[Free article] Constructed Criticism The Defining Forces of Legacy

[stacker]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/standard/19292_Constructed_Criticism_The_Defining_Forces_of_Legacy.html

I'm seriously glad I don't have SCG premium, because how can anyone pay this guy to shit out a gem like this. I'm trying to play and learn Reanimator up to GP Columbus, and so I scroll down to the middle of this article and see Gerry's winning decklist and think to myself, oh hey may be I can learn something from Todd Anderson. He knows a lot about legacy, right?

I'll post what I posted on their forums, which is a paraphrased summary of this vomit.

'I drove 5 hours to borrow a bad standard deck that I didn't want to play, I really wanted to play with walkers I swear but boy are they expensive!'

'The winning legacy deck was good I wouldnt change a thing, I mean deep analysis and minamo in Reanimator? I won't talk about why or anything but they're amazing!'

'Goblins is bad it will never win a tourney, I mean look at all the broken things reanimator does'

'I scooped to moat when playing goblins on sunday because really, matron for sgc? Who woulda thought?'

This is an actual quote: "This is one of the reasons why I really hate Vintage, since it usually just depends on who has the better draw. I mean, if two combo decks are battling and both have broken combos backed up with Force of Will, where is the skill involved? If the only decision that matters is whether or not to mulligan, I don't consider that a real format."

'So in closing, I plan to play the standard and legacy decks that won SCG ATL (I won't mention ANT because I think that deck involves math), hopefully I will be able to buy all these expensive cards to play with'

Utter garbage.

[yankeedave]

Yeah, I only read Todd's articles to see how much he can flex he epeen, and as he bombed out this weekend, he didnt get to, so he complained about how bad Eternal formats are instead. Nice of him to run it down to all the people thinking of starting out in Legacy. He admits 0 knowledge of the format, yet makes sweeping statements. This is the Anderson I have come to expect.

[practical joke]

It might be me,

but he has serious L2P issues.

Also has no clue about legacy at all!
His credibility is non-existant.

@yankeedave: he does mention that legacy is a very healthy format. He just hates vintage but likes legacy.

I agree with stacker, The quotes you made could've been mine. ( if they aren't)

The stupidity they write on legacy at both SCG and channelfireball is of the same level as little kids running into a brick wall just to catch the light.

[yankeedave]

Indeed, you are correct, but he does state that "but I have never been the biggest fan of eternal formats in general due to their degeneracy."

[Rune]

I didn't like this article very much. I agree with OP, it did seem like a big pile of whine and ignorant statements. People who don't know Legacy and read it will definitely get some messed up impressions.

[jazzykat]

I hope he doesn't get compensated for writing. Also I hope I meet him one day so I can say the following to his face.

His writing is not wholly truthful and presents a distorted view of Legacy.

I have found one of reanimator's worst matchups to be Rb goblins because they have stingscourger that can be cheated into play, weirding that can be tutored for, and sometimes earwig squad.

One of his losses was to Belcher, REALLY? A mid-range aggro deck loses to a glass cannon combo dec, when did you hear that happening?

IMO the best strategys are always the ones that can disregard your opponent as much as possible.

Regarding cost , all the planeswalkers he wants cost a bunch too and I bet they won't be worth much after the rotation. Legacy staples often retain
their value.

His arguments are greatly conflicted and generally poorly constructed.

[Dilettante]

Agreed with your comments on cost, Jazzy. He talks about cost... and I worry about retained value. A Legacy deck built ~4 years ago cost me... ~$150 to build, I still use with around $5-10 in improvements since then. If I sold off the pieces now, I'd probably fetch about $400, but is still a valid deck for me to play. I certainly didn't lose money over time collecting and retaining staples. I trade chase standard rares for Legacy staples but keep what I feel would retain their value and never look back (like trading Chinese M10 lands for entombs at the beginning of the year and a foil Chinese Lotus Cobra for about 2 dozen APAC/Eurolands). Standard in most cases is an expense (since there tends to be a price creep for 'standard staples'). Legacy in many cases is retained earnings. What decks in Legacy have lost in value over the last few years? Goblins and Merfolk are relatively retaining. Dredge players should be happy that their LEDs have shot up from $5 store binder staples only used with IGGy Pop and Salvagers to $40ish, though most of the deck's value has been static. My buddy Lego who I 'sold' a playset of Loyal Retainers to at my cost is ecstatic =P

He also talks about the 'degeneracy' of the format... without going into details besides not being able to bring a white weenie deck to a tourney and expect to win, then talks about deck variety. He's conflicting himself without a single clear line of thought.

He talks about the advantages of his black splash against one matchup, but fails to talk about the rammifications of not splashing other colors for different advantages (Krosan Grip, anyone?).

[DragoFireheart]

So in short, the article is really bad, nonsensical and commits brain drain?

[practical joke]

in short: yeah

[Nightmare]

I wrote:


It's rare for me that I feel the need to log in to the forums and comment on an article. In fact, the last time I did so was Chris Dube's article http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/18201_Feature_Article_Legacy_Meta_What.html, which was only slightly less good than this one.

I will admit that I have a vested interest in the promotion of Legacy. That being said, I cannot believe that the editors of Star City Games are willing to attach their own brand to this kind of intellectual dishonesty, or that the proprietors of SCG are willing to pay out money for such a complete waste of their patrons' time.

This article does not provide any substance whatsoever. It consists of a half-article about how some guy went to a tournament unprepared - with no deck, no testing, and no insight. He failed to perform, as we could expect, and blamed the loss on everything but his own lack of preparation - which is as much a necessary skill for this game as any. He follows that up with another half-article about the next event - again, no deck, no testing, no insight - but this time he played "Goblins because it won the last event." He follows up his three sentence tournament report with a diatribe about how much Legacy sucks, now that he has seven WHOLE ROUNDS of experience with it.

If this is the type of article we can expect from the Star City writers, you guys can go ahead and cancel my premium account today. Consider me an unhappy customer - and from the looks of things, I'm not alone.

[Malakai]

His arguments are flimsy because he's not arguing; he's whining. You didn't win. You didn't win because you were completely unprepared, didn't playtest, and had little knowledge of the format. This is true of every format.

That you bothered to have that article published is shameful, and scg should be embarrassed.

[bakofried]

Hell, Mono-R Goblins take Reanimator. All of the removal is uncounterable, so Iona really doesn't do much. I'll admit Rb has a better MU, but all Goblin decks have a fighting chance.
Plus, that article sucked balls.

[(nameless one)]

Its funny because this other guy Top 8ed on the same tournament with the same deck archetype. The only difference is this other guy barely plays Magic but it looks like he did do his homework: http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?17445-Rb-Goblins-Top-8-at-SCG-Atlanta

I guess whining online makes you feel better. I mean I am whining about how poorly made that article was made online and I already feel better.

[markbris]

It might be me,

but he has serious L2P issues.

Also has no clue about legacy at all!
His credibility is non-existant.

@yankeedave: he does mention that legacy is a very healthy format. He just hates vintage but likes legacy.

I agree with stacker, The quotes you made could've been mine. ( if they aren't)

The stupidity they write on legacy at both SCG and channelfireball is of the same level as little kids running into a brick wall just to catch the light.

What does L2P issues mean if you don't mind?

[rleader]

^ Some of his biggest detractors have taken issue with a series of articles he wrote where it was basically one tournament report after another that he just wrote up as "bad luck."

Of course, getting matched up with belcher was bad luck too. But somehow it's the format's fault.

[ramanujan]

I have the following response to the article.

Thank you for showing the legacy community a complete understanding of the format. It is really quite amazing that you were able to derive the entire nature of this format with so little experience and preparation, especially given how well you did in the tournament. I am so glad that I paid money to read such a well thought out article that was so in depth. I really hope that your supreme intuition in the face of failure will continue to be represented at one of the most esteemed Magic the Gathering websites. You have given something back to the community by writing this article. I especially enjoyed how you described a lack of interaction in the format, that was certainly news to me.

-Peace

[DalkonCledwin]

I am so glad that I paid money to read such a well thought out article that was so in depth.

The Article was free... i.e. not a premium article. Thus you didn't pay money for it.

As for my opinion of the Article. I personally think that given how poorly he did with as little preparation as he had, he probably would have been better off NOT writing the article. But that is just my opinion.

[Jak]

The Article was free... i.e. not a premium article. Thus you didn't pay money for it.

As for my opinion of the Article. I personally think that given how poorly he did with as little preparation as he had, he probably would have been better off NOT writing the article. But that is just my opinion.

Premium account holders pay SCG and SCG pays its writers. You are essentially paying him.

[DalkonCledwin]

Premium account holders pay SCG and SCG pays its writers. You are essentially paying him.

fair point, and I don't know if this author actually writes Premium articles or not. But I would wager that if he doesn't he isn't payed nearly as much as those authors who do write them. But that is just my guess.

Either way, since the article is free, only those people with premium accounts are actually paying Star City Games any money for the article, and there is about as likely a chance that their money is going towards this particular article as there is that it is going towards any of the other articles written in the given month.

[rleader]

he probably would have been better off NOT writing the article. But that is just my opinion.

Well, he really didn't have much of a choice; that's the drawback of having columnists instead of soliciting freelancers.

OTOH, my least favorite column there is the budget one, though. I can't really think of a market it's serving. It's not at all like the dailymtg column (especially back when Ben wrote it) where they take the builds in direct competition with tier 1 archetypes to see what happens. Neither is it quietspeculation material. It's just "here are some cheap cards that most people don't play."

At least Todd doesn't end all his articles with a quote like "don't make the loser choice!"

[Meekrab]

Goblins isn't a deck I would ever play in the format again if I had another choice, since it contains neither a broken combo nor Force of Will, which really means you are probably going to lose
LOL


I have a serious problem with a format where the goal is to do the most broken thing possible so that there is no real Magic going on. This is one of the reasons why I really hate Vintage, since it usually just depends on who has the better draw. I mean, if two combo decks are battling and both have broken combos backed up with Force of Will, where is the skill involved?
This gets published on the same website where Stephen Menendian has a weekly column heralding the virtues of broken-ass Magical cards?

All in all I've never skimmed a more worthless rant disguised as a strategy article.

[Forbiddian]

I guess I'll jump on the bandwagon: The article made me puke in my mouth.

[grover1522]

I happened to be sitting near Todd when he was writing down his decklist for Legacy at the open in Atlanta. I was laughing inside at some of the stuff he was saying about Legacy. Then I read this article and started laughing some more. He has no idea what he is talking about. He was right about one thing though, the endless meat at FOGO is awesome.

[hungryLIKEALION]

Good god, this article is pure, unadulterated shit. I don't even know the last time I read a piece of writing about magic that was quite this level of bad...

Todd Anderson, you suck. Don't write about formats that you know nothing about.

[Jak]

The thing that always annoys me is the comments from people hating on Legacy players as if they are in some sort of cult. It happens everytime some players respond to an article about how Legacy.


I'm certainly no Todd barn by any means but the hate is pretty ridic. He needed something to write about by the deadline so fine, maybe the article is a little loose. I'm not sure how I can possibly defend the article but the insane OMG I LOVE LEGACY people are tilting me. It's a free article, you'll read much worse I promise.


Wow, Legacy is a massive sacred cow to a lot of players.


what 's up with you all legacy lovers. you invested tons of FOW online and tabernacles in real life that any argument against it makes you mad? cant you even stand the idea that someone can find that format stupid,and deranged? Does everybody have to agree with you? tons of writers write against t2 or extended without any problem but when they touch your precious legacy, you all revolt.


Stop being such cliqueish d-bags and educate non-Legacy players about the format. In fact, Cedric, I challenge you that your next article should be about introducing laymen such as myself into the wonderful world of Legacy. Because, the way I see it...it's about who has the FoWs and the Dazes in their hand, and from what I've gathered from other non-Legacy players, they think the same way.

Last one is my favorite.

[Aggro_zombies]

Don't you get Sphinx against Goblins? I mean, Vial, Lackey, Incinerator, and Stingscourger all hose Iona, and that's just in the mono-colored version. I mean, yeah, turn one Iona kills them if they don't have Vial, but if you're on the draw or they had the Vial, Sphinx of the Steel Wind seems so much better. They can't really race you gaining 12 life every two turns and pro: red means you can just save all your counters for Wierding.

EDIT: To address the article directly: yeah, he was whining, but he kinda has a point, which is that the best strategies in Legacy are the ones least interested in fighting fairly. (in b4 flame war over Max's article)

EDIT 2: I mean, Sphinx against :b::r: Goblins. Iona seems correct against mono-red if you get it down ahead of Vial.

[Meekrab]

I like that he included Daze along with FoW. Because they're even close to the same power level, you know?

[Aggro_zombies]

I like that he included Daze along with FoW. Because they're even close to the same power level, you know?
In the first two to three turns, yeah, they are. Just the threat of Daze slows the other guy down a lot.

[Amon Amarth]

Is it me or was there some mega cognitive dissonance going on in that article?

Edit: I still don't understand how Todd's myopic viewpoint is still being spouted off every week in articles. Basing a deck's strength off of some vague sense of how "fair" or "unfair" it is is counterproductive at best. Those terms are worthless.

[Forbiddian]

Is it me or was there some mega cognitive dissonance going on in that article?

Edit: I still don't understand how Todd's myopic viewpoint is still being spouted off every week in articles. Basing a deck's strength off of some vague sense of how "fair" or "unfair" it is is counterproductive at best. Those terms are worthless.

Wow, that argument against Todd was short and completely obliterated his pathetic article.

Must be unfair to use that tactic in a debate.

[Cthuloo]

Wow, that argument against Todd was short and completely obliterated his pathetic article.

Must be unfair to use that tactic in a debate.

Stay tuned for "Debating is Miserable", coming next week.

[the Thin White Duke]

"...I have never been the biggest fan of eternal formats in general due to their degeneracy."

Wow. I've heard and thought myself a lot of different things about the state of Legacy, but degenerate?
I hate to pile on...but...
Degenerate? Legacy?? Really??

"...the format is starting to warp towards decks that are too powerful for fair decks to handle."

"Fair" decks? A third grader has sense enough to tell this guy to quit his bitching.
Ugh...

[Meekrab]

Nobody has purposely built a 'fair' Mt:G deck since people figured out Necropotence was broken.

In like, 1996.

Grow up, Standard players.

[Skeggi]

The silly thing, I think, is that Standard players don't seem to realize most Legacy players also started out as Standard players. But most of us just grew tired of the format, wanted more interaction and a deeper, richer Magic game. So we went to Legacy. At least, for me, that's the case. So I don't understand why Standard players are giving Legacy players a hard time, while it actually should be the other way around. Standard is too simple, seriously. It is simply beneath most of us. You might as well play Settlers of Catan if you want to play a game which requires little intellect and has a large luck factor. Simple games; not my interest. The Legacy player seeks to challenge his mind. Legacy has so many itterations it's hard for a beginner (Standard player) to see. What they don't understand, they talk down. That's basically the problem I think. The fact that they don't understand is not that they're stupid, they don't understand because they've never developped a real interest because they don't want to spend the money required to play Legacy. But we all know that's a weird argument too, because playing Standard in the long run will simply cost you alot more than playing Legacy in the long run.

TLDR: Legacy > Standard.

We've had the discussion at our local scene too, ofcourse. Me and a few friends always play Legacy, and most players sit at the café and draft. They figured we weren't good enough to draft and that's why we played Legacy, small player pool, easier to get to the top. So we proved them wrong by joining a draft a couple of times. We did well, showing that we're not complete dolts. Now the drafters/standard players are showing interest in Legacy too, some even attend a Legacy tournament every once in a while. To bridge the gap between Standard and Legacy players, I think we also need to show we can play a game of Standard/draft.

[Meekrab]

It's not that they don't want to spend the money, its that they've never played a format that wasn't Tarmogoyf versus Baneslayer versus Merfolk versus Vampires. I mean Storm was last printed in 2006, four Standard rotations ago. Entomb was printed in 2001. Force of Will was printed while the Smashing Pumpkins were the biggest band in the world. Our format just isn't relevant to teenagers. That's the problem we're facing here.

[eq.firemind]

It seems like SSG masturbates on UnfairLegacy.deck and especially Reanimator as the favorite one.

[Skeggi]

It seems like SSG masturbates on UnfairLegacy.deck and especially Reanimator as the favorite one.
Shows how much they know, right? :smile:

This guy also made me giggle:


So, I don't play Legacy, but I would have thought that the ranking of 'can interact with combo' would go like this:

1. Blue
2. Black
3. White
4. Green
5. Red

Do the cards in Black that are good against combo go in Goblins? Maybe not, but that doesn't mean that they're not available. What am I missing here?

For someone who admits knowing nothing of Legacy, this is quite a bold - and wrong on so many levels - statement. Although he is asking what he is missing. But I guess we could write a book on what this guy apparently is missing.

[practical joke]

I really, really would like to dress up like a goblin piledriver, barge his house, force him to a game of magic and then start with a mountain, lackey, go!

Also skeggi, don't forget the standard pro's that shout that we can't play standard and such. (kv)
I can't wait till nationals. ( qualified by winning a 78 player standard tournament)

I started with legacy and am still ignoring standard untill nationals for now.

[Skeggi]

Also skeggi, don't forget the standard pro's that shout that we can't play standard and such. (kv)
Yeah, alot of people from KV come to the cafe I frequent at. A few are coming around :smile:

[practical joke]

I know,

some are still complete asses.

[Dilettante]

Wow, that argument against Todd was short and completely obliterated his pathetic article.

Must be unfair to use that tactic in a debate.

Jon Stewart got a decades-long 'debate show' canceled with: "You're on CNN. The show that leads into me is puppets making crank phone calls."

[Nelis]

I know,

some are still complete asses.

Most are.

[General_Norris]

Plaing fair in torunaments. =/

I mean, stupid article is stupid

[DragoFireheart]

What I don't understand is why he would make it apparent to us that he has little experience in legacy and will then turn around and began to bash the format as if it has devolved into "degeneracy". Is it purposely trying to get people to hate on him or something?

[Resist_Temptation]

Hah. I find this article to be grade-A horse-shit. I actually started playing Legacy because I could not afford to keep up with standard and a one time investment will get me enough cards to rotate between two or three competitive decks. He has no idea what is going on. "Please write an article to explain this format to us non-legacy players."
Not word for word because I was too lazy to find it. That makes me laugh...maybe he could just start playing the format and eventually picking it up just like the rest of us...

[DalkonCledwin]

"Please write an article to explain this format to us non-legacy players."
Not word for word because I was too lazy to find it. That makes me laugh...maybe he could just start playing the format and eventually picking it up just like the rest of us...

To Todd Anderson's credit, the person you are paraphrasing above... was not Todd Anderson. Todd Anderson was in fact attempting on some level to learn the format. Even if he went about it in a terrible way.

[Resist_Temptation]

Then that was my bad. I am man enough to admit when I'm wrong, but his article still made me laugh.

[Artowis]

What I don't understand is why he would make it apparent to us that he has little experience in legacy and will then turn around and began to bash the format as if it has devolved into "degeneracy". Is it purposely trying to get people to hate on him or something?

TBF here, that's true of a lot of competitive gaming stuff. Look at any gamefaqs board for a fighting, FPS or RTS game and it's comedy gold for anyone experienced. When you aren't used to something and already have a bit of a preconceived notion heading into the experience then it's easy to just say, 'this is bullshit' and write off the game (or in this case, format).

[Nelis]

TBF here, that's true of a lot of competitive gaming stuff. Look at any gamefaqs board for a fighting, FPS or RTS game and it's comedy gold for anyone experienced. When you aren't used to something and already have a bit of a preconceived notion heading into the experience then it's easy to just say, 'this is bullshit' and write off the game (or in this case, format).

That's bullshit. :wink::tongue:

[QQQ]

After reading this article a second time, I think I can see why Legacy players might get off-put by it. Endlessly parroting mindless garbage like, 'if you're not playing Force of Will, you're doing it wrong' could understandably upset those who aren't used to it. See, Todd is addmitedly a Standard, not a Legacy player. And they are quite accustomed to this hyperbole.

You constantly hear "Jund is two-thirds of the format', or unsurprisingly 'if you're not playing Jund, you're doing it wrong', or even 'Standard is just stupid' (in reference to the domination of Jund). Standard has often gone through these periods of total domination of a single deck or strategy. So, when one completely unfamiliar with Legacy sees similar trending toward a certain deck, (see: Reanimator) it's not a stretch to have them aping statements they have heard from people who know what they are talking about, in order to appear knowledgeable.

The problem with this, is that Standard, is not Legacy. Legacy has never had any deck in any form with half the dominence of a Jund, or Affinity. So Legacy players can't frame statements like those made by the author in any realistic regard to their format.

Standard is more like Legacy's retarded little brother. He's bigger. He's stronger. He has a penis the size of a fire hydrant. Everyone loves him, and he's the life of the party. He drifts through life without a thought in his head. But in reality, we are all nerds. And at the end of the day, would a nerd rather be happily ignorant, and ride the bus to their janitorial duties at McDonalds? Or would they rather be intellectually challenged, and fly their helicopter to their own track to do doughnuts in their Formula-1 race car?

[Ciberon]

Actually I believe legacy had Flash-Hulk.

[Dilettante]

QQQ, we did for a while. The format once revolved around a turn 1 goblin (and later in addition, a 1 cost artifact), but recent sets have coughed up additional answers... and more dangerous threats. Everyone's favorite */*+1, Qasali Pridemage, the unbanning of Entomb, and the M10 combat rules reducing the number of 2:1's are additions in particular that have broadened the field. Yes, Tarmogoyf is an overpowered card, but it has, in its own way, contributed to slowing the format back down. Yes, it does have overwhelming power for its cost, but the format is no longer Turn 1 Lackey/Vial. force it (thus a 2:1), swords or bolt the lackey, lucksack a needle (when it existed) and hope they don't have a response within 2 turns, or don't expect to win. Definitely more fun now.