All B/R update speculation.

[Barook]

Well, it's a tempo deck... So no, you're not.

What makes it a tempo deck? Free countermagic? Vial? Most current iterations don't even run Wasteland anymore.

[Quasim0ff]

What makes it a tempo deck? Free countermagic? Vial? Most current iterations don't even run Wasteland anymore.

And wasteland isn't synonymous with a tempo deck. The overall strategic purpose of most fish (which are usually BANT) is that of a tempo deck.

[Gheizen64]

If you really all want to see aggro played just unban recruiter and Survival. Vengevine survival would be a legit aggro deck in current legacy alternative to elves!, at least until people start running a bit more hate for it (needle would kill top and SotF, RiP would hate both delve and SotF etc...). I'm not convinced that food chain gobs is that much better than regular gobs, but it's worth a shot. Both those cards are pretty unsinergistic with most top decks (don't go in most blue decks, can't fit in elves, SnT, Lands etc...)

[Zombie]

If you really all want to see aggro played just unban recruiter and Survival. Vengevine survival would be a legit aggro deck in current legacy alternative to elves!, at least until people start running a bit more hate for it (needle would kill top and SotF, RiP would hate both delve and SotF etc...). I'm not convinced that food chain gobs is that much better than regular gobs, but it's worth a shot. Both those cards are pretty unsinergistic with most top decks (don't go in most blue decks, can't fit in elves, SnT, Lands etc...)

Not so sure about Elves. It might not be a 1-1 trade upgrade, but Survival Elves was a thing back in the day (try to find a list, it was a beautiful thing), and if Elves has a problem, it is that its engines have tension with each other and with the best cards to solve the deck's problem matchups. NO, GSZ, Therapy want stuff on the field, Glimpse stuff in hand, Glimpse, NO to play (small green) creatures and not interactive cards, cards like Teeg sabotage the deck's primary threat against combo, etc.

The Vengevival engine could prove pretty useful in defusing those tensions and open more sideboard cards for inclusion as well. Not saying that it will, but the potential is there.

[Lemnear]

If you really all want to see aggro played just unban recruiter and Survival. Vengevine survival would be a legit aggro deck in current legacy alternative to elves!, at least until people start running a bit more hate for it (needle would kill top and SotF, RiP would hate both delve and SotF etc...). I'm not convinced that food chain gobs is that much better than regular gobs, but it's worth a shot. Both those cards are pretty unsinergistic with most top decks (don't go in most blue decks, can't fit in elves, SnT, Lands etc...)

Did you just ignore that Survival did to linear aggro the last time it was legal? It streamlined all creature-strategies into a single Aggro-Combo core and eradicated all linear aggro decks like Zoo, Goblins or Meerfolk at that time. Survival was never a card to push "aggro" but to hand creature-centric decks a combo finish and card-quality/-advantage tool.

WotC clearly stated that they banned StoF because hate CAN'T GET HOLD of it, because you can tutor answers to hate in response or sidestep certain angles of hate like graveyard-solutions simply by not using the combo-package SotF provides but the card-advantage/-selection more only. The idea to really control Survival at any point of the game is plain absurd with Reclamation Sage/Eternal Witness around and the Survival Package so Compact that you can squeeze it in any aggro deck and just smash faces if your opponent focuses on fighting Survival. We have seen all that before and it did not work out well. Is it too much to ask if you guys learn from the past?

The same is true for Recruiter. You guys complain that games against SDT take forever but are fine if your opponent can use Recruiter to sort oh and stack their deck (room for cheating) for minutes several times per game? Never wondered why WotC never bothered to unban Recruiter? Logistic reasons might be the most obvious ones. I know all that bullshit from Vintage and old Extended

[Gheizen64]

Did you just ignore that Survival did to linear aggro the last time it was legal? It streamlined all creature-strategies into a single Aggro-Combo core and eradicated all linear aggro decks like Zoo, Goblins or Meerfolk at that time. Survival was never a card to push "aggro" but to hand creature-centric decks a combo finish and card-quality/-advantage tool.

WotC clearly stated that they banned StoF because hate CAN'T GET HOLD of it, because you can tutor answers to hate in response or sidestep certain angles of hate like graveyard-solutions simply by not using the combo-package SotF provides but the card-advantage/-selection more only. The idea to really control Survival at any point of the game is plain absurd with Reclamation Sage/Eternal Witness around and the Survival Package so Compact that you can squeeze it in any aggro deck and just smash faces if your opponent focuses on fighting Survival. We have seen all that before and it did not work out well. Is it too much to ask if you guys learn from the past?

The same is true for Recruiter. You guys complain that games against SDT take forever but are fine if your opponent can use Recruiter to sort oh and stack their deck (room for cheating) for minutes several times per game? Never wondered why WotC never bothered to unban Recruiter? Logistic reasons might be the most obvious ones. I know all that bullshit from Vintage and old Extended

Learn from the past, so let's ban SnT, Time Spiral, Disciple of the vault etc...

SotF has lost a lot of power in the last year since nothing better than Vengevine has been printed to abuse it, and nothing better than Iona, meanwhile other decks gained a lot in power and a lot of cards incidentally good against it are commonly run now (DRS, AD, Terminus), as well as decks which just ignore it (SnT based ones). But i guess you just can't see it and you'll ignore this extremely simple and clear-cut point that was presented to you dozens of times because of your intellectual dishonesty, as always.

This said, i'm done. All i've ever read from you on this argument were snarky one liners and flames towards all people that ever presented a different opinion than yours, no matter how many facts and lists and testing they eventually brought, all was "obviously stupid and dishonest" to you. I'm done being flamed after trying to conceive lists and tests as arguments in the discussion only to have to read whatever snarky remark you had toward posters that did not fit into the perfect world cantrip cartel format worldview. I'm done repeating the same points and bring the same arguments time and time again only to be dismissed by "it would clearly be broken and you're stupid if you can't see why" claiming intellectual superiority never actually brininging a single decklist that supported ur claims. At least IBA flamed but he brought out lots of different lists and interesting testing in B&R discussions. At least he, like me, was able to change his opinions after seeing lists , like the case in the channel and fastbonds debates. You're just not interested in this discussion, only in stifling it and feel superior while doing it. Ignore list it is.

[Crimhead]

SotF has lost a lot of power in the last year since nothing better than Vengevine has been printed to abuse it, and nothing better than Iona, meanwhile other decks gained a lot in power and a lot of cards incidentally good against it are commonly run now (DRS, AD, Terminus), as well as decks which just ignore it (SnT based ones).

Would SotF be containable in today's meta? I'm not sure. I can assume it wouldn't be as bad as it was, but it still looks dangerous for now. There are safer cards to unban first, at the very least.

Regardless, I do agree that Survival will not help linear aggro. Any deck running it becomes aggro/combo almost by definition I would think.

[Lemnear]

Learn from the past, so let's ban SnT, Time Spiral, Disciple of the vault etc...

SotF has lost a lot of power in the last year since nothing better than Vengevine has been printed to abuse it, and nothing better than Iona, meanwhile other decks gained a lot in power and a lot of cards incidentally good against it are commonly run now (DRS, AD, Terminus), as well as decks which just ignore it (SnT based ones). But i guess you just can't see it and you'll ignore this extremely simple and clear-cut point that was presented to you dozens of times because of your intellectual dishonesty, as always.

Calling me out on Intellectual dishonesty while talking about Disciple which was never banned outside of Standard in terms of "learning from the past" is funny.

Yeah, the game never saw TNN, DRS, Griselbrand, SFM, etc. got printed since SotF saw the banhammer, just to name a few. Tutoring for an Emrakul or Iona with S&T on the Stack is nothing you consider possible, because you choose to "ignore these extremely simple and clear-cut points presented to you dozens of times, because you're intellectual dishonest, as always."

[Echelon]

I'd want to build a SotF TinFins-ish build. Bin a Griselbrand, tutor a Children of Korlis, reanimate Griselbrand, ???, fun!

Don't know if it's viable, but it sounds like a hell of a lot of fun.

[Finn]

Except that that one colorless card quality engine is used almost exclusively in competitive Legacy by the premier blue control deck.

Again, please read this link:
http://tcdecks.net/busqueda.php?toke...ide=&strict=on

This is a listing of top-8 appearances of Legacy decks that feature Sensei's Divining Top since March 22, 2015. Of the 100 decks tcdeck has listed via that search query, only 37 are not Miracles decks.

Of those 37 decks:
- 10 are blue-based ANT combo decks that feature no more than one SDT in their list. Not only are they non-essential to the game plan, they are included to give a blue deck more consistency.
- 4 are UW Stoneblade lists that added the SDT-Terminus-Counterbalance package.
- 3 are Imperial Painter lists that play anywhere from 2-4 SDT.
- 2 are Sneak and Show lists that play 1-2 SDT almost as a throw-in.
- The rest are miscellaneous decks such as 12 Post, Burn, BGx Control, Mono Black, Nic Fit that play an average of 1-2 SDT as random throw-ins. Of these decks, no more than 4 of them play more than 2 SDT.

So what exactly are we losing if we ban SDT? Other than weakening Miracles, obviously, we no longer get to throw 1-2 Sensei's Divining Tops into our Ad Nauseum Tendrils decks (oh no), we no longer get to play SDT in our Painter lists (that will be a loss, but honestly, is Painter going away because it lost Top?), and we no longer get to throw 1-2 SDT into random tier 2 decks.

There is this myth that banning SDT will weaken other archetypes - that is simply false. The only deck in competitive Legacy that depends on SDT as a fundamental part of its core strategy is Miracles. Period.

Why did you bother with all that? I don't care which decks have Tops in them since the card is perfectly benign. Try to get this in your head because I hate repeating it...if what you want is to assassinate Miracles, ban Brainstorm and Miracles will die. Or don't. There is nothing wrong with Miracles, only the stupid homogeneity of the card quality engine it shares with 3/4 of the format. Other methods of quality control are entirely outclassed, and that shit is monotonous.

[Lemnear]

All i've ever read from you on this argument were snarky one liners and flames towards all people that ever presented a different opinion than yours, no matter how many facts and lists and testing they eventually brought, all was "obviously stupid and dishonest" to you. I'm done being flamed after trying to conceive lists and tests as arguments in the discussion only to have to read whatever snarky remark you had toward posters that did not fit into the perfect world cantrip cartel format worldview.

You called me "intellectual dishonest" several times for not seeing everything in regards to B&R matters in clear-cut black & white, but ponder about potential side effects of certain bannings and whine about flaming, if I respond to your bold and empty arguments with snarky comments? You haven't seen me flaming at all and I'm not in the mood either. I just tend to call people out for showing at least a logic line of thought which lead to their ideas with at least a grain of self reflection of ideas, which I rarely get in this thread. If you want an example take the "we would have 10% more aggro decks without Terminus!" Stuff earlier today.

You talk about "facts, lists, and testing" at the same time you deny that DRS, GSZ, TNN, Griselbrand and other cards which are pretty easy fits for the Survival concept saw print post Survival ban. Dood, your definition of "facts" is pretty iffy, if I dare to say. Did you present us any lists or testing which take all these newer printings into consideration at all? You did not. Never. I only remember a user (and I'm not sure if it was you or another dear Sourcer) tried to point out how "FAIR" SotF is against todays metagame BY RUNNING STRICTLY PRE-BAN SURVIVAL LISTS AND CARDS. Intellectual Dishonesty much? It's like makin points about Necropotence with the help of lists from '96 played against todays Miracles/S&T while ignoring Infernal Tutors or Storm cards printed years later. We had the discussion in this thread and I consider these so-called "lists" and "testing" still hilarious. I hope most other users reading this would agree that all testing of Survival lists against the current meta is invalid if the mana-acceleration grounds on Birds of Paradise rather than DRS

[Bobmans]

Is there a way from hiding specifically this annoying thread?

[M+1]

The same is true for Recruiter. You guys complain that games against SDT take forever but are fine if your opponent can use Recruiter to sort oh and stack their deck (room for cheating) for minutes several times per game? Never wondered why WotC never bothered to unban Recruiter? Logistic reasons might be the most obvious ones. I know all that bullshit from Vintage and old Extended

Nope, you know nothing. Please read and learn why Recruiter is banned: http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...l=1#post882997

I made that post 10 days ago, and it is now 16 pages away. The posting rate of some individuals in this thread is... unreasonable.

[TsumiBand]

I made that post 10 days ago, and it is now 16 pages away. The posting rate of some individuals in this thread is... unreasonable.

Did you not know? Post quality is measured in the same way as DPS.

[frogczar]

I can't imagine why people want Survival of the Fittest unbanned. The card is absolutely bonkers and should have been banned way back at the start of the format. I've hated that card since I saw it at the Exodus Pre-release. Take your copies and burn em up, it's broke in half and it isn't getting unbanned. It's incredibly unfun to play against.

[Julian23]

It's incredibly unfun to play against.

A lot of people in this thread are making a case for that not being an argument because "there will always be a best deck."

[FoolofaTook]

Survival of the Fittest is a whole different thing when people are playing main list disenchant effects (Abrupt Decay and Council's Judgement) and when Rest in Peace is available and commonly played in sideboards. Spell Pierce is a 2-of in most aggro-control lists. Thalia makes SotF cost 3 to play when the SotF player is on the draw. Elves would be slower with SotF than they currently are and the Plan B aspect wouldn't work well because they rely on heavy concentrations of elves to actually win games.

SotF was a problem in a meta where GY hate was Relic of Progenitus and Tormod's Crypt, both one shot deals, and Leylines of the Void, which was a hard card for many lists to jam as GY hate. It's going to face a different reality if it's ever unbanned.

[Crimhead]

A lot of people in this thread are making a case for that not being an argument because "there will always be a best deck."

It's not an isslue of whether or not survival would be the best deck (nor is it an issue of whether or not Survival would be fun to play against). The question is whether or not the format will become extremely narrow with very few competitive decks. That's why it was banned in the first place. The environment is likely more hostile to SotF than it was then, but it's uncertain if this would be sufficient to keep SotF at bay.

[FoolofaTook]

It's not an isslue of whether or not survival would be the best deck (nor is it an issue of whether or not Survival would be fun to play against). The question is whether or not the format will become extremely narrow with very few competitive decks. That's why it was banned in the first place. The environment is likely more hostile to SotF than it was then, but it's uncertain if this would be sufficient to keep SotF at bay.

Assuming Miracles doesn't get nerfed somehow Survival of the Fittest is going to be dealing with putting 2 Vengevines on the bottom of their library during their attack step.

More hostile isn't the way to describe the changes. Completely new meta with new assumptions is the way to describe them. Dredge was a great deck back in the day too, only limited by the number of people willing to win game 1 and then take their chances against hate games 2 and 3. Now the hate is so strong that Dredge doesn't even win game 1 reliably.

[Blastoderm]

I can't imagine why people want Survival of the Fittest unbanned. The card is absolutely bonkers and should have been banned way back at the start of the format. I've hated that card since I saw it at the Exodus Pre-release. Take your copies and burn em up, it's broke in half and it isn't getting unbanned. It's incredibly unfun to play against.

"It's incredibly unfun to play against."

By that logic, let's ban Show and Tell, Belcher and Bridge from Below.