Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst 12345678 ... LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 178

Thread: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

  1. #61
    Greatness awaits!
    Lemnear's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2010
    Location

    Berlin, Germany
    Posts

    6,998

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    I know a lot of these things have been Blue, part of that is TNN, Dig and Cruise, but I also think part of it is a lack of flexibility in non Blue shells that Blue has. You could print a 3 mana Enchantment in Green that breaks the game, but Lands and Elves both likely would not run it main because unless it fits in their plan its not worth it. Print a Blue spell that breaks shit? Well the Blue shell is made to be flexible. No issue absorbing that new toy.
    That's part of my issue voiced earlier: It has never been easier for the blue shell to absorb newly printed haymakers, due to a certain 1 mana blocker who happens to have no restriction on your manabase while providing rainbow manaacceleration.

    We wouldn't have such problem if DRS was outright green and demands you to fetch a Tropical Island, locking you more into green. Shit like turn 2 Hymn or Therapy + Pyromancer would be notable harder to be put together and more restrictive than getting to play 90% of your decks cards off Seas and one DRS.
    www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!

    Join us at Facebook!

    Quote Originally Posted by Echelon View Post
    Lemnear sounds harsh at times, but he means well. Or to destroy, but that's when he starts rapping.

    Architect by day, rapstar by night. He's pretty much the German Hannah Montana. Sometimes he even comes in like a wrecking ball.

  2. #62
    Member

    Join Date

    May 2007
    Location

    Italy, Eternal
    Posts

    1,848

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Unban top and sotf, give other decks stupidly broken engines as well. Miracle may still be the best deck in the format, but sotf would be a decent predator for It.

    Also unban recruiter, earthcraft, search and maybe bargain as well

  3. #63
    Curmudgeon
    SpatulaOfTheAges's Avatar
    Join Date

    Apr 2004
    Location

    Brussels
    Posts

    2,939

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lord Seth View Post
    (note: For the purpose of clarity, "dual land" in this message refers specifically to the original ones)

    The removal of the fetchlands would increase the usage of non-dual, non-fetchland lands, but it would do absolutely nothing to decrease the amount of dual lands seeing play... in fact, it would probably increase them. Because the fetchlands are functionally dual lands (as they can search them out), you often don't need to play a full set of duals. But without the fetchlands, there's really no reason to not start out with 4x of them.

    For example, let's take a look at this Grixis Delver deck. It doesn't run the full set of any of its dual lands; it doesn't need to, because again the fetchlands essentially are dual lands because of their ability to search them out. But without the fetchlands, you have every incentive to maximize the number of dual lands you're running because they have less drawback than any other 2-color land in the format.

    So the removal of the fetchlands would do the opposite of what you claim: It would make people run more of them and increase the price of the format. It would cause other lands to see more play (e.g. checklands) but they would only be seeing play after you've maximized your number of dual lands for that color (i.e. you wouldn't be running Razorverge Thicket unless you already had 4x Savannah).
    Largely, I'd just reiterate what Bithlord said in his second point. Without fetchlands, the difference between Tundra and Mystic Gate drops dramatically. There are, I would argue, decks that would actually prefer the latter. Miracles, playing a suite of cards at UU and WW, might actually run more Gates than Tundras - or maybe they'd run Celestial Colonnade more often, or maybe the relative weaknesses of mana-bases would make Landstill more viable as the premier control deck and we'd see a general increase in man-lands. I'm not sure exactly what would happen, but I do know that it would significantly complicate how you go about building your mana-base, and how many colors you can actually support.

    So although I'm also not convinced it's reasonable to use Grixis Delver as an example - that type of deck simply wouldn't exist, not in its current state, and not as a top competitor, in a fetch-less meta-game, it is true that a blue-based aggro-control deck, especially one running Daze, will always want the blue dual-lands. But if such a deck is forced to cut down to 2 colors to support Wasteland in its arsenal, they're likely to only run 3-4 dual-lands, instead of 7, as the list you linked is. If the demand for dual-lands was thus cut in half, there would most likely be a decrease in price.

    The main point here is that the fair decks will go from 3-4 colors to 2-3 colors. That alone will dramatically decrease the demand on dual-lands. And if the power level gap between dual-lands and their imitations falls, it lowers the practical cost of entry for new legacy players. Maybe they'll be reducing their odds of winning the next GP by not buying Underground Seas, but they'll probably do just fine at local tournaments.
    Early one morning while making the round,
    I took a shot of cocaine and I shot my woman down;
    I went right home and I went to bed,
    I stuck that lovin' .44 beneath my head.

  4. #64
    It's not easy being green

    Join Date

    Jul 2010
    Posts

    1,635

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by taconaut View Post
    Similarly, the reason it is banned in Modern is because anything and everything can be and is banned in Modern. The modern banlist contains:

    - Preordain (??)
    With respect to this, cantrips are probably a similar case to movement abilities in other games - the LoL developers are on record as saying they have to tune eg. movement auras to be brokenly good before people perceive them as doing anything and feel good about picking them. Meanwhile at the highest level of play the pros keep grinding and typically end up noticing even rather weak-feeling movement abilities end up winning games. Cantrips are pretty much in the same camp: They have to feel clunky on the eye test to keep Xerox from taking over completely like it has in Legacy, and even in Modern they ended up playing Death's Shadow as a Delver analogue for a good while running on stuff like Thought Scour, Serum Visions and Street Wraith. Those cards got run because they won games.

    I used to be of the opinion to just ban BS and be done with it, but over time it just looks like Xerox is a law of nature in this game and it really needs to be fought actively lest it take over a format.
    Quote Originally Posted by Lemnear
    (On Innistrad)
    Yeah, an insanely powerful block which put the "derp!" factor in Legacy completely over the top.

  5. #65

    Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    I think legacy, and in particular the understanding on legacy magic, have evolved the last year immensely to the degree that a bunch of strategies have become obsolete. I think this change is so vast that a banning of DRS will not change anything.
    The future of legacy is the hyper-effective good in a vakuum cards that doesnt rely on each other, or on opponent, or on boardstate, or on which other cards are in the deck.
    Think of the cards that constitutes delver or check pile. There is synergies, yes, but not at the expense of good-on-it's-own effects. No card is a dead card or imposes heavy deck building restrictions. I dont believe more synergestic decks ever can compete with good stuff piles ever again. Sure, in a single tournament with variance on it's side, bur not over the course of many tournaments.
    Last edited by JackaBo; 06-28-2018 at 12:18 PM.

  6. #66
    Greatness awaits!
    Lemnear's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2010
    Location

    Berlin, Germany
    Posts

    6,998

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by JackaBo View Post
    I think legacy, and in particular the understanding on legacy magic, have evolved the last year immensely to the degree that a bunch of strategies have become obsolete.
    I have serious doubts that this is a matter of people getting smarter, rather than the price spiral making it rather unlikely that people invest/build/toy/evolve anything that isn't a top dog already. Nobody drops a grand or two for SneakShow or whatever, just to find out that it's not quite the hot stuff im the current metagame. People play it save if they invest such an ridiculous amount of money.
    www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!

    Join us at Facebook!

    Quote Originally Posted by Echelon View Post
    Lemnear sounds harsh at times, but he means well. Or to destroy, but that's when he starts rapping.

    Architect by day, rapstar by night. He's pretty much the German Hannah Montana. Sometimes he even comes in like a wrecking ball.

  7. #67

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    MTGGoldfish currently has Grixis Delver and Czech Pile each as Grixis Delver. So there's your answer.

  8. #68
    Site Contributor
    Whitefaces's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2013
    Location

    London
    Posts

    1,378

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by SpatulaOfTheAges View Post
    Largely, I'd just reiterate what Bithlord said in his second point. Without fetchlands, the difference between Tundra and Mystic Gate drops dramatically. There are, I would argue, decks that would actually prefer the latter. Miracles, playing a suite of cards at UU and WW, might actually run more Gates than Tundras - or maybe they'd run Celestial Colonnade more often, or maybe the relative weaknesses of mana-bases would make Landstill more viable as the premier control deck and we'd see a general increase in man-lands. I'm not sure exactly what would happen, but I do know that it would significantly complicate how you go about building your mana-base, and how many colors you can actually support.
    I think you're way off base here on filter lands, not being able to cast 1cmc cards is a huge, huge negative and is the reason they wouldn't be played as more than 1 or 2 of, at best. And ETB lands are just too weak vs Wasteland strategies too, sure a lot would change, but not how you're describing I think.

    Quote Originally Posted by NeckBird View Post
    MTGGoldfish currently has Grixis Delver and Czech Pile each as Grixis Delver. So there's your answer.
    It doesn't mean anything other than that their website is wrong currently. 4c has had a bunch of name changes.
    Quote Originally Posted by CutthroatCasual View Post
    Storm was killed by Leovold
    Quote Originally Posted by LegacyIsAnEternalFormat View Post
    The power of blue is overrated...I personally play Jund and I consistently top 4 FNMs with it.

  9. #69

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Whitefaces View Post
    It doesn't mean anything other than that their website is wrong currently. 4c has had a bunch of name changes.
    I was pointing out the irony of that mistake happening while we have this discussion. It's clearly not meant to be taken as an actual argument for any sort of similarities between Delver and Pile.

    Personally, if nothing changes by the post-pro tour ban update I'm probably just going to jump ship to Modern. It's unfortunate for my local scene since I usually loan out two-three decks every week, but I can only tolerate effectively dying to turn two TNN or actually dying to turn 1-2 Griselbrand or cast Probe into Therapy so much.

  10. #70

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by NeckBird View Post
    I was pointing out the irony of that mistake happening while we have this discussion. It's clearly not meant to be taken as an actual argument for any sort of similarities between Delver and Pile.

    Personally, if nothing changes by the post-pro tour ban update I'm probably just going to jump ship to Modern. It's unfortunate for my local scene since I usually loan out two-three decks every week, but I can only tolerate effectively dying to turn two TNN or actually dying to turn 1-2 Griselbrand or cast Probe into Therapy so much.
    If your deck can’t beat a 3 mana 3/1 than have you considered not playing that deck?

  11. #71
    Site Contributor

    Join Date

    Apr 2014
    Posts

    950

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by WashableWater1 View Post
    If your deck can’t beat a X mana P/T than have you considered not playing that deck?
    Oh are we doing this thing again? Here are my favorites.

    1 mana 1/2
    1 mana 1/1
    3 mana 3/3
    2 mana 2/1
    7 mana 5/5
    8 mana 7/7
    Quote Originally Posted by ThatDeleuzeGuy View Post
    I want to play as close to possible a 100% reactive deck that also approached 0% variance in how it played. I want to play magic with as little variance as possible. Also had a foiled out miracles deck that was an investment of about 6 grand that is now nearly worthless.
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee View Post
    My original post did that.

    I'd love to have a battle of wits with you but I see you lack the necessary equipment.

    Good day.

  12. #72
    Greatness awaits!
    Lemnear's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2010
    Location

    Berlin, Germany
    Posts

    6,998

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by CptHaddock View Post
    3 mana 7/7 lifelink
    Ftfy and would like to add: 3 mana 15/15
    www.theepicstorm.com - Your Source for The Epic Storm - Articles, Reports, Decktech and more!

    Join us at Facebook!

    Quote Originally Posted by Echelon View Post
    Lemnear sounds harsh at times, but he means well. Or to destroy, but that's when he starts rapping.

    Architect by day, rapstar by night. He's pretty much the German Hannah Montana. Sometimes he even comes in like a wrecking ball.

  13. #73

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by WashableWater1 View Post
    If your deck can’t beat a 3 mana 3/1 than have you considered not playing that deck?
    I have considered this and that's what I'm going to do. I'm going to have to play a different deck because a lot of Legacy cards aren't legal in Modern.
    Last edited by NeckBird; 06-28-2018 at 04:45 PM.

  14. #74
    Some dipshit of a Moderator.
    Dice_Box's Avatar
    Join Date

    Mar 2013
    Location

    A Tabernacle in some random Valley.
    Posts

    4,843

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    No one going to mention my 2 mana 20/20?
    It is better to ask and look stupid then keep your mouth shut and remain so.
    Quote Originally Posted by Spam View Post
    Do not make fun of lands masters, they've spent many years mastering the punishing fire technique in the secret loam monastery. Do not mistake them with the miracles masters, eternal rivals, they won't like it.
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    I hope your afterlife is filled with eternal torment.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    Fuck. Which one of my quotes do I drop for this?
    Quote Originally Posted by DarthVicious View Post
    Something about how fun it is pulling the wings off flies and microwaving the neighbors cat?

  15. #75
    Site Contributor

    Join Date

    Apr 2014
    Posts

    950

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    No one going to mention my 2 mana 20/20?
    We get it dude, you vape.
    Quote Originally Posted by ThatDeleuzeGuy View Post
    I want to play as close to possible a 100% reactive deck that also approached 0% variance in how it played. I want to play magic with as little variance as possible. Also had a foiled out miracles deck that was an investment of about 6 grand that is now nearly worthless.
    Quote Originally Posted by Secretly.A.Bee View Post
    My original post did that.

    I'd love to have a battle of wits with you but I see you lack the necessary equipment.

    Good day.

  16. #76

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lemnear View Post
    I have serious doubts that this is a matter of people getting smarter, rather than the price spiral making it rather unlikely that people invest/build/toy/evolve anything that isn't a top dog already. Nobody drops a grand or two for SneakShow or whatever, just to find out that it's not quite the hot stuff im the current metagame. People play it save if they invest such an ridiculous amount of money.
    I think that that is the actual matter. During miracle's reign legacy wasn't evolving for two reasons. First: Miracle, even if badly tuned, could beat a bunch if good decks. There was no reason, or preassure, to evolve. Think of how long it manager without ponders and that mentors only were adapted by some players.
    Secondly you could beat miracle with a bad deck with a bunch of clunky cards, actually you had better chance doing so. After tops ban i think competition increased which sparked tuning, brewing and creativity. You can practically only go toe to toe with the best decks if you play similarly efficient deck.

  17. #77
    Member

    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    PDX
    Posts

    2,477

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by JackaBo View Post
    Secondly you could beat miracle with a bad deck with a bunch of clunky cards, actually you had better chance doing so. After tops ban i think competition increased which sparked tuning, brewing and creativity. You can practically only go toe to toe with the best decks if you play similarly efficient deck.
    @JackaBo: I think everyone knows Counterbalance creates insurmountable one-sided advantage, it was only a matter of time before people rediscovered that simple truth. The issue is that the months where CB was almost non-existent people realized they could get away with SCM and cheap interactive spells not called Abrupt Decay; but it was Hymn's monolithic adoption by that strategy that is the real cause for pushing out every other non-Vial or non-Delver fair deck. Grixis Delver is always going to get rolled by Terminus & SCM/StP, and when the only other fair strategy left to care about (Czech), it doesn't take a genius to figure out you have to stay off-board with non-enchantments and concentrate value in the top card of the deck - and suddenly miracles with Counterbalance is tier one again. Now your non-competitive fair deck [again b/c of Czech] has to slow down and run Decay again [for CB] and Hymn is now even better against you, as you're that much slower at putting cards from hand onto the table.
    ---
    This cycle really doesn't have anything to do with Grixis Delver, even though Git. Probe is a load of bull-crap. Even though CB is the most bannable card in legacy, that ban doesn't stop the above cycle (UW Standstill is just as effective at steamrolling either member of this 23% of the meta, and that status quo wouldn't really change). Like most issues, we're describing problems that arose from fetchlands, which won't be banned (b/c they won't reprint duals). If you want to tackle this over-representation issue, Hymn is probably the safest target. You could hit DRS of course, but I don't know how much you really want to try and make new fair decks against Stifle/Wasteland and Loam/Strip Mine - and even in that setting you're just asking for Counterbalance to be an even greater problem, so good luck brewing around a deck that pretty much has to run Decay without DRS mana fixing....I mean, there's not even a legacy playable, generically usable 1-drop creature for in the runner up slot.

  18. #78

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by WashableWater1 View Post
    If your deck can’t beat a 3 mana 3/1 than have you considered not playing that deck?
    I forgot that TNN has a blank text box, and is just a vanilla beater. [cloud spirit] was dominating for so long, I can't believe it got replaced by something without flying. It must be TNN's ability to block that pushes it over cloud spirit.

  19. #79
    Member

    Join Date

    May 2015
    Location

    PDX
    Posts

    2,477

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Bithlord View Post
    I forgot that TNN has a blank text box, and is just a vanilla beater. [cloud spirit] was dominating for so long, I can't believe it got replaced by something without flying. It must be TNN's ability to block that pushes it over cloud spirit.
    Have to account for power creep on the cmc, the 3/1 you're looking for is Rainbow Efreet. Also what decks are left over that really have to care about TNN anymore? I don't think it's seeing as much play since Blade decks converted to the better good stuff pile (Czech), and TNN sees much less play there. The only other difference is that the Delver decks were faced with targeted-removal pile and had to incorporate the untargetable 3/1 as a 2-of. The idiocy of 6-8 mana dork Turbo-TNN decks has diminished significantly as a viable strategy.

  20. #80

    Re: Is 23% of the top spot too much for one deck? How about two?

    Quote Originally Posted by Dice_Box View Post
    No one going to mention my 2 mana 20/20?
    My 12/12 for 1 never seems to do it anymore :(

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)