[Article] Eternal Europe: The True Heroes Of Legacy

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

An article dedicated to the people and decks that make Legacy as sweet as it is, though obviously I could only scratch the tip of the tip of the iceberg. Enjoy and let me know what you think!

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/legacy/24821-Eternal-Europe-The-True-Heroes-Of-Legacy.html

[Sloshthedark]

the Enchantress is sweet, i know the idea in general, but didn't think its actually playable

btw. try out this one http://www.thecouncil.es/tcdecks/deck.php?id=8503&iddeck=61989 (missing lands/extractions)

[Jenni]

Nice Article.

I actually got to see someone pilot that enchantress deck, it's a really fun deck to watch, as long as you're not on the receiving end of it. I still love my G/W enchantress deck, though, so I'm not sure I'll be switching to the blue version.

I'd love to see more articles about the lesser-known or less-played decks/strategies in legacy.

[Mr. Safety]

I must admit this: I'm a HUGE Carston Kotter fan! I can honestly say that I can't find any writing as good as yours on the internet. I write for a site myself, but its for noobs, a 'school of magic' column, so to speak. I try to read as much as I can so I can stay current, be well-read, and also know what the hell I'm talking about when I write my own stuff. Your work is an inspiration to me and I can honestly say that I've enjoyed every article of yours I've read.

(end of sappy, seemingly brown-nosing post)

I am currently trying to re-work B/G loam...using white as a splash, for several cards: Knights, StP's, and.....Armageddon. I haven't seen anyone use Armageddon in ages, and the synergy of having 9 functional copies of Knight in my deck to play before Armageddon hits (4 knights, 2 Terravores, 3 GSZ) makes it a quasi-combo deck. Play a beefy threat, kill all the lands, swing for absurd damage and win in 1-2 turns. I'm not the best deck-builder but I keep trying new stuff. This article should stir the deckbuilder in anyone playing legacy.

[Hardcore]

There is one thing seriously lacking: support for the innovators. They are left to themselves and can only use a method of trial and errors.

[Arianrhod]

There is one thing seriously lacking: support for the innovators. They are left to themselves and can only use a method of trial and errors.

I agree with this. It was pretty rough going in the early days of Nic Fit...certainly nothing like now, where we have a pretty good community built up around the thread on here for the archetype. It helps that the deck is a ton of fun, but even still, Nic Fit's rise proves that if some people have an idea, and they stick with it and work on it until it yields results, more people will come and adopt it. Sure, most people are going to stick with their RUGs and 'Blades, and Mavericks and whatever the "it-girl" happens to be at the moment, but despite their best efforts, innovation still abides. Some kind of better support network for the people in the trenches creating new archetypes would be a very good thing.

Thanks for the shout-out by the way, Carston =)

[sdematt]

I liked the article, in general, although it felt a tad short. Maybe it was just me wanting more.

[nedleeds]

There is one thing seriously lacking: support for the innovators. They are left to themselves and can only use a method of trial and errors.

Is this alcohol rehab or Magic? Some of you people are so dramatic.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

Thanks everybody, happy you enjoyed it.

Some answers:
@Slosh: I will, though the idea of running 4 Helms doesn't appeal to me all that much (so I just dropped a Helm and now you're casting Jace on turn 3? :( ) and that deck just screams Future Sight :p

@Jenni: I'll definitely write about some others in the future.

As for Enchantress, I don't think the blue list replaces the classic build but it offers up very different gameplay and advantages using the same engine. Playstyle choice more than anything else I suspect. I do think however that the GSZ engine is something regular Enchantress should look to adopt if it hasn't already.

@Mr. Safety:

Thanks for the props, some ego-stroking always feels nice ;)

As for reworking GBW Loam, you might want to try out Cataclysm instead of Geddon. Almost as backbreaking manawise but clears out the opponents creatures, too (the remaining one should be smaller than your Knight/'Vore) and, most importantly, gets rid of all kinds of pesky Planeswalkers. Criminally underplayed card, imo.

@Hardcore: Well, that's the nature of the beast, really. Coming up with out of the box ideas is and always has been something that will earn you much more derision than appreciation until you've proven it works (not only in Magic). A forum like this is probably the best kind of support network for brewers we have available and even then you have to convince your readers that what you're proposing is actually worth the investment.
Most people are mainly trying to find stuff that wins, after all, so if your idea doesn't immediately look powerful, you need to convince people it works first so that more minds take over the workload and share your devotion to some particular engine, interaction or other deck foundation.

@Arianrhod: You're welcome, you earned it :) I was originally planning on giving more explicit credit, actually, but didn't find a way to integrate it into the text-flow in a way that actually read well.

@sdematt: Happy to hear it, always gotta leave 'em wanting more. Seriously, though, while the article is rather short as far as my writing habits are concerned, it already clocks in at ~2800 words (SCG guidelines suggest 1500 - 3000 - not that I adhere strictly to the guidelines a lot of the time :p). At least it means you're already waiting for the next one ;)

@nedleeds: Don't make light of the dangers of addictive ink :p

[Squirrel]

Another problem i see is the ignorance of most players against new ideas. , Nic Fit all had to go trough the shitstorm of "If you want to play veteran Explorer, play EDH" or
Maverick was called G/W Stoneblade on SCG..

[Arianrhod]

Another problem i see is the ignorance of most players against new ideas. , Nic Fit all had to go trough the shitstorm of "If you want to play veteran Explorer, play EDH" or
Maverick was called G/W Stoneblade on SCG..

To this day I get told that my deck looks like the greatest cube draft ever. I just smile and go with it. At the end of the day, if your fellows don't appreciate your slightly off-the-wall deck, that's their loss.

I will agree though that SCG mis-naming things is a serious problem. They called Caffrey's BUG Nic Fit variant BUG Control, if memory serves...completely different than what it actually was.

[Phoenix Ignition]

Nice article, it's good to see some of those lists out from under the radar (but D&T has been around for ages).

A little curious that you mention Nic Fit as Legacy's "one actual rock deck" when the Stoneforge lists with a few GSZ's keep doing pretty well, even winning SCG 5ks.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

Arianrhod: Why would you complain, it definitely is the greatest cube-draft ever (at least the older Titan-versions) ;p

@Squirrel: Yeah, the deck naming regularly pisses me off, too. I mean, the coverage guys could take the time to at least look at my Legacy Compendium when trying to find what the decks are called.... But c'est la vie, I guess.

@Phoenix: D&T is definitely a format grandfather. Doesn't mean people actually know about it existing outside of truly devoted players of the format.

As for "Legacy's one actual Rock deck", I stubbornly cling to the traditional definition of the Rock: GBx midrange-control. The GBW lists with a ton of efficient beatdown creatures are Junk-decks to me, that is to say midrange-aggro.

[Finn]

I approve of this article.



Thx for the nod. Also, I gently poke haughty Standard players for being Legacy neophytes now and again. I have to say that I never bothered to learn exactly what Scapeshift was doing that made it special until reading the article. When I realized that you weren't going to tell us (because duh, everyone knows), I discovered what an ignorant goob I have become and had to find out from the decklist.

[Jenni]

@Jenni: I'll definitely write about some others in the future.

As for Enchantress, I don't think the blue list replaces the classic build but it offers up very different gameplay and advantages using the same engine. Playstyle choice more than anything else I suspect. I do think however that the GSZ engine is something regular Enchantress should look to adopt if it hasn't already.


I don't know how common GSZ is in the 'classic' enchantress decks, but I've made space for two in my deck, and it's been rather helpful. The only real "downside" was cutting two enchantments in the main for it, which isn't usually a problem anyway. I also cut a Words of War for Progenitus, when I added the zeniths, because a 10/10 pro-everything closes out games pretty fast, and with GSZ he's easier to get on the board than Emrakul (another finisher I see fairly often in enchantress decks), and with the Argothian enchantresses around innocent blood/sac effects aren't usually a concern.

[Hardcore]

@carsten, yes that is the situation. There have been attempts at running deck clinics/ deck labs here and there. In magazines and blogs. Unfortunately they seems short lived.

[joemauer]

Your article seems to run counter to this one:

http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?24599-A-Net-Decker%92s-Paradise-or-Why-Not-to-Go-Rogue-in-Legacy


Good article by the way(yours not Broverturf's).

[Mewens]

Seconded on the GSZs in 'chantress. I'm not a hard-core player by any stretch, so my input isn't quite as valuable, but I've been running it as a 1-of and it works nicely. The major reason I don't like more than 2 is that there aren't many targets for it to fetch, and the deck already has an overall low card quality; increasing the number of mid-game dead draws doesn't help much. Perhaps I'm being narrow-minded, but the GSZs don't seem to help much against heavy, sustained disruption, either; I see a lot of Cabal Therapy and Duress, which I struggle against more than Daze/FoW/Pierce.

Still, the U/G 'chantress deck is a blast to play (it's the deck that got me playing with Argothians to begin with). I do wish the posted list had Pucca's Mischief in it -- talk about a ridiculous finish for a ridiculous deck.

Maybe in any future articles you can look at Chalice-based aggro? Dragon and Faerie Stompy are some of my favorite almost-there decks.

[nedleeds]

Another problem i see is the ignorance of most players against new ideas. , Nic Fit all had to go trough the shitstorm of "If you want to play veteran Explorer, play EDH" or
Maverick was called G/W Stoneblade on SCG..

People have been calling Erhnamgeddon Maverick for years, Veteran Explorer rock was around years before Nic or Fit. Some newer players should go search usenet ... or whatever is left of the dojo.

[(nameless one)]

If you wanna get technical with deck beginnings, Stoneblade was first Excalibur here on the Source before it was Stoneblade. Before there was even Caw-blade in Standard. Way before Scars of Mirrodin. I believe it got placing in GP Madrid (yes, the GP to last feature Mystical Tutor).

I can't remember who that person was but I salute you.

Also, I remember Finn developing Merfolk way before Shards of Alara saw print. I kinda have to thank him since he's the reason why I picked up Wasteland and Force of Will while they were still $15-20. Honestly we need more Finn-players. The dude created archetypes with messed up interactions that actually works.

[Shion]

Great article, perhaps not one of the most intensive, but the tone and content were thoroughly uplifting. Definitely one of the best I've read.

It really is a difficult thing to push new decks in Legacy, unless a large percentage of people find it interesting, or you manage to win early and get people on board to help work on it, it takes tons of time and dedication perfecting the list. It's good to see some recognition for these attempts.

I think it's why I've enjoyed this forum so much over the years, so much of Legacy was defined by people here, and even the decks that didn't work or last long in the metagame still showed a solid base for potential future decks.



@Squirrel: Yeah, the deck naming regularly pisses me off, too. I mean, the coverage guys could take the time to at least look at my Legacy Compendium when trying to find what the decks are called.... But c'est la vie, I guess.


From what I remember, they said they do it intentionally, because they want to make the coverage easier to understand for players of other formats, thus the "Color/Color
|random maindeck card" naming convention. I think it's stupid too.




@Phoenix: D&T is definitely a format grandfather. Doesn't mean people actually know about it existing outside of truly devoted players of the format.


Yeah, I was at a local tournament and I still heard people calling it generic White weenie, and complaining it wasn't a real deck. Then again, I heard someone say the same about Deadguy, which ended up in the top 8.



As for "Legacy's one actual Rock deck", I stubbornly cling to the traditional definition of the Rock: GBx midrange-control. The GBW lists with a ton of efficient beatdown creatures are Junk-decks to me, that is to say midrange-aggro.

I agree on this, I was extremely confused when I happened to look at The Rock
thread on this site. Looks absolutely nothing like traditional Rock and more like someone splashed some black in Maverick.