[Article] Fixing Legacy

[MMogg]

Posted at the StarkingtonPost (http://www.thestarkingtonpost.com/articles/-/Fixing_Legacy).


Grand Prix Top 8'er Ari Lax managed to rip off a 9-0 run to start the first day of Grand Prix-Columbus undefeated. The format du jour at that tournament? Legacy. Now Ari presents an argument for the banning of numerous cards in the format. As a combo storm player with a lot of Pro Tour experience, he knows of what he speaks...

Yay! More hyperbolic articles claiming combo decks are broken and the format needs to be fixed!

While I understand that the power level of Legacy seems crazy at times (like turn one Belcher kills), I think the fact that the decks with the rawest power are not the ones dominating the format means there is nothing to worry about from those degenerate decks. Personally, I like the power levels where they are. Also, it seems to me that Legacy is the most wide-open format, meaning making the power levels higher (Vintage) or lower (Extended) would probably only serve to constrict rather than expand the amount of viable decks.

[Aggro_zombies]

He makes some interesting points, but the splash damage of what he's advocating would be tremendous. Plus, Life from the Loam is my favorite card.

I would actually swap Loam and Show and Tell on his list, but the rest of it makes sense. Banning combo decks into the ground by removing LED makes Zoo far too powerful; banning Nacatl forces it to make early-game sacrifices that allow other decks, especially midrange blue decks, to reasonably compete.

Removing Loam suggests to me that he thinks Lands would be too strong, but I'm not sure that's the case given that the deck suffers from high build price, difficulty finishing matches within the time limits, and optimal play difficulty when both players are of comparable skill level. However, Lands in his scenario would likely dominate any meta it was in due to its strength against creature decks and its mana denial power against control, so I could see Life from the Loam being a ban-worthy card despite the damage its loss would do to fair decks like Aggro Loam.

Banning Counterbalance seems better than banning Top, if only because Top is a staple in control decks, and those decks could probably use some help. Yes, time constraints are an issue, but it did not seem like an excessive number of matches were going to time at the GP or at the SCG events I've been at this year. Counterbalance would probably be too strong even in the absence of combo, but only in the sense that it would force the meta into a rock-paper-scissors configuration with Counterbalance as one peg.

Entomb is in a bit of a lull right now. Removing Counterbalance and slowing aggro down would probably make Reanimator better, but it still has consistency issues in games two and three. The deck seems fine.

I get the feeling that Survival is only on the list because of the Survival Madness deck in the top 8 of the GP. The card seems fine and I'm not sure making a shortlist of all the powerful cards in the format and then banning them is a good way to approach things (otherwise, why is Jace TMS still legal in Standard, etc.). Survival as an engine is still relatively fair, and the card itself allows for some interesting deck building options - and it lends itself to a lot of fair applications, so it's probably fine.

Banning Dark Ritual seems excessive. Banning Tendrils accomplishes the same purpose, which is to completely kill off black-based Storm combo in favor of more unstable decks like Belcher.

Interestingly, the one thing I kept thinking about when reading his list of proposed changes was how strong Merfolk would be. It would probably be the default best aggro deck as Zoo's loss of a powerful early drop would leave it on even footing with midrange Bant decks, which in turn are choice prey for Merfolk. Merfolk could set up a sideboard built to beat heavy board control and burn strategies while being reasonably strong against everything.

[Nihil Credo]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Ninety percent of the complaints about Mystical Tutor's banning revolved around R&D supposedly basing their ideas over a few rounds of MODO-Legacy. Ari Lax has a ton more experience than that, but he is also making a much, much stronger statement.

Lax claims that Storm players can become the undisputed masters of the format? Then let them show it. Let the Top 8s be increasingly dominated by growing percentages of Lion's Eye Diamonds. Then we can decide what to ban, one card at a time.

We can afford to wait: there will be the time to see this happening and react before a GP is destroyed. Lax doesn't claim that what's holding Storm back is the lack of a perfect decklist, rather the lack of perfect play skill. A new decklist can wreck a format overnight, but players won't suddenly become Storm masters.

If, instead, things keep going largely as they do now, with only a minority of placements being combo decks, that will mean either of two things: that combo decks aren't overpowered, or that they are exceedingly difficult to properly play. Both outcomes are equally fine.

I respect that Lax is offering his honest ideas on how to preserve Legacy, and that he clearly cares deeply about the format. But he is asking that the format be hamstrung now, because in the future it might potentially go wrong if a particular condition is met (and also if new printings don't make the entire debate irrelevant).

This isn't medicine, it's a hobby. Nobody will die if the format becomes annoyingly degenerate for three or six months. There are no such things as urgent dangers.

[Nizmox]

I think the majority of arguments presented at the time of mystical tutor banning are still valid (I'll try not to repeat these).
Given he didn't lose a match in Day 1 at Colombus i'd be very curious to see his list.
It is interesting that he goes a step further and talks about banning many broken cards rather than just coup de grace'ing combo (although I don't agree with the bannings).

The problem I see with articles like this is he mentions two things regarding combo.
1. It being overpowered
2. The lack of interactivity (gentleman's agreement)
The solution to these two problems are distinct, so which of the two is it?

If combo is still overpowered, ban 'some' more cards. If the lack of interactivity is the problem, well combo needs to be nuked entirely so why not ban tendrils (and brain freeze) altogether? I personally don't agree with either of the above but find it strange that he's ok with keeping combo around at reduced power levels and yet complains about it's lack of interactivity.

My biggest gripe however is Dredge. Why is Dredge any more fair than the other decks in the format? Why are people perfectly willing to permanently devote 4/15 cards in the sideboard for a chance at beating dredge but not ok with the same for combo? (I will concede Dredge sideboard cards have other uses). Dredge is near unbeatable in game one so i'm not sure why it's considered fair?

EDIT:



We can afford to wait: there will be the time to see this happening and react before a GP is destroyed. Lax doesn't claim that what's holding Storm back is the lack of a perfect decklist, rather the lack of perfect play skill. A new decklist can wreck a format overnight, but players won't suddenly become Storm masters.

And this is absolutely true. There is really no need to start banning left right and centre until 'the decks' actually begin to dominate.

[Aggro_zombies]

This isn't medicine, it's a hobby. Nobody will die if the format becomes annoyingly degenerate for three or six months. There are no such things as urgent dangers.
No, but history (Black Summer, Combo Winter, Affinity, Flash, etc.) demonstrates that something far worse would happen: players would become unhappy, lost interest, and potentially stop playing. And everyone knows that players who don't play don't buy cards or compete in tournaments.

Wizards seems very sensitive to long bouts of degeneracy these days, and the banning of Mystical suggests that even the potential for such is a sufficient reason to ban a card. Given that policy, Lax's suggestions make sense.

In effect, what you're arguing could be used to justify unbanning Mystical Tutor, as the decks that card enabled were not dominant outside of certain European metagames. Tournament results from the U.S. and MTGO (to a lesser extent) consistently showed that Mystical Tutor decks like Ad Nauseam and Reanimator were among the worst performing decks in the field.

Lax is basically implying, "Let's assume the DCI has a new policy towards managing Legacy, which is to ban cards proactively that could cause format-warping issues. If that's the case, then the following should also go: [list]." It's an interesting hypothetic situation, but I would personally find it unpleasant because Life from the Loam would be banned, and that would take out a lot of incentive for me to play the format.

[DukeDemonKn1ght]

People need to stop feeding the troll that is this conversation in its largest context. The format really is not broken. And the more articles like this get written, it becomes increasingly likely that they're going to try, again, to fix something that ain't broken.

I think a big part of the reason that these types of articles are so popular these days is that they make this implicit statement of "Oh, if more people knew how to pilot combo correctly (like me), the format would be entirely warped." Here's the reality though: There are plenty of people who take this format seriously. If combo was really the boogeyman that everyone likes to say it is these days, it would be actually-factually putting up the numbers that people imply it's putting up.

Basically, I agree with Nihil Credo 100%: Let's have this conversation once top 8's are actually being dominated by Lion's Eye Diamonds and Show and Tells (or whatever the combo-du-jour may be). Until then, I think people should just stop bitching, lest we feel the benevolence of WotC's ham-fisted ban-hammer again sooner than necessary.

[practical joke]

The whole article he wrotes makes no sense.

Sure, all cards listed there are "broken" , but not broken enough to be banned.
Goblins with a T1 resolved lackey and a T2 beat can still be hindered by every deck. ( Force, daze, stp, random creature, etc)

This counts for everything listed in that horrible list of his. His lack of good argumentation makes me doubt his legacy experience. Also his list is not very impressive. He might have had good match-ups.

Now, get back to february 2010, Grand Prix Madrid where a Rock list made it to 9-0 on day 1. Besides the tarmogoyfs, was that deck broken?!
Did it play such sick cards to dominate day 1? Ari Lax isn't really comparing, but just giving a word on his personal experience from a single Grand Prix.

so, not worth reading and I definately wasted my time reading it.

[Cthuloo]

Beside all the other remarks people have already made (legacy being not broken, lack of evidence, and format not yet settled after the ban of Mystical - I definitely agree) I think the article basically contradicts itself. The author claims that legacy should be fun, but then proceeds to list some of the cards I mostly enjoy to play with and against as deserving a ban:

- Entomb: enables different strategies that are dead without it (and helps some very original decks like Trisomie 21)
- Life from the Loam: see above
- Survival: one of the trickiest and more interactive cards of the format. I'd rather ban loyal retainers to stop the brainless combo, but playing with and against Survival decks is usually a blast
- Recruiter: enables Aluren and Painter, two niche decks that people love to play
- Lackey: people love to play Goblins, and this is not 2005
- Dark Ritual: Sui Black anyone? The ban will kill another underperforming archetype people love to play.

Plus, of course, nobody knows what could come out of such a storm (no pun intended) of bans. The format may very well be really boring.

[Waikiki]

Looks like he just wants to ban all the cards that make the decks tick. So then we all go to some sort of landstill build? I say dont fix anything that is not broken. Sure combo is strong. So is counterbalance and so is..... Look at all top 8's made this year. There is no deck really dominating.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

I have a few problems with the assumptions in this article:

a) There are people who like combo, or even like playing against combo. Personally, I enjoy the intricate battle for position that happens in a control on combo matchup far more than having to contend with "mindless" beatdown - and I'm playing the supposedly disadvantaged non-CB control side, usually. Is making Legacy another creature vs removal fest format like Standard really what we are looking for? I think most people play Legacy exactly because this isn't the case, because strategies are diverse and reach from storming out through controlling the stack to beatdown in a mix where all these decks can compete. I know it's the reason I play Legacy instead of smaller formats, I think those are boring.

b) The "gentleman's agreement" crap again. I don't know how this is elsewhere, but the reason people (me included) don't play combo around here is that you actually don't consistently win against blue aggro-control with combo if the opponent knows what he is doing/how to mulligan. I admit the skill-barrier exists, though. Storm is very hard to play, at least against resistance, reducing its numbers.

c) If combo was really that good if you can play it, why don't Vintage-players that come to the Legacy GP not universally default to combo. I've played Vintage for a long time, I have no problem winning with Long and I don't think someone like Rich Shay would, either. Legacy storm is, in comparison to Vintage combo, not all that hard. So these people could play Storm and clearly would if they thought it was the overwelming best. Yet they don't. Tells us something?
For another example, Saito was playing ANT pre-Mystical and is already a master. It seems safe to assume that he could pilot storm on a sufficient level to succeed wiht it. Yet he played Merfolk. Again, why may that be?

d) Very importantly: Citing this
At GP Columbus last weekend I played Storm, and I didn’t lose a single game to a fair deck that wasn’t my fault. as something bad. Replace Storm with "a deck", remove fair and I think that's what the perfect format would be described as. Do we really want a format that's basically driven by matchups instead of playskill? I think Magic is fun when you lose for screwing up and win because you played better than the opponent.

e) Minor: The LED thing. If you play Goblins, I agree, you don't have all that much to think about, mana denial and clock and hope it's enough. On the other hand if counters or discard are involved and the LED actually knows what he's doing (as in doesn't mindlessly run into FoW headfirst) these games are quite intricate games of crafting hands and evaluating danger-potentials. Sure, nobody gets to do combat math, but combat math isn't necessary to make this game a great interesting battle of wits.

f) the CB, Lackey and Wild Nacatl thing: Sure these get abused and are very high powered. Realize it and you can build your deck in a way to deal with it. If we ban everything that does something powerful we again end up with Standard albeit with duals for better mana. I don't miss being able to play Bloodbraid Elf and Baneslayer Angel. If you do, Standard is always there for you. And while I'd like playing Mind Spring for six, I prefer not being able to do that due to format constraints (which in that case are more about aggro than anything else anyway) than having another format where both players play lands and do nothing for three turns until they can start dropping random four-cost bombs and see who has the better ones. What's interesting about that? The Worlds 2009 Top 8 was the most boring to watch ever for exactly that reason.

[paK0]

This guy is judt a fucking moron. I usually donÄ't like to bash article writers too much, but claiming that unfair decks dominate (which they don't) and asking for a Nacatl ban is ridiculous.

And yeah, ban Imperial Recruiter pls, why not ban a card that is used in two decks that hardly put up results (though Aluren did post some, but nothing to get worried about)

[Patrick]

The whole article he wrotes makes no sense.

Sure, all cards listed there are "broken" , but not broken enough to be banned.
Goblins with a T1 resolved lackey and a T2 beat can still be hindered by every deck. ( Force, daze, stp, random creature, etc)

This counts for everything listed in that horrible list of his. His lack of good argumentation makes me doubt his legacy experience. Also his list is not very impressive. He might have had good match-ups.

Now, get back to february 2010, Grand Prix Madrid where a Rock list made it to 9-0 on day 1. Besides the tarmogoyfs, was that deck broken?!
Did it play such sick cards to dominate day 1? Ari Lax isn't really comparing, but just giving a word on his personal experience from a single Grand Prix.

so, not worth reading and I definately wasted my time reading it.

I play Legacy with Ari almost weekly so I can vouch that he knows something about the format. He does also express awful ideas on a regular basis.

This isn't his worst.

While the specific cards on the list may seem confusing to people who know more about Legacy than Ari we should all agree that the idea of a shakeup in the format isn't all bad. Most people have at least one card in their mind that they would like to see banned. Sensei's Top, Entomb, Enlightened Tutor, whatever. I don't agree with any of these cards being banned.

Ari loses a lot of his audience in the beginning of his article because he is completely arrogant in his play ability and the power level of storm. Reading his article with a clear head is worthwhile even if you don't agree with the specifics.

One at a time:

Lion's-Eye Diamond: Banning this card cripples storm decks but leaves them viable, be it slower. Before Wizard's axes this card I'd like to see more copies in Top 8's of 32+ person tournaments.

Entomb: With Mystical gone, Reanimator has lost so much raw power and resilience that Entomb is fine. Entomb is also a possibility in other decks. Entomb has not put up the numbers to warrant banning.

Top or Counterbalance: While I personally want to see Top gone (more for time reasons than anything else) this combo just doesn't make the cut. While the format was once dominated by this archetype those days are over and players are moving away from it. If combo makes a huge comeback these cards need to be around to put it in check.

Life from the Loam: The issue Ari has here is that early, lucky Loams let players Waste-lock opponents out of the game. People can fix this by playing more basic lands. Any time a discussion about Wasteland comes up, the default answer should be "Play more basics." Playings duals comes with risks in this format. Playing 0-2 basic lands doesn't always work.

Wild Nacatl: Here Ari is suggesting that if the other decks of Legacy get powered-down, Zoo with a 3/3 on turn 1 becomes the best deck by far. He's right, but since none of these other cards have been banned Nacatl is safe.

Survival of the Fittest: Another proactive ban, Ari says that if combo is removed from the format and there are no Counterbalance or Wasteland decks that Survival will be an unstoppable menace. Again he's correct but this situation will never happen.

The biggest problem in Ari's article is he misunderstands what the Legacy community wants. Fun. Legacy players by and large don't care if overpowered Storm decks are viable or whatever. Legacy is a format about playing your favorite cards against other people playing their favorite cards. When you play in a tournament you make a decision of how to sculpt your sideboard, and you choose what decks you want to beat. Any deck can be tailored to beat Storm, Reanimator, Show and Tell, Charbelcher and any other fast, non-interactive strategy.

Ari's idea isn't bad. It's poorly worded and expressed.

[Brad Herbig]

Honestly most of those cards seem like "pillars of Legacy", similar to the "pillars of Vintage" (mana drain, dark ritual, mishra's workshop, bazaar of baghdad, null rod). Instead of making the field more wide open, I think these kind of banning of the pillars of Legacy would just result in a huge loss of power, and for a lot of people, a loss for the reason they play Legacy. I would probably move to playing Vintage if LED was to get banned.

[Soldar]

Ari's idea isn't bad. It's poorly worded and expressed.

I run a blog (The Rusty Machete (http://rustymachete.blogspot.com)) where Ari's reports and articles get published every now and then, and the only complaint I've ever gotten from anyone, since we're free, is that we needed someone to edit his work - to make it more readable.

I almost feel bad for Bill Stark for having to edit it.

More to the point, I've talked to Ari about these changes, and it's just a general power-down of the format, to make more cards viable; he wants more (currently) tier 2 decks to be a contenders. Getting rid of our pillars would do the same thing as getting rid of the pillars in Vintage - it would shake up the format, a lot of weaker and role-player cards would be experimented with and we would have a period of innovation by necessity.

But I also echo the statements that people need to react to the format first. We've shown that we can effectively keep the Zoo numbers down if given the chance, we can adapt our decks to beat these as well.

[Tacosnape]

This is idiocy. Why do you need to fix anything about a format where the top 8 of the most recent Grand Prix consists of eight different decks?

Getting rid of the most powerful cards in a balanced format will do one of two things only:

1. It'll make a new set of "most powerful cards" where the format's still balanced.
2. It'll do what's listed above, only axe the balanced part.

Result 1 is the same as things are now, and Result 2 is worse.

For the record, LED's the only card I agree with banning, and I've been for its banning for years.

[jrsthethird]

why not ban tendrils (and brain freeze) altogether?

Tendrils is the only 'problem' Storm card. With the increase of Emrakul in the format, Brain Freeze strategies need to have a second card in addition to the storm combo kill, whether it be Cunning Wish for Stroke or Ravenous Trap, boarding in their Dredge hate against Emrakul decks, or running Stifles to hit the trigger. The other kills are ETW and Grapeshot, but ETW is easily stopped by any sweeper and Grapeshot requires twice the storm to kill.


Life from the Loam: The issue Ari has here is that early, lucky Loams let players Waste-lock opponents out of the game. People can fix this by playing more basic lands. Any time a discussion about Wasteland comes up, the default answer should be "Play more basics." Playings duals comes with risks in this format. Playing 0-2 basic lands doesn't always work.

The problem with Wasteland is not that people don't play enough basics. The problem is that it almost always convinces you to make the wrong play by grabbing a basic. Games are often decided by the mere presence of this card being in the format. Any time you fetch a basic out of fear of Wasteland, you're increasing the chances that you will color-screw yourself. Playing more basics doesn't fix anything, it makes your deck less consistent and that hurts you against non-Wasteland decks. Loam is the problem here, not Wasteland. Loam is susceptible to grave hate, so if this really bothers you, board in Extirpate, or Pithing Needle on Wasteland. This is why you have a sideboard; to improve your bad matchups. You shouldn't have to weaken your manabase against a strategy that makes up only 5-10% of a metagame.

[jazzykat]

Saying that the format needs fixing, implies that it is broken. I do not think the format is broken.

If he wants to shake things up then maybe he should couch his arguments that way. I can't make heads or tails of the GP results and neither can a lot of other people so I have a feeling the format has been "shaken to the appropriate level".

[OurSerratedDust]

We've seen about one month of magic since mystical tutor was banned. While I respect the ideas shared, the format still has a lot of settling to do. The GP was one metagame, one time. If, when the dust settles, combo decks are still on top, we can go from there. The last thing we need is another hasty banning.

[Rizso]

Think Legacy is way to stable and healthy to just give the banhammer to all the top decks. I dont not want to see legacy turned into standard where kontrol and their planeswalkers rules the format. I like the combo aggro aggro control control cycle legacy have.

[bleuisforwhimps]

There is a format for people claiming all this shit, it's called standard.
So zombies would be better than goblins, no alluren, no loam, no survival, no storm,no CB just merfolk and dredge then really and after that prolly the banning of bridge from below and lord of atlantis.Yeah that would be fun.

[Bryant Cook]

(Black Summer, Combo Winter, Affinity, Flash, etc.)

Sounds racist.


Grapeshot requires twice the storm to kill.

Challenge accepted.

I'm glad I beat him, he clearly doesn't know what he's talking about when it comes to bannings. Although, I agree with him that combo is the best archetype in the format. I walk into every match-up saying, "I'm going to win" for a few reasons.

1.) I feel like there is so such thing as a bad match-up.
2.) It's good to be confident when playing.
3.) I think that's it.

[mujadaddy]

Saying that the format needs fixing, implies that it is broken. I do not think the format is broken. Quoted for Redundancy

You want to shake up the format? Ban the Dual Lands.

[majikal]

What is it with all the terrible Legacy articles this year? This is seriously the worst pile of garbage I've ever read.

[Psyqo]

Just have to chime in and say that this feels like the most wide open format I can remember. At this time there is no need to ban any new cards.

[SpikeyMikey]

Posted at the StarkingtonPost (http://www.thestarkingtonpost.com/articles/-/Fixing_Legacy).



Yay! More hyperbolic articles claiming combo decks are broken and the format needs to be fixed!

While I understand that the power level of Legacy seems crazy at times (like turn one Belcher kills), I think the fact that the decks with the rawest power are not the ones dominating the format means there is nothing to worry about from those degenerate decks. Personally, I like the power levels where they are. Also, it seems to me that Legacy is the most wide-open format, meaning making the power levels higher (Vintage) or lower (Extended) would probably only serve to constrict rather than expand the amount of viable decks.

I actually didn't think this was a bad read. Oh, I disagree with the author on virtually every point he makes, but he wasn't arrogant and it was obvious that he'd put more thought into this than most people do before they go pontificating. He seems like a good guy, if a little off base. He even admitted that he was biased towards storm, which is more than the rest of the "storm is overpowered" crowd.

But I'm going to let you all in on a little secret. Whenever someone backs up their take on theory or deckbuilding with their play record, my skepticism goes up 1000%. Because the best deckbuilders are rarely good players. Oh, there are a few, Pat Chapin comes to mind, as does Brian Kowal. But generally, good players are mediocre builders and theorists and vice versa. Mike Flores is the greatest theorist and builder in the history of Magic, but if you were to make a list of the 50 most proficient players, he wouldn't get anywhere near it. The Finkels and the Buddes may be HoF caliber players, but their construction skills are lacking.

Generally, good players win tournaments, not good deckbuilders. This makes sense, as a suboptimal card is less likely to knock you out of a tournament than a suboptimal play. But being a good Magic player does not automatically one a good builder, any more than being a good baseball player would automatically make you a good coach.

[Vacrix]

Why don't we just ban all the Legacy staples while we are at it? Then we will all just be playing Nourishing Lich...

Seriously.. this guy wants to ban what makes Legacy. You can't ban CB or ToA. Its nonsensical. How is the NFL supposed to function if they ban the football? It would be an entirely different game, and frankly I think the aftermath of such bannings would suck. You would have to keep banning things until we were back in the Dark Ages. If CB and ToA are gone than Nacatl's run wild. Ban those, then you have O.P Merfolk... ban a few lords.. etc. Right now Legacy is in a very nice situation. The card pool has expanded to the point at which every good card has several counterstrategies. Nothing is O.P and combo will remain in check because its difficult to play. If it becomes easy to play, WotC will step in and ban something, hence the MT ban.

What pisses me off is that you don't see players bitching about Zoo being king of the format. Why is interaction all of a sudden a standard for something being fair and unfair? Don't you think its a little ridiculous that you could interact with Zoo and still lose consistently? At least combo players are nice and end your life quickly. Zoo players torture and give you hope that you might pull something out of your ass.


This isn't medicine, it's a hobby. Nobody will die if the format becomes annoyingly degenerate for three or six months. There are no such things as urgent dangers.
Exactly.
People shouldn't get their panties in a knot just because someone thought of a good idea. Otherwise, you are punishing innovation. The beauty of Legacy is that it REWARDS innovation. People like Saito who pull something out of thin air like a Black Merfolk splash ought to be rewarded (seriously never even heard of it until GP). The same concept can be applied to the team who invented Flash, etc. If you punish those people by banning their innovations then you are encouraging players to play the same old shit and not take any risks with their lists. I like this format because its constantly changing. Regulating it more closely would probably be a disaster.

[Gaius Darkfire]

His article reminds me of the adage for Vintage "ban everything until Mana Drain dominates, and then ban Drain". I'll give him that his points were clear and had some modicum of thought put into them, but it comes off as a list of decks that he doesnt like so he wants them crippled/destroyed. He doesnt seem to understand that Legacy is currently the most diverse and relatively healthy format that exists and it therefore should be left alone.

Are there annoying or broken cards, sure, and there are decks that can seem unfair. But for every problem there is an answer and nothing is supremely dominating on a long-term basis. Indeed, the format is incredibly diverse and healthy; the GP results prove it. Proposing a small ban in this environment requires a hell of an argument; a ban for this many cards is just laughable.

Also, once you delve into the realm of "ban these cards to fix the format that would happen after you ban the first set of cards", you really lose a lot of credibility for your argument.

[Nihil Credo]

Why don't we just ban all the Legacy staples while we are at it? Then we will all just be playing Nourishing Lich...
Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.

[Grollub]

Your ideas intrigue me and I wish to subscribe to your newsletter.
If this would imply my namesake card could be a tournament staple sign me up too.

This article was a serious waste, I figured something as pretentious as "fixing legacy" wouldn't be worth my time - but alas! Somehow all the words merged together to form nothing but w's, a's and h's for me.

[Rico Suave]

This is unfortunately an article where the author's ego has hindered his ability to understand the format.

[SpikeyMikey]

I think you're all being too hard on the guy. It's not a shining gem of an article, but it's a big step up from Birklid. The biggest problem with it is that the author doesn't articulate his thought process well enough; he makes jumps in logic without detailing the parts in between. He's off base too, but he basically states that it's an op ed piece and that it may not be what the community wants.

[DukeDemonKn1ght]

I think you're all being too hard on the guy. It's not a shining gem of an article, but it's a big step up from Birklid. The biggest problem with it is that the author doesn't articulate his thought process well enough; he makes jumps in logic without detailing the parts in between. He's off base too, but he basically states that it's an op ed piece and that it may not be what the community wants.

Evidently the author was right about at least one thing: It may not be what the community wants. (And it doesn't look to be even close, judging from most of the reactions so far...)

[CorpT]

From what I can tell, Bill Stark and co. should probably stick to non-Legacy formats. At least we won't have to hear straw man arguments about how awful we are for another 6 months when Pros care about Legacy against because of another GP.

[Brushwagg]

Well that was a complete waste of time. This is why the Mods on this site lock every "this card needs to be banned" thread. All the changes he would make would totally kill a very fun format and I know I would stop playing.

I just want to say that if you ban said cards then another combo would just come to the front. The first one that comes to mind is Thopter Sword.

[Nidd]

Although, I agree with him that combo is the best archetype in the format. I walk into every match-up saying, "I'm going to win" for a few reasons.

1.) I feel like there is so such thing as a bad match-up.
2.) It's good to be confident when playing.
3.) I think that's it.
QFFT!

Folks say Combo or Dredge players act arrogant or overconfidant. Well, a certain degree of confedence comes from playing these decks, as you pretty much are playing the 600 pound gorilla in the room when you know what the fuck you're doing.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

So combo blasts everything out of the water, but the power level of Wild Nacatl, Survival of the Fittest and Life from the Loam is unacceptable? wtf?

If you're arguing that a couple dozen different decks are all unacceptable in power level you might not have an argument.

[Finn]

I am surprised that nobody has mentioned that Ari made his list of cards to be banned based on disabling the mechanics he sees creating masturbatory games. I can certainly understand his perspective. I hate those kinds of games. That is why I can confidently say that he does not know what he is talking about. There are no decks that can negotiate all the cards on his list, of course. But I have built, tested, discarded, and started over enough times to say that all the stuff he is afraid will dominate games can be side stepped with some smart deck design without donating the remainder of your matchups. We have seen articles like this before written by people who are unable or unwilling to dive into the grinding of design and test. He just can not see how it is done so he figures it can't be. I wish would-be article authors would take a moment to consider exactly how many ways there are to skin a cat in this format.

It hardly matters anyway. If WOTC banned half the cards he wants, there would be no Legacy community.

[mujadaddy]

We have seen articles like this before written by people who are unable or unwilling to dive into the grinding of design and test. He just can not see how it is done so he figures it can't be. Wow. Wisdom lies here.

[Neuad]

Here is the problem with the article.

Ari Lax is a flaming bag of douche who shouldn't be talking about Legacy.

Kid may know standard, and may be able to almost top8 at a GP with a Combo deck, facing all aggro decks day1. . . but playing with him locally he isn't that great.

[Rune]

Here is the problem with the article.

Ari Lax is a flaming bag of douche who shouldn't be talking about Legacy.

Kid may know standard, and may be able to almost top8 at a GP with a Combo deck, facing all aggro decks day1. . . but playing with him locally he isn't that great.

He actually beat Saito on day 1.

However, he didn't board in his Bobs against Bryant Cook, which kind of gave away that he doesn't know that much about Legacy..

[Antonius]

these recommendations wouldn't "fix" the Legacy format--they would re-make the format entirely. I believe that this is what the author intended.

[Aggro_zombies]

He actually beat Saito on day 1.

However, he didn't board in his Bobs against Bryant Cook, which kind of gave away that he doesn't know that much about Legacy..
No, he beat Saito day 1 because Saito decided to make turn one Vial instead of turn one Cursecatcher, and Lax went off the following turn (much to Saito's dismay - I wish I'd had a camera, as his face was priceless as he stared at the Cc in his hand). Had he made Cc, Lax would not have been able to go off that turn and Saito would still have been in the game.

[Neuad]

He actually beat Saito on day 1.

However, he didn't board in his Bobs against Bryant Cook, which kind of gave away that he doesn't know that much about Legacy..

Didn't hear about the match, only time I watched Ari was when he was facing countertop and watching him fail miserably.

[Meekrab]

This is unfortunately an article where the author's ego has hindered his ability to understand the format.
Seriously. The only problem with Legacy right now is that too many cards are banned.

[Aggro_zombies]

Didn't hear about the match, only time I watched Ari was when he was facing countertop and watching him fail miserably.
Yeah, I wasn't there for games 1 and 2, but at the beginning of game three Ari was on the play and Saito had clearly thought about whether or not he had it and then decided against it. His face was a mix of disbelief and that expression you get when you're kicking yourself for doing something stupid.

I stopped watching shortly after Ari began going off because I assumed at the time that he was going to get there (and apparently, he did). IIRC he was Saito's only day 1 loss.

[dontbiteitholmes]

His whole argument seems to be based on...

At GP Columbus last weekend I played Storm, and I didn’t lose a single game to a fair deck that wasn’t my fault.
First off, I'd like to see the decks he played against.
Second his idea of a "fair" deck is one that doesn't include... Life From the Loam, Lion's Eye Diamond, Sensei's Top, Counterbalance, Wild Nacatl, Survival of the Fittest, Entomb, and possibly Wasteland/Lackey. So wow, I guess he didn't lose the merfolk or Enchantress since those are pretty much the only decks without one of those cards.

Life/Loam - Are you serious? When you've imaginary banned so much of the format that you have to ban Loam maybe you should call it quits.

A 6 card banned list complaining about fairness with about 16 cards mentioned and you don't even comment of Emrakul? If Loam, Counterbalance, and a vanilla 3/3 are not fair what the fuck is fair about a 15/15 one sided nuclear weapon that has protection from everything except Karakas and O Ring getting cheated into play on turn 2 or 3 or 4. I mean I don't care how you cheat him into play, there are many ways, he wins like 99% of the games he gets a chance to attack.

Not that I think he should be banned, but when you propose banning like 75% of the format and ignore the broken thing that made up 25% of the top 8 of the biggest Legacy event in the US this year you come off as a fucking retard. I mean let's ban LED, Loam, and Nacatl, but the only reason we might have to ban Show and Tell is because it cheats in Hive Mind or Dream Halls. Not because it regularly puts into play the 2 best 2 turn clocks in Magic, who also happen to be the 2 hardest creatures to answer, nah that's fair. Yeah, okay that seems like a shakey at best understanding of the format.

[Neuad]

As far as I know (with the above posters updated info) he only played against Saito day1 as far as blue decks go. . .probably a BANT deck or 2 but idk.

Day2 he lost miserably to counterbalance 2 or 3 times, and I laughed 2 or 3 times. And then a 4th when his 'team sponser' heard the news.

[Soldar]

I have his full report up on my blog, that I can't seem to stop name dropping (http://rustymachete.blogspot.com/2010/08/beep-beep-storming-through.html).

Day 1:
3 byes
GWB Natural Order Rock 2-0
Canadian Thresh 2-0
Belcher 2-0
TES 2-1
Burn 2-0 (I didn't even realize Burn made it to 7-0)
Merfolk 2-1

Day 2:
CB-Top 1-2
Lands 2-1 (It sounds like more of an Eternal Garden deck, because of Dark Confidant)
Bant Survival 2-0
Doomsday Show and Tell 1-2
UGB Landstill 2-0
TES (our hero, Bryant Cook) 1-2
CB Top (Martell) 0-2

[dontbiteitholmes]

His deck is good, but he also seemed to get lucky quite a bit day 1. Some of his opponents were really lucky draws. I mean his Beltcher opponent sided in Autumn’s Veil? He played Burn at 7-0 and the guy sided in Mindbreak Traps? I don't know maybe it's just my luck, but combo would be a horrible deck for me to play. Until about round 4 of the GP I played vs. something like 14 Blue decks in a row (though only 13 had FoW). His record vs. decks with Force of Will seems to be 4-3 which is not very good considering 6 of the top 8 decks had Force of Will. He also went 1-4 in games against Countertop. Sorry broseph. Storm decks are good, but decks with Force of Will are better.

[Neuad]

I think its just that he doesn't know how to play around/into FoW.

[Patrick]

The Finkels and the Buddes may be HoF caliber players, but their construction skills are lacking.


You know these guys both performed spectacularly in Limited Pro Tours, which is a form of deckbuilding, right?

[Nihil Credo]

You know these guys both performed spectacularly in Limited Pro Tours, which is a form of deckbuilding, right?
Limited deckbuilding is an incredibly distant cousin to Constructed deckbuilding.

Though Mr. attempted murderer *is* oversimplifying things, since it is very common for top performing players to also be highly involved in the design and tweaking of their lists - something which is almost always done in teams.

[Lejay]

It's fun that merfolk is probably the best deck in Legacy and his first list doesn't contain any card merfolk plays.

[SpikeyMikey]

You know these guys both performed spectacularly in Limited Pro Tours, which is a form of deckbuilding, right?

Finkel's biggest successes in T2 were with decks other people designed. Napster, Tinker, Jon was a great player, but he was better with other people's decks. Again, good players will win games on the back of play skill with sub-optimal cards. There is value to construction, but if you were to somehow quantify play skill and construction skill, playskill would count for several times more than construction skill. Which is to say that it's not surprising, especially given that era, that good players would do well in limited.

Creature power levels were lower, games were generally less swingy (most sets had a bomb or two that would break a game wide open if drafted, but they were few and far between), a lot slower and players had more time to make mistakes and good players could get more value out of cards on the cuff of playability. Limited matches now (and by now I mean Alara because that was the last time I drafted) are more linear, they're more like constructed games. Now, just because there are less decisions per game, the playskill edge is a bit more limited.

[TheAardvark]

Evidently the author was right about at least one thing: It may not be what the community wants. (And it doesn't look to be even close, judging from most of the reactions so far...)

Clearly, a page and a half of responses (at the time of your post) on The Source is representative of the "Legacy community". Now who is being pretentious?

I dunno, I think Ari had some salient points. The issue is that the vocal minority is so rage-filled about any changes to the format (whether jusifiably so or not is moot) that the knee-jerk reaction is "what a dumbass", ignoring the thought exercise that an article like this provides. Like someone else said, innovation would be born of necessity, and who knows what awesome cards/decks could leap to the forefront? There is a lot of merit in his argument within this context.

That said, I disagree with most of his suggestions, only because I think the format is currently at least "ok" in innovation. I do think that the presence of certain cards really stifles more innovation than it breeds (Counterbalance, among others, although it helps keep storm in check), but until the format actually begins to grow stagnant, I believe a "wait and see" approach is the correct thing to do at this time.

[dahcmai]

About the only thing I would like to see in Legacy is a single creature deck besides Zoo be able to compete without Aether Vial. Zoo only exists because the absolute best creatures you can use are in it's colors. Everything else is using Vial as a crutch. Sad really.


I forgot to mention, I do think the format if fine as is though. That was only a minor whine.

[luckme10]

At least he got the title right, the ideas in this article really would be Neutering Legacy.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Clearly, a page and a half of responses (at the time of your post) on The Source is representative of the "Legacy community". Now who is being pretentious?

I dunno, I think Ari had some salient points. The issue is that the vocal minority is so rage-filled about any changes to the format (whether jusifiably so or not is moot) that the knee-jerk reaction is "what a dumbass", ignoring the thought exercise that an article like this provides. Like someone else said, innovation would be born of necessity, and who knows what awesome cards/decks could leap to the forefront? There is a lot of merit in his argument within this context.

That said, I disagree with most of his suggestions, only because I think the format is currently at least "ok" in innovation. I do think that the presence of certain cards really stifles more innovation than it breeds (Counterbalance, among others, although it helps keep storm in check), but until the format actually begins to grow stagnant, I believe a "wait and see" approach is the correct thing to do at this time.

Nah, fuck that. People don't want the format to change because it is already very diverse. In fact Legacy is by far the most diverse format in MTG. 8 very different decks top 8'd the GP and I can name at least 16 more decks I wouldn't have been surprised to see in the top 8 if they replayed the event tomorrow. People love to say combo is broken, then Force of Will is broken, ban this, ban that. Shut the fuck up already. Everytime a deck does good in anything people want to cry about banning cards. Seriously shut the hell up. Banning Nacatl, are you fucking serious? Life from the fucking Loam? This guy is talking about banning stuff, then banning stuff because in the imaginary format where combo beats everything and he had to imaginary ban combo, Life From the Loam and Nacatl need to be imaginary banned.

This article sucks so much ass I can barely even begin to comment on it. I'm tired of it being cool to be "nice and accepting" of articles like this. I think all the ideas in this article are stupid and I think everyone agrees and I think we should stop trying to be cool about people basically shitting on the format we all love and basically saying they know what is the best deck, and what cards need to be banned, and what cards will need to be banned after those cards are banned. News alert, they don't know shit. People were saying Lion's Eye Diamond would be insta-banned because combo was too good the moment legacy came into existance and what was that 5 years ago. Where's the combo winter? I don't see it? Can we just call a spade a spade here and stop being polite? If you think Loam should be banned, go play Extended. If you think Wild Nacatl and Lion's Eye Diamond should be banned, go play standard. People keep saying he's making valid points, but I fail to see them. No one agrees that I can see even though he claims everyone secretly agrees with him. If combo gets degenerate they will ban one piece at a time like they should. No one wants to push the panic button on the format, especially since it's not broken. Everyone seems to like to play fun cards. So if you say ban Loam or E. Tutor or CounterTop, I say you're an idiot and your article sucks. There I said it.

[Amon Amarth]

I wasn't aware the format needed fixing.

Honestly, I don't know what he's trying to say in the article; it feels like it's all over the place.

At first he has some valid points- he makes a remark about people not actually playing games in Legacy. In a format so vast some matches are really one-sided. Then he goes on to talk about how broken Loam and Nacatl are? Is he trolling me? Then he wants to ban all these cards and it's not even Legacy anymore. I'm not sure it's even worth talking about what you would hypothetical have to do in a hypothetical situation of a mega neutered Legacy...

what is this i dont even

[dahcmai]

Ok, I think everyone here got the point. This guy likes standard or something too much and wants to destroy the Legacy format! We should wage war on Stark by writing more responses in a forum!






lol sorry couldn't help it.

[woremak]

I think in order to make a smoother transition towards what Ari Lax is saying, we should just ban all the sets from Mirrodin back. And then every time a new block rotates in, we rotate out an old one. That way Legacy can be a viable format that can have its own ptq season and everyone will want to play it, and zoo will be powered down and everyone will be happy!

BEST FORMAT EVER!!!!111!!!!


In all seriousness though, I agree with the people who want proof. I feel like a lot of the people writing articles about legacy are exactly like my mother, in that when they hear of something that could potentially be dangerous maybe they call the police and then stand in their bathroom with a steak knife waiting.

Or something.

[Vacrix]

About the only thing I would like to see in Legacy is a single creature deck besides Zoo be able to compete without Aether Vial. Zoo only exists because the absolute best creatures you can use are in it's colors. Everything else is using Vial as a crutch. Sad really.
Madness much? I think its going to become pretty prevalent. Its easy to play, explosive, and it runs FoW. Funny though.. no Goyfs yet in the list.

[Mark Sun]

In all seriousness though, I agree with the people who want proof. I feel like a lot of the people writing articles about legacy are exactly like my mother, in that when they hear of something that could potentially be dangerous maybe they call the police and then stand in their bathroom with a steak knife waiting.

Or something.

I've actually had a similar feeling towards some of the articles that I have read as well. This year, with SCG expanding their 5K's to include Legacy, it was the new sliced bread and everyone wanted to dabble in this mysterious format where you could play with this card called Force of Will that counters everything, destroy nonbasics at will with Wasteland, or win on turn one with Ad Nauseam. Somewhere in the middle of what seemed to be rediscovering a format, the sky fell down multiple times, and immediately writers wanted to share their ideas on either why Legacy was terrible, or how to "fix" the format. Some examples that I can think of off the top of my head are the Todd Anderson Goblin Experience (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/standard/19292_Constructed_Criticism_The_Defining_Forces_of_Legacy.html), the Steven Birklid "Play Moar Basics Now" Article (http://strategy.channelfireball.com/featured-articles/sweeping-ice-and-other-important-topics-dazed-and-confused/), and of course this current article that is the subject of discussion.

I personally think the scope of Ari Lax's argument is fairly small; it seems like he's only taken the last half year into consideration, as he is citing Life from the Loam (Lands), and Entomb (Reanimator) as some of his candidates for a banning in the format. Both of those decks saw explosive starts at the beginning of the year, but the format adapted quickly to deal with these two decks. The MT banning was the silver bullet that led to no Reanimator decks in Day 2 of the GP, but the evolution of cheating a fatty into play had already moved from the graveyard as an intermediate to directly into play from the hand. Lax claims that the format is "glacially slow in terms of evolution," but a subset of evolution is adaptation, and it's something that Legacy does incredibly well with such a large card pool. The magnitude of change may not be as easy to notice compared to a format like Standard where you see 500+ cards leaving the format with every Expansion rotation, but relative to the card pool available in Legacy, the changes are still pretty evident.

[dtrooper]

I read the whole article and could swear he was trolling.

I mean, Wild Nacatl?

But then he wasn't. And that makes me sad.

[EssKay]

Why can't people get it through their heads that Legacy is so much fun because there's so much broken stuff you can do?

[Vacrix]

Why can't people get it through their heads that Legacy is so much fun because there's so much broken stuff you can do?
+1

Everyone can do broken stuff. Its not like the storm players are hacking; everyone is.

[Dark Ritual]

Wait the format is broken? Since when? Last I heard, combo isn't overly dominating any metagames at the moment. Neither is zoo and neither is countertop. And seriously, ban life from the loam? Are you fucking retarded? Go play standard Ari, where I hear you get to bash face with baneslayer angels and primeval titans and combo is nonexistant. If you want interactive games in magic, go play limited or type 2 or extended even.

This article was a major piece of shit and I'm sorry to have read it. Ari, you don't know jack shit about legacy like most other writers out there.

He also contradicts himself. He says brainstorm is a skill intensive card that people don't know how to use right. Same with combo decks, they are extremely powerful but require lots of skill. You said to ban LED, but not brainstorm? You do realize that brainstorm is the best card in legacy as long as it is legal right and nothing will change it. The card is just immensely powerful.

Also, ban wild nacatl but not tarmogoyf? Nacatl is played in ONE deck and that is zoo. It see's zero play in other decks across the format which is very diverse while tarmogoyf is played as a 4 of in any deck with green in sans enchantress. The card is hardly broken. Woohoo, you got a 3/3 on turn 2. I'll answer it with a one drop of my own, its called lightning bolt ever heard of that card? Or even better I'm on the play you're on the draw turn 1 I'll play some random 1 drop and turn 2 I'll use the fire half of fire//ice to kill your nacatl. Nacatl is not broken. Period. And creatures that simply attack and block are never going to be banned, ever again. Everyone knows this or should know this. WotC stated that banning kird ape back in what 1994 or 1995 was the wrong move and when it was reprinted in 9th edition, they unbanned it because it only does 2 things. Attacking and blocking.

And someone earlier stated that if you ban combo pieces that are prevalent today a new combo would arise namely thopter sword. They are right. That's what happened in extended or rather what dominated it until they made it a 4 year cycle. Thopter depths was the best deck in the format and if Ari's cards were banned I'm pretty sure it would dominate legacy as well.

[Smmenen]

Apparently, my post was deleted.

This article is just nonsense, and it should be ignored.

It was written by a precocious 19 year old who performed very well at the GP, and felt a grandiose sense of both ability and understanding. While I agree with him that most combo opponents are probably straw men, a read through reveals numerous logical flaws, omitted facts, and just plain absurdities (yeah, let's ban Wild Nacatl). I doubt Ari will be playing Magic in 2 years, and I doubt he's been playing for more than 4. Ignore him.

[SpikeyMikey]

I'm disappointed in this thread. You guys are coming to the right conclusion, that Ari is way off base, but you're getting the right answer for the wrong reasons. I don't see a whole lot of comprehension here, but I do see a whole lot of rage and flaming. Even from Steve, and I've grown to expect better quality posts from him than this.

If you'd stopped to actually consider the article before bashing the guy, you'd see that he put some thought into it. It wasn't "OMG Nacatl is busted, ban it NAOW". It was "if you remove the biggest enablers in Legacy, Zoo goes from a tier 1 deck among many to the best deck in the format hands down. His reasoning behind banning Wild Nacatl at that point is that Tarmogoyf is better in decks other than Zoo than it is in Zoo. Without 'goyf, non-Zoo decks suddenly have a hard time matching up with Nacatl and co. in the red zone. Now honestly, this wouldn't require a banning of Nacatl, the format would adapt, probably through an increase in EE and Firespout. But at least he put some thought into it, even if his understanding of the format is lacking. That's more than I can say for "Brainstorm is the best card in Legacy as long as it is legal right and nothing will change it.". I'd rather read something that's wrong but well thought out than a mindless repetition of Legacy platitudes.

[jjflipped]

Im pretty sure Ari is just trying to make the point that these are the main cards that, if banned simultaneously, would balance out the format considerably. My problem with this logic however is that new decks will arise (good), but one of them will have some broken (relativistically) play that it can make and people will just be unhappy again. (bad)

I love legacy and vintage for the things that i can do that feel like im actually cheating at the game, but orchard mox oath go is even stoppable. I feel that people are pushing aggro decks so far in legacy, where combo and control should be the only decks that even exist. banning kittens would just further prove that point.

LED however, should be banned to promote something resembling fair - unless, of course, people wise up and run disruption.

[dtrooper]

The problem here is the format doesn't need fixing. When you start banning cards left and right and THEN have to ban Wild Nacatl, of all things, because it turns too powerful for the hypothetical format, you're doing it so wrong.

[SpikeyMikey]

The problem here is the format doesn't need fixing. When you start banning cards left and right and THEN have to ban Wild Nacatl, of all things, because it turns too powerful for the hypothetical format, you're doing it so wrong.

Agreed. My thing is just that it's not his logic that's flawed, it's his information. Even perfect logic from a faulty premise will lead to a faulty conclusion. It's not that he's retarded or stupid, he's just under/mis-informed.

[AriLax]

Clearly I wasn't clear enough in the thesis of the article, so here's a better explanation.

First off, we can agree that Legacy is a format based on local events, rather than larger events such as PTQs. As such, Legacy falls somewhere between a completely competitive and completely casual format. People who play in Legacy events are very likely to make deck decisions based on what cards they want to have fun with and play, but they also play to win over just having fun.

If Legacy was a purely competitive format (ie. Extended), I would not want to ban anything right now. Top, LED, and Entomb would be closely watched (LED and Entomb for power, Top mainly for logistics). People will just play whatever wins in this kind of format and bannings are only necessary when the format becomes overly narrow.

If Legacy was a purely casual format (ie. EDH), the banned list would be largely unnecessary as the player base would regulate it within their own groups.

The issue is that it isn't either. The format is in a situation where people are restricted from playing a larger base of what they want to play while still having fun and winning. The cards I have endorsed banning are those I have found to be the restricting forces. There are two main categories.

1. Hopeless losses:

These are the kind of cards that people never actually want to play against. When people lose to these cards over and over, it drives them away from playing.

The three here were LED, Loam, and Top/CB.

2. Constraining Forces

These are the kind of cards that you have to considerably build to beat. This is fine to have exist to some extent, but I feel that these cards do so to an unreasonable level.

LED, Nacatl, and Entomb fall here. Survival is borderline here, and was mainly listed as a precaution.

The goal was to make a format where a Tier 2 deck is not punished with a 0/100 match up like they are now against Zoo/Storm/Old Reanimator/CB Top, but where it is much closer.


Interestingly enough, this logic would almost apply to Standard before it was a PT/PTQ format. The issue there was banning some flagship cards in Legacy still leaves a lot of room, but in Standard there really isn't much deeper beyond the first layer. In Legacy, the secondary and tertiary layers are much broader than the primary one and much closer in power level.

[Grollub]

If you'd stopped to actually consider the article before bashing the guy, you'd see that he put some thought into it.
Mikey, he proposed the banning of Nacatl for crying out loud - the amount of thought put into this article is about the time it takes to make a cup of coffee (instant coffee at that).

[paK0]

1. Hopeless losses:

These are the kind of cards that people never actually want to play against. When people lose to these cards over and over, it drives them away from playing.

The three here were LED, Loam, and Top/CB.

2. Constraining Forces

These are the kind of cards that you have to considerably build to beat. This is fine to have exist to some extent, but I feel that these cards do so to an unreasonable level.

LED, Nacatl, and Entomb fall here. Survival is borderline here, and was mainly listed as a precaution.

The goal was to make a format where a Tier 2 deck is not punished with a 0/100 match up like they are now against Zoo/Storm/Old Reanimator/CB Top, but where it is much closer.




1. No, just no, how many hundred people did tell you that they feel like quitting magic as soon as the other player plays a Loam?

2. Same here, there is no data that would uphold you claim. Entomb is basicaly nonexistent since the Mystical ban and LED showed up in 1 deck in the GP top 8.


Stop making stuff up dude, thats like the worst thing any writer can do. And the 0/100 is bullshit, we had a friggin Sneak attack deck in the GP top 8.

[Grollub]

Clearly I wasn't clear enough in the thesis of the article, so here's a better explanation.

First off, we can agree that Legacy is a format based on local events, rather than larger events such as PTQs. As such, Legacy falls somewhere between a completely competitive and completely casual format. People who play in Legacy events are very likely to make deck decisions based on what cards they want to have fun with and play, but they also play to win over just having fun.

If Legacy was a purely competitive format (ie. Extended), I would not want to ban anything right now. Top, LED, and Entomb would be closely watched (LED and Entomb for power, Top mainly for logistics). People will just play whatever wins in this kind of format and bannings are only necessary when the format becomes overly narrow.

If Legacy was a purely casual format (ie. EDH), the banned list would be largely unnecessary as the player base would regulate it within their own groups.

The issue is that it isn't either. The format is in a situation where people are restricted from playing a larger base of what they want to play while still having fun and winning. The cards I have endorsed banning are those I have found to be the restricting forces. There are two main categories.
You cannot be serious... 'Legacy' is just but a name for a certain type of tournament Magic: the Gathering and as thus is purely competitive. Do not confuse the lack of popularity compared to a format like standard, with it being any less competitive...

[Mark Sun]

You cannot be serious... 'Legacy' is just but a name for a certain type of tournament Magic: the Gathering and as thus is purely competitive. Do not confuse the lack of popularity compared to a format like standard, with it being any less competitive...

Quoted for truth. Ari, I think you're (mis)interpreting a perceived closer relationship among players (honestly, I have gotten the feel that this is one of the few formats that have clear sense of "Teams" and a ton of well-known and respected players that either don't have time for/choose not to play at the Pro Level, Vintage being the other one) as a casual setting. Do not make this mistake, it's almost the same as the whole Gentleman's Agreement garbage from WOTC that was posted to justify the MT banning. If I walk into a tournament, you can bet your ass I'm there to win games and make prize at the very least. Actually, just last night I took TES to a small 9-man local, and I do not apologize for it.

What empirical data do you have to suggest that players are quitting when they see LED, Loam, or CB/Top? Playing competitive formats (I guess this goes against your main assumption, which I hope is cleared up by now) requires knowledge of the format and knowing what are good and bad matchups, and upon entrance into the event you are accepting the consequences of running into said bad matchup. I personally would not want to see this format turn into a 50/50 coin-flipping cripple fight, with no sense of synergy or explosiveness.

[kinda]

This article was irritating...who exactly does Ari feel his audience was? It's not people who don't play legacy, because anyone who doesn't play legacy 1) doesn't have the perspective required to evaluate his claims 2) probably doesn't care about a format they don't play. It's also probably not people who play legacy...because I'm assuming people who play legacy enjoy it and aren't waiting until 6-11 format defining cards get banned.

And the article was filled with other problems...

So entomb is one of the top 6 cards to get banned...but dredge is easy to beat?

Everyone should be able to deal with or race a snt'd emrakul and progenitus but wild nacatl is unacceptable?

Life from the loam? A card played in one deck that's vulnerable to gy hate, counterbalace, nonbasic hate, and the deck has a horrid combo matchup.

Apparently imperial recruiter is only used in one deck...what are these tier 2 decks we should all be playing?

"Hypergenesis: The concern here is the combination of speed and consistency, though the deck design required to play this card is definitely limiting enough to be almost reasonable."

I could write a whole article on that gem...so his definition of consistent is a 4 color deck with no tutors or deck manipulation...apparently emrakul/progenitus are fine so the card we should be scared of is sphinx of the steel wind?

[dtrooper]

AriLax, I admire the courage to jump right into the wolves, but you came to defend your points saying the stuff most posters disagreed with in the first place.

Legacy is a competitive format, or else Wizards wouldn't support it. Two Grand-Prix per year is a respectable number. It might not be as popular as Standard, but that doesn't make it casual. The changes you propose are based on this mindset, which analyses the format from the wrong spectrum.

Also, there is no such thing as a 0/100 matchup, not even 80/20 exists. Every viable deck creates interactions - even the most linear combo decks do - and not always the most powerful deck comes ahead. The card pool is too big to exist such a thing as a metagame in legacy, I'll give you that. But from a broad card pool come as many broken interactions as great answers to those interactions. The format has done a pretty good job of balancing itself out on its own and you are suggesting desperate measures to fix something that isn't broken.

[Smmenen]

Who said there shouldn't be hopeless losses? Magic is ultimately a more complex form of Rock, Paper Scissors, and positioning is one of the most important things people do. Without dog matchups, positioning isn't as important.

I, frankly, really like the idea that every deck has at least one really bad matchup. That's a big reason I don't like bannings like Mystical Tutor.

[DukeDemonKn1ght]

Actually, just last night I took TES to a small 9-man local, and I do not apologize for it.


http://www.kungfuculture.net/admin/images/bully-1278926499.gif

"Gimme yo shit, shawty." I approve.

[MMogg]

First off, we can agree that Legacy is a format based on local events, rather than larger events such as PTQs. As such, Legacy falls somewhere between a completely competitive and completely casual format. People who play in Legacy events are very likely to make deck decisions based on what cards they want to have fun with and play, but they also play to win over just having fun.

If Legacy was a purely competitive format (ie. Extended), I would not want to ban anything right now. Top, LED, and Entomb would be closely watched (LED and Entomb for power, Top mainly for logistics). People will just play whatever wins in this kind of format and bannings are only necessary when the format becomes overly narrow.

If Legacy was a purely casual format (ie. EDH), the banned list would be largely unnecessary as the player base would regulate it within their own groups.

The issue is that it isn't either. The format is in a situation where people are restricted from playing a larger base of what they want to play while still having fun and winning. The cards I have endorsed banning are those I have found to be the restricting forces. There are two main categories.

Might you be confusing competitive and professional? I think it's objectively true that Legacy is not a PTQ format, but seeing that it has not only Wizards' sponsored large events like Grand Prixs, but also other large tournaments (for example SCG $5K and Bazaar of Moxen) that have their fair share of professional players who attend, Legacy can and should be labelled competitive. These events are competitive enough that someone like LSV scrubbed out of both GPs. He also couldn't even win the MTGO Legacy Daily Events he joined in the run up to GP: Columbus. So, I think it's true that players who only play Legacy when it comes to sanctioned constructed tournaments may be considered amateurs, but I don't think that equals non-competitive.

[SpikeyMikey]

Dtrooper is right. You've got some mammoth-sized junk, jumping into this thread where there are maybe 2 people who don't want to tar and feather you and no one who is on your side. You're somehow under this mistaken impression that you understand the format and we don't. Doesn't that strike you as a bit arrogant? We ARE the old school. We are the guys who taught you to play. We are the guys who did the footwork so that you would understand what a mana curve is and why you scarf up removal in limited. I was writing articles for Brainburst and SCG before your balls dropped. No lie.

I can only speak for myself, but I quit playing T2 because of the direction that Wizards is trying to go with it. You want to talk about a semi-casual format, there it is right there. A bunch of guys beating each other with 5+ mana fatties. It's like the guy in Starcraft going "5 minutes no rush, guys!" A format where a blue based "control" deck might run 4 counterspells and 3 draw spells. If I wanted to play Yu-Gi-Oh, I would. Just. Play. Yu-Gi-Oh. It's lame and it's not Magic. Sure I want to have fun. Because winning IS fun.

Now like I said before, I think your logic was fine, but you're working from a number of flawed premises, namely that you have a grasp of how the Legacy metagame works, that you understand the mentality of the players who exclusively (or damn close to) play Legacy and that those bannings would lead to a healthier format. The format is so healthy and diverse it makes my eyes bleed and makes baby jeebus cry. And tinkering with it when you don't longstanding and intimate understanding of it doesn't work. The DCI banned Mystical in an effort to stomp on combo (and make it more casual friendly like T2) and combo had its best major tournament on US soil in years because people got complacent about it. But you want to ban half a dozen cards, half of which you suggest banning because of expected consequences? When anyone can see the fresh example of unintended consequeces the DCI just presented to us? Your game skills may be fine, but you need to do a lot of brushing up on eternal deck construction and theory skills before you start suggesting wild changes to the people who eat, sleep and breathe this stuff.

Christ, and all that after I just got done ripping on others for not being nicer. Some days you're just bound to make a hypocritical asshole out of yourself...

[MMogg]

Christ, and all that after I just got done ripping on others for not being nicer. Some days you're just bound to make a hypocritical asshole out of yourself...

Way to out-arrogant the arrogant. He Arrogant Bolts you and you Arrogant Blast him in response.

Just because I used to read the Dojo doesn't mean I have a better grasp of the format than a newcomer. Formats change and evolve as has Magic and I don't think swinging your age-based e-peen around is the right way to go about this. Sometimes newcomers bring new and fresh perspectives that old stogy veterans can't see or refuse to admit. It's what they call a psychic prison. That's why emic and etic views are both essential for getting a clear understanding of anything.

[AriLax]

Who said there shouldn't be hopeless losses? Magic is ultimately a more complex form of Rock, Paper Scissors, and positioning is one of the most important things people do. Without dog matchups, positioning isn't as important.

I, frankly, really like the idea that every deck has at least one really bad matchup. That's a big reason I don't like bannings like Mystical Tutor.

I'm not against unfavorable match ups, but when for a deck's end game involves it sitting around 10 minutes twiddling its thumbs while the opponent can't do anything and couldn't really do anything earlier that didn't result in that deck not playing the game, is that what you think people want?

Most formats it doesn't matter what people want. Legacy, I feel it does.

Also, as to your earlier comment, I can't speak to the future, but I was buying packs of Urza's Saga when it came out and I have PTQ top 8's dating to when Rochester draft still existed. If you want to go after lack of experience, I think you will be disappointed.

[Smmenen]

I'm not against unfavorable match ups, but when for a deck's end game involves it sitting around 10 minutes twiddling its thumbs while the opponent can't do anything and couldn't really do anything earlier that didn't result in that deck not playing the game, is that what you think people want?


Whether it's Aluren, Doomsday, or Ad Nauseam, I don't think it matters. The correct thing to do is scoop.

When people play Yawgmoth's Wil in Vintage, people generally don't sit around for 10 minutes. They scoop.




Most formats it doesn't matter what people want. Legacy, I feel it does.

And most people think Legacy is great. If the DCI tinkers with Legacy, they are as likely to make it worse as they are better, despite the best of intentions.




Also, as to your earlier comment, I can't speak to the future, but I was buying packs of Urza's Saga when it came out and I have PTQ top 8's dating to when Rochester draft still existed. If you want to go after lack of experience, I think you will be disappointed.

Fair. But my point wasn't that you didn't have experience, it was about your perspective.

[kinda]

I'm not against unfavorable match ups, but when for a deck's end game involves it sitting around 10 minutes twiddling its thumbs while the opponent can't do anything and couldn't really do anything earlier that didn't result in that deck not playing the game, is that what you think people want?

Most formats it doesn't matter what people want. Legacy, I feel it does.

Also, as to your earlier comment, I can't speak to the future, but I was buying packs of Urza's Saga when it came out and I have PTQ top 8's dating to when Rochester draft still existed. If you want to go after lack of experience, I think you will be disappointed.

In competitive chess if you've lost you scoop...unless your opponent is going to flag. Same principle applies in magic...you can sit around and hope for your opponent to blunder, but if you do no one wants to hear you complain about sitting there.

What people want is important in every format...wizards has a vested interest in maintaining people's interest in the game...

[Aggro_zombies]

Ari, I think you would have been fine if you'd presented your article as the answer to, "How do we ban storm combo without imbalancing the format?" That is essentially what you've written about, but by trying to present it as anything but a thought experiment, you've ended up pissing off a lot of Legacy players who see the format being just fine as-is. Really, arguing that the format is out of balance now is insane, given that one Tier I deck made top 8 (two, if you count Counterbalance as a deck and not just as a combo). The remainder of the top 8 was made up of Tier II decks or decks that were premiering at the event. How is that anything but the sign of a healthy format?

Also, the "time bomb" argument is not an argument. It's an excuse that translates as, "most of what I'm saying flatly contradicts reality, but I'll hedge my bets by putting a potential told-you-so clause here in case the shit hits the fan somewhere down the road." Given the balance and innovation possible in the format right now, it's more likely that it will implode due to card availability and price issues than to any inherent imbalance.

Furthermore, future printings and errata could blow the format up at any time: no one even looked at Flash as a potential sideboard option until MaGo suddenly made it a one-card win condition.

Also, way to be part of the problem instead of the solution, Mr. LED-Is-A-Hopeless-Loss-But-I-Played-Storm-Combo-At-The-GP-Anyway.

[SpikeyMikey]

Way to out-arrogant the arrogant. He Arrogant Bolts you and you Arrogant Blast him in response.

Just because I used to read the Dojo doesn't mean I have a better grasp of the format than a newcomer. Formats change and evolve as has Magic and I don't think swinging your age-based e-peen around is the right way to go about this. Sometimes newcomers bring new and fresh perspectives that old stogy veterans can't see or refuse to admit. It's what they call a psychic prison. That's why emic and etic views are both essential for getting a clear understanding of anything.

Not going to touch the arrogant thing. I was damn arrogant, although in this instance I feel it was justified. Newcomers can have potent insights. I don't think Legacy wouldve ever stumbled onto Thopter Sword had it not been tearing up Extended. And us stodgy old timers are generally resistant to new ideas. I think it's a major flaw in the majority of the Magic community but it affects Eternal formats more strongly than more fluid formats, probably, when you trace it back, because the power level is so high. There are 100 wrong ways to build a deck for every workable variation on a theme and subpar deck construction matters a lot more in a format where 2 or 3 turns can be an eternity. So people tend to dismiss new things that don't work quickly instead of tweaking until they do work.

But the thing with newcomers is that the signal to noise ratio tends to be low because this format is more complex than any other format, even moreso than Vintage. So without spending a long time immersing yourself in the format and studying card and deck interactions, you're going to have a hard time producing anything meaningful. The format has a tough learning curve. The thought process was fine, laudable even. But it betrayed a lack of understanding of the balances and interactions that make Legacy not just balanced but stable. The banning of MT affected the format but not catastrophically so. Banning Loam/LED etc. Would make Zoo stronger, but it would quickly drop back to the power level it's at now. Big Zoo would beat Zoo, non-aggro would pack more EE and the format would rebalance itself. Nacatl would not need a banning.

So while I can appreciate the logic Ari provides, it's based in flawed premises and therefore his conclusions are flawed. Good thought process, bad starting point and poor knowledge of counters and balances. But it's one thing to come out and say something wrong and another thing to come back after you've been corrected and continue to argue bad information is silly.