Landstill is a disaster.

[Peter_Rotten]

We (the mods) need to do something about that Landstill thread. It's a F-ing disaster. What options exist for making a better, more coherent Landstill thread?

Options:

Create a thread for discussing which build is best?
Create a thread for each color variant?
Keep the discussion of all variants focused in one thread?
Suggestions?


I'm really at a loss as to how to salvage the Landstill thread.

[Arsenal]

I would suggest making a thread for each color variant. The Landstill color variants play different enough from each other, similar to the differences between the multiple Threshold variants (that coincidentally, have their own threads).

[kicks_422]

Separating Landstill into builds (e.g. Enlightened Tutor builds, Cunning Wish builds, CB-Top builds, etc.) and/or into colors (UW, UGB, UGBW, UWR, UR, etc.) would create too many threads.

The problem is the deck itself. It's so flexible/customizable that you really can't put everything about it in one thread an expect the thread to be coherent, nor can you split it up and manage all the threads that would be popping up about it. Hell, it could have its own subforum.

I think the best way is by color combination though, out of all the options presented, and only the most popular ones should remain in DTB (I'm guessing UGBW, UGB, and maybe UW and UWB).

[Nihil Credo]

The Threshold threads seem to be working just fine. Let's follow that model.

[Nightmare]

I'd more or less make a thread for each of the different approaches to Landstill otherwise it would be too chaotic and some discussion redundant:
One thread for Landstill with Pernicious Deed (Ubg, 4c)
One thread for the more traditional Landstill (with WoG, white heavy)
Maybe one thread for innovation and new lists/ideas (like aggro Landstill - aka burn based Landstill)

Support.

[Joon]

We could seperate them in a raw way, for example

UBGx Landstill, which contains UBG and UGBw which are at least a bit similiar, as they use the same Sweeper

UWx Landstill, which contains UWb, UWg and UWr Landstill

and maybe for completeness an Ur Landstill Thread :laugh:

Bad about this would be that Variants like UBr Ironbreaker don't fit in any of these. And what about UB Landstill?

[diffy]

The Threshold threads seem to be working just fine. Let's follow that model.

The problem is, that this model isn't directly appliable to Landstill. The different color splashes of NQG all play out quite differently, but for Landstill, I can only see two or maybe three different strategies that re-group some color combinations in them.
For instance, there's the Pernicious Deed Landstill (4c, Ubg) and there's the more traditional white-heavy Landstill builds (UW, UWb, Cunning Landstill, Enlightened Tutor Landstill etc.). With those two threads, you could cover a large proportion of the discussion without having to handle too many different threats which would lead to redundant discussion and to slower development. You could then maybe also open another thread for any new ideas (e.g.: Aggro Landstill, Burn Based Landstill, Intuition Landstill, Land-Landstill [Landstill variant with a touch of 43lands]) and you'd be pretty much covered. Those threads could be kept in the Proven Forum.
The problem then is that you can't really differenciate between the builds if one reports a tournament that would be used for the DtB Forum if he doesn't hand in the lists as well and that you'd be lacking a thread to solve the great question, about life, the universe and everything (read: general Landstill questions as 'How should it evolve further', 'Which is the best list for the general/specific meta' etc.). Therefore I'd open another thread that would be put into the DtB Forum in months when Landstill is in that is open only to that kind of discussion.

Conclusion:

One DtB-Thread for only this kind of discussion:
'How should Landstill evolve in the Future (adopt a more aggressive/controlish pace)'
'Which Landstill variant is the best for which Meta/for the general Meta?'
etc. (Questions would have to be agreed on)

Following Established Threads:
One thread for Landstill with Pernicious Deed (Ubg, 4c)
One thread for the more traditional Landstill (with WoG, white heavy)
Maybe one thread for innovation and new lists/ideas (like aggro Landstill - aka burn based Landstill)

[Nihil Credo]

I think that redundant 'general' discussions will not be a problem. To take the Threshold comparison further, Counterbalance/Top is a discussion that applies to every variant, and it's been a good thing that each thread discussed it separately: the long debate about the viability of UGR Burning-Tree Thresh without Balance would have clogged down a general thread, but it was fine in the Red one. On the opposite side, Counterbalance was accepted pretty fast in UGW, arguably the variant least suitable to tempo-heavy builds.

Still, there's little reason not to add a 'Landstill archetype discussion' thread somewhere. Worst scenario, it will remain unused.

[AnwarA101]

Who reads the Landstill thread?

Okay, on a more serious note why is Landstill treated differently than Threshold? I still don't get this. If you think Threshold should be separated by color, why not Landstill? At least it would make more sense to treat two similar situations in the same way.

[mossivo1986]

We (the mods) need to do something about that Landstill thread. It's a F-ing disaster. What options exist for making a better, more coherent Landstill thread?

Options:

Create a thread for discussing which build is best?
Create a thread for each color variant?
Keep the discussion of all variants focused in one thread?
Suggestions?


I'm really at a loss as to how to salvage the Landstill thread.

Well to get at what I said a couple of months ago Landstill in general needs to be seperated into color groups kind of like Thresh but alittle differently.

Instead of labeling specific colors for the LS threads we should be more worried about labeling them by number of colors.

2c
3c
4c

The main trend i've seen is this---->

You have 1 person who likes 4c
you have another who likes 3c.

p1: " I like 4 color because it has more answers then all the other versions."
p2: " I like 3 color because its more resiliant then the 4 color model."
p1: " I've never had and problems with resiliancy, I run all the best cards!"
p2: "Yes but your prone to not developing your ___, which makes me better."
Random P3: "Yes you get hozed by ____ because your a noob!"
P1: "Umm, well show your models if you guys are soo good."
p4: Um hi, I just thought you should see my list. Though im new to landstill thread and I have no real idea of what im doing, but HERE IT IS ANYWAYS :)"
"p4 presents 2 color list with nothing relavent in the thread right then other then its called landstill."


"""Rinse repeat""""

So By changing landstill to 2-3-4 color builds, not naming the colors chosen we then give ourselves the option to not only choose how many colors we want and have people actually put some research into which model they REALLY like, not just netdeck some random deck and play it. But they also have a much wider room for innovation on splashing tuning ect.

I don't know if anyone would agree with me, but thats my two cents on this whole situation and I was the one who said to do it a while back because of the current situations.

[freakish777]

If you think Threshold should be separated by color, why not Landstill? At least it would make more sense to treat two similar situations in the same way.

Because Threshold automatically runs UG, and the question is: White, Red, Black, or a combination or lack there-of (which leaves us with 8 other possibilities, at least 2 of which have yet to be tried UGbr, 5-color Thresh).

Meanwhile, Landstill has only 1 color variable accounted for, as the following have all been attempted:

UW
UR
UB
UG (the turboland decks at GP Philly ran Villages and Standstill iirc)
UBW
UBG
URW
UBGW
etc

The combinations become unmanagable when you want a thread for each one.

I'm in favor of seperating them by lineage so to speak, if the focus of the deck follows from the "original" UW/UR/UWr versions when the format first split from Vintage, put them in one thread (basically Landstill lists that feared Wasteland and wanted to have as much utility as possible) vs. the BHWC/BHWW lists that are running as many colors for as much power as possible. If people want to further split, that's fine, but I think the obvious thing to split on first is "are you running scared of Wasteland/Bloodmoon", or "are you attempting to get the most power out of your deck."

Granted that suggestion isn't perfect as you get people like Bardo making his UBG version to avoid wasteland (ditching Swords) while attempting to cram the most power into his deck as well blurring the line. However, I think his version can go under the Power list (a resolved Blood Moon/Magus against his deck is basically un-answerable except by an Engineered Explosives for 3, which isn't easy, or an unpopped Deed prior to the fact), where as the more "traditional" lists probably have something like 2 basic Plains, 5 basic Islands and Disenchants "just in case" someone actually resolves Bloodmoon (or more likely Cunning Wish for Disenchant).

I might be rambling a bit, but I don't think you can split on color first if at all.

[Hoojo]

So By changing landstill to 2-3-4 color builds, not naming the colors chosen we then give ourselves the option to not only choose how many colors we want and have people actually put some research into which model they REALLY like, not just netdeck some random deck and play it. But they also have a much wider room for innovation on splashing tuning ect.

I like this idea. The only consistent color in Landstill is :u:. This will fit more with how the Threshold threads are divided up, since they are more based on what third color is ran rather than what "up to 3" other colors are ran, a lot like what Freakish is saying.

[mossivo1986]

Because Threshold automatically runs UG, and the question is: White, Red, Black, or a combination or lack there-of (which leaves us with 8 other possibilities, at least 2 of which have yet to be tried UGbr, 5-color Thresh).

Meanwhile, Landstill has only 1 color variable accounted for, as the following have all been attempted:

UW
UR
UB
UG (the turboland decks at GP Philly ran Villages and Standstill iirc)
UBW
UBG
URW
UBGW
etc

The combinations become unmanagable when you want a thread for each one.

I'm in favor of seperating them by lineage so to speak, if the focus of the deck follows from the "original" UW/UR/UWr versions when the format first split from Vintage, put them in one thread (basically Landstill lists that feared Wasteland and wanted to have as much utility as possible) vs. the BHWC/BHWW lists that are running as many colors for as much power as possible. If people want to further split, that's fine, but I think the obvious thing to split on first is "are you running scared of Wasteland/Bloodmoon", or "are you attempting to get the most power out of your deck."

Granted that suggestion isn't perfect as you get people like Bardo making his UBG version to avoid wasteland (ditching Swords) while attempting to cram the most power into his deck as well blurring the line. However, I think his version can go under the Power list (a resolved Blood Moon/Magus against his deck is basically un-answerable except by an Engineered Explosives for 3, which isn't easy, or an unpopped Deed prior to the fact), where as the more "traditional" lists probably have something like 2 basic Plains, 5 basic Islands and Disenchants "just in case" someone actually resolves Bloodmoon (or more likely Cunning Wish for Disenchant).

I might be rambling a bit, but I don't think you can split on color first if at all.

I do not think you can seperate landstill into "Types" or even colors. It just doesn't work to me. You have to seperate it by How many as opposed to which. Like one of the comments said before me, Blue is the ONLY must have in the deck, because otherwise you cant use the key components.

So like I said my idea

make 3 threads

2c Landstill
3c Landstill
4c Landstill

Each of them will have their own people who "prefer" that specific color. Innovations and splashes can happen at will, and best of all everyone will be happy!

[godryk]

I'm not an adept and I don't pretend to be considered as an expert at all, I just want to quote two true ideas I share with people who know this deck much better than I do:

A) If Landstill can be classified, there are two clear categories:
- Pernicious Deed variants (4C, UBG, etc.)
- Heavy white variants (UW, UWb, etc.)

I've seen Wrath of God in 4C Landstill, those things do happen, no classification is perfect, but that's like discussing Swords to Plowshares in the black Thresh thread.

B) There are no more threads needed, all innovations can be discussed in the variants' threads. Seriously, Threshold threads work fine.

[mossivo1986]

I'm not an adept and I don't pretend to be considered as an expert at all, I just want to quote two true ideas I share with people who know this deck much better than I do:

A) If Landstill can be classified, there are two clear categories:
- Pernicious Deed variants (4C, UBG, etc.)
- Heavy white variants (UW, UWb, etc.)

I've seen Wrath of God in 4C Landstill, those things do happen, no classification is perfect, but that's like discussing Swords to Plowshares in the black Thresh thread.

B) There are no more threads needed, all innovations can be discussed in the variants' threads. Seriously, Threshold threads work fine.

I guess I don't follow your idea. Threshhold is fine with 6 different thresh threads and landstill is good with its one thread? Isn't that just saying "I say good day sir!" Realisticly there needs to be a change because the different strategies that landstill has are often mistaked as "normal" strategies. The deck constantly gets confused for having the same strategies because typically its a "slow" control deck. Its a common misconception, because not all landstill decks are even close to alike.

[Tacosnape]

I guess I don't follow your idea. Threshhold is fine with 6 different thresh threads and landstill is good with its one thread? Isn't that just saying "I say good day sir!" Realisticly there needs to be a change because the different strategies that landstill has are often mistaked as "normal" strategies. The deck constantly gets confused for having the same strategies because typically its a "slow" control deck. Its a common misconception, because not all landstill decks are even close to alike.

The argument here would be that Threshold isn't fine with a bunch of different threads and should be set the same way as Landstill. Not that I'm taking either side, just saying.

I rarely post in Landstill anymore due to the fact that it's all become a pissing match of Build X >> Build Y >> Build Z >> Build X without there being any real card choice discussion except for "How do you deal with Blood Moon?", which has easily surpassed Goblin Lackey as the most paranoia-inducing card in the history of the format.

I do agree that most Landstill falls into either White-Heavy or Deed, although there are exceptions (UB, UBR, UR, etc) that make it really difficult to split the Landstill threads intelligently. The problem is that nobody making T8 is doing so with lists that look remotely alike.

[Osse]

I'm not going to say the Threshold builds are fine as they are, because I honestly think they aren't. But that's a discussion that should be somewhere else (And I hope sometime soon it will be...).

As for Landstill I think the best way to go is make a *NEW* Thread for each of the following;

2c Landstill
3c Landstill
4c Landstill

I think if new threads alot of the questions need to be addressed in the Opening Post, or at least a Disclaimer as such that it needs to be understood that any control deck is almost entirely customizable by a couple cards. Ex: -1 Deed +1 Engineered Explosives or -1 Crucible +1 Loam.

I think with threads in this design we can both keep them seperate and make the best version of each. I think there is a best 2c Build, but it's not going to play the same as the 3c or 4c builds, so they can't be compared.

I also think there has been alot of discussion of whether Landstill should start including things like Tarmogoyf, Garruk, Tombstalker etc, things that traditionally weren't even thought of. Are the decks trying to employ this really landstill decks, or just Control decks with Standstill and Man lands?

EDIT: I agree that Blood Moon has been the biggest reason for all the arguments in the Landstill threads (But my manabase beats Blood Moon, and yours doesn't!). I'm pretty sure the problems just arise from people who feel the need to discuss this just aren't testing enough against it. I mean its a fair question, but arguing over it is kind of pointless.

[darkalucard]

2c There are many two color decks that are unrelated, the discussion would be confusing, they would be fighting over wich colors are the best. UW, UB, UR, etc.

I'm not sure if it is the best way I don't know what is the best but heres an idea:

Sort them by mass removal choice:
Pernicous Deed
Wrath of God
Damnation
Etc.

Most decks that share the same sweeper are simular enough and the variations are smaller.

[Tacosnape]

Number of Colors doesn't fix anything except the 4C discussion, which 9 times out of 10 is UBGW.

3C is as often UBW as UBG, as well as occasionally UWG, UWR, and, on rare occasions, UBR. None of these four builds play even remotely similar. Most UBW is closest to UW (As is UWR), most UBG is closest to UBGW without Swords, UWG runs the gamut, and UBR plays like none of the above.

2C is usually UW, but recently it's been UR a lot, and Duck Hunt (UB) had its heyday as well. Certainly none of these play alike.

[Serbitar]

I second the motion to split by choice of mass removal, as it seems to be the playstyle effecting choice.
Thus one would have a thread for WoG/Humility (white-heavy) Landstill and one for Pernicious Deed (UBG, UBGW) Landstill.

If there is need, the rest (Ur, UB, UBr) could be melted in a third thread (as there really hasn't been that much discussion about them).

[holkenborg]

SUPPORT !!!

I mailed a moderator about this about a month or two ago, but no response.

4c Landstill is just too different than UW Humstill to be in one threat..

[Tacosnape]

SUPPORT !!!

I mailed a moderator about this about a month or two ago, but no response.

4c Landstill is just too different than UW Humstill to be in one threat..

Wow. I totally read that as "I nailed a moderator."

[mujadaddy]

Wow. I totally read that as "I nailed a moderator."

Who do I have to fuck around here to get the Landstill thread organized???

[mossivo1986]

So what about 4 c white based landstill that runs humility AND deed? Are we going to have a thread for every major wrath effect/ still build.

Because I seriously cant see one for u/w nev disk. It just doesnt flow with me.

[Nihil Credo]

So what about 4 c white based landstill that runs humility AND deed?
From what I've read and from a few quick test games, it has mostly the same pros (can deal with everything) and cons (manabase from Hell) of regular 4C Landeed. So I'd put it in the Deed thread, also because, you know, it is built around Deed.

[Berzerked]

Landstill threads can be compared to Threshold threads.

For example, there used to be a UG Thresh thread, but no one plays that anymore so it's fallen back a couple of pages, and will eventually disappear. 5c Thresh isn't played so there isn't a thread. UGw, UGr, and UGb all see heavy play, so they each have a thread.

UGBx Landstill sees the most play so it needs its own thread.
UW sees a lot of play, so it needs one too (UWb builds are basically UW with black for extirpate in the board... UWg is also extremely similar with the addition of Monastery and maybe LftL, with Grip in the board. [Here the players can discuss pros and cons of all the UW options: CBTop, Wish, Humlity/Moat, Hoofprints, E.Tutor.])
Now, please don't jump on me for mentioning the obvious, but R varients are not played anymore. If you want to discuss an R varient, it should not be in DTB. UB is not played anymore.

Landstill only needs 2 DTB threads: UGBx and UWx.

[darkalucard]

I agree:

2 DTB:
4c (Deed)
UWx (Wrath, Humility)

2 Established Decks:
URx (Needs to be made?)
UBx (Already there.)

That solves everything.

End of discussion.

[lebarion]

I agree with Berzeked.

Although UWx can use Cunning Wish or not, Counterbalance or not, Enlightened Tutor or not (just to give some examples), these discussions are valid for UWx builds. However, they are almost meningless in UGBx builds.

With this approach there would be threads for UBGx, UWx and a few other for less played versions (UR, UB, and maybe UG). I think the moderators can deal with 5 threads, specially because some of them will, like Berzeked said, fall back a couple of pages and eventually disappear.

[Berzerked]

Or we could just skip having to wait for them to disappear and not make them to begin with. Believe me, almost every contributor to the current thread plays UGBx/UWx, with extremely few discussing Ur (only the freakaccident and Adan, I believe), and none discussing UG/UB. A URx should probably be made for the established forum, but like I said before, only UGBx and UWx need to be in DtB.

[holkenborg]

Wow. I totally read that as "I nailed a moderator."

Euh.. no. I could have done two things: spoil the Landstill topic about this or mail a moderator with arguments why to split the topic. There are just too many different versions.

I like this initiative too and even more, all the attention people give it :-)

I agree with Berzerked and everyone with the same ideas

[mossivo1986]

I disagree with naming the by the type of removal. Thats too specific when it comes down to it.

I realize that no 2 still decks play exactly the same. They all kill at their own speed and some versions have a much better matchup against the field vs specific matchups.

I think labeling it by number of colors vs which colors is a better way of doing things because it limits the ammount of threads landstill uses, and you keep a majority of your members in 3-4 threads. By spliting up into 3 threads you continue to see improvement in the different combinations and people get different ideas on colors they can run.

I would have to say my prime example would be the differences between marious's list, and Der's list are PRIME examples of why different threads need to be made.

Marious's list is Very good against the broad field, but has a weak matchup against blood moon type of decks. Where as Der's list has a stronger matchup against blood moon type decks, but sacrifices some of it's overall consistency and the ability to stop certain things because it runs wrath over deed "marrious's build runs deed."

So these small yet gigantic differances need to be addressed in their own respective threads. Otherwise the decks look virtually identicle. They do make a huge impact in gameplay though. And yes they both have humility, one plays deed one plays wrath I do understand. So they could I guess be seperated by removal choices, but that would only be one of the minor differences. How about labeling card choices like 1 of LFLT in MArious's build. SPlashing green is huge for multiple reasons and people need to know why and how it plays.

viva la Revolution!!!!!

[Nihil Credo]

I disagree with naming the by the type of removal. Thats too specific when it comes down to it.

I realize that no 2 still decks play exactly the same. They all kill at their own speed and some versions have a much better matchup against the field vs specific matchups.

I think labeling it by number of colors vs which colors is a better way of doing things because it limits the ammount of threads landstill uses, and you keep a majority of your members in 3-4 threads. By spliting up into 3 threads you continue to see improvement in the different combinations and people get different ideas on colors they can run.

I would have to say my prime example would be the differences between marious's list, and Der's list are PRIME examples of why different threads need to be made.

Marious's list is Very good against the broad field, but has a weak matchup against blood moon type of decks. Where as Der's list has a stronger matchup against blood moon type decks, but sacrifices some of it's overall consistency and the ability to stop certain things because it runs wrath over deed "marrious's build runs deed."

So these small yet gigantic differances need to be addressed in their own respective threads. Otherwise the decks look virtually identicle. They do make a huge impact in gameplay though. And yes they both have humility, one plays deed one plays wrath I do understand. So they could I guess be seperated by removal choices, but that would only be one of the minor differences. How about labeling card choices like 1 of LFLT in MArious's build. SPlashing green is huge for multiple reasons and people need to know why and how it plays.

viva la Revolution!!!!!
I commend you for out-arguing yourself. Few are brave enough to do that.

[Berzerked]

Alright, so instead of letting this thread drag on any longer with random arguments and specifics, can the mods agree on a split?

DtB
UBGx Landstill (to include UBG, UBGw)
UWx Landstill (to include UW, UWb, UWg, UWr)

And, if anyone actually wants

Established
UR Landstill

[from Cairo]

I'd agree.

DTB Forums:
[DTW] UWx Landstill (like D I F's Cunning wish build, Traditional UW, etc.)
[DTW] UBGx Landstill (like BHWW, Bardo's Vorosh, Taco's Lists etc.)

Established Forums:
[Archetype] Landstill (for innovation / lists that deviate greatly from the DTWs)

[FoolofaTook]

I do agree that most Landstill falls into either White-Heavy or Deed, although there are exceptions (UB, UBR, UR, etc) that make it really difficult to split the Landstill threads intelligently. The problem is that nobody making T8 is doing so with lists that look remotely alike.

That usually means that the builds involved fall more under a general archetype (land-based control in this case) than under a specific theme.

Are UR and Ubgw really the same decks? If so then all the Threshold variants should be in a single thread also, because they can't possibly be as different as those two Landstill variants.

There's an enormous difference between running Nantuko Monastery, which creates a graveyard dependence, and not running it.

[Mental]

There's an enormous difference between running Nantuko Monastery, which creates a graveyard dependence, and not running it.

Is the difference large enough to warrant a different thread? It's one card. I don't think so.

[revenge_inc]

I like the subforum idea. I would break it down in a way similar to what Der_imaginäre_Freund suggested.

In Decks to Beat have a Landstill subforum and inside it have:
-One thread for Landstill with Pernicious Deed (Ubg, 4c)
-One thread for the more traditional Landstill (with WoG, white heavy)
- possibly a UR Landstill thread
- A New and Developmental Decks Forum but just for Lanstill
-The old Landstill thread (locked, but kept for reference)


Since there are so many variants that can potentially become competitive (and therefore be in DtB), more threads can be added to the Landstill subforum if necessary. This is the solution that allows for the most flexibility in the long-term without the risk of having Landstill threads all over the place.

[Mental]

That seems like too much, Revenge. I would just have two threads in the DTB forum and 1 in Established. We don't need to completely redo the site to make this work.

[Bardo]

I'd agree.

DTB Forums:
[DTW] UWx Landstill
[DTW] UBGx Landstill

Established Forums:
[Archetype] Landstill (for innovation / lists that deviate greatly from the DTWs)

That's is my preference: 2 threads:

1) UW // B/R or some combination thereof;

2) UBG /W/R

Basically, the Pernicious Deed builds and the Wrath/Damnation builds. I'm not sure about your proposed [Archetype] thread in 'Established,' or what that should look like or where a separate discussion should be, but the idea is interesting.

[revenge_inc]

That seems like too much, Revenge. I would just have two threads in the DTB forum and 1 in Established. We don't need to completely redo the site to make this work.

lol I know my solution sounds extreme but I actually think it will be less work for the admins in the long run. I think that if all the landstill threads aren't kept in one place, we will have one messy forum with many organized threads instead of one messy thread.

[mossivo1986]

I commend you for out-arguing yourself. Few are brave enough to do that.

Im still waiting for my Pinder. I would really like one of those. What I could do with 13.5 Lesbian points god has yet to find out.

[Peter_Rotten]

I'm leaning toward the following suggestion:

UGB(x) builds. (Essentially important removal in the form of Deed)
UW(x) builds. (Essentially important removal in the form of StP and probably Wrath)
General Landstill thread to discuss broader questions and debate the finer points of the current best builds.
Other threads (UR, UB) as needed.


I also like the Landstill forum idea, but in practice, it wil be more effort to create, maintain, and move back and forth than it's worth.

[deviant]

"General Landstill thread to discuss broader questions and debate the finer points of the current best builds."

-> Sounds like a place to continue the asshattery.
Seriously though - I don't think we need million landstill threads. Or at least want them. Definitely not in the DTB-section, as long as they're not DTBs. We don't want three goblin threads, nor do we want to have seventeen survival threads.
Make a 'goystill-thread in the experimental or something?

[diffy]

"General Landstill thread to discuss broader questions and debate the finer points of the current best builds."
-> Sounds like a place to continue the asshattery.


Why do people want to evade some serious discussion?
Thing is: most Landstill lists are pretty much finished but for some fundamental choices (number of colors, Cunning Wish, Humility, Tarmogoyf, Counterbalance, Planeswalker etc.). For me it is more important to have these fundamentals discussed rather than have millions of pages of discussion on card choices which are obvious most of the time or on random tweaks like splitting Crucible with Life from the Loam.



Seriously though - I don't think we need million landstill threads. Or at least want them. Definitely not in the DTB-section, as long as they're not DTBs. We don't want three goblin threads, nor do we want to have seventeen survival threads.
Make a 'goystill-thread in the experimental or something?

I don't see the problem with this: just put the 'General Landstill Thread' into the DtB Forum in months when Landstill is in, with links in the first post to all the oter development Threads. Those development threads would then be put permanently into the Established Forum to not be moved around.
Same could be applied to the NQG threads: you could have one NQG-discussion thread in the DtB Forum and the other threads (one for each color splash/version, just as we have it now) in the Established Forum.

[FoolofaTook]

Is the difference large enough to warrant a different thread? It's one card. I don't think so.

The point was that the Landstill variants running green as a splash are very different from all of the other variants, both in having Nantuko Monastery and potentially Life from The Loam and also in having Krosan Grip available as an uncounterable removal piece. The non-green variants that include Crucible of Worlds are close in some cases but a lot of the variants just don't use the graveyard at all.

The difference between having recurring manlands and wastelands and not having them is almost an archetype change in terms of threats and responses.

[mossivo1986]

The point was that the Landstill variants running green as a splash are very different from all of the other variants, both in having Nantuko Monastery and potentially Life from The Loam and also in having Krosan Grip available as an uncounterable removal piece. The non-green variants that include Crucible of Worlds are close in some cases but a lot of the variants just don't use the graveyard at all.

The difference between having recurring manlands and wastelands and not having them is almost an archetype change in terms of threats and responses.

100% Agreed.

[Illissius]

So the problem with the current Landstill thread is just volume? How do we know that splitting the mess into multiple multiple threads won't just... split the mess, into multiple threads? Giving us multiple threads, each with mess in them?

I mean, it might work. But I don't see why it's the obvious silver bullet solution to be jumping to like everyone else seems to. Tighter rules and/or moderation or other measures could also have beneficial effects.

Of course, there's something to be said for empirical evidence, which says that "whatever we're doing now isn't working". So if we don't come up with anything better, changing it is probably better than not changing it.

EDIT -- And I still think that both Threshold and Landstill, and any other archetypes for that matter, should be handled in the same manner as each other. These days, I see more difference among strategies than I do among colors, so if we do end up splitting things, it should be along those lines.

[Bardo]

So the problem with the current Landstill thread is just volume? How do we know that splitting the mess into multiple multiple threads won't just... split the mess, into multiple threads? Giving us multiple threads, each with mess in them?

If we implement a multi-thread, we should close the current Landstill thread, archive it for posterity and start with fresh threads.


a) UGB(x) builds. ...
b) UW(x) builds. ...
c) General Landstill thread to discuss broader questions and debate the finer points of the current best builds.
d) Other threads (UR, UB) as needed.

Other than "C," this works for me. I'm not strictly opposed to "C," but I think it might invite too much conversation bleed and pull focus away from the main thread. But, fuck, I suppose it couldn't to try.

[mossivo1986]

So whats going to happen then? I mean this has been up for quite a while why hasnt something been integrated?

[Peter_Rotten]

It totally has fallen by the wayside. I'll see if I can get things organized. By "organized" I mean opening up separate threads. I just don't have any solid opening posts. :frown: Any volunteers to write some opening posts for the following threads:

a) UGB(x) builds
b) UW(x) builds
c) General Landstill thread to discuss broader questions and debate the finer points of the current best builds.

[freakish777]

I could give the UW(x) one a try if no one else claims it.