[Feature Article] – The Legacy of Brainstorm [Archive]

Marske

11-08-2011, 05:55 AM

As someone who's running Bant with 21 lands, I couldn't agree more. Rarely, do I see an issue that polariizes the community as this one. The banning of Brainstorm would be the first ban that I can recall to have such a unquestionable global metagame impact; considering banning Mystical Tutor gave everyone over in the states a, "where on earth did that come from" stance, while Survival of the Fittest hardly impacted the Europe scene. Brainstorm has the longevity and more fandom than both aforementioned cards combined, and its dispute comes during a time where everyone seems to be questioning the longevity of Magic as a franchise. To say the format, let alone the game won't be the same, that is a scary thought.
A true statement. That being said, I highly doubt the sky is falling regarding Magic not existing either. (people should do well to read this (http://www.gamehead.com/article/1389/scary-upsetting-understandable-and-little-bit-awesome-magic-op-changes)) Sure, things are changing, sure there's a lot of uncertainty. No it will not be the end of Magic as we know it, especially not Legacy which will never have PT level support anyway. Nothing is changing regarding the local scenes or the GP's...

There's nothing wrong with change, there's also not going to be a "creature decks everywhere!!" metagame if they axe brainstorm... do all the answers blue has to creature decks suddenly dissapear with it or something?

I am the brainwasher

11-08-2011, 08:18 AM

@v. Zunder:

As much as I respect you as a player, (well at least how much I can, based upon of what I red about you and especially what you did to the vintaqge community in the Netherlands) I couldnt disagree more with some of your statements in the article.

I liked how you declared the arguments made by Caleb as nonsense, because mainly they really were, but the conclusion why Legacy is in the spot it is right now really doesnt make as much sense as well, sorry.
Comparing Vintage to Legacy at this special point (!!!) is not just plane incorrect, but also confusing coming from an experienced player like the one you are.
The gigantic difference in Vintage is, that besides Brainstorm there are tons of other cards that are able to get blue's cornerstones/powerhouses to not only compensate the lack of 4 Brainstorms, but also keeping the different archetypes of control and combo alive while beeing somewhat in balance with decks like MUD, Dredge and XX-Hatebears which are really that powerful because of the nature of the format (not that I would have to tell you that).
Legacy is a different story at that point. The first thought of a lot of players is that Brainstorm basically is a Cantrip and could be replaced as easily as Preordain and Ponder, which are obviously doing a very equal thing but only distinguish in terms of how they dig into the first cards of your library.
Sorry, that isnt the case. This is simply wrong on so many levels that I really have a hard time to start at a point to explain how wrong it really is.
At first, Brainstorm isnt a Cantrip, it is more like a engine. I have to admit, that it is a engine which might seem so powerful (oviously with all sort of different shuffle effects/library manipulation) at the first glance (also maybe at the second) that it seems worth banning. I really do understand that point of view. BUT it seems that a lot of players dont even realize that Brainstorms is, in terms of beeing an enabler, just partial in the fault of creating an somewhat unhealthy metagame (In my oppinion the Meta isnt as healthy as it could be, even if its still healthy, but really still).
It is very tempting to miss out the fact that a lot of different cards are responsible for the actual changes (stucking) in the Legacy-meta, but this really is the case.
It is just irrational that decks are part of the format that dont allow decks without countermagic to attack them via sb as effective that they have at least a shot at winning. As an example, I would rather sit at home and scratch my balls as to register myself with a Zoo/Goblin-deck right now.
If you want to go the simple route, sure try to convince everybody that Brainstorms deserves to get banned, but in all honesty, would Brainstorm be so bonkers without all that shit that floats around it?
I can definetly see Legacy going to the point where every Top16 list has 13 Blue (or decks with Brainstorm besides Merfolk if you want to) decks, if it hasnt reached that point already, plus 5 decks in the Top8 playing REB's/Pyro's to outclass the rest of the "meta" but the answer why that is the case is really not Brainstorm.
The reason is that the most powerful cards in the new sets are blue or fit best into a blue shell, which make existing cards (which are already damn strong on their own, even if the powerlevel is balanced) even stronger or lets you play with them as a 8-of (thanks Snap-bastard), without printing cards that are equivalent on powerlevel in other colors. Not that this is misunderstood, I play Brainstorm by myself and think its an awesome card, but the last few sets, plus the nonsense bannings (Earthcraft, dont make me laugh. Whats with f***ing S&T?!?) created an awkward situation where Legacy might not come out of, mostly because so many players misunderstand the problem the format has right now.
Please, I really can just beg anybody who has such a big influence on the community to not let him fool into the whole Brainstorm story. IT IS NOT THE PROBLEM. The devils in the detail. Fix the B/R list, let non-blue decks have a chance getting into the meta via this fixing of (said in a very childish way) nearly unbeatable cards and for gods sake start reprinting sweet cards which are not blue (sure this isnt your personal fault v.M., just in genral).
Greetings!

Marske

11-08-2011, 09:13 AM

@I am the brainwasher,
Without going to deep into your comments... What would you fix to the B/R list to give non-blue decks a better shot?

Reprints are a bad idea, how are they going to do that without upsetting other formats? From the Vault: Legacy ?!

bowvamp

11-08-2011, 10:13 AM

I would have stopped after "I've heard pros say that you need 4x Brainstorm + 4x FOW" if I was sane. Unfortunately, this has lead me to the realization that I'm not.

Have any of your "pros" ever heard of Dredge? How about Zoo, Suicide Variants, or Pox (which I list because it does well against combo)?

The part about what people like also confused me. I personally like beating blue decks that run brainstorm with decks that don't run blue. I also don't see anyone upset over how much combo there is.

I also think that your article presents too many reasons that a stupid argument against brainstorm's banning is stupid, and not enough reasons against brainstorm to sway my opinion.

I am the brainwasher

11-08-2011, 10:14 AM

I think the biggest Issue right now for non-blue decks (logically because they simply can not use countermagic at all, which is a general answer to each thread. In Legacy also at nearly every given time when u look at the "casting cost" of counterspells in the format) are decks that doesnt allow straight up sb-strategies.
When you look at decks like Reanimator or Hive-Mind you realize that if you are not playing blue you are in an awkward situation fighting those decks, because either your sb-plan doesnt affect all angles with which the opposing decks is attacking you or the sideboarded cards doesnt even do anything at all.
For example, if you are playing a nonblue deck, lets say Zoo, your sideboard options against those decks are playing particular hate which contains GY-hate, REB's, maybe some other fancy stuff which might be quite the brew is honestly just allover ok, like Phyrexian Metamorph and all that Jazz.
Now you go postboard, you have to draw either both pieces of different hate (which is very unlikely without library-manipulation besides 1-2 Sylvan Library, which might also come to late) or cross your fingers that the one you kept keeps enough pressure on them with your clock that he cant afford to have disruption for your counter-strategy/sb-choice. Besides that, good luck with keeping a hand with a surgical Extraction and a Scavenging Ooze when your opponent kicks you in the nuts with Show and Tell, maybe because he is able to manipulate his draws.
2nd Example, likeley same scenario with Gobs/Elves/Rock-like decks.
G1 you loose/win against Hive Mind/Sneak Attack. Postboard you have to have a relevant clock, Red Elemental Blast or Handdisruption (which is also negated by Leyline of Sanctity most of the times, Divert is now also common sense, so is Misdirection) plus the opponent doesnt having a word o any of those.
Where does this leave those decks? Yes, correct, nowhere. They are all garbage. I mean it. All those decks are garbage right now. They might have a occurance at some point at some Top16/8 but thats really it. Count me up on that. Do freaking unfair stuff, play blue or Maverick or dont even consider yourself getting registered right now. Shitty but this is the truth.
So whos to blame for that? Brainstorm? Nope. Its because of the existence of decks that really say a big fat NO to all the decks/Archetypes (and a truckload more) that I tried to talk of and all their different variants.
The problem lays within printing more absurd cards for the already absurd decks + unbanning ridicolous cards to give them even more potent weapons to extinct all non-blue decks. Dont get me wrong, I am not that kiddy crying loosing to storm-combo, thats a very different story, you can hate Storm-Combo very effectiveley because hate does exist and it is a million times more likeley, mainly because Storm-based-Combo-Decks lack countermagic, that you are able to win with 1-2 Hatebears, MotR+bear, Aven Mindcensor, ridicolous clock+REB/Mindbreak Trap or something than dont even having a potent weapon in your sideboard at all.
So yes, I think S&T needs to go, giving decks really THE answer with simple graveyard hate against Reanimator and removing 1-2 turn kills or Emrakul/Prog. from Legacy entirely. Not that its simply unfun to play against those decks (especially if you are not playing blue) it denies the format to breathe a bit to fix itself right now.
This in addition of printing ridicolous cards (Jin Gitaxias, Elesh Norn, Hive Mind as well as Snapcaster Mage and MM) and unbalancing the color-pie so heavily this year (also if its the so called blue year, whyever this was needed...) makes the format so unexciting as it is right now.
Besides all that, I wouldnt cry out a single tear if Snapcaster Mage leave as well. Snapcaster is homungus in Legacy, who doesnt understand this clearly and wastes his time in the "is Snappy better than Confy?" thread should stop reading this whole discussion regardless IMHO.
Ad Nauseum tracking back from the MTG Battlefield would also make GY-hate much better against Combo decks which would rely much more on IGG/or Tutor Chains then, not that I really see such a big problem of the card atm, but it will definetly create also a more diverse meta, while we are at it.

I hope I pointed out clearly what I ment with my statements and didnt awoke the feeling in you that I tried to insult/blame you for anything, which honestly wasnt and isnt the case.

Gui

11-08-2011, 10:30 AM

The problem with the "Brainstorm vs. The World" discussion, in my view, is that those advocating Brainstorm is not overpowered don't have any data to prove that, since every single tourney has copies of it on Top8's, but people claiming it's too strong don't seem to be proving it with data as well, since it's so hard to say that a card is responsible for the wins related to the decks that uses it.

Marske

11-08-2011, 10:34 AM

@IATB,
So you're basically saying Brainstorm isn't enabling decks to say NO to the strategies you suggested? I think you are mistaken with that statement. Without Brainstorm the decks that are able to say no greatly decrease.

ps. No offense taken obviously.

@GUI,
If you want I can back up my statement with data but as you yourself has stated, this data doesn't really "prove" anything beyond the fact that it gets played a lot.

DragoFireheart

11-08-2011, 11:39 AM

As much as I don't want to see brainstorm banned since this is the last format you can use four of it in, it would be interesting to see if blue was in fact "nerfed" as much as the theorycrafts are suggesting. I suspect that combo decks that weren't storm (Reanimator/SnT/ maybe No RuG) would quickly become popular again since other cantrips can easily fill the void of brainstorm for cantripping.

Here is the thing that bothers me most: lets assume brainstorm is banned but blue is STILL the "best" deck. What would people suggest banning next (since that is going to be the natural reaction) to nerf blue? Force of Will? Other cantrips? Snapcaster?

I am the brainwasher

11-08-2011, 12:15 PM

@v.Z.:

I think theres a relevant difference between 2-card combo decks and controllish/aggro-control having countermagic and awesome fixing via Brainstorm + Jace/Ponder/SDT(...).
I would much rather play against Stoneblade with K-Grips/Grudges in my board than against S&T with REB's thats for sure. Squelching those archetypes/decks and the use of Brainstorm in those decks into a single group isnt very likeley at that point and plain incorrect.
Another point it wanted to touch is that some players really are convinced that TES/DDFT/ANT would have not such a big chance anymore without Brainstorm.
Sure, who couldnt recognize that, the Infernal Tutor plan without LED's gets more awkward, but those decks could easily adapt to that by playing either more copies of Tendrils, switching to more Chants and Killing with IGG/Nauseum or start to understand that Past in Flames is indeed a very powerful card and can be abused heavily in this archetype.
2 card combo decks like Painter, Reanimator and S&T-variants are the decks which are simply not playing Brainstorm at all (mono-red painter is a real deck, believe it or not) or are the ones which could replace Braintorm with Preordain/Craptrip really easily and would get the most out of it in comparison to decks that play Counterbalance or the whole Tempo-thresh archetype which is simply dead if Brainstorm gets the axe.
So where does that leave the format?
Well, most annoying and dumb combo decks doesnt lack much power and WILL see a lot more play than nowadays, (S&T is still underrated and not played enought btw, that deck/card is bonkers) storm-based combo decks will stay on the same powerlevel as soon players recognize that there are lists out there which dont give a f*ck about Brainstorm anymore (especially in the new meta) but wont face as many blue decks as in the past, PLUS that the most powerful archetype against all those decks, which is indeed Tempo, is literally unplayable due to banning Brainstorm.
And I havent mentioned Belcher at that point at all... .
So where would that leave not single decks but the format to? To a mile-long B/R list where people start to moan and to complain that they dont want to play modern with real duals.
That sound just awesome! (sarcasm)
This might be a bit overeager in general, but really isnt. Again, pls reconsider, I can just beg anybody to think twice about wishing for things that might run out of hand (IMO they definetly will), especially if they have any influence on those decisions.
MtG hasnt a good time in general atm, obviously because of the recent announcement of changing the tournament structure, worlds and so on.
Please dont kick against the tower thats already shaking.

@Drago:

That would be the most funniest and at the same time most awkward spot where the format could get in, hope that never happens though

Mr. Safety

11-08-2011, 12:32 PM

DragoFireheart

11-08-2011, 12:36 PM

Is restricting a card not an option? What about only allowing 2 Brainstorm's per deck?

I'm really curious why the DCI hasn't come up with a much more creative spin than just banning. 'All or nothing' doesn't work in every situation (except maybe if you're playing Belcher, lol)

- It would be an awkward change and it's not consistent with any non-Vintage format. No, it's all or nothing according to WotC logic.

Mr. Safety

11-08-2011, 02:56 PM

- It would be an awkward change and it's not consistent with any non-Vintage format. No, it's all or nothing according to WotC logic.

How does the broad community of players feel about this? Would the die-hard legacy community support a restricted number of cards, rather than bans?

UnderwaterGuy

11-08-2011, 03:17 PM

I kind of agree with wotc about bannings vs restrictions. Bannings in Legacy are the thing that differentiates it from Vintage so I feel like it's a valuable line to draw that separates the two, very different, formats.

DrJones

11-09-2011, 08:55 AM

Here is the thing that bothers me most: lets assume brainstorm is banned but blue is STILL the "best" deck. What would people suggest banning next (since that is going to be the natural reaction) to nerf blue? Force of Will? Other cantrips? Snapcaster? Force of Will, obviously. I can guarantee that banning brainstorm won't impact the format at all, because it will have the same results than banning Atog in standard affinity. There's simply too much filtering available and wotc will keep printing more every set, and the control decks that don't need filtering will instead play card drawing effects.

However, banning FoW automatically fixes the format for good because it kills the blue tempo decks and the blue combo decks that have been ruining magic since forever.

Then, WotC hires me to make sure that the next Snapcaster Mage is red and Insectile Aberration is black, and I use my power to print "Chancellor of the Discard" and other cards that actually fix the format without having to rely on broken cards that makes all other colors irrelevant.

By the way, the reason people don't play discard anymore is not because of brainstorm, but because discard is severely outclassed by free (and undercosted) countermagic.

DragoFireheart

11-09-2011, 09:21 AM

However, banning FoW automatically fixes the format for good because it kills the blue tempo decks and the blue combo decks that have been ruining magic since forever.

-So everyone can play Zoo like in Modern? That's your idea of "Magic"?

I hope enough people listen to you. Banning FoW will kill Legacy and then more people will play EDH. It'll also makes duals cheaper for EDH. Go on, keep crying for the ban of blue: I hope you win! :laugh:

DrJones

11-09-2011, 09:40 AM

-So everyone can play Zoo like in Modern? That's your idea of "Magic"?

I hope enough people listen to you. Banning FoW will kill Legacy and then more people will play EDH. It'll also makes duals cheaper for EDH. Go on, keep crying for the ban of blue: I hope you win! :laugh:Heh, it's not my fault that WotC is stupid and doesn't ban any piece of Zoo in modern, or prints stupid cards like Delver of Secrets and Snapcaster Mage, but people here is also pretty dumb. You know, the only nonblue deck that gets played and wins nowadays is dredge because it doesn't cast spells, and people conclude that the problem is brainstorm and not the free timewalks. :eyebrow:

DragoFireheart

11-09-2011, 09:48 AM

Heh, it's not my fault that WotC is stupid and doesn't ban any piece of Zoo in modern, or prints stupid cards like Delver of Secrets and Snapcaster Mage, but people here is also pretty dumb.

WotC wants everyone to play Zoo or deck like Zoo. That and the fact that combo decks of jank cards rule the format are why Modern is dying.

You know, the only nonblue deck that gets played and wins nowadays is dredge because it doesn't cast spells, and people conclude that the problem is brainstorm and not the free timewalks. :eyebrow:

Maverick and Zoo don't exist in Legacy.

xDITx Force of Will

11-09-2011, 12:27 PM

It'll also makes duals cheaper for EDH. Go on, keep crying for the ban of blue: I hope you win! :laugh:

wtf? there are people without 40 duals? Furthermore, there are people without 40 duals who play legacy?!

xDITx Force of Will

11-09-2011, 12:30 PM

However, banning FoW automatically fixes the format for good because it kills the blue tempo decks and the blue combo decks that have been ruining magic since forever

You do play legacy I guess, eh? It's hard to tell, but you have 1K+ posts so I guess you do... Sorry you hate blue tempo decks (LOLOL)

Well, anyway, there's this thing called combo, without free counterspells combo decks become much stronger. In fact, this is so true that people often refer to Force as "the glue that holds legacy together"

You should go check out some Storm decks or TES and see why FoW is important for us.

DrJones

11-09-2011, 01:23 PM

You do play legacy I guess, eh? It's hard to tell, but you have 1K+ posts so I guess you do... Sorry you hate blue tempo decks (LOLOL)

Well, anyway, there's this thing called combo, without free counterspells combo decks become much stronger. In fact, this is so true that people often refer to Force as "the glue that holds legacy together"

You should go check out some Storm decks or TES and see why FoW is important for us.I think you got it wrong, combo decks become stronger because they can play Force of Will, and fact is, 90% of banned cards belonged to combo decks that used FoW to force the combo through all kinds of hate. Yeah, it sucks but it's an ugly truth.

Or where you thinking in those other combo decks that cast a bunch of rituals? Heh, R&D confessed in an article that they keep them legal because they can put up a fight against the FoW decks, otherwise, it would just be FoW decks all day. Did you think for a moment that any deck that reliably kills you on turns 1-2 would be legal otherwise? :laugh:

If you still don't understand why free countermagic is destroying the format, you could also read this article (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/23003_Vintage_AvantGarde_Is_Vintage_Too_Fast.html) that sums it nicely. It's the section: "What happens when everybody plays duress", but I also urge you to read the section "Are we speeding offtrack or did we already crash and are already dead?".

UnderwaterGuy

11-09-2011, 02:18 PM

I think you got it wrong, combo decks become stronger because they can play Force of Will, and fact is, 90% of banned cards belonged to combo decks that used FoW to force the combo through all kinds of hate. Yeah, it sucks but it's an ugly truth.

Reanimator is the only competitive combo deck that runs Force. The storm decks are also extremely powerful and do not use Force.

ANT or some similar deck would dominate unconditionally if Force were gone.

Pippin

11-09-2011, 02:53 PM

DrJones I missed you. That is all :D

xDITx Force of Will

11-09-2011, 05:11 PM

Force of Will did 9/11

Not sure if serious...

Admiral_Arzar

11-09-2011, 05:19 PM

Reanimator is the only competitive combo deck that runs Force. The storm decks are also extremely powerful and do not use Force.

ANT or some similar deck would dominate unconditionally if Force were gone.

I guess you forgot about Spiral Tide, Hive Mind, every other deck that plays Show and Tell (and a few that play Natural Order). Since you listed "competitive" implying "right now" I won't expound on all the other combo decks with FOW that have seen play in the last year or so.

As for ANT dominating without Force? Who knows. It's quite possible to fight it with discard, and as a storm player I actually fear Stompy and Staxxx-esque strategies much more than blue (but stompy is bad because of blue decks, so I don't usually have to worry about it).

emidln

11-09-2011, 05:26 PM

wtf? there are people without 40 duals? Furthermore, there are people without 40 duals who play legacy?!

As far as I can tell, there are only 28 dual lands. I keep hearing rumors of lands that tap for extra colors of mana with no drawback in colors that don't cast Brainstorm or Dark Ritual, but I'm pretty sure they're false.

UnderwaterGuy

11-09-2011, 06:37 PM

I guess you forgot about Spiral Tide, Hive Mind, every other deck that plays Show and Tell (and a few that play Natural Order). Since you listed "competitive" implying "right now" I won't expound on all the other combo decks with FOW that have seen play in the last year or so.

As for ANT dominating without Force? Who knows. It's quite possible to fight it with discard, and as a storm player I actually fear Stompy and Staxxx-esque strategies much more than blue (but stompy is bad because of blue decks, so I don't usually have to worry about it).

Yes I meant current top tier decks. Hive Mind isn't as good as it was in the summer and I haven't seen Spiral Tide doing well for a while.

I'm not saying those aren't real decks but they aren't the best decks around right now and that's all I said.

and I realize now I was trolled :(

boneclub24

11-09-2011, 06:46 PM

I got kind of annoyed with the numerous grammatical errors... doesn't anyone proof-read these things?

DrJones

11-09-2011, 06:56 PM

Yes I meant current top tier decks. Hive Mind isn't as good as it was in the summer and I haven't seen Spiral Tide doing well for a while.

I'm not saying those aren't real decks but they aren't the best decks around right now and that's all I said.

and I realize now I was trolled :(Hive Mind made Top 8 at GP Amsterdam two weeks ago.

UnderwaterGuy

11-09-2011, 07:06 PM

I got kind of annoyed with the numerous grammatical errors... doesn't anyone proof-read these things?

I felt this too at first but I assume English is not the author's first language.

You'd think the website would at least have an editor though :/

Solar Ice

11-09-2011, 07:47 PM

As for ANT dominating without Force? Who knows. It's quite possible to fight it with discard, and as a storm player I actually fear Stompy and Staxxx-esque strategies much more than blue (but stompy is bad because of blue decks, so I don't usually have to worry about it).

AnT would get a huge boost if FoW was out of the picture. Though you're right, decks like Stax are far harder to beat than most blue decks, with the exception of CounterTop.deck. Stompy I don't much care about short of a live MoM with a Ethersworn Canonist on the table or a G1 Teeg.

crovakiet

11-09-2011, 08:51 PM

I think you got it wrong, combo decks become stronger because they can play Force of Will, and fact is, 90% of banned cards belonged to combo decks that used FoW to force the combo through all kinds of hate. Yeah, it sucks but it's an ugly truth.

Or where you thinking in those other combo decks that cast a bunch of rituals? Heh, R&D confessed in an article that they keep them legal because they can put up a fight against the FoW decks, otherwise, it would just be FoW decks all day. Did you think for a moment that any deck that reliably kills you on turns 1-2 would be legal otherwise? :laugh:

If you still don't understand why free countermagic is destroying the format, you could also read this article (http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/vintage/23003_Vintage_AvantGarde_Is_Vintage_Too_Fast.html) that sums it nicely. It's the section: "What happens when everybody plays duress", but I also urge you to read the section "Are we speeding offtrack or did we already crash and are already dead?".

Yes we all know how you (DrJones) wants to see FoW Banned.

Funny how you mention the SCG article by Brian Demars saying Vintage is too fast due to the 'free' counterspells, and fail to even mention the various articles by arguably better players that argue against it one of which is found here http://www.eternal-central.com/?p=2333. Mr. Menendian himself stating and I quote "Although Brian’s article is well written (from a rhetorical and literary perspective), and entertaining, ultimately his argument is poorly conceived, badly reasoned, and, most importantly, factually wrong. Put simply, free spells don’t necessarily create a faster format. Nor have the free spells printed recently done so as a factual matter"

Dark Ritual

11-09-2011, 09:04 PM

Please ban FoW so I can sling belcher all day long with ease. Or ANT or TES or what have you.

I knew you would post FoW to be the next banning knowing you DrJones. And foil isn't a legitimate card because it's a 3 for 1 and no one would run it. Disrupting shoal is also awful as fuck to replace it. Pact of negation costs 5 mana or 0 mana if you win the turn you cast it.

I'm against banning brainstorm; but knowing WotC they'll ban it anyways just to fuck up my blue decks and make a lot of the playerbase angry.

Also DragonFireheart who said EDH players would scoop up all the duals if some number of legacy players quit? There is no way to know this for sure unless it happened and you tracked the sale of every single dual land and asked the buyer of said dual what they would use it for. I'm guessing most would say legacy.

(nameless one)

11-09-2011, 09:09 PM

wtf? there are people without 40 duals? Furthermore, there are people without 40 duals who play legacy?!

I play Legacy and I own zero Duals.

Hell, I refuse to play with Duals. It might sound dumb but it's a challenge I'm willing to accept.

bruizar

11-12-2011, 04:24 AM

If brainstorm gets banned, i think i will quit competitive magic all together. I dont see why i would collect expensive cards such as survival, foil missteps and foil brainstorms just to see them banned (dont play the "just play with the regular version" card on me. If wizards doesnt want me to collect foils, thry shouldnt make them)

I play eternal formats because i like playing with broken cards. I dont want to play a dumbed down format where grizzly bears and ironclaw orcs define the format. Is brainstorm banworthy? Yes. Should it be banned, ever? No.

The blue-bans in vintage killed the format. If this happens to legacy, legacy will be done for as well. frankly, i dont care about arguments when it comes to banning cards in eternal formats. The way to balance the format is to unban something else first and see ifthat fixes it, not to expand the banlist.

bruizar

11-12-2011, 04:49 AM

To expand on this, I don't have confidence in RND and the DCI anymore. RND continues to make stupid mistakes which are later corrected by another wrong from the DCI.

They treat magic like an MMO with their erratas and bans. They let us balance the game because they don't want to spend the resources to do this. Meanwhile, we're buying cards that get axed, and RND creates the next abomination is printed in the new set, which peaks interest from the eternal crowd. THe eternal crowd ends up buying their new 'legacy essentials' only to have it banned the next quarter. By doing this, they've implemented a way to make eternal as rotational as standard. This is their strategy to monetize on the eternal player base.

EDIT:

First you write:"This statement by Caleb is not only totally unfounded and untrue, it also shows a bias towards what “he” thinks should be fun for everybody."

Followed by
"The banned list, first and foremost should be there to make a metagame diverse. Because a Diverse Metagame is what players enjoy the most. Legacy, at this point, isn’t diverse. "

You criticize calebs assumption on fun, yet proceed to assume your own biased version. This makes your argument for diversifying the metagame an ungrounded assumption, no better than Caleb's. You then continue to attack Caleb's personal biases, but forego the fact that you started the central topic of the article from an assumptive standpoint, namely, diversified metagame=fun and to provide it, is the job of WOTC+DCI.

PS: I would love to know what you believe is a diverse metagame. I personally don't know a competitive format with as much diversity as legacy. If you do know one, please enlighten me.

DragoFireheart

11-12-2011, 12:08 PM

It's impossible to have a very large and diverse meta in a competitive environment. People will tinker to discover the best decks and play them. Rogue decks will always exist, but outside of those there will always be a single arch-type that rules, the best anti-arch-type, and the best deck that beats everything but the single-arch type that rules.

KobeBryan

11-12-2011, 12:34 PM

I play eternal formats because i like playing with broken cards.

geez. Why even bother..../thread

jrw1985

11-12-2011, 01:50 PM

Doesn't it seem entirely logical and intuitive that, given the rising power level of Legacy, a card restricted in Vintage will eventually need to be banned in Legacy as well?

DragoFireheart

11-12-2011, 03:02 PM

geez. Why even bother..../thread

His argument is valid. The entire point of the two Eternal formats is so that 99% of your card collection will always be playable and legal regardless of their viability. Removing too many fun and powerful cards defeats the entire purpose of the eternal formats. On the other hand, letting too many powerful cards be legal is also bad for Legacy. A balance must be struck.

rufus

11-16-2011, 10:14 AM

Doesn't it seem entirely logical and intuitive that, given the rising power level of Legacy, a card restricted in Vintage will eventually need to be banned in Legacy as well?

No. There are spoiler cards like Trinisphere that are relatively much more powerful in Vintage than in Legacy.

Zilla

11-16-2011, 01:35 PM

The banned list, first and foremost should be there to make a metagame diverse. Because a Diverse Metagame is what players enjoy the most. Legacy, at this point, isn’t diverse. It’s decks featuring Brainstorm vs decks that don’t have Brainstorm.

This statement is the biggest problem I had with the article. Legacy is the most diverse format in the history of Magic, even now. At any given tournament, you can face any one of over 50 competitive decks during any given match. Given that a lack of diversity seems to be the article's driving premise, it falls very flat.

It's a pretty preposterous notion to say "Legacy is just Brainstorm decks vs. non-Brainstorm decks!" Brainstorm isn't a strategy. It's not a threat. It's a tactical card that fits into a hugely diverse set of strategies, which is why it's so widely played.

It's not a situation like the Hulk Flash fiasco, for example, where you're either playing the most broken deck or you're playing a deck that specifically aims to beat it. You don't build a deck specifically aiming to beat Brainstorm any more than you would build a deck specifically aiming to beat Wasteland. You don't build decks to beat tactics, you build them to beat strategies.

Legacy is strategically diverse, and Brainstorm does absolutely nothing to stop that. If anything it supports it by making non-redundant decks more consistent and therefore playable. Varying forms of control, aggro, and combo are all viable in Legacy. It's ridiculously diverse.

Brainstorm might theoretically need banning, but a lack of diversity isn't at all the reason why.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

11-16-2011, 01:58 PM

Mr. Safety

11-16-2011, 02:51 PM

This statement is the biggest problem I had with the article. Legacy is the most diverse format in the history of Magic, even now. At any given tournament, you can face any one of over 50 competitive decks during any given match. Given that a lack of diversity seems to be the article's driving premise, it falls very flat.

It's a pretty preposterous notion to say "Legacy is just Brainstorm decks vs. non-Brainstorm decks!" Brainstorm isn't a strategy. It's not a threat. It's a tactical card that fits into a hugely diverse set of strategies, which is why it's so widely played.

It's not a situation like the Hulk Flash fiasco, for example, where you're either playing the most broken deck or you're playing a deck that specifically aims to beat it. You don't build a deck specifically aiming to beat Brainstorm any more than you would build a deck specifically aiming to beat Wasteland. You don't build decks to beat tactics, you build them to beat strategies.

Legacy is strategically diverse, and Brainstorm does absolutely nothing to stop that. If anything it supports it by making non-redundant decks more consistent and therefore playable. Varying forms of control, aggro, and combo are all viable in Legacy. It's ridiculously diverse.

Brainstorm might theoretically need banning, but a lack of diversity isn't at all the reason why.

If Brainstorm were colorless, we wouldn't be having this conversation. If Brainstorm gets banned, I'm fairly sure that Sensei's Divining Top will be the new go-to deck manipulator. It is already played in a ton of decks, and the fact that Mental Misstep is banned means it will make a big resurgance. I'm not sure if CounterTop will come back in full force (but it did top8 at GP-Amsterdam) but SDT will drop right into Brainstorm's spot. Some decks would opt for Ponder, tempo decks and such, but other strategies will start leaning on SDT.

That's what I will do anyways. SDT is a little more limiting in the short term, but gains a metric fuck-ton of value throughout the whole game, something Brainstorm can't claim.

In all honesty, I was very surprised when I first started getting into legacy. I figured 9/10 decks would start their lists with 4x Wasteland and 3-4x SDT. Yes, I was quite naive.

Zilla

11-16-2011, 04:25 PM

The short answer of why is that blue decks are ridiculously expensive to build, so making the format three-color-blue-based-deck only is going to make the barrier to entry ridiculously high and the format, thus, unsustainable, no matter how much strategic depth remains afterwards (and while the current format is still fairly diverse, it's hardly the most diverse Legacy has seen in its history, especially considering the actual different in card lists and strategies of previous incarnations.)
This is a logical disconnect. Almost every competitive deck in Legacy is 3 colors, whether or not they run Brainstorm. The cost-related barrier to entry exists whether or not Brainstorm is legal and always will, so long as dual lands are legal and don't get reprinted.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

11-17-2011, 02:51 PM

This is a logical disconnect. Almost every competitive deck in Legacy is 3 colors, whether or not they run Brainstorm. The cost-related barrier to entry exists whether or not Brainstorm is legal and always will, so long as dual lands are legal and don't get reprinted.

A three color blue deck often costs double what a three color non-blue deck costs to build, which isn't cheap to start with. More if you're running Team Italia and don't need either Goyfs or Force (PS don't anyone do this it's a trap).

There are also lots of decks outside of non-linear mid-range strategies! We shouldn't just accept that Legacy is doomed to a future of blue-based Goodstuff.dec vs blue-based Goodstuff.dec. That format might be diverse in terms of decks but it's just one archetype.

Zilla

11-17-2011, 03:48 PM

A three color blue deck often costs double what a three color non-blue deck costs to build, which isn't cheap to start with. More if you're running Team Italia and don't need either Goyfs or Force (PS don't anyone do this it's a trap).
I still don't buy this argument. Even if Brainstorm is banned, blue will remain the strongest color in Legacy, and will therefore necessitate blue duals.

You can argue that new players can simply opt not to play blue decks, but I'd argue the same is true now. Zoo, GW Maverick, Dredge, and Merfolk are all top contenders that don't require blue duals. Hell, even ANT only plays 2 blue duals.

The cost barrier as a reason to ban Brainstorm argument just doesn't hold water at all.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

11-17-2011, 03:59 PM

I still don't buy this argument. Even if Brainstorm is banned, blue will remain the strongest color in Legacy, and will therefore necessitate blue duals.

You can argue that new players can simply opt not to play blue decks, but I'd argue the same is true now. Zoo, GW Maverick, Dredge, and Merfolk are all top contenders that don't require blue duals. Hell, even ANT only plays 2 blue duals.

The cost barrier as a reason to ban Brainstorm argument just doesn't hold water at all.

There's a difference between blue being the strongest color and blue being a necessary color if you want to win. Traditionally, since at least 2007, blue has been the former; lately it's been the latter.

Dzra

11-17-2011, 04:05 PM

DrJones

11-17-2011, 05:09 PM

Back to Brainstorm. Blue is strong because it provides players with the greatest opportunity to outplay their opponent by giving them more choices and reducing variance. Banning Brainstorm is a strong move in dumbing down Magic. Why not go the other way and give other colors ways to reduce their variance and have more options available?I think you are wrong in this point, blue isn't strong because <blah blah blah>, blue is strong because some of its cards are severely undercosted.

In particular, WotC has acknowledged that they have undercosted blue bombs on purpose to help sell a set. Some of the most blatant examples have been "Jace, The Silver Mind", "Fact or Fiction", and now "Snapcaster Mage". The problem is that if WotC needs to print a bomb for the tournament player profile, it will be a blue card because that's what 85% of tournament players play, and not the other way around, and they print bombs by reducing the casting cost, and these changes happen at a stage that is too late to make further changes or playtest.

Then you have the problem that their duty is to balance a format in order to maximize players attending to tournaments, but if all of you constantly refuse to tone down blue even the slightest when it's the best color by a long long long shot, the only option that remains for WotC is power creep. So yeah, you either accept that there's a need to ban cards in blue, or expect WotC to keep printing stupid cards in an attempt to let other colors catch up.

Zilla

11-17-2011, 06:07 PM

There's a difference between blue being the strongest color and blue being a necessary color if you want to win. Traditionally, since at least 2007, blue has been the former; lately it's been the latter.
There's no small amount of hyperbole in this statement. Decks without Brainstorm are still performing well in tournaments, which categorically disproves the assertion that blue is required to win. I accept that decks with blue and especially decks with Brainstorm are on a sharp incline, but that doesn't mean you can't play other decks and remain competitive.

You yourself have frequently lamented the tendency towards "group think" amongst the SCG crowd, and yet a lot of the hand-wringing everyone is doing right now is based on results from those tournaments. The SCG regulars have a giant boner for BUG Tempo and RUG Tempo right now, so suddenly Brainstorm needs to be banned! Give me a fucking break.

Just once I'd like to see the community wait more than a month of a given deck's "dominance" before assuming there's something horribly wrong with the format and calling for bans.

So yeah, you either accept that there's a need to ban cards in blue, or expect WotC to keep printing stupid cards in an attempt to let other colors catch up.
I accept the latter.

Dzra

11-19-2011, 06:34 AM

Just once I'd like to see the community wait more than a month of a given deck's "dominance" before assuming there's something horribly wrong with the format and calling for bans.

I agree wholeheartedly with this. There are a lot of cards in Legacy, when one gets broken it'll take some time for the format to search up some new tech. Right before Survival was banned, people starting doing really well with GW Maverick using Aven Mindcensor. Banning Survival set the format back quite a long while from realizing that Mindcensor is such a strong card still.

Survival is another beast entirely, but the point is that it takes a format like Legacy a long time to adjust to things in part because there are just so few major tournaments.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

11-19-2011, 01:44 PM

There's no small amount of hyperbole in this statement. Decks without Brainstorm are still performing well in tournaments

Not in large, high-stakes tournaments. I mean if someone wants to scrounge up the big European tourneys they're welcome to it.

which categorically disproves the assertion that blue is required to win. I accept that decks with blue and especially decks with Brainstorm are on a sharp incline, but that doesn't mean you can't play other decks and remain competitive.

It may very well mean just that thing.

You yourself have frequently lamented the tendency towards "group think" amongst the SCG crowd, and yet a lot of the hand-wringing everyone is doing right now is based on results from those tournaments. The SCG regulars have a giant boner for BUG Tempo and RUG Tempo right now, so suddenly Brainstorm needs to be banned! Give me a fucking break.

No.

And this argument is specious and has been specious from the start. SCG boners can explain the tendency to play those decks! But they can't explain the tendency for those decks to outperform other decks once they actually crack top 16 and especially top 8.

Just once I'd like to see the community wait more than a month of a given deck's "dominance" before assuming there's something horribly wrong with the format and calling for bans.

It has been more than a month, far more, that many people have had the sinking feeling that they were strictly lowering their chances of winning a tournament by not starting out a list with 4 Brainstorm and 4 Force of Will, there's just been more and more building evidence over time that that feeling is in fact the reality.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

11-19-2011, 01:49 PM

The cost argument is worthless. Whether they ban Brainstorm or not, the value of dual lands will continue to rise (Blue and otherwise). No rhymes intended. ;) What WotC should do is print lands that are close to (or even better than) dual lands and actually support Legacy as one of their big three formats.

Back to Brainstorm. Blue is strong because it provides players with the greatest opportunity to outplay their opponent by giving them more choices and reducing variance. Banning Brainstorm is a strong move in dumbing down Magic. Why not go the other way and give other colors ways to reduce their variance and have more options available?

Christ, it's like I'm talking to myself here.

Other colors have ways of reducing variance.

Those ways are just not as efficient or powerful as Brainstorm, nor as easy to play. It is a lot harder to play cards that require commitment and mulliganing decisions and timing and other difficult things correctly over a Brainstorm. If you are not braindead, 90% of the time it is extremely simple to play a Brainstorm correctly, compared to more skill-intensive cards like Green Sun's Zenith, Stoneforge Mystic, Ponder, Sensei's Divining Top, Sylvan Library, Knight of the Reliquary, Jace, Wishes, Fauna Shaman, and basically every other tutor or filtering card. And of course it doesn't compare to a card like Thoughtseize.

KevinTrudeau

11-19-2011, 02:09 PM

Paraphrasing a post of mine in another thread in response to the above:

Brainstorm isn't as simple as you make it out to be. It's not always easy to determine which two of your cards are the weakest to shuffle back when you take your current board and hand state, your opponent, and future turns into consideration. Do you shuffle back the StP even though your opponent has no creatures in play? Do you shuffle back one of your spells just so you can hit a guaranteed land drop next turn? Those two scenarios are just the tip of the iceberg, and that's not even taking into account whether or not it was the correct time to cast Brainstorm at all and Brainstorm's efficacy in non-control decks. I agree that the card is overrated in its complexity, but you're taking it a bit too far, to the point of your thoughts coming off as myopic distaste (mostly because of your somewhat ridiculous SFM comparison).

TheInfamousBearAssassin

11-19-2011, 02:41 PM

No, it's not always easy. But it is 90% of the time. Conversely, it's almost always difficult to decide how to play another card filtering spell correctly when the timing matters a lot more and it eats up a lot more mana. Do you turn 1 GSZ for an Arbor or wait and try to grab a Goyf or Knight later? What equipment will help you most in this board state off of SFM? Do I swing for five with Knight of the Reliquary this turn, or hold back and search for a Wasteland or a Maze? Do I even run these cards out now or do I play around counters with something else?

Compared to this, it's pretty easy to determine by the board state what you need. And the fact that you don't actually have to shuffle away Brainstorm cards helps.

Brainstorm just isn't that difficult to play compared to a lot of other Legacy cards. It's a lot less skill testing than Force, for instance, or Wasteland.