Do you enjoy the current state of legacy?

[Fox]

Creature decks cannot interact on the stack so they cannot defeat an instant or sorcery.

So let me get this straight, Teeg down and Storm literally cannot win (g1). Storm packs Pyroclasm (g1), and it helps them win (b/c +1 storm count???)...and casting Pyroclasm continually and completely invalidates the entire capability of hatebear deck to win? Don't get me wrong, if Pyroclasm had some kind of "epic" mechanic where it kept firing every single upkeep I'd agree - alas it does not.

This kind of card evaluation is a problem in legacy. You cast Decay: doesn't matter. They cast CB: you lost (until you find the answer). In the same way Storm finds Pyroclasm, they aren't winning. Hatebears finds Teeg and Storm just lost. You're forcing Storm to play removal based magic, but will never be forced to play stack-based magic yourself.

[Megadeus]

I defeated a deck playing Teeg and Thalia in my run to top 8 because Pyroclasm. I have no idea what you're even on at this point other than it seems to be that you hate removal and think it's mindless while daze and force of will are the only true ways to interact.

http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckd...p?DeckID=76829

[Crimhead]

And maverick runs 4 1 CMC spells, 4-of an X spell (really bad with Thalia and Teeg in your deck), a couple 2 CMC 2 color spells, a 2 CMC enchantment, and 2-3 artifacts that are varying CMC's of 2,3, and 5. But you're right. Building a creature deck is pretty mindless and takes 0 build around while playing 8-12 cantrips and fetch lands and simply inserting different countermagic and win conditions is far more skill intensive.

Easy there! I never said building a creature deck is mindless, nor that building cantrip decks is skill intensive.

Loam needs to be built around. Glimpse needs to be built around. Hatebears obvioulsy need to go in a balanced deck with a smooth curve and cohesive game plan, but you don't exactly have to build around the hatebear - just don't don't put it on the style of deck that the bear happens to hate (assuming it's not a one sided effect like Leotard).

[CptHaddock]

I defeated a deck playing Teeg and Thalia in my run to top 8 because Pyroclasm. I have no idea what you're even on at this point other than it seems to be that you hate removal and think it's mindless while daze and force of will are the only true ways to interact.

http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckd...p?DeckID=76829

Yeah it's not like storm can proactively try to stop the hatebear deck from getting him out with their discard spells. Sometimes the stars align and the hatebear deck gets him out no problem, I don't see how that is any different from any of the absurd stuff that can happen and completely shut down a deck in legacy. That's legacy, stuff happens and you move on with your life.

[hymnyou]

So let me get this straight, Teeg down and Storm literally cannot win (g1). Storm packs Pyroclasm (g1), and it helps them win (b/c +1 storm count???)...and casting Pyroclasm continually and completely invalidates the entire capability of hatebear deck to win? Don't get me wrong, if Pyroclasm had some kind of "epic" mechanic where it kept firing every single upkeep I'd agree - alas it does not.

This kind of card evaluation is a problem in legacy. You cast Decay: doesn't matter. They cast CB: you lost (until you find the answer). In the same way Storm finds Pyroclasm, they aren't winning. Hatebears finds Teeg and Storm just lost. You're forcing Storm to play removal based magic, but will never be forced to play stack-based magic yourself.

This is one of the most insane posts I have read on mtgthesource.com.

[Megadeus]

So let me get this straight, Teeg down and Storm literally cannot win (g1).

God forbid that the deck with 1 win condition gets shut down by a single card. If my deck was all non flying creatures and my opponent played a Moat then what? I just lose because I had a narrow win condition and my opponent had a trump? I've played storm at an SCG and had an opponent drop a turn 0 white leyline game 1. it sucked. But I built a deck that was incredibly powerful, but folds to certain hate. It happens. That's what a sideboard is for. Anywhere from 50-66% of your games will involve your sideboard. The upside of storm is I get to win on turn 1 some number of times. The downside is sometimes my opponent plays a gaddock teeg or a leyline and I just lose. Seems pretty fair to me.

[Lemnear]

Things Leovold did right: Being powerful enough to be a maindeckable card.

Things Leovold did wrong: Being one-sided. He doesn't discourage the use of cantrips since he can be played alongside them. We're currently seeing an uptick in cantrips instead of a downtick, despite Leovold being the new hotness. Color is also an issue, although a minor one, given how easy it is to splash colors in Legacy.

That's why I like Chalice. It puts restrictions on your deckbuilding due to being symmetrical. Sure, it isn't fun to play against, but I see it as a necessary evil like FoW preventing the format being overrun by glasscannon combo.

If you want to make color requirements balancing out the powerlevel, you don't start with BUG colors which already runs DRS and cantrips for colorfixing, but also have the best removal in the format, but choose a fringe played color combination. Its like hoping to balance a DemonicTutor-effect by making the card UB instead of mono-B and hope its an issue for Storm lol.

I would agree on Chalice if running SolLands would present a real downside for deckbuilding. There is a reason MUD was never an issue for the metagame at all, while Eldrazi is Tier 1. Eldrazi has no significant stability or variance issues

[Dice_Box]

Eldrazi does have variance issues. This is born out by the fact that it's penetration in both day 2 and top 32 standings is slipping. The deck is not as effected by variance as previous Stompy decks, but it's no Workshop deck that's for sure. But on the bright side, it's done a lot of good this past year.

[Fox]

I defeated a deck playing Teeg and Thalia in my run to top 8 because Pyroclasm. I have no idea what you're even on at this point other than it seems to be that you hate removal and think it's mindless while daze and force of will are the only true ways to interact.

You didn't defeat them because you ran Pyroclasm; you wasted time removing cards you can't win through, and somehow had enough left over to kill them in spite of drawing a card that impedes your ability to win (in a vacuum). Holding onto cards in hand that serve zero purpose other than to kill potential enemy things on the field is the lowest form of strategy - many enjoy this type of magic, and indeed it is a competitive way to play...but it's not really strategic so much as it is anti-strategic.

I don't hate removal, I hate wasting my time and my opponents' time drawing cards whose only purpose is to drag games on to the point that we're hellbent topdecking like standard champs. I prefer bi-modal interaction which alternates between disrupting opponents and supporting/protecting my wincon - cards like these are imperfect, and they can often create strange interactions or emphasize sequencing. Combo pilots are more prone to associate strange/hilarious gamestates with enjoyment of legacy; we're not really interested in "but then someone topdecked [insert removal card]" or "I was able to mull to [insert hate card]" stories. Everyone enjoys legacy in their own way, but it should also be noted that the format is devolving into removal based play. If board removal is the interaction you enjoy this is great news for you; you're being rewarded for choosing a narrow interaction path...but going around insisting everyone play removal based magic like you do is opposed to format diversity and unintentionally undermines how others may enjoy legacy.

It's a pretty shortsighted path to go down if you're of the mindset that CB is ok b/c you play [insert uninteractive card/s], and continue to cantrip cartel is the real problem in legacy. You need to acknowledge the existing diversity problem posed by CB before we move to a serious look at cantrips; to ignore it simply exacerbates the problem.

[Lemnear]

Eldrazi does have variance issues. This is born out by the fact that it's penetration in both day 2 and top 32 standings is slipping. The deck is not as effected by variance as previous Stompy decks, but it's no Workshop deck that's for sure. But on the bright side, it's done a lot of good this past year.

If you define "done a lot of good" as "reduce the penetration of Delver and cantrips for a while", its fitting. Personally, I would not label the fact, that the format is now completely dominated by blow-/lockouts within the first 3 turns, "doing a lot of good".

[Dice_Box]

I believe that the current diversity issue is caused by hybridisation of deck building into one extraordinary streamlined and fine tuned set of cards. CB is not one of those cards. CB does play it's part in making a mess of the format sure, but the only reason to even look at attacking CB is because we have come to accept other problem cards are never going to face the fate they deserve.

On the flip side, I would not argue against the idea that CB has done its part to push cards like Decay to their current highs. I also don't feel the removal of CB would actually dampen Decays popularity. But that is talk for another thread. In the flip side, my views on a few things have changed since reading this thread. I will post in B/R about it later. What's the worst that could happen...

Edit:

If you define "done a lot of good" as "reduce the penetration of Delver and cantrips for a while", its fitting. Personally, I would not label the fact, that the format is now completely dominated by blow-/lockouts within the first 3 turns, "doing a lot of good".

Do a lot of good to me means "Make people think about choices they make in deck building and not default to the old norms". Leovold seems to be the new card for that though. The wheel forever turns.

[Whitefaces]

You didn't defeat them because you ran Pyroclasm; you wasted time removing cards you can't win through, and somehow had enough left over to kill them in spite of drawing a card that impedes your ability to win (in a vacuum). Holding onto cards in hand that serve zero purpose other than to kill potential enemy things on the field is the lowest form of strategy - many enjoy this type of magic, and indeed it is a competitive way to play...but it's not really strategic so much as it is anti-strategic.

Are you for real?

'You didn't defeat them because you ran Pyroclasm;' - no, that's exactly what he did. He played a card that interacted with the opponents strategy so that he was able to win. This can come in many forms. Stack based (countermagic), removal based (destroy/sac effects etc), permanent based (hatebears, null rod effects etc) to name a few. Of course it's strategic, you're anticipating your opponent interacting and countering that with more interaction!

There will be hard counters to every strategy. If said strategy is a known quantity, like storm, then people will play hard counters if possible. The pilot of these strategies needs to then anticipate the hate. It's not all removal based, look at BR Reanimator for example. The best SB card for them is Faerie Macabre and Surgical Extraction.

[Fox]

Are you for real?

'You didn't defeat them because you ran Pyroclasm;' - no, that's exactly what he did. He played a card that interacted with the opponents strategy so that he was able to win.

Let's rehash: opponent casts a Teeg, Storm can't win. Storm casts Pyroclasm, who cares - Pyroclasm doesn't refire every upkeep. Can Pyroclasm create a moment in a game where Storm can win while diluting deck with a card that is [by itself] antagonistic to winning, yes. Teeg in play is game over, and that doesn't change unless he's removed - there is no timing window built into Teeg, he has no Culm. Upkeep, he creates a non-game that only really changes if Storm resorts to removal based magic.

Simply because a card worked in a given scenario does not make it statistically correct. A better example would be using Chain of Vapor to bounce one's own LED/Petal before targeting it at Teeg - this is an actual engine card (or rather it can be an engine card, though it would be rare that critical mass of storm count could only have been assured by double-casting a mana rock). There are a few cards out there which provide imperfect interaction but still feed into the engine behind which a deck wins. This is perhaps a foreign concept to the fair mindset where all they care about is jamming whatever card they topdeck. Their deck is deliberately constructed sure, but everything is unlinked - they get a creature? jam it and call it a day, mission accomplished, one card combo, got there. The thing is not everyone is interested in tapping lands to drop an unlinked wincon even though it allows you to get away with running cards that don't win games/don't protect your wincon without a compliant opponent deploying targets - that's a luxury. If your deck runs on linked cards, every card like Pyroclasm that you run makes your deck weaker.

Now there's a second level to this: if someone has a game-ender like Teeg and your only option is a card that removes it, you are severely disadvantaged from a game theory standpoint. The most correct response would be to have a [one card] game-ender of your own which by itself trumps theirs (for the rest of the game, unless it's dealt with) - sadly this does not exist in magic when an opponent's strategy is creature based; alas there is no Leyline of you can't deploy creatures. The next best thing would be to approach the game in a novel way such that you completely invalidate the text of a game-ender without even addressing it - the linked concept of Tabernacle and mana denial (obviously not an option in Storm) would be an excellent example of ignoring away hatebear nonsense. The next best thing then is subpar engine piece that can provide imperfect interaction (Chain of Vapor for example). The last resort is to settle upon an anti-engine card which provides perfect interaction and does nothing [by itself] to an opponent's ability to win the game at a later point (Pyroclasm from the example). A fair deck mindset sees the worst possible approach to solving problems as normal and even optimal precisely because their vantage point is skewed. Acknowledge your bias, put disclaimers on removal based solutions...there is more than one vantage point in legacy, yours is merely equivalent. When removal based approaches are the most reasonable ways forward regardless of one's vantage point (how they view and enjoy legacy), a problem exists - the cost is decreased playerbase.

[Megadeus]

I have no idea what you're rambling about. It seems you're unhappy that a storm deck might have to fight through permanent based hate rather than stack based hate. And that maybe you have to run a card that isn't exactly perfect in your strategy to answer one that completely shuts down your strategy. Another way to not care about the gaddock teeg deck is to win on turn 1. And the teeg deck might have to run Mindbreak trap, a very narrow card that is the antithesis of what the deck is trying to do. It sucks that maybe you have to run cards that aren't perfect for your deck to not auto lose to certain things. Sorry you have to actually think about whether it maybe dilutes your deck a slight amount. That's part of the deck building and sideboarding process.

[Whitefaces]

Does it not make sense to you that a narrow deck (storm) has specific hate cards (Teeg etc)? And because of that the cards needed to fight them aren't necessarily going to be synergistic with the rest of your deck.

It's really hard to understand your posts, and I'm not trying to be an arsehole about it, it just doesn't make much sense beyond a personal agenda that you want the game to meet.

[Crimhead]

it just doesn't make much sense beyond a personal agenda that you want the game to meet.

To be fair guys, this thread is about whether each of us personally enjoys this format and why. Storm is struggling right now, and WotC keeps printing hatebears. I can see a Storm player might not like that.

[Fox]

It's more that were magic perfectly made for legacy, we might see the Teeg effect of 'Storm can't win' on a card like Solitary Confinement with all the supporting cards that allows an Enchantress'y deck to indefinitely sustain it (let's pretend for a moment that Enchantress and Storm are equally viable in the meta and have a 'real' game of magic when they meet). The more effortless [i.e. unlinked] a card is, the less likely that it should indefinitely hose entire decks unless the opponent submits a deck which plays a type of magic which makes it actively less competitive, particularly in pre-board submissions. When the only[ish] answer is just play removal, it's not a good enough answer for format health. In the same way, just play blue in the DTT era was merely a viable answer, but one that still hurt the format.

[thecrav]

Scroll up slightly. This is what I don't like about the current state of Magic.

[Zombie]

It's more that were magic perfectly made for legacy, we might see the Teeg effect of 'Storm can't win' on a card like Solitary Confinement with all the supporting cards that allows an Enchantress'y deck to indefinitely sustain it (let's pretend for a moment that Enchantress and Storm are equally viable in the meta and have a 'real' game of magic when they meet). The more effortless [i.e. unlinked] a card is, the less likely that it should indefinitely hose entire decks unless the opponent submits a deck which plays a type of magic which makes it actively less competitive, particularly in pre-board submissions. When the only[ish] answer is just play removal, it's not a good enough answer for format health. In the same way, just play blue in the DTT era was merely a viable answer, but one that still hurt the format.

So... Show and Tell? Doesn't even care what you play, they play a single card and you lose. Teeg is unbelieveably narrow in comparison, same kind of thing as maindecking Blood Moon to hose BUG is. Maindecking Teeg is, indeed, actively hosing yourself. It's a very low-impact slot in most matchups, and we have even Elves players reporting that it underperforms for them. And if any deck stereotypically wants a card to hose Storm and Miracles, it's Elves.

As far as Teeg vs. Storm goes, Storm plays your multi-axis removal stuff with discard and Daze, so...

[Lormador]

Storm was a tier 1 deck not so long ago, and I think we can fully expect it to return to that status someday. It's true that they haven't gotten a card in awhile though.

The current state of the meta is fine, Legacy is normally like this. We aren't at one of the peaks, like the Summer of Maverick when one could actually play Goblins almost credibly. We also aren't at one of the valleys, like the Treasure Cruise / Dig Through Time or Mental Misstep days.

Right now there's a good variety of tier 1 decks, from old classics to the combo flavor of the month, and a horde of tier 1.5 decks that one can perfectly well expect to encounter in a tournament.

The part about the format that I don't like is the lack of good coverage these days.