www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!
Join us at Facebook!
Those are just guilds associated with the colours, I think. BUG/RUG/UWR have been formally named "Sultai", "Temur" and "Jeskai".
Also: If in doubt about the ability to provide legacy content for SCG, please look at the Todd Anderson (BUG Delver) vs Brad Nelson (UWr Miracles) Versus Video that just got published to select a few days ago. That speaks volumes about why they misscredit (or show lack of appreciation for someone familiarizing) said deck.
www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!
Join us at Facebook!
Well honestly why does it really matter? Its a name for christ sake, everyone knows what they are talking about so I really don't see the point. Also they don't called it "Izzet Sneak Attack" because the common deck name, "Sneak and Show" has no mention of any colors. The deck names they do change (RUG delver, Shardless BUG, etc) actually mention the colors. They obviously aren't applying it to everything, in the Modern open they didn't change names to Izzet Storm or Simic Tron for example. I think the main reason they don't name two color decks after guilds is because the guilds have much more specific identities in mechanics and what not. Just like Jund, esper, etc have become ubiquitous with the colors and not the mechanic/gimmick from shards, these new names are viewed in similar ways.
"It's just a name", the scum said. Names matter.
That being said, this whole conversation is about a year past relevant.
I had to grimace when I read Todd's follow up article today. His info was pretty solid, but then we get this tidbit at the end:
Woo boy...Originally Posted by The Article
- If the articles weren't meant to give credit, then don't put names in the article. It's not hard - some of the best strategic content I've read in 2 decades has been articles that didn't mention a name in the article at all.
- Talking about how much you disliked the comments to your last article is a terrible idea. You are just asking for the quasi-constructive criticism to turn into outright trolling.
- Some of the more popular current SCG authors have a real problem with Tone in their articles, and it's surprising that people who have written that many words don't seem to have picked up very much in the way of Style corrections.
It's weird (but not entirely unexpected) that SCG is allowing the relationship between their Editors and Writers to get even more chummy. We'll have to see if it decreases the quality across the board.
Check out my Legacy UBTezz Primer. Chalice of the Void: Keeping Magic Fair.
-----
Playing since '96. Brief forced break '02-04. Former/Idle Judge since '05. Told Smmenen to play faster at Vintage Worlds.
-----
Most of the 'Ban brainstorm!' arguments are based on the logic that 'more different cards should get played in Legacy', as though the success or health of the format can be measured by the portion of cards that are available and see play. This is an idiotic metric.
Matt Bevenour in real life
Agreed. Don't acknowledge nor post in the comments box. You can always message people individually if you need to, or just take the constructive criticism and incorporate it with thanks.
-Matt
Matt Bevenour in real life
Hello,
can anyone actually tell me why we are having a discussion about totaly subjetive names. I mean no one wil stop you to call any deck as you like. What SCG is trying to do is giving person hinst who donīt who are totaly new to Legacy and only started to play recently. So these people are only nknow the Clan Colour Combination and SCG is just trying to give them something familiar when readin an article about Legacy deck to provide a better understanding.
Why is it bad to help new guys to understand things faster?
Because they try to rename establish decks with nonsensical Wizards marketing crap.
How is Sultai Delver more informative than BUG Delver, aka the common color code? It also makes things harder to find on established Legacy sources for new players since those keep the old names.
I don't mind Abzan, Mardu, and Jeskai so much, but Sultai and Temur are awful compared to BUG and RUG.
I see this as new card frames. I don't like it at all, especially when I can pronounce BUG and RUG quite easily. For some reason I don't mind Bant, Jund, or Esper though. Meh.
The thing is though is that why should they be called different things for different formats? The names are naturally going to be used in Standard so why should the older formats have different names? It makes it a lot easier to find decks in the colors you want if it just has a standard name that is used universally. Some players (especially new ones) don't realize that blue is referred to as U if you are just going by one letter, which makes decks like BUG and RUG unintuitive to new players.
Honestly though, there are plenty of legitimate complaints when it comes to Wizards management of the game and Starcity's management of its content, but the names are so trivial that complaining about renaming the color combination is irrelevant.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)