[article discussion] Duel With Ruel – A Look at Legacy: Two Matchups by Antoine Ruel

[Julian23]

Canonist is good because Reanimator is the beatdown. Thus, Reanimator has to play proactively ergo it will use it's countermagic to back-up it's plays (unlike Bant Survival which will use Countermagic as disruption). While Canonist doesn't stop disruptive countermagic it will prevent it from being used as protection.

[SpikeyMikey]

KRKKKK -- KRKKKK -- KRKKKK -- KRKKKK

You hear that noise? That's the sound of Nightmare opening a can of whupass! Although I would like to correct one minor, nigling little point. Antoine Ruel is a better *player* of Magic than anyone on this site. I don't know that I would say that he's a better Magic writer or a better Magic deckbuilder or a better Magic theorist. Most of the time, those 4 traits do not go hand in hand. Using the time period I'm familiar with (because I haven't given 2 shits about T2 or the Tour in close to a decade), guys like Flores, Shvartzman and Schneider were the best deck builders while guys like Finkel, Budde and Maher were the best players. Actually, Maher was a pretty solid builder as well, but Finkel? Terrible. Flores was (and still is, really) the best theorist but he's not much of a player. Not that this makes any difference in the point that Nightmare is making here, I just felt like tossing my two cents in.

The real question isn't "Did this person play flawlessly?" or "was this person spot on with *my* analysis of every little part of the format?" it's "overall, was this informative and enjoyable to read?" Because if you want every article to be the next "Who's the beatdown" you're going to be sorely disappointed. The fact that people are writing about the format and the fact that the pros are looking at it is a good sign. Or rather, it's a good indicator of the growing popularity of Legacy, and for anyone that likes to play Legacy, that's a good sign. At least, until the format collapses, but we've been over that enough times that it's not worth discussing anymore. It's not our format. We may have done the groundwork to get it where it is, but it doesn't belong to anyone here. It belongs to the Mt:G community as a whole, and I think you have to accept and respect that fact.

The point:

Step 1 - Bitch about the fact that there's no one writing articles about Legacy.
Step 2 - Don't in any way shape or form contribute to the pool of writers.
Step 3 - Skim any given article that touches on Legacy.
Step 4 - Tear the author of said article apart due to their "lack of experience" on the format - whether they're some random dude who played two formats shittily, or one of the best players in the world.
Step 5 - Turn off brain, go into offended Xenophobe mode.
Step 5a - Get belligerent about being called elitist/xenophobic.
Step 6 - Bitch about the fact that there's no one writing about Legacy.

Legacy is not a sacred cow. The people playing standard do, at least, have that right.
Regardless of the time you've spent playing Legacy, you are worse at Magic than Antoine Ruel. This is a fact. Sure, he didn't IMMEDIATELY recognize the intricacies of one of the most complex decks in the format, but neither did you during your first playtesting session, either. And I bet he never once miscounted mana or storm and lost to himself. You did.

Todd is just a regular Joe who plays in PTQs and shit. He's not a pro. He's not any different than you guys, other than he choses to chase the dream of the pro-tour, rather than chasing the dream of being a Legacy playing nobody - which is what we all are. Even those of us who aren't, still are. He is as prone (and as permitted) to making mistakes in gameplay and writing as any of us. And trust me, you all do it too.