All B/R update speculation.

[FoolofaTook]

The same perception that lets you ignore the numbers of Brainstorm + Ponder decks which registered compared with the numbers of non-blue decks? Once more: if 70% of all players Register "Brainstorm decks" and 6 of those make it into a top 8, there is no anomaly nor did they overperform.

This is beside the point though. That 70% of players feel required to register a blue shell list is the point. That said blue shell lists sh*t all over 90% of the non-blue alternatives is the point.

We're so deep into a majority-blue shell meta at this point that we can't even see the game for what it once was. It's a shrunken shriveled mess compared to the grandeur that 30k cards should make possible. Yes, only a small percentage of those should be playable in a truly competitive environment but there are about 8 cards out there (Brainstorm, Force of Will, Ponder, Delver of Secrets, Daze, Terminus, Counterbalance and True-Name Nemesis) that make most of the small percentage irrelevant.

[Lemnear]

However a Brainstorm ban would halt that pillaging army in it's tracks as it tried to figure out how exactly to replace the one card manipulation instant in it's arsenal. A daunting task to be sure, since Terminus in the opening hand would be not good and 2x would be a disaster.

That's why I mentioned a thousand times that players would stop playing conditional cards like Entreat/Terminus/Daze and move to options less conditional in Uxx like SFM/TNN.

Stop making a point based on "people are idiots, ergo..."

[FoolofaTook]

That's why I mentioned a thousand times that players would stop playing conditional cards like Entreat/Terminus/Daze and move to options less conditional in Uxx like SFM/TNN.

Stop making a point based on "people are idiots, ergo..."

There's no way people would stop playing Daze. The other 2 are possible.

What WotC should do is break the blue shell irrevocably. They should ban Brainstorm, Ponder, Sensei's Divining Top and Delver of Secrets and rely on that deep card pool to provide playable alternatives. It certainly would and the blue shell would become 45% of the meta instead of 70%.

[AznSeal]

There's no way people would stop playing Daze. The other 2 are possible.

What WotC should do is break the blue shell irrevocably. They should ban Brainstorm, Ponder, Sensei's Divining Top and Delver of Secrets and rely on that deep card pool to provide playable alternatives. It certainly would and the blue shell would become 45% of the meta instead of 70%.

No, because if they did that, the format would be like 70% elves and 30% decks metagamed to beat elves.

[FoolofaTook]

No, because if they did that, the format would be like 70% elves and 30% decks metagamed to beat elves.

It wouldn't though. People would still play the blue shell for consistency, using Preordain and another 1cc cantrip of choice to provide that. They'd still play Force of Will and Daze. They'd still play Lightning Bolt and Swords to Plowshares and Chain Lightning and Forked Bolt and Disfigure and Dismember and other easily used targeted removal. They'd go back to playing things like Engineered Plague and Perish in the sideboard. They'd use things like Pyroclasm and Marsh Casualties as sweeper options.

Lists that are completely moribund now, like White Stax and other Mono-White Control would become playable again. You might even see a Boros sighting now and then. Bw Suicide would get played, and it would have a *very* good matchup against Elves.

The point is that Elves thrives in a blue shell meta because the blue shell suppresses almost everything that preys upon it. The price Elves pays for that is a poor matchup against Miracles. Weaken the blue shell and concepts that are hostile to Elves will become more playable. The meta will shift towards a more varied playing field with less predictability for all involved.

Obviously if you could have that predictability without having it associated with a very limited pool of cards that would be great. That's not the reality we live in.

[Julian23]

You had that color break down at the last GP. Blue did better the longer the tournament went on.

Where did we have that? All I could find is http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/c...gpnj14/r14meta, which has nothing to do with what I am saying.

If you have data like the one I'm asking for, pleasre share it with us because if somehow actually had access to something like that, it would be HUGE!

[testing32]

Where did we have that? All I could find is http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/c...gpnj14/r14meta, which has nothing to do with what I am saying.

If you have data like the one I'm asking for, pleasre share it with us because if somehow actually had access to something like that, it would be HUGE!

There is a day 2 meta, then a round 14 and then the top 16. I have searched everywhere for data like we used to get from the Hatfields but I haven't found anything. That type of data would give a clearer picture of what is going on.

[Julian23]

So your statement doesn't hold up. I just wanted to conclude that because you threw out it there as if we actually had the data at hand and people will read it and be like "Yeah, see? Blue is so op" despite not having the data we really need.

[testing32]

So your statement doesn't hold up. I just wanted to conclude that because you threw out it there as if we actually had the data at hand and people will read it and be like "Yeah, see? Blue is so op" despite not having the data we really need.

As long as we are clarifying things, are you suggesting that the GP:NJ registered decklists were 87% blue like the top 16 turned out to be?

[Michael Keller]

The format is fine. Nobody just has the balls to try something new or create something interesting.

[FoolofaTook]

http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/c...gpnj14/d1undef

Day 1 Undefeateds above. 11 blue shell, 5 non-blue shell.

[Lemnear]

As long as we are clarifying things, are you suggesting that the GP:NJ registered decklists were 87% blue like the top 16 turned out to be?

Clarification after being called out to post blatant bullshit? Yeeeeeeah *slowclap*

Your question ignores the playskill of each participant and their deckchoice, which is something to have in mind. On a second instance, how much percentual difference between the Top16 (+ people who miss these based on tiebreakers) and the metagame distribution is acceptable for you to qualify as not over-/underperforming?

http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/c...gpnj14/d1undef

Day 1 Undefeateds above. 11 blue shell, 5 non-blue shell.

So 16 undefeated decks? 11/16=68,75% which is mysteriously the same percentage Brainstorm decks are played in general according to MTGtop8! No under-/overperforming to be seen

[Dice_Box]

Clarification after being called out to post blatant bullshit? Yeeeeeeah *slowclap*

Your question ignores the playskill of each participant and their deckchoice, which is something to have in mind. On a second instance, how much percentual difference between the Top16 (+ people who miss these based on tiebreakers) and the metagame distribution is acceptable for you to qualify as not over-/underperforming?

Please point me to the "Bullshit" post. So far I am not seeing one.

[Darkenslight]

Clarification after being called out to post blatant bullshit? Yeeeeeeah *slowclap*

Your question ignores the playskill of each participant and their deckchoice, which is something to have in mind. On a second instance, how much percentual difference between the Top16 (+ people who miss these based on tiebreakers) and the metagame distribution is acceptable for you to qualify as not over-/underperforming?



So 16 undefeated decks? 11/16=68,75% which is mysteriously the same percentage Brainstorm decks are played in general according to MTGtop8! No under-/overperforming to be seen

Honestly, I'm really tempted to see if I can't ask Wizards for all ~4,000 decklists so that we can do a full metagame analysis. OR something of the sort. Because everyone's quibbling over hypotheticals when the data is available, if Wizards are willing.

[Lemnear]

Please point me to the "Bullshit" post. So far I am not seeing one.

It is right here:

You had that color break down at the last GP. Blue did better the longer the tournament went on.

You can't state this being a fact if you don't have a day 1 metagame breakdown aka not having the base data to see a development. I don't even know IF there's even a trend between Day 2 and Top 16 to be seen

Edit:

Honestly, I'm really tempted to see if I can't ask Wizards for all ~4,000 decklists so that we can do a full metagame analysis. OR something of the sort. Because everyone's quibbling over hypotheticals when the data is available, if Wizards are willing.

Dunno if it's possible, but that would possibly stop people arguing based on data they don't have at hand. The data we as players actually have aka Top 8/16/32 lists say nothing about the metagame as a whole

[AznSeal]

It is right here:



You can't state this being a fact if you don't have a day 1 metagame breakdown aka not having the base data to see a development. I don't even know IF there's even a trend between Day 2 and Top 16 to be seen

Edit:


Dunno if it's possible, but that would possibly stop people arguing based on data they don't have at hand. The data we as players actually have aka Top 8/16/32 lists say nothing about the metagame as a whole

He thinks the fact that 70% of people are running blue in the first place is the problem, not the fact that blue is strong lol................

[menace13]

He thinks the fact that 70% of people are running blue in the first place is the problem, not the fact that blue is strong lol................

Right. And that is only because boys favorite color is blue. Like, when baby showers are thrown. It is always blue for boys and pink for girls. There is no relation to how powerful those blue cards are. It's just that theyre all males.

[btm10]

/Edit: All of this kind of feels like the inner conflicts of human and elf kingdoms in Lord of the Rings. All the while the real enemy, Miracles, keeps wrecking havoc in the eastern lands and will soon also take over the US meta. It pretty much destroys all of those decks we are talking about here with the exception of what people call "Gold Digger" these days.

An aside, since I agree with your general point - I don't think Miracles is the real enemy. It's actually got some pretty obvious foils like 12Post, MUD, and Enchantress and plenty of regular old unfavorable matchups like Team America and Shardless BUG.

The format is fine. Nobody just has the balls to try something new or create something interesting.

This I'm not so sure on. I think without Cruise we've got a ton of space in which to innovate, and that Khans just adds to the space (and it looks like Fate Reforged will too), but Cruise actually makes it much harder to come up with a new tier-1 deck because at least two of the current top decks (UWr Aggro-Control with or without Stoneforge Mystic and/or Delver and URb Aggro-Control) generally win through card advantage alone, and that's one hell of an axis to fight on if you're brewing without going the Cruise route yourself.

Something like Dredge that generates tons of virtual CA is an option, but it faces a lot of easily run and incredibly powerful hate; Enchantress beats the slow aggro-control lists pretty handily while losing horribly to the exact combo lists they encourage the rest of the meta to be playing.

Honestly, I'm really tempted to see if I can't ask Wizards for all ~4,000 decklists so that we can do a full metagame analysis. OR something of the sort. Because everyone's quibbling over hypotheticals when the data is available, if Wizards are willing.

This would be great. I don't know why they wouldn't release the decklists if you asked for them (unless they aren't digitized). It would be even better if they gave you the match results for each player as well so you can actually see what's beating what.

[AznSeal]

Right. And that is only because boys favorite color is blue. Like, when baby showers are thrown. It is always blue for boys and pink for girls. There is no relation to how powerful those blue cards are. It's just that theyre all males.

Yah it's a dumb criteria. I think the format is fine.

[death]

The format is fine. Nobody just has the balls to try something new or create something interesting.

A Legend has spoken.