Why isn't there more Storm combo in the US?

[nevilshute]

Why, why, why doesn't more people play Storm in the US?

Once in a blue moon I see a storm deck present in a top-8 or top-16 on the SCG-Open circuit, but that's about it. To me, it seems that storm is criminally underplayed at these SCG-events. It doesn't have a truly miserable matchup among the tier 1 decks unlike other mainstays (Elves gets steamrolled by Miracles, Death and Taxes gets steamrolled by Elves etc), is at worst about even against most of the field and even has (mostly) free wins against some of the other tier 1 decks (Elves).

Here in Europe there is a lot of storm compared to what my impression is of the US. The Elves deck that just won the SCGIndy open didn't even bother running a Ruric Thar among its 75 (or 76 rather). That would never cut it where I play.

I really struggle to understand this. Being one of the cheaper decks to assemble (only 4 duals, 8 fetches and 4 LEDs) budgetary reasons can't be it. Is it really a playstyle-preference thing? If so, I struggle to understand what would explain this.

Anyway, I know it frequently gets recited how Europe is more "combo-centric" than the US and I guess my impressions back this up, I just really do not understand why.

[Acclimation]

It's mostly a playstyle preference I think. A lot of the people I've met in the Midwest that are SCG Grinders prefer playing Midrange/Control decks, since they give them "more control over the outcome of the game" and less "losses because I didn't draw what I needed"; those being things that people have said to me.

Even then, the people who do want to play combo stick to either Elves or Show and Tell decks, and don't want to take the time to master storm combo decks; I think people feel that these decks are easily stopped.

So, to sum it up, people prefer to play boring decks because it gives them the illusion of choice, and they don't have the testicular fortitude to live life on the edge with a combo deck like Storm.

[nevilshute]

It's mostly a playstyle preference I think. A lot of the people I've met in the Midwest that are SCG Grinders prefer playing Midrange/Control decks, since they give them "more control over the outcome of the game" and less "losses because I didn't draw what I needed"; those being things that people have said to me.

Even then, the people who do want to play combo stick to either Elves or Show and Tell decks, and don't want to take the time to master storm combo decks; I think people feel that these decks are easily stopped.

So, to sum it up, people prefer to play boring decks because it gives them the illusion of choice, and they don't have the testicular fortitude to live life on the edge with a combo deck like Storm.

That sounds like a reasonable explanation. Though I'm fucked if I know why Europeans would be more risk willing than Americans :smile:

[GoblinZ]

I do think there are less good storm players in America than in Europe in general, I often see bad storm players on SCG stream, although I don't deny there are a few great storm players like Bryant Cook or Ari Lax,etc in America.

[Koby]

There is a lot more RUG Delver in the US than in Europe. RUG Delver is usually billed as the "aspiring Pro's top choice" because it give a great illusion of control, plus it's a delver deck so it can autopilot anyone with half a brain into Top 8. All that means is that it's a popular choice and has easy tools to fight most Storm decks between 8 free counters and an additional 7-8 one mana counters.

Most storm pilots cannot handle this kind of disruption without going into catatonic shock on a regular basis. Thus they put it down in favor of something more equitable against the bevy of Delver decks, which tend to also be blue based tempo strategies.

[nevilshute]

There is a lot more RUG Delver in the US than in Europe. RUG Delver is usually billed as the "aspiring Pro's top choice" because it give a great illusion of control, plus it's a delver deck so it can autopilot anyone with half a brain into Top 8. All that means is that it's a popular choice and has easy tools to fight most Storm decks between 8 free counters and an additional 7-8 one mana counters.

Most storm pilots cannot handle this kind of disruption without going into catatonic shock on a regular basis. Thus they put it down in favor of something more equitable against the bevy of Delver decks, which tend to also be blue based tempo strategies.

Interesting analysis. It's funny though, most committed storm pilots I've run into (and I can include myself to this group) will happily play against Delver decks any time. Fighting on only one axis (the stack) makes it quite beatable. Not trying to come off as saying that storm is a heavy favorite in the hands of the "right pilot", but at the same time when you are new to playing storm then them having force, daze, pierce and fluster/snare (post board) can feel unbeatable. In truth it is probably 50/50. The BUG variant can be a more challenging proposition due to discard.

[Higgs]

I think the primary reason is the European metagame is more diverse and therefore more people prefer to play with powerful, proactive decks (combo in general) as opposed to trying to play goodstuff aggro-control decks which try to metagame heavily and jam the best answers against a known metagame. With any control or aggro-control deck I think you are trying to constantly finetune your deck against a shifting target and in the American meta this is a more achievable goal because your target shifts less (less diversity). In an open meta if you put all that effort into learning your deck really well, you can take the same 75 which turn 2s your opponent consistently, you have better chances of doing well.

[Zombie]

There is a lot more RUG Delver in the US than in Europe. RUG Delver is usually billed as the "aspiring Pro's top choice" because it give a great illusion of control, plus it's a delver deck so it can autopilot anyone with half a brain into Top 8. All that means is that it's a popular choice and has easy tools to fight most Storm decks between 8 free counters and an additional 7-8 one mana counters.

Most storm pilots cannot handle this kind of disruption without going into catatonic shock on a regular basis. Thus they put it down in favor of something more equitable against the bevy of Delver decks, which tend to also be blue based tempo strategies.

Storm vs. RUG is really entertaining. Why do Americans hate entertainment ;_;



Storm --- even has (mostly) free wins against some of the other tier 1 decks (Elves).

Storm vs. Elves is not free. Not nowadays. It's certainly in Storm's favour, but not horribly. You want to beat Elves free, you're talking Reanimator and Miracles really.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

I think it also has something to do with commitment. Take someone like BBD, a good player who plays Legacy a lot during SCG Opens. He dabbled with Storm for a while but stopped playing the deck, to paraphrase his words, because he felt Storm forced him to always play perfectly or lose (a reasonably true observation, though you do get autopilot hands/matchups) - meaning he put more pressure on himself not to mess up than by playing something with similar expected value on deck alone. Storm is a great deck if you master the intricacies (though brainfarts can still be hard to avoid) but especially punishing during the learning process/if you only pick it up from time to time because so many small decision can cost you the whole game (something that's especially true against Delver Tempo decks, reinforcing Koby's point from above). So to become good with Storm, you need to commit and invest the time to focus on it alone, even if you're good at the game already. That's something many players aren't ready to do when they're mainly playing the Legacy Opens because they're already present because of Saturday's Standard event and, in all honesty, isn't a great allocation of playtest resources for them, at least in the medium to short term. In Europe, or at least that's my experience, Legacy players often are dedicated "format specialists" who are significantly more likely to invest the time to really understand Storm.

[nevilshute]

Storm vs. RUG is really entertaining. Why do Americans hate entertainment ;_;




Storm vs. Elves is not free. Not nowadays. It's certainly in Storm's favour, but not horribly. You want to beat Elves free, you're talking Reanimator and Miracles really.

The parathesis containing the word "mostly" was meant to bring nuance to the "free win" part, but it might have come off too confidently :smile: I know that it is less of a free win compared to both miracles and reanimator, heck I lost to my friend playing Elves the other night at our LGS after telling him how good of a matchup I thought it was. That being said I always feel very comfortable when playing storm against elves. Of the tier 1 decks it feels like the best matchup by some distance. Off the top of my head I think I can boast a 65-70 % win ratio at competative level.

[Zombie]

The parathesis containing the word "mostly" was meant to bring nuance to the "free win" part, but it might have come off too confidently :smile: I know that it is less of a free win compared to both miracles and reanimator, heck I lost to my friend playing Elves the other night at our LGS after telling him how good of a matchup I thought it was. That being said I always feel very comfortable when playing storm against elves. Of the tier 1 decks it feels like the best matchup by some distance. Off the top of my head I think I can boast a 65-70 % win ratio at competative level.

Probably because the matchup is in Storm's favour, especially Game 1. Favourable matchups tend to leave you with that confident feeling ^^
70% sounds a bit too heavy to me, but meh.

[Julian23]

Probably because the matchup is in Storm's favour, especially Game 1. Favourable matchups tend to leave you with that confident feeling ^^
70% sounds a bit too heavy to me, but meh.

70% for Game1 sounds reasonable. Postboard it of course heavily depends on what tools both players have available. With the sideboard I ran in the past, postboard games felt very 50/50, even potentially slightly favored for Elves when on the play. For now I have moved away from that configuration though for now.

Sorry, what were we talking about int he first place? Oh yeah, the presence of Storm. Pretty much that thing about how it feels that there are %-wise more dedicated deck specialists in Europe and how playing Storm "casually" doesn't really feel very rewarding, even if you win.

[btm10]

I can certainly agree that there seem to be few dedicated Legacy/Vintage-only in the US, at least in the Midwest. I'm originally from the Northeast, where there was a much better Vintage-only scene (Legacy had just been separated when I left, so it hadn't really developed yet. I have no idea what it's like there now). I say this because it might mean that there are also fewer (or a smaller proportion of) people who are predisposed to like/appreciate Storm here.

I also think there's an element of combo-shaming in a lot of local metas where people who bring ANT or TES week-in week-out are stigmatized for it. I'd play ANT in my local if there weren't 4 or 5 dedicated BUG Delver players, butI don't think I can play flawlessly in that matchup since I haven't played Storm combo as my primary deck in years (the last time was when I could run 4 LED in Long.dec).

I think the greater puzzle is why people in the US continue to play so much Elves and Sneak and Show relative to Storm, which is just objectively more powerful and probably more resilient than either.

[nevilshute]

Sure, it's funny though. Having played storm with some regularity for about a year and half (and intensely during the six months leading up the recent BoM) I felt that I pretty quickly reached something of a plateau with the deck. Maybe after about two months. It was here that I really started to minimize play mistakes and got the hang of more and more lines of play. After that though the progress is slow and harder to track at least from your own point of view.

However, whenever I've since then tried to play something like Death and Taxes or even tempo strategies for any period of time I've always felt that those types of decks actually contained, if not more, then at least as many demanding play skills as Storm. To me, personally, I find it... not easier, but perhaps less taxing to play storm. Maybe it means I'm not maximizing the deck's potential I don't know. But it usually feels like my plan is more linear and clear to me. I know what I need to do and it will usually demand a lot of mental energy during one or two big turns during each game (notwithstanding the games where you just free roll). With something like D&T it feels like every freaking turn has two or more incredibly important decisions. Every goddamn turn*. Turn after turn, game after game, round after round. It gives me a head ache just thinking about it :smile: The mistakes you make - like for instance not porting to flash in mindcensor or vice versa - are more subtle than the "oh, I guess I miscounted" Ad Nauseam flop, but feels like they will equate to much the same during the course of a tournament. It's the same - if slightly less so - with tempo decks. Each turn has so much subtle intricacy and it's much harder to know if you were right in the decision you made on turns one and two.

Maybe people are just happy to play these decks suboptimally because the decks never force them to face that. Unlike storm where you'll have egg all over your face after expending all your resources trying to infernal tutor without being hellbent. Instead they play a solid deck that puts up results all the time but that, for some mystical reason, they can never seem to do better than x-2 with.


*I'm not saying that only the turn you win with storm matters. Obviously there are decisions to be made in every turn leading up that and you can get mileage out of your experience in terms of maximizing cantrips and discard.

[Megadeus]

It's a tough deck. I played TES for a few months to mixed results. Basically when I actually thought out my lines I would win, but on nights when I was unfocused I'd lose. Go figure. I quit mostly because grinding locals with storm is miserable for me and my opponents. I think though that the mass amount of delver in the US, like someone said has something to do with it. The main "grinders" who play more than a handful of large legacy events per year just aren't storm players.

[Bryant Cook]

I think the level of storm pilots is really based on your location in the US. In the northeast (Where I live), there's actually a decent amount of competent storm players. But I too have noticed the lack of numbers in the mid-west, there used to be some in the Los Angeles/Vegas area but they've seemed to dry up.

[Zombie]

It's a tough deck. I played TES for a few months to mixed results. Basically when I actually thought out my lines I would win, but on nights when I was unfocused I'd lose. Go figure. I quit mostly because grinding locals with storm is miserable for me and my opponents. I think though that the mass amount of delver in the US, like someone said has something to do with it. The main "grinders" who play more than a handful of large legacy events per year just aren't storm players.

Pretty much why I stopped playing TES. So many hands scream "Turn 1 Goblins, go." Doesn't feel much like playing Magic.

[mini1337s]

Pretty sure that the NA combo preference is Sneak and Show. Similar, uninteractive, powerful game, but much less taxing on the player. Not to say that Sneak and Show doesn't require skill, but it's a lot easier to jam 10 rounds of SnT into Emrakul than it is to combo off with storm.

[Megadeus]

Also, being able to derp into a 2 card combo is much more simple than actually having to sequence out your spells. Cast Show and Tell. Put in Griselbrand. If my opponent does nothing, battle for 7. If he tries to kill it, draw until I find answer.

[Sloshthedark]

I think

1, the deck is just label being hard, if you're bad with Storm after couple of weeks you're probably bad at legacy/MtG in the first place...

2, the SCG Sundays have a decent portion of non-legacy players who aren't able to even try to step 1 and do not know what they are doing at all

3, getting stigmatized as the "Storm guy" in your LGS is the real point when it gets harder, it's when you open the door and flusterstorms start falling out of peoples binders... well that means you have earned some respected at least... the "i know what you're up to mull into FoW" is annoying and sometimes an obstacle for a novice...

conclusion - Storm is like any other better deck in legacy, pro/cons, strenghts/weaknesses, people not interested/experienced in legacy/Mtg tend to play poorly like with any other deck but do not see it (most damage is self inflicted, no creatures racing, combatmath = too much whip & no sugar), blame the deck rather then themselves then choose their favorite SFM deck/aggro tempo shit and spin the roulette with the same bad plays next week...

simply put it's not appealing/rewarding deck for the masses of average Mtg players


There is a lot more RUG Delver in the US than in Europe. RUG Delver is usually billed as the "aspiring Pro's top choice" because it give a great illusion of control, plus it's a delver deck so it can autopilot anyone with half a brain into Top 8. All that means is that it's a popular choice and has easy tools to fight most Storm decks between 8 free counters and an additional 7-8 one mana counters.

Most storm pilots cannot handle this kind of disruption without going into catatonic shock on a regular basis. Thus they put it down in favor of something more equitable against the bevy of Delver decks, which tend to also be blue based tempo strategies.

RUG - that's actually situation I'd love to play in... I consider Thresh one of my best match-ups (that's kind of sad) and definitely the most entertaining one

[phazonmutant]

I love storm. I played it for a long time, but eventually had to put it down.

Sure, it's powerful and proactive, but at least in the US meta, all the free wins have dried up. People know how to sideboard against storm now - 2 types of interaction - and the answer cards like Flusterstorm and Rest in Peace are much better. If the meta were right, I would certainly go back to storm, but right now the meta is filled with 50-50 matchups (at best) like all the flavors of Delver, Miracles, Sneak and Show, and even Death and Taxes can be difficult for ANT. Plenty of grinders pick up storm, and some fall in love with it, but I think most have done a similar EV calculation and figured out that non-storm decks are better.

[afb0032]

A lot of great posts that I agree with so far. It is a deck that is rewarding with lots of practice, but a lot of people want to play traditional magic and attack/block in the US, or just automatically assume that it is hard and that they would never be able to play it. There is a lot of negative stigma as others have mentioned about playing storm/playing against storm in certain metas as well. It upsets a lot of people to sit down, be done with the match in 10-15 minutes, and not have a chance to play their expensive deck. If people actually care what others think of them, then this can discourage individuals from potentially even trying the deck.

[Dice_Box]

If you do not want RIP to be a pain, just don't play ANT. There is another option.

[Lemnear]

If you do not want RIP to be a pain, just don't play ANT. There is another option.

How cunning ;P

[mishima_kazuya]

A lot of great posts that I agree with so far. It is a deck that is rewarding with lots of practice, but a lot of people want to play traditional magic and attack/block in the US, or just automatically assume that it is hard and that they would never be able to play it. There is a lot of negative stigma as others have mentioned about playing storm/playing against storm in certain metas as well. It upsets a lot of people to sit down, be done with the match in 10-15 minutes, and not have a chance to play their expensive deck. If people actually care what others think of them, then this can discourage individuals from potentially even trying the deck.

There is a small gag about me taking forever to resolve my Ponders when I play AnT. So both me and my opponent will have plenty of time to admire my Japanese/chinese cards. :P

On a more serious note, I can understand the frustration of losing to a slow roll lethal tendrils of agony as I quadruple check my mana and storm count.

[btm10]

I love storm. I played it for a long time, but eventually had to put it down.

Sure, it's powerful and proactive, but at least in the US meta, all the free wins have dried up. People know how to sideboard against storm now - 2 types of interaction - and the answer cards like Flusterstorm and Rest in Peace are much better. If the meta were right, I would certainly go back to storm, but right now the meta is filled with 50-50 matchups (at best) like all the flavors of Delver, Miracles, Sneak and Show, and even Death and Taxes can be difficult for ANT. Plenty of grinders pick up storm, and some fall in love with it, but I think most have done a similar EV calculation and figured out that non-storm decks are better.

This actually prompts the other side of the OP's question: Why is there comparatively little Delver in Europe? Or why is the meta there less hostile to Storm?


... but a lot of people want to play traditional magic and attack/block in the US

I get what you're saying, but I probably wouldn't call attacking/blocking "traditional" magic, at least not in eternal formats ever since mid-late 90's. Sure, Weissman-style control ran Serra Angel and/or Morphling, but those creatures engaged in creature-to-creature combat a comparatively small proportion of the time and usually just mopped up when winning was a formality.

[DarthVicious]

I started with ANT before Mystical got banned and haven't given up on storm since. Tried TES, it was OK. But I'll never stop playing SI.

There really is nothing like ninja kills...

[Tammit67]

There is a small gag about me taking forever to resolve my Ponders when I play AnT. So both me and my opponent will have plenty of time to admire my Japanese/chinese cards. :P

Literal years, Jacky.

I've put down storm for elves in recent weeks. Turn 1 probe revealing flusterstorm, spell snare, force of will, brainstorm is incredibly frustrating. It is one of those decks everyone hates to lose to so they pack hate.

This wasn't as much of a problem before but the hate has become more effective and, the major point, flexible. Meddling mage, flusterstorm, enlightened tutor, thalia, grafdigger's cage, rest in peace, surgical extraction, snapcaster mage, clique + karakas, venser...

Every deck is trying to attack you from 2+ angles. It feels like in order to do well at an event, my decisions don't matter as much as my opponent's draw step. At the same time, I watch Royce Walters and Bryant Cook crush events in the northeast US with TES and it boogles my mind how they end up doing well consistently.

[Lemnear]

This actually prompts the other side of the OP's question: Why is there comparatively little Delver in Europe? Or why is the meta there less hostile to Storm?

There is more than enough Delver, but the metagame is more hostile towards the matchplan of slamming Turn 1 Delver and riding it to victory which should be obvious if you look at the sheer number of Miracles, Shardless, D&T, and GWx Midrange in Europe, which have all a more than solid matchup against Daze + Wasteland + Delver.

North American players looks like prefering the Delver-mirror and a few trumps to battle opponents Insectile Aberation for the already named reasons. In Europe there are much fewer supported tournaments with companies like WotC or SCG as backers and much less players who can make a living of grinding in the various Formats supported by those

[afb0032]

This actually prompts the other side of the OP's question: Why is there comparatively little Delver in Europe? Or why is the meta there less hostile to Storm?



I get what you're saying, but I probably wouldn't call attacking/blocking "traditional" magic, at least not in eternal formats ever since mid-late 90's. Sure, Weissman-style control ran Serra Angel and/or Morphling, but those creatures engaged in creature-to-creature combat a comparatively small proportion of the time and usually just mopped up when winning was a formality.

You are correct. My intention was to use that as a example of interactive magic compared to just sitting there watching a storm player count and add up numbers.

[Bryant Cook]

At the same time, I watch Royce Walters and Bryant Cook crush events in the northeast US with TES and it boogles my mind how they end up doing well consistently.

We recommend lots of practice, Blue Moon and self-loathing.

[MrGlantz]

Is this really true that there isn't much storm combo in the US? In the PA / NJ meta where I play I see a decent amount of storm. I don't really watch scg much anymore, but I've always assumed that was an overblown myth, but I've never looked at the data to see if that's true.

[Richard Cheese]

Seems like at our local meta almost everyone plays storm combo at one point or another, but almost nobody seems to stick with it long term. Can't speak for everyone, but for me it feels very all-or-nothing, and it's much more like puzzle solving than a typical game of Magic. Sometimes that's exactly what I'm in the mood for, but usually it's not. For big events I almost never take storm because I'm just not that good at it, and one misplay tends to put me in a shitty mindset and lead to a bunch more.

[JACO]

I just don't think Storm is all that appealing an option for most people. It's a good deck, but not all that well positioned. There are tons of dead draws (relative to Delver decks), and no 'value' plays, unlike Delver, CounterTop, and Shardless variants. Even when playing combo, it's much easier to assemble Show and Tell plus your kill card of choice, and decks like Sneak and Show typically fare very well heads up against Storm (because they have very broken openers, play Force of Will, Flusterstorm, Spell Pierce, etc.). I don't see a whole lot of incentive to play Storm given the other available option at the moment, as the metagame is currently constituted. If there wasn't like 70% blue decks in most tournaments here it might be more feasible. Storm is always present, but often gets swallowed up in a sea of Delver and Stoneforge decks.

[Richard Cheese]

Then again, sometimes you have a killer hangover and you just need to break the emergency glass on Belcher.

[Griselpuff]

I also think Miracles is heavily underplayed in the US. RUG is a good deck but it is a bit overplayed here.

[Admiral_Arzar]

A lot of good replies in this thread. I spent the first couple years I played Legacy playing almost exclusively combo (primarily Storm and High Tide but I tested plenty of other decks as well). Eventually I needed a change, and in the case of High Tide especially the time has passed and the deck just isn't well positioned anymore. The favorable matchups are largely extinct due to the death of aggro decks since the printing of Batterskull/Delver/Terminus et al. My local metagame is a giant circlejerk of Delver decks (75% at times) and that matchup is never really better than 50/50 and is not particularly fun to play against in my experience. When combo does appear it's usually Sneak or ReAnimator both of which are poor matchups. I would rather play midrange decks (or combo that has a grinding plan B, see Food Chain) in this kind of meta and have been relatively successful doing so. I'd like to go back to combo, but when I face a field of almost entirely blue decks and can look forward to enormous amounts of post-board hate attacking me from numerous angles, I just don't see the point.

[twndomn]

I also think Miracles is heavily underplayed in the US. RUG is a good deck but it is a bit overplayed here.

comments like that can easily cause a thread to go off-tangent. Imagine in an alternate universe where Joe Lossett did not play Miracles and stream, or an universe in which Jose Lossett is not an American, THEN, where would Miracles be in the U.S.? Hence, I would say US has maxed out on the number of Miracles players.

Now, back to Storm, according to PV's article, Storm and Miracles are the highest in terms of difficulty http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/pvs-playhouse-hard-decks/ . As you know, Americans are exactly known for the patience. Dosen't help when Adam Prosak left the competitive scene for R&D.

[Barook]

Now, back to Storm, according to PV's article, Storm and Miracles are the highest in terms of difficulty http://www.channelfireball.com/articles/pvs-playhouse-hard-decks/.
Storm isn't easily to play, but please don't quote that terrible article. Claiming that Sneak and Show is harder to play than D&T and being above-average in terms of difficulty when a mouthbreather can pay :2::u: and jam down a flying spagetti monster to win the game is downright insulting to everyone's intelligence.

[Final Fortune]

RUG is the least of Storm's worries, in theory it should thrive in a RUG a heavy meta game as opposed to any other aggro control heavy meta game because Lightning Bolt is hardly a concern compared to discard or bears.

[MGB]

Storm is too linear a strategy. If you play enough hate and have a clock, you can have a 60%+ win percentage vs Storm with any deck, basically.

BUG Delver, RUG Delver, Death n Taxes, and the like all have very good answers for Storm combo backed up by a quick clock. Miracles has a two card combo (Countertop) that says "I win" vs. Storm. Other combo decks like Elves, Reanimator, and Show n Tell are as fast, or faster than Storm.

I just don't think that Storm is a good strategy in Legacy any more. It's like the Goblins of combo decks - once well positioned and powerful, but the rest of the format has surpassed it with newer printings.

[SaberTooth]

I play storm in legacy. It's my favourite deck (the deck that i enjoy most), but why you want to play storm when you can play griselbrand decks and win more even without thiking too much?

[Lemnear]

Storm is too linear a strategy. If you play enough hate and have a clock, you can have a 60%+ win percentage vs Storm with any deck, basically.

BUG Delver, RUG Delver, Death n Taxes, and the like all have very good answers for Storm combo backed up by a quick clock. Miracles has a two card combo (Countertop) that says "I win" vs. Storm. Other combo decks like Elves, Reanimator, and Show n Tell are as fast, or faster than Storm.

I just don't think that Storm is a good strategy in Legacy any more. It's like the Goblins of combo decks - once well positioned and powerful, but the rest of the format has surpassed it with newer printings.

Lmfao

You act as if card like Abrupt Decay (Counterbalance), Dread of Night (D&T) or Cabal Ritual (RUG's softcounter) do not exist or as if Hatebears or turn 3 Craterhoof are faster than storm can combo in average. You also miss that ANT gives a fuck about it's life total as long as it's bigger than Zero. What about actually dipping a nose into the archetype before trying to be smart? It's not that the last BoM's didn't have quite some storm decks in their top 8/16/32

[Tammit67]

Storm is too linear a strategy. If you play enough hate and have a clock, you can have a 60%+ win percentage vs Storm with any deck, basically.
Isn't that like every deck? Sure the hate against storm is effective, but if you board enough against any deck you can swing matchups.


BUG Delver, RUG Delver, Death n Taxes, and the like all have very good answers for Storm combo backed up by a quick clock. Miracles has a two card combo (Countertop) that says "I win" vs. Storm. Other combo decks like Elves, Reanimator, and Show n Tell are as fast, or faster than Storm.
Every deck finally has a way to interact, this is true. That doesn't mean storm is completely helpless though.

I actually lose more to cannonist postboard out of miracles than counterbalance preboard out of miracles

[Richard Cheese]

This thread has become "why is storm good/bad right now", when the question is why it's not getting played in the US. I think it's just a cyclical effect from having well-publicized, large tournaments happening almost every week. The top SCG grinders, the ones that show up to almost every tournament, seem to prefer decks like xUx Delver, Miracles, and Stoneblade. My guess is that it's because these are all very flexible, have few terrible matchups, and don't often lose to variance, but the reasons don't really matter. If you go to a large event in the states, you have a pretty reasonable expectation of seeing some or all of those decks at the top tables, so most people are either going to try to emulate their success or play something to specifically beat that meta, and storm combo just doesn't really fit well into either of those categories.

Also, as some people have already mentioned, storm sees plenty of play at local events in the US, but it comes and goes more than being a staple, because small metas are much easier to sideboard for.

[Zombie]

BUG Delver, RUG Delver, Death n Taxes, and the like all have very good answers for Storm combo backed up by a quick clock. Miracles has a two card combo (Countertop) that says "I win" vs. Storm. Other combo decks like Elves, Reanimator, and Show n Tell are as fast, or faster than Storm.

I just don't think that Storm is a good strategy in Legacy any more. It's like the Goblins of combo decks - once well positioned and powerful, but the rest of the format has surpassed it with newer printings.

Elves is as fast as ANT, no more. And even then ANT packs discard where Elves packs grindy draw engines and stuff. ANT is definitely the favourite game 1. It's not nightmarish, but certainly not even. G2/3 Elves tends to morph into some weird prison/tempo/beatdown concoction that does have a nice Storm matchup. But it's not really about the combo then, it's about disruption and turning dudes sideways.

[CabalTherapy]

This discussion could have been copy-pasted from mtg salvation.
I am really not sure if you guys know what you are talking about. JACO's and MGB's posts are hilarious.

[nevilshute]

I think this thread has started to go off the rails a bit. The question was never "is storm a good deck?". It quite obviously is, at the very least, a fine deck and has shown through the years a resiliency to all the hate coming its way (for people with short term memory I'd like to point to the fact that the BoM in Paris in November had 3 storm decks in the top 8).

Further, to the people in this thread making statements regarding storm not being good anymore:

If you accept the premiss that storm is played significantly more in Europe than in the US then are all the Europeans playing storm just stupid? Why are they choosing a suboptimal deck? Or is everyone else stupid for not playing "good enough" anti-storm strategies. I really don't think so.

Some people in this thread have offered some good insights into why there seems to be this disparity between the amount of storm pilots in the US compared to Europe. I, at least partly, feel like my initial question was answered :smile:

[Higgs]

Yep, by looking at the discussion it seems that less people believe in the deck in the States. Could be why.

[Mystic Snake]

Is it the same reason why rug is far more played in the US than in Europe where people think it is almost dead because of bug strategies...?
I guess it is all about everyone's habits that each deck is played or not.
Same question about miracles which is a part of the metagame much more than in the US, where only Joe lossett is a regular of the deck...

Sent from my GT-I9300 using Tapatalk

[heathen]

I can only speak for myself, but I stopped playing Storm for a number of reasons.

First, where I play (Denver) the Legacy scene is small and we very rarely get any kind of big event (no SCG Open around here since 2012). So, if you consistently play one deck, or one style of deck, people remember it and make their game one decisions accordingly. Automatically giving my opponent's that edge in every match feels like a fairly significant issue.

Second, the sideboard answers to Storm are just so potent, and no one likes losing to Storm so I think people over-compensate their sideboard plans (again, at least locally here where they can know they will face Storm and thus not feel like the sideboard space is wasted). Playing those awful games 2 and 3 really wore me down.

Third, and again I'm just speaking for myself, I began to think that I'm just not good enough at the game to play Storm truly well. After devoting a fair amount of time to it I did feel comfortable with it and developed some degree of skill, but I don't think I'm good enough to play it on the level of a truly good Storm player. Thus, in every match I'm battling my opponent AND myself. I love Storm but it can really punish small mistakes, and for a sub-par player like me that really hurt my results.

Fourth, I never found a variety of Storm that truly felt great for me. I started out with ANT, which I liked but often felt too slow. So I switched to TES and didn't like the sketchy manabase. TES definitely made me think that I'm not that good of a player. I briefly flirted with Doomsday, but that REALLY showed me I wasn't up to the task. I also tried some tweaked lists of my own, but again I felt like I simply wasn't a good enough player to truly do well with them.

Finally, after playing unfair and somewhat uninteractive Magic in Legacy for so long, I've decided I want to try playing a bit more fair and try being a bit more interactive. I don't think I'll set the world on fire with a fair deck, but it's appealing to me right now.

[Tormod]

Storm comes and goes in my meta. We have known storm players that will shelve their decks when the hate is strong and bring play other decks. The same hold true for graveyard combo decks like dredge and re animator. They never really go away, they just come and go.

Fair decks are popular. I've seen an increase in shardless bug and miracles.

[sjmcc13]

I think the lack of storm in the US (not sure how this relates to Europe though) is due to a combination of several factors affecting its playability.
A few of them being :

Fair" and "Unfair" deck propaganda.
Fair and unfair were a horrible choice of labels. People have a tendency to associate "Unfair" with cheating, and avoid such decks. Conventional decks for creature based ones, and unconventional decks for other decks that use a different axis of attack. All that labelling decks as unfair does is make people who do not want to interact in other ways feel better (it is not your fault your zombie deck lost, even though had you been running some discard you could have disrupted him enough to pull out a win), and justify the game being slowly turned into nothing but drop creatures turn them sideways seems to be the only valid interaction in Wizards likes.
The american educational system
the US educational system is NOT designed to produce free thinking intellectuals. It is designed to create drones who do what they are told, and believe what they are told to believe. Or simply put it is designed to create conformists. This means that they are more likely to disregard decks that have negative connotations and pick up decks with positive ones. This means that they will tend to go towards whatever decks are being hyped or advertised.
The Stores/stratagey articles
Stores are going to hype the decks that make them the most money, The only expensive card in ANT's Main deck that is not played all over the place is LED. Seriously once you have the mana base the rest of the deck can be built under $200, probably under $100 if you shop around enough. Why would a store hype ANY when there is ore money to be made selling Canadian Threshold which runs Goyf, FoW, and Stifle on top of a mana base that costs more then ANT on its own. Or Deathblade with Jace, Fow, SFM, Jitte and Batterskull. There is more money to be made on the other decks, especially if they market those cards to higher demand levels.
Bad and vocal players
I do not know what the levels are like in Europe, but I have run into allot of bad players over the years I have been playing MTG, and the vocal ones complaining about decks being bad/wrong/unfun has a tendency to discourage players from trying them. I have seen people become convinced that storm was a bad deck that should be hated out after losing to it once, with not effort of thought put into analysing what he could have done to win, or to protect against that type of deck in the future or shore up his defences against that type of strategy. (Though this is also a guy who in a previous game when I was playing a Std aggro deck saw me evaluating how to tap mana in my main phase to play something and immediately tried to cast silence because he had 0 understanding of priority and the stack and did not realize I had to pass it first) though to make matters worse it was not storm that won that game but a bad and unreliable infinite combo (required 3 specific cards, and doubles of 2 of them) of them that would have killed him with any burn card and a draw spell that had I drawn into.

I have run into to many people who just want to play fat, turn it sideways and complain about any other type of deck. Which is a mindset I never understand because to me the amount of different strategies and axis of attack is what makes magic so fun of a game (I am also someone who the more complex a deck the more I wan to play it for the challenge, and Yes I own every card for Doomsday, and have built it a couple times) I have never lost to a deck and said that deck should not exist, I always took it as a learning opportunity to see what my deck needs. I do not care if you are going to run Stasis, because if I do not have an answer in the deck/board then I will next week.
Instant gratification culture
To many people want low investment and high reward, given the choice between a simple deck, and a complex one they will pick the simple one every time even if the complex deck is more powerful. I have seen people take a deck, loose 1 tournament and give up allot over the years. This is also present in people saying thing like why play X when I can just Show and Tell down a Grizzlebrand. to many players are skill averse,In my experience most new players never actually read the rules, and rely on someone else to explain them t them who in turn does not know the rules properly since they never read them, and it has been there since the beginning as the confusion back in the day over banding was due to not reading the rulebook (I still remember the gu who taught me to play getting the rule wrong, and only knowing because I picked up a rulebook the furs chance I got), and it is not limited to Magic almost every D&D group I have played in has had 1-3 players who refused to read the basics of the rules.

[ESG]

This is the most laughable post I've seen in a while. There is no conspiracy by stores to hype decks. People play what they want to play or, in some cases, what they can afford. And the U.S. education system has nothing to do with how people select Magic decks. I'm laughing out loud! I can't believe someone is blaming the U.S. education system for people not playing Storm.

You would learn a lot more if you actually asked people why they play the decks they do.

[Higgs]

The pro-circuit in the States and SCG qualifier ladders etc. could be another reason why people prefer picking up more straightforward, factory standard delver/SFM decks over fun decks like Storm and TinFins. I don't think in Europe people play Legacy to build up some points for a given tournament circuit or to earn cash like a pro card player, but people play Legacy just because they love the format.

[Sloshthedark]

This is the most laughable post I've seen in a while. There is no conspiracy by stores to hype decks. People play what they want to play or, in some cases, what they can afford. And the U.S. education system has nothing to do with how people select Magic decks. I'm laughing out loud! I can't believe someone is blaming the U.S. education system for people not playing Storm.

You would learn a lot more if you actually asked people why they play the decks they do.

Aside U.S. education system I know nothing about, those points are not unreasonable for me...

1. true
2. - sound a bit stupid
3. bit exaggegerated legacy is too expensive, but shapes metagame and functional in Mtg in overall
4. true
5. true

[MGB]

What's funny is that ESG's post is basically a reinforcement of sjmcc13's point about the US educational system.

[ESG]

What's funny is that ESG's post is basically a reinforcement of sjmcc13's point about the US educational system.

I don't see how you could infer that. People have free will, but most of them do not have unlimited money. It has nothing to do with mindless conformity. If someone wants to get into Legacy, that person is going to build the deck or decks that he or she finds interesting and powerful. I know plenty of people who love Storm and would never grow tired of it. I also know plenty of people who played Storm for a while and are off of it now, for various reasons. I don't see how you guys can make a value judgment about people who play or don't play Storm. You're exalting Storm players and slamming everyone else.

There are bad players in every format, and some of them -- shock of shocks! -- even play Storm. I've been handed free wins by at least three different Storm players over the years who either miscounted mana or storm.

[Richard Cheese]

Only one AdNaus deck in the top 16 this week?

THANKS OBAMA.

[afb0032]

Only one AdNaus deck in the top 16 this week?

THANKS OBAMA.

Thank you very much for my new sig quote!

[pcalexander]

THANKS OBAMA.
I think that we may be onto something.

[PirateKing]

Vote me for President! My pledge: to elect a Storm Czar to sort this nonsense out.

[HammafistRoob]

Not really sure why, maybe most people prefer to not fight through tons of hate cards? I find it intriguing and frustrating at the same time. I've only played about 9 tournament matches with storm(Bryant's list) at the local. I'm currently 4-6 so far playing against ANT with faster hands, MUD, Miracles, and Reanimator. I did manage to beat Reanimator but the pilot was inexperienced with the deck and blue cards in general. I also won a game against Miracles where I had Tendrils in hand and needed to get him to cast two spells for the natural tendrils, he had Vendilion+Karakas and CBtop online. I got him to Brainstorm and Force of Will and slipped in the Agony for exactsies(18). It felt great but I proceeded to get steam rolled in game 3.

I'm probably gonna stick with it at the locals for a while, although I like to switch up my deck choice a lot. I've noticed a good amount of mistakes in my play afterwards or saw different lines I should've taken after the fact. Game 1's are generally cake, but post board is where the skill of the storm pilot really gets tested. I don't see myself playing it in a large tournament though, since I like decks with more flexibility in card choices and boarding plans for 6+ round events. I also don't have the resources to do the proper amount of dedicated testing with the deck. It is fun winning with though.

[LOLWut]

The american educational systemthe US educational system is NOT designed to produce free thinking intellectuals. It is designed to create drones who do what they are told, and believe what they are told to believe. Or simply put it is designed to create conformists. This means that they are more likely to disregard decks that have negative connotations and pick up decks with positive ones. This means that they will tend to go towards whatever decks are being hyped or advertised.

The European education system is NOT designed to produce free thinking intellectuals. It is designed to create drones who are less likely to be entrepreneurs and invent a game like M:tG.


The pro-circuit in the States and SCG qualifier ladders etc. could be another reason why people prefer picking up more straightforward, factory standard delver/SFM decks over fun decks like Storm and TinFins. I don't think in Europe people play Legacy to build up some points for a given tournament circuit or to earn cash like a pro card player, but people play Legacy just because they love the format.

I commissioned Quinnipiac for a poll and out of the scores who've played in or watched a SCG event, they found 47 people who care about points for the SCG Players' Championship.

[btm10]

The European education system is NOT designed to produce free thinking intellectuals. It is designed to create drones who are less likely to be entrepreneurs and invent a game like MtG

You're both wrong, at least based on my experience with people who have been through the French, German, Italian, and post '86 Polish educational systems. The people who make it to what most people in the US would recognize as or call 'high school' actually do learn a lot more, and get much deeper theoretically into their schoolwork than their counterparts in the States. The way this is achieved is by tracking those who aren't academically strong into vocational programs that are less bookish. In the US, the stated goals of universal secondary education and a whole host of historical issues particular to the US means that tracking is harder to achieve in practice and the secondary curriculum is less rigorous for the average student as a result. Any direct comparison between these systems that doesn't take the difference in their goals and methods into account is uninformed at best and disingenuous at worst. In any case, sjmcc13 didn't provide any evidence for any of his points and they're pretty weak except for the first one as a minor contributor.

[hobart]

OK so I've been lurking on here since I got back into Magic again a several months ago (love the site), and a few posts in this thread are so great I finally had to make an account to praise them. First of all, sjmcc13's points are all spot on, and I love LOVE that he decided to take a shot at the US educational system while ranting about the current topic. Also, Richard Cheese's "Thanks Obama" line made me laugh so hard I spit my coffee all over my keyboard at work. Keep it up!