All B/R update speculation.

[MorphBerlin]

This is an opinion without any facts supporting it. Is like: "this is the best possible world". It is not.


Vintage t1 is still together with 1 brainstorm, and lot of fanboys were crying about the end of t1 with banning brainstorm.

brainstorm is broken: Check it, in GP Birmingham 12 deck in top 16 was playing brainstorm and 11 of those 12 plays DRS too. Other decks were Combo or COTV Deck.

less diversity -> less fun

today decks are: DRS + Brainstorm and blue shell + Finishers / COTV DECK / HIgh speed Combo.
is it fun? i don't think so.

Funny that you use vintage as reasing were there is a card that clearly would be restricted if you use objective measures: Mirshra's Workshop

Let me guess you wouldn't want shop to be restricted would you?

[Dice_Box]

Let me guess you wouldn't want shop to be restricted would you?

I know this question is not directed at me, and I know I am on the flip side of this in Vintage, but I feel like in Vintage you need something that does make Blue piles of Restricted stop and think. The issue with Shops is the recent printings have helped it far far more than the recent printings have helped Blue. It's also changed the deck into something I don't enjoy.

When I tell people I have three Tabernacle they think I'm nuts, but I use to play Terra Nova and I loved that deck. These days it's unplayable because so much of it has been restricted for other cards sins. Mostly the two Walkers (Hangerback and Ballista) and Inspector did this. The days of playing cards like Forgemaster are long gone and I feel like the changes in Shops have made the deck better and the format worse.

There was a time when the best thing you could do against Shops was Dack their shit. Now they just shoot the fucker in response and sac the target. It's just too much. And just like I once argued for the protection of Brainstorm and my views changed (Yea, if you look far enough back I was on the other side) I am starting to feel the same way about Shops.

Because Vintage, like Legacy, is not as fun as it was once. Sadly I don't feel like the removal of Shops would change that because Blue would just take over unaposed, but if you give the format Thorn and Chalice back at least Hatebears is a thing again.

[Crimhead]

But here's the rub, just about every single argument you use to defend Brainstorm being legal I could make to argue that Recall should be. It would support "A wide range of strategies", it would "Not really be homogeneous in 70% of the format because it goes in combo and Midrange" and it "Would offer fun and interesting play" for those who like it.

...switch Recall out for Gush. Another broken Blue effect.

You could use the Brainstorm arguments for other "broken blue effects", but you might very well be wrong.

Case in point - DTT. Sure, it found a home in all sorts of archetypes, but it pushed combo decks to OP levels. Likewise TC went in lots of decks, but Delver was the real winner.

BS has been shown to have very high density but still resulting in a diverse format (from the archetype/strategy perspective). We can only guess what the format might turn into if we unleashed Gush or Recall.

I'm not sure Legacy is unhealthy, but if it starts looking like Birmingham it will be more "sick" than I have ever seen it.

(FoW notwithstanding), DRS and BS are the strongest cards in the "blue-stew" fair decks that might be plaguing the format. A BS ban would set these decks back, but a DRS ban would more likely cause a complete strategic reevaluation. To me that makes DRS a more sensible ban, never mind the splash damage from a BS ban.

This is really the question - if we need a ban to address the homogeneous "good-stuff" piles, do we want BS or DRS. A lot of us are pretty biased though, because they desire the ban to also hit S&T, Miracles, Prowess, Infect, and Storm! Its like we want to pass legislation to curb the good-stuff, but people want to tack on a rider.

If we were to agree (even for argument's sake) that the intention is to reign in the BUGx fair decks, there is a strong case for banning DTS over BS.

For the record, I think it's foolish that BS should have immunity. As we have no control or say, this is a theoretical/academic debate, I am happy to discuss what should be done, and not just what could be done.

[Crimhead]

DnT players tend to face all of the cantrip decks in a very similar fashion, so we have always felt the format was inbred.

This surprises me.

I've never sleeved up D&T, but from what I hear Sneaky Show or UB Reanimator are almost a cinch, UR Delver is very hard to beat, and Miracles is a close to even grind.

I would think this would cause some pretty serious adjustments. I know with Lands I approach those decks very differently, and the matches feel very different.

[Dice_Box]

You could use the Brainstorm arguments for other "broken blue effects", but you might very well be wrong.

Might be, might not be. Don't really care either way. Was talking about someone else's point that I agreed with and I think I'm right. Not in the mood to fight in the weeds over a broad point of view though.

[Crimhead]

Might be, might not be. Don't really care either way. Was talking about someone else's point that I agreed with and I think I'm right. Not in the mood to fight in the weeds over a broad point of view though.

What I'm saying is it is wrong to assume an argument which app!is to BS applies equally to other powerful blue draw spells. I provided 2 counterexamples to make short work of that assertion.

I tend to think I'm right, but I do address the arguments against the things I say.

[Dice_Box]

What I'm saying is it is wrong to think an argument which app!is to BS app!is equally to other powerful blue draw spells. I provided 2 counterexamples.

I tend to think I'm right, but I do address the arguments against the things I say.

I think you can use all (or at least most) of the same arguments for keeping Brainstorm in the format for removing cards like Recall, Gush or Necro off the list. Like, if we where taking these arguments to heart and extending them to other cards you could make a case, because most of the arguments are mostly based on such things as "Skill" or "Enjoyment". Abstract reasoning.

I can reason I would have more fun in Legacy if I got to run Fastbond, should we unban it? I think it would be skill testing to balance out life lose against some decks and I feel it would be better if I could do more broken things with a card that is obviously unreasonable.

Anyway. Like I said, I'm really not looking for fine point debate today. I was agreeing with a borad statement. If you want more than that from me, feel free to PM me and I will get back to you when I feel like a back and forth.

[Crimhead]

Because it's the cheapest competitive option that resembles normal Magic...

This might be a big force behind the meta - too many players wanting to play "normal Magic".

We've had a lot of growth in the last ten years. Anybody who's been playing MTG for less than a decade has been bottle-fed "normal Magic", and will likely avoid Lands, Miracles, Stompy, Elves, and other decks that prey on the good-stuff fair decks. Legacy can't be diverse if people don't want to play different strategies.

[Nielsie]

I don't understand how people can keep defending Brainstorm when Wizards basically admitted the only reason it's not on the banlist is because of pillar of the format whatever blabla...

Banning DRS will hurt some non-brainstorm options much harder than fixing the format. Another Brainstorm deck will become the top-dog. Something in the cantrip-shell should be targeted. I guess Ponder but I doubt that will be enough these days so I guess Ponder and Preordain have to go if Brainstorm stays untouchable. Looks like we go the same road as vintage in that case were it's shop that causes one victim after the other.

I am also sick of hearing Brainstorm causes this wonderful environment because it slots into any archetype. Misstep, Recall, DTT slot into any archetype as wel. Sure one deck will be better than the others, how is that different from any other point in time. Those 3 cards will not reduce the format to 2 decks. They would give a field full of blue archetypes with one being a little bit better than the others. But somehow we can all agree that those cards need to be banned?

On the other hand, oh no, watch out! DRS makes good-piles way too overpowered. Newsflash: it's not because of DRS, it's the combination of Brainstorm/fetches/duals and the fucked up good stuff cards blue got lately: delver, leovold, tnn, snapcaster. Blue has so many in color threats they don't need to splash heavily anymore. I wouldn't be surprised if we will be left with another good-stuff brainstorm pile after a DRS ban but without some of the non-brainstorm options as Dark Maverick.

Anyway, when the time comes that Wizards pulls the trigger I fully expect them to ban DRS or Probe. Both options would be terrible I think.

[MorphBerlin]

I know this question is not directed at me, and I know I am on the flip side of this in Vintage, but I feel like in Vintage you need something that does make Blue piles of Restricted stop and think. The issue with Shops is the recent printings have helped it far far more than the recent printings have helped Blue. It's also changed the deck into something I don't enjoy.

When I tell people I have three Tabernacle they think I'm nuts, but I use to play Terra Nova and I loved that deck. These days it's unplayable because so much of it has been restricted for other cards sins. Mostly the two Walkers (Hangerback and Ballista) and Inspector did this. The days of playing cards like Forgemaster are long gone and I feel like the changes in Shops have made the deck better and the format worse.

There was a time when the best thing you could do against Shops was Dack their shit. Now they just shoot the fucker in response and sac the target. It's just too much. And just like I once argued for the protection of Brainstorm and my views changed (Yea, if you look far enough back I was on the other side) I am starting to feel the same way about Shops.

Because Vintage, like Legacy, is not as fun as it was once. Sadly I don't feel like the removal of Shops would change that because Blue would just take over unaposed, but if you give the format Thorn and Chalice back at least Hatebears is a thing again.

I only watch vintage and not play it, and in addition the VSL is skewed in that regard. So I didnt want to go deep into how vintage should be managed.

I only wanted to point out the hipocracy in people who say BS should be banned because of power level but at the same time those "I hate blue"-players are perfectly fine sleeving up their workshops for Vintage because it is a "Pillar of the format" there.

[jolssoni]

This might be a big force behind the meta - too many players wanting to play "normal Magic".

We've had a lot of growth in the last ten years. Anybody who's been playing MTG for less than a decade has been bottle-fed "normal Magic", and will likely avoid Lands, Miracles, Stompy, Elves, and other decks that prey on the good-stuff fair decks. Legacy can't be diverse if people don't want to play different strategies.

I'd put Elves and (Eldrazi) Stompy in the somewhat normal camp as well, there's nothing more normal than vomiting handful of creatures on board asap, some of which were Standard legal not too long ago. The only "unintuitive" thing about Eldrazi is that you need to mulligan to Chalice or really explosive t2 TKS t3 Smasher hands to have game vs the rest of the format.

[kinda]

I think wizards should post a pillars of the format list. Then we would know what is untouchable. Brainstorm is confirmed...but Drs and ponder?

[guillemnicolau]

I think wizards should post a pillars of the format list. Then we would know what is untouchable. Brainstorm is confirmed...but Drs and ponder?

Do you want Deathrite to become a +20€ card? If dealers knew which cards will never be banned, they would go all-in and these cards prices would skyrocket.

[Nielsie]

I only watch vintage and not play it, and in addition the VSL is skewed in that regard. So I didnt want to go deep into how vintage should be managed.

I only wanted to point out the hipocracy in people who say BS should be banned because of power level but at the same time those "I hate blue"-players are perfectly fine sleeving up their workshops for Vintage because it is a "Pillar of the format" there.

Nice generalization... where the hell does this come from? Can you point me to some facts or are you just making this up?

I think Brainstorm should be banned in Legacy and Shops should be restricted in Vintage (with unrestriction of lodestone and chalice, maybe 3sphere). But I don't even play Vintage, I probably don't even care what happens over there, it has nothing to do with Legacy...

[kombatkiwi]

I am also sick of hearing Brainstorm causes this wonderful environment because it slots into any archetype. Misstep, Recall, DTT slot into any archetype as wel. Sure one deck will be better than the others, how is that different from any other point in time. Those 3 cards will not reduce the format to 2 decks. They would give a field full of blue archetypes with one being a little bit better than the others. But somehow we can all agree that those cards need to be banned?

Some people have made this argument in a few posts and the difference is because Brainstorm has a different effect on the quality of the gameplay

If my opponent has Brainstorm in their opener and I don't, then they do probably have a slight advantage (it's a good card obviously), but this is nowhere near the same as if the opponent has Recall and I don't, in which case they just get insanely ahead for no investment/effort. I think it's bad for the game to have individual cards that are so obviously more powerful than everything else to the point where we end up with this "Leyline of winpercentage" subgame - match results become largely determined by who draws the good card and who doesn't. To a lesser degree this is also why I think Misstep should stay banned.

While Gush is a very good card and unbanning it would be a big boost to the 'blue stew', it's not a card that you can use to give yourself a huge advantage on turn 1 and is also very skill-testing to use properly, so I probably wouldn't be too upset if they unbanned Gush for the same reason I think Brainstorm is fine.

DTT is a problem for how it enables combo; I think having Omnitell be the best deck is shit. I don't think I mind it as like a Gifts Ungiven for control decks but there's no way to guarantee this is how it would end up being used.

[Crimhead]

Banning DRS will hurt some non-brainstorm options much harder than fixing the format. Another Brainstorm deck will become the top-dog...
...I wouldn't be surprised if we will be left with another good-stuff brainstorm pile after a DRS ban but without some of the non-brainstorm options as Dark Maverick.

It's okay if the best deck is good-stuff with Brainstorm. It's not okay if too many decks are playing similar strategies.

Dark Maverick is quite the fringe deck, and doesn't belong in the conversation (anymore than DDFT belonged in the SDT conversation). Exalting KotR is not the goal of banning cards!

Grixis, Czech, and BUG variations would be hit, and fair decks like Infect, Thresh, Prowess, DnT, and Burn stand to gain. Even if it's only the first three decks that pick up (which I doubt), they are more diverse and (less powerful) than the slew of BUGx good-stuff we are currently seeing (arguably) too much of.

I am also sick of hearing Brainstorm causes this wonderful environment because it slots into any archetype. Misstep, Recall, DTT slot into any archetype as wel. Sure one deck will be better than the others, how is that different from any other point in time.

It's okay for one deck to be a little better than the others. DTT, pushed S&T beyond "a little better". Misstep pushed NO RUG. I suspect Recall makes Storm (or High Tide) too good, but it's anyone's guess.

Brainstorm has existed in balanced metas more often than not. I'm not saying it causes a wonderful environment, but rather that it doesn't hinder one. I think it's ridiculous that BS is "protected". But I don't think its the best ban if the purpose is to take BUGx fair decks down a notch. BS is the right ban if you want an enormous shake-up and to take the colour blue down a notch across the field.

[hovercraft]

DRS ban would only work if they printed a fixed version of him that can only give G/B mana(and maybe just a 1/1) and not any colour. The issue is that he's too easily splash-able and fixes every mana base. Otherwise U/x brainstorm decks will still dominate.

[Watersaw]

Some people have made this argument in a few posts and the difference is because Brainstorm has a different effect on the quality of the gameplay

If my opponent has Brainstorm in their opener and I don't, then they do probably have a slight advantage (it's a good card obviously), but this is nowhere near the same as if the opponent has Recall and I don't, in which case they just get insanely ahead for no investment/effort. I think it's bad for the game to have individual cards that are so obviously more powerful than everything else to the point where we end up with this "Leyline of winpercentage" subgame - match results become largely determined by who draws the good card and who doesn't. To a lesser degree this is also why I think Misstep should stay banned.

While Gush is a very good card and unbanning it would be a big boost to the 'blue stew', it's not a card that you can use to give yourself a huge advantage on turn 1 and is also very skill-testing to use properly, so I probably wouldn't be too upset if they unbanned Gush for the same reason I think Brainstorm is fine.

DTT is a problem for how it enables combo; I think having Omnitell be the best deck is shit. I don't think I mind it as like a Gifts Ungiven for control decks but there's no way to guarantee this is how it would end up being used.

On the "Leyline of Winpercentage" comment, I feel like we're already there with how important Force of Will has been since forever. This is not a condemnation of the card or a claim that it should be banned, but given the prevalence of fast combo and lock pieces decks are straight unplayable if they can't stop a turn 2 kill (EDIT: a more comprehensive/anal way to word this is "can't answer a game-ending threat being presented as early as turn 2"). There is an entire subsest of decks based on the idea that your opponent simply won't have the card to stop you in their opening hand, and it wasn't that long ago where people were arguing that Belcher is proof that we need Brainstorm in format.

[Finn]

I have been rolling this around in my head for a bit, and dice_box's update (as well as the dialog in here) really has me thinking. Perception appears to be the rub of it all. Lemme get an unscientific piece of data here.

To all:
Do you feel that facing grixis delver and facing the control variant (Czech) is much the same? To flesh that idea out some, if after two rounds of a tournament, you had seen Czech in rd 1 and Grixis in rd 2, would you be hoping to face "something different" in rd 3, JUST FOR SOME VARIATION? (These guys make up a higher portion of wining decks than Miracles ever did) The caps indicate that your desire is not out of a bad BUG matchup or something, but rather just the desire for variety. The converse to this would be that you would be entering rd 3 feeling that your first two opponents had sufficiently different decks/strategies such that you might view facing another Grixis or another Czech some time in the Swiss would be a repeat, but not oppressively omnipresent.

BTW, perception is also the issue with Brainstorm. My adversaries would argue that there are so many cantrip decks with so many different central strategies that it is simply a feature of the format that cantrips are king, and not a bug. I and my brethren view the issue to be that the cantrip engine requires decks of all stripes to adopt the same tactics to accomplish those strategies - or they simply aren't competitive. We view this as a real problem of homogenization, albeit harder to feel than the DRS debate. So yeah, it is what we, the player feel about the metagame that is at issue.

[Whitefaces]

I have been rolling this around in my head for a bit, and dice_box's update (as well as the dialog in here) really has me thinking. Perception appears to be the rub of it all. Lemme get an unscientific piece of data here.

To all:
Do you feel that facing grixis delver and facing the control variant (Czech) is much the same? To flesh that idea out some, if after two rounds of a tournament, you had seen Czech in rd 1 and Grixis in rd 2, would you be hoping to face "something different" in rd 3, JUST FOR SOME VARIATION? (These guys make up the majority of winning decks. At it's height, I don't think Miracles came close to 50%) The caps indicate that your desire is not out of a bad BUG matchup or something, but rather just the desire for variety. The converse to this would be that you would be entering rd 3 feeling that your first two opponents had sufficiently different decks/strategies such that you might view facing another Grixis or another Czech some time in the Swiss would be a repeat, but not oppressively omnipresent.

I suppose this is going to change based on what deck you're playing yourself, but for me usually playing fair blue decks, no. They feel very different. G Delver is an aggro deck, Pile is midrange/'control' (loose definition of the word). One has Daze and Wasteland while the other does not, this already makes a huge difference on how you play vs them. I'd be interested in knowing what decks the people that see them as the same thing are playing.