All B/R update speculation.

[Amon Amarth]

Honestly, I wish they would, as it would probably bring goblins back to the tables. If printing cards that suppress variance in nonblue colors is part of the brainstorm-issue, this one's a non brainer (just like using top, experienced players should be able to stack their decks in an acceptable amount of time)

My philosophy is I'd rather add to the format than take anything away. If you want to nerf Miracles then Goblin Recruiter makes Miracles his bitch but doesn't make the deck obsolete. of course, it strengthens the deck against other blue decks in general but that's a desired consequence too.

[Quasim0ff]

My philosophy is I'd rather add to the format than take anything away. If you want to nerf Miracles then Goblin Recruiter makes Miracles his bitch but doesn't make the deck obsolete. of course, it strengthens the deck against other blue decks in general but that's a desired consequence too.

Goblins usually have an excellent blue matchup. Terminus is just a wrath on roids.

[Lemnear]

Grixis doesn't run GProbe, nor does it run the full twenty of the other cards.

edit 1:

My bad - I meant Preordain.

edit 2:

Decks don't run all those cards, though. Omnitell does, because it's a two card combo and can afford to run twenty four card filters/draw spells. No other deck runs that many cantrips.

Right in your face! 10th Place at StarCityGames.com Premier IQ on 5/17/2015

[Zombie]

Also, none those cards aren't play-style defining. If all the decks with blue run (most of) those cards to accomplish different goasl; and if we continue to see roughly 30% blueless decks, I don't see how format diversity is in any danger.

Actually, playstyle defining is exactly the term I'd use to refer to the blue core, or cantrip cartel(+DTT) at least. You can play whatever strategy you wish, but the style in which that is accomplished is monotone and stale. The format has tons of other interesting engines that would lend a very different feel to decks with the same strategy, but none can reliably compete.

ie. Elves, Storm => Similar strategy, different style
RUG, Miracles => Different strategy, similar style

[Dice_Box]

Goblins usually have an excellent blue matchup. Terminus is just a wrath on roids.

Terminus is not the biggest issue in the world for Goblins. Thanks to the Goblins going back into your deck you just Matron for a Ringleader and your back off to the races. That's why you held your Matrons against Miracles, it was you spare magazine so to speak.

[Blastoderm]

*Yawn*. Miracles isn't even that good, stop complaining and put some Extirpate and Choke in your SB. Sidenote: Goblins completely crushes Miracles.

Omnitell is worse than sneak/show. It's flavor of the month.

Summary: Git gud

[Julian23]

*Yawn*. Miracles isn't even that good, stop complaining and put some Extirpate and Choke in your SB. Sidenote: Goblins completely crushes Miracles.

Omnitell is worse than sneak/show. It's flavor of the month.

Summary: Git gud

Seldomly has there been so little truth in one post.

Playing Sneak Show is fine if you enjoy it. As a competitive player, OmniTell or even more specific Dig Through Time is where it's at.

I don't even know why I'm replying to this, but now I already hit the button and feel committed: It's nice that Goblins has a slightly favorable matchup against Miracles. It doesn't help the deck though, that it itself is the one being crushed by the rest of the metagame. Unless we see some insane new printings or bannings, the age of Goblins is over.

[MGB]

Different road, same destination; 1 for 1, 1 for 1, draw some cards, pull ahead and win.

What aggro deck is playing something with a cmc> 3?
What aggro deck is playing Black knight to get past Swords to Plowshares?
They're not even close to conditional removal spells against "aggro" decks.

I drew a match against Esper Deathblade because my 15/2 Piledriver attacking through his Batterskulled-True Name wasn't enough for lethal. Good luck beating that with Wild Nacatl (y)

Except that Terminus is far more than a 1 for 1. It's a sweeper. It generates card advantage and leads to blow-outs vs. aggro. That's kind of the point.

Absorbing a Swords to Plowshares or Abrupt Decay on a single dude is at most 1-for-1 trade that nets both players comletely even on card advantage. That's perfectly fair for the deck casting the Swords or the Decay. Aggro decks should be able to win in the face of 1-for-1 removal.

It's a 1 mana *sweeper* that can get rid of as many dudes as you have in play, that can be cast at instant speed, that is much harder for aggro to combat.

[sjmcc13]

It's a 1 mana *sweeper* that can get rid of as many dudes as you have in play, that can be cast at instant speed, that is much harder for aggro to combat.

Except it is NOT a 1 mana sweeper.
The only point Terminus costs 1 mana is if it is your draw for your turn, every other point it required you to jump through some hoops to cast it for cheap, and those hoops are adding to the cost of actually casting Terminus.
Sure I can drop top (next turn) spin top see terminus put it on top draw with Top on my opponents turn, but that is 3 mana and 2 cards to cast Terminus, not 1 mana.

Pretty much every scenario that involves miracling a terminus (or any Miracles card to be fair) involves the investment of mana to set up the trigger, and using it as instant speed requires at least 1 mana investment just to get the trigger. The difference here is you can pay the costs of setup over a couple turns.

[MGB]

Except it is NOT a 1 mana sweeper.
The only point Terminus costs 1 mana is if it is your draw for your turn, every other point it required you to jump through some hoops to cast it for cheap, and those hoops are adding to the cost of actually casting Terminus.
Sure I can drop top (next turn) spin top see terminus put it on top draw with Top on my opponents turn, but that is 3 mana and 2 cards to cast Terminus, not 1 mana.

Pretty much every scenario that involves miracling a terminus (or any Miracles card to be fair) involves the investment of mana to set up the trigger, and using it as instant speed requires at least 1 mana investment just to get the trigger. The difference here is you can pay the costs of setup over a couple turns.

Nononono. Did you really just go there? "Jump Through Hoops"? This is laughable.

And the extra mana you spend on Topping is not really just an added cost for the Miracle spell - you would have spent your spare mana topping anyway. Miracling after a Top activation is simply an incidental benefit, similar to young Pyromancer generating creatures for spells you would have cast anyway, or Tarmogoyf for growing after you put cards in your graveyard that you otherwise would have put anyway.

The combination of Sensei's Divining Top, Ponder, Brainstorm, and Jace all make Miracles ridiculously easy to cast for their Miracle cost. That is the entire point of the SDT ban idea : if we ban the most *reliable* way to set up Miracle spells, the deck will no longer be Tier 1.

[eays]

Decks don't run all those cards, though. Omnitell does, because it's a two card combo and can afford to run twenty four card filters/draw spells. No other deck runs that many cantrips.

Also, none those cards aren't play-style defining. If all the decks with blue run (most of) those cards to accomplish different goasl; and if we continue to see roughly 30% blueless decks, I don't see how format diversity is in any danger.

I play Lands, and I assure you midtrange and tempo decks are not favoured in the long game. Against combo decks, midrange, tempo, and control are supposed to be favoued in a longer game! What matches are you referring to?

Decks DO run all of those cards though. as you've been told several times now. The flex spot being the preordain which get swapped for some other low cost blue spell that facilitates the decks win condition.

Lands is the ONE deck that can now keep up with dig decks in a grinder and that's if your lucky enough to not get your key spells forced early on or your gy nuked. Lands typically only loses when it gets tempo out early on. ..no deck can keep up with the raw card advantage if they can stall to the long game except miracles.

you seem to think these decks are all different but to me differing ways of winning with the same engine is extremely stale.

[Jain_Mor]

When a grixis control deck and a mono blue combo deck are running the same 24 of ~40 nonland cards, something's gotta give right?

[Stevestamopz]

Except that Terminus is far more than a 1 for 1. It's a sweeper. It generates card advantage and leads to blow-outs vs. aggro. That's kind of the point.

Absorbing a Swords to Plowshares or Abrupt Decay on a single dude is at most 1-for-1 trade that nets both players comletely even on card advantage. That's perfectly fair for the deck casting the Swords or the Decay. Aggro decks should be able to win in the face of 1-for-1 removal.

It's a 1 mana *sweeper* that can get rid of as many dudes as you have in play, that can be cast at instant speed, that is much harder for aggro to combat.

I don't even know how I'm supposed to continue this conversation, when "1 for 1, 1 for 1, pull ahead on cards + win" obviously described the game plan of other non-miracles decks, like Deathblade or Delver variants, aka things aggro also can't beat. I even said "different road, same destination."

As for the other things you wrote...

Terminus is 1 for X, where X's value is determined by how you play the game. Have you ever wondered how Death and Taxes beats Miracles?
Aggro decks in standard may be able to beat 1 for 1 removal, but this is legacy son.

Again, assuming Miracles ceases to exists, how is a pure Aggro deck still supposed to beat any creature-based Midrange Control deck? Merfolk is probably the closet "aggro" deck in in legacy. Even with access to TNN, islandwalk, FoW and the ability to make absolutely huge fatties, they still struggle against these decks, so how is a pure aggro deck supposed to win? You won't have the disruptive elements of Maverick or Death and Taxes, nor the things that define Merfolk, nor the insane card advantage and tutoring abilities of Goblins, nor the speed and uninteractivity of burn, so again I ask you, how is an aggro deck supposed to win in legacy anymore? These decks (with the exception of DnT) are all solidly Tier 2+, what deck are you proposing that is better than all of the above?

[MGB]

I don't even know how I'm supposed to continue this conversation, when "1 for 1, 1 for 1, pull ahead on cards + win" obviously described the game plan of other non-miracles decks, like Deathblade or Delver variants, aka things aggro also can't beat. I even said "different road, same destination."

Except that Miracles pulls ahead by actually generating card advantage via Counterbalance and Terminus.

The "1 for 1, pull ahead on cards + win" plan actually only works when, you know, you're generating real card advantage.

Refresher course on card advantage: Counterbalance trigger counters a Goblin Lackey. Even on CA. Counterbalance trigger counters a Goblin Matron after that +1 CA for Miracles player.
Or: Terminus is cast and bottoms a Goblin Lackey, a Goblin Warchief, and a Goblin Piledriver. +2 CA for Miracles player And so on.

Abrupt Decay hitting a Goblin Lackey generates exactly ZERO card advantage. And where is the draw spell from the BUG Delver player to actually generate CA and "Get ahead"? They don't play it. Those Abrupt Decay decks are pure tempo decks that fight on the same axis as the aggro decks and thus are not as hard to face as a control deck creating real, hard card advantage.

As for the other things you wrote...

Terminus is 1 for X, where X's value is determined by how you play the game. Have you ever wondered how Death and Taxes beats Miracles?
Aggro decks in standard may be able to beat 1 for 1 removal, but this is legacy son.

Again, assuming Miracles ceases to exists, how is a pure Aggro deck still supposed to beat any creature-based Midrange Control deck? Merfolk is probably the closet "aggro" deck in in legacy. Even with access to TNN, islandwalk, FoW and the ability to make absolutely huge fatties, they still struggle against these decks, so how is a pure aggro deck supposed to win? You won't have the disruptive elements of Maverick or Death and Taxes, nor the things that define Merfolk, nor the insane card advantage and tutoring abilities of a deck like Goblins, nor the speed and uninteractivity of burn, so again I ask you, how is an aggro deck supposed to win in legacy anymore?

The way they always have - with undercosted beats, reach and/or disruption. Remove Terminus from the format and aggro is once again more viable. It's not 1-for-1 removal that aggro is struggling against, it's the presence of Miracles and its cheap methods of generating card advantage against every deck in the format.

[Crimhead]

Right in your face! 10th Place at StarCityGames.com Premier IQ on 5/17/2015

Howmuch digging did you do to find the exception?. Lists from Worcester (4th & 16th) run zero preordain. One list runs only three DTT, the other only runs a singleton Ponder. You should know this - you're the one who said we need to "watch this closely". The expression " in your face" is rude a bit arrogant.

[Lemnear]

Howmuch digging did you do to find the exception?. Lists from Worcester (4th & 16th) run zero preordain. One list runs only three DTT, the other only runs a singleton Ponder. You should know this - you're the one who said we need to "watch this closely". The expression " in your face" is rude a bit arrogant.

There was no digging required as the list was discussed in the Grixis thread which made me aware of the similarities between running 4 Therapy + 4 Pyromancer in Grixis or 4 S&T + 4 Omniscience in OmniTell both surounded by the same 24-card-package. We need to watch this development to estimate if outside action is required for Legacy. Maybe 4 SFM, 1 Skull, 1 Jitte, 4 TNN is the next kill-package which gets paired with those 24 cards in question? It's a disturbing and linear development far worse than people already complained about in regards to 4 Ponder + 4 Brainstorm.

The douchy expression was picked due to you managing to be bold and clearly false three times within a page of postings. It needed only 1 link to prove it. You can now ponder about your sentence that "no other deck runs that many cantrips" if we already have two DtBs doing exactly this and more are likely to follow (see above)

[Crimhead]

You can now ponder about your sentence that "no other deck runs that many cantrips" if we already have two DtBs doing exactly this and more are likely to follow (see above)

No we don't. We have one DTB which runs those, and another which runs fewer except for one isolated incident (where it made tenth place).

[Lemnear]

No we don't. We have one DTB which runs those, and another which runs fewer except for one isolated incident (where it made tenth place).

You don't think we potentially facing a trend here?

[Crimhead]

You don't think we potentially facing a trend here?

One instance does not a trend make. I think it's a bit alarmist to talk about the format steering towards a ~20 lands/24 blue card core on the basis a single deck plus one other deck that did it once; especially considering it had an unexceptional finish and successful lists since have not followed suit.

I think you are seeing problems that don't exist. Maybe you are looking too hard?

you seem to think these decks are all different but to me differing ways of winning with the same engine is extremely stale.

If you think the only difference between Omnitell and Grixis is their win-cons, likely you are habitually misplaying against at least one of those decks!

Those "core" spells are not actually the heart of the deck. They are not business cards. Except for FOW (and the occasional BS interaction with discard), they have nothing to do with how your deck interacts with your opponent - aka how the deck actually plays. All those cards do is consistently allow you access to the cards which make your deck do what your deck actually does.

When a grixis control deck and a mono blue combo deck are running the same 24 of ~40 nonland cards, something's gotta give right?

Why? I think all this shows is how negligibly an ubiquitous cantrip package damages format diversity.

[LeoCop 90]

Quote Originally Posted by Jain_Mor View Post
When a grixis control deck and a mono blue combo deck are running the same 24 of ~40 nonland cards, something's gotta give right?
Why? I think all this shows is how negligibly an ubiquitous cantrip package damages format diversity.

I really cannot believe people are ok with the fact that every deck could play all the same 20 cards. I cannot believe even more that they would call this a diverse format. Aren't you getting tired of seeing your opponents and yourself cast brainstorm ponder force of will over and over everytime you walk into a tournament ? Probably i am crazy but i just can't conceive such a thing.