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 1114 of 1178 FirstFirst ... 11461410141064110411101111111211131114111511161117111811241164 ... LastLast
Results 22,261 to 22,280 of 23542

Thread: All B/R update speculation.

  1. #22261
    A short, sturdy creature fond of drink and industry.
    PirateKing's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2011
    Location

    BEST JERSEY
    Posts

    1,731

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    I think both because the 5-0 lists are single point data and that the list in whole is curated, the only good use of these kind of updates from Wizards is to showcase the interesting and obscure.
    Anything beyond is hubris.
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatWhale View Post
    Gross, other formats. I puked in my mouth a little.

  2. #22262
    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 PirateKing View Post
    I think both because the 5-0 lists are single point data and that the list in whole is curated, the only good use of these kind of updates from Wizards is to showcase the interesting and obscure.
    Anything beyond is hubris.
    Right, in one sense, you can think of the whole list as only edge cases. This makes sense, because really there is almost never a balancing 0-5, since almost everyone drops at, say, 0-3. So, it really isn't exactly a zero sum game. I guess in another sense, this means that it is actually a bit "harder" to 5-0, because you are more likely facing someone with an even to winning record than someone with a losing one. In that respect, it does sort of make it somewhat akin to a swiss tournament, but certainly not the same.

    Aside that, we have something like a classic problem of induction (generalization), which I am certainly not qualified to really excavate in any real way. Suffice to say, it might work sometimes, with large enough data sets, but maybe not particularly well all the time and it is hard to say exactly what those which times are which without a ton of data and analysis (and likely some quantization of things almost impossible to quantize).
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  3. #22263
    Member

    Join Date

    Sep 2011
    Posts

    4,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by PirateKing View Post
    60 Forests: 5-0 record.
    Suboptimal tech.

    It should be 99 Mountains.
    With an awkward Ashling the Pilgrim in the Sideboard instead of the Command Zone.

    Then at least you can pretend you just registered for the wrong format.

  4. #22264
    Member
    Wanderlust's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jan 2006
    Location

    Boulder, CO
    Posts

    259

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by FTW View Post
    I think the problem is blue gets to play both aggro & control, which upsets that balance...

    ..I think the Legacy metagame was healthiest and most diverse before Delver was a thing...
    I agree. I think we're in trouble when all 6 of the most played threats in the format (and in fact 7 of the top 10) are blue. The below data is from mtgtop8.com from the past two months; the percentage is how many decks include at least one copy of the card. (I'm defining "threat" as any card that can win the game on its own.)

    1. Oko, Thief of Crowns (28.5%)
    2. Jace, the Mind Sculptor (18.3%)
    3. Delver of Secrets (17.4%)
    4. Snapcaster Mage (17.3%)
    5. Brazen Borrower (16.5%)
    6. Ice-fang Coatl (13.6%)

    7. Dreadhorde Arcanist (12.9%)
    8. Dryad Arbor (12%)
    9. Young Pyromancer (11.7%)

    10. True-Name Nemesis (9.4%)

    I would support an Oko ban: I think it's justified based on meta representation and misery of gameplay. Delver's not going to happen, but I sure would be happy for it to go too. (Hell, ban every blue card on the above list except Snapcaster Mage and I'd support it.)

  5. #22265
    Site Contributor

    Join Date

    Dec 2013
    Posts

    319

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by Wanderlust View Post
    Hell, ban every blue card on the above list except Snapcaster Mage and I'd support it.
    nah, you only need to ban ONE blue card and that list will change dramatically...

  6. #22266
    Member

    Join Date

    Sep 2011
    Posts

    4,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Of the 3 non-blue cards there, 2 of them are basically blue. Dreadhorde Arcanist and Young Pyromancer are splashable value engines for blue spell decks. They're as blue as Tarmogoyf.

    I wonder what would happen to the meta if they just banned Snow-Covered Island.
    It would weaken the stability of blue-based Astrolabe manabases and incidentally weaken cards like Oko, Ice Fang Coatl.. You could still run Astrolabe Oko, but it'd have to be a Forest-based deck. To stay blue you'd have to ditch Astrolabe and run duals.

  7. #22267
    Member

    Join Date

    Oct 2015
    Location

    Prague, CZ
    Posts

    85

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    People play blue threats because they play blue decks.
    People play blue decks because they want to play Brainstorm and have to play Force of Will.
    Ban all fast combo and print green brainstorm and people will start play green decks.

  8. #22268
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    704

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by jattra View Post
    People play blue threats because they play blue decks.
    People play blue decks because they want to play Brainstorm and have to play Force of Will.
    Ban all fast combo and print green brainstorm and people will start play green decks.
    I think you're missing that the blue threats also seem to be better than the non-blue threats, a point that has been put forward here on many occasions. Not only does the blue shell seem superior, the blue threats do too. It would be nice to see more non-blue threats with deck-building requirements that make them not easily splashable in blue. Like Leovold GWB or Thrun the Questing Beast. WotC are fairly active in printing new good threats, like Karn tGC which has been great for non-blue strategies like Painter and Bomberman. We just need more of those threats opening up for a variation of competitive strategies.

  9. #22269
    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 pettdan View Post
    I think you're missing that the blue threats also seem to be better than the non-blue threats, a point that has been put forward here on many occasions. Not only does the blue shell seem superior, the blue threats do too. It would be nice to see more non-blue threats with deck-building requirements that make them not easily splashable in blue. Like Leovold GWB or Thrun the Questing Beast. WotC are fairly active in printing new good threats, like Karn tGC which has been great for non-blue strategies like Painter and Bomberman. We just need more of those threats opening up for a variation of competitive strategies.
    How would you actually qualify that assertion though?

    Couldn't it well be the case that Blue threats "seem better" precisely because they are aided by Blue Cantrips and Blue disruption?
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  10. #22270
    A short, sturdy creature fond of drink and industry.
    PirateKing's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2011
    Location

    BEST JERSEY
    Posts

    1,731

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    How would you actually qualify that assertion though?

    Couldn't it well be the case that Blue threats "seem better" precisely because they are aided by Blue Cantrips and Blue disruption?
    That is a factor, yes, but you'd be naive to think that True-Name Nemesis in a two player game doesn't offers a value difficult to produce in other colors as a single all-in-one card.
    Heck, in the same set they printed Delver of Secrets they printed Reckless Waif at uncommon. That's as close to an apples to apples comparison as you can get.

    "BuT wHaT iF yOu DoN't PlAy InStAnTs AnD sOrCeRiEs??"

    Yeah, okay...
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatWhale View Post
    Gross, other formats. I puked in my mouth a little.

  11. #22271
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    704

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    How would you actually qualify that assertion though?

    Couldn't it well be the case that Blue threats "seem better" precisely because they are aided by Blue Cantrips and Blue disruption?
    I think the general sentiment whenever this topic is brought up is that the threats are obviously better, although to verify that one would need to put in some effort to come up with a method for validating that statement..

    I'll use the method of obviousness, first. Let's see how well that works, there is good reason to be skeptical. Oko is obviously the best threat, agreed? TNN is obviously the most resilient and cheap threat (cheap in relation to resilience), at least pre Plague Engineer. Delver of Secrets is obviously the most aggressive cheap threat with evasion. And Snapcaster Mage is obviously the most flexible card-advantage threat that lets you improve your deck's strengths based on your matchup (I mean doubling discard, counterspells or removal based on what you're playing against; any spell-based interaction, in short. Kind of like what Renegade Rallier does for permanents.). I think all of these threats are fairly obviously the best.. Fairly..

    Edit: I guess hate-bear style of threats would be non-blue though. Thalia, Guardian of Thraben taking a clear lead there. Eidolon of the Great Revels being pretty high up there too, and Collector Ouphe and Gaddock Teeg. This kind of non-blue threats lead to new archetypes, especially when they don't fit in a blue shell. But, none of these stand a chance on the battlefield vs the blue threats. They are mostly for interacting with the spells of other decks. They are ridiculously bad creature threats. Which isn't necessarily a problem. I guess Stoneforge Mystic fits there too [edit: among non-blue threats in general]. Which illustrates why I don't like having Oko in the format, beats up on the best(?) non-blue threat. Luckily Death and Taxes have a couple of ways to interact with Oko, so they can still play Stoneforge, while Maverick is mostly dropping it for now.

    I think, regarding a method for validating the best threats.. That's not an easily accomplished task. I'll not take it on here, just write a little bit on the topic. In the Nic Fit thread one dedicated player put up a list of requirements for a good threat, based on years of discussing whether new cards are relevant. It's mostly useful for new players who don't intuitively do this, but a list also lets more experience players refine their understanding.. The list contains a couple of points, most of which are evaluating the resilience to common removal: does it die to Lightning Bolt, StP, Fatal Push, Abrupt Decay, Coatl/Strix [edit: and Plague Engineer]? Does it get bounced by Karakas? Can it accrue value before it is terminused or otherwise answered (etb effect or Haste)? Is it uncounterable? Then some other effects, like if it has evasion (trample, flying, unblockable) or etb effects.

    Edit: (non-blue) cards filling these criteria are... None. It used to be Sigarda, Host of Herons, but then Baleful Strix was popular for a few years, Council's Judgement was printed and now Coatl makes it worse. Thrun, the Last Troll was a thing, but gets chump-blocked forever. Questing Beast is a thing, but is answered easily by StP. Still pretty good. Oko handles all these tests, pretty well (save for Decay, but, you know, still accrues value on etb). Snapcaster Mage too. Idk what that means, but I think it would be nice to have a Thrun the Questing Beast printed, for the Nic Fit and Maverick decks to have a powerful threat. Maybe it would be too good for them. I doubt it.
    Last edited by pettdan; 02-27-2020 at 12:30 PM.

  12. #22272
    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 PirateKing View Post
    That is a factor, yes, but you'd be naive to think that True-Name Nemesis in a two player game doesn't offers a value difficult to produce in other colors as a single all-in-one card.
    Heck, in the same set they printed Delver of Secrets they printed Reckless Waif at uncommon. That's as close to an apples to apples comparison as you can get.

    "BuT wHaT iF yOu DoN't PlAy InStAnTs AnD sOrCeRiEs??"

    Yeah, okay...
    Well, far be it from my intent to "defend" TNN. Or, for that matter, Oko. Both were assured mistakes, to me.

    I don't want to go crazy here, but one thing about Delver, for example, is that it fits right in with what Blue already wanted to do. Since cantrips and disruption were already "good" Delver sort of "naturally" synergizes with what was already a quality strategy in the first place. So, indeed, is Delver "good" in isolation to Blue's already good suite of Instant and Sorceries? I don't know that you can really say that. A 3/2 Flyer for one is "good" in theory, but contingent upon the I&S trigger, would it really be worth it if cantrips were not as good? In fact, Modern results could lead us to believe the answer is "no" since Delver is not really played there in any meaningfully competitive frequency.

    Sure, you can lampoon the notion of Delver minus Instants and Sorceries. But it is the case that Delver's color has little to do with it's power level in Legacy. If Delver were Green, or White, or whatever color, Blue decks would still play it, because the power level of heavily Instant and Sorcery decks in Legacy is already (pretty demonstrably) high.

    Again, this does not posit that Delver is a bad card, at all. I also do not mean to suggest that Delver was not another "mistake." What it does propose though is that there could be real questions about just how sperable a card is from the entire paradigm of (realistically) playable cards.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  13. #22273
    A short, sturdy creature fond of drink and industry.
    PirateKing's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2011
    Location

    BEST JERSEY
    Posts

    1,731

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    Well, far be it from my intent to "defend" TNN. Or, for that matter, Oko. Both were assured mistakes, to me.

    I don't want to go crazy here, but one thing about Delver, for example, is that it fits right in with what Blue already wanted to do. Since cantrips and disruption were already "good" Delver sort of "naturally" synergizes with what was already a quality strategy in the first place. So, indeed, is Delver "good" in isolation to Blue's already good suite of Instant and Sorceries? I don't know that you can really say that. A 3/2 Flyer for one is "good" in theory, but contingent upon the I&S trigger, would it really be worth it if cantrips were not as good? In fact, Modern results could lead us to believe the answer is "no" since Delver is not really played there in any meaningfully competitive frequency.

    Sure, you can lampoon the notion of Delver minus Instants and Sorceries. But it is the case that Delver's color has little to do with it's power level in Legacy. If Delver were Green, or White, or whatever color, Blue decks would still play it, because the power level of heavily Instant and Sorcery decks in Legacy is already (pretty demonstrably) high.

    Again, this does not posit that Delver is a bad card, at all. I also do not mean to suggest that Delver was not another "mistake." What it does propose though is that there could be real questions about just how sperable a card is from the entire paradigm of (realistically) playable cards.
    No you're right. The lampooning was among friends. Your point about Delver being a different color though is kind of my point, really.

    Classic Canadian Thresh was kind of sort of the ideal multicolor deck, since every color had a distinction and it was pretty clear what the roles were.
    Blue had cantrips and countermagic, along with Wasteland and Stifle, you had a really solid tempo window to fit a threat through and carry the game for you.
    What color were those threats? Green was the color of the cheapest, most efficient creatures available. Werebear and Nimble Mongoose played well with the fast use of card on the Tempo side to make sure they were cheap to play but stayed relevant once the opponent got access to more then 2 mana. Tarmogoyf was a welcome addition to the same affect.
    Then throw in red for Lightning Bolt. Because Lightning Bolt.
    Boom, deck done. Clean, purposeful use of cards.

    Once you get Delver involved, it starts to fall apart. UR Delver outperforms the damage output of Canadian Thresh. By dropping green, the "creature color", you get access to better creatures.

    It seems once the NWO decided that good cheap creatures were something all colors should have, but that blue was still the color of counterspells; that blue was still the color of raw card advantage; that blue was still the color of bounce; then it's kinda over.
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatWhale View Post
    Gross, other formats. I puked in my mouth a little.

  14. #22274
    Member

    Join Date

    Sep 2011
    Posts

    4,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    How would you actually qualify that assertion though?

    Couldn't it well be the case that Blue threats "seem better" precisely because they are aided by Blue Cantrips and Blue disruption?
    Historically the meta was more rock-paper-scissors. Blue decks had the best answers for unfair combo decks and cantrips, but they couldn't run the best threats. They had to run mediocre control finishers (e.g. Mishra's Factory, Nimble Mongoose) or fragile combo finishers (e.g. Phyrexian Dreadnought). The best threats were in non-blue decks. You had to make a choice between running the best answers and running the best threats. Each deck had some strong matches and some weak matches.

    Tarmogoyf was considered a "blue card" because it finally gave blue decks an efficient threat on par with aggro decks, something they were sorely lacking before, and you still had to add another color to get access to a threat.

    Then since Delver, blue started getting even better threats than aggro decks in its own color. Look at how Delver compares to Wild Nacatl, Steppe Lynx, Goblin Guide, or Carnophage. The problem is not that Delver is inherently broken and unfair (like TNN's mechanic). But it's an efficient threat on par or better than other colors have. That lets blue run the best answers AND best threats, backed by the best card selection. You shouldn't be able to play Rock and Paper at the same time.

    Now blue has threats like Delver, TNN, Oko, Brazen Borrower. Cards like TNN and Oko have no rival in other colors. They're just game-warping threats and blue gets to run them. How is that color balance?

    If blue only had the best answers but not the best threats, it would Restore Balance. Alternately, other colors would need to gain better answers.

  15. #22275
    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 PirateKing View Post
    Once you get Delver involved, it starts to fall apart. UR Delver outperforms the damage output of Canadian Thresh. By dropping green, the "creature color", you get access to better creatures.

    It seems once the NWO decided that good cheap creatures were something all colors should have, but that blue was still the color of counterspells; that blue was still the color of raw card advantage; that blue was still the color of bounce; then it's kinda over.
    Well, I definitely agreed with everything you said, up to this part here. Especially when you got to the critique of Green.

    While I do agree, in a sort of "isolation" case, that Green is the "Creature color" I think that is partly misleading. In fact, depending on the context, the case could be made that White is the "creature color." I've actually brought this up elsewhere in the Forum, in times past, about Green's identity in this regard. We tend to think of Green as that "creature color" because it, often, has few other relevant uses. Tangentially, it removes Artifacts, or Enchantments (but White can do that), or single edge-cases of utility, like Choke. What else is left, but it's Creatures?

    As a partial aside, this is likely why there is so much distaste for Veil, in addition to just it's power-level.

    In any case though, to me, the reason why UR puts up better results is because non-Green Creatures generally synergize better with Cantrips than Green ones do. Now, given how good cantrips are, of course that makes the non-Green threats generally better. But they aren't better "objectively" they are better "situationally," that is, as I pointed out in my above post, with the already demonstrably established competitive paradigm of Blue cantrips and disruption. INterestingly, look at the poll at the top of the thread. People were, in fact, upset that Green's creatures synergized with Blue at all, once upon a time! Now, we see those same cards in the total opposite way.

    So overall, that is just my point, that, were TNN a different color, it would likely see play, but not nearly as much, since it would synergize less with what people are already, on it's own "intrinsic" strengths, be apt to play. So, to me, it is not difficult to see why it is (currently) "better" for Delver to be UR rather than URG. Is that "good" for the format? I don't know.

    However, by way of deck composition, it really would not matter much at all for RUG Delver if Delver was Green or Red. You'd still essentially play all the same cards, fetch the same lands at the same times. This is why, to me, the question of the card's color is a bit spurious.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  16. #22276
    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 FTW View Post
    Now blue has threats like Delver, TNN, Oko, Brazen Borrower. Cards like TNN and Oko have no rival in other colors. They're just game-warping threats and blue gets to run them. How is that color balance?
    Well, probably my fault, but I think you mistake the intent of my question.

    I am not pretending that these are example of "color balance." In fact, just the opposite. I am saying that there, in Legacy, is absolutely not color balance at all. At this point, that realistically is no longer a bug, but a feature.

    We can justifiably lament it, want it to change, but the Legacy dynamic is sort of almost undeniably Blue or fight Blue. I absolutely want it to be the case that non-Blue decks are given more tools to fight Blue, but what I don't really advocate is the nerf-Blue movement, for the most part, or that Blue "ruins the format" or some other notion of how terrible or oppressive Blue is.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  17. #22277
    Member

    Join Date

    Sep 2011
    Posts

    4,776

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    In any case though, to me, the reason why UR puts up better results is because non-Green Creatures generally synergize better with Cantrips than Green ones do. Now, given how good cantrips are, of course that makes the non-Green threats generally better. But they aren't better "objectively" they are better "situationally," that is, as I pointed out in my above post, with the already demonstrably established competitive paradigm of Blue cantrips and disruption. INterestingly, look at the poll at the top of the thread. People were, in fact, upset that Green's creatures synergized with Blue at all, once upon a time! Now, we see those same cards in the total opposite way.
    Synergizing with cantrips is fine. Young Pyromancer, Snapcaster Mage and Dreadhorde Arcanist are, to me, good examples of "fair" blue threats. They synergize with cantrips and the blue game plan, but the payoff is structured as a card advantage value engine. It's fine to have payoffs for playing instants and sorceries, and blue decks will tend to run them. The problem with Delver is how the payoff is structured. Instead of getting a control payoff (long-term card advantage), you get rewarded with the best 1-drop beatdown creature, and it can be cast on turn 1 with a basic Island.

    3/2 evasion for 1 mana is something no other fair strategy can match. Other fair decks don't get the same big payoffs for playing their own gameplan. If you don't believe in color balance, do you at least believe in Rock-Paper-Scissors balance?

    Delver reads
    "U - 1/1. If you do blue things, become the best 1-mana clock."

    Where's the
    "G - If you do green things, become a 4/4 trample"
    or
    "G - If you do green things, become a tier 1 control answer"

    What about
    "R - 1/1 haste. Bloodthirst 4"

    Cantrips and counters are inherently good, but there are also creatures that give high payoff for playing a Xerox gameplan, while there are few creatures that give good payoffs for playing other gameplans. Goblin Lackey used to be it (very high payoff for jamming a bunch of Goblins instead of blue spells), but that card keeps getting weaker over time, and new designs need to emerge.

  18. #22278
    Member
    pettdan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    Stockholm, Sweden
    Posts

    704

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    While I do agree, in a sort of "isolation" case, that Green is the "Creature color" I think that is partly misleading. In fact, depending on the context, the case could be made that White is the "creature color." I've actually brought this up elsewhere in the Forum, in times past, about Green's identity in this regard. We tend to think of Green as that "creature color" because it, often, has few other relevant uses. Tangentially, it removes Artifacts, or Enchantments (but White can do that), or single edge-cases of utility, like Choke. What else is left, but it's Creatures?
    I think you're missing the creature tutors. The green creature tutors are fantastic. There's Green Sun's Zenith which is like a 1 mana Demonic Tutor and it fuels several archetypes with consistency. There's Once Upon a Time, helping green mages mulligan less. There's Collected Company, which is not really Legacy playable, it seems, but still. And there's Traverse the Ulvenwald.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    However, by way of deck composition, it really would not matter much at all for RUG Delver if Delver was Green or Red. You'd still essentially play all the same cards, fetch the same lands at the same times. This is why, to me, the question of the card's color is a bit spurious.
    If the color is not blue, then it puts requirements on the manabase. This has two effects, right.
    1) UR Delver plays basics, other Delver decks typically don't. When they don't play basics, they become vulnerable to cards like Wasteland and Blood Moon.
    2) It also makes different versions of the Delver decks come with different flavors, RUG Delver, BUG Delver and UR Delver all function a bit differently, and if Delver had another color it would affect how these different versions looked.

    So, we can't really say that the card's color doesn't matter. Sure, whether it's blue, green or red doesn't really matter for RUG Delver, but that seems like a strange way to limit the discussion.. What am I missing here..

  19. #22279
    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 FTW View Post
    Synergizing with cantrips is fine. Young Pyromancer, Snapcaster Mage and Dreadhorde Arcanist are, to me, good examples of "fair" blue threats. They synergize with cantrips and the blue game plan, but the payoff is structured as a card advantage value engine. It's fine to have payoffs for playing instants and sorceries, and blue decks will tend to run them. The problem with Delver is how the payoff is structured. Instead of getting a control payoff (long-term card advantage), you get rewarded with the best 1-drop beatdown creature, and it can be cast on turn 1 with a basic Island.

    3/2 evasion for 1 mana is something no other fair strategy can match. Other fair decks don't get the same big payoffs for playing their own gameplan. If you don't believe in color balance, do you at least believe in Rock-Paper-Scissors balance?

    Delver reads
    "U - 1/1. If you do blue things, become the best 1-mana clock."

    Where's the
    "G - If you do green things, become a 4/4 trample"
    or
    "G - If you do green things, become a tier 1 control answer"

    Cantrips and counters are inherently good, but there are also creatures that give high payoff for playing a Xerox gameplan, while there are few creatures that give good payoffs for playing other gameplans. Goblin Lackey used to be it (very high payoff for jamming a bunch of Goblins instead of blue spells), but that card keeps getting weaker over time, and new designs need to emerge.
    I do think a sort of "Rock-Paper-Scissors" balance is good. Or, at least a sort of notional Aggro-Combo-Control dynamic. But Legacy is a beast that tends to blur lines. Again, to me, that is not so much a bug, but a feature.

    To me, showing up to a Legacy event hating Blue is almost like showing up to an ice cream shop hating ice cream. One, I don't know what you would expect, and two, while in theory, the shop would have many snacks everyone would enjoy, that just isn't the pragmatic, realistic way things actually work.

    On the note about Green creatures, I absolutely, 100% agree, that there should be a Green-stuff Delver, or the like.

    Quote Originally Posted by pettdan View Post
    So, we can't really say that the card's color doesn't matter. Sure, whether it's blue, green or red doesn't really matter for RUG Delver, but that seems like a strange way to limit the discussion.. What am I missing here..
    Because the example at hand was how the old Canadian Thresh decks were more "compartmentalized" in structure, by color and Types of cards employed. I would absolutely grant that outside that, yes, the example there makes little sense.

    Again though, I am not saying that color does not matter at all. I am saying that the notion that color is a major factor seems somewhat spurious to me, given how Legacy mana bases can and are constructed. So, in the case there Delver was, say, White, indeed, all Delver decks would be UW. That does limit the nature of them somewhat, but likely (given that we have seen 4c Delver decks in the past and likely will in the future) doesn't really change all that much, in my estimation.
    "The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
    Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order

  20. #22280
    A short, sturdy creature fond of drink and industry.
    PirateKing's Avatar
    Join Date

    Nov 2011
    Location

    BEST JERSEY
    Posts

    1,731

    Re: All B/R update speculation.

    Quote Originally Posted by H View Post
    However, by way of deck composition, it really would not matter much at all for RUG Delver if Delver was Green or Red. You'd still essentially play all the same cards, fetch the same lands at the same times. This is why, to me, the question of the card's color is a bit spurious.
    Is slippery slope overplayed?

    It's a slippery slope. Yeah, if Delver was green then RUG would continue as is. But it's blue. So for other decks, now you have an easier time moving your splash around. And the trend is more and more cards that you had to splash for previously are ending up less and less off-color for blue decks. I mean, if Delver was red, then yes, RUG would be all good. But then what else would be good? Burn? Zoo? We can't really know.

    Regarding green's "identity", I wasn't saying it IS the creature color and shouldn't be good at anything else. It's definitely the direction you get if you every read those color wheel inserts you get with precon decks. I like Veil of Summer, I think it's an interesting space to explore. Is it too powerful? Maybe, but it still signals a shift in thinking what colors can have access to. Green was 100% the creature color of Canadian Thresh, so in the specific frame of my point, they ability to drop the color and not suffer any real hardships putting out repeatable damage is really the telling sign of the times. If you want to have a separate discussion about what green's color identity SHOULD be I'll be there :D
    Quote Originally Posted by GreatWhale View Post
    Gross, other formats. I puked in my mouth a little.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1931 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1931 guests)