First of all, "whining" is a terrible term to use (as is "bitching, and so on). No one who disagrees with you is going to suddenly agree with you because you tried to invalidate their concerns. You'll get the people that agree with you already and think that others must be simply underinformed/stupid/malicious, but others will be off-put by your attitude and then you're morally no different from Mark Levin, really.
It assumes a priori that your opponent's argument is invalid, and since proving a point like this is the entire point of reasoned, civil debate, its use renders your own arguments dismissable and is to be avoided.
It has been suggested that people always complain about Standard, which is true.
This is because dissatisfaction with the status quo is an inherent aspect of human nature. While Legacy is a fun format, it would be strange to think that it was fully optimized for enjoyability (a vague factor which includes far more than mere skill level or reducing variance as others have suggested; if variance weren't itself a huge part of what makes a game fun, we wouldn't be drawing random cards, we'd be playing Chess).
It's natural, necessary even, that people have different visions of what the game and thus also Legacy should look like. I can think of a dozen cards off the top of my head I wish did not exist and roughly five hundred I wish did. I wish Wizards would push LD and put decent, cheap card draw in other colors, at least green and black. I mean this is natural enough in a good format like Legacy, let alone Standard where the format very often does suck.
Bannings draw some special ire, however, which is understandable but not desirable. People resent the idea of having their investments devalued by a banning. The reality is, however, that this is a collectible card game, and fluctuating card prices are part and parcel of that. It doesn't always go one way, and if real estate isn't a reliable investment there's no particular reason why your Japanese foil Brainstorms should be. If you're in this game a while- and if you're playing Legacy you probably have been- it's inevitable that cards you own that were worth much are suddenly going to be worth little. While it may strike people harder that a card is outright banned, this effect can also come from power creep, rules changes and reprintings, and the difference isn't much. If I call for Werebear to be banned or for Tarmogoyf to be printed, the effect is pretty much the same as far as Werebear is concerned.
Fundamentally, it is civil to make a case for any change to the format, as long as one behaves civilly and makes an effort to create a persuasive argument, and fundamentally uncivil to complain that someone voices an opinion contrary to the status quo. This is true even when the argument is for something that anyone familiar with the power balance of the format should view as a truly terrible idea, like banning Force of Will.
tl;dr: What you call whining is generally people voicing opinions of those you disagree with- who may be completely wrong headed, but still have a right to make their case- and you should just get over it. This is a forum for discussion, and any argument should stand or fall on its own merits, not based on some hivemind hatred of challenges to the status quo.
Also I lied about the article, all you get is this post.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
This is a point I disagree about. With Vintage as a benchmark, there are certain cards that will NEVER be printed due to imitating the power of certain cards that are restricted in the Vintage format. With this in mind, there is a "cap" on the power creep of cards (for Legacy at least).Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
Take Lightning Bolt for example. Would it be possible for WotC to print a nearly identical version of it with the difference being it deals one more point of damage? Yes? Is it a direction they want or should take?
Yet Lightning Bolt has gotten worse precisely because of power creep; because it's much less often reliable removal than it once was.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
Some cards do get worse from the power creep, but Lightning Bolt hasn't seen any less play. As a creature kill spell yes, it's weaker, but as a small creature killer and a reach spell? Nearly as potent as the day Alpha was printed. Increasing its damage would balance it in one way but imbalance it in another.
Some cards also get better from the Power Creep (Survival of the Fittest), though you already said that I think.
Edit: On a side note, accusing someone of whining as a form of argument to invalidate that persons position is a poor form of arguing. Resorting to calling others "whiners" when they may very well have a legitimate point should invalidate yourself for even using such a form of argument.
I laughed at the picture. I'm a visual person firstly.
I'll read the rest later and elaborate on this post.
West side
Find me on MTGO as Koby or rukcus -- @MTGKoby on Twitter
* Maverick is dead. Long live Maverick!
My Legacy stream
My MTG Blog - Work in progress
I can't even tell if this thread is a troll.
Are you whining about whining?
Only posts when drunk.
Dear Scordata,
It's not.
Glad to be of assistance.
Regards,
- Jack M.F. Elgin
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
Contrary to the belief of the internet, bringing up your point of view isn't whining. I know you think it's really witty to use that phrase, but after 12 years, people need to stop it. I genuinely don't understand the logic of someone who uses that little catch phrase, is it just that you truly don't believe a group of people can discuss something so much so that virtually all forms of communication between one person disagreeing with another boils down to whining?
The post itself has to do with people dismissing other people's points of view through the use of the term whining. Is it at all possible for you to see how that and whining itself differ?
The sad thing about this is that banning Force of Will is not such a terrible idea when you actually try to think about it.
But whenever you try to have any debate about it there is always a guy who think he looks cool and brillant by saying something in the line of "Omg ban force of will, you should ban yourself noob you know nothing about legacy fow save legacy from roflmao combo". And then a few people who are even more stupid come and applaud the retard argument...
I may be wrong on that subject but then i would like to know why. Yet people just refuse the debate on the basics of supposed common sense :/
Because banning Force of Will would enable a lot of fast combo decks to take over, and that would make the format uninteresting and unfun.
I mean I know you just said that but that's the actual reality. If Force didn't exist Belcher would probably be a Tier 1 deck.
I mean I've never paid attention to you before, so I'm really not sure what the point of telling me you're ignoring me is except as a desperate and unintentionally ironic cry for attention.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
I can understand that but i'm not sure that would be the reality.
A lot of the best combos deck in the format actually play Force and that is one of the reason they are strong. Fow can act as a way to protect their combo against hate or as a way to slow opponent down in order to find its combo piece. Talking about blue combo decks like hive mind, reanimator, painter, show and tell. But those deck are rather "slow" and i get they are not the main problem.
So fast combo decks :
- Dredge doesnt care about force, lets move on.
- Storm is certainly the most problematic. But there is really a lot of hate you can use against it, especially now the MM is in the format. Force is good because it slows it down. But most of the time MM can actually do the same job, for every color. Then you can throw a lot of hate to beat it. Discard, hatebears, leyline, counters, chalice, ... you choice.
- Belcher, SI and other all in decks : those really aren't so good. They are inconsistant and very succeptible to disruption. If you can live past turn 1, any piece of disruption will do the job. Again, i think MM can help any deck to prevent the turn 1 win.
MM helps any color to deal with pesky turn 1 wins to the point Force is not really needed anymore. I mean a hand with MM, mana tithe and gaddock teeg would beat any combo deck.
With Force being such a versatile answer people dont think too much about it but really there is a lot of tools to keep combo in check. If fast combo really end up being too powerful i think the problem would rather be the presence of LED than the lack of Force. All the really broken combo enablers are banned in legacy.
Belcher Can Just go Mox+ any color card, Petal, Manamorphose, LED, and any Spirit Guide to kill you with Belcher, or Empty Warrens. It makes a lot more lines of play than a Pierce, Daze or Misstep can stop.
Also, your hand does nothing to SnT and 4 mana.
Yes belcher can combo turn 1 through MM but hitting tinder wall, ritual or rite of flamme will likely slow them down. While it is a bit harder they can also beat a Force of will hand with Empty Warrens. That doesnt make it a tier1 deck.
Yea it was just a sample hand. Still it is great against a lot of combos. Not many things beat SnT with 3 manas and a fow. I mean there are always hands that will beat you, doesnt mean you can't win the match.
Did not say SnT with FoW, also did not say Empty vs FoW either, But in both cases you can At least attempt to FoW the LED or SnT.
What I really don't understand is people who express contempt of the "whiners". The choice itself of the term "to whine" is full of it.
Real superiority is expressed by accepting a phenomenon and ignoring it. Expressing contempt is probably meaning they unconsciously fear that "whiners" may be right.
Against SnT having fow banned or not isnt relevant. 3 cases:
- You have fow. More chance to stop it.
- He has fow. Harder to stop. More chance to die.
- You both have fow. Blank.
Against belcher yes fow is a great card. It is a lot better than MM. But the same way belcher can win through MM it can win through fow. MM can still help to beat it by giving something to disrupt/slow it on the draw. Belcher would be better, but tier 1 i'm not sure. If they dont combo out on the play through MM you can throw a lot of hate at it. And hate is devastating for belcher.
In the case of SnT, not having a FoW as backup or digging for one can lead to a game loss and add to that the SnT deck has to have 4 cards to your 2 in both cases 2 and 3.
Case 1 is FoW+ blue card
Case 2 is FoW + blue card + Emrakul + SnT
Case 3 is case 1 vs case 2
You tell me which one is more common? Not to say a T1 discard is strong against Case 2 but not as much against case 1.
The real point you should do here is: not every deck run FoW, but every SnT do, so case 1 isn't as common as it appear to be.
However, FoW isn't the only answer to SnT. Discard is efficient against it, as are a lot of other cards like Oblivion ring and Metamorph. This is especially relevant when you consider that you can lay a card like Stalker with SnT and then oblivion ring or edict their Emrakul on their turn, meaning they are EXTREMELY behind. SnT is far more interactive than any storm will ever be. Worst case scenario, everyone start playing metamorph (and fatties) in their sideboards.
Well SnT having his combo in hand has nothing to do with him or you having fow. Even if you dont have fow he stills need 2 cards. If we consider you have as much chance to draw your fow, in 50% of the case it give you more chances to fight and in 50% it make it harder to disrupt.
Edit :Of course case 1 is more common. Case 2 is a win situation. But that has nothing to do with fow. Its like saying :
Case 1 any 3 cards
Case 2 any 3 cards + Emrakul + SnT
Which one is the more common?
What i'm saying is that if you remove the 4fow from both deck the matchup percentage will more or less remain the same.
This is actually my point. Against combo fow is great because it can disrupt fast combo on the draw. Which is a role MM can take to some extend. After that other cards can do the job.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
