Survival of the Fittest

[sdematt]

I've had a few discussions with people in my area (all of whom don't own Survivals, I'm the only one) and we were talking about the situation with Vengevine Survival. I'm not playing it in the community at the moment, as I know no one has boarded against it (but it's understandable, since I'm the only one). I see a ton of people online/in real life complaining about it, but no one wants to do anything about it. Everyone's complacent about taking action against it because they think the DCI is going to do something for them.

Vengevine Survival is a good deck because it does thing Survival used to do for lots of mana for little mana. Plain and simple. But, why are few people adapting their sideboards, and their lists in general to have a better matchup? Is it so hard to slide the grave-hate you took out when Reanimator left back in? Is it so hard to lose 4 slots of sideboard against another archetype to deal with a very prevalent archetype at the moment?

The most active thread on Survival is the one calling for it's banning, and a bunch of people complaining about the unstoppable power, with very few people like myself discussing and reassuring that it isn't broken, and that we should work together to deal with it.

I think we all need to take a look at the lists we're running (and losing with) against Vengevine, and see how the board or main or both can be tweaked to improve the matchup. Discuss in the deck's appropriate thread or in the "How to beat Survival" thread, but seriously, go out, test, and discuss. I've already done solid testing with the decks that I play and I know how I need to board to give me a better shot at a win. Will it always work? No. Do you sometimes lose because the opponent draws the nuts? It can happen even with a matchup you're heavily favoured to win.

My two cents.

-Matt

[Wanderlust]

@ Rico Suave: The difference between Necropotence/Illusions/Donate and Survival/Vengevine is that Vengevine is great with or without Survival. Donate and Illusions of Grandeur are/were both terrible cards by themselves. As a two card combo without Necropotence, Illusions/Donate suffers from the same problems as all other two card combos made up of two independently bad cards.

The current question of banning ISN'T a clear cut case of one card being broken and the other card(s) channeling that bonkers into actually winning. This is a case where both cards are damn good on their own. That is something rare in the history of Magic.

It is totally legitimate to debate which card is more of a problem. Both sides of the argument have merit.

[dontbiteitholmes]

There are a whole slew of extremely faulty lines of thought in this thread. I'm not going to go through each and every one because that would take hours, but there is one in particular that a number of people in this thread seem to cling to that is particularly fascinating to me.

I see people mention all the time that Survival of the Fittest is not a problem card, and their reasoning is that it has been around for a while and has not been a problem before. There was another card that fit a similar description over a decade ago - Necropotence. You see, at the time most people were using Necropotence for a nice 5-6 years and it was fine. They used the skull to cast cards like pump knights or Nekrataal or maybe a Hymn to Tourach. Then suddenly people started using the card not to cast "fair" creatures but to do rather "unfair" things like kill the opponent on turn 3. This was completely overpowered at the time and a ban needed to happen, which of course set people apart because they had differing opinions on what exactly to ban. There were two main parts: the combo engine and the outlet. The combo engine was Necropotence, and the outlet was Illusions/Donate. If you ask people nowadays, they will tell you that Necro must be banned and Illusions/Donate is perfectly fine.

Guess what? The same evolution has now happened to Survival. People have awoken from playing poor versions of Survival and have finally improved to good versions. From this point on, every competitive Survival list will never be the same just like old Necro decks never went back to their pump knights.

Now, the current crop of Survival decks is such that there is a ridiculous combo engine, which is Survival, and then there is the outlet which is either Vengevine or Necrotic Ooze or something equivalent. Yet I see people who have not learned from history and spout off that somehow the outlet is the problem. Do you want to unban Necropotence too? If there is a problem, the clear target to ban is the combo engine in Survival of the Fittest.

For what it's worth, I don't think Survival needs to be banned. I think people are just upset and frustrated.

Speaking of faulty logic, comparing Necropotence in old 1.X to Survival in current legacy is quite a stretch. Necropotence was not "fine" for 5 years, it was broken the day it came out. It dominated Standard so hard they nicknamed the season it came out "Black Summer." The only reason it didn't rage for years was because of Stasis then later the printing of Force of Will. When it got to Extended Necro won the first Extended pro tour, Urza's sets came out and everyone played Academy decks that got banned, and Necro came 1 game away from winning the next year, it went in Trix which was the deck to beat for a long time, it went in Pebbles, the only reason Necro didn't get banned much earlier is because it took Wizards several years to ban everything from Urza's Block. It completely dominated Extended while it was legal except for the short time Memory Jar, Academy, and stuff like that was legal. So yeah, just another example of WoTC not knowing what they were doing back in the day. They should have banned it much earlier, it reigned almost nonstop 4 years.

[Amon Amarth]

@ Rico Suave: The difference between Necropotence/Illusions/Donate and Survival/Vengevine is that Vengevine is great with or without Survival. Donate and Illusions of Grandeur are/were both terrible cards by themselves. As a two card combo without Necropotence, Illusions/Donate suffers from the same problems as all other two card combos made up of two independently bad cards.

The current question of banning ISN'T a clear cut case of one card being broken and the other card(s) channeling that bonkers into actually winning. This is a case where both cards are damn good on their own. That is something rare in the history of Magic.

It is totally legitimate to debate which card is more of a problem. Both sides of the argument have merit.

I'm not sure how good you think Vengevine is without Survival, but it requires quite a bit more work than it already does to make hasty plants. One that is slower and much more vulnerable to GY hate. In comparison to Survival, well there is none. Vengevine still acts like a creature, you can still interact with it. Nothing that a Plow or six won't fix.

[Rico Suave]

@ Rico Suave: The difference between Necropotence/Illusions/Donate and Survival/Vengevine is that Vengevine is great with or without Survival. Donate and Illusions of Grandeur are/were both terrible cards by themselves. As a two card combo without Necropotence, Illusions/Donate suffers from the same problems as all other two card combos made up of two independently bad cards.

The current question of banning ISN'T a clear cut case of one card being broken and the other card(s) channeling that bonkers into actually winning. This is a case where both cards are damn good on their own. That is something rare in the history of Magic.

It is totally legitimate to debate which card is more of a problem. Both sides of the argument have merit.

It's funny you should bring this up, considering Kai Budde won a Pro Tour with Illusions/Donate after Necropotence was banned.

You are entitled to think what you want, but don't be surprised if some day it dawns on you that Vengevine is a very mediocre card (much like Illusions/Donate).


Speaking of faulty logic, comparing Necropotence in old 1.X to Survival in current legacy is quite a stretch. Necropotence was not "fine" for 5 years, it was broken the day it came out. It dominated Standard so hard they nicknamed the season it came out "Black Summer." The only reason it didn't rage for years was because of Stasis then later the printing of Force of Will. When it got to Extended Necro won the first Extended pro tour, Urza's sets came out and everyone played Academy decks that got banned, and Necro came 1 game away from winning the next year, it went in Trix which was the deck to beat for a long time, it went in Pebbles, the only reason Necro didn't get banned much earlier is because it took Wizards several years to ban everything from Urza's Block. It completely dominated Extended while it was legal except for the short time Memory Jar, Academy, and stuff like that was legal. So yeah, just another example of WoTC not knowing what they were doing back in the day. They should have banned it much earlier, it reigned almost nonstop 4 years.

Necro wasn't broken until a lightbulb went off in someone's head and revolutionized the way it was used. The same thing happened with Survival, though it happened only recently (and it's not as powerful a card as Necro is). I'm not going to argue the strength of Necro though. If you actually played during this period of time it would have been evident to you that what you're saying is false, but it's beside the point.

The point was to illustrate how a card which was previously a tame card can become more powerful because people use it differently. I could have cited the synergy of Burning Wish and LED in T1 as another example of this phenomenon. These are cards that were legal for a considerable period of time until one day people broke them and they were no longer fit to remain legal in that environment.

[dahcmai]

Is there anyone on here actually calling for it or Venvgevine's banning? You guys seem to just be arguing over different stuff, but agreeing on the main point.

[sdematt]

At first, I was upset that it was so powerful and wanted it gone. Then I decided to think and realized there are answers, and all was well.

-Matt

[Rico Suave]

Is there anyone on here actually calling for it or Venvgevine's banning? You guys seem to just be arguing over different stuff, but agreeing on the main point.

Not even a page ago, I saw a person suggest banning Basking Rootwalla.

[paK0]

I had the pleasure of playing two Vengevine Survival decks today and I gotta say, while they are not unbeatable they are a little over the top.

The problem is not either card, but the combination of the two. Stopping one doesn't cut it and to combat Survival and Vengevine sucessfully a great number of hate cards is required,often too much to keep the rest of the deck strong.

The deck is borderline broken, but has only been around for a short time. While it is completely going nuts all over the globe a ban might not be neccesary (although I would like one). I does take much longer for a metagame to adapt than for a single deck to take over it, so the problem might solve itself in a month or two.

[SpikeyMikey]

Rico:

I think LED is a good comparison. But for different reasons. What you said parrots what I heard from a lot of T1 players over the years. Even read an article on SCG about it 4 or 5 years ago. The thought runs something like this:

"Man, those old school T1 players were idiots. Playing bad things like Morphling and Lightning Bolt when they should've been playing with Workshop and Burning Wish. Those cards are so fundamentally broken!"

Ecept they weren't. It's not that LED was a junk rare and Burning Wish was Cunning Wish's poor cousin because people were too stupid to break them, it's because they couldn't be broken until the storm mechanic. Imagine if storm was part of the resolution instead of a trigger upon casting. LED would still be a junk rare and Burning. Wish would still be a vaguely unplayable limited tutor.

Until Mirrodin came out, Stax was a tier 2 deck at best, and that's being generous.

It's not a new way of using it that is propelling SotF forward, it's Vengevine, pure and simple. Is anyone HONESTLY going to tell me that they'd be scared of a Survival deck that used Rootwallas to put Nether Shadows and Bloodghasts into play??

The difference is that you can't ban en entire mechanic. So storm doesn't go, LED does. But Vengevine is 1 card, and it's not the mechanic that breaks it, it's the size. Leaving Survival in the format does little to limit design space. And of the two, Survival is more fun. It's a vaguely playable engine that has never dominated the format but always been at the fringes. Oh, it was overrepresented at the birth of the format, but the first couple of Worlds at Gen Con showed that it wasn't broken.

If they printed a card that broke the fuck out of Lifeline, would you call for it to be banned as an enabler? What about Recycle? Both of those cards could be overpowered if the right card was printed. But sometimes the enabler is more fair than the cards being abused with it.

[The Big Ragu]

Easily my favorite green card in the game. I think it makes Legacy as a whole a lot more interesting. It's not unbeatable/broken, just really friggen good!

[Tao]

Vengevine:
- so far it has only seen play in Survival decks.

Survival:
- Squee/Krovikan Horror/Genesis/Wonder/Anger were used for years in an abusive manner to keep the deck at Tier2
- Survival acted as a Tutor for solutions, threats and card advantage
- Iona gave the deck a huge push by cheating on Mana for the big Angel that stops the opponent from playing spells
- The printing of Vengevine (a good, but completely fair card in T2 and Extended) put the deck to Tier 1
- Necotic Ooze is a single black Mana to expensive to be really broken, but still gets played and ends game instantly.

Now compare:
Vengevine: only played in Survival decks, fair synergy with Wild Mongrel and Fauna Shaman.
Survival: unfair, 1-card-win combo that ends games instantly, cheats on Mana, abusive, Tutor

Now to my questions:

Assuming it is decided that a ban is nessecary because of this, what should Wzards ban?

What is more likely for the next sets:
Another card that makes Vengevine dangerous again should they ban Survival? Or another card that puts Survival over the Top again should they ban Vengevine?

[Piceli89]

Just finished to watch the SCG 5k Boston videos, pretty disgusted if you ask me, and to anyone saying that Survival is fair, please do not tell lies.
That card deserves to be banned and quickly. If we want to discuss about the potential brokeness of Legacy staple, then as of now it is a mile above everything else, LED and Top included.
It's just like a turn 2 drop that means victory if the other doesn't have the counter or manages to get it off the table. You can watch those videos and see how this happens on a regular basis each, and I say EACH game. This is not balanced anymore, the games consist either in dropping Survival on the table or (trying) to knock it off. In the mirrors, the first that sees it wins. I could not find an exception in all those vids.
There is also a game where a guy dazes, needles and firespout off vengevines; the other, with zero cards in hand, topdecks Nature's claim and a creature and wins on the spot. Basically it requires at least 2 mana, a creature in hand and Survival on the table to win in 2-3 turns.
I mean, you can play tightly, not doing a single mistake, countering, needling, gripping, and if the other topdecks that card you're dead on the spot. Seems pretty right, yes.

This is not funny anymore. You can bitch about Mystical tutor, the truth is that we're getting closer to something etremely similar and even more unbalanced. The format has become worse a lot since 1,5 years ago.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Those who want Survival/Vengevine banned:

1. Refuse to adapt and won't let go of their petdecks that don't beat Vengevine Survival - What can I say?

2. Can't afford a decent deck - This is Legacy, go play Casual.

[SpikeyMikey]

Tao made some good points. Survival decks have always been tier 2. And Vengevine has only been used so far in decks running Survival. But if you think for a second that banning Survival keeps vine from being broken, you need to spend a few minutes thinking about what happens when UG Madness swaps SotF out straight up for Intuition. It loses maybe half a turn on average, but that doesn't matter because a hand relying on SotF is balls slow to begin with.

GW would go away. You know, the slower version of the deck? UG wouldn't go anywhere. It would just get better since it's poor in the 'mirror' against GW.

But the bottom line is, if you can't deal with a deck that generally does nothing until turn 3, you're playing the wrong game. Go pick up Pokemon. There are a number of decks with positive vine MUs. Look at how well Rock style decks have been doing. New Horizons and TA perform well too. Or just retune your main to cope and quit thinking you can beat every deck by siding in 3 or 4 cards.

[Piceli89]

Those who want Survival/Vengevine banned:

1. Refuse to adapt and won't let go of their petdecks that don't beat Vengevine Survival - What can I say?

2. Can't afford a decent deck - This is Legacy, go play Casual.

You are completely missing the point and replying with cheap answers as it's clear that you are a Survival player and you would not like to see your $300 Vengevines and Sotf get the banhammer.

I'll tell things clear: Legacy is not balanced anymore. Survival is clearly a lot above any other deck. It thrashes easily any form of aggro-control just letting resolve a Survival and getting it run for a turn. It has just become a "answer me now or you'll lose" card.
As Mystical tutor used to be. And it got banned. And I'm an avid Storm combo player and I think the ban was perfectly right.

It's too fast for Goblins and Merfolk. Too fast and resiliant for Countertop. Too recursive for Control. Too good for discard decks as basically you topdeck a Survival and you have won.
You can say "just adapt" as any times as you want, but you clearly can't fill your deck with shitty card just to fight Survival. And it would still be able to pull off some crazy combo or just skullfuck you in some old-fashioned way. You can put as much hate around Survival and it will still get you, maybe in the form of Fauna Shaman. You can pack gravehate and they will find a way to go around it. You can needle Survival only when your opponent is fully tapped out because he's going to take a solution in response. The same is true for Qasaling it, he gets a Witness and you're still at the beginning.
Just WATCH those videos, and you get the idea. It's shocking.

I repeat, i should be the one who's more happy to see so many Vengevines running around because I can easily trash them. What matters me is the variety of the format. You can still say that it is healthy, but when you stare at several top8s infested by a single CARD that basically makes several combos viable, you should start to make yourself some questions.

Survival is tutorable, it's cheap, it work instant speed and it's a tutor effect that is used several times. Does this remind you something?
Yes, it was the same story for Mystical tutor. As it was the piece that let multiples archetype run with consistency. Too much consistency, as it seems.
And as Mystical tutor would have allowed to take any instant or sorcery printed to make new combos viable, Survival will allow to take whichever creature to do the same unfair stuff. In a UGx shell, it also allows you to stay open to cast counterspell and, if they don't, you just pull your shitty Squees and Triskelions out of the deck and start doing CA or shenanigans. This brings to an inevitable superiority, be it in the late game or immediately with 4 idiotic green monsters coming out of the water.
It doesn't even take a lot of skill to win from a resolved Survival. As it wasn't difficult to cast Ad Nauseam and draw a bunch of cards after a Duress or a Chant.


If you could manage to put down your business for a second, would you still think that things are still balanced? I mean, a card that says "G, discard a card: Demonic tutor. Repeat.". And no, Vengevines without Survival are not worth building a deck around them. It's the tutor piece that makes them so dangerous, otherwise they're cool 4/3s that would combo in a suboptimal -or slower- way.

[Rune]

Tao made some good points. Survival decks have always been tier 2. And Vengevine has only been used so far in decks running Survival. But if you think for a second that banning Survival keeps vine from being broken, you need to spend a few minutes thinking about what happens when UG Madness swaps SotF out straight up for Intuition. It loses maybe half a turn on average, but that doesn't matter because a hand relying on SotF is balls slow to begin with.

GW would go away. You know, the slower version of the deck? UG wouldn't go anywhere. It would just get better since it's poor in the 'mirror' against GW.

But the bottom line is, if you can't deal with a deck that generally does nothing until turn 3, you're playing the wrong game. Go pick up Pokemon. There are a number of decks with positive vine MUs. Look at how well Rock style decks have been doing. New Horizons and TA perform well too. Or just retune your main to cope and quit thinking you can beat every deck by siding in 3 or 4 cards.

UG Madness would go back to sucking ass without Survival. Its brokeness comes from being able to 'play' uncounterable creatures once SotF is in play. Intuition is infinitely slower than Survival and is just nowhere near as good. It's like comparing Personal Tutor to Mystical Tutor. Intuition on 3 Vengevines also gets hit a lot harder by GY hate. GY hate against Survival only solves half the problem or gives you a small tempo boost.

UG Survival is tough for GW because UG has disruption and Wonder.

What do you mean Survival decks don't do anything until turn 3? Most Survival decks are very disruptive and can keep playing threats until the coast is clear for a SotF to hit the table. I would say that if your opponent has SotF in hand, he's definitely "doing something" just by representing a threat that is lethal as soon as it resolves. If you're far behind on the board in terms of creatures and you untap with SotF on turn 3, you can recover from almost any terrible board state.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Lets take a look at the best case scenario with UG Madness:

T1 - Land + Noble Hierarch.
T2 - Land + Survival + discard Vengevine(1), get Vengevine(2).
T3 - Land + discard Vengevine(2), get Vengevine(3), discard Vengevine(3), get Vengevine(4)/Wonder, discard Vengevine(4)/Wonder, get a Basking Rootwalla, discard and cast Basking Rootwalla, get a Shield Sphere/Memnite and cast it, swing for 12/16

So yes, you don't do anything until turn 3, and you don't even kill your opponent until T4.

Last time I checked, there are plenty of decks that kill on T4 or even before that. Even goblins can kill you on T3.

All you have to do is deal with Survival/Graveyard. If you counter Survival or Extirpate Vengevines, the deck can only hope to topdeck another Survival or (if Vengevines were removed from the game) win with 3/3 Rootwalla's or X/X Mongrels. How's that unbeatable?

You can even argue that the deck will play around Extirpate, but how's that any good?

The same way that if a combo deck is dealt with, the combo player can only hope to draw enough relevant cards to get it going again.

Same goes for Dredge and Reanimator.

I don't see how it could be unbalanced.

[Vacrix]

You are completely missing the point and replying with cheap answers as it's clear that you are a Survival player and you would not like to see your $300 Vengevines and Sotf get the banhammer.

I'll tell things clear: Legacy is not balanced anymore. Survival is clearly a lot above any other deck. It thrashes easily any form of aggro-control just letting resolve a Survival and getting it run for a turn. It has just become a "answer me now or you'll lose" card.
As Mystical tutor used to be. And it got banned. And I'm an avid Storm combo player and I think the ban was perfectly right.

It's too fast for Goblins and Merfolk. Too fast and resiliant for Countertop. Too recursive for Control. Too good for discard decks as basically you topdeck a Survival and you have won.
You can say "just adapt" as any times as you want, but you clearly can't fill your deck with shitty card just to fight Survival. And it would still be able to pull off some crazy combo or just skullfuck you in some old-fashioned way. You can put as much hate around Survival and it will still get you, maybe in the form of Fauna Shaman. You can pack gravehate and they will find a way to go around it. You can needle Survival only when your opponent is fully tapped out because he's going to take a solution in response. The same is true for Qasaling it, he gets a Witness and you're still at the beginning.
Just WATCH those videos, and you get the idea. It's shocking.

I repeat, i should be the one who's more happy to see so many Vengevines running around because I can easily trash them. What matters me is the variety of the format. You can still say that it is healthy, but when you stare at several top8s infested by a single CARD that basically makes several combos viable, you should start to make yourself some questions.

Survival is tutorable, it's cheap, it work instant speed and it's a tutor effect that is used several times. Does this remind you something?
Yes, it was the same story for Mystical tutor. As it was the piece that let multiples archetype run with consistency. Too much consistency, as it seems.
And as Mystical tutor would have allowed to take any instant or sorcery printed to make new combos viable, Survival will allow to take whichever creature to do the same unfair stuff. In a UGx shell, it also allows you to stay open to cast counterspell and, if they don't, you just pull your shitty Squees and Triskelions out of the deck and start doing CA or shenanigans. This brings to an inevitable superiority, be it in the late game or immediately with 4 idiotic green monsters coming out of the water.
It doesn't even take a lot of skill to win from a resolved Survival. As it wasn't difficult to cast Ad Nauseam and draw a bunch of cards after a Duress or a Chant.


If you could manage to put down your business for a second, would you still think that things are still balanced? I mean, a card that says "G, discard a card: Demonic tutor. Repeat.". And no, Vengevines without Survival are not worth building a deck around them. It's the tutor piece that makes them so dangerous, otherwise they're cool 4/3s that would combo in a suboptimal -or slower- way.
Be careful how you use the concept of fairness to make your argument. Most decks have an "answer me now or you are fucked card", that or the cards act in synthesis to put you in the same situation. The deck has a good strategy that will usually require some sideboard space to combat, but there are plenty of decks that put Survival in its place. If you have a problem with Survival, you can always play something else. The deck is hyped and people are slow to adapt to the changing metagame. Whenever a good new deck concept enters the fray people are obviously unprepared for it and lack the proper tech to deal with that matchup because it hasn't been discovered yet. Besides, even if some decks don't have a solid answer for it, other decks will and those decks will get better. Much like in Economics, some people win and some people lose. The question is, do you want to win or do you want to lose? Ultimately, its your choice.

Further, its worth taking a closer look at the concept of the metagame. Usually there are a few decks that dominate the top tiers. Usually the top 3 decks eat each other, Zoo eating the control flavor of the week, control eating the TES, and TES eating the Zoo player. But now that order has flipped completely so everyone is freaking out. Now Zoo (aggro) players are having trouble with the Survival (control) players, and TES (combo) players are beating the Survival (control) players and the Zoo players. Now whose to say that Survival cannot switch the order this way, or even sit itself at the top of the metagame? Storm combo still keeps the deck in check while people learn how to fight it off with hate instead of speed. If we see a resurgence of storm combo, we will probably also see more Countertop (likely with Dreadnought/Stifle and Trinket Mage for Pithing Needle).. etc. The point is the metagame will shift, just give it some time. Do you remember when Ichorid first got big and everyone thought it was the shit? And then it dropped out of favor... and now its back again? And the same situation with Landstill? Shit changes!

All the time you spend bitching about it would be better spent finding an answer to the problem. And for the record, Pithing Needle shuts down Survival pretty well.

Also..

I'm glad that WotC doesn't use the banhammer by representative democracy or we'd have a shitty ass format. Every time a deck gets really good people feel it necessary to wave their pricks menacingly at the new kid on the block and threaten the banhammer. I say Survival is a drop in the bucket compared to what ANT and Reanimator did to the format not too long ago. Survival doesn't have a particularly fast clock and it has minimal disruption, and its creatures are comparatively weaker than most others in the format; however, it is very consistent and Vengevine makes it resilient as well. Consider its weaknesses though. Survival has to setup before it can go crazy and minimal protection makes it difficult for the Survival player to deal with strong early turn plays. Its no surprise that storm combo is so good against Survival. So make it a point to have a strong opening play that can put you ahead of the Survival player, play more sideboard hate, or play storm combo. Its that simple. Why do all the haters think the format has to remain static? Don't you like change? Don't you like having to adapt and overcome the challenge of a strong adversary? Or do you like the sweatless kicking the shit out of everyone you come across because I'm the Juggernaut bitch and I can't be stopped??! Seriously my brain hurts.


Or just retune your main to cope and quit thinking you can beat every deck by siding in 3 or 4 cards.
This.

I agree completely. Guys you can only play this game so well and you always have a bad matchup, namely the 50/50 mirror. Know your metagame and make some sacrifices so that you don't get beaten by what you expect to see the most of, and if that deck is Survival prepare for it. This is Magic Economics 101; stop sleeping in class.

[Crysthorn]

if you can't deal with a deck that generally does nothing until turn 3, you're playing the wrong game.
If you seriously think that Survival decks are doing nothing until turn 3, you should either play with more competent opponents or watch more videos. Turn 1 Noble Hierarch (which is a common thing in all versions of Survival) usually demands immediate answer and depending on the build, they also have Daze/Spell Pierce/FoW, StP and/or Thoughtseize, which allow them to succesfully resolve their engine.

[Vacrix]

Sure but they play minimal protection because they have a demanding maindeck when you consider that they have to pack a decent number of creatures and sometimes a toolbox to make Survival a more lucrative business spell. I've seen builds that drop the countermagic to as low as 7. Do you really think you are protecting a Survival consistently? The deck cannot do that. It simply lacks the slots.

Survival is certainly 'doing' something in the first few turns of the game but the scope of 'doing' is completely different when you look at what storm combo can do in three turns.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

If you seriously think that Survival decks are doing nothing until turn 3, you should either play with more competent opponents or watch more videos. Turn 1 Noble Hierarch (which is a common thing in all versions of Survival) usually demands immediate answer and depending on the build, they also have Daze/Spell Pierce/FoW, StP and/or Thoughtseize, which allow them to succesfully resolve their engine.

That's like saying that you can't beat Jacestill because pretty much all the cards are either counters/removal which allows it to win with Jace without any problems.

[Rico Suave]

Rico:

I think LED is a good comparison. But for different reasons. What you said parrots what I heard from a lot of T1 players over the years. Even read an article on SCG about it 4 or 5 years ago. The thought runs something like this:

"Man, those old school T1 players were idiots. Playing bad things like Morphling and Lightning Bolt when they should've been playing with Workshop and Burning Wish. Those cards are so fundamentally broken!"

Ecept they weren't. It's not that LED was a junk rare and Burning Wish was Cunning Wish's poor cousin because people were too stupid to break them, it's because they couldn't be broken until the storm mechanic. Imagine if storm was part of the resolution instead of a trigger upon casting. LED would still be a junk rare and Burning. Wish would still be a vaguely unplayable limited tutor.

Until Mirrodin came out, Stax was a tier 2 deck at best, and that's being generous.

It's not a new way of using it that is propelling SotF forward, it's Vengevine, pure and simple. Is anyone HONESTLY going to tell me that they'd be scared of a Survival deck that used Rootwallas to put Nether Shadows and Bloodghasts into play??

The difference is that you can't ban en entire mechanic. So storm doesn't go, LED does. But Vengevine is 1 card, and it's not the mechanic that breaks it, it's the size. Leaving Survival in the format does little to limit design space. And of the two, Survival is more fun. It's a vaguely playable engine that has never dominated the format but always been at the fringes. Oh, it was overrepresented at the birth of the format, but the first couple of Worlds at Gen Con showed that it wasn't broken.

If they printed a card that broke the fuck out of Lifeline, would you call for it to be banned as an enabler? What about Recycle? Both of those cards could be overpowered if the right card was printed. But sometimes the enabler is more fair than the cards being abused with it.

The storm mechanic was in T1 for about 8-9 months before LED and B.Wish were restricted. It wasn't the introduction of storm that made LED and B.Wish good, it was the point where someone realized they could find Yawgmoth's Will way too early with way too much mana. Who cares what the win condition is at that point?

If you ban Vengevine, people will still have the same combo potential with Survival. Instead of paying 6 to set up Vengevine attacks for 16, we'll just see people play a Necrotic Ooze combo or something for the same amount of mana and deal 20. The point is - who cares what the win condition is when you resolve Survival with tons of mana to spare?

Pandora's Box has been opened, and there is no closing it and undoing what has been released. Vengevine is just the beginning.

[majikal]

If you ban Vengevine, people will still have the same combo potential with Survival. Instead of paying 6 to set up Vengevine attacks for 16, we'll just see people play a Necrotic Ooze combo or something for the same amount of mana and deal 20. The point is - who cares what the win condition is when you resolve Survival with tons of mana to spare?
So instead of using Survival like they normally would and getting free, hasty 4/3's for doing so, they have to spend 3GGGGBB and actually resolve a creature? THAT'S SO BROKEN!


Pandora's Box has been opened, and there is no closing it and undoing what has been released. Vengevine is just the beginning.
THE SKY IS FALLING!

[SurFitOfTheVine]

So instead of using Survival like they normally would and getting free, hasty 4/3's for doing so, they have to spend 3GGGGBB and actually resolve a creature? THAT'S SO BROKEN!


THE SKY IS FALLING!

True. Vengevine would be the card to ban, not Survival. They won't ban Vengevine though, it's bad for business.

[practical joke]

They won't ban survival: both decks aren't broken.

Vengevival's usual hands are like this:

forest, force, survival, goyf, vengevine, vengevine, rootwalla:

Even brainstorm can't fix the clunkyness of this deck.


And the deck hardly works without survival anyways.

It won't be banned, because it's far from broken.

[Phoenix Ignition]

So instead of using Survival like they normally would and getting free, hasty 4/3's for doing so, they have to spend 3GGGGBB and actually resolve a creature? THAT'S SO BROKEN!

Not to mention Vengevine at least beats for a decent amount without Survival putting him out there. If you get an opening hand with Ooze you're not very likely to be excited. None of the cards needed for the Ooze combo are worth having in a deck by themselves, whereas Vengevine still synergizes with Wild Mongrel and Intuition, making it not a dead card (like pretty much every combo creature in any other survival build).

[Marske]

I played Ooze Survival at the Dutch Legacy Championship yesterday to a 5-0-3 Finish (I was standing 5-0-1 at one point) and although the deck is totally unfair at certain points it's nowhere near "broken" enough to warrant any bannings. Historically the DCI has always banned the Engine instead of the Kill condition (In this case Survival instead of Vengevine) but I don't think either should be handled at this point. Giving the format some time to adjust is probably all that's needed. It's not like Vengevine didn't make a similar splash in T2 a while back, untill they figured out how to deal with it.

[Nessaja]

Yesterday at the Dutch National Championships, Vengevine Survival was pretty much fixed by combo and landstil (control)l. Even though it was dominant, it was mostly found at the lower tables. For reference, top 8:

1) ANT
2) TES
3/4) Sneaky Show
3/4) 43 Land
5/6/7/8) Ooze survival
5/6/7/8) Goblins
5/6/7/8) Dark Tempo Thresh
5/6/7/8) BGW New Horizons

[Marske]

Even though it was dominant, it was mostly found at the lower tables.
This doesn't make any sense at all. unless "dominant" by your criteria is "X % of the meta" in which case I'd say it was the most played deck which doesn't make it dominant at all (not even sure if this was true). Domination would be if the top 8 where 7 Survival decks and 1 lucky bastard, which obviously wasn't the case here.

[SpikeyMikey]

Oh man, and the ridiculous hyperbole flies. Demonic Tutor? If Survival is that busted, why didn't it make T8s before Vengevine?

And Intuition is infinitely slower? It costs 5 mana to put two vines in yard with SotF, unless you've got a vine in your hand already, then it's 4. And it's 1GGGG. Or Intuition does it for 2U. And brings the deck's blue count to 19 which means they can more consistently use FoW. The difference is that it's not recursive. But banning SotF won't kill the deck, not by a long shot.

It's becoming obvious that nothing productive is coming out of this thread. The lines are drawn and tempers are running high. I'm out.

[Nessaja]

This doesn't make any sense at all. unless "dominant" by your criteria is "X % of the meta" in which case I'd say it was the most played deck which doesn't make it dominant at all (not even sure if this was true).
Dominant in numbers? You already answered your own question. Dominance doesn't neccesarily refer to domination and you can certainly make that up out of the context. Less complaining, more discussion.

[kkoie]

Seems to me the fundamental arguement in this thread when it comes to the for and against crowd on the "to ban or not to ban" debate is the definition of Dominance. What defines a dominant deck? Does it have to pull shenanigans like Flash did at the Columbus Grand Prix? Or is it something else?

I guess the first step to determening that is to fire a question at the crowd that is against the idea of a ban. At what point, minimally, does Surviving Veggies have to dominate, to warrent the Ban hammer?

[Rico Suave]

So instead of using Survival like they normally would and getting free, hasty 4/3's for doing so, they have to spend 3GGGGBB and actually resolve a creature? THAT'S SO BROKEN!


THE SKY IS FALLING!

I'm sorry if you feel that caps lock and missing the point is going to provide a productive conversation. I thought this thread was going to be full of idiots and a waste of time, but I gave it the benefit of the doubt. You, however, have completely removed that doubt and replaced it with certainty.

Vengevine makes Survival better.

Survival makes Vengevine playable.

When you learn the difference, then we can talk some more.

[majikal]

I'm sorry if you feel that caps lock and missing the point is going to provide a productive conversation. I thought this thread was going to be full of idiots and a waste of time, but I gave it the benefit of the doubt. You, however, have completely removed that doubt and replaced it with certainty.
Well I thought we were a bit more mature than resulting to ad hominem attacks, but I suppose when your argument doesn't hold water you have to draw attention away from that fact. Fair play, I guess.


Vengevine makes Survival better.

Survival makes Vengevine playable.

When you learn the difference, then we can talk some more.
Nobody is denying that Vengevine makes Survival better. However, I posit that Vengevine will still be playable (and a problem) even without Survival. All it requires is a way to put it in the graveyard.

It's not so much a clear-cut case of Engine vs Outlet - Vengevine combined with any number of discard effects creates an engine. It's just that with Survival you get a double engine. In this case, we have one card quality engine (Survival) which traditionally requires a lot of mana and cards, and then we have a free recursion engine on top of that engine (Vengevine + dudes) that rewards you for simply doing what Survival of the Fittest does best (discarding creatures), while simultaneously synergizing on a very high level with the entirety of the rest of the deck (Wild Mongrel, Fauna Shaman, Intuition, LED, etc).

Not such a simple decision, although IF (big if) anything needs to banned, I am a proponent of cutting out the free, uncounterable part of the engine, which is Vengevine, as history shows us that Survival of the Fittest plays fair when it actually has to resolve spells in order to win.

On the flip side, should Survival get the axe, I'm 100% certain that decks sporting Intuition as a replacement for Survival will still wreck up tournaments with angry plants and Fauna Shamans. Free, huge dudes are free, huge dudes, no matter what you use to make them, and as long as they exist, people will find a way to abuse them.

[Marske]

Dominant in numbers? You already answered your own question. Dominance doesn't neccesarily refer to domination and you can certainly make that up out of the context. Less complaining, more discussion.
Well It wasn't a complaint, it was an observation. A deck can be totally dominant in numbers (going by your definition) and not warrant any bannings because everybody beats it... My Red Flag jumps up when a deck is Dominating (by the standards I explained in my earlier post)... the fact that a lot of people choose to play a certain deck should never warrant any bannings, the fact that the deck rakes up all top 8 slots should.

To add another 0.02 to this discussion.

As long as people willing to beat Survival decks (with non survival decks) are able to do so with some adjustments I don't see any reason to ban anything. During the Dutch Legacy Championship the Survival decks where kept "in check" by people having adjusted their SB for it (running needles, yard hate, peacekeeper and what not) or running combo decks (TES, ANT) and as a result Survival decks didn't top 8 all that much (only 1 made it out of 200+ players with plenty Survival decks present). Until we get to the point that not playing Survival is just plain wrong or people that include tons of hate maindeck lose a huge amount of the time this entire discussion is kinda of pointless imho.

So you need to adjust to the new deck that takes you by surprise, so you need to rework sideboarding maybe even include a maindeck answer or switch to a totally new deck that's Magic folks, that's how the game works. Survival decks are "unfair" at certain points I won't disagree there, but they are totally fair in the fact that when you want to beat them, you can without giving away a lot against other matchups. For this reason, I don't believe the DCI will take any action regarding Survival or Vengevine as it's well within their comfort zone as Forsythe once defined it (interview can be found here (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc/19565_The_Magic_Show_193_2010_Community_Cup_Forsythe_Interview.html)).

People not taking it into account or not using the correct cards fighting it are going to be beaten, people that do include the right cards and / or strategy are perfectly capable of beating it.

[Rico Suave]

People not taking it into account or not using the correct cards fighting it are going to be beaten, people that do include the right cards and / or strategy are perfectly capable of beating it.

More to the point, it wasn't just that people could beat Survival. People could beat Academy when it was unbanned too.

The real point is that there were a variety of strategies and decks which were beating Survival as demonstrated by that tournament, and they didn't have to jump through hoops to do so. If only one deck could beat Survival and it had to warp itself so much that it lost to every other deck, then clearly Survival would need to go. But that is not the case here.

[Marske]

@Rico_Suave,
Once again you get the entire point of my argument ;)

[Rune]

Some interesting stats from Magic-League. Since GP Columbus, every trial or master tournament has had a Vengevine Survival deck of some kind in the finals. I think these results are more interesting than those from MTGO because there are a lot more people playing in them, and there are no monetary constraints to prevent people from playing the deck they believe has the best chance of winning.



Nov 12 - 1st Ooze Survival beats Team America in finals

Nov 4 - 2nd UG Survival loses to Aggro Loam in finals

Oct 24 (Master) - 2nd UG Survival loses to Dredge in finals. 4 Vengevine Survival decks in top8

Oct 21 - 1st UG Survival beats Merfolk in finals

Oct 14 - 1st Bant Survival with Vengevines beats ANT in finals

Oct 7 - 1st GW Survival beats Goblins in finals

Sep 29 - 1st GW Survival beats NO Elves in finals

Sep 22 - 1st GW Survival beats UG Survival in finals

Sep 15 - 1st UG Survival beats Hive Mind in finals

Sep 8 - 1st GW Survival beats Merfolk in finals

Sep 5 - 2nd UG Survival loses in finals (somehow?) to Belcher

Aug 25 - 1st UG Survival beats UWb Landstill in finals

Aug 18 - 1st GW Survival beats Uw Merfolk in finals

Aug 11 - 2nd UG Survival loses to Goblins in finals

Aug 1 - Saito wins GP Columbus, UG Madness/Vengevine Survival becomes publicly known

Jul 28 - No Survival decks

Jul 26 - 1st GW Survival beats Merfolk in finals

Jul 22 - No Survival decks

Jul 18 - No Survival decks

Jul 14 - 2nd GW Survival loses to Aeon Bridge in finals

[ryO!]

# MLL 3 - Cerro Maggiore (Italy) - T1.5 106 players
07/11/2010
1 - One Faerie
2 - Survival GW (4vv & 4sotf)
3 - DreadStill
4 - Survival (no vv & 4 sotf)
5 - Doomsday
6 - Big Zoo
7 - Landstil
8 - Countertop
(http://www.magic-ville.com/fr/decks/decklists?event=546 list are on the left corner the 8 links)
seems like an healthy format to me

# France - T1.5 52 players
13/11/2010
1-Ant
2-Rock Junk Dark Horizon W/E
3-Cunning Ant
4-Maverick
5-LandStill
6-(was not a survival deck just can't remember)
7-Ant
8-(was not a survival deck just can't remember)


So anyway when you drasticaly fail to adapt or to leave your pet deck please do not call for a ban. Is Survival VV is strong ? yes ! is it broken ? not even close. Don't blame the card just blame yourself. Thanks to VV & Sotf the format evolved.

[IsThisACatInAHat?]

So anyway when you drasticaly fail to adapt or to leave your pet deck please do not call for a ban. Is Survival VV is strong ? yes ! is it broken ? not even close. Don't blame the card just blame yourself. Thanks to VV & Sotf the format evolved.

Somehow posting 2 cherrypicked results strikes me as a poor way to prove your point. I hear the Dutch metagame was tyrannized by ANT before the ban, despite only occasionally making a top 8 over here and yet apparently Mystical Tutor deserved to be banned (probably rightfully so; ANT is still very strong, just not as much). Worse, even the most stalwart anti-ban voices like Chapin have changed their tone. The deck may not be more powerful than Flash-Hulk, but it's still objectively making more top 8 finishes than Flash was when it was legal. Even the 2 events you posted are a minefield of fast combo decks, probably the only decks that legitimately stand a chance at beating Vengevines consistently. Awesome format, right?

[ryO!]

Somehow posting 2 cherrypicked results strikes me as a poor way to prove your point. I hear the Dutch metagame was tyrannized by ANT before the ban, despite only occasionally making a top 8 over here and yet apparently Mystical Tutor deserved to be banned (probably rightfully so; ANT is still very strong, just not as much). Worse, even the most stalwart anti-ban voices like Chapin have changed their tone. The deck may not be more powerful than Flash-Hulk, but it's still objectively making more top 8 finishes than Flash was when it was legal. Even the 2 events you posted are a minefield of fast combo decks, probably the only decks that legitimately stand a chance at beating Vengevines consistently. Awesome format, right?

I ve posted other results from France as well as other results from Europe were posted where SotfVV wasn't dominating as it is in america. I don't know maybe as it as been said already, it's only a matter of means toward a new "scary" situation, on one hand you go and play the new fancy and strong deck, and, one the other hand you play something that crushes it. However, and please don't misunderstand me, i am not judging at all either ways, as both are logical (and justified) behaviours but yet different. Saying that i am pretty much saying that SotfVV is the new flash as the results seems equivalent (either you play it or you go full hate). But i wouldn't go that far, firstly because the so called "hate decks" are numerous (Combo.deck, landstill.deck, rock.deck, heavy aggro control deck etc) and secondly because you don't need to include specific cards MD (that would be useless againt other MUs) to stilll be able to defeat SotfVV even at G1. So yes merfolk and cb top doesn't seems as powerfull as they were before (yet i don't even thing cb top is dead) yet in my honest opinion the format doesn't seems that "clunky" to me it's just evolving. Legacy has tons of powerful cards as it's the main concept of it anyway, so i believe that VV+Sotf aren't the only terrifying combo cards, let's maybe seach for new archetypes before giving up too fast.

[Tammit67]

Wow this is exactly opposite of how it was with mystical tutor.

[keys]

Saying that i am pretty much saying that SotfVV is the new flash as the results seems equivalent (either you play it or you go full hate). But i wouldn't go that far, firstly because the so called "hate decks" are numerous (Combo.deck, landstill.deck, rock.deck, heavy aggro control deck etc) and secondly because you don't need to include specific cards MD (that would be useless againt other MUs) to stilll be able to defeat SotfVV even at G1.

You and others continue to claim that Landstill, Rock, and Heavy Aggro [this is new] hate on Survival. Do you have any evidence to back up this assertion?

As far as I can tell these are just decks that play Extirpate, and probably only have a decent post-sideboard win % against one version. Extirpate is a fairly narrow card [that some players are beginning to play maindeck], contrary to your opinion that specific cards aren't needed for the matchup.

[Mr.C]

You guys know what's dominant? I just looked at the T8 of the Standard Kentucky open, and there were 28 Jace 2 in the top8. 28! That's more skullclamps than affinity days.

SCG Boston, half the Top8 were Jace decks. Jace took top3. SCG Charlotte, only one deck in the top8 didn;t play Jace. SCG Nashville, half the top8 played jace. That's unhealthy.

Survival is fine. Other decks are placing in T8.

[Rood]

I personally hope it doesn't get banned even though it will at this point. I just kinda like the challenge this deck presents. It's like trying to fight a heavyweight in boxing as a lightweight. Good stuff.

[godryk]

Last weekend, the Madrid league event (usually around 60 players) and 4 decks out of the top 8 were Vengevine decks. Is this the end of the world? Not really, I just want to show that people here "in Europe" don't just stick with their old pet decks. People realize about the power of Vengevine here too, but we're not that obsessed (by FAR). Next edition anything can happen.

BTW, people here talk all the time about parras (vines) placing here and there. Nobody talks about the raw power of Survival of the Fittest but Vengevine, which most of people over here see as the last craziness of WoTC. I'm just amazed to see all the attention put on Survival in these boards. It really seems that all the people writing articles and opening threads really want to move the focus from Vengevine to Survival, and maybe get it banned. It's pretty simple:

- Before Vengevine: Survival is ok, never dominant nor Tier 1, a fun card that enables all kind of decks.
- After Vengevine: Survival based decks become Tier 1 and the sky seems to fall.

We can say Wizards doesn't act rationally very often, but I regret to wonder about their unpredictable line of action.

[Cthuloo]

Last weekend, the Madrid league event (usually around 60 players) and 4 decks out of the top 8 were Vengevine decks. Is this the end of the world? Not really, I just want to show that people here "in Europe" don't just stick with their old pet decks. People realizes about the power of Vengevine here too, but we're not that obsessed (by FAR). Next edition anything can happen.


I definitely agree with this statement, something similar happened in my local league. There have been 4 tournaments after Gp Columbus (and I only was able to attend one, damn you Ph.D thesis!), with the following results:

05/09/2010 Dragons League (Vicenza) Dueville (Vicenza) 84 Players: 1 SurVine in top 8
19/09/2010 Dragons League (Gorizia) Gorizia 44 Players: 3 SurVIne in top 8
03/10/2010 LANDFALL 2 Campo S. Martino - Padova 121 Players: 2 Survine in top 8
07/11/2010 DragonsLeague (Udine) Udine 48 Players: 1 Survine in top 8

To me it looks like the deck was indeed picked up, showed some strong performance, and was then fought and kept in check. By the way, i think it would be interesting to collect some results form non-american tournaments. The results of the SCG 5k series are well known and readily available, but they're not the end of the story. In fact, it may very well be that they're an exception. Maybe in a separate thread?

[ramanujan]

I don't know if it has been said before, but the availability of hate cards at the Starcitygames Open tournaments could effect the results. Honestly, how many competitors were unable to pack hate because it was not available for purchase. I am not saying that is the primary reason for the deck doing so well in those tourneys but it certainly contributed.

[jamied1981]

i attended scg boston and there were no peacekeepers and very low if any extirpates, i bought 3 on the fri and he said there werent many. It may havee been a reason, i personally feel decks are not adjusting, they don't want too change here aleady fine tuned deklists, with hopes of beating vengvine.

[GGoober]

Last weekend, the Madrid league event (usually around 60 players) and 4 decks out of the top 8 were Vengevine decks. Is this the end of the world? Not really, I just want to show that people here "in Europe" don't just stick with their old pet decks. People realizes about the power of Vengevine here too, but we're not that obsessed (by FAR). Next edition anything can happen.


This is the heart of it. If people deny this, then go take all the data and compare: How many non-VV Survival decks made Top8, how many VV Survival decks made Top8. We'll see that non-VV Survival decks' penetration is just about as 'strong' as Countertop/Zoo/combo in this current unhealthy meta.

The sad thing is. If Survival gets axed, then WotC is simply not thinking, or caring TOO much about Legacy's format because Standard has over prominence of Bloodbraid Elves, Faeries, Jaces at one point in time.

Let's just ban Islands, blue has been represented way too much in the history of MTG. By banning Island, we restore the color pie in the game, making it healthy for n00bs to play this game because the problem of blue isn't Mana Drain/Brainstorm/FoW/Ancestral Recall, it's the Island that makes them easy to cast these spells. By banning Island, we solve the problem of these 'powerful' cards. So let's ban Survival, because it'll clearly solve the problem of free 4/3 hasters that will continually be abused in different shells running Intuition/Fauna Shaman/Buried Alive.

[jazzykat]

What if they unban Mana Drain instead? A Vengevine beatdown makes it seem a little fairer now...

[GGoober]

I thought about Mana Drain in Legacy, mainly to boast the underdogs that are control decks e.g. Landstill etc.

But then I thought, how annoying would the format be at the 2-land drop mark: No one is willing to play spells because everyone is waiting to Drain each other :/

Unlike Vintage, Legacy is still slow for Mana Drain to be healthy. In Vintage, a lot of actions can sneak past Mana Drain, but in Legacy, there's still a lot more going on on turns 3-4. Trust me I want Mana Drain to be unbanned, but I think imagining a format where everyone is not playing spells and afraid to be drained ain't too healthy. At least FoW you know you made them go down by 2 cards, but Drain = more mana for them i.e. they always win if it resolves lol.

Drain would also slow the format down, which can be argubly a bad thing.

[Gheizen64]

What if they unban Mana Drain instead? A Vengevine beatdown makes it seem a little fairer now...

Why a blue broken card? Unban balance and say "gg" to the noobs that play creatures lol. Imagine, white best color in the format!

[Shawn]

Drain would also slow the format down, which can be argubly a bad thing.

This doesn't slow the format down, it gives the control deck a fundamental turn of two, as opposed to turn four. Turn three Jace/Humility/Elspeth/Fact or Fiction after countering their second or third turn play with the ability to have Spell Snare or Pierce backup consistently (not to mention Force) is really unfair. Drain would be obnoxious in the format, and that's coming from someone who has played mostly Landstill since Threshold ran Fledgling Dragon.

[Rune]

i attended scg boston and there were no peacekeepers and very low if any extirpates, i bought 3 on the fri and he said there werent many. It may havee been a reason, i personally feel decks are not adjusting, they don't want too change here aleady fine tuned deklists, with hopes of beating vengvine.

I don't think Peacekeeper can be considered Survival hate anymore. It's a card that only works if the opponent is completely unprepared, and, to be honest, I think you can only expect to blow out bad Survival players with it.

Extirpate is also not very strong anymore since many Survival decks now play more than just one thing you need to Extirpate; both Vengevines and the Ooze combo. It's not insane against the UGx Survival lists either, because those decks can and SHOULD bring in Vendilion Cliques from the board. Not only to deal with Extirpate, but also to drastically improve their MU against faster combo decks and to completely solidify their MU against any kind of control.


I think hate cards that attempt to do something once Survival has hit the table are just pure garbage. Those kinds of cards only really work in decks where they will translate into a tempo boost that will allow you to outrace the SotF player - decks like Merfolk and Goblins. Other decks have these options: a) NEVER allow Survival to resolve while somehow also dealing all the other threats they play. b) Play Tendrils of Agony.

[dahcmai]

Why a blue broken card? Unban balance and say "gg" to the noobs that play creatures lol. Imagine, white best color in the format!


As much as I would love that, killing creatures would be the last thing on my mind when casting Balance in Legacy. Oooo I love that card. I remember getting to play with 4. I still have them, because you know, stupider things have happened.

[nedleeds]

I don't think Peacekeeper can be considered Survival hate anymore. It's a card that only works if the opponent is completely unprepared, and, to be honest, I think you can only expect to blow out bad Survival players with it.


The threat of Peacekeeper forces them to retain their StP against control. Peacekeeper is at least decent vs. Merfolk as well.


Extirpate is also not very strong anymore since many Survival decks now play more than just one thing you need to Extirpate; both Vengevines and the Ooze combo.

Ooze = 2BB ? There are plenty of things that can win the game @ 4 mana if left untouched.

Artifact: Pithing Needle, Various Gravehate, Ensnaring Bridge
White: Arbiter, Suppression Field, Ghostly Prison, Humility, Moat, Runed Halo, Wheel of Sun and Moon, Worship and a man with Shroud, one of the 400 enchantment removal cards many of which are free (Patricians Scorn, Abolish, Aura Blast, War Priest of Thune)
Blue: Spell Snare, Propaganda, Hibernation, more countermagic
Red: :(
Black: Planar Void, Leyline, Yixlid Jailer, Withered Wretch, Faerie Macabre, Extirpate, Shred Memory, Eradicate
Green: the 400 different forms of enchantment removal, uh ... Night Soil
Gold: Aura Mutation, Flooded Woodlands

[GGoober]

This doesn't slow the format down, it gives the control deck a fundamental turn of two, as opposed to turn four. Turn three Jace/Humility/Elspeth/Fact or Fiction after countering their second or third turn play with the ability to have Spell Snare or Pierce backup consistently (not to mention Force) is really unfair. Drain would be obnoxious in the format, and that's coming from someone who has played mostly Landstill since Threshold ran Fledgling Dragon.


That is true, but which idiot will play into a Mana Drain if it is theoretically unbanned? Why I meant by slowing down the format is: everyone starts to play around Drain like playing around Daze, and decks will shift to play more Duress/Thoughtseize to take out drains before resolving threat. Instead of blatantly resolving threats, people have to slowly bait Drains, or risk losing to it entirely. Seeing UU open in a Drain environment will do so, because Drain unbanned in Legacy is very different than in Vintage where plenty of decks can sneak threats/wins before Drain mana is up. And I fully agree Drain would be terrible in Legacy, due to the inability of decks to play around it as opposed to a Vintage environment. Drain would most significantly boost Landstill/control variants, but probably make them too powerful if they played 4 FoW, 4 Drain + 4 more Counterspells.

[Rico Suave]

That is true, but which idiot will play into a Mana Drain if it is theoretically unbanned? Why I meant by slowing down the format is: everyone starts to play around Drain like playing around Daze, and decks will shift to play more Duress/Thoughtseize to take out drains before resolving threat. Instead of blatantly resolving threats, people have to slowly bait Drains, or risk losing to it entirely. Seeing UU open in a Drain environment will do so, because Drain unbanned in Legacy is very different than in Vintage where plenty of decks can sneak threats/wins before Drain mana is up. And I fully agree Drain would be terrible in Legacy, due to the inability of decks to play around it as opposed to a Vintage environment. Drain would most significantly boost Landstill/control variants, but probably make them too powerful if they played 4 FoW, 4 Drain + 4 more Counterspells.

Just because you've lost on turn 2 and it takes a while to play it out doesn't mean that the format has slowed down.

[dontbiteitholmes]

These Survival discussions have really reached critical mass. It's really just coming to the point where there are about 6 threads about the exact same thing and everyone is just spitting out bad opinions like unban Flash, Mana Drain, or Library or people comparing Survival to Necropotence. I just wanted to point out to anyone that hadn't noticed yet that most of the people with sensible opinions left these threads long ago and now they have just turned into the standard ban this/unban that thread along with all the typical nonsense that is said in such threads.

[Koby]

http://www.mccoveychronicles.com/images/admin/BeatDeadHorse.gif

Apparently the reply was too short. I think it was 1000words too long.

[menace13]

These Survival discussions have really reached critical mass. It's really just coming to the point where there are about 6 threads about the exact same thing and everyone is just spitting out bad opinions like unban Flash, Mana Drain, or Library or people comparing Survival to Necropotence. I just wanted to point out to anyone that hadn't noticed yet that most of the people with sensible opinions left these threads long ago and now they have just turned into the standard ban this/unban that thread along with all the typical nonsense that is said in such threads.

I agree all these Threads on Surv are the same posts all over the place.

But Why is unbanning LoA a bad opinion. The card isn't even played anymore in Vintage. Like seriously, maybe all of 10 decks played it all of this year. Its time has passed like so many of the cards on their archaic list. Turn one on play, drop LoA leaves you with 6 cards and no spells. BoB is far better.

[GGoober]

I agree all these Threads on Surv are the same posts all over the place.

But Why is unbanning LoA a bad opinion. The card isn't even played anymore in Vintage. Like seriously, maybe all of 10 decks played it all of this year. Its time has passed like so many of the cards on their archaic list. Turn one on play, drop LoA leaves you with 6 cards and no spells. BoB is far better.

...

Sorry but LoA would be a tad too strong in the format. It's not played in Vintage because of the way Vintage is i.e. there are better cards to run. However, if LoA is in Legacy, there would not be better cards to run over it e.g. Mox, Vault, Crypt, Time Vault, Powers. i.e. "This card is not played in Vintage" does not always mean that it is safe for Legacy.

Also, being a restricted card in Vintage makes it questionable to run it at all. If LoA is unrestricted (As in the case for Legacy cards unbanned/unrestricted), I'm pretty sure Vintage decks will work an unrestricted list of LoA in some form of control decks. I'm not the Vintage expert here, but I believe there would not be a strong reason not to run 4 LoA if a deck could support it.

[menace13]

...

Sorry but LoA would be a tad too strong in the format. It's not played in Vintage because of the way Vintage is i.e. there are better cards to run. However, if LoA is in Legacy, there would not be better cards to run over it e.g. Mox, Vault, Crypt, Time Vault, Powers. i.e. "This card is not played in Vintage" does not always mean that it is safe for Legacy.

Also, being a restricted card in Vintage makes it questionable to run it at all. If LoA is unrestricted (As in the case for Legacy cards unbanned/unrestricted), I'm pretty sure Vintage decks will work an unrestricted list of LoA in some form of control decks. I'm not the Vintage expert here, but I believe there would not be a strong reason not to run 4 LoA if a deck could support it.

I disagree. Outside of the control mirror, what decks can afford to not play a colored source on turn 1 and on top of that not play many spells, seeing as if you ever fall below 6 cards you need at least 2 turns of no spell casting and no land drops just to get it active. Maintaining a 6 card grip all game long rarely happens and god forbid if you have to play a land, a spell and then fow all in one turn...youll never get it active. Giving up a colored source,Tempo and Spells to draw a card seems so much worse than BoB/Jace.

The lack of fast mana makes LoA worse than it would be in Vintage. Doing nothing for the first 3 turns aside playing 2 more lands while the opponent is on Goyf/Surv,Ritual/LED or Aether Vial/Wasteland is a beating. Most decks kill turn 4-5-Zoo,Merf,Gobs,Surv-. It isnt because there are other cards like Mox,Lotus,Recall/Walk, but because there are better draw engines like Bob and Jace that work every turn no matter how many cards are in your hand.

If a land isnt called Bazaar,Academy,Strip Mine or WorkShop it is weaksauce!

[Koby]

You forgot Wasteland, which even in Vintage is still devastating.

[dontbiteitholmes]

I agree all these Threads on Surv are the same posts all over the place.

But Why is unbanning LoA a bad opinion. The card isn't even played anymore in Vintage. Like seriously, maybe all of 10 decks played it all of this year. Its time has passed like so many of the cards on their archaic list. Turn one on play, drop LoA leaves you with 6 cards and no spells. BoB is far better.

Sorry but Vintage is not Legacy and that is a bad argument, I mean...

But Why is unbanning Balance a bad opinion. The card isn't even played anymore in Vintage. Like seriously, maybe all of zero decks played it all of this year.

It's just not a solid reasoning


I disagree. Outside of the control mirror, what decks can afford to not play a colored source on turn 1 and on top of that not play many spells, seeing as if you ever fall below 6 cards you need at least 2 turns of no spell casting and no land drops just to get it active. Maintaining a 6 card grip all game long rarely happens and god forbid if you have to play a land, a spell and then fow all in one turn...youll never get it active. Giving up a colored source,Tempo and Spells to draw a card seems so much worse than BoB/Jace.

The lack of fast mana makes LoA worse than it would be in Vintage. Doing nothing for the first 3 turns aside playing 2 more lands while the opponent is on Goyf/Surv,Ritual/LED or Aether Vial/Wasteland is a beating. Most decks kill turn 4-5-Zoo,Merf,Gobs,Surv-. It isnt because there are other cards like Mox,Lotus,Recall/Walk, but because there are better draw engines like Bob and Jace that work every turn no matter how many cards are in your hand.

If a land isnt called Bazaar,Academy,Strip Mine or WorkShop it is weaksauce!

Well first off you hit the nail on the head at the end there. Why play LoA when Academy, Bazaar, or Workshop exist and are all better options for actually winning the game. Second you act like card drawing, Life from the Loam, and cards that net you even when played (Brainstorm, Ponder, Daze, Jace) don't exist. Third, we don't have restricted, so the only option is 4x LoA or 0x LoA. Sure there aren't many decks that can draw-go and keep a full grip, but with tricks like Life From the Loam it's just not unsafe to unban Library. Library trigger also goes on the stack, so if you managed to get more than one Library out and 7 cards in hand you can activate one in resp to another. It's not as broken as most people think it is, but at the same time it's not as safe as you think it is especially as a 4x. Not to mention there are probably 10 other cards much safer to unban so why are you moving straight to Library? Another thing is, not that this should be a consideration, but Library would probably be a $250 card if it was unbanned in Legacy and Vintage.

[menace13]

You got me on the 1200$ playset. But Balance? ..Pff, while you're at it why don't you mention Tinker and YWill?

No, I did not say Library would not see play. You are correct and it is a powerful card, but is it half of the SCGs 5k season's top 16?
Maybe some sort of combo deck could play 4 Library besides control. As long as it doesn't get Surv banned there has to be a way to preserve the archetypes that card makes and at the same time bring something to keep it in check.
Jumping straight to Library is better than jumping straight to something that would see marginal play for example; Land Tax, Black Vise and Earthcraft and not have Survival or anything else banned in the process. WotC does not like to look silly by banning then unbanning only to ban again and maybe unban an additional time for old times' sake. Granted they did this for Gush, but once they ban something it tends to stay banned for a very long time at the least.
I think more bannings leads to more bannings( Yes, captain obvious strikes again). Possibly unban something else, Mystical is not going to be allowed anytime soon-if ever again- cards like Memory Jar, Gush, Frantic Search. What other cards are left?
I am not sure which ones, but pretty sure banning even more cards feels unsettling.

[Jak]

but balance? ..pff, while you're at it why don't you mention tinker and ywill?

woooooooooooooooooooooooooooossssssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

[dontbiteitholmes]

woooooooooooooooooooooooooooossssssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

LOL, I know right. Is it wrong I get some sick satisfaction from participating in these threads?

[menace13]

woooooooooooooooooooooooooooossssssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

Sorry, I dont get the word woooooosssssshhhhhhhhhhhhh.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Sorry, I dont get the word woooooosssssshhhhhhhhhhhhh.

That was the sound of my point flying over your head.

When I said

Sorry but Vintage is not Legacy and that is a bad argument, I mean...

But Why is unbanning Balance a bad opinion. The card isn't even played anymore in Vintage. Like seriously, maybe all of zero decks played it all of this year.

It's just not a solid reasoning

I just took where you said


But Why is unbanning LoA a bad opinion. The card isn't even played anymore in Vintage. Like seriously, maybe all of 10 decks played it all of this year. Its time has passed like so many of the cards on their archaic list.

And replaced "LoA" with "Balance" to illustrate that the point you were trying to make by comparing a card that is a 1x in Vintage to it's strength as a potential 4 of in Legacy is entirely invalid. It's a pretty common debating tactic especially on this site to show that someone is applying questionable logic to a particular card. Anyways I expect this thread to be locked soon, no one wants to talk about Survival anymore and we are about a mile off topic. It's like Godwin's Law for MTG sites. As a thread gets longer the probability of it turning into a discussion of ban this vs. unban that approaches 1.

[menace13]

ummmm. I think you missed the point in the first place bringing up Balance when we were talking about Library. Those are not the same and terrible that you would say it is like saying so. IBL?

[brattin]

your logic:

if people rarely play a card in vintage, then it would be safe to unban in legacy
people rarely play library in vintage
therefore, library would be safe in legacy

he shows a counteraxample to your logic:

people rarely play balance in vintage
using your premise, (if people rarely play a card in vantage, then it would be safe to unban in legacy)
he can conclude it would be safe to unban balance in legacy
since it is obviously not the case that it would be safe to unban balance, there must be something else false in the preceding statements.
it's (presumably) true that people rarely play balance in vintage, therefore your premise (if people rarely play a card in vantage, then it would be safe to unban in legacy) must be false.

he didn't miss the point--the card is just irrelevent to the argument (if people rarely play a card in vantage, then it would be safe to unban in legacy).

on topic, sort of, i'd be happy to see all the vengevival discussion threads locked.

[menace13]

If that was my logic i would have mentioned Balance then.......

[GGoober]

I don't know why the hell are we suddenly talking about Vintage/Legacy transitions of banned/restricted cards. Just because a card isn't played in Vintage should never be a reason for it to be unbanned in Legacy. A card isn't played in Vintage because it isn't good enough for the meta. It doesn't speak of the power level of the card itself e.g. Balance is a terribly powerful card but is just terrible in the Vintage meta now. Does that mean it's safe to unban it in Legacy? Hell no. Because Balance could argubly be very well-played in Legacy looking at the meta. The color pie between the formats already suggests this. A big reason why Balance isn't played in Vintage is white is usually not a desirable splash color whereas in Legacy, white is considered a strong color due to the meta.

The same philosophies apply for other cards that are not popularly played in Vintage that are still banned in Legacy e.g. Library of Alexandria, Timetwister, Goblin Recruiter etc

[Gheizen64]

I don't know why the hell are we suddenly talking about Vintage/Legacy transitions of banned/restricted cards. Just because a card isn't played in Vintage should never be a reason for it to be unbanned in Legacy. A card isn't played in Vintage because it isn't good enough for the meta. It doesn't speak of the power level of the card itself e.g. Balance is a terribly powerful card but is just terrible in the Vintage meta now. Does that mean it's safe to unban it in Legacy? Hell no. Because Balance could argubly be very well-played in Legacy looking at the meta. The color pie between the formats already suggests this. A big reason why Balance isn't played in Vintage is white is usually not a desirable splash color whereas in Legacy, white is considered a strong color due to the meta.

The same philosophies apply for other cards that are not popularly played in Vintage that are still banned in Legacy e.g. Library of Alexandria, Timetwister, Goblin Recruiter etc

Beside the fact the logic was false, you have also to see that while Balance is "bad" in Vintage due to the fact that creature and lands are more often a non-issue and it's hard to capitalize on Balance in a format where a lot of the mana is off jewerly and the creatures played are usually bombs that lock you out of the game.
LoA suffer from more "universal" problems. First, it need a deck around it. Second, it need a very specific meta around it. Modern age decks tend to lay down cards too fast, in fact even control decks play quickly cards like top and counterbalance. In vintage, the main "control", prison, have to lay lock pieces as fast as possible. Draw-go isn't really a modern viable archetype. The only matchup where draw-go is a viable style is the control permission mirror. To make things worse, you can't actually play counterspells from LoA and you need to play counters with colorless in their mana cost (so no spell pierce, counterspell, spell snare, drain but cards like negate, mana leak etc...). If you start with a LoA on first turn, i can go Wild Nacatl or Lackey or Vial and invalidate your whole strategy. Playing FoW is also severely counterproductive with LoA on board. While LoA is probably too strong in modern Legacy, it's far more fair than people imagine. LoA was restricted because it was heavily distorting in old draw-go control mirrors and made them more luck-based than skill-based, times have changed from when Keeper was actually the best deck.
Imho it's overrated the same way Vault (and some other card, like Druid and else) is.

The philosophies that are applied in Vintage aren't to be applied in Legacy, but it's not like you can't learn anything from it.

[Tacosnape]

While it's probably not going to happen and I don't think it's really a big deal, I don't think Library of Alexandria would be all that nuts in Legacy, given that it requires you have a full hand to capitalize on and it dies to Wasteland. I think it's far less powerful than say, Bazaar of Baghdad. And it might even be less powerful that some lands still permitted in the format (IE, The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale.)

However, the prospect of getting two or three of these going at once is a little daunting and ridiculous and would probably be a game-ender for any control deck that wanted to fit it in (And a lot of them would.) So while you could debate its merit for quite some time, it's probably not going to be on the unbanning radar, especially given that card availability is one of the primary complaints of Legacy right now.

EDIT: Also, thank God there's only another week of me not playing Legacy until I figure out what they're doing with the stupid B/R list.

[DragoFireheart]

You know, you really have to admit the humor in the card [card]Survival of the Fittest[/cards]. Only the decks that are fit will survive in this meta change and I doubt survival will be banned. Combo decks are going to resurge up the wazoo once people get tired of losing with their pet decks. The meta may start to resemble Europe, where combo decks like TES are the deck to beat. I believe the meta will shift as following:


Vengevival
The Epic Storm
Ichorid
Anti-Vengevival Rogue decks (Enchantress, Combo elves, Burn etc)
Merfolk

TES and Ichorid are too fast for Veggies. Burn and combo elves can actually race a veggie deck, while enchantress can lock down the veggies with enchantments.

Merfolks will stick around as they are not terribad against veggies as they do have some counters to slow them down.

Zoo, Goblins and Countertop are likely to get pushed out. The increased storm decks will make sure the green men and cats go away, while Countertop gets stomped by veggies.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

You know, you really have to admit the humor in the card [card]Survival of the Fittest[/cards]. Only the decks that are fit will survive in this meta change and I doubt survival will be banned. Combo decks are going to resurge up the wazoo once people get tired of losing with their pet decks. The meta may start to resemble Europe, where combo decks like TES are the deck to beat. I believe the meta will shift as following:


Vengevival
The Epic Storm
Ichorid
Anti-Vengevival Rogue decks (Enchantress, Combo elves, Burn etc)
Merfolk

TES and Ichorid are too fast for Veggies. Burn and combo elves can actually race a veggie deck, while enchantress can lock down the veggies with enchantments.

Merfolks will stick around as they are not terribad against veggies as they do have some counters to slow them down.

Zoo, Goblins and Countertop are likely to get pushed out. The increased storm decks will make sure the green men and cats go away, while Countertop gets stomped by veggies.

I agree. Zoo and Countertop have done their top8's. It's about time the meta shifts. I don't think Goblins will be pushed away as long as they splash black though, especially with Zoo out of the way. Sounds like a healthy format to me.

[Catitas]

I believe Survival will be banned, you see, when people like evan erwin cry for bannings wizards normaly attend to them...

In Europe the meta is very diverse and survival cant beat certain decks (ANT, TES, Solidarity, Life, Big Zoo, Enchantress, Dredge...)


I agree. Zoo and Countertop have done their top8's. It's about time the meta shifts. I don't think Goblins will be pushed away as long as they splash black though, especially with Zoo out of the way. Sounds like a healthy format to me.

How can you call it a heathy format without Zoo and Countertop? Besides Big Zoo beats Survival... Many top8s in europe have like 2 or 3 big zoos in top, along survival and other decks... Countertop is still awesome and if your meta changes to Storm decks, guess who beats those decks...
Recently in spain there 2 ugw Countertops in top2 in a 100 players tournment, and yes, there were survivals in top8...

The problem seems that people dont want to evolve and adapt to the deck...

[Volrath]

I agree. Zoo and Countertop have done their top8's. It's about time the meta shifts. I don't think Goblins will be pushed away as long as they splash black though, especially with Zoo out of the way. Sounds like a healthy format to me.

Don't forget some versions of Merfolk,, Quinn, D&T,Enchantress, Show & tell.deck, wombat, landstill and the Rock.
These decks can all be a beating for survival.

Sounds like a fun, diverse and healthy meta to me.

[DragoFireheart]

I agree. Zoo and Countertop have done their top8's. It's about time the meta shifts. I don't think Goblins will be pushed away as long as they splash black though, especially with Zoo out of the way. Sounds like a healthy format to me.

Nah: even with black Goblins will still have a hard time. Veggie decks will have their own backup plan, be it Squee + Goyf spam or NO/Pro combo.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

EDIT: Also, thank God there's only another week of me not playing Legacy until I figure out what they're doing with the stupid B/R list.

We'll only know on Dec 20. So it's rather another month :(

[Catitas]

Evan Erwin said in his show that annoucment woulb be in december 1st...

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Evan Erwin said in his show that annoucment woulb be in december 1st...

http://www.wizards.com/magic/magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/feature/15a


DCI Policy Change: Timing of Changes to the Banned and Restricted Lists

Updates to the Banned and Restricted Lists will continue to be announced quarterly, but the timing is changing. Starting later this month, announcements will take place on the following schedule:
Announcement Date Effective Date
December 20 January 1
March 20 April 1
June 20 July 1
September 20 October 1

[alderon666]

Dredge would be able to mull to 1 and still win by a mile if that card was Bazzar.

Dredge would be practicly locked on turn 2 going off every game.

[Shabbaman]

Evan Erwin said in his show that annoucment woulb be in december 1st...

Which exactly shows what he knows about the game, right?

[Catitas]

Which exactly shows what he knows about the game, right?

I have to agree on that dude...

Although as i said when people like him start crying about bannings, you know what wizards do...

[majikal]

Pretty sure he cried about banning Bloodbraid Elf, too, though... just sayin'.

[Mark Sun]

Which exactly shows what he knows about the game, right?

I left him a post on the SCG forums. Dude has a serious issue with a malicious obsession towards a card. From what I was told, after apparently three shows on Survival, no one was paying attention so he had to do a fourth. He can't spend time on more T2 stuff? Or has that format become so stale that he needs to cry wolf at a format he doesn't regularly play? Either way, the video was terribly done and contained a slew of faulty arguments (to see what I'm talking about, take a look for yourself here (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/standard/20567_The_Magic_Show_213_Jace_vs_Survival_and_RIP_MPR.html)).

Anyhow, the fact that SCG is behind him and his show is pretty disappointing. I knew it would be an issue when he demanded SotF's banning on ggslive a few 5K's ago.

[frenchy-man]

Did he really compared standard and legacy ? ... Great analysis...

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Did he really compared standard and legacy ? ... Great analysis...

Amusing isn't it? It gets worse when he actually says that Survival is "set to be banned". Who the hell is he to say something like that?

[SlopeeJ]

actually it was comparing how both cards are dominating their format, was a pretty good analysis

[SurFitOfTheVine]

actually it was comparing how both cards are dominating their format, was a pretty good analysis

He was taking a piss on Survival. Like, see? Jace won't get banned in Standard, but Survival will be banned in Legacy! He hates Survival so much that he needs to cover the same topic over and over and over...

EDIT: I'm willing to bet that if Survival doesn't get banned next month, he'll be making videos about it until March.

[Gheizen64]

Man that video was so stupid i'm now really against a Survival ban. Sigh. Reasonable people are really more and more rare nowadays.

[keys]

R.I.P. Goyf (http://cgi.ebay.com/mtg-52-TARMOGOYF-magic-green-rare-card-collection-lot-/270662831995?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f04c30f7b)

[Koby]

R.I.P. Goyf

Apparently $45/ea is still alive and kicking.

[keys]

Apparently $45/ea is still alive and kicking.

OK FINE but I felt that someone unloading that many into the marketplace at one time is more symbolic.

[2Rach]

OK FINE but I felt that someone unloading that many into the marketplace at one time is more symbolic.
It's one guy. He just wants to dump them for whatever reason. If it was everyone and their mother you could say it's a sign.

[SpikeyMikey]

R.I.P. Goyf (http://cgi.ebay.com/mtg-52-TARMOGOYF-magic-green-rare-card-collection-lot-/270662831995?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item3f04c30f7b)

Nice. I've got your Lotus/Duals auction on watch. :)

[keys]

It's one guy. He just wants to dump them for whatever reason. If it was everyone and their mother you could say it's a sign.

how often do you see an auction for 52 goyfs? it's symbolic of Goyf's decline :tongue: not a scientific study. not my auction either.

[1mpulse]

By this point, I think everyone can agree Evan Erwin has no idea what he is talking about.

[DragoFireheart]

By this point, I think everyone can agree Evan Erwin has no idea what he is talking about.

I can't wait for Survival to not be banned so I can hear him bitch more about it.

[majikal]

I can't wait for Survival to not be banned so I can hear him bitch more about it.
+50

[dontbiteitholmes]

how often do you see an auction for 52 goyfs? it's symbolic of Goyf's decline :tongue: not a scientific study. not my auction either.

How often do you see a card get sold in bulk of 52 and still make anywhere close to what it's actually worth? That is about 1000x as rare.

The fact that one guy sold 52x Goyfs = not a sign.

The fact that those Goyfs sold at almost StarCityGames retail even with a bulk of 52 = a huge sign that no one expects Goyf to go anywhere.

[Amon Amarth]

1 auction = sample size too small.

[Cthuloo]

how often do you see an auction for 52 goyfs? it's symbolic of Goyf's decline :tongue: not a scientific study. not my auction either.

It's more symbolic of its decline that I finally decided to buy my playset. I'm great in this kind of predictions. Back in the days I traded a lot of duals for shivan dragons and icy manipulators.

@Morbid: I agree with your post on SCG almost word for word.

[Nidd]

His logic for not banning Jace blew my mind.

"People spent time and cash getting him".

Guess what, no one gave me my Survivals as a present.

[Nelis]

His logic for not banning Jace blew my mind.

"People spent time and cash getting him".

Guess what, no one gave me my Survivals as a present.

He probably thinks everybody got their survivals for €5 back in the day. (I did actually)

[Nidd]

He probably thinks everybody got their survivals for €5 back in the day. (I did actually)
Even if that were true, the value would collapse and many people would lose lots of money. His arguments aren't entirely wrong, but he really does say some stupid stuff.

[pippo84]

His logic for not banning Jace blew my mind.

"People spent time and cash getting him".

Guess what, no one gave me my Survivals as a present.

Mmm.. I totally agree with you, but WotC does not earn directly from you buying SotF. Anyways we could say that they earn from the Vengevines you play in the same deck.

I looked at the video and something blew my mind: in the past years no card was banned, we were happy and the usual trolls complained about something. Then something happened. More people started playing this format and they probably played T2 or Extended before. Since they weren't used to play with the best cards available the probably started complaining about the power level of this format. And someone in WotC probably so bannings etc happen.

I like Legacy because I can play with the best cards with a high power level. If you don't like it please play other formats!

Anyways that video was terrible and I agree with Morbid's post.

[jazzykat]

FYI I have 9 Survivals, 0 Vengevine, and 5 Mystical Tutors. Banning Survival would destroy archetypes. Banning Vengevine would stop "free Creatures" and save Survival. Unbanning Mystical would make more cards playable and help balance out the format. Sorry survival dudes Vengevine is good with it but it's only "unbeatable"/"banworthy" or whatever because WotC hates combo.

Most of the Venge/SotF are fun for little kids and big ones a like. I'd like to return to crushing their dreams with AdNT, and only lose to CB/Top decks. Maybe a little balance in the old Rock Paper Scissors Paradigm. But I'm sure wizards will print the following next set:

CC: 1 colorless mana
Name: Whiny little kids who suck at magic but we like to sell packs to
Type: Summon creature
Rarity: MYTHIC^3
Abilities: Haste, Shroud, Indestructible, Split second. You may play more than 4 of: "Whiny little kids who suck at magic but we like to sell packs to".
When "Whiny little kids who suck at magic but we like to sell packs to" attacks you win the game, unless your opponent whines more than you do then whoever buys the most packs wins.
P/T: 4000000/40000000000

They HATE combo and like selling packs. What do you guys think is going to happen?

[Koby]

He probably thinks everybody got their survivals for €5 back in the day. (I did actually)

More like he got Jace from a Fatpack and doesn't want to lose playing with it.

He's clearly biased and trying distraction.

[DragoFireheart]

They HATE combo and like selling packs. What do you guys think is going to happen?

They will leave survival alone because it is a permanent and can be interacted with. They will leave Vengevine alone because it is a creature and needs the attack phase to win the game. They will leave Jace alone because it is a permanent and can be interacted with.

Keep in mind that when they unbanned Entomb, they choose to ban Mystical Tutor and not ban Entomb again or anything from Storm decks along with it. They MIGHT ban enlightened tutor if people start to abuse it along with SoFT, but banning Survival?

It tutors creatures, but they don't win the game right away as you still cast it. The majority of creatures are no where near the power level of some of the non-creature spells used, and those that are broken are not being hard casted.
It dumps veggies in the yard, but it can be hated with yard hate or SoFT can be hated.

Mystical tutor can only be stopped by counter magic.

When was the last time Wizards banned a permanent? Skullclamp? If we are going to compare SotF to a card that is banned, Skullclamp is the most logical one. Compare the power level of the two and tell me this: is SotF as format warping as Skullclamp?

Also think of how many ways one could tutor for clamp:


Steelshaper's Gift
Stoneforge Mystic
Enlightened Tutor


Oh, and does anyone remember what skullclamp did in Standard back in the day? Extended? Legacy?

[alderon666]

Mystical tutor can only be stopped by counter magic.


Saying something can only be stopped by countermagic is just stupid. I can just name a "shady" card like Predict and completely ruin your argument.

In this case I don't even have to: best example is Extirpate. Efectively counters Mystical Tutor with the bonus of exiling some other card completely.

Survival is easily comparable with Mystical Tutor, both cards win the game shortly after they resolved, given your have the needed resources. For Survival those resources are mana and a creature in hand. For Mystical Tutor it's whatever else you didn't look for with Mystical Tutor, be it mana, protection or bomb.

[GGoober]

Where's the link to this Erwan-dumb show? I would like to see him talk about Survival and Jace lol.

@Dragofireheart: Unban Skullclamp and I will play creature decks, that's all I needed to say :P Survival is the only reason why I play creature decks so Skullclamp will be another reason. I'll use my creatures just to get clamped :D

[DragoFireheart]

Saying something can only be stopped by countermagic is just stupid. I can just name a "shady" card like Predict and completely ruin your argument.

Only if you ignore the power level of mystical tutor.



In this case I don't even have to: best example is Extirpate. Efectively counters Mystical Tutor with the bonus of exiling some other card completely.

Extirpate does not tutor.
Extirpate does not increase the consitenecy of combo decks.
Extirpate does not get hate cards for combo decks.

Your logic only work if we completely ignore the funcition of the card.



Survival is easily comparable with Mystical Tutor, both cards win the game shortly after they resolved, given your have the needed resources.

Survival will end the game at the fastest of 4 turns and requires resolving said enchantment, paying the mana for Vengevines, paying the mana for two Rootwallas and also ensuring that a attack phase can happen AND SotF isn't blown up at some point.

Or there is no yard hate.
Or they don't just Extirpate the Veggies in response. (Which can't be countered).

Mystical Tutor gets Ad Nausiem and wins the game the following turn. Turn 2 at the fastest, which can't be disrupted by stopping the attack phase, locking up the graveyard or even having discard

The cards are not even close to comparable.



For Survival those resources are mana and a creature in hand. For Mystical Tutor it's whatever else you didn't look for with Mystical Tutor, be it mana, protection or bomb.

- Thank you for pointing out why Mystical Tutor is vastly more powerful than Survival of the Fittest in their respective decks.

[DragoFireheart]

Where's the link to this Erwan-dumb show? I would like to see him talk about Survival and Jace lol.

@Dragofireheart: Unban Skullclamp and I will play creature decks, that's all I needed to say :P Survival is the only reason why I play creature decks so Skullclamp will be another reason. I'll use my creatures just to get clamped :D

Because Skullclamp totatlly won't warp the format. :)

[Dark Ritual]

The power level of clamp when compared to survival is very good. Seems like paying 1 to draw 2 cards is broken, and when that can be repeated, makes it uber broken. Survival however, you pay G and gain +1 card since a vengevine in the yard is effectively +1 card advantage. Not to mention it requires green mana, not just colorless mana, to be able to use. In short, clamps > survival. There's a reason one is banned and the other is not.

Predict countering mystical tutor = fun times. So you have your one of ad nauseam on top? I'll mill that, drawing two cards as well. Absolutely hilarious. Same with extirpate you waste their u. sea and extirpate it to counter tutor. Good luck winning without u. sea storm players.

Ad nauseam costs 5 mana to win the game. Survival of the fittest, with a vengevine in hand at the start of the chain, requires 1G + GGGGGG mana barring a memnite or shield sphere in hand at the start of the chain which makes it cost 1 less green. That requires 8 mana total and if you can get to that much mana without being disrupted, your opponent is doing something terribly wrong. When something costs a grand total of 8 mana to win the game, it is not overpowered by any means.

I'd be fine with mystical tutor coming off the banned list. Seriously, vengevine stands no chance against that deck.

[codegeass]

Is Survival of the fittest worth buying right now? Because everybody is in a panic on ebay selling there Survival of the fittest. There is a ebay member selling 3XSOTF for $118. I would really like to buy the 3XSOTF. But I am really worried about them being banned. So what is everyone's opinion good deal are not? also what is everyone's opinion on how much SOTF will be worth if it dose gets banned?

[Cabal_chan]

Is Survival of the fittest worth buying right now? Because everybody is in a panic on ebay selling there Survival of the fittest. There is a ebay member selling 3XSOTF for $118. I would really like to buy the 3XSOTF. But I am really worried about them being banned. So what is everyone's opinion good deal are not? also what is everyone's opinion on how much SOTF will be worth if it dose gets banned?

You could read this thread, and the 2-3 other ones to figure that out.

[Mark Sun]

You could read this thread, and the 2-3 other ones to figure that out.

I doubt it, his garbage is all over here, Salvation, MOTL, etc. I can't seem to avoid the guy, no matter where I go. You can't always count on common sense prevailing, and codegeass has displayed pretty clearly that he has the intelligence level of a four year old. 5-6 threads, question addressed about a dozen times, and he still has to ask. I can't decide if he's trolling or not. How was he allowed to even join The Source? I'm sure our standards are better than that.

[RTucker]

Where's the link to this Erwan-dumb show? I would like to see him talk about Survival and Jace lol.

@Dragofireheart: Unban Skullclamp and I will play creature decks, that's all I needed to say :P Survival is the only reason why I play creature decks so Skullclamp will be another reason. I'll use my creatures just to get clamped :D

The link's on Starcitygames.com. You should ask him why he got a match loss at Grand Prix: Nashville. Let's just say you don't circle cards on the deck registration sheet and write, "What a bomb!".

As for SoTF, I don't see it getting banned because as many others have said it's a permanent that can be dealt with in many ways.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

You should ask him why he got a match loss at Grand Prix: Nashville. Let's just say you don't circle cards on the deck registration sheet and write, "What a bomb!".

I Lol'd.

[GGoober]

I doubt it, his garbage is all over here, Salvation, MOTL, etc. I can't seem to avoid the guy, no matter where I go. You can't always count on common sense prevailing, and codegeass has displayed pretty clearly that he has the intelligence level of a four year old. 5-6 threads, question addressed about a dozen times, and he still has to ask. I can't decide if he's trolling or not. How was he allowed to even join The Source? I'm sure our standards are better than that.

Wow! What a noob! Can't believe the "voices" in MTG community are actually whinny kids. Bleh.

[FieryBalrog]

They will leave survival alone because it is a permanent and can be interacted with.
There are plenty of permanents on the Banned list, some way more harmless than Survival (the format-devouring Land Tax for one...)
Of course, some of those "harmless" ones may not deserve to be there, but plenty of permanents are deservedly banned, because they are broken fast mana, or they allow degenerate combos or they are too powerful as engines. Survival is a bit of the "degenerate combo" problem, and a lot of the "powerful engine" problem.

Just being interactive isn't enough. Library of Alexandria is plenty interactive in a format with Wasteland running rampant- and a more incremental advantage than Survival to boot. Yet it belongs on the Banned list.

And unlike some of the other cards, Survival restricts future design space because it interacts with so many creatures, and creatures are exactly what Wizards has been pushing so hard.

[DragoFireheart]

There are plenty of permanents on the Banned list, some way more harmless than Survival (the format-devouring Land Tax for one...)
Of course, some of those "harmless" ones may not deserve to be there, but plenty of permanents are deservedly banned, because they are broken fast mana, or they allow degenerate combos or they are too powerful as engines. Survival is a bit of the "degenerate combo" problem, and a lot of the "powerful engine" problem.

-Killing on turn 4-5 with the attack phase is not degenerate. Dredge has an argubly stronger engine AND is faster.




Just being interactive isn't enough. Library of Alexandria is plenty interactive in a format with Wasteland running rampant- and a more incremental advantage than Survival to boot. Yet it belongs on the Banned list.

- They aren't comparable as they are vastly different permenants. Counters, Pridemage, Krosan Grip, Natures Claim and a host of other cards can slow down or stop SoTF.
LoA is only stopped by a handful of cards. Blood Moon and Wasteland come to mind.

Note that I did do a comparison with Skullclamp.





And unlike some of the other cards, Survival restricts future design space because it interacts with so many creatures, and creatures are exactly what Wizards has been pushing so hard.

-How does Survival restrict design space?

[codegeass]

I do not think that SOTF should be banned. MT was a better ban even thought I was really mad about it. Because i had just spent $900 to complete my reanimator. In then bam they ban MT. While madness deck's are broken. There is way's to get around them. why MT was banned was because it constantly shut you down on turn 1-2 with reanimator and constantly win with tendrils on turn 1-2. Not only dose madness have to worry about extirpate but permanent removal and counter's. I don't know right now everyone is thinking they are going to ban it dose it need to be banned no. But i just picked up a playsets of vengevines for a $102 and SOTF are selling for 3x for around $125.

[majikal]

I do not think that SOTF should be banned. MT was a better ban even thought I was really mad about it. Because i had just spent $900 to complete my reanimator. In then bam they ban MT. While madness deck's are broken. There is way's to get around them. why MT was banned was because it constantly shut you down on turn 1-2 with reanimator and constantly win with tendrils on turn 1-2. Not only dose madness have to worry about extirpate but permanent removal and counter's. I don't know right now everyone is thinking they are going to ban it dose it need to be banned no. But i just picked up a playsets of vengevines for a $102 and SOTF are selling for 3x for around $125.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_mDTLphIVY

[codegeass]

really really really ? get a life and grow up you baby loser.

[Atwa]

really really really ? get a life and grow up you baby loser.

The man does have a point though. Start by writing some coherent sentences and please for the love of baby Jesus use some punctuation.. Even if you are from a non-English speaking nation (like myself), at least take some time to make yourself understandable. A grammar mistake or something lost in translation is very forgivable if you show you at least made an effort to make yourself understandable.

We don't have those forum rules for nothing......

[codegeass]

The man does have a point though. Start by writing some coherent sentences and please for the love of baby Jesus use some punctuation.. Even if you are from a non-English speaking nation (like myself), at least take some time to make yourself understandable. A grammar mistake or something lost in translation is very forgivable if you show you at least made an effort to make yourself understandable.

We don't have those forum rules for nothing......

sorry i thought I was using good english.

[zalachan]

I do not think that SOTF should be banned. MT was a better ban even thought I was really mad about it. Because i had just spent $900 to complete my reanimator. In then bam they ban MT. While madness deck's are broken. There is way's to get around them. why MT was banned was because it constantly shut you down on turn 1-2 with reanimator and constantly win with tendrils on turn 1-2. Not only dose madness have to worry about extirpate but permanent removal and counter's. I don't know right now everyone is thinking they are going to ban it dose it need to be banned no. But i just picked up a playsets of vengevines for a $102 and SOTF are selling for 3x for around $125.

It hurt me when i read this, but then i re-read it 2 more times for more lolz and hurts. Try harder, i know i have to re-read my stuff several times and it's still kinda crappy.

[lordofthepit]

The performance of the two decks are not comparable at all. In fact, some have attributed the high numbers of Survival decks in the Top 16's to the number of players piloting those decks, but in fact, there were many more Merfolk decks in Denver, Minneapolis, and Baltimore than Survival decks (and in fact, more at each tournament)--they just didn't fare nearly as well, despite claims that Merfolk was "dominating". Although data is still unavailable for Nashville and Charlotte, I highly doubt this trend has changed much.

I know the topic has been thoroughly discussed already, but Jared Sylva just provided complete data for SCG Nashville, Charlotte, and Boston, so I wanted to complete the discussion as I had previously promised: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/20629_Too_Much_Information_Legacy_Two_Months_of_Data.html

The various Survival archetypes comprised 73 out of 540 decks (13.52%) in the field and had a 64.45% win percentage against the field (excluding the mirror). That 13.52% of the field grew to 39.58% (19/48) of the top 16 spots, 54.17% (13/24) of the top 8 spots, 58.33% (7/12) of the top 4 spots, and 100% of the finalists/championships.


N C B Tot
Top 1: 1 1 1 3
Top 2: 2 2 2 6
Top 4: 3 2 2 7
Top 8: 4 5 4 13
Top 16: 5 7 7 19

Clearly, Survival wasn't dominating the top 16 because "half the field was playing it". It was dominating the top 16 because Survival decks rose to the top of the Swiss standings, and it continued to rise throughout the top 8.

Sylva also provided matchup analysis for those three tournaments against the most common archetypes:

- Merfolk: 35-17-1, 66.98%
- Goblins: 25-16-3, 60.23%
- G/W/B Rock: 30-19-2, 60.78%
- Countertop: 20-11-0, 64.52%
- Ad Nauseam: 14-10-0, 58.33%
- Zoo: 12-7-1: 62.50%

Everyone has their opinion on what kinds of decks "stomp" Survival--I've even heard on these forums that Merfolk, Zoo, and Goblins have positive matchups, but few people took this at face value, and the data show why. More credible were claims that the Rock and Ad Nauseam combo decks had positive matchups, but this is clearly not the case. Rather, the data shows that Survival has a very positive matchup against both decks (60% is roughly what you would expect for Goblins versus Merfolk, which is generally regarded as very lopsided).

Certainly, a great storm combo player might have better chances than these data suggest, but at that point, you're basically conceding that "you can compete in Legacy against Survival decks if you're playing storm combo and a professional pilot". Even then, there is probably no better Storm player than Bryant Cook, and his loss in GP Columbus was to Survival; so it's hard for me to believe that even in the hands of the best pilots, combo decks "stomp" Survival.

As a reminder, note that there was also no deck with a positive matchup in the three previous tournaments (Denver, Minneapolis, Baltimore) either:

- 27-22-5 (54.63%) against Merfolk
- 36-14-3 (70.75%) against Countertop
- 16-8-0 (66.67%) against Goblins
- 14-12-1 (53.70%) against Zoo
- 3-3-0 (50.00%) against Ad Nauseam
- 7-3-1 (68.18%) against Dredge
- 4-0-0 (100.00%) against Enchantress
- 9-1-0 (90.00%) against Charbelcher

Just to recap, after a rather innocuous but still strong showing at Denver (34-24-4/58.06%, weighed down by the weaker non-Vengevine decks which constituted more relatively more of the archetype at the time), Survival improved to put up unprecedented win percentages at Minneapolis (67-32-5/66.83%) and Baltimore (102-60-8/62.35%). It continued its dominance into the next three tournaments (as shown above). Across six tournaments, it has posted a staggering 64.63% win percentage and has yet to encounter a viable "bad matchup". More impressively, its top X penetration has gotten dramatically better in recent tournaments despite only a relatively modest increase in its prevalance in the overall field.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

I know the topic has been thoroughly discussed already, but Jared Sylva just provided complete data for SCG Nashville, Charlotte, and Boston, so I wanted to complete the discussion as I had previously promised: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/20629_Too_Much_Information_Legacy_Two_Months_of_Data.html

The various Survival archetypes comprised 73 out of 540 decks (13.52%) in the field and had a 64.45% win percentage against the field (excluding the mirror). That 13.52% of the field grew to 39.58% (19/48) of the top 16 spots, 54.17% (13/24) of the top 8 spots, 58.33% (7/12) of the top 4 spots, and 100% of the finalists/championships.


N C B Tot
Top 1: 1 1 1 3
Top 2: 2 2 2 6
Top 4: 3 2 2 7
Top 8: 4 5 4 13
Top 16: 5 7 7 19

Clearly, Survival wasn't dominating the top 16 because "half the field was playing it". It was dominating the top 16 because Survival decks rose to the top of the Swiss standings, and it continued to rise throughout the top 8.

Sylva also provided matchup analysis for those three tournaments against the most common archetypes:

- Merfolk: 35-17-1, 66.98%
- Goblins: 25-16-3, 60.23%
- G/W/B Rock: 30-19-2, 60.78%
- Countertop: 20-11-0, 64.52%
- Ad Nauseam: 14-10-0, 58.33%
- Zoo: 12-7-1: 62.50%

Everyone has their opinion on what kinds of decks "stomp" Survival--I've even heard on these forums that Merfolk, Zoo, and Goblins have positive matchups, but few people took this at face value, and the data show why. More credible were claims that the Rock and Ad Nauseam combo decks had positive matchups, but this is clearly not the case. Rather, the data shows that Survival has a very positive matchup against both decks (60% is roughly what you would expect for Goblins versus Merfolk, which is generally regarded as very lopsided).

Certainly, a great storm combo player might have better chances than these data suggest, but at that point, you're basically conceding that "you can compete in Legacy against Survival decks if you're playing storm combo and a professional pilot". Even then, there is probably no better Storm player than Bryant Cook, and his loss in GP Columbus was to Survival; so it's hard for me to believe that even in the hands of the best pilots, combo decks "stomp" Survival.

As a reminder, note that there was also no deck with a positive matchup in the three previous tournaments (Denver, Minneapolis, Baltimore) either:

- 27-22-5 (54.63%) against Merfolk
- 36-14-3 (70.75%) against Countertop
- 16-8-0 (66.67%) against Goblins
- 14-12-1 (53.70%) against Zoo
- 3-3-0 (50.00%) against Ad Nauseam
- 7-3-1 (68.18%) against Dredge
- 4-0-0 (100.00%) against Enchantress
- 9-1-0 (90.00%) against Charbelcher

Just to recap, after a rather innocuous but still strong showing at Denver (34-24-4/58.06%, weighed down by the weaker non-Vengevine decks which constituted more relatively more of the archetype at the time), Survival improved to put up unprecedented win percentages at Minneapolis (67-32-5/66.83%) and Baltimore (102-60-8/62.35%). It continued its dominance into the next three tournaments (as shown above). Across six tournaments, it has posted a staggering 64.63% win percentage and has yet to encounter a viable "bad matchup". More impressively, its top X penetration has gotten dramatically better in recent tournaments despite only a relatively modest increase in its prevalance in the overall field.

Right. So what was the overall win percentage of Countertop/Zoo back when they were dominant?

[Cthuloo]

Right. So what was the overall win percentage of Countertop/Zoo back when they were dominant?

Not that good, to be honest: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy19770_Way_Too_Much_Information_Compiled_Legacy_Results.html

It' a pity that we don't have such detailed results for the european tournaments. I guess that combining the data the performance of Survival will lower a bit, reaching more reasonable levels.

[lordofthepit]

Right. So what was the overall win percentage of Countertop/Zoo back when they were dominant?

I'm trying to assemble data from what's available, but some of the earlier tournaments (St. Louis I, Dallas/Fort Worth, and Richmond) will require me to dig into the actual spreadsheets.

Zoo managed to post 65.82% at Seattle, which is by far its most dominant performance. Between Atlanta and Minneapolis (a stretch of 6 tournaments), it managed to post 59.12%, which is by far the best of any non-Survival archetype. Of course, those six tournaments were bookended by two relatively poor showings (Baltimore, 51.79%; Orlando, 46.88%). It also didn't have near the top 16 penetration (despite being much more prevalent), it had quite a few bad matchups, and even though it performed the best of any archetype during this time, most people considered Ad Nauseam and Reanimator the best decks (more on that later). For the tournaments between Richmond and Baltimore, it posted 56.82%.

Countertop was pretty bad in 2010. It didn't even break even (49.78%) for the data I've looked at so far (excludes Richmond, DFW, and St. Loui Is, which I'll look at later). It failed to break 53% for any two consecutive tournaments for the 9 tournaments I'm looking at. Countertop was much more prevalent (i.e. represented more of the field) in 2009, for which I don't have data, but I'd be shocked if it won more than 55-60% that year.

Merfolk fared a little better than Countertop in 2009, but there were no two consecutive tournaments in which it broke 55% across both). Here I'm looking at the ten tournaments (excluding DFW and St. Louis I, which I'll include later). It finished at 53.84% for the year.

Ad Nauseam and Reanimator were wildly inconsistent even when they were "the decks to beat". Pre-banning, neither was able to post higher than 52% for two consecutive tournaments. Overall, Ad Nauseam is a shade over 50% (50.69%) between Indianpolis and Baltimore, while Reanimator is just below that (49.90%) Interestingly, Ad Nauseam has actually posted better win percentages after the banning, because players are less prepared for something which they're less likely to face (it was under 50% pre-banning). This is also why I think Countertop didn't necessarily have a much higher win percentage in 2009 despite being more prevalent (people were maindecking Grips and other hate).

This also makes the success of Survival that much more disconcerting considering it's posted amazing win percentages in every single SCG tournament since its debut while being the deck that everyone is targeting. Moreover, Survival/Vengevine builds (I assume that these decks are the ones explicitly labeled "U/G Survival", "U/G Madness", "G/W Survival", or "Ooze Survival") had a win percentage in excess of 62% at each of the six tournaments in which it's been featured.

When I get a chance, I'm going dig up complete data for all the archetypes from the SCG spreadsheets (I haven't included DFW and St. Louis early in the year, nor have I included the data from the last three tournaments, among others).

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Survival decks only win consistently with Survival on the table. And it can always be dealt with in many different ways. Apparently Zoo posted identical results back in the day. Considering it certainly lost to Storm and Reanimator, which still had MT, I'd say Zoo was as dominant as Survival is now.

After all the noise about Survival though, I don't think WOTC will share this perspective when looking at the data you posted.

[Shabbaman]

This also makes the success of Survival that much more disconcerting considering it's posted amazing win percentages in every single SCG tournament since its debut while being the deck that everyone is targeting.

Well, if you look at today's statistical analysis over at SCG you see that people keep playing goblins and merfolk in an attempt to beat Survival. That fact is more disconcerting than the fact that Survival managed to win again.

[DragoFireheart]

Well, if you look at today's statistical analysis over at SCG you see that people keep playing goblins and merfolk in an attempt to beat Survival. That fact is more disconcerting than the fact that Survival managed to win again.

Like I said in the B/R topic, the current meta is Vengevival vs Pet decks. Once people drop their mid-range decks and start using faster decks, things will even out.

I actually remember a few months back around the time before MT was banned on this site there was an excessive amount of whining when Vial Goblins was removed from the DTB thread. People are becoming attached to their pet decks and don't want to change, hence they will whine for Survival to be banned.

[(nameless one)]

I actually remember a few months back around the time before MT was banned on this site there was an excessive amount of whining when Vial Goblins was removed from the DTB thread. People are becoming attached to their pet decks and don't want to change, hence they will whine for Survival to be banned.

This. But in fairness, I think we all get attach to our pet decks because of the cost of buying new cards.

[Mr.C]

10. The Survival of Legacy

The banned and restricted announcement will go up on December 20 as usual—after Worlds. If any player is going to come up with a strategy to beat the Survival of the Fittest decks that have been dominating the format then the Team Competition may be the last chance that they get to do so before it is defeated through legislation.

Defeated through legislation? Sounds like a ban is coming after all.

[majikal]

Fuckin great. They'll probably ban everything until Rebels are good, and then ban Lin Sivvi. :\

[Pippin]

So its sort of "official" now...

Bye survival, was nice knowing you :eyebrow:

[Volrath]

Great, yust friggin great.

Somewhere Evan Irwin and all other whiners/people not willing to adapt are doing a victory dance...

[majikal]

I, for one, plan to continue savaging people with Vengevines even after this nonsense, unless they pre-emptively ban Intuition as well.

[DalkonCledwin]

I, for one, plan to continue savaging people with Vengevines even after this nonsense, unless they pre-emptively ban Intuition as well.

what if... they actually ban Vengevine and NOT survival of the fittest for some odd reason?

That said, it likely is going to be Survival of the Fittest that gets the Hammer since it is the older of the two problem children. However this will be interesting to watch unfold over the next few weeks. Apparently Star City Games has yet to notice the article though, Survival of the Fittests still cost 60 bucks >.<

[Hopo]

The article isn't an official declaration and it has a "may" clause, so stop being prematurely pissed off for god's sake. Why bother shitting your pants beforehand and then look stupid (but relieved) when no bannings happen? And if something will get banned, it will happen in fixed schedule, not when you people here are crying out the loudest.

[DalkonCledwin]

The article isn't an official declaration and it has a "may" clause, so stop being prematurely pissed off for god's sake. Why bother shitting your pants beforehand and then look stupid (but relieved) when no bannings happen? And if something will get banned, it will happen in fixed schedule, not when you people here are crying out the loudest.

okay 2 things:

1.) it was posted on the Wizards of the Coast website. While he may not work for Wizards of the Coast himself, and while it may have a "may" clause built into it. He would look really stupid if he wrote that and then it didn't happen, especially if he wrote that on the Wizards of the Coast website and then it didn't happen. Did you even stop to think about the kind of publicity that posting this kind of statement on the Wizards of the Coast Website causes even if you don't work for them outside of the capacity of an article author and Pro-Tour Historian?

2.) While it may not be guaranteed, the fact is that Survival of the Fittest is EXACTLY the kind of card that Wizards of the Coast has long attested to despising in all regards. It is worse in many ways than Mystical Tutor (which itself was recently banned). So while this statement carries the "may" clause, it also has the AIR of truth to it. And that is the important thing I think.

[Hopo]

You truly cannot say anything about it, yet people behave like it was a fact. I call this kind of thinking bullshit.
People are just guessing, nothing more. I think dozens of topics and articles like this one having more than 30 pages is enough of guessing already. People haven't said anything new since the first page. And you claim that the guy writing the Chiba article wouldn't want to look stupid, hence survival will be banned? Are you serious?

Survival is basically a card making creatures relevant in modern legacy against control and combo. I have always thought that wizards supports the attack phase and creatures, so I'm not buying your speculation and reasoning.

Why cannot you just wait the official announcement and see if nothing actually happens? How many pages more do you want to speculate with this thing?

You can also try to justify your claims by reasoning: they just printed Fauna Shaman. Does it tell you that wizards is fine with survival-effects, or that they have been thinking of banning survival and are just softening the impact and giving us a lousy replacement?

[DalkonCledwin]

You truly cannot say anything about it, yet people behave like it was a fact. I call this kind of thinking bullshit.
People are just guessing, nothing more. I think dozens of topics and articles like this one having more than 30 pages is enough of guessing already. People haven't said anything new since the first page. And you claim that the guy writing the Chiba article wouldn't want to look stupid, hence survival will be banned? Are you serious?

Survival is basically a card making creatures relevant in modern legacy against control and combo. I have always thought that wizards supports the attack phase and creatures, so I'm not buying your speculation and reasoning.

Why cannot you just wait the official announcement and see if nothing actually happens? How many pages more do you want to speculate with this thing?

You can also try to justify your claims by reasoning: they just printed Fauna Shaman. Does it tell you that wizards is fine with survival-effects, or that they have been thinking of banning survival and are just softening the impact and giving us a lousy replacement?

No I didn't say that he didn't want to look stupid... I wrote that he WOULD look stupid given who he wrote the article for and what he said in it.

And no, Survival isn't a card making creatures relevant in modern legacy against control and combo... it is a combo engine itself. If you want a card that makes creatures relevant against Control, you want Æther Vial. I am not sure there IS a card that makes Creatures viable against Combo (it certainly isn't Survival of the Fittest as Combo happens to be Survival's worst match up).

The official announcement is what? 17 days away. And yet we have an author writing on the FREAKING MOTHERSHIP that he thinks Survival (or some component of the deck) will be banned and he is writing it NOW. I think that warrants speculation at the very least.

Survival is very different from Fauna Shaman. For one thing, Survival can be used multiple times in a single turn, without the aid of Quirion Ranger or Scryb Ranger, Fauna Shaman cannot. Further Survival is an Enchantment, which is much harder to get rid of than a Creature, where as Fauna Shaman is a creature. So yes I can justify it by saying that removing Survival of the Fittest is possibly going to happen and that Fauna Shaman is a lousy attempt at a replacement.

[Odd Mutation]

@Hopo


10. The Survival of Legacy
The banned and restricted announcement will go up on December 20 as usual—after Worlds. If any player is going to come up with a strategy to beat the Survival of the Fittest decks that have been dominating the format then the Team Competition may be the last chance that they get to do so before it is defeated through legislation.


This is sounds pretty straightforward to me...

Robrecht

[(nameless one)]

Don't forget that Survival of the Fittest doesn't have summoning sickness.

[Pich]

Damn, yea, SURVIVAL IS GOOD ? SO ** what ? I'm not playing it, i'm sticking to Merfolk and i do fine against Vengevivals-type decks. Stop crying because there's a new good deck guys.. i MEAN.. DUDE.. It's called META-GAMING, just customize your Sideboard to beat it..

Yixilid Jailer
Hibernation
Extirpate
Krosan Grip
Pithing Needle
Peacekeeper
Countermagic
Maindeck 4x Spell Snare
Playing COMBO.

DANG, just ADAPT and stop pissing off people that bought survivals for 60 $ (I didn't.)

[Volrath]

Damn, yea, SURVIVAL IS GOOD ? SO ** what ? I'm not playing it, i'm sticking to Merfolk and i do fine against Vengevivals-type decks. Stop crying because there's a new good deck guys.. i MEAN.. DUDE.. It's called META-GAMING, just customize your Sideboard to beat it..

Yixilid Jailer
Hibernation
Extirpate
Krosan Grip
Pithing Needle
Peacekeeper
Countermagic
Maindeck 4x Spell Snare
Playing COMBO.

planar void
leyline of the void
dueling grounds
aven mindsoncer
more stp + pte
Humility
perish

DANG, just ADAPT and stop pissing off people that bought survivals for 60 $ (I didn't.)

Also, the rise of vengivine makes some other decks viable again.

Merfolk
D&T
The rock (4 stp, 2 pte and witnesses spells doom for vines and SB dueling Grounds.)
Wombat variants.
Combo
Zoo( more mindsencors more pte and stp les lightning helix)
Show & Tell decks
Dreadstill
Landstill

[GGoober]

Who cares about what is/not banned anymore. The official quote from the Mothership once again confirms that WotC enjoys listening to wildfire rumors and look at data within the states and continue to show their dis-support to non-USA metas (which argubly non-USA people take MTG just as seriously if not even more competitively than their US counterparts).

Although, at the very least, I am glad they are giving till after Worlds to make a decision. Good news is meta are shifting to start adapting against Survival. Bad news is with this fucking post from the mothership, EVERYONE will want to play Survival just to have one-last shot with the deck, which happens to be a good deck.

Self-fulfilling prophecies!

There's quite a lot of things to ban then from what I see:
- Entomb
- Intuition
- Burning Wish/Cunning Wish
- Enlightened Tutor

Because they all have potential to be broken cause they are TUTORs. I just find it highly annoying they are viewing the state of Legacy like it's Standard or something. There's an inherent dislike for tutors and combo from WotC, but this is fucking eternal. I'll be more and more disinterested if the format evolves to tap creatures sideways with some tighter turn 1-3 plays. It'll be like playing Standard with FoW and Daze. I don't want that. If Survival gets banned, I'll be sad, because I don't get to play all the cool decks that I've designed (Welderstone Survival, Rock Survival, Goblin Survival, Sliver Survival). I guess I won't have to waste time tweaking those crappy decks because they're probably overpowered as hell since they play Survival! (except they aren't, it's really just Vengevine that made it dumb).

[LegacyDan]

Do people really not know how to use a sideboard? I suppose after this Aether Vial will get banned. Along with Wasteland, Tarmogoyf, Sword to Plowshares, and Force of Will.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Do people really not know how to use a sideboard? I suppose after this Aether Vial will get banned. Along with Wasteland, Tarmogoyf, Sword to Plowshares, and Force of Will.

Also SDT, Jace, NO and S&T. Ban EVERYTHING!!111!!one!!

[Volrath]

Also SDT, Jace, NO and S&T. Ban EVERYTHING!!111!!one!!


Do people really not know how to use a sideboard? I suppose after this Aether Vial will get banned. Along with Wasteland, Tarmogoyf, Sword to Plowshares, and Force of Will.

Yeah, ban everything except goyf and Vial.

Wizards want's us to have a meta full of zoo, goblins and merfolk. nothing else.

[Azdraël]

Damn, yea, SURVIVAL IS GOOD ? SO ** what ? I'm not playing it, i'm sticking to Merfolk and i do fine against

DANG, just ADAPT and stop pissing off people that bought (survivals) Mystical Tutor for 60 $ (I didn't.)
seems it was the same for ANT at its time...and this time i'm sure it's gonna piss off more people. Your turn guys!
(althought I agreed on your whole post)

[Michael Keller]

Who cares about what is/not banned anymore. The official quote from the Mothership once again confirms that WotC enjoys listening to wildfire rumors and look at data within the states and continue to show their dis-support to non-USA metas (which argubly non-USA people take MTG just as seriously if not even more competitively than their US counterparts).

Although, at the very least, I am glad they are giving till after Worlds to make a decision. Good news is meta are shifting to start adapting against Survival. Bad news is with this fucking post from the mothership, EVERYONE will want to play Survival just to have one-last shot with the deck, which happens to be a good deck.

Self-fulfilling prophecies!

There's quite a lot of things to ban then from what I see:
- Entomb
- Intuition
- Burning Wish/Cunning Wish
- Enlightened Tutor

Because they all have potential to be broken cause they are TUTORs. I just find it highly annoying they are viewing the state of Legacy like it's Standard or something. There's an inherent dislike for tutors and combo from WotC, but this is fucking eternal. I'll be more and more disinterested if the format evolves to tap creatures sideways with some tighter turn 1-3 plays. It'll be like playing Standard with FoW and Daze. I don't want that. If Survival gets banned, I'll be sad, because I don't get to play all the cool decks that I've designed (Welderstone Survival, Rock Survival, Goblin Survival, Sliver Survival). I guess I won't have to waste time tweaking those crappy decks because they're probably overpowered as hell since they play Survival! (except they aren't, it's really just Vengevine that made it dumb).

Each one of the tutors you have listed are situational and do not enable anything construed as "broken" (there is a difference between a strong play and a series of strong plays); you are essentially trying to correlate a degenerative combo-enabling machine to cards that have only a single utility. The activated cost of Survival - factored in that it is a permanent, reusable, instant-speed engine - allows for the said player to effectively search for any creature they need at any given time.

The utility of each of these creatures in Survival-based decks really is what sugar-coats the card itself because the list of tutors (Enlightened, Worldly, Mystical, etc.) each allows you to specifically go for a type of card that has a unique affect on the game. Survival accomplishes each of these tasks by allowing you to develop your deck using cards of a varying degree of utility or simply for an abhorrent surge as it pertains to the attack step. It doesn't necessarily allow you to fetch up Instants or Sorceries, but it still allows for the make-up of degenerative plays.

Vengevine pushed the envelope on this card and exploited it for all of its worth. The card has to and should go. I typically board correctly and adaptively and do relatively well against Survival-based decks. That doesn't mean the next person will, and that is what seems to be the recurring theme here: Survival's ability to, well, survive.

[Meekrab]

Don't forget that Survival of the Fittest doesn't have summoning sickness.
It does if Opalescence is in play.

[Rune]

The best deck of the format was pretty hard to determine before Vengevine Survival was "dicovered" and the meta was more interesting. Now it's pretty clear that you just need to pick up a Survival deck if you want the best chances of winning a tournament. An average win percentage of about 65 against the whole format? Yes, please. To quote Gerry Thompson, "that shit is retarded and needs to be banned" (on ggslive in SCG Boston where he finished 2nd with Ooze Survival).

Playing stupid hate cards that Survival can easily win through isn't the answer. The best answer is playing Survival yourself, or one of the few decks that can race its combo. "Just adapt your deck!!" - such a compelling argument, but I think I will just play Survival myself instead of maindecking relatively narrow cards like Extirpate and Pithing Needle.

[Amon Amarth]

Man, I can understand banning Survival of the Fittest. If people are boarding Tormod's Crypt and expecting to get the job done... it ain't gonna' happen. If I read another article that tells people to play ineffective hate cards I will shoot myself.

[Lorgalis]

"Just adapt your deck!!" - such a compelling argument, but I think I will just play Survival myself instead of maindecking relatively narrow cards like Extirpate and Pithing Needle.

:eek:

And next thing you're saying that Swords to plowshares is narrow too, because it only deals with creatures.

Survival is going to be banned because of lazy players like you...too bad.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Can everyone stop jumping to conclusions. It's still possible that WoTC will choose to not ban Survival. I mean at this point it seems like so many people are jumping on it that it's just a forgone conclusion, but until it actually is official can we hold off on the lamentation. I don't consider one fringe writer to be a very reliable source even if it is on the official WoTC website. To tell you the truth I think that guy has just as much a clue what's going to happen as anyone else and he was just speculating.

[SpikeyMikey]

The banned and restricted announcement will go up on December 20 as usual—after Worlds. If any player is going to come up with a strategy to beat the Survival of the Fittest decks that have been dominating the format then the Team Competition may be the last chance that they get to do so before it is defeated through legislation.



From BDM's article on Worlds. Sounds like a clear indication...

[keys]

:eek:

And next thing you're saying that Swords to plowshares is narrow too, because it only deals with creatures.

Survival is going to be banned because of lazy players like you...too bad.

What's lazier, switching your entire deck because one is clearly the best, or simply squeezing 4 hate cards of your choice into your 60 and expecting to win?

[Mana Drain]

The banned and restricted announcement will go up on December 20 as usual—after Worlds. If any player is going to come up with a strategy to beat the Survival of the Fittest decks that have been dominating the format then the Team Competition may be the last chance that they get to do so before it is defeated through legislation.



From BDM's article on Worlds. Sounds like a clear indication...

Would you please post a link.

[Azdraël]

http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/twtw/119

[SpikeyMikey]

What's lazier, switching your entire deck because one is clearly the best, or simply squeezing 4 hate cards of your choice into your 60 and expecting to win?

I've been maining Extirpate since GP:Chicago because it's nuts. It's stock goes up and down a bit as tje format changes, it's relatively bad against Zoo and Fish, but it's the dead nuts against a lot of decks.

[frenchy-man]

Nice ban survival ! I was so much missing merfolks...

[Gui]

10. The Survival of Legacy
The banned and restricted announcement will go up on December 20 as usual—after Worlds. If any player is going to come up with a strategy to beat the Survival of the Fittest decks that have been dominating the format then the Team Competition may be the last chance that they get to do so before it is defeated through legislation.

Nice move, he didn't say explicitly that SotF is going to be banned. "May" is the key word there, and as far as we know, he doesn't know whether it will be banned or not, too.

[Koby]

From BDM's facebook -

Brian David-Marshall (http://www.facebook.com/BeeDeeM) I actually have no inside info on this one. Comment was based on players insisting that something needs to happen.

[ChrisElrod]

I've long thought survival of the fittest had an extraordinary power level.
Even when survival decks weren't good, a resolved survival meant you win the game if you have mana.
I'm not much of a deckbuilder, and I always felt that someone else could've put together a deck that runs great without survival, and then put in four copies of survival, just so it reads "1G, win in a few turns". Problem was you needed so much crap, like anger, rofellos, genesis, and squee, so the decks never worked so well. I was scared anyway that someone would figure it out and then my favorite card would get banned.
I still feel like survival with vengevine isn't really any stronger than survival with the old package (genesis + viridean zealot could let you grind out a lot of wins against stax type decks, spore frog lock could hold off certain strategies, etc), but without survival vengevineis way better than all that crap. The deck is obviously extraordinarilly good.
Despite being a suboptimal player it got my eternal rating to ~1830 for a while (still ~1820), because GW is simply that strong.

I feel that the card deserves banning without doubt. The deck is a bunch of extremely efficient creatures, and about even with other decks in quality without survival. Putting those in just gives you a massive trump card. If other decks are forced to try hard to answer it, then they're spending a lot of effort to try and handle only a small part of the deck. Did you know GW survival gives knight of the reliquary just as much support (mom protection vs fow to protect them; both run the utility land package) as new horizons-the kotr deck-does?

Trying hard ot adapt and answer your deck isn't exactly a winning proposition, especially if it weakens those decks against the rest of the field.
Unless by adapt you mean play combo, in which case yes, combo crushes GW.

[SpikeyMikey]

As a Rock player, G/W is definitely the hardest of the 3 to beat, but it's still not a bad M/U. I wonder, if there is a SotF ban if there would be enough support for an alternate Eternal format similar to Legacy but with a less-restrictive ban list. We've got a lot of old players that have been playing 1.5 since it was still tied to the T1 ban list. I think we could do a better job of managing a banlist than the DCI. Set up our own rating system, come up with a catchy name and go from there...

[sdematt]

I remember playing Legacy in the days of Drains, Bazaars and the like in the format. It was a good time at the time, but I think the banlist has moved beyond that. I'm not saying that I don't love playing with Mana Drain and Library of Alexandria, but I think Legacy players that think Library and Drain are going to get unbanned obviously haven't played regular or unrestricted Vintage.

Back to Survival, I'm on the "unban Mystical" bandwagon. I'm not a combo player, nor do I like combo. I'd be fine if the format took a crap until March and Storm/Reanimator raped the format, because then they'd have solid evidence for a reban, and they could say "I told you so" to all the Reanimator players. Mind you, I'd sit in my isolated corner of Legacy while it happened, but my point still stands.

-Matt

[Rune]

:eek:

And next thing you're saying that Swords to plowshares is narrow too, because it only deals with creatures.

Survival is going to be banned because of lazy players like you...too bad.

There's a reason why StP is a 4-of in many decks (Legacy = mostly creature-based) while Pithing Needle is not an exciting card to maindeck, unless you play Trinket Mage already. I don't know why I even mentioned the card in the first place, because its effectiveness against Survival is very debatable. It does close to nothing if they have the enchantment on the table and G open (tutor for disenchant on a stick). You need to play it preemptively and just cross your fingers they don't have the aggro/Natural Order/Fauna Shaman draw.

Threats >>>> answers. Most sensible people will either just play the format's undisputed best threat (Survival) or play a deck that can consistently outrace it instead of trying to fight an extremely multifaceted deck with some narrow, reactive cards.

When you say lazy, I say smart.

[alphacat]

I feel this is greatly more justified than the banning of MT.

HOWEVER, I really think this is also just an overreaction. I really think they should experiment more with unbanning cards to shift the meta rather than just banning whatever deck that makes multiple T8 apparent.

[GreenHornet]

I'd really rather they don't ban survival. It's a good card an finally has found a home in a competitive deck. It's been posting good numbers, but it's also been one of the most played decks at tournaments, and has been preying on other popular decks.
http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/20629_Too_Much_Information_Legacy_Two_Months_of_Data.html
This article shows that the only other deck played more than survival is merfolk, which has a dreadful match up against survival. Only makes sense that it posts good results when the meta is either playing survival or playing decks that lose to it.
Heck, if you come up with a deck that beats both merfolk and survival with 55+% I think you'd sweep a tournament.

[sdematt]

We're working on it, it's called Rock. :cool:

-Matt

[GreenHornet]

We're working on it, it's called Rock. :cool:

-Matt

Good call. Get some. And do it fast before a ban. :wink:

[luckme10]

So, anyone following this on salvation? Evan Erwin popped on, who some may argue is a catalyst for this debacle, err debate, and got flamed by a moderator. lol. With threads like these, who needs Jerry Springer. Stay Classy Salvation.

http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=249609&page=53 (http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/showthread.php?t=249609&page=53)

[ChrisElrod]

We're working on it, it's called Rock. :cool:

-Matt

I can think of at least three distinct times I played against rock with GW survival.
My record was 2-0 each time.
Perhaps your list is different from the usual?

[sdematt]

Oh no, I've done quite well, don't get me wrong. It's just most people only see the Rock results from SCG and then dismiss it as being weak to Survival.

Are you saying you beat them 2-0, or got defeated 2-0? Either way, I'm running a similar list, but with more Swords, and the possibility of MD Extirpates.

-Matt

[SpikeyMikey]

Threats >>>> answers. Most sensible people will either just play the format's undisputed best threat (Survival) or play a deck that can consistently outrace it instead of trying to fight an extremely multifaceted deck with some narrow, reactive cards.

When you say lazy, I say smart.

So... Lightning Bolt > Force of Will?

"People like control because they think it shows that they're good Magic-players. Active decks, on the other hand, produce threats, and control decks must have the right answer to the right threat. If not, they're in trouble... while there are wrong answers, there are no wrong threats."

I don't think there's anyone that's been playing Magic competitively and hasn't heard at least a bastardization of this Dave Price quote. However, history has proven this wrong time and again. Most of the formats I've played have gravitated towards control as time goes on. Now, I'm an aggro player at heart, and I firmly believe that I can win swinging dudes into the red zone, if I'm built properly. But once a deck becomes a known quantity, anyone can build to beat it. Whether people run cards like Pithing Needle and Extirpate main or not has nothing to do with whether it's correct to main Pithing Needle or Extirpate.

Look at the DTB section. You have Merfolk, TES, Vial Goblins, Zoo, U/G Vine, Pro Bant, Dredge, Countertop and New Horizons. Needle is good against Fish, passable against TES, good against Goblins, dead against Zoo, great against U/G Vine, relatively dead against Pro Bant, relatively dead against Dredge, great against Countertop and very good against New Horizons. So of 9 DtBs, it's good against 5. Swords to Plowshares is good against Merfolk, dead against TES, good against Vial Goblins, good against Zoo, passable against U/G Vine, good against pro Bant, relatively dead against Dredge, relatively dead against Countertop and good against New Horizons. Of the 9 DtBs, it's good against 5. And there are quite a few decks that aren't in the DtB but are tier 1 or 1.5 that Needle is good against as well, Thopter, all Landstill variants, etc. I'm not arguing that Needle is as good or better than StP, it's not (in a broad sense, in some matchups obviously it's far superior), largely because it can be removed, allowing the offending permanent to be used again. But it is DEFINITELY good enough to maindeck. The fact that it's not is not a testament to the weakness of Pithing Needle, it's a testament to lazy deck building.

[Rune]

It' not what I meant. I should have been more specific. I know that many reactive decks are good. But in this case with Survival, the player who has to react to the card is usually screwed. It's in this case that threats > answers. I see it as almost impossible to argue why I should even bother being the one who has to answer the card immediately.

Needle has its uses in many matchups, but I still think it's mediocre against Survival specifically. It just gives you a small tempo boost because they have to spend some mana to get rid of it. If your deck isn't able to take full advantage of the tempo boost and win, you're probably still dead.

[SpikeyMikey]

I like being in a position to react to Survival because when I Extirpate VV with triggers on the stack, my opponent has spent at least 5-6 mana and several turns setting up a play that I've negated for 1 mana and 1 card and I've eliminated his primary path to victory. Again, I think G/W is the hardest M/U for me as a Rock player because there are actually 3 wincons, VV, Iona and KotR/'goyf. VV is easy to answer, Iona is a little bit tougher and the KotR/'goyf plan is the hardest. Of course, my listing is a bit non-standard. But G/W is my worst M/U of the Survival decks and I'd still say I'm 40% preboard. U/G is very easy and G/B is favorable. The nice thing about the hate cards for VV Survival is that the decks they're weak against are weak against Survival, meaning that Needle, Extirpate and even Aven Mindcensor(he's been a star in my sideboard for Survival and TES) are generally good against Survival of the Fittest and against all the other decks that are good against Survival. So if you can dodge the "fair" decks early, those cards get better and better, as you're basically boarding for G1.

[FieryBalrog]

Damn, yea, SURVIVAL IS GOOD ? SO ** what ? I'm not playing it, i'm sticking to Merfolk and i do fine against Vengevivals-type decks. Stop crying because there's a new good deck guys.. i MEAN.. DUDE.. It's called META-GAMING, just customize your Sideboard to beat it..

Yixilid Jailer
Hibernation
Extirpate
Krosan Grip
Pithing Needle
Peacekeeper
Countermagic
Maindeck 4x Spell Snare
Playing COMBO.

DANG, just ADAPT and stop pissing off people that bought survivals for 60 $ (I didn't.)

You're right, everyone's an idiot and doesn't realize that the sideboard exists in the game, that's why survival gets to win so much.

[frenchy-man]

You're right, everyone's an idiot and doesn't realize that the sideboard exists in the game, that's why survival gets to win so much.

Actually, yes. At least in the US.

[DragoFireheart]

Actually, yes. At least in the US.

[FieryBalrog]

I find all you doom and gloomers hilarious.

goddamn you retards everyone is lazy and dumb just play Extirpate/Pithing Needle/Janky Nonsense maindeck or combo and wtfpwn survival yuo newbs survival is so easy to beat wtf I hate you

Here's some knowledge for you folks:

1) Everyone else is not a retard
2) Everyone else is not clueless about sideboarding
3) You almost certainly have no amazing tech
4) Your tech will not "doom" survival, you probably don't even have a >50 match win % vs it

Want to prove me wrong? Go ahead and use your super tech metagamed decks to destroy Survival at various tournaments. We're waiting for your maindeck Extirpate to save the format.

[DragoFireheart]

I find all you doom and gloomers hilarious.

goddamn you retards everyone is lazy and dumb just play Extirpate/Pithing Needle/Janky Nonsense maindeck or combo and wtfpwn survival yuo newbs survival is so easy to beat wtf I hate you

Here's some knowledge for you folks:

1) Everyone else is not a retard
2) Everyone else is not clueless about sideboarding
3) You almost certainly have no amazing tech
4) Your tech will not "doom" survival, you probably don't even have a >50 match win % vs it

Want to prove me wrong? Go ahead and use your super tech metagamed decks to destroy Survival at various tournaments. We're waiting for your maindeck Extirpate to save the format.


(Whips out a non-mid range deck)

Dredge? TES? Burn?.

[frenchy-man]

I find all you doom and gloomers hilarious.

goddamn you retards everyone is lazy and dumb just play Extirpate/Pithing Needle/Janky Nonsense maindeck or combo and wtfpwn survival yuo newbs survival is so easy to beat wtf I hate you

Here's some knowledge for you folks:

1) Everyone else is not a retard
2) Everyone else is not clueless about sideboarding
3) You almost certainly have no amazing tech
4) Your tech will not "doom" survival, you probably don't even have a >50 match win % vs it

Want to prove me wrong? Go ahead and use your super tech metagamed decks to destroy Survival at various tournaments. We're waiting for your maindeck Extirpate to save the format.

Explain to me then why survival is not dominant in Europe. Do you really think that we play maindeck extirpate or needles ?
It is a pity that you guy ask for a ban that is a non sense everywhere else.

[Amon Amarth]

I find all you doom and gloomers hilarious.

goddamn you retards everyone is lazy and dumb just play Extirpate/Pithing Needle/Janky Nonsense maindeck or combo and wtfpwn survival yuo newbs survival is so easy to beat wtf I hate you

Here's some knowledge for you folks:

1) Everyone else is not a retard
2) Everyone else is not clueless about sideboarding
3) You almost certainly have no amazing tech
4) Your tech will not "doom" survival, you probably don't even have a >50 match win % vs it

Want to prove me wrong? Go ahead and use your super tech metagamed decks to destroy Survival at various tournaments. We're waiting for your maindeck Extirpate to save the format.

Um... what? I don't know what you're trying to say here.

[Tacosnape]

(Awards FieryBalrog 22 lesbian points for general awesomeness. Redeemable, like always, as soon as I have excess lesbians in stock.)

Like seriously. The discussion isn't even whether to ban something. It's which piece to ban. If the duo were to be left alone, Two of the Five decks I keep assembled in my box would have the Vengevine Survival combo in it. And you can cry all you want. A piece WILL be banned. With this much outrage and controversy over it, Wizards will ban some piece of it whether you think they should or not. So in another couple weeks, GG, naysayers.


Explain to me then why survival is not dominant in Europe. Do you really think that we play maindeck extirpate or needles ?
It is a pity that you guy ask for a ban that is a non sense everywhere else.

Maybe the Europeans don't play Survival as much, or can't play it well. Since you apparently want to get into a continent war.

Or, we could just stick to things that we know are true. That, for better and worse, the European metagame changes more slowly than the US one does. The US, generally, is quicker to pick up a new good deck when we should, but also quicker to abandon an old good one prematurely.

OR, we could just avoid regional cliches together and try to have an intelligent discussion based on merit, but judging by your last couple posts (Europe isn't "Everywhere else," for the record,) I'd say that's out.


(Whips out a non-mid range deck)

Dredge? TES? Burn?.

I'm 4-0 combined against these in sanctioned matches. Just saying. I'm pretty sure I can pilot my GW list and go 2-1 against that gauntlet.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

(Whips out a non-mid range deck)

Dredge? TES? Burn?.

Survival beats those 3 decks. Especially TES. It just sucks too much.

[Volrath]

Survival beats those 3 decks. Especially TES. It just sucks too much.


Wait a minute, since when does survival beat combo?.

[Piceli89]

survival beats those 3 decks. Especially tes. It just sucks too much.

l
o
l
z

[Volrath]

l
o
l
z

Indeed.

[markbris]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/standard/20670_Round_1_Alix_Hatfield_vs_Jeremy_Tibbetts.html

Round 1 Feature Match from SCG Richmond.

Notice that the guy is playing rock, a supposedly good deck for beating Survival, has him on the ropes the first game, Survival gets ripped and its game over when Alix was like a turn away from death. Second game the guy drops a needle, extirpates the vengevines, gets rid of two survivals and still loses to natural order. Pretty ez to stop with just a couple hate cards eh? And this from a deck that already has maindeck answers for it.

Oh and Jeremy Tibbets is at least decent at the game.

Before the hating comes in, I'd be fine if they kept it legal for a while as I'm working on my own answers to it and I don't mind trying to crack it but I can see the reasons for the ban.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Wait a minute, since when does survival beat combo?.

Don't be so narrow and ignorant. Combo decks are not all the same. TES is not consistent enough to beat Survival. Other ANT decks are though.

[deviant]

I'm 4-0 combined against these in sanctioned matches. Just saying. I'm pretty sure I can pilot my GW list and go 2-1 against that gauntlet.

I assume the loss is TES?

I have yet to lose a match to Survival, ever.
(hint: I like to count storm when I play)

It would be a pity to ban survival this soon. I truly believe the metagame can shift and handle this "problem" by itself.

EDIT: Oh, and if someone is wondering how I can believe survival shouldn't be banned as it's power level is more than comparable to those of mystical, land tax, whathaveyou on the banned list, the explanation is rather simple: I think that list is a little too long

MORE EDITING: I too, believe they will ban it though, not banning it would be like admitting banning mystical was a mistake, and I do not think they are willing to admit they made a mistake.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

I assume the loss is TES?

I have yet to lose a match to Survival, ever.
(hint: I like to count storm when I play)

It would be a pity to ban survival this soon. I truly believe the metagame can shift and handle this "problem" by itself.

EDIT: Oh, and if someone is wondering how I can believe survival shouldn't be banned as it's power level is more than comparable to those of mystical, land tax, whathaveyou on the banned list, the explanation is rather simple: I think that list is a little too long

You haven't been playing against decent players then. Sorry.

[Tacosnape]

I assume the loss is TES?

The loss would probably be either Dredge or TES. I'm not picking specifically. I'm just saying this. If I took my GW Survival and went in, back to back to back, against TES, Dredge, and Burn, I would expect to be 2-1 by the time I was done. In any case, I'm 1-0 against TES, 2-0 against Dredge, and 1-0 against Burn. I'm well aware that on occasion TES or Dredge will win the die roll and erase me game 1 before I get to respond, and then my board will only be enough to get me there one of the two next games. But I pack a very strong and very versatile hate package for Combo, and while I wouldn't be thrilled to get a TES pair up, I wouldn't be intimidated either. For someone who talks about how the metagame can adapt, Survival can adjust its sideboard to beat TES a lot easier than the rest of the format can adjust to beat Survival.

I also like how it's all the Storm Combo players bellowing how Survival is fair and should be left alone. There can't -possibly- be any bias here, considering they like that the format is completely dominated by a deck that actually is a fair matchup for them, can they?

[Piceli89]

In all honesty, even if I would not mind Survival remaining as the format is pretty easy for us Stormers right now, I'm still of the idea it's just too good to be left there. I won't add any "you can play SurvivalHaterator.dec and still get blown" argumentation, there are plenty in this discussion.

I'd just say that Survival, as of now, resembles me what Oath of Druids is in Vintage. They both cost 2 and require another card in play to, practically, lead you to victory 80% of the times by cheating on huge and/or fast beefs. While I know this comparison is inaccurate because Survival requires mana for activations and Oath doesn't, I think I rendered the feeling. I've seen games won on the back of a turn-before-death Survival, which otherwise would have been lost due to wrong plays, I've seen people topdecking Survival in a dead situation and winning as soon as they drew a creature.
I've seen tempo decks Stifling, Wasting, Snaring, FoWing, and then losing because the opponent topdecked Survival and it resolved. Pretty fair I'd dare to say.

I agree that Mystical Tutor got dumb as soon as they unbanned Entomb and printed Ad Nauseam. It was beneficial to axe it, even for the fact that it's better to avoid future broken cards being tutored cheaply.
Survival is a chaining Demonic Tutor effect at instant speed that can't be dealt unless you play it tapped out. You Needle it and they respond with pridemage. You Pridemage it and they respond with Witness. You let it resolve on turn 2, and you've basically lost the game. You let it resolve in tight/topdeck situations with nothing on the board, and in a pair of turns Vengevines, Oozes, but also Squees and whateverelse have buried you under "combos" or a massive card advantage machine.

Hate me as much you want, tell me that it's sufficient to run Pithing Needle or Extirpate or 4 Snares or play another deck or getting good at the game. The truth is, "that shit is retarded and needs to be banned" (quote). If you want to keep the format at an overall power-level equity, Sotf is clearly a meter above everything else. And I'm saying this with the awareness that, if it gets banned, the meta will shift back to Counterbalance against Zoo and the rest.

[frenchy-man]

(Awards FieryBalrog 22 lesbian points for general awesomeness. Redeemable, like always, as soon as I have excess lesbians in stock.)

Like seriously. The discussion isn't even whether to ban something. It's which piece to ban. If the duo were to be left alone, Two of the Five decks I keep assembled in my box would have the Vengevine Survival combo in it. And you can cry all you want. A piece WILL be banned. With this much outrage and controversy over it, Wizards will ban some piece of it whether you think they should or not. So in another couple weeks, GG, naysayers.



Maybe the Europeans don't play Survival as much, or can't play it well. Since you apparently want to get into a continent war.

Or, we could just stick to things that we know are true. That, for better and worse, the European metagame changes more slowly than the US one does. The US, generally, is quicker to pick up a new good deck when we should, but also quicker to abandon an old good one prematurely.

OR, we could just avoid regional cliches together and try to have an intelligent discussion based on merit, but judging by your last couple posts (Europe isn't "Everywhere else," for the record,) I'd say that's out.



I'm 4-0 combined against these in sanctioned matches. Just saying. I'm pretty sure I can pilot my GW list and go 2-1 against that gauntlet.

On what are you based to claim that european meta doesn't change as fast as US meta ? Forgive us if we mainly don't play survival because we tested enough to know it is not the best deck. By the way, you lost your credibility when you said that survival has a good MU vs combo... It ill probably be my new signature...

Oh, and tell me why American people are ot able to win their own legacy GPs...

[Meekrab]

Dear anybody talking about being X-0 versus {some deck} where X is less than 10,

lol sample size

Love,
meekrab.

[deviant]

Haha! That is partly true, but then again - did you see any CB players devastated when they snipped mystical? Of course a strong personal bias plays a part in everyones opinion. If you ask a dedicated zoo player what he thinks, yes you are in fact wasting your time you should already know how he feels about survival.

I may have more trust on the format solving itself than most people (this seems to hold true to every banning discussion, in every format.) but I just feel like it's really narrow (you know the unfortunate stereotype of americans who only care about stuff that happens inside their borders and ignore everything on the other side just because it isn't american? Yeah, this banning discussion (not specifically here) is at times making me wonder if there is some base to that stereotype.. (not intended as a flame, calm down) to ban an engine that is only a problem in the SCG opens, that seem to be tournaments where most people attending just play the deck that won the last one.

I just would prefer to have as little bans as possible, and if they really have to ban the engine I hope they at least snip the vengevines, not the survival. That card has been in the format for ages w/o problems, it is not the card SotF that is the "issue" to anyone here.



And I'm just going to use this opportunity to thank that guy who seems to think the playskill of the survival player magically makes the mu good for them. That's just.. yeah. You keep on telling that to people, we combo players gotta pay our respects to the people paving the road for us.

EDIT: I've faced survival decks easily more than 10 times in tournaments..
Love you too,
kozel on mtgo

[jazzykat]

Survival has been a staple and fun card since the beginning of this format. It was a fun and even card, I would argue that with the banning of mystical survival and other aggro decks had a more than fair shot at doing well against them all the while punishing Control hard. With VV and no mystical I am having quite a bit of trouble sometimes against the UG varieties. It seems that it's ok if an aggro combo deck is going over 60% vs. the non-combo part of the field and 50/50 with the fast combo?

VV is the problem. Whatever else happens I hope they don't ban SotF, <Sarcasm>hey maybe they would ban LED that would make everyone happy right? </Sarcasm>

[frenchy-man]

Btw : legacy Cachan in France (near Paris) : 235 players. Only 1 survival in top 8 (GW). Others (I am not totally sure) : Ustax (by the god kLu), rock, landstill, reanimator, merfolk and dunno for the two others (but probably no survival).
I don't think that the meta is not sain...

[Dark Ritual]

Lol, TES sucks too much? Sorry, but if that's true then Mr. Cook top 8'ed a GP with a 'crap' deck and made everyone look bad. Only reason he lost to Caleb Durwald was because his d. returns turned up a pile of crap cards that typically doesn't happen very much when you draw 7 cards in TES.

Also, survival is beginning to catch on in Europe. If the deck is left untouched (which I seriously doubt at this point), in half a year at most VV survival will be sweeping up the european metagame as well. Like tacosnape said, Europe is slower to switch to decks that are very good than americans.

[Catitas]

When some of you say that you are X- Y against any deck, please recall when you were playing against a bye and still lost(guess what i've lost against goblins with tendrils, that alone doesnt mean that goblins is a matchup for ANT)... while some argue that maybe survival players are bad in europe, perhaps they should bring survival here to try and see by themselves...Other say that europe meta is slower...does anyone remember where Reanimator show up in legacy? yes gentleman in holand and then in GP Madrid...so yes we europeans do have a very slow meta, i dont recall any SCG with reanimate before madrid or the dutch nations 2009...

So instead of trying to argue about our meta, try to innovate in yours...Your problem is simply one you're all playing with the same, none of you wants to beat survival, then you come here complayning about it... See top8s in europe they support what im telling you...

Last weekend in spain there was a 86 player tournment and survival was almost half meta, but turned out that in top8 there was no survival or storm, guess why? Decent sideboards... Probably in US most of you dont recall what is a sideboard...

heres the top8, and please pay atencion to the sides...

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=5359

[FieryBalrog]

Last weekend in spain there was a 86 player tournment and survival was almost half meta, but turned out that in top8 there was no survival or storm, guess why? Decent sideboards... Probably in US most of you dont recall what is a sideboard...

heres the top8, and please pay atencion to the sides...

http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=5359

lolz. All those decklists tell me is that "Probably in Spain most of you can't afford to switch to decent decks". Top deck has 61 cards, mindbreak trap, and wheel of sun and moon? That's the killer sideboard?

I don't see anything there that isn't bog standard fare. "half the meta survival" either that's false or you guys are still playing ATS.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Here's why the European meta is slower:

http://www.magiccardmarket.eu/

Bare in mind that 1.00 EUR = 1.34158 USD

This means that people in the US can buy an expensive deck for 1/3 of it's price here in Europe.

[Nidd]

Also, survival is beginning to catch on in Europe. If the deck is left untouched (which I seriously doubt at this point), in half a year at most VV survival will be sweeping up the european metagame as well. Like tacosnape said, Europe is slower to switch to decks that are very good than americans.
Might as well call that a difference in the metagame.

[SpikeyMikey]

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/standard/20670_Round_1_Alix_Hatfield_vs_Jeremy_Tibbetts.html

Round 1 Feature Match from SCG Richmond.

Notice that the guy is playing rock, a supposedly good deck for beating Survival, has him on the ropes the first game, Survival gets ripped and its game over when Alix was like a turn away from death. Second game the guy drops a needle, extirpates the vengevines, gets rid of two survivals and still loses to natural order. Pretty ez to stop with just a couple hate cards eh? And this from a deck that already has maindeck answers for it.

Oh and Jeremy Tibbets is at least decent at the game.

Before the hating comes in, I'd be fine if they kept it legal for a while as I'm working on my own answers to it and I don't mind trying to crack it but I can see the reasons for the ban.

I've had dozens of games where I've been on the ropes and ripped any number of cards that suddenly swung things back in my favor. It happens. I remember way back in the day in T1, I was playing G1 of Keeper vs. Keeper. We were both in topdeck mode and he rips Ancestral, draws 3, drops a Masticore and passes turn. I untap, pull Hollistic Wisdom, proceed to masturbate furiously with Ancestral Recall and Time Walk, find and drop Morphling and beat him to death without ever passing the turn again. I was probably one of half a dozen people in the world playing Wisdom in Keeper because everyone else felt the power level was too low. We play an Eternal format. Any threat, unanswered, will be your ass in short order. How many swings with a KotR does New Horizons need to kill you? 2? 3? How many times have you played against storm combo and thought you had them on the ropes before they rip a timely Ritual or IT that compliments the rest of the cards in their hand and suddenly you're taking a Tendrils for 26 to the dome?

Frankly, I just don't think that Survival is deserving of a ban yet. For that matter, I don't think Survival is deserving of a ban at all. All these half-cocked wanna-be theorists talking about resuable DT's are off their rocker. It takes a very specific kind of card to improve Survival of the Fittest at a rate faster than the rest of the field is improving. Survival's value has been going down for years, occasionally to be bouyed back up by some new toy like Iona only to drift back into the borderland of playability. Why? Because you're spending 3 mana just to drop it and search. You spend 3 mana and 2 cards to Eladamri's Call (NOT DT. Call. If you want to make comparisons, there's no reason to get ridiculously hyperbolic about it). Generally speaking, any single creature card in your deck that you wanted to fetch out, you'd rather spend 2 mana and 1 card and ACTUALLY Call. Unless you need to fetch 2 creatures and 1 needs to be in your yard (Loyal/Iona). Unless you need to fetch 4-6 creatures and 2-4 of them need to be in your yard. Very specific cards that require your deck to be built around Survival of the Fittest. And it's not even a matter of "do I need them in my yard?" It's a matter of "can they win me the game if I put all this effort into setting this up?" Don't believe me? Try and play Bloodghast Survival and see how busted it is. Without Vengevine, Survival is still just trade-bait instead of a tier 1 deck.

[D. Watta]

I'd like to make a suggestion regarding the forum:

We are all anticipating the "results" of the potential banning of Survival, or, I suppose, the unbanning of Mystical (but this is a moot point).

I have had an observation and would like to know if anyone else has found this to be the case--

I started playing Survival last year after noticing a list (SurviVeteran) of a variant of RGBSA. It was immediately intriguing and, I was amazed to find, could win with tactful play even when a Survival was not on line. The beauty of an amalgamation of singletons working together to neutralize the opponent's threats and to enable you to "survive" with or without the namesake card was something I became thoroughly inspired by in Deck Building.

Then came Vengevine. I immediately hopped on the hype wagon and bought up a set of Vines and have since been playing UG madness. It's a solid deck that satisfies the Timmy and the Spike in all of us. However, and this is where the observation occurs, it does little for the Johnny in us all.

What I mean is this: I set about experimenting with a few other, slightly older, more compelling Survival builds. I repeatedly found, and much to my agitation, that there was simply no reason to be playing Survival without Vengevine. Suddenly, such a dynamic card that opened up so many options, had become, not only in deckbuilding, but also in actual play, a tragically limited and linear card. There used to be a series of economic and highly strategic choices necessary in utilizing Survival to it's full potential. Now it's just a string of Vengevines.

A few people have cited the "design restrictions" set upon Wizards in things like Mystical and, thus, Survival. Personally, I have found profound design restrictions as well as play restrictions set upon a card as beautiful as Survival by the existence of Vengevine.

To put it short, though I don't believe it is necessary, if something were to happen on the B/R list, I would actually [I]welcome[I] a ban on Vengevine. It has nullified the creative influence of one of the most dynamic cards in Legacy. Also, it is the singular two cc green card that enables players to not have goyfs.

[FieryBalrog]

I actually love that a UG deck exists that not only dominates, it dominates while running Wild Mongrel over Goyf. I love that a GW deck can shoot for the top tier. I love both those things very much.

What I don't love is that it's so over the curve. Survival decks are driving on a V8 while the rest of us are driving a V6.

In my opinion the best thing to do would not be to ban survival, or even vengevine; it would be to print some actual solid activation or search hate, so that Survival can be effectively hated out. Take Aven Mindcensor, shave a mana off and ditch the flying, and you have a solid card. Take suppression field, make it 1 per activation, and throw it on a grizzly bear for the same mana cost. I don't know, just ideas.

However, I'm realistic. This isn't going to happen, if they do anything they're going to ban survival, and it probably deserves to be banned given the general criteria for bannings.

[Koby]

It will become even more comical when Survival is banned and Vengevine still continues to dominate T8s with BUG lists that utilize Buried Alive and Intuition.

I will laugh at no end when I bring up how many failed ban attempts DCI made before finally axing Necropotence, because "it's better to kill the engine than the offending card". Vengevine is the clear culprit, and removing it from the equation will stabilize the metagame.

[Rune]

Unlike SotF, Intuition -> 3x Vengevine actually gets hosed by yard hate, so I don't see why that deck would happen.

[SpikeyMikey]

How so? EoT, I Intuition for 3 VV's, untap, make a mongrel, pitch VV and walla and beat for 12. How does that give you more time? They can still easily play around Relic and Crypt.

[4eak]

How so? EoT, I Intuition for 3 VV's, untap, make a mongrel, pitch VV and walla and beat for 12. How does that give you more time? They can still easily play around Relic and Crypt.

Relic/Crypt activation in response to VV triggers seems difficult to 'play around' in that circumstance. SotF has other options. Perhaps it depends on the build. I always have at least one Disenchant effect to tutor up with SoTF in GW versions, e.g. QPM. I'll tutor up, drop, and pop QPM against relic/crypt before I endanger my VVs. Intuition lacks that ability.



peace,
4eak

[AriLax]

1. 3 >> 2 when talking about mana. Survival being able to come down so fast while dodging Daze and Wastes more easily is huge.

2. One shotting the effect makes the deck much less resilient. I Wrath after the VV's come back off Intuition and I probably have a bit of time to stabilize. Against Survival I'm lucky to have a turn.

3. The difference between engine + 1 creature and engine + 2 creatures is not to be under estimated.

Also, I don't think WotC generally wants to promote a metagame where the "leveling" of people in the long term is to play non-interactive combo decks. And I say long term as Survival has the tools to hold it's own (albeit unfavorably) against those decks well enough to still exist in a metagame flooded with them and scare off the anti-anti-Survival decks.

[dahcmai]

Curious question would be if they do ban it, what's going to be top dog all of a sudden? Makes you wonder. I have to say reanimator since everyone will pick Zoo back up again and the newer Reanimator combo deck is silly fast.

[Artowis]

Buried Alive

You already fucked up if you plan on playing Buried Alive in Legacy.

SCG results, 4 survival decks in t8 with GW survival winning. Shocked I tells ya, shocked!

[keys]

In my opinion the best thing to do would not be to ban survival, or even vengevine; it would be to print some actual solid activation or search hate, so that Survival can be effectively hated out. Take Aven Mindcensor, shave a mana off and ditch the flying, and you have a solid card. Take suppression field, make it 1 per activation, and throw it on a grizzly bear for the same mana cost. I don't know, just ideas.

http://magiccards.info/scans/en/som/14.jpg

Knock yourself out...

[f|i[p]]

In a 66 player tourney yesterday no vengvine survivals made top 8. There were around 4 players or so, and what was interesting was, most of them got raped by affinity and dredge.

People are adjusting to vengevine survivals, it may not be as fast as people assume but survival decks act like combo decks but kills you around turn 4 or 5 instead requiring tons of mana and other requirements to be satisfied. I am long time survival player myself, and things just got stupid when vengevine came. It gave survival a very good option against control as well. Other than that, I dont think survival is going to be banned.

[Grollub]

Here's why the European meta is slower:

http://www.magiccardmarket.eu/

Bare in mind that 1.00 EUR = 1.34158 USD

This means that people in the US can buy an expensive deck for 1/3 of it's price here in Europe.

Cards are not an availability issue in Europe, sorry.

It's true that they have always been more expensive here than in the states, but we just grit our teeth and choke up or buy them online. Did you expect our PTQs, nationals and local tournaments to be dominated by junk.dec? If that's the case, I only have one thing to say, "lolz".

[Tacosnape]

On what are you based to claim that european meta doesn't change as fast as US meta ? Forgive us if we mainly don't play survival because we tested enough to know it is not the best deck. By the way, you lost your credibility when you said that survival has a good MU vs combo... It ill probably be my new signature...

Oh, and tell me why American people are ot able to win their own legacy GPs...

Can you READ?

The point of my post was that claiming general distinctions between Europe and the US was a ridiculous exercise.

Secondly, I never said Survival has a -good- matchup against combo. Never. Quote me on what I actually said and I'll stand by it.

Oh, and also, Survival beat ANT in the quarterfinals of SCG Richmond. Not that this matters to you, because clearly all results in the US are null and void on the grounds of us being a country of complete morons incapable of matching wits with your superior cranial prowess. Just saying.

[Crysthorn]

Oh, and also, Survival beat ANT in the quarterfinals of SCG Richmond.
It's more than that. According to Jared Sylva (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/20629_Too_Much_Information_Legacy_Two_Months_of_Data.html), various Survival builds had 58,33% matchup against Ad Nauseam during the last two months of SCG Opens.

[practical joke]

It's more than that. According to Jared Sylva (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/20629_Too_Much_Information_Legacy_Two_Months_of_Data.html), various Survival builds had 58,33% matchup against Ad Nauseam during the last two months of SCG Opens.

====> read tacosnape's previous post again.

I'll have to agree on that.
Let's get a bit deeper on that.

complete retards that play with combo can't win when the opponent makes it a bit difficult.
Every retard can play vengevival since it only has to drop survival, if not they can still drop random creature and beat face.

easy right. retards with combo < retards with vengevival



If you would have SCG's in Europe, that score would definately be a lot lower. Survival is having a hard time reaching top 8's at all.

[Mr. Safety]

Just piping in a few remarks that will hopefully spark some positive discussion:

1) How about UNBANNING some other cards in legacy, therefore creating a pull towards innovation?

2) Why not allow the format to 'suffer' for a short while, and then let itself readjust accordingly? Survival of the Fittest is not anything new to legacy, just Vengevine. It seems that players/deckbuilders just need to do some research and become a little more savvy with card choices.

3) Look at Mystical Tutor's banning...do you feel it was neccessary? I don't think so. Un-ban it, and you'll have traditional Reanimator to fight against Vengevine.

4) Is Pithing Needle NOT a good answer to Survival? Needle is pretty common tech that a lot of decks run in the main/side.

[deviant]

It's more than that. According to Jared Sylva (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/20629_Too_Much_Information_Legacy_Two_Months_of_Data.html), various Survival builds had 58,33% matchup against Ad Nauseam during the last two months of SCG Opens.

I'm sorry but I have this uncomfortable feeling that maybe not all of those people picking up storm can play it on the same level as those picking up survival.

Also, someone pointed out that we, who are proud to not have lost to deck x in tournaments should try to remember when we lost to bye.

Well, I went undefeated in our nats swiss and then punted my top8 mu against ww. A deck I would claim to be a bye for tes.

I have also lost a match 1-2 agianst an opponent making these plays:
G1: forest, llanowar elves, go.
G2: Forest, go (dunno what this was about, he prolly should have mulled)
G3: Forest, the 2/2 that untaps with G spells, go and then on his second turn some other elves.

I played Turn 2 Ad Nauseam, always from 18 or more life and fizzled twice.
EDIT: I was afraid he would be playing elf-combo and glimpse combo me if I waited. Well, he was just playing a casual elf deck..

(on a related note, I have also received an actual bye in a tournament, then proceeded to lose that round.)

[Skeggi]

There are so many ways to battle Survival of the Fittest. There are also alot of ways to battle Oath of Druids. Just sayin' (as a European, OMG!).

[Tinefol]

I'd even say there are many ways to battle Yawgmoth's Will. You know. And Bazaar of Baghdad.

</troll>

[jazzykat]

There are so many ways to battle Survival of the Fittest. There are also alot of ways to battle Oath of Druids. Just sayin' (as a European, OMG!).

Unban Oath! Aw yeah~!

[Amon Amarth]

Just piping in a few remarks that will hopefully spark some positive discussion:

1) How about UNBANNING some other cards in legacy, therefore creating a pull towards innovation?

2) Why not allow the format to 'suffer' for a short while, and then let itself readjust accordingly? Survival of the Fittest is not anything new to legacy, just Vengevine. It seems that players/deckbuilders just need to do some research and become a little more savvy with card choices.

3) Look at Mystical Tutor's banning...do you feel it was neccessary? I don't think so. Un-ban it, and you'll have traditional Reanimator to fight against Vengevine.

4) Is Pithing Needle NOT a good answer to Survival? Needle is pretty common tech that a lot of decks run in the main/side.

Whether Survival gets the axe or not there are certainly cards on the list that pale in comparison to many unbanned cards currently. Obligatory Land Tax sentence.

I'd still say there is room for innovation. I'm always suprised about what kind of decks people can come up with.

I'm still of mixed emotions about Mystical Tutor. I'm not sure, I'd probably leave it where it is.

I like Needle as a solution to Survival but it doesn't trump the deck. What it does is buy you quite a bit of time if it comes down early and is good against every variant and there is no shortage of other targets: Mongrel, jitte, mom, ooze, waste etc.

[DragoFireheart]

There are so many bad arguments being used that if each one was a pair of creatures coming down onto the battlefield, there would be dozens of Vegnevines munching on us.

[menace13]

And Bazaar of Baghdad.


God i love Bazaar and it is exactly what dredge needs to win every event. Best answer i can think of for this Surv format.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Explain to me then why survival is not dominant in Europe. Do you really think that we play maindeck extirpate or needles ?
It is a pity that you guy ask for a ban that is a non sense everywhere else.

Just for the record Frechy that's pretty much in a nutshell what American's were saying about ANT for the past couple years. It put up high numbers in Europe but over here it was getting stomped left and right. For a long time I saw many ANT players at every tournament I went to, seriously I remember seeing an ANT match to my left or right round 1 or 2 at pretty much every tournament I went to and it rarely if ever made top 8. Everyone in Europe swore up and down it was the best deck by far and couldn't imagine why we were not playing it. Thing is, over here it was a crappy deck. The meta here was absolutely full of Countertop tempo decks, and I don't care what anyone says that was never a favorable matchup for ANT. I once played in 2 back to back tournaments and only played vs. two non-Blue decks in both of them put together and 5 of the decks I played were CounterBalance tempo decks (that's out of maybe 12 rounds total). Survival is owning SCG but overall there are many events that have 1-2 Survival decks in the top 8 and those tournaments have attendance levels approaching SCG numbers (but more skilled players overall).

Fact is if you take Survival to a SCG event you are going to get a couple of free wins because it's still a good deck and it stomps unprepared players. So Survival is doing really well in the 6-7 events you have heard of and for the most part putting up the expected results of a normal tier 1 deck in many others. Meanwhile you ride in on your high horse trolling that America lost it's GP and saying France is superior because they don't have top 8's full of Survival. However I see your top 8 results you posted earlier with repeated wins of Elves and Hive Mind and wonder how such terrible decks can do well in any event past maybe one fluke win. I mean if someone wants to tell me that Hive Mind is the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd best combo deck in the format be my guest, but I'm not buying it, so why are the French unable to handle a bit tier combo? Elves are like a bye stateside. Before a tournament I cross my fingers and hope my first opponent is playing Elves and I'm 100% serious. So troll smarter.

[frenchy-man]

However I see your top 8 results you posted earlier with repeated wins of Elves and Hive Mind and wonder how such terrible decks can do well in any event past maybe one fluke win. I mean if someone wants to tell me that Hive Mind is the 1st, 2nd, or 3rd best combo deck in the format be my guest, but I'm not buying it, so why are the French unable to handle a bit tier combo? Elves are like a bye stateside. Before a tournament I cross my fingers and hope my first opponent is playing Elves and I'm 100% serious. So troll smarter.

Yep elfball had been for a while a dtb in France. Exactly. But I must confess that it is hard to play so you won't see many of them... (notice that I did not say that you would not many of them in the US...). Nowadays it not a dtb anymore, but you won't see elball top8ing anymore either.

Btw give Hivemind.deck a try (with MT...) before arguing on it. At least I do speak about decks that I played and tested.

edit : oh, no that it could matter, but I never posted top8s...

[SurFitOfTheVine]

Cards are not an availability issue in Europe, sorry.

It's true that they have always been more expensive here than in the states, but we just grit our teeth and choke up or buy them online. Did you expect our PTQs, nationals and local tournaments to be dominated by junk.dec? If that's the case, I only have one thing to say, "lolz".

1. I never said card availability was the problem. I just said cards in Europe are 3x more expensive than in the US.

2. Junk.dec? No, but if people spend a lot of money on a particular decent deck, they won't ditch it and buy new cards as soon as a new better deck shows up.

[frogboy]

It's more than that. According to Jared Sylva (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/20629_Too_Much_Information_Legacy_Two_Months_of_Data.html), various Survival builds had 58,33% matchup against Ad Nauseam during the last two months of SCG Opens.

every combo player I know would cheerfully play the Tendrils/Survival matchup for money until the other guy was broke.

[SurFitOfTheVine]

every combo player I know would cheerfully play the Tendrils/Survival matchup for money until the other guy was broke.

"Tendrils/Anything that has blue" too, right?

[Skeggi]

Just for the record Frechy that's pretty much in a nutshell what American's were saying about ANT for the past couple years. It put up high numbers in Europe but over here it was getting stomped left and right. For a long time I saw many ANT players at every tournament I went to, seriously I remember seeing an ANT match to my left or right round 1 or 2 at pretty much every tournament I went to and it rarely if ever made top 8. Everyone in Europe swore up and down it was the best deck by far and couldn't imagine why we were not playing it. Thing is, over here it was a crappy deck. The meta here was absolutely full of Countertop tempo decks, and I don't care what anyone says that was never a favorable matchup for ANT.


1. I never said card availability was the problem. I just said cards in Europe are 3x more expensive than in the US.

The difference between the American meta and the European one isn't card availability, it's not whether one meta is more advanced than the other. The difference seems to be the popularity of CounterTop decks. While CounterTop got their asses handed to them in Europe by Goblins, The Rock and Landstill, in America they still ruled supreme. So naturally ANT was able to become a way bigger threat in Europe than in America. It still is a huge threat. With ANT (and TES too since the banning of MT) being so popular in Europe, Vengevival strugles to reach top8. In the meanwhile, in CounterTop meta known as America, they discover the force of Vengevine. They can counter it, but it just comes back. Vengevival hits the top8 en-masse because it's a popular good deck with a good CounterTop match-up (among other good match-ups). I think that should explain the succes of Vengevival in America. So, now in Europe we're in a twist. If we want to defeat ANT, we'll need more CounterTop in our meta. But that will only open us up to Vengevival.

I think Americans and Europeans should both try harder to see the other side of the story here. If you put it all in perspective, it's not weird Americans are asking for a ban while alot of Europeans ask 'why?'.

With the current ban policy, which basically bans any engine that tends to allow its controller to go nuts, Survival of the Fittest is certainly a card that's up for serious consideration.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Yep elfball had been for a while a dtb in France. Exactly. But I must confess that it is hard to play so you won't see many of them... (notice that I did not say that you would not many of them in the US...). Nowadays it not a dtb anymore, but you won't see elball top8ing anymore either.

Btw give Hivemind.deck a try (with MT...) before arguing on it. At least I do speak about decks that I played and tested.

edit : oh, no that it could matter, but I never posted top8s...

My bad it was RyO I just thought it was you because they were French results. Though you did tell me if I didn't think Elfball was a good deck I didn't know Legacy, I thought that was someone else. I fail to see how Elfball is hard to play when compared to most other Legacy decks and if the skill of French players were what was keeping Survival off the top tables I don't think they'd let a little thing like a hard to play deck hold them back. I've played HiveMind before and the results in question were after MT was banned so irrelevant (or more relevant you decide), it's never been nor is it currently one of the best combo decks in the format, this was only more true when MT was still around.

These decks all exist in America but rarely, and I mean very, very rarely put up any results worth talking about. If Elfball and Hive Mind had showed up in the top 8 of a 200+ tournament in America people would have had their minds blown because those decks are pretty much the scrub decks over here that usually are only good for an 0-2 drop. Once again I'm not even trying to troll, it's all true, so I'm just saying if you are going to come in here talking about US is scrubby at Legacy because Survival is 1/2 the top 8 of a handful of tournaments and because the one foreign player that made top 8 at the GP (I believe he was the only one, fact check?) went on to win, maybe you should look at what's been going on in your back yard in the same time frame. People may cut you slack because France has a lot of Legacy players, but I can assure you if someone came in here saying Texas was better at Legacy then someone pulled up the results of the last couple large events there and they all had Berserk Stompy, Hivemind, and Elfball in them it would be an LOL GTFO situation.

[bleuisforwhimps]

Belgian legacy cup, 58 participants;

1: ANT
2: TES
3-4: TES - Dark Horizons
5-8: Merfolks 2x, UBGW Landstill, Slivers

1st survival deck 10place. Banning mystical did nothing for the format, banning survival wouldn't either. This top8 is as boring as those in the SCG-tournaments :s . Maybe a mix of both would be perfect, I don't know.

[Jonathan Alexander]

Thank you, Skeggi. This basically is the whole issue: the metas are different. But it's not really that one meta is more advanced than the other one. There are just different "trends" so to say, and therefore Vengevine is worse here than it is in America. Over here in Europe there's not much Counterbalance decks. I don't even remember facing any in my last 3-4 tournaments. What I indeed faced were Merfolk, combo and tempo decks. Except for Merfolk these aren't exactly the best matchups for Survival and even Merfolk can be tuned to have an acceptable matchup against Survival.
By the way, I wouldn't say that the German meta is adapting more slowly than the American meta. Directly after Mystical Tutor was banned everyone over here played some form of aggro which then resulted in more combo decks over the past few months. Not exactly slow.