Converted Mana Cost and Power Ratios

[raharu]

Some of the most powerful cards in the game are also the least expensive. Brainstorm, Swords to Plowshares, Thoughtseize, Lightning Bolt, Nimble Mongoose, and Sensei's Divining Top, to name a few. Despite being 1 mana cards, they are powerful enough to maintain relevance into the latest stages of the typical game. But notice how out of the examples I listed, only one is a creature. A Nimble Mongoose, after threshold, is possibly one of the most broken creatures ever to have existed, and on a strict scale of P/T and effects to mana cost it's stronger than Tarmogoyf. Despite this rather stupid investment/ return ratio, Nimble Mongoose is narrowly played (in what, three decks maybe?) and isn't that relevant in the late game, unlike most non-creature spells of equal cmc. This brings up a few points, which are most likely to ramble, and a few of which have most likely been brought up in the past, but are more relevant to today's metagame then they previously could have been:


Green being the least powerful color.
Green has always been the domain of beats and not much else, so perhaps that's why green isn't a strong standalone color, is rarely splashed for, and isn't particularly sought out, unless it's for the ubiquitous Tarmogoyf.
Cheap creatures lacking relevance.
Maybe this is why argo is failing? I can't name more than 3 creatures with a cmc of less than 3 which actually swing that are a relevant threat to, well... most decks. All the decks argo dislikes shrug off most early threats and handle the 1 or 2 important ones.
Would stronger inexpensive creatures be impossible?
For example, Isamaru is fairly useless in this metagame, no? Would a W: 2/2 first strike creature be any more relevant? I really don't think so. Although it would make 'Goyf more manageable, it doesn't let agro be a relevant force in the metagame anymore. Now, would a W: Silver Knight or a W: 3/2 with first strike be relevant? Most likely. The question is, would it be overpowered? Again most likely, but are the low cmc spells too overpowered right now? Well... Possibly.
Would stronger, less expensive creatures fix agro as an archetype?
iDunno... I've always that some sort of disruption is vital, but agro decks have done well in the past without it... Then again, they haven't recently.

[MTG Guru]

I also agree that Nimble Mongoose should be played in more decks than it's currently included in. It's a busted card and should be played in more decks of the Zoo-ish variety and various aggro decks that include green. I think that any multi-colored aggro deck with green, running fetches should have him as an auto-include. Call that a little over the top, but that's how I feel.

EDIT: He also combos well with baubles and Street Wraith. I have an interesting idea of rebuilding Goyf Sligh up again starting from it's roots and include 4 Nimble Mongoose.

[Isamaru]

I think Aggro needs an uncounterable way to not lose to Deed, and the anti-aggro enchantments (Moat, Humility, Ghostly Prison/Propaganda, Solitary Confinement), but especially Deed. What good is the fast creature if you just lose everything still?

[GenioDeArena]

On point 4.
If my memory doesnt fails me, disruption is essential for aggro. Just see classic WW on the black summer. If it werent by armageddon or Strip mine the deck was ok at best. straight aggro by itself isnt going to win much in general metagames, only on limited/block or T2, that doesnt offer many optios as far a hibridizing opportunities, otherwise... vintage, Legacy, and to some extent Extended are Hybrid formats by nature, the card pol is so wide that going straight aggro or control seems dumb.

[Iranon]

You usually don't get anywhere in Legacy by playing fair.

Affinity can get multiple free 4/4s around turn 3, and those aren't even seen as the main threats with Ravagers and Atogs around.

Goblins are competitive thanks to the brokenness of Goblin Lackey; without it they are essentially an average midgame deck with big beats, gradual card advantage and a light disruption suite.
IIRC That archetype hasn't been viable since the Mirage cycle.

Even old standbyes like Burn try to turn individually fair cards into something unfair by creating dead cards.

Threshold is ironically one of the most fair decks in Legacy; the light 'cheating' on the mana cost is almost insignificant.


***


Pure Aggro isn't viable because it flat-out loses against anything broken.

Let's assume you're playing Aggro against something stupid like SI + Glimpse. An average or good hand will kill you on the first turn they get. A bad hand could still do something like Glimpse, Shield Sphere, Shield Sphere, Phyrexian Walker, go.
The combo player would probably still win even if all beaters had the power level of pre-Threshed Mongeese.

Yes, even powerful decks like Storm combo and Stax have bad match-ups and there are tools for fighting them... but few match-ups are truly abysmal because of their inherent brokenness. They can reduce your entire deck to one simple question... 'Do you have the Force?'

On the other end of the spectrum, you have clunky control decks that essentially go 'cripple me in the first 3-4 turns or lose', at least to Aggro. Something like MBC doesn't care how awesome your threats are; you'll discard most of them anyway and whatever manages to stick sure isn't going to kill them until Damnation clears the board.

Hitting with regular-sized threats (I'm including something like Tarmogoyfs or hypothetical cards of similar or slightly higher power level, but not monstrosities like Dreadnaught or a huge Kavu Predator) only works when backed up with a fair amount of control and the ability to find it... hence the ability of Threshold to remain competitive.

[MattH]

Despite being 1 mana cards, they are powerful enough to maintain relevance into the latest stages of the typical game.
They're not powerful DESPITE being 1-mana cards, they're powerful BECAUSE they're 1-mana cards. If you asked me to pay 3-4 mana for any of those effects, I'd laugh in your face.

[Alfred]

Isamaru is potentially a good card in some decks because it doesn't require anything in order for it to be a relevant clock, unlike Nimble Mongoose. With Mongoose, it can be a few turns before it's anything more than a 1/1.

In RW sligh decks, the turns where a Savannah Lions/Isamaru are going to be the most relevant are typically within the first 4, when they can potentially pile on 6 damage for a single mana, which is incredibly efficient for an aggressive deck.

It's why Boros aggro was so good for a long time in this past extended format.

I think the older the format gets, the worse straight up curve-oriented aggro decks get. In order for them to get better, they need something to disrupt an opponent without slowing themselves down, or have an extremely explosive win condition.

Unfortunately for Legacy, the presence of anything like that would probably hurt the other formats too much.

[Forbiddian]

Some of the most powerful cards in the game are also the least expensive. Brainstorm, Swords to Plowshares, Thoughtseize, Lightning Bolt, Nimble Mongoose, and Sensei's Divining Top, to name a few. Despite being 1 mana cards, they are powerful enough to maintain relevance into the latest stages of the typical game.

I wouldn't even pay two for any of those. Incinerate isn't even a four-of in any deck that I know of and it's strictly better than a Lightning Bolt for two. Also, saying Lightning Bolt has staying power into the endgame?


But onto your main point:

Saying that aggro is broken or that aggro needs another 5 power two-drop creature or a 3/1 for 1 or something to be competitive is ridiculous. The problem isn't that Aggro is bad.


What makes life hard for Aggro is that Aggro cards are the cheapest in terms of USD ($$, cash, money, the green, etc.). Players might not have access to Duals or Forces or Moats or Fetches, but they DO have access to a couple of Lightning Bolts, some Shocks, and a Jackal Pup or two.

New players or players with low budgets (or type 2 converts without access to vintage card power) comprise at least 30-40% of any metagame and most all of them realize their best chance of winning is going Aggro (best performance for the cost). Throw in a few more players who choose to pick aggro even though they could afford the U spells and just about half of ANY metagame is gonna be Aggro.

This pushes ALL the decks that are bad against Aggro completely out of every metagame and encourages the surviving decks to rig sideboards (and even maindecks) heavily against Aggro.


When people maindeck aggro hosers like Propaganda and Wrath of God (hosers bordering on Silver Bullet status), they're making a good metagame choice to deal with the massively prevalent Aggro. No matter how good your deck is, you can't deal with 6+ dedicated maindeck hosers with more coming in Game 2. The fact that Aggro still wins occasionally is testament to the fact that it's nearly impossible to stop with multiple ways of killing you/putting pressure.


Look at a decklist.

Here’s an example of Landstill (first thread under DTB):

…
4x Mishra’s Factory (although prolly a good choice anyway, Mishra’s Factory owns any 2/2s in the area).
2x Wrath of God
2x Engineered Explosives
4x Swords to Plowshares

Sideboard:
...
4x Pyroclasm
2x Blue Elemental Blast
2x Vedalken Shackles

That’s like 2 dedicated maindeck hosers and 10 more spells that are best against aggro with 8 more dedicated hosers coming in game two.



Imagine playing Ichorid if everyone maindecked 4x Tormod's Crypt and 4x Leyline of the Void? You'd just keel over and die, but Aggro goes through that EVERY SINGLE GAME. And it can stand up to that, too!


Again, aggro is quite good:
Aggro goldfishes turn 4 with near-100% consistency AND tons of redundancy (like it won't keel over and die to a force of will). It runs a low land count (as mentioned) so it draws mostly business. In addition, there are the more abstract game theory things like "there are no wrong questions" and the ability to keep 1 and 3 mana hands, meaning they don't have to mulligan as much and will probably never lose a game from going to 5 or 4.


I think that's pretty balanced with the 15% turn 1 goldfish, 30% turn 2 kills, and 40% turn 3 kills with razor thin disruptability and mulligan risks that combo decks put up. They'll have a losing matchup to Combo, but they sound just about as scary.

A healthy metagame has a lot of Aggro. Aggro is really the trial-by-fire for a lot of decks, the yardstick to measure your performance. You have to be faster than aggro on the goldfish or able to throw an anticog redundant-as-hell cogs of aggro to survive. That’s how the game should be.


Would you rather have a few 3/1s for 1 printed and then have people forced into maindecking 4x Pyroclasms, Fire and Ice, and Propagandas?

I would. I have 8x Volcanic Islands I want to sell off.

Although people would probably just go White and Black for God Damn. God damn, I'm never gonna get rid of these Islands.



EDIT: Sorry, quote was attributed to the wrong person.