Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 71

Thread: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

  1. #41
    explosive
    Adan's Avatar
    Join Date

    Feb 2006
    Location

    Germany - RLP
    Posts

    855

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Machinus View Post
    Legacy is not affected by theory or "hype." Competitive players play the best decks they can build.

    Tournaments are a lot different than forums.
    Well, in my opinion you are wrong. I remember the discussions about Ur Landstill, or where I suggested BTS in NQGr.
    People just looked at the lists and said: "UR landstill is junk, it don't runs S2P" and/or "BTS+Fetchland = Bombo!!!", not thninking about how versatile a removal such as Lightning Bolt can be or that BTS is insanley good against Landstill and Rifter, 2 decks which were heavily played here.

    Aw, anyways, I think it's a lot influenced by theory and hype where people decide whether this deck is good or bad.

    A new deck only gets interesting when someone rocks a big tournament with it. That's the point.

  2. #42
    Member

    Join Date

    Feb 2007
    Location

    San Diego
    Posts

    1,473

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    @ Hanni -

    I am confused... you start with the question, how much of the format is driven by theory?

    and then you break down the archtypes for no apparent reason?

    I hope I am not the only one hear that wants to say this, but stuff like this turns my brain into swiss cheese (fries holes in it).

  3. #43
    Etherium is limited. Innovation is not.
    Hanni's Avatar
    Join Date

    Aug 2006
    Location

    Columbus, OH
    Posts

    2,818

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    @ thefreakaccident

    Well... I'm drunk, the topic is vague as fuck. Looking at the other replies in this thread, the thread itself confuses me into oblivion. Factor in that I've had a shitload of beer and smoked a bunch of weed. Then we get to my actual post. I was just posting something that seemed like it had a valuable content to this thread. The original question is about theory and maybe hype. I never even touched hype. My position on the archtypes helps direct the theory and hype into an explanation of the origins of theory and hype. Build off of that content. Hype? I never follow hype but I like to playtest as much as I can. Hype definitely occurs on these boards. I always investigate. My hype is never heard because I am not part of a team and I'm not an Adept. Regardless... what was I getting at...? Hmm... yea, my post may have scrambled your brains. I'm sorry. My brain is pretty scrambled right now too... yet I'm typing like an English major... awesome sauce.
    Sligh
    Echo Stompy
    /r Miracle Intuition
    Yorion's Intuition
    5c Hollow Vine

    Quote Originally Posted by MMogg View Post
    In porn terms, Zoo has a 11" shlong and an impressive money shot, but it's over in 4 minutes, whereas Landstill is a good 8" and can go for 30 minutes.

  4. #44
    Member

    Join Date

    Jun 2004
    Location

    Madison, WI
    Posts

    1,601

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Honoluluicecaps View Post
    I haven't taken the time to comb through every thought on here so I apoligize if I step on someone elses toes... but the format is driven by hype and combo is present (in various forms) at most major tournaments.

    Hulk-Flash was hyped up on the internet to all hell. And every deck prepared for it. And those decks that didn't prep for it got their asses kicked... So for those of us that played at the GP thank goodness for that hyping.
    That wasn't hype though. Hype implies unwarranted attention, and HF definitely warranted the attention. Post FS, it would have been almost completely unstoppable. The pacts increased the consistancy and protection to a point where the red zone board strategy wasn't necessary, the deck could win 9 times out of 10 by turn 2 with at least 1 counter backing it up, and usually 2.

    Hype would be like oh, I dunno, when the format first split from the T1 B/R list and everyone went ga ga over LED and Petal being 4 of's. OMG BELCHER AND LONG ARE SO BROKEN!!! That was hype. It drove the forums for the first couple months, before people realized that Belcher and Tendrils decks just weren't performing up to expectations. Hype, combined with over-inflated self reporting made the decks seem more solid than they were, and as a result, the people playing things like Landstill were packing 4xNull Rod in board and 4xStifle main.

    To an extent, that was warranted, because combo saw heavyish(for combo in 1.5 anyway) play, but it was still a choice driven by hype, not by a credible threat to the metagame. To be fair, for a little while, a few months down the road, that Severance Belcher/Landstill hybrid(I forget the name and the deck's author, and I apologize) with Humility did quite well for itself. I'm getting off topic though, my point is, there are at least a few points that I can recall where hype on the forums actually warped the format, despite no real evidence to back up the hype.

    Belcher is has been resurrected now, but that's because of ETW, not because Belcher on it's own was a tier 1 deck that everyone had just forgotten about or something. Belcher of old was just a hype deck, bred of poor theory on how the accleration of LED and Petal and the poor man's moxen was going to magically overcome the massive card disadvantage they generate and make the format as fast and broken as T1.

    I started the topic because I think a lot of the players that feel like they are pillars of the format tend to get too far ahead of themselves. It doesn't help that everyone is in love with Flores(don't get me wrong, I like Flores too, but like any writer, you have to digest what he writes, not just swallow it whole) and wants to build the deck that beats the deck that beats the deck to beat. The way I see it, the way hype warps the format is like this:

    Deck X is strong. The strong players go to work figuring out how to beat deck X, then assume that that is what everyone else will play. We'll call this deck Y. Then they figure out what beats deck Y, while still having a matchup against X, and tell everyone how wonderful it is. For a while, the deck(deck Z) actually stands up, because it's being piloted by players that are just that much better than everyone else in their area. As the deck sees wider play, people realize that it's really not that strong. The deck's author(s) insists that the poor track record is because it's a deck that takes a lot of skill to pilot(as if there's a deck that doesn't get better the more skilled the pilot is). After a while, the deck finally falls off the radar, but in the meantime, the format has been stifled because everyone is still trying to build with deck Y in mind, even though it's seen limited play, because the good matchup against decks X and Y is what made deck Z so good in the first place.

    In real world terms, and this doesn't follow the path exactly, but it's close enough:

    Goblins is strong. Solidarity is created. Solidarity stomps the piss out of Goblins, whose only real answer is the 8 Blast board, weakening all it's other matchups with dead board slots. Solidarity has a few high finishes(no first places that I can recall, but a few T8s), but it's really underplayed for it's power level. Nonetheless, Threshold and Fish are touted as tier 1 decks, because they beat Solidarity and still have a Gobbo matchup. The decks are good, but not the be all and end all of the format, and in many places, only the best pilots can consistently play them to T4, because they have some real weaknesses. Fish falls off the radar, Thresh loses popularity(but since most strong players gravitate towards control, and traditional UW Landstill and Duckhunt are too weak to win with consistently for ANYONE, it never dies completely), but now, the format is trying to create decks that handle Goblins and Thresh, even though Thresh was just a meta response, and not seriously a tier 1 deck in it's own right.

    -----------------------------------------------------

    Now, as an aside, I know I'm going to hear the argument that if the best players are playing a deck and winning with it, it is therefore the best deck. I disagree with this opinion, although I see how alluring it can be. If some of the best snipers in the world favor gun X, and are incredibly accurate with gun X, but gun X is a pile of shit in the hands of anyone but those select few, then gun X is not a good sniper rifle, it just happens to be a fluke, an abberation. I knew a guy on my track team in middle school that was damn good at shotput. Thing is, he'd just stand there and do pops. If he tried to actually spin and get some momentum going, he'd lose distance. So he'd just stand there and throw it. Best shot put on the team, probably in southern Wisconsin, but that doesn't mean that his method was the best method for shot put, it was actually an inferior method, it just worked best for him.

    Obviously, it's never possible to have 2 players with *exactly* the same skill level, but that's really what we should be shooting for when we try and determine what's strong against what. If some guy with Thresh and a 2k eternal rating beats a 1600 rated Goblins player playing 1.5 for the first time, that is not a strong indication that Thresh beats Gobbos, it's an indication that the better player won. From watching my roomate, I've realized that playskill counts for a lot more than a few points in favor of one deck or the other in a matchup. In fact, I had a hard lesson in this in the first round of the tournament I went to on vacation in SD. Round 1, I got paired against Angel Stompy, which is a good matchup for me, but I kept when I should've mulled both games, and favorable matchup or not, I got 2-0'd.
    Quote Originally Posted by Draener View Post
    You know who thinks it's sweet to play against 8 different decks in an 8 round tournament? People who don't like to win, or people that play combo. This is not EDH; Legacy is a competitive environment, and it should reward skill - more so than it does.
    Quote Originally Posted by Borealis View Post
    Plow their Mom every chance you get!

  5. #45
    Arbitrary Wielder of Justice

    Join Date

    Oct 2003
    Posts

    3,195

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    most strong players gravitate towards control
    Most strong players want to play the best deck in the format and don't actually give a damn what archtype it is. Further, those that do tend to want to play decks like UGR Threshold, because it constantly interacts with it's opponents and sooner or later those opponents will make mistakes.

    Personally, I only do theorizing about the metagame. I sit down and test matchups.
    When in doubt, mumble.

    When in trouble, delegate.

  6. #46
    Member

    Join Date

    Jun 2004
    Location

    Madison, WI
    Posts

    1,601

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by frogboy View Post
    Most strong players want to play the best deck in the format and don't actually give a damn what archtype it is. Further, those that do tend to want to play decks like UGR Threshold, because it constantly interacts with it's opponents and sooner or later those opponents will make mistakes.

    Personally, I only do theorizing about the metagame. I sit down and test matchups.
    I have to disagree with you there. Blue has been weak in T2 for a long time now, and it still sees a lot of play. People will always play with counterspells. People will always refer to themselves as "control players".
    Quote Originally Posted by Draener View Post
    You know who thinks it's sweet to play against 8 different decks in an 8 round tournament? People who don't like to win, or people that play combo. This is not EDH; Legacy is a competitive environment, and it should reward skill - more so than it does.
    Quote Originally Posted by Borealis View Post
    Plow their Mom every chance you get!

  7. #47
    Arbitrary Wielder of Justice

    Join Date

    Oct 2003
    Posts

    3,195

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Blue has been weak in T2 for a long time now, and it still sees a lot of play.
    lol, no. See also Block Constructed.

    People will always play with counterspells. People will always refer to themselves as "control players".
    People will always scrub out at tournaments, too, particularly people like this.
    When in doubt, mumble.

    When in trouble, delegate.

  8. #48
    You meet the nicest people on a Honda
    Obfuscate Freely's Avatar
    Join Date

    Dec 2003
    Location

    Fredericksburg, Va
    Posts

    1,411

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    As long as you're highlighting Threshold as a deck made popular by hype, your hypothesis is going to break down. The fact is that Threshold, by its own merit, has been one of the strongest decks in the format pretty much since its inception.

    Arguing otherwise is pretty silly. We have three Premier-level Legacy events to consider, and Threshold has made it to the elimination rounds of each one of them. In those top eights, Threshold outnumbered Goblins twice (arguably, in the only two events that are even relevant), and has almost twice as many appearances overall.

    Obviously, the deck has enjoyed tons of success at the amatuer level, as well, but that's just because the best players play it, right?

    Honestly, considering the deck's performance record, it's a wonder it isn't more popular. Maybe it's a victim of negative hype? Like this thread?
    Quote Originally Posted by nitewolf9
    I can show up whenever I vomit off my hangover and get rid of the passed out females who's naked bodies will be sprawled out all over my condo. Oh wait, I'm engaged. FUCK.

    Well in that case I can be there at like 2 then, I guess.
    Quote Originally Posted by IAmTheBestEver View Post
    I built my car with my bare hands. It has 32 engines and 17 gas pedals so I can go extra-turbo fast. I sold it for a million dollars and then stole it from the guy using my super computer that can hack into any car in the world as long as I built it. Now I speed down the highway listening to Bruce Springsteen at max volume and flipping off other drivers.

    What are regrets?

  9. #49
    12/12
    Bane of the Living's Avatar
    Join Date

    Dec 2004
    Location

    Spencer MA
    Posts

    1,828

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Obfuscate Freely View Post
    Honestly, considering the deck's performance record, it's a wonder it isn't more popular. Maybe it's a victim of negative hype? Like this thread?
    I think your right. I saw two Thresh decks at the Sea Drake tournament. Thats out of 44 participants.
    Now playing real formats.

  10. #50

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    All formats are driven by hype, performance and trends.

    Every now and then there's a new deck that smashes every other deck, just to become a new archetype. Many of those decks fall into oblivion eventually. But they always return as well.

    So, yes, the novelty and the reports from people are relevant. Very few people has such a high knowledge of the metagame to know most decks played around and a tournament, even a local store one. So if someone comes and tell you about this "broken" deck that will make card X become banned and how it kills in turn 1/2 and how it totally smashes all other decks, people believe them and build them.

    The fact that a lot of people, who don't really know a deck (like me!) tells you something "looks" bad does not mean it is, and the other way around.

    The same happen to cards. Some start really low and suddenly boom when people actually realize how to exploit them (the most spectacular case, imho, being Reset), and others make people say "OMG! Broken" and fall into oblivion really fast, when people realize it may have a niche but it's not as useful as it looks (like Browbeat, I know you pros/experts knew it was not such a big thing the second you saw it).

    So, yes, Legacy is driven by "theory", but that theory is normally backed up by actual testing. Hype is for one or two months. If a deck survives that, normally the deck has something behind.

  11. #51
    Member
    Machinus's Avatar
    Join Date

    Jun 2005
    Location

    Knoxville, TN
    Posts

    1,538

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by ninjabear View Post
    So if someone comes and tell you about this "broken" deck that will make card X become banned and how it kills in turn 1/2 and how it totally smashes all other decks, people believe them and build them.
    Talented players don't do this. And it's a shame that no one calls out these charlatans on their bullshit.

  12. #52
    Get Money, Ghost
    Whit3 Ghost's Avatar
    Join Date

    Oct 2005
    Location

    Albany
    Posts

    926

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Machinus View Post
    Talented players don't do this. And it's a shame that no one calls out these charlatans on their bullshit.
    It happens, but the people doing the calling out usually get beaten down by the followers of said charlatans. Not naming any names here, but the problem with the internet is that things degenerate into ego battles and flame wars incredibly easily.
    Team Rehab- We Keep Coming Back For More
    Team Blitzkrieg- Swagga.
    Storm Boards
    Quote Originally Posted by FakeSpam View Post
    Legacy is like Japan. We don't make stuff, we just make stuff better.

  13. #53

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by Whit3 Ghost View Post
    It happens, but the people doing the calling out usually get beaten down by the followers of said charlatans. Not naming any names here, but the problem with the internet is that things degenerate into ego battles and flame wars incredibly easily.
    The thing is that it's often a matter of perspective. I remember in the summer of 06, when Wastedlife and I were both starting to work on Burning Wish based combo, how Mike Bomholmn made it his personal mission in life to see that no one would bother testing Burning Wish because when he did it, it "sucked," and now in retrospect he made himself out to be a complete ass.

    Despite being wrong 99% of the time, I think it's more important to investigate radical ideas than to dismiss them, because if people aren't willing to evaluate whatever is waiting in the winds, then the format will revolve around U/g/w Threshold and Goblins until the end of time. Even the good ideas, like figuring out how to abuse Phyrexian Dreadnought, either get way more flak than they really deserve or go totally unnoticed.
    Quote Originally Posted by wastedlife View Post
    Breathweapon, I regret saying this but ... I've been liking you more and more every day.

  14. #54
    Member

    Join Date

    Nov 2005
    Location

    Germany
    Posts

    358

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Speaking of Dreadnaught... rough lists can win matches and tournaments too. It becomes doubly confusing if said rough list isn't worth refining once it got the job done ('Thresh with maindecked Stifle should beat the field... might as well throw in Dreadnaughts for a laugh').

    I think a lot of confusions arises when it's not clear whether the object of speculation is supposed to be a good deck in its own right or a metagame-killer.

  15. #55

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    So, here is what I notice. Innovation in a format that has a near inifinite supply of cards is very tough. Do I think that Threshold is the best deck? No, personally I feel like U/W/b Fish is a much better deck all around. It has the same permission, both have meddling mage, only difference is that Fish doesnt need to wait for a couple of turns for threshold to kick in to be effective. Along the same lines I'd say that CounterSliver has similar advantages while having few of the disadvantages of Threshold.

    However, there is a LOT of groupthink in Magic. Someone says the best decks are goblins and threshold, then that'll see play. The better players will say "i want a good deck to play" they play threshold because they hear its good. They top 8, someone else is like "well it top 8'd so i'll play it". This doesnt just happen in Legacy, but in every format in magic basically. Innovation doesnt come around all that often until it top 8's some tournament of note.

  16. #56
    (' ' '\( 0 ,o)/''')
    TheInfamousBearAssassin's Avatar
    Join Date

    May 2004
    Location

    Northern Virginia
    Posts

    6,627

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by BreathWeapon View Post
    The thing is that it's often a matter of perspective. I remember in the summer of 06, when Wastedlife and I were both starting to work on Burning Wish based combo, how Mike Bomholmn made it his personal mission in life to see that no one would bother testing Burning Wish because when he did it, it "sucked," and now in retrospect he made himself out to be a complete ass.
    Is this the kind of retrospect where we retroactively pretend that Empty the Warrens was existing in the Summer of '06?

    But yeah, there's a lot of scrubs who play Legacy who don't want to hear why any given idea won't work. This is why people don't get challenge on bogus claims more often, because other forums are wastelands of bad ideas where challenging said ideas gets you banned. This is why the Source is the sole bastion of intelligent discussion on the Legacy format, at least in English; every other forum has buried itself beneath the weight of poor speculation and bad decks that "break the format".
    For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
    And found I was for endurance made

  17. #57
    Undefined Fantastic Object

    Join Date

    Oct 2006
    Location

    Waterloo, Canada
    Posts

    810

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Although I hate to do so, I have agree with BW here. Radical ideas have to be tested, no matter how ridiculous it looks in the first place. However, you also have to know when to quit with an idea that does not work, like IBA said.
    She said, "You're broken."
    "So is your face." replied the Tarmogoyf.

  18. #58

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin View Post
    Is this the kind of retrospect where we retroactively pretend that Empty the Warrens was existing in the Summer of '06?

    But yeah, there's a lot of scrubs who play Legacy who don't want to hear why any given idea won't work. This is why people don't get challenge on bogus claims more often, because other forums are wastelands of bad ideas where challenging said ideas gets you banned. This is why the Source is the sole bastion of intelligent discussion on the Legacy format, at least in English; every other forum has buried itself beneath the weight of poor speculation and bad decks that "break the format".
    Whether or not ETW existed in the summer of 06 isn't the relevant issue, disregarding ETW, Rite of Flame and Simian Spirit Guide the shell of the deck was based on being able to combo with Diminishing Returns as a second Storm engine. Bomholmn argued that Burning Wish was fundamentally bad in combo, because it couldn't tutor for mana and it didn't have access to Yawgmoth's Will, but his first point was irrelevant (more or less) and his second point was misguided by his inexperience with Burning Long. Even tho' the deck is built around ETW, Right of Flame and Simian Spirit Guide now, it wasn't always that way, and it was still just as capable of winning a game against the same range of decks as IGGY POP. I'm not arguing that those three red cards didn't have a tremendous impact on combo, because they did, but Burning Wish wasn't the pile that Mike Bomholmn made it out to be, and if we had quit then, TES wouldn't exist.

    There's a difference between people who refuse to listen to criticism and people who refuse to use constructive criticism. While the format is full of people with their pet decks, I'd argue the internet is full of even more people that can't construct a counter argument that contains more than a one liner or a flame.

    @Samshire, in the interests of not derailing this thread, let's not start.
    Quote Originally Posted by wastedlife View Post
    Breathweapon, I regret saying this but ... I've been liking you more and more every day.

  19. #59
    Utterly ViLe
    Cait_Sith's Avatar
    Join Date

    Sep 2006
    Posts

    1,601

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Yea, since the Summer of '06 totally had SSS.

    Quote Originally Posted by BreathWeapon
    There's a difference between people who refuse to listen to criticism and people who refuse to use constructive criticism. While the format is full of people with their pet decks, I'd argue the internet is full of even more people that can't construct a counter argument that contains more than a one liner or a flame.
    Part of the problem is that there aren't people who can make constructive criticism. When someone goes "I don't think this idea will work" and leaves it at that, what are you supposed to do? I ended up getting angry when several people did that to me; they told me it wouldn't work, they never said why. Even worse is when people explain to you how your metagame deck loses to a metagame its not designed to win in. You assume that people always make intelligent comments and only their opponents are idiots.
    Quote Originally Posted by frolll View Post
    It is not like any other penises, though...
    It's a penis drawn by Leonard friggin' Da Vinci; which pretty much owns our penises.
    Team Multi-Grain - We're wholesome.

  20. #60
    Undefined Fantastic Object

    Join Date

    Oct 2006
    Location

    Waterloo, Canada
    Posts

    810

    Re: [Discussion] How much is the format driven by theory?

    Quote Originally Posted by BreathWeapon View Post
    I'm not arguing that those three red cards didn't have a tremendous impact on combo, because they did, but Burning Wish wasn't the pile that Mike Bomholmn made it out to be, and if we had quit then, TES wouldn't exist.
    Burning wish was a pile before Coldsnap and TS block. If ETW, Rite, SSG was not printed, Red based storm combo deck will not exist, making burning wish marginal at best. The example of yours works only because Wizards printed those cards. If they did not, Bomholmn would still be right on the burning wish in Legacy combo. If you think you were insightful for not giving up on Burning wish, you are wrong. You were just lucky.

    Any cards can be argued the same. The Ideas can get better with new cards, but that does not make the idea better at the time.
    She said, "You're broken."
    "So is your face." replied the Tarmogoyf.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

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