Welcome to the fifth episode of Lone Star Legacy! With a B&R announcement looming, Sam (theCrav), Sean (Jesture), and Arjune (Myrmidon7328) talk about everyone's favorite 1 CMC Planeswalker: Deathrite Shaman. Like most people with brain cells, they recognize the elf shaman's many issues and design flaws, as well as the good things it brings to the format. What's their final verdict? Will Underground Sea still be casting mana dorks after this week? Has the DCI even heard of our podcast? Listen and find out!
Direct link is up on our website, and it should also be on iTunes sometime soon.
Cheers!
The card is absolutely stupid. It's probably not broken by Legacy's standards, but it's about as broken as you'll ever see a creature for one mana and what it does. It's bad enough it doesn't actually target (so protective measures fail), but it causes loss of life (so it can get around dealing damage without attacking), attacks the graveyard (so graveyard strategies are hindered) gains life (to swing the game or keep you alive) and the casting cost of the card is hybrid (so it's splashable in decks supporting black, green or both). I don't know if that makes the case for a ban-worthy card, but to be honest for one mana it's better than a vast majority of planeswalkers printed.
For sure. My opinion and (spoiler alert) the opinion of the guys on this episode is that it's one of the most powerful and poorly designed cards in Legacy, but not ban-worthy. 1/2 creatures with summoning sickness and activated abilities are eminently answerable. Likewise, the grave hate aspect is potentially good for the format. Still, it's definitely busted and creates some miserable play patterns. I'd be a happier man if I never had to engage in another Deathrite mirror.
I thought this cast was excellent, great job framing the issue.
Sam's point that the lack of regular large events is contributing to homogeneity in the meta was good. I do think there's an element of fear that people have when a big event comes around that they have to play "the best deck" now. I certainly feel it myself. Sure I'll goof around with some weirdo deck at the local but with so few chances to play competitive Legacy it's natural people will want to go with what works.
I also liked the comparisons to the conversations in Vintage about banning cards that aren't THE problem in order to try and solve it. I actually think there is some element of applicability to Legacy. I think the Grixis payoff cards are stronger than anything else you can be doing with Deathrite and if you got rid of some of the dumber ones there may be more of a reason to play other Deathrite decks.
I appreciated that even though most casters clearly dislike the card they agreed that it isn't the right time to ban it yet.
Finally, I think it was great that you opened up the idea of discussing the purpose of the Legacy ban list. That is where the rubber meets the road on many of these conversations. It seems that the line comes down to whether you think that different strategies are what contribute to metagame diversity vs. whether you think different cards are a sign of a diverse meta.
For example, Grixis Delver and Czech Pile share a lot of cards. Sure, Czech plays out slightly differently in a more midrange direction, maybe drawing comparisons to a deck like Jund. But in practice, I think Grixis and Czech are so close as to be nearly indistinguishable while Czech vs. Jund are very different decks.
To illustrate, I think a Storm deck plays much the same way against Grixis or Czech -- it is on the lookout for counterspells and discard. But vs. Jund, a storm deck may cut a card like Duress in favor of trying to just go off faster, before Jund can get discard online. Or, it may feel the need to bring in some sort of permanent destruction expecting a card like Grafdiggers Cage or Thorn of Amethyst.
A deck with Chalice of the Void probably mulligans to it on the play against either Grixis or Czech. But against Jund, they may be cut entirely.
This is just my opinion and to the extent that I feel Jund should occupy the meta space currently taken up by Czech, my views on what needs to be done if anything drift in that direction. However, I think the point that none of us really know what the actual definition of these things is when it comes to the DCI is accurate and intriguing.
Jund doesn't run Brainstorm, therefore it's automatically disqualified as an actual contender.
Lack of events might definitely be a factor. The good ol' "Run Brainstorm or you gimp yourself" comes back to bite everyone in the ass since the combination of DRS, Brainstorm and fetchlands is a match made in heaven at minimal deckbuilding cost. It's probably the best thing you can do in Legacy right now in terms of consistency and resilience.
My predictions:
- DRS/Brainstorm decks percentage in the meta is going to rise even further as a long-term trend.
- Same goes with Leovold because a one-sided draw jammer with upside that blue decks can run is incredibly stupid.
The next update to DTB is September 16. It's not close.
I don't wish to see DRS go, I just feel after you rip out the core of Legacys most dominant deck you should give the format some time to settle. If Legacy is a river, there is too much sediment still in the water from the last time someone went running though the shallows. Let it settle, then mess up the ground once more.
This was a fun podcast. I didn't agree with everything, but you guys made a good effort to look at the situation objectively from multiple PoVs.
I think there is definitely something to be said for more people jumping on the band wagon instead of trying to answer the meta. We can see this more evidently in the highly warped online meta.
It certainly seems people would rather play a deck they know is putting up numbers rather than try to figure out which decks can beat it and still hold their own in the field. As long as people are flocking to whichever deck has had the most recent success, that deck will only be more successful, and the format will inevitably become more homogenous. No amount of bans will ever fix this. The format will never realise its potential if too many people automatically copy the leading deck rather than attack it.
Related is the point made of not enough people playing Moon - despite Moon Stompy almost surely having a better conversion rate. If Moon got big, Grixis and Czech might decline making room for less greedy fair decks like UW Blade, Miracles, D&T, and maybe even Fish (come on, Ixalan). But people would rather play a DRS deck than Moon Stompy, so the format stagnates.
Maybe the problem is too many new players who've known pretty much nothing but fair decks? Thank WotC for ruining an entire generation of players. Just a hunch. But it seems pretty clear there aren't nearly as many Moon players as there should be.
Aggro-Loam has a strong engine and is in a far better position to contend than a straight Jund build.
I'm not sure what it would take to put Loam on the map. A new printing? A ban? Perhaps simply a larger dedicated player base? Either way, I think we'd see Loam as a contender long before we'd ever see Jund come back. And it would certainly fit the bill of a midrange deck that plays differently than Grixis or Czech.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
There is an entire generation of magic players who started off while miracles was an extremely dominant force, and it became the baseline for everything they know. They don't know that the format has been around a lot longer than when miracles was first created, nonblue decks like Rock and Maverick used to be very good in their haydays and that there were costs to playing specific archetypes.
If you want examples of this you can just go back and read portions of the miracles thread and some of the threads on reddit. People were saying that banning miracles out of the format would cause combo to be rampant...
It has the same problem that Jund has, if you end up drawing the right half of your deck you win matches. I don't know why you would play it when you can basically just play Grixis/Czech and while lessening the number of free wins due to chalice or teegs have better matchups across the board.
This is probably true. But I'm not sure where you're going with it. It doesn't seem to relate to a wide spread reluctance to attack the meta with an "unfair" deck like Moon Stompy or Lands.
Moon Stompy should be heavily played to address the greedy DRS decks running rampant. And that, in turn, should open up the meta for other (less greedy) fair decks.
So why are people joining the band-wagon and/or complaining about DRS instead of picking up Moon and kicking some Deathrite Ass?
I think Loam runs a lot more card advantage than straight Jund. If it has the same problems, it should have them to a lesser extent, and therefore be closer to being competitive.
Loam has traditionally been strong vs fair blue decks, but I hear it's been tougher since Grixis became the go-to Delver shell.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
It wasn't really related to your post, just an observation.
The problem with decks like Stompy is that they're inconsistent. If you're going to a GP or other large event and looking to win why would you play it? I'm sure that you can land some win here and there but over the course of a tournament you're going to run into situations where you mulligan to oblivion and while your Grixis Control/Czech Pile opponent has cantrips to play from behind you're just hoping that your 1st prison piece will win you the game. I guess if you are running hotter than the sun that works as well. I don't know about lands, I guess people don't like the polarizing matchups that it has.
Oh yes I enjoy reading those as well. How could you possibly hate out graveyards without DRS?
This makes me laugh because those people are so hilariously wrong. Sure the DRS decks are much weaker in game 1, but it would force decks to play more than just a couple side board pieces to actually beat these decks. I mean we have Black Leyline and RIP. It doesn't get much better than that in terms of yard hate
Hey guys - it's Arjune (I was one of the guys on the cast). For whatever reason, I can't remember by password, and don't know which email I used to sign up, so I'm starting back from scratch.
We really appreciate this kind of feedback on these casts. I would agree that Legacy certainly has the tools to beat dedicated graveyard decks. I do also think that without DRS, Reanimator becomes tier 1. I think that's fine, but I don't think it will be as depressed as it is right now given that its two biggest predators (Miracles, DRS) are out. Yes, there will be more hate post-board, but I still would think of it as a better pseudo-dredge deck.
This is an argument I don't quite understand. Let's say you're 60% match win vs the field with either Grixis Delver or Moon Stompy. The fact that more of your losses come from nonfunctional hands with the latter doesn't mean the deck itself is worse or even less consistent at winning - it's just that you have less room to outplay your opponent. You also get a bunch more free wins with the deck. So, assuming your a priori win percentages are the same with either, it shouldn't make a difference which deck you bring to an event, regardless of if its 4 rounds of 15+. Or am I missing something?Originally Posted by CptHaddock
Because all indications suggest it has a better conversion rate than the "best" decks. Same goes for Lands
Consistency is over-rated, and more about bad feels than statistics.
eg, it's better to play an inconsistent deck with a 60% win rate than a consistent deck with a 55% win rate. The problem is that 40% loss rate is tougher to swallow if your deck crapped out on you. It's easier to accept a 55% loss rate where you at least felt like you had agency.
I think ban list decisions should be based on conversion rates. If a single deck (or style) is winning too much because it is the best positioned deck, ban something. But if there is another deck(s) with a +ve MU vs that "best" deck and a better overall conversion rate, the problem lies with the players and not the card pool.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
Some people have addressed it already, but I think there's a few things:
One, some people might not find the playstyle that exciting - not that the deck has no play, but Grixis definitely feels like it has more opportunities to leverage pilot skill. For stompy, it kinda feels like (as an outsider) "you slam a hate piece early, and then go to town with a big dumb beater!!" I get that it's more nuanced than that, but from the other side of the table that's often what it feels like.
Second, I don't think it's a real gimme matchup in the way we're proposing - especially if the deathrite player is on the play, they could start with a deathrite or a delver, and make rainbow mana to decay your hate piece or daze it and just fly over, and it's hard to manage that as the stompy guy. Especially if the hate piece isn't coming down turn one.
Finally, less excitingly, the sol lands and other stompy cards have gotten a bit more expensive lately with the advent of Eldrazi, and I think a lot of players might view them as too expensive to switch to for what really is a volatile build. If you buy into Forces and Blue duals, it's expensive, but you have a lot of options; if you buy into Tombs, the choices are more limited, both in-game and in a metagame sense.
I'm not really arguing that your MU win % is changing because of consistency, I think that your match win % should stay the same regardless of if you're playing 1 match or 1,000 matches. I'm talking about the % of times you are going to draw poorly and it's going to cost you the game due to not running cantrips. The longer the tournament the more likely you are to draw like crap. I also don't want to say that blue playing decks don't fall apart at some point, all decks fail; however while playing cantrips you can minimize the risk of failure.
I hope that makes sense and it wasn't just me rambling.
not worth banning, but does take away from deck diversity. also blocks goblin lackey!
-rob
I don't remember if I did it on the cast but I've taken to calling them Grixis and Grixis Green to illustrate just how similar they are.
Another point is that with instant deliverability and the associated liquidity, it's easy to change decks, so jumping to the best deck is super easy compared to paper where, event if I had an unlimited budget, it would take me at least a week to acquire all the cards for a new deck.
One more thing I don't remember if we mentioned - If there's a B&R update affecting either Legacy or Vintage, we've already planned to livecast at 7:30 CDT on Monday!
Mathematically, your MU win % is all that matters. It doesn't matter how you lose - that's purely psychological. Mathematically, it only matters how frequently you lose.
I agree with your other points, but are you saying Grixis Tempo & Czech are favoured vs Moon Stompy?
You did! I dont think it's entirely fair, as Czech is better at grinding.
I think you guys were a bit unfair in your whole assessment of strategic diversity. You took the Source DTB section as the meta, but you wrote off all the UW Blade decks so as to lump Blade in with Grixis and Czech. I think you then mis-counted the number of decks in DTB. More importantly decks that have been in-and-out of DTB (eg, Miracles, Storm) were ignored entirely.
For most things, you guys showed both sides of the argument, which I thought was really great. But I think you could have made a much better case for Strategic diversity than you did.
All the more reason online should be seeing a huge surge of Moon Stompy?
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)