All B/R update speculation.

[Dice_Box]

I don't follow modern closely, but doesn't the turn-4 rule prevent the existence of true combo decks? I mean, if your combo decks are not allowed to be faster than the fair decks, are they really producing a diverse type of interaction? In Legacy, combo decks create strategic diversity because they demand a strategic adjustment from decks that cannot outrace them.

Also, does Modern have a tier-1 prison deck? I understand Lantern Control is a tier-2 deck, and Rack and Ponza are worse.

For me, format diversity can't really exist without decks that approach the game from a completely different angle. In Legacy, ANT, Lands, and RB Reanimator are perfect examples. Does Modern have decks that are that "weird"? Honestly curious.

First. Combo if undisturbed in Modern is fast, faster than most aggressive decks. The difference between combo in Modern and combo in Legacy is that Modern combo tends to also need permanents to work. This gives other decks interaction but it does not always give them the win.

Lantern is tier one. It was tier two but then it got tutors and... well you know what happens when a deck dependet on a handful of cards gets tutors right? Yea that happened. The only reason it's not going to see a ban is because Artifact hate is to Modern what Graveyard hate is to Vintage.

As for "Weird" decks, yea, Modern has its share. I would argue that Scapeshift is odd but there is some crazy fucking shit. My personal favourite that I play sometimes is Haakon Loam. A deck that you Dredge into Haakon and then play shit like Crib Swap and Nameless Inversion out of the grave. Your also playing Knight and Loam, so the deck can do some oddly broken things. Retrace comes to mind. It's not good but it's dam fun.

[taconaut]

Except Modern currently is a format where you can do a ton of different things, and decks are powerful and can interact. In fact it's more diverse than it was back when those cards were legal..

Yeah, I acknowledged this in response to Mega, there is certainly a variety of nominally different decks in modern, and more of them were reactive than I anticipated. Unfortunately, I think they're just not that interesting - many of the decks they banned were much cooler, in my opinion, though that isn't really a good argument for bans/unbans. A lot of them also feel "nerfed;" why play these when you can play Legacy?

I liked the rest of your analysis though, interesting take.


The difference between combo in Modern and combo in Legacy is that Modern combo tends to also need permanents to work. This gives other decks interaction but it does not always give them the win.


This is one of the things that makes me like modern less.

[kombatkiwi]

I'd really rather pass on the "fun" based arguments.

What kind of argument do you prefer? What other kind of argument is there?
You can try to make 'objective' arguments like 'X card should be banned because the metagame represenation of Y color is disproportionate' or 'X card should be banned because its % share of the metagame is too high' but these are just arbitrary metrics.
Can you answer a question like "why is metagame % of cards relevant to bannings discussions?" without making any kind of 'appeal to fun?'

Edit: I don't agree that the argument (as presented) is reasonable justification for not unbanning Black Vise, but "it turns out Black Vise is really good and it's a miserable gameplay experience losing to it" seems like it would be a fair reason for banning it again

[Megadeus]

Yeah, I acknowledged this in response to Mega, there is certainly a variety of nominally different decks in modern, and more of them were reactive than I anticipated. Unfortunately, I think they're just not that interesting - many of the decks they banned were much cooler, in my opinion, though that isn't really a good argument for bans/unbans. A lot of them also feel "nerfed;" why play these when you can play Legacy?

I liked the rest of your analysis though, interesting take.



This is one of the things that makes me like modern less.

The Main reason to play modern in my eyes is that you can actually come up with crazy shit and it be fairly viable. I mean for god's sake we just had a deck featuring burning inquiry and goblin lore become a tier deck. And a deck with lantern of insight being the key card is arguably the best deck in the format. Things like that don't happen in legacy because the raw efficiency of the format (mostly the cantrip cartel) makes it impossible to do. The format (again this is to me at least) is pretty much solved at this point and it's to the point that if something interesting and powerful enough to see play comes into the format it's either absorbed by blue stew or it's eventually figured out how to beat by the blue stew.

[taconaut]

The Main reason to play modern in my eyes is that you can actually come up with crazy shit and it be fairly viable. I mean for god's sake we just had a deck featuring burning inquiry and goblin lore become a tier deck. And a deck with lantern of insight being the key card is arguably the best deck in the format. Things like that don't happen in legacy because the raw efficiency of the format (mostly the cantrip cartel) makes it impossible to do. The format (again this is to me at least) is pretty much solved at this point and it's to the point that if something interesting and powerful enough to see play comes into the format it's either absorbed by blue stew or it's eventually figured out how to beat by the blue stew.

I think you're right that it is more or less solved, but I think (for me, at least) the "crazy shit" that is available in modern is still strictly less interesting than what you can do in Legacy (there's no Modern deck as cool as Legacy Lands, or ANT, or Elves, or Food Chain, or pre-top Miracles, etc).

I do think it's too bad that, strictly speaking, the best decks are probably Grixis and Czech, but I also think those decks allow for people to actually employ a competitive mindset in this format, as well. I also am skeptical that banning the cantrips would make more space for brewing - even if we get rid of all the good cantrips, is whatever brew you want to make going to be able to beat Lands? How about Elves? What about glass cannon combo, like Belcher? If it's a combo deck, can it compete with Eldrazi and DNT? I think there are still oppressive efficiencies in Legacy beyond U: Draw a card, and many of them are non-blue.

[Whitefaces]

Unban top and ban CB would do wonders for the format.

[PirateKing]

So I'm wondering,

Are the folks yearning to get survival back also the folks who are bothered by "blue-stew cantrip cartel" decks?
I would tend to think there is a very good chance that, like DRS, the best Survival decks will be blue based. If June midrange plays better in a blue shell, why not Survival?

TBH (in Legacy) I have never played Survival, never played a Delver deck, and the closest I've come to playing a midrange deck is Elves.
So obviously I don't consider myself an expert on fair decks!

But is there no concern that Survival becomes the next best "blue card"? Do we really want that shell to get even better? Is that the subtle plan - unban Survival so that WotC is forced to ban DRS or a cantrip (rather than embarrassingly re-ban)?

I certainly don't hate the blue stew. I have 5 decks sleeved up currently, ANT, Miracles, UB Reanimator, Deadguy Ale & Food Chain. So that's what, 16 Brainstorms, 12 Force of Wills? 8 Deathrite Shaman if we're also counting that. So no, I'm not crying for bans. It is not my plan to engineer a meta where Wizard's hand is force to axe DRS because of Survival. I just think it would be fun to play against, and would be fun to see what people would do with it in the world of Delver of Secrets and Young Pyromancer and Gurmag Angler.

[caprino]

Next bann shaman or gitaxian?

[Claymore]

it's to the point that if something interesting and powerful enough to see play comes into the format it's either absorbed by blue stew or it's eventually figured out how to beat by the blue stew.

Or, in the case of Chalice, called absolutely unfair and needs to be banned then stricken from history.

[Megadeus]

Or, in the case of Chalice, called absolutely unfair and needs to be banned then stricken from history.

Eh the irony of the chalice decks is that despite chalice being one of the best cards against Blue Stew it rarely puts up numbers. The more rounds an event has the less likely it will be there

[Mr. Safety]

Next bann shaman or gitaxian?

I hope neither.

I think I'm a little too cynical to nab a set of SDT's in the hope that they unban it and ban CB; I just don't see it happening. I would love it, but I don't see it happening. I don't think they'll ban DRS either, and we all know they won't ban Brainstorm. Survival seems a bit of a stretch as well.

I hope no changes, other than maybe Earthcraft/Mind Twist/Frantic Search unban.

[Noctalor]

I don't think DRS will get banned next patch, still, the amount of hate DRS is getting is super high.

And while top got even more hate in the years, it also had a good share of the playerbase defending it, I see very few people defending DRS now, maybe because DRS is not deck defining, its just a new 4x that has to be played in the goodstuff shell

[PirateKing]

The reason to enjoy Legacy, in my opinion, is the absurdly large card pool. And I don't mean getting to play a large variety of decks, but rather, the unknown number of one-step-from-busted cards that just need one innocuous card printed to produce a synergy worthy of a new deck. The fact that Lion's Eye Diamond (1996) had to wait until Infernal Tutor (2006) to become an all-star card. Food Chain (1999) had to wait until Misthollow Griffin (2012) before it had an infinite combo, and then wait until Walking Ballista (2017) before it could win without combat. How many years was Show and Tell a dollar rare before it became valuable? Didgerioo's day is coming, and who knows what other laughably bad cards will turn out to be hot next year?

And this isn't just limited to Legacy, though the window of power is usually too high for recent cards to be included, but I consider Lodestone Golem (2010) and Hangerback Walker (2015) to be rather recent cards to what should be a 25 year old format. Modern too has it's examples of curious synergies impossible to predict coming together to produce a neat deck. Lantern of Insight is a great example. Even in standard the nonsense around Saheeli Rai and Felidar Guardian shows that their microscopic card pool isn't immune from unintended synergy.

Legacy sits in that perfect spot, where some pushed Wizard from Dominaria could have made Wizard Tribal a thing. Who knows what the next set could reveal?

[Megadeus]

The next set could reveal that whatever comes out, the best thing to do with whatever card comes out is play it next to Brainstorm, Ponder, and Force of Will

[PirateKing]

The next set could reveal that whatever comes out, the best thing to do with whatever card comes out is play it next to Brainstorm, Ponder, and Force of Will

Well I mean, sure, okay.

[Hanni]

The Main reason to play modern in my eyes is that you can actually come up with crazy shit and it be fairly viable. I mean for god's sake we just had a deck featuring burning inquiry and goblin lore become a tier deck. And a deck with lantern of insight being the key card is arguably the best deck in the format. Things like that don't happen in legacy because the raw efficiency of the format (mostly the cantrip cartel) makes it impossible to do. The format (again this is to me at least) is pretty much solved at this point and it's to the point that if something interesting and powerful enough to see play comes into the format it's either absorbed by blue stew or it's eventually figured out how to beat by the blue stew.

Except the format frequently gets new archetypes, or at the very least, scarcely played decks that are still good become more popular because some pro does well with it. Then over time, people coalesce around what they perceive to be as the best decks, and the lesser played decks go back to the fringes.

Examples include Turbo Depths, Br Reanimator, Noble Hierarch BUG (which increased the popularity of Bant Deathblade for a time), and Czech Pile. All of these are relatively new archetypes within the last couple of years. If we go back even further, there are even more examples.

The point is, new archetypes pop up all the time. I would hardly consider Legacy "solved." Some decks fall off the map, like Shardless BUG, and new ones pop up too. This happens all the time, and not all of them are blue (like Turbo Depths and Br Reanimator).

I agree that it makes sense to splash blue for Brainstorm and Ponder in most decks, because increased consistency of drawing what you need when you need it is a winning strategy, especially at large events. But that doesn't mean you can't brew new competitive decks in Legacy, or that all new competitive brews require blue.

EDIT: Big Eldrazi is another one that comes to mind. Relatively new (within the last year), most certainly competitive, and isn't blue.

EDIT2: Looking through N&D revealed Steel Stompy as well. Also, although this is a bit of a shameless plug, but I did well last October with my Esper Mentor brew, and I did well last year at GP Louisville with my Sligh brew. I realize both of them run blue, but I like casting Brainstorm so whatever.

[Megadeus]

Except the format frequently gets new archetypes, or at the very least, scarcely played decks that are still good become more popular because some pro does well with it. Then over time, people coalesce around what they perceive to be as the best decks, and the lesser played decks go back to the fringes.

Examples include Turbo Depths, Br Reanimator, Noble Hierarch BUG (which increased the popularity of Bant Deathblade for a time), and Czech Pile. All of these are relatively new archetypes within the last couple of years. If we go back even further, there are even more examples.

The point is, new archetypes pop up all the time. I would hardly consider Legacy "solved." Some decks fall off the map, like Shardless BUG, and new ones pop up too. This happens all the time, and not all of them are blue (like Turbo Depths and Br Reanimator).

I agree that it makes sense to splash blue for Brainstorm and Ponder in most decks, because increased consistency of drawing what you need when you need it is a winning strategy, especially at large events. But that doesn't mean you can't brew new competitive decks in Legacy, or that all new competitive brews require blue.

EDIT: Big Eldrazi is another one that comes to mind. Relatively new (within the last year), most certainly competitive, and isn't blue.

EDIT2: Looking through N&D revealed Steel Stompy as well. Also, although this is a bit of a shameless plug, but I did well last October with my Esper Mentor brew, and I did well last year at GP Louisville with my Sligh brew. I realize both of them are blue, but I like casting Brainstorm so whatever.

Your mentor deck (which I really liked btw) was basically just proof of how busted DRS and Cantrips can be together. I think it was 18 lands trying to cast mentor and Jace. It was incredibly greedy. And Steel and Eldrazi decks are just traditional stompy shells that basically gained better threats. They aren't exactly new archetypes

[Hanni]

Your mentor deck (which I really liked btw) was basically just proof of how busted DRS and Cantrips can be together. I think it was 18 lands trying to cast mentor and Jace. It was incredibly greedy. And Steel and Eldrazi decks are just traditional stompy shells that basically gained better threats. They aren't exactly new archetypes

Big Eldrazi isn't a Stompy deck. It's the evolution of 12-Post MUD decks.

Most new archetypes are evolutions of older ideas with new cards. There are only so many unique strategical concepts that can occur in Magic: the Gathering, regardless of whatever new cards Wizards decides to print.

[PirateKing]

Unless we get something as monumental as dredge, I don't see how we'll come across a new archetype if we're saying evolution of Stompy or whatever don't count.

[Finn]

D.n.T

[Lemnear]

If you take Deathblade 2013 and remove its 4 SFM, 1 Batterskull, 1 Jitte and 4 Plows for 4 Pyromancer, 2 Angler and 4 Lightning Bolts you pretty much end up with the default Grixis 2018.

If you take the old Shardless decks which ran Agent+Visions+Goyf and replace these with Leovold+Command+Snapcaster, you end up with 4c Control 2018.

These are no new archetypes, not even real evolutions, as mainly the creatures were swapped as a natural result of powercreep, while the rest of the deck is essentially the same for years

[Ronald Deuce]

I agree with much of what's been said lately by users much more adept than I at Magic, but let's not forget that 4x Brainstorm or 4x Chalice don't make a deck, either. Not pointing fingers, but I feel like that's where this discussion often goes.

And if people complain that Chalice decks aren't consistent enough, why don't they run more Serum Powders?

[Crimhead]

Eh the irony of the chalice decks is that despite chalice being one of the best cards against Blue Stew it rarely puts up numbers.
I'm not sure where this comes from at all. Eldrazi Stompy has been DTB for 5 or 6 months straight.


And if people complain that Chalice decks aren't consistent enough, why don't they run more Serum Powders?
It would run more consistently, but also worse.

Consistency is not the be all and end all. What matters is your odds/frequency of winning matches (varies from MU to MU). A consistent deck doesn't win more often - it just loses for different reasons.

[Cave]

Woha. I disagree with pretty much everything you said.


I'm not sure where this comes from at all. Eldrazi Stompy has been DTB for 5 or 6 months straight.
This is flat out false. Eldrazi stompy thread's has not been a constant presence in the DTB section over the last 6 months. It has gone in and out, like many other decks.
Not only that. The DTB section of this forum is not -with full respect to the staff- an objective representation of what the legacy metagame looks like. It's just an opinion based on statistics.
If you use a different webstite to get your stats, then your opinion changes.



Consistency is not the be all and end all. What matters is your odds/frequency of winning matches (varies from MU to MU). A consistent deck doesn't win more often - it just loses for different reasons.

Theory and practice are the same thing in theory, but not in practice.
1. Your statement would be true if we were to play with random-nonsensical-weird cards. I think what invalidates your opinion is the fact that legacy decks play some of the best cards ever printed, and they want to see those cards. Try to pay attention to the fact that even non-blue decks are designed to maximize the odds of seeing a certain card, like, squared-out lists or searching toolboxes.
2. Legacy metagame has always been dominated by the most consistant decks. Eldrazi Stompy was tier1 for just about as much time as it was needed to realize there was a viable blue answer. The fact that I can come up with t2 Strix twice as likely as you being able to t2 TKS does matter.

[Backseat_Critic]

Hi all,

I'm no legacy expert, but I try to play when I can, and have most of the decks built, so I have a passing familiarity with just about everything. I think this B&R update will pass without incident, to be honest, or they might ban deathrite. If they decide to ban, it may be better for the format as a whole now, but it sets a bad precedent for the future. I do not want legacy to be the format where wotc just bans the best card each year. I think most long time legacy aficionados probably agree with that; the neglect is the format's biggest strength. If this were modern, we'd have lost brainstorm from the jump.

My idea would sound mostly crazy, but maybe crazy enough to work. There was a previous post, and I apologize for not giving proper credit, that separated banned cards into always broken, and can be broken but require some sort of synergy and cost. I would propose that instead of banning deathrite, they just unban the contextually powerful cards. Before top was banned, miracles kept deathrite shaman in check. Before that dig, treasure cruise, and survival were banned. Each led to oppressive metagames (especially cruise), but maybe if they were all available (except cruise) they'd balance each other out.

Here's what I'd propose:

Ban:
Nothing

Unban:
Sensei's Divining Top: It's painful, but it's a cool interaction with counterbalance that has been around for ages without breaking anything. It also enables some lower tier decks that otherwise wouldn't exist. It could also help keep deathrite in check. I think the biggest impediment is it would require wotc to eat a little crow, and rework their legacy b&r philosophy.
Survival of the Fittest: It's a great engine, but it costs a ton of mana, and doesn't immediately win the game. There is way more pressure on the graveyard than there was during the banning. It could be broken still, but it's worth a shot.
Mind Twist: Great card, probably won't even see play. Chaining rituals can do more powerful things.
Frantic Search: This unban still won't make high tide as good as storm or s&t.
Goblin Recruiter: Kind of annoying the play against, but not overpowered. I think if we can have top, we can have this.
Earthcraft: Another combo piece that would probably be weaker than available pieces.

Maybe Unban:
Dig through Time: This will give combo a shot in the arm, but with everyone else getting richer, it may even be necessary.
Mana Drain: Will either hardly get played, or spawn a new play pattern. I doubt it would break everything. It can even be reprinted.
Mystical Tutor: We'll just have to go back to the gentleman's agreement... Helps other combo decks (mostly reanimator), they could probably use a slight assist.
Yawgmoth's Bargain: Griselwho? Seriously, it might give storm too much of a boost.

Longshot Unbans:
Balance: This is the most controversial pick. I would say it skirts the edge of good on its own. It's super versatile, but it works best in a deck with fairly high constraints. I think it would spawn a new type of white/x chalice/stax deck. The more I think about it, the more brutal it seems. It could lead to a lot of light's out turn ones, but to do it consistently it would need to be built kind of like belcher, which literally kills on turn one and is not a powerhouse.
Gush: Has minor deck building considerations. This will probably soup up tempo and deathrite decks too much.
Tinker: Is this better than show and tell? It has less deck building requirements, but the payoffs are not as good. I have a hunch that wotc is getting more cautious with its 'pay a bunch of mana and win' type of cards, so there should be a give and take between this and show and tell. It will definitely spawn an archetype for brewers.

The chances of this happening is not likely, and it just might completely break the format. A positive is that even if a deck proves too oppressive, it will probably take a long time to 'solve' the metagame.

Imagine this landscape:
Tempo/Delver decks
4c Control
Miracles
Lands
Depths combo
Reanimator
Survival based tempo and combo
Show and Tell based combo
Storm
Death and Taxes
Eldrazi
12 post
Prison/Stax
Painter
Merfolk
Earthcraft/enchantress
Goblins??
High Tide??
Mana drain based control??
Tinker combo??

It's totally a theory, but having a few new viable, maybe even powerful, archetypes sounds good. I'm sure there are plenty that I didn't even think about, and yet more that are unknown unknowns. The known archetypes get a little richer, and compete better relative to deathrite decks. We all have our biases and boogiemen, but I think there could be a good shot that all the insanity may just balance out. What do you think would happen in this environment? Too crazy to work, or so crazy it might just work?

Edit: added more decks

[kinda]

Hi all,

I'm no legacy expert, but I try to play when I can, and have most of the decks built, so I have a passing familiarity with just about everything. I think this B&R update will pass without incident, to be honest, or they might ban deathrite. If they decide to ban, it may be better for the format as a whole now, but it sets a bad precedent for the future. I do not want legacy to be the format where wotc just bans the best card each year. I think most long time legacy aficionados probably agree with that; the neglect is the format's biggest strength. If this were modern, we'd have lost brainstorm from the jump.

My idea would sound mostly crazy, but maybe crazy enough to work. There was a previous post, and I apologize for not giving proper credit, that separated banned cards into always broken, and can be broken but require some sort of synergy and cost. I would propose that instead of banning deathrite, they just unban the contextually powerful cards. Before top was banned, miracles kept deathrite shaman in check. Before that dig, treasure cruise, and survival were banned. Each led to oppressive metagames (especially cruise), but maybe if they were all available (except cruise) they'd balance each other out.

Here's what I'd propose:

Ban:
Nothing

Unban:
Sensei's Divining Top: It's painful, but it's a cool interaction with counterbalance that has been around for ages without breaking anything. It also enables some lower tier decks that otherwise wouldn't exist. It could also help keep deathrite in check. I think the biggest impediment is it would require wotc to eat a little crow, and rework their legacy b&r philosophy.
Survival of the Fittest: It's a great engine, but it costs a ton of mana, and doesn't immediately win the game. There is way more pressure on the graveyard than there was during the banning. It could be broken still, but it's worth a shot.
Mind Twist: Great card, probably won't even see play. Chaining rituals can do more powerful things.
Frantic Search: This unban still won't make high tide as good as storm or s&t.
Goblin Recruiter: Kind of annoying the play against, but not overpowered. I think if we can have top, we can have this.
Earthcraft: Another combo piece that would probably be weaker than available pieces.

Maybe Unban:
Dig through Time: This will give combo a shot in the arm, but with everyone else getting richer, it may even be necessary.
Mana Drain: Will either hardly get played, or spawn a new play pattern. I doubt it would break everything. It can even be reprinted.
Mystical Tutor: We'll just have to go back to the gentleman's agreement... Helps other combo decks (mostly reanimator), they could probably use a slight assist.
Yawgmoth's Bargain: Griselwho? Seriously, it might give storm too much of a boost.

Longshot Unbans:
Balance: This is the most controversial pick. I would say it skirts the edge of good on its own. It's super versatile, but it works best in a deck with fairly high constraints. I think it would spawn a new type of white/x chalice/stax deck. The more I think about it, the more brutal it seems. It could lead to a lot of light's out turn ones, but to do it consistently it would need to be built kind of like belcher, which literally kills on turn one and is not a powerhouse.
Gush: Has minor deck building considerations. This will probably soup up tempo and deathrite decks too much.
Tinker: Is this better than show and tell? It has less deck building requirements, but the payoffs are not as good. I have a hunch that wotc is getting more cautious with its 'pay a bunch of mana and win' type of cards, so there should be a give and take between this and show and tell. It will definitely spawn an archetype for brewers.

The chances of this happening is not likely, and it just might completely break the format. A positive is that even if a deck proves too oppressive, it will probably take a long time to 'solve' the metagame.

Imagine this landscape:
Tempo/Delver decks
4c Control
Miracles
Lands
Depths combo
Reanimator
Survival based tempo and combo
Show and Tell based combo
Storm
Death and Taxes
Eldrazi
12 post
Prison/Stax
Painter
Merfolk
Earthcraft/enchantress
Goblins??
High Tide??
Mana drain based control??
Tinker combo??

It's totally a theory, but having a few new viable, maybe even powerful, archetypes sounds good. I'm sure there are plenty that I didn't even think about, and yet more that are unknown unknowns. The known archetypes get a little richer, and compete better relative to deathrite decks. We all have our biases and boogiemen, but I think there could be a good shot that all the insanity may just balance out. What do you think would happen in this environment? Too crazy to work, or so crazy it might just work?

Edit: added more decks

Yes.

[Crimhead]

This is flat out false. Eldrazi stompy thread's has not been a constant presence in the DTB section over the last 6 months. It has gone in and out, like many other decks.
Do you want to actually do a little research next time?

Eldrazi made DTB in October, and has been there ever since. That's 5 straight months (I said 5 or 6).

http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?5460-DTBF-Philosophy-amp-Deck-Selection/page6



Not only that. The DTB section of this forum is not -with full respect to the staff- an objective representation of what the legacy metagame looks like.
Did I say otherwise?
I was disputing the statement that Stompy "rarely puts up numbers". DTB is not the be all and end all, but you don't sit there for 5 straight months without "putting up numbers". That's a fact.



Theory and practice are the same thing in theory, but not in practice.
1. Your statement would be true if we were to play with random-nonsensical-weird cards. I think what invalidates your opinion is the fact that legacy decks play some of the best cards ever printed, and they want to see those cards. Try to pay attention to the fact that even non-blue decks are designed to maximize the odds of seeing a certain card, like, squared-out lists or searching toolboxes.
2. Legacy metagame has always been dominated by the most consistant decks. Eldrazi Stompy was tier1 for just about as much time as it was needed to realize there was a viable blue answer. The fact that I can come up with t2 Strix twice as likely as you being able to t2 TKS does matter.

Given the degree of thought and knowledge you've put into your post, I will not be giving a free lesson in math this morning. Maybe another time. TBH, I can't shake the feeling that you are trolling me with your " alternative" facts.

But as far as I know, the most consistent deck in Legacy (Burn) has never dominated the format.

[Crimhead]

What kind of argument do you prefer? What other kind of argument is there?

Oh, I don't mind people expressing an opinion.

If you say things like:
I want to see a diverse range of play-styles
I want better colour balance
I want a minimal banned list
I want more viable cores in multi-colour fair decks
That's fine. You are object stating your opinion; as an opinion.

But saying things like:

This card does not create interesting board states
This card makes Legacy worse
Is utterly useless.

[Lemnear]

Ban:
Nothing

Unban:
Sensei's Divining Top
Survival of the Fittest

You suggest reverting the format back to Miracles vs Deathrite+Decay once again which has shown for 4 years that it's toxic? Miracles has put 2 people into a GP Top8 recently afaik, so how do you justify that it needs a boost?

[Lord Seth]

I don't follow modern closely, but doesn't the turn-4 rule prevent the existence of true combo decks? I mean, if your combo decks are not allowed to be faster than the fair decks, are they really producing a diverse type of interaction? In Legacy, combo decks create strategic diversity because they demand a strategic adjustment from decks that cannot outrace them.What exactly do you mean by "true combo decks"? What makes deck like Scapeshift or Storm in Modern not "true" combo decks?


Also, does Modern have a tier-1 prison deck? I understand Lantern Control is a tier-2 deck, and Rack and Ponza are worse.Modern doesn't really have a Tier 1 prison deck, true. Some have argued that Lantern Control is actually a much better deck than its Tier 2 status would indicate (after all, "tiers" aren't really measures of strength, but of results, which is a combination of strength and popularity), though. Still, counting it as Tier 2, stop and consider what the Tier 1 prison deck in Legacy is: Death & Taxes. I won't argue it's not technically a prison deck, but it's hardly what comes to mind when someone says "prison deck." In terms of more classic ideas of a prison deck, I feel like Lantern Control is higher tier than any "classic" prison deck in Legacy. Also, while 8Rack is fairly fringe, Ponza's actually become pretty good lately thanks to Bloodbraid Elf.

And if we want to pull the "where is the Tier 1 <insert archetype here>?" question, then where is the Tier 1 aggro deck in Legacy?


For me, format diversity can't really exist without decks that approach the game from a completely different angle. In Legacy, ANT, Lands, and RB Reanimator are perfect examples. Does Modern have decks that are that "weird"? Honestly curious."Weird" is far too vague of a term for me to respond properly. But if we're just talking combo, then yeah, there's Scapeshift, Storm, Krark-Clan Ironworks. If we want to talk about something that's not really combo but is just weird in a more general sense, there's Lantern Control and Hollow One.

[Backseat_Critic]

You suggest reverting the format back to Miracles vs Deathrite+Decay once again which has shown for 4 years that it's toxic? Miracles has put 2 people into a GP Top8 recently afaik, so how do you justify that it needs a boost?

To be honest, top would definitely give miracles a boost, but I don't think the gap is even as big as everyone thought when it was banned. Even before the top ban, miracles was moving toward a more cantrip heavy build. If other decks get new toys too, I think it may even or some. Also, terminus survival/vengevine will pretty ll prey on terminus.

Like I said, I don't know if this would be good for the format. Just a theorycraft for discussion.

[DarthVicious]

Hi all,

I'm no legacy expert, but ...

My idea would sound mostly crazy, but ...

Here's what I'd propose:

Ban:
Nothing

Unban:
Sensei's Divining Top
Survival of the Fittest
Mind Twist
Frantic Search
Goblin Recruiter
Earthcraft

Maybe Unban:
Dig through Time
Mana Drain
Mystical Tutor
Yawgmoth's Bargain

Longshot Unbans:
Balance
Gush
Tinker

The chances of this happening is not likely, and it just might completely break the format.

I'll admit I never saw Gush in action in a competitive format, so I have no comment there, but those other two longshots are never coming off the list. I do remember Gush enabled the 'other Forces' though, but 12-16 available free counterspells sounds like too much to me. (The 'other Forces' being Foil and Thwart, not to mention Daze)

Neither are any of the maybes ever coming off. I knew they'd ban Mystical when I was playing AnT, I Mystical'd for AdN and cast it in my draw step, opponent Mystical'd for Force and brainstormed into it. If Bargain ever comes off the list... well... I got a few ideas that'd get it banned right away again. Dig and Drain are way too much.

I'm glad the stupidness that was CounterTop is no more, good riddance. I would've also been glad to see Terminus go instead.
The rest... might be ok.

Banning DRS with all the answers printed available for it seems harsh... but what I'm hoping for a B&R update is this:
Legacy: True-Name Nemesis is banned. The lack of interactivity it creates in games is not in line with what we want to see in competitive formats, combined with the lack of solid answers to a resolved mini-Progenitus in nonblack decks. We realize it only has one toughness, and isn't completely destroying the format by itself, but it was created with a multiplayer format in mind, with the intent on forcing political decisions and player interaction on a social level. It has accomplished the opposite of this in duel formats, almost forcing players to twist and contort their decks to deal with it, at the cost of ruining the entire experience.

What I'm expecting for a B&R update:
Legacy: No changes.

[niv]

I personally would be really happy to see a Legacy B/R update like:
BAN:
True-Name Nemesis
Delver of Secrets
Terminus

UNBAN:
Sensei's Divining Top
Earthcraft
Mind Twist
Goblin Recruiter
Frantic Search

Possible future unbans in this hypothetical:
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Survival of the Fittest

This is quite similar to Backseat_Critic's list, but I'd like to at least try to explain why I think this is a good idea (not that it will ever happen, but I digress).

tl;dr: I feel the above 3 cards to be hypothetically banned are too mana efficient in many ways, and I feel the format wouldn't be worse off without them. Of the 5 cards to be unbanned, 4 have been on the list for quite some time, and I feel the format is simply more efficient than when they were banned, and they wouldn't cause problems. 1 is an exchange for terminus that I feel is simply a much more interesting card and has many more applications in decks. Possible unbans are cards I feel might be a bit too much due to how much the 3 bans would likely shift the format.

TNN/Delver bans:
I really dislike the absolute raw efficiency of these cards...and the fact that simply some of the best aggressive creatures ever printed are now blue and not red/green is somewhat astonishing.
On True Name Nemesis:
The lack of proper interaction* with TNN is extremely disappointing, and really just feels like the best thing to be doing at 3 mana turn 2 since there's not terribly much your opponent you can do about it. I do, in some ways, like the pressure it puts on an opponent to do something about it (this kind of pressure makes for very interesting games in my opinion), but most typical removal does nothing to it, so it feels very lopsided to me. I feel like the fact that Sword of Fire and Ice has seen an uptick in play partially because of this card is notable (However, it's likely that's not the only reason it's played).
Delver:
I simply think it's just too efficient at what it does. It's possibly the best aggressive creature ever printed. Indeed, the condition to flip imposes quite some deckbuilding constrants at the first look, but I feel it's interesting to compare decks like Grixis delver to, say, Burn:
GP Trial - April 7, 2018 (https://mtgtop8.com/event?e=18928&d=318777&f=LE)
There is a burn list and a grixis delver list. Burn has less creatures (-1) and more instants and sorceries (+2) than the delver list...This might not mean much, but I think it's an interesting comparison, considering both are decks that could easily be considered quite aggressive. Maybe the 'constraint' to flip delver really isn't much of a deckbuilding consideration at all? Nay, maybe the best kind of decks already lend themselves to such a list that will already be able to flip delver without much issue?
I feel like that getting rid of these cards would pull some of the aggressive power away from blue, and hopefully cut some of the mana efficiency of the format away
Terminus:
Simply put, a sweeper at :w: that doesn't even put creatures into the yard feels far too strong. Of course, it must be drawn to be cast for that cost, but there is so much deck manipulation that it never seemed to be much of an issue. I'm going to simply use the 'Too mana efficient' argument here, as I don't think under any conditions should a control deck be able to sweep the board for :w:.

*: Really, the only things that get rid of TNN are boardwipes (Terminus or Wrath of God types, of which WoG is not really played) or global -x/-x effects...or really strange stuff like Drop of Honey/Porphyry Nodes/Council's Judgement. First of all, my problem with Sweeper and -x/-xs are that they are complete parity...If you were ahead on board, the opponent can simply drop a TNN and suddenly block your best creature for free until they can find an answer. The only way to get rid of it, then, is possibly to harm your own board.
With the last category, these cards are extremely rare...Not in literal scarcity, but simply cards that choose permanents and remove them are simply not printed often, and when they are it's rare that they're even played. Hell, Drop is really only played BECAUSE of TNN (to some extent leovold as well, but not nearly as much). CJ is the only other card that really sees play in this category that removes it, but it's mana parity at that point, which really isn't where you want to be with an otherwise vanilla 3/1.
Hopefully this explains my positions on these thoroughly. I'm sure it will be easy for many to poke holes in them if anyone bothers reading this, but what it comes down to is:
I simply think the format is too mana efficient. I feel the format would be better, in my opinion, if we could tune it back a notch on this axis. There are already a great many of viable decks and archetypes, but there is always room for improvement, right? :wink:

Unbanned stuff:
I honestly don't have as much to say on these as the above, but here goes:
Sensei's Divining Top:
Not nearly as bad without Terminus. Counterbalance was a thing in legacy for quite some time before it. I know wizards generally likes to ban enablers (and they had an easy 'causes matches to go to time' excuse handy), but I really liked how this card glued a lot of silly decks together.
Earthcraft:
Been on the banlist since the format's inception if I'm not mistaken. For all intents and purposes, I think Cryptolith Rite is simply a better version of it that doesn't make infinite squirrels...
Mind Twist
Antiquated at this point, very likely that unbanning this would do much. I think the format can handle this one.
Goblin Recruiter
Again, I believe (please correct me if I'm wrong) that this was banned due to time constraints? If not, I apologize, but I don't think I put the crux of my argument on this fact, anyhow.
I simply think it's not even necessary to 'stack your deck' with this card in goblins, honestly. I just feel that it would give the deck a little push to compete with the efficiency of the format nowadays.
Frantic Search

Possible unbans in the future in this hypothetical:
Yawgmoth's Bargain
Simply a (much) better ad nauseam, in many ways. I've commented on this in the past here, but I think that it might be just a little bit risky to pull off since it's not like storm style decks are in a horrible place or anything. I think it would be fun, and wouldn't be at all back-breaking to the format at large. I don't think the push it gives to storm decks would be enough to put it 'over the edge' in the current meta, but in this hypothetical scenario (With the above three cards banned) it might be a little too much.
Survival of the Fittest
Same as the above, really I think nowadays it might not be too bad (creatures overall are much stronger, but answers to permanents such as these are very strong also), but in this hypothetical it might warrant some waiting to see how creature decks shape up after loosing aggressive tools such as Delver and TNN.

This is a very long post, so I wouldn't be too surprised if no one cared to read it, but my main argument is in the tl;dr above.

What do you think?

[Megadeus]

When was the last time we had a legacy grand Prix have something like this?

"There were 13 players who finished the day undefeated, with eight archetypes that break down as follows:

3 Bogles
2 Humans
2 Affinity
2 Mardu Pyromancer
1 Hollow One
1 Burn
1 Jund
1 Red-Green Tron"
All very different archetypes with different engines and win conditions. It's hilarious how legacy has so many more thousand cards available and yet it's so much less diverse

[grimfield]

I think Mana Drain should be unbanned to foster more actual control, rather than midrange or tempo decks. WOTC reprinting it makes me think they have entertained this possibility. Yeah, it's a strong card; however, the average CMC of spells in legacy is quite low.

Counterspell is played only in passing, sometimes SB. Allowing control decks to turbo out their Jace or Auriok Salvagers (my biased preference haha) would be cool. I might even play Consecrated Sphinx in my deck, though probably not because it dies to REB. Drain is hardly played in Vintage! I'm old and I don't really like having to use creatures in my control deck to win. I would prefer Mishra's Factory beatdown or a morphling/baneslayer style card.

[Lord Seth]

Earthcraft:
Been on the banlist since the format's inception if I'm not mistaken. For all intents and purposes, I think Cryptolith Rite is simply a better version of it that doesn't make infinite squirrels...
I don't disagree that Earthcraft would be perfectly fine to unban (Squirrelcraft is fairly mediocre by modern combo Standards, and the main deck it could benefit--Enchantress--is Tier 4 right now), but even setting aside the combo potential, it's better than Cryptolith Rite for two major reasons:
1) In Earthcraft, Earthcraft is tapping the creature, whereas Cryptolith Rite requires the creature to tap itself. This is important because it means that (excluding creatures with haste), Earthcraft can be used with a creature the turn it's played whereas Cryptolith Rite requires you to wait a turn.
2) Enchantress, the main deck Earthcraft would see play in, plays Abundant Growth and Wild Growth, which combine significantly better with Earthcraft than Cryptolith Rite.

[Lemnear]

I'll admit I never saw Gush in action in a competitive format, so I have no comment there, but those other two longshots are never coming off the list. I do remember Gush enabled the 'other Forces' though, but 12-16 available free counterspells sounds like too much to me. (The 'other Forces' being Foil and Thwart, not to mention Daze)

The point about Gush is that Delver and other decks with low landcounts can enter their turn 3 with 2 lands in play and none in hand, float 2, Gush to draw two cards and then replay one of the lands. It reads:

0 mana - draw 2 cards, add one mana any of your Island cards can produce to your mana pool.

Of course it gets even more stupid with the likes of Fastbond, Exploration and the likes of Regrowth, Merchant Scroll, etc

[Crimhead]

What exactly do you mean by "true combo decks"? What makes deck like Scapeshift or Storm in Modern not "true" combo decks?
I mean deck that must go off to win. In Legacy, ST or Storm must combo to win; where Elves or Lands don't have to and are considered hybrid combo decks.

I would figure in order for such a deck to be relevant, it would need to gold fish faster than the midrange and aggro decks. Otherwise they can lose a footrace or via disruption. When these decks are allowed to be fast, they have an interesting impact on the meta because they force even the most aggressive fair decks to play "control"

AFAIK Modern, those decks fit my definition of "true combo". I didn't realise they were actually good, though! If I were to ever play Modern, Scapeshift is totally the deck I'd choose.


Modern doesn't really have a Tier 1 prison deck, true. Some have argued that Lantern Control is actually a much better deck than its Tier 2 status would indicate (after all, "tiers" aren't really measures of strength, but of results, which is a combination of strength and popularity), though.
I totally get that about tiers. Lantern sounds like the real deal (and if it remain unpopular it may never get hit with the hammer).


Still, counting it as Tier 2, stop and consider what the Tier 1 prison deck in Legacy is: Death & Taxes. I won't argue it's not technically a prison deck, but it's hardly what comes to mind when someone says "prison deck." In terms of more classic ideas of a prison deck, I feel like Lantern Control is higher tier than any "classic" prison deck in Legacy. Also, while 8Rack is fairly fringe, Ponza's actually become pretty good lately thanks to Bloodbraid Elf.
I would argue D&T is aggro/prison hybrid. In essence, it feels like a cross between Geddon Stacks and white Weenie-Geddon. I do consider Lands tier-1 as well. It's also less popular, but dollars-to-doughnuts says it's actually overrepresented at the top tables. RG Lands I consider a combo/prison hybrid, but blue lists with EE, Crucible, and fewer "combo" lands certainly lean more towards prison. So Legacy lacks a classic prison deck, but does have prisony options.


And if we want to pull the "where is the Tier 1 <insert archetype here>?" question, then where is the Tier 1 aggro deck in Legacy?
Touché! Some say Eldrazi plays like Zoo, but I feel the reliance on ramp pieces makes "Stompy" a unique style. Fish puts up numbers occasionally. It looks tier-2, but also suffers from lack of popularity (and some consider it more Tempo - especially Daze builds). I tend to think Burn is a lot better than the numbers suggest (lack of skilled pilots), but I actually agree that a lack of linear aggro is the biggest gap in the Legacy meta.


"Weird" is far too vague of a term for me to respond properly. But if we're just talking combo, then yeah, there's Scapeshift, Storm, Krark-Clan Ironworks. If we want to talk about something that's not really combo but is just weird in a more general sense, there's Lantern Control and Hollow One.
The weirdest decks in Legacy are Dredge (which doesn't cast spells) and Lands (which wins with lands and mostly only plays enablers). But I meant anything that throws a wrench in the game for "normal" decks and forces a different approach to strategy. These would tend to be fast combo or denial decks.

Modern certainly sounds like it's come a long way from the "midrange" format of which it once bore the stigma. I do have a hard time understanding how a turn-4 combo deck can be good though.

[Crimhead]

The point about Gush is that Delver and other decks with low landcounts can enter their turn 3 with 2 lands in play and none in hand, float 2, Gush to draw two cards and then replay one of the lands. It reads:

0 mana - draw 2 cards, add one mana any of your Island cards can produce to your mana pool.
Or,

0 mana - Counter target ability activated by a permanent named Wasteland or Rishadin Port, draw 2 cards.

[Lemnear]

Or,

0 mana - Counter target ability activated by a permanent named Wasteland or Rishadin Port, draw 2 cards.

In Legacy, absolutely.

And again, I wonder why we talk about Gush, SDT & Co in this thread atm, as if the top decks wouldn't just get stronger.

[kinda]

When was the last time we had a legacy grand Prix have something like this?

"There were 13 players who finished the day undefeated, with eight archetypes that break down as follows:

3 Bogles
2 Humans
2 Affinity
2 Mardu Pyromancer
1 Hollow One
1 Burn
1 Jund
1 Red-Green Tron"
All very different archetypes with different engines and win conditions. It's hilarious how legacy has so many more thousand cards available and yet it's so much less diverse

As long as brainstorm + ponder + fow + more cantrips and protection + some win cons.deck is by far the best deck we won't get this diversity. It'll just be this deck and thalia and chalice and glass cannon combo.

[DarthVicious]

The point about Gush is that Delver and other decks with low landcounts can enter their turn 3 with 2 lands in play and none in hand, float 2, Gush to draw two cards and then replay one of the lands. It reads:

0 mana - draw 2 cards, add one mana any of your Island cards can produce to your mana pool.

Of course it gets even more stupid with the likes of Fastbond, Exploration and the likes of Regrowth, Merchant Scroll, etc

Allowing them to play around things like Choke and Winter Orb also. Gush is too many tricks in one barrel.

[Megadeus]

As long as brainstorm + ponder + fow + more cantrips and protection + some win cons.deck is by far the best deck we won't get this diversity. It'll just be this deck and thalia and chalice and glass cannon combo.

Sad but true. We should just rename legacy "Magic: The Gathering Blue Edition"

If people just want to watch each other jerk off with cantrips every single round I guess that's fine

[Crimhead]

...we won't get this diversity.
Looking at individual top-8s invites a lot of randomness. If we look at the last 4 major events, we see top-8s for:

- Crisis Tempo
- Elves
- Miracles
- Eldrazi Stompy
- Lands
- Dragon Stompy
- Storm
- Death blade
- Miracles
- S&T
- Leo-BUG
- Czech
- Maverick

If you don't see diversity there, you aren't looking.



...brainstorm + ponder + fow + more cantrips and protection + some win cons.deck...
The most tired mantra of this thread. :frown:

If our analysis of archetypes is so superficial we can see Miracles, ANT, Delver, etc, as a a single deck, we will never experience diversity. MTG is a collectable game, but it's also a strategy game. Try looking at decks as not a collection of cards, but as a range of strategic options. Big difference.

[Cartesian]

Birds are characterised by feathers, toothless beaked jaws, the laying of hard-shelled eggs, a high metabolic rate, a four-chambered heart, and a strong yet lightweight skeleton. As long as this is by far the best type of bird we won't get diversity in birds. It'll just be this bird.

[Rascalyote]

Birds are characterised by feathers, toothless beaked jaws, the laying of hard-shelled eggs, a high metabolic rate, a four-chambered heart, and a strong yet lightweight skeleton. As long as this is by far the best type of bird we won't get diversity in birds. It'll just be this bird.

I'm sick of penguins being tier 2, they should have flying!!!

[non-inflammable]

Try looking at MY decks as not a collection of BRAINSTORM cards, but as a range of BLUE strategic options.

Don't be a shill for brainstorm...


collateral damage protecting the "pillar" of the format:

Sensei's Divining Top
12-Post
Doomsday
Painter
Old Miracles?

anyone else want to add to this list, go ahead...

[Crimhead]

Birds are characterised by feathers, toothless beaked jaws, the laying of hard-shelled eggs, a high metabolic rate, a four-chambered heart, and a strong yet lightweight skeleton. As long as this is by far the best type of bird we won't get diversity in birds. It'll just be this bird.
Sure, we got penguins, emu, songbirds, owls, and everything in between.
We also have an alligator, a Whale, a human, and a hive of killer bees.

But until we get some four-legged mammals, I do not acknowledge diversity. I want my favourite pet, damn-it! Not these f'ing "specialty" animals.

[Crimhead]

Try looking at MY decks as not a collection of BRAINSTORM cards, but as a range of BLUE strategic options.


Strategies are not colour-coded. Jund and Shardless use essentially the same strayegies. Only the tactics vary a little.
My deck doesn't cast BS or any other blue spells. So kindly address my ideas rather than attacking my (fabricated) motivations. Cool?
Edit - funny how different Legacy looks if you actually enjoy any of the various non-cantrip decks...

[Watersaw]

Looking at individual top-8s invites a lot of randomness. If we look at the last 4 major events, we see top-8s for:

- Crisis Tempo
- Elves
- Miracles
- Eldrazi Stompy
- Lands
- Dragon Stompy
- Storm
- Death blade
- Miracles
- S&T
- Leo-BUG
- Czech
- Maverick

If you don't see diversity there, you aren't looking.



The most tired mantra of this thread. :frown:


Not to be pedantic, but this is one event vs 4. (it's also 13 decks vs. what 32?). And even looking at the engines we see
Cantrip engine
GSZ
8 Tombs
Loam
4 total between the 13 archetypes. 8 of them use the cantrip engine, and half of those could be classified as goodstuff piles (Maverick is the loan goodstuff deck that doesn't play it, and the only non-cantrip deck that doesn't have a way to end the game as early as turn 2). Frankly the mantra is tired because time and again it's proven true, cantrips win games.
Meanwhile when I look at the single Modern event (which, as a GP should theoretically filter out the bad decks and pilots ) I see a clear difference in how they win as well as how they execute their plan.


And if people complain that Chalice decks aren't consistent enough, why don't they run more Serum Powders?

Hang on. This is getting off topic but isn't there some real logic to this? Not even just Chalice decks; if we accept that most games are decided turn 3 then having better starting 7's across the board should translate to better results, even if every 15th card is a brick. Hell you can even Brainstorm+fetch it away if you need to.

[Crimhead]

Not to be pedantic, but this is one event vs 4.
And which gives a better representation of a metagame - looking at 1 major event, or 4?


And even looking at the engines we see
Cantrip engine
GSZ
8 Tombs
Loam

Elves is GZS + Glimpse + NO
Storm is built on rituals and tutors as much as cantrip.
S&T is cantrip as well as 8Tomb.

If we reduce decks to their base enablers we don't see the whole picture. Look at how each deck approaches it's matches, and you'll see a wealth of diversity. Ignore this, and see what you want to see (to justify a call for a shake-up, perhaps)?

Edit - I get that some people want more viable cores (and more equilibrium between the viable cores). That's fair. But to say we don't have diversity is objectively wrong.

Also, referring to every threat and answers in a fair deck collectively as "win conditions" (as in the post I had quoted) is either totally disingenuous, or ignorant in the extreme. Grows very tired.

[Noctalor]

Question to the cantrip haters.

What deck would you like to see viable in legacy right now?

(Please, no shitty answers, im asking about precise decks)

[Dice_Box]

Looking at individual top-8s invites a lot of randomness. If we look at the last 4 major events, we see top-8s for:

- Crisis Tempo
- Elves
- Miracles
- Eldrazi Stompy
- Lands
- Dragon Stompy
- Storm
- Death blade
- Miracles
- S&T
- Leo-BUG
- Czech
- Maverick
Personally not interested in digging up the numbers myself, so take this as a disclaimer of how little of a shit I really give.

How many Maverick decks made it to the 32 possible lists? One? An outlier? I'm happy that it made it but an outlier in statistics is not something to pin your hopes too. How many Lands? How many Elves? That's a fine list as a short hand but I am sure if we graffed that data we would see some fairly obvious spikes and some rather basic trends.

Let's be honest, at a 4 round Fnm you can play Jund and do fine. Because lacking filtering doesn't matter in 4 rounds really. At a 15 round event you need it or you need to do something broken in some other form. Even then what your doing ends up forcing such constraints on you that you can be hated out often with a card.

Land's likes to play around Life from the Loam. Thus it's weak to mass land control. Elves is built around Glimpse, thus you need a lot of small cheep creatures. These fail to hold up against sweeping removal.

For every deck that is not playing Brainstorm they have to give up something to do so. Consistency, interaction, open new weaknesses. Often these decks will either share an identity or share nothing at all. Elves and Maverick share a similar plan, to a point. Elves and Lands share... a Forest and some fetches I guess.

I saw something about how birds are all made of the same core elements but are different. Sure. I get you point, here's mine. Elves is your Penguin, Lands is your Emu and the blue stew is your 280 odd different kind of Pidgin. So diverse, all of the fuckers just want my chips and they all try and get to them the same fucking way. Feels apt as a comparison actually. Good call.

Also I'll be fair, Blue has an enemy in Chalice. Good thing those decks have the consistency of bus on a public holiday so you don't really have to worry about them.


Question to the cantrip haters.

What deck would you like to see viable in legacy right now?

(Please, no shitty answers, im asking about precise decks)
Goblins, Maverick (An outlier is not a trend), Thresh (Can't believe I'm saying that) and Zoo. I know that's all not going to happen though, so hey, bigger fool me. I guess I just miss 2009.

[Zulabnar]

Looking at individual top-8s invites a lot of randomness. If we look at the last 4 major events, we see top-8s for:

- Crisis Tempo
- Elves
- Miracles
- Eldrazi Stompy
- Lands
- Dragon Stompy
- Storm
- Death blade
- Miracles
- S&T
- Leo-BUG
- Czech
- Maverick

If you don't see diversity there, you aren't looking.


You are mixing Maverick with 1x presence sometimes with 3x always deck like brainstorm control no sense.

There are no good cards as brainstorm in legacy, draw 3 clean your hand and shuffle the deck with ponder or fetch. Nothing as this power level, infact there are no blue deck without brainstorm, while there are green deck without goyf or black deck without drs.

Some combo deck like TES play blue only for ponder and brainstorm.

Deal with it this is a format that is a brainstorm tirranny, the only way to change it is to ban brainstorm.

Even If WOTC \ Hasbro print good aggro green red white cards, they will be mixed with brainstorm shell, just giving power to the same deck. Also in wiz are so stupid to print blue creature more powerfull than green like delver or TNN.

[Watersaw]

And which gives a better representation of a metagame - looking at 1 major event, or 4?


Elves is GZS + Glimpse + NO
Storm is built on rituals and tutors as much as cantrip.
S&T is cantrip as well as 8Tomb.

If we reduce decks to their base enablers we don't see the whole picture. Look at how each deck approaches it's matches, and you'll see a wealth of diversity. Ignore this, and see what you want to see (to justify a call for a shake-up, perhaps)?

The point was that the two data sets shouldn't even be compared, as one is a single set of 13 while the other is 4 sets of 8. Even then the Modern list is more complete as it tells us the exact quantity of each of the 8 deck archetypes to go x-0. We also know the event, so we have context for time and place. The Legacy list just tells us that out of 32 decks across 4 different events there was at least one instance of each of those 13.

At any rate the argument is about the enablers, so if course we reduce the deck to them. That is what actually matters here, there is a clear correct choice as to what is the best shell across the board.

[Crimhead]

Land's likes to play around Life from the Loam. Thus it's weak to mass land control. Elves is built around Glimpse, thus you need a lot of small cheep creatures. These fail to hold up against sweeping removal.

For every deck that is not playing Brainstorm they have to give up something to do so.
Good-stuff blue piles give up resilience to waste-lock + removal. Every deck in Legacy has it's vulnerabilities

We don't need every cantrip deck to have a single vulnerability, because - news flash for some - they are not a single deck.



Also I'll be fair, Blue has an enemy in Chalice. Good thing those decks have the consistency of bus on a public holiday so you don't really have to worry about them.

Eldrazi has been DTB for 5 straight months, and Dragon Stompy has top--8ed twice in the last 4 major events (including a 1st place). Definitely a relevant presence in the meta.


The point was that the two data sets shouldn't even be compared...
Absolutely right! For a more accurate comparison, we should look at multiple Modern events as well.

Lots of scrutiny over the data from the last 4 major legacy events, but we ate shown a single Modern event and expected to accept it as representative of the format's diversity. Yeah.

That isolated datum from Modern should not have been admissible as evidence at all.

[Crimhead]

You are mixing Maverick with 1x presence sometimes with 3x always deck like brainstorm control no sense.

I am simply listing decks that made top-8 in a recent major event. Not saying maverick is on equal footing with Czech, or even that it's tier-1.

That said, I'd love to see the conversion rates for Maverick!

[Noctalor]

Goblins, Maverick (An outlier is not a trend), Thresh (Can't believe I'm saying that) and Zoo. I know that's all not going to happen though, so hey, bigger fool me. I guess I just miss 2009.


Goblin got power creeped, is not really about brainstorm, goblin is hopeless as long as it doesn't get some new prints, and arguably cantrip decks are the best goblin can face currently
Maverik is honestly quite good right now, I think it will get played more and more as time passes, right now maverik is possibly just straight up better than D&T, or at least on the same power level, still, in legacy it take ages for people to adapt.
Sadly, thresh will underperform, by definition the deck was the pile of the most efficient tempo plays + the most efficient threats, DRS has to leave for it to be relevant, also, cantrips need to stay for it to be a deck
Zoo pretty much got power creeped by black, big zoo basicly turned into Jund (which is arguably not that good still, i agree) and aggro zoo is in fact just dead, still, no cantrips would not really help zoo that much, both maverik and jund are better options.


I personally miss Goblin aswell, hey even Spiral which was my bread and butter since the goblin vs solidarity meta, but as it happens in every card game, power creep exists, and out of the 4 decks you mentioned, pretty much all of them just got power creeped out of the format.
The only real loser here is zoo, which just got obsolete, mostly because GRW are pretty much the worst 3 colors of the game, there is basicly not a single card good enough to carry that color combination

I would prefer new, interesting prints, rather than bans, cantrips are not gonna matter unless a mass ban happens,

[Crimhead]

Maverik is honestly quite good right now, I think it will get played more and more as time passes, right now maverik is possibly just straight up better than D&T, or at least on the same power level, still, in legacy it take ages for people to adapt.
If Maverick becomes tier-1 again (and supplants D&T) I predict a lot less noise in these forums.

Obviously Maverick adds a lot more diversity than D&T. :rolleyes:

[Lemnear]

It's comical that some try to split up the DRS + Blue Shell decks based on if they ran Leovold, TNN or Pyromancer and call that diversity

[Crimhead]

It's comical that some try to split up the DRS + Blue Shell decks based on if they ran Leovold, TNN or Pyromancer and call that diversity
I would distinguish Czech vs Grixis Tempo as one being an (albeit grindy) tempo deck, while the other leans to control and is more firmly a midrange deck. From the Who's The Beat down perspective, Grixis is hoping to play beat down, while Czech hopes to play control.

But I agree that these decks are not that different. These decks are only slightly more different than BUG is to Jund , or High Tide is Solidarity, or TES is to ANT.

Personally I think diversity is driven by the enormous share of the meta that is collectively occupied by Lands, Elves, Eldrazi, D&T, ANT, S&T, Miracles, Depths, Prowess, and other relevant but less prominent decks. Sadly these aren't the decks people seem to want to see, so they don't count as providing diversity.

[Watersaw]

Good-stuff blue piles give up resilience to waste-lock + removal. Every deck in Legacy has it's vulnerabilities

We don't need every cantrip deck to have a single vulnerability, because - news flash for some - they are not a single deck.

Lots of scrutiny over the data from the last 4 major legacy events, but we ate shown a single Modern event and expected to accept it as representative of the format's diversity. Yeah.

Fine, I'll take the bait.
In this day and age "good-stuff blue piles" is largely synonymous with "Blue + DRS." These lists are notorious for running 3+ colors alongside their own Wasteland. The card is really not great against them.

As for the perfectly justifiable scrutiny, you presented an incomplete data set as gospel in response to a snapshot of one event. Here, I'm assuming these are the events you took from.

GP Seattle http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=18985&f=LE
1664 players - 07/04/18
1 Grixis Delver - Daniel Duterte2 BUG Leovold - Jeremy Dezani
3 Lands - Sam Black
4 Miracles - Keaton Wood
5 Grixis Delver - Noah Walker
6 4c Control - Steve Rubin
7 Miracles - Luke Purcell
8 Maverick - Miranda Keith

SCG Team Open Cincinnati http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=18846&f=LE
341 players - 24/03/18
1 Grixis Delver - Joe Bernal
2 Grixis Delver - Erik Rose
3/4 Lands - Matthew Dilks
3/4 Miracles - James Baker
5/8 Dragon Stompy - Edward Drew
5/8 Grixis Delver - Tannon Grace
5/8 Miracles - Bernie Wen
5/8 Show and Tell - Dylan Kirkpatrick

Grand Prix Madrid Team Constructed http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=18737&f=LE
354 players - 11/03/18
1 Eldrazi Aggro - Charles Eliatamby
2 4c Control - Thomas Enevoldsen
3/4 Dragon Stompy - Alessandro Lippi
3/4 Dragon Stompy - Per Nyström
5/8 BUG Threshold - Javier Dominguez
5/8 Dark Depths- Vladimir Arneuve
5/8 Stoneblade - Jasper Grimmer
5/8 UR Delver -Alessandro Manzini


SCG Classic Worcester* http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=18670&f=LE
206 players - 04/03/18
1 Dragon Stompy - Zac Turgeon
2 Storm - Ethan Formichella
3/4 Grixis Delver - Dylan Gellis
3/4 Lands - Kevin King
5/8 4c Stoneblade - William Moore
5/8 Grixis Delver - Patrick Foote
5/8 Lands - Ross Mcgee
5/8 Storm - Chad Uzzell


Final count (deck - top8/top4)
Grixis Delver - 7/4
Lands - 4/3
Miracles - 4/2
Dragon Stompy - 4/3
4c Control - 2/1
Storm - 2/1
BUG Leovold - 1/1
Eldrazi Aggro - 1/1
Maverick - 1/0
Show and Tell - 1/0
BUG Threshold - 1/0
Dark Depths - 1/0
Stoneblade -1/0
UR Delver - 1/0
4c Stoneblade - 1/0


*BONUS - SCG Legacy Open Worcester http://mtgtop8.com/event?e=18668&f=LE
719 players - 03/03/18 (one day prior to the previous event, more than 3 times as many players)
1 Grixis Delver - Drake Sasser
2 Elves - Ben Feingersh
3/4 Grixis Delver - Jeffrey White
3/4 Miracles - Jim Davis
5/8 Eldrazi Aggro - Dylan Hand
5/8 Grixis Delver - Jonathan Sukenik
5/8 Grixis Delver - Noah Walker
5/8 Lands - Adam Falls

Adding this, our data is
Final count (deck - top8/top4)
Grixis Delver -11/5
Miracles - 5/3
Lands - 4/4
Dragon Stompy - 4/3
4c Control - 2/1
Storm - 2/1
Eldrazi Aggro - 2/1
BUG Leovold - 1/1
Elves - 1/1
Maverick - 1/0
Show and Tell - 1/0
BUG Threshold - 1/0
Dark Depths - 1/0
Stoneblade -1/0
UR Delver - 1/0
4c Stoneblade - 1/0


Four of the five events have predominantly cantrip-based decks in the top 8. Count follows as
GP Seattle - 6
SCG Team Open Cincinnati - 6
Grand Prix Madrid Team Constructed - 4
SCG Classic Worcester - 5
SCG Legacy Open Worcester - 5
26/40 or 65%, less then I actually expected.
For top 4 the numbers are 12/24. 50% even. EDIT: I can't count. 12/20, 60%.

Eldrazi Aggro has placed twice of the 40 listed entries, at those numbers it's even with 4c Control and Storm. Dragon Stompy's presence is a surprise to me, if there are any caveats they are that (1) it is only represented in events with less than 500 players and (2) the one event is did win was a much smaller event the same weekend as an Open.

[Crimhead]

Thanks for making this post!




As for the perfectly justifiable scrutiny, you presented an incomplete data set as gospel in response to a snapshot of one event. Here, I'm assuming these are the events you took from.
I omitted the team event. Not sure where this gospel stuff comes from. I just figured looking recent (major) top-8s would provide some insight into the meta and what is viable. Not saying those 4 lists define the meta.

My point was that we don't need a wide range of decks to all do well in a single event. If multiple decks are succeeding over a few separate events, that's just as good.



Four of the five events have predominantly cantrip-based decks in the top 8.
I have an issue with categorising decks based on the presence of cantrip. This is an arbitrary division in that +/- cantrip doesn't give any information what the deck actually does, which matches it likes, etc. eg, Miracles and ANT are close to as different as 2 decks can be (way more different than, eg, Maverick vs Czech).

To me this is (almost) akin to complaining that too many decks have the exact same land count. That simply doesn't define a deck at all.



In this day and age "good-stuff blue piles" is largely synonymous with "Blue + DRS." These lists are notorious for running 3+ colors alongside their own Wasteland. The card is really not great against them.
I am willing to consider these decks collectively. As you say, these are good-stuff aggro control decks that only differ in the degree of aggression and the specific (similarly functioning) threats and answers.

Looking at paper data from MTG top8, these decks make up about 1/3 of the meta. That is pretty high, but:

These decks are not 100% the same. eg, we are including Stoneblade.
This is a lot higher than it has been lately (I've been checking regularly) We can't assume the past 2 months are a trend that will stick.
If good-stuff blue+DRS sustains this meta-share, I could be open to supporting a ban (but not insisting on a ban). If it comes to it, my vote would be to lose DRS and keep BS. Reasons being:

DRS feeds good-stuff decks almost exclusively (BS supports other strategies).
Banning DRS will have a more drastic effect, as the gap between DRS and the next best replacement is probably more significant.
Basically DRS is a midrange value engine that promotes good-stuff decks. If too many good-stuff aggro/control decks is the issue, that is the obvious solution IMO.
Honestly I wouldn't miss either card much (unless of course the meta goes to complete shit).



Eldrazi Aggro has placed twice of the 40 listed entries, at those numbers it's even with 4c Control and Storm. Dragon Stompy's presence is a surprise to me, if there are any caveats they are that (1) it is only represented in events with less than 500 players and (2) the one event is did win was a much smaller event the same weekend as an Open.
Eldrazi seems to be on a downswing after 5 months of DTB status (and holding 2nd place overall for a while according to MTG top8 paper data). But it is normal for Legacy to ebb and flow a bit. Don't count it out.

re Dragon Stompy, also worth considering that we can assume a relatively tiny player base. That makes those numbers extremely impressive IMO.

[kinda]

Interesting stat, according to mtgtop8 the top two most played nonland modern cards are lighting bolt at 37% and fatal push at 19%. What this tells me is modern has one established tier 1 card in bolt. Legacy has 4 cards played in over 40% of decks. Plus 7 tier 2 cards in the 20-39% range. I still prefer legacy over modern but think this could be improved.

[Lemnear]

So from watersaws paper result crunch we have DRS goodstuff at 60% within the top 8s and with a 33% metashare according to crimhead.

That sounds like it's overperforming more than Miracles did at it's time

[Julian23]

I guess I just miss 2009.

Same here. The period from 2009 to 2011 was by far the most enjoyable Legacy has ever felt to me. Then we started doing this whole Griselbrand, Delver thing and archetypes changed quite a lot and the whole format did speed up a lot.

[Lemnear]

I guess we all just miss when tempo and aggro-control had to choose between it's colors and tools accordingly to not get fucked over in the mirror, Painter & Co.

The whole thing went to shit then people ran run Shardless Agent, Hymn to Tourach and Meddling Mage in the same deck. Everything we see today is just natural development

[Zulabnar]

Thanks for making this post!





I have an issue with categorising decks based on the presence of cantrip. This is an arbitrary division in that +/- cantrip doesn't give any information what the deck actually does, which matches it likes, etc. eg, Miracles and ANT are close to as different as 2 decks can be (way more different than, eg, Maverick vs Czech).



That's your problem. Those deck are categorised by common cards. Because we talk about cards not about decks.

Power level of those cards is high, infact Tempo decks, Combo decks, and control decks use the same shell (brain + Ponder).
It means those cards are just too good for any strategy to not choose to put in.

This is why Brainstorm and Ponder are to good. While DRS no. Infact combo decks not use DRS, and also MIracle does not use DRS.

You can finde decks playin DRS + Brainstorm + Ponder, or deck playing Brainstorm+ Ponder.

Deck that plays DRS without Brainstorm + Ponder are not tier 1 , it's just an accident? i don't think so.

http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php Loof top 3 decks are just control with brain + ponder shell.

[Crimhead]

So from watersaws paper result crunch we have DRS goodstuff at 60% within the top 8s and with a 33% metashare according to crimhead.

That sounds like it's overperforming more than Miracles did at it's time
The difference is one month vs a long time.

Worth noting watetsaws was counting all cantrip decks, not just DRS/cantrip decks. Miracles, Tempo, Storm, S&T, etc. I believe during SDT's heyday cantrip decks were over 70% (hovered between 60%-75%)

[maharis]

Question to the cantrip haters.

What deck would you like to see viable in legacy right now?

(Please, no shitty answers, im asking about precise decks)

I wouldn’t really consider myself a cantrip hater, but I do tire of starting every deck the same way.

I would like to see more decks that operate on different engines. Fair/Grindy applications of Faithless Looting, for example, like the old Zombardment deck or modern’s BRw pyromancer deck.

I’d like to see Dark Confidant come back as a good card, or for Smuggler’s Copter to get a chance to break out.

And before someone links me to some rando list that uses some of these cards... I mean in the way that there would actually be a meaningful decision to make about what deck you would select. Everyone knows that a Brainstorm and buddies deck is the way to go.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Crimhead]

Those deck are categorised by common cards. Because we talk about cards not about decks.

If we want to meaningfully discuss diversity in a strategy game, we talk about strategies. Strategies are linked to decks or match-ups more so than to individual cards - especially cards that are enablers or filters.

DRS pushes a certain (narrow) range of strategies - debatably to uncomfortable levels. BS does not push that strategy. Take BS away and the best DRS decks get worse, but so does much of the rest of field. Hard to say where the chips will fall. Take DRS away, and pretty much only one kind of deck gets worse - the kind that is (allegedly) too good.

Now if the goal is not to make fair decks worse, but to make them change colours and cores, by all means ban BS not DRS. So what exactly is the problem? Too many decks of a similar play-styles, or the fact that they are mostly blue (instead of mostly green)?

TLDR, a DRS ban could be sold as defending strategic diversity. A BS ban would be better sold as defending colour or core-enabler diversity.

[Crimhead]

I would like to see more decks that operate on different engines. Fair/Grindy applications of Faithless Looting, for example, like the old Zombardment deck or modern’s BRw pyromancer deck.

I’d like to see Dark Confidant come back as a good card, or for Smuggler’s Copter to get a chance to break out.

I really liked the old Zombardment lists! The old builds with Humility. I Always wanted that deck to take off.

I also get excited whenever I see Merfolk placing. Was a list that top-8ed recently that ran a Scooter. I'd like to see that breaking out. Where else do you see Looter Scooter? I only really picture it in aggro decks. Maybe Affinity? Do you think it could be midrange viable?

Bob I could take or leave. It's another value engine with legs, not exciting to me personally. But I get how it would be nice if you like value engines with legs.

I'm not sure cantrip are what's holding those decks back.

Bob's last home was Shadeless, and he got power crept out by better creatures.
Affinity and Fish struggled when Maverick was king g of the hill. Worse so by the time Jund supplanted Maverick. Midrange killed aggro by getting superior tools across the board.
Bombardment... Who the fuck knows what that would need?
I could see maybe Bob coming back if they ban enough cantrips that Leotard becomes undesirable main deck. But a ban of that caliber would wreak unpredictable havoc, so it's hard to say.

[Darkness]

DRS is on my ban vote for tomorrow, here's looking to a coming of the new Golden Age in Legacy.

[zulander]

Ban Deathrite, Brainstorm, and Ponder. I'm all for that.

[thedetoxguy]

Ban Deathrite, Brainstorm, and Ponder. I'm all for that.

May I point you over towards Modern? Seems like what you are looking for.

[ubernostrum]

Forsythe on Twitter tonight: https://twitter.com/mtgaaron/status/985674571188588544

Replying to someone saying Workshop needs a restriction in Vintage, he says:


It's one of the "pillars of the format" that makes it unique and players tolerate/love. It's like Brainstorm in Legacy. Every saturation metric we could ever invent would point to it being banned, but people love it. Transgressive stuff needs a place to live.

Is this as close as we've come to an official "no, we're never going to ban Brainstorm" statement?

[thedetoxguy]

Forsythe on Twitter tonight: https://twitter.com/mtgaaron/status/985674571188588544

Replying to someone saying Workshop needs a restriction in Vintage, he says:



Is this as close as we've come to an official "no, we're never going to ban Brainstorm" statement?

Yes

[Lemnear]

Wow. Brainstorm is now officially a pillar. Can we lock down this thread now as it's dead?

[Hopo]

I'd love it if DCI took a closer look at the possibility of managing a restricted list in legacy. I don't know about the history of not doing this but it feels like it would be fresh and interesting.

[Erdvermampfa]

I find it more concerning that Wizards apparently adopted the concept of "pillar of formats" (which basically originated from various internet platforms of the MtG community) as a tool to handle the development of formats...Yesterday I reread TomLapille's article on the Mystical Tutor Ban from 2010 and wished they would still pursue a comparable "holistic" approach that looks at the overall state of the format.

[Dice_Box]

I am disappointed but not surprised. I only wish this had of been said in black and white years ago. Oh wait, it was, every ban announcement.

[Lemnear]

I find it more concerning that Wizards apparently adopted the concept of "pillar of formats" (which basically originated from various internet platforms of the MtG community) as a tool to handle the development of formats...Yesterday I reread TomLapille's article on the Mystical Tutor Ban from 2010 and wished they would still pursue a comparable "holistic" approach that looks at the overall state of the format.

That article was the most ridiculous ban justification in the history of MTG and resulted in LaPille being moved to D&D as a result for years. I don't think we should encourage WotC to abuse strawmen instead of tournament data for bannings. I still don't know how 2-3 games against casuals in the practice room are worth more than years of tournament data, or why the idiot is part of the MTG brand again.

[Echelon]

On the Forsythe article - we're up for banning anything unless people like it. Hypocritical bullshit. I'm fine with keeping the fun police around (really can't have Legacy without it), but everything else should be susceptible to banning.

[Crimhead]

On the Forsythe article - we're up for banning anything unless people like it. Hypocritical bullshit. I'm fine with keeping the fun police around (really can't have Legacy without it), but everything else should be susceptible to banning.
This is fun policing. Straight up. It's managing The ban list based on what they think players enjoy rather than by tournament data. That's the definition of fun policing, is it not?

Though to be fair, ArFo said:
Every saturation metric we could ever invent would point to it being banned
He didn't say that saturation alone as a metric was ever enough to put a card on the block.
If he is like MaRo, I wouldn't infer anything unless he literally states it.


Wow. Brainstorm is now officially a pillar. Can we lock down this thread now as it's dead?
Why should it be dead? The banned list is not fixed - that's just one card.
If your only interest in ban list updates is whether or not BS gets the axe, then I guess the thread is pretty much dead to you.

I don't care too much about Brainstorm, but I was hoping WotC might change their mind about Workshop in Vintage. But that's only because I want one for EDH.

[kinda]

Do people think Drs will be banned? I think this is the only card with a legitimate possibility.

[Matsu]

I only hope for Fetchlands not being the "pillar of the format"

Based on what Forsyth said, there a many people who don't like Fetchlands, too much shuffling.
Maybe they will ban them because people don't like them :tongue:

I personaly hate them since they were printed in Onslaught.

At least it will make DRS, Brainstorm less powerful.

[Matsu]

Double post

[thedetoxguy]

I only hope for Fetchlands not being the "pillar of the format"

Based on what Forsyth said, there a many people who don't like Fetchlands, too much shuffling.
Maybe they will ban them because people don't like them :tongue:

I personaly hate them since they were printed in Onslaught.

At least it will make DRS, Brainstorm less powerful.

They are not going to ban Fetchlands.

[Watersaw]

The difference is one month vs a long time.

Worth noting watetsaws was counting all cantrip decks, not just DRS/cantrip decks. Miracles, Tempo, Storm, S&T, etc. I believe during SDT's heyday cantrip decks were over 70% (hovered between 60%-75%)

Truefax. This data set is only a one month period. Additionally the events vary wildly in size from 200 players to over 1,000. Thirdly SCG Worcester is an outlier with half the Top 8 being a single deck. It's also the second largest event.
God I hate statistics.

Deck - Top 8/Top 4
Deathrite Blue - 16/7 (11/5 being Grixis Delver)
Chalice - 6/4 (4/3 being Dragon Stompy)
Other Blue - 6/2 (4/2 being Miracles)
Loam - 4/3 (4/3 being Lands. wew Addendum: Even though there are no other Loam archetypes represented I didn't want to make lands its own category. Furthermore I'm not that familiar with the deck but all 4/3 appear to be R/G combo lists.)
Cantrip Combo - 3/1 (2/1 being Storm)
NonBlue DRS - 3/1 (2/1 being GSZ decks)

Wonder of Wonders, you are better off sleeving up Chalice of the Void than playing Deathrite Shaman without blue support. Grixis Delver is far and away the best thing you could be doing, even if we ignore SCG Worcester it's score is 7/4. Also worth noting, non-Grixis Blue Deathrite decks comes in at 5/2, making them worse overall than Chalice (6/4) and NonDRS, NonCombo Blue (6/2).


Forsythe on Twitter tonight: https://twitter.com/mtgaaron/status/985674571188588544

Replying to someone saying Workshop needs a restriction in Vintage, he says:



Is this as close as we've come to an official "no, we're never going to ban Brainstorm" statement?

well shit.

[Echelon]

This is fun policing. Straight up. It's managing The ban list based on what they think players enjoy rather than by tournament data. That's the definition of fun policing, is it not?

Fun police to me is the suite of 0 mana counters we have available.

If Brainstorm is to never be banned, at least entertain the idea of banning the next worst offender (so Ponder).

Every blue deck nowadays starts off w/ 4 Brainstorm & 4 Ponder and is very likely to run 4 FoW & 4 Daze as well. Add in some lands and about 50% of every deck is pretty much set in stone before even a single choice is made. Am I the only one that finds that boring..?

[Mr. Safety]

I also get excited whenever I see Merfolk placing. Was a list that top-8ed recently that ran a Scooter. I'd like to see that breaking out. Where else do you see Looter Scooter? I only really picture it in aggro decks. Maybe Affinity? Do you think it could be midrange viable?

Biggest thing holding it back is that it *isn't* fetch-able with Stoneforge Mystic. If it was I think it would see a definite amount of play. It's shown up in some Painter lists as a pseudo-replacement for Top, from what I've read.

DRS is really the only card on the chopping block, and I really hope it doesn't get banned.

[Lemnear]

If Brainstorm is to never be banned, at least entertain the idea of banning the next worst offender (so Ponder).

Every blue deck nowadays starts off w/ 4 Brainstorm & 4 Ponder

Cool. So we all play 4x Brainstorm, 4x Preordain. No biggy

[Echelon]

Cool. So we all play 4x Brainstorm, 4x Preordain. No biggy

Hey, if banning Brainstorm is off the table what can we do..? Lol

I'd ban both Brainstorm and Ponder, to be honest. Just to shake shit up.

[Lemnear]

Hey, if banning Brainstorm is off the table what can we do..? Lol

If there were just a set of cards, which act as enabler for DRS, Ponder, Brainstorm, Treasure Cruise, Dig Through Time, SDT & Co ... one could ban those instead

;p

[Julian23]

I thought this belongs in here. It's some great insight and one of the rare public statements WotC makes regarding their B&R policy in Eternal formats:

Regarding Workshop and Brainstorm:

https://i.imgur.com/gNa302t.png

Also:

https://i.imgur.com/yBiEf3p.png

[Echelon]

If there were just a set of cards, which act as enabler for DRS, Ponder, Brainstorm, Treasure Cruise, Dig Through Time, SDT & Co ... one could ban those instead

;p

Yeah, but I like those too. So don't touch the stuff that I like, ok..? :laugh:

Fuck me, I'm a hypocrite dammit.

@Julian23: Seems to me like WotC is saying "We're not banning or unbanning a single thing for now". Called it!

[Crimhead]

Add in some lands and about 50% of every deck is pretty much set in stone before even a single choice is made. Am I the only one that finds that boring..?
Who really chooses their 75 one card at a time?

People typically chose an archetype. They want to play Stoneblade, or Storm, or Elves, or Eldrazi, or whatever. Once you've picked a deck, something like 90-100% of the main deck is set in stone. This is true whether you play cantrip or not, and it app!is to pretty much every format with an established tier of decks.


Truefax. This data set is only a one month period.
I was responding to another poster who wanted to compare our one month worth of data the the entire reign of SDT Miracles.



Wonder of Wonders, you are better off sleeving up Chalice of the Void than playing Deathrite Shaman without blue support.
And?

If we want to talk about banning a card, we should identify a problem and find a ban that solves it. If Grixis Delver is truly the problem, I think a DRS ban is more likely to send it reeling than a BS ban. It doesn't matter what DSR decks w/o BS are currently doing in the meta we are wanting to change. That's irrelevant.
What matters is how the main offender would adapt in a new meta; given the various banning options.

[Cartesian]

Every blue deck nowadays starts off w/ 4 Brainstorm & 4 Ponder and is very likely to run 4 FoW & 4 Daze as well. Add in some lands and about 50% of every deck is pretty much set in stone before even a single choice is made. Am I the only one that finds that boring..?

Fun police? How about fact police. Delver aggro runs Daze, other decks are highly unlikely to run Daze. Some blue based decks run fewer than 4 Ponder, some less than 4 FoW. Some run a full set of Preordain instead of Ponder. Some run all of these, and Probe. Some mono blue decks run no cantrips at all (e.g. Merfolk, Mono U Chalice/Painter). Since people generally like to not be a goldfish against Belcher if it can be avoided, most of them run 4 FoW.

But hey, of course most blue based decks will go for the consistency that only Brainstorm, Deathrite and friends can offer, and of course they are going to run the best cantrips available, in general. This is great, it is perhaps the greatest allure of Legacy. Consistency is good for the game. Consistency can be attacked, it is a fundamental, interesting problem how to effectively attack consistency without being an inconsistent pile of junk yourself. This is not boring, it is the opposite.

[Hanni]

If Leovold would have been printed with a GWB manacost instead of UGB, I wonder if we would still be having these conversations right now...

[kombatkiwi]

If Leovold would have been printed with a GWB manacost instead of UGB, I wonder if we would still be having these conversations right now...

strict upgrade, can't pyroblast it

[CptHaddock]

If Leovold would have been printed with a GWB manacost instead of UGB, I wonder if we would still be having these conversations right now...

Czech pile splashing white instead of red seems like a very difficult mana base change in this format.

[Crimhead]

Wonder of Wonders, you are better off sleeving up Chalice of the Void than playing Deathrite Shaman without blue support.
I think I see what you are saying. DRS decks w/o blue are not currently a problem, therefore they will continue to not be a problem with BS gone. I have 2 objections to this reasoning:

If you only hit BS, blue DRS decks will still have blue support and not suffer too much. Especially since other competing decks also take a hit.
If you a blue ban does hurt blue based DRS decks, we have a new meta where blueless DRS decks could likely thrive. For one, they will no longer be outcassed by the blue versions of the same strategy! surely this is the biggest thing keeping blueless midrange down (Jund didn't ever really die, it just added blue to be better optimised). Take away the blue goodies, and the deck reverts to an earlier version).
At the very least, you can bet your dual lands CotV would no longer outperform blue less DRS in a world w/o cantrips!

[Barook]

Hey, if banning Brainstorm is off the table what can we do..?
Take a dump before WotC's headquarter. They shit up the format, we shit up their entrance. :tongue:

If they don't ban Brainstorm, at least tell them that we need better hate - one that
a) isn't multiple times more expensive than BS,
b) isn't sorcery speed &
c) isn't usable in Brainstorm decks (Mental Misstep failed here).

I just did, now do you parts.

As for DRS:
I don't think that DRS gets banned, simply because R&D believes that it keeps the format in check (which begs the question what kind of degeneracy it keeps in check - certainly not fast combo decks).

[Echelon]

I just did, now do you parts.

But I don't need to poop... Nor do I have the desire to cross the ocean before taking a dump :laugh:

[Watersaw]

I was responding to another poster who wanted to compare our one month worth of data the the entire reign of SDT Miracles.

And?

If we want to talk about banning a card, we should identify a problem and find a ban that solves it. If Grixis Delver is truly the problem, I think a DRS ban is more likely to send it reeling than a BS ban. It doesn't matter what DSR decks w/o BS are currently doing in the meta we are wanting to change. That's irrelevant.
What matters is how the main offender would adapt in a new meta; given the various banning options.


I think I see what you are saying. DRS decks w/o blue are not currently a problem, therefore they will continue to not be a problem with BS gone. I have 2 objections to this reasoning:

If you only hit BS, blue DRS decks will still have blue support and not suffer too much. Especially since other competing decks also take a hit.
If you a blue ban does hurt blue based DRS decks, we have a new meta where blueless DRS decks could likely thrive. For one, they will no longer be outcassed by the blue versions of the same strategy! surely this is the biggest thing keeping blueless midrange down (Jund didn't ever really die, it just added blue to be better optimised). Take away the blue goodies, and the deck reverts to an earlier version).
At the very least, you can bet your dual lands CotV would no longer outperform blue less DRS in a world w/o cantrips!

Perhaps I worded that wrong, I was surprised not only at the meta share of Grixis Delver, but at how playable Chalice apparently is. As to adaptation, is Grixis Delver in its current form playable without DRS? I don't know, would like to hear the opinion of someone familiar with the deck.
As of now, nonBlue DRS is defined as Elves, Maverick, Jund, and Dark Depths. I guess what I'm wondering is if a (highly unlikely now) Brainstorm ban is actually enough to make these decks more attractive.

[Barook]

But I don't need to poop... Nor do I have the desire to cross the ocean before taking a dump :laugh:
I was talking about the "suggest better Brainstorm hate" part. :eyebrow:

[Echelon]

I was talking about the "suggest better Brainstorm hate" part. :eyebrow:

I can help with the name... I call it "Fuck you, cantrip!". Not sure if it'll really catch on though.

Or "Screw cantrips" if we're going for an artifact/enchantment.

[Matsu]

Ok, lets assume they will not ban anything, because pillar etc.

Are they any unbans possible that will give more options. Will extend the current format.

1. DRS stays maybe Survival of the Fittest is fine.
2. Grizzlybrand stays maybe Yawgmoth's Bargain.
3. Show and Tell stays turn one Oath of druids sounds fair to me, so why not.
4. Mind twist is not broken, because you can swamp + 2x dark rit+ mind twist turn one from time to time.
5. Swap SDT with Terminus.

Maybe we should go this way ?
If they really don't want to ban cards, because of the "Fun argument". Maybe they should unban some stuff. I will be happy to play any of the cards mentioned above.

It will be extremely fun to go turn 1: petal, trop, oath against lands or storm or turn 1: bayou, mana dork and turn2: land+SotF against Delver or Czech Pile.

[Crimhead]

Perhaps I worded that wrong, I was surprised not only at the meta share of Grixis Delver, but at how playable Chalice apparently is. As to adaptation, is Grixis Delver in its current form playable without DRS? I don't know, would like to hear the opinion of someone familiar with the deck.
I am not that familiar with tempo decks (beyond smashing them with Lands).

But I tend to think of Pyromancer as providing card advantage more than tempo. Maybe that's why faster tempo decks like Thresh and Prowess don't run it?
DRS certainly encourages Delver decks to grind a little more at the cost of speed. Without DRS, I suspect Delver would prefer one of the faster shells.

Like I said though, I wouldn't touch Delver with a stick. I'd hit it with a Maze, a Punishing Fire, or a 20/20, but not a stick. It would be interesting to hear an actual experienced Delver player chime in on the viability of Pyro builds sans DRS.



As of now, nonBlue DRS is defined as Elves, Maverick, Jund, and Dark Depths. I guess what I'm wondering is if a (highly unlikely now) Brainstorm ban is actually enough to make these decks more attractive.
Hard to say. I feel Elves is pretty good, and it's in and put of DTB. With D&T as DTB again, we can expect Elves to rise again.
Certainly a ban that hits Terminus.dec will give Elves a little boost.

Re Jund and Maverick, if you start taking away cantrips, fair midrange piles should either:

Thrive on the 2nd rate cantrips,
Revert to non-cantrip builds (like Jund & Maverick), or
Fall behind altogether.
Maybe a mix of all 3?

[Zulabnar]

As of now, nonBlue DRS is defined as Elves, Maverick, Jund, and Dark Depths. I guess what I'm wondering is if a (highly unlikely now) Brainstorm ban is actually enough to make these decks more attractive.

The fact is that is very hard to upgrade this deck with new cards without printing something that could also fit well in a brainstorm list.

E.g: If Wizard\Hasbro will print a 3\4 Creature with haste legendary, with cc R you could put it perfectly in a list with brainstorm to avoid to have multiple copies in hand.

Every verygood card that can fit in an aggro deck, could also fit in a aggro\tempo deck (Goyf, Pyromancer, Mentor, Moongose) etc.

You should print something with a very strange limitation ("you can cast this card only if you don't have island among Your land type in play" to not let this card fit in a Brainsrorm+ponder shell, this was clear in mind of MTG producer when they print Eldrazi cards.

[Crimhead]

I was talking about the "suggest better Brainstorm hate" part. :eyebrow:
Too late now, we all know what you did (and where you did it)!

[Erdvermampfa]

Assuming it is legit the second twitter screenshot from a few posts above is even more disheartening than the brainstorm thing. It's basically a concession that they've given up on eternal formats...("100% managed for the people who already play it"). I really wonder what made them abandon Legacy, the trauma after their failed misstep experiment from 2011? The RL can't be the reason because obviously they do not consider skyrocketing modern prices an issue either since they don't take action against those at all (100€ Liliana from 2011 anyone?) This really makes reconsider if it's worth to to continue engaging with MTG in general.

[Ace/Homebrew]

No changes.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/game-info/gameplay/rules-and-formats/banned-restricted

[maharis]

Earthcraft still too strong for Legacy

See you guys in late June

[pettdan]

Am I really first with this? No changes all formats.

https://magic.wizards.com/en/articles/archive/news/april-16-2018-banned-and-restricted-announcement-2018-04-16

Edit: of course not. ;)

[Echelon]

Called it!

[Barachai]

They were good about explaining their logic with the previous B&R announcements, disappointed with the lack of thoughts with this one.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Question to the cantrip haters.

What deck would you like to see viable in legacy right now?

(Please, no shitty answers, im asking about precise decks)

Zoo. I don't play it but I think it's a litmus test for the health of the format. If Zoo needs Blue, the format is getting too homogeneous or dominated by some other overpowering strategy.

[Amazingxkcd]

They were good about explaining their logic with the previous B&R announcements, disappointed with the lack of thoughts with this one.

check Aaron Forsycthe's twitter regarding their thoughts

[Claymore]

Yep, not even an acknowledgement of the format. Or any format.

No money to be gained means no changes.

[Mr. Safety]

Zoo. I don't play it but I think it's a litmus test for the health of the format. If Zoo needs Blue, the format is getting too homogeneous or dominated by some other overpowering strategy.

+1

I really wish I could still be swinging with Wild Nacatl...

[Claymore]

The only thing I can see wizards doing to police Legacy is printing new commander cards they think would combat certain strategies. That way, players get new toys and wizards gets to sell product in a limited print run in big box stores.

I think even still they are having cards released that would have hit Miracles (Harsh Mentor), but once HQ was directly attacked they hit the big red button.

The promo-only Buy a Box I think is a shift signal from when they said they would no longer pull a True Name limited release. I imagine we'll see a few more staples coming out of commander products soon.

[Erdvermampfa]

I wonder if people who complain about Zoo being outdated have actually tested it in the post-Miracles environment or if they are simply repeating old "wisdom". I can not imagine that attacking with a 4/4 on Turn 2 is that bad. And TNN isn't actuall a problem for Zoo, there are plenty of ways to give your creatures trample (including incolor lands).

[Ephemeron]

So if Legacy really is managed for the existing player base, can we call start a petition and sent it to WotC to ban True-Name Nemesis? I think everyone has basically the same feelings about that card, namely:

1. On pure power level alone, it's not worth a ban. It's not really warping the format to the point where action objectively needs to be taken about it.
2. The card is fucking stupid and is clearly a huge mistake stemming from WotC overlooking the impact that a card designed specifically for a multiplayer format would have on a 1v1 format. It's probably the least fun card in the format, and that's saying something. I don't think people even have fun WINNING with TNN, let alone losing to it. It's just a stupid, dead behind the eyes card. I don't think I've seen a single argument that Legacy is a better format for having TNN in it.

[Mr. Safety]

I wonder if people who complain about Zoo being outdated have actually tested it in the post-Miracles environment or if they are simply repeating old "wisdom". I can not imagine that attacking with a 4/4 on Turn 2 is that bad. And TNN isn't actuall a problem for Zoo, there are plenty of ways to give your creatures trample (including incolor lands).

Traditional, sligh-type zoo isn't feasible. Yes, I've tried it. It doesn't have good enough matchups against the field. It ends up splashing for cards that can approach the format better, and ends up turning into a bad version of Maverick. Would it do well against some of the fair decks? Sure, just like Maverick or Jund. It would still struggle against storm, Sneak/Show, Reanimator, Dark Depths, Eldrazi, Moon/Chalice stompy variants. Overall it's better to take your chances with Burn and try and steal a tournament than with Zoo and it's unstable mana-base.

[ReAnimator]

Frantic Search still too strong for Legacy... lol.

[Crimhead]

I really wonder what made them abandon Legacy, the trauma after their failed misstep experiment from 2011? The RL can't be the reason because obviously they do not consider skyrocketing modern prices an issue either since they don't take action against those at all (100€ Liliana from 2011 anyone?)
100+€ Modern staples are great for WotC because they can charge $10 for a Masters booster. 100+€ Legacy staples that they can't/won't reprint do nothing for the company. I think WotC backed off of Legacy, announced Modern, and doubled down on the reserve list, as a unified strategy.

Really though WotC don't want to encourage players to jump on non-rotating formats at all. The last thing they want is players bailing on Modern and Standard to play eternal.

[maharis]

I wonder if people who complain about Zoo being outdated have actually tested it in the post-Miracles environment or if they are simply repeating old "wisdom". I can not imagine that attacking with a 4/4 on Turn 2 is that bad. And TNN isn't actuall a problem for Zoo, there are plenty of ways to give your creatures trample (including incolor lands).

it is when the other guy plays a 5/5 on turn 3.

Source: tested hollow one decks, consistently had multiple 4/x in play turn 2-3, still couldn't get through gurmag/YP army/TNN

[Crimhead]

Zoo. I don't play it but I think it's a litmus test for the health of the format. If Zoo needs Blue, the format is getting too homogeneous or dominated by some other overpowering strategy.
Zoo was dying out before the cantrips really took over - back in Maverick Summer. Later versions of Zoo actually looked a lot like punishing Maverick.

Aggro died because WotC pushed midrange value engines to the point where just turning dudes sideways has become a bad strategy.

That said, I think Burn just needs one more (actually good) printing. eg, a 4-damage Lava Spike could possibly put Burn on the map. Even just a 5th Bolt might do the job.

[Ephemeron]

That said, I think Burn just needs one more (actually good) printing. eg, a 4-damage Lava Spike could possibly put Burn on the map. Even just a 5th Bolt might do the job.

Sadly, I think the days of 3 damage to a player for R are over. It would be interesting to see if they ever printed a Sulfuric Vortex on legs, kinda like Eidolon was able to bump out Pyrostatic Pillar.

[Crimhead]

So if Legacy really is managed for the existing player base, can we call start a petition and sent it to WotC to ban True-Name Nemesis? I think everyone has basically the same feelings about that card, namely:

1. On pure power level alone, it's not worth a ban. It's not really warping the format to the point where action objectively needs to be taken about it.
2. The card is fucking stupid and is clearly a huge mistake stemming from WotC overlooking the impact that a card designed specifically for a multiplayer format would have on a 1v1 format. It's probably the least fun card in the format, and that's saying something. I don't think people even have fun WINNING with TNN, let alone losing to it. It's just a stupid, dead behind the eyes card. I don't think I've seen a single argument that Legacy is a better format for having TNN in it.

There are a lot of us who don't want to go down the road of a "hands-on" banned list. While we might wish TNN (or any other card) had never been printed, banning cards for being "dumb" sets a precedent not everybody would welcome.
I suspect Stoneblade enthusiasts are/were happy to get the leg up (fin up?). If you like seeing SFM outside of D&T, TNN is a boon to the format. (OersonallyI don't give a shit about whether or not the piles are running SFM, but some people do).
I do not have strong feeling about the TNN either way. At least it's thematic. I find Leotard and other hate bears (that should have been enchantments) much "dumber".

[simdude]

Zoo was dying out before the cantrips really took over - back in Maverick Summer. Later versions of Zoo actually looked a lot like punishing Maverick.

Aggro died because WotC pushed midrange value engines to the point where just turning dudes sideways has become a bad strategy.

That said, I think Burn just needs one more (actually good) printing. eg, a 4-damage Lava Spike could possibly put Burn on the map. Even just a 5th Bolt might do the job.

Sadly(?) such a card would be far too strong for Modern, and could easily put burn at S tier.


I want to say I'm unsurprised but I genuinely thought that there was something in the air that was pointing towards some changes. I'm actually pretty ambivalent about DRS and whether or not it should be banned, I'm not exactly in love with the format but its not like DTT era where things were nearly unplayable.

I am feeling like Charlie Brown with Lucy and the football though. Surely this time they'll recognize that Earthcraft is a completely safe unban (AAUGH). Equally disappointing is the lack of comments on *any* format.

[Darkness]

Boring. I’ll see you all back on 7/2/2018

[Claymore]

I wouldn't put it past Wizards to continue to let Legacy rot with further Brainstorm-DRS homogenization, or even get worse with more TNN type cards in Commander product, to push players into Modern. Like someone said previously, at least Modern players can buy Masters packs.

They're also capitalizing on the popularity of Commander with Brawl so it's easy to see that their moves are continuously going to be "how can we sell more product". Past that you have them stopping the lottery cards in favor of putting those cards into Masters sets anyway.

Edit: Plus the Buy a Box promo.

I don't think they'll let Modern decay, so if the trend of linear combo gets worse we would see bans there.

[Crimhead]

Boring. I’ll see you all back on 7/2/2018
Quite right. It's much more exciting when we can expect "no changes" right away, instead of waiting 2.5 months for nothing to change. :wink:


Sadly(?) such a card would be far too strong for Modern, and could easily put burn at S tier.
I guess WotC needs an avenue to release new cards into the eternal pool while bypassing Modern legality?
:tongue:

[now]

Fun police? How about fact police. Delver aggro runs Daze, other decks are highly unlikely to run Daze. Some blue based decks run fewer than 4 Ponder, some less than 4 FoW. Some run a full set of Preordain instead of Ponder. Some run all of these, and Probe. Some mono blue decks run no cantrips at all (e.g. Merfolk, Mono U Chalice/Painter). Since people generally like to not be a goldfish against Belcher if it can be avoided, most of them run 4 FoW.

But hey, of course most blue based decks will go for the consistency that only Brainstorm, Deathrite and friends can offer, and of course they are going to run the best cantrips available, in general. This is great, it is perhaps the greatest allure of Legacy. Consistency is good for the game. Consistency can be attacked, it is a fundamental, interesting problem how to effectively attack consistency without being an inconsistent pile of junk yourself. This is not boring, it is the opposite.

I’m glad that there are actually a few comments in here that are a bit nuanced and thought through. I’m also glad that this is coming from one of the few players that are actually experimenting in the format as it is. Thank you, Cartesian. It always brightens my day when I see one of your lists in the 5–0 league reports.

To think what could have been achieved with all the effort that has been and still is – now basically confirmed by Forsythe (with whom I don’t quite agree) – being invested in saying (arguing requires more than stating that something is or isn’t) that Brainstorm is too good.

Personally, I would love to have seen a list of decks that are now unplayable because of Brainstorm+Ponder/Preordain. Had we had such data we might have been able to have a constructive argument about the actual merits of Brainstorms banning.

(My personal opinion, by the way, is that there are way too many Ponders being played.)

[bakofried]

Something to bear in mind is that we have another Grand Prix with a legacy main event in less than a month. Would it really be wise to shake up a stagnant (but not -overtly- broken) format, leaving so little time to test, let alone save up for new cards if you're affected by the ban?

I'm fine with them pushing this decision back, if only because I hold out hope that they manage to resolve the issue via new printings or unbannings. I'm 50/50 on whether DRS is the right card, and would personally sooner see TNN go.

[NegatorITA]

who thought a ban would happen today was surely not thinking that (as a dude up here mentioned) there is another legacy GP incoming
What you forgot is that AFTER that GP, there will be data from both USA and EU legacy metagame for them to analyze AND THEN decide if something is worth of a ban.
Now, this said, I keep reading ban Ponder, deathrite, brainstorm:
You all really want to go play modern 2.0 with perfect mana base so much?
Why not print more cards like leo/thalia or new ones to actually tamper card selcetion while also not printing these in blue colors? (leo shouldn't have been blue tbh)

[taconaut]

When was the last time we had a legacy grand Prix have something like this?

"There were 13 players who finished the day undefeated, with eight archetypes that break down as follows:

3 Bogles
2 Humans
2 Affinity
2 Mardu Pyromancer
1 Hollow One
1 Burn
1 Jund
1 Red-Green Tron"

All very different archetypes with different engines and win conditions. It's hilarious how legacy has so many more thousand cards available and yet it's so much less diverse


And even looking at the engines we see
Cantrip engine
GSZ
8 Tombs
Loam

Meanwhile when I look at the single Modern event (which, as a GP should theoretically filter out the bad decks and pilots ) I see a clear difference in how they win as well as how they execute their plan.


I actually think you're making some fair points, Watersaw, but from my perspective, the Modern meta that Mega described could be summarized like:

3 Hexproof Dudes
2 Tribal Dudes
2 Metal Dudes
2 Midrange
1 Goblin Lore Dudes
1 Bolts and Bolt Dudes
1 Midrange
1 Ramp

Or, more succinctly:

9 Dudes
3 Midrange
1 Ramp

Like I acknowledged in another post, there are actually other diverse options in Modern (UWR control, Amulet, KCI, Scapeshift), so I'm not saying Modern is not diverse, but I think all of the "attack my opponent with a bunch of guys" decks are not really all that different, and it's unfair to split them if you're one of the people who is unwilling to differentiate between, say, Czech and Grixis in Legacy.

[Claymore]

8 Linear/non-interactive
5 Midrange

I'm counting Affinity as linear/non-interactive because it doesn't care what you do. Play dudes, play Plating, swing, put the playing on Blinkmoth, swing again. RG Tron, similar story. Ramp, ramp, ramp, Karn, Ugin, Wurmcoil.

[HSCK]

Are people on here really saying decks like Hollow One and Bogles are healthy while complaining about TNN and YP? The quality of this forum continues to go deeper into the gutter.

[ubernostrum]

who thought a ban would happen today was surely not thinking that (as a dude up here mentioned) there is another legacy GP incoming
What you forgot is that AFTER that GP, there will be data from both USA and EU legacy metagame for them to analyze AND THEN decide if something is worth of a ban.

Except, according to this site and basically every other Legacy forum, a GP is "not representative" of the Legacy metagame.

Neither is an SCG Open. Nor an MKM Series event. Nor a local event. Nor an aggregation of all of these. Nobody knows what the "representative" data is for those people, but it isn't to be found at any tournament or combination of tournaments the rest of us know about.

[Crimhead]

Except, according to this site and basically every other Legacy forum, a GP is "not representative" of the Legacy metagame.

Neither is an SCG Open. Nor an MKM Series event. Nor a local event. Nor an aggregation of all of these. Nobody knows what the "representative" data is for those people, but it isn't to be found at any tournament or combination of tournaments the rest of us know about.
WotC has conversion rate data, but will not release it.
That, plus the relatively low pool (way too few major events), leaves us with an incomplete picture and a lot of (educated) guesswork.

But you might be missing the point (if you are not just being snippy). WotC will use as much data as they have, whether it's truly representative or not, to make a decision. Making decisions on partial information is the human condition - we do it all day every day.

And the upcoming GP represents a large proportion of their potential available data. If they are even considering issuing a change, makes sense to wait.

[Crimhead]

Why not print more cards like leo/thalia or new ones to actually tamper card selcetion while also not printing these in blue colors? (leo shouldn't have been blue tbh)
I'd rather see more cards that aren't hate-bears or midrange-value with legs. Maybe some enchantment based lock pieces or combo enablers?


Sadly, I think the days of 3 damage to a player for R are over. It would be interesting to see if they ever printed a Sulfuric Vortex on legs, kinda like Eidolon was able to bump out Pyrostatic Pillar.
I could get behind a 2/1 symmetric Vise with legs for :r:

[Noctalor]

People really wants Burn to be relevant?

In my opinion playing against burn is pretty much the worst experience you can get in MTG, literally makes it look like you need a PHD in quantum physics to play sneak and show.

[ubernostrum]

WotC has conversion rate data, but will not release it.
That, plus the relatively low pool (way too few major events), leaves us with an incomplete picture and a lot of (educated) guesswork.

But you might be missing the point (if you are not just being snippy). WotC will use as much data as they have, whether it's truly representative or not, to make a decision. Making decisions on partial information is the human condition - we do it all day every day.

And the upcoming GP represents a large proportion of their potential available data. If they are even considering issuing a change, makes sense to wait.

My point is that if you read basically any forum that deals with Legacy, you'll see arguments made that a GP can't be representative because it's full of pros who don't care about the format and who all converge on a single deck they like, and they do well because they're pros, so that tells us absolutely nothing whatsoever about the deck they chose. And an SCG event isn't representative because it's the same thing but with the SCG circuit grinders. And... on and on and on, until you wonder whether there's anything these folks would accept as a representative sample of the Legacy metagame.

[Lemnear]

My point is that if you read basically any forum that deals with Legacy, you'll see arguments made that a GP can't be representative because it's full of pros who don't care about the format and who all converge on a single deck they like, and they do well because they're pros, so that tells us absolutely nothing whatsoever about the deck they chose. And an SCG event isn't representative because it's the same thing but with the SCG circuit grinders. And... on and on and on, until you wonder whether there's anything these folks would accept as a representative sample of the Legacy metagame.

The problem is that online, major and local metagames are VERY different and finding a common ground to work with the data we have is always debatable and easy to dismiss for people who want to nicpick.

Countless attempts to discuss performance of decks at majors get derailed by people pointing to their local 4-rounder or a daily challenge result. A pro/grinder does not choose a deck he/she "likes", but the one with the best odds of winning against the meta afaik.

[Cave]

My point is that if you read basically any forum that deals with Legacy, you'll see arguments made that a GP can't be representative because it's full of pros who don't care about the format and who all converge on a single deck they like, and they do well because they're pros, so that tells us absolutely nothing whatsoever about the deck they chose. And an SCG event isn't representative because it's the same thing but with the SCG circuit grinders. And... on and on and on, until you wonder whether there's anything these folks would accept as a representative sample of the Legacy metagame.

The magic world of internet, where you can find arguments supporting pretty much every theory.:laugh:
In fact, if you think about it, people on the internet also tend to overreact with surprise (and sometimes joy) when a particular big event's top8 doesn't match the current metagame expectations. This indicates that in fact a 1000+ players Grand Prix is indeed representative of the metagame. How can't it be?
In my humble opinion, pros being skilled at the game and winning an important event with a non-tier 1 deck is an indicator that a particular deck is viable if piloted with enough skill. It doesn't indicate that skill is the only thing that matters. Deckbuilding matters, and so does luck.

[non-inflammable]

All the tangential attacks at blue are really aimed at brainstorm. All the other "characters" are just supporting actors.



I'd rather see more cards that aren't hate-bears or midrange-value with legs. Maybe some enchantment based lock pieces or combo enablers?

Any early turn play that can negate cantrips, will be met with at least one counterspell.


Why not print more cards like leo/thalia or new ones to actually tamper card selcetion while also not printing these in blue colors? (leo shouldn't have been blue tbh)



https://i.imgur.com/9SL9HJX.jpg

[Crimhead]

Countless attempts to discuss performance of decks at majors get derailed by people pointing to their local 4-rounder or a daily challenge result. A pro/grinder does not choose a deck he/she "likes", but the one with the best odds of winning against the meta afaik.
From what I hear, grinder pros are lucky to clear 35-40k a year, with no benefits and massive travel expenses

Nobody is going to chose that life if it means playing a deck they don't enjoy.
Pros also need to balance costs vs profit. eg, if a pro thinks playing Lands will give them a (slightly) higher EV than sticking with Grixis, that extra EV might not be worth the cost of any staples they don't own and can't borrow.
Also, pros might recognise that sticking with a deck they know inside-out and that suits their strengths is better than a objectively better positioned deck.
Being skilled at playing Legacy =/= brilliant meta insight. I understand Finkle did not design his famous deck.
The notion that pros have an infallible assessment of the meta and change decks on a dime sounds like a fairy tale to me.


My point is that if you read basically any forum that deals with Legacy, you'll see arguments made that a GP can't be representative because it's full of pros who don't care about the format and who all converge on a single deck they like, and they do well because they're pros, so that tells us absolutely nothing whatsoever about the deck they chose. And an SCG event isn't representative because it's the same thing but with the SCG circuit grinders.
It's true that the relevant decks are not played in equal numbers; nor by equally skilled players. Looking at conversion rates would even out the more and less played decks, but, not the relative skill levels.

That said, it's the only data we have. The best we can do is to analyse it but take the conclusions with a heavy scoop of salt.

[Crimhead]

Any early turn play that can negate cantrips, will be met with at least one counterspell.
You'd think CotV would never hit the table turn-1, but that is not my experience.

And why should it absolutely need to be a turn-1 play? What's wrong with baiting the counter turn-1 and dropping the hoser turn-2? I know from playing Enchantress and Lands vs blue decks that you can overwhelm them with "must counter" spells.

[Lemnear]

From what I hear, grinder pros are lucky to clear 35-40k a year, with no benefits and massive travel expenses

Nobody is going to chose that life if it means playing a deck they don't enjoy.
Pros also need to balance costs vs profit. eg, if a pro thinks playing Lands will give them a (slightly) higher EV than sticking with Grixis, that extra EV might not be worth the cost of any staples they don't own and can't borrow.
Also, pros might recognise that sticking with a deck they know inside-out and that suits their strengths is better than a objectively better positioned deck.
Being skilled at playing Legacy =/= brilliant meta insight. I understand Finkle did not design his famous deck.
The notion that pros have an infallible assessment of the meta and change decks on a dime sounds like a fairy tale to me.

Fair points. I went a bit to far and now row, row, row my boat back

[kombatkiwi]

Are people on here really saying decks like Hollow One and Bogles are healthy while complaining about TNN and YP? The quality of this forum continues to go deeper into the gutter.

QFT times a million


The notion that pros have an infallible assessment of the meta and change decks on a dime sounds like a fairy tale to me.

Go look at the top 8 profiles of GP Seattle:


What deck are you playing and why?

Lands - it looked good [Sam Black]
Four-Color Leovold - it has good cards and Jarvis Yu built it for me! [Steve Rubin]
Sultai Leovold. I think the deck has a chance against everything. Feels like the old Jund Modern with Deathrite Shaman. [Jeremy Dezani]

i.e. 'I thought it was a good deck for the tournament' and/or 'someone lent me the cards'

Then you look at the non-pro answers:
Duerte: 'Grixis Delver because I got the deck 6 months ago and grinded with it a bunch'
Keith: 'I always play Thalia'


Nobody is going to chose that life if it means playing a deck they don't enjoy.
Being competitive at something at the highest level generally means the most enjoyment they get comes from winning. People like Wafo-Tapa that consistently act on their preference towards a certain type of deck across multiple formats are probably the exception rather than the rule.

Pros also need to balance costs vs profit. eg, if a pro thinks playing Lands will give them a (slightly) higher EV than sticking with Grixis, that extra EV might not be worth the cost of any staples they don't own and can't borrow.
Once at that level in the community I would say most pros have enough connections that they can basically access any cards that they want

Also, pros might recognise that sticking with a deck they know inside-out and that suits their strengths is better than a objectively better positioned deck.

True, but if most pros also recognise that they are not playing the best positioned deck then A) they are highly motivated to switch (more driven by winning than the average player) and B) it is relatively easy for them to switch (not only in terms of obtaining the cards, but they are good at the game in general so it doesn't take much for them to play any deck at a high level).

[Crimhead]

Being competitive at something at the highest level generally means the most enjoyment they get comes from winning.
I earned my living grinding poker for a few years round the turn of the millennium, and I have a different perspective on lifestyle competitive gaming at the professional level. Pro gamers want to win, but they also want to outplay their opponents and capitalise on their skills. So a lot of pros will be turned off my decks that seem to "lose to themselves", even if they have an equally high chance of winning.

Basically, pros want more than money - most could earn a lot more in a profession. Pros want the satisfaction of earning their wins. They are humans, with complicated needs. Poker pros don't generally like to buy short and play a mathematically formulaic push/fold strategy - even if it is profitable. Legacy pros similarly want a high level of agency so they can feel more satisfied by winning.

If you are interested in gamer psychology, I recommend:

Inside the Poker Mind: Essays on Hold 'em and General Poker Concepts by David Skanksy & Jon Feeney, PhD

The Psychology of Poker by Alan N Schoonmaker



i.e. 'I thought it was a good deck for the tournament' and/or 'someone lent me the cards'

Yet they played totally different decks? If they all thought they were playing "the objectively best deck for the format", most of them were wrong! They sure as hell can't all be right!

More likely there is a range of decks pros consider tournament worthy or very close in positioning. Then they pick 1 of those for personal reasons.

[kombatkiwi]

I earned my living grinding poker for a few years round the turn of the millennium, and I have a different perspective on lifestyle competitive gaming at the professional level. Pro gamers want to win, but they also want to outplay their opponents and capitalise on their skills. So a lot of pros will be turned off my decks that seem to "lose to themselves", even if they have an equally high chance of winning.
The 'equally high chance of winning' is a huge caveat that I didn't specify or assume
Obviously if someone is trying to make a living doing something they will choose a lower-variance route if the EV is the same.
I thought your original statement ("Nobody is going to chose that life if it means playing a deck they don't enjoy") meant that pro players would willingly sacrifice EV to play a deck that they find more 'fun', which I disagree with


Basically, pros want more than money - most could earn a lot more in a profession. Pros want the satisfaction of earning their wins. They are humans, with complicated needs. Poker pros don't generally like to buy short and play a mathematically formulaic push/fold strategy - even if it is profitable. Legacy pros similarly want a high level of agency so they can feel more satisfied by winning.
This may or may not be true for 'pros' but this statement would be equally valid if you substitute 'pros' with 'human beings'. At that point why are you even making the distinction between pro and non-pro if everybody suffers from this same leak?
I hardly know anything about poker but that analogy seems retarded.
"X Pros don't generally like to [do Y thing] even if it is profitable" citation needed


If they all thought they were playing "the objectively best deck for the format", most of them were wrong! They sure as hell can't all be right!
Correct

More likely there is a range of decks pros consider tournament worthy or very close in positioning.
Correct

Then they pick 1 of those for personal reasons.
Almost certainly wrong. They will pick the deck based on whatever they think gives them the greatest chance of winning the tournament. If by personal reasons you include things like "I think X deck is the best deck but I have no idea how to play it and therefore I have a better chance of winning by playing this weaker deck instead" then you aren't wrong, but it seems misleading to call this a 'personal reason'.

I think our arguments might be slightly disconnected because I am taking 'pro' to be synonymous with 'perfectly rational competitive agent' (and I think that for top-level competitive ANYTHING this assumption should be close to true as long as the playerbase is large enough), whereas you seem to have a more relaxed definition e.g. 'a person who likes games and is reasonably good at them' or something along those lines

[DarthVicious]

Almost certainly wrong. They will pick the deck based on whatever they think gives them the greatest chance of winning the tournament. If by personal reasons you include things like "I think X deck is the best deck but I have no idea how to play it and therefore I have a better chance of winning by playing this weaker deck instead" then you aren't wrong, but it seems misleading to call this a 'personal reason'.

I think our arguments might be slightly disconnected because I am taking 'pro' to be synonymous with 'perfectly rational competitive agent' (and I think that for top-level competitive ANYTHING this assumption should be close to true as long as the playerbase is large enough), whereas you seem to have a more relaxed definition e.g. 'a person who likes games and is reasonably good at them' or something along those lines

Assume one player has access to both Miracles and Sneak & Show, and that both are just as likely to win the tournament.

"Miracles will be a boring grind all day, I'll go to time a few times, and barely have any fun, let alone have time for a lunch."
"Sneak & Show will get some easy wins against the unprepared, rounds will be over fast and I'll have a blast."

Those sound like perfectly rational 'personal reasons' to me.

[kombatkiwi]

Assume one player has access to both Miracles and Sneak & Show, and that both are just as likely to win the tournament.

"Miracles will be a boring grind all day, I'll go to time a few times, and barely have any fun, let alone have time for a lunch."
"Sneak & Show will get some easy wins against the unprepared, rounds will be over fast and I'll have a blast."

Those sound like perfectly rational 'personal reasons' to me.

Why is everybody trying to sneak in this "assuming the winrate is the same" bit
The point is that a competitive player will search for an edge (real or not), whether it's 5% or 1% or whatever

Theres no way even casual players would think that they have the same chance winning a tournament with SnS as Miracles

[Zulabnar]

You'd think CotV would never hit the table turn-1, but that is not my experience.

And why should it absolutely need to be a turn-1 play? What's wrong with baiting the counter turn-1 and dropping the hoser turn-2? I know from playing Enchantress and Lands vs blue decks that you can overwhelm them with "must counter" spells.

The problem is pretty simple.
what would you do with COTV number 2\3\4 ? Nothing. SO You have 3 dead cards in your deck, just to counter a 2 cards (ponder + brainstorm).

The fact that i have to find a solution to ponder+brainstorm describes by itself the powerlevel of those cards.

Why turn 1 and not 2? Because assuming that on turn 1 on the draw COTV is easily countered by Daze, Force, Spell Pierce etc. on turn 2 You have access to at least 7 starting cards +3 brainstorm\ponder cards, + 1 draw card at least you can find a counter in 11\60 cards when you have 8 counters. SO You will probably counter it easily, while if is it possible to cast on turn 1 is harder.

Consider that i also coul lost my COTV by an easy to play Abrupt decay on turn 2, or disenchant....


I really don't understand why blue lover mage, pretend that other decks\strategy lovers people have to find solution and fill their deck with junkies, while they have not to do it.

[Crimhead]

The problem is pretty simple.
what would you do with COTV number 2\3\4 ? Nothing. SO You have 3 dead cards in your deck, just to counter a 2 cards (ponder + brainstorm).
So how come 3x CotV counts as 3 cards, but 4x Ponder + 4x Brainstorm are only 2 cards? Really?
And how are those cards dead? Ignoring that CotV can be removed and require replaying, I have had 3 Chalices on board set at 3 different numbers before. Storm player scooped!



The fact that i have to find a solution to ponder+brainstorm describes by itself the powerlevel of those cards.
I seriously doubt CotV would see any play whatsoever if they only countered those 2 spells.
Fact is Legacy is full of 1-drops. From DRS, to Bolt, to Plow, to Delver, etc. Heck, Chalice doesn't even always bet set at '1'.



Why turn 1 and not 2? Because assuming that on turn 1 on the draw COTV is easily countered by Daze, Force, Spell Pierce etc. on turn 2 You have access to at least 7 starting cards +3 brainstorm\ponder cards, + 1 draw card at least you can find a counter in 11\60 cards when you have 8 counters. SO You will probably counter it easily, while if is it possible to cast on turn 1 is harder.

Assuming you have no threatening plays that bait the counters before hand, sure.

I used to resolve CotV against SDT Miracles past turn one almost every match. I'd bait them out with Exploration, Vortex, or whatever. If they managed to get Counter-Top online, I would bait them with a Loam. As I said, you can overwhelm a blue deck with more "must-counter" spells than they have counters.



I really don't understand why blue lover mage, pretend that other decks\strategy lovers people have to find solution and fill their deck with junkies, while they have not to do it.

I don't think I understand this sentence at all.

But for the records, I am not a "blue lover mage", whatever that means. I'd say I am only one of those three things! I play Lands.

[Zulabnar]

So how come 3x CotV counts as 3 cards, but 4x Ponder + 4x Brainstorm are only 2 cards? Really?

Because normally you chose to don't play cc1 card with cotv, not cc1 \cc2 cc3 and cc4.

How many time you draw Brainstorm and say "OH SHIT a FUCKING BRAINSTORM?" never.





I seriously doubt CotV would see any play whatsoever if they only countered those 2 spells.
Fact is Legacy is full of 1-drops. From DRS, to Bolt, to Plow, to Delver, etc. Heck, Chalice doesn't even always bet set at '1'.

Infact it is symmetrical, this is the reason it is not so strong. i burn my 1cc drop also.




I don't think I understand this sentence at all.
I mean: Why blue mage thinks that they could have overpowered cards, while other color has to find solution for specific cards (i.e. Brainstorm and cantrip) fullfilling their decks with garbage cards. If You play aggro You have to fullfill your deck with shitty card because overpowered cards like brainstorm permit to access to all purpose card (terminus? Snap? Will of the council?).


Also consider that card selection permited by Brainstorm will drive the format forever in a stagnant situation, where half of the top 8 are the same shell deck with 8-12 card changing.

[Crimhead]

"X Pros don't generally like to [do Y thing] even if it is profitable" citation needed
I guess you've never known anybody (or been the person) to turn down a supervisor position or a night shift despite the fact that it pays a little better? Once a person is earning a reasonable living, they have other motives besides money (aka, profitability).

Would you trade a job you love for a job you dislike for a measly 1-5% increase? I wouldn't.



I thought your original statement ("Nobody is going to chose that life if it means playing a deck they don't enjoy") meant that pro players would willingly sacrifice EV to play a deck that they find more 'fun', which I disagree with
That would make them the only professionals in the world who give zero consideration to job satisfaction when making career decisions.



"I think X deck is the best deck but I have no idea how to play it and therefore I have a better chance of winning by playing this weaker deck instead" then you aren't wrong, but it seems misleading to call this a 'personal reason'.
Totally not intending to mislead anybody.
I considered this a personal reason because it is a property of the person not the deck.

But would you not agree there is a high correlation between the play-styles a (good) player enjoys and the play-styles they are skilled with?



I think our arguments might be slightly disconnected because I am taking 'pro' to be synonymous with 'perfectly rational competitive agent' (and I think that for top-level competitive ANYTHING this assumption should be close to true as long as the playerbase is large enough), whereas you seem to have a more relaxed definition e.g. 'a person who likes games and is reasonably good at them' or something along those lines
By pro player I mean a player who derives a significant portion of their income from playing. They chose that lifestyle so they can do what they love doing.

[DarthVicious]

Why is everybody trying to sneak in this "assuming the winrate is the same" bit
The point is that a competitive player will search for an edge (real or not), whether it's 5% or 1% or whatever

Theres no way even casual players would think that they have the same chance winning a tournament with SnS as Miracles

First, I was simply attempting to provide an example for personal preferences in deck selection, regardless of who the player is. The assumption that both are just as likely to win was presented as a given for this specific example, it is not representative of anything factual. Attacking this argument just makes you look dumb, especially after quoting me.

Second, regardless of how robotic you seem to think a professional's decisions are, they're people too. They want to have fun, and there's as many ways to have fun as there are people that play this game. Including those that only have fun when winning, or those that just want to troll their opponent, or those that want an interesting challenge.


I guess you've never known anybody (or been the person) to turn down a supervisor position or a night shift despite the fact that it pays a little better? Once a person is earning a reasonable living, they have other motives besides money (aka, profitability).

Would you trade a job you love for a job you dislike for a measly 1-5% increase? I wouldn't.

Exactly. Noone is going to care if (in my example) Miracles has a measly '5% edge' in a handful of matchups over S&S. One tournament is not likely to reveal an edge that small, even a GP. That small of an 'edge' takes years to show itself in practical tournament results. Not to mention that those percentages change dramatically as the metagame changes with new releases, B&R changes, etc.

[non-inflammable]

You'd think CotV would never hit the table turn-1, but that is not my experience.
And why should it absolutely need to be a turn-1 play? What's wrong with baiting the counter turn-1 and dropping the hoser turn-2? I know from playing Enchantress and Lands vs blue decks that you can overwhelm them with "must counter" spells.

My post which you quoted above, was in reference to a need of new 2CMC cards that hurt the cantrip cartel; like chains of mephistopheles and spirit of the labyrinth.
If you had a "new" 2CMC card that hurt cantrips like spirit or chains, it would almost always be a turn 2 play.
You probably wouldn't play chains and chalice in the same deck, just sayin'...

You keep a hand that has this "new" 2CMC card that hurts cantrips and you go for it on turn 2.
Your turn 1 could be anything from a deathrite to a mirri's guile but optimally should be a thoughtseize or inquistion/duress.

Your opponent's turn 1 and possibly turn 2 are ponders/brainstorms and they sculpt their hand and then easily counter (free counters, yeah!) your "new" 2CMC turn 2 play.
You just got timewalked and your opponent says thank you for that free turn, but hey, you still have your turn 1 play, right?

That's why I posted a Leyline that does nothing by itself but it hurts cantrips but also has a deckbuilding cost that will take up slots in your 75.

I've only ever gotten chains into play once (against miracles) and I try often; sorry in advance for the italian version...

https://i.imgur.com/uS2vz7O.jpg

[Crimhead]

Because normally you chose to don't play cc1 card with cotv, not cc1 \cc2 cc3 and cc4.

How many time you draw Brainstorm and say "OH SHIT a FUCKING BRAINSTORM?" never.
That's not what I am saying.

If Chalice 2-4 are 3 dead cards, then they negate 8 cards in BS & Ponder - not 2 cards.

Accurate numbers please.

Also:

Chalice negates other cards too.
You are saying CotV 2-4 are bricks, but have also noted CotV dies to AD. Not really redundant in that case.




I mean: Why blue mage thinks that they could have overpowered cards, while other color has to find solution for specific cards (i.e. Brainstorm and cantrip) fullfilling their decks with garbage cards.
I don't even know where to start.
All I said was that turn-1 plays that hose BS go encountered all the time. I don't think you necessarily need to hose cantrips to beat cantrip decks either. Depends what you are playing.



If You play aggro You have to fullfill your deck with shitty card because overpowered cards like brainstorm permit to access to all purpose card (terminus? Snap? Will of the council?).
You don't play aggro in Legacy.



Also consider that card selection permited by Brainstorm will drive the format forever in a stagnant situation, where half of the top 8 are the same shell deck with 8-12 card changing.
I'm seeing about 1/3 of top-8s being Grixis Delver + Team America + Czech + BUG + Blade. Also I seriously doubt these decks share a common core of the same 48-52 cards!

Accurate numbers please.

[Claymore]

I'm seeing about 1/3 of top-8s being Grixis Delver + Team America + Czech + BUG + Blade. Also I seriously doubt these decks share a common core of the same 48-52 cards!


Apologies for the dog shit formatting, but...http://mtgtop8.com/topcards?f=LE&meta=39

Card Name Decks Avg

Brainstorm 57.7 % 4.0
Ponder 54.2 % 3.8
Force of Will 51.9 % 3.9
Polluted Delta 49.9 % 3.2
Wasteland 44.6 % 3.7
Volcanic Island 42.1 % 2.2
Deathrite Shaman 40.1 % 3.9
Tropical Island 39.2 % 1.4
Underground Sea 38.9 % 2.5
Misty Rainforest 38.1 % 2.4
Scalding Tarn 34.4 % 2.8
Bayou 31.4 % 1.6
Lightning Bolt 30.1 % 3.3
Flooded Strand 28.7 % 3.1
Verdant Catacombs 28.3 % 2.8
Gitaxian Probe 28.1 % 3.7
Daze 25.8 % 3.9
True-Name Nemesis 22.1 % 2.2
Delver of Secrets 21.7 % 4.0
Spell Pierce 21.7 % 1.8

Couldn't you just sleeve that up and play it as is?

Reformatting to separate lands and creatures:

The Legacy shell (35 cards)
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Force of Will
4 Deathrite Shaman
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Daze
2 True-Name Nemesis
4 Delver of Secrets
2 Spell Pierce
3 Lightning Bolt

Lands (25 cards):
3 Flooded Strand
3 Verdant Catacombs
3 Polluted Delta
4 Wasteland
2 Volcanic Island
1 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Misty Rainforest
3 Scalding Tarn
2 Bayou

Cut 6 lands to go to 19, put in whatever unique flavor makes you special (such as Preordain), have 15 singletons as your sideboard. Deck to Beat.

I was going to compare the top few decks that made up the highest % of the metagame on there, but seeing that "most played cards" list being an actual Delver deck seemed easier.

[Zulabnar]

Apologies for the dog shit formatting, but...http://mtgtop8.com/topcards?f=LE&meta=39

Card Name Decks Avg

Brainstorm 57.7 % 4.0
Ponder 54.2 % 3.8
Force of Will 51.9 % 3.9
Polluted Delta 49.9 % 3.2
Wasteland 44.6 % 3.7
Volcanic Island 42.1 % 2.2
Deathrite Shaman 40.1 % 3.9
Tropical Island 39.2 % 1.4
Underground Sea 38.9 % 2.5
Misty Rainforest 38.1 % 2.4
Scalding Tarn 34.4 % 2.8
Bayou 31.4 % 1.6
Lightning Bolt 30.1 % 3.3
Flooded Strand 28.7 % 3.1
Verdant Catacombs 28.3 % 2.8
Gitaxian Probe 28.1 % 3.7
Daze 25.8 % 3.9
True-Name Nemesis 22.1 % 2.2
Delver of Secrets 21.7 % 4.0
Spell Pierce 21.7 % 1.8

Couldn't you just sleeve that up and play it as is?

Reformatting to separate lands and creatures:

The Legacy shell (35 cards)
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Force of Will
4 Deathrite Shaman
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Daze
2 True-Name Nemesis
4 Delver of Secrets
2 Spell Pierce
3 Lightning Bolt

Lands (25 cards):
3 Flooded Strand
3 Verdant Catacombs
3 Polluted Delta
4 Wasteland
2 Volcanic Island
1 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Misty Rainforest
3 Scalding Tarn
2 Bayou

Cut 6 lands to go to 19, put in whatever unique flavor makes you special (such as Preordain), have 15 singletons as your sideboard. Deck to Beat.

I was going to compare the top few decks that made up the highest % of the metagame on there, but seeing that "most played cards" list being an actual Delver deck seemed easier.


That is the stagnant situation i talk about. (Since Years). Those are things already seen in Vintage (i play mtg since 1999).

[Crimhead]

I was going to compare the top few decks that made up the highest % of the metagame on there, but seeing that "most played cards" list being an actual Delver deck seemed easier.
Not sure what your point. Given that Delver Tempo is:

Is the most prominent archetype.
Is a pile of good-stuff cards.
It is no surprise that a list of the most played cards will resemble a Delver shell.

Good-stuff cards will always see more play than narrow cards, so when the top performing deck uses these cards, they are going to be everywhere. If the top performing deck were playing fewer all-purpose versatile cards (say Storm, D&T, Miracles, or whatever), its cards would not see as much play in other decks.

[Whitefaces]

How many time you draw Brainstorm and say "OH SHIT a FUCKING BRAINSTORM?" never.

Plenty of times, when the opponent has played a Chalice of the Void.

[Mr. Safety]

Apologies for the dog shit formatting, but...http://mtgtop8.com/topcards?f=LE&meta=39

Card Name Decks Avg

Brainstorm 57.7 % 4.0
Ponder 54.2 % 3.8
Force of Will 51.9 % 3.9
Polluted Delta 49.9 % 3.2
Wasteland 44.6 % 3.7
Volcanic Island 42.1 % 2.2
Deathrite Shaman 40.1 % 3.9
Tropical Island 39.2 % 1.4
Underground Sea 38.9 % 2.5
Misty Rainforest 38.1 % 2.4
Scalding Tarn 34.4 % 2.8
Bayou 31.4 % 1.6
Lightning Bolt 30.1 % 3.3
Flooded Strand 28.7 % 3.1
Verdant Catacombs 28.3 % 2.8
Gitaxian Probe 28.1 % 3.7
Daze 25.8 % 3.9
True-Name Nemesis 22.1 % 2.2
Delver of Secrets 21.7 % 4.0
Spell Pierce 21.7 % 1.8

Couldn't you just sleeve that up and play it as is?

Reformatting to separate lands and creatures:

The Legacy shell (35 cards)
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Force of Will
4 Deathrite Shaman
4 Gitaxian Probe
4 Daze
2 True-Name Nemesis
4 Delver of Secrets
2 Spell Pierce
3 Lightning Bolt

Lands (25 cards):
3 Flooded Strand
3 Verdant Catacombs
3 Polluted Delta
4 Wasteland
2 Volcanic Island
1 Tropical Island
3 Underground Sea
2 Misty Rainforest
3 Scalding Tarn
2 Bayou

Cut 6 lands to go to 19, put in whatever unique flavor makes you special (such as Preordain), have 15 singletons as your sideboard. Deck to Beat.

I was going to compare the top few decks that made up the highest % of the metagame on there, but seeing that "most played cards" list being an actual Delver deck seemed easier.

This is a tautology. "If you take all the most played cards and put them into a list, then made a deck out of those cards, it would resemble the most played deck." The list is generated from the most played decks and the cards that populate those decks.

[Nielsie]

This is a tautology. "If you take all the most played cards and put them into a list, then made a deck out of those cards, it would resemble the most played deck." The list is generated from the most played decks and the cards that populate those decks.
If that would be true, than why doesn't it give me a nice legacy starter deck if I filter on `All decks of 2012`?
Why doesn't it give me a nice starter deck for modern?

[Mr. Safety]

You know it's 2018 and Modern is a different format right? Apples and oranges. Regardless, I'm sure if you tried that for 2012 for Legacy, you would probably be able to cobble together a starter deck for legacy.

Let's do it:

https://mtgtop8.com/topcards

I put in the filter of most played cards for all decks in 2012, for reference.

Card Name Decks Avg

Page 1 (Tier 1)

Brainstorm 61.5 % 4.0
Force of Will 57.3 % 3.8
Wasteland 54.1 % 3.6
Misty Rainforest 46.8 % 2.8
Ponder 42.1 % 3.4
Scalding Tarn 36.9 % 3.0
Polluted Delta 35.3 % 2.9
Swords to Plowshares 35.1 % 3.9
Volcanic Island 34.3 % 2.6
Flooded Strand 32.4 % 3.1
Karakas 32.2 % 1.2
Spell Pierce 32.2 % 2.7
Daze 30.3 % 3.4
Tropical Island 28.6 % 2.8
Jace, the Mind Sculptor 26.8 % 2.8
Snapcaster Mage 24.5 % 3.0
Umezawa's Jitte 24.5 % 1.3
Tarmogoyf 23.8 % 3.5
Underground Sea 22.9 % 2.7
Tundra 22.8 % 3.1

Page 2 (tier 2)

Stoneforge Mystic 21.7 % 3.4
Lightning Bolt 21.0 % 3.9
Vendilion Clique 20.8 % 1.9
Delver of Secrets 20.0 % 4.0
Sensei's Divining Top 18.8 % 2.8
Spell Snare 18.8 % 2.6
Scavenging Ooze 18.5 % 1.6
Batterskull 16.6 % 1.0
Green Sun's Zenith 16.6 % 3.6
Savannah 16.5 % 2.7
Windswept Heath 16.5 % 3.3
Counterspell 16.1 % 1.7
Verdant Catacombs 16.1 % 2.7
Wooded Foothills 15.2 % 2.3
Thoughtseize 14.9 % 2.4
Nimble Mongoose 14.8 % 3.8
Dryad Arbor 14.5 % 1.0
Knight of the Reliquary 12.9 % 3.9
Sylvan Library 12.7 % 1.3
Stifle 12.6 %


Have fun with Bant Stoneblade-ish deck. I'm sure it would be a fine starter deck.

Let's do it for Modern:

https://mtgtop8.com/topcards

Page 1 (tier 1)

Misty Rainforest 44.5 % 2.9
Scalding Tarn 35.7 % 3.5
Lightning Bolt 35.2 % 3.9
Stomping Ground 33.6 % 1.2
Steam Vents 29.6 % 2.0
Verdant Catacombs 29.4 % 3.8
Marsh Flats 28.8 % 2.3
Path to Exile 27.6 % 3.6
Overgrown Tomb 25.4 % 1.6
Arid Mesa 25.3 % 3.0
Tarmogoyf 24.7 % 3.9
Kitchen Finks 24.0 % 3.1
Serum Visions 23.8 % 3.8
Snapcaster Mage 23.0 % 3.6
Inquisition of Kozilek 22.6 % 3.2
Blood Crypt 21.0 % 1.4
Hallowed Fountain 19.6 % 1.7
Dark Confidant 19.0 % 3.9
Blackcleave Cliffs 18.7 % 3.9
Thoughtseize 18.1 % 2.4

Page 2 (tier 2)

Mana Leak 17.7 % 3.3
Breeding Pool 17.2 % 1.3
Temple Garden 16.7 % 1.3
Liliana of the Veil 16.4 % 3.2
Vendilion Clique 15.8 % 2.5
Bloodbraid Elf 15.7 % 4.0
Remand 15.7 % 3.4
Treetop Village 15.1 % 3.1
Cryptic Command 14.8 % 2.6
Inkmoth Nexus 14.1 % 3.7
Sacred Foundry 14.0 % 1.2
Spell Snare 13.9 % 2.9
Raging Ravine 13.4 % 2.3
Noble Hierarch 13.0 % 3.0
Spellskite 12.8 % 1.7
Terminate 12.7 % 2.0
Twilight Mire 12.5 % 1.9
Delver of Secrets 12.0 % 4.0
Grim Lavamancer 12.0 % 2.5
Birds of Paradise 12.0 % 3.7

Take your pick, Jund or some combination of mid-range good stuff. Would make a fine starter deck for modern. Look, even Bloodbraid Elf is legal again without Deathrite Shaman! It's actually a pretty spot-on call. I might do this...EDIT: This was sarcasm fyi...

[Amazingxkcd]

new deck building strategy: Just make adjusting piles completely based on popularity %s, update every month

[Zulabnar]

Good-stuff cards will always see more play than narrow cards, so when the top performing deck uses these cards, they are going to be everywhere. If the top performing deck were playing fewer all-purpose versatile cards (say Storm, D&T, Miracles, or whatever), its cards would not see as much play in other decks.

Infact what we are writing is that some cards power level is huge. It means that If You want to win You have to chose first of alla BRAINSTORM because the power level of this card is awesome compared to other cards.


This is a tautology. "If you take all the most played cards and put them into a list, then made a deck out of those cards, it would resemble the most played deck." The list is generated from the most played decks and the cards that populate those decks.

that's not true. There are card COMMON to the most played decks. Infact You find earlier Jace or Thoughtseize than Gurmag.

The reality is that some cards are too damn good (Overpowered) to play without if You want to win, otherwise You can play other decks. Combo. Aggro is not possible.

Brainstorm is the most powerfull and so most played card . Is good for control, tempo, aggro\control, combo etc. And ponder is following.

Brainstorm is overpowered because it let You draw 3 and keep all those 3 cards until You have other 2 to put on top of the deck

You clean your hand, removing the wood You draw in start 7.
You have 2 lands in hand ? play brainstorm and find jace fow and blue card? wow, from shit to stars.
You have an average hand with brainstorm, trasnform it and shiuffle with a fetch.
Oppo plays duress\tseize\cabal, let me cover my bomb with brainstorm
I have a land and a brainstorm in my starting 7? ok i keep

Without the interaction with fetchland brainstorm will not be so powerfull, but with this interaction given, (or ban all the fetchlands?) brainstorm is too overpowered. This is why a ban is the correct thing to do.

[Kap'n Cook]

You clean your hand, removing the wood You draw in start 7.
You have 2 lands in hand ? play brainstorm and find jace fow and blue card? wow, from shit to stars.
You have an average hand with brainstorm, trasnform it and shiuffle with a fetch.
Oppo plays duress\tseize\cabal, let me cover my bomb with brainstorm
I have a land and a brainstorm in my starting 7? ok i keep



What a brainstorm do? Draw card and activate on draw effects fix hand, removing woods.





new deck building strategy: Just make adjusting piles completely based on popularity %s, update every month

We are all witnesses to the next GP Champion right here.

[Amazingxkcd]

Now I just need a Legacy GP in the Chicagoland area

[Crimhead]

Infact what we are writing is that some cards power level is huge. It means that If You want to win You have to chose first of alla BRAINSTORM because the power level of this card is awesome compared to other cards.

Or one of the established tier decks that don't run Brainstorm.

[Zulabnar]

Or one of the established tier decks that don't run Brainstorm.

http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy&fecha=2018-3

sum the number and tell me if is more probable if i play brainsotrm or not to be in t8.

[Claymore]

The question was if the top 1/3rd of decks would share the same 48-52 cards. Still, this isn't looking at individual deck lists, but just overall card usage from a given data set. If you drilled down into the diverse spread 4c delver, Slower 4c Delver, BUG delver, Grixis Delver, and Miracles, then things might look different.

2018 Legacy:


Brainstorm 57.7 % 4.0
Ponder 54.2 % 3.8
Force of Will 51.9 % 3.9
Polluted Delta 49.9 % 3.2
Wasteland 44.6 % 3.7
Volcanic Island 42.1 % 2.2
Deathrite Shaman 40.1 % 3.9
Tropical Island 39.2 % 1.4
Underground Sea 38.9 % 2.5
Misty Rainforest 38.1 % 2.4
Scalding Tarn 34.4 % 2.8

Rounded up, 34/60

2012 Legacy:


Brainstorm 61.5 % 4.0
Force of Will 57.3 % 3.8
Wasteland 54.1 % 3.6
Misty Rainforest 46.8 % 2.8
Ponder 42.1 % 3.4
Scalding Tarn 36.9 % 3.0
Polluted Delta 35.3 % 2.9
Swords to Plowshares 35.1 % 3.9
Volcanic Island 34.3 % 2.6

31 cards

Modern:


Misty Rainforest 44.5 % 2.9
Scalding Tarn 35.7 % 3.5
Lightning Bolt 35.2 % 3.9
Stomping Ground 33.6 % 1.2

11 cards...Bolt being the only distinct card. Ban Lightning Bolt.

So you could say that the majority Legacy has been stagnant since 2012, only shifting really Swords for DRS (Not looking at lands). I'm actually surprised at that.

What's further interesting is I'd assume that shell was Delver, but Delver only goes from 20% in 2012 to 22% in 2018.

Hard to say really, since once you get data and start digging into it, there's all sorts of ways to interpret and sell your own view point.

[Crimhead]

http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy&fecha=2018-3

sum the number and tell me if is more probable if i play brainsotrm or not to be in t8.


BS's success is spread over a lot more decks. eg, the fact that Miracles also plays BS does not make, eg, S&T somehow more likely to place.
Top-8 lists without conversion rates do not provide a statistical bases for the likleyhood of an individual entrant placing with that deck.
How many times has this been pointed out? Yawn.

[Lemnear]

What's further interesting is I'd assume that shell was Delver, but Delver only goes from 20% in 2012 to 22% in 2018.

Part if the reason is that many DRS decks skip the fragile Delver thanks to the pretty common (pseudo-)mirrors in the current meta and tend to different creatures like snapcaster, TNN, Pyromancer which Bolt & Co can't trade even with

[Crimhead]

http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy&fecha=2018-3

sum the number and tell me if is more probable if i play brainsotrm or not to be in t8.
I'd like to address this once more because it comes up a lot and it's among the most erroneous things I see in print (edited for civility).

Let's go back 5 or 6 years to the time that Jund was losing much of it's meta share to to Shardless. When that shift happened, BS started showing up a little more in the top8s, and GSZ a little less. Would you conclude that, eg, Elves had gotten worse because GSZ has become an objectively weaker card in every deck that runs it?

I sure hope not. BS went up and GSZ goes down precisely because Shardless is better than Jund. That shift does not mean that every other GSZ deck has become a bigger dog, and that other BS decks become more favoured. Decks will get better or worse because the meta changed and they see different pairings. But your deck never gets better or worse based on whether or not other good decks play similar cards.

Essentially, people talk about the probability of winning with a BS deck as the sum of the probabilities of winning with every BS deck.It doesn't work like that. You have to consider the probability of winning with each individual deck, because an individual deck is all you ever get to get to play. You can't play every BS deck simultaneously; and you don't get to absorb the chance of winning with a different deck and add it to your chance of winning with the deck you actually chose.

[Nielsie]

You know it's 2018 and Modern is a different format right? Apples and oranges. Regardless, I'm sure if you tried that for 2012 for Legacy, you would probably be able to cobble together a starter deck for legacy.
You were the one throwing around expensive words like tautology, so I tried it for different years and different formats. 2012's most played cards couldn't just be scooped up into 1 pile and be called a deck, unless you wanted to play some weird shit with plows, goyfs, delvers, jaces and some random karakas... So, no, I am not convinced. 2018's most played cards just show how badly homogonized legacy has become.

[BirdsOfParadise]

Agreed that it's not a tautology. If the four most played decks were 33% Goblins, 27% Merfolk, 20% Sneak & Show, and 20% BR Reanimator, the most played spells piled together would build a Vial Goblins deck that ran Force of Will (common in Merfolk and Sneak & Show) and Griselbrand (common in Sneak & Show and BR Reanimator), possibly with fringe Goblin slots being replaced by stock Merfolk slots. Obviously that deck would be awful. Whatever it means that 2018 Legacy's top cards pile is a plausible Delver deck, it's not a tautology given only that Delver is the most played deck.

[Crimhead]

Agreed that it's not a tautology. If the four most played decks were 33% Goblins, 27% Merfolk, 20% Sneak & Show, and 20% BR Reanimator, the most played spells piled together would build a Vial Goblins deck that ran Force of Will (common in Merfolk and Sneak & Show) and Griselbrand (common in Sneak & Show and BR Reanimator), possibly with fringe Goblin slots being replaced by stock Merfolk slots. Obviously that deck would be awful. Whatever it means that 2018 Legacy's top cards pile is a plausible Delver deck, it's not a tautology given only that Delver is the most played deck.
I got one. What if the meta were:
33% Goblins
27% S&T
20% Team America
20% Miracles

The most played cards are something like 67% FOW, BS, Ponder.

Obviously in that meta you are better off playing BS. 67% of all winning lists play it! If you don't play blue, you are handicapping yourself.
:rolleyes:

See what happens when you suck at math? See how math =/= just arithmetic?

Edit:
Switch that up so that Gobos are 27% and S&T is 33%. In this meta it is true that you are better off playing BS/FOW*, but only if you are playing them in one specific shell. The idea that other FoW/BS decks are worse that goblins is false; and the idea that rogue decks or brews with BS > rogue decks or brews w/o BS is pure conjecture.

*assuming top-8 penetration is proportional to conversion rates (which in practise it surely never is).

[Watersaw]

I got one. What if the meta were:
33% Goblins
27% S&T
20% Team America
20% Miracles

The most played cards are something like 67% FOW, BS, Ponder.

Obviously in that meta you are better off playing BS. 67% of all winning lists play it! If you don't play blue, you are handicapping yourself.
:rolleyes:

See what happens when you suck at math? See how math =/= just arithmetic?

Edit:
Switch that up so that Gobos are 27% and S&T is 33%. In this meta it is true that you are better off playing BS/FOW*, but only if you are playing them in one specific shell. The idea that other FoW/BS decks are worse that goblins is false; and the idea that rogue decks or brews with BS > rogue decks or brews w/o BS is pure conjecture.

*assuming top-8 penetration is proportional to conversion rates (which in practise it surely never is).

Let's not deal in hypothetical thought-experiments. These prove nothing and frankly a lot of people WOULD be happy if goblins stood a decent chance against 67% of the field.

The best deck as of now is Grixis Delver. The cards in Grixis Delver are individually powerful enough that they are among the most played in the format.

[Mr. Safety]

You were the one throwing around expensive words like tautology, so I tried it for different years and different formats. 2012's most played cards couldn't just be scooped up into 1 pile and be called a deck, unless you wanted to play some weird shit with plows, goyfs, delvers, jaces and some random karakas... So, no, I am not convinced. 2018's most played cards just show how badly homogonized legacy has become.

I think we are actually agreeing on this...but with just a different perspective. I'm not saying the format isn't homogenized (it is.) Grixis Delver and Czech Pile share a lot of the same cards, regardless of strategic difference. I guess the point I'm arguing is: so what? So the format is homogenized, this isn't breaking news. Hasn't it been said like a million times that 'there will always be a best deck, best cards, yadda yadda, because competitive format, etc.'. The deeper the format, the more homogenization you'll get (see: Vintage.)

[Hanni]

I guess I just don't get all of the butthurt about certain cards seeing a higher % than other cards. This will always happen. An eternal format is always going to revolve around the most powerful and efficient cards ever printed. No amount of bannings will change this; all bannings do is change which ones become the highest %.

There will always be a best deck. There will always be cards that see more play than everything else.

Are people really that disatisfied with games of Legacy? I feel like we are in a sweet spot where games tend to be very interactive and enjoyable. I'd much rather have our current state of affairs than a rock-paper-scissors format, or a format with mostly linear decks where matchups are decided based on what you sideboarded for.

There are tons of unique decks and strategies that you can't find anywhere else but Legacy. Tons of decks and strategies are competitive and viable, despite not being flavor of the month. Even if it is much more difficult to do these day, there is still plenty of room for innovation and brewing.

Why are people so upset with the state of the format right now? Because blue is better than the other colors? Welcome to eternal formats.

[Mr. Safety]

I guess I just don't get all of the butthurt about certain cards seeing a higher % than other cards. This will always happen. An eternal format is always going to revolve around the most powerful and efficient cards ever printed. No amount of bannings will change this; all bannings do is change which ones become the highest %.

There will always be a best deck. There will always be cards that see more play than everything else.

Are people really that disatisfied with games of Legacy? I feel like we are in a sweet spot where games tend to be very interactive and enjoyable. I'd much rather have our current state of affairs than a rock-paper-scissors format, or a format with mostly linear decks where matchups are decided based on what you sideboarded for.

There are tons of unique decks and strategies that you can't find anywhere else but Legacy. Tons of decks and strategies are competitive and viable, despite not being flavor of the month. Even if it much more difficult to do these day, there is still plenty of room for innovation and brewing.

Why are people so upset with the state of the format right now? Because blue is better than the other colors? Welcome to eternal formats.

Thank you for this, even though it's been said many times before. I love the format, interaction, how games play out.

Seriously, will you be my friend?

Yes []
No []

[Claymore]

The problem is that the format is the same 48-52 card shell, for over half of the matches you'll play. Interactive, yes. But you know how every single game is played out. And play it out the exact same way every round. Fun, sure. But eventually you get tired of the redundancy every single game, fighting against T1 DRS, opponent (or yourself) resolving Brainstorm/Ponder/Preordain several times a turn, discard into removal into countermagic into who can top deck and keep a Delver/Deathrite/True Name on the battlefield long enough to close out.

Then week after week of over half the matches playing out the same way, eventually you've seen everything that this solved format has to offer and you move on.

Coverage of Legacy events (SCG, GPs) get a ton of criticism for always showing a Deathrite Delver match/mirror, but that's just what Legacy is now.

[taconaut]

I guess I just don't get all of the butthurt about certain cards seeing a higher % than other cards. This will always happen. An eternal format is always going to revolve around the most powerful and efficient cards ever printed. No amount of bannings will change this; all bannings do is change which ones become the highest %.

There will always be a best deck. There will always be cards that see more play than everything else.

Are people really that disatisfied with games of Legacy? I feel like we are in a sweet spot where games tend to be very interactive and enjoyable. I'd much rather have our current state of affairs than a rock-paper-scissors format, or a format with mostly linear decks where matchups are decided based on what you sideboarded for.

There are tons of unique decks and strategies that you can't find anywhere else but Legacy. Tons of decks and strategies are competitive and viable, despite not being flavor of the month. Even if it is much more difficult to do these day, there is still plenty of room for innovation and brewing.

Why are people so upset with the state of the format right now? Because blue is better than the other colors? Welcome to eternal formats.

I also want to agree with all of this, and add: "I'd much rather have our current state of affairs than a rock-paper-scissors format, or a format with mostly linear decks where matchups are decided based on what you sideboarded for and variance."

Cantrips make it more likely that people get to play Magic.


The problem is that the format is the same 48-52 card shell, for over half of the matches you'll play. Interactive, yes. But you know how every single game is played out. And play it out the exact same way every round. Fun, sure. But eventually you get tired of the redundancy every single game, fighting against T1 DRS, opponent (or yourself) resolving Brainstorm/Ponder/Preordain several times a turn, discard into removal into countermagic into who can top deck and keep a Delver/Deathrite/True Name on the battlefield long enough to close out.

Then week after week of over half the matches playing out the same way, eventually you've seen everything that this solved format has to offer and you move on.

Coverage of Legacy events (SCG, GPs) get a ton of criticism for always showing a Deathrite Delver match/mirror, but that's just what Legacy is now.

I think this is overstated - plenty of people I play against aren't on Czech or Grixis. Sure, many of them are, but not certainly not over half. You never play against DNT/Lands/Storm/ANT/Miracles/Eldrazi/SNT/Elves/Maverick/Aluren/Food Chain? I would not be embarrassed to bring any of those decks to a Legacy event, and certainly you could too.

Also, I think the coverage issue is actually distinct from the diversity issue - whoever is providing coverage chooses what to show, so it's not always representative of the format in the way a random sampling would be. At some level, casters may choose to put more Delver mirrors up because that's what's popular; especially for WOTC, they may want to highlight the fair decks Legacy has to offer, because it might encourage people to buy in/watch that only usually play Modern or Standard, where creature battles rule the day. It's kinda like how they do the 5-0 league reports now - you only get to see the ones they choose to show.

[Hanni]

The problem is that the format is the same 48-52 card shell, for over half of the matches you'll play. Interactive, yes. But you know how every single game is played out. And play it out the exact same way every round. Fun, sure. But eventually you get tired of the redundancy every single game, fighting against T1 DRS, opponent (or yourself) resolving Brainstorm/Ponder/Preordain several times a turn, discard into removal into countermagic into who can top deck and keep a Delver/Deathrite/True Name on the battlefield long enough to close out.

Then week after week of over half the matches playing out the same way, eventually you've seen everything that this solved format has to offer and you move on.

Coverage of Legacy events (SCG, GPs) get a ton of criticism for always showing a Deathrite Delver match/mirror, but that's just what Legacy is now.

Legacy coverage =/= actual matchups that you are paired against.

I could go into detail with my previous matchups that I've personally experienced at large events over the last couple of years, but since I haven't played in one since October 2017, let's use the only tournament report that I see in the Tournament Reports section of the forum from GP Seattle 2018, from user Sparkii. His matchups were:

DNT
Turbo Depths
Miracles
Esper DNT
Aluren
Eldrazi
Junk-fit
Grixis Control
TES
Grixis Delver
Czech Pile
Moon Stompy
Soldier Stompy
Turbo Depths
Elves

That's not Grixis Delver and Czech Pile matchups every round.

Yes, this is a single example. This sample size is way too small to be an accurate representation of the diversity of matchups. However, my own personal experiences at larger events have been similar in the diversity of matchups I've had.

This whole "every game is a Grixis Delver or Czech Pile matchup" is superfluous and incorrect. Quit blowing things out of proportion. Those are two good decks, but they aren't the only decks you'll run into.

Pretending like every game plays out the same because most decks are playing cantrips and there is a good bit of card overlap between decks is wrong. Acting like every game is on autopilot when you have cantrips is also wrong. Most of the time, there are many different decision trees to make every single turn. Matches don't play out the same way every single time. If that was how it worked, we wouldn't keep seeing the same pros doing well time and again, and there wouldn't be players going 0-2 drop with those decks. Even with cantrips, there is still variance.

/end rant

[Dice_Box]

Are people really that disatisfied with games of Legacy?
Yes.


Why are people so upset with the state of the format right now? Because blue is better than the other colors? Welcome to eternal formats.
Because it all feels the same and that's not fun. I mean I can show up with Stax and make others lives miserable, that's fun, so I do that. You will likely beat my deck because it's bad, but I am going to make sure you regret paying money to play against me. Because watching people grit their teeth in place of masturbating with cantrips is as close to fun as I can find in this shadow of what once was a great format.

Legacy has gone from a place where I could enjoy myself to a place I were I reminisce. It's also become a place that people go to the bathroom after the game and scream "Fuck!" really loudly. (It happens) Because no, Legacy is not fun, but it was and I miss that.

[non-inflammable]

Because it all feels the same and that's not fun. I mean I can show up with Stax and make others lives miserable, that's fun, so I do that. You will likely beat my deck because it's bad, but I am going to make sure you regret paying money to play against me. Because watching people grit their teeth in place of masturbating with cantrips is as close to fun as I can find

100% this ^^

It's not a "deck" and it's not even a "color" for me, it's just Brainstorm; I was fine with treasure cruise and dig through time.
Would dig and cruise have been banned if Brainstorm was already banned? Two more victims sacrificed for the "pillar" of Legacy.

It's always brainstorm: it's no other card, it's no other deck, it's no specific color and it's no specific strategy.
#don't be a shill for brainstorm

[Hanni]

Yes.


Because it all feels the same and that's not fun. I mean I can show up with Stax and make others lives miserable, that's fun, so I do that. You will likely beat my deck because it's bad, but I am going to make sure you regret paying money to play against me. Because watching people grit their teeth in place of masturbating with cantrips is as close to fun as I can find in this shadow of what once was a great format.

Legacy has gone from a place where I could enjoy myself to a place I were I reminisce. It's also become a place that people go to the bathroom after the game and scream "Fuck!" really loudly. (It happens) Because no, Legacy is not fun, but it was and I miss that.

Except my friend Michael Coyle has done pretty well playing his Metalworker Stax deck, and made Top 32 at an SCG Open last year with it, so I don’t buy that argument. If you like playing Prison decks, guess what? They're still viable. Moon Stompy has been putting up Top 8 results lately, no?

If you think every matchup feels the same, it's probably because of your local meta. When was the last time you played at a large event where all of your matchups felt the same?

You've expressed that you are a Lands and Stax player, many times. What is it that you miss exactly? Stax is as viable now as it's always been in Legacy... it's not really gotten any better or worse in relation to everything else since I started playing Legacy in 2006. Last time I checked, Lands just made Top 8 at a GP and is one of the best decks in the format. What are you complaining about exactly?

What is so miserable now that wasn't miserable before? What timeframe is "before" to you? You're argument sounds like people are just now starting to play cantrips and you dislike playing against cantrips? News flash dude, cantrips have been a cornerstone of Legacy since it's inception. Solidarity and Threshold were two of the three major pillars of the format from 2005 and onward, and both played a bunch of cantrips. New and better decks have replaced those, obviously, but what has changed? 13 years later, people are still casting cantrips. Why is this all of a sudden a problem for you now? Why wasn't it a problem for you "back when"?

It mostly seems like people miss the old Merfolk, Zoo, Maverick, Goblins metagame. I'm not really sure why, but okay. And it's not like you can't play those decks these days. Goblins made Day 2 at the GP and Maverick made Top 8. Regardless, I personally like the current metagame better than the tons of creature pile matchups, but I digress. By the way, the reason those decks aren't as viable these days has more to do with how much faster and powerful the combo decks of the format have become than it does with the fair blew stew getting better tools. If you want to return to fair creature decks, you need to start banning cards like Show and Tell, Griselbrand/Emrakul, Thespian's Stage, and Tendrils of Agony... not Deathrite Shaman and True-Name Nemesis.

[Dice_Box]

I miss Goblins. Lands is viable, I love it, it's totally pimped and it's my baby. Stax is not a viable deck. One top finish last year does not a viable deck make, nor was that my argument. Stax is fun, I don't play it to win I play with with Sadistic glee. Stax can stay bad for all I care, while it's making Delver players miserable I don't care that it's bad.

Last big event I play at was about two months ago. 70% of the room was some form of combo (Not normal) and I got smashed. Some someone sold me a snack pack at half price because he had to close early so that was a good day for me.

My issue with Legacy is that if I sit down from someone playing Delver, Grixis, 4c, SnT, ANT, Miracles, ect your game plan is the same. You win condition is not and people will argue nuance but I am past that, your all doing the same shit with the same goal. Play the same core cards that do the same core thing with the same core outcome.

Now sure, your going to say SnT and ANT aren't the same deck, argue nuance, but I'm talking about "Tap Island, fiddle myself until I find what I need, shuffle my library." They all do it, it's boring and I'm well past pretending to think anything will change.

These days I show up to play their game. If your going to masturate in public I'm happy to play the role of catholic dad and put a dampener on your fun.

Edit;
Just to point out something, in case anyone misunderstood. I'm not arguing for or against a ban here. My preference is officially untouchable. Regardless of any metric or argument I can make it doesn't matter. So right now, your asking questions and I am answering them. Explaining why I feel like I do. I have no intention of talking about what I want to change because that's no longer relevant, the die has been cast.

On the bright side, there was some closure given to the main topic and for that I am actually very thankful. Legacy is being looked after for those of us who play it with no wish to grow the format, sadly I dont know myself how much longer I will play it. My work roster has changed, I only do nights now and waking up 3 hours early to go and play something I am honestly not enjoying is a tough ask. Knowing nothing will change only quickens my already diminishing enjoyment in this format and at some point games locally will stop firing as the old guard moves away. The local population has already been split over store ownership changes, another stupid reality of this game.

I really honestly miss what we had. All I have ever done was to hold some part of that as it has slipped away like water in my fingertips. I miss the teenager who in 2004 was bitching about not owning Sharpshooter and was desperatly cracking packs to find one. That part of me, it's gone and since then I have watched the soul of Legacy go too.

No, I don't enjoy Legacy as much as I did and now going in takes more effort than ever. I have to travel 4 hours (2 each way) to play. I was willing to do that. I have put in real time and effort, I have really loved this, I have really cared for and about this. But now it's official, the worst part of this format is protected and I can't bring myself to care any more.

I have played once in the last month while watching on my discord more and more people say they will never finish Lands. (Tabernacle buy outs) So now the joy I had, talking to new players and walking them though what I have learnt over years of playing my deck is now a dying light of joy that has flickered out too.

There is nothing left in Legacy that is good. The format is mismanaged, the Reserves list is killing decks and the format is straining under the weight of those who see it as a stock market. And I say this all while owning a deck where the cheapest non foil card in it is Drop of Honey. It's not like I haven't invested myself into this.

I'm just sad, so when you ask are people really disatisfied I guess I just feel driven to answer. Because yes, I do, and that really hurts my soul.

[Hanni]

Well, Dice_Box, I can't argue with any of that. It sounds like you've burned yourself out of Magic in general, and I'm not really sure that there is a solution for that other than quitting for an extended period of time.

Really though, this is something that happens in life. Things that we once were passionate about start becoming dull over time. I've increasingly felt this way about video games. VR reignited my passion for a while, but the quality of current VR games has me back to a waning interest in video games again.

At any rate, hopefully you can find something new to be passionate about... because not having anything that excites oneself makes life extremely boring and miserable.

Sorry for getting this thread way off topic.

#bandeathriteshaman

[BirdsOfParadise]

I got one. What if the meta were:
33% Goblins
27% S&T
20% Team America
20% Miracles

The most played cards are something like 67% FOW, BS, Ponder.

Obviously in that meta you are better off playing BS. 67% of all winning lists play it! If you don't play blue, you are handicapping yourself.
:rolleyes:

See what happens when you suck at math? See how math =/= just arithmetic?

It seems like you are reading into my post things that I did not say. All I said is that it's not tautological that:

[Top N most played spells in their average 1--4 quantities] = [The N spells in the 1--4 quantities that appear in the most played deck].

For this to be true about any given format is not guaranteed. Someone said it was, so I gave a counterexample. I did not say whether it's good or bad, and I didn't commit the fallacy that you correctly debunked previously (about whether you should play Brainstorm) and are now debunking with more attitude while quoting me.

[kombatkiwi]

@Dicebox Yes the reserved list is trash but don't conflate that with everything else
"The format is mismanaged" "The worst part of this format is protected" are not objective statements
I agree with Hanni that it sounds like you're just burned out / bored

"Legacy is being looked after for those of us who play it with no wish to grow the format"
If this is referring to the RL then I obviously agree but if you're talking about BR announcements it seems like a pretty big leap of faith to believe that banning BS/DRS would cause a significant influx of players

[Dice_Box]

No wish to grow was about the tweet that they manage Legacy and Vintage for the players that play it.


Very true, but at this point, Vintage and Legacy are managed ~100% for the people that do play it.
Aaron Forsythe.


As for objective statements, haha ha... I was never claiming to be objective, I was answering a question on if anyone was dissatisfied. At no point was I seeking to claim objectivity. Read the whole post. Haha.

[morgan_coke]

The only correct answer is to ban everything until Astral Slide is viable again. But since that ain't happening the format is just basically fucked forever.

/troll

(but yeah, why the fuck is there not a format where Slide is legal and playable? Seriously, put it in Modern already wotc)

[dte]

(but yeah, why the fuck is there not a format where Slide is legal and playable? Seriously, put it in Modern already wotc)

There is, have a look: http://mtgtop8.com/archetype?a=642&meta=124&f=PEA

[Megadeus]

I agree with much of what Dice said. Many people in our area are burned out on it and only come to hang out with others, half of us don't even like legacy right now. I just continue playing despite knowing that the format is too far gone

[Finn]

Dice_Box, don’t lose track of your magic buddies as you fade from tournament play. There are others who feel as you do. But I just don’t think what drew you to this game will ever go away, and nothing else is good enough to permanently keep you from it.

I’m almost entirely out of competitive play, but my core group of about six players all still brew. We get together a few times a month for Legacy and commander, and we have a mini meta with all the features of a real scene. Magic nirvana. There are others. If you ever find yourself in south Florida, gimme a shout. We will deal you in for the night.

[Ronald Deuce]

Thank the gods all I want to do is Storm. Apparently we're officially green-lit for the forseeable future, whatever that's worth....

[rlesko]

Thank the gods all I want to do is Storm. Apparently we're officially green-lit for the forseeable future, whatever that's worth....

Sort of...until ridiculously overpowered hatebear #37 finally puts the nail in the coffin.

[Nielsie]

I guess I just don't get all of the butthurt about certain cards seeing a higher % than other cards. This will always happen. An eternal format is always going to revolve around the most powerful and efficient cards ever printed. No amount of bannings will change this; all bannings do is change which ones become the highest %.
But where do you draw the line in that case? Why even have a ban list in that case? If you get your toys, I want to get mine too, give me workshop and you keep on casting brainstorms for 3. Don't worry, I am sure the format will adapt...

I fully agree with and feel like Dice. Legacy became boring and utterly stale, at least for people that thought Legacy wasn't Brainstorm-the-format. I was one of those people thinking Legacy was about playing different engines from all over Magic's history: goblins, elves, fish, loam, rituals, bob, metalworker, affinity, mana denial, dredge and sure cantrips and a lot of other stuff. The problem these days is that cantrips are simply the only viable thing to do, maybe together with loaming. Isn't it insane that even something like Bob is outclassed these days? But that's on me, I thought this format had more to offer than just dicking around with cantrips.

To be honest, I don't even know if a Brainstorm ban would actually save legacy. Incredibly stupid stuff like TNN and Leo is also too damaging for a more varied and open playing field. I played Goblins up until the point TNN got released. People thought that hiding behind DRS or Stoneforge would save them but if you knew your deck and match-ups well, you could take a tournament with Goblins. TNN changed this, not only does it stonewall Goblins and utterly destroys them with equipement, the most damaging thing TNN did was making people put crap like Golgari Charm and friends in their sideboards which happen to be pretty good against a random bunch of 1/1's...

[Stevestamopz]

But where do you draw the line in that case? Why even have a ban list in that case? If you get your toys, I want to get mine too, give me workshop and you keep on casting brainstorms for 3. Don't worry, I am sure the format will adapt...

So much this.

[kombatkiwi]

No wish to grow was about the tweet that they manage Legacy and Vintage for the players that play it.


The way I interpret this (and I assume you agree with this interpretation) is that they aren't banning Brainstorm, because 'managing legacy for the players that play it' means 'appealing to the people who already like legacy' meaning 'the people who like Brainstorm'.

I will quote you again:

"Legacy is being looked after for those of us who play it with no wish to grow the format"

If "no wish to grow the format" means "won't ban Brainstorm", how does banning Brainstorm grow the format?

- Nobody who can't afford to buy in currently will suddenly be able to with that change
- Eventually people will figure out the best deck again and everybody will go back to square 1 of complaining. Even if you achieve this holy mecca of 'all random strategies are viable' people will just go and play modern instead because it already is that, and it's cheaper
- People who like Brainstorm could/will leave

With e.g. the Shops discussion you can point to the fact that it warps the format in a way that emphasizes the matchup and lessens the impact of gameplay decisions:
- Shops is the default best deck
- Stock blue deck is probably unfavoured vs Shops
- You can tune your blue deck to be more favoured to beat shops e.g. by replacing cards like Mental Misstep
- The more adjustments like this you make to your blue deck the worse it becomes in the blue mirrors
- A significant (unhealthy) aspect of the metagame becomes 'I prepared to face X deck but I only played against Y'

You could make the same arguments about Chalice decks in legacy, and I would, except the effect isn't as pronounced because those decks aren't as good as vintage Shops

[Zulabnar]

If "no wish to grow the format" means "won't ban Brainstorm", how does banning Brainstorm grow the format?



I believe that to grow the format Wiz has to make more diverisification in deckbuilding and deck strategies.
To cut the conversation, a good way to grow is to make aggro viable again
To do this they have to:
- Print good creature (good rapport cc strenght, and good ability) not blue.
- Slow down of at least 1 turn the efficiency of control\tempo strategies (to permit creature to swing and to play creature with cc > 2)

First Option: Print good creatures

Th last good creatures printed to sprint the race are ..... DELVER and TNN that are Blue. This is pretty stupid, because good creature should be green, or red, not blue. Was a big error. Like printing a green cantrip or counterspell, better than blue existing ones.

Also Wiz printed Eldrazi, that is another pretty stupid move, because You could do the same with existing colors. But at least You have an aggro deck (very unconistant).

The problem is: if WIZ print cheap cc creature they will fit in blue shell deck, generating another aggro\blue deck, that is not what the meta need to grow. The meta needs aggro deck. Player loves aggro deck.




ABout the second option Slow down of at least 1 turn the efficiency of control\tempo strategies
I think that banning brainstorm is a good way to keep control deck a little out of card selection. Nowadays control deck can choose with a lot of cantrips what to draw. The old keeper in T1 draws a lot to control, and was full of tutors to chose the solution. Now the same in legacy, the card selection permitted by ponder\brainstorm\azcanta\Jace\preordain is too much. Infact sometimes also UGx deck does not play Sylvan Library, that was an house for card selection for years (and a good reason to play green) now is no more efficient.

At the same time banning Brainstorm slow down combo decks, for te same reason of card selection.

This is why i think that banning brainstorm is good for legacy -> slow down the format and permit aggro deck to exist.

[Lemnear]

I think that banning brainstorm is a good way to keep control deck a little out of card selection. Nowadays control deck can choose with a lot of cantrips what to draw.

How do you keep decks "out of card selection" if they simply play Preordain+Ponder+Probe? How is that card selection less superior to anything other colors can provide in terms of card selection?

Most of the meta these days is keen on dropping DRS T1 or T2 after double cantripping anyways. How does replacing Brainstorm with Preordain change that? All you do is bringing various clunky combo decks down a tier with next to zero effect on the already dominating decks in the format.

[Megadeus]

https://i.imgur.com/kDHSiEQ.jpg

[Zulabnar]

How do you keep decks "out of card selection" if they simply play Preordain+Ponder+Probe? How is that card selection less superior to anything other colors can provide in terms of card selection?

Most of the meta these days is keen on dropping DRS T1 or T2 after double cantripping anyways. How does replacing Brainstorm with Preordain change that? All you do is bringing various clunky combo decks down a tier with next to zero effect on the already dominating decks in the format.

I don't want to put 0 card selection disrtupting control decks strategy.
Replacing Brainstorm with preordain is a significant lowering on power level of card that does card selection.

Scry 2 and draw 1sorcery is very different from draw 3 and put 2 on the top, istant. This is what i mean in slow down, not stop the motor, just slow down.

Same for combos.

Also some good creatures are needed, to let aggro live, but this maybe is easier once that the meta is slowed.

[rlesko]

I believe that to grow the format Wiz has to make more diverisification in deckbuilding and deck strategies.
To cut the conversation, a good way to grow is to make aggro viable again
To do this they have to:
- Print good creature (good rapport cc strenght, and good ability) not blue.
- Slow down of at least 1 turn the efficiency of control\tempo strategies (to permit creature to swing and to play creature with cc > 2)

First Option: Print good creatures

Th last good creatures printed to sprint the race are ..... DELVER and TNN that are Blue. This is pretty stupid, because good creature should be green, or red, not blue. Was a big error. Like printing a green cantrip or counterspell, better than blue existing ones.

Also Wiz printed Eldrazi, that is another pretty stupid move, because You could do the same with existing colors. But at least You have an aggro deck (very unconistant).

The problem is: if WIZ print cheap cc creature they will fit in blue shell deck, generating another aggro\blue deck, that is not what the meta need to grow. The meta needs aggro deck. Player loves aggro deck.




ABout the second option Slow down of at least 1 turn the efficiency of control\tempo strategies
I think that banning brainstorm is a good way to keep control deck a little out of card selection. Nowadays control deck can choose with a lot of cantrips what to draw. The old keeper in T1 draws a lot to control, and was full of tutors to chose the solution. Now the same in legacy, the card selection permitted by ponder\brainstorm\azcanta\Jace\preordain is too much. Infact sometimes also UGx deck does not play Sylvan Library, that was an house for card selection for years (and a good reason to play green) now is no more efficient.

At the same time banning Brainstorm slow down combo decks, for te same reason of card selection.

This is why i think that banning brainstorm is good for legacy -> slow down the format and permit aggro deck to exist.

Eldrazi and burn are the aggro decks of the format. Perhaps even merfolk. Sorry but, your analysis is pretty wrong. And funny how you said you want a creature to "slow down tempo / control strategies" when that card literally exists (thalia).

Creatures printed after delver- thalia, guardian of thraben, Deathrite shaman, young pyromancer, ediolon of the great revel, gurmag angler, all the eldrazi...

Eldrazi has been a DTB for a while, so not sure what consistency issues you're really talking about.

[taconaut]

Are we really comparing Brainstorm to Mishra's Workshop? :eyebrow:

Also, no one has said Chalice of the Void is killing Legacy - that card is terminally boring and high variance, sure, but it has an important role in that it preys on some of the hyper-efficient strategies that are very good in Legacy. I'd love to see it banned on a personal level, but I understand and appreciate why it isn't.

[Crimhead]

Eldrazi has been a DTB for a while, so not sure what consistency issues you're really talking about.
People have a fallacious notion that the manner in which a deck losses is somehow more important than the frequency in which that deck loses.

[Crimhead]

My issue with Legacy is that if I sit down from someone playing Delver, Grixis, 4c, SnT, ANT, Miracles, ect your game plan is the same. You win condition is not and people will argue nuance but I am past that, your all doing the same shit with the same goal. Play the same core cards that do the same core thing with the same core outcome.

Now sure, your going to say SnT and ANT aren't the same deck, argue nuance, but I'm talking about "Tap Island, fiddle myself until I find what I need, shuffle my library." They all do it, it's boring and I'm well past pretending to think anything will change.
Fiddling with cantrip is not the "game plan" (aka, strategy). How you find the cards you need is purely tactical. Your actual strategy is centered around which cards you are trying to find, and how you employ the cards you do find.

There is nothing nuanced about the differences between ANT and Miracles. They have radically different matches and approach the meta from a radically different angle. One deck has a game plan to blow the opponent out faster than the opponent can stabilise. The other has a game plan to frustrate the opponent and slowly grind them out of resources. Real subtle.

They don't even use cantrip the same. Storm likes cantrips to chain a bunch of spells and up the storm count. Miracles wants to find a good "top deck", often letting it just sit there.



As for objective statements, haha ha... I was never claiming to be objective..
I would say you are making every effort not to be.

That, or you are so flustered with the state of affairs that you've completely lost the ability to think about Legacy in objective terms.

Take a little break. 6-12 months without Legacy and you'll be chomping at the bit to strip your opponent of all their lands and all their creatures. :)

[ScottW]

The entitlement in this thread regarding a children's card game is silly. If you feel too old for magic, that's probably good and it's probably better for is all to quit in the long run. If you find yourself too despondent to continue, count your blessings, sell your well-appreciated cards and just play candyland.

[Balanced]

I sympathize with a lot of the burnt out sentiments I'm seeing. I think the biggest issue I have with how the format is managed at the moment is the lack of transparency from WOTC to the legacy community. I don't play other formats, so maybe this feeling is universal, but as a legacy player I feel like the amount Wizards keeps the community in the dark about is staggering and hard to understand. Why don't B/R updates always have short summaries of their thoughts for every format? Would this hurt anything? Where are general comments about format intentions and health? I don't understand how this sort of communication with the public would hurt WOTC's bottom line at all, and I think players would have more faith in the company and the game. The secondary market may have rises and falls due to comments if they did this sort of thing, but isn't that supposed to be outside of Wizard's concerns anyway? When I see the conspiracy theories about pushing people out of legacy and and vintage toward modern and standard with printings I'm generally skeptical, but the lack of communication with the player base is strange to me and generally makes me feel like Wizard's may have dubious intentions in some regards, even if its just laziness.

As to format health, I see a few problems. When I started playing legacy I felt like there were clear demographics for decks (nuances abound, but still in the minority overall). You could play a blue aggro shell like Delver, where you have consistent card selection and premium counterspells, you could play a blue control shell like Miracles, where you grind harder and have to play tightly to stabilize and beat draws for going over time, you could play combo and accept poor draws to variance and out-right losses to hate from mostly non-blue decks (like Thalia and Leyline of the Void) but you get to have the lottery of occasional unfair insta-wins, or you could play non-blue decks and accept the loss of counterspells and card selection but have the upper hand in card quality (bigger badder dudes, nasty enchantments, wasteland locks, etc). I think a handful of cards have seriously disrupted this balance, and made the appeal for non-blue decks almost non-existent (with perhaps the exception of chalice of the void and blood moon decks, which are specifically targeting the blue meta). Specifically deathrite shaman, true-name nemesis, and monastery mentor. I think Leovold was printed in the wrong colors as well and is an offensive garnish to these other cards, but I don't think he is outright as troublesome.

I don't think true-name nemesis can be banned, as much as I really really hate the card and wish it wasn't printed. I agree with an earlier sentiment that this allows for a slippery slope where cards are banned due to their "fun" factor, and as much as people hate cards like Ponder or Chalice I feel heavily that if you removed these cards and disrupted the ability for people to have their consistency or to have choices in variation of decks ranging from prison to combo that the format would become very stale and/or have much larger swings in variance. I think this is a dark path to tread. The problem with true-name other than its over-the-top lack of interactivity, as has been pointed out, is that this card seriously hurts non true-name aggro strategies. This often means non-blue aggro strategies, as true-name is clearly top tier blue aggro. So what happens? Well, as a non-blue player you sacrificed card selection to play higher quality cards, but now your blue opponent with card selection consistently sees their true-name which completely invalidates your strategies on the ground and is THE higher quality aggro creature. This is intensely frustrating, you've sacrificed card selection and counterspells for power but now you get neither. Then, as an added bonus, your blue opponents also have sideboard cards which invalidate all your aggro dudes because of their own need to deal with other blue player's TNN (mostly in the form of black sweepers currently, which are all intensely effective against non-blue aggro strategies). I don't know how to solve the problem that is this card. Honestly I just want a statement from WOTC admitting that it was an offensive mistake that is regrettably too hard to be made right. I don't think I'll ever get that statement, as again WOTC seems ever reluctant to share their thoughts or intentions with the public.

Deathrite shores up where TNN leaves off. Generally the other angle of attack against blue aggro strategies is their dependency on greedy mana, and deathrite is often a MB outright answer to mana denial strategies. Now not only does my blue opponent have the better badder 3 drop to kill me with, they get the better birds of paradise to accelerate into that 3-drop too, making my hand of 3 wastelands feel woefully inadequate to a turn-1 DRS. But perhaps if you flood the ground with dudes the TNN can't afford to connect? Well then the DRS will ping you to death during the standstill, and TNN will swing in unimpeded in the last turn (or the board of pyros, or anglers, or w/e). Do you pay burn? Your opponent now has 4 must answer threats in the maindeck to your strategy, that also kill you after they stabilize on life. This is the real problem with DRS. Its another cog in the chain of invalidating non-blue strategies, which generally need to fight you on the ground or attack your mana or your life (burn). I also dislike how this card hits Storm and RUG so hard personally, but I don't think these are the real problems with this card.

Monastery Mentor gave blue control the other two pieces of the base strategy triangle: aggro and combo. What are the weaknesses for blue control generally? Inability to close out quickly against fast aggro, or recover when you have a lack of resources. Monastery Mentor can end the game on turn 5 no sweat. This is an intense change in tempo for a control deck. And when you are down to 2 cards in control on an empty board one mentor and a brainstorm can completely end the game for your opponent. Suddenly two cards for control turns into the ability to go wide over 1-2 turns against your aggro opponent, and this is frankly insane. Mentor alone takes every supposed downside of being a blue control shell and removes them. Its one thing to lose to a control deck over 20 turns, another to lose to a lucky Terminus, but it is quite a bad feeling as an aggro creature deck to out grind your control opponent completely only to be overrun by tokens 2 turns later out of no where. The amount of resources a non-blue aggro deck has to put in to accomplish these sort of things in comparison to the blue player is just becoming unreasonable.

So really that's my two cents overall. I don't think the format is un-interactive, or fundamentally broken, but I do think it severely punishes non-blue aggro strategies, or non-blue non-chalice control strategies. Of course you can still win with these decks, legacy has inherently powerful cards and if you have the right selection of cards and your opponent doesn't, or your caliber of play is significantly higher, you'll pull through. But non-blue non-combo players consistently have to look across the table at their blue opponents and see that the blue player is able to negate or excel beyond their own strategies, all while doing so with more consistency and control due to cantrips and counterspells, and often less cards invested (one true name versus a handful of white creatures, one deathrite vs ports and wastelands, one mentor vs... and so on and so on).

I think this is a delicate time for the format. It is starting to become hard to imagine that 3-drops can get any better, and I think printing better non-blue answers is a slippery slope. When cards are doing too much for their cmc I don't think the best approach is to print more cards that do even more than they should for the same or better cmc. Eventually you just get a 1cmc creature that says "Tap,Sac this creature: win the game". I mean, it can be countered, stifled, and plowed. That makes that a reasonable card right? Since the format can technically adapt?

I'm nervous a DRS banning will end up looking like that recent standard banning, where another handful of cards had to be banned as a result of 1-2 cards needing to go. I'm just not clear on where the format should move to when there is a handful of cards that imo should simply not have existed to begin with.

EDIT: As a follow up, I would like to say that I think that eternal formats should be designed to be more than playing the most powerful individual cards in the game. I feel like higher premiums should be put on designing and releasing cards that interact with one another to do busted things, or that create incremental value toward a win. Knight of the Reliquary and Wasteland, Stage and Depths, Vial and Port, etc, all at least require two cards to really begin to feel threatening (even Show and Tell at least requires that you also have another threat in hand, and accepts that your opponent may have something busted to put in as well). Generic cards which often decide the fate of the game on their own like mentor or TNN make the stage of the game uninteresting, stagnant, and harder to interact with as it is much easier to protect a single card than a combination of 2-3. I understand that this is the format for powerful things, but I would also hope as the game has evolved that so would the design and interactions between cards, instead of moving to a format of single card hosers. Lets enjoy the mistakes of the past without increasing their number into the future. My opinion anyway. May you all enjoy any games you play to the utmost :tongue::cool:

[Dice_Box]

I would say you are making every effort not to be.

That, or you are so flustered with the state of affairs that you've completely lost the ability to think about Legacy in objective terms.

Take a little break. 6-12 months without Legacy and you'll be chomping at the bit to strip your opponent of all their lands and all their creatures. :)
Your right, I made no attempt in my "Opinion" piece to be objective. The question was "Is anyone dissatisfied?" not "Does anyone wish to make objective points about a card that can not be touched and bang their head against a wall for no reason at all?"

I see no reason to be objective, we have been told the protection of Legacy's cancer is a subjective choice, because objective stats will have no impact. Don't tell me to be objective anymore, we have been officially told that's not going to mean shit. Its easy to say "Be Objective" when the ref has decided before the game is played who is going to win and you are on the winning side.

Oh and as for time off, if I take 6 months off I honestly feel that at the end of that there will be no Legacy to play locally. Because of both the prementioned split of the player base and because others have decided to tap out for their own separate reasons. Seriously, those of you who live in the states and can drive to SCG or GPs a few times a year have no idea how lucky you are.

[Crimhead]

Its easy to say "Be Objective" when the ref has decided before the game is played who is going to win and you are on the winning side.

Not sure if you mean me...

I don't think I'm on the "winning side" here.

A BS ban shouldn't directly hurt Lands. if anything it would soften the competition (and push combo towards Elves).
I don't agree BS is a cancer - or that the format is even sick at all. But if there is a problem with Legacy (Grixis and Czech being too good), I don't think BS is the right ban.
However, while I don't think BS is currently ban-worthy, I alsolutely don't believe it should be exempt from consideration! Nothing should be. That's not how I want to format to be managed.



Oh and as for time off, if I take 6 months off I honestly feel that at the end of that there will be no Legacy to play locally. Because of both the prementioned split of the player base and because others have decided to tap out for their own separate reasons. Seriously, those of you who live in the states and can drive to SCG or GPs a few times a year have no idea how lucky you are.
Eastern Canada is not the best either. Toronto is a ~20+ hour drive. The biggest event I've been to locally was 64 players, but that was over 5 years ago. I'm lucky to play in a 20 person tournament, the monthlies are usually fewer.

I know I can be abrasive because we disagree so polarly. But I am sorry you are burning out. I appreciate your contributions, and I actually kind of like you. As much as I can like a cantankerous internet stranger whom I have probably pissed off more than once. I hope you can find joy and peace of mind. :)

[Zombie]

When can we get Necro back?

[Lord_Mcdonalds]

When can we get Necro back?

Necro is likely a bad idea, but as someone that loves bad ideas and Necropotence, this.

[Lemnear]

When can we get Necro back?

Turn One Deathrite Shaman, Turn Two Necropotence...

That sounds like a minor upgrade to Liliana, TNN, Leovold & Co.

/s

[Zombie]

Turn One Deathrite Shaman, Turn Two Necropotence...

That sounds like a minor upgrade to Liliana, TNN, Leovold & Co.

/s

I mean we're already sacrificing cards at the altar of one card, and Necro has work experience. Some competition shouldn't hurt... much.

[Dice_Box]

If "no wish to grow the format" means "won't ban Brainstorm", how does banning Brainstorm grow the format?
No wish to grow the format is completely a comment about the tweet quoted and nothing else. It has nothing to do with any cards in the format and everything to do with Aaron stating they manage Legacy only for those who play it. That's a fair statement to me, I do not have anything harsh to say about it but it is an admission that they seek no growth in Legacy. They have placed Legacy in a holding pattern and plan only to do what they have to to keep those who already play it happy. No effort is put in to do anything else. With the price of Tabernacle in mind of late I guess that is a fair thing to do, I mean we have a situation right now where a card in Legacy is worth more than 8 of the power 9. Why grow what you can not support?

Wizards right now only cares about us in as much as they once made a format called Legacy and now they have to keep it on the books. The same way the US keeps the USS Pueblo on the books while its in enemy hands. It really is only symbolic at this point and it would be best for everyone if the issue would just somehow go away. Oh wait, it has, because they have Modern to worry about.

[kombatkiwi]

No wish to grow the format is completely a comment about the tweet quoted and nothing else. It has nothing to do with any cards in the format and everything to do with Aaron stating they manage Legacy only for those who play it. That's a fair statement to me, I do not have anything harsh to say about it but it is an admission that they seek no growth in Legacy. They have placed Legacy in a holding pattern and plan only to do what they have to to keep those who already play it happy. No effort is put in to do anything else. With the price of Tabernacle in mind of late I guess that is a fair thing to do, I mean we have a situation right now where a card in Legacy is worth more than 8 of the power 9. Why grow what you can not support?

Wizards right now only cares about us in as much as they once made a format called Legacy and now they have to keep it on the books. The same way the US keeps the USS Pueblo on the books while its in enemy hands. It really is only symbolic at this point and it would be best for everyone if the issue would just somehow go away. Oh wait, it has, because they have Modern to worry about.

How. Are. Wizards. Supposed. To. Grow. Legacy?

It was heavily implied in your posts that "Legacy cannot grow unless they ban brainstorm"
If this is in fact not what you mean then you need to be more specific

"They have placed legacy in a holding pattern" if you don't mean "they are refusing to ban Brainstorm" then what have they done to place legacy in a holding pattern?

At the moment you're just having a vague sky-is-falling whinge, it's impossible to have a conversation about this with you because you aren't even saying anything

[Dice_Box]

That's because I was answering a question not talking about banning anything. I already said that. If your not going to read my posts don't complain when you don't understand what I am saying.

Question;
Is anyone dissatisfied.

Answer;
Yes, this is why.

You;
What do you mean they have put Legacy into a holding pattern.

Me;
There is a tweet that says at this point that the format is being managed only for those who play it and have no intention of doing more than that.

You;
Wait, aren't you talking about banning Brainstorm.

Me;
No I was talking about the tweet, that of which I have already explained.

You;
Your impossible to understand.

Me;
Then read the part where I said I was answering a question not talking about banning something.

You;
Wait your not talking about Brainstorm.

Me;

I'm not arguing for or against a ban here.

Turns out yea, it's fairly hard to talk to someone when your only reading part of their posts.

[kombatkiwi]

My problem is that you haven't been able to articulate why the tweet (or more specifically the WOTC stance in the tweet) is bad.

Here was my initial assumption of your thought process
1. WotC says "we manage the format for the people that play it"
2. The "people that play it" include people who like Brainstorm (or DRS or whatever)
3. Therefore wizards are stating they won't ban Brainstorm
4. By not banning Brainstorm (or some other card to shake up the format), wizards are limiting the growth of the format, by excluding the vast untapped player pool that hates Brainstorm, or by alienating all the people that dislike Delver mirrors, etc

This argument at least makes sense, the reason why I was trying to take you to task over this is because I think that point 4 is unrealistic/wrong.

Note that by 'growth of the format' I assume we both mean tournament attendance.

However you have since clarified that your disdain for the tweet has nothing to do with whether cards are banned or not. Therefore you must think that the tweet indicates WotC are taking actions (or inactions) to 'place legacy in a growth-stifling holding pattern' other than BR list changes. However you haven't said what you think any of these actions (or inactions) are.
Possible ideas:
- "It means WotC won't change their reserved list policy". Possibly, although WotC stance on this was pretty clear before the tweet and part of making sure legacy remains enjoyable for the 'players that do play it' is ensuring that the game doesn't die, so I don't know if you can even make this connection
- "It means WotC won't design cards with legacy in mind". Possibly, but WotC has basically never done this ever and has never given any indication that they ever would, so I don't know why the tweet would suddenly make you upset
- "It means WotC will de-emphasize legacy tournaments in the tournament schedule". I'm sure that 'players who currently play it' obviously want to play in tournaments, so I don't know if you can reach this conclusion from the tweet

TL:DR If you don't see the tweet as having a connection to BR announcements then I can't understand why you have a problem with it

[Dice_Box]

No wish to grow the format is completely a comment about the tweet quoted and nothing else. It has nothing to do with any cards in the format and everything to do with Aaron stating they manage Legacy only for those who play it. That's a fair statement to me, I do not have anything harsh to say about it but it is an admission that they seek no growth in Legacy. They have placed Legacy in a holding pattern and plan only to do what they have to to keep those who already play it happy. No effort is put in to do anything else. With the price of Tabernacle in mind of late I guess that is a fair thing to do, I mean we have a situation right now where a card in Legacy is worth more than 8 of the power 9. Why grow what you can not support?

Wizards right now only cares about us in as much as they once made a format called Legacy and now they have to keep it on the books. The same way the US keeps the USS Pueblo on the books while its in enemy hands. It really is only symbolic at this point and it would be best for everyone if the issue would just somehow go away. Oh wait, it has, because they have Modern to worry about.

Seriously, read the posts.

[kombatkiwi]

I do not have anything harsh to say about it... Seriously, read the posts.

OK


they seek no growth in Legacy

No effort is put in

Wizards right now only cares about us in as much as

The format is mismanaged

I have watched the soul of Legacy go

There is nothing left in Legacy that is good

NO NEGATIVITY HERE

If WotC decided tomorrow "WOW we need/want to grow legacy", what should they do?
If you can't provide an answer to this then just move along

If you're just bored of legacy then that's fine but don't make posts with claims like "the format is mismanaged" and then retreat behind "hurr durr it's just my opinion dude and actually I have no problem with WotC" when pressed to explain them

[Dice_Box]

they seek no growth in Legacy
Because they do not.


No effort is put in
Because the format is now on the back burner with no hope of change. The format can not be made to grow it is too expensive.


Wizards right now only cares about us in as much as
As much as they have to because they made us long ago when these issues did not exist, now they do and that is a reality that they have adapted to.


The format is mismanaged
Yes it is. I can decide I have 4 kids and don't want any more, then I come home dunk, my wife calls it quits and I lose my family. I both:
a) had no wish of growing my family and
b) was mismanaging my relationship with my family or they would not have left me.

Both can be true at the same time.


I have watched the soul of Legacy go
This was never meant to be a positive statement and came from my opinion piece. I stand by it. What is your point here other than I answered a question about dissatisfaction?


There is nothing left in Legacy that is good
See above.


If WotC decided tomorrow "WOW we need/want to grow legacy", what should they do?
If you can't provide an answer to this then just move along
You want a wish list? Remove the Reserve list, unban Twist, Gobo and Earthcraft, Ban Brainstorm and TNN, release a public apology for printing TNN and then set up a 9 person committee (Of which I would not like to be on) of great Legacy players (because I am a bad player) to manage the list. I would also do that for Vintage. Said committees must release a statement about how they view the future of the format every 3 months. Transparency.


If you're just bored of legacy then that's fine but don't make posts with claims like "the format is mismanaged" and then retreat behind "hurr durr it's just my opinion dude and actually I have no problem with WotC" when pressed to explain them
Read the dam posts and stop making me point out every dam time I was either answering a question or had already made the point you where attacking. No one is making you constantly read over my comments, I have quoted myself to comments you are asking of me time and time again. Reading the car... post explains the post. Dam.

Look, someone asked something, I answered. If you have an issue with that post fine, it was not for you anyway. If you have an issue with my views on the list that is also fine, I am not longer debating those views as it no longer matters. That choice has been made and articulated. That conversation is over. Its not me wanting to shut you down or not answer you, its a statement of fact made by Wizards.

I never claimed a lack of negativity about how I thought the format was handled, but I have no issue with the statement that Wizards feels they are unable to grow Legacy. Do you understand me now? Yes? No? It's time for a beer maybe?

[kombatkiwi]

You want a wish list? Remove the Reserve list, unban Twist, Gobo and Earthcraft, Ban Brainstorm and TNN, release a public apology for printing TNN and then set up a 9 person committee (Of which I would not like to be on) of great Legacy players (because I am a bad player) to manage the list. I would also do that for Vintage. Said committees must release a statement about how they view the future of the format every 3 months. Transparency.

This is all I wanted

I totally agree that reserved list needs to go but the last time I talked to WotC staff they said their hands are tied by the legal shit so I am unsure to what extent present-day wotc can be held accountable for changing this. Of all your suggestions I think this is the only one that would actually cause format growth. Unbanning those cards (while almost certainly the correct decision) won't change anything. A public apology for printing a card is just an excuse for a handful of enfranchised players to fellate themselves. Banning Brainstorm would likely cause a number of enfranchised players to leave, some non-legacy players may be attracted to Brainstorm gameplay and lose interest, and the majority of the others that would really want to play in non-Brainstorm legacy are still kept out by the financial barrier.

and now for some post reading:

No wish to grow the format is completely a comment about the tweet quoted and nothing else. It has nothing to do with any cards in the format and everything to do with Aaron stating they manage Legacy only for those who play it.

Me: we need/want to grow legacy", what should they do?


unban Twist, Gobo and Earthcraft, Ban Brainstorm and TNN

Here's another good one


I never claimed a lack of negativity about how I thought the format was handled


...they manage Legacy only for those who play it. That's a fair statement to me, I do not have anything harsh to say about it

Maybe there's some way this all makes sense in your head but hopefully you can see why I feel I'm being led around in circles

[Dice_Box]

[QUOTE]No wish to grow the format is completely a comment about the tweet quoted and nothing else. It has nothing to do with any cards in the format and everything to do with Aaron stating they manage Legacy only for those who play it.

Me: we need/want to grow legacy", what should they do?
Get rid of the list. Its the only option. Other than that do what they have chosen to do, let us go.




I never claimed a lack of negativity about how I thought the format was handled


...they manage Legacy only for those who play it. That's a fair statement to me, I do not have anything harsh to say about it

Maybe there's some way this all makes sense in your head but hopefully you can see why I feel I'm being led around in circles

Yes it is. I can decide I have 4 kids and don't want any more, then I come home dunk, my wife calls it quits and I lose my family. I both:
a) had no wish of growing my family and
b) was mismanaging my relationship with my family or they would not have left me.

Both can be true at the same time.
I do not like how the format itself is handled (The idea that a card is now given the "Pillar" treatment) but I have no issue with a lack of desire to grow a format they can not support with the cards we require. I am sure I have made both points time and time again.


I totally agree that reserved list needs to go but the last time I talked to WotC staff they said their hands are tied by the legal shit so I am unsure to what extent present-day wotc can be held accountable for changing this.
Yep, fuck that list. The worst part are the morons that say "Well if your not invested you don't get a say". Then I post a picture of my Duels and Power while stating get rid of that thing and they shut up.

The worst part of it is that I do not think its all Wizards fault. I sold the Duels I do not use last year, but I had a set of 40 that I often used a handful of and lent out a handful more. That made me part of the issue. Yes, I owned those cards just to play with and not to hoard but while they are in a box at home and not seeing play what do my intentions really matter? I only play two decks with Duels in them so even if the others are 'For play' I am still part of the problem.

Then add those who do hoard with a hope of making a profit... I do feel like a lot of pressure could be taken off the format if those two issues stopped happening. But hey, that's wishful thinking.

[Stevestamopz]

On the topic of the Reserved List, a classic meme from a classic time.

https://i.imgur.com/HceSZDal.jpg

[kombatkiwi]

@Stevestamopz all of those make too much sense, there needs to be a 4th panel like "the New World Order of MTG isn't just a design philosophy and WotC is the actual new world order; the deepstate/illuminati want to suppress subversive messages in reserved list cards such as 'Jihad' or 'Pyramids'"

[tescrin]

Honestly, I think the format is very accessible..

For badlands, plateau, taiga, and scrubland.

Honestly, if WotC made a couple WR,, BR, WG, and WB powerhouses you could get a player-boost a la Eldrazi, where a cheap accessible deck exists for awhile. The cards would eventually go up, but there you go. And by powerhouses, I mean things that are awkward for the Blue shell that are must-kill/Force bombs. Something like "RG - Goblin, Haste, 2/1, Destroy Target Island on ETB"

That guy right there. You just shat on the format *pretty hard*

________________
That said, the format *is* growing. There's no way it's not as several singles in the last few months have been spiking quite a bit; and they're regular staples like Snapcaster, USea, Dark Confidant (?!), Chains of Meph (?!), and a bunch of others. I can't imagine such regular staples that saw dips would be spiking if it were the same player base as a little bit ago.

I'm just hoping they stop spamming Goyf printings long enough that he goes up for a short time.

[JDK]

@tescrin
"Honestly, I think the format is very accessible.."
If you don't like winning, you mean?

"RG - Goblin, Haste, 2/1, Destroy Target Island on ETB"
Yup, sounds reasonable with Cavern floating around...as if Goblins had a problem with Island to begin with...is there someone whispering DRS in the background?

"I can't imagine such regular staples that saw dips would be spiking if it were the same player base as a little bit ago."
You really cannot imagine the following: In the recent months and years more and more people jumped on the speculation train and bought cards in either fear of spikes or hopes of spikes, especially when it comes to RL cards.

Also, don't confuse Modern and EDH impact with Legacy.

[Lemnear]

Honestly, I think the format is very accessible..

For badlands, plateau, taiga, and scrubland.

Honestly, if WotC made a couple WR,, BR, WG, and WB powerhouses you could get a player-boost a la Eldrazi.

Please, don't get me wrong, but we are waiting for a new, non-splashable creature powerhouse to be released since Knight of the Reliquary. Every time they tried, the card was either not good enough or straight absorbed by the blue shell. You can't even bank on colors anymore to offer a restriction with DRS removing potential color issues completely.

I neither think we fix anything, if we simply make other RL cards more expensive either.

[Crimhead]

"RG - Goblin, Haste, 2/1, Destroy Target Island on ETB"
Yup, sounds reasonable with Cavern floating around...as if Goblins had a problem with Island to begin with...is there someone whispering DRS in the background?
Exile instead.

And a "fixed" Recruiter (cap on stacking). And a legendary land that taps for :r::r: but only casts Goblin spells.

[Lemnear]

Exile instead.

And a "fixed" Recruiter (cap on stacking). And a legendary land that taps for :r::r: but only casts Goblin spells.

Instigator approves

[non-inflammable]

Banning Brainstorm would likely cause a number of enfranchised players to leave...
and the majority of the others that would really want to play in non-Brainstorm legacy are still kept out by the financial barrier.

Those two statements conflict. i know my tundras are worth way less after the top ban.


@tescrin
"Honestly, I think the format is very accessible.."
scrubland, taiga, badlands, savannah, etc...

If you don't like winning, you mean?.

after the brainstorm ban and blue duals drop in price, we'll have an "accessible" format?

cavern of souls and LOTS of other non RL cards costs just as much as a HP scrubland, taiga, badlands, savannah, etc...
Are people crying about paying almost $100 for their 3 fulminator mages they need to combat TRON? no...

Savannah can be had for less than $50 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Savannah-Revised-MTG/152957803838?hash=item239cfedd3e:g:anIAAOSwWqpattL~
Badlands can be had for less than $60 (really) https://www.ebay.com/itm/Magic-The-Gathering-MTG-Revised-Badlands-LP-Dual-Land/323084483487?hash=item4b3955fb9f:g:210AAOSwG7Faig1k
Unlimited Taiga can be had for $40 https://www.ebay.com/itm/MTG-Unlimited-TAIGA-Dual-Land-Red-Green-Land-Rare-Played-Condition/123033402943?hash=item1ca55cbe3f:g:BasAAOSwupRasm3I
plateau can be had for $43 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Plateau-Dual-Land-Magic-the-Gathering-MTG-Revised-HP-Heavily-Played/352266475163?hash=item5204b7d69b:g:-HQAAOSwQN5abTV2

There are so many more examples where these cards are accessible.
Get ready for it: I just sold an italian tabernacle in SP condition for $600 to a yugioh player that converted to EDH, yeah bitches...

I just top 4'd my local legacy event (D&T) with no duals. the top 2 was grixis delver :rolleyes: and burn (no duals).
A local teen-ager at the LGS almost made money at an SCG NJ event playing miracles with all shock lands. The people he did beat were pissed...

The sky is falling and it's inaccessible is a falsehood that only bears out any truth by pointing to a handful of cards.

Give us back top, do a prisoner exchange or two and ban brainstorm...

[JDK]

after the brainstorm ban and blue duals drop in price, we'll have an "accessible" format?
This was not part of the post I replied to, but sure, let's dive into this.
Do you honestly thing blue will take such a hit that the duals somehow get to the level of Plateau, a land seeing pretty much no play whatsoever? I confidently say "no".


cavern of souls and LOTS of other non RL cards costs just as much as a HP scrubland, taiga, badlands, savannah, etc...
Are people crying about paying almost $100 for their 3 fulminator mages they need to combat TRON? no...

Savannah can be had for less than $50 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Savannah-Revised-MTG/152957803838?hash=item239cfedd3e:g:anIAAOSwWqpattL~
Badlands can be had for less than $60 (really) https://www.ebay.com/itm/Magic-The-Gathering-MTG-Revised-Badlands-LP-Dual-Land/323084483487?hash=item4b3955fb9f:g:210AAOSwG7Faig1k
Unlimited Taiga can be had for $40 https://www.ebay.com/itm/MTG-Unlimited-TAIGA-Dual-Land-Red-Green-Land-Rare-Played-Condition/123033402943?hash=item1ca55cbe3f:g:BasAAOSwupRasm3I
plateau can be had for $43 https://www.ebay.com/itm/Plateau-Dual-Land-Magic-the-Gathering-MTG-Revised-HP-Heavily-Played/352266475163?hash=item5204b7d69b:g:-HQAAOSwQN5abTV2

There are so many more examples where these cards are accessible.


Get ready for it: I just sold an italian tabernacle in SP condition for $600 to a yugioh player that converted to EDH, yeah bitches...


I just top 4'd my local legacy event (D&T) with no duals. the top 2 was grixis delver :rolleyes: and burn (no duals).
A local teen-ager at the LGS almost made money at an SCG NJ event playing miracles with all shock lands. His opponents were pissed...

The sky is falling and it's inaccessible is a falsehood that only bears out any truth by pointing to a handful of cards.

Give us back top, do some prisoner exchange and ban brainstorm...
So because there are some exceptions (DnT isn't cheap either), it's competitive or even close to "full-fledged" decks?
If we stick to your prediction of a price drop for blue duals, if Brainstorm gets banned, don't you think other duals will go up in price? They are still on the RL. Their demand will increase.

Funny sidenote: I just bought a Tabernacle for 600€ last week.

[Lemnear]

Pls guys, it can't be the argument that the longterm health of Legacy should be achieved by bannings in order to lower the demand on certain RL cards to counter the nonstop price spiral caused by buyouts.

[Ronald Deuce]

If we stick to your prediction of a price drop for blue duals, if Brainstorm gets banned, don't you think other duals will go up in price? They are still on the RL. Their demand will increase.

Only Taiga. All Spells doesn't play duals.

[JDK]

Pls guys, it can't be the argument that the longterm health of Legacy should be achieved by bannings in order to lower the demand on certain RL cards to counter the nonstop price spiral caused by buyouts.
I hope you didn't interpret THAT while reading my posts. I am a strong proponent of ditching the RL.


Only Taiga. All Spells doesn't play duals.
I got the joke, but still...All Spells is one of the worst decks in Legacy...and it would still be, if BS gets banned. XD

[Lemnear]

I am a strong proponent of ditching the RL

Then you are in good company with pretty much every Legacy player, I guess. I am quite certain that the only people interrested in keeping the RL list are the ones trying to protect their "investment" aka stores, speculators, flippers and hoarders who look at MTG as a stockmarket on training wheels

[JDK]

100% agreed.

[janchu88]

well,

i got wastelanded out of the game by the 4 color deck and while in top deck mode after hymn, snapcaster hymn played with the Help of 2 DRS providing the mana, plus i had to discard 4 consecutive turns at instant speed during my draw step thanks to kolaghans command + snapcaster command. - "brought to you DRS"

Without DRS the game would have gone a completely different direction, but its all about the turn f***** DRS and who manages to stick it first. What you serve along is just a matter of taste

my 2 cents and 5 minutes of losing it

[Lord Seth]

No wish to grow the format is completely a comment about the tweet quoted and nothing else. It has nothing to do with any cards in the format and everything to do with Aaron stating they manage Legacy only for those who play it. That's a fair statement to me, I do not have anything harsh to say about it but it is an admission that they seek no growth in Legacy. They have placed Legacy in a holding pattern and plan only to do what they have to to keep those who already play it happy. No effort is put in to do anything else. With the price of Tabernacle in mind of late I guess that is a fair thing to do, I mean we have a situation right now where a card in Legacy is worth more than 8 of the power 9. Why grow what you can not support?Is Tabernacle the second most expensive card in the game now, actually? (for the purpose of this discussion, a card's price is determined by the cheapest tournament-legal version of it) From what I can tell, only Black Lotus beats its current $2,000 pricetag.

Granted, I doubt Tabernacle will hold that, but it's surprising to see it be at #2, even if it's only there for a short period. Or is there another card I'm overlooking?

[Vissah]

How about just banning Duals if they are to pussy to get rid of the reserved list.