Sounds racist.Originally Posted by Aggro_zombies
Challenge accepted.
I'm glad I beat him, he clearly doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to bannings. Although, I agree with him that combo is the best archetype in the format. I walk into every match-up saying, "I'm going to win" for a few reasons.
1.) I feel like there is so such thing as a bad match-up.
2.) It's good to be confident when playing.
3.) I think that's it.
Quoted for Redundancy
You want to shake up the format? Ban the Dual Lands.
What is it with all the terrible Legacy articles this year? This is seriously the worst pile of garbage I've ever read.
Just have to chime in and say that this feels like the most wide open format I can remember. At this time there is no need to ban any new cards.
I actually didn't think this was a bad read. Oh, I disagree with the author on virtually every point he makes, but he wasn't arrogant and it was obvious that he'd put more thought into this than most people do before they go pontificating. He seems like a good guy, if a little off base. He even admitted that he was biased towards storm, which is more than the rest of the "storm is overpowered" crowd.
But I'm going to let you all in on a little secret. Whenever someone backs up their take on theory or deckbuilding with their play record, my skepticism goes up 1000%. Because the best deckbuilders are rarely good players. Oh, there are a few, Pat Chapin comes to mind, as does Brian Kowal. But generally, good players are mediocre builders and theorists and vice versa. Mike Flores is the greatest theorist and builder in the history of Magic, but if you were to make a list of the 50 most proficient players, he wouldn't get anywhere near it. The Finkels and the Buddes may be HoF caliber players, but their construction skills are lacking.
Generally, good players win tournaments, not good deckbuilders. This makes sense, as a suboptimal card is less likely to knock you out of a tournament than a suboptimal play. But being a good Magic player does not automatically one a good builder, any more than being a good baseball player would automatically make you a good coach.
Why don't we just ban all the Legacy staples while we are at it? Then we will all just be playing Nourishing Lich...
Seriously.. this guy wants to ban what makes Legacy. You can't ban CB or ToA. Its nonsensical. How is the NFL supposed to function if they ban the football? It would be an entirely different game, and frankly I think the aftermath of such bannings would suck. You would have to keep banning things until we were back in the Dark Ages. If CB and ToA are gone than Nacatl's run wild. Ban those, then you have O.P Merfolk... ban a few lords.. etc. Right now Legacy is in a very nice situation. The card pool has expanded to the point at which every good card has several counterstrategies. Nothing is O.P and combo will remain in check because its difficult to play. If it becomes easy to play, WotC will step in and ban something, hence the MT ban.
What pisses me off is that you don't see players bitching about Zoo being king of the format. Why is interaction all of a sudden a standard for something being fair and unfair? Don't you think its a little ridiculous that you could interact with Zoo and still lose consistently? At least combo players are nice and end your life quickly. Zoo players torture and give you hope that you might pull something out of your ass.
Exactly.
People shouldn't get their panties in a knot just because someone thought of a good idea. Otherwise, you are punishing innovation. The beauty of Legacy is that it REWARDS innovation. People like Saito who pull something out of thin air like a Black Merfolk splash ought to be rewarded (seriously never even heard of it until GP). The same concept can be applied to the team who invented Flash, etc. If you punish those people by banning their innovations then you are encouraging players to play the same old shit and not take any risks with their lists. I like this format because its constantly changing. Regulating it more closely would probably be a disaster.
Luck is a residue of design.
I'm an aspiring Psychedelic Trance musician. Please feel free to enjoy my sense of life:
http://soundcloud.com/vacrix
Expect me or die. I play SI.
His article reminds me of the adage for Vintage "ban everything until Mana Drain dominates, and then ban Drain". I'll give him that his points were clear and had some modicum of thought put into them, but it comes off as a list of decks that he doesnt like so he wants them crippled/destroyed. He doesnt seem to understand that Legacy is currently the most diverse and relatively healthy format that exists and it therefore should be left alone.
Are there annoying or broken cards, sure, and there are decks that can seem unfair. But for every problem there is an answer and nothing is supremely dominating on a long-term basis. Indeed, the format is incredibly diverse and healthy; the GP results prove it. Proposing a small ban in this environment requires a hell of an argument; a ban for this many cards is just laughable.
Also, once you delve into the realm of "ban these cards to fix the format that would happen after you ban the first set of cards", you really lose a lot of credibility for your argument.
Be polite, be professional, but have a plan to kill everyone you meet.
Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
YOU'RE GIVING ME A TIME MACHINE IN ORDER TO TREAT MY SLEEP DISORDER.
If this would imply my namesake card could be a tournament staple sign me up too.
This article was a serious waste, I figured something as pretentious as "fixing legacy" wouldn't be worth my time - but alas! Somehow all the words merged together to form nothing but w's, a's and h's for me.
This is unfortunately an article where the author's ego has hindered his ability to understand the format.
Suddenly, Fluffy realized she wasn't quite like the other bunnies anymore.
-Team R&D-
-noitcelfeR maeT-
I think you're all being too hard on the guy. It's not a shining gem of an article, but it's a big step up from Birklid. The biggest problem with it is that the author doesn't articulate his thought process well enough; he makes jumps in logic without detailing the parts in between. He's off base too, but he basically states that it's an op ed piece and that it may not be what the community wants.
Evidently the author was right about at least one thing: It may not be what the community wants. (And it doesn't look to be even close, judging from most of the reactions so far...)
Bless your heart, we must consider Blue/White Tempo's strategy and win percentages in an entirely different deck thread. -4eak
From what I can tell, Bill Stark and co. should probably stick to non-Legacy formats. At least we won't have to hear straw man arguments about how awful we are for another 6 months when Pros care about Legacy against because of another GP.
Well that was a complete waste of time. This is why the Mods on this site lock every "this card needs to be banned" thread. All the changes he would make would totally kill a very fun format and I know I would stop playing.
I just want to say that if you ban said cards then another combo would just come to the front. The first one that comes to mind is Thopter Sword.
Quote Scrumdogg @ Amrod's:
"Didn't you know that Mike Glow invented this format?? We are all just renting it."
The EPIC Syndicate - Grindermen
Team Disquailified Poster Duey Cheatem & Howe.
QFFT!
Folks say Combo or Dredge players act arrogant or overconfidant. Well, a certain degree of confedence comes from playing these decks, as you pretty much are playing the 600 pound gorilla in the room when you know what the fuck you're doing.
This looks like a job for me.
Most of my posts will be written from my phone, so please excuse the eventual lack of proper typing.
So combo blasts everything out of the water, but the power level of Wild Nacatl, Survival of the Fittest and Life from the Loam is unacceptable? wtf?
If you're arguing that a couple dozen different decks are all unacceptable in power level you might not have an argument.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
I am surprised that nobody has mentioned that Ari made his list of cards to be banned based on disabling the mechanics he sees creating masturbatory games. I can certainly understand his perspective. I hate those kinds of games. That is why I can confidently say that he does not know what he is talking about. There are no decks that can negotiate all the cards on his list, of course. But I have built, tested, discarded, and started over enough times to say that all the stuff he is afraid will dominate games can be side stepped with some smart deck design without donating the remainder of your matchups. We have seen articles like this before written by people who are unable or unwilling to dive into the grinding of design and test. He just can not see how it is done so he figures it can't be. I wish would-be article authors would take a moment to consider exactly how many ways there are to skin a cat in this format.
It hardly matters anyway. If WOTC banned half the cards he wants, there would be no Legacy community.
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job."
"Politicians are like diapers. They should be changed often and for the same reason."
"Governing is too important to be left to people as silly as politicians."
"Politicians were mostly people who'd had too little morals and ethics to stay lawyers."
Wow. Wisdom lies here.
Here is the problem with the article.
Ari Lax is a flaming bag of douche who shouldn't be talking about Legacy.
Kid may know standard, and may be able to almost top8 at a GP with a Combo deck, facing all aggro decks day1. . . but playing with him locally he isn't that great.
He actually beat Saito on day 1.
However, he didn't board in his Bobs against Bryant Cook, which kind of gave away that he doesn't know that much about Legacy..
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote