Putting aside the question of which cards to put back, which is a test in which I think your trained monkey will find itself outperformed by most humans most of the time, there is the question of when to play Brainstorm if you don't have a shuffle effect ready, since it can sometimes be a gamble. Ponder, not so much. I am sure that is what bt10 meant.
Of course it's a drawback. Brainstorm takes up actual card slots in a deck, you know. You play cantrips instead of other cards, counting on them to find what you need, when you need it. Sometimes it fails.
Umm, aren't they already almost unplayable due to the speed and efficiency of the format. Which is why Abrupt Decay is so good, because it kills pretty much every threat.
Wouldn't Drain actually increase the # of spells playable because it would fuel some of the bigger mana cost spells and make them actually playable.
Though I might be biased since I completed a set of drains ~ 10 yrs ago and want to play with them.
It still surprises me how many facets of BS is the community willing to discuss, while there's clearly one and only thing (right?) that needs to be evaluated when speaking of potential ban: is the card overpowered?
And inb4 "but we ban only warping cards, not op ones", well, that's not entirely true: warping cards are those powerful ones, amirite? Except for strange stuff like Shahrazad and Falling Star and Rebirth, are there cards that warped the field by any other aspect that their power? I guess that power of Tinker, Will, Survival, etc. was what "forced" the people to play them, not e.g. art or w/e else.
So, if we can agree that it's the power what makes a card a "metagame warping mechanism", and if we can agree that this is the overall reason to ban cards, might we finally come to some conclusion about BS, one that might be chosen of these three possibilities:
- it's not op, thus it should remain in format
- we don't know
- it's op, lets ban it.
No more monkeys returning lands to shuffle them away, no more "it allows more archetypes than it suppresses", no more "I'd quit if they (don't) ban it", no more color-related stuff - although I need to admit that I really dislike how they push color blue, as it leads to repetetive boring gaming experience -, no more of these things. Simply:
Is BS too strong or not?
I took the bait once, not doing that again.
While I am not wholeheartedly for the ban, I think we don't know exactly, but data almost certainly points to "it's OP."
Luckily I still retain all my pre-marriage knowledge. As far as Easter Eggs go though, that is a pretty nice one to find.
"The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
—Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order
I suppose this tournament is relatively small (45 players), but non blue decks dominated. Only 8 brainstorm in the top 8. http://www.mtgtop8.com/event?e=8644&f=LE
Edit: Just thought it was interesting to share. Not saying this single tournament proves anything.
It's a good site and the one I use when I'm looking at archetypes.
All 2011 lists: http://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE&meta=61
All 2012 lists: http://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE&meta=6
All 2013 lists: http://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE&meta=80
All 2014 lists: http://www.mtgtop8.com/format?f=LE&meta=81
What it documents is a meta heavily defined by Brainstorm and Force of Will in which the percentages of said dominance are creeping up year after year. This is because WotC keeps printing good cards and Brainstorm continues to be the best way to find them and protect them and Force of Will continues to be the best way to protect them and to stop opposition use of them.
Brainstorm and Force of Will were in just over 50% of all Legacy top 8 (4) lists in 2011. They're in just over two-thirds of all such lists now. They'll be in about eighty percent of all such lists in 4 years. By that time Underground Sea will be a $700 card and the other blue lands will be close. Plateau will be only a $100 card. Yay Plateau!
Phrase in bold for emphasis: what of Mind Twist and Mana Drain remaining banned? Or perhaps you'd like to explain why Griselbrand remains unbanned despite being a reanimatable Yawgmoth's Bargain on a body?
Power is not the sole reason why a card is banned or stays banned (even ignoring gimmicks like conspiracy, dexterity, ante, etc.). In the end, it comes down to what's fun for the majority of players (regardless of competitive level). And, as Modern ban policy has indicated, that boils down to how long a given game lasts (i.e. why absurdly powerful cards like Power 9 are banned, despite the fact that anyone that could run them would run them) and how diverse a given meta is (i.e. why cards like Flash, Bazaar of Baghdad, Frantic Search, Tolarian Academy, etc. are banned). Now, I'm not gonna lie: power is a big part of why these cards even see the banned list in the first place. But it's how that power impacts that meta (just like to say again that we play with decks, not individual cards) whether for the better or for the worse, and right now Brainstorm+Ponder helps more decks than it hurts.
To answer your question though: it's strong, but not too strong.
I was initially totally against banning Brainstorm but in looking at and analyzing the metagame data, I think it is really Brainstorm that is holding down innovation, because no matter how much you innovate, your creation is probably inferior to a Brainstorm deck. I think the community has really optimized those builds to a point that there are so few gaps that Brainstorm is now it's own best answer and I don't believe that's healthy.
It isn't as if I am gnashing my teeth and pulling out my hair over it, I just feel like the Legacy meta is not really all that healthy where Brainstorm is so overwhelmingly dominant.
While people want to misconstrue the fact that I am saying that banning Brainstorm as merit, I often play Brainstorm, so it isn't as if I just have some irrational hatred for it. In fact, I love Brainstorm, but what my feelings tell me and what the data tells me are definitely at odds.
Last edited by H; 12-05-2014 at 10:37 AM. Reason: Putting commas where, they don't, belong...
"The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
—Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order
And you didn't even fix it!
Anyway, of all the arguments for banning Brainstorm, "I don't hate the card, but I think it's really good" is probably the weakest. There are a few reasons, but the more popular reason is that there will always be a new "best" card that will see too much play. And there's also the consideration that Brainstorm isn't oppressive, which is a fact that counts for quite a bit. Stoneforge Mystic and Jace were stifling and oppressive. Affinity was stifling and oppressive. Cards have been banned and will be banned for a variety of valid reasons. From being oppressive to just being broken like Yawgmoth's Will. But "they were really good and we felt like it" has never been a justifiable reason. That's how the Survival of the Fittest we all lament over got banned, and it's the reason no one likes Modern.
Then you do not understand what Brainstorm does, Brainstorm is not an answer to Brainstorm. Brainstorm + shuffle effect is the most popular answer to the problem of deck consistency. The other real option is deck redundancy which tends to leave you with less options in game, but a much more consistent deck that is faster because it does not need to waste as much resources fixing its hand. Brainstorm allows you to run a more varied and random deck with more answers at the cost of speed and consistency when you do not draw a Brainstorm. It means you are less likely to fold when thrown a curve ball.
I honestly wonder if we went back to the old Paris mulligan rules where the first one was free, how much would that help deck consistency, because the more consistent your deck is on its own, the less Brainstorm does for your list when you add it in.
You should have seen it before I edited it then,
The general answer to beat Brainstorm decks is to match their consistency. The best way to do that is to run Brainstorm.
The data doesn't show it as merely popular, it shows it as fundamentally more likely to top 8 a tournament. Now, if you want to make a case that this is because of it's popularity, you can do that, but you need to show how the data supports your premise. Mind you, I do believe that premise has some merit, but I feel there is more going on, but I can't prove it without data.
OK, you got me, they are nothing alike, except they all run Brainstorm and some number of other Blue cards?
"The Ancients teach us that if we can but last, we shall prevail."
—Kaysa, Elder Druid of the Juniper Order
I think it is because bs power level is really close to ancestral recall.
I mean, draw 3 and put 2 dead cards on top with a shuffle effect avaliable is tecnically as good as "draw 3" (a hand that's 5 good cards and 2 dead cards it's equal to a hand of 5 good cards).
Difference is that brainstorm is a card that needs experience to be played optimally. Turn one brainstorm is not that good (it's almost like casting a "fair" cantrip like ponder) but sometimes is a necessary evil if you need lands, combo pieces, or to protect important cards from discard spells (in this last scenario bs is even better than ancestral). From turn 2 brainstorm (+fetch) is potentially an ancestral: here comes the experience, you have to understand what cards in your deck are dead in the current matchup (also you have to recognize what your opponent is playing) and you have to program a plan for your next turns.
I would like to stress that in every game you'll have at some point dead cards, no matter what deck are you facing. I'm talking about lands. Delver decks in particular are pretty good at this: because they play only higly efficent spells, after 2-3 lands every other becomes a dead card ready to feed ancestr... err... brainstorm.
In a magic christmas land, where each draw is a good draw, brainstorm would be 100% inferior to ancestral, but we all know how magic works and that dead cards are a thing (removal against most of control and combo decks, extra lands, late game discard spells ecc...ecc...).
It cracks me up that people seriously contend Brainstorm isn't grossly overpowered. The fact that 8 out of 10 tournament-winning decks, on average, run and rely upon Brainstorm to function as effectively as they do says it all as far as I'm concerned. If that isn't overpowered, I don't know what is. When will it become overpowered, when a full 100% of competitive decks must run a playset and you can't compete unless you're using Brainstorm? I think there's so much push-back against people complaining about Brainstorm because so many people love to win... and when 80% of people succeeding are playing Brainstorm when they play to win on a competitive level that means you have a lot of people who are loath to give up their most powerful weapon.... one that gives them an unbelievable advantage when put up against anyone not running the card. I personally couldn't care less either way though, I only play for fun anymore.
We already have a thread for endlessly bickering about Brainstorm. Take it back over there.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)