[Article]Eternal Europe: Why Aggro Died

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

A little look at why there's one of the three traditional core archetypes missing from current Legacy.

http://www.starcitygames.com/article/29215_Why-Aggro-Died.html

Enjoy :)

[Ellomdian]

Yup.

It's a slight misstatement that WotC is "Pushing the power level of creatures" - what's really happening is that as creatures get better, the 'average' creature is now very good, and the benefits of playing midrange have gotten even more distinct. When cards like Goyf, DRS, or Geist exist, it makes sad Wild Nacatl very, very sad.

Remember years ago when you had to make the Grizzly Bears Legendary to make it cost 1? I don't think that a 2/2 for 1 with no downside would even impact Modern, let alone Legacy.

[ESG]

I really dislike the Trained Armodon comparison, which makes light of the format-warping disaster that is True-Name Nemesis. I think Drew Levin was the person who coined that, but it's extremely unhelpful to repeat it. I've played Legacy for six years now, and this is the least fun the format has ever been.

Delver of Secrets isn't the problem. True-Name Nemesis is the problem. Ban that card and aggro decks can contort themselves enough to beat Miracles and most combo decks.

I know you favor control and combo decks, so you probably don't appreciate the negative impact of TNN in the same way that those of us who play less control and combo do. I really wish you could walk in our shoes for a day.

[Lemnear]

I really dislike the Trained Armodon comparison, which makes light of the format-warping disaster that is True-Name Nemesis. I think Drew Levin was the person who coined that, but it's extremely unhelpful to repeat it. I've played Legacy for six years now, and this is the least fun the format has ever been.

Delver of Secrets isn't the problem. True-Name Nemesis is the problem. Ban that card and aggro decks can contort themselves enough to beat Miracles and most combo decks.

I know you favor control and combo decks, so you probably don't appreciate the negative impact of TNN in the same way that those of us who play less control and combo do. I really wish you could walk in our shoes for a day.

Delver is the reason all the Zoo and Sligh strategies became obsolete; TNN and SFM killed the whole Midrange diversity.

Pick your badboy :/

[(nameless one)]

Delver is the reason all the Zoo and Sligh strategies became obsolete; TNN and SFM killed the whole Midrange diversity.

Pick your badboy :/

Delver tempo isnt the reason why aggro is dead. Delver tempo IS the "aggro" of the format.

[Higgs]

Delver tempo isnt the reason why aggro is dead. Delver tempo IS the "aggro" of the format.

- Luke, I am your father.
- Nooooooo!!!

[HSCK]

I really dislike the Trained Armodon comparison, which makes light of the format-warping disaster that is True-Name Nemesis. I think Drew Levin was the person who coined that, but it's extremely unhelpful to repeat it. I've played Legacy for six years now, and this is the least fun the format has ever been.

Delver of Secrets isn't the problem. True-Name Nemesis is the problem. Ban that card and aggro decks can contort themselves enough to beat Miracles and most combo decks.

I know you favor control and combo decks, so you probably don't appreciate the negative impact of TNN in the same way that those of us who play less control and combo do. I really wish you could walk in our shoes for a day.

The comparison is totally correct though, and if you prefer Mental Misstep era Legacy to what we have now then that speaks for itself. You're also dead wrong about contorting to beat Miracles with aggro when Miracles has 1 mana wrath and a lock at the 2. I have no idea how you're coming to these conclusions.

[Barook]

Delver tempo isnt the reason why aggro is dead. Delver tempo IS the "aggro" of the format.
Only RUG classifies as "aggro" deck.

UWR is clearly midrange with SFM and TNN. BUG is also quite mid-rangey with cards like DRS and the occasional Liliana.

[Echelon]

I very much enjoyed the article!

[menace13]

if you prefer Mental Misstep era Legacy to what we have now then that speaks for itself.
I'm really not so sure that strategic diversity was any lower during that period. You compiled data sets and touted that this is the most diverse Legacy has been. With something along the lines of the top 12 decks of the format compromising 60% of all top 8s. While I am terrible with math, we do have data during the short tenure of the Mental Misstep era. New Phyrexia release on May 13th 2011 and the ban on September 20th 2011.

June 2011: http://www.tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy%20Archive&fecha=2011-6

July: http://www.tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy%20Archive&fecha=2011-7

August: http://www.tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy%20Archive&fecha=2011-8

Compare those 3 months to the last 3 months now. At a glance it doesn't seem to be any less diverse.

[Barook]

The comparison is totally correct though, and if you prefer Mental Misstep era Legacy to what we have now then that speaks for itself. You're also dead wrong about contorting to beat Miracles with aggro when Miracles has 1 mana wrath and a lock at the 2. I have no idea how you're coming to these conclusions.
There was a format before Mental Misstep. I share the sentiment that the format has become less enjoyable since the printing of Delver because it marked the point of printing a bunch of blue/blue-releated cards that caused the shift towards the extremely blue-heavy meta we have today.

E.g. Zoo can deal with SFM via Burn and Stp before Batterskull comes online and it can also nuke Skull with Pridemade. That's least of its trouble, aside from Delver out-aggroing it.

As the article mentioned, Terminus absolutely ruins aggro's strategy (and Teeg without protection doesn't do too much, besides not fitting an aggro strategy as a Vanilla bear), Snapcaster also hurts (although that's more relevant in Modern) and TNN is basically an indestructible roadblock that can ruin your day with equipment.

What I kinda miss in the article is going a bit more into detail on Griselbrand (and Emrakul). A resolved Griselbrand is basically game over and aggro has only very limited ways to deal with him and his ilk.

"Ban Card X" won't bring back aggro unless Wizards would go on a massive banning spree to remove all the horsecrap they've printed since Innistrad (not happening).


I'm really not so sure that strategic diversity was any lower during that period. You compiled data sets and touted that this is the most diverse Legacy has been. With something along the lines of the top 12 decks of the format compromising 60% of all top 8s. While I am terrible with math, we do have data during the short tenure of the Mental Misstep era. New Phyrexia release on May 13th 2011 and the ban on September 20th 2011.

June 2011: http://www.tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy%20Archive&fecha=2011-6

July: http://www.tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy%20Archive&fecha=2011-7

August: http://www.tcdecks.net/metagame.php?format=Legacy%20Archive&fecha=2011-8

Compare those 3 months to the last 3 months now. At a glance it doesn't seem to be any less diverse.
The format suffered from blue ubiquity, not lack of format diversity. And no, Mental Misstep, does not go into every deck. In the B&R thread, I ran some numbers over an average 10 SCG Open events and *suprise* *suprise* Mental Misstep was only in ~73% of all decks on average during its zenith (for comparision, Brainstorm is at ~69% right now).

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

I really dislike the Trained Armodon comparison, which makes light of the format-warping disaster that is True-Name Nemesis. I think Drew Levin was the person who coined that, but it's extremely unhelpful to repeat it. I've played Legacy for six years now, and this is the least fun the format has ever been.

Delver of Secrets isn't the problem. True-Name Nemesis is the problem. Ban that card and aggro decks can contort themselves enough to beat Miracles and most combo decks.

I know you favor control and combo decks, so you probably don't appreciate the negative impact of TNN in the same way that those of us who play less control and combo do. I really wish you could walk in our shoes for a day.

Admittedly, TNN hasn't been troubling me personally much - as you said, sleeving up Terminus or Dark Ritual the majority of the time tends to do that. However, I've seen (and playtested) enough games involving TNN to be well aware what a clusterfuck creature-based games involving it are. That doesn't change the fact that for an aggro deck TNN is pretty terrible as it actually does feel like just a random 3 power Phantom Warrior. You might notice that I also called it a three mana Progenitus a little further down the line - which I feel decently depicts what the card does in a midrangy deck and how warping it is in that context.


Delver tempo isnt the reason why aggro is dead. Delver tempo IS the "aggro" of the format.
Delver is pretty far from a traditional aggro deck, though. Yes, among the top tier Legacy decks, it clearly plays the closest to an actual aggressive strategy. That doesn't mean it actually works even remotely close to something like Zoo that is just trying to 'zerk the opponent down. It's kinda said if players that favor that kind of game don't get an outlet any more.


You're also dead wrong about contorting to beat Miracles with aggro when Miracles has 1 mana wrath and a lock at the 2.
Goblins would like to disagree. There really is no single deck that's holding aggro back, it's the fact that between combo, Terminus and overpowered creatures, nothing is bad against turn one Kird Ape any more and "protect the queen" Delver strategies do the same job more efficiently.



@Misstep era discussion: It seems that with time the period when Mental Misstep was legal has somehow become a time period during which only two decks were viable and the format was completely ruined. I remember that time rather vividly and that's pretty far from the truth. I've come around to agreeing that the format over all is better without Mental Misstep but it's important to remember that Misstep wasn't a combo winter style event. We still had a large and strategically varied metagame when Misstep was legal, just with everybody playing essentially 56 card decks and Canadian Thresh and Storm style strategies pushed out by decks going somewhat bigger.

/edit: @barook: got ninja-posted ;)

Concerning the lack of discussing Griselbrand/Emmi, the problem with those for aggro seems to be mainly that an easy to play to tier combo deck has made combo more common. Combo in and of itself is a terrible matchup for aggressive decks because of its strategic superiority so I don't think that matchup would be all that much better if S&S still cheated in Progenitus or something similar on t2 (a little, sure). Mind you, I agree that Emmi and Griselbrand don't help the format (on the contrary), I just don't think the disgusting duo had much to do with aggros demise. The difference between them and the threats they cheated in when aggro was still a thing isn't what makes aggro's matchup against the deck suddenly terrible. It was already, Griseldad just makes it even more obvious.
As to Misstep once again, I think most people among those 27% that didn't run it were probably just wrong - and that's the main problem with the card (aside from it forcing out non-redundant early game strategies such as Stifle-based Tempo and non-Show and Tell combo). If your deck doesn't have a very strong reason (the only one I can think of right now is having Chalice of the Void in your deck or maybe -just maybe - Lion's Eye Diamond) to run a free tempo advantage tool that places absolutely no requirements on your own deckbuilding, you should likely be playing that card.

[HSCK]

I also agree that Misstep era had more diversity than people give it credit for, but was it really more than what is here now? If the only data people are using to determine health and diversity now is the Opens then I think Legacy is obviously going to look more skewed than a look at worldwide trends. As for "fun" I have a hard time believing a player that complains about how "unfun" things are now would think Misstep Legacy was more, which was the comment I was referring too.

I still think Miracles is a bigger obstacle, as it can just as easily get Thopter combo and the SFM package in addition to the weapons it already has.

[menace13]

The format suffered from blue ubiquity, not lack of format diversity. And no, Mental Misstep, does not go into every deck. In the B&R thread, I ran some numbers over an average 10 SCG Open events and *suprise* *suprise* Mental Misstep was only in ~73% of all decks on average during its zenith (for comparision, Brainstorm is at ~69% right now).
Which is what I was trying to get at. It could be we are at the same point in terms of strategic diversity and blue based dominance right now. I recall your exact post in B&R on the subject.


I also agree that Misstep era had more diversity than people give it credit for, but was it really more than what is here now?
I dont know. The data is there, however it is limited to what TCDecks recorded at that time. And my math skills suck, so it would be laughable to try and bring any data analysis of mine into discussions as a topic. What the format appears to be from just looking at the decks might be totally different once calculated. Even so it's not an all encompassing collection of data.




As to Misstep once again, I think most people among those 27% that didn't run it were probably just wrong - and that's the main problem with the card (aside from it forcing out non-redundant early game strategies such as Stifle-based Tempo and non-Show and Tell combo). If your deck doesn't have a very strong reason (the only one I can think of right now is having Chalice of the Void in your deck or maybe -just maybe - Lion's Eye Diamond) to run a free tempo advantage tool that places absolutely no requirements on your own deckbuilding, you should likely be playing that card.
I agree that those 27% of decks were most likely wrong and am inclined to believe that had Misstep been allowed to stay then those numbers would keep increasing towards total Misstep ubiquity. I dont have any stats on this, but it is just a hunch. However, based on the DCI statement at the time, WotC knowingly admitted to them being okay with the idea that every deck played Misstep, just not so much when the only decks doing well were by far largely blue based shells.

As for Chalice, i suppose there could be an argument for it then, but it still suffered from what ails it now. A lack of the best spells in the format being in the deck. Despite that in that era Chalice probably was better positioned then now due to the format slowing down from Missteps. LED is interesting too, but I see it as a tool for only one deck in that time period. Dredge. And am not sure how much Dredge even played LED then. Belcher, the other LED deck suffered from Misstep two fold. One from an increase of blue and FoW and the other from another turn 0 counter to bottle neck their rituals from high storm and mana counts.

Thanks for the articles btw. Always hot topics.

[ESG]

If the only data people are using to determine health and diversity now is the Opens then I think Legacy is obviously going to look more skewed than a look at worldwide trends. As for "fun" I have a hard time believing a player that complains about how "unfun" things are now would think Misstep Legacy was more, which was the comment I was referring too.

I can't go play Magic in France or Italy or wherever the meta is presumably more diversified, so those worldwide examinations don't really help me.

On the fun issue, the Mental Misstep era was a worse time for the format as a whole, but I personally had more fun in that period than I do now, and I think sdematt feels similarly. One contributing factor is that the card got banned after one cycle, so that kept things from getting stale. It's possible that if Misstep had been kept around for years and years, I might have disliked that period more than the one we're in now. During the Misstep era, I designed and played three or four different off-the-radar decks and had success with most of them. The format is much more stringent and restrictive now, which impedes brewing, and I usually end up defaulting to a Tier I deck. From a skill-testing perspective, I enjoy playing and mastering BUG Delver and Elves, sure, but a big part of the fun of Legacy for me was the randomness and how Tier 2 or Tier 3 decks were still very competitive. The gulf now is much larger between the tiers. The format today is also a bluer one and more narrow in terms of dominant strategies, which makes sense because basically a whole chunk of the pie -- aggro (essentially always nonblue) -- has been cut out of serious contention. In my mind, that should be a clear wake-up call that we need some bannings, but if you've been reading The Source for any length of time, then you've seen how people dig their heels in over ban talk and don't actually contemplate whether things could be better.

At minimum, I think you have to concede that the power level of the format has risen a lot. Bans are one of the ways to curtail power level, but WOTC has not been exercising that, to the format's detriment, in my opinion.


Admittedly, TNN hasn't been troubling me personally much - as you said, sleeving up Terminus or Dark Ritual the majority of the time tends to do that. However, I've seen (and playtested) enough games involving TNN to be well aware what a clusterfuck creature-based games involving it are.

Thank you for acknowledging this. And, yes, a three-mana Progenitus (that can be equipped) is exactly what it is, so that is a comparison I would welcome.

[Ellomdian]

... which makes light of the format-warping disaster that is True-Name Nemesis.

You're right - TNN has single-handedly warped the format; but much to the dismay of most people who trot out this almost year-old rhetoric, it's for the better. Having a threat that can't be answered with the same tired, generic answers that players had been clinging to for years like a door in the middle of the ocean after the Titanic went down is a GOOD thing.

The good news is that comments that involve bashing TNN can be handled with the same reaction as people emphatically calling for Brainstorm to die - /ignore...


Admittedly, TNN hasn't been troubling me personally much - as you said, sleeving up Terminus or Dark Ritual the majority of the time tends to do that. However, I've seen (and playtested) enough games involving TNN to be well aware what a clusterfuck creature-based games involving it are.

I don't understand why there is still so much outrage about a card that requires you to play fundamentally differently - there's not nearly the vehemence around Dredge, and it functions in the same vein of "guess what? You have to deal with this thing that you aren't very good at dealing with..."

Also, people who expect to play Legacy like fancy-modern (play some creatures, get into the red zone, winzorz!!!) without significant hindrance and a certain amount of Fuckery shouldn't be playing in a format where cards like Nether Void, Invoke Prejudice, or Pox are legal. If you can't protect or force your game plan through, don't whine when it doesn't work very well.

[Barook]

You're right - TNN has single-handedly warped the format; but much to the dismay of most people who trot out this almost year-old rhetoric, it's for the better. Having a threat that can't be answered with the same tired, generic answers that players had been clinging to for years like a door in the middle of the ocean after the Titanic went down is a GOOD thing.
So you're saying that having cards that take completely the interactivity out of Magic games and turning them into a borefest are a good thing? :eyebrow:

This isn't a case of e.g. "I'm on BUG, Mirran Crusader fucks me over, maybe I should play Toxic Deluge etc." - the answers to TNN are extremely narrow to non-existant (Hi, red! Good luck resolving those REBs...) and give birth to abominations like Council's Judgment which was clearly printed as answer to TNN to sell packs.

[HSCK]

So you're saying that having cards that take completely the interactivity out of Magic games and turning them into a borefest are a good thing? :eyebrow:

This isn't a case of e.g. "I'm on BUG, Mirran Crusader fucks me over, maybe I should play Toxic Deluge etc." - the answers to TNN are extremely narrow to non-existant (Hi, red! Good luck resolving those REBs...) and give birth to abominations like Council's Judgment which was clearly printed as answer to TNN to sell packs.

Everything is designed to sell as much product as possible, I want WotC to sell more and more every year too, it's good for the game.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Invoke Prejudice. There was a mention of Invoke Prejudice. What's to discuss?
Seriously, while Dredge is at least interesting deck and it needs to be played cautiously (and one may easily interact with it, at least postboard), there's not much interesting about TNN.



Everything is designed to sell as much product as possible, I want WotC to sell more and more every year too, it's good for Wizards.
Ftfy.
What's good for the game is really an objective thing. There's a school of thought saying that TNN sucks and ain't good for the game. One may wonder what the will to sell might do with the game. I hope I'll never remind you of your words, after they mainstream this game into Yugioh Unlimited.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

As for Chalice, i suppose there could be an argument for it then, but it still suffered from what ails it now. A lack of the best spells in the format being in the deck. Despite that in that era Chalice probably was better positioned then now due to the format slowing down from Missteps. LED is interesting too, but I see it as a tool for only one deck in that time period. Dredge. And am not sure how much Dredge even played LED then. Belcher, the other LED deck suffered from Misstep two fold. One from an increase of blue and FoW and the other from another turn 0 counter to bottle neck their rituals from high storm and mana counts.

Thanks for the articles btw. Always hot topics.
Just a note: I wasn't saying that people should have been playing Chalice during the Misstep era. Just that it's the one good reason I can come up with on the spot why you wouldn't put Misstep in your deck. ;)

Happy you enjoy them :D


I don't understand why there is still so much outrage about a card that requires you to play fundamentally differently - there's not nearly the vehemence around Dredge, and it functions in the same vein of "guess what? You have to deal with this thing that you aren't very good at dealing with..."

That's like saying it would be ok for Wizards to print a 2BB Drain Life for twenty. After all, Storm does it, too, right? Dredge is a complete deck dedicated to doing something completely different that pays for that with a terrible mana base and no back up plan if your opponent actually has chosen to interact with you. TNN is a single card that shits all over creature combat at absolutely no deckbuilding cost whatsoever other than making room for it. If you don't see the difference between those two things, I'm not sure how to talk to you.

Also, the problem with TNN isn't only how hard it is to beat but how terribly uninteractive and boring games become (between creature based decks) once it gets involved. As long as the TNN player is behind, you can never profitably attack because TNN stays on defense and once they either equip it with something or have wrested control of the board (they had infinite time to do so, after all), it becomes an attacker that once again can't really be interacted with. How exactly does this kind of dynamic help make the format better?
As for the whole "play the answers you lazy ***" argument I personally am pretty fond of when people whine about how something crushes their cutesy pet deck, yes, there are dedicated hate cards to deal with it available to most color combinations but because TNN is a card, not a strategy a deck actually has to work to benefit from, you just made your deck so bad against the rest of their deck by adding all those crappy cards that killing TNN likely won't help you any more (or you boarded so few cards that only heavy library manipulation will give you a decent chance to find one in time). So unless you happen to already play one of those strategies that has natural answers to it (Miracles with its Wraths, Black decks with Liliana and combo decks to laugh about it), there's a good likelihood you end up caught between a rock and a hard place. I happen to think that it isn't great for the game if a host of possible decks can't be played just because of one fucked up card that leads to intensely boring games and is very difficult to hate in any efficient way.

@Barook: While I completely disagree with your assessment of Council's Judgement - I happen to think reasonably costed, flexible answers make for better games - I totally agree with your position on TNN. However your example wasn't exactly chosen perfectly (Toxic Deluge is in fact one of the best answers to TNN, too, not just Mirran Crusader ;) )


Everything is designed to sell as much product as possible, I want WotC to sell more and more every year too, it's good for the game.
I happen to agree with that one, too. If Wizards isn't making money, they'll stop making cards. I don't think there's anything that would be worse for the game (outside of totally unrelated things like WWIII or the zombie apocalypse, obviously). We can discuss about the problems the underlying design philosophy causes all we want, WotC selling cards and making money is, in fact, a thing we all should very much be rooting for.

[Barook]

@Barook: While I completely disagree with your assessment of Council's Judgement - I happen to think reasonably costed, flexible answers make for better games - I totally agree with your position on TNN. However your example wasn't exactly chosen perfectly (Toxic Deluge is in fact one of the best answers to TNN, too, not just Mirran Crusader ;) )
Of course Toxic Deluge also answers TNN. I was just telling this as an example how BUG decks adapted over the course of time.

CJ is reasonable costed, but its an abomination in design since it ignores basic rules of the game. Making removal for TNN might a noble cause, but not at the cost of fucking over all kind of protection mechanisms on-board like non-TNN protection creatures, etc. - once a CJ is cast, there's absolutely no way to save your card since you don't even know what exactly could be "targeted".
All while blue is laughing all the way to the bank because the color that plays TNN also has the best (and pretty much only, aside from discard) answer to CJ in form of counters.

[Scott]

CJ is reasonable costed, but its an abomination in design since it ignores basic rules of the game. Making removal for TNN might a noble cause, but not at the cost of fucking over all kind of protection mechanisms on-board like non-TNN protection creatures, etc. - once a CJ is cast, there's absolutely no way to save your card since you don't even know what exactly could be "targeted".
All while blue is laughing all the way to the bank because the color that plays TNN also has the best (and pretty much only, aside from discard) answer to CJ in form of counters.

I felt similarly regarding Council's Judgment and then someone reminded me about the long history of cards like Forcefield, the Runes like Rune of Protection: Red, the Circles like Circle of Protection: Green, Story Circle, and a lot more, that use "of your choice" and get around protection, shroud, and hexproof, and I felt a bit better.

[Sisyphos]

Everything is designed to sell as much product as possible, I want WotC to sell more and more every year too, it's good for the game.
I happen to agree with that one, too. If Wizards isn't making money, they'll stop making cards. I don't think there's anything that would be worse for the game (outside of totally unrelated things like WWIII or the zombie apocalypse, obviously). We can discuss about the problems the underlying design philosophy causes all we want, WotC selling cards and making money is, in fact, a thing we all should very much be rooting for.

I’m sorry, but I find this kind of argument overly simplified to the point of being wrong.

I agree that if WotC goes down because of not selling any product, the game will die. Not immediately, because at first privately organized tournaments will continue, but without a corporation backing it and providing new input, marketing, etc. it will die.

The point I feel is missing from the statement you made though, is: If the cards WotC needs to print or simply prints, because they can’t think of anything better, warp the game into something I can no longer enjoy, what is the difference to me between the game dying because of WotC ceasing business and me stopping to play the game because I sure as hell will not continue with a hobby that is no longer fun to me?

I don’t mean to sound like another guy crying about TNN killing his pet deck. I buried lots of pet decks, including my favorite deck of all times (I’m talking about decks you could win Legacy tournaments with, just to be clear), which I have not played in several years, yet I still continue to play nearly as much as I did before. But that is relying on me finding something new that I like after something I liked before is no longer possible.

Based on your writing and talking to you, I feel pretty safe to say that you a) like Storm and control decks like Miracles and b) hate non-interactive stuff like TNN and Griselbrand. Would you still be playing and liking the game as much as you do now if WotCs need to sell packs would create a game where decks like Storm and Miracles would no longer be reasonable decks to play in a tournament if you want to win and the only decks that are, offer an amount of interaction on the level of TNN or Griselbrand? In such a scenario would you go home from a tournament and think: “Boy, I sure am happy that WotC sells packs with such cards in them!”?

Once again for emphasis: I personally don’t think the game is at that point, where Legacy is concerned. But I also can understand people who quit the game because it is no longer what they enjoyed in the past. And if I look at Standard – where I have to admit my knowledge is limited to watching a match or two on SCG waiting for Legacy, so maybe I’m missing something – I get the picture that at some point – hopefully in the distant future – the vision WotC has of what the game should be, might differ from the type of game I enjoy. And then to come back to your argument: I will not be happy for WotC to sell packs anymore, because I will no longer care.

/rant

[bruizar]

Warstorm, Zynga is a good example of what happens when you try to squeeze money out of your product. Watch it, it compares it to Magic too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxszx60ZwGw

[Zombie]

I don't understand why there is still so much outrage about a card that requires you to play fundamentally differently - there's not nearly the vehemence around Dredge, and it functions in the same vein of "guess what? You have to deal with this thing that you aren't very good at dealing with..."

A combo deck is a whole deck built around that narrow, strong plan. Typically if you stop it, they just lose or turn into an iffy pile of crap with bad card quality at least.

TNN is a card that forces that type of interaction that is readily just slotted into goodstuff decks. It requires next to no commitment in deckbuilding or in play - oh hey, a three-mana creature spell to completely take over the game. Wow.

Contrast with NO-Prog, if you will. It requires deckbuilding commitment to have victims on board. Ingame, it costs 4 mana (a "magic number" where certain anti-broken things hate cards like Teeg turn on), is a Sorcery so falls victim to all the hyperefficient taxing counters that have seen print in recent years, and just casting it costs you board presence because of the additional cost. Even with all those checks and requirements, it can still be a pretty damn dumb card.

TNN is even dumber. If you answer it, oh well, the opponent still has a rock solid goodstuff deck to play with. The effect is kind of OK, permissible when you have to build around it, work for it. TNN doesn't need any of that shit. Hell, it even has Awesome so if it's crappy you can just pitch it to Force.

That's the difference between a combo deck and a Goodstuff+TNN deck.

[lyracian]

The point I feel is missing from the statement you made though, is: If the cards WotC needs to print or simply prints, because they can’t think of anything better, warp the game into something I can no longer enjoy, what is the difference to me between the game dying because of WotC ceasing business and me stopping to play the game because I sure as hell will not continue with a hobby that is no longer fun to me?

– the vision WotC has of what the game should be, might differ from the type of game I enjoy. And then to come back to your argument: I will not be happy for WotC to sell packs anymore, because I will no longer care.
We do not have a like button here so I will just quote it. I agree with what you are saying; Wizards can print as many Grizzlebees as they want to sell packs but if we are no longer playing the game it does not impact us. There has been a few comment in other topics recently about people wanting to play/create Classic magic (the reverse of modern you can only use pre-8th ed cards). To bring this comparison to other games Games Workshop have recently printed 7th Edition 40k and a lot of my friends have decided to stay with 6th Edition rules. For them it no longer matters what GW produce they are just kitchen table war-gamers. Clearly Legacy is not at that stage yet but if new cards devolve the format back to the level of interaction of Hulk-Flash how many people will still want to play?

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Exactly my point.

What's the use for WotCs money? I'm not a shareholder, so I don't care. The only thing that matters for me is the game I like. They may sell as few packs as possible, (or as many), but as long as I'm not playing the game, I simply won't care.

Back in 1997 I was the only one guy in my classroom who played the game; with the rest of our school having one another dude (my former classmate) who collected the cards. Two guys in the whole school. And I loved the game. We played with friends several hours a day, everyday. I liked the cards, but even back then I was a bit overwhelmed by the sheer amount of them.

Fast forward 15 years. I guess that some 3-5 % of high school boys play some CCG, with at least half of them being in MtG scene. And what? Does it make the game any better?
In fact lots of old cards were horrible (I'm not thinking Erhnam-like horrible, I think of all those "pay cumulative upkeep to have mana to pay cumulative upkeep" type of crap), but this has nothing to do with those boys, it's about horrible old design.
Is the game more enjoable now when the scene is wider? Maybe. But the answer is not definitive. Simply put, whenever anything becomes mainstream (and WotC work hard to make th game mainstream, remember, they print it for the money), it quite often starts to stink.

So yeah, while the new age of MtG might be enjoyable for someone, and while the modern design trends might sell the packs, it really has nothing in common. Again: if they'd start throw Grislebrand into the packs, or if they'd give you a plastic toy and voucher for kids movie, would it sell the boosters? i guess it would. But would it make the game any better? I don't think so.

[Barook]

Warstorm, Zynga is a good example of what happens when you try to squeeze money out of your product. Watch it, it compares it to Magic too.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bxszx60ZwGw
I don't know if it's rather sad or hilarious that Wizards printed "protection from everything - except even better" in form of TNN.

Power creep is bad, but I'm not sure if increasing the mana cost on everything across the board, including Magic staples like 1 mana dorks, is healthy for the game, either. Something which also happens to shift away from aggro into midrange decks.

As far as Wizards and money is concerned - sure, Wizards should make money to keep the game going, but what's the point if we don't get any return out of it while they swim in money? MTGO and its abyssal client/developer team are a prime example for that - shitty product with no drive to improve.

[iamajellydonut]

I don't know if it's rather sad or hilarious that Wizards printed "protection from everything - except even better" in form of TNN.

Which is one card. And it's not even good. An actual and concerning example of power creep would be the existence of mythics.

[amalek0]

really, TNN is a problem, sure, but there are easily printable answers--give us reasonable agro dudes (a-la-isimaru type stats) with a "damage can't be prevented" clause. Sure, this turns things into an arms-race of narrow answers to TNN, but the point stands that there ARE ways to design around the existence of TNN in a way that would have little impact on standard legal sets/constructed.

[menace13]

And it's not even good.
The card is actually very good. How are we defining any good here? Is it played in full sets of 4 as the definition? Or every deck playing it as the definition? Using those to define TNN as not any good would make you correct. But it's just lying to yourself. By power it is unmatched in terms of abilities tacked onto it for any card not costing 7+. By format effect it is slightly more subtle, but pronounced enough. Its presence is accounted for and must be adjusted to. From its release the card caused Deathblade, Patriot, and Bladecontrol to ascend into the top ranks of tier one Legacy decks. To some extent Team America as well, even though all the Team lists aren't playing TNN. But, yeah, I guess that isn't any good if going by "then why doesnt everyone play it or play all four?"

[iamajellydonut]

It was a joke that the significance of its presence in Legacy is greatly exaggerated.

Anyway, "tier" is not defined by "good". Often times "good" is tier, but tier itself is measured by popularity. When True-Name Nemesis was released, holy hell did it make those decks tier 1. At SCG Providence in November (happy birthday to me) I played against one Deadguy, one High Tide, one Reanimator, and I'm fairly certain the rest of the night I played against U/W/x Stoneblade with fourteen copies of True-Name Nemisis jammed in all night to the point where the top eight had five Stoneforge variants.

But it didn't necessarily make those decks stellar, and it wasn't at all the glue that held them together. U/W/x was already very well established. True-Name Nemesis just made them all flavor of the month. A good card? Yes. But not worth getting your panties in a bunch for. I'm not even sure if there's a deck that packs True-Name Nemesis specific hate. Hell, even Golgari Charm was already being run before True-Name Nemesis was printed. Certainly it put Golgari Charm in the spotlight, but the truth is that Golgari Charm's utility would keep it being used in its current amounts (sans meta-shift) even if True-Name Nemesis were banned.

[Barook]

I'm not even sure if there's a deck that packs True-Name Nemesis specific hate. Hell, even Golgari Charm was already being run before True-Name Nemesis was printed. Certainly it put Golgari Charm in the spotlight, but the truth is that Golgari Charm's utility would keep it being used in its current amounts (sans meta-shift) even if True-Name Nemesis were banned.
Nobody packs TNN-specific hate since it's so extremely narrow that it's a waste of slots. E.g. does D&T run Holy Light to deal with TNN? Fuck no, because it sucks.

But decks do pack cards like Golgari Charm, Zealous Persecution, Toxic Deluge and Council's Judgment with TNN in mind.

[Dzra]

Good article and I think it really helps illustrate why aggro is bad in Legacy at the moment (and perhaps just from here on out). Sure TNN is a poorly done card, I don't think many would argue with that, but TNN isn't the reason that aggro died out.

I think the key point in all of this is that aggressive decks and aggressive creature strategies in particular are not bad. What has changed is that a 60 card deck doesn't need 30+ creatures to be aggressive. Due to cards like Tarmogoyf and most recently to Delver of Secrets, aggressive creature strategies only need 10-12 creatures to put up a really strong clock. Thus, traditional "aggro decks" have become obsolete in the face of aggressive creature decks packed full of disruption and cantrips.

The push towards midranged is a slightly different topic, but both subjects are related to WotC's recent overall gameplan of "print lots of really good creatures."

[btm10]

Good article and I think it really helps illustrate why aggro is bad in Legacy at the moment (and perhaps just from here on out). Sure TNN is a poorly done card, I don't think many would argue with that, but TNN isn't the reason that aggro died out.
I think the key point in all of this is that aggressive decks and aggressive creature strategies in particular are not bad. What has changed is that a 60 card deck doesn't need 30+ creatures to be aggressive. Due to cards like Tarmogoyf and most recently to Delver of Secrets, aggressive creature strategies only need 10-12 creatures to put up a really strong clock. Thus, traditional "aggro decks" have become obsolete in the face of aggressive creature decks packed full of disruption and cantrips.

The push towards midranged is a slightly different topic, but both subjects are related to WotC's recent overall gameplan of "print lots of really good creatures."

I'd be careful writing posts that actually reflect thought about the subject. You'll derail the conversation.

While I'm not the biggest fan of midrange's rise, I'm not upset that that 30 creatures, 20 lands, 10 burn spells aggro isn't good.

[tescrin]

This isn't a case of e.g. "I'm on BUG, Mirran Crusader fucks me over, maybe I should play Toxic Deluge etc." - the answers to TNN are extremely narrow

Hmm



the answer to TNN, maybe I should play Toxic Deluge etc."

Right



Toxic Deluge are extremely narrow

lolwut?



Did you literally just use a comparison of an unblockable untargetable creature and another unblockable untargetable creature and say one is fine and the other isn't?

http://www.reactiongifs.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/mind_blown.gif

[Barook]

Did you literally just use a comparison of an unblockable untargetable creature and another unblockable untargetable creature and say one is fine and the other isn't?
Maybe you shouldn't quote me out of context to weave a fake statement I never made. :rolleyes:

Crusader also dies to Burn and StP, something that TNN doesn't do, among other things.

[Dzra]

I'd be careful writing posts that actually reflect thought about the subject. You'll derail the conversation.

I know, right?

[Meekrab]

Maybe you shouldn't quote me out of context to weave a fake statement I never made. :rolleyes:

Crusader also dies to Burn and StP, something that TNN doesn't do, among other things.
In context, then... How many burn spells and copies of Swords to Plowshares does BUG-whatever typically run?

[Barook]

In context, then... How many burn spells and copies of Swords to Plowshares does BUG-whatever typically run?
For what purpose do you want to compare BUG's weakness to Mirran Crusader to TNN?

[btm10]

BUG has an easier time killing TNN than it does Crusader. And only a marginally easier time dealing with it in combat.

[Barook]

BUG is only one deck (two if you count Shardless) - that's like bitching that D&T can't beat Elves. And we're going way too off-topic now.

[ubernostrum]

Turns out there is an aggro deck in Legacy. It's U/G Infect.*

*competitiveness only guaranteed in the hands of Tom Ross and Olle Rade

[ironclad8690]

As I watch Tom Ross win another invitational, I have to think that he is on to something with Infect.

His victories over Reid felt very decisive, especially for a creature deck.

Though not aggro in the typical sense, it is probably the closest thing to a real aggro deck we have seen since Canadian Thresh.

[maharis]

Infect works because each point of damage counts twice as much and is irreversible through life gain. I'm sort of surprised the shoal version isn't more popular.

[btm10]

I think it's been under appreciated and I'm not really sure why. If I owned Hierarchs, I'd build it in an instant.

[Julian23]

Infect works because each point of damage counts twice as much and is irreversible through life gain. I'm sort of surprised the shoal version isn't more popular.

Then you should read Tom's article he wrote about Infect some time ago on SCG. Addresses, among other things, exactly that. Olle Rode has been playing Infect on MODO for almost an eternity and also prefers the Berserk version, which is really that much better.

Long story short: Shoal + Pitch is two cards that do absolutely nothing on their own. Berserk + any pump spell are two cards that will do a lot on their own. Also, as you can see from Tom's matches, the deck is very capable of grinding out wins slowly but surely. The Berserk version (if you even wanna call it that; inappropaite in my eyes) is way superior and doesn't need to pack 8+ cards that do nothing on their own.


One should also mention that Tom mentioned that he thinks that Infect is the best deck in Legacy. Don't know if he still feels that way, considering that he was looking for MonoR Sneak Attack cards before the event, but it's really interesting to me. I've been thinking about trying out the deck for quite a while and might try it on stream next week. Feel free to tune in at http://twitch.tv/itsJulian

[ironclad8690]

I figured I would try to get aggro back on the map:

4 Glistener Elf
4 Qasali Pridemage
4 Noble Hierarch
4 Ichorclaw Myr
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Invigorate
4 Vines of Vastwood
3 Boros Charm
3 Reckless Charge
3 Rancor
4 Inkmoth Nexus
2 Savannah
2 Taiga
1 Plateau
1 Karakas
4 Wooded Foothills
1 Arid Mesa
4 Windswept Heath
1 Pendelhaven
2 Crop Rotation
1 Forest
SB: 1 Crop Rotation
SB: 2 Rest in Peace
SB: 2 Ethersworn Canonist
SB: 1 Enlightened Tutor
SB: 1 Meekstone
SB: 1 Celestial Flare
SB: 2 Pyroblast
SB: 1 Choke
SB: 2 Vexing Shusher
SB: 1 Ensnaring Bridge
SB: 1 Pithing Needle

So far I am 1-2 against Canadian, 2-0 against Shardless, and 2-1 against Death and Taxes.

Worth making a New and Developmental Deck?

[btm10]

Then you should read Tom's article he wrote about Infect some time ago on SCG. Addresses, among other things, exactly that. Olle Rode has been playing Infect on MODO for almost an eternity and also prefers the Berserk version, which is really that much better.

Long story short: Shoal + Pitch is two cards that do absolutely nothing on their own. Berserk + any pump spell are two cards that will do a lot on their own. Also, as you can see from Tom's matches, the deck is very capable of grinding out wins slowly but surely. The Berserk version (if you even wanna call it that; inappropaite in my eyes) is way superior and doesn't need to pack 8+ cards that do nothing on their own.


One should also mention that Tom mentioned that he thinks that Infect is the best deck in Legacy. Don't know if he still feels that way, considering that he was looking for MonoR Sneak Attack cards before the event, but it's really interesting to me. I've been thinking about trying out the deck for quite a while and might try it on stream next week. Feel free to tune in at http://twitch.tv/itsJulian

Perhaps the oddest thing is that basically no one other than Olle and Tom - both of whom have impressive resumes - has picked up the deck. It's very cheap to build (requires, what, 3 Duals, 4 Forces, 8 Fetches, and 2 Berserks?) and doesn't seem susceptible to "conventional" combo hate.

[Lord Seth]

I think of infect as aggro-combo, personally.

[ubernostrum]

Perhaps the oddest thing is that basically no one other than Olle and Tom - both of whom have impressive resumes - has picked up the deck. It's very cheap to build (requires, what, 3 Duals, 4 Forces, 8 Fetches, and 2 Berserks?) and doesn't seem susceptible to "conventional" combo hate.

I've played against it twice online.

One of those times was Olle.

The other was just now in a daily event. Lost in 3, playing Reanimator. Sire of Insanity is really really good against the deck :)

Bricking on consecutive Brainstorms after Sire ate a Vines'd Elf was not so good against it.

[Dzra]

I mean, Tom's Infect deck really isn't any more of an aggro deck than RUG Delver is. They both essentially play 12 threats and then some disruption. Infect is definitely more aggressive than RUG. I suppose that RUG has the option of being defensive with Goyf, whereas Infect basically just has to be the aggressor in almost every instance. Still, "play one threat and protect it" is a difference, if perhaps a subtle one, from "play a very high density of threats." Since Eidolon's printing, you might be able to consider Burn an aggro deck, but Burn might be somewhat of a special case. Either way, Burn is certainly a strong deck now.

[force_of_phil]

There may be a little bit of anti-delver bias in Carsten's reasoning (a little in the article, and a lot in the comments). Delver is undercosted, the wrong color, shouldn't have been printed... and on this topic, it's also a red herring. Ultimately the power of legacy cantrips is what made true creature based aggro strategically obsolete. It's simply better to run the best 12 threats and be able to produce threats or disruption as needed, rather than running more threats of decreasing quality and praying for threats when you need them and removal when you don't. The cost is speed, but speed is not the reason to play aggro in a format with turn 2 combo.

Carsten noted all this and came to the conclusion that it's the power of the individual creatures (specifically delver), not the consistency of the shell around them, that made this the case. I would disagree. Such strong cantrips not only remove the reason to run a true aggro deck with many redundant threats, they also enable the midrange decks to consistently produce answers to them, set up the format's dominant sweeper, and fuel the combo decks that goldfish them.

Conslusion? If it's worth it to you, ban Brainstorm, Ponder, and Sensei's Top. If you want aggro back at tier 1, you're going to have to deal with a format with more variance, because variance is what made jamming 20 Kird Apes and 20 bolts good in the first place. Obviously... not gonna happen.

[Mon,Goblin Chief]

@Sysiphos: Clearly I would stop playing if the game wasn't fun for me any more. So yes, if Wotc decided to print more and more overpowered cards that ruin the fun for me, that would be just as bad for the game from a personal point of view as them just stopping to make it. That doesn't change the fact that it is good for all of us that want to be playing the game if Wizards has a nice fat bottom line so we can be sure they keep making cards. Yes, there is a scenario where they make terrible cards just to make money so that that also leads to me not getting to play any more - that doesn't mean we shouldn't all hope the game is doing well financially in the first place (all the while being very vocal about which cards we think are mistakes so that they stop making such cards, something we can see working in their admittance that the hexproof focus was a bad plan in their announcement of what they plan on doing with removal during the next standard seasons).



There may be a little bit of anti-delver bias in Carsten's reasoning (a little in the article, and a lot in the comments). Delver is undercosted, the wrong color, shouldn't have been printed... and on this topic, it's also a red herring. Ultimately the power of legacy cantrips is what made true creature based aggro strategically obsolete. It's simply better to run the best 12 threats and be able to produce threats or disruption as needed, rather than running more threats of decreasing quality and praying for threats when you need them and removal when you don't. The cost is speed, but speed is not the reason to play aggro in a format with turn 2 combo.

Carsten noted all this and came to the conclusion that it's the power of the individual creatures (specifically delver), not the consistency of the shell around them, that made this the case. I would disagree. Such strong cantrips not only remove the reason to run a true aggro deck with many redundant threats, they also enable the midrange decks to consistently produce answers to them, set up the format's dominant sweeper, and fuel the combo decks that goldfish them.

Conslusion? If it's worth it to you, ban Brainstorm, Ponder, and Sensei's Top. If you want aggro back at tier 1, you're going to have to deal with a format with more variance, because variance is what made jamming 20 Kird Apes and 20 bolts good in the first place. Obviously... not gonna happen.

This assertion doesn't make sense as a primary cause behind aggro's decline for the same reason that combo can't be the true reason Aggro isn't viable any more. The cantrips and SDT (and the aggro-control decks they enable) existed in the format in concert with dedicated aggro decks like Zoo and Goblins literally for years and those decks where definitely viable choices. Only since the overpowered stand-alone creatures have started to hit the scene (SFM+Batterskull providing first inklings of the troubles ahead followed by Delver into TNN nailing the coffin shut) do we actually see these decks losing viability to a point where you just shouldn't be playing them any more. Goblins was still a solid choice outside of combo heavy metagames before TNN made it into the format, for example.

@Infect: Tom's deck looks awesome (not on paper but seeing it in action) and I wouldn't be surprised if it should be part of the absolute top tier at this point. The deck does one of the most important things right that you can do right: It has the ability to play the full spectrum of strategies reasonably well depending on where it wants to position itself in a matchup by focusing either on its disruptive elements, its tempo-style slow beatdown plan or the super-fast combo finish.

[force_of_phil]

This assertion doesn't make sense as a primary cause behind aggro's decline for the same reason that combo can't be the true reason Aggro isn't viable any more. The cantrips and SDT (and the aggro-control decks they enable) existed in the format in concert with dedicated aggro decks like Zoo and Goblins literally for years and those decks where definitely viable choices. Only since the overpowered stand-alone creatures have started to hit the scene (SFM+Batterskull providing first inklings of the troubles ahead followed by Delver into TNN nailing the coffin shut) do we actually see these decks losing viability to a point where you just shouldn't be playing them any more. Goblins was still a solid choice outside of combo heavy metagames before TNN made it into the format, for example.

Show and Tell existed long before Grislebrand and Emrakul and was never a problem, so blame the fatties? It's inevitable that more and more powerful standalone threats will be printed over time. It was going on before Delver, SFM, and TNN, but as the new best threat enters the format, we bemoan the loss of our old friends and call our new overlord the devil, ignoring what enables decks to ride these cards in the first place. Sure, Zoo and Goblins existed alongside cantrips for years, but they were always on borrowed time. Blame the payoff or blame the enabler; either way, the power level of threats will continue to go up, and the blue shell that finds them and protects them will stay the same.

[ESG]

Show and Tell existed long before Grislebrand and Emrakul and was never a problem, so blame the fatties? It's inevitable that more and more powerful standalone threats will be printed over time. It was going on before Delver, SFM, and TNN, but as the new best threat enters the format, we bemoan the loss of our old friends and call our new overlord the devil, ignoring what enables decks to ride these cards in the first place. Sure, Zoo and Goblins existed alongside cantrips for years, but they were always on borrowed time. Blame the payoff or blame the enabler; either way, the power level of threats will continue to go up, and the blue shell that finds them and protects them will stay the same.

You bet we'll blame the fatties. Griselbrand and Emrakul are very close to having text boxes that read "You win the game." Prior to Progenitus being printed, fatties were large and had a powerful effect on the game, but they weren't even close to today's power level, which is right on the verge of instant wins. Show and Tell isn't the only card that circumvents paying retail. Sneak Attack, Through the Breach, Reanimate, Exhume, Shallow Grave, Animate Dead, Hypergenesis, Dream Halls, and Eureka are all ways to do the same thing. None of these cards saw a ton of play in Legacy before WOTC starting making insanely pushed "You win" permanents. WOTC had the right idea with Phage the Untouchable: If a card wins you the game outright, it should be extremely difficult to exploit. WOTC tried to reduce the ways you could back-door some of these ridiculous creatures into play, which is why some of them have the shuffle ability when they hit the graveyard, but they clearly weren't thinking of all the enablers that exist.

[force_of_phil]

You bet we'll blame the fatties. Griselbrand and Emrakul are very close to having text boxes that read "You win the game." Prior to Progenitus being printed, fatties were large and had a powerful effect on the game, but they weren't even close to today's power level, which is right on the verge of instant wins. Show and Tell isn't the only card that circumvents paying retail. Sneak Attack, Through the Breach, Reanimate, Exhume, Shallow Grave, Animate Dead, Hypergenesis, Dream Halls, and Eureka are all ways to do the same thing. None of these cards saw a ton of play in Legacy before WOTC starting making insanely pushed "You win" permanents. WOTC had the right idea with Phage the Untouchable: If a card wins you the game outright, it should be extremely difficult to exploit. WOTC tried to reduce the ways you could back-door some of these ridiculous creatures into play, which is why some of them have the shuffle ability when they hit the graveyard, but they clearly weren't thinking of all the enablers that exist.

Blame them if you like, but what I'm getting at is how different deck types scale in power with new releases. For example, Elves, Goblins, and D&T may get an upgrade to a card once in a while, but their power is largely set in stone. Blue cantrip-based decks can incorporate just about anything powerful that's released, e.g. Abrupt Decay and Deathrite going straight into in blue decks. That puts an expiration date on the non-blue decks. D&T and Elves will eventually be pushed out of the format like Zoo and Goblins were.

[iamajellydonut]

If only Brainstorm were timeshifted to black... Imagine all the bitching we'd have dodged.

[iamajellydonut]

Anyway, moving onto other discussions, why does everyone keep bringing up Zoo and Goblins and comparing them to other things? Oh, my God, yes, Goblins is dead, but it doesn't mean that Elves and Death and Taxes will die because they're non-blue and clearly are fooling around with the same cesspool of cards. Goblins is dead because the last card it got to play with was Cavern of Souls. And the card before that was Aether Vial. I shit you not. It has been playing literally the exact same hand for ten years. I don't think any other fan club can beat that. By sharp comparison, Elves gets things like Green Sun's Zenith, Natural Order targets, Elvish Visionary, Scavenging Ooze, Lorwyn, Reclaimation Sage, Deathrite Shaman, Abrupt Decay, and they're still getting shit. Same with Death and Taxes. Boy, it sure do does suck to painlessly mainboard four Thalias and Phyrexian Revokers.

[force_of_phil]

Goblins got Grenzo... I want to believe.

[iamajellydonut]

Goblins got Grenzo... I want to believe.

Fanboying harder doesn't actually make it work.

[Zombie]

Anyway, moving onto other discussions, why does everyone keep bringing up Zoo and Goblins and comparing them to other things? Oh, my God, yes, Goblins is dead, but it doesn't mean that Elves and Death and Taxes will die because they're non-blue and clearly are fooling around with the same cesspool of cards. Goblins is dead because the last card it got to play with was Cavern of Souls. And the card before that was Aether Vial. I shit you not. It has been playing literally the exact same hand for ten years. I don't think any other fan club can beat that. By sharp comparison, Elves gets things like Green Sun's Zenith, Natural Order targets, Elvish Visionary, Scavenging Ooze, Lorwyn, Reclaimation Sage, Deathrite Shaman, Abrupt Decay, and they're still getting shit. Same with Death and Taxes. Boy, it sure do does suck to painlessly mainboard four Thalias and Phyrexian Revokers.

Storm's got only a couple maindeck cards. Luckily they're not Grenzo but actual Good Stuff. Poor gobs :/

Saying all they got is Cavern is wrong, btw. Winstigator, Krenko, Wort, Earwig Squad, Tarfire, Warren Weirding, T-SH, Stingscourger, Kiki, Tuktuk Scrapper all have been printed after Vial :P

[iamajellydonut]

Saying all they got is Cavern is wrong, btw. Winstigator, Krenko, Wort, Earwig Squad, Tarfire, Warren Weirding, T-SH, Stingscourger, Kiki, Tuktuk Scrapper all have been printed after Vial :P

Dear god, how could I forget how much Krenko impacts the viability of Goblins as an archetype?!

Anyway, if you ignore all the fringe playable "I guess this is kind of ok if you tutor it" riffraff, Goblins hasn't actually had a card that successfully impacted its overall performance since Cavern of Souls and Aether Vial. And no, Winstigator doesn't count.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Jelly, and what's your point? Sorry, I'm not trying to troll, I simply don't understand what you mean.
Also, as sidenote - and feel no offense -, but your avatar is really disturbing.

[iamajellydonut]

Jelly, and what's your point? Sorry, I'm not trying to troll, I simply don't understand what you mean.

My point is that people keep bringing up Zoo and Goblins like their current existence, or lack thereof, is relevant to the existence of other non-blue archetypes. They just keep getting shoved in our faces like those commercials of old people with electrolarynxes groaning "this is what happens when you play non-blue". Goblins didn't die because it was non-blue. Goblins died because it's been ten years without an update. If Show and Tell doesn't get any updated fatties or enablers for the next ten years, I promise you it will be just as dead.

Yes, my complaint is sort of out of place here, but so is trying to predict the fate of Elves with Goblins. If people want to cite them as an example of "oh, Wizards hasn't cared about pure aggro for ten years", then so be it. But they often do the former and it's a pet peeve.



Also, as sidenote - and feel no offense -, but your avatar is really disturbing.

Thanks.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

Oh yeah, now I get it. Well, but there' still one question, though. And excuse me, if I'll ask about some notoriety, but I never played Goblins, so bear with me: all those goblinssince-Vail mentioned, do they really make no difference at all?

[iamajellydonut]

Oh yeah, now I get it. Well, but there' still one question, though. And excuse me, if I'll ask about some notoriety, but I never played Goblins, so bear with me: all those goblinssince-Vail mentioned, do they really make no difference at all?

Again, none of them are integral to plan, strategy, or core of the deck. None of them make a splash with consideration to how good or not good the deck does in an overall sense. For example, if I were to ask you what the last addition to TES was, the answer would probably be either Past in Flames or Gitaxian Probe. But by technicality it would be Void Snare. Two of those matter to the deck. The other is just a neat addition.

[bruizar]

Aggro inevitably always dies as more utility is printed. Anyone that originates from the vintage scene knows this. The only vanilla creature that defies this rule is Tarmogoyf (and perhaps our blue flying insect cluster fuck of a design error)

I'm just waiting for legacy's version of Lodestone Golem. That's bound to happen as WOTC wants to push Modern and take control of the one thing that's been haunting them since they managed to fuck up with the Chronicles reprint: The reserved list. Prices are now controlled by SCG and the players. Bringing players to modern shifts price control back to WOTC.

Lodestone Golem 2.0 will happen and there will be no bans, just watch. It will be a deliberate, calculated attack on this format in order to funnel legacy players into the modern pool. This should create mega modern tournaments (standard + modern + legacy players in one tournament instead of multiple fragmented tournaments) and will be good for the game.

[Barook]

It's funny how Wizards want to shift away from 4 mana Wraths while we have 1 mana instant speed Wraths.


Lodestone Golem 2.0 will happen and there will be no bans, just watch. It will be a deliberate, calculated attack on this format in order to funnel legacy players into the modern pool. This should create mega modern tournaments (standard + modern + legacy players in one tournament instead of multiple fragmented tournaments) and will be good for the game.
You mean TNN? And letting Brainstorm continue to rampage through the format while being close to Mental Misstep numbers now? There's no conspiracy, although TNN is pretty close to an intention to fuck up the format.

As far as the "outdated" argument goes, RUG Delver is a top deck since god know how long with little to no upgrades in a long time. The only major upgrade it got was Delver.

[tescrin]

This isn't a case of e.g. "I'm on BUG, Mirran Crusader fucks me over, maybe I should play Toxic Deluge etc." - the answers to TNN are extremely narrow to non-existant

Nobody packs TNN-specific hate since it's so extremely narrow that it's a waste of slots. E.g. [..] cards like Golgari Charm, Zealous Persecution, Toxic Deluge and Council's Judgment

Maybe you shouldn't quote me out of context to weave a fake statement I never made. :rolleyes:

Crusader also dies to Burn and StP, something that TNN doesn't do, among other things.


For what purpose do you want to compare BUG's weakness to Mirran Crusader to TNN?

It's *your* example!
The point is you're saying that Mirran crusader has to be killed with -X/-X hate, but that's exactly what kills TNN.
It's literally the worst possible example you could've chosen in legacy.
You could've chosen ANY OTHER CREATURE or ANY OTHER DECK *IN LEGACY* and not been made fun of.

Aside from that, complaining about TNN is worse than complaining about Goyf because at least Goyf is way above the curve.
At least SFM->Batterskull feels unfair half the time.
TNN is just Invisible Stalker with a hexproof Bonesplitter.


I'm sad to say that my hilarious post did not tease agreement out of you.
Btw; 2013 called, they want their TNN-whining back.

[iamajellydonut]

As far as the "outdated" argument goes, RUG Delver is a top deck since god know how long with little to no upgrades in a long time. The only major upgrade it got was Delver.

How good was Thresh before Delver of Secrets?

[Bed Decks Palyer]

How good was Thresh before Delver of Secrets?
Pretty.

[Richard Cheese]

Pretty.

3-4 years before Delver maybe. Wasn't it pretty non-existent from around Shards block until Innistrad? I guess if you count NO-RUG?

[Bed Decks Palyer]

3-4 years before Delver maybe. Wasn't it pretty non-existent from around Shards block until Innistrad? I guess if you count NO-RUG?
Yeah, of course, the deck was very bad in Mental Misstep era (namely when CotV decks rised in numbers) and it was far from from stellar in some other time frames.
Basically what I had in mind... Thresh (any kind of that) was always a choice to consider, and it was pretty powerful deck. The gameplan (both the control and tempo versions, and all the colour combinations) were solid, the deck had the perfect amount of library and stack manipulation, threats and answers, it was good in the days of old and it keeps to be good in the modern times. Also, there are lots of possible builds (although some of them are called "threshold" only out of the habit, lets say pre-DRS BUG),so maybe it's more of a terminology/taxonomia/systematics affair than anything else.
And I'm quite a fanboy of Mystic Enforcer, so call me biased.

tl, dr: It was always a good deck, ever since Thresh-Landstill-Goblins era, but there were times when it wasn't the best choice or when it struggled to survive.

[iamajellydonut]

So, what you're saying is that Delver of Secrets is responsible for putting Thresh back on the map and transforming it into the modern powerhouse and DtB it is today?

[menace13]

Aside from that, complaining about TNN is worse than complaining about Goyf because at least Goyf is way above the curve.

TNN is actually way more above the curve than a goyf. As a matter of fact the ONLY creature that is comparable to its ability is a 10mana one.

[iamajellydonut]

a 10mana one.

That is also a 10/10.

[TsumiBand]

I would play 4th Edition white bordered fetches at this point. I don't even.
[QUOTE=Sloshthedark]
you should be fat 12 year old in Cannibal Corpse shirt to sling that

I am so sad that I missed the original post because it looks like it's received errata that removes this flavor text. :(

On topic -- something something, Delver shoulda been Red, something. You know the argument, copypaste it here. I'm not wrong! I'm not. No, really. I'm just not. *staunch face of destiny*

[menace13]

That is also a 10/10.
That is also legendary.

[HSCK]

Because that makes up for it being a 10/10 for sure. TNN is closer to the Elephant than Progenitus most of the time.

[Zombie]

Because that makes up for it being a 10/10 for sure. TNN is closer to the Elephant than Progenitus most of the time.

Uh, no?

[menace13]

Because that makes up for it being a 10/10 for sure. TNN is closer to the Elephant than Progenitus most of the time.
#BringBackReadingComprehension

[iamajellydonut]

What point are you trying to make?

[menace13]

What point are you trying to make?
IDK, I just went along with your game of name something totally irrelevant about the post quoted.

[Richard Cheese]

It was a joke that the significance of its presence in Legacy is greatly exaggerated.

A good card? Yes. But not worth getting your panties in a bunch for. I'm not even sure if there's a deck that packs True-Name Nemesis specific hate. Hell, even Golgari Charm was already being run before True-Name Nemesis was printed. Certainly it put Golgari Charm in the spotlight, but the truth is that Golgari Charm's utility would keep it being used in its current amounts (sans meta-shift) even if True-Name Nemesis were banned.

I'm going to have to disagree here. Looking at TCDecks for decks that placed in the top 16 of a 30+ player tournament running Golgari Charm in the board:

10 months before TNN: 14
10 months since TNN: 61

E. Plague before: 24
E. Plague since: 28

Persecution before: 10
Persecution since: 39

Massacre before: 14
Massacre since: 26

Note that I'm not taking into consideration the numbers of these cards in boards, but my guess is that those have gone up as well.

It may not have as big of an impact within the scope of a single game as something like Griselbrand, but it's definitely had a warping effect on the format. D&T made a lot of changes to try and compensate, and it's still losing ground. Basically every deck now has to ask itself "can I deal with a hexproof/indestructable/unblockable guy?" and "can I deal with -x/-x effects?".

Edit: It's certainly possible that all the TNN hate is a knee-jerk reaction to the card, and will taper off somewhat over time. It would also be interesting to see if the numbers of TNNs getting played is remaining constant or trending up/down.

[iamajellydonut]

it's definitely had a warping effect on the format.

Is this necessarily a bad thing?

Anyway, the numbers on cards that kill True-Name Nemesis have gone up. Absolutely they have. The question is whether they would go down if True-Name Nemesis ceased to exist. Because Massacre is the tits. Massacre is literally the best card in the entire game. Go to game two? Board in four of them. They're playing High Tide? No problem. Massacre's got you covered from Hatebear A to Hatebear Z and every Stoneforge in-between. And Golgari Charm was a largely undiscovered card before True-Name Nemesis was released, but has become a staple in so many sideboards because of its utility.

I'm sure Golgari Charm's popularity would dip as I think it's overplayed even now with True-Name in the format, but I'm of the opinion that these cards have always been good and people just didn't know how good.

[HSCK]

I'm going to have to disagree here. Looking at TCDecks for decks that placed in the top 16 of a 30+ player tournament running Golgari Charm in the board:

10 months before TNN: 14
10 months since TNN: 61

E. Plague before: 24
E. Plague since: 28

Persecution before: 10
Persecution since: 39

Massacre before: 14
Massacre since: 26

Note that I'm not taking into consideration the numbers of these cards in boards, but my guess is that those have gone up as well.

It may not have as big of an impact within the scope of a single game as something like Griselbrand, but it's definitely had a warping effect on the format. D&T made a lot of changes to try and compensate, and it's still losing ground. Basically every deck now has to ask itself "can I deal with a hexproof/indestructable/unblockable guy?" and "can I deal with -x/-x effects?".

Edit: It's certainly possible that all the TNN hate is a knee-jerk reaction to the card, and will taper off somewhat over time. It would also be interesting to see if the numbers of TNNs getting played is remaining constant or trending up/down.

The meta's definitely warped.....now there are more rogue decks doing well. RUG Delver and Jund aren't 40% of the meta anymore either.

[Bed Decks Palyer]

I am so sad that I missed the original post because it looks like it's received errata that removes this flavor text. :(
:tongue:


IDK, I just went along with your game of name something totally irrelevant about the post quoted.
I'm in:

That is also hydra.


I don't mind that people started to play Golgari Charms, in fact (some of the) charms were good at least since Visions. What I mind is the reason why the Golgari one was introduced into the environment. It's Disco Inferno case and I don't like it, Charm sees play mostly (not only, but yeah) because of a design error (intentional or not). The fact that GGC is a nice and flexible card doesn't compensate for the fact that TNN is an ugly and boring one, at least in 1v1@20life games. Add its color plus creature type and maybe we might agree upon the idea that TNN is over the top and an example of bad design.
Also, I don't really get what the whole High Tide Massacre part was about, but I think that you meant something like "in matchups where Golgari Charm isn't exactly necessary or where it's outright blank, one may simply sb it out for games 2+3", so maybe it'll be better to write it like that so that we don't need to play guess games.

[iamajellydonut]

Also, I don't really get what the whole High Tide Massacre part was about, but I think that you meant something like "in matchups where Golgari Charm isn't exactly necessary or where it's outright blank, one may simply sb it out for games 2+3", so maybe it'll be better to write it like that so that we don't need to play guess games.

That... seriously? It's an idiotic quip exaggerating the effectiveness of Massacre. There's no much to get.

If you're playing black and you expect to play against or anticipate the possibility of people playing white, Massacre is one of the best sideboard cards in the game. That's the beginning and the end of it.

[Richard Cheese]

Is this necessarily a bad thing?

Anyway, the numbers on cards that kill True-Name Nemesis have gone up. Absolutely they have. The question is whether they would go down if True-Name Nemesis ceased to exist. Because Massacre is the tits. Massacre is literally the best card in the entire game. Go to game two? Board in four of them. They're playing High Tide? No problem. Massacre's got you covered from Hatebear A to Hatebear Z and every Stoneforge in-between. And Golgari Charm was a largely undiscovered card before True-Name Nemesis was released, but has become a staple in so many sideboards because of its utility.

I'm sure Golgari Charm's popularity would dip as I think it's overplayed even now with True-Name in the format, but I'm of the opinion that these cards have always been good and people just didn't know how good.

I'm totally willing to accept that whether you think True-Name's effects are a problem or not is a matter of opinion. I really just made that post because I was getting this impression that some people want to brush it off as no big deal, like it hasn't really had much impact on the format at all.

I wouldn't call Charm undiscovered, I was running it in BUG Delver essentially right after it came out. That was a deck without a ton of removal though, now you see it in decks like Jund and Aggro Loam. Decks that already have Punishing Fire, Decay, Liliana, Bolt, and most are running at least 2 Charms in the board. Hell, people are talking about running it main now, and that's not because of the scourge that isn't D&T.

It feels like when Dredge was really good several years ago, before they printed amazing grave hate in every set. People complained that it was warping the format because everyone devoted multiple sideboard slots to it. It made sideboards worse overall, and coincidentally shit on anything else that tried to use the graveyard as a resource. If you were on Zoo or goblins you didn't really give a shit. Loam or Reanimator? Might as well sleeve something else up for a while.

Oh, and Teeg wants a word with Massacre...except the deck he was best in got shat on by Golgari charm everywhere meta.

[iamajellydonut]

Oh, and Teeg wants a word with Massacre...except the deck he was best in got shat on by Golgari charm everywhere meta.

RIP Gaddock "Too Good" Teeg. Past quietly in his sleep under the hooves of a thousand decks that didn't suck. He seriously is such a good though.

I think your examples of Golgari Charm and suspicion of a knee-jerk reaction are that "overplayed" I was talking about. For the record, I do play Golgari Charm in my Jund main and have for quite some time now, but I play it as a one-of in a flex spot because it's rarely a dead card, and I board it out in most match-ups because it's rarely the best card. I don't even keep it in against many decks running True-Name Nemesis because it's too narrow of a usage and is more likely to be in the graveyard before it sees a True-Name.

[Quizzlemanizzle]

Golgari Charm use is not increased just because of TNN. It is only good against it when it was not equipped anyway and an unequipped TNN is not even particularly good or threatening.

Golgari Charm is good because of cards like Young Pyromancer, Dark Confidant, unflipped Delvers, Counterbalance, increasing popularity of Elves..

If you asked me why Goblins is dead currently I would say that since the introduction of Deathrite Shaman, the success rate of Lackey has gone down to near zero. Before Lackey would at least trade with Delver or Dark Confidant but DRS just kills it.

[DragoFireheart]

Delver is the reason all the Zoo and Sligh strategies became obsolete; TNN and SFM killed the whole Midrange diversity.

Pick your badboy :/

Tarmogoyf killed off Werebear and co. I think that was a much more emotional shock for its time than TNN or Delver IMO.