[Article] North American Defeatism and the Dominance of Brainstorm

[sdematt]

"Three Steps Forward, and Two Steps Back: North American Defeatism and the Dominance of Brainstorm," a rebuttal by Everyday Eternal host Matt Pavlic.

Legacy is, by far, one of the most intricate, difficult, frustrating, enjoyable, and entertaining formats in all of Magic the Gathering. Many people in the local Legacy community have been playing since Type 1.5 back in 2003. The shift of decks over the past ten years has been more than generous as more and more cards are added to the abundant pool that is Legacy. However, few cards truly shake up the format often, and yet, even with little change over periods of many years, Legacy is hardly a solved format, in contrast to something like Magic 1994. Jeff Hoogland recently wrote an article which will be referred to in this rebuttal (http://themeadery.org/articles/leaving-legacy-for-a-modern-mistress), explaining Mr. Hoogland’s frustration with Legacy and his subsequent move to strictly blue decks in Legacy and to Modern.

The article begins with complaining that “Legacy is a degenerate and frustrating format.” I wholeheartedly agree with the words scribed but not the tone of this argument. Legacy is a powerful format, with access to almost every card ever printed. The frustration experienced has to do with the minimum power level to compete, I suspect. If you are not familiar with Legacy, imagine a professional basketball team. To compete, you need to be at least as good as a professional basketball player. College ball just won’t cut it, and this can frustrate many people. The minimum barrier of entry is so high because the format will only use THE most efficient spell at doing a specific task – whether it be removing a creature, buffering variance, or drawing cards. In the cutthroat world of Legacy, you are either first or you are last.

The article progresses to explain one of adventure of someone getting into Legacy – mainly through the Aggro Loam archetype – and their subsequent Legacy experience with powerful decks and strategies. As a fellow non-blue player and past competitive Aggro-Loam player, I understand the trials and tribulations of defeating top-tier archetypes with something out of left field. Consistency, the article claims, is the reason he could not defeat top performing blue archetypes in the hands of very experienced players. I cannot truly rebut his anecdotal evidence, but I can add some of my own. Aggro-Loam, or 4-Colour Loam, is one of the most inconsistent piles of amazing cards a person could construct. The deck has incredible internal synergy with itself, but this is assuming you draw the right combination of cards in the right order. You could say this about any deck, or any pile of powerful cards firing on all cylinders. Seismic Assault, Life from the Loam, Countryside Crusher, Terravore, Mox Diamond, and others work so well in concert with each other that when Loam decks get going, there’s almost no stopping them as the late game engine is too powerful. I played Aggro-Loam primarily in the Mental Misstep Summer of 2011, as some of you may recall. The deck was unstoppable and I was over thirty matches to zero against Stoneblade of the era. Why? The deck itself is inconsistent, but can create clunkiness in an opponent’s deck just due to Aggro-Loam’s inherent strategy and being so different from the other decks in the format at the time. This is something important that will be expounded upon later – reducing variance and increasing an opponent’s variance and decreasing value and consistency. The top placing deck of the format just was not ready to handle something so powerful and so different. Case in point, the article compares one of the most all-or-nothing decks in the format to blue decks that run Brainstorm and are designed to reduce variance. My best attempts to reduce variance and increase consistency for Aggro-Loam have moved towards using engines like Dark Confidant and Sylvan Library, yet other builds fail to address key structural flaws within the archetype (like Dredging away your Dark Confidants and Sylvan Libraries accidentally...), and have instead resulted in protests against the Legacy format containing Brainstorm.

Next, the article claims that, “Brainstorm is generally present in more than 50 percent of the top performing Legacy decks every Open weekend...in a format with more than two decades worth of legal cards, more than half the successful players feel it is necessary to play four copies of the same card week in and week out.” One of the main problems with Legacy at the moment is the egocentrism that the North American Legacy Circuit, mainly the SCG Open Circuit, IS the Legacy format, which is one of the biggest mistakes in assessing the health of the format at large. For a long time, Legacy was popular in scattered pockets around North America, with the most activity in the Northeastern United States (New York, Boston, Maryland, DC, etc.). For much of the mid-2000’s, the majority of the activity in terms of numbers of players, tournaments, and new deck construction were and have been done in Europe, mostly in Germany, Italy, and France. Due to the proximity of large metropolitan areas in Europe, much like the small corner of the East Coast of the US, Legacy flourished, but original design was still more present in Europe than America.

Look at the current decks in the Legacy metagame on a world scale – where did they originate? Who designed them? Where were decks tuned and popularized? Miracles, Shardless BUG, Imperial Painter, Patriot Delver, Elves, Death and Taxes, Nic Fit, OmniTell, and others are all European creations or saw many more finishes in Europe before people caught on in America. The only North American decks to really make an impact have been RUG Delver, Team America, and Sneak Attack. Why has most of the innovation come from Europe? I can’t say for sure, but the Europeans are really doing a better job than us North Americans. Survival Vengevine got you down? Play Combo. Delver delving a bit too hard for you? There’s a Miracle just a Top away. True-Name Nemesis too good for you? Toxic Deluge says hello. Lists are manifested and tweaked with enthusiasm. Deck choice snobbery also exists heavily within the North American metagame as well, and to a lesser extent in Europe. With every ebb and flow of the Legacy format, the Europeans have bailed everyone out with either a new deck or have started the metagame shift months before the SCG circuit sees much change. The impact of the internet has decreased this time, but the delay is still there.

I think what the article is actually addressing is that the sharks of the SCG circuit – whether they are professionals or just above average – tend to choose Brainstorm decks or blue decks over non-blue decks. In Europe, the split is not as drastic. Tune into any tournament results for a large European tournament and you will see a Brainstorm contingent, but not to the same extent as in North America. You see much more Jund, Nic-Fit, Junk, Deadguy Ale and other decks that prey upon the weaknesses of the blue decks. Maybe players are hedging their bets and playing Brainstorm frequently paired with Force of Will to reduce the lopsided-ness of certain matchups, especially in North America. You polarize fewer matchups and can require less dedicated hate slots when you can just counter spells, and maybe players don’t need to stress as much. As a non-blue player primarily, there’s a lot of work to control polarized matchups without the blue crutch, so to speak. Maybe European players embrace the openness that is the Legacy metagame and choose to innovate with their deck in an evolving format as time moves on and the pool grows. The author is “sick and tired of bashing [his] head against the wall” in dealing with Brainstorm and Force of Will, and in some ways, I know many people agree. WotC has created cards primarily in blue that help diminish variance and thus, increase consistency of that deck choice. I agree with the article’s postulation that in deck construction, we try to reduce variance as much as possible.

In deck construction, we have an idea in our mind of what we are trying to get a deck to do. There are combinations of cards that produce favourable outcomes and the more often these combinations occur, the more likely we are to win. This is the reason why tutors are so good. Finding the exact cards you need means you are more likely to win. This is also the reason why the unconditional tutors are generally banned in Legacy and restricted in Vintage. Since the format has been shaped to remove the use of tutors, cantrips are the next best thing by offering card advantage and/or selection. Not only is Brainstorm good, but it has much more depth of play than some newer players initially think. Brainstorm allows a player to find the cards they want as well as throwing away the cards they do not want. Prior to fetchlands, Brainstorm wasn’t a format staple as much as it is today. As the format moved on, the prospect of drawing three cards, putting two back on top, and then drawing fresh after using a fetchland is very enticing and is extremely powerful. But not only is this ability powerful, it is complex. When to fire off a Brainstorm and when to save it separates the experienced Legacy player from the outsider looking in. Some would say the best Brainstorm is the Brainstorm never played. Brainstorm is not the only card to do this. Ponder and Preordain have similar effects at sorcery speed, but the main trend is that there are mainly blue cards that do this. Other cards in other colours help to do similar things either by drawing more cards or just by manipulation, like Dark Confidant, Sylvan Library, and Sensei’s Divining Top. Without this level of interaction, what happens to the format? Without the decision making and optimisation required when using these cards, what do we see?

Look at the Modern format. What cards were really good? Bloodbraid Elf, Deathrite Shaman, Dark Confidant, Thoughtseize. These show card advantage, information, or increasing an opponent’s variance. In a format with no manipulation like Ponder and Brainstorm, hand disruption strategies run rampant and without suitable counterspells, Combo decks run rampant. I love playing midrange, and Modern should be the format for me. However, the format lacks depth. The level of interaction is so low because there are few tricks and fewer lines to think about. We’re not playing chess anymore, boys and girls. We’ve gone past checkers to tick-tack-toe, some have argued. There is no Brainstorm to respond to Thoughtseize. There is no Force of Will to counter a Splinter Twin. We see blue being pushed out of Modern in some extent because of the lack of manipulation and efficient counterspells, except for a few good blue cards. I think WotC should move in a direction, especially for Legacy, where more colours can obtain the tools to reduce variance and increase consistency.

But, several archetypes are already taking it into their own hands to do something about variance, either by fixing their own or shutting off their opponents’ actions. Decks like MUD and Aggro-Loam play Chalice, as the article explained, to hose cantrips and prevent the blue decks from being consistent. When these blue decks cannot cantrip, they are much weaker and are easily defeated by more powerful cards and strategies on a head-to-head basis. Burn increases its own consistency by essentially running forty of the same card and playing it over and over again. This deck construction means you’re either hitting a spell, or not a spell, and at a 2:1 ratio, you’re very likely to draw live. It also attacks the format by turning usually live cards, like creature removal, into dead cards in an opponent’s hand (called virtual card advantage), which decreases the power level of the deck sitting across from you. Burn is doing very well as of late because it uses Eidolon of the Great Revel to attack the cantrip crutch of blue decks, while being incredibly consistent in paying one mana for three damage and lobbing it at an opponent’s face. Lastly, we come to raw extra card draw and manipulation like Sylvan Library, Sensei’s Divining Top, and Dark Confidant. Sylvan Library is criminally underplayed and can help green decks keep up with Brainstorm decks. Even if you don’t get the raw advantage of drawing extra cards often, the manipulation alongside fetchlands is astounding, as it is with Top. Dark Confidant increasing consistency by just drawing more cards, and hopefully some of those are the ones you need. Even though the Pavlic Special, aka. Three Colour Midrange, should contain some number of Sylvan Libraries (according to some, at least five or more...), players should consider running it in two copies. Non-blue players should consider three to six slots to increase their consistency, in my experience with playing Legacy. Realistically, I think if more professional players worked on non-Brainstorm decks and tuned them, we would see a lot more non-Brainstorm decks in the Top 8’s of large tournaments, plain and simple.

The article continues on to argue that Modern is the “non-rotating format of the future... you will never consistently lose on the first turn of the game before you have a chance to even play a land for the turn. It means that any time a card becomes oppressively popular for an extended period of time, it will be removed for the sake of diversity.” One must note that first turn kills are rare in Legacy, but what is wrong with losing on the first turn? Why does their deck win on the first turn and what can you do about it? Some people enjoy the intricacy and the puzzle-like aspect of combo decks in many formats. When a card does well in tournaments in Modern, it will be removed to increase diversity. The main complaint with many eternal players who consider moving to Modern is the extensive banned list, which does the opposite of generating diversity. Should we not be allowing players to respond to the threat of a card before banning it? What about creativity, innovation, and original thought? I have always stood against the banning of Survival of the Fittest in Legacy because the majority of the grumblings of the community were from the SCG circuit, where no one cared to innovate and professionals just showed up and cleaned everyone else out. No one cared to innovate to perhaps play Spell Snare, add Extirpate to their sideboard, play a Combo deck, or just to think. Few dared to explore, to dream, and to try new things. Like countless Legacy players, I enjoy a format where there are not objectively the “best cards” to play, because if I wanted that, I would go to Vintage and have access to the Power Nine. But, this even ground should come from rigorous testing, WotC printing new cards, and generous community involvement and not from banning every good card in a format.

Without variance, Magic would not be the same game. It creates stories, experiences and excitement, but can bring frustration, disappointment, and failure. Thankfully, we do have cards that help fix consistency within the Legacy format. The format is not perfect, and blue does have an edge on its opponents with easier ways to fix consistency issues. But, the format will not fix itself. By being stubborn and not adapting, the small problems are only perpetuated and are not being solved. Is Legacy perfect? Not even close. The question is, will you be the one to put in some work and have some fun to see how deep the rabbit hole goes? I know I will, but maybe others will not.





-------------

Special thanks to Plague Sliver, Lord of the Pit, and J. White for Editing and to Benjamin Wheeler for the title.

Thoughts? Post here. Problem with syntax, editing, grammar or whatever? PM me and I'll fix it.

(Edit: Broke up longer paragraphs so it is easier to read)

[Blowsene]

Awesome article. Sylvan Library is indeed an absolute house.

[Technicolor Mage]

Fun read. Legacy truly is all about going down the rabbit hole!

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Due to the proximity of large metropolitan areas in Europe, much like the small corner of the East Coast of the US, Legacy flourished, but original design was still more present in Europe than America. Look at the current decks in the Legacy metagame on a world scale – where did they originate? Who designed them? Where were decks tuned and popularized? Miracles, Shardless BUG, Imperial Painter, Patriot Delver, Elves, Death and Taxes, Nic Fit, OmniTell, and others are all European creations or saw many more finishes in Europe before people caught on in America. The only North American decks to really make an impact have been RUG Delver, Team America, and Sneak Attack.

Patriot Act was made by Americans, as the first post in the thread acknowledges. Bryant Cook's article linked is busted but to my recollection it was something like James Pogue, David Gearhart and a couple other Northern Virginia players (maybe Dan Signorini?) that created the first iteration.

Shardless Bug I'm less familiar with but the first post gives credit to Brian DeMars who is a Michigan player. The first I remember about it being seen as a viable deck it was still being confused with Team America but lauded by a bunch of top name players on the SCG circuit.

I have no idea who really wants to claim credit for Miracles but the first post in the thread belongs to Hanni who is American.

Legacy Elves is harder to trace because it's not clear at what point you want to differentiate it concretely from Extended Elves, but even take that and that's 5/6 of the DTB alone. And like as much as I rip on Finn all the time for good reasons he was still clearly the primary motivating force behind the development of Death and Taxes for instance.

I mean I've talked about the SCG echo chamber myself before but this is not a well-researched or compelling case at all.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It's also just both ignorant and arrogant to assume that if people say that the format is stagnant and solved that that must be because they haven't poured enough creativity into finding new decks. Especially when you're not producing any hint of what these decks that secretly solve the blue probme might actually look like.

[SevenInTheQueue]

It's also just both ignorant and arrogant to assume that if people say that the format is stagnant and solved that that must be because they haven't poured enough creativity into finding new decks. Especially when you're not producing any hint of what these decks that secretly solve the blue probme might actually look like.

It isn't an issue of creativity, but more flexibility.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It isn't an issue of creativity, but more flexibility.

What does that mean?

[SevenInTheQueue]

What does that mean?


Players aren't directly being asked to throw their current archetype to the flames, and brew up the answer we've all be waiting for. What is asked from (non-blue/non-Brainstorm) archetypes, is to possibly branch out to different configurations. For example, if you're dead-set on running a 4/5 Colour Loam variant, why not explore all the possible options. Experiment with quantities, revisiting older staples of the archetype, or shift into a version of the deck/engine that offers a flatter risk/reward potential.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Players aren't directly being asked to throw their current archetype to the flames, and brew up the answer we've all be waiting for. What is asked from (non-blue/non-Brainstorm) archetypes, is to possibly branch out to different configurations. For example, if you're dead-set on running a 4/5 Colour Loam variant, why not explore all the possible options. Experiment with quantities, revisiting older staples of the archetype, or shift into a version of the deck/engine that offers a flatter risk/reward potential.

So, there isn't a difference really. So, again:


It's also just both ignorant and arrogant to assume that if people say that the format is stagnant and solved that that must be because they haven't poured enough creativity into finding new decks. Especially when you're not producing any hint of what these decks that secretly solve the blue probme might actually look like.

[SevenInTheQueue]

So, there isn't a difference really. So, again:

Removing Chalice of the Void from your list or increasing your Sylvan Library/Hand-Attack suite is not what I'd label as "creativity".

[Zombie]

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=175124&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=45859&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=75241&type=card
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=221559&type=cardhttp://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=3671&type=card


:eek::eek::eek:

[Higgs]

I think another weak point worth emphasizing in Hoogland's article is this argument:

"It means that any time a card becomes oppressively popular for an extended period of time, it will be removed for the sake of diversity"

To me this reads: If you cry hard enough your wish will be granted in Modern.

It doesn't sound like a clear headed, stable eternal format to me.

[lordofthepit]

/cue dramatic 30 for30 intro


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJRisjTCuGE

What if I told you that a self-identified Modern player went into one of the biggest Magic events of the year with a 4-color Loam deck and took home the most valuable prize this side of the Pro Tour?

/end intro

Look no further than Niklas Kronenberger at the Bazaar of Moxen.

When you are having a rough spell with your pet deck, you have three options: (1) get better with your pet deck, (2) pick a new deck and become more proficient with it, and (3) blame factors out of your control such as variance, the format, or the game. European players might deserve credit for their innovation, but they also deserve credit for their skillful piloting of tried-and-true decks.

[Bobmans]

/cue dramatic 30 for30 intro
What if I told you that a self-identified Modern player went into one of the biggest Magic events of the year with a 4-color Loam deck and took home the most valuable prize this side of the Pro Tour?
/end intro
Look no further than Niklas Kronenberger at the Bazaar of Moxen.


End of credibility for blue being to overpowered. In the end, the person is always the (his own) problem.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

"Sometimes people still win without Brainstorm. Anyway stop whining."

Historically the biggest sign of a degenerate format has been people repetitively using the same non sequitors to desperately defend the status quo.

[Julian23]

Niklas is another great example of people being rewarded for not adhering to the "blue is oppressive/overpowered" mantra.

[The same though might be true for "SCG players are just uncreative copycats"]

Everywhere you look, you will always find people complain about blue doing well in Legacy.

Seriously, man up. Instead of bitching, do something about and win a tournmanet with it. It's not like pure sophism will every get anywhere.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

In all frankness, these are the exact same arguments people have used to defend every shitty obviously-needs-to-be-banned card/deck ever. Skullclamp/Raffinity type 2, Flash in Legacy, Caw Blade, it doesn't matter, it's always just ignoring trends for anecdotes and making vague but demeaning aspersions about the "whiners"' creativity or manliness or whatever.




Snip - Removed Flames.

[Plague Sliver]

Nice job Matt. Even as I read the draft, I was pleasantly surprised to see that this did far more than I expected out of a rebuttal article.

I also do not see what is so inherently bad about winning or losing on the first turn, but I recognize that my views may not represent that of most players. Or Wizards, for that matter.

I can't find the article now, but Conley Woods wrote a really good piece in 2012 about how we all have finite energy to invest into learning the formats. So while one could try to "master" and brew Legacy decks non-stop, it isn't the ideal goal for most grinders or pros. I think it's fine to play the decks that are popular or winning in North America. More power to folks who do it, and do well. But I'd like to think that there's a special place in heaven for people who want to invest the time to explore the format a little more broadly.

Besides, for every good Brainstorm player, there's a bad Brainstorm player. And Legacy, more than any other format, is the format where we want to have fun and win on our own terms. If it were anything else, I would have quit long ago.



In all frankness, these are the exact same arguments people have used to defend every shitty obviously-needs-to-be-banned card/deck ever. Skullclamp/Raffinity type 2, Flash in Legacy, Caw Blade, it doesn't matter, it's always just ignoring trends for anecdotes and making vague but demeaning aspersions about the "whiners"' creativity or manliness or whatever.

I think it's a worthy discussion to have. Literally every card has an answer, it just comes down to how format-WARPING it is. The challenge with Brainstorm is that:

1) There are varying definitions of whether it is format-WARPING or format-DEFINING (and is there even a difference? and does it matter?)
2) It just adds to the incredible nuclear stockpile of Blue staples

I don't have the answers, and I think there's an interesting thread Finn started about "What would it take?", including banning fetchlands. Might we take it over there?

[Hof]

Nice article. I didn't think a rebuttal article was needed because the original article was so weak, but this is a good one.

[Parcher]

Patriot Act was made by Americans, as the first post in the thread acknowledges. Bryant Cook's article linked is busted but to my recollection it was something like James Pogue, David Gearhart and a couple other Northern Virginia players (maybe Dan Signorini?) that created the first iteration.

Shardless Bug I'm less familiar with but the first post gives credit to Brian DeMars who is a Michigan player. The first I remember about it being seen as a viable deck it was still being confused with Team America but lauded by a bunch of top name players on the SCG circuit.

I have no idea who really wants to claim credit for Miracles but the first post in the thread belongs to Hanni who is American.

Legacy Elves is harder to trace because it's not clear at what point you want to differentiate it concretely from Extended Elves, but even take that and that's 5/6 of the DTB alone. And like as much as I rip on Finn all the time for good reasons he was still clearly the primary motivating force behind the development of Death and Taxes for instance.

I mean I've talked about the SCG echo chamber myself before but this is not a well-researched or compelling case at all.

You are correct about Patriot, It was Dr. Dan, Gearhart and the Pogues. Their deck was identical other than running Stifle over Pierce, and Steppe Lynx over an unprinted TNN. And it was the Michigan players, specifically DeMars and GerryT who created Shardless. The fact that Hollywood isn't credited with Imperial Painter simply means he hasn't had time to read this thread yet. Claiming invention for Elves is about as realistic as for Affinity or Goblins.

The Euros can lay claim to D&T, NicFit, and OmiTell. I can't imagine anyone else wanting the blame.

[NilsH]

What I have since come to realize is that I was generally playing my underpowered selection of cards a bit more optimally than many of my opponents were playing their powerful selection of cards
-from Hooglands article

Hahaha...

I've seen a few matches with Hoogland playing 4c Loam. I recall great plays like:

Opponent tapped out with lots of Angel tokens on table and Force of Will in hand, Hoogland with Thalia in play and Devasting Dreams in hand. A DD for 4 would have cleared the opponents table and won Hoogland the game. Instead of winning the game Hoogland sends Thalia to battle, which gets blocked and dies, and plays DD secound main phase. The DD gets FOW'ed.

Hoogland didn't lose to Force of Will, he lost all by himself.


I've seen him play Thoughtseize into his own Chalice of the Void on several occasions, and I don't belive that to be optimal play :tongue: Good thing, he could still make that particular play in Modern :laugh:

[Higgs]

The Euros can lay claim to D&T, NicFit, and OmiTell. I can't imagine anyone else wanting the blame.

Lol.

I thought TinFins was European as well. I remember reading some Storm-Reanimator hybrid being brewed here on the forums by a french player and reading a couple tournament reports before it matured into the deck we know as TinFins today. Could be wrong though, feel free to correct.

[Lemnear]

Lol.

I thought TinFins was European as well. I remember reading some Storm-Reanimator hybrid being brewed here on the forums by a french player and reading a couple tournament reports before it matured into the deck we know as TinFins today. Could be wrong though, feel free to correct.

95% of credits for decks go to people simply placing with them not to the people creating and tuning the decks for months/years. I doubt anyone is really claiming credits for simply opening a post in a forum.

[Barook]

People want to play Magic. If somebody gets defeated before they even get their first turn, what's the point of even playing then? What games are fun if you lose before you even started playing? Losing to T1 kills is extremely bad for the game and very frustrating.

I also disagree about blue getting pushed out of the format in Modern, e.g: Modern MODO meta (http://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/modern/full#online)

Blue not claiming 70+% of the meta =|= pushed out of the format.

[Higgs]

I can understand how frustrating it is for some players to get killed on T1. Last week my D&T opponent, who was quite a nice guy up until that point, got visibly upset and cross when he didn't get a second turn in both games. But I think it's about deck choices and what sort of risks you're willing to take. Playing a fast combo deck doesn't come free either and there can be many frustrating losses against shitloads of hate. I think people should accept this as a fact of Magic and should respect those choices.

[Bobmans]

I can understand how frustrating it is for some players to get killed on T1. Last week my D&T opponent, who was quite a nice guy up until that point, got visibly upset and cross when he didn't get a second turn in both games. But I think it's about deck choices and what sort of risks you're willing to take. Playing a fast combo deck doesn't come free either and there can be many frustrating losses against shitloads of hate. I think people should accept this as a fact of Magic and should respect those choices.

Choosing to play aggro, control or combo is like choosing rock, paper or scissors.

[AggroControl]

We've got a decade of hard evidence now that blue is the most dominant color in Legacy and was in 1.5 before it. That doesn't mean that there haven't been lists like Goblins, Aggro Loam and The Rock that didn't have their moment in the sun. It does mean that we always come back to blue and the blue we come back to is ALWAYS degenerate when it has been finely tuned against the meta.

Legacy suffers from the same problem with blue that the old single format did. The best lists will play blue for consistency and card draw and then figure out what else is most powerful in the format at the moment and meld the splashable stuff in. The shell of the great lists is always blue plus power. This makes the format stagnant over time.

Miracles is just Counter Top with better finishers and removal. To those arguing that Miracles would rather play 8 tops than 4 + 4 Brainstorm, you're making an irrelevant point. Miracles players do keep hands with Brainstorm in them and no top because they know that Brainstorm will help them fix their hand later. They know that Brainstorm will likely find them a top. They know that Brainstorm will prevent hand disruption from damaging them too badly in the process.

There are two directions a solution to the problem can go. The solution could give other colors enough consistency and fixing options so that blue is not the only place to go for the type of consistency you need to win against good players in a long tournament. The solution could recognize that at least one of the blue options for consistency and fixing is degenerate against the power level of the format and ban that option.

Alternately WotC could print cards that see common play that make multiple card draw in a spell a very dicey proposition so that Brainstorm could be a dead card in your hand after the first turn or two.

If they just do nothing then we'll have the same format that we've had since Legacy was created. A format in which Underground Seas peak at $300 just before a large tournament while Plateaus stay at $60. Doesn't that price range tell us something about how broken blue is compared to the rest of the color wheel?

[Megadeus]

I can understand how frustrating it is for some players to get killed on T1. Last week my D&T opponent, who was quite a nice guy up until that point, got visibly upset and cross when he didn't get a second turn in both games. But I think it's about deck choices and what sort of risks you're willing to take. Playing a fast combo deck doesn't come free either and there can be many frustrating losses against shitloads of hate. I think people should accept this as a fact of Magic and should respect those choices.

While it is miserable to lose to a glass cannon combo deck in legacy, I think that if you are playing the format, you have to at least know that sometimes that is just what is going to happen.

[AggroControl]

While it is miserable to lose to a glass cannon combo deck in legacy, I think that if you are playing the format, you have to at least know that sometimes that is just what is going to happen.

And it's more miserable to lose to the same list over and over again because after turn 4 they're going to lock down the game and then go find their win-con and beat you.

I hate losing to fast combo but I hate losing to blue-based control more than that and I lose to blue much more often than I lose to combo. It's the control thing that makes players hate blue. Playing a good blue-based control or aggro control list in a good player's hands is like getting bullied repeatedly. They are going to beat you with great consistency over time and they will do it in a way that you have to sit through the same horrible experience and watch it unfold in front of you.

The only answer is to play blue and then I wind up doing the same things to non-blue players.

If you play against a non-optimal blue list or the player is not a good player you can beat them with a lot of things but the optimal list in a good players hands is always king unless they get very unlucky on the draw or in the game.

[Zombie]

And it's more miserable to lose to the same list over and over again because after turn 4 they're going to lock down the game and then go find their win-con and beat you.

I hate losing to fast combo but I hate losing to blue-based control more than that and I lose to blue much more often than I lose to combo. It's the control thing that makes players hate blue. Playing a good blue-based control or aggro control list in a good player's hands is like getting bullied repeatedly. They are going to beat you with great consistency over time and they will do it in a way that you have to sit through the same horrible experience and watch it unfold in front of you.

The only answer is to play blue and then I wind up doing the same things to non-blue players.

If you play against a non-optimal blue list or the player is not a good player you can beat them with a lot of things but the optimal list in a good players hands is always king unless they get very unlucky on the draw or in the game.

My horde of little green men sternly disagrees. The only decks I really fear are Reanimator, LED Dredge (esp. oldschool builds in the vein of Ando Ferguson's Dawn of the Deaf list) and Show and Tell. Rest eat Hoof.

[cab0747]

While it is miserable to lose to a glass cannon combo deck in legacy, I think that if you are playing the format, you have to at least know that sometimes that is just what is going to happen.

I agree with this. As a painter player, I can just get blown out by Oops! All Spells or Belcher and I have next to nothing to interact with those decks. It happens. I take my lumps and move on to the next round (or just drop).

Those same Belcher and Oops! All Spells players do the same when they see FoW (most of the time at least). It will happen. Just a few things you have to accept when making a deck choice.

[Hof]

We've got a decade of hard evidence now that blue is the most dominant color in Legacy and was in 1.5 before it.
Brilliant, Sherlock.
Now ask yourself why Legacy is not already dead, when theoretically people should have been rage quitting left and right since forever.

[Julian23]

[T]he optimal list in a good players hands is always king unless they get very unlucky on the draw or in the game.

Bullshit. It's this kind of thinking that will keep holding you down.

[AggroControl]

Brilliant, Sherlock.
Now ask yourself why Legacy is not already dead, when theoretically people should have been rage quitting left and right since forever.

What makes you think people aren't rage quitting left and right since forever?

[rlesko]

What makes you think people aren't rage quitting left and right since forever?

The fact that attendance numbers are up across the world which is also evidenced by the price of cards. This would suggest net growth.

[AggroControl]

The fact that attendance numbers are up across the world which is also evidenced by the price of cards. This would suggest net growth.

Sorry dude, I played legacy extensively in 2007, 2008 and 2009 and the attendance numbers are nothing like those numbers were. The price of cards right now is driven by two things: 1. The Legacy Grand Prix events upcoming. Prices always skyrocket during the run up to one of those events. 2. There's a world wide asset price spike in just about everything you can imagine at this point. Not going into the details here because it would derail but luxury consumables are among the highest spiking things at the moment and MTG is right in that category.

[AggroControl]

Bullshit. It's this kind of thinking that will keep holding you down.

I own almost all of the Legacy staples. Most of them I got cheap right after they were printed. Just to have a playset of what I thought was going to be a necessary card. Every now and then I have broken down and bought an expensive set of cards that I knew were going to be staples because I'd been ignoring Magic for the wrong year or two and enough good cards had been printed that I had to pay a premium. I paid $28 a pop for my playset of Goyfs after one of those absences. I paid $20 a pop for Thoughtseizes shortly thereafter.

This has nothing to do with poor player who doesn't own the blue staples or the mana base crying because he's getting beat by blue-based lists all the time. That is a common experience for most players who haven't been playing MTG since 1993 but it isn't true for me.

My upset with blue comes from the fact that I've seen two decades of Magic at this point and blue has been the dominant theme in every meta except for Standard and Draft. The dominance is always the same. It always revolves around card advantage, card selection and the ability to deny opposing plays with the superior hand that card advantage and selection create. This forces most serious players to play blue over time and blue is cyclically dominant in organized Magic play.

I'm just saying that if blue card advantage and selection were more fair the meta would be a much better place. Blue is like a slow motion combo deck that can both stop fast combo at times and also slow motion combo almost everything else to death. The argument that fast combo would overwhelm the meta in the absence of a big blue presence is false. There are many plays that screw combo over in the meta that are non-blue based today. Thoughtseize, 2 mana land for Chalice, any number of plays off of Chrome Mox or Mox Diamond, etc. Dark Ritual is not even played any more outside of combo because of the risk of a FoW or Daze destroying the game plan.

All of these things would become more possible if the stranglehold that blue has on the eternal meta was broken.

Brainstorm is a completely broken spell. It's better than Ancestral Recall. It's not just card advantage, it serves so many other purposes in the decks that use it. It hides spells from discard. It turns dead land draws into business in the mid game. It sets the top of the deck. It's a virtual counterspell in most cases alongside Counterbalance because it can put a 1cc or 2cc spell on top of your list if needed.

There are other somewhat broken spells in Legacy that have too much versatility and power for the meta as a whole. The obvious next choice is Deathrite Shaman, however at least he is a creature and can be interacted with in ways that almost every list in the meta has handy.

The defenders of Brainstorm have to keep coming back to the notion that without making blue over powerful something else would become too powerful and make everybody miserable. That's the bullshit that we all smell on regular basis.

[sjmcc13]

I hate losing to fast combo but I hate losing to blue-based control more than that and I lose to blue much more often than I lose to combo. It's the control thing that makes players hate blue. So anything other then aggro decks are bad/wrong/unfun? Seriously the whole ability to play multiple strategies is the whole point of a game like Magic. It needs for there to be multiple strategies that approach the game in different ways to be healthy, not just the same basic strategy with a different list of cards. The player base needs to be mature enough to accept that, and realize that a loss to a skilled control player has more to do with them being skilled, then them playing control.


The only answer is to play blue and then I wind up doing the same things to non-blue players.
In the history of magic that has NEVER been true, except in cases like Ravager standard were a single deck was to powerful. There are always answers and ways to tune your deck, or options to include in your sideboard to help these match ups.


If you play against a non-optimal blue list or the player is not a good player you can beat them with a lot of things but the optimal list in a good players hands is always king unless they get very unlucky on the draw or in the game. a skilled player with a good deck will beat a unskiled player most times yes, this has nothing to do with which deck is blue, and everything to do with the player skill.

It is not blue that is beating you, it is your play skill. People have been scapegoating blue as the source of their losses for years, and I have seen people who know what they are doing beat blue lists with non blue ones to many times.

[Barook]

The fact that attendance numbers are up across the world which is also evidenced by the price of cards. This would suggest net growth.
The number of Magic players has quite increased over the years. And thus also increased the number of Legacy players. More players will result in more Legacy players. It's simply a matter of chance.

Considering prices are stabilizing now instead of seeing ridiculous increases every few weeks like earlier this year, I'd say that Magic in general has reached a plateau for now (which is also supported by Wizards current profits) - something I would consider a result of the horrible clusterfuck from Gatecrash onwards.

[Lord Seth]

Choosing to play aggro, control or combo is like choosing rock, paper or scissors.This analogy breaks down when one considers that rock (aggro) loses to both paper and scissors in this format.

[Lemnear]

That is a common experience for most players who haven't been playing MTG since 1993 but it isn't true for me.

My upset with blue comes from the fact that I've seen two decades of Magic at this point and blue has been the dominant theme in every meta except for Standard and Draft. The dominance is always the same.

-snip-

Brainstorm is a completely broken spell. It's better than Ancestral Recall.

-snip-

That's the bullshit that we all smell on regular basis.

You are right, the complete post is utter bullshit and ignores large parts of MTG history.


I can understand how frustrating it is for some players to get killed on T1. Last week my D&T opponent, who was quite a nice guy up until that point, got visibly upset and cross when he didn't get a second turn in both games. But I think it's about deck choices and what sort of risks you're willing to take. Playing a fast combo deck doesn't come free either and there can be many frustrating losses against shitloads of hate. I think people should accept this as a fact of Magic and should respect those choices.

Well, nothing prevented him to metagame against fast combo with chalice or Mindbreak Trap, right? I have no respect for the "turn 2 Thalia = GG" mindset some D&T pilots show

[Finn]

I'm going to read it, Matt. I hope I will enjoy reading it. But I got to the first sentence and...

Legacy is, by far, one of the most intricate, difficult, frustrating, enjoyable, and entertaining formats in all of Magic the Gathering. Please don't ever write this sentence again, and fire your editor.

[twndomn]

Seriously, it's Jeff Hoogland. Have you guys ever visited Jeff Hoogland's stream? His demeanor can be best described as the Phil Hellmuth of the Magic the gathering. If he lives in a box, believing in that Magic should be played in a certain approach, why should we try to jam ourselves into his box?

Matt gave Hoogland way too much credit, not worth the effort to write that many words.

[menace13]

In the history of magic that has NEVER been true.
Actually the history of Legacy GPs there have been only 2 times that a non blue deck has won outright. 2 out of 15. 2/3rds of the top 8 lists have been blue in those 15. BoM is more varied and smaller than GPs. I would argue GPs have a higher concentration of professionals than any other events. BoM Legacy events are in line with the smallest of the GPs, except GP Philly with 400~. The other 3 smallest GPs are close to BoM's number of Legacy players, Lille 900, Columbus 07 800~, GP Denver 700.



"Sometimes people still win without Brainstorm. Anyway stop whining."

Historically the biggest sign of a degenerate format has been people repetitively using the same non sequitors to desperately defend the status quo.
People need crutches. They'll defend them after the banning too.

[wcm8]

Instead of printing hate bears that punish cheap library manipulation, I think they should just add cheap, efficient library manipulation spells to the other colors.

A few arguments in this favor:
1. Blue-based decks would still stick to the 4/4 Brainstorm/Ponder configuration unless one of the other colored spells was vastly superior or fit a particular strategy (e.g. consider how SDT is played in Miracles, generally 4 copies prior to adding any Ponders to the mix). Simply because it maintains the Blue count for FoW. Cantripping into another cantrip is pretty awful, and is a big reason that a deck like RUG Delver doesn't run Preordain.
2. There is precedent for this kind of effect. Ponder existed without the draw tacked on in the form of Alpha's Natural Selection. They are starting to show some love for Red with the Looting effect (e.g. Faithless Looting), but I think there's no reason to limit library manipulation/card draw on Sorceries/Instants to purely Blue. They can still make it so that each color's form of library manipulation "feels different" enough, but still equally powerful (consider how Swords to Plowshares and Lightning Bolt achieve the same thing the majority of the time, but each has a tactical advantage depending on the particular situation).
3. They have a safe method of introducing these cards to the Legacy card pool without affecting Standard, so the argument that it would never be printed for power-level concerns holds little weight when they could throw such a spell into a Commander product.

[Richard Cheese]

95% of credits for decks go to people simply placing with them not to the people creating and tuning the decks for months/years. I doubt anyone is really claiming credits for simply opening a post in a forum.

:[

Edit: For what it's worth, I'm from the US, as are all the people who've actually done well with the deck (.dk, phazonmutant, Koby, Durward). On top of that, the main inspiration (for me at least), was this tournament report (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23605-I-m-Bad-at-Storm-And-it-s-funny-(SCG-Phoenix-20th-Place)) by Tony DeVeyra (Antonius). The links appear to be dead, but I think that's where he mentioned Grislebrand + Goryo's + LED.

[Finn]

I like Sylvan Library and donating life away in increments of four, but the fact that after the first one, the card is dead weight puts it a clear step behind Brainstorm. Sure, it's great for green, but the card ain't great. Or else you would tell us to use four of them.

And ffs, Death and Taxes is an American deck. It was brewed up by a guy in South Florida who is a member of this site. Buffoons elsewhere I expect to not know this, but here it is not a secret.

If your message was that "Brainstorm is too good, but it is a fun, abuse-able card, so let's keep it," I actually agree. Let's get stuff like that to compete with Brainstorm rather than bitch about Brainstorm. The card is currently an anomaly. Let's make it a template instead.

[Barook]

Let's get stuff like that to compete with Brainstorm rather than bitch about Brainstorm. The card is currently an anomaly. Let's make it a template instead.
And how do we prevent blue from abusing said cards the most?

It's easy to say "X has library manipulation, too!" or "Don't ban Brainstorm! Make library manipulation in other colors instead!", but that totally disregards reality:

1. Other library manipulation, even the named one here, isn't on par with Brainstorm & friends. Library sucks when drawn in multiples. SDT doesn't fit in every deck. Bob is good, but can only be run by decks running black and puts some restrictions on your deck building. People know about these cards. But they also know about their limits and restrictions. Otherwise, everybody would run 8+ fetches + other shuffling effects while chanting "Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel" and spinning Top like a madmen.

2. Wizards isn't going to print good library manipulation in other colors anytime soon. Maro has too much of a raging hard-on for blue to let that happen. We're rather getting new blue bullshit cards that totally disregard the color pie (Hello there, TNN!) to sell EDH products before we get quality library manipulation that can stand up to Brainstorm in other colors. And if we did, blue decks would just adapt it with greater success than other colors - again.

3. Hate against Brainstorm (as some people suggest) won't do jackshit as long as it isn't as cheap (or cheaper) than Brainstorm, instant speed, symmetrical and good enough of a staple to be run by a good chunk of the format as 4-of.

This is the situation we're in and I doubt anything is going to change anytime soon aside from blue getting slowly a tighter grip on the format over time due to new blue dumb cards.

[Finn]

And how do we prevent blue from abusing said cards the most?

It's easy to say "X has library manipulation, too!" or "Don't ban Brainstorm! Make library manipulation in other colors instead!", but that totally disregards reality:

1. Other library manipulation, even the named one here, isn't on par with Brainstorm & friends. Library sucks when drawn in multiples. SDT doesn't fit in every deck. Bob is good, but can only be run by decks running black and puts some restrictions on your deck building. People know about these cards. But they also know about their limits and restrictions. Otherwise, everybody would run 8+ fetches + other shuffling effects while chanting "Dreidel, Dreidel, Dreidel" and spinning Top like a madmen.

2. Wizards isn't going to print good library manipulation in other colors anytime soon. Maro has too much of a raging hard-on for blue to let that happen. We're rather getting new blue bullshit cards that totally disregard the color pie (Hello there, TNN!) to sell EDH products before we get quality library manipulation that can stand up to Brainstorm in other colors. And if we did, blue decks would just adapt it with greater success than other colors - again.

3. Hate against Brainstorm (as some people suggest) won't do jackshit as long as it isn't as cheap (or cheaper) than Brainstorm, instant speed, symmetrical and good enough of a staple to be run by a good chunk of the format as 4-of.

This is the situation we're in and I doubt anything is going to change anytime soon aside from blue getting slowly a tighter grip on the format over time due to new blue dumb cards.
This is an important point. Someone should make a thread to discuss this (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?28401-What-would-it-take) very topic.

[menace13]

This is an important point. Someone should make a thread to discuss this (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?28401-What-would-it-take) very topic.
It would just become another ban Brainstorm and shitty card creation thread that good mods here should close asap. /sarcasm off

[Dice_Box]

I know I before have said let's give the other colours Manipulation, but now I have all my duals and have tested blue decks in full, I am against it. The ease of which blue can absorb cards from other colours is scary. See two colour decks or three colour decks outside blue tend to have a strong need to splash for a colour. Add to this the point that they tend to run less fetches. Blue already has a habit of running a high number of fetches in its decks due to Brainstorm and throwing in a few different duals is not a tall ask. I mean, RUG loves green for what? A beater? It's just so easy to slash with blue.

Now if you give the other colours something that holds a candle to Brainstorm and you do not make it totally unusable for blue, well the only reason that a deck would not drop Ponder for a stronger off colour card is if you really need to up your pitch count for Force.

[rufus]

....
Now if you give the other colours something that holds a candle to Brainstorm and you do not make it totally unusable for blue, well the only reason that a deck would not drop Ponder for a stronger off colour card is if you really need to up your pitch count for Force.

Dear WotC, don't make strong non-blue cards because blue decks will just use them.

[Barook]

It would just become another ban Brainstorm and shitty card creation thread that good mods here should close asap. /sarcasm off
Who didn't see it coming?

One particular interesting thing is that there are people out there who claim that any Brainstorm hate stronger than Spirit of the Labyrinth is OP - a card that barely sees any play in a single deck with 0-2 copies in their 75.

Sometimes it feels like Brainstorm is blue players what holy cows are to Indians.

[rlesko]

Sorry dude, I played legacy extensively in 2007, 2008 and 2009 and the attendance numbers are nothing like those numbers were. The price of cards right now is driven by two things: 1. The Legacy Grand Prix events upcoming. Prices always skyrocket during the run up to one of those events. 2. There's a world wide asset price spike in just about everything you can imagine at this point. Not going into the details here because it would derail but luxury consumables are among the highest spiking things at the moment and MTG is right in that category.

I'm not sure if your evidence is anecdotal or based on facts, but these are the GP attendance numbers and they do not favor your claim.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Magic:_The_Gathering_Grand_Prix_events


Pre 2010:
2004–05 Philadelphia Legacy 12–13 November 2005 United States Jonathan Sonne - 495
2006 Lille Legacy 18–19 December 2005 Austria Helmut Summersberger - 938
2007 Columbus Legacy 19–20 May 2007 United States Steven Sadin - 883
2009 Chicago Legacy 7–8 March 2009 France Gabriel Nassif - 1230

Post 2010:
2010 Madrid Legacy 27–28 February 2010 Germany Andreas Müller - 2228
2010 Columbus Legacy 31 July–1 August 2010 Japan Tomoharu Saitou - 1296
2011 Providence Legacy 28–29 May 2011 United States James Rynkiewicz - 1179
2011 Amsterdam Legacy 22–23 October 2011 France Pierre Sommen - 1878
2012 Indianapolis Legacy 10–11 March 2012 United States Tom Martell - 1214
2012–13 Atlanta Legacy 30 June–1 July 2012 United States Gaudenis Vidugiris - 905
2012–13 Ghent Legacy 21–22 July 2012 Germany Timo Schünemann - 1345
2012–13 Denver Legacy 5–6 January 2013 Indonesia Vidianto Wijaya - 700
2012–13 Strasbourg Legacy 13–14 April 2013 Denmark Thomas Enevoldsen - 1364
2013–14 Washington, D.C. Legacy 16–17 November 2013 United States Owen Turtenwald - 1698
2013–14 Paris Legacy 14–16 February 2014 Spain Javier Dominguez - 1587

[Finn]

Hold on.
The key is to not make anti-brainstorm cards. You make powerful, interesting staples that work poorly with Brainstorm. This forces players to have to make choice that - unlike every other "healthy" format - they currently do not have to.

[danyul]

Dear WotC, don't make strong non-blue cards because blue decks will just use them.

It's kind of true. For example, REB is mostly played by blue decks to hose other blue decks. Truly effective cantrip hate, like Thalia, has to be designed in a very specific way such that cantrip decks wouldn't want to play them. That requires the card to have a heavy color requirement that blue decks don't want to splash for, or requires the card to be designed in such a way (Thalia, Spirit of the Lab) that blue decks wouldn't play them even if they could splash for them.

That design space seems rather narrow.

And either way, it results in cards that are often clunky or inelegant or too specific to just be jammed as a 4 of in most decks.

[Julian23]

Dear WotC, don't make strong non-blue cards because blue decks will just use them.

Or maybe those decks...actually just use blue? :eek:

[Lyle Hopkins]

Fantastic Article, Matt. You've taught me quite a bit about playing cards over the past couple of years. It's always interesting to hear your interpretation of the Legacy format.

[Higgs]

:[

Edit: For what it's worth, I'm from the US, as are all the people who've actually done well with the deck (.dk, phazonmutant, Koby, Durward). On top of that, the main inspiration (for me at least), was this tournament report (http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23605-I-m-Bad-at-Storm-And-it-s-funny-(SCG-Phoenix-20th-Place)) by Tony DeVeyra (Antonius). The links appear to be dead, but I think that's where he mentioned Grislebrand + Goryo's + LED.

This was the first thread where I saw the Griselbrand+Shallow Grave combo:
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23794-Griselbrand-Reanimator

And OrGy was the first player I know of to post a tournament report with a Shallow Grave + Goryo's Vengeance + Griselbrand deck. I'm not sure what argument Lemnear was trying to make, hadn't seen his post until you had to quote him, but yeah.. The origins of the deck I think belong to whoever first came up with those 3 cards and took it to a real event.

[Lemnear]

This was the first thread where I saw the Griselbrand+Shallow Grave combo:
http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?23794-Griselbrand-Reanimator

And OrGy was the first player I know of to post a tournament report with a Shallow Grave + Goryo's Vengeance + Griselbrand deck. I'm not sure what argument Lemnear was trying to make, hadn't seen his post until you had to quote him, but yeah.. The origins of the deck I think belong to whoever first came up with those 3 cards and took it to a real event.

My post wasn't in regards to any specific deck. It was a general observation I mentioned as the topic of deck origins came up

[rlesko]

I think its funny how transparent people's arguments are. So lets get this straight...

WotC: We want good cards to get printed outside of blue, right?

The masses: Yes.

WotC: And we wan't various colors to be able to deploy these cards, right?

The masses: You said it!

WotC: Ok, so I'm going to make a card called Stoneforge Mystic and its only going to cost :1::w:! So you can play it with your Dark confidant, mother of runes, Knight of the Reliquary, Tarmogoyf, or Bloodbraid elf.

The masses: BUT BLUE CAN SPLASH FOR IT!!!

WotC: :confused: you guys realize there is no mana symbol which equates to "You may use any colored mana except blue mana to pay for this spell" right?

Seriously, Brainstorm / blue isn't nearly the boogeyman everyone is making it out to be. If we keep eliminating the good cards in Legacy, we will be left with a shitty card pool to deck build from and an artificial format. This is why we can't have nice things.

[HSCK]

We have nice things, people would rather see it all burn thinking that the ashes are the real treasure though. This was a nice rebuttal article.

[Parcher]

IWotC: :confused: you guys realize there is no mana symbol which equates to "You may use any colored mana except blue mana to pay for this spell" right?

Seriously, Brainstorm / blue isn't nearly the boogeyman everyone is making it out to be. If we keep eliminating the good cards in Legacy, we will be left with a shitty card pool to deck build from and an artificial format. This is why we can't have nice things.



This is brilliant! Why has no one thought of this before; "Anti-Awesome" as a mechanic, sort of like Ghostflame. Has a Blue border, but states that it isn't a Blue card on it. Or something along the lines a :1: mana symbol, with an overlay of the Blue teardrop with a slash through it. Indicating the colorless mana cost may not be paid for with U.

Or perhaps a caveat that this spell may not be played if you control any Islands. Problem is, both this and the previous restrictions would just force U/x/x players to run a few rainbow lands and/or Shaman. Might hurt Miracles, though.

[iamajellydonut]

Really, all we need is a shit ton of islandwalk.

[Megadeus]

River Boa time bitches

[Julian23]

Have I ever told the story about how I went to GP Madrid in 2010 with a bunch of awesome Russians I had just met the night before? After some debate they decided to share their most important tech with me: River Boa — this card is the actual gentlemen's agreement.

[Higgs]

Hell yeah!
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=4787&type=card

[iamajellydonut]

Ah yiss... Can't even use broken blue tech like Abrupt Decay to get rid of it. River Boa for president 2012.

[Higgs]

I have actually been on the receiving end of Scragnoth and River Boa while holding FoW, CS and Powder Keg and it was not pretty. Those were the days.

[Lemnear]

Hell yeah!
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=4787&type=card

Tom LaPille handed us the tool to end the blue reign 5 years ago

http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=193759&type=card

[Ellomdian]

I can't find the article now, but Conley Woods wrote a really good piece in 2012 about how we all have finite energy to invest into learning the formats. So while one could try to "master" and brew Legacy decks non-stop, it isn't the ideal goal for most grinders or pros.

^This. The overwhelming majority of SCG 'Grinders' play Brainstorm decks because the decision trees many of them share are extremely similar. Also, as with any other format ever created, the more (quality) reps you get in, the better you can expect your results to be.


His demeanor can be best described as the Phil Hellmuth of the Magic the gathering. If he lives in a box, believing in that Magic should be played in a certain approach, why should we try to jam ourselves into his box?

Having interacted with Magic 'Pros' for the last Decade, I am comfortable saying there are 2 kinds of them; there are the players who enjoy playing the game and are very successful at it, and there are the players who expect it to be as easy as possible for them to take their existing skills and somehow monetize them. The opinions of the first group generate beneficial discussion, the opinions of the latter are so much Tilting at Windmills...

[thecrav]

WotC: :confused: you guys realize there is no mana symbol which equates to "You may use any colored mana except blue mana to pay for this spell" right?


This is actually a really interesting design space that I don't think any card has on it.



Having interacted with Magic 'Pros' for the last Decade, I am comfortable saying there are 2 kinds of them; there are the players who enjoy playing the game and are very successful at it, and there are the players who expect it to be as easy as possible for them to take their existing skills and somehow monetize them. The opinions of the first group generate beneficial discussion, the opinions of the latter are so much Tilting at Windmills...

I enjoy playing the game and I'm really UNsuccssful :(

[Barook]

The masses: BUT BLUE CAN SPLASH FOR IT!!!

WotC: :confused: you guys realize there is no mana symbol which equates to "You may use any colored mana except blue mana to pay for this spell" right?
One of the problems of modern design is them being a bit too generous with card design nowadays. They simply can't design good cards with decent drawbacks anymore. Being symmetrical was definitely a (situational) drawback.

But now we get Slivers that throw everything Slivers stood for out of the window because some random kid might feel bad about the Sliver mirror match. For the same reasons, we don't get any really powerful black creatures with drawbacks anymore because the kids don't like drawbacks. And they make cards too easy on the mana to make them more splashable.

E.g. imagine what havok Thalia would have wrecked on the format if she had been just one-sided.


This is actually a really interesting design space that I don't think any card has on it.
It's actually less awesome with all the duals around. Who cares if you tap your Tundra for :w: or :u: if you pay :1: ?

[Phoenix Ignition]

It's actually less awesome with all the duals around. Who cares if you tap your Tundra for :w: or :u: if you pay :1: ?

Could just make a clause on the card: " :1: cannot be paid using an island." and watch the people flock to Adarkar wastes

[AggroControl]

One of the problems of modern design is them being a bit too generous with card design nowadays. They simply can't design good cards with decent drawbacks anymore. Being symmetrical was definitely a (situational) drawback.

But now we get Slivers that throw everything Slivers stood for out of the window because some random kid might feel bad about the Sliver mirror match. For the same reasons, we don't get any really powerful black creatures with drawbacks anymore because the kids don't like drawbacks. And they make cards too easy on the mana to make them more splashable.

E.g. imagine what havok Thalia would have wrecked on the format if she had been just one-sided.


It's actually less awesome with all the duals around. Who cares if you tap your Tundra for :w: or :u: if you pay :1: ?

You can't design a card that is usable in Legacy as a staple (has CMC of 2 or less), that is powerful enough to compete with Brainstorm blue, that can't be splashed by blue. BUG Delver is the ultimate proof of this, with a 2cc un-counterable instant costing two other colors and designed to remove the things that blue tries to exploit and protect (Tarmogoyf, Counterbalance, etc.), as a 4-of in many lists. The killer in BUG Delver is a 3cc Planeswalker with double black in the casting cost.

You can't fix the problem by printing other usable and powerful cards. You just make things worse for everybody else when you do that because blue will fit them into the game plan if they are that powerful. The only way to fix the problem is to prune blue a bit and bring it back into line with the normal power curve of the format. Instead they printed True-name Nemesis.

Look at this list and tell me with a straight face that Brainstorm is not format warping.

http://www.mtggoldfish.com/format-staples/legacy/full/spells

[LOLWut]

You can't design a card that is usable in Legacy as a staple (has CMC of 2 or less), that is powerful enough to compete with Brainstorm blue, that can't be splashed by blue.


Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, Chalice of the Void, Green Sun's Zenith, Eidolon of the Great Revel.

Want them to have more impact? Just make the non-blue card a little stronger, or make more of them.

[AggroControl]

Thalia, Guardian of Thraben, Chalice of the Void, Green Sun's Zenith, Eidolon of the Great Revel.

Want them to have more impact? Just make the non-blue card a little stronger, or make more of them.

Other than GSZ those aren't staples. They're used in a couple of lists tops. If you look at the link I provided above you have to get down to card 20 among the most played Legacy spells before you get one that is not played primarily in blue or splashed for in blue. That's the 19 most played cards in the format all contributing to mainstream blue plans, usually multiple plans.

Brainstorm is in 61% of top 8 Legacy lists. It's always in as a 4-of. The only other cards that are over 28% are Force of Will and Ponder and both are carried by Brainstorm. If Brainstorm was gone then Force of Will and Ponder's presence in the meta would decline some.

[Lord Seth]

One of the problems of modern design is them being a bit too generous with card design nowadays. They simply can't design good cards with decent drawbacks anymore. Being symmetrical was definitely a (situational) drawback.

But now we get Slivers that throw everything Slivers stood for out of the window because some random kid might feel bad about the Sliver mirror match. For the same reasons, we don't get any really powerful black creatures with drawbacks anymore because the kids don't like drawbacks. And they make cards too easy on the mana to make them more splashable.There's been plenty of powerful Black creatures with drawbacks in recent sets; Desecration Demon is one in particular that's seen a whole lot of play, at least in Standard. It just isn't strong enough for Legacy is the problem.

I don't really mind the Slivers only affecting your creatures as much as the horrible new art design they gave, though. That was legitimately throwing what they stood for out the window.

[LOLWut]

Other than GSZ those aren't staples. They're used in a couple of lists tops. If you look at the link I provided above you have to get down to card 20 among the most played Legacy spells before you get one that is not played primarily in blue or splashed for in blue. That's the 19 most played cards in the format all contributing to mainstream blue plans, usually multiple plans.

Brainstorm is in 61% of top 8 Legacy lists. It's always in as a 4-of. The only other cards that are over 28% are Force of Will and Ponder and both are carried by Brainstorm. If Brainstorm was gone then Force of Will and Ponder's presence in the meta would decline some.

Then you're admitting that such a card can be designed, because GSZ was designed, right?

Like I said, if you want such a card to be more of a staple, it can be made a little stronger, or just make more of such cards to whittle the gap down.

[Barook]

Look at this list and tell me with a straight face that Brainstorm is not format warping.

http://www.mtggoldfish.com/format-staples/legacy/full/spells
In paper, the BS percentage is even higher. The MTGO meta is highly warped due

a) non-blue decks being able to put up better results in DEs going only over 4 rounds and thus making consistency less of an issue and
b) Burn being big on MODO right now due to how cheap it is. Mountain is the most common land in the format, even before Islands!

GSZ is only used by Elves now. Maverick has become pretty irrelevant due to various factors.

@Lord Seth: Desecration Demon is one of the few good black creatures they put out in the last few sets. Pack Rat is the other one. And no, Griselbrand is not a black creature, it's a blue one.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

So, at this point the pro-Brainstorm crowd has abandoned anything resembling an argument about strategic depth or any kind of benefit of the card's existence, and is relying on a handful of standard non-sequitors deployed to defend obviously-soon-to-be-banned cards; slippery slope ("If they ban Brainstorm it's only a matter of time until Llanowar Elves gets the axe!"), appeals to mystical forces ("Some deck somewhere will fix the metagame if you believe hard enough!"), appeals to future salvation ("Wizards just needs to print cards that hose Brainstorm and are also maindeckable and also cost like one mana or less!"), appeals to masculinity ("Only women ban degenerate cards! Man up!")

This would actually be nice, in that these arguments are never compelling to Wizards to their credit, except that there's no sign that Wizards gives a shit about the health of the Legacy format, and actually we can infer from the Modern-off-the-Pro-Tour announcement that the opposite is the case; they actively don't want to administer the format in a meaningful sense anymore.

So, really, it doesn't matter how shitty the arguments of the "don't ban anything" crowd become, because they'll win through the default of Wizards not caring.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

You are correct about Patriot, It was Dr. Dan, Gearhart and the Pogues. Their deck was identical other than running Stifle over Pierce, and Steppe Lynx over an unprinted TNN. And it was the Michigan players, specifically DeMars and GerryT who created Shardless. The fact that Hollywood isn't credited with Imperial Painter simply means he hasn't had time to read this thread yet. Claiming invention for Elves is about as realistic as for Affinity or Goblins.

The Euros can lay claim to D&T, NicFit, and OmiTell. I can't imagine anyone else wanting the blame.


Right, it's really a side convo, but this bizarre idea that Europe is the center of innovation for Legacy is just bad Magic history.

[Dice_Box]

So, at this point the pro-Brainstorm crowd has abandoned anything resembling an argument about strategic depth or any kind of benefit of the card's existence, and is relying on a handful of standard non-sequitors deployed to defend obviously-soon-to-be-banned cards; slippery slope ("If they ban Brainstorm it's only a matter of time until Llanowar Elves gets the axe!"), appeals to mystical forces ("Some deck somewhere will fix the metagame if you believe hard enough!"), appeals to future salvation ("Wizards just needs to print cards that hose Brainstorm and are also maindeckable and also cost like one mana or less!"), appeals to masculinity ("Only women ban degenerate cards! Man up!")

This would actually be nice, in that these arguments are never compelling to Wizards to their credit, except that there's no sign that Wizards gives a shit about the health of the Legacy format, and actually we can infer from the Modern-off-the-Pro-Tour announcement that the opposite is the case; they actively don't want to administer the format in a meaningful sense anymore.

So, really, it doesn't matter how shitty the arguments of the "don't ban anything" crowd become, because they'll win through the default of Wizards not caring.

Meh. You can view it how you like, I think it has more to do with the topic being dredged up over and over than people just kind of fall into a lull over how they talk about it.

Personally, as a red player, I am pro Brainstorm and pro banning Delver and TNN. I think that would be a far better and fairer option. Lump SnT in there for good measure and watch 6 months of good solid magic being played as the format takes stock of itself. Brainstorm still live in the format, now that would be heaven to me.

[LOLWut]

So, at this point the pro-Brainstorm crowd has abandoned anything resembling an argument about strategic depth or any kind of benefit of the card's existence, and is relying on a handful of standard non-sequitors deployed to defend obviously-soon-to-be-banned cards; slippery slope ("If they ban Brainstorm it's only a matter of time until Llanowar Elves gets the axe!"), appeals to mystical forces ("Some deck somewhere will fix the metagame if you believe hard enough!"), appeals to future salvation ("Wizards just needs to print cards that hose Brainstorm and are also maindeckable and also cost like one mana or less!"), appeals to masculinity ("Only women ban degenerate cards! Man up!")

Did you have Professor Blaine for Intro. to Logic too? I don't think the simplistic bullet points from the class are very useful in figuring out of a complicated world, but I'm glad you're getting use out of the syllabus.

[nedleeds]

I agree with this. As a painter player, I can just get blown out by Oops! All Spells or Belcher and I have next to nothing to interact with those decks. It happens. I take my lumps and move on to the next round (or just drop).

Those same Belcher and Oops! All Spells players do the same when they see FoW (most of the time at least). It will happen. Just a few things you have to accept when making a deck choice.

If you are playing Belcher or Oops! All Dicks then you've already lost because you are poor or miserable or both.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Did you have Professor Blaine for Intro. to Logic too? I don't think the simplistic bullet points from the class are very useful in figuring out of a complicated world, but I'm glad you're getting use out of the syllabus.

Strangely, no matter how complicated the world, it doesn't make "1+1=3" any more complicated a mistake.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Meh. You can view it how you like, I think it has more to do with the topic being dredged up over and over than people just kind of fall into a lull over how they talk about it.

Personally, as a red player, I am pro Brainstorm and pro banning Delver and TNN. I think that would be a far better and fairer option. Lump SnT in there for good measure and watch 6 months of good solid magic being played as the format takes stock of itself. Brainstorm still live in the format, now that would be heaven to me.

I mean sure, banning a suite of blue cards would accomplish a similar end although probably only temporarily. Similar dilemma though.

I mean due to gross and continual disregard the banned list is kind of nonsensical at this point overall and should probably look something like:

+ Brainstorm
+ Griselbrand
+ Show and Tell
+ True-Name Nemesis

- Black Vise
- Mind Twist
- Earthcraft
- Survival of the Fittest
- Worldgorger Dragon

But, we are where we are.

[iamajellydonut]

+ Brainstorm
+ Griselbrand
+ Show and Tell
+ True-Name Nemesis

Do you hate having fun?

[Dice_Box]

Strangely, no matter how complicated the world, it doesn't make "1+1=3" any more complicated a mistake.

It is a measure of how you view the question. 1+1 can equal 3 with ease. I mean, when a couple get together there is only two, given time, that can become 3.

If you want to look at it from a maths view point as well. 1.4+1.4 equals 2.8. Given rounding, 1.4 rounds down, 2.8 rounds up. I mean it's imperfect, but that's not the point. It's about how you frame the question. The answer can change.

I also think this has applications here. I feel like a lot of the time we tend to read I to things differently and complicate issues that are not so complicated, but it all has to with perception.

Lastly. I understand from a pure maths view point, base Math will answer 1.0+1.0=2.0. But you have to clearly define your parameters to make sure your not misunderstood getting there.

[Megadeus]

Alright. Lock it up mods. I think it's over.

[AggroControl]

I mean sure, banning a suite of blue cards would accomplish a similar end although probably only temporarily. Similar dilemma though.

I mean due to gross and continual disregard the banned list is kind of nonsensical at this point overall and should probably look something like:

+ Brainstorm
+ Griselbrand
+ Show and Tell
+ True-Name Nemesis

- Black Vise
- Mind Twist
- Earthcraft
- Survival of the Fittest
- Worldgorger Dragon

But, we are where we are.

+ Deathrite Shaman
+ Sensei's Divining Top

Both are much too powerful at what they do to cost 1 mana. Both have many different applications and fit in a wide range of decks although they are best in a deck with some blue also.

[bakofried]

If anything, True-Name is the antithesis of fun.

[Michael Keller]

River Boa time bitches

Worked before. (www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?14331-A-Swift-Boot-to-the-Progenitals-Taking-Third-at-Jupiter-Games-40-Dual-Land-Draft)

[iamajellydonut]

If anything, True-Name is the antithesis of fun.

It's played as a one-of in approximately half a deck and is no less interactive than many other cards, but ach! Hans, run! It's the True-Name!



Worked before. (www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?14331-A-Swift-Boot-to-the-Progenitals-Taking-Third-at-Jupiter-Games-40-Dual-Land-Draft)

This deck makes me all kinds of happy.

[bakofried]

I didn't say it was dominating the format, I just called it the "antithesis of fun." Entirely subjective.

[iamajellydonut]

I didn't say it was dominating the format, I just called it the "antithesis of fun." Entirely subjective.

And plenty of other people find it fun. So...

[bakofried]

I call those people "assholes" - with kindness, of course.

Note, I'm not for banning brainstorm, but I do support the unbanning of Survival, Vise, Earthcraft, a number of cards.

[Megadeus]

Worked before. (www.mtgthesource.com/forums/showthread.php?14331-A-Swift-Boot-to-the-Progenitals-Taking-Third-at-Jupiter-Games-40-Dual-Land-Draft)

Dude. That deck looks awesome

[Aggro_zombies]

What is with this sudden spate of Brainstorm rants these days? I thought that contagion was contained in the cesspool of the B&R Thread.

People have been making these same arguments and counterarguments for literally years. Fantastic anti-Brainstorm cards already exist in the format - Chalice, Chains, Thalia - but it turns out that running those cards is just worse overall than running Brainstorms. You still have to draw your Brainstorm-hate in every match in a relevant time frame, which means somewhere within 10-15 cards. You'd be more likely to draw those cards if you had cheap library manipulation like Brainstorm and Ponder, but alas, you can't run those because you're trying to shut down cheap library manipulation. However, your opponent is using his cheap library manipulation to ensure he has the counter to your anti-library manipulation, so unless you get lucky and just naturally open the perfect seven every time you're probably in much rougher shape than people would like to believe. Cheap library manipulation reduces variance in a way that hate cards can't really touch.

Also, this magical thinking that because it's possible to win tournaments with Random Piles doesn't mean it's likely. That's like arguing that because people have won the lottery before, you should abandon your stodgy old savings account and invest entirely in lottery tickets. The true test of whether a deck is good is whether it makes top eight frequently and in the hands of a diverse body of players; otherwise, confounding variables like individual pilots, unusual tournament metagames, and luck have an equal explanatory power for the results. The data show that the surest way to consistently do well in Legacy is with some sort of blue deck with Brainstorm. Whether that's good or bad depends on what your vision of an ideal Legacy format is.

I'm going to leave this thread open for now but I don't see anything worthwhile coming out of it.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It's played as a one-of in approximately half a deck and is no less interactive than many other cards, but ach! Hans, run! It's the True-Name!

Of 160 top 8 decks in SCG Opens of the past six months, 45 had TNN, and 19 of the past 80, which is not overwhelming but is not exactly a "one-of in approximately half a deck."

But as noted banning TNN fits in more with defending fun than solving an unsolvable problem.

[AggroControl]

If the thread allows the proponents of Brainstorm-banning to get their very logical and well-informed rants off their chests while simultaneously making the defenders of Brainstorm and blue dominance re-examine some of their sureties in the light of said arguments then it has some value.

I don't expect Brainstorm to get banned. I think WotC has no love for the Eternal formats at this point and probably a vexed notion that somehow Eternal Magic is hindering the growth of new sales. Profits are what really matter to Hasbro and that's where the energy that WotC has left is surely directed. That's a rant for another time though.

[Aggro_zombies]

If the thread allows the proponents of Brainstorm-banning to get their very logical and well-informed rants off their chests while simultaneously making the defenders of Brainstorm and blue dominance re-examine some of their sureties in the light of said arguments then it has some value.
There are very few people for whom this is still true. At this point, the arguments have been simmering for so long you are either firmly for it, firmly against it, or you don't care anymore.

[AggroControl]

There are very few people for whom this is still true. At this point, the arguments have been simmering for so long you are either firmly for it, firmly against it, or you don't care anymore.

So, if 61% of top 8 lists use 4 of them shouldn't that tell us that it's time for WotC to end the arguments in the one way that will guarantee that they don't simmer for another decade?

How many people argue about Balance at this point? How many about Necropotence? How many about Survival of the Fittest? Which btw could be easily unbanned once the blue shells that finally broke it were less dominant.

[menace13]

So, if 61% of top 8 lists use 4 of them.
That number in paper is closer to 70%

[HammafistRoob]

I'm just going to come out and say what needs to be said. If you think Brainstorm is a fun and awesome card then give me and everyone else a high five!

If you think Brainstorm is fine, fair, or that good blue creatures are the problem, you seriously need to wake the fuck up and stop being retarded. That's all I'm going to say since I know it's literally impossible to convince you otherwise, as evident by all the perfectly articulated posts by IBA in this thread that got completely ignored or selectively butchered. Reading the posts of Brainstorm defendants is like reading a statement from Obama or George Dubbya, the words create a coherent and readable response, it just makes literally zero intelligent or logical sense.

[sjmcc13]

So, if 61% of top 8 lists use 4 of them shouldn't that tell us that it's time for WotC to end the arguments in the one way that will guarantee that they don't simmer for another decade?

In a format filled with 3 color decks, no. it is the hands down best card in the color
What you need is to provide the % of EACH color in the formats metagame, not just blue's %.

[btm10]

What is with this sudden spate of Brainstorm rants these days? I thought that contagion was contained in the cesspool of the B&R Thread.


Any discussion of the format as a whole is going to come back to Brainstorm because, for better or worse, it's the defining card of the format. It's almost like political viewpoints in the US - tell me what you think about women's access to abortion and I'm well over 50% to guess how you feel about anything else. If you want Brainstorm banned, I can say with confidence the sort of metagame you want. It's a pretty raw nerve for a lot of people, too, because we all come to Legacy with different assumptions and different things we want to get out of the format. Brainstorm just crystallizes them and has become (with some reason) the flashpoint.

[AggroControl]

In a format filled with 3 color decks, no. it is the hands down best card in the color
What you need is to provide the % of EACH color in the formats metagame, not just blue's %.

That's irrelevant though unless there are cards in each of those colors that are in most lists. Not most lists of that color. Most lists overall. At this point that's just not the case.

The numbers for spell inclusion at this point are:

1. Brainstorm - 61.5%
2. Force of Will - 57.1%
3. Ponder - 37.9%
4. Deathrite Shaman - 29.2%
5. Swords to Plowshares - 28.5%
6. Abrupt Decay - 24.7%
7. Lightning Bolt - 23.7%
8. Spell Pierce - 23.6%
9. Daze - 22.7%
10. Thoughtseize - 22.5%

Two of those numbers are completely out of range compared to the others. The odds are extraordinarily good that almost every other card on that list is where it is in terms of overall numbers only because it can be included with the two that are out of range.

If Brainstorm is banned that list will get shaken up pretty dramatically. I believe that Deathrite Shaman will rise up to at least the level Ponder is at. I believe that Ponder may even rise a bit because all blue decks will be including it as a cantrip and to fix the top of the library once Brainstorm is gone. Those two cards will likely become the most played spells in Legacy. Wasteland will become the most played non-basic land as the fetches spread out some with Misty Rainforest and Scalding Tarn no longer the most played fetches by a wide margin. We'll have a much more wide open format than we do now.

Combo will be the most played archetype for awhile and Dredge will see a revival. The ways to deal with both of those archetypes are numerous at this point and largely not confined to blue. That means the meta will figure out ways to manage them and then we'll have the meta we should have had from the beginning.

[btm10]

If Brainstorm is banned that list will get shaken up pretty dramatically. I believe that Deathrite Shaman will rise up to at least the level Ponder is at. I believe that Ponder may even rise a bit because all blue decks will be including it as a cantrip and to fix the top of the library once Brainstorm is gone. Those two cards will likely become the most played spells in Legacy. Wasteland will become the most played non-basic land as the fetches spread out some with Misty Rainforest and Scalding Tarn no longer the most played fetches by a wide margin. We'll have a much more wide open format than we do now.

Combo will be the most played archetype for awhile and Dredge will see a revival. The ways to deal with both of those archetypes are numerous at this point and largely not confined to blue. That means the meta will figure out ways to manage them and then we'll have the meta we should have had from the beginning.

DRS would definitely rise up, probably higher than Ponder is now, because the format would revolve around two and three color midrange goodstuff decks. I think you have your rose-colored glasses on otherwise, though. Miracles and the whole Storm archetype would die if Brainstorm were banned. Miracles would just go back to something like Landstill with CounterTop, but Storm would just be dead without the ability to sculpt its hand and hide things from discard. Tempo would be far worse because it would have to run more lands and lose the ability to make sure Delver flips on turn 2. I guess they could run Opt, but that isn't a guarantee the way Brainstorm is, and doesn't dig very deep. I don't want that metagame. Not at all.

[AggroControl]

DRS would definitely rise up, probably higher than Ponder is now, because the format would revolve around two and three color midrange goodstuff decks. I think you have your rose-colored glasses on otherwise, though. Miracles and the whole Storm archetype would die if Brainstorm were banned. Miracles would just go back to something like Landstill with CounterTop, but Storm would just be dead without the ability to sculpt its hand and hide things from discard. Tempo would be far worse because it would have to run more lands and lose the ability to make sure Delver flips on turn 2. I guess they could run Opt, but that isn't a guarantee the way Brainstorm is, and doesn't dig very deep. I don't want that metagame. Not at all.

Miracles wouldn't die without Brainstorm. It would die without SDT. It just wouldn't be dominant against so many lists if Brainstorm were removed. It would still be a DTB.

Tempo wouldn't die without Brainstorm. It would just run 4x Gitaxian Probe alongside Ponder and Stifle. It might run Sleight of Hand as well. The old Tempo Threshold ran 10-12 cantrips in Brainstorm, Ponder and Sleight of Hand. In fact the Canadian Theshold version might actually be almost as good with Gitaxian Probe instead of Brainstorm. A huge part of playing that list correctly is knowing whether to make a play turn 1 (usually wrong) or sitting on your fetchland during the opponent's turn. Probe answers that question with a high degree of accuracy and replaces itself.

Storm wouldn't die without Brainstorm. It's would still get it's 25-30% of turn 1-2 wins, mostly on the play, and have a really good early game. It would still get disrupted by discard and counters on the play and be at a slight disadvantage there. It would be a fairer archetype that both suffered from the loss of Brainstorm and gained by lists with Force of Will and Daze dropping as a percentage of the meta.

What you are saying is that you don't want a meta where blue can't dominate the game early on because not only does it have the best denial but it also splashes the best removal and it can find things it needs quickly with the best selection. I'll let you in on a little secret that everybody who has played Eternal Magic likely knows already: blue is still going to be the most played color in the absence of Brainstorm. It just isn't going to be head and shoulders above the rest of the options the way it has been for most of Legacy's existence.

[btm10]

Miracles wouldn't die without Brainstorm. It would die without SDT. It just wouldn't be dominant against so many lists if Brainstorm were removed. It would still be a DTB.

Terminus for 4WW at sorcery speed is pretty bad, and Entreat the Angels is strictly worse than Decree of Justice unless it's Miracle-ed. Without the ability to throw copies of these cards back into the deck, there's no reason not to move into some other sort of U/W list, and Dream Cache is unlikely to cut it. Miracles would be replaced by something else. The new deck would likely be similar, but would probably be more reliant on creatures of some sort to get through the early game.




Tempo wouldn't die without Brainstorm. It would just run 4x Gitaxian Probe alongside Ponder and Stifle. It might run Sleight of Hand as well. The old Tempo Threshold ran 10-12 cantrips in Brainstorm, Ponder and Sleight of Hand. In fact the Canadian Theshold version might actually be almost as good with Gitaxian Probe instead of Brainstorm. A huge part of playing that list correctly is knowing whether to make a play turn 1 (usually wrong) or sitting on your fetchland during the opponent's turn. Probe answers that question with a high degree of accuracy and replaces itself.


I didn't say Tempo would die, and RUG Thresh isn't the only Tempo deck. I said it would get a lot worse. Which it would, because its best card would be replaced by a worse one, and it would lose its most aggressive start.



Storm wouldn't die without Brainstorm. It's would still get it's 25-30% of turn 1-2 wins, mostly on the play, and have a really good early game. It would still get disrupted by discard and counters on the play and be at a slight disadvantage there. It would be a fairer archetype that both suffered from the loss of Brainstorm and gained by lists with Force of Will and Daze dropping as a percentage of the meta.

Storm isn't even widely played in North America now, likely because BUG variants packing both discard and counters make for an inhospitable environment here. So weakening the deck isn't going to make it more popular, and it definitely doesn't need to be made "fairer". Add to that the fact that Storm frequently draws too much of one aspect of the deck and too little of another, and throwing back your fourth and fifth mana accelerants to get two more mainupulation/search or protection spells, or having the ability to hide the scarce component from Thoughtseize or Hymn while exposing something you have an excess of matters a lot to the deck's success. The loss of Brainstorm would hobble Storm as a meaningful part of the metagame.



What you are saying is that you don't want a meta where blue can't dominate the game early on because not only does it have the best denial but it also splashes the best removal and it can find things it needs quickly with the best selection. I'll let you in on a little secret that everybody who has played Eternal Magic likely knows already: blue is still going to be the most played color in the absence of Brainstorm. It just isn't going to be head and shoulders above the rest of the options the way it has been for most of Legacy's existence.

I really don't know where this is coming from. I'm not committed to any color or combination of colors, and have played competitive events with decks of every color (and most color combinations) at some point in my life. What I don't want in a meta is an endless parade of goodstuff midrange vs. goodstuff midrange decks with everything else nipping at the heels of those decks. Sure, the random Dredge or MUD or Sneak and Show pilot will get lucky and/or be good enough to Top 8 occasionally, but most of the time is going to be grindy aggro-control decks bashing each other with Hymns and countermagic until someone doesn't topdeck their removal on time. I'll take making the game more skill-testing and decks more consistent over having more even color representation any day of the week.

[Zombie]

How is Brainstorm+Ponder much more skilltesting than Brainstorm+Preordain, especially in a deck where you want to keep mana up?

EDIT: Same in more controllish decks - DRS already allows for win-win lines where you drain if they don't do anything and counter scary things.

Also, a lulzy hand from goldfishing ANT:

the opener: 1 BS, 5-6 lands

Turn 3:
Board:UG Sea, Badlands, Island.
Hand: LED, Delta, Petal, Therapy, Dark Rit, Probe

#brainstorm

[Higgs]

What I don't want in a meta is an endless parade of goodstuff midrange vs. goodstuff midrange decks with everything else nipping at the heels of those decks. Sure, the random Dredge or MUD or Sneak and Show pilot will get lucky and/or be good enough to Top 8 occasionally, but most of the time is going to be grindy aggro-control decks bashing each other with Hymns and countermagic until someone doesn't topdeck their removal on time. I'll take making the game more skill-testing and decks more consistent over having more even color representation any day of the week.

I agree with this sentiment 100%. I want to elaborate on that point more, probably only the people who are looking to flame or sting me will care but anyways here it goes.

What was the best era in Magic for you? For me it was circa-2000 Extended. The popular decks were:
Oath
Recur-Survival
Free Spell Necro (4 of Necropotence)
Accelerated Blue (Tinker)
Cocoa Pebbles
Trix (Necro again)
Stasis
Forbiddian
Slivers
...

Mostly engine decks and decks full of synergies. No good stuff decks. Well Slivers was somewhat a goodstuff deck, there was still Junk but you get my point. Nothing like Deathblade, X blade, Y blade and WHIURGH Blade or Delver BUG, TNN BUG, Shardless BUG, 4 color BUG. Today those engines are banned in Legacy and we don't have less broken but equally viable and fun alternatives which would lead to unique and innovative deck design, which can also be competitive. I think the issue lies less with the power and prominence of Brainstorm but more with the lack of innovation in the Magic design principles of the current era.

Sure, any of those cards (Tinker, Oath, Survival, Necro) would wreak havoc on the format if taken off the banned list alone but maybe all should be taken off the banned list and format should embrace brokennes a bit more (semi serious thought experiment) to move away from goodstuff optimization being the norm for deckbuilding. If they can't unban the sweet stuff from that golden era then they should print viable alternatives, which are not creatures and which are not Omnisciences, that we can build unique and standalone decks around.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Dear WotC, don't make strong non-blue cards because blue decks will just use them.
:laugh:

Yeah, I really don't understand why people fear a solid library manipultion and CA in non-blue colors. Why would blue bother playing a green Ponder? It has already an access to 8-24 cantrips and may thus choose a set of Ponder, Brainstorm, Preordain to name the most usual choices, without even thinking about any cantrip that cannot feed FoW in case of need.
It's not like every deck is Dredge to suck out all sick draw, be it blue or not.

If you take a look at the winning Brainstorm decks, you'll see the obvious pattern described as "blue uses the best of non-blue", like all the eight-cantrips-eight-goyfs RUG-like piles and such. But one may also argue that the pattern should be described as "non-blue uses the best of blue", as the decks/colors that desperately need/lack library manipulation, CA ans card selection, have no other choice than use some of the blue's arsenal.

If there'd be some kind of card selection and/or advantage in other colors while respecting the color wheel and MtG flavour, this game would only improve. I'm not saying that BS should be given to all colors, because BS is clearly a broken card that many peole consider ban-worthy. But cheap looting effects, interesting cantrips, reasonable creatures with etb triggers (not exactly Stripped Bears), etc. there are possibilities.

For example, I like how flavourfully WotC closed one of the green holes, the inability to remove creatures - they designed a very "green" cards with a very "green" ability, Fight. (Ok, it's presented in re more often than in green, but whatever...)

I think non-blue should get some tools similar to BS/Ponder shell that blue uses. Otoh, things like GSZ are exactly that, so maybe we're just blind or lazy to find them.

[AggroControl]

If you print anything that is playable turn 1 to help other colors compete with blue then blue will just find a way to incorporate it unless it is similar to or worse than what they already have to play.

Some solutions might even be marginally worse in many ways but better in one key way and get incorporated as a result. This is Abrupt Decay in a nutshell. It's harder to play than a bolt or StP and harder to splash into a blue shell, however it is immune to counter spells and it hits artifacts and enchantments as well so it is incorporated in several dominant blue shells.

I'm not getting into a broken cards creation post but it's hard to see how things that fixed card advantage and selection for any of the other colors and were also playable on turn 1 would not just get incorporated into blue. This would likely be true even if they were straight ripoffs of Brainstorm for one of a different color. Blue would go "wow! 8 Brainstorms and all I have to do is..."

[rlesko]

If you print anything that is playable turn 1 to help other colors compete with blue then blue will just find a way to incorporate it unless it is similar to or worse than what they already have to play.

Some solutions might even be marginally worse in many ways but better in one key way and get incorporated as a result. This is Abrupt Decay in a nutshell. It's harder to play than a bolt or StP and harder to splash into a blue shell, however it is immune to counter spells and it hits artifacts and enchantments as well so it is incorporated in several dominant blue shells.

I'm not getting into a broken cards creation post but it's hard to see how things that fixed card advantage and selection for any of the other colors and were also playable on turn 1 would not just get incorporated into blue. This would likely be true even if they were straight ripoffs of Brainstorm for one of a different color. Blue would go "wow! 8 Brainstorms and all I have to do is..."

Hey I have a great idea that you'll love! Lets just ban the color blue. I mean, anything short of this will be unsatisfactory to you. Since you hate brainstorm and don't want to strengthen other colors, there is literally no other option since "blue will just adopt the new awesome cards".

[AggroControl]

Hey I have a great idea that you'll love! Lets just ban the color blue. I mean, anything short of this will be unsatisfactory to you. Since you hate brainstorm and don't want to strengthen other colors, there is literally no other option since "blue will just adopt the new awesome cards".

Blue adopts the new best cards because it already has access to most of the old best cards. Take away the best blue spell which is also the best spell in the format and the lists get worse. They come back to the meta in power level somewhat. That blue can splash other colors is less of a problem.

The main problem right now is that archetypes other than combo can't really splash blue effectively. Even with the power level of Brainstorm it's very hard to justify throwing it into a list that wants to tap out a lot of the time early on. It's very hard to justify throwing it into a list where half the time a mid-game Brainstorm is completely inapplicable to what is happening at the moment because the list has no way to interact effectively with a sorcery, instant or game-winning permanent about to land on the board.

In most blue shells Brainstorm is a dominant card that overpowers/foils the opponent and at the least provides unparalleled early consistency. In most non-blue shells it is worth much less.

[Lemnear]

Storm wouldn't die without Brainstorm. It's would still get it's 25-30% of turn 1-2 wins, mostly on the play, and have a really good early game. It would still get disrupted by discard and counters on the play and be at a slight disadvantage there. It would be a fairer archetype that both suffered from the loss of Brainstorm and gained by lists with Force of Will and Daze dropping as a percentage of the meta.

Nonsense. Blatant nonsense.

Storm is unplayable without cantrips like Brainstorm to adjust it's hand depending on the current game situation aka switching protection for gas and vice versa. If you are required to have a perfect starting grip and are completely dependant to your draws, you can and will play Belcher instead which also has a much better T1 kill rate

[menace13]

So, at this point the pro-Brainstorm crowd has abandoned anything resembling an argument about strategic depth or any kind of benefit of the card's existence, and is relying on a handful of standard non-sequitors deployed to defend obviously-soon-to-be-banned cards; slippery slope ("If they ban Brainstorm it's only a matter of time until Llanowar Elves gets the axe!"), appeals to mystical forces ("Some deck somewhere will fix the metagame if you believe hard enough!"), appeals to future salvation ("Wizards just needs to print cards that hose Brainstorm and are also maindeckable and also cost like one mana or less!"), appeals to masculinity ("Only women ban degenerate cards! Man up!").
Yep. You mean like this one:


Hey I have a great idea that you'll love! Lets just ban the color blue. I mean, anything short of this will be unsatisfactory to you. Since you hate brainstorm and don't want to strengthen other colors, there is literally no other option since "blue will just adopt the new awesome cards".

Yeah. That's a great post. Especially the ban the whole color argument. It's like deep inside, past all the rage and hurt, he knows that blue = Brainstorm. And the only way he could admit it, without having his head explode from the logic bomb was through a non-sequitur. Good job guys. Having irrationals implode is always fun.

[Zombie]

Nonsense. Blatant nonsense.

Storm is unplayable without cantrips like Brainstorm to adjust it's hand depending on the current game situation aka switching protection for gas and vice versa. If you are required to have a perfect starting grip and are completely dependant to your draws, you can and will play Belcher instead which also has a much better T1 kill rate

I don't think anyone is on a crusade against Ponder and Preordain here.


Even with the power level of Brainstorm it's very hard to justify throwing it into a list that wants to tap out a lot of the time early on.

BUG Delver.

[rlesko]

Blue adopts the new best cards because it already has access to most of the old best cards. Take away the best blue spell which is also the best spell in the format and the lists get worse. They come back to the meta in power level somewhat. That blue can splash other colors is less of a problem.

Your blind bias against blue will prevent you from ever changing your mind. the goal of every deck isn't to splash blue. Blue has access to Force of Will yes, would you not want Force of Will in the format? Or you want all colors to have force of will? I'm trying to figure out what these "old best cards" are besides brainstorm and force of will.


The main problem right now is that archetypes other than combo can't really splash blue effectively. Even with the power level of Brainstorm it's very hard to justify throwing it into a list that wants to tap out a lot of the time early on. It's very hard to justify throwing it into a list where half the time a mid-game Brainstorm is completely inapplicable to what is happening at the moment because the list has no way to interact effectively with a sorcery, instant or game-winning permanent about to land on the board.

You say this as though every deck should splash blue (which is wrong btw). As you argue, you don't want brainstorm in every deck...so whats the issue? Brainstorm only fits into certain strategies...in an aggressive deck, it is not wanted.


In most blue shells Brainstorm is a dominant card that overpowers/foils the opponent and at the least provides unparalleled early consistency. In most non-blue shells it is worth much less.

And non brainstorm decks can get early consistency by being threat dense. I guess you've never cast the card, but you act as though every time someone casts a brainstorm the other person loses which is simply not the case.

General question: Why does everyone who loses to a blue deck blame brainstorm and not play skill or other decisions?

[AggroControl]

Nonsense. Blatant nonsense.

Storm is unplayable without cantrips like Brainstorm to adjust it's hand depending on the current game situation aka switching protection for gas and vice versa. If you are required to have a perfect starting grip and are completely dependant to your draws, you can and will play Belcher instead which also has a much better T1 kill rate

Well, Belcher has about the right consistency rate for a combo list. It can and will kill you early on but it is no lock to get it's grip and do that consistently.

I disagree on Brainstorm being necessary for Storm combo. There are a lot of cantrips in blue that have similar effects in terms of card searching in the first couple of turns. Storm combo can find a hand-fixing card that will work without too much trouble. It just won't have access to the no-brainer.

[rlesko]

Yeah. That's a great post. Especially the ban the whole color argument. It's like deep inside, past all the rage and hurt, he knows that blue = Brainstorm. And the only way he could admit it, without having his head explode from the logic bomb was through a non-sequitur. Good job guys. Having irrationals implode is always fun.

oh man, I'm so angry you have no idea. people like you have the thought that brainstorm needs to be banned ingrained in their brain so hard its literally impossible to formulate a discussion about it and anything short of a brainstorm ban will not please you. you don't want more cards like thalia. you don't want wizards to creep into other colors with powerful cards because "blue will adopt them". So don't project your blue hate onto me (in regards to your "blue = brainstorm" comment). Just acknowledge that you irrationally hate brainstorm and then I can stop responding to you.

[rlesko]

I disagree on Brainstorm being necessary for Storm combo. There are a lot of cantrips in blue that have similar effects in terms of card searching in the first couple of turns. Storm combo can find a hand-fixing card that will work without too much trouble. It just won't have access to the no-brainer.

Its obvious you have never piloted storm because you are quite simply wrong. I don't really know how to put it any other way. Storm needs a very precise group of cards. without being able to exchange business spells for mana accel or vice versa the deck would get A LOT worse.

[AggroControl]

Your blind bias against blue will prevent you from ever changing your mind. the goal of every deck isn't to splash blue. Blue has access to Force of Will yes, would you not want Force of Will in the format? Or you want all colors to have force of will? I'm trying to figure out what these "old best cards" are besides brainstorm and force of will.

Force of Will is not a best card. It's a heavily played card because Brainstorm is a best card and blue is over-played and people can't avoid the lure of a "free" counterspell in the first couple of turns of the game. If you look at the discussions going on right now you see a lot of debate about whether Force of Will is all it is cracked up to be. The card disadvantage from using it is a big factor, even early on. When you're going to lose if something doesn't get countered right now then it is what you need but more often than not after that you will lose anyway. The real value in Force of Will is protecting your own winning plays.

The best cards in Legacy right now are: Brainstorm, Ponder, Deathrite Shaman, Tarmogoyf, Sensei's Divining Top, Hymn to Tourach, Liliana of the Veil, Abrupt Decay, Lightning Bolt and Jace, the Mind Sculptor. The only reason Jace doesn't see play as more than a 1 or 2-of is his CMC. 4 is out of bounds in Legacy as anything more than a finisher or desperate defense.



General question: Why does everyone who loses to a blue deck blame brainstorm and not play skill or other decisions?

Because it's the single card they see the most often while they are in the process of losing.

Why do you not get this simple and very salient point in the conversation?

If I was beating you with black based lists and black based lists were 60-70% of the top 8's and you saw Hymn to Tourach EVERY time you played one of those dominant black based lists what would you think the problem was?

BTW, just to further explain the comment about FoW above. When I cast a turn 1 Thoughtseize or Turn 2 Dark Confidant or Hymn to Tourach and the opponent Forces to stop the play I consider it to be break even for them at best. It shows me a weakness in their hand and it puts me a leg up on getting the card advantage the other plays were trying to achieve. Having the spells resolve would usually be better but the cost of the FoW is pretty heavy for the opponent anyway. Even Daze is not a huge deal because it puts the opponent a turn behind in terms of land drops and extends the window in which I can try to get a grip on the game.

Brainstorm on the other hand will get them out of many predicaments while also being a source of card advantage once they hit the mid-game. It's the broken card in the blue themes because it is never a bad card to have in hand. All my very good cards can be mostly dead later in the game but Brainstorm will always retain a higher percentage of it's value than any other spell in the format. That's because it's an every-card. It can be anything and it can be used in many different ways.

[Admiral_Arzar]

I have said in the past that Brainstorm is strongest in Combo, and will re-iterate that here. Most goodstuff and tempo decks don't run a bunch of cards that are objectively dead in most circumstances (especially in multiples). I mean, who doesn't want to draw a second Deathrite Shaman? There are few times in the game where you don't want to draw a Shaman. However, drawing a second Emrakul when I need an enabler is pretty bad. Drawing another fast mana source when I have 2 LEDs and a Ritual and desperately need business to go off while I'm under a clock is also pretty bad. Combo relies on Brainstorm to do the lion's share of its hand sculpting and decrease the inherent derpiness that happens when you draw multiples of the same combo piece (or type of card if you're playing a system deck).

I have never been a fan of Legacy's blue dominance, because the only blue I really like playing is the blue shell in system combo decks. It didn't use to be as much of an issue a few years ago, but WOTC continues to push the envelope with absurd blue cards or cards for already existing blue shells in other colors. Regardless, I do not support a Brainstorm ban and would prefer that WOTC issues a "we goofed" series of bans to correct their mistakes of the last few years.

Delver of Secrets
True-Name Nemesis
Terminus
Griselbrand

If those four cards were immediately removed from the format, I believe we would see significantly less dominance by blue and a much more open format relatively quickly.

[AggroControl]

I have said in the past that Brainstorm is strongest in Combo, and will re-iterate that here. Most goodstuff and tempo decks don't run a bunch of cards that are objectively dead in most circumstances (especially in multiples). I mean, who doesn't want to draw a second Deathrite Shaman? There are few times in the game where you don't want to draw a Shaman. However, drawing a second Emrakul when I need an enabler is pretty bad. Drawing another fast mana source when I have 2 LEDs and a Ritual and desperately need business to go off while I'm under a clock is also pretty bad. Combo relies on Brainstorm to do the lion's share of its hand sculpting and decrease the inherent derpiness that happens when you draw multiples of the same combo piece (or type of card if you're playing a system deck).

I have never been a fan of Legacy's blue dominance, because the only blue I really like playing is the blue shell in system combo decks. It didn't use to be as much of an issue a few years ago, but WOTC continues to push the envelope with absurd blue cards or cards for already existing blue shells in other colors. Regardless, I do not support a Brainstorm ban and would prefer that WOTC issues a "we goofed" series of bans to correct their mistakes of the last few years.

Delver of Secrets
True-Name Nemesis
Terminus
Griselbrand

If those four cards were immediately removed from the format, I believe we would see significantly less dominance by blue and a much more open format relatively quickly.

Delver of Secrets and True-Name Nemesis are creatures and that makes them flawed in terms of being power cards. TNN is closer because of the limited ways the opponent can interact with it but it can still be raced and black in particular has a lot of options to interact with a TNN player. White has some options. Blue of course has black and white and so has a bunch of good options to choose from.

I agree on the other two but I think Terminus is manageable enough that it's not a format breaker. Griselband is just broken. A cheap spell for 7 cards at a 7 life cost is clearly broken.

Removing Delver of Secrets or TNN is really not going to fix anything. Blue was dominant before they arrived. Removing one of the key cards in blue dominance since the birth of the format is the right answer. If you have a bad toothache you don't pull all the teeth that might come into contact with the tooth and make it worse. You pull the tooth.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

If you print anything that is playable turn 1 to help other colors compete with blue then blue will just find a way to incorporate it unless it is similar to or worse than what they already have to play.

Some solutions might even be marginally worse in many ways but better in one key way and get incorporated as a result...
Why? Why should anybody incorporate anything?
There's no Storm deck that uses Sylvan Library. There's no Miracles list using Faithless Looting. What's so funadamently wrong about giving other colors similar consistency tools like blue already has? Do you really fear that some 40cantrips_20lands.dec will kill Legacy?

And even if blue incorporates new off-color cantrips, then what? It already has access to best consistency and filtering tools in its very own color. You may build a deck solely of Brainstorm, Ponder, Preordain, Portent, Sleight of Hand, Gitaxian Probe, Careful Study, Clairvoyance, Mental Note and Thought Scour, Serum Visions, Obsessive Search, Quicken or Peek playsets, as there are enough exclusively blue cantrips to choose from before you need to take look into any other color. Heck, I'd guess that you may build an EDH made of cmc 1-2 blue cantrips and you won't run out of card choices long before you'll be forced to include any real win con.

[HSCK]

As much as I love TNN, if it meant removing those other three I think the format would be more open. I talked at length with one of the original Source Legacy community members about health last week and he put it like this: Deck diversity and results are probably at the highest they've been historically, but the format is constrained by the tremendous power level on wildly different axes which limits true health. He does think DRS and Decay are pretty big culprits, but they might be more pillar than poison.

[menace13]

oh man, I'm so angry you have no idea. people like you have the thought that brainstorm needs to be banned ingrained in their brain so hard its literally impossible to formulate a discussion about it and anything short of a brainstorm ban will not please you.
Yeah, I know. Because I can just reel of shitty arguments like you and get no where. Here's one. People like you have the thought that Brainstorm doesnt need to be banned ingrained in their brain so hard that it's literally impossible to formulate a discussion about it and anything short of a brainstorm dominated format will not please you. See how dumb that was? It only took me repeating your words back to you. Let that one sink in for a bit.


you don't want more cards like thalia. you don't want wizards to creep into other colors with powerful cards because "blue will adopt them". How many more Thalias do you think the format needs for you to realize it isn't even close to how ubiquitous Brainstorm is. or are we going to just skip rationale and spew bile? Cos i'm better at that than you, so


So don't project your blue hate onto me (in regards to your "blue = brainstorm" comment). Just acknowledge that you irrationally hate brainstorm and then I can stop responding to you.
How about you take your own advice and stop projecting your irrational love of brainstorm like it was your child behaving like an idiot and you defending it with the illogical, unconditional love of a mother.

[Finn]

If you print anything that is playable turn 1 to help other colors compete with blue then blue will just find a way to incorporate it unless it is similar to or worse than what they already have to play.I will take that challenge. I will even make it not broken. Remember, you do not want Brainstorm hosers. Those are destined to fail. You want attractive alternatives that will coax players to choose this card instead of Brainstorm.

-------
Cattle-Prodded Goblin
:r::g::b: Creature - Goblin Berserker
Haste
When Cattle-Prodded Goblin attacks, defending player reveals the top card of his library. If that card is an instant or sorcery, Cattle-Prodded Goblin deals 3 damage to defending player.
3/3
Yeeeehawww
-------
Sort of the brute force method. This one punishes opponents who use a high percentage of cantrips while making it hard for blue to use this card simply due to the casting cost.

-------
Mr. On-the-Draw
:w: Legendary Creature - human advisor
Flash
When Mr. On-the-Draw enters the battlefield, you may discard a white creature card. If you do and if an opponent has more cards in his/her graveyard than you, search your library for a white creature card, reveal it, and put it in your hand.
1/1
-------
Great ability eh? Go ahead and use cantrips and fetch lands with this card. I dare you.

-------
Too Many Secrets
:b::g: Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast Too Many Secrets, reveal any number of green and/or black cards from your hand. Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If you revealed more creature cards than your opponent, choose a nonland card from the opponent's hand. That card is discarded. Then search your library for a green and/or black creature card with converted mana cost equal to the discarded card, reveal it and, put it in your hand.
"Setec Astronomy" doesn't mean anything.
-------
Convoluted, I know. But it is probably the most skill-intensive card ever.

Every one of those cards gives players a good reason not to use Brainstorm and provides interesting game mechanics that reward skill. So it can be done.

[Phoenix Ignition]

I will take that challenge. I will even make it not broken. Remember, you do not want Brainstorm hosers. Those are destined to fail. You want attractive alternatives that will coax players to choose this card instead of Brainstorm.


How about any cards with new keyword "islandhate"

Islandhate: this card may not be cast with mana produced by Islands.

You could make it whatever nonblue colors you wanted and brainstorm decks would have a really tough time using it. Make it like a 6/6 for :g::g:

[rlesko]

How many more Thalias do you think the format needs for you to realize it isn't even close to how ubiquitous Brainstorm is. or are we going to just skip rationale and spew bile? Cos i'm better at that than you, so


So, you want to ban brainstorm because it is (relatively) ubiquitous? I want to make sure I understand exactly what your argument is.

[btm10]

As much as I love TNN, if it meant removing those other three I think the format would be more open. I talked at length with one of the original Source Legacy community members about health last week and he put it like this: Deck diversity and results are probably at the highest they've been historically, but the format is constrained by the tremendous power level on wildly different axes which limits true health. He does think DRS and Decay are pretty big culprits, but they might be more pillar than poison.

DRS and Decay do seem like reasonable culprits if we're concerned about strategic convergence - they both favor midrange goodstuff strategies (though I'm not worried about this yet). I agree with your diversity data, and think that TNN has been an outright boon to the format. I don't get the hate for Terminus, and while I don't think it's necessary, I wouldn't weep for Delver or Show and Tell if they were banned.


Yeah, I know. Because I can just reel of shitty arguments like you and get no where. Here's one. People like you have the thought that Brainstorm doesnt need to be banned ingrained in their brain so hard that it's literally impossible to formulate a discussion about it and anything short of a brainstorm dominated format will not please you. See how dumb that was? It only took me repeating your words back to you. Let that one sink in for a bit.


How about you take your own advice and stop projecting your irrational love of brainstorm like it was your child behaving like an idiot and you defending it with the illogical, unconditional love of a mother.

Just don't engage with the shitty arguments. There are some of us who are at least trying to be civil and make reasonable arguments about Brainstorm not being banned, and actually enjoy the discussion. I accept that the card is ubiquitous, I just don't think it's a bad thing. It gives me what I want in a magic format, which is consistency and a strategically diverse environment. I'd ask that you at least acknowledge that there are a lot of "top decks" right now, even if most of them share a common set of Blue cards.


I agree with this sentiment 100%. I want to elaborate on that point more, probably only the people who are looking to flame or sting me will care but anyways here it goes.

What was the best era in Magic for you? For me it was circa-2000 Extended. The popular decks were:
Oath
Recur-Survival
Free Spell Necro (4 of Necropotence)
Accelerated Blue (Tinker)
Cocoa Pebbles
Trix (Necro again)
Stasis
Forbiddian
Slivers
...

Mostly engine decks and decks full of synergies. No good stuff decks. Well Slivers was somewhat a goodstuff deck, there was still Junk but you get my point. Nothing like Deathblade, X blade, Y blade and WHIURGH Blade or Delver BUG, TNN BUG, Shardless BUG, 4 color BUG. Today those engines are banned in Legacy and we don't have less broken but equally viable and fun alternatives which would lead to unique and innovative deck design, which can also be competitive. I think the issue lies less with the power and prominence of Brainstorm but more with the lack of innovation in the Magic design principles of the current era.

Sure, any of those cards (Tinker, Oath, Survival, Necro) would wreak havoc on the format if taken off the banned list alone but maybe all should be taken off the banned list and format should embrace brokennes a bit more (semi serious thought experiment) to move away from goodstuff optimization being the norm for deckbuilding. If they can't unban the sweet stuff from that golden era then they should print viable alternatives, which are not creatures and which are not Omnisciences, that we can build unique and standalone decks around.

I'd love to play Magic like this again. I think a lot of people forget that the first 4-of Necro decks were among the first that could be described as aggro-control - Necro fueled Hypnotic Specters and Hymns long before it made Trix amazing. But my favorite eras? I really liked the Mirari's Wake era in Standard, parts of combo winter were actually a ton of fun in both Standard and Extended, Extended with MiracleGro and Gro-A-Tog were awesome (who doesn't love Cunning Wish --> Shadow Rift?) and I love Counterpost. But Vintage from the restriction of Fact or Fiction until right around Worldwake, with a brief exception for the Gro-A-Tog era, would have to be my favorite. The first Long.dec was amazing fun to play, both with and against. I'm not sure which of the several bad things around Worldwake was the worst: unrestricting Gush, restricting Brainstorm, or printing Lodestone Golem.

[Admiral_Arzar]

As much as I love TNN, if it meant removing those other three I think the format would be more open. I talked at length with one of the original Source Legacy community members about health last week and he put it like this: Deck diversity and results are probably at the highest they've been historically, but the format is constrained by the tremendous power level on wildly different axes which limits true health.

This is exactly it, and the reason why I listed those four specific cards. Delver and TNN are among the best aggressive creatures in the format - and they are blue, putting intense pressure to use them if you are playing any relatively fast creature strategy. Delver simply out-aggros comparable one-drops like Wild Nacatl and Goblin Guide, and that is the reason why Canadian Threshold is arguably the best aggro deck in the format. Besides being an excellent aggressive creature, TNN trumps most other attackers on the defensive, and is very nearly unbeatable when combined with equipment. TNN is so good against aggro that it has allowed blue decks to pack significantly more sideboard hate for both combo decks and each other as well.

Terminus is pressure from another axis. In the proper shell it is light-years better than any other Wrath effect in the game's history. Decks that focus on attacking with creatures need to take this into account by running significant disruption (Canadian, Death and Taxes, other Delver varients) or by running a card advantage engine that can trump the sweepers (Shardless BUG, various Blade decks, Jund). This pushes decks into either Delver-based aggro (already made powerful by the aforementioned broken blue creatures) or card-advantage based midrange goodstuff strategies. Midrange goodstuff is notably good against the Delver decks as well as against Terminus.dec.

Griselbrand is the final pressure point. This one is a bit harder to see because the decks that play it aren't exactly dominant - their influence is more of an undertoe than a blatant surface wave, if you will. The card is obviously busted - a card justifiably on the Legacy banlist tacked onto a 7/7 flying lifelinker. It fuels A+B combo decks like Sneak/Show and Reanimator, which are powerful enough to have reasonable matchups against most of the blue decks while actively shitting on everything else that isn't Death and Taxes. Griselbrand wins combat races against all but the largest creature offensives - this was generally true of Emrakul or Sphinx of the Steel Wind as well. The card draw adds another axis though, allowing the pilot to draw into countermagic. Thus they can stop removal on Griselbrand himself while also drawing a handful of countermagic against other combo decks. These points are both extremely important - old-school Show and Tell decks ran the risk of their bomb getting killed by Innocent Blood, now the Force of Will is just 7 life away. At the same time, Show -> Emrakul didn't necessarily beat other combo decks as they still had a turn to go off - this is no longer the case with Grisel who is often as much of a lock as Iona against Storm or Tide.

It's arguable that Deathrite Shaman is another axis of pressure, but it's also arguable that having cheap yard hate in maindecks is a good thing so I'm not sure about that.

[Barook]

DRS and Decay do seem like reasonable culprits if we're concerned about strategic convergence - they both favor midrange goodstuff strategies (though I'm not worried about this yet). I agree with your diversity data, and think that TNN has been an outright boon to the format. I don't get the hate for Terminus, and while I don't think it's necessary, I wouldn't weep for Delver or Show and Tell if they were banned.
Decay gave the format another staple removal spell aside from StP to deal with undercosted, fat creatures. It kinda sucks that it made BUG Delver to one of the the topdogs of the format, but we can't have everything.

People can complain about DRS all they want, but let's not forget that DRS (alongside RiP) freed the format from excessive GY abuse. People were bitching alot that the GY is used as second library before DRS was printed. DRS has an absurd powerlevel, but he's also the format's watchdog over the graveyard. Just look at Modern - since the DRS ban, people started spamming Snapcaster Mages left and right.

[Zombie]

I agree with this sentiment 100%. I want to elaborate on that point more, probably only the people who are looking to flame or sting me will care but anyways here it goes.

What was the best era in Magic for you?

I started playing right after Future Sight, so I don't have experience in the older formats. But TS-Lor/Sha-Snap Standard was a pretty rad format. It was huge, decks played different stuff instead of different configurations of the same stuff, and basically everything was just really good. Lorwyn brought the first wave of really strong creatures, both blocks had a lot of amazing spells, NWO hadn't yet taken full effect so commons/uncommons were actually interesting and good (The core of Elf Rock was basically all uncommons IIRC). Boardstates were full of synergy and entertaining complications.

Creatures were amazing (everything), removal was great whether sweeper or targeted (O-Ring, Incinerate, Skred, Wrath/Damnation, Volcanic Fallout, Shriekmaw, Sower, Condemn...), countermagic(Rune Snag, Negate, Spell Pierce, Spellstutter, Cryptic, Mystic Snake, Venser, Glen Elendra Archmage, Sage's Dousing all in one format O_o) and draw spells were great (Harmonize, Mulldrifter, Reveillark, Careful Consideration, Think Twice, Jace 1.0), hell, red was fucking amazing and the format had a genuinely interesting ramp deck. Speaking of which, manlands and utility lands were amazing too. Combo decks were a thing - yes, combo decks.

Also, Quick 'N Toast was a thing. I think the only thing that was genuinely bad in that format was equipment.

I want that format back http://imageshack.us/a/img443/4251/ixgr.png

...so I can swing for 6-8 and cast Wrath to kill your dude, untap my team and draw 4 cards. And cast Momentary Blink again. I miss that card so much. RIP Blink.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

One thing to note about blue's dominance are the low prices on non-blue duals and fetches.

Consider this manabase...
4 USea
4 Delta
______
1200 dollars

...then this one:
4 Taiga
4 Foothills
______
500 dollars


Hm. It's not that much of a difference as I hoped for, while you basically lose any chance for a stack interaction or whatever the fancy stuff that blue may offer.
Strange. I thoght that there's a space for brewing/novices in non-blue colors, as the lower prices might mean that people will be more courageous to try something else. Alas, the prices of non-blue lands are insane just as well as those of the blue manabase.
I guess that the whole trouble of Legacy lies in the no-reprint policy of WotC and thus there will be similar monetary limits in Legacy as there are in Vintage now. Unless some drastic change happens, I cannot imagine Legacy five years from now as anything else than an elitist and golden youth format. Which is sad.

But maybe this won't matter right after the US unleashes the WW3.

[Zombie]

Griselbrand is the final pressure point.

The way it often enters play is a problem in itself as well:

I have way less issues with Delver tbh. It's not good for the color balance of the format, but I don't feel like the game is just plain dumb when I play against Delver decks apart from the T1 Delver T2 natural flip, waste you nutdraw, and even that can be mitigated by simply playing basics. That or when they play TNN.

S&T, on the other hand, just feels dumb every step of the way. The card itself - oh hey, it's the actual threat so you have to stop it instead of being able to stop it partway like you can with engine decks - you don't even have to expose the win con to counterspells afterwards like you have to with broken mana engines. It's a 3 mana sorcery that puts stuff into play from your hand so it evades most traditional card-logistic indicators of brokenness being afoot - cards coming into play from unusual zones, lots of cards being played in one turn, expensive spells being cast, and so forth. Unlike NO, it requires no sacrifice in board position to even try to get one through.

And then the win cons themselves are just about the least situational and, frankly, offensively dumb cards ever printed - Bargain with Lifelink (???), Emrakul, oh hey all my cards are free into Komplete Kombo In A Kan ("Now with a built-in failsafe so you can't accidentally deck yourself.")

All of which is topped off by Leyline, which immunizes the deck to the main form of combo hate that is naturally good against it for no mana investment and makes mulligans into lottery.

It may win less than Delver, but that's only because it can lose to itself, which Delver can't. That doesn't mean it's fine. The games involving the deck suck, just like the TNN ones do.

the tl;dr is: "Cast a 3-mana sorcery" is a hard plan to hate because it's one of those things that should happen in normal Magic. As should permanents entering play from people's hands. Most other combo decks do something that has a "signature" of brokenness because unusual things happen and those unusual things can be targeted. Not so with S&T cheating in the most hideously dumb bullshit in the game's history.

[sjmcc13]

I guess that the whole trouble of Legacy lies in the no-reprint policy of WotC and thus there will be similar monetary limits in Legacy as there are in Vintage now. Unless some drastic change happens, I cannot imagine Legacy five years from now as anything else than an elitist and golden youth format. Which is sad. I have to agree, there are not enough copies of key cards for the format to grow, and the nature of the market and player base means that a small preference in card selection can lead to a large difference in price.

Persionally what I would love is if WotC would somehow work around the reprint restrictions and make a series of official proxies, that are linked to both your DCI # and Magic Online Account such that if you have the card online you can put it into some kind of can not be traded state and they send you a proxy with your DCI # printed on it that you can use at any sanctioned tournament. Set it up similar to the normal set redemption where you have to have a complete set in order to opt.

Realistically they never should have remove the foil loophole as instead stated that they would use it as a pressure valve to keep the inflation rate down (but not negate it).

[sdematt]

If you have a bad toothache you don't pull all the teeth that might come into contact with the tooth and make it worse. You pull the tooth.

Being in Dental, this isn't strictly correct advice. Just sayin'.

-Matt

[btm10]

Decay gave the format another staple removal spell aside from StP to deal with undercosted, fat creatures. It kinda sucks that it made BUG Delver to one of the the topdogs of the format, but we can't have everything.

People can complain about DRS all they want, but let's not forget that DRS (alongside RiP) freed the format from excessive GY abuse. People were bitching alot that the GY is used as second library before DRS was printed. DRS has an absurd powerlevel, but he's also the format's watchdog over the graveyard. Just look at Modern - since the DRS ban, people started spamming Snapcaster Mages left and right.

Oh, I like both cards. I just think that if there's any sort of convergence to be worried about it's the movement of the whole format toward multicolored midrange goodstuff decks, and I think that DRS is basically tailor-made to support those strategies because it's a clock and a sort-of blocker that doesn't rely on combat in either of those roles, it's maindeckable graveyard hate, and it's a mana fixer. Again it's a great card in pretty much every aspect, but I think it might be the biggest factor in pushing non-combo decks to be more similar to each other than they otherwise would be because it's so splashable and does so much so well.

That being said, I'm still relatively happy with where the format is. If it were up to me Storm would be better positioned, D&T would be more poorly positioned, and there would be more Imperial Recruiters in the world, but that's just my admittedly unusual preference for what a better meta would look like.

[LOLWut]

If you print anything that is playable turn 1 to help other colors compete with blue then blue will just find a way to incorporate it unless it is similar to or worse than what they already have to play.

Some solutions might even be marginally worse in many ways but better in one key way and get incorporated as a result. This is Abrupt Decay in a nutshell. It's harder to play than a bolt or StP and harder to splash into a blue shell, however it is immune to counter spells and it hits artifacts and enchantments as well so it is incorporated in several dominant blue shells.

I'm not getting into a broken cards creation post but it's hard to see how things that fixed card advantage and selection for any of the other colors and were also playable on turn 1 would not just get incorporated into blue. This would likely be true even if they were straight ripoffs of Brainstorm for one of a different color. Blue would go "wow! 8 Brainstorms and all I have to do is..."

Complete, utter, horseshit.

I'm going to quickly create a few cards that would fix card advantage/selection for other colors, that aren't worse than Brainstorm in the right shell, and I want you to tell me how "blue decks" would incorporate them. Power levels could be upped or lowered.

:wg:
Enchantment
Flash. When ~ ETB, reveal the top six cards of your library. Put all enchantment cards revealed this way into your hand and the rest on the bottom of your library in any order. Put two cards from your hand on top of your library in any order.

:1:
Artifact
When ~ ETB, Scry [#].
Whenever a player shuffles his or her library, each of that player's opponents may Scry [#].

:b::b:
Sorcery
Exile cards from the top of your library until you reveal a nonland card with converted mana cost less than 2. Put one of the exiled cards into your hand. Shuffle the exiled cards into your library.

By the way, I've never adopted a deck with Brainstorm.


But maybe this won't matter right after the US unleashes the WW3.

Yeah, it was the US who started the first two, not Europe, I believe.

[nedleeds]

Decay gave the format another staple removal spell aside from StP to deal with undercosted, fat creatures. It kinda sucks that it made BUG Delver to one of the the topdogs of the format, but we can't have everything.

Yes. The black green removal spell is most successful in a blue deck with no basics.

[nedleeds]

Yeah, I know. Because I can just reel of shitty arguments like you and get no where. Here's one. People like you have the thought that Brainstorm doesnt need to be banned ingrained in their brain so hard that it's literally impossible to formulate a discussion about it and anything short of a brainstorm dominated format will not please you. See how dumb that was? It only took me repeating your words back to you. Let that one sink in for a bit.

How many more Thalias do you think the format needs for you to realize it isn't even close to how ubiquitous Brainstorm is. or are we going to just skip rationale and spew bile? Cos i'm better at that than you, so


How about you take your own advice and stop projecting your irrational love of brainstorm like it was your child behaving like an idiot and you defending it with the illogical, unconditional love of a mother.

What you aren't tired of 'arguments' like

"pillar of the format"
"format defining"
"skill intensive"
"variance reducing"
"go play modern you loser"
"I'd quit if they banned it"

Those aren't compelling? C'mon man!

[Lemnear]

I disagree on Brainstorm being necessary for Storm combo. There are a lot of cantrips in blue that have similar effects in terms of card searching in the first couple of turns. Storm combo can find a hand-fixing card that will work without too much trouble. It just won't have access to the no-brainer.

Kid, you are undoubtfully arguing with the wrong guy about how important Brainstorm is for storm and it's kinda funny that you don't even notice


Edit:
http://gatherer.wizards.com/Handlers/Image.ashx?multiverseid=463&type=card

http://940ee6dce6677fa01d25-0f55c9129972ac85d6b1f4e703468e6b.r99.cf2.rackcdn.com/products/pictures/168145.jpg

http://www.mtgotraders.com/store/media/products/roe/Ancient_Stirrings_f.jpg

/topic: there are no good card selection spells in other colors than blue

[Teveshszat]

Hello,

after I read of of the comments I think that maybe not all people are aware of what mechanics really drive Magic.

I mean we have a resource Management Game with incomplete information so each card which is increasing information and the recources
yiu can use, yes hand cards are a resource too, is a card which is good on its own. If it also decreases the variance of draws then it is even
better.
As it happens Brainstorm does all that and even more so we can concider brainstorm a powerfull card.
Now let us think what we can do with this card. I would suggest just to splash it in every deck you play because of the powerlevel it has.
I would not even hurt because there are enough lands even beside the classic duals which enable this splash of 1 blue mana for you
to just get your personal suit of blue cantrips into your deck.

If you don´t want that concider Sensei´s Divining Top since it is an Artifact it is collorless and you can play 4 of them in most decks
which have lands to produce Mana. Yes you can´t hide cards with it but you can fish for answers and decrease varance with this card too.

And then there are non blue cards which can be played as draw enhancer. One is of cource Silvan Lybary another is Dark Confidant.

But just to rememer you the Blue colour was allways the collour which stood for Cardadvantage, control libary manipulation and draw effects. If
you can acept this in will come to your mind that cards like TNN or Delver are more a problem because they give blue hard to deal creatures
in the early phases of the game.

So I don´t concider Brainstorm a problem because he is a card with it easy to splash and there are some other options I can retreat to if
I find that Brainstorm don´t fit in the deck I play even I hardly can imange that it would not the first move putting this card in any deck I play.

I also have no problem with terminus because it acutally weakens creature onyl rush strategies. A good example is L5r were no wrath or termnus
exsists and most of the decks which are played are rush decks which finish you of in turn 3 or 4 without anything you can do against it.
So this forces you into playing creatures as well and or fast combo strategies.
So if we would remove Termnius it is likely to happen that tempo decks will become even stronger then they are now because terminous is
one of the cards they don´t want you to have as defense option becasue is it actually flexible and cheap enough to screw them even trhough things like daze effects.

So finally I would love that we can quit this hating discussion but I know is is the internet so this will not happen but maybe we can start thinking how
incooperate some of the powerfull cards we have in decks which an not mainly blue to make them stronger and better instead of trying to make
other peoples decks worse.

Edit: I like the natural selection card maybe this card is worth a try.
Edit again: I apologize in advance if I hurt someones feelings but try to think about waht I say


What you aren't tired of 'arguments' like

"pillar of the format"
"format defining"
"skill intensive"
"variance reducing"
"go play modern you loser"
"I'd quit if they banned it"

Those aren't compelling? C'mon man!

The last 2 are out of frustration because some of us are trying desparatly to make you understand that infact reducition of variance is a disirable affect in an
mathamathic driven game were you just want to optimize each card drawn and that variance is the thing leading to so called unlucky draws so big variance
is something you naturally want to avoid in Magic.
The problem here is that despite some good reasonings you are just refering to
you normal argument that people just don´t have to play brainstorm but never concidered to play it your self and reducing the frutration about bad draws
or unlucky hands.

Best regards Teveshszat

[Ellomdian]

Force of Will is not a best card. It's a heavily played card because Brainstorm is a best card and blue is over-played and people can't avoid the lure of a "free" counterspell in the first couple of turns of the game.

When people manage to 'avoide the lure' of a free counterspell, there is virtually 0 downside to running Manic combo decks like Reanimator and Belcher. That those decks do reasonably well even in a format where Force is prevalent is saying something.

People don't run Force because Brainstorm is a thing - it's just convenient that Brainstorm pitches to Force. People run Force because if no one is playing killjoy to the non-interactive decks in the format, they tend to be the strongest option (much like Affinity of old, or Dredge.)


I really don't know where this is coming from. I'm not committed to any color or combination of colors, and have played competitive events with decks of every color (and most color combinations) at some point in my life. What I don't want in a meta is an endless parade of goodstuff midrange vs. goodstuff midrange decks with everything else nipping at the heels of those decks. Sure, the random Dredge or MUD or Sneak and Show pilot will get lucky and/or be good enough to Top 8 occasionally, but most of the time is going to be grindy aggro-control decks bashing each other with Hymns and countermagic until someone doesn't topdeck their removal on time. I'll take making the game more skill-testing and decks more consistent over having more even color representation any day of the week.

QFT. The biggest sin DRS committed in Modern was encouraging and supporting Midrange Goodstuff, and when everyone is playing at the same level of interaction it is incredibly boring. Look at the GW or Mono-B mirrors in standard right now (if you even watch standard) or the post-board Pod mirrors in Modern.

I was really excited when Jund was the hot new thing on the SCG circuit last year, because it meant that the echo chamber shifted. The sad truth is that until there is a completely different strategy (ahem, DnT) in that venue that doesn't rely on Brainstorm/Fetch style interactions, we will continue to see a disproportionate number of copies of Brainstorm in the T8.

[Rizso]

When people manage to 'avoide the lure' of a free counterspell, there is virtually 0 downside to running Manic combo decks like Reanimator and Belcher. That those decks do reasonably well even in a format where Force is prevalent is saying something.

People don't run Force because Brainstorm is a thing - it's just convenient that Brainstorm pitches to Force. People run Force because if no one is playing killjoy to the non-interactive decks in the format, they tend to be the strongest option (much like Affinity of old, or Dredge.)



QFT. The biggest sin DRS committed in Modern was encouraging and supporting Midrange Goodstuff, and when everyone is playing at the same level of interaction it is incredibly boring. Look at the GW or Mono-B mirrors in standard right now (if you even watch standard) or the post-board Pod mirrors in Modern.

I was really excited when Jund was the hot new thing on the SCG circuit last year, because it meant that the echo chamber shifted. The sad truth is that until there is a completely different strategy (ahem, DnT) in that venue that doesn't rely on Brainstorm/Fetch style interactions, we will continue to see a disproportionate number of copies of Brainstorm in the T8.

Modern is still quite midrangy just look at the last scg modern premier. In the top8: 26 dark confidants, 23 thoughtseize, 22 inquisition of kozilek, 18 liliana of the veil and 15 Fullminator mages

[Barook]

QFT. The biggest sin DRS committed in Modern was encouraging and supporting Midrange Goodstuff, and when everyone is playing at the same level of interaction it is incredibly boring. Look at the GW or Mono-B mirrors in standard right now (if you even watch standard) or the post-board Pod mirrors in Modern.
Yet peole still run the same GB good stuff core after DRS was banned or switched over to Pod.

Modern is midrange because that's what Wizards wants - otherwise, they wouldn't have banned a metric fuckton of cards. Modern doesn't have any interesting engines going for it (aside from Pod), so people either play that, GB good stuff, Affinity or some Snapcaster/Bolt deck.

[AggroControl]

I will take that challenge. I will even make it not broken. Remember, you do not want Brainstorm hosers. Those are destined to fail. You want attractive alternatives that will coax players to choose this card instead of Brainstorm.

-------
Cattle-Prodded Goblin
:r::g::b: Creature - Goblin Berserker
Haste
When Cattle-Prodded Goblin attacks, defending player reveals the top card of his library. If that card is an instant or sorcery, Cattle-Prodded Goblin deals 3 damage to defending player.
3/3
Yeeeehawww
-------
Sort of the brute force method. This one punishes opponents who use a high percentage of cantrips while making it hard for blue to use this card simply due to the casting cost.

-------
Mr. On-the-Draw
:w: Legendary Creature - human advisor
Flash
When Mr. On-the-Draw enters the battlefield, you may discard a white creature card. If you do and if an opponent has more cards in his/her graveyard than you, search your library for a white creature card, reveal it, and put it in your hand.
1/1
-------
Great ability eh? Go ahead and use cantrips and fetch lands with this card. I dare you.

-------
Too Many Secrets
:b::g: Sorcery
As an additional cost to cast Too Many Secrets, reveal any number of green and/or black cards from your hand. Target opponent reveals his or her hand. If you revealed more creature cards than your opponent, choose a nonland card from the opponent's hand. That card is discarded. Then search your library for a green and/or black creature card with converted mana cost equal to the discarded card, reveal it and, put it in your hand.
"Setec Astronomy" doesn't mean anything.
-------
Convoluted, I know. But it is probably the most skill-intensive card ever.

Every one of those cards gives players a good reason not to use Brainstorm and provides interesting game mechanics that reward skill. So it can be done.

None of those cards is played effectively on turn 1. You need something that is played effectively right away if you want to make Brainstorm more of a double-edged sword.

The idea that I had and abandoned because I didn't want to turn this into a speculative thread with card inventions was:

Leyline of Selection
:2::g::g: Legendary Enchantment - Aura Curse

Enchant Player

If Leyline of Selection is in your opening hand, you may reveal two green cards other than Leyline of Selection and begin the game with it on the battlefield.

Whenever enchanted player plays a non-creature spell you may draw the top 3 cards of your library and put three cards from your hand back on top of your library in any order.
If you do not control a forest at the beginning of the end step of any of your turns sacrifice Leyline of Selection.

Draw a card when you put Leyline of Selection into play.

[btm10]

It does strike me as slightly odd that Jund doesn't top 8 SCG evets more frequently. I know that it struggles against combo, but of all the combo matchups, Sneak and Show is probably its best (and currently the most common) because of its susceptibility to discard and the fact that Jund has SB enchantment removal in case they're on Leyline. I don't play Jund, so I could be completely wrong about this, but it does seem like the deck is underplayed.

There's a small number of nonblue decks that I think are a small step from greatness, but without either unbannings or an unexpected printing, they're stuck as either too inconsistent or too slow.

[sdematt]

It does strike me as slightly odd that Jund doesn't top 8 SCG evets more frequently. I know that it struggles against combo, but of all the combo matchups, Sneak and Show is probably its best (and currently the most common) because of its susceptibility to discard and the fact that Jund has SB enchantment removal in case they're on Leyline. I don't play Jund, so I could be completely wrong about this, but it does seem like the deck is underplayed.

There's a small number of nonblue decks that I think are a small step from greatness, but without either unbannings or an unexpected printing, they're stuck as either too inconsistent or too slow.

This could just be a lack of players, as well. Representation itself could be an issue.

-Matt

[Ellomdian]

Modern is still quite midrangy just look at the last scg modern premier. In the top8: 26 dark confidants, 23 thoughtseize, 22 inquisition of kozilek, 18 liliana of the veil and 15 Fullminator mages

I didn't mean to turn a discussion about Brainstorm into one about Modern - its WAY too loaded a discussion for most of this Forum.

Having said that, I am not sure if I am willing to tag Thoughtseize or Inquisition as 'midrange' cards. They do a hell of a job defending combo as well, when you can afford to run them.

[Barook]

It does strike me as slightly odd that Jund doesn't top 8 SCG evets more frequently. I know that it struggles against combo, but of all the combo matchups, Sneak and Show is probably its best (and currently the most common) because of its susceptibility to discard and the fact that Jund has SB enchantment removal in case they're on Leyline. I don't play Jund, so I could be completely wrong about this, but it does seem like the deck is underplayed.

There's a small number of nonblue decks that I think are a small step from greatness, but without either unbannings or an unexpected printing, they're stuck as either too inconsistent or too slow.
Jund placed pretty inconsistently ever since TNN became a thing. Checking the DTB, its performance this year is on/off the DtB, kinda like D&T.

Consistency compared to blue decks might be the issue here.

[HSCK]

UWR, Deathblade, Jund, Sneak and Show, RUG, and Elves are all about the same since TNN got printed in terms of top 8 appearances, 57-51 top 8s through June so far.

[Dice_Box]

It does strike me as slightly odd that Jund doesn't top 8 SCG evets more frequently. I know that it struggles against combo, but of all the combo matchups, Sneak and Show is probably its best (and currently the most common) because of its susceptibility to discard and the fact that Jund has SB enchantment removal in case they're on Leyline. I don't play Jund, so I could be completely wrong about this, but it does seem like the deck is underplayed.

There's a small number of nonblue decks that I think are a small step from greatness, but without either unbannings or an unexpected printing, they're stuck as either too inconsistent or too slow.

Jund likes to win top deck wars. BUG WINS top deck wars. If you want to see selection at play, have a look at the two of them at work.

Personally, I like Jund more though. Punishing fire sings to my style of play.

[btm10]

This could just be a lack of players, as well. Representation itself could be an issue.

-Matt

That makes sense, especially since player bias probably plays some part in the shape of the meta.


Jund placed pretty inconsistently ever since TNN became a thing. Checking the DTB, its performance this year is on/off the DtB, kinda like D&T.

Consistency compared to blue decks might be the issue here.


UWR, Deathblade, Jund, Sneak and Show, RUG, and Elves are all about the same since TNN got printed in terms of top 8 appearances, 57-51 top 8s through June so far.

Of all the nonblue decks, I see Jund having the fewest consistency issues between Bob and Sylvan Library. And Jund's only issue with TNN has to be the occasional pilot embarrassment when one sticks around long enough to actually get more than a single hit in. Between Golgari Charm, Diabolic Edict, Liliana, and Toxic Deluge, and the fact that Decay and Punishing Fire mean that the board is usually otherwise clear for sac effects.

EDIT:


Jund likes to win top deck wars. BUG WINS top deck wars. If you want to see selection at play, have a look at the two of them at work.

Personally, I like Jund more though. Punishing fire sings to my style of play.

Depends on which BUG list. Shardless can struggle with Jund because Jund is better in Goyf standoffs (PFire) and BBE cascades into gamebreakers like Liliana, which a house in that matchup. The actual topdeck wars usually come down to Vision vs. Bob, and which is better there is pretty context dependent.

[menace13]

I'd ask that you at least acknowledge that there are a lot of "top decks" right now, even if most of them share a common set of Blue cards.
For sure. There are tons of blue decks. And a few non-blue decks that can win but for some reason just arent as heavily played as blue. I feel these are where WotC should focus on to push the saturation of Brainstorm down a good number of percentage points. Decks like; Jund, Loam, DnT, Elves, Dredge, MUD, Maverick, Burn, Post Ramp, Nic Fit, Goblins, Lands, Painter. More cards printed that reward those decks more than blue shells is a good thing.

If at any given time any of those non-blue decks can always be 3 in the top 6 spots. Then you have a highly diverse format. Mostly now it is diverse, but in a blue shell diverse sort of way. As the rounds of large events push longer that diversity becomes narrower. It shouldn't be that way. There were years when it wasn't always like this. I think those years rewarded deck selection and meta gaming more so than tuning a deck to square off against largely blue dominated rounds. It is now almost never a better choice to pilot most of the above listed decks over Blue ones.

Finn has got the right idea of designs that make players picks those cards over Brainstorm. If statistically Brainstorm is at 70% there is a problem. I am confident in saying that if price wasn't such a factor that number would probably push 80% or more.

[Rizso]

I didn't mean to turn a discussion about Brainstorm into one about Modern - its WAY too loaded a discussion for most of this Forum.

Having said that, I am not sure if I am willing to tag Thoughtseize or Inquisition as 'midrange' cards. They do a hell of a job defending combo as well, when you can afford to run them.

Thought most combos isnt black in modern :D Confidant and Liliana is very much midrange cards. All the best card they print nowdays are midrange cards tbh.

[btm10]

For sure. There are tons of blue decks. And a few non-blue decks that can win but for some reason just arent as heavily played as blue. I feel these are where WotC should focus on to push the saturation of Brainstorm down a good number of percentage points. Decks like; Jund, Loam, DnT, Elves, Dredge, MUD, Maverick, Burn, Post Ramp, Nic Fit, Goblins, Lands, Painter. More cards printed that reward those decks more than blue shells is a good thing.

If at any given time any of those non-blue decks can always be 3 in the top 6 spots. Then you have a highly diverse format. Mostly now it is diverse, but in a blue shell diverse sort of way. As the rounds of large events push longer that diversity becomes narrower. It shouldn't be that way. There were years when it wasn't always like this. I think those years rewarded deck selection and meta gaming more so than tuning a deck to square off against largely blue dominated rounds. It is now almost never a better choice to pilot most of the above listed decks over Blue ones.

Finn has got the right idea of designs that make players picks those cards over Brainstorm. If statistically Brainstorm is at 70% there is a problem. I am confident in saying that if price wasn't such a factor that number would probably push 80% or more.

I get what you're saying. But I actually think that if accessibility weren't an issue you'd see more nonblue decks because buying the narrow cards for Jund (Taigas) or Painter (Recruiters, Plateaus), or 12Post (Candleabras) wouldn't mean that you were dumping a large amount of money to lock yourself in to a single deck. Sure, buying blue Duals is a bigger upfront cost, but once you have Underground Seas, you can use them in Tezz, in BUG decks, or in Storm decks. Similarly, with Tundras you can play UWR Delver or Miracles. The issue with some of the other decks like MUD is (I think) consistency, so blue would actually help there, but it's more a fit for Thirst for Knowledge than Brainstorm. I have to imagine that there's a reason that MUD doesn't splash Blue for Thirst, but that's a question for the MUD thread.

Other than Burn, I think that accessibility and the narrowness of the expensive cards are whybmost of the decks you listed aren't played. I think the issue with Burn is more about pilot quality than accessibility, but the small number of pilots (many of whom are probably weak) coupled with some probably unwinnable matchups like Belcher and Storm are the chokepoints for that deck.

[AggroControl]

Thought most combos isnt black in modern :D Confidant and Liliana is very much midrange cards. All the best card they print nowdays are midrange cards tbh.

Delver of Secrets. All it takes is one dominant option being printed to overpower blue in some way again. That's the problem.

If BUG Delver was using Nimble Mongoose instead of Delver of Secrets it's only a tier 1 list instead of one of the three best lists in the meta right now. If RUG didn't have Delver it's probably tier 1.5 atm. Delver's not a big pricey staple it's just a small evasive 3/2 beater that puts both lists on a higher plane at this point.

[AndyTron]

People want to play Magic. If somebody gets defeated before they even get their first turn, what's the point of even playing then? What games are fun if you lose before you even started playing? Losing to T1 kills is extremely bad for the game and very frustrating.

I also disagree about blue getting pushed out of the format in Modern, e.g: Modern MODO meta (http://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/modern/full#online)

Blue not claiming 70+% of the meta =|= pushed out of the format.

Go check out the original banned list explanation/announcement for Modern. They only got rid of Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Ancestral Vision because after making the list they realized there were no blue cards on it so they added some just because. You'll also notice that they didn't ban any red cards just for the sake of it even though there weren't any on the original list. I don't play Modern, so I can't say for sure, but if blue hasn't been pushed out I doubt it's for lack of trying.

[AggroControl]

Go check out the original banned list explanation/announcement for Modern. They only got rid of Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Ancestral Vision because after making the list they realized there were no blue cards on it so they added some just because. You'll also notice that they didn't ban any red cards just for the sake of it even though there weren't any on the original list. I don't play Modern, so I can't say for sure, but if blue hasn't been pushed out I doubt it's for lack of trying.

They got rid of Jace and SFM because they thought they'd get an absolutely dominant Blue-White list in Modern if they left the two of them in the format and they didn't know which one was more broken. The Standard that immediately preceded the creation of Modern had been broken into little pieces by CawBlade and they were still shell-shocked from that experience.

[AndyTron]

They got rid of Jace and SFM because they thought they'd get an absolutely dominant Blue-White list in Modern if they left the two of them in the format and they didn't know which one was more broken. The Standard that immediately preceded the creation of Modern had been broken into little pieces by CawBlade and they were still shell-shocked from that experience.

The quote from the article says: "You'll notice that we haven't touched a blue card yet. When we got to this point and realized that blue was escaping unscathed, we knew we had to ban something, or a very powerful blue control deck would likely be the best thing left."

I don't see being the best deck and dominating as the same thing. There's also no mention of white cards here. Stoneforge was already banned at this point and when BBE and Jace existed together in the same format, as they had in Shards/Zendikar standard, Jace was hardly oppressive. I know CawBlade standard was really unfun for a lot of people, but even though Jace and Stoneforge were winning the most, the card they should have banned was Primetime. The fact that it beat all of the decks that beat Caw was what was really oppressing the format. Personally I would have liked to see Jace in modern, but I openly admit that I'm biased and I love playing with the card.

[Lord Seth]

The quote from the article says: "You'll notice that we haven't touched a blue card yet. When we got to this point and realized that blue was escaping unscathed, we knew we had to ban something, or a very powerful blue control deck would likely be the best thing left."You know, I can understand thinking Blue should get a hit also, but their concerns were a blue control deck? They should've been worried about a powerful blue combo deck, which did do a respectable job in dominating that Pro Tour in the form of Splinter Twin and Infect Shoal. Ponder would've been a far smarter ban.

It's especially highly amusing to be afraid of a blue control deck dominating in a format where 12-Post was Tier 1...

I don't think Jace being banned was unreasonable, though. After all, a big impetus for them switching the Pro Tour format to Modern was because Caw-Blade was considered unstoppable in Extended, so ensuring Caw-Blade wouldn't just dominate the format anyway made some sense. Their reasoning for Ancestral Vision seemed quite weak, though, especially as part of it was "it sees play in Jace decks." Didn't you already ban Jace?


I don't see being the best deck and dominating as the same thing. There's also no mention of white cards here. Stoneforge was already banned at this point and when BBE and Jace existed together in the same format, as they had in Shards/Zendikar standard, Jace was hardly oppressive. I know CawBlade standard was really unfun for a lot of people, but even though Jace and Stoneforge were winning the most, the card they should have banned was Primetime. The fact that it beat all of the decks that beat Caw was what was really oppressing the format. Personally I would have liked to see Jace in modern, but I openly admit that I'm biased and I love playing with the card.You can maybe make that argument for Primeval Titan before New Phyrexia (though at that point Caw-Blade might not have really been banworthy anyway), but once New Phyrexia entered the format (most notably bringing Batterskull with it), I don't think banning Primeval Titan would have done anything to stop Caw-Blade. Valakut wasn't keeping down the decks that could beat Caw-Blade; Caw-Blade was keeping down the decks that could beat Caw-Blade because it got boosted in power so much that Caw-Blade beat them anyway. Well, I guess Twin-Blade could handle Caw-Blade...

[AggroControl]

Even with the power level of Brainstorm it's very hard to justify throwing it into a list that wants to tap out a lot of the time early on.


BUG Delver.

Tapped out early with Force of Will and Daze is not the same as tapped out in lists without them. I do see your point because BUG Delver definitely wants to drop something on turn 1 and then either defend it on turn 2 or drop another thing the opponent has to deal with.

My point was that Jund and Junk can't splash blue for Brainstorm because if they don't tap out on turns 1, 2 and 3 they probably aren't going to win the game and that's true whether they have Brainstorm plus mana to use it or not. They require a continual pressure on the opponent, lacking which they have usually lost the game.

[AggroControl]

Lest anybody forget, or not have looked real hard at the time, this is the top 8 of Grand Prix Dallas in early 2011. http://archive.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpdal11/welcome

The event was won by David Shiels with the stock Cawblade list which did not include Batterskull. There were 3 other Cawblade lists in the top 8. None of them included Batterskull, which had been in print for 6 months at that point. They all used Sword of Feast and Famine instead as their killer equipment.

There were 4 other lists in that top 8. They were all RUG Ramp Control.

The story of the event was that there were 32 Jace, the Mind Sculptor in the final 8 and they powered two lists which had collectively over-powered the meta. CawBlade had been dominant for almost a year at that point and RUG had joined the party after the focus of the Ramp archetype had switched from resolving Primeval Titan to resolving Jace and then using him to get card advantage and overpower the opponent.

There was no way in hell WotC was going to let Modern become Jace-land. Less than no way in hell.

One thing to remember about the CawBlade debacle was the WotC was deeply embarrassed at the way they had let Standard degenerate from Zendikar to Scars of Mirrodin. They were hearing really angry complaints from players at their events, both pros and amateurs. Very few people liked playing in a Standard in which one card defined the meta in a way that it's price shot up well over $100 for a long period of time. Very few people liked playing in a Standard in which you had to play blue to be competitive. Attendance at Standard events declined significantly over the last half of 2010 and early 2011.

Read Aaron Forsythe's mea culpa when the Jace and SFM bannings were announced and it becomes clear that he was prostrating himself before the player base in the hope that the anger would run it's course. He admitted that he thought Batterskull would put SFM on a different plane for a short period after it was printed. He did not however acknowledge the basic fact that SFM and Jace were joined at the hip in that Standard after Worldwake was printed. That's one of the few times that WotC blatantly overpowered blue in a Standard and they paid for the sin by watching attendance numbers dwindle, hence the long apology by Forsythe.

[SevenInTheQueue]

Lest anybody forget, or not have looked real hard at the time, this is the top 8 of Grand Prix Dallas in early 2011. http://archive.wizards.com/magic/magazine/article.aspx?x=mtg/daily/eventcoverage/gpdal11/welcome

The event was won by David Shiels with the stock Cawblade list which did not include Batterskull. There were 3 other Cawblade lists in the top 8. None of them included Batterskull, which had been in print for 6 months at that point. They all used Sword of Feast and Famine instead as their killer equipment.

There were 4 other lists in that top 8. They were all RUG Ramp Control.

The story of the event was that there were 32 Jace, the Mind Sculptor in the final 8 and they powered two lists which had collectively over-powered the meta. CawBlade had been dominant for almost a year at that point and RUG had joined the party after the focus of the Ramp archetype had switched from resolving Primeval Titan to resolving Jace and then using him to get card advantage and overpower the opponent.

There was no way in hell WotC was going to let Modern become Jace-land. Less than no way in hell.

This event is dated April 10th, 2011. New Phyrexia wasn't released until May 13th, 2011. They did not have access to Batterskull, etc.

[AggroControl]

This event is dated April 10th, 2011. New Phyrexia wasn't released until May 13th, 2011. They did not have access to Batterskull, etc.

You're right. I mentally fixed the release of Batterskull with SoM in October. So Cawblade was wickedly overpowered without Batterskull and RUG joined it at a slightly lower level. Jace, the Mind Sculptor and Preordain were the common elements that linked the power in Standard at that point.

[Finn]

I don't give a rat's ass about Cawblade, the thinking behind Modern's ban list, or which of you is right. Way to make this thread get boring fast.

[AggroControl]

It's on topic though because it illustrates clearly that WotC has a blind spot for blue power and that the blind spot starts in R&D and extends outwards from there. WotC knew that Jace was overpowered for the format and yet they did nothing to resolve the problem until the entire format became about Jace.

I get that you think it is off-topic because it's not about Brainstorm, but in fact it is all about Brainstorm. 61-70% of the paper meta top 8 lists include 4 copies of the same card. Legacy is defined by Brainstorm, a power card that WotC clearly has a blind spot for.

[Teveshszat]

Hello,

sry but I don´t understand why this Cawblade Deck is so hated it looks like a very good control deck with not to many creatures
so for me there is no reason to hate it. ok maybe standard has a to limited cardpool to deal with such decks but I don´t think
modern has the same problem.
Maybe its just Wotc policy to forbid creature less control decks in any relevant format thanks to people who want to play competitive
but don´t bring the mindest for it.

Best regards Teveshszat

[sdematt]

The main problem that is also apparent is that of statistics. We don't usually have access to how many players playing each deck, and each of the matchups faced by everyone. Reasonably, to get an accurate scale of representation vs. placement, we would ideally have a tournament of size X with a number of different decks, Y, that all have X/Y players playing it. Even in a sufficiently large GP, data collection isn't great. We could still be running into the Vintage deck selection problem all over again.

-Matt

[AggroControl]

The main problem that is also apparent is that of statistics. We don't usually have access to how many players playing each deck, and each of the matchups faced by everyone. Reasonably, to get an accurate scale of representation vs. placement, we would ideally have a tournament of size X with a number of different decks, Y, that all have X/Y players playing it. Even in a sufficiently large GP, data collection isn't great. We could still be running into the Vintage deck selection problem all over again.

-Matt

We have access to a lot of top 8 data and to the size of the tourneys involved.

What everybody else is playing isn't really relevant because the best players get to the top 8's most of the time, particularly in large tourneys. What they are playing is indicative of which lists and cards are best at any given point. The net decking ensures that top 8 representatives of a particular list rarely differ by more than a few cards.

You can't really make the argument that the best players are playing inferior cards because they somehow think those cards give them better consistency. The consistency argues instead that they are playing the best cards to win with and the most powerful cards in the format.

I feel kind of like the guy trying to explain how dangerous the Rabbit of Caerbannog really is. "just look at the bones man, look at the bones!"

[sdematt]

What everybody else is playing isn't really relevant because the best players get to the top 8's most of the time, particularly in large tourneys

What do you mean this isn't important? It's important to know that if 70% of the meta is blue based decks, and the top 8 is 70% blue, then at least you have an appropriate showing. If 95% of the meta is non-blue and 70% of the top 8 is blue, then you know you have a REALLY big problem. That's my point. Is there a disproportionate number of Brainstorm decks in the Top 8 relative to the entire meta, or not?

Also, one problem I notice is how people actually playtest to see how the matchups end up going. How many people sit down and grind a matchup with a list for 2-3 hours at a time? Ex. Let's see how Junk vs. Deathblade goes, and then proceed to play an hour preboard and 2 hours postboard? I feel like too many people grade matchups based on seeing a match in a tournament a few times a month and that's all. Are we sufficiently testing to know how matchups should be played out?

-Matt

[Dice_Box]

I do not feel like the Cawblade standard has any bearing on Legacy. You can claim that it proves that Wizards has a blind spot for Blue. I call bullshit. I played in the first Affinity wave, Wizards just has a blind spot in general for there latest baby, regardless of colour.

[Barook]

What do you mean this isn't important? It's important to know that if 70% of the meta is blue based decks, and the top 8 is 70% blue, then at least you have an appropriate showing. If 95% of the meta is non-blue and 70% of the top 8 is blue, then you know you have a REALLY big problem. That's my point. Is there a disproportionate number of Brainstorm decks in the Top 8 relative to the entire meta, or not?
While it's impossible to get the data of all tournaments, we could use the Day 2 data of GPs. Was it the last GP that had an absurd amount of BS decks in the Top 16? IIRC, the lower you went in the final rankings of the Day 2 decks, the higher the percentage of non-blue decks became.

So I would definitely say that there's a gap between the number of decks playing Brainstorm and the number of decks placing with Brainstorm, with BS decks outperforming the non-blue decks.

[btm10]

It's on topic though because it illustrates clearly that WotC has a blind spot for blue power and that the blind spot starts in R&D and extends outwards from there. WotC knew that Jace was overpowered for the format and yet they did nothing to resolve the problem until the entire format became about Jace.

I get that you think it is off-topic because it's not about Brainstorm, but in fact it is all about Brainstorm. 61-70% of the paper meta top 8 lists include 4 copies of the same card. Legacy is defined by Brainstorm, a power card that WotC clearly has a blind spot for.

I don't think it's a blind spot, it's a combination of a lack of community outcry, a general desire not to interfere in Legacy and Vintage if it can be avoided at all, and the problems we have actually being problems they want us to have.

[AndyTron]

I do not feel like the Cawblade standard has any bearing on Legacy. You can claim that it proves that Wizards has a blind spot for Blue. I call bullshit. I played in the first Affinity wave, Wizards just has a blind spot in general for there latest baby, regardless of colour.

This. I was also around for when they decided to ban dark rit instead of necro in original extended. The DCI really needs to be made up of a separate body of people who aren't attached to cards they made or want to shape a format to to resemble the way they think magic should be instead of what people actually want to play.

[Lemnear]

Hello,

sry but I don´t understand why this Cawblade Deck is so hated it looks like a very good control deck with not to many creatures
so for me there is no reason to hate it. ok maybe standard has a to limited cardpool to deal with such decks but I don´t think
modern has the same problem.
Maybe its just Wotc policy to forbid creature less control decks in any relevant format thanks to people who want to play competitive
but don´t bring the mindest for it.

Best regards Teveshszat

It's because of "Hawk-cestral Recalls" if paired with Jace and the absurd power of SFM. The draw engine was so absurd that it made it even into Legacy as you had Brainstorms too. 1/1 flying bodies are nice chumpblocker, Jitte-Carrier or a Kill-option behind a Moat.

[iamajellydonut]

He did not however acknowledge the basic fact that SFM and Jace were joined at the hip in that Standard after Worldwake was printed. That's one of the few times that WotC blatantly overpowered blue in a Standard and they paid for the sin by watching attendance numbers dwindle, hence the long apology by Forsythe.

"Stoneforge Mystic is blue." -AggroControl

Anyway, that team wasn't banned because X card was too good, it was banned because there was one fucking deck. Same as when Affinity was banned. Same as when Urza's happened. Bannings don't happen because Grizzly Bears is too good. Historically it has always been, and always should be, that a singular deck has rose to oppressing popularity.

[Barook]

http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/the-game/modern/567422-i-just-personally-spoke-with-aaron-forsythe-at-pro

Jace and SFM (just like GSZ :cry: ) stay banned in Modern and likely won't come off. Just let the topic die.

Interestingly enough, they killed Modern as a PT format because they consider the current state as "stale" (and because Modern doesn't really promote their latest products properly, according to a twitter of Forsythe).

They expected a healthy mix of each archetype (3-4ish) (Combo, Aggro, Aggro-Control, Control - giving a total of 12 top tier decks), but since that failed, they cut it.

Legacy seems far healthier than that despite its staleness. Except we don't have true aggro decks in format, unless one wants to shoehorn stuff like Tempo decks into the aggro slot.

[iamajellydonut]

Legacy seems far healthier than that despite its staleness. Except we don't have true aggro decks in format, unless one wants to shoehorn stuff like Tempo decks into the aggro slot.

I'd call Burn aggro, though in fairness that's literally the only aggro and it's not even close to tier one. Anyway, semantics aside, I don't think the lack of aggro is intrinsically a bad thing. There has to always be the poor man. Every deck type has been there.

Edit: Are we considering Thresh tempo or aggro?

[CorwinB]

Isn't Burn more of a linear combo deck than an aggro deck, with the combo being "assembling enough bolts to send 20 to the dome"?

[iamajellydonut]

Isn't Burn more of a linear combo deck than an aggro deck, with the combo being "assembling enough bolts to send 20 to the dome"?

This is opposed to "assembling enough 3/3s to send 20 to the dome"?

[Esper3k]

I tend to consider Burn more of a combo deck myself. Aggro usually implies the primary win condition is a bunch of creatures and can thus be interacted with on that level. I wouldn't say that Burn fits that description.

[Lemnear]

I tend to consider Burn more of a combo deck myself. Aggro usually implies the primary win condition is a bunch of creatures and can thus be interacted with on that level. I wouldn't say that Burn fits that description.

No, Aggro deal damage with it's cards as sources. Combo decks win the game by assembling combinations of cards which are not required to deal damage themselves. Burn is clearly an Aggro deck

[iamajellydonut]

Aggro usually implies the primary win condition is a bunch of creatures and can thus be interacted with on that level. I wouldn't say that Burn fits that description.

This is an arbitrary distinction. It's like saying Pox isn't a control deck because it doesn't use counter spells. Burn's approach is a strategic choice.

[Caekor]

I'd probably say, Aggro is an archtype of decks, trying to curve out it's opponent as fast and direct as possible - maximizing it's damage with the opening hand and it's first draws.
That way it fits Burn as well as the creaturebased Aggro lists.

[Dice_Box]

It's a distinction that doesn't matter. It has no impact to the conversation at large.

I was looking at old Brainstorm article's for a piece I want to write up on the card (When a Red Mage trys Blue) and came across this: http://www.channelfireball.com/home/feature-article-the-legacy-of-brainstorm/ I wish people would talk about shit like this, because while I might not agree with his wish to ban the card, his points are smarter and he backs them up. Just move on from article's like the one in the OP, there are better ones to be found.

[CorwinB]

This is opposed to "assembling enough 3/3s to send 20 to the dome"?

I was going by Chapin's terminology where he includes Burn decks (which he calls "Lava Spike decks") with combo decks (other archetypes of combo decks in his terminology being "Big spell" (Tooth&Nail, Valakut...), "traditional" combo (Trix, Dark Depths...) and Storm). He has some good arguments as to why Burn differs from aggro decks in how it chooses to avoid traditional interaction (creature removal mostly).

[AggroControl]

Wizards hates blue. Current R&D is made up of bitter failed pros who blame their failure on the existence of blue cards instead of their own lack of play skill and new hires hand-picked to suck up to bitter failed pros who blame their failure on the existence of blue cards instead of their own lack of play skill. For almost two years before Jace was printed blue was the de facto worst color in magic and received a near zero number of playable cards in any format. Then after Jace was printed everybody just pretended like the last two years had never happened. The more play a blue card sees the more likely it is that there will be some card(s) printed specifically to hate it out. If that card becomes format defining then this is basically guaranteed. Other colors don't receive this treatment, although combo cards/mechanics sometimes do. If it weren't for the money to be made off of the large number of players who love powerful blue cards we'd probably get nothing but limited/EDH fodder.

How many Survival of the Fittest big wins did it take for them to ban SotF? How many top 8's where SotF was in the majority of the lists? The answer to the latter question is that SotF was in 5 of 8 top 8 slots in Charlotte. It was half the top 8 in two other major tourneys. We live with this kind of blue based control and aggro-control doing the same or better than that year after year and nothing is done about it. That's just hypocrisy and bias in action on the part of WotC.

SotF got banned because it, Vengevine and the various combos it enabled presented the first real consistency threat outside of blue in a long time. It got banned because people who liked blue consistency and interactive play were complaining that SotF and Vengevine and the combos were too consistent and too fast to deal with much of the time.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

How many Survival of the Fittest big wins did it take for them to ban SotF? How many top 8's where SotF was in the majority of the lists? The answer to the latter question is that SotF was in 5 of 8 top 8 slots in Charlotte. It was half the top 8 in two other major tourneys. We live with this kind of blue based control and aggro-control doing the same or better than that year after year and nothing is done about it. That's just hypocrisy and bias in action on the part of WotC.

SotF got banned because it, Vengevine and the various combos it enabled presented the first real consistency threat outside of blue in a long time. It got banned because people who liked blue consistency and interactive play were complaining that SotF and Vengevine and the combos were too consistent and too fast to deal with much of the time.

This is very good point. Quite frankly, this may also mean that Survival gets never unbanned... We all know how WotC hate consistency and tutors, esp. in non-blue.

[HSCK]

How many Survival of the Fittest big wins did it take for them to ban SotF? How many top 8's where SotF was in the majority of the lists? The answer to the latter question is that SotF was in 5 of 8 top 8 slots in Charlotte. It was half the top 8 in two other major tourneys. We live with this kind of blue based control and aggro-control doing the same or better than that year after year and nothing is done about it. That's just hypocrisy and bias in action on the part of WotC.

SotF got banned because it, Vengevine and the various combos it enabled presented the first real consistency threat outside of blue in a long time. It got banned because people who liked blue consistency and interactive play were complaining that SotF and Vengevine and the combos were too consistent and too fast to deal with much of the time.

It got banned because it was extremely overpowered, the knots you'll tie yourself into for your hatred of blue is quite remarkable.

[AggroControl]

It got banned because it was extremely overpowered, the knots you'll tie yourself into for your hatred of blue is quite remarkable.

It wasn't extremely overpowered until they printed Vengevine. People played SotF lists to one top 8 slot in the typical tourney for 2 years before they printed Vengevine. The lists tended to be Survival Advantage or Junk Survival and they almost never won the tourney, just played well enough to get into the top 8 before they lost to a better list.

You hear people now say that instead of banning Brainstorm WotC should ban TNN or Delver or somesuch. That's the WotC should have banned Vengevine or Necrotic Ooze argument. Instead they banned the thing that caused both the other cards to be broken. Hopefully they won't ban TNN or Delver. Instead they'll ban the thing that causes those lists to be overpowered.

[Finn]

How many Survival of the Fittest big wins did it take for them to ban SotF? How many top 8's where SotF was in the majority of the lists? The answer to the latter question is that SotF was in 5 of 8 top 8 slots in Charlotte. It was half the top 8 in two other major tourneys. We live with this kind of blue based control and aggro-control doing the same or better than that year after year and nothing is done about it. That's just hypocrisy and bias in action on the part of WotC.

SotF got banned because it, Vengevine and the various combos it enabled presented the first real consistency threat outside of blue in a long time. It got banned because people who liked blue consistency and interactive play were complaining that SotF and Vengevine and the combos were too consistent and too fast to deal with much of the time.This feels like troll bait. I am going to avoid going into any detail for fear of driving the car off the rails, but I love this conspiracy theory argument for its entertainment value alone.

[ESG]

Wizards hates blue. Current R&D is made up of bitter failed pros who blame their failure on the existence of blue cards instead of their own lack of play skill and new hires hand-picked to suck up to bitter failed pros who blame their failure on the existence of blue cards instead of their own lack of play skill.

I know a number of people at WOTC, and the opposite is true of them. It's possible we know different people, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say you don't know what you're talking about.

[btm10]

How many Survival of the Fittest big wins did it take for them to ban SotF? How many top 8's where SotF was in the majority of the lists? The answer to the latter question is that SotF was in 5 of 8 top 8 slots in Charlotte. It was half the top 8 in two other major tourneys. We live with this kind of blue based control and aggro-control doing the same or better than that year after year and nothing is done about it. That's just hypocrisy and bias in action on the part of WotC.

SotF got banned because it, Vengevine and the various combos it enabled presented the first real consistency threat outside of blue in a long time. It got banned because people who liked blue consistency and interactive play were complaining that SotF and Vengevine and the combos were too consistent and too fast to deal with much of the time.

There are major differences between Survival and Brainstorm. Survival is an engine (which Wizards doesn't like because it crowds out 'real' creature decks), it has all the traditional hallmarks of brokenness like repeatable tutoring and cards entering play from unusual zones, and it enables very traditional A+B combo, which they also don't like when it's too fast. Brainstorm may facilitate brokenness, but it doesn't directly enable it the way that Survival does, and there are highly competitive ways to use it in shells that aren't abusive. I'm not suggesting that Survival should still be banned - it shouldn't - but I am saying that Survival looks like it breaks rules in ways that Brainstorm doesn't, and Brainstorm doesn't need a ban either.

Also, this argument is a little tinfoil hatty.

[AggroControl]

I know a number of people at WOTC, and the opposite is true of them. It's possible we know different people, but I'm going to go out on a limb and say you don't know what you're talking about.

Just to back this up: in the middle of that Standard that was so dominated by Jace and Preordain you had people in the WotC hierarchy being quoted saying that Jace might be too powerful but a little extra power would surely make the format more interesting and bring people to the tourneys. Then attendance began to drop, both at big tourneys and at FNM and the defenders just vanished into the mists. The next thing you heard from them was after the 32 Jace finals and it was along the lines that they knew Jace was overpowered but they didn't know what they were going to do about it. There were still people at WotC prepared to ride things out until WWK rotated out.

They're in an echo chamber and that chamber is dominated by people who think Magic should be played in a specific way at the highest levels. It takes a tremendous hue and outcry from the player base to get though that mentality and group think. The only times that I am aware of in which the hue and outcry got to that level was when Affinity was running wild and when Jace broke Standard.

[Barook]

There are major differences between Survival and Brainstorm. Survival is an engine (which Wizards doesn't like because it crowds out 'real' creature decks), it has all the traditional hallmarks of brokenness like repeatable tutoring and cards entering play from unusual zones, and it enables very traditional A+B combo, which they also don't like when it's too fast. Brainstorm may facilitate brokenness, but it doesn't directly enable it the way that Survival does, and there are highly competitive ways to use it in shells that aren't abusive. I'm not suggesting that Survival should still be banned - it shouldn't - but I am saying that Survival looks like it breaks rules in ways that Brainstorm doesn't, and Brainstorm doesn't need a ban either.

Also, this argument is a little tinfoil hatty.
Survival is an engine. While I don't agree with its banning, I can see where Wizards is coming from.

It's hard to argue that Brainstorm isn't broken (instead of just facilitating it) when it has 70% Top 8 representation and Legacy being the only "regular" Constructed format left where it's allowed as a 4-of.

Wizards keeps Preordain and Ponder in Modern banned since they feel like blue already has strong enough tools to work with (and keeping a certain degree of color balance instead of just archetype balance - interpret that as you want since they just admitted they failed with that and cut it from the PT). I assume the people responsible for banning cards (who exactly was responsible again?) just don't care about Legacy anymore.

@JMS: They intentionally made him overpowered since they felt blue was a bit weak in the last few sets before and designed him to be a set seller. They did went overboard with him and they knew it, but they're extremely hesitant to ban cards in Standard since it sends bad signals to the customers when their expensive cards just got "worthless" out of the blue instead with a set rotaton.

[Lemnear]

It's a distinction that doesn't matter. It has no impact to the conversation at large.

I was looking at old Brainstorm article's for a piece I want to write up on the card (When a Red Mage trys Blue) and came across this: http://www.channelfireball.com/home/feature-article-the-legacy-of-brainstorm/ I wish people would talk about shit like this, because while I might not agree with his wish to ban the card, his points are smarter and he backs them up. Just move on from article's like the one in the OP, there are better ones to be found.

And I quote:


Proper Deck Selection, Sideboarding, Metagaming and Solid Technical play are the only skill testers that should matter in any format of Magic.

Is it only me or does Marius try to sell netdecking as the "only skill that should matter"? Mindmagic and strategic intelligence should be the "only skill that should matter", if you ask me

[HammerAndSickled]

For what it's worth, I would rather play any format where every card is as good as Brainstorm than a format where Brainstorm is banned.

The power level of brainstorm comes primarily from its ability to decrease variance, and therefore the impact of luck, on games. There are corner cases where it can also protect from discard or set up strange things like Miracle or Probe/LED tricks, but most of the time when someone casts Brainstorm it's because they drew cards that aren't good and/or didn't draw the good cards they needed. I feel that these effects are welcome in the game, because at its core Magic is already far too luck-dependent for my tastes. It's incredibly hard to convince anyone that Magic is a competitive skillful endeavor when even an outsider can plainly see that many games are decided through factors outside of a player's control. Brainstorm helps to mitigate that. It helps you find lands when you need them and get rid of some when ou'te flooded. It helps you find threats when you need to, helps you find removal when you need to, helps you find that Counterspell you desperately need to not die. It helps you exchange "wrong threats" for right ones and "wrong answers" for right ones. These are all GOOD THINGS for Magic. If you drew perfectly every game you would never need Brainstorm.

In essence, the argument boils down to "by not playing Blue and Brainstorm, you're handicapping yourself by making your deck less consistent and more reliant on luck." And I agree 100% with that statement. But the problem there comes because other colors don't have that consistency, not because blue has a nice thing. An analogy would be "people with health insurance have higher quality of life than others due to access to better health care, but some people can't afford healthcare. So let's close all hospitals and let everyone be on equally shitty footing."

[AggroControl]

In essence, the argument boils down to "by not playing Blue and Brainstorm, you're handicapping yourself by making your deck less consistent and more reliant on luck." And I agree 100% with that statement. But the problem there comes because other colors don't have that consistency, not because blue has a nice thing. An analogy would be "people with health insurance have higher quality of life than others due to access to better health care, but some people can't afford healthcare. So let's close all hospitals and let everyone be on equally shitty footing."

This is a horrible analogy though. You're comparing life and death against the ability to have fun playing a game.

Being forced to play blue and to play Brainstorm if you want the most competitive lists is not fun. It's the antithesis of fun. What's fun is being able to play any of a dozen lists that have roughly equal chances to win. What's fun is being able to make a change or two in the list to get to your version that you think is most optimal and then somehow succeeding despite your silly changes. If you fail in the endeavor what's fun is looking at your list afterwards and slapping yourself on the forehead as you realize what you actually did with the couple of card changes and why you likely lost as a result. What's not fun is contemplating the reality that in order to compete with the greater consistency that Brainstorm creates you're going to have to play Brainstorm.

If there were a half dozen cards in the format available to various archetypes along the color wheel that created the kind of consistency that Brainstorm did and all of them did not play alongside Brainstorm we'd be in a very different position right now. The problem is that those cards all play alongside Brainstorm as well and only a few of them play outside the blue sphere of influence, those being Sensei's Divining Top, Dark Confidant and Sylvan Library.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

And I quote:



Is it only me or does Marius try to sell netdecking as the "only skill that should matter"? Mindmagic and strategic intelligence should be the "only skill that should matter", if you ask me

It's just you. A stagnant metagame with very little strategic variance- i.e., this one- doesn't test metagame analysis.

You are saying that the only skills that should matter start once you sit down and begin playing; he, and I, say that this is wrong, and cards/decks that harm the metagame strategy of the format should go.

[Ellomdian]

This. I was also around for when they decided to ban dark rit instead of necro in original extended. The DCI really needs to be made up of a separate body of people who aren't attached to cards they made or want to shape a format to to resemble the way they think magic should be instead of what people actually want to play.

Who (exactly) do you think makes Ban decisions (as opposed to who enforces them)? Also, March of 2000. Pretty much the same people who decided (at the time) to power-level errata free creatures decided that fast mana was the problem in extended. Almost a decade an a half ago - great precedent.

Good news Andy - I too was around (and playing Extended competitively) when they decided to try to 'fix' Trix multiple times. What actually happened was that they desperately wanted to keep Necro alive, but they didn't want it powering out combos, so they did backflips trying to ban Trix without just banning Donate or Illusions (because on their own, each card is laughably teh Lulz...)

Time and time again, formats have demonstrated that broken Engines (Necro, Rebels, Affinity, JTMS, Survival, and Pod (...)) have a negative effect on a majority of the people who want to play a given format, because they tend to dictate how a given format has to be played. Almost diametrically opposite to your assertion that WotC is trying to dictate how formats should be played, they typically like a given format to be as open as possible because it makes it accessible to New players.


Wizards hates blue. Current R&D is made up of bitter failed pros who blame their failure on the existence of blue cards instead of their own lack of play skill and new hires hand-picked to suck up to bitter failed pros who blame their failure on the existence of blue cards instead of their own lack of play skill.

This quote is mindbogglingly Troll Level. Like, it would be funny if I wasn't actually worried someone thought this way. Hell, between Drownyard control and U/x in the last 18 mos, I don't remember a better time to be tapping islands since the days of Cruel Control and Teachings... /shudder (I HATE checking Teachings decklists...)

EDIT: Looks like Aggro_zombies just took a hatchet to this thread. Disregard quotes if no longer appropriate.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Since it was brought up in the podcast, now would be a good time to correct your article to reflect the parts where all these European innovations like Death & Taxes, Patriot Act etc. were actually developed in America btw.


I mean it does render your entire argument baseless and pointless but hey maybe lesson learned there?

[danyul]

Since it was brought up in the podcast, now would be a good time to correct your article to reflect the parts where all these European innovations like Death & Taxes, Patriot Act etc. were actually developed in America btw.


I mean it does render your entire argument baseless and pointless but hey maybe lesson learned there?


Look at the current decks in the Legacy metagame on a world scale – where did they originate? Who designed them? Where were decks tuned and popularized? Miracles, Shardless BUG, Imperial Painter, Patriot Delver, Elves, Death and Taxes, Nic Fit, OmniTell, and others are all European creations or saw many more finishes in Europe before people caught on in America. The only North American decks to really make an impact have been RUG Delver, Team America, and Sneak Attack. Why has most of the innovation come from Europe?

Emphasis mine.

Matt's point was mostly about the lack of American innovation. It seems like you are nit picking super hard. Matt is asking why Europeans are better than Americans at navigating this Brainstorm-meta, or whatever you want to call it. You are asking why a couple of his sentences, which aren't absolutely integral to his argument, are perhaps factually shaky. I don't know the history of all those decks. But I also don't think that being wrong on that one issue renders his argument pointless.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

It's ever so nitpicky to point out that the premise of the argument is fundamentally wrong, I guess, and also that the author is basically committing plagiarism.

I guess you can retool the argument until any deck can be described as being "from" anywhere, but the reason non-blue decks don't survive or thrive in America has nothing to do with Americans not innovating. As we've demonstrated, almost all the decks the author, wrongly, gives Europeans credit for are actually American in origin.

Maybe Americans are the ones who are actually better at navigating "this Brainstorm-meta" because they're less likely to delude themselves into playing inferior decks, even if they're the ones that construct them.

[AggroControl]

6 of the 7 decks in DTB right now are blue with Brainstorm. Elves is the lone hold out. Brainstorm and Force of Will appear in all 6 lists. Ponder is a staple in 4 of the 6 lists (3x Delver, Sneak and Show). Daze is a staple in 3 lists (3x Delver). Delver of Secrets is a 4x in 3 lists (3x Delver). Tarmogoyf is a 4x staple in 3 blue lists (RUG, BUG Delver, Shardless BUG). Deathrite Shaman is a 4x in 3 lists (BUG lists + Elves). Spell Pierce is in 2 lists as 3x or less (RUG and BUG Delver). Jace is in 2 lists as 3x or less (Miracles and Shardless BUG). Abrupt Decay 4x in 2 lists (BUG Delver and Shardless BUG).

The reason 6 lists are blue at the moment is Brainstorm and Force of Will with an assist from Ponder. The other cards are mostly not shared in common. There are 4 different blue archetypes in play at the moment in the top 7 lists in the format. StifleDelver, DecayDelver, Shardless and Miracles. They are all well above the power level of the format. The cards that are doing that are the same cards that take blue above the power level of the format every time good new blue cards are printed. They're the glue cards in blue dominance. Brainstorm is the card that makes it all work at a dominant level. These lists would all be good in the absence of Brainstorm. They're the elite in the meta with it in the mix.

[TsumiBand]

Tight Sight

[btm10]

6 of the 7 decks in DTB right now are blue with Brainstorm. Elves is the lone hold out. Brainstorm and Force of Will appear in all 6 lists. Ponder is a staple in 4 of the 6 lists (3x Delver, Sneak and Show). Daze is a staple in 3 lists (3x Delver). Delver of Secrets is a 4x in 3 lists (3x Delver). Tarmogoyf is a 4x staple in 3 blue lists (RUG, BUG Delver, Shardless BUG). Deathrite Shaman is a 4x in 3 lists (BUG lists + Elves). Spell Pierce is in 2 lists as 3x or less (RUG and BUG Delver). Jace is in 2 lists as 3x or less (Miracles and Shardless BUG). Abrupt Decay 4x in 2 lists (BUG Delver and Shardless BUG).

The reason 6 lists are blue at the moment is Brainstorm and Force of Will with an assist from Ponder. The other cards are mostly not shared in common. There are 4 different blue archetypes in play at the moment in the top 7 lists in the format. StifleDelver, DecayDelver, Shardless and Miracles. They are all well above the power level of the format. The cards that are doing that are the same cards that take blue above the power level of the format every time good new blue cards are printed. They're the glue cards in blue dominance. Brainstorm is the card that makes it all work at a dominant level. These lists would all be good in the absence of Brainstorm. They're the elite in the meta with it in the mix.

So in a format where almost every card ever printed is legal, only the best cards are represented in the top decks? No one disputes this. It's not news. And the "blue decks should be nerfed by bannings" set just keeps beating the ubiquity horse. It's not going to change anybody's mind, because people like me think that we have a diverse meta right now and that variance reducers like Ponder and Brainstorm are features rather than bugs.


It's just you. A stagnant metagame with very little strategic variance- i.e., this one- doesn't test metagame analysis.

You are saying that the only skills that should matter start once you sit down and begin playing; he, and I, say that this is wrong, and cards/decks that harm the metagame strategy of the format should go.

First, you're wrong that the current metagame doesn't reward analysis. I'm considering travelling to an SCG IQ this weekend, but I know that the best player who is likely to show up is going to be playing BUG Delver, which is my current primary deck's worst matchup. So knowing this, I'll play Shardless BUG if I go so I keep a solid Miracles matchup, gain a lot against BUG Delver, and don't lose too many points against RUG. I'm deliberately weakening my Burn and combo matchups (which I expect to be rare)to strengthen a matchup that I know will show up and have a strong pilot. This is precisely what metagaming is.

And yet, I think that Lemnear is right. Your actual ability to navigate your matches should be paramount.

[menace13]

beating the ubiquity horse.
That happens to be the best metric and the only one in any of these conversations that has any factual statistical data.

[Teveshszat]

Hello,


Aggro Control
What's fun is being able to play any of a dozen lists that have roughly equal chances to win.

This maybe not fun for you but for me it is becasue in such an enviorment were all deck have the same chance you win or lose by skill and that is what you want if
you play in a competetive envoirment. And some people seems to agree with that.

Also

Aggro Control
What's fun is being able to make a change or two in the list to get to your version that you think is most optimal and then somehow succeeding despite your silly changes.
Is is not fun for me but luck because you can get through with this should show you how great the variance is and how little infulence you and your skill have.
This is actually unfun for me because it is just a little to random and in a competetive envoirment I want to decrease randomness. So if you want this
play for your fun but please do not try to enforce this on tournment structures because there most of the people have another opinion and mindset about
waht is fun for them.

Best Regards Teveshszat

[btm10]

That happens to be the best metric and the only one in any of these conversations that has any factual statistical data.

There is data, but all it says is that ~70% decks making top8 in large events run Brainstorm. The long dominance of Blue in Vintage makes it pretty clear that "everyone is playing blue" isn't a winning argument - something else has to be wrong in order to warrant a ban, and that thing is likely dominance of a single archetype or, in extreme cases, a single deck. The other, and I'd argue the superior, metric for describing the meta is rhe bumber of different decks appearing in top 8s, and as HSCK has demonstrated, that number is at an all-time high.

[AggroControl]

There is data, but all it says is that ~70% decks making top8 in large events run Brainstorm. The long dominance of Blue in Vintage makes it pretty clear that "everyone is playing blue" isn't a winning argument - something else has to be wrong in order to warrant a ban, and that thing is likely dominance of a single archetype or, in extreme cases, a single deck. The other, and I'd argue the superior, metric for describing the meta is rhe bumber of different decks appearing in top 8s, and as HSCK has demonstrated, that number is at an all-time high.

When you have a bunch of different lists making top 8's and most of them are blue and all of the blue ones include 7-8 stock cards you have to look at the 7 or 8 stock cards as format-warping.

There are no other cards in Legacy that propel lists to top 8 finishes as well as Brainstorm and Force of Will. Those two cards are so good at what they do that the blue lists can't even agree on what the best cards after them are.

Force of Will *may* be necessary for a healthy meta, due to the omnipresent threat of a counterspell coming out of nowhere. Brainstorm clearly is not necessary for a healthy meta. It just becomes the meta when it is available.

[Dice_Box]

Ban Brainstorm and I will move on, ban Force and I am long gone. Beltcher.format does not sound like a format I will enjoy.

[menace13]

There is data, but all it says is that ~70% decks making top8 in large events run Brainstorm. The long dominance of Blue in Vintage makes it pretty clear that "everyone is playing blue" isn't a winning argument - something else has to be wrong in order to warrant a ban, and that thing is likely dominance of a single archetype or, in extreme cases, a single deck. The other, and I'd argue the superior, metric for describing the meta is rhe bumber of different decks appearing in top 8s, and as HSCK has demonstrated, that number is at an all-time high.
Vintage has been dominated by Shops since Return to Mirrodin. And it isn't like they didn't restrict a long list of blue cards either.

Nothing else has to be wrong than a single card showing up in over 70% of winning deck lists. As for deck diversity being the superior metric that is demonstrably false in this case as such that the diversity is limited to only a wide majority of blue decks. That isnt diverse as you think it to be.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

This is a horrible analogy though. You're comparing life and death against the ability to have fun playing a game.

Your sarcasm detector seems to be broken more than Yawgmoth's Will.

I like the HammerAndSickled's post. And although I dislike BS and playing against it, this argument is quite convincing. Maybe, maybe my annoyance by BS is simply because of very few other choices especially in other colors, that lead to this BS-dominated and blue-dominated and very predictable metagame/decks/gameplay?

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

For what it's worth, I would rather play any format where every card is as good as Brainstorm than a format where Brainstorm is banned.

The power level of brainstorm comes primarily from its ability to decrease variance, and therefore the impact of luck, on games. There are corner cases where it can also protect from discard or set up strange things like Miracle or Probe/LED tricks, but most of the time when someone casts Brainstorm it's because they drew cards that aren't good and/or didn't draw the good cards they needed. I feel that these effects are welcome in the game, because at its core Magic is already far too luck-dependent for my tastes. It's incredibly hard to convince anyone that Magic is a competitive skillful endeavor when even an outsider can plainly see that many games are decided through factors outside of a player's control. Brainstorm helps to mitigate that. It helps you find lands when you need them and get rid of some when ou'te flooded. It helps you find threats when you need to, helps you find removal when you need to, helps you find that Counterspell you desperately need to not die. It helps you exchange "wrong threats" for right ones and "wrong answers" for right ones. These are all GOOD THINGS for Magic. If you drew perfectly every game you would never need Brainstorm.

In essence, the argument boils down to "by not playing Blue and Brainstorm, you're handicapping yourself by making your deck less consistent and more reliant on luck." And I agree 100% with that statement. But the problem there comes because other colors don't have that consistency, not because blue has a nice thing. An analogy would be "people with health insurance have higher quality of life than others due to access to better health care, but some people can't afford healthcare. So let's close all hospitals and let everyone be on equally shitty footing."

Raising the power level of every card in the format to Brainstorm- assuming for a moment we could agree this was desirable- is basically impossible.

The power level so described is far above what Wizards has indicated they want for Standard, so printing this bevy of cards would basically require direct injection via Commander or similar sets. They would either have to be cards that somehow don't fit in blue or more likely, be of such a number as to make other color combinations (without blue) as appealing as the thresh variants.

And the end result wouldn't even be Legacy at that point, it would just be completely unrecognizable. A bunch of new cards + duals, fetches and Brainstorm/Force.

[TheInfamousBearAssassin]

Ban Brainstorm and I will move on, ban Force and I am long gone. Beltcher.format does not sound like a format I will enjoy.

Okay, snap keep, Force can stay and Brainstorm goes.

[TsumiBand]

What prevents a different staple from dominating after a theoretical BS axe? Isn't this turtles all the way down? Whatever card the community settles on or shows up the most, that will just be next "Card XYZ needs to go" thread waiting to happen.
I realize I'm invoking a slippery slope, but in understanding that Eternal formats will always be defined by the cards with the best mana : effect ratio, I do not see how it could be any other way.
Please also understand that I'm no Blue apologist, and I'd show up at a Legacy event tomorrow with the most un-Island pet deck I own. I just want to understand what would actually prevent the discussion from simply pivoting to different cards until we end up with a format not unlike Modern.

[Barook]

What prevents a different staple from dominating after a theoretical BS axe? Isn't this turtles all the way down? Whatever card the community settles on or shows up the most, that will just be next "Card XYZ needs to go" thread waiting to happen.
What other card is head and shoulders above the power level of the format, aside from Brainstorm? DRS? That's a creature and way easier to deal with.

[Finn]

Raising the power level of every card in the format to Brainstorm- assuming for a moment we could agree this was desirable- is basically impossible.

The power level so described is far above what Wizards has indicated they want for Standard, so printing this bevy of cards would basically require direct injection via Commander or similar sets. They would either have to be cards that somehow don't fit in blue or more likely, be of such a number as to make other color combinations (without blue) as appealing as the thresh variants.

And the end result wouldn't even be Legacy at that point, it would just be completely unrecognizable. A bunch of new cards + duals, fetches and Brainstorm/Force.
I am kinda responding to HammerandSickled as much as you here. You do not need to bump the entire cardpool. There are other, better solutions.

-nerf it by repeated numbers of minor hosers becoming commonplace
-give at least one attractive option that impacts the game as much as Brainstorm does and which can not be used in tandem with Brainstorm

I am repeating myself here.
I already sketched out a few examples of card designs on this very thread that have the appearance of doing just that. With so many voices ideas get lost. Brainstorm is too good, I agree. But it is fun, iconic, and THE reason a lot of players flock to this format. Just get Wizards to follow one of these solutions and the card will be relegated to Tarmogoyf status. But we aren't going to get solutions unless there is an actual effort made to do so. That is, the cards must be designed to do so from the ground, up.

[menace13]

What other card is head and shoulders above the power level of the format, aside from Brainstorm? DRS? That's a creature and way easier to deal with.
Wasteland would become the most played card. But that hasnt been the case since like 2011. It is perpetually Brainstorm as #1 on that list.

[TsumiBand]

What other card is head and shoulders above the power level of the format, aside from Brainstorm? DRS? That's a creature and way easier to deal with.
Isn't it hard to just say that, though, without playing it out and seeing what the meta actually becomes? I mean to an extent it's like adding or removing an animal from a food chain; cards don't exhibit behavioral changes but players can, to the extent that certain cards or archetypes become more potent.

Tangent example - you remove the wolves from Yellowstone, and suddenly your plant life suffers and the habitat starts falling apart. Reintroduce them, and the habitat improves. The *reason* is because deer and elk no longer have to live on the move, so they overeat the land before moving on - but the only way we could have known that would happen would be to have seen the change in behavior of deer with no predators. Again, cards aren't subject to behavioral changes, but players are - without BS in the format, what do players do with their resources? It almost isn't about the cards at that point.

I don't think it's a strict hierarchy, is all I'm saying.

[AggroControl]

What other card is head and shoulders above the power level of the format, aside from Brainstorm? DRS? That's a creature and way easier to deal with.

I think the cards that are likely to become more played in the absence of Brainstorm are Deathrite Shaman, Sensei's Divining Top, Abrupt Decay and Thoughtseize. They all fit in the same general slice of the wheel and while Top will not appeal to all lists in that slice it will be used by other strong archetypes and make up the difference there.

I think Ponder will rise some immediately after the Brainstorm banning and then settle depending on whether blue play declines significantly or not.

I think Liliana of the Veil and Hymn to Tourach may rise in play but I'm not sure how much because neither are a staple even in the lists that play Thoughtseize at this point. Thoughtseize is played in 22% of all top 8 lists and Liliana and Hymn are played in 9%.

Goyf is goyf. He will always have a heavy presence in the metagame but it's hard to see how he becomes more of a staple than he already is if blue declines. Goyf is essentially a blue card that other lists get to splash, usually with less effect.

The question for WotC if they ban Brainstorm is whether or not to ban Deathrite Shaman at the same time. If they do this it will be a preemptive ban, since DRS currently sits in only 29% of the top 8 lists and sits alongside Brainstorm in several of them. There's no evidence at this point that the meta will be warped by DRS remaining in play if Brainstorm is banned. A sneaking suspicion is a bad reason to ban something. If DRS sits in 50%+ of top 8 lists after a couple of cycles, well then you have your answer and it should probably be banned.

Edit: forgot one very important card that will rise in the meta again if Brainstorm is banned. Aether Vial will go up since both Merfolk and Death and Taxes will likely become tier 1 again.

[rlesko]

Goyf is goyf. He will always have a heavy presence in the metagame but it's hard to see how he becomes more of a staple than he already is if blue declines. Goyf is essentially a blue card that other lists get to splash, usually with less effect.


Dude, are you serious? I honestly cant even tell if you're just trolling at this point. Guess what...last I checked, there were 10 fetchlands with unique pairings. Likewise for dual lands. That means that every color has an equally easy time splashing goyf. Calling cards like goyf or SFM blue cards is just ignorant.

[btm10]

Isn't it hard to just say that, though, without playing it out and seeing what the meta actually becomes? I mean to an extent it's like adding or removing an animal from a food chain; cards don't exhibit behavioral changes but players can, to the extent that certain cards or archetypes become more potent.

Tangent example - you remove the wolves from Yellowstone, and suddenly your plant life suffers and the habitat starts falling apart. Reintroduce them, and the habitat improves. The *reason* is because deer and elk no longer have to live on the move, so they overeat the land before moving on - but the only way we could have known that would happen would be to have seen the change in behavior of deer with no predators. Again, cards aren't subject to behavioral changes, but players are - without BS in the format, what do players do with their resources? It almost isn't about the cards at that point.

I don't think it's a strict hierarchy, is all I'm saying.

This is an interesting idea. I don't know how people would respond. I actually think you'd see about the same number or even more blue midrange and control decks because some number of Storm players would move to Belcher as ANT and TES became unplayable without Brainstorm, and the deck's relative positioning would (probably) improve as a result of people being less likely to have turn 1 Force+blue card (or being able to Brainstorm into it) and tempo strategies getting worse because they get a lot worse at digging, making their super tempo-y draws of one real land, one wasteland, some manipulation, and gas harder to keep when the cantrips don't dig as deep and can't be used to throw back chaff, and lose staying power because they'll eventually flood out or end up in the late game with soft countermagic that's no longer useful. Some hatebear deck might show up, but since those would all but auto-fold to Belcher without Force, I don't see them being very good.


Vintage has been dominated by Shops since Return to Mirrodin. And it isn't like they didn't restrict a long list of blue cards either.

Nothing else has to be wrong than a single card showing up in over 70% of winning deck lists. As for deck diversity being the superior metric that is demonstrably false in this case as such that the diversity is limited to only a wide majority of blue decks. That isnt diverse as you think it to be.

They never restricted blue cards in Vintage (at least not since ca. 2002 when BBS with 4 Fact or Fiction was an actual problem deck) to make blue less dominant. The bizarre decision to restrict Brainstorm so they could unrestrict Gush probably exacerbated the power level differential between Blue and Shops by making the best control-ish decks less consistent and favoring Gush-based tempo strategies that Workshop excels at preying on while weakening traditional 3-5 color control and combo-control lists that can adequately fight back. This is admittedly speculation, and isn't particularly relevant.

I don't think deck diversity is a demonstrably inferior metric at all. We have plenty of different tactical approaches that are working now. And most do use Brainstorm to mitigate variance, and as HammerAndSickled said, bringing all of the decks down to the same shitty level would make the format way less fun. And if you want more strategic diversity, it's far easier to create in a way that keeps the format popular and competitive by unbanning cards like Earthcraft and Survival that create or help engines like Enchantress or RecSur (which is probably too weak, but you get the idea) or by easing up on either fast mana by unbanning Mana Vault (to give MUD and Storm boosts) or, less likely because of Miracles, Mystical Tutor (to help Storm).

[Bed Decks Palyer]

DRS doesn't do what BS does, it isn't "your unmull starts in 10, 9, 8..." device and as a creature it's easy to get rid off, although very often it needs to be done pretty fast.

I think that with BS gone, different decks would respond differently.
Decks like XYZ Thresh would use Preordain or any other now-secondary cantrip. Those decks don't have time for fancy stuff and need the card that does have effect NOW.
I'm not sure about Storm, but I guess they'd use a mix of SDT (for card selection; especially the slower ones like DD-centric decks), then maybe looting effects to emulate BS effect of hand-and-library dead/live cards exchange.
Miracles would either blend with and/or return back to Standstill roots, maybe some kind of Shardless things would happen, there's even a possibility of running See Beyond to get rid of excess Termini or w/e without actually losing the card.

Speaking of "you cannot make off-color Brainstorms"; well, this isn't about strict remakes, namely IF Brainstorm is really THAT powerful. What I meant are other (non-SDT) manipulation/looting/selection effect with immediate effect that would help other colors be on par with blue. Maybe! Maybe it's unnecessary (or at least not desired by WotC) and maybe the correct/desired state is achieving reliability through redundance; if a Burn-like deck everywhere is what we should hope for, that's another question.

So far there are:
- Sylvan Library and (etb)draw effects in green for selection and CA
- discard (to increase opponent's variance) or draw in black
- looting in red (which needs lots of work to undo it's backside), but it's best used in blue decks (be it traditional Ichorid or any Reanimator)
- nothing in white, unless we coun't the many stax-on-legs as a way how to increase pressure against the opposing decks (yet this has very little to do with an idea of card selection and/or CA)
Is it enough? Idk...

[menace13]

Thi

They never restricted blue cards in Vintage (at least not since ca. 2002 when BBS with 4 Fact or Fiction was an actual problem deck) to make blue less dominant.
.
Thirst for Knowledge was the last restricted blue card well past 2002. The 3 last un-restrictions from 2010-2011 are in chronological order Frantic Search, FoF, and Gush.




I don't think deck diversity is a demonstrably inferior metric at all. We have plenty of different tactical approaches that are working now. And most do use Brainstorm to mitigate variance, and as HammerAndSickled said, bringing all of the decks down to the same shitty level would make the format way less fun. And if you want more strategic diversity, it's far easier to create in a way that keeps the format popular and competitive by unbanning cards like Earthcraft and Survival that create or help engines like Enchantress or RecSur (which is probably too weak, but you get the idea) or by easing up on either fast mana by unbanning Mana Vault (to give MUD and Storm boosts) or, less likely because of Miracles, Mystical Tutor (to help Storm).

It is not inferior but happens to be false at this point in time. There hasn't really been a time when Brainstorm was in 70% of placing lists. Mystical would only increase Brainstorm decks and not because of Miracles but because of Reanimator and Storm.

[Lord Seth]

There is data, but all it says is that ~70% decks making top8 in large events run Brainstorm. The long dominance of Blue in Vintage makes it pretty clear that "everyone is playing blue" isn't a winning argument - something else has to be wrong in order to warrant a ban, and that thing is likely dominance of a single archetype or, in extreme cases, a single deck. The other, and I'd argue the superior, metric for describing the meta is rhe bumber of different decks appearing in top 8s, and as HSCK has demonstrated, that number is at an all-time high.Problem is, the whole point of Vintage is a format where cards aren't banned for power level, only restricted. So saying "Blue is dominant in Vintage and hasn't gotten any bans" doesn't mean anything because Vintage doesn't get bans for power reasons. There are bans, but none of them are for power reasons.

[AggroControl]

Dude, are you serious? I honestly cant even tell if you're just trolling at this point. Guess what...last I checked, there were 10 fetchlands with unique pairings. Likewise for dual lands. That means that every color has an equally easy time splashing goyf. Calling cards like goyf or SFM blue cards is just ignorant.

By effectively I meant in top 8 deck lists. Goyf is a winner for blue in those lists and a rare-appearer for non-blue lists. The most common non-blue top 8 finisher at events of 50+ players is Maverick. No goyf there. Then you have clustered closely together Storm, Burn, Goblins, Zoo, Jund and D&T. Only 2 of those lists use goyf.

Whatever the intent of the card Tarmogoyf has been co-opted and turned into a blue win-con over the last few years. Blue-Green is the slice of the color pie that he is most successful in, with either Red or Black splashes. Until Bant declined he won in Blue-Green with a White splash.

[btm10]

Problem is, the whole point of Vintage is a format where cards aren't banned for power level, only restricted. So saying "Blue is dominant in Vintage and hasn't gotten any bans" doesn't mean anything because Vintage doesn't get bans for power reasons. There are bans, but none of them are for power reasons.

My syntax there wasn't the best - I was trying to refer to the lack of action in general in Vintage to nerf blue and say that for a ban to happen in Legacy you need a bigger problem than one color being better than the others. Hopefully this is clearer.


Thirst for Knowledge was the last restricted blue card well past 2002. The 3 last un-restrictions from 2010-2011 are in chronological order Frantic Search, FoF, and Gush.

My bad with Thrist - completely forgot about it getting axed for a second there. And it's pretty fair to call Control Slaver a blue deck, so yeah, I was wrong on the dates.




It is not inferior but happens to be false at this point in time. There hasn't really been a time when Brainstorm was in 70% of placing lists. Mystical would only increase Brainstorm decks and not because of Miracles but because of Reanimator and Storm.

This is really the crux of our disagreement. I'd like to see more diversity too. But I want our current DTB forum, just with Reanimator, Storm, and Jund (or something like those decks) added to the decks there. As far as I'm concerned, that would be a lot more diversity. I do think Mysti would make Miracles too good, or at least would make some Miracle cards like Temporal Mastery too good, which I realize are two different things, and one or the other may be wrong. Either way, unless we start defining diversity in the same way, I think the "ban Brainstorm" and "protect Brainstorm" camps are just irreconcilable. It's a fun discussion to have, but clearly our goals are pretty different.

[iamajellydonut]

By effectively I meant in top 8 deck lists. Goyf is a winner for blue in those lists and a rare-appearer for non-blue lists. The most common non-blue top 8 finisher at events of 50+ players is Maverick. No goyf there. Then you have clustered closely together Storm, Burn, Goblins, Zoo, Jund and D&T. Only 2 of those lists use goyf.

You make it seem like there are blue decks that run Goyf beyond BUG and RUG when the truth is that Goyf simply as relevant as it was five years ago.

[AggroControl]

You make it seem like there are blue decks that run Goyf beyond BUG and RUG when the truth is that Goyf simply as relevant as it was five years ago.

Goyf is a main player in RUG Delver, BUG Delver and Shardless BUG. That's 20% of the meta and all blue. Which as you say is pretty much as relevant as he was 5 years ago. He's still a blue creature. The non-blue lists that ran 4 of him have either declined significantly (Jund, Zoo) or had their engine card banned (Survival, where Tarmogoyf was either a 4-of or not used at all). Even back then you had Tempo Threshold and Bant running 4 of him and you had Ugr Dreadstill over-performing against the format as whole with 4 Tarmogoyf in the mix.

[danyul]

This is really the crux of our disagreement. I'd like to see more diversity too. But I want our current DTB forum, just with Reanimator, Storm, and Jund (or something like those decks) added to the decks there. As far as I'm concerned, that would be a lot more diversity. I do think Mysti would make Miracles too good, or at least would make some Miracle cards like Temporal Mastery too good, which I realize are two different things, and one or the other may be wrong. Either way, unless we start defining diversity in the same way, I think the "ban Brainstorm" and "protect Brainstorm" camps are just irreconcilable. It's a fun discussion to have, but clearly our goals are pretty different.

The cut off for the DTB forum was recently (~3 months ago?) changed to make it harder to qualify as a DTB, since that forum was getting a bit busy with sometimes 10 different decks qualifying. If that change was redacted, perhaps some of those decks would be in the DTB forum right now. Given that, I wouldn't make our DTB forum the holy grail of what qualifies as a T1 deck. It's a nice guideline, but for your purposes I think you can still call Jund, storm, and Reanimator solid decks to beat.

[btm10]

The cut off for the DTB forum was recently (~3 months ago?) changed to make it harder to qualify as a DTB, since that forum was getting a bit busy with sometimes 10 different decks qualifying. If that change was redacted, perhaps some of those decks would be in the DTB forum right now. Given that, I wouldn't make our DTB forum the holy grail of what qualifies as a T1 deck. It's a nice guideline, but for your purposes I think you can still call Jund, storm, and Reanimator solid decks to beat.


Oh, I'd consider them solid decks to beat too, and wouldn't go to a large event unprepared for the Jund and Storm matchups. Though I don't have Reanimator specific SB/answers because it the hate overlaps with Dredge and the matchup plays a lot like the Storm matchup, I do test it a bit. My point was more about wishing those decks had a (slightly) higher penetration than they currently do and less about the DTBF itself.

[danyul]

Aah ok. Gotcha. That's fair.

[Dragonslayer_90]

Oh, I'd consider them solid decks to beat too, and wouldn't go to a large event unprepared for the Jund and Storm matchups. Though I don't have Reanimator specific SB/answers because it the hate overlaps with Dredge and the matchup plays a lot like the Storm matchup, I do test it a bit. My point was more about wishing those decks had a (slightly) higher penetration than they currently do and less about the DTBF itself.

I like using the term Tier 1.5 to apply to decks like Storm, Reanimator, and Jund. These are decks that have put up good results in the past and are inherently solid decks. These decks could very well be good enough to be Tier One but aren't because they haven't been putting up enough good finishes to merit that status in recent memory.

[.dk]

Speaking of "you cannot make off-color Brainstorms"; well, this isn't about strict remakes, namely IF Brainstorm is really THAT powerful. What I meant are other (non-SDT) manipulation/looting/selection effect with immediate effect that would help other colors be on par with blue. Maybe! Maybe it's unnecessary (or at least not desired by WotC) and maybe the correct/desired state is achieving reliability through redundance; if a Burn-like deck everywhere is what we should hope for, that's another question.

So far there are:
- Sylvan Library and (etb)draw effects in green for selection and CA
- discard (to increase opponent's variance) or draw in black
- looting in red (which needs lots of work to undo it's backside), but it's best used in blue decks (be it traditional Ichorid or any Reanimator)
- nothing in white, unless we coun't the many stax-on-legs as a way how to increase pressure against the opposing decks (yet this has very little to do with an idea of card selection and/or CA)
Is it enough? Idk...

Don't forget about Mirri's Guile. That card is better than a lot of people give it credit for.

[Dice_Box]

Other colours tend to have card draw engines, not library manipulation. Black has the whole "Pay life for cards" thing going. Green has Glimpse, Visionary and thanks to a quirk if the early days, some effective Enchantments. Red has the Looting effects, something I feel have since been nerfed and the oringal Looting idea moved to blue. Now you discard as part of the cost and blue gets discard on resolution. It is fucked. Lastly, white gets pockets here and there. Land tax, Tithe and the kind gives white it's traditional "Equaliser" style of things. Granted, Scroll Rack can make Land Tax go nuts but overall it feels underwhelming.

This is why I am glad Scry is making its way across all colours. The issue is though, the design of new cards is so underpowered that this new idea is going to see little play because to make them Legacy playable, they would likely break Standard. Modern as a secondary concern is not helpful either and yet another concern when designing cards. In a format where Preordain is too strong, your unlikely to see something that pushes the envelope in Green be printed and let lose on such a format for example.

[Barook]

In a format where Preordain is too strong, your unlikely to see something that pushes the envelope in Green be printed and let lose on such a format for example.
Considering that GSZ is considered an absolute no-go as far as Modern unbannings are concerned, I doubt that they're printing quality library manipulation in green, too.

[Dice_Box]

What I mean (and did not say very well) is that useful and aggressively costed cards with the Scry keyword could help. But it is unlikely we will see cards with strong enough effects at a low enough cost to make them strong enough to see play in Legacy.

[sjmcc13]

Red has the Looting effects, something I feel have since been nerfed and the oringal Looting idea moved to blue. Now you discard as part of the cost and blue gets discard on resolution. Moved to blue??? Didn't it kind of get moved from blue to red, or is there a looting affect older then merfolk looter?

[Dice_Box]

Of late, the effect was made to be red, but then the effect was nurfed, moved again and red got the short stick with having the cost now include the discard clause. While really old effects where in different colours, it's the more modern actions that bother me here.

[btm10]

Moved to blue??? Didn't it kind of get moved from blue to red, or is there a looting affect older then merfolk looter?

For completeness' sake, Merfolk Traders appeared in Weatherlight. There may be an earlier looting effect, but I can't think of any other than Bazaar of Baghdad.

As for making looting better, I think I'd rather have the discard as part of the cost in red so you can discard a land or something to draw gas. Would it be better as part of the effect where you discard, then draw? Yes, but that's probably too good for Legacy (imagine Faithless Looting like that in Burn) and way too good for Standard.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Don't forget about Mirri's Guile. That card is better than a lot of people give it credit for.

For the record: I never forget about it. I just believed (and was right) that SL will remind the ppl of Mirri's Guile, and I also didn't want to write the whole list of this kind of green cards, as I feared I'd forget about something else... like when I forget about the whole Tress archetype, be it creatures or enchantments. :laugh:

It still bothers me why Tress isn't much better positioned. Durdle durdle all mine cards are belong to us, nice Delver, now pay four to attack... what's wrong about it? Combo matchup? If not for the cost of Enchantress and MG, I'd build the deck. GW, you know. Draw cards, you know. Must be deck for me. :smile:

[btm10]

Yeah, the weakness of Enchantress is the combo matchup. Anything other than High Tide and Reanimator is horrid, and any Show and Tell variant is essentially unwinnable. If I could guarantee that I'd never face combo, I'd play that deck all day. Against Midrange you basically just take their lunch money, though tempo, especially BUG Delver, is challenging. If not for TNN, it would almost assuredly be tier 1, but Argothian gets swept up in the -X/-X effects, so you get hit with a lot of splash hate. I played combo 5 rounds in a row at SCG Columbus (in Jan. of this year) and put the deck down after that. It was probably just insanely bad luck, but I don't really like having the potential for lopsided negative matchups. You do get a couple of free wins against decks like Zoo, Painter, and Burn, but those are uncommon enough that it doesn't offset your combo problem.

[AggroControl]

Yeah, the weakness of Enchantress is the combo matchup. Anything other than High Tide and Reanimator is horrid, and any Show and Tell variant is essentially unwinnable. If I could guarantee that I'd never face combo, I'd play that deck all day. Against Midrange you basically just take their lunch money, though tempo, especially BUG Delver, is challenging. If not for TNN, it would almost assuredly be tier 1, but Argothian gets swept up in the -X/-X effects, so you get hit with a lot of splash hate. I played combo 5 rounds in a row at SCG Columbus (in Jan. of this year) and put the deck down after that. It was probably just insanely bad luck, but I don't really like having the potential for lopsided negative matchups. You do get a couple of free wins against decks like Zoo, Painter, and Burn, but those are uncommon enough that it doesn't offset your combo problem.

Wrong thread for this but it's hard to believe that Humility and Oblivion Ring don't handle the main threats in Show and Tell/Sneak Attack type lists. Blue has bounce but Enchantress has access to Sterling Grove and usually plays it.