Was that change in question of relating to policy of criteria or assuming that the change was philosophical in nature?Originally Posted by HSCK
How does unbanning Nacatl and Bitterblossom in Modern correlate to their policy of a Blue dominated meta as a mark of unbalance in Legacy? Or are we just using the fact that they unbanned this one card that they had banned in Modern means they changed their mind on Blue dominance being okay in Legacy? And by extension Misstep should be legal because they changed their minds? I dont really follow what you are arguing for?
I don't think you can compare Brainstorm and Misstep beyond, "look, they have x amount in the top 8!" Furthermore, Julian's assessment of color diversity seems spot on, that it doesn't make any sense to point to a color and say, "look, things are bad!"
From my own experience at big events and talking to WotC officials and ex-R&D people (one of the few upsides to working a big event instead of being on the floor), they care about strategic diversity more than a simple pie chart with the colors on it. This philosophy has been the driving force for Modern, and it's something they use when evaluating all formats. Misstep caused a huge amount of strategies to flounder, can you say the same for Brainstorm? I mean I keep asking, what exactly is Brainstorm killing? Jund? Death and Taxes? Is there a specific archetype that is now dead because of Brainstorm?
No archetypes are dead as a direct result of Brainstorm. It simply puts you on the "Play brainstorm or reduce your chances of placing highly in a tourney by a decent margin" thing.
I don't understand what the standard for 'causing a strategy to flounder' is. What strategies does Misstep cause to flounder?
Oh, wait. I got this one, fellas.
Explanation: Those with spells that cost 1.
On another note...Is this not exactly where we started on page 1?
"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."
Clearly some of you were not playing when Mental Misstep was around. If seeing a bunch of Brainstorms in Top 8 results makes you upset, you would have lost your minds when every single deck was playing 4 Misstep and resolving your first spell felt like pulling teeth.
Edit: this post had no point. I dunno what I'm even addressing. I need coffee.
Elves Discord Channel: https://discord.gg/2EVsdw2
Yes. Zoo is awful in this Brainstorm-centric meta. Where it's plethora of redundant 1-mana spells made it well-positioned in the Misstep era.
~ Team Unicorn Motto
You can compare the two. If their reasoning was too many blue decks. Then is it that we are as a format in that same place? That is exactly what the DCI in their own words did in regards to the blue dominance caused by Misstep.
Which strategies did Misstep cause to flounder? What were the percentages of the top 12 decks in the format that constitute a top 8 during that time? Today by your data collection it is 60%, correct? Was it marginally lower or drastically?
Zoo is not dead because of BS. It is just badly positioned in the meta. Seriously we are blaming BS for killing zoo now??
What will it take to convince people that BS is over powered and detrimental to the game? If zoo is a convincing argument (which it appears it's not), it's a good hill to fight on (so it isn't).
You can make the argument for that. Delver of Secrets is yet another card that gets a turbo boost from Brainstorm. And I think most people would agree that the very existence of Delver makes players scratch their heads as to why they would bother with Zoo and its less impressive terrestrial analogue.
"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."
Zoo has no prey either, which is probably why it's not in the meta.
Incorrect. Zoo has two things it preys on; Tribal, and inconsistancy. Both of which have been forced out of and/or negated by Brainstorm.
~ Team Unicorn Motto
Listen, Kefalín, and what do you imagine under those words "strategic diversity"? Is that this brainstormdeathritestoneforgeconfidantponderhymnswordsboltgoyfgoyfgoyf metagame?
I for one dislike the nowadays state of Legacy. Imho the best time was years ago, definitely before Griseltard, Misstep and maybe even before Goyf. If you like today's metagame with is hyper-efficient one- and two-drops (there's what, some fifty different cards played altogether?) and consider it strategically diverse, then you'd definitely love the metagame of past where there were such a gems as Wildfire.dec, Angel Stompy, Trinket Solution or w/e the else.
Today's metagame is pretty boring and predictable, the decks are boring and predictable, too. Lately I realized I simply dislike the tournament scene and I dislike the decks played. I find little joy in playing them, and I find little joy in playing against them. Maybe I'm just fed up with the game and simply need a pause, but it really gets old to play against the unending stream of DRS, SFM, BS, SDT, CB, JTMS, FoW, LED all night long. For me it's more like another work, and I already got one, so what's the point of this all? To ride to the tournament already annoyed right before it started?
And I'm not even saying that it's Brainstorm's fault. I'm not even saying it's a fault per se, maybe others like this metagame, and maybe I just need that pause and return back in full force. However, the nature of today's Legacy where every deck needs to stand chance against those extremely powerful 1-3 cmc cards (with occasional Jace thrown in the mix, yeah) leads to a very static metagame, one that definitely IS NOT strategically diverse, unless you fell like the many Delver lists are that much different from each other that it warrants even a single word.
Imao a strategically diverse metagame would include not only DTBs plus a non-DTB Delver.dec ("don't panic, it'll be back on next update") and then some Hatebear antideck, but also things like, idk, Wildfire, Angel Stompy, Trinket Solution or w/e the else.
Ok, ok, I know, you may "play whatever you want", and all that jazz.
Yeah, I may play w/e I want and I may even swallow the fact I won't win. (But then there's really no incentive to play at all, I may simply make a monthly cheque to pay for winning people's prizes and stay at home.) Trouble is that even though I may try better and more than your local family brewery, the rest of the people won't, so I end up with a sub-optimal list playing against super-duper-efficient one-drop I win herp-Delver-derp-Daze deck round after round; yawn.
This meta. So much diverse. Wow.
That's the opposite of incorrect, tribal decks aren't in the meta so it doesn't have prey, how in the world is that wrong? And Zoo doesn't beat any of the glass cannon combo decks either does it? So what is it trying to beat?
Zoo is dead because it ceased to be good. The relative meta has very little to do with it. If a deck is constructed well and is in the hands of a competent pilot, it stands a fair chance against the world. But the fact of the matter is that Zoo is just outclassed. There are better decks, even better non-blue decks, that drop creatures and smack shit up without resorting to the classic Wild Nacatl.
The tournament I started is over. You should join the next one.
As for this, maybe you're talking about the fact there are only a dozen or so good cards in the format, but that's not a Brainstorm only problem, that's an everything problem. As for all those decks you mentioned, I don't think any of them were ever top tier decks anyway.
In fact, go pick a time you had as many decks doing different things occupying similar percentages of the meta? You're living in a fantasy land of nostalgia. Pre-Goyf what was it, Gobbos, Threshold, Landstill, and Solidarity? Then it was decks trying to use Goyf in some capacity, so maybe 2007-2009 Legacy was the high point? I don't remember 2010 and 2011 being all that diverse, but Delver radically altered things anyway. Shardless Agent, Abrupt Decay, and DRS all came after that too, oh and the Miracle mechanic. All of those things are radically more powerful than what preceded them, and all are super different too.
Sdematt: Jeff says you fail to Link None SCG events:
https://twitter.com/JeffHoogland/sta...64380425744385
Just focusing on the Shardless, Delver and Miracle mechanic. BS in combination with these things makes Legacy BS or bust, because they are all infinitely better with BS, strong unto themselves, and have few comparables in other colors to manipulate the game. The same way Flash isn't broken without Protean Hulk (and likely Grislebrand), with the addition of other cards/mechanics, BS is not correct for the environment.
No one is trying to remove Blue's filter. The majority of non-U players are saying, sub BS for Portent, or any other legal singledraw spell. Being able to can-trip at instant speed is busted, that's my biggest beef.
Or, I'm of mind to say, keep BS, and axe the total of V.Clique, Snappy, Delver & TNN instead. That brings balance back to the color wheel and hopefully the game; or, how does one explain why every spell should not just be colorless?
To mention AD & DRS- what part of an uncounterable removal spell is broken? That it can't be countered and is instant speed? Woe is the world of smotherable permanents. DRS, it allows a black/green resourced deck to interact with gy in meaningful ways. Still adopted by
I didn't say Decay was broken? Just that it's extremely powerful, same with DRS, and Liliana. The power level of a lot of things went up which renders old decks much less viable.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Reply With Quote