analyzing this carefully (where the data comes from) at first glance it looks like one engine is superbly overrepresented. A valid comment though is that what you use the engine for makes a difference on how games play out or feel. Despite this I still think, which I've argued a few times here, that if something could suppress the dominance of the cantrip shell that would open room for the format to flourish (even more). Not destroy the cantrip shell, just reduce its dominance a small bit.

  4. #21104

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post

    Without analyzing this carefully at first glance it looks like one engine is superbly overrepresented. A valid comment though is that what you use the engine for makes a difference on how games play out or feel. Despite this I still think, which I've argued a few times here, that if something could suppress the dominance of the cantrip shell that would open room for the format to flourish (even more). Not destroy the cantrip shell, just reduce its dominance a small bit.
    Cantrips see the most play because they are the most flexible and most accommodating, and by association their access to counterspells, and every other good blue thing makes the package way, way more appealing for other strategies to adopt for consistency than any other engine currently in the game. Off the top of my head, every other engine needs to be built around (elves/dredge synergies, loam with lands, most tutors are very specific, and sol land/ chalice to a lesser extent), none of these other strategies are anywhere near as flexible as cantrips which has found a home in everything ranging from ant to ru delver to miracles. It is the closest thing to 'one size fits all' for legacy.

  5. #21105
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    425

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    @Phonics: good point. Need to consider that and look at the data again.

    Edit : I think, maybe, a reasonable way to interpret what you're saying is that it's just verifying the cantrip shell's dominance. Blue has access to this generic shell, counterspells and great threats. This leads to convergence of the meta I think. Which I argued is bad for format health. I still need to look into the data though.

    Edit2: this just leads to the same question of meta diversity, doesn't it, is the glass half full or half empty, when you can play SnT, Storm, Miracles, Grixis Control, and Grixis Delver supported by the cantrip shell, and a few other decks, is this a meaningfully diverse meta? I guess this leads back to my first post on how different players request different things from the format and maybe a meaningful evaluation considers how possible it is to win or top8 a large tournament with another deck than the dtb's. I'm writing and thinking fast now so maybe way off..

  6. #21106
    It's not easy being green

    Join Date

    Jul 2010
    Posts

    1,624

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    Without analyzing this carefully (where the data comes from) at first glance it looks like one engine is superbly overrepresented. A valid comment though is that what you use the engine for makes a difference on how games play out or feel. Despite this I still think, which I've argued a few times here, that if something could suppress the dominance of the cantrip shell that would open room for the format to flourish (even more). Not destroy the cantrip shell, just reduce its dominance a small bit.
    mistercakes said he collected decklists from the last 22 Legacy GPs - the listing goes very far back, as evidenced by eg. Standstill decks, and was done a few pages back during an argument about what the historical trend has been.

    The problem with suppressing the dominance of the cantrip shell is - how? If you do it by deck selection, it basically means Thalia and Chalice and a rather inbred metagame. The other direction means bans, and probably more than most of us are comfortable with because Xerox is fundamentally the best way to play the game. A cantrip has to, at face value, "read bad" and look like a bad card and then it's maybe fine. A cantrip with good optics is probably just broken. Rich Shay's brief article about Mentor-Xerox decks in Vintage is still worth a read. To see just how things go, Pauper decks now look like Legacy ones - not just "okay they play cantrips", but basically being Bizarro to Superman:

    UB Delver

    //Maindeck:
    4 Delver of Secrets
    4 Augur of Bolas
    4 Gurmag Angler

    4 Brainstorm
    4 Preordain
    3 Gitaxian Probe
    3 Gush

    3 Counterspell
    4 Daze
    3 Foil

    1 Disfigure
    3 Echoing Decay
    3 Snuff Out

    1 Ash Barrens
    3 Terramorphic Expanse
    3 Evolving Wilds

    8 Snow-Covered Island
    2 Snow-Covered Swamp


    //Sideboard:
    4 Hydroblast
    2 Annul
    2 Dispel
    1 Faerie Macabre
    2 Relic of Progenitus
    1 Shrivel
    3 Stormbound Geist

    The second problem with bans "around" the shell is that the cantrip shell is in some ways incredibly generic in what it enables: You can tag a GSZ target and hit a certain kind of green deck pretty surgically, but Xerox shells care only that cards are efficient, cheap to cast and good on their own. An eternal format by nature accumulates those cards. It was far easier to nerf Shardless or Jund because their lynchpin cards were relatively unique than it is to do jacksquat to Xerox dominance without attacking the engine itself.

    If we look at nonblue decks in Legacy and which of Shay's criteria they fulfill:
    Eldrazi: Goes under, goes over the top, taxes/locks out. Probably no wonder they are consistently DTB.
    Lands: Goes over the top, taxes.
    D&T: Taxes/locks out, a bit of going over the top in some cases.
    Elves: Goes over the top, with the occasional goes under fast combo hand.
    Dredge: What is this "Magic" you speak of? Fast, over the top.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemnear
    (On Innistrad)
    Yeah, an insanely powerful block which put the "derp!" factor in Legacy completely over the top.

  7. #21107
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Well, I must respectfully disagree with this reappearing description (maybe it's not what you meant here, sorry then, but I'll take the opportunity to address it now) that people who want to make small changes to the format are somehow less entitled to this than those who want a status quo; this is what WotC do repeatedly to improve the format (most players even seem to like most of it once it's a fact) and actually I think every change they have made has been protested when discussed here prior to bannings using this argument that people who want to improve the format don't belong and should play something else (well this was certainly not in your post). If anything, WotC's constant rearrangements of the format should indicate that people who want to keep oppressive cards in the format are actually the ones who are out of touch with what the format represents. Tl;dr: just let people argue for what they think is good for the format (whether that is change or not).
    I apologize if I was unclear. I wasn't using a blanket categorization. I meant there are some in these groups you mentioned that are doing this. There are folks that are fine with the format, and yet don't see it in a real way because their preferred deck was blue since the beginning (for example.) So they are fine with the format, but don't see it for what it is. There are folks that perpetually play non-blue decks but see the format for exactly what it is and attempt to find a way around it, for some reason (love of a strategy, exploiting a known quantity, etc.) Then there are folks that prefer blue, for whatever reason, and have a clear picture of the format and can reasonably get behind the 'small changes' you mention (which I'm not clear on yet.) Then there are folks that don't play blue, don't recognize the format, and are actively trying to petition for change to suit their view of what it should be. My point isn't about generalizing or oversimplifying; it's that there is another element to your discussion, that being some people recognize the format as it is and some don't. Some people are pragmatic, some are idealistic (still too general, but getting closer.) These aren't categories, these are attributes that affect your categories. A good example is a new Legacy player, let me be non-pc, someone younger that doesn't have experience with the changes over time. And yet, they have the format figured out and call for drastic change. New perspectives are great, but truly learn the landscape before suggesting changes. On the flip side of the coin are old (I'm old, I admit it) players that want 'the good old days' of when zoo and High Tide were competitive decks. Ban some shit so we can get back to that! Both are using an entitlement mindset, and both are wrong.

    What are these small changes you speak of? We need a definition. I would argue banning a card would not be a small change but rather a big change. I would say small changes are: new cards printed that are strict upgrades to older cards, unbanning 'safe' cards (Black Vise, Worldgorger Dragon, speculation on Mind Twist and Earthcraft), and printing new cards that create new archetypes (Eldrazi and Ruby Storm are the ones that come to mind, even though the card that birthed Ruby Storm isn't played in it anymore, Hazoret's Undying Fury.) These are small changes to the format. Ask anyone, in any group you care to describe, if they are against these small changes. I think you know the answer is 'no'. So what other small changes are you suggesting?


    TL;DR - I'm not blanket categorizing, I'm saying a true understanding, or the lack of it, of the format informs perspectives. I welcome debates about the format, I love a good argument for change. We all need to keep in mind there are things that just won't change, ever. Brainstorm isn't going anywere. Blue will always be good, favored even, in the metagame. We need to see legacy for what it is, affect what we can affect, and stop trying to change things that are clearly never going to. I firmly believe that once we see the format for what it is, we will relax and enjoy it. Tackle some of those small changes and keep it growing.
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  8. #21108

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    This just leads to the same question of meta diversity, doesn't it, is the glass half full or half empty, when you can play SnT, Storm, Miracles, Grixis Control, and Grixis Delver supported by the cantrip shell, and a few other decks, is this a meaningfully diverse meta?
    Yes.

  9. #21109

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    This just leads to the same question of meta diversity, doesn't it, is the glass half full or half empty, when you can play SnT, Storm, Miracles, Grixis Control, and Grixis Delver supported by the cantrip shell, and a few other decks, is this a meaningfully diverse meta?
    Yes

  10. #21110
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    425

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    @Zombie & Mr. Safety: how great that you ask the same question, I'll be able to answer both of you in one message. :) However, it'll have to wait a while. Anyway, discussing how to improve the format is a separate discussion, I was mostly trying to give some input to the question that some people don't understand why a change would be needed at all.

    @taconaut & WashableWater1: hehe, I wrote a post recently trying to explain how some people think so and some people think otherwise, and how this may be motivated by players having different appreciation of values related to the format. Also, the format is, like I said, relatively fine now, I'm fine with waiting to see what shape it takes when stabilizing. Though I still think it can be improved, too.

  11. #21111
    Member
    talpa's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2016
    Location

    Italy
    Posts

    128

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    There are folks that are fine with the format, and yet don't see it in a real way because their preferred deck was blue since the beginning (for example.) So they are fine with the format, but don't see it for what it is
    I reply since it almost seems to me as a debate with creationists
    Or maybe this blue fanatics do see the format for what it is, and simply denounce the opposite POW exaggerations (maybe sometimes exaggerating on their own).
    And by the way, not just the format but THE GAME was blue since 1994 (I discovered it only then ) with ancestral recalls and counterspells, so maybe they don't like when someone speaks of the old good days where blue wasn't dominant (ok, I get that delver and nemesis are new things and I don't particularly like them, but still).




    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    Blue will always be good, favored even, in the metagame. We need to see legacy for what it is



    oh and by the way
    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    when you can play SnT, Storm, Miracles, Grixis Control, and Grixis Delver supported by the cantrip shell, and a few other decks, is this a meaningfully diverse meta? I guess this leads back to my first post on how different players request different things from the format and
    Yes.
    And I think you're right in pointing out that different people have different priorities.

  12. #21112
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    @Zombie & Mr. Safety: how great that you ask the same question, I'll be able to answer both of you in one message. :) However, it'll have to wait a while. Anyway, discussing how to improve the format is a separate discussion, I was mostly trying to give some input to the question that some people don't understand why a change would be needed at all.
    I look forward to it! This allows for productive conversation.

    Also:

    This just leads to the same question of meta diversity, doesn't it, is the glass half full or half empty, when you can play SnT, Storm, Miracles, Grixis Control, and Grixis Delver supported by the cantrip shell, and a few other decks, is this a meaningfully diverse meta?
    Let me be the 3rd to chime in with 'yes'.
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  13. #21113
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    425

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by talpa View Post
    I reply since it almost seems to me as a debate with creationists
    Well, that is basically my point. People have different values, and in a discussion based on values it is hard to convince others. We need to understand what different values people have or it's very hard to understand why we have different opinions. I think it is similar with religion, like you noted, and politics too for that matter.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    I look forward to it! This allows for productive conversation.
    So, in my view, this discussion is fine but it's not as important as motivating why this discussion is relevant. The challenge is explaining why/that it is ok to have a different opinion.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    Let me be the 3rd to chime in with 'yes'.
    I've also written many times now that I think the meta is relatively fine. When three people feel like they need to add this, I realize I failed at making my point in the previous posts. ;) Which is ok.

  14. #21114
    Member
    mistercakes's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2009
    Location

    Berlin
    Posts

    1,743

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    I think it's hard to say that something like cantrips are objectively better than other strategies is an opinion.

    I also feel like every time Talpa wants to make an argument, he's making them very personal and not so objective.
    -rob

  15. #21115
    Member
    Mr. Safety's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2010
    Location

    New Gloucester, Maine, USA
    Posts

    3,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    Well, that is basically my point. People have different values, and in a discussion based on values it is hard to convince others. We need to understand what different values people have or it's very hard to understand why we have different opinions. I think it is similar with religion, like you noted, and politics too for that matter.
    He stole that from me!


    So, in my view, this discussion is fine but it's not as important as motivating why this discussion is relevant. The challenge is explaining why/that it is ok to have a different opinion.
    I would argue that any productive discussion is better than the shitshow this thread has become in the past. Why is this discussion relevant? Because the people engaged in it make it relevant.

    I've also written many times now that I think the meta is relatively fine. When three people feel like they need to add this, I realize I failed at making my point in the previous posts. ;) Which is ok.
    I missed that sentiment, sorry for being so thick!
    I am counted amongst legions of the unrighteous
    who dread not being immersed in pits of fire

  16. #21116

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    @Phonics: good point. Need to consider that and look at the data again.

    Edit : I think, maybe, a reasonable way to interpret what you're saying is that it's just verifying the cantrip shell's dominance. Blue has access to this generic shell, counterspells and great threats. This leads to convergence of the meta I think. Which I argued is bad for format health. I still need to look into the data though.

    Edit2: this just leads to the same question of meta diversity, doesn't it, is the glass half full or half empty, when you can play SnT, Storm, Miracles, Grixis Control, and Grixis Delver supported by the cantrip shell, and a few other decks, is this a meaningfully diverse meta? I guess this leads back to my first post on how different players request different things from the format and maybe a meaningful evaluation considers how possible it is to win or top8 a large tournament with another deck than the dtb's. I'm writing and thinking fast now so maybe way off..
    You're right, I wasn't necessarily making an argument for or against anything, but just stating that it is natural for the format to progress the way that it has. The design 'restriction' of cantrips is that they require everything else in the deck to be very efficient because what they give in consistency they take with tempo. As WOTC prints more and more efficient cards as they have done over the past decade, it is only natural that cantrips become more dominant. Until WOTC decides to give other colors access to way better card selection this will be the norm. Printing a bunch of very good blue cards (specifically creatures) along the way certainly didnt hurt either.

  17. #21117
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    425

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Safety View Post
    I would argue that any productive discussion is better than the shitshow this thread has become in the past. Why is this discussion relevant? Because the people engaged in it make it relevant.
    I was trying to address some of the shit show, so to speak. By helping people understand why you would want to change the format, hopefully they can act a bit more rationally, maybe respectfully. Discussing how you actually accomplish this change is a separate discussion, and while interesting I will not jump into that right now. :)

    Edit: I guess I also consider it more productive to try to change people's attitudes than to discuss hypothetical scenarios [edit: on how to manage the format] that we have no control over. Not that I mind that, just, some other time.

    I missed that sentiment, sorry for being so thick!
    Well, I should probably apologize for not being more clear, but I'm kind of torn and really consider the glass both half full and half empty at the same time, as opposed to full or empty; it's kind of good, better than in some time, but not great, also not horrible.
    Last edited by pettdan; 01-08-2019 at 11:16 AM.

  18. #21118
    Bob Ross
    Kap'n Cook's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2012
    Location

    West Coast
    Posts

    521

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Would anyone actually be against switching out counterbalance for top? I never understood the original ban decision, where they basically blamed the players, instead of looking at their horribly implemented rules. Wizards is always trying to play up the 'fun' aspect of Magic, and uses it in their banning decisions. If that's the case, why is a two blue mana, zero activation, non-symmetrical hardlock the card that stays in the format? At least chalice forces design restrictions and is purposely built to prey on cards like brainstorm/top. TNN has to go as well. This was designed right when commander was starting to get huge. It was a corporate profit-push to get new commander product out, and some guy who doesn't play Legacy ended up being on the design team. I don't think its too much to ask wizards to acknowledge they don't always know what some random corner of their company is about to put out, and to remove dumb cards for ones people like to play.

    I also think everyone already forgot that before the design abominations that were miracle cards, Sensei Top wasn't overpowered. Top was a deceptively large mana sink that took a while before seeing a return on your mana investment. Even without top, current Miracles decks are doing the exact same thing pre-ban old miracles decks were doing. Blue has been given enough tools that they will always be able to control the top of their library for counterbalance now, and the only difference is that instead looking at the top 3, miracles just draws three now. Predict+Accumulated Knowledge is no different than Sensei Top, and might be better for flashback/dodging chalice, since the payoff cards are always Snapcaster/Swords/Jace/Terminus. My quick aside on Miracles cards is that why haven't they been errata'd yet to only trigger during your own draw step? Forsythe???

    The format stagnated back into this cantrip morass because they removed non-blue midrange's only viable selection tool, in order to protect the underlying agenda of pushing the Blue-White shell. Grixis control is just the latest flavor of blue-jund, successor of shardless bug and esper stoneblade. I would wager that Miracles right now is stronger than it would be if Counterbalance was gone instead. If you fix the miracle mistake and just ban balance for top, the format opens back up towards its natural Brainstorm/Chalice/LED/Top/Wasteland ebb and flow.

    At the very least, the select few can keep believing they only lost with Doomsday because they couldn't figure out the line in time.

    I wouldn't be surprised either if at some point the community says fuck it and takes the banned list into its own hands, like Old School. If that ever becomes the case, i want in on the council.

    And while we're at it, #FreeNedleeds2019
    Strawberry Shortcake

    http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...erry-Shortcake

    What a brainstorm do? Draw card and activate on draw effects fix hand, removing woods
    #FreeNedleeds

  19. #21119
    Member
    merfolkotpt's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jul 2009
    Location

    Cleveland
    Posts

    102

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    I think part of the reason they hit Top instead of CB was because of the tournament time thing. Slow players playing top are excruciating (reduce the fun). That being said I agree CB and/or terminus might have been the more oppressive and less widely used cards. I don't think Wizards is going to change their mind about this ban anytime soon, even though I miss Top.
    @turingTested on twitter
    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    これは水である。

  20. #21120

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by merfolkotpt View Post
    I think part of the reason they hit Top instead of CB was because of the tournament time thing.
    This is the "wallpapering" Kap'n Cook was talking about.

    Tournaments still have rounds that go to time even with Top gone - slow players are slow players, it's not about the card itself. All it takes is one match going long for the round for everyone to have to wait.

    The reason they banned top was similar to why they banned Probe - there's a huge number of players that just have an irrational hatred for it, so banning it is probably net positive for players' attitude about the format, because the group that liked Top/Probe is much smaller than the contingent that hates them.

    That being said, as others have pointed out with data, it's still possible that Miracles was too good and needed some sort of ban as an independent issue; choosing to get rid of Top lets Wizards do both the nerf and the "feel-good" ban at the same time, even if it was a bummer for a lot of other cool non-miracles decks like Painter.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)