Why the demise of Legacy is greatly exaggerated

[lordofthepit]

There has been a lot of discussion on MTG Salvation about the health of Legacy, often fueled by players who don't play the format, so I started a blog and wrote a long post there. There is still some concern about the future of the format from active players here, so I thought this might be interesting to everyone: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?b=8635

Warning: very long!

[DragoFireheart]

There has been a lot of discussion on MTG Salvation about the health of Legacy, often fueled by players who don't play the format, so I started a blog and wrote a long post there. There is still some concern about the future of the format from active players here, so I thought this might be interesting to everyone: http://forums.mtgsalvation.com/blog.php?b=8635

Warning: very long!

Great article. I agree with a lot of points in it.

Maybe if Modern fails WotC will give up their god damn Reserve list and invest in Legacy. One can dream. If that fails, maybe WotC will unban some cards to help Modern stablize and to avoid banning every broken card under the sun. Note that Force of Will is not on the reserved list...

[Koby]

Great article. I agree with a lot of points in it.

Maybe if Modern fails WotC will give up their god damn Reserve list and invest in Legacy. One can dream.

Trying to get cards banned in Modern will only help fuel how lame the format is. Go go gadget #griselbanned!

[wcm8]

One point about the print run: you only need one Black Lotus for Vintage. Whereas for dual lands, you often need 3 or 4 to build an optimal deck.

Also, it's amusing (and great!) that my local store has dropped its Modern FNM and is now doing Legacy "FNM" instead due to player interest. Modern really does suck.

[DragoFireheart]

Trying to get cards banned in Modern will only help fuel how lame the format is. Go go gadget #griselbanned!

Exactly. Granted, Griselbanned might get banned in Legacy as well, but the growing ban list will:

1. Discourage creation of new decks out of fear of a key card getting banned.

2. Reduce format diversity.

3. Reduce event appearances.

I like what Modern is supposed to do, but WotC is completely moronic in their management of it.


One point about the print run: you only need one Black Lotus for Vintage. Whereas for dual lands, you often need 3 or 4 to build an optimal deck.

I think the article was taking that into consideration.

[wcm8]

Modern could actually be pretty good if they reprinted Wasteland and a few other choice cards from Legacy, overhauled the banned list, and printed some sort of Force of Will replacement. If the primary difference between it and Legacy was *just* the reserved list, it could actually be a decent format. But instead it's full of Jund-esque midrange decks and degenerate combos.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Exactly. Granted, Griselbanned might get banned in Legacy as well, but the growing ban list will:

1. Discourage creation of new decks out of fear of a key card getting banned.

2. Reduce format diversity.

3. Reduce event appearances.

I like what Modern is supposed to do, but WotC is completely moronic in their management of it.



I think the article was taking that into consideration.

That seems pretty speculative. If anything S&T seems to be on the decline. It really waxes and wanes depending on how much people prepare for it.

[DragoFireheart]

That seems pretty speculative. If anything S&T seems to be on the decline. It really waxes and wanes depending on how much people prepare for it.

A deck with a "bannable" card doesn't mean require said deck to put up performance numbers (though it helps).

See: Mystical Tutor.

Edit: http://www.tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy&fecha=2013-3

Sneak attack is second only to RuG Threshold.

EDIT: This doesn't mean that SnT/Griselbanned will get banned though. I think WotC is ok with broken decks in Legacy so long as there is a drawback that keeps them back. TES/ANT require a high skill level and can outright lose if you make a simple mistake, Belcher loses to FoW, SnT loses to inconsistency, etc. If there is a drawback that keeps the combo deck in check, then it's fine to use it.

[walker]

A better conversation: why "The Demise of Legacy" is even a topic to begin with. Whiners turned haters because they can't afford to play, and also aren't willing to do what it takes to get a legacy deck? yeaaaa. Nothing new to see hear move along and ignore the whining voices on the way out.

[sdematt]

When I have time, I'll read this and respond.

-Matt

[majikal]

The health of Magic: the Gathering as a whole hinges on the availability of an eternal format. Legacy is fast becoming unsustainable in WotC's player retention model (the projected life-cycle of a Standard player is only a few years, and then they are expected to move to nonrotating formats or casual formats) so they are trying to fix that by supplanting it with Modern. This is currently a failure. Something needs to be done or Magic: the Gathering will actually implode on itself, maybe not this year or next year, but soon. Whether that means fixing Legacy to be somewhat affordable to new players or fixing Modern to be an actual enjoyable format, something needs to happen.

I would say let it crash and the market will adjust itself, but that is only assuming Hasbro doesn't just axe it once it starts underperforming.

edit: That something could also be the continued rise in popularity of Commander, but lately everyone is complaining about the giant, win-now bombs they keep printing for that format too, so I don't really trust WotC to do anything right for any format, ever.

[DragoFireheart]

The health of Magic: the Gathering as a whole hinges on the availability of an eternal format.

WotC might argue otherwise. I'm sure 90% of their profits come from Standard and people buying packs.

[Koby]

Currently, MTG is Hasbro's largest revenue-generating game. I doubt they would let it atrophy without injecting more business-minded people into the company to help turn it out.


WotC might argue otherwise. I'm sure 90% of their profits come from Standard and people buying packs.

That is their revenue stream. Not to be confused with player retention, which accounts for tournament attendance (a measurable metric for growth).

-------

I understand and agree with where Modern fits into the Constructed format. I just don't agree with which WotC is managing it currently. It leaves a lot to be desired from a format. Modern is needed as a PTQ format to differentiate from Standard and Block for constructed offering. Legacy, by its very nature is not ideal for PTQs (even as much as I would enjoy it). The heavy-handed bannings are a little too trigger happy right now, and there is too much flux with new card additions still reshaping the metagame.

Wait, this is supposed to be about Legacy. I think if WotC wants to foster its retailer relationships, it needs to mind all the Eternal formats. Ignoring the first 15 years of cards printed will leave a lot of money on the table for these shops. Commander can only go so far to help fulfill the cards roles in Magic. Key example, Karakas -- without Legacy, it would be a $2 card.

[majikal]

WotC might argue otherwise. I'm sure 90% of their profits come from Standard and people buying packs.
You obviously didn't read the rest of my post. Right now, M:tG is experiencing a boom of new players. What happens when those players quit (and they will, according to their business model)?

We're talking about decay rate here. Currently WotC is employing a vast array of specialty products to increase retention, but when all of their secondary and tertiary formats become unsustainable due either to high price points or otherwise lack of enjoyability, the players these products are aimed at will no longer have any reason to buy them, and they will just quit. Without some major changes coming soon, in order for the game not to collapse, WotC will have to increase acquisition (that's Standard players) every single year, forever, and retention be damned.

Right now, the boom has lasted roughly four years, which is just about the average lifespan of a Standard player. I predict we will start seeing a decline at the end of this year that will continue until they figure out some way to attract more new players, but I think the damage is done when it comes to Legacy. Expect less support starting next year, as they try to make Modern the go-to non-rotating format.

[DragoFireheart]

You obviously didn't read the rest of my post. Right now, M:tG is experiencing a boom of new players. What happens when those players quit (and they will, according to their business model)?

We're talking about decay rate here. Currently WotC is employing a vast array of specialty products to increase retention, but when all of their secondary and tertiary formats become unsustainable due either to high price points or otherwise lack of enjoyability, the players these products are aimed at will no longer have any reason to buy them, and they will just quit. In order for the game not to collapse, WotC will have to increase acquisition (that's Standard players) every single year, forever, and retention be damned. Either way, we lose.

Right now, the boom has lasted roughly four years, which is just about the average lifespan of a Standard player. I predict we will start seeing a decline at the end of this year that will continue until they figure out some way to attract more new players, but I think the damage is done when it comes to Legacy. Expect less support starting next year, as they try to make Modern the go-to non-rotating format.

Ah I see. So they won't care about retention after a certain point and that is when Legacy will really be screwed.

[majikal]

Ah I see. So they won't care about retention after a certain point and that is when Legacy will really be screwed.
Exactly.

[DragoFireheart]

Exactly.

But, WotC wasn't concerned about Legacy to begin with... right?

[majikal]

But, WotC wasn't concerned about Legacy to begin with... right?
That's not really true. They have been showing a large amount of support with specialty products, GPs, and Judge Reward promos. Their current business model actually relies on people switching to Legacy after they finish with Standard in order to keep their specialty products profitable and to keep people buying packs and/or singles who otherwise would just quit.

[DragoFireheart]

That's not really true. They have been showing a large amount of support with specialty products, GPs, and Judge Reward promos. Their current business model actually relies on people switching to Legacy after they finish with Standard in order to keep their specialty products profitable and to keep people buying packs and/or singles who otherwise would just quit.

But now with Modern...

[majikal]

But now with Modern...
... they are already attempting to make Legacy irrelevant, and they are horribly mismanaging the transition as prices are rising just as fast in that format, while also having the disadvantage of being massively unenjoyable to play and unstable regarding bannings.

[DragoFireheart]

Can we blame Tom Lapille for any of this? I always like to put a face on any major problems with a company.

[majikal]

It's obvious you're just trolling, so I'm not going to reply to any more of your posts.

[DragoFireheart]

It's obvious you're just trolling, so I'm not going to reply to any more of your posts.

Seriously? I'm not trolling. Why do you think I'm trolling?

[sourcefire]

... they are already attempting to make Legacy irrelevant, and they are horribly mismanaging the transition as prices are rising just as fast in that format, while also having the disadvantage of being massively unenjoyable to play and unstable regarding bannings.

What exactly would you prefer that WotC have done in regards to Modern pricing? They are releasing a set in the summer that should ease some of the high priced cards while not totally destroying the value of the cards already printed. Isn't this what most people wish could be done with Legacy staples?

I think "massively unenjoyable to play" may be a bit of an overstatement. I enjoy the format and I know a lot of other people do as well - is there any evidence other than more anecdotes (from pros or otherwise) that it is massively unpopular? The format has a large variety of viable decks (12 different decks out of 14 4-0s or 3-1 in the last MTGO daily event for instance) and no broken cards or decks that are dominating the format, which is something that WotC has tried to cultivate. Of course there are ongoing bannings, but this should be expected in a non-rotating format for obvious reasons. You can argue the merits of specific bans, but assuming that a non-rotating format will be totally stable for any extended duration seems a little naive.

[SpikeyMikey]

Wizards stopped caring at some point. Likely at the point that the Reserved List loophole was closed and the decision was made to create and push Modern.

Majikal has it right with their business model. They're not looking for the most sustainable growth, they're looking for the largest growth. That's why they ended the JSS, pulled the money out of MPR, gutted the Pro Tour, axed Worlds and dumped all the money saved from there into marketing things like Game Day, Pre-releases and a more friendly, less competitive FNM environment. Things like PWP Achievements don't matter to competitive players, but they're big for casual players and Wizards is really pushing that casual market because it's where the biggest potential for growth is. It takes a while to build a tournament player, but selling a few duel decks to someone who's never played but likes gaming, that takes no time at all. As he pointed out, however, those players need to be retained or they cycle out of the game. Eventually, your pool of potential customers shrinks to the point where you're not adding enough new players each year to replace the ones that are cycling out.

Keep in mind that we're the exception, not the rule. Most people who play Magic don't take it all that seriously and haven't been playing for all that long. Personally, I think it's a terrible business plan, but I understand why they're doing it. Like pretty much any other major corporation, the people at the top get bonuses based on performance. Shuffling issues off down the road to make bonuses now is a time-honored tradition. Later, when issues arise, you just hide them with creative accounting or shift the blame off onto someone else.

In any case, the demise of Legacy really isn't overblown. Of course, there will always be people insisting that the format is fine, but then again, I know people who insist that Vintage is healthy and that it's accessible financially. SCG is starting to slowly pull support for Legacy because there is no growth in the Sunday events. Saturday has increased in size roughly 50% on average from a year or two ago, Sunday has been flat. Eventually, Legacy will be an occasional Sunday event instead of the normal Sunday event because Standard brings twice the crowd that Legacy does. Legacy doesn't have perfect retention either, people quit from Legacy every year. With the rising prices making acquisition of the necessary Legacy staples very difficult, if not impossible for some people, we're barely replacing the people we lose.

If the number of Legacy tournaments drops or price increases much more, Legacy will start losing its player base. When that happens, tournaments will drop even further and the loss will grow faster and faster. Why hold on to $10k worth of cardboard when there's only 1 or 2 events within traveling distance that you can do in a year and the LGS Legacy has shrunk to 10-12 people?

[SpikeyMikey]

What exactly would you prefer that WotC have done in regards to Modern pricing? They are releasing a set in the summer that should ease some of the high priced cards while not totally destroying the value of the cards already printed. Isn't this what most people wish could be done with Legacy staples?

I think "massively unenjoyable to play" may be a bit of an overstatement. I enjoy the format and I know a lot of other people do as well - is there any evidence other than more anecdotes (from pros or otherwise) that it is massively unpopular? The format has a large variety of viable decks (12 different decks out of 14 4-0s or 3-1 in the last MTGO daily event for instance) and no broken cards or decks that are dominating the format, which is something that WotC has tried to cultivate. Of course there are ongoing bannings, but this should be expected in a non-rotating format for obvious reasons. You can argue the merits of specific bans, but assuming that a non-rotating format will be totally stable for any extended duration seems a little naive.

Evidence? Modern season is over and the LGS I judge at is cutting Modern on Mondays for Sealed because attendance has dropped to the point where they're barely pulling enough people to sanction. In Madison WI, a highly competitive tournament town. Modern is analagous to Extended. Sure, there were people who really liked Extended too, but generally, most people either disliked the format or couldn't be bothered to give a fuck about it.

Personally, I also like Modern. I think it's mismanaged as all hell and that it's fundamentally flawed with the 8th/Mirrodin starting point, but it's a new(ish) format, which means I can exploit the fact that I'm better at designing decks than everyone else and snipe wins that I'd never get off the strength of technical skill. But the fact that I like it does not mean that I'm blind to the fact that most people don't. I also like Block and I wouldn't try and argue that it's a popular format.

Actually, assuming that an eternal format will be stable for long periods of time is not naive. You share the same flawed thinking that Wizards has, which is that formats necessarily have a "solved" point. They don't. Whether it's a tired and worn-out comparison or not, rock-paper-scissors formats have existed in the past. Legacy bannings don't occur because the format stagnates, they occur when contemporary design theory tosses up a brick so big that you can't filter it through the teeth of 20 years worth of cards. Generally, what that means is that something can't be controlled with Wasteland and Force of Will. Eternal formats, by their nature, should be at the same time more stable and more diverse than rotating formats, but because Wizards is terrible at their job, Modern is so naturally broken that it literally cannot exist without a ban list; the tools do not exist to control imbalanced strategies because those would be unfun for the casual players that Wizards is pandering to.

[sourcefire]

Legacy bannings don't occur because the format stagnates, they occur when contemporary design theory tosses up a brick so big that you can't filter it through the teeth of 20 years worth of cards. Generally, what that means is that something can't be controlled with Wasteland and Force of Will. Eternal formats, by their nature, should be at the same time more stable and more diverse than rotating formats, but because Wizards is terrible at their job, Modern is so naturally broken that it literally cannot exist without a ban list; the tools do not exist to control imbalanced strategies because those would be unfun for the casual players that Wizards is pandering to.

This is actually the point I was alluding to - Modern bannings will always exist because printing new cards will at times push power levels of some decks high enough to where it's strangling variety in the format. I don't mean to imply anything about solved formats, just that WotC will probably have to cull outliers from the ever expanding card pool.

I'm not sure I understand your point about WotC being terrible at their jobs == Modern only surviving with a ban list. All non-rotating formats have ban lists. Does Legacy's ban list also result in the same conclusion about WotC's performance? I feel like, "[Legacy] is so naturally broken that it literally cannot exist without a ban list; the tools do not exist to control imbalanced strategies because those would be unfun for the casual players that Wizards is pandering to." is a perfectly valid statement as well.

[majikal]

This is actually the point I was alluding to - Modern bannings will always exist because printing new cards will at times push power levels of some decks high enough to where it's strangling variety in the format. I don't mean to imply anything about solved formats, just that WotC will probably have to cull outliers from the ever expanding card pool.

I'm not sure I understand your point about WotC being terrible at their jobs == Modern only surviving with a ban list. All non-rotating formats have ban lists. Does Legacy's ban list also result in the same conclusion about WotC's performance? I feel like, "[Legacy] is so naturally broken that it literally cannot exist without a ban list; the tools do not exist to control imbalanced strategies because those would be unfun for the casual players that Wizards is pandering to." is a perfectly valid statement as well.
The problem with the Modern banned list is that they banned a lot of important cards at the offset of the format and then continued to ban a lot of things that those cards could have kept in check, and then they banned some more things that looked like Standard decks that everyone hated playing against, and then banned some more things that weren't even winning because why the hell not, etc.

Basically, it makes it where it becomes a huge gamble to go in on cards from a competitive deck because things will most likely get banned. Like I'm afraid to pick up cards for the new Elf deck because I'm pretty sure Beck//Call is going to get something else from that deck banned (Probably Heritage Druid because it makes too much mana).

[Arsenal]

The problem with the Modern banned list is that they banned a lot of important cards at the offset of the format and then continued to ban a lot of things that those cards could have kept in check, and then they banned some more things that looked like Standard decks that everyone hated playing against, and then banned some more things that weren't even winning because why the hell not, etc.

This. Wizards never let the format breathe and try to self regulate, they just hacked and slashed at everything that could conceivably be good/broken/boring/etc and just said "here you go, enjoy".

EDIT: Full disclosure, I like playing Modern. But that's mostly because I know that I'll be showing up every FNM (like tonight) and have people to play with in a competitive setting... and I dislike Standard's business model.

[sourcefire]

The problem with the Modern banned list is that they banned a lot of important cards at the offset of the format and then continued to ban a lot of things that those cards could have kept in check, and then they banned some more things that looked like Standard decks that everyone hated playing against, and then banned some more things that weren't even winning because why the hell not, etc.

Basically, it makes it where it becomes a huge gamble to go in on cards from a competitive deck because things will most likely get banned. Like I'm afraid to pick up cards for the new Elf deck because I'm pretty sure Beck//Call is going to get something else from that deck banned (Probably Heritage Druid because it makes too much mana).

I definitely understand this complaint. I share it about Legacy. When I originally convinced my closest friend to jump into the format, he looked at Durward's U/G Vengevine deck from the GP he top8ed and and decided to build that as his initial foray into the format. Boy was he pissed when Survival got banned after he dumped that investment into the deck. It's the same reason that I've held off from picking up SnTs. This is just an inherent risk of all non-rotating formats.

[Psyqo]

I think SCG's test run of dropping Legacy on a few Sundays this year is one of the first tangible signs we have of the format slowing down.

As a disclaimer, I love both Legacy and Modern. I like format diversity, and I don't care how many bans it takes to achieve that in either format.

Wizards seems crippled by whatever stupid fucking promise they made regarding the Reserved List, so at this point the only singles I've purchased in the last few months have gone into Modern decks, not Legacy. Until I see some sign that there can be more growth in the Legacy player-base based on support from SCG or WOTC, I'm buying into Modern because I know there will be sanctioned support for that format into the foreseeable future.

[Arsenal]

Until I see some sign that there can be more growth in the Legacy player-base based on support from SCG or WOTC, I'm buying into Modern because I know there will be sanctioned support for that format into the foreseeable future.

This is music to Wizards' ears...

[DLifshitz]

This is music to Wizards' ears...

Meh. They care much more about Standard than everything else. So far they've announced a single, limited edition set targeted specifically at Modern players and that's it. If the recent EDH and Planechase decks were simply rebranded as Legacy decks, our format would be getting about as much official support as Modern. Between them, they introduced several staples into the format, and better yet, they were mass-produced and non-random.

Anyway, I would be genuinely worried about the future of Legacy if Modern was like Old Extended: a cutthroat format with fast decks, including combo, that sometimes even got ported to Legacy. What's happening instead is more like, Standard decks get ported into Modern. It just doesn't offer a similar experience to Legacy.

[Arsenal]

Meh. They care much more about Standard than everything else. So far they've announced a single, limited edition set targeted specifically at Modern players and that's it. If the recent EDH and Planechase decks were simply rebranded as Legacy decks, our format would be getting about as much official support as Modern. Between them, they introduced several staples into the format, and better yet, they were mass-produced and non-random.

The power level seperating Standard and Legacy are light years apart. Standard and Modern? Not so much. Modern players will be cracking far more boosters than Legacy players will in order to get their playsets of Modern-competitive cards (some of which we laugh at as Legacy players).

[DLifshitz]

The power level seperating Standard and Legacy are light years apart. Standard and Modern? Not so much. Modern players will be cracking far more boosters than Legacy players will in order to get their playsets of Modern-competitive cards (some of which we laugh at as Legacy players).

If you're playing Modern but not Standard, actually buying boosters is a waste of money... Modern players will buy singles, of course, but the demand from Modern players doesn't seem to significantly affect the prices of cards that are still in Standard. Maybe because the people who play Modern also tend to play Standard. It's only after a card has been out of print for some time that Modern demand becomes decisive. By then, it doesn't really matter for WotC.

As a matter of fact, I believe that buying boosters is a waste of money, period, but that's another story.

[nedleeds]

If the recent EDH and Planechase decks were simply rebranded as Legacy decks

I think between those 2 products and the ugly foil decks there were some legacy concessions.

- Entomb
- Other reanimator crap
- Chain Lightning
- Other legacy walmart burn crap
- Baleful Strix
- Shardless Agent
- Flusterstorm
- Illusionary Angel
- Mother of Runes
- Edric

I think casual/EDH is splitting their attention as a drove of new cards are geared towards that whole mess

[Koby]

EDH and casual are such a cash crop for WotC it's not even funny. They are apt to complain directly much less than Tournament Spikes because they will generally not care what kind of shenanigans R&D comes up with. They eat up Goblin Test Pilot like it's fucking Kool-Aid. High dollar-noise ratio = less headaches.

[DragoFireheart]

EDH and casual are such a cash crop for WotC it's not even funny. They are apt to complain directly much less than Tournament Spikes because they will generally not care what kind of shenanigans R&D comes up with. They eat up Goblin Test Pilot like it's fucking Kool-Aid. High dollar-noise ratio = less headaches.

It's why I joke that every card is playable in EDH.

[Aggro_zombies]

Man, what's with all the hatred for casual players in this thread? The condescension is so thick I could cut it with a knife.

If WotC only relied on competitive players to support their game, Magic might very well be out of print now. We know from info they've released that Time Spiral block was popular among long-time tournament players, but that sales plunged unsustainably while it was in print. Pandering solely to tournament players is just as bad as pandering solely to new players. Just because many of the people on this site are tournament players doesn't mean WotC owes you anything more than they owe any of their other customers.

I agree with (almost) everything SpikeyMikey said, though I would add that I haven't played the format in over a year in no small part because the reason I got into it in the first place - because it was a wide open format where just about anything had a shot of winning if you did it right - is no longer true. The format is stale, even if it isn't "solved." In a lot of ways, SCG picking the format up professionalized it, and that, combined with the realities of how Eternal formats work, basically ensures that the same decks, or the same kinds of decks, will always exist.

I would be more interested in Modern if I could be reasonably sure that the $800+ I dropped on a deck wouldn't be wasted the next time WotC decided to update the Banned List.

[ESG]

@Lordofthepit: Excellent arguments.

"The $1350 required for Modern Jund probably excludes almost as many people as the $2000 required for Legacy Jund."

For the people it doesn't exclude, I can't see them not paying just a little extra to buy into Legacy instead. If you're more than halfway there, why not?

@Aggro_zombies: How can you say Legacy is stale when every set or every other set introduces new cards? The bar is obviously high, but new cards continually make it in. Are you arguing that playing a current Junk list feels the same to you as a Junk list from two or three years ago? If you're judging Legacy as a format pre-SCG Open Series, then it's been a lot more than a year since you should have felt the shift you seem to be perceiving. Personally, I've noticed little difference between the two periods. People brought to tournaments what they had or liked or felt was the best, and they jammed those decks. When you say "the same kinds of decks," isn't this true of any format? Are you saying you want a shake-up like Manaless Dredge, where it's a very different experience? Are you finding more to like in other formats?

I'm curious how many tournaments you have participated in overall this year. Have you played non-Legacy tournaments? If you haven't been playing in tournaments, have you been playing casually?

[KZhang]

Just to add on another point.

Lets operate under the assumption that modern becomes immensely successful, and legacy players (significant portion of them) march in droves to modern.

What would be the net effect?

1) Legacy players will trade in their un-usable staples for modern. (ABU duals, FOW, etc)
2) Increased demand for Modern staples result in increased prices (expansions like modern masters may mitigate price rises, but not significantly)
3) Supply of legacy staples surges (due to everyone leaving)
4) Lack of demand for Legacy staples result in panic selling/dumping (similar to what you see when standard is about to rotates)
5) Modern becomes more expensive than Legacy

What happens then now?

I believe the only way that Legacy will die, is if Modern is becomes more enjoyable as a format on a whole.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

The problem with that is sticky prices. People won't be eager to dump their duals for a fraction of what they paid or what they believe they're worth. You could easily have a situation where the perceived value of duals collapses due to lack of demand, but prices don't fall enough to accommodate decreased demand.

[majikal]

The problem with that is sticky prices. People won't be eager to dump their duals for a fraction of what they paid or what they believe they're worth. You could easily have a situation where the perceived value of duals collapses due to lack of demand, but prices don't fall enough to accommodate decreased demand.
This is basically what happened when Vintage crashed, as well.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

See also: Every housing bubble ever.

[Fossil4182]

While the article is well written, I disagree with your conclusion. Legacy will collapse. TheInfamousBearAssassin is just correct that what is happening. Continual price increases and increased popularity of the format parallel a housing/tech/every economic bubble. By definition, this is a bubble caused by liquidity and will eventually burst either due to environmental factors &/or sustainability. The other large factor will cause the demise is the Reserved List. The article's point is that there are probably close to 350,000 copies of the dual lands available to given that there's the 22,000 from ABU, an approximate 289,000 from R, and some odd number from foreign expansions (estimating 40,000). Entropy alone means the market will collapse because there is a finite number of cards available without the possibility of a reprint. Ironically, the point you make that is the most well warranted, that Legacy is growing, is the very reason it will collapse. The growth of Legacy means we'll see too many would be players chasing too few cards. Additionally, the effect of entropy will only accelerate with more players entering the format. I can not predict when Legacy will collapse, only that it will. No one can claim how long Legacy will be sustainable for a definite period of time. The reason no one can make such a predication is because data isn't available to make such a prediction - one would need sales trends, a way to estimate the rate of decay of the available cards, etc. However, the reason the Legacy Doomsday-sayers can make such claims are because of the finite availability of cards, we just can't give an exact point of when it will happen. The article is descriptive, not predictive, in its conclusions about the sustainability of Legacy. The claims & data in the article merely indicate that Legacy is health now, not that it will be healthy in future.

[Backseat_Critic]

Hi all,

I like the article. Good discussion. Something I've noticed is that people seem to think that all of the formats are really competing with each other. While people have finite resources and most can not simply play every format. This is ironically why there is so much feeling toward competition between formats. There's a lot of talk about which format wizards supports and finds most profitable. I believe this is missing the forest for the trees. Wozards ultimately wants all formats to thrive. The more they do to 'help' a format with new sets, the more EV in a pack. As the article said, people are savvy. They know that when they open a legacy/modern/edh staple that it is worth something even if this they don't actually play said format.

What I've noticed is that there are far less inplayable cards now. This isn't really a power creep issue, it's just that there are so many formats. In fact, if I were to guess, I'd say part of the motivation behind modern was to make a bunch of previously unplayable cards playable; ditto the recognition for edh. The gap between legacy and standard left out a lot of respectable, fun cards. Modern and edh not only brought new life to people's collections. It also made each new pack have more potentially useful cards. Legacy fits into this puzzle as well. Legacy cards, and the hated restricted list, keep some equity for the stores which are also essential to wizards' business model.

The reason why magic is growing so much is that so many cards are playable, because there are so many ways to play.

To those who specifically predict the demise of legacy, I would repeat what is said in the article. Even with the reserved list availability is not the issue. Go on ebay right now and I guarantee that you can find any staple. They may be pricey, but they exist in sufficient quantity. I will admit that they are pricey at times, but this is unfortunately by design. If legacy was as cheap initially as standard, then why play standard? The reason why longer term players tend to drift toward eternal formats is because they get sick of buy high, sell low standard, and rather than give up good cards for a fraction of their standard value, they spend some cash to build legacy (and now modern) decks. The deep dark secret is that eternal ends up being cheaper in the long run. Also, once you get some staples/decks, the cost of maintenance is very low. When you get some extra cash, pick up some more staples. In the mean time you won't need to buy whole new decks every year.

Each format has a niche, and wizards does a good job of being fairly long sighted in their policy. Even the maligned reserved list has a place in the grand scheme. Modern was not made to kill legacy. It has caused some cross format cards to jump, but modern masters is also coming to relieve some pressure. If I were to guess, I'd say wizards will reprint all/most of these cross format cards with the goal being to get their prices closer to where they wre before the modern started. Ironically, modern masters may actually be an expression of wizards trying to keep modern from infringing too hard on legacy.

They want all the formats to thrive. People have an emotional investment in their favorite formats (and colors/archetypes), but fortunately for us there is a group whose job is to be above it all.

Thanks for humoring my musings.

Cheers,
Backseat Critic

[lochlan]

Entropy alone means the market will collapse because there is a finite number of cards available without the possibility of a reprint.

So, you didn't actually read the article?

[Fossil4182]

So, you didn't actually read the article?

Ya... I disagreed with his conclusions. Just because the article lists a few reason why claims of entropy in Legacy are misleading and a "misappropriation" doesn't mean its correct (See Myron Tribus or any number of Thermoeconomic authors). Even excluding a research/author view point - logically, a format based on a finite amount of resources that is ever increasing in demand will ultimately collapse. Even if the authors argument is true that higher prices will "reintroduce cards" back into the market, that's only true to the extent that there are cards available. Legacy literally runs into a ceiling whereby there just aren't enough cards to satisfy market demand. At which point, people will stop buying in because they can't afford it and the liquidity in the market drys up because no one can sell their cards. This will cause the prices of the cards to crater - IE the bubble bursts and the format collapse. The claim I'm making is that the article is descriptive, not prescriptive in nature. It doesn't lay out a path for Legacy to be sustainable long term - it only indicates that its healthy now and will be for the short term future.

If you're going to indict my claims, you should at least indict the warrants behind the claims I'm making rather than just referring back to the article to do the work for you (which is pointless when I indict the thesis of the article).

[ESG]

Lets operate under the assumption that modern becomes immensely successful, and legacy players (significant portion of them) march in droves to modern.

What would be the net effect?

1) Legacy players will trade in their un-usable staples for modern. (ABU duals, FOW, etc)

This is quite the hypothetical situation. I would wager there's a better chance of me getting paired against three decks in a row running maindeck Spectral Bears.

@Fossil4182: You disagreed with the article. Do you have an opinion on what should happen to make Legacy effectively immortal? Or do you believe it will eventually fold no matter what anyone does?

[lochlan]

@Fossil4182: Your point about entropy was addressed in the article and you made no attempt to respond to it directly. That's not moving the discussion forward, it's just lazy. Now you're just throwing around the word "logically" as if it magically holds up your argument by itself. Your claims are not well supported.

Edit: you in the last post did mention the argument about "reintroducing cards." But even your attempted refutation doesn't really address the argument properly.

From the article:


Higher prices result in sequestered cards being introduced into active circulation

According to the article, we will never get to your point of "there just aren't enough cards to satisfy market demand" because people will be incentivized to sell their cards if prices continue to go up. After all, they're making some money. Your suggestion is basically that people will continue to horde forever, but I don't think that's true, and it doesn't really argue the points put forth in the article.

And as for this:


The claim I'm making is that the article is descriptive, not prescriptive in nature. It doesn't lay out a path for Legacy to be sustainable long term - it only indicates that its healthy now and will be for the short term future.

Yeah, he's saying it's healthy. There's no need to "lay out a path for Legacy to be sustainable" as you say.

[FieryBalrog]

I agree with (almost) everything SpikeyMikey said, though I would add that I haven't played the format in over a year in no small part because the reason I got into it in the first place - because it was a wide open format where just about anything had a shot of winning if you did it right - is no longer true. The format is stale, even if it isn't "solved." In a lot of ways, SCG picking the format up professionalized it, and that, combined with the realities of how Eternal formats work, basically ensures that the same decks, or the same kinds of decks, will always exist.

This is why I left. Legacy is no longer the format it was when I began playing before the SCG boom. The format has only grown more and more overcentralized over the years, and it'll remain that way because a good portion of the established Legacy player base likes it that way. That's fine, it's just not for me. The format is incredibly stale, just looking at the GP Legacy list (http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpstr13/welcome#3) is yet another a demonstration of that. I think I mentioned in the B&R list that: At this point, if you want to win, based on the endlessly repeated actual results, you should be going into the format with a Jace deck, a Tendrils deck, a S&T deck or a Delver deck, always using Brainstorm as the glue. Sure, you have control, combo and 'aggro' (tempo, really), but with a whopping {1+variations} of each and all of them built in a single color. Unless you have some alternative genius take on the format, this is what you should be doing, period.

Chapin made a brief but smart mention of this here (http://www.starcitygames.com/article/25361_Shardless-Agent-Jund-And-The-Death-Of-Maverick.html), where he says that Legacy needs the fish to be healthy. Maybe it's so the sharks can feel smart about themselves.

[lyracian]

According to the article, we will never get to your point of "there just aren't enough cards to satisfy market demand" because people will be incentivized to sell their cards if prices continue to go up. After all, they're making some money. Your suggestion is basically that people will continue to horde forever, but I don't think that's true, and it doesn't really argue the points put forth in the article.Taking the numbers given there are about 350,000 Tundra's printed which is 87,500 Playsets. So what happens when you have 88,000 players wanting Tundra's for there Esper/Miracles deck? A few of them are going to be running on 2-3 Tundra. What happens next when the new player comes along? He can not get any until someone quits playing Esper-Blade and sells Tundras..

[Megadeus]

How many people play legacy do you think? And if you look at it, what are the odds that all of them want to play the same deck?

[Aggro_zombies]

Chapin made a brief but smart mention of this here (http://www.starcitygames.com/article/25361_Shardless-Agent-Jund-And-The-Death-Of-Maverick.html), where he says that Legacy needs the fish to be healthy. Maybe it's so the sharks can feel smart about themselves.
An aside: the sort of people who use categories like "sharks" and "fish" universally self-identify as sharks. After all, who wants to set up categories to rag on one specifically and then proudly self-identify as a member of that one? His belief that Maverick is essential to the functioning of Legacy rings insincere to me; you don't rag on Maverick with the implication that it's bad and played by bad players and then turn around and totally praise it as, like, the most important part of the format (because it keeps real cards like Brainstorm unbanned, natch).

What he does prove, though, is that there are things that will drive players away, and that the act of driving them away is bad for the health of the format. Things like price barriers (to entry or to switching decks), staleness, elitism, and so on will bleed players out of the format. The more players leave, the greater the perception that the format is dying; you end up with a vicious downward spiral where reduced tournament attendance leads to cancellations or withdrawal of support, which enters the internet echo chamber as evidence of Legacy's decline, which saps morale and the willingness of all but a few hardcore Grinders/fans of the format to play it, which reduces tournament attendance, etc. The format doesn't actually have to die to be effectively dead.

[lordofthepit]

Taking the numbers given there are about 350,000 Tundra's printed which is 87,500 Playsets. So what happens when you have 88,000 players wanting Tundra's for there Esper/Miracles deck? A few of them are going to be running on 2-3 Tundra. What happens next when the new player comes along? He can not get any until someone quits playing Esper-Blade and sells Tundras..

The format is in a really good place if 88000 people want Tundras. It's doing extremely well right now and I suspect that there's probably only a few thousand "Tundra players" worldwide.

Just a few nitpicks, I claimed roughly 350000 Tundras (actually, slightly less than that) between A/B/U/R English printings. But there are also six different printings through three different foreign languages. I suppose some of the Tundras have been destroyed or lost, so perhaps those numbers roughly balance out. Also, most Esper or Miracle builds I've seen run 3 or 2 Tundra. And there are probably a dozen Tier 1 decks and many more competitive decks that don't require Tundra.

Aside from the discrepancy in the figures cited, I don't disagree with your premise that the growth of Legacy is capped. However, what I am saying is that gap is orders of magnitude above what is necessary for a thriving Legacy format. (Admittedly, we'll never get the existing print run distributed perfectly into the hands of active players, so I'm not claiming Legacy can expand 10- or 100-fold.) However, that's still a lot of extra room to grow. Saying otherwise is like claiming that paper Magic will eventually die because we only have so many trees we can use to manufacture the product, so we might as well all go online.

[lordofthepit]

Legacy is no longer the format it was when I began playing before the SCG boom.

I suspect it's because of the 20 or so sets that have been printed and introduced into Legacy since then.

Maverick didn't fade in popularity because people magically figured out the format, and it certainly wasn't winning a bunch of large events because everyone was an idiot who didn't know any better, as Chapin's article seems to suggest. It got weaker because Terminus and the Entreat the Angels crippled its control matchups; cards like Omniscience, Griselbrand, and Enter the Infinite resulted in combo decks less susceptible to hatebears + Karakas; and the printing of Abrupt Decay and Deathrite Shaman meant that new fair decks like Jund could also compete on the fair axis.

But sure, blame Brainstorm.

[Mewens]

Just echoing Aggro_zombies and lordofthepit: The idea that Mav was the "fair" deck that enabled the scrubs – that is, "fish" – to swim with the "sharks" should be noxious to everyone who reads it. If our format really needs morons to pad attendance rates so that we can feel good about ourselves and increase our chances of winning, maybe it really is time to pack it in.

Of course, I don't believe that for a moment. Mav lived in a certain meta; that meta changed as our tools to attack it changed. lordofthepit restates it far better than I could, so I'll just quote for truth:


Maverick didn't fade in popularity because people magically figured out the format, and it certainly wasn't winning a bunch of large events because everyone was an idiot ... It got weaker because Terminus and the Entreat the Angels crippled its control matchups; cards like Omniscience, Griselbrand, and Enter the Infinite resulted in combo decks less susceptible to hatebears + Karakas; and the printing of Abrupt Decay and Deathrite Shaman meant that new fair decks like Jund could also compete on the fair axis.

[(nameless one)]

I think this is what Fossil4182 is trying to say:


- I purchased CardA for $15 about three-four years ago.
- A new set comes and CardA is speculated to be good. Price jumps to $30. I purchase more than a playset in hopes of making money.
- The cost of CardA is now $50-60 because of demand. Also, it is a staple in a tier1 deck. To add to this, it is on the Reserved list.
- I want to make profit so I sell CardA for no lower than $50. Because of demand, PlayerB buys it.
- There is no way CardA is going to be obsolete in Legacy. It is also unlikely to be banned. The price just creeps up. It is now around $75-90 depending on condition.
- PlayerB is done with the said card and what's to sell it and to make profit out of this. He will not sell it for lower than $75.
- The cycle continues.


Sure its a prosperous time for Legacy. I agree with this but I wouldn't be surprised if the cycle keeps happening like it was mentioned above then what? If Underground Seas costed as much as a Moxen, then wouldn't you just play say Vintage?

And if it does happen, how would you market potential Legacy new comers to purchase a playset of Underground Seas.

The format is good right now. The article is dead on but its argument is only focused on the short term.

What about 5-10 years from now?

Personally, I think the format will die by that time. And it's not just WotC's Reserve List's fault. It's also going to be hoarder's fault. There's a reason why insider trading is illegal in stock market. Unfortunately for us Legacy players, Magic is just a game.

I think the best thing for us to do is just enjoy Legacy right now, while it exists.

[Amon Amarth]

I remember reading an article (Chas Andres, I think) that detailed why it's not the fault of collectors for the rapid rise in card prices. I'd try to find it but I think it's Premium. :(

[Mr.C]

Instead of Modern, they should have just ran with Overextended, or created a "Legacy-Lite", wherein all reserved cards were restricted or something like that.

Modern Masters will actually be very determinant in the success or failure of modern.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

According to the article, we will never get to your point of "there just aren't enough cards to satisfy market demand" because people will be incentivized to sell their cards if prices continue to go up. After all, they're making some money. Your suggestion is basically that people will continue to horde forever, but I don't think that's true, and it doesn't really argue the points put forth in the article.

It's possible he didn't address this because I had just addressed this. This theory doesn't work because of sticky prices.

So basically how it will play out is like this;

People for years are willing to pay higher and higher prices for duals because you have an increasing number of players chasing a stagnant/slowly diminishing supply. Their value is supported by 1) The utility (ability to play Legacy with the cards) and 2) The belief that duals etc., can later be cashed out for same or equal value due to constantly rising prices.

However eventually the price will be driven, in part by increasing demand and in part by speculative hoarding, to a point where there are no longer enough people willing to pay the market price of entry to keep adding new players to the Legacy base, and tournament attendance will decline.

This will initiate the death spiral. The price will begin to "crash" but it's important to understand that there's a psychological floor below which the market will not go; people that bought their playset of Underground Seas for $600 are not going to part with them for $100. We don't know where exactly this floor is, we just know it's there; prices are sticky and people are unwilling to accept the losses that market collapse would dictate, they'd rather hold onto the duals and hope for a rebound at that point. People aren't willing to pay that floor price, because there's no certainty that they'll be able to play Legacy tournaments with the cards and/or that they'll be able to cash out with them later for the price the remaining sellers are asking for. What you'll have is a glut of people willing to sell duals at old or close to old prices and a dearth of people willing to pay those prices.

[FieryBalrog]

An aside: the sort of people who use categories like "sharks" and "fish" universally self-identify as sharks. After all, who wants to set up categories to rag on one specifically and then proudly self-identify as a member of that one? His belief that Maverick is essential to the functioning of Legacy rings insincere to me; you don't rag on Maverick with the implication that it's bad and played by bad players and then turn around and totally praise it as, like, the most important part of the format (because it keeps real cards like Brainstorm unbanned, natch).

Chapin doesn't really care about Legacy; being a guy who likes to talk, though, he's just lifting the curtain a little. It's not like this is a secret, you just have to look at actual empirical results from the last X years and look at that the best performing cards and strategies were. Certain people realize it; certain people don't, and keep playing the things that lose. There's just less of them now, is what his point is.

[Lt. Quattro]

I agree with (almost) everything SpikeyMikey said, though I would add that I haven't played the format in over a year in no small part because the reason I got into it in the first place - because it was a wide open format where just about anything had a shot of winning if you did it right - is no longer true. The format is stale, even if it isn't "solved." In a lot of ways, SCG picking the format up professionalized it, and that, combined with the realities of how Eternal formats work, basically ensures that the same decks, or the same kinds of decks, will always exist.


This is why I left. Legacy is no longer the format it was when I began playing before the SCG boom. The format has only grown more and more overcentralized over the years, and it'll remain that way because a good portion of the established Legacy player base likes it that way. That's fine, it's just not for me. The format is incredibly stale, just looking at the GP Legacy list (http://www.wizards.com/Magic/Magazine/Article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpstr13/welcome#3) is yet another a demonstration of that. I think I mentioned in the B&R list that: At this point, if you want to win, based on the endlessly repeated actual results, you should be going into the format with a Jace deck, a Tendrils deck, a S&T deck or a Delver deck, always using Brainstorm as the glue. Sure, you have control, combo and 'aggro' (tempo, really), but with a whopping {1+variations} of each and all of them built in a single color. Unless you have some alternative genius take on the format, this is what you should be doing, period.

Stale? Get real, like seven strangers in a house real. Look at this list and tell me these cards didn't change the format.

Return to Ravnica:
Abrupt Decay
Deathrite Shaman
Detention Sphere
Rest in Peace
Supreme Verdict

Magic 2013:
Krenko, Mob Boss
Master of the Pearl Trident

Avacyn Restored:
Cavern of Souls
Craterhoof Behemoth
Entreat the Angels
Griselbrand
Terminus

Dark Ascension:
Lingering Souls

Innistrad:
Delver of Secrets
Desperate Ravings
Geist of Saint Traft
Liliana of the Veil
Snapcaster Mage

New Phyrexia:
Batterskull
Dismember
Elesh Norn, Grand Cenobite
Gitaxian Probe
Jin-Gitaxias, Core Augur
Mental Misstep

[lordofthepit]

Stale? Get real, like seven strangers in a house real. Look at this list and tell me these cards didn't change the format.

Off the top of my head, you forgot Omniscience (M13), Thalia (Dark Ascension), Grafdigger's Cage (Dark Ascension), Thought Scour (Innistrad), and Gravecrawler (Innistrad).

[lyracian]

The format is in a really good place if 88000 people want Tundras. It's doing extremely well right now and I suspect that there's probably only a few thousand "Tundra players" worldwide.

Just a few nitpicks, I claimed roughly 350000 Tundras...
Also, most Esper or Miracle builds I've seen run 3 or 2 Tundra.
And there are probably a dozen Tier 1 decks and many more competitive decks that don't require Tundra.

Aside from the discrepancy in the figures cited, I don't disagree with your premise that the growth of Legacy is capped. However, what I am saying is that gap is orders of magnitude above what is necessary for a thriving Legacy format. (Admittedly, we'll never get the existing print run distributed perfectly into the hands of active players, so I'm not claiming Legacy can expand 10- or 100-fold.) However, that's still a lot of extra room to grow. Saying otherwise is like claiming that paper Magic will eventually die because we only have so many trees we can use to manufacture the product, so we might as well all go online.It does not really matter which card you take; There are X number of copies of card A, there are x/4 playsets of card A. There are a lot of players that have 40 Dual's in case they want to use them. My badlands had barley been until Jund took off. Sure some Esper decks might use only 2-3 Tundra's but is that because they only want 2 or because they can only afford two? I used to have 9 Tundra's (2 decks and EDH) I now have 4 so I have let another player or two into Legacy. However even if I am not playing Tundra decks I am not going any lower.

We both agree growth of Legacy is capped and sure we may never get to 80,000 players. I think TheInfamousBearAssassin sums it up well and I do not think there are as many dual's in circulation as you think there are. EDH players and Collectors both take a slice out of the market.

This will initiate the death spiral. The price will begin to "crash" but it's important to understand hat there's a psychological floor below which the market will not go; people that bought their playset of Underground Seas for $600 are not going to part with them for $100. We don't know where exactly this floor is, we just know it's there; prices are sticky and people are unwilling to accept the losses that market collapse would dictate, they'd rather hold onto the duals and hope for a rebound at that point.

[DragoFireheart]

Instead of Modern, they should have just ran with Overextended, or created a "Legacy-Lite", wherein all reserved cards were restricted or something like that.

Modern Masters will actually be very determinant in the success or failure of modern.

No, it won't. Modern is failing because of reasons other than its cost of entry.

[Barook]

No, it won't. Modern is failing because of reasons other than its cost of entry.
What reasons? Because they banned the fun out of the format? Or the lack of tools to handle certain stuff (FoW, Wasteland, etc.)?

[frolll]

Mayhap it's just beacause it's god awful. Modern is, like, a worse Standard ffs ! :/


OTOH : Legacy WILL fall, as Vintage did somewhere 4 or 5 years ago. The reasons have been stated by IBA and others. You have to get real. Flex your Limited muscles, develop a love for Standard, and then, you'll be playing "sustainable" MtG. Continue playing only Legacy, and soon enough you'll be like the Vintage players of yore - a rare breed indeed, not playing as much as contemplating your dear cards.

[FieryBalrog]

It's possible he didn't address this because I had just addressed this. This theory doesn't work because of sticky prices.

So basically how it will play out is like this;

People for years are willing to pay higher and higher prices for duals because you have an increasing number of players chasing a stagnant/slowly diminishing supply. Their value is supported by 1) The utility (ability to play Legacy with the cards) and 2) The belief that duals etc., can later be cashed out for same or equal value due to constantly rising prices.

However eventually the price will be driven, in part by increasing demand and in part by speculative hoarding, to a point where there are no longer enough people willing to pay the market price of entry to keep adding new players to the Legacy base, and tournament attendance will decline.

This will initiate the death spiral. The price will begin to "crash" but it's important to understand that there's a psychological floor below which the market will not go; people that bought their playset of Underground Seas for $600 are not going to part with them for $100. We don't know where exactly this floor is, we just know it's there; prices are sticky and people are unwilling to accept the losses that market collapse would dictate, they'd rather hold onto the duals and hope for a rebound at that point. People aren't willing to pay that floor price, because there's no certainty that they'll be able to play Legacy tournaments with the cards and/or that they'll be able to cash out with them later for the price the remaining sellers are asking for. What you'll have is a glut of people willing to sell duals at old or close to old prices and a dearth of people willing to pay those prices.

Exactly. There have been lots of studies showing that humans are very psychologically averse to realizing a loss, even if it means economic behavior that would be 'irrational' in the classical sense. E.g. One participant is given $10 and is told to offer a split with a 2nd participant, who either accepts the split or rejects it in which case neither of them gets anything. If the split is $9/$1, most people will reject the $1 offer even though it means getting $0 instead. The perceived "getting screwed" is stronger than the actual dollar value of the decision. If you're looking to sell an Underground Sea, you're unlikely to accept an offer of $60, even though the alternative may be getting $0 because you'll just be sitting on it. You'll hold out for an offer that won't feel like "getting screwed".

What exacerbates this is the huge price jumps Magic has seen across the board in the past few years of the secondary market. If you regularly shop for cards, it's almost crazy compared to how it was just 4 years ago. Everything is going up, and few cards that jump like that ever come down by much, unless there's a reprint or something. I won a box of Eventide in a raffle on Cardshark when it was in Standard. They used Eventide because no one wanted it and the value of the set sucked. Now, the value of the set is through the roof, like, across the board high. Kamigawa is the same way. For years, it was the Jitte set because it was full of shitty legends; now a good number of those shitty legends are worth good money.

As a result, players have become very averse to "getting screwed" by giving up a card that then triples or quadruples in value. The loss aversion kicks in. I know it's happened plenty of times in my case alone in the past 2 years. It's very much a case of "once-bitten, twice-shy", because like I said above, humans generally have stronger reactions to (and memories of) losses than they do of gains. Quite a few people who sold their dual lands for $30-40 a few years ago are kicking themselves, and they're going to be extra cautious to taking a hit like that again. The way the market has moved has trained people to think: "hold on to your cards; things are going up, and any of these cards could suddenly become the next Hot Shit that triples in value."

[Lord Seth]

No, it won't. Modern is failing because of reasons other than its cost of entry.While I do have some big issues with Modern (I enjoy playing it, but I honestly feel like I enjoy it in spite of itself), I'd like a rationale for how it's failing other than just not liking it.

[DragoFireheart]

While I do have some big issues with Modern (I enjoy playing it, but I honestly feel like I enjoy it in spite of itself), I'd like a rationale for how it's failing other than just not liking it.

Constant bannings will discourage any serious tournament players from trying to make new decks out of fear of key cards getting banned. They'll stick to "safe" decks and just try to win that way.

Also, the fact that there is no way to check combo decks means that any future cards WoTC makes could be broken in Modern by a few people that are still trying to make a new combo deck. For example, Koby made a Griselbrand deck that can win by turn 3/4. The lack of strong control cards makes the format unstable in regards to new combo decks that could break it.

[Lord Seth]

Constant bannings will discourage any serious tournament players from trying to make new decks out of fear of key cards getting banned. They'll stick to "safe" decks and just try to win that way.

Also, the fact that there is no way to check combo decks means that any future cards WoTC makes could be broken in Modern by a few people that are still trying to make a new combo deck. For example, Koby made a Griselbrand deck that can win by turn 3/4. The lack of strong control cards makes the format unstable in regards to new combo decks that could break it.So again: Your rationale is just not liking it.

If it's "failing" you need to show something really backing it up, e.g. really weak attendance.

Look, like I said, I certainly don't think the format is without its problems, but saying "I don't like these aspects of the format" doesn't mean the format is legitimately failing. I like Sealed a lot more than Draft, but I'm not going to deny that Draft is a heck of a lot more popular.

[xfxf]

My answer to the question in the OP is because some people like to stir up the community to get their fixations banned or to cry for reprints and the easiest way to do this is scare tactics and doom mongering.


Remember who said this when Legacy dies out.

[Amon Amarth]

Constant bannings will discourage any serious tournament players from trying to make new decks out of fear of key cards getting banned. They'll stick to "safe" decks and just try to win that way.

Also, the fact that there is no way to check combo decks means that any future cards WoTC makes could be broken in Modern by a few people that are still trying to make a new combo deck. For example, Koby made a Griselbrand deck that can win by turn 3/4. The lack of strong control cards makes the format unstable in regards to new combo decks that could break it.

Lack of identity would be a big one too.

[DragoFireheart]

So again: Your rationale is just not liking it.


Please show me where I said "Modern is bad because I don't like it".

Jesus fucking Christ.

[DragoFireheart]

Lack of identity would be a big one too.

Yeah, but that isn't because of Modern being Modern. It's still a new format.

[Lord Seth]

Please show me where I said "Modern is bad because I don't like it".

Jesus fucking Christ.But then what is your rationale for it "failing"? You haven't shown anything. You've just stated some stuff you didn't like about the format.

It was perhaps poor phrasing on my part to suggest you didn't like the format, but you clearly were listing aspects you didn't like. And I even agreed with you on a lot of them, but those things are subjective, whereas a format "failing" (lack of popularity) is much more objective. Though I suppose what level of popularity/lack of popularity is required for something to be "failing" is subjective in and of itself...

[DragoFireheart]

But then what is your rationale for it "failing"? You haven't shown anything. You've just stated some stuff you didn't like about the format.

It was perhaps poor phrasing on my part to suggest you didn't like the format, but you clearly were listing aspects you didn't like. And I even agreed with you on a lot of them, but those things are subjective, whereas a format "failing" (lack of popularity) is much more objective. Though I suppose what level of popularity/lack of popularity is required for something to be "failing" is subjective in and of itself...

Not having balanced arch-types which just results in WotC banning everything until we're left with almost 90% aggro decks means I don't like the format?

Pros themselves have admitted they don't care for the format. That is because there is nothing to keep combo in check beyond WotC banning combo pieces. FoW doesn't exist, so if there ever exists a combo that can kill before their turn 3/4 requirement, cards will be banned. Meanwhile, the pendulum will swing in the other direction and an aggro deck will get out of control. That doesn't sound like a healthy format going into the future, what with new cards always being printed. The control archtype is extremely weak in Modern, while aggro and combo archtype are powerful. At the moment, the format is starting to turn into "shit ton of bolts and smash with Geist" format. I wonder if Geist will be banned?

FFS, Wild Nacatl and Preordain got banned because of how out of whack the format was at one point. A format that is constantly in flux when it's supposed to mimic the eternal formats is going to cause people to quickly lose interest.

[twndomn]

the topic is about exaggeration of legacy's demise, but the thread is discussing Modern..., good job.

[Arsenal]

the topic is about exaggeration of legacy's demise, but the thread is discussing Modern..., good job.

It's hard talk about one without the other as Modern is clearly, despite what Wizards claims, the successor to Legacy. To not talk about Modern while talking about the reason Legacy may collapse (Reserved List being the chief concern) is just silly.

[Megadeus]

Not having balanced arch-types which just results in WotC banning everything until we're left with almost 90% aggro decks means I don't like the format?

Pros themselves have admitted they don't care for the format. That is because there is nothing to keep combo in check beyond WotC banning combo pieces. FoW doesn't exist, so if there ever exists a combo that can kill before their turn 3/4 requirement, cards will be banned. Meanwhile, the pendulum will swing in the other direction and an aggro deck will get out of control. That doesn't sound like a healthy format going into the future, what with new cards always being printed. The control archtype is extremely weak in Modern, while aggro and combo archtype are powerful. At the moment, the format is starting to turn into "shit ton of bolts and smash with Geist" format. I wonder if Geist will be banned?

FFS, Wild Nacatl and Preordain got banned because of how out of whack the format was at one point. A format that is constantly in flux when it's supposed to mimic the eternal formats is going to cause people to quickly lose interest.

I mean aggro should be pretty solid in a format where every player basically starts at 15 life...

[DragoFireheart]

I mean aggro should be pretty solid in a format where every player basically starts at 15 life...

Yeah. That is one of the reasons why. When you are Lightning Bolting yourself to get a land, it helps make killing your easier.

[Lord Seth]

I do still wish Modern had started with Mercadian Masques. That gives Rishadan Port, Foil, and Daze as good police cards. (and gives us a lot of interesting cards and decks from Masques through Scourge that aren't playable in Legacy but can't be used in Modern)

[bkemke]

I do still wish Modern had started with Mercadian Masques. That gives Rishadan Port, Foil, and Daze as good police cards. (and gives us a lot of interesting cards and decks from Masques through Scourge that aren't playable in Legacy but can't be used in Modern)

Agree 100%. I wonder if they could still change this?

[kombatkiwi]

The thing that I'm really concerned about is their apparent pandering to the reserved list crowd with the limited print run on Modern Masters. They're still following the philosophy of "it's more important to not piss off our current players (not even necessarily players, just people who own the cards) than to attract new players to the format". Why even create the modern format at all if they're going to have that attitude?

As an analogue, the computer game Heroes of Newerth originally charged $30 for an account, but moved to the "free-to-play but make money from microtransactions" model like the similar game League of Legends. When they did this, many of the original $30 players complained that the company behind HoN (S2 Games) had basically wasted their money. Whenever S2 Games make changes to their account system there are still players who insist that S2 needs to introduce some benefit for people playing on those original paid accounts (like faster earning of in-game currency or whatever).

But the comments from these entitled complainers are always drowned out by others who disagree (many of which are original account holders themselves). The arguments often run along the lines of "you don't ask for a refund on the DVD you just bought if the film comes out on TV a few days later". The most convincing argument against these complainers is S2's statement that without moving to the new account system, the game was simply unable to compete with other options in the genre, so it would have eventually died (or died faster, whatever your opinion - I'm not trying to turn this into a thread about the (non)success of HoN as a game) and the players would have lost their $30 anyway.

Of course, this argument doesn't directly translate to mtg well at all, because:
-Nobody buys a videogame account to store it in a binder and hope it will go up in value.
-The amount of money people have invested in cards (active players too, not just collectors) is usually a couple of orders of magnitude greater than $30.

But I still see enough similarity to be pretty disgusted with how wizards is handling their shit, especially the "we were pricing people out of playing our game" admission. I think the number one use of an Underground Sea, or Tarmogoyf should be as a game piece and not a Faberge Egg.

So to be a bit more on topic, while I thought the article made some good points I thought overall that a lot of the reasoning was flawed and I couldn't agree with its main conclusion.

[ukyo_rulz]

When I look at Legacy nowadays, what with the skyrocketing prices and the irrational exuberance of the proponents, I see a bubble. All bubbles burst eventually, so it seems inevitable to me that Legacy will go down the same road as Vintage. It might take longer, but Legacy is bound by all the same limitations that Vintage was.

[lyracian]

The thing that I'm really concerned about is their apparent pandering to the reserved list crowd with the limited print run on Modern Masters. They're still following the philosophy of "it's more important to not piss off our current players (not even necessarily players, just people who own the cards) than to attract new players to the format". Why even create the modern format at all if they're going to have that attitude?We can but hope that Modern Masters (one) is the start of a new trend. Goyf's will still be $90 (or insert local price here) but what happens when MM2 comes around and MM3? Sure there might not ever be enough Goyf's to go around but the more times they are printed the cheaper they will become.

[slave]

When I look at Legacy nowadays, what with the skyrocketing prices and the irrational exuberance of the proponents, I see a bubble. All bubbles burst eventually, so it seems inevitable to me that Legacy will go down the same road as Vintage. It might take longer, but Legacy is bound by all the same limitations that Vintage was.

I can't see it going any other way if the RL stays as it is.
Once Dual Lands get so expensive no one can afford them, the format will rely on the people who were lucky enough to already have them. As legacy players retire, leave the format etc., the format will decline into obscurity. Without reprints I can't see the manabase-cost problem getting anything but worse.

The only way out of this I can see, is to make it completely legal in any tournament to have an allowance of proxies, to improve the access of the format for newer players.

[Arsenal]

The only way out of this I can see, is to make it completely legal in any tournament to have an allowance of proxies, to improve the access of the format for newer players.

Many in the Vintage community point to this very situation as to why Vintage fell off the face of the Earth. Here's one (of many) articles explaining the point: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc/16980_Insider_Trading_Are_Proxies_Hurting_Vintage_Tournament_Attendance.html

[menace13]

Many in the Vintage community point to this very situation as to why Vintage fell off the face of the Earth. Here's one (of many) articles explaining the point: http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/misc/16980_Insider_Trading_Are_Proxies_Hurting_Vintage_Tournament_Attendance.html
Not so sure what good ole Ben is saying there is totally true. While it may have something to do with it, like when people spend more with Credit being due to not valuing it as much as paper monies. I believe it is that the players knew they would never own a Ten Thousand Dollar deck. Giving up on the format despite being able to use proxies. Another thing I noticed his article had a complete lack of Card prices- the staples p9+lands, from 2004-2008, and the number of attendees from when there was a no proxy rule, to when the 5 card proxy rule was implemented, and lastly the numbers of when the 10 card proxy limit was instituted.

[dontbiteitholmes]

Not so sure what good ole Ben is saying there is totally true. While it may have something to do with it, like when people spend more with Credit being due to not valuing it as much as paper monies. I believe it is that the players knew they would never own a Ten Thousand Dollar deck. Giving up on the format despite being able to use proxies. Another thing I noticed his article had a complete lack of Card prices- the staples p9+lands, from 2004-2008, and the number of attendees from when there was a no proxy rule, to when the 5 card proxy rule was implemented, and lastly the numbers of when the 10 card proxy limit was instituted.

While I agree that prices are probably the #1 reason Vintage tanked, the close #2 reason is that the format had pretty much back to back to back to back to back to back broken decks that ruled the format.

I mean I can name probably 10 Vintage decks since 2000 that were broken to the point that they damaged the health of the format and still be forgetting something, and around that time is when you really started to see that sharp decline in interest in Vintage.

I mean there was pretty much a point when there was no reason to play anything other than Academy, then it was Burning Long, Prison (with 4x 3Sphere), Tog, Rector Tendrils, Gifts, etc. Even today IMO you need a pretty compelling reason not to run Shops.

Price and broken decks were the one-two punch that ruined Vintage, but I think it's important to realize it WAS a 1-2 punch and that price alone can't take all the blame.

[menace13]

While I agree that prices are probably the #1 reason Vintage tanked, the close #2 reason is that the format had pretty much back to back to back to back to back to back broken decks that ruled the format.

I mean I can name probably 10 Vintage decks since 2000 that were broken to the point that they damaged the health of the format and still be forgetting something, and around that time is when you really started to see that sharp decline in interest in Vintage.

I mean there was pretty much a point when there was no reason to play anything other than Academy, then it was Burning Long, Prison (with 4x 3Sphere), Tog, Rector Tendrils, Gifts, etc. Even today IMO you need a pretty compelling reason not to run Shops.

Price and broken decks were the one-two punch that ruined Vintage, but I think it's important to realize it WAS a 1-2 punch and that price alone can't take all the blame.
You raise a valid point. I feel also that the see-saw of restricted, unrestricted only to be restricted later, won't keep players happy either. Sanctioning has a part of the blame. Look at what GP Legacy draws out; testing spikes, interest, exposure. Taking that away is a big deal to the pro grinders too. I suspect Benny boy may have had ulterior motives in raising interests to do away with Proxies for monetary gains.

[Barook]

I suspect Benny boy may have had ulterior motives in raising interests to do away with Proxies for monetary gains.
This.

The article could as well have been named:


Insider Trading - Why Proxies Are Hurting Our Profit Margins

[TsumiBand]

This.

The article could as well have been named: Insider Trading - Why Proxies Are Hurting Our Profit Margins

Hey so about this; I've been trying to liken the Reserve List to insider trading, but I don't find it an accurate analogy - I'm no econ major, but they don't seem at all the same to me. I've been looking for real-life examples of consumer-demanded scarcities of a product in the interest of demanding a protected investment - which seems like an accurate description of what's happened regarding the Reserve List and the Reprint Policy, but I just cannot find anything to establish a comparable similar story in real life.

I compared it in this thread to demanding that a car company only make X-hundred of what could have been a non-limited run of a 2014 model, in the hopes that it is found to be exceptional in later years and recognized as a collector's item - does that seem like a reasonable simile? What's an appropriate comparison to make here, because I don't think "insider trading" works. As I understand the sequence of events, this is not someone at Wizards going "Hey collectors - we're not gonna make any more of these, so buy em up now", this was "So we've got your product but we're not convinced it's actually collectible b/c you made a lot of them already, so we need certain assurances that we're not blowing our dough."

[PirateKing]

As I understand the sequence of events,

Wizards printed Chronicles which was a very large set that included a number of reprints, including the Elder Dragons and other legendary creatures, which were gathered by collectors and somewhat valuable. There was a significant price drop, and some people lost real money. I looked but couldn't find hard numbers, but that incident is what spawned the Reserved List. Wizards had printed a product with an unspoken but I guess implied to some understanding that rare cards were rare and therefore valuable.

Chronicles was seen as a huge breach in the trust to collectors who were very vocal in their displeasure and somehow strong armed Wizards to promise in policy that cards they were holding would never have another Chronicles incident. The Reserved List was born.

But you are correct, I can't think of any parallel situation to extrapolate from.

A company produces a product and then in response outcry from increasing supply, promises never to increase supply ever.

[Mr.C]

Wizards printed Chronicles which was a very large set that included a number of reprints, including the Elder Dragons and other legendary creatures, which were gathered by collectors and somewhat valuable. There was a significant price drop, and some people lost real money. I looked but couldn't find hard numbers, but that incident is what spawned the Reserved List. Wizards had printed a product with an unspoken but I guess implied to some understanding that rare cards were rare and therefore valuable.

Chronicles was seen as a huge breach in the trust to collectors who were very vocal in their displeasure and somehow strong armed Wizards to promise in policy that cards they were holding would never have another Chronicles incident. The Reserved List was born.

But you are correct, I can't think of any parallel situation to extrapolate from.

A company produces a product and then in response outcry from increasing supply, promises never to increase supply ever.

Diamonds.

[PirateKing]

Diamonds.

Yeah I suppose, diamonds aren't all that rare are they? I mean when compared to gold or other jewels like sapphire or emerald, they're relatively common.
But jewelers want them to be rare so they purposely don't go digging up every diamond they could, and make mines slow production down.

But a difference would be that those workings are completely internal working, I am not aware of an official policy out of Kay that says "We're intentionally stifling supply because we got everyone to believe that a diamond is worth $10,000 and we like it that way" Whereas Wizards has a public policy in that aspect.

[slave]

Yeah I suppose, diamonds aren't all that rare are they? I mean when compared to gold or other jewels like sapphire or emerald, they're relatively common.
But jewelers want them to be rare so they purposely don't go digging up every diamond they could, and make mines slow production down.

This is just wrong. Jewellers have as much influence on the miners as we have on getting the RL reprinted.

Miners can't get them out of the ground quick enough to meet demand currently, of which has never been higher now that India and China are modernising and becoming an ever increasing force in the world economy. If there was ever to be glut of over supply and a poor price, I could imagine the mines would stockpile vast amounts and wait until demand, and profit margins, increases. (like they've done with crude oil, copper, uranium & plenty of other stuff historically)
Mines don't do anything for the jeweller's directly besides sell them something for a price the world demand dictates. Miners have their own shareholders to look after, so they'll satisfy that first and foremost.
The price of diamonds is ALL about demand and supply. Currently the demand is insatiable.... so the price stays high.

RE: Rarity - emeralds (or true emeralds) are from Colombia, so yeah, they are rare. Everwhere else in the world they're not considered a true emerald as they contain vanadium instead of chromium. This isn't actually 100% true, but a lot of jewellers use it as a tool to get more money out of you!
Gold and diamonds are found everwhere, and I'm pretty sure gold is far more common than diamonds.

[DrJones]

Lol, the price of Diamonds is only explained by artificial scarcity caused by monopolist practices from the single company (De Beers) that owned almost all the diamond mines in the world. Moreover, Russia politely waited until the CEO retired last year to reveal that they are sitting on tens of thousands of tons of diamonds (http://www.wired.co.uk/news/archive/2012-09/18/russian-diamond-smorgasbord) in what is the world's largest diamond deposit, with an estimate supply enough to meet all demand for industrial diamonds for the next 3.000 years. It was also known for years that Earthquakes create tons of gold in one second (http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=earthquakes-make-gold-veins-in-an-instant), even though sciencists refused to acknowledge it until literally a few months ago.

[PirateKing]

So Wizards is a monopoly that is setting prices by fabricating scarcity in their products, with the kicker being, the don't profit at all from the prices they are setting?

[nedleeds]

I do still wish Modern had started with Mercadian Masques. That gives Rishadan Port, Foil, and Daze as good police cards. (and gives us a lot of interesting cards and decks from Masques through Scourge that aren't playable in Legacy but can't be used in Modern)

Those cards would all be banned. Along with about 50 more judging by WotCs stance on modern being a turn8 format. For christs sake bloodbraid elf is banned. An elf.

Dark Ritual
Tendrils
Stifle
Nimble Mongoose
Misdirection
Cabal Ritual


Would all get the axe ......

[Megadeus]

I just wanna cast Cabal Therapy in Modern.

[Jamaican Zombie Legend]

I just wanna cast Cabal Therapy in Modern.

I want to have a format where Gerrard's Verdict is still playable. Preferably alongside Vindicate and Deed.


Also, on the life/death of Legacy, I don't see it dying. But I certainly see it contracting in a big way soon. New Legacy playgroups can't sprout up with relative ease in the way that Standard, Limited, and EDH ones can because of price* (Modern suffers from a similar, albeit less severe, problem). And because of entry barriers, it's a lot harder to "patch up" playgroups when one player quits or goes, shall we say, dormant. Especially in the case of "dormancy", when a player steps out of Legacy for the time being, but holds onto their cards due to the fear that if they ever wanted to play again, the buy-in cost may have sky-rocketed again; this is the thing that will hurt the format a lot, while ironically being one of the biggest draws. That means you are going to have a lot less opportunities to play, less ability to showcase and build interest in the format, and the "use-value" of your cards diminishes greatly.

Legacy will still have tourneys, but there will come a time when SCG no longer sees the benefit in hosting Opens, when local playgroups diminish as players depart with no replacements ready to take their place, and people hang on to Legacy cards for a few occasionally tourneys every once in a (long?) while.

*This certainly requires explication, so here goes. Limited is a very easy format to make a playgroup for. Get people, get boosters, go nuts. EDH is also very easy to make a playgroup for. Commander decks practically do it for you, and a newer player can easily assemble a decent deck for a politics-regulated, multiplayer format. These are very different from serious constructed formats however, so they aren't the best comparison. Type 2 is a lot better choice for that.

Standard has a high cost to entry if you want to be able to build (multiple) Tier decks, but you can make budget decks (actually budget...not 150 bucks to play LOLBURN) that both stand a chance in a non-pro meta, and also are likely of having an interactive game of Magic in any given match. Not so much in Legacy (and Modern), where the main tools of interaction (Force, Cashseize, Wasteland, Port, V-Bomb) are prohibitively expensive or require expensive complements and win conditions (Fetch/Dual manabase, Goyf, Clique, Karakas, Snappy, Lili, JtMS). You can't really budgetize interactive decks. The closest is to go for a "budget" archetype like Pox capable of interacting, but even that's pretty expensive nowadays.

The cheapest decks tend to be linear, low-interaction "combo". Burn, Elves, and uh....well LED's recent price increase has made Belcher, Storm, and Dredge pretty expensive, so scratch them. I guess you can also have some really "bad" combo decks that can be bought on the cheap too. The problem with all of these kind of decks being cheap is when a financially constrained group tries to get into Legacy altogether, to make a new playgroup. They'll all gravitate towards the cheap options and you'll end up with a meta full of noninteractive shit matches. Ever play Enchantress versus Burn? Ever play that matchup twice in a row?

Game 1: I get my lock or I get burned out

Games 2&3: Mulligan to Leyline....LOLBURN!

That's what a budget meta is going to look like. In Standard a budget meta can actually produce interactive games that while simple, can be fun. Legacy almost requires a certain proportion of the meta to be running interactive decks in order to create a high probability of engaging matches. And with those decks being expensive...well, you get the picture.

[ukyo_rulz]

That's what a budget meta is going to look like. In Standard a budget meta can actually produce interactive games that while simple, can be fun. Legacy almost requires a certain proportion of the meta to be running interactive decks in order to create a high probability of engaging matches. And with those decks being expensive...well, you get the picture.

I never thought of this concept from that angle, but it makes a lot of sense to me. I've actually seen it play out when a group of my friends who normally play standard decided to make legacy decks for the occasional tournament. Almost all of them ended up with Dredge and Elves, plus one each of Burn and Affinity. They had to find people outside their playgroup to test against because playing against each other was so miserable.

[Lord Seth]

Those cards would all be banned.Daze and Rishadan Port, maybe. Though I still doubt it. They don't enable turn 4 wins, they don't do anything particularly broken, and as far as I know they weren't centerpieces to decks that dominated any formats.

Foil? Extremely unlikely. I think they've made some dumb calls in regards to the Modern banned list, but I don't see them banning a 3-for-1 card.


Along with about 50 more judging by WotCs stance on modern being a turn8 format.Turn 4. And yes, there would be some more bans. Brainstorm would be banned, Dark Ritual would be banned, Mind's Desire would be banned... I'm honestly fine with that. We'd still get a lot of interesting cards that wouldn't be banned that would make the format a lot more fun, along with some useful police cards so they wouldn't have to ban as many things.
For christs sake bloodbraid elf is banned. An elf.Uh...okay, it's an elf. So what? What does that have to do with it? Does "it's a human" mean anything for whether Hermit Druid should be unbanned? That's like the most irrelevant argument I've seen in regards to Bloodbraid Elf. If it were renamed "Bloodbraid Berserker" and had a different creature type, would you find it more acceptable?

As for Bloodbraid Elf itself, while I do still contend that its banning was only necessary due to them being unduly banhappy earlier on, the fact is that Jund was dominating the format to a ridiculous extent and something had to be done about it. I would have preferred they unban cards to enable opposing decks, but the format after Bloodbraid Elf was banned was honestly a better one due to Jund's stranglehold on the meta being alleviated.


Dark Ritual
Tendrils
Stifle
Nimble Mongoose
Misdirection
Cabal Ritual


Would all get the axe ......Dark Ritual and Cabal Ritual, almost certainly. Tendrils of Agony, probably. I'm highly dubious on Stifle, Nimble Mongoose, and Misdirection getting banned though. And yeah, I know, Wild Nacatl in regards to Nimble Mongoose, and while I do think the banning of Wild Nacatl was dubious, it becomes a 3/3 faster and easier and was part of the deck that was dominant in the format at the time.

Overall I'm not really sure what your point is other than to complain about the Modern banned list. And I'm not going to say complaints about it aren't legitimate considering I complain about it myself, but you seem to do a poor job connecting that with my post you replied to.

[Megadeus]

I just think that the turn 4 rule is dumb. If you really want the format to not be dominated by combo decks then make Force into a modern card. Sure blah blah blah we dont want legacy lite, but if the only combo decks are extremely shitty then people wont play them as much, and as we have seen with the rise of Jund and BUG decks, force of will isnt a good card in a format full of MidRange grindy decks. So force would see SB play more than likely (Combo wouldnt be as prevalent as it is in Legacy) and the format would have powerful things to do... Maybe Im just mad that Chrome Mox is banned. I just want some kind of not so shitty fast mana. Simian Spirit Guide just doesnt cut it.

Also to whoever said Misdirection would be banned, would it really? I think Masques block would have been great. You get some sweet stuff like Deed and Stifle and so much sweet shit. I would probably play modern if it went back that far. Nothing broken other than the storm mechanic really would be introduced to the format. Watch out for Lin Sivvi though ;) You also get all of the fetchlands. Allied fetches would be insanely fucking expensive, but that is nothing that a good old reprint cant fix.

[(nameless one)]

I'm a little sad that Chrome Mox is banned in Modern as well. Tezzerator isn't as it used to be when it was in Extended.

Legacy will die when people stopped paying attention to it. Price doesn't matter. People will either buy/borrow/steal (which is sad) cards to play the format. It will only die if the DCI wanted it too. Look at Extended (too much DCI meddling) and Vintage (they restricted Brainstorm)

[Gheizen64]

Overextended was a fine format and had like, a 10 card banned list (started from invasion tho', so no ritual, neither ports).

Bridge From Below

Disciple of the Vault

Hypergenesis

Mind’s Desire

Narcomoeba

Sensei’s Divining Top

Skullclamp

Sword of the Meek


If MM were to make it in, only ritual would be a sure ban. Daze with Shocks is much less annoying, and Port is a good card, but without wasteland i think there must be some options to punish greedy manabases.