Talking Shop #1: Why you don't need to play Blue to play Legacy(Don't ban Brainstorm) [Archive]

View Full Version : Talking Shop #1: Why you don't need to play Blue to play Legacy(Don't ban Brainstorm)

sdematt

12-04-2011, 01:22 AM

Talking Shop #1: Why you don't need to play Blue to play Legacy

Hello all, and welcome to my first article. The series is called, "Talking Shop," and today's article is about the business surrounding the call for a ban for Brainstorm. Let me know your feedback/comments. I've never really written any articles before, so any suggestions, corrections, tips, etc. would be great. I'm having a banner done up so it looks a little more professional, but let me know on the content.

There are rumblings that Brainstorm will be getting banhammer come December. As a Legacy player who has been around since the days of Goblins, Drain and Dragon, and as someone who has seen the separation of banned and restricted lists, mourned Survival, and played through Combo Winter, I feel that the time has come not to ban Brainstorm, but to examine how the Legacy Metagame (which is larger than the StarCityGames.com Open Series) already has the tools to take on and beat Brainstorm the card, and Brainstorm the archetype. This article is the first in a series I intend to write (when school permits) examining just this issue.

Bans, and calls for them can be hasty and short-sighted responses to perceived shortcomings of the metagame. Nothing better illustrates this, to my mind, than the short life of Mental Misstep as a Legacy-legal card. When rumors of Mental Misstep’s impending ban started to circulate, I thought, as many Legacy players did, “what, already?” While you can’t blame the American-based Wizards of the Coast for being influenced by the pervasive (and excellent!) coverage of the performances blue-based decks put up time and again on the SCG circuit, we need to keep in mind that top decks are also piloted by top players, and the better a player gets, the more they are drawn to the power of blue. This is a fact of life in Legacy—many of the best cards are in that color, and Brainstorm itself helps combine tight play with blessed consistency. Mix in the incentive for SCG ringers to continue to play consistent and powerful decks in order to continue to rack up money and Open Points, and the monotony of blue in the top 8 becomes a little less surprising.

So, where does Brainstorm fit into all of this? Well, it’s in most of the decks we’re seeing in the SCG Open Top 8’s. Why? It’s blue, and it creates card quality/advantage. It’s a great card, don’t get me wrong. Not just running off how well you’ve shuffled is always a great thing, and digging at instant speed to hide cards from discard is superb. But, does Brainstorm win you the game? Yes, and no. It increases consistency by manipulating your deck, especially with Fetchlands and other shuffle effects. This is pretty awesome, and it pitches to Force of Will! It’s pretty much the tits, by any stretch of the imagination. But, what this article is really about, besides wild tangents into banning policy and SCG, is about how Brainstorm is a great card, but not a card that bends the format.

Workshop would end the format. Anyone who saw or played Vintage with four Trinisphere and four Workshop knows what I’m talking about. Bazaar is ridiculously powerful. Mana Drain and Library of Alexandria could make a strong core to a Legacy Landstill deck. Mind’s Desire, as shown to me by some Storm masters on MTGTheSource, could render my butt very hurt if it were unbanned. But, does Brainstorm deserve to be on a list of such malicious offenders of all that is holy? Some say yes, but honestly, Brainstorm isn’t everything. Sometimes you Brainstorm into nothing, sometimes it pitches to Force, and other times, you are already dead. So, because the card is good, but not warping all that is holy, I don’t believe it should be banned. To prove that point, I’ll also attempt to get across another point: You don’t need to play Brainstorm to win in Legacy. You may be a stranger to decks that don’t run Brainstorm, or don’t run blue, but that doesn’t mean you can’t find success with them.

----

The format right now is so wide and open. At the moment, Delver Tempo is really good because people have forgotten how to play against Tempo. Brainstorm makes their deck better, and is really hampering some people’s decks. My point is this: when the car was invented, the buggy whip business collapsed. But, the last company making buggy whips made the best damn buggy whips you ever saw. My question to you is this: is your 75 card list from your 1996 Goblin deck outdated, or is Brainstorm worth banning? Are you still sending telegraphs to Aunt Bessie in Iowa? Times change. Mental Misstep changed the format in a huge way, and its banning also changed the format. But, I think given some time, the format will calm down, just like it always does. I find that before the Internet, decks were a lot more local and homebrewed. But now, even with the amount of interaction and communication that the Internet allows, there’s no innovation. People are content with reading about a deck, and playing it forever without making changes. It seems like we’re in a Muller’s Ratchet type situation: certain decks have evolved to the point of extinction, and no one wants to go back. Why? It’s easy. It’s easier to complain about something, rather than formulate an answer. It’s easy to say your math homework is too difficult, or the test was too hard. It takes effort and work to sit down and say, “Where am I going wrong, and how do I fix it?”

Do I think Mental Misstep deserved to be banned September 20th? No. Do I think it may have been wise to leave it until December 20th? Yes, but we’re no longer in that reality. We’re in flux, kids, and I think instead of entertaining the thought of banning a card that defines the format, we need to look at what we’re playing and how we’re playing it to determine how non-blue decks are going to leverage advantage against blue-based decks. Banning Brainstorm may be the “easy fix” to right the format, but it may also mortally wound it. Beating Blue can be done, as many have proved in the past, and even quite recently, like James Rynkiewicz playing no-Force Bant at GP Providence. He edged out the competition without using Force and Natural Order, both staples of Bant at the time. Blue isn’t a necessity to play Legacy, to win, to have fun, and to profit. Any deck properly tuned for the expected metagame will have a chance against the field. Any deck even means a deck without Brainstorm!

Thanks for reading the article and getting this far! I’ll now move onto some decklists, just to show that banning Brainstorm isn’t the answer, but innovation, thought, and hard work are. Just remember: try to find some tech, explore a deck, and see what happens. You just might beat Brainstorm without having to ban it.
-----------
I’m a fan of non-blue decks, since I’m a fan of board-based control compared to stack-based control. So, I’m going to present to you readers a bunch of decks that don’t play blue, or don’t play Brainstorm, and tell you enough about them to make an informed decision about playing them.

Since I’m a Junk player primarily, I’ll start with Junk, the Rock, or any other name for G/B/W good stuff.

4 Windswept Heath
2 Verdant Catacombs
2 Marsh Flats
1 Swamp
1 Forest
1 Plains
3 Scrubland
3 Bayou
1 Savannah
1 Dryad Arbor
1 Maze of Ith
1 Karakas
3 Wasteland

4 Knight of the Reliquary
3 Tarmogoyf
4 Dark Confidant
1 Qasali Pridemage
1 Birds of Paradise
2 Stoneforge Mystic

4 Swords to Plowshares
3 Hymn to Tourach
3 Vindicate
3 Sensei’s Divining Top
3 Green Sun’s Zenith
4 Inquisition of Kozilek
1 Sword of Feast and Famine
1 Batterskull/Umezawa’s Jitte

This is my build at the moment. It’s a hybrid GSZ/SFM build, similar to Maverick in that sense, but with a sprinkling of the Junk from the late Survival days. Inquisition replaced Thoughtseize recently to combat all the life loss from Lightning Bolts being thrown at our face, and since Jace isn’t a huge player, I don’t need to hit things that cost 4 as much. Rock is really as midrange as they come, and thrives on the fact it plays “all the good things” in one deck. The decklists are usually tight, and differ by their mana acceleration, GSZ vs. SFM, land count, discard suite, etc. It’s pretty variable, and you can build it up the way you want to. Playing against tons of Aggro? Add more 1 CMCremoval, ala Ghastly Demise/Path. Playing tons of Combo? Add some Teegs main, maybe more targeted discard. The deck has weaknesses against really fast Aggro (Burn and Zoo, but a well-built sideboard helps) and some Combo is awkward. Otherwise, you can usually just pack a toolbox, with the right tools for the job. Playing Gobs? Sword of Fire and Ice is pretty sweet. Esperblade got you down? Thrun + Sword of Light and Shadow can really give them fits. It’s really versatile, but doesn’t do everything. I hear this deck is decently popular in Holland, so expect it if you’re running into some Dutch tournaments.

Rock doesn’t usually place first in any given tournament, but always is pretty consistent. It hasn’t won an SCG Open (but it has come close multiple times), but it’s usually in the Top 16. Because of the fact it doesn’t have a ton of true bad matchups, it’s also not having a ton of byes either. You have to play every match well, and it’s not the easiest deck to play. Perfect practice makes perfect, though.

Maverick is also another midrange deck that’s not popular at all in the US, but has done very well inEurope. I’m resisting the temptation to call this Team Europe, due to its heavy European prevalence and lack of American performance. The deck is midrange with an awesome GSZ package, huge threat density, mana acceleration, and tons of value in the threats it presents. Julian Knab from MtgTheSource placed 88th with a similar list to the one I’m posting, so credits to him and to many other German teams who are playing the same list.

1 Gaea’s Cradle
4 Windswept Heath
1 Verdant Catacombs
1 Wooded Foothills
4 Savannah
1 Tropical Island
2 Horizon Canopy
2 Forest
1 Plains
1 Karakas
1 Maze of Ith
3 Wasteland
1 Dryad Arbor

4 Knight of the Reliquary
4 Mother of Runes
3 Noble Hierarch
3 Aven Mindcensor
3 Stoneforge Mythic
2 Qasali Pridemage
1 Trygon Predator
1 Scryb Ranger
1 Quirion Ranger
1 Scavenging Ooze
1 Edric, Spymaster of Trest
1 Thrun, the last Troll
1 Gaddock Teeg
1 Birds of Paradise

4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Green Sun's Zenith
1 Sword of Feast and Famine
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Umezawa's Jitte

My only change from Julian’s list is ditching Eternal Witness. I found it to be a dead weight all the time and I always run into enchantments like Blood Moon/Moat, so having the Trygon Predator can be pretty good. Plus, having a GSZ target that flies can be crucial. I haven’t played the deck a ton, but it runs decently well against Aggro if it can stabilize into the midgame, and then just destroys you with equipment, value, and Knights. Mother of Runes is great for protecting threats, blocking, and sneaking in, while Scavenging Ooze is a beating if you’re running Tarmogoyf or Knight of the Reliquary. Being able to fetch Gaddock Teeg is great, as is Edric or Thrun. Again, I’m not an expert on the deck, but it has a decent matchup against Combo with the right sideboard, and has a seemingly fine matchup against most decks in the format. Knight is just bigger than Bolt or Dismember, so take that, Tempo. The deck does hate to see Perish though, so I’d count on seeing that if playing against a prepared deck splashing Black. Deed is pretty devastating, as well. The deck usually loses when you can’t get GSZ to go for good creatures or you’re just short on mana, which is why I’ve added the Cradle as the 61st card. Yes, stats say you shouldn’t, but when I figure out what I want to drop, I’ll let you know.

Imperial Painter is also another valid, non-blue choice.

4 Ancient Tomb
4 City of Traitors
3 Great Furnace
5 Mountain
2 Wooded Foothills

1 Goblin Welder
4 Imperial Recruiter
1 Jaya Ballard, Task Mage
3 Magus of the Moon
4 Painter's Servant
1 Phyrexian Revoker
4 Simian Spirit Guide

4 Blood Moon
3 Chrome Mox
4 Grindstone
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Pyroblast
3 Red Elemental Blast
3 Sensei's Divining Top

This is Kim Grymer’s list from GP Amsterdam, also a member on the Source. Obviously, the buy-in on this deck is pretty high, but the plan is simple: grind your opponent out with Grindstone, or leverage advantage with Blood Moon effects. You’ve got maindeck blue hate in the form of six counterspells, which is huge. Bolt handles your little creatures, and Painter can turn REB’s into Vindicates if you need it. I’ve played a version of this deck before, and it’s really fun. I think with all the non-basics running around, I think this version, Imperial Painter, is a bit better than the U/R version that Alex Kwan played at the previous LA SCG Open. It’s definitely something you should consider playing, even if you don’t have the Recruiters. Just proxy them and test it!

Aggro-Loam is a Jund or Jund+W control deck based around land recursion. During the era of Misstep, the deck was very favourably positioned in the meta. By completely avoiding one-drops, you could blank Misstep entirely and profit off of the acceleration and control that Life from the Loam can provide. The format slowing down helped this deck immensely. Unfortunately, the format has sped up, and Loam can be tricky to play if you’re constantly facing Canadian Thresh speed decks.

Dmitri Nitkin, 17th place at GP Amsterdam

3 Qasali Pridemage
4 Knight of the Reliquary
4 Tarmogoyf

3 Lightning Bolt
4 Swords to Plowshares

3 Devastating Dreams
4 Life from the Loam

2 Seismic Assault

3 Sensei's Divining Top
4 Mox Diamond
1 Arid Mesa
1 Bojuka Bog
1 Forest
1 Horizon Canopy
1 Karakas
1 Mountain
1 Plateau
1 Savannah
1 Tranquil Thicket
1 Windswept Heath
4 Forgotten Cave
4 Taiga
4 Wasteland
4 Wooded Foothills
Tony DeVeyra, 5th place SCG Vegas

4 Wooded Foothills
3 Bloodstained Mire
1 Forest
2 Mountain
3 Taiga
1 Badlands
1 Bayou
4 Wasteland
1 Volrath’s Stronghold
4 Forgotten Cave
3 Tranquil Thicket

4 Mox Diamond
2 Engineered Explosives
4 Life from the Loam
2 Maelstrom Pulse
4 Lightning Bolt
3 Seismic Assault

2 Grim Lavamancer
2 Scavenging Ooze
2 Tarmogoyf
4 Countryside Crusher
4 Dark Confidant

My list, as of a few months ago.

4 Wooded Foothills
2 Bloodstained Mire
2 Mountain
1 Forest
4 Wasteland
3 Forgotten Cave
3 Tranquil Thicket
1 Volrath’s Stronghold
2 Taiga
1 Bayou
2 Badlands
3 Grove of the Burnwillows

4 Tarmogoyf
3 Countryside Crusher
1 Terravore
4 Dark Confidant

4 Life from the Loam
3 Seismic Assault
4 Mox Diamond
4 Terminate
2 Sylvan Library
2 Maelstrom Pulse
2 Punishing Fire

Aggro-Loam, once online, usually is very hard to stop. It has an excellent card advantage engine in the form of Life from the Loam. With Seismic Assault and cycling lands, Loam can be absolutely brutal at mowing down creatures, planeswalkers, and ultimately, your opponent. Once Loam and Assault are online, the game is usually over in three turns or less if you have the lands to pitch. Sylvan lets you Dredge up to 3 times per turn for free, Dark Confidant flips lands, and Fires and Terminate deal with most creatures you will come into contact with. Bolt is better for being a bit more aggro, but doesn’t deal with Knight of the Reliquary, which can be a huge threat against you, since you’re usually Wastelocking your opponent. The deck is a tad slower than I’d like right now, but if you practice enough with the deck, you can easily crush opponents with your card advantage. You unfortunately have very little game against Combo (unless your whole board is devoted to it), and sometimes very fast aggro can be a bit of a problem. Overall though, it’s pretty fun to play.

Zoo is usually a GRW based aggro deck packing lots of burn, efficient creatures, and a fast clock.

Grzegorz Kowalski, 25th place at GP Amsterdam

1 Gaddock Teeg
1 Scavenging Ooze
2 Grim Lavamancer
2 Qasali Pridemage
4 Knight of the Reliquary
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Tarmogoyf
4 Wild Nacatl

3 Lightning Helix
3 Swords to Plowshares
4 Lightning Bolt

4 Green Sun's Zenith

2 Sylvan Library

1 Elspeth, Knight-Errant
1 Forest
1 Horizon Canopy
1 Karakas
1 Maze of Ith
1 Mountain
1 Savannah
1 Wasteland
2 Plateau
2 Taiga
2 Windswept Heath
4 Arid Mesa
4 Wooded Foothills

Zoo is really fun to play, and is one of those decks that plays well in a long tournament: doesn’t usually have long rounds, there are fewer key decisions to make (this deck doesn’t autopilot, but definitely easier on the brain than playing TES in a 16-round tournament), and has a good matchup against many decks, even Storm. The GSZ package, in any of these decks listed, provides you with a ton of options against much of the field: Ooze, Gaddock Teeg, multiple Knights, etc. This particular Zoo deck runs GSZ, but there is Zoo playing mostly one-drops to overload Mental Misstep, which played more Goblin Guide than the listed deck. You’re a bit weak to heavy control, and sometimes you can run out of gas, but Sylvan helps out a ton.

43 Lands is also an expensive, but great choice with all the aggro going on. It dreamcrushes most Aggro decks, with its web of Maze of Ith, Tabernacle, recurring Wastelands, etc. It’s really expensive to build, but it’s quite good. It hasn’t seen much popularity lately because it was terrible with Misstep in the format, and it isn’t great against Combo post-Misstep. The deck is also very complex to play, and knowing what decisions to make and when is key. There are two schools of thought at the moment: White for Enlightened Tutor, or Black for Entomb. I think both have merit, but I’ve got the black version together.

Black 43 Lands

4 Life from the Loam
4 Exploration
2 Manabond
3 Intuition
2 Entomb
3 Mox Diamond
2 Engineered Explosives
1 Ensnaring Bridge
1 Zuran Orb
1 Mindslaver
1 Crucible of Worlds
1 Smokestack
4 Verdant Catacombs
3 Tropical Island
1 Bayou
4 Wasteland
1 Rishadan Port
4 Maze of Ith
3 Tolaria West
3 Tranquil Thicket
2 Mishra’s Factory
1 Tabernacle
1 Karakas
1 Ghost Quarter
1 Glacial Chasm
1 Creeping Tar Pit
1 Academy Ruins
1 Forest

This was just a recent White list taken from Fuzzy on MtgtheSource.

4 Exploration
4 Life from the Loam
4 Mox Diamond
3 Intuition
2 Enlightened Tutor
2 Manabond
1 Crucible of Worlds
1 Enginereed Explosives
1 Ensnaring Bridge
1 Mindslaver

4 Rishadan Port
4 Wasteland
1 Dust Bowl
1 Ghost Quarter
4 Maze of Ith
1 Glacial Chasm
1 The Tabernacle at Pendrell Vale
3 Tolaria West
2 Tranquil Thicket
1 Horizon Canopy
3 Tropical Island
2 Savannah
1 Forest
1 Misty Rainforest
1 Verdant Catacombs
1 Windswepth Heath
1 Wooded Foothills
2 Mishra's Factory
1 Academy Ruins
1 Karakas
1 Treetop Village

Bridge is an essential component in this deck, as are Zuran Orb, Engineered Explosives, Crucible, etc. depending on the build. Lands is really hard to hate out, unless you’re running Leyline or Extirpate, since Loam can be cycled and Dredged so Extraction won’t hit it. One of the huge problems is falling victim to Jace’s ultimate, as most of these decks can stop Loam if they really want to for 2-4 turns while Jace gets high enough in loyalty. Never fear though, since you can still win with this deck after falling victim to Jace, which is not an easy feat to do, I might add. If you have most of the expensive cards, I’d suggest giving it a try. Mind you, everyone in your playgroup will really hate you, since most people don’t know how to play against it properly, what to counter and when, etc.

----

All in all, I obviously can’t go over every non-blue deck in the format, since there’s just an absolute ton of them. Goblins, Pattern/Hulk Combo, Elves, The Gate, etc. all are reasonable decks to play, and can easily win tournaments. You needn’t play Brainstorm, or even blue, to do well in a major tournament, but it does certainly make it easier. You don’t have to pack awkward, narrow hate when playing blue, since you can just counter key spells. Will this always get you there? Of course not. TES can beat CounterTop, Zoo can beat Stoneblade, Rock can beat Delver Tempo. That’s just the way it goes.

Instead of jumping on the ban(d)wagon, take a look at some other options. Tune your deck, try some tech, and perhaps you’ll find something that just wrecks what your opponent is trying to do. I know whenever I brought out my Chains of Mephistopheles against Stoneblade, it turned some heads. Maybe you’ll find something you like, and do just the same.

Until next time, board in those Chokes!

-Matt

For those of you who don’t know me, I’m SDEMatt on MtgSalvation.com, MtgtheSource.com, andMagicLibrarities.com, as well as a ton of other Half Life 2 based forums (in case it rings a bell, it’s the same me). Yes, I love Beta duals. This is the first in a line of articles about Legacy, since I feel that the slant represented by the Star City Games articles can be a *tad* biased to the Star CityCircuit itself, and not to Legacy as a whole. I’ll try to put out articles regularly, but I can’t really make any promises, since I’m a student, and unfortunately, school comes before Magic, kids.

from Cairo

12-04-2011, 02:22 AM

Nice article. I agree with your main point, that while Brainstorm and Blue (in general) are good, decks can be tuned to beat Blue strategies. I don't think anything needs to be banned, guess we'll see what DCI thinks.

Beatusnox

12-04-2011, 02:34 AM

I really liked the article. The only complaints that I have are 1: the lack of a combo deck in your list of non-Blue decks, and 2: The lack of a transition where you moved to discuss Workshop and other overly broken cards. It made me re-read it three or four times to make sure I was understanding it right(could be the lack of sleep however).

I look forward to reading your articles more and if you ever need insight into some of the storm based combo decks of legacy feel free to ask I playtest and gold fish tes belcher and UB ant far far more than I should lol.

Also, Try to use the [ cards ] [/ cards ] Tags around the decks so people who do not know all of the cards you mention can see them more readily, it makes for an easier read.

sdematt

12-04-2011, 02:49 AM

Beatusnox

12-04-2011, 02:59 AM

I originally had all the decklists right after the Workshop section, but I found that it was terrible for people who wanted to slog through the writing before going into the decklists, that's why there's not a really great transition there. If I can write a decent bridge between the two, I'll definitely add it.

I didn't add Storm in since it plays Brainstorm.

-Matt

Even outside of storm, Flashless hulk or even combo elves just so players who like playstyles that are not mid-range or flash in the pan aggro. All in all though I really liked the article.

nwong

12-04-2011, 04:03 AM

Whilst I agree with your points, I don't agree with the idea that "good players play blue because it offers consistency and good players like consistency". In my opinion, these good players are attracted to blue because it's simply stronger.

Good article though.

Kich867

12-04-2011, 04:42 AM

nwong

12-04-2011, 04:52 AM

That's exactly my point. At what point does being more consistent stop being a preference and start being the reason why something is objectively better?

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-04-2011, 05:20 AM

And a stronger deck is a deck that employs the same strategy as another but does so more consistently. What?

Unless the other deck has a stronger strategy. Raffinity wasn't the most consistent deck in Type 2, but it was the most powerful. Ditto to Jund.

For that matter, if consistency were all that mattered people would play burn. Every burn hand plays out pretty much the same, it's very consistent, it's just what it's trying to do isn't that powerful.

Shursh

12-04-2011, 05:21 AM

Dmitri Nitkin, 17th place at GP Amsterdamfix it please Dmitri Nikitin
btw he is 17th twice, Madrid too

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-04-2011, 05:56 AM

Honestly, though, I think consistency is the new tempo. I have no idea what the fuck people think they mean when they say it. I've heard people insist that Merfolk shouldn't run Brainstorm specifically because, and apparently for the only reason, it's already so consistent. I have no idea what the fuck deck they were playtesting but eh.

death

12-04-2011, 11:07 AM

I remember Drago saying burn is consistent because it had only lands and burn spells. I have to say its consistency is being overrated because you can brick on lands or be stuck on 1 land for the rest of the game, draw dudes when you needed a burn spell else your dead. Burn has Magma Jet and Browbeat but those aren't as good as the draw manipulation that blue have. For that matter, I define consistency as being able to constantly do what you're supposed to do, without failing out so much.

If Burn splashing blue for Brainstorm + fetchlands means anything, it means players already recognize its weakness and adapt by making it consistent since the deck isn't exactly like what you think.

http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?22661-Blue-Sligh

The decklists inside that link outclass Blue Zoo, Sligh and Burn itself. Blue Sligh in fact has greater odds of becoming the next DTB before mono-red Sligh or even Burn.

sdematt

12-04-2011, 11:41 AM

I'm hoping to get through some of these decks more in depth in subsequent articles, and just run through each deck and see a) what's going on, b) how to play it, c) How can you beat blue etc.

Thanks for the comments all! I'd love to hear more!

-Matt

socialite

12-04-2011, 12:13 PM

I don't mean to be rude but what exactly does this article accomplish?

Listed are decks already well known in the format and to be honest are still not as good as Brainstorm based Blue decks.

It's like your argument is "You don't have to play or ban Brainstorm in Legacy - You can keep playing the same decks that lose to Brainstorm and continue to lose to it!"

Legacy a bunch of people who like winning with Brainstorm and a bunch of people who like losing to Brainstorm?

nedleeds

12-04-2011, 01:30 PM

Nice write up. Sure sucks to have to play 24 lands and mana dorks though. Over a long tourney you`ll lose to land flood a couple of times.

That`s the real broken aspect of brainstorm. Allowing forabsurd mana bases in 3color decks.

sdematt

12-04-2011, 01:56 PM

My point, Ertai, is people seem to be forgetting that there is an entire section of Legacy that doesn't play Blue or doesn't play Brainstorm, yet they either choose to ignore it or choose not to innovate. I'm also addressing the point that people would rather take the easy route of banning something rather than doing something about it. Yes, the decks are well known, but no one ever seems to bring them up. Plus, for people newer to the format or don't have a varied metagame, I'm basically saying that these decks exist and can do well.

-Matt

thefringthing

12-04-2011, 02:02 PM

I don't think Lands is a reasonable deck to mention in an article about fighting blue. How does it ever beat a Jace?

I feel the same way Ertai's Familiar does about this article. It's just a list of the donkey decks that the Brainstorm people are beating on their way to the top tables week after week.

Zilla

12-04-2011, 02:04 PM

For that matter, if consistency were all that mattered people would play burn. Every burn hand plays out pretty much the same, it's very consistent, it's just what it's trying to do isn't that powerful.
Disagree. Burn is a horribly inconsistent deck. Consistency comes from having what you want when you want it. The only card that helps mono-red burn in that department is Magma Jet, and it's not very good.

Just because Burn is highly redundant doesn't mean it's highly consistent. There are games where it can blow out its opponents in 3 turns with the right combination of cards, and plenty of others where it flounders in topdeck mode drawing land after land.

I feel like you're using consistency as a synonym for redundancy and I don't think it's accurate, although in some cases redundancy can create consistency. That is (arguably) the case for Merfolk, which is why people argue that Brainstorm is unneeded there. I'm actually with you on that one... I don't think I've ever seen a compelling argument against the card in that deck, because although it's already highly redundant, there's still room for greater consistency, and Brainstorm provides it. It's not like it hurts the deck's threat density, because it replaces itself with a threat when you cast it. It doesn't hurt the deck's tempo either, as long as it has Vial.

Phoenix Ignition

12-04-2011, 02:26 PM

I don't think Lands is a reasonable deck to mention in an article about fighting blue. How does it ever beat a Jace?

This is a great point.

My argument, however, is that blue right now can't be hated the same way it used to be. The rock would crush blue decks with attrition, hand hating threats out while using cards like Pernicious Deeds and Vindicate to deal with any threats, sometimes better than a 1 for 1 card trade. Eternal Witness or bob would follow up with extra card advantage, and usually top would keep consistency up.

Now blue just has too many card advantage engines to be fought in the same method. Not only do they have better beaters (like the flying nacatl) than before, they have a better Eternal Witness in Snapcaster Mage. Jace was causing problems a while back for the rock anyway, since the number of spells that just flat up kill a planeswalker is so small (P Deeds was printed before the time of planeswalkers, sadly). There are even more efficient beaters than goyf in the form of Stoneforge Mystic now, who by herself can win games against fast aggros and control decks just by choice of which equipment to grab. SFM can be run in lieu of any other creatures, really, since the equipment also turn into creatures (or make snapcaster an actual threat).

It's the combination of all of these things that gives blue too many things to handle. I don't think it's brainstorm that's causing the problems in the format, it's just the number of good blue cards now causing too much card advantage. You can't hate it with black strategies anymore, attrition doesn't work against a constant inflow of card advantage. In my eyes now it's play it or lose to it, and that's why I think something has to happen to make legacy a format again. Whether that's banning brainstorm, another blue card, or just simply printing better non-splashable, non-blue cards, I don't really care. I just know right now I don't like the format at all.

SpatulaOfTheAges

12-04-2011, 06:23 PM

Disagree. Burn is a horribly inconsistent deck. Consistency comes from having what you want when you want it. The only card that helps mono-red burn in that department is Magma Jet, and it's not very good.

Umbrowbeatguy

dahcmai

12-04-2011, 10:07 PM

Lands beats Jace by repeatedly casting an Oblivion Stone off an Academy Ruins until it blows up said Jace. That or try out something really weird like I used to play a Meloku in my Lands deck. Grabbed him back with a Volrath's Stronghold after loaming him in and then proceeded to abuse Manabond like no one's business.

Article was pretty decent btw.

Julian23

12-04-2011, 10:12 PM

sdematt

12-05-2011, 12:13 AM

So if I wrote another decent article, it'd be read?

-Matt

Einherjer

12-05-2011, 12:55 AM

-for sure

Lemnear

12-05-2011, 01:31 AM

Matt, i was sold the moment you rightfully mentioned that Legacy is bigger than SCG that somehow a shitload of people force to ignore pointing on the copy/paste mimicry metagame of SCG to justify their calls for action against xy.

Kudos; want more

P.S. Back then our fella Carsten Koetter wrote a similar article about the "Ban BS/Misstep" movement he earned disapproval too. Critic to the critics isn't welcomed, I guess

Beatusnox

12-05-2011, 01:46 AM

Or just use Creeping Tar Pit. From what I experienced, the best thing to do against Jace is to try to prevent a 4 casting cost sorcery speed card from being cast in the first place; and Pithing Needle.

I was going to say the man-land thing to kill jace, but people do not really want to hear it, so I just ignored it lol.

sdematt

12-05-2011, 02:21 AM

I know when my friends play 43 lands against Jace.deck, the matchup isn't that bad. I think people don't like it because it's hard to play, expensive, and is a dog to combo.

-Matt

Beatusnox

12-05-2011, 02:52 AM

I know when my friends play 43 lands against Jace.deck, the matchup isn't that bad. I think people don't like it because it's hard to play, expensive, and is a dog to combo.

-Matt

I havent tested as the lands player in the match-up but as a belcher pilot, Game 2 and three one of the most common things I have had against me is mulling until they hit Glacial and its just a headache to win from there. not impossible but a lot of extra work.

MirrorMask

12-05-2011, 06:40 AM

Very well written.Good job my friend. I totally agree with you on NOT banning brainstorm. What I would like to see is more power to the other colors. I really don't get it why wizards doesn't support the rest of the colors as much as blue. It would be better if all had powerhouse cards as blue does.

(nameless one)

12-05-2011, 07:09 AM

It's funny how post-Zendikar/pre-Worldwake days, a lot complained on how WotC is nerfing blue. Then Super Jace showed up.

I wouldn't be surprised if they start nerfing blue again and everyone complains again.

We have to admit, no matter what, we secretly love blue.

Mr. Safety

12-05-2011, 07:34 AM

So if I wrote another decent article, it'd be read?

-Matt

Absolutely. I like your approach to this topic. All of us know that those decks exist in legacy, but it's easy to lose sight of them when you're staring at Brainstorm under a microscope. Great job at the summaries after each deck, too...that was the most enjoyable part of the article. I am not a blue player by nature so you had me at 'Don't have to play Brainstorm...' The funny part is that every deck I do have blue in, has Brainstorm...I guess that makes me a troll. :laugh:

dahcmai

12-05-2011, 08:12 AM

We have to admit, no matter what, we secretly love blue.

I'm not secret about it. Screw non-blue decks, especially Goblins. I still feel like I should be able to counter a Leyline.

Admiral_Arzar

12-05-2011, 09:29 AM

I liked the article, but there were a couple of things that were off-putting for me. The first was your claim that the Misstep ban was unwarranted - I vehemently disagree with that, but that's an argument for another time and thread.

Second, and more importantly - the BANT deck from GP Providence was a blue deck that played Brainstorm. Using this deck as an example in a thread about not having to play Brainstorm (in particular about beating blue) is either very ironic, ignorant, or deceptive to the readers. The fact that the deck didn't play Force or Natural Order is irrelevant to this discussion. Using a BLUE DECK WITH BRAINSTORM as an example of how to beat blue decks with Brainstorm does nothing but prove the point of the people calling for a Brainstorm ban.

sdematt

12-05-2011, 10:33 AM

I was using it as an example of the time: it didn't play Force or Natural Order, both super staples that were somewhat under the microscope as well. True, it did play Brainstorm, but I was looking more at the, "it got there without overwhelmingly popular choices." Sorry if it wasn't a great example or super clear.

-Matt

Zilla

12-05-2011, 12:15 PM

Umbrowbeatguy
What an embarrassing oversight. :cry:

Mr. Safety

12-05-2011, 12:35 PM

Yeah, seriously. There was what, 24 Browbeats that top-8-ed Amsterdam? :tongue:

Julian23

12-05-2011, 12:55 PM

Hans: "Browbeat?"
Franz: "Uhm...target?"
Hans: "You, of course!"

Happened countless times. It's so funny how people often just assume how targeting on certain cards works :laugh:.

dahcmai

12-05-2011, 01:19 PM

God, I used to hate Browbeat since the older versions say "Unless a player has Browbeat deal 5 damage to him or her, target player draws three cards." and people used to be sooo sure that it meant unless they had a browbeat in the opponents hand the opponent took 5 damage and you got to draw three. Perfect example of punctuation being quite important. One lack of a comma makes a large difference.

thefringthing

12-05-2011, 03:47 PM

"Has" is never even used in that way on any card. It would have been "Unless a player reveals a card named Browbeat from their hand, Browbeat deals..." or something like that.

Mr. Safety

12-05-2011, 04:29 PM

nedleeds

12-05-2011, 04:31 PM

On topic, what would the best 'dig' spell be that *isn't* blue? )

Contract from Below.

SpikeyMikey

12-05-2011, 06:36 PM

On topic, what would the best 'dig' spell be that *isn't* blue? Here is an (incredibly short) list of playable options:

Sensei's Divining Top
Sylvan Library

I suppose you could put Magma Jet into that category because it's the closest thing Burn/red sligh has to a dig spell. It's a little disconcerting that sligh decks are splashing blue for B-Storm and Snappy...are they playing Delver as well? What has this world come to that sligh has turned to the Dark Side in order to become competitive? (I jest...)

Top, easily. Over the course of half a dozen turns, I would much rather top every turn than Brainstorm once. The longer the game goes, the more powerful top becomes in comparison to any other filter effect. The card quality you get over the course of a game from a turn 1 top can't be matched by any other (legal) card.

Finn

12-05-2011, 07:54 PM

Life from the Loam. Of course, where it goes into a Loam deck, Brainstorm goes into every deck. Ditto Stoneforge Mystic. But the card you are looking fir is Dark Confidant. Though none of these are quite "dig" which is a blue mechanic after all.

randomly.anonymous

12-05-2011, 09:22 PM

Merfolk is a good example of a non-brainstorm blue strategy that beats blue (or is designed to).

Brainstorm is a super-interactive card. It has cool tricks with shuffle effects, can "hide" stuff in your hand, manipulate the top cards of the library, put away unwanted cards, etc.

This card encourages diversity in the format. It's not valid to say, simply on a point of comparison between BS and Mental Misstep that XX card is present in a high number of decks which perform well, therefore XX card should be banned. MMS did not encourage diversity in the format because it was a linear card that shut down strategies (decks which played/relied on a lot of one-drops). That's why all the people played it.

Similarly, Jace TMS and Stoneforge were banned because it was simply too powerful for the format. That's why all the people played them.

People play Brainstorm because it functions well in their deck, but Brainstorm itself does not encourage one to play a certain deck (this is instead determined by other factors, like playing style and metagame). Moreover, it certainly does not discourage one from playing a deck.

It's like saying fetchlands or Wasteland should be banned. They all are highly interactive cards which encourage or enable a plethora of deck strategies. They do not make people inclined to play a deck on its own, but instead encourage people to play decks because of the strategies they support. Fetchlands and Wasteland are format-defining. So are Brainstorm and Force of Will. This doesn't mean that they are over-powered, and much less does it mean they should be banned.

-----edit--------
Perhaps it would be easier to understand like this.

Linear + Cheap (for its effect) = format defining (eg, Tarmogoyf, Dark Confidant, High Tide, Swords to Plowshares, Thoughtseize, Force of Will)
These cards which straightforwardly perform one function. Tarmogoyf is a big creature. Dark Confidant is a cheap draw engine. High Tide produces a lot of mana. Swords to Plowshares removes creatures.
However, if only these types of cards were around, the format would be too linear. There would be only so many combinations of these cheap but linear spells that there wouldn't be many decktypes around)

Interactive + Cheap = format diversifying (eg, Fetchlands, Brainstorm, Wasteland, Enlightened Tutor, Infernal Tutor)
These cards on their own do not produce a very powerful effect. Wasteland is useless vs. basic lands. Fetchlands on their own do not win games. Brainstorm will not win a game, and the effect without a shuffle effect is roughly on par with those of Ponder, Preordain, or Sensei's Divining Top. Enlightened Tutor doesn't shine without a desirable artifact or enchantment in your deck
These cards compliment the more linear cards to diversify the format. It prevents the format from degenerating into a limited number of strategies by enabling people to combine the aforementioned powerful cards in a multitude of ways.

Interactive + Cheap + Linear = should be banned.
These include cards like Survival of the Fittest, Power9, Mental Misstep, Mishra's Workshop, Strip Mine, Mystical Tutor
Cards like this come in two flavours. Either they can be placed in pretty much any deck (hence highly interactive) and still exert a powerful effect because the card does what it does for too cheap a cost. Or, they are cheap and powerful and interact greatly with a certain strategy (eg, Land tax, Workshop, Survival) that makes that strategy too broken.

CorpT

12-05-2011, 10:07 PM

Interactive + Cheap = format diversifying Enlightened Tutor

Interactive + Cheap + Linear = should be banned.
Mystical Tutor

That's funny. They do exactly the same thing. And yet one you define as Linear and the other you don't. Of course, one you think should be banned and the other you don't.

AKA: your argument makes no sense at all. You've defined two cards that do almost exactly the same thing as doing different things. Your definitions are completely arbitrary and only based on your own personal biases.

For example: you think tournaments with blue decks 75% of the top 16 as diverse. I don't. I think that requiring deck building to begin with Brainstorm and then adding 56 cards is a pretty un-diverse format. Amazingly enough, if I defined that as diverse, I would find it diverse.

Phoenix Ignition

12-06-2011, 12:40 AM

People got off on a discussion of lands vs. jace, I don't think the OP can use comparisons of decks that used to work because now their strategies are outdated. Here's why again:

My argument, however, is that blue right now can't be hated the same way it used to be. The rock would crush blue decks with attrition, hand hating threats out while using cards like Pernicious Deeds and Vindicate to deal with any threats, sometimes better than a 1 for 1 card trade. Eternal Witness or bob would follow up with extra card advantage, and usually top would keep consistency up.

Now blue just has too many card advantage engines to be fought in the same method. Not only do they have better beaters (like the flying nacatl) than before, they have a better Eternal Witness in Snapcaster Mage. Jace was causing problems a while back for the rock anyway, since the number of spells that just flat up kill a planeswalker is so small (P Deeds was printed before the time of planeswalkers, sadly). There are even more efficient beaters than goyf in the form of Stoneforge Mystic now, who by herself can win games against fast aggros and control decks just by choice of which equipment to grab. SFM can be run in lieu of any other creatures, really, since the equipment also turn into creatures (or make snapcaster an actual threat).

It's the combination of all of these things that gives blue too many things to handle. I don't think it's brainstorm that's causing the problems in the format, it's just the number of good blue cards now causing too much card advantage. You can't hate it with black strategies anymore, attrition doesn't work against a constant inflow of card advantage. In my eyes now it's play it or lose to it, and that's why I think something has to happen to make legacy a format again. Whether that's banning brainstorm, another blue card, or just simply printing better non-splashable, non-blue cards, I don't really care. I just know right now I don't like the format at all.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-06-2011, 12:50 AM

sligh16

12-06-2011, 12:50 AM

People play Brainstorm because it functions well in their deck, but Brainstorm itself does not encourage one to play a certain deck (this is instead determined by other factors, like playing style and metagame). Moreover, it certainly does not discourage one from playing a deck.

Interactive + Cheap = format diversifying (eg, Fetchlands, Brainstorm, Wasteland, Enlightened Tutor, Infernal Tutor)
These cards on their own do not produce a very powerful effect. Wasteland is useless vs. basic lands. Fetchlands on their own do not win games. Brainstorm will not win a game, and the effect without a shuffle effect is roughly on par with those of Ponder, Preordain, or Sensei's Divining Top. Enlightened Tutor doesn't shine without a desirable artifact or enchantment in your deck
These cards compliment the more linear cards to diversify the format. It prevents the format from degenerating into a limited number of strategies by enabling people to combine the aforementioned powerful cards in a multitude of ways.

You could say that for any card. There's a reason why Brainstorm is the best blue card, and why blue decks dominate top 8's. It's because it gives you so much library manipulation for only one blue and a land drop. It's a card that doesn't ask you for anyting else, no tribal synergies, no creatures as prerequisites. It only asks you to play blue. That's why it's a no brainer in any blue deck (yeah, merfolk is a case here, but that's a discussion for another thread).

Some may argue that Sword to Plowshares is also a no brainer, and as Brainstorm, the real reason to play that color. But the level of power of both cards is totally different. Swords is an answer, does not provide you with card quality advantage and is dependant on the opponent playing a creature deck. Brainstorm is never a dead card, gives you three new cards, three new opportunities just for one blue mana. You can also keep those three cards in your hand if you happen to have 2 other cards in your hand (wich is almost sure).

You can also say that Brainstorm doesn't win you games. That's a lie. Sure, it's not a piece of any combo, instead is the card that finds you that pieces, finds you the cards that protect the combo and finds you the lands to pay for those cards. Just for one mana.

Yeah, Maverick it's the real deal and does not play Brainstorm. Guess why. Because it has a similar level of library manipulation that blue decks have always got thanks to powercreep. Green Sun's Zenith, Knight of the Reliquary, Stone Forge Mystic are all cards that have been printed lately, but that require you to have some prerequisites in exchange of the flexibility. Brainstorm only asks you to play blue (the color of free counterspells and lately the color of awesome creatures too) and 8 fetchlands. You must really, really have a good reason not to play a deck with Brainstorm.

sdematt

12-06-2011, 02:05 AM

Honorik

12-06-2011, 03:03 AM

SlopeeJ

12-06-2011, 04:13 AM

I am not saying brainstorm needs to be banned but I read the article a couple of times and it actually gave some strong reasons as why brainstorm should be banned. One is the obvious (and why everyone loves brainstorm) drawing 3 cards for one mana is really strong and any deck that doesn't draw 3 for 1 mana is at a disadvantage from draw 7

You can't hate it with black strategies anymore

This is my biggest thing with brainstorm, I don't like that it pretty much blanks discard which is pretty much what makes black.

Gheizen64

12-06-2011, 05:24 AM

Unrelated, yet slightly related question for a possible future article: Could MM and Mystical be in the same format, and do you think MM could help decrease the supposed brokenness of Mystical?

-Matt

Imho, unbanning misstep with Snapcaster in a format is a mistake. The combination is something i seriously wouldn't want to play against. Could be wrong obviously.

Admiral_Arzar

12-06-2011, 09:16 AM

snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ

12-06-2011, 01:26 PM

I fundamentally find it hard to take someone seriously who thinks that the bannings of Mental Misstep and Mystical Tutor were warranted, but doesn't think Brainstorm is bannable. I mean those two cards were clearly less powerful, less played and less good in actual performance than Brainstorm at the time that they were fully legal. Especially Mystical Tutor.

Stuff doesn't get banned on power level alone. It is something that has a lot of influence on a banning, but there must be more. Mystical Tutor was a flub, we all know that. Mental Misstep on the other hand was format warping because every deck played it to either shut out certain archetypes completely or just to combat suspected enemy Missteps. For example, Stoneforge Mystic is insane bonkers broken, don't think I'm reaching too far there. It can be splashed into any deck. If it comes down on turn 2 and sticks you have a 4/4 vigi LL guy coming at you next turn. There are tons of super powerful cards in Legacy, it takes more than power level for something to be banned.

Brainstorm gets played very often because it helps control card quality, allows you to hide important spells and get lands when you need them. Brainstorm, as has been said ad nauseum, is a skill tester and an enabler, but not close to broken on it's own. Mental Misstep was not a skill tester but a unbearably cheap oppressor. I LOVED playing Mental Misstep but totally understood the bannning. If WoTC bans Brainstorm they will turn off way more people then they will excite. People want to keep banning blue cards until the color is as good as red or green. These folks need to recognize that this is the nature of an eternal format, and more people like it this way than not.

Richard Cheese

12-06-2011, 02:07 PM

If you don't want to play Blue, just do what I do: stop caring about winning!

http://funny-pictures-blog.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/03/haters-gonna-hate1.jpg

randomly.anonymous

12-06-2011, 02:35 PM

That's funny. They do exactly the same thing. And yet one you define as Linear and the other you don't. Of course, one you think should be banned and the other you don't.

AKA: your argument makes no sense at all. You've defined two cards that do almost exactly the same thing as doing different things. Your definitions are completely arbitrary and only based on your own personal biases.

Both cards increase the consistency of the decks they're in. If that's what you mean by "do the same thing", I completely agree.

However, the cards which interact with those either tutor are completely different. Mystical Tutor is much more interactive with cards played in the format than is Enlightened Tutor.

If there was a deck which wins consistently (to the extent Re-animator and ANT decks were dominant) through one or a combination of artifacts or enchantments, there will be people pushing for Enlightened Tutor to be banned.

For example: you think tournaments with blue decks 75% of the top 16 as diverse. I don't. I think that requiring deck building to begin with Brainstorm and then adding 56 cards is a pretty un-diverse format. Amazingly enough, if I defined that as diverse, I would find it diverse.

You're right. It depends on how we define "diverse". I believe diverse refers to a format where numerous strategies are available, and if these strategies depended so heavily on Brainstorm giving it consistency, then by all means Brainstorm shouldn't be banned.

You state that the format is not diverse because many decks are 4 Brainstorm + 56 other cards. The flaw in that statement lies in that those 56 cards are vastly different cards that accomplish different gameplans.

Consider the following example.

More than 80% of tournament decks in the top 16 use fetchlands. Fetchlands greatly increase the consistency of decks by turning on the correct colours the deck needs and, to lesser effect, decreasing the probability of drawing lands when you no longer need them. They enable you to protect your manabase against Wastelands and Vindicates by fetching basics or not fetching until you need the mana. They also offer a consistent boost to cards like Tarmogoyf, Knight of the Reliquary, and Terravore, combo nicely with Crucible of Worlds, and can reset the top of your library vs Jace TMS or when digging with Sensei's Divining Top. Moreover, its ability cannot be countered using couterspells.

Amazingly enough, most decks begin with 4-10 fetchlands of their colours, and then adding in the remaining cards. I don't define that as being anything, except the obvious: that fetchlands interact with enough of the format for it to be in many decks, and more so for it to be the backbone of some decks.

Yeah, Maverick it's the real deal and does not play Brainstorm. Guess why. Because it has a similar level of library manipulation that blue decks have always got thanks to powercreep. Green Sun's Zenith, Knight of the Reliquary, Stone Forge Mystic are all cards that have been printed lately, but that require you to have some prerequisites in exchange of the flexibility. Brainstorm only asks you to play blue (the color of free counterspells and lately the color of awesome creatures too) and 8 fetchlands. You must really, really have a good reason not to play a deck with Brainstorm.

I think that this speaks to the fact that decks which are consistent tend to win more, not that cards which make decks consistent should be banned.

Merfolk and Zoo are consistent because they have a lot of redundancy.
Dredge is consistent because... of what it does.
GW is consistent because of its number of tutor and maunipulation effects.
The rest of the decks use a combination of Brainstorm, Fetchlands, and other tutors/cantrips.

You could say that for any card. There's a reason why Brainstorm is the best blue card, and why blue decks dominate top 8's. It's because it gives you so much library manipulation for only one blue and a land drop. It's a card that doesn't ask you for anyting else, no tribal synergies, no creatures as prerequisites. It only asks you to play blue. That's why it's a no brainer in any blue deck (yeah, merfolk is a case here, but that's a discussion for another thread).

Brainstorm is found in Blue decks which play blue for other reasons too (eg, Force of Will, Vendilion Clique).

Why don't we consider this problem from the other perspective. If brainstorm does increase considerably the consistency of decks which play it and if all it requires is one measly blue mana, why doesn't every deck not playing blue splash blue for Brainstorm? I mean, when Tarmogoyf first came out, all sorts of decks splashed green just for Goyf (and were successful in many case).

(This isn't a rhetorical question. I'm actually interesting to hear people's opinions on it)

Some may argue that Sword to Plowshares is also a no brainer, and as Brainstorm, the real reason to play that color. But the level of power of both cards is totally different. Swords is an answer, does not provide you with card quality advantage and is dependant on the opponent playing a creature deck. Brainstorm is never a dead card, gives you three new cards, three new opportunities just for one blue mana. You can also keep those three cards in your hand if you happen to have 2 other cards in your hand (wich is almost sure).

I know I didn't argue this, but I agree that whoever did is mistaken. The power levels of Brainstorm and StP are different.

It is precisely for the reasons that you listed that makes Brainstorm so unique. No other card in Magic does quite what it does at that cheap a cost. However, its effect isn't linear like that of Worldgorger Dragon or Skullclamp. Instead, its effect is highly interactive and synergistic, though not to the extent of Demonic Tutor or Mystical Tutor.

You can also say that Brainstorm doesn't win you games. That's a lie. Sure, it's not a piece of any combo, instead is the card that finds you that pieces, finds you the cards that protect the combo and finds you the lands to pay for those cards. Just for one mana.

I think the term you're looking for is consistency. I agree that Brainstorm makes the deck consistent in a way that most other cards outside of Ponder, Sylvan Library, Sensei's Divining Top, Infernal Tutor, Burning Wish, or Green Sun's Zenith cannot. I also agree that it is less limiting in deck construction than many of the aforementioned cards. However, the aforementioned cards have their merits over Brainstorm, and are played for those reasons.

More importantly, it does not make your deck linear in the way Mystical Tutor or Vampiric Tutor does. Brainstorm can fit into decks which play blue, but the prerequisite is that what you're looking for lies in the top 3 cards of your library. This imposes a severe limitation that cards like Mystical Tutor do not have.

sdematt

12-06-2011, 04:05 PM

Also, if you guys know other people that would like to maybe give this read, link it to them maybe?

-Matt

RaNDoMxGeSTuReS

12-06-2011, 07:22 PM

I just finished my foil playset :( no bans.

socialite

12-06-2011, 07:30 PM

I just finished my foil playset :( no bans.

That's always when the bans come though! Bad omen!

Lemnear

12-07-2011, 12:28 AM

I was trying to not play blue - not to play Brainstorm at GP Amsterdam and having hard time , just to finish 4 -3-1. In 8 rounds i meet exactly one non - blue, non - brainstorm deck, elves.

In general i don't want to play blue. But i reality, if not playing it - mean that i have a less consistent deck. The author of this topic suggest a bunch of non blue deck, but no one of the is consistent as a any brainstorm deck. And the most funny part is that not a single of this decks is a winner in the given tournament. Taking the first is reserved only for the blue decks...

In 2011 we have a couple non blue bases decks to win a big tourney - 2 dredges, 2 goblin decks, 1 zoo, 1 Loam deck , 1 affinity . Out of 31 Starcity opens and 2 GPs.

First: what deck did you play? 4-3-1 doesn't Tell me anything about your choice of deck, your skill or luck.

Second: we all know that SCG tournaments are a mimicry metagame of the last winning decks. If Gerry T. or anyone is winning with Landstill 25% of the meta of the next SCG will be Landstill. Look at the numbers: If 50% of the meta is blue, 20% viable non-blue strategies and 30% "piles" it's no wonder why there are 80% Blue Decks in T8 at SCG. And here comes the joke: Those Blue T8 will Be copied again. See the pattern?

So please spare us with narrow data to prove anything. Look around at global results and then Mix em up to have an adequate image of legacy which is far more healthy.

FieryBalrog

12-14-2011, 05:50 AM

lordofthepit

12-14-2011, 02:08 PM

Pretty much. When it comes to a serious tournament the top players end up packing Force of Wills for a reason, and that reason isn't "subjective preference".

Top players like Gerry T play whatever they believe is best suited for a metagame; usually, this is a deck with Brainstorm and Force of Will because the power of having options is magnified in the hands of a great pilot. But they will choose different decks (as he did at the Invitational to great success) depending on the suitability of the deck for a metagame.

I've personally switched to playing Force of Wills and Brainstorms only recently (despite having owned the necessary cards forever) because of metagame shifts at local stores. But I've won stacks of dual lands, fetches, and other big money staples piloting Big Zoo for over a year, even in tournaments with plenty of Survival, storm combo, etc.. I do think Force of Will must exist in a healthy metagame/format, and I do believe Brainstorm is a card that draws people to play Legacy; however, I do not believe that an individual player needs to play blue to be competitive. For every game I am glad I had a Force of Will to save my ass, there is at least one where I wish I had 12-16 pieces of maindeck removal.

FieryBalrog

12-14-2011, 09:32 PM

Top players like Gerry T play whatever they believe is best suited for a metagame; usually, this is a deck with Brainstorm and Force of Will because the power of having options is magnified in the hands of a great pilot. But they will choose different decks (as he did at the Invitational to great success) depending on the suitability of the deck for a metagame.

I've personally switched to playing Force of Wills and Brainstorms only recently (despite having owned the necessary cards forever) because of metagame shifts at local stores. But I've won stacks of dual lands, fetches, and other big money staples piloting Big Zoo for over a year, even in tournaments with plenty of Survival, storm combo, etc.. I do think Force of Will must exist in a healthy metagame/format, and I do believe Brainstorm is a card that draws people to play Legacy; however, I do not believe that an individual player needs to play blue to be competitive. For every game I am glad I had a Force of Will to save my ass, there is at least one where I wish I had 12-16 pieces of maindeck removal.
You're just agreeing with me. I'm not arguing WHY the blue skeleton is so overpowered and enduring in the eternal formats, just that it is. Yes, it is the consistency it creates, the options it allows for, the flexibility, etc. that make blue so ridiculous. That's not in dispute.

The problem, and it's a very real one, is that if you don't own the blue duals and the forces, you're in the Legacy ghetto with only the inferior or "occasionally useful" decks to choose from. You're barred from the elite decks that are far and away the best decks in the majority of situations.

sdematt

12-15-2011, 12:26 AM

And you are entitled to your opinion, but there's another group that doesn't feel that way, so that's why I wrote the article.

I'm hoping to have another article up in the next few days.

-Matt

lordofthepit

12-15-2011, 03:03 AM

You're just agreeing with me. I'm not arguing WHY the blue skeleton is so overpowered and enduring in the eternal formats, just that it is. Yes, it is the consistency it creates, the options it allows for, the flexibility, etc. that make blue so ridiculous. That's not in dispute.

The problem, and it's a very real one, is that if you don't own the blue duals and the forces, you're in the Legacy ghetto with only the inferior or "occasionally useful" decks to choose from. You're barred from the elite decks that are far and away the best decks in the majority of situations.

I am not agreeing with you. I think that you are arguing that players able to buy the blue duals and Forces have a substantial advantage over players that cannot, which I agree with. You then try to conflate that into "blue decks... are far and away the best decks in the majority of situations". I disagree with that.

I think the most important determinants of your tournament success on any given day are as follows--drawing good matchups for your deck, getting lucky with your draws in any given game, piloting well, and having a good deck (as long as you're playing something that's not Tier 43 with Scars duals and Standard creatures). The first point contributes to the importance of reading the metagame and choosing your deck accordingly (but even then, you might correctly choose to play Goblins for a given tournament but then proceed to draw the only combo decks in the room). As for the last point (having a good deck), I believe there is little difference in inherent power between the very best decks of the format and the second tier decks.

Certainly, the people who can afford all the cards will be able to afford the blue duals and Force of Will, and I believe that their success should be attributed to their superior ability to adjust to the metagame than because blue decks are that much better. In fact, I think Maverick (though traditionally a European deck) is extremely well-positioned even at SCG tournaments, and recent data by the Hatfields will bear that out that it is much stronger than the vast majority of blue decks.

The player that can for some reason only build Merfolk (even with duals to splash for another color), or only build Painter's Stone/High Tide/Hive Mind/CounterTop (previously excellent deck choices that have been left in the dust by the evolving metagame) are at an extreme disadvantage compared to the player who can build Maverick. Of course, most players that can afford to build the blue shell can also build other decks with a blue shell (for example, Bant, which in many regards is like Maverick with a blue splash and therefore shares many of the same strengths). It's not fair to compare a Goblins player who scrubbed out because he took a bad choice only since it was only deck he owned (perhaps with suboptimal budget choices at that) to another player who considered dozens of deck possibilities (some of which involved blue duals + FOW, some of which did not) and chose a strong deck for his metagame.

Is it unfortunate that not every player can afford to play blue, or to generalize, any deck of their choice? It is, but that's the nature of a collectible card game and the topic of another thread. That should not dictate the DCI's decisions on whether to ban cards to weaken a color. I do believe that blue is indeed the best color in Legacy, but only by a small margin over green.

At a recent 42-person tournament I went to in Arlington (usually featuring the best Legacy players in the Northwest), I played Bant instead of my usual Zoo decklist and went 4-0 in Swiss before drawing into the top 8. I grimaced when I opened up against Goblins (which would have been a much stronger matchup for Zoo), but was very happy with my deck choice when I drew Dredge in R2 and Hive Mind in R4. The rest of the tournament consisted of Maverick, BUG, RUG, Reanimator, etc.; in other words, what you might typically expect from a SCG event. Fast-forward to the top 8, and there were 3 Mavericks, 1 Big Zoo, 1 Goblins, 1 Elves, 1 Belcher, and 1 Bant, with two Maverick decks squaring off in the Finals. In other words, I was the only person in the Top 8 playing any blue (from a room that originally consisted of plenty of blue), and I was quickly dismissed from the tournament in 3 games by Zoo. Blue was a liability in this case--that deck had too much speed and redundancy for me. You can't reasonably prepare for every possibility in the format, regardless of what deck you are playing, and it's not accurate to assume "Force of Will + blue duals + Brainstorm" does either.

Gui

12-15-2011, 05:20 AM

Great post, lordofthepit, really great.

Zilla

12-15-2011, 02:55 PM

Great post, lordofthepit, really great.
Agreed.

snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ

12-15-2011, 03:20 PM

For fear of this sounding like a circle jerk... i actually did want to say that was a refreshing and compelling perspective before I saw others who felt the same; but fuck it. That was a good post..

TeenieBopper

12-15-2011, 03:24 PM

That should not dictate the DCI's decisions on whether to ban cards to weaken a color.

Cool. Can we have Drain, Bazaar, and Workshop back?

Admiral_Arzar

12-15-2011, 04:28 PM

Cool. Can we have Drain, Bazaar, and Workshop back?

The thought of these cards all being unbanned at once is actually hilarious. Not necessarily in a good way, but it would definitely be entertaining.

GGoober

12-15-2011, 05:23 PM

Can we sticky LotP's post? That really sums up the nature of a format as awesome and diverse as Legacy as opposed to the narrow unadaptive format that people are tending to view Legacy in.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-15-2011, 05:25 PM

If they banned Bridge from Below and reprinted them in some kind of promo set first, I would be quite happy with Drain, Bazaar and Workshop coming back to the format. Hell, I wouldn't mind having Worldgorger Dragon back at the same time.

TheInfamousBearAssassin

12-15-2011, 05:32 PM

I am not agreeing with you. I think that you are arguing that players able to buy the blue duals and Forces have a substantial advantage over players that cannot, which I agree with. You then try to conflate that into "blue decks... are far and away the best decks in the majority of situations". I disagree with that.

I think the most important determinants of your tournament success on any given day are as follows--drawing good matchups for your deck, getting lucky with your draws in any given game, piloting well, and having a good deck (as long as you're playing something that's not Tier 43 with Scars duals and Standard creatures). The first point contributes to the importance of reading the metagame and choosing your deck accordingly (but even then, you might correctly choose to play Goblins for a given tournament but then proceed to draw the only combo decks in the room). As for the last point (having a good deck), I believe there is little difference in inherent power between the very best decks of the format and the second tier decks.

Certainly, the people who can afford all the cards will be able to afford the blue duals and Force of Will, and I believe that their success should be attributed to their superior ability to adjust to the metagame than because blue decks are that much better. In fact, I think Maverick (though traditionally a European deck) is extremely well-positioned even at SCG tournaments, and recent data by the Hatfields will bear that out that it is much stronger than the vast majority of blue decks.

The player that can for some reason only build Merfolk (even with duals to splash for another color), or only build Painter's Stone/High Tide/Hive Mind/CounterTop (previously excellent deck choices that have been left in the dust by the evolving metagame) are at an extreme disadvantage compared to the player who can build Maverick. Of course, most players that can afford to build the blue shell can also build other decks with a blue shell (for example, Bant, which in many regards is like Maverick with a blue splash and therefore shares many of the same strengths). It's not fair to compare a Goblins player who scrubbed out because he took a bad choice only since it was only deck he owned (perhaps with suboptimal budget choices at that) to another player who considered dozens of deck possibilities (some of which involved blue duals + FOW, some of which did not) and chose a strong deck for his metagame.

Is it unfortunate that not every player can afford to play blue, or to generalize, any deck of their choice? It is, but that's the nature of a collectible card game and the topic of another thread. That should not dictate the DCI's decisions on whether to ban cards to weaken a color. I do believe that blue is indeed the best color in Legacy, but only by a small margin over green.

At a recent 42-person tournament I went to in Arlington (usually featuring the best Legacy players in the Northwest), I played Bant instead of my usual Zoo decklist and went 4-0 in Swiss before drawing into the top 8. I grimaced when I opened up against Goblins (which would have been a much stronger matchup for Zoo), but was very happy with my deck choice when I drew Dredge in R2 and Hive Mind in R4. The rest of the tournament consisted of Maverick, BUG, RUG, Reanimator, etc.; in other words, what you might typically expect from a SCG event. Fast-forward to the top 8, and there were 3 Mavericks, 1 Big Zoo, 1 Goblins, 1 Elves, 1 Belcher, and 1 Bant, with two Maverick decks squaring off in the Finals. In other words, I was the only person in the Top 8 playing any blue (from a room that originally consisted of plenty of blue), and I was quickly dismissed from the tournament in 3 games by Zoo. Blue was a liability in this case--that deck had too much speed and redundancy for me. You can't reasonably prepare for every possibility in the format, regardless of what deck you are playing, and it's not accurate to assume "Force of Will + blue duals + Brainstorm" does either.

That's a great story, and I think it really describes Legacy as it should be. It's fine if blue is the best color but there should be metagames where it isn't.

The problem is that there's little reason based on large tournament results to think that that's the case. If you look at the results of Grand Prixs, SCG Opens, BoM etc.., you have to dig pretty deep to find non-blue decks winning, and they make up a small percentage even then. It's been almost a year since an SCG Open was won without blue, three years for BoM, and you have to go back to the original GP Philly to find a Grand Prix where blue didn't walk away with the prize.

We can't simply believe what we would like to be true, we have to actually critically consider how much merit the idea has. What you describe is how I've classically viewed Legacy and certainly what I want Legacy to be like, but I just don't know how much truth there is to it. Especially since the printing of Snapcaster and Delver helped blue fill out its threats in both hyper-aggressive and more controlling deck types, the reasons to not play blue have diminished severely.

sdematt

12-15-2011, 07:10 PM

I definitely agree Snapcaster and Delver certainly have pushed Blue ever more into the "play me!" category, but I also think it can be beaten.

I skimmed through your posts, LotP, and I agree. Mostly. :smile:

-Matt

snappingbowls | ಠ_ಠ

12-15-2011, 07:53 PM

Blue is very strong right now. But that's ok because everyone loves blue, and it is a big draw for eternal formats. It can totally be beaten and Maverick is better positioned than ever in this meta.

DragoFireheart

12-16-2011, 04:50 PM

There will always be a best deck. Ban brainstorm and blue decks MIGHT stop being the best. Maybe. However, it's unlikely and Maverick will continue to be the best meta-game choice to fight blue decks. Regardless of what you ban or add, there will always be a best deck. Pick your poison as to what you want.

Do you want a relatively interactive deck like blue control to be the deck to beat?
Do you want a fast combo deck to be the deck to beat?
Do you want Legacy to look like Modern where it's actually the Zoo format?

Pick your poison but stop pretending the format will be balanced enough to the point that a single shell, be it a blue-shell or a combo-shell or an Mid-range-aggro-shell or a Zoo-shell will ever be balanced to the point to allow the variety you truly want. As long as we play a competitive format, people will look for the "best" deck.

DrJones

12-16-2011, 05:50 PM

Stop saying nonsense. If there's a clear best deck that's because the game isn't good. Period. What you fail to understand, it's that not only decks can be good against some decks and bad against others, but also that sideboard should allow to reverse the odds so that the tournament scene isn't just a match of paper/rock/scissors. The ideal magic meta should be like the "integration" math problem. There isn't a universal strategy that solves every problem, but there are a bunch of different strategies that are good against certain kinds of problems, and bad against the others. That's how it should work there, too.

The current problem with legacy's meta, is because R&D and the DCI have done an horrendous job at managing their card game and haven't printed any good card against counter-based strategies in fifteen years of tournaments dominated by that color (standard, old extended, new extended, vintage, and legacy), rather the opposite. They have proven their ineptitude handling this issue time and time again. In fact, after more than a decade they still haven't understood what the color should be able to do, what it shouldn't, and what its weaknesses are. They still haven't understood that counterspells and spot removal work differently, so they are totally clueless about why their audience is having fun with one of them and not the other.

Because R&D is composed by pretty good players yet horrible designers and they are focused on fixing the wrong problems and creating new ones due to their lack of foresight, some people have start to believe that it's impossible to balance blue, or that it will always be stronger than all the other colors, when that's not true. Legacy/Vintage being this unbalanced for so long is entirely Wotc's fault and proof of genuine incompetence.

DragoFireheart

12-16-2011, 07:15 PM

DrJones

12-16-2011, 08:08 PM

I know I'm talking to a wall, but banning FoW will not turn legacy into Modern, nor it would make combo the menacing beast you say, although it might force WotC to either print good answers against fast combo decks that are available to all colors, or ban all those combo decks that kill on your first turn until these answers exist. Both pretty reasonable measures that any intelligent person can understand. I'm amazed that people find decks that consistently kill you on turn 1 fair game (as long as they don't matter because there's an even more broken strategy that renders all the others useless), but both concepts are stupid from a game design perspective, and allowing any of them to exist is a sure way to lose your player base. In fact, Pro Players tend to avoid Legacy and Vintage like the plague because the winning strategy is so blatantly obvious they lose the interest in the format.

You have also to understand that the DCI has purposely designed Modern to be that way. Legacy has a different set of criteria and as such it will never turn into a copy of Modern, the same way it shouldn't be a copy of Vintage where the only playable decks are Fow-powered Blue Tempo and Fow-powered Blue Combo.

I heard most people don't play FoW in MODO because each one costs a kidney and a half, and whenever I see Magic Online tournament results on the internet I see aggro, combo and control equally represented in Top 8s even right now, and blue is still pretty playable in that meta, so I find pretty hard to believe that it would be THAT different on paper magic.

Pippin

12-17-2011, 06:55 AM

the same way it shouldn't be a copy of Vintage where the only playable decks are Fow-powered Blue Tempo and Fow-powered Blue Combo.

Do you just pull "facts" out of thin air or what?
Same goes to most stuff you write

Gheizen64

12-17-2011, 07:10 AM

Do you just pull "facts" out of thin air or what?
Same goes to most stuff you write

Dredge/Workshop/DarkSnapcaster control

FoW tempo vs FoW combo lol. Combo is probably at an all-time low in vintage right now with snapcaster everywhere. And FoWs is less played in Vintage than in legacy actually. True story.

DrJones

12-17-2011, 08:20 AM

Dredge/Workshop/DarkSnapcaster control

FoW tempo vs FoW combo lol. Combo is probably at an all-time low in vintage right now with snapcaster everywhere. And FoWs is less played in Vintage than in legacy actually. True story.Clarification: less copies of FoWs are played in Vintage because instead of just 4 FoWs, Vintage players can also play 4 Mental Missteps which has the same purpose (free timewalks) but it's more Snapcaster Friendly. So instead of 4 they do play 5 to 8 copies of FoW (the archtype), even though to the untrained eye it looks like that less copies of FoW (the card) are played overall.

Dredge and Workshop are at an all-time low in vintage in the deliver department, because even Dredge has troubles racing Blightsteel Colossus or beating Laboratory Maniac. I get my data from Starcitygames articles, and the tournament results I find on the internet. Maybe for you "Tinker to Blightsteel Colossus" doesn't count as combo because it's not storm, just two cards that can fit any deck, but it's obvious to me that from the 5 "archtypes" that balanced Vintage (Mana Drain, Dark Ritual, Workshop, Bazaar, FoW), only one remains in big numbers.

Gheizen64

12-17-2011, 09:46 AM

Clarification: less copies of FoWs are played in Vintage because instead of just 4 FoWs, Vintage players can also play 4 Mental Missteps which has the same purpose (free timewalks) but it's more Snapcaster Friendly. So instead of 4 they do play 5 to 8 copies of FoW (the archtype), even though to the untrained eye it looks like that less copies of FoW (the card) are played overall.

Dredge and Workshop are at an all-time low in vintage in the deliver department, because even Dredge has troubles racing Blightsteel Colossus or beating Laboratory Maniac. I get my data from Starcitygames articles, and the tournament results I find on the internet. Maybe for you "Tinker to Blightsteel Colossus" doesn't count as combo because it's not storm, just two cards that can fit any deck, but it's obvious to me that from the 5 "archtypes" that balanced Vintage (Mana Drain, Dark Ritual, Workshop, Bazaar, FoW), only one remains in big numbers.

FoW is less used because a large part of the meta don't use it, namely Workshop and Dredge. Some marginal decks like Painter and WG hate don't use it either. Dredge won the latest largest tournament (TMD Open) in america and Panther Stax came second, so i dunno what you're on there.
That's a Top2 without force. How long has it been since legacy saw a T2 without FoW? It never happened if i recall correctly.