[Article] Flash - by Anusien

[frogboy]

http://www.starcitygames.com/php/new...cle/14145.html

This thread is not allowed to degenerate into a flamefest.

[barron]

I am curious as to what math you used to arrive at those statistics. Showing your match could be a bit much, but, like, did you actually use that statistical equations with factorials? (for example)

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

The first response defends the DCI by basically pointing out that there is nothing they can or should do to respond. The DCI and the Rules Team are distinct teams in responsibilities if not people. The Rules Team should be ignoring power level in fixing cards to the way they should work according to the rules; this is the point of removing power-level errata. The DCI can only do two things when it comes to disruptive cards: ban or restrict it when the B/R cycle is upon us, and emergency ban or restrict it. I've already argued that they are unlikely to emergency ban it, so there is literally nothing they can do. Anti-Wizards folks like to say that un-errata'ing Flash was a horrible move at this time because it is so powerful, but the analysis already presented is that basically they should un-errata the card as soon as possible because it should always have worked that way. After all if they take how powerful the card is into consideration when deciding whether to remove power-level errata, that kind of defeats the purpose.

This argument is an appeal to protocol; they can't do other than what they did, because that's how they do things. But you simply assume that the way they do things is correct, without looking at "why".

Why do they not issue an emergency banning? Because it would be an unforeseen setback to those who had been playtesting one format and would find another. This doesn't apply to an un-errata that fundamentally changes the nature of the card. Banning the card a few days after it, for all intents and purposes, sprung into existence would have invalidated little to no testing, and certainly far less than what is equivalent to creating a new card out of nowhere, more powerful than half the banned list, and making it immediately legal.

A lot of people want Flash to be banned because it is simply that good. And yes, Flash is at a higher power level than several cards already on the banned list seem to be. This is making me reconsider my views on those cards; I do feel that leaving something unbanned requires less burden of proof or less fairness than to unban something. I do feel that it is a fine decision to leave questionable cards on the Banned list, simply because I do not think we have explored the entirety of the format. Maybe in another year when the format has actually progressed again; but calling for unbannings seems to say that we have given up on deck building.

This argument is nonsensical on multiple fronts. A card that can't be played can't "prove" it's bustedness; Regrowth was on the banned list for so long that everyone thought it was busted, but who besides me has even played even a singleton of the card in the two-and-a-half years it's been Legacy legal?

When I raised these arguments before, the criticism came back that the only decks that are performing well are combo decks, Flash decks, and blue and black disruptive decks; supposedly that is not healthy for the format. But honestly with storm cards and things like Dark Ritual, Diminishing Returns, Infernal Tutor, Ill-Gotten Gains and Goblin Charbelcher legal, did people honestly think that Elves! was going to be a defendable metagame choice?

Dismissing any deck not running heavy Blue or killing on the first turn as being equivalent to running elves is an absurd and mildly offensive argument.

[Machinus]

This issue is complicated, and I think the important points deserve a more sophisticated treatment than they are given here. The arguments are legalistic and circular, and that is insufficient to get the attention of the format's management. If the purpose is to proselytize Legacy players themselves, then it may work just fine.

I am glad to see some more public discussion of tech, though.

[Hanni]

This was actually one of the few articles of Anusien's that I really liked. I think he hit the nail on the head with alot of his points. I disagreed with a few things but that is to be expected with any article someone writes.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

I'm not sure, sometimes, why we actually care about these articles; it's basically a platform to present poor arguments that only makes it more difficult for other people to point out your logical inconsistencies.

think the trend you see is that the decks that cannot compete fall by the wayside, but all of the decks that you would expect to be good (the multi-colored disruption beatdown decks) continue to do well.

Is there any good reason that a 2 deck format is desirable?

Also, by saying anything that isn't Aggro-control or combo is the same as playing Elves, you have to consider why in your previous article you encouraged me to play Goblins, which I now know are nothing more than Elves in green leoatards. Are you trying to mislead me, sir?

[blacklotus3636]

When they banned skullclamp from standard they did it because its power level was so high that it forced you to play with it or against it which is as wizards calls it `warping the metagame`. So the question is if its warping the metagame. Its hard to really tell since its only been legal for a few weeks and all we have is GPT results but from the testing people have done with flash and the little data we have its obvious that flash is dominating everything that doesn`t play either blue or black. Also, just from a standpoint of power level I can`t think of any other deck in my 5 years of playing magic even in vintage that could kill reliably on turns 1-2 and possibly 0 at instant speed for 2 mana with cheap tutors. I don`t think its a question anymore of if it will be banned the only question is when.

Edit: `This deck doesnt have any blue or black mana in it. This deck sucks!` (I`m not sure if anyone has said this or not but I thought it was a funny thing to say about the current flash environment)

[Phantom]

Defending the DCI and rules team by hiding behind policy and job description is ludicrous. It is their job to give us a good format and to keep us happy. They fucked up our format, wasted our time and money, and made us angry. Thus, they did a poor fucking job.

[C.P.]

I agree on the first part of the article about how we should react to wizards, although I'd like to see some more reaction other than random Q&A.

However, how can you call the format healthy when you cannot play anything that does not have Counter or Discard? This is Legacy, and I'd like to play five colors instead of two.

Using the example from T2 is absurd, since Legacy does not get enough large tournaments to show DCI the metagame shift, unlike type 2. If Dragonstorm was problematic, DCI could deal with it, thanks to vast amount of informations from large tournaments. How about legacy? We barely get any attention, and 3-4 tournaments are all the information they've got. If they let flash be, and sit there until it ruins every deck that does not run blue or black, degenerating the format into cheaper vintage, it will be too late. To make things worse, Flash is not going to rotate out anytime soon.

EDIT: Stating your mere opinion as 'fact' is not very nice to see, either. Who are you? god of Legacy?

[Anusien]

I am curious as to what math you used to arrive at those statistics. Showing your match could be a bit much, but, like, did you actually use that statistical equations with factorials? (for example)

In short, it's an extension of the Force of Will math. We (me plus the guys of #scg) worked out the hands that do not win on turn 0, and then found the probability of any of those. That is:
0 Flash or 0 Caverns or 0Hulk(0Pact) or 0ESG0SSG(0Pact)

P(A or B or C or D) = P(A) + P(B) + P(C) + P(D) - P(AB) - P(AC) - P(AD) - P(BC) - P(BD) - P(CD) + P(ABC) + P(ABD) + P(ACD) + P(BCD) - P(ABCD)

Then final P(Turn 0) = 1-P(0 Flash or 0 Caverns or 0Hulk or 0SpiritGuide)


Anyway, in short, the reason why I defend this metagame is because I think it was inevitable. Even excluding Flash, the power level of the combo decks, or even things like Tog (if they can manage to dodge Goblins) and similar decks is just so high relative to the rest of the field that I think it's inevitable. If you look at the GPT Top 8 results, you see roughly the same Threshold counts, Belcher has surpassed Solidarity, and you see an approximate amount of the same Tier 2 aggro-disruption decks (even though they've become more sophisticated; BW/BR instead of Sui, Fish instead of other things). You just see less Goblins, and less Tier 3 crap. But my central point is which of the decks that can't compete in Flash.meta could compete in TES+Belcher+Iggy.meta? My contention is very few or none. If the blue and black decks are the only ones that can interact with the combo decks, then there is a reason they are the only ones playable. It's not like there's a Green Hymn to Tourach.

This argument is an appeal to protocol; they can't do other than what they did, because that's how they do things. But you simply assume that the way they do things is correct, without looking at "why".

I don't assume what they did was correct, I simply tell it how it is to explain why it WILL be legal. That's all I was trying to do there is explain the protocol. I do believe they did the right thing, simply because delaying removing power-level errata for power-level concerns seems silly to me, but that is just my opinion.

Also, by saying anything that isn't Aggro-control or combo is the same as playing Elves, you have to consider why in your previous article you encouraged me to play Goblins, which I now know are nothing more than Elves in green leoatards. Are you trying to mislead me, sir?

At the time, there were two factors going on: 1) Goblins was the absolute best deck and everyone knew it. It had the best chance against the field. 2) TES and Iggy were hardly represented at tournaments. You might run into them once, but you could afford to lose to them once and still make Top 8. They were pushed out of the meta by Tide (both because Tide >>> Iggy, and because the combo players tended to like the blue deck), and Goblins had a much better Tide matchup than Iggy. Flash is a bit more prevalent than TES. I think it's fair to say Flash is the consensus best deck. My logic was only ever to play the best deck or be able to beat the best deck.
And considering people have been advocating Goblins with maindeck Chalice (which would have been an amazing meta call three weeks ago), Rb Goblins with Therapy, or even Goblins with FoW and Daze, I hardly consider it misleading anyone, especially since Goblins is itself a combo deck.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

Anyway, in short, the reason why I defend this metagame is because I think it was inevitable. Even excluding Flash, the power level of the combo decks, or even things like Tog (if they can manage to dodge Goblins) and similar decks is just so high relative to the rest of the field that I think it's inevitable. If you look at the GPT Top 8 results, you see roughly the same Threshold counts, Belcher has surpassed Solidarity, and you see an approximate amount of the same Tier 2 aggro-disruption decks (even though they've become more sophisticated; BW/BR instead of Sui, Fish instead of other things). You just see less Goblins, and less Tier 3 crap. But my central point is which of the decks that can't compete in Flash.meta could compete in TES+Belcher+Iggy.meta?

Any deck can run 4x CotV, or Null Rod.

I think you're failing to understand the larger meta-game picture.

None of the previous combo decks were as effective against traditional aggro-control as Hulk is. There were reasons not to run TES; if you ran into aggro-control multiple times, you could be in trouble. With a good build of Hulk, that's not really as much of a concern.

Because there's no reason NOT to run Hulk, that means that everyone WILL play against Hulk, multiple times.

That means that you can't play a deck like, oh, GOBLINS, and bite your combo losses, while shoring up your other matches. You also can't fit in 4x CotV and up your combo match-up by a signifigant portion.

It also means, directly, there's also very little reason to play aggro-control(short of not being able to find Flashes). Whatever aggro-control plan you have, you can probably fit in the Hulk-Flash kill and make it better.

In short, this isn't at all where the meta-game was headed.

I hardly consider it misleading anyone, especially since Goblins is itself a combo deck.

I consider it a contradiction to say that one week Goblins is the best deck, and two weeks later say that it being completely pushed out of the meta-game was inevitable, because it was in reality on par with Elves in power level.

[Bardo]

Holy shit, Kevin.

Personally, I think this is the best article you've ever written. I liked the style, it had a fine structure and I think I agree with you on every point.

That you prefaced the last section with "this is just my opinion, fwiw," strengthens the article. Re: Flash's effect on the format, I'm definitely in a "let's just wait and see" position. And we won't have to wait very long at all; another week and a half should do it.

Again, kudos on an excellent article.

Also, did you realize that the Lincoln quote that starts the article was my sig at TMD for like six months? What a weird way to get a shout-out. ;)

[barron]

Depending on how you are actually finding the "P" I think I can see how our math is differing, especially if you are just finding the math for the hands that have the wins minus the extra cards. The only reason why I haven't calculated it in it's entirety yet is because I am pretty busy atm and the math is a bit intimidating. The math is really a series of hypergeometric distributions and not just addition and subtraction of the individual probablities. How did you find the individual probablities?

[Mad Zur]

I do not think "Flash is not broken because Belcher was broken anyway" is a sound argument.

[Finn]

When I raised these arguments before, the criticism came back that the only decks that are performing well are combo decks, Flash decks, and blue and black disruptive decks; supposedly that is not healthy for the format. But honestly with storm cards and things like Dark Ritual, Diminishing Returns, Infernal Tutor, Ill-Gotten Gains and Goblin Charbelcher legal, did people honestly think that Elves! was going to be a defendable metagame choice?

Come on, here. An environment that dictates the very colors you play out of necessity is not healthy - It's fucking Vintage.

The singular form of "errata" is "erratum"

You are killing me, dude. Don't mention grammatical errors if you are about to make them. You have to say "an erratum" if you insist on making it singular. Or you could just go on using "errata" like everyone else.

Alright, so they removed a power-level erratum from Flash.

Older cards with a power-level erratum are being fixed when they...

Flash was already receiving an erratum, and the rules team...

Despite my complaints - I think you are dead wrong about what constitutes unhealthy for example - you made me think hard about what I "knew". gj

[Tacosnape]

I do not think "Flash is not broken because Belcher was broken anyway" is a sound argument.

Agreed.

[SpatulaOfTheAges]

I find it insulting that you think I would sacrifice my integrity or the community for the sake of a tournament.

I think people are complaining merely because the decks they used to play cannot beat Flash.

I think it's also a contradiction to become huffy when you think people accuse you of ulterior motives, then accuse a huge segment of the playing population of the same.

[Volt]

I do not think "Flash is not broken because Belcher was broken anyway" is a sound argument.

I totally agree. Any deck can run Pithing Needle to stop Belcher. Goblin tokens can be dealt with in a variety of ways that are accessible around the color wheel. And if you stop Belcher's first win condition, the deck often rolls over at that point because it used up all its gas.

Well-built Hulk Flash has inevitability. It is highly redundant and resilient. It runs almost as much disruption as the decks that are designed to beat it. And there is very little that can be done about it. It cannot be compared to any of the previously existing archetypes. When a Legacy combo deck is being favorably compared to Vintage combo decks, you know you have a problem.

But enough of that. I will compliment Kevin for his clear, concise writing style, and thank him for once again contributing to the Legacy following.

[TheAardvark]

So, far, this is the only article Kevin has written that I have truly enjoyed. I am not trying to flame...there's just something about his writing style that has always bugged me. I thought this was one Perfectly Acceptable and raised a few interesting points, some of which I even agreed with, to an extent.

However, I must echo some of the others in saying that being forced to play 2 colors isn't the sign of a healthy meta in any way, shape, or form. Yes, playing Duress is a good idea, but it should not be a requirement, which is basically what you are endorsing. I find that to be a very obtuse and dangerous argument to make. It's possible that with Belcher/TES/IGGy, we were heading down that road, but not for a certainty, and to simply say "eh, play Duress and blue" seems to, in my mind, ignore the problem entirely. We are not ostriches, after all.

[Bardo]

However, I must echo some of the others in saying that being forced to play 2 colors isn't the sign of a healthy meta in any way, shape, or form.

At face value, I certainly agree with this. And while it keeps getting mentioned, over and over, is there any real truth to this assertion? That is, Legacy has become a two-color format?