Brainstorm
Force of Will
Lion's Eye Diamond
Counterbalance
Sensei's Divining Top
Tarmogoyf
Phyrexian Dreadnaught
Goblin Lackey
Standstill
Natural Order
Why are we talking about Divine Intervention? It's Dark Depths with the exceptions of needing Hexmage/Hex Parasite, way more counterable pieces, and it draws the game instead of winning. Much closer to Depths than Shahrazad by my estimation. The total number of pieces is the relevant comparison, Shahrazad is a 1-card combo whose only build-around cost is white mana - the point of the card in paper events would be to win game 1, then time out the match.
@MaximumC there is no evidence to support the claim that Divine Intervention would be banned at cost - it still requires build-around. Look at the inverse 6 colorless mana discount scenario: Counterbalance versus Decree of Silence. Certainly Counterbalance is a ridiculously higher ceiling than enchantment that says "counter opponent's next 3 spells" - but people would [mistakenly] think 6-dicounted Decree is more oppressive than Counterbalance, it would be banned, and Counterbalance would remain unbanned. Why? One of those requires build-around.
If Divine Intervention vs Shahrazad is really worth talking about a huge poing against the latter is the reconstruction of the game, you aren't just wasting time playing an extra match, you then have to rewind back to the game state as Shahrazad was casted, this is already time consuming if no information are hidden, but if players have cards in hand and/or know the position of certain cards in the deck you are forced to call a third person to track them as shahrazad resolves, this could potentially mean that a judge has to come, list both hands and all the cards in a determinate position in the decks (cards on the bottom due to a terminus, card on top after a cantrip, potentially the entire deck can be in a precise order or you can end up with a bunch of really boring to track patterns like a 5 creature terminus into a cascade into another terminus) and then hold those information until the subgame ends, and shahrazade decks plans to cast the card as many times as possible and each time the process must be done again.
In a tournament scenario this could lead to disaster is just a bunch of people chose to pick this strategy, the card may look like just a silly cool one with no use like goblin game, but shahrazad has really the potential to make the cut in control decks as a tool to basicly just have to win game 1 against any slowish opponent.
In a time waste scale from 1 to 10 shahrazad is by far the 10 , no card comes close, divine intervention has the potential to stall the game but is probably on a worldgorger loop level, with the great "malus" to be simply unplayable in any legit tournament deck, sensei's divining top is not even close to be as time consuming as those card if used as intented.
I would argue that the main problem with top isnt time consumption, is just the card being broken and really obnoxious to play against in many ways.
Sucks that this game cant have fixes like hearthstone does, i think that many legacy staples could get nerfed into a more healty state, im not pro bans, but i see top being a more streamlined card with the tap effect removed for example, i see the game getting better with a bunch of those tweeks, as most legacy cards are in fact design flaws in the first place.
"You either die a Onesto-Player, or live long enough to see yourself become a Dredger"
Not everybody would agree that nerfing Legacy staples would be a good thing. Every deck that's unfair, plus half the fair decks, are running something that would be OP in any format besides Vintage (and in some cases OP in Vintage too). That's part of Legacy's charm and how it stays healthy.
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 a few cards I think would be better with a tweak or two, but the point of eternal formats is you get to play with the mistakes.
That's not how Shahrazad works: "Players play a MAGIC subgame, using their libraries as their decks."
=> you just set aside and keep both hands, grave, gamestate and use your libraries to play. It can be a space problem, but probably manageable.
On the Shahrazad issues in tournaments:
- power level: In WR burn, the card would be very brutal
- time issues: a lot of draws, and how do you manage the 5 additional turns?
Is this the end of the road for Miracles?
http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/ban-miracles
Unlikely. This has come up before. There was the "Ban Top" "Don't Ban Top" thing they did before too. Basily, does it get views? Yes? That's why its on the site. Will it have an impact? I can not remember the last time and article had an impact on the Legacy ban list. Not since 09 when I came back that is for sure.
Most likely nothing gets banned, which I wouldn't really mind. If they do ban something, hopefully it's Terminus or Mentor. Both of those cards let Miracles do things control decks probably shouldn't be able to do, but aren't integral to its existence.
I don't really want them to touch Top or Counterbalance. They're obnoxious cards, but they define the deck and make it viable. If they get banned, Miracles becomes, what, Stoneblade? Also, it'd be shitty if all of us Quinn/Painter/12-Post/etc players got hit by a Top ban .
I hope they ban terminus... Supreme Verdict is a good card that actually used to be played as a 1-of in miracles decks. A counterbalance ban would kill the deck because playing traditional draw-go control in legacy will lead to failure(I know this because I have tried it before).
Terminus is at best a good card, the power level is laughable if you compared it to a card that is actually ban-worthy like: Yawgmoth's Will. This is not modern, we don't ban cards merely for being good - please make points that illustrate a quality of life (like Goblin Recruiter) or power level problem.
The two cards at the top of the list, based on power level, are SDT and Counterbalance. There is also a quality of life issue of having people's time wasted; while SDT enables time-wasting, it is Counterbalance which incentivizes >1 spin between draw steps.
What is truly insidious about the 'ban Terminus' arguments is that they use "x beats Counterbalance, so it's ok" and fail to apply that same logic to Terminus. Beyond that logical fallacy, you don't even need to run creatures to be top tier in legacy...on the flip side it is not possible to have a game actions-only deck be top tier in legacy. Now it's one thing be upset about a card like Terminus to the point of being unreasonable, but it's quite another to tell everyone who plays combo and/or a responsible mana curve to play magic like you do (grindy, fair, x-for-y removal) in order to make Counterbalance ok.
There are multiple ways to play legacy competitively, if your fix is "play magic/decks like I do" then at least own up to the fact that Miracles (specifically Counterbalance) is diversity-killing and you're casting your vote for less diversity in the format. To be clear, being anti-diversity in legacy is a valid viewpoint - just be sure to pair coherent logic with that controversial stance.
By completely getting rid of a deck you are going to make tons of people mad. Just look at how mad everyone was when Twin got banned in modern. All those people who have played miracles actively for years are going to be really pissed that it doesn't exist anymore. Also Miracles is the only blue control deck that exists in legacy right now and by banning it completely the diversity of the format will take a hit. Instead we need to weaken the deck so it is still present and viable but isn't too powerful and popular. There is not a problem with banning Terminus, I don't care if its less powerful as Yawgmoth's Will, 1 mana instant speed board wipes are so much better than the standard 4 mana sorcery speed board wipes that it isn't even funny. And this is irrelevant because the goal of a ban list is to make a format enjoyable, not to include only iconic powerhouse cards.
Ban Top, unban Drain.Also Miracles is the only blue control deck that exists in legacy right now and by banning it completely the diversity of the format will take a hit.
"I'm willing to imagine a TES where Past in Flames replaces Ill-Gotten Gains entirely, and we just don't play Diminishing Returns." - me, 29/09/2011
Founding member of Team Scrubbad: Legacy Legends
Top is used in many legacy decks that are already tier 2 and shooting top will make them even worse and therefore reduce diversity in the format
Ban counterbalance unban drain is a better idea
Edit: although both these ideas have a high chance of killing control in legacy... 2 mana counterspells are inefficient in legacy
the safest route to balancing Miracles is just to ban terminus...
Ok so right there, modern mentality. This isn't modern.
You're skipping ahead into the area of questions like:
-when did it become unreasonable to lose a card to counter a spell
-do we really want legacy to turn into a game where I cast x and then cast y, and because of that I won (if that's the case, unban Time Vault, at least a player can concede to this)
We don't play eternal magic to ban/restrict cards for being good in-game, you need a metric that distances the conclusion from subjectively disliking a card - otherwise we're just discussing personal feelings, which by design is only valid to an audience of one.
Bans don't exist to weaken decks here, we didn't ban DTT to weaken Omnitell nor did we ban Treasure Cruise to weaken UR/RUG Delver.
maybe im just stupid but i have no idea what this "-when did it become unreasonable to lose a card to counter a spell" has to do with anything we are discussing right now.
"-do we really want legacy to turn into a game where I cast x and then cast y, and because of that I won (if that's the case, unban Time Vault, at least a player can concede to this)" this is an EXTREME exaggeration... unlike other combos SDT+CB does not win you the game... there is a bunch of removal that destroys CB(and of course counterspells that counter it and hand disruption but that is the case for every combo) and this combo does not deal with permanents already in play when the combo was assembled nor does it deal with 3+ cmc cards slipping past the lock(not to mention the occasional 2cmc).
"Bans don't exist to weaken decks here" ??? then why do bans exist? because a card is played too much(which is an idiotic reason and Mental Misstep shouldn't have been banned in my opinion)? i think bans exist to make a format more enjoyable to play which means increasing diversity which can only be done by bans and unbans(and WotC printing cards for legacy but this would be a HORRIBLE idea because power creep would kill the game too quickly)
I have a nasty feeling that a stupid banning is coming due to miracle's success. They banned survival for the same dominance.
However, the right course of action is to unban cards to give other decks tools. I wish Wotc would take this philosophy. They should unban Earthcraft and Survival.
Notice, how Worldgorger dragon and black vise have not even made an appearance. Wotc is too conservative.
I know this is an internet forum, but for the love of god, please use appropriate capitalization and punctuation. Go on whatever pot-banging, circle jerking rant your little heart desires, but for fuck's sake, at least pay some respect to the conventions of written language.
EDIT: Probably should have posted this in the drunk thread. Move along.
Agree with the sentiment, but in the future please just report problematic posts rather than posting about them yourself. Thanks. -zilla
1- you are the one who dredged up the myth about 'control can only exist with the card Counterbalance'
2- the Time Vault comparison is not that extreme to a huge segment of the legacy community that plays combo and/or responsible mana curves. Simply because a fair, removal-based deck isn't as profoundly affected doesn't invalidate the problem. If we use your logic, I can flippantly tell you to play ANT and Terminus won't be a problem - in short you aren't going to prove a point by telling people to play legacy like you do.
3- you immediately moved to talk about increasing diversity in legacy when the point you just made in your last paragraph was to effectively tell people to play fair decks.
There are currently 1988 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1988 guests)