[Article] TCRF: Griselbanned?

[Aggro_zombies]

@catmint: Mystical Tutor provides precedent for banning a component of combo decks when those combo decks were not putting up results that suggested the need for a dominance-based ban. Sometimes, cards can be banned for being basically unfun or basically overpowered even when the decks built around them are not crushing the metagame.

I mean, right now, combo in all its guises is probably at or approaching a historical high-water mark for the format. Reducing the number of Easy Mode combo decks (using Griselly Bear) would put a damper on combo and open up space for strategies better at interacting with the battlefield than with the stack.

[catmint]

Sure, dominance is not the only reason for bannings. Wanting more creature combat is a strange thing to me since modern and standard are all about creature combat anyway. The format should also not be "too combo heavy", but as long as fair decks dominate and many other fair and unfair decks are viable this is not the case. That some strategies are "fun" or "unfun" is a valid argument. A little bit up the taste of the people involved though but I can see how Show&Tell fits there. Personally I hate playing against a Goblin Lakey but enjoy it very much playing with and against any combo deck.

Combo beeing on a high is relative. It is obviously the season for combo in the metagame cycle:
Show&Tell is much stronger than in February where it was pretty weak (top of a wave)
ANT is DTB after a 2 month break

On the other hand Dredge is superlow, TES & High-Tide are very low.

If you compare it with February 2012: Dredge, ANT and Reanimator were pretty clearly DTB #3,4 and 5 scoring together 27% of the points in the top 8 of the DTB decks. Similar is it now with Show&Tell variants and Storm scoring 26% of the points in the top 8 DTB decks.

So according to this comparison the presence of combo is not vastly different from Febraruy 2012. Given that the meta will react more to show & tell and tin-fins, the overall combo % of good finishes will decrease again.

[LOurs]

Reducing the number of Easy Mode combo decks (using Griselly Bear) would put a damper on combo and open up space for strategies better at interacting with the battlefield than with the stack.

I understand your idea and I would tend to agree with, but I also think that the real issue is more about how people are estimating the skill required to win with a specific deck than about the kind of engine this same deck is using.

I mean : lots of players just hate to loose to what they consider as autopilot.dec
So more autopilot the deck is, more people are looking towards ban hammer. Often this is even not a question of math probabilities, it's a question of personnal estimated probabilities which is a pretty different thing. And the definition of "easy mode combo deck" becomes very subjective...

[Aggro_zombies]

I understand your idea and I would tend to agree with, but I also think that the real issue is more about how people are estimating the skill required to win with a specific deck than about the kind of engine this same deck is using.

I mean : lots of players just hate to loose to what they consider as autopilot.dec
So more autopilot the deck is, more people are looking towards ban hammer. Often this is even not a question of math probabilities, it's a question of personnal estimated probabilities which is a pretty different thing. And the definition of "easy mode combo deck" becomes very subjective...

Any argument about bannings and balance and format health ultimately comes down to subjective issues of fun and player satisfaction. There's no inherent reason why a one-deck metagame is a bad thing...except that players get bored and/or frustrated playing the same deck, the same way, through the same matchup over and over and over again.

If people hate losing to (or really, just playing against) a deck that prominently features a certain card, that is legitimate ground for considering a ban of that card. The deck doesn't have to be the best deck. It doesn't have to be dominant. It just needs to be unfun for enough players enough of the time.

Honestly, all this talk of whiners and haters and the tossing around of statistics kind of misses the point. Combo decks warp the metagame by excluding strategies bad at interacting with the stack; Griselly Bear, despite being a creature, is absolutely a stack-based combo engine; therefore, banning Griselly Bear will reduce the number and breadth of combo decks and thus provide more room in the metagame for midrange and aggressive decks.

[TraxDaMax]

I understand your idea and I would tend to agree with, but I also think that the real issue is more about how people are estimating the skill required to win with a specific deck than about the kind of engine this same deck is using.

I mean : lots of players just hate to loose to what they consider as autopilot.dec
So more autopilot the deck is, more people are looking towards ban hammer. Often this is even not a question of math probabilities, it's a question of personnal estimated probabilities which is a pretty different thing. And the definition of "easy mode combo deck" becomes very subjective...

If that's true ban Burn.dec? It's basicly a turn 3 kill.

[KobeBryan]

Any argument about bannings and balance and format health ultimately comes down to subjective issues of fun and player satisfaction. There's no inherent reason why a one-deck metagame is a bad thing...except that players get bored and/or frustrated playing the same deck, the same way, through the same matchup over and over and over again.

If people hate losing to (or really, just playing against) a deck that prominently features a certain card, that is legitimate ground for considering a ban of that card. The deck doesn't have to be the best deck. It doesn't have to be dominant. It just needs to be unfun for enough players enough of the time.

Honestly, all this talk of whiners and haters and the tossing around of statistics kind of misses the point. Combo decks warp the metagame by excluding strategies bad at interacting with the stack; Griselly Bear, despite being a creature, is absolutely a stack-based combo engine; therefore, banning Griselly Bear will reduce the number and breadth of combo decks and thus provide more room in the metagame for midrange and aggressive decks.

I really hope he doesn't get banned. We will be back to Stoneblade v. Rug v. maverick matchups every event. And then the occasional TES/ANT

[Aggro_zombies]

DRS and Abrupt Decay make BGx a thing too, you know. Jund will continue to exist.

I mean, it's better than RUG vs. Stoneblade vs. SnT/Sneak Attack/cheat-a-fatty combo vs. Jund, with occasional storm, but that's just me.

[menace13]

Combo decks warp the metagame by excluding strategies bad at interacting with the stack; Griselly Bear, despite being a creature, is absolutely a stack-based combo engine; therefore, banning Griselly Bear will reduce the number and breadth of combo decks and thus provide more room in the metagame for midrange and aggressive decks.

What decks are currently excluded? How is the meta warped, and compared to when/what point in time?

I really hope he doesn't get banned. We will be back to Stoneblade v. Rug v. maverick matchups every event. And then the occasional TES/ANT

Agreed

DRS and Abrupt Decay make BGx a thing too, you know. Jund will continue to exist.

I mean, it's better than RUG vs. Stoneblade vs. SnT/Sneak Attack/cheat-a-fatty combo vs. Jund, with occasional storm, but that's just me.

Actually that is less decks than his example.. So, you're actually excluding more decks from the metagame.

[LOurs]

If people hate losing to (or really, just playing against) a deck that prominently features a certain card, that is legitimate ground for considering a ban of that card. The deck doesn't have to be the best deck. It doesn't have to be dominant. It just needs to be unfun for enough players enough of the time.

Unfair =/= unfun.
That's the point I wanted to highlight.

For some player I know, dredge is an unfun deck to play, some other it's belcher and some other it's burn in example. This doesnt make these deck "unfair" most of the time but indeed "unfun" for them. If the entire meta would play burn, would it desserve a ban ? Not sure.
My point is just to say that statisticals performance analyzis should remain a relevant indicator regarding a banning decision imo, even if it should never be the only one as well.

[catmint]

Honestly, all this talk of whiners and haters and the tossing around of statistics kind of misses the point. Combo decks warp the metagame by excluding strategies bad at interacting with the stack; Griselly Bear, despite being a creature, is absolutely a stack-based combo engine; therefore, banning Griselly Bear will reduce the number and breadth of combo decks and thus provide more room in the metagame for midrange and aggressive decks.

Agree that whiners and haters in both directions are painful for the argument.

Working with statistics and numbers though is necessary and good to counter or at least put a different perspective on certain statements thrown around like "he is broken", "warping the metagame", "combo is on a historical high",... and others.

Your theory that with much less show&tell more aggro and midrange decks have a fighting chance (aka there is more format diversity) is wrong imo. Aggro basically died with Batterskull (Goblins is way more than an aggro deck to me) and has nothing to do with show&tell/Grisel. Graveyard strategies are hated so much by wizards with deathrite and rest in peace so the "fear of dredge" is very low and dredge will probably never be DTB #4 again, which is good news for non-linear decks. This is also not a problem of show&tell/Grisel. I am not even sure that there would be more creature decks viable even with 0% combo in the meta. There are certain color combinations like GW, Jund, Esper, RUG, BUG which are super-strong and just much better than junk/rock, BW, zombies, brown, big zoo, and other midrange/aggro decks. So if these strong 2-3 color non-linear “beat everything” decks don’t have to worry about all kinds of combo and non-combo decks they will optimize their md/sb for the smaller meta and bring the format to the stall like we had it before. If Show&Tell/Grisel hurt anything it hurts the viability of other weaker combo decks like Enchantress, Aluren or Painter Stone.


That the top decks score much less DTB points now compared to the time where RUG, Maverick, Stoneblade ruled is much better for format diversity and legacy without a healthy amount of combo as DTB (with rotations and cylces) is not healthy legacy. If you want to play creatures and make sure you don't loose to unfair stuff there is modern and standard right?

What I also want to point out:
Many say the lower skill requirements for show&tell makes them unfair. To me the lower skill requirement is fair since it is also balanced on the other side. The potential to gain an edge with skill using show&tell is also much more limited compared to storm combo or “3 color blue”. So to be successful with show&tell you need of course as well skill, a certain meta with limited specific hate and a bit of luck (this you need with everything but I mean luck in the sense of your faith is less in your hands). Anyone who wants to master a certain deck and crush everything (have move influence on his faith) will move on to something else and will not stick with Jund, Belcher, show&tell or burn.