[Article] Design Patterns

[Nihil Credo]

Hic. (http://www.starcitygames.com/php/news/article/15905.html)

Content: It's OK, I guess.
Execution: Fucking Awesome.

[Hightower]

An excellent read, on a rainy monday =)

[ACME_Myst]

Very nice article. Am I the only one who thinks it's funny that the decklists in the article will be suggested in 6 days time?

[Zach Tartell]

Very nice article. Am I the only one who thinks it's funny that the decklists in the article will be suggested in 6 days time?



Wanted: Somebody to go back in time with me.

This is not a joke. You'll get paid after we return. Must bring your own weapons - safety not guaranteed. I've only done this once before.


I wasn't displeased with the article. I'll give it another once-over before I really decide whether or not it was worth that whole debacle from a couple weeks ago.

[rleader]

so how many words was that to say that goyf, brainstorm, FOW, dark ritual, and thoughtseize are good?

I agree with the OP that the execution was good, having all the decklists up nicely, but I think Nightmare is a bit vindicated.

[Peter_Rotten]

I'd rather this didn't turn into a "writer vs. writer" thread. On the other hand (and, as always), I'm happy to see Legacy get exposure.

[BreathWeapon]

I don't know, I thought the article was well written, but it felt like all the article did was state the obvious.

All of the combo lists were out dated to.

[Deep6er]

I approve of every article that has my name in it.

Thus, the Gearhart stamp of approval for this one. :)

[nitewolf9]

Great article, for a number of reasons.

I like the fact that this provided an overview of the different strategies in legacy for people that don't really play the format but might want to start. You see a lot of design flaws in new decks, on this forum and on others, because people are making assumptions that are simply not true. I think having all of this information in one place is a useful tool for judging new ideas.

I also liked how it stuck to proven ideas, citing deck lists that have had success as a basis for the ideas in the article and providing food for thought to the reader.

[mujadaddy]

Content: It's OK, I guess.
Execution: Fucking Awesome.I rekindled my interest in Magic about 6 months ago. This article is a *fantastic* starting point for anyone interested in getting into Legacy.

(...having done research for 6 months, though, it didn't tell me anything I didn't know...)

So, I have to agree that it was a *very* complete & thorough article, even if it was a bit encyclopedic, in both good & bad ways.

At any rate, thanks, Anwar!

[b4r0n]

I liked the article. The use of decklists was excellent; they reinforced your points by providing the context in which you were discussing specific cards. They also provided a current depiction of exact lists that make up the decks composing the general meta, which is important for both new players and veterans alike.

However, I felt like the conclusion was slightly lacking. I think you could have explored the relevance of the ubiquity of certain cards, and offered your opinion on why this is. In other words, why should people care? These cards don't seem to be representative of specific strategies (as evidenced by the use of Ritual for aggro or combo, and the different applications of Thoughtseize), so how should one exploit potential weaknesses in the design of the decks that utilize these cards? In fact, it seems easier to exploit the weaknesses of the decks that don't run these cards; for example, Enchantress and Goblins (as well as Stax, Burn, Ichorid, and other relatively linear strategies) seem easier to hate than Threshold or Eva Green. I think that you could have elaborated on this more, other than just mentioning that these specific cards are not necessarily essential for success. Perhaps ending with a list such as Ichorid, which is generally able to ignore Force, Thoughtseize, and Tarmogoyf, would have been good here.

Overall though, I liked the article a lot. It was definitely solid, and a very good read.

[Nightmare]

I'm on vacation in Florida, so I didn't have time to read the article thoroughly as of yet, but from what I've read, it seems like a good start to your writing career. Keep up the good work.

[calosso]

I actually read the article. It was very good IMO. Keep up the good work Anwar.

[Finn]

Thank you for that article Anwar. I tip my hat to you, as always, if the writer writes something interesting and I actually learned something from it. This one snuck in on both counts. Now, just accomplish that every month for a year or so.

[Deep6er]

Important note, Dan (nitewolf9) did a lot of work for "It's the Fear". Just wanted to make sure credit was given where it was due.

On another note, I did like the article (especially the parts with me in them), and I thought it served as an excellent "introduction to the author and style" piece. With Anwar's precision and careful wording/editing, it's definitely coming off as well-researched and planned. Kudos.

[nitewolf9]

Important note, Dan (nitewolf9) did a lot of work for "It's the Fear". Just wanted to make sure credit was given where it was due.

On another note, I did like the article (especially the parts with me in them), and I thought it served as an excellent "introduction to the author and style" piece. With Anwar's precision and careful wording/editing, it's definitely coming off as well-researched and planned. Kudos.

With the 1/2 credit for this and for eva green, I think I'm at the "one whole deck created" level of e-credit. Do I get to cash this in for something? My e-penis could use an overhaul and I don't wana use paypal.

[Parcher]

Screw you Gearhart, the article needs moar me. Anwar, why can't you be more like Kevin?

More importantly, nice fucking picture. When did you get arrested?

[Bovinious]

The article was good lots of (good, for once) decklists and data, except it needed moar Ichorid :wink:

[Ewokslayer]

The article was ok,
Your picture was crap.
You should steal Adam's hat and update your pic.

[freakish777]

Seems like a nice starting point. Out of curiosity, was this a supposed to address the "The Deck" vs. "The Anti-Deck" dichotomy (I think kirdape3 or Dfxler uses that term, are you running "fully powered" with the best cards or are you running the cards that are supposed to beat the best cards, P9 or Chalice of the Void, Duals or Blood Moon, etc)? Or was this more just an analysis of which cards players should pay attention to because they top 8 in a lot of different decks?

[Nydaeli]

So I guess good cards are good.

I liked the article, though. Being a little bit obvious isn't really a bad thing, and there was plenty of useful commentary.

[AnwarA101]

I don't know, I thought the article was well written, but it felt like all the article did was state the obvious.



So I guess good cards are good.

I liked the article, though. Being a little bit obvious isn't really a bad thing, and there was plenty of useful commentary.

I thought that it might be the case, but I thought that some analysis of these widely used cards might provide some benefit even if some of the observations might have been well-known. I was trying to make it a more in-depth article. If it failed in that regard, that is a quite a disappointment.

Did more people think it was a bit obvious or redundant? I wasn't just trying to show that Tarmogoyf is good. Virtually everyone can agree on that. More so I was trying to show how Tarmogoyf is being used successfully. Not every deck playing Tarmogoyf is making T8, but actually a few very specific decks that seem to utilize him well within their strategy. The same goes for the other cards. If that distinction wasn't clear, it probably deserved more emphasis.



However, I felt like the conclusion was slightly lacking. I think you could have explored the relevance of the ubiquity of certain cards, and offered your opinion on why this is. In other words, why should people care? These cards don't seem to be representative of specific strategies (as evidenced by the use of Ritual for aggro or combo, and the different applications of Thoughtseize), so how should one exploit potential weaknesses in the design of the decks that utilize these cards? In fact, it seems easier to exploit the weaknesses of the decks that don't run these cards; for example, Enchantress and Goblins (as well as Stax, Burn, Ichorid, and other relatively linear strategies) seem easier to hate than Threshold or Eva Green. I think that you could have elaborated on this more, other than just mentioning that these specific cards are not necessarily essential for success. Perhaps ending with a list such as Ichorid, which is generally able to ignore Force, Thoughtseize, and Tarmogoyf, would have been good here.


You are right about the conclusion. It was lacking and this partly because I wasn't sure how to end it. I wanted to bring up Ichorid as a possible foil to most of these decks, but I thought that it might take more than a few sentences to explain why.


Seems like a nice starting point. Out of curiosity, was this a supposed to address the "The Deck" vs. "The Anti-Deck" dichotomy (I think kirdape3 or Dfxler uses that term, are you running "fully powered" with the best cards or are you running the cards that are supposed to beat the best cards, P9 or Chalice of the Void, Duals or Blood Moon, etc)? Or was this more just an analysis of which cards players should pay attention to because they top 8 in a lot of different decks?

I think the latter is probably more accurate. I was just observing that many of the same cards keep showing up in T8s and that suggests something about those cards and how that could be used to build Legacy decks in general at least at this given point in time.


I'm on vacation in Florida, so I didn't have time to read the article thoroughly as of yet, but from what I've read, it seems like a good start to your writing career. Keep up the good work.

Thank you for the kind words. I hope you can get back to me about what you think once you get through it.

It just hit me that I got to write the article this week, but you are spending it in Florida. Some how it doesn't seem like I got the best part of the deal. :frown:

[bladewing019]

This article is probably great for people just trying to get into legacy, but otherwise I didn't think it was very good. Basically you just said:
- good cards are good
- good decks play good cards
- Linears get away with not playing these good cards because of synergy
- the most played good cards are the flexible ones

It just struck me as rather weak, although it was thoroughly in depth. The decklists and explanations were definitely nice additions.

Other than that Dark Ritual didn't seem to really fit in the same way your other examples did. It wasn't played in as many decks, and isn't as flexible.

Your writing also seems awkward for an article. I'm not exactly sure why, I guess it comes off as too mechanical and redundant.

But besides all the criticism I think it was a good starting point. The article did a great job of saying what you wanted it to (even if I thought the topic was a little weak) and it was thoroughly in-depth.

Fake Edit: The words Eva Green appear 11 times :P

[Belgareth]

It wasn't bad so to speak, it just wasn't so much unlocking legacy as legacy staples 101.
It was good for what it was, but it was basically stating the obvious for anyone who knows legacy by pointing out key staples that are part of multiple decks.
It reminded me of an old mtgs article on legacy staples, it's a nice thing to have for newcomers but nothing new or innovative.
Your writing style was fine,it kept you reading untill the conclusion but then was pretty anti-climatic.

[MattH]

I think the whole thrust of the article should have been whittled down to about 1/3 the size, and followed up with some natural related questions.

Exploring what kinds of cards get used in multiple ways would have been a nice touch.

As far as specific staple cards go, I noticed a severe lack of STP discussion. Orim's Chant and Extirpate would also have been way more interesting to discuss than some of the cards you chose, especially Goyf. Chant (disrupt opposing combo, protect own combo, time walk) and Extirpate actually ARE used in very very different ways depending on what they're being used IN and AGAINST; Goyf really only ever does the same thing in any deck (apart from feeding Sutured Ghoul), which is to sit at the sweet spot on the speed vs. power vs. reliability curve of win conditions (although a curve in three variables really ought to be a 'surface', I suppose. But I digress).

I'm surprised you mentioned FoW being used to protect a combo without at least mentioning Pact of Negation as something a Legacy designer (as opposed to player) ought to keep in mind. Protecting combos is basically the entire justification for Pact's existence.

LED would have been much more illustrative of how differently a card can be used, comparing its use with Tutor effects as in Storm decks, versus how Ichorid uses it more or less as a free One With Nothing that sometimes lets you flash a Deep Analysis back.

The different roles of FoW and Thoughtseize, I thought, were not particularly well-delineated. Pretty much every use of FoW falls in one of two general categories: protect my win condition until it wins the game for me (Threshold counters the STP that would have taken out its Goyf, Flash forces through its namesake, Breakfast counters a Needle), or stop you from winning while I try to establish control (which is pretty much how Landstill uses it). The different ways to use Thoughtseize, I thought, were similarly underexplored/underhighlighted.

Wasteland would have been a good one to tackle, drawing a distinction between using it for tempo (as all those creature decks like Eva Green, Goblins, and U/G Threshold use it) or for disruption (as Stax uses it).

The best section by far was Brainstorm, because you very clearly differentiated the ways Threshold uses it vs. Landstill, which almost never uses it to find lands, vs. Breakfast and TES, which use it to put back dead cards.

Overall I think you focused too much on talking about the most common cards, rather than the cards which best illustrated your points. You could say it's a kind of "teaching to the test."

[mercenarybdu]

Not impressed by it at all other than being reminded of how many different directions the decks could be built or how many uses the cards have in many different prototypes.

[FoolofaTook]

Was a good read. I enjoyed the specific linking of the power to the lists presented and the different ways in which it functioned in each deck.

[Peter_Rotten]

More importantly, nice fucking picture. When did you get arrested?

Holy shit, I was thinking the same thing but I didn't want to be the dick that said it first.

[quicksilver]

http://www.starcitygames.com/images/writers/Ahmad.jpg

I too was thinking the same thing, it's a really terrible picture.

[AnwarA101]

Exploring what kinds of cards get used in multiple ways would have been a nice touch.


I don't think I understand exactly what you mean by this. Can you explain further?



As far as specific staple cards go, I noticed a severe lack of STP discussion. Orim's Chant and Extirpate would also have been way more interesting to discuss than some of the cards you chose, especially Goyf. Chant (disrupt opposing combo, protect own combo, time walk) and Extirpate actually ARE used in very very different ways depending on what they're being used IN and AGAINST; Goyf really only ever does the same thing in any deck (apart from feeding Sutured Ghoul), which is to sit at the sweet spot on the speed vs. power vs. reliability curve of win conditions (although a curve in three variables really ought to be a 'surface', I suppose. But I digress).

I'm surprised you mentioned FoW being used to protect a combo without at least mentioning Pact of Negation as something a Legacy designer (as opposed to player) ought to keep in mind. Protecting combos is basically the entire justification for Pact's existence.

LED would have been much more illustrative of how differently a card can be used, comparing its use with Tutor effects as in Storm decks, versus how Ichorid uses it more or less as a free One With Nothing that sometimes lets you flash a Deep Analysis back.

The different roles of FoW and Thoughtseize, I thought, were not particularly well-delineated. Pretty much every use of FoW falls in one of two general categories: protect my win condition until it wins the game for me (Threshold counters the STP that would have taken out its Goyf, Flash forces through its namesake, Breakfast counters a Needle), or stop you from winning while I try to establish control (which is pretty much how Landstill uses it). The different ways to use Thoughtseize, I thought, were similarly underexplored/underhighlighted.

Wasteland would have been a good one to tackle, drawing a distinction between using it for tempo (as all those creature decks like Eva Green, Goblins, and U/G Threshold use it) or for disruption (as Stax uses it).

The best section by far was Brainstorm, because you very clearly differentiated the ways Threshold uses it vs. Landstill, which almost never uses it to find lands, vs. Breakfast and TES, which use it to put back dead cards.

Overall I think you focused too much on talking about the most common cards, rather than the cards which best illustrated your points. You could say it's a kind of "teaching to the test."

STP would have been a good staple, but is its function much different in different decks?

LED was a great example and part of my original list, but it was also last on my list of cards and I ended up cutting it in the final edit. I agree Ichorid and Storm combo would have been a good comparison.

Wasteland is another interesting idea and its another worthy card of discussion in this kind of discussion.

[Mental]

Important note, Dan (nitewolf9) did a lot of work for "It's the Fear". Just wanted to make sure credit was given where it was due.

On another note, I did like the article (especially the parts with me in them), and I thought it served as an excellent "introduction to the author and style" piece. With Anwar's precision and careful wording/editing, it's definitely coming off as well-researched and planned. Kudos.

Are we going to see a thread for "It's the Fear" in the DtB forum soon?

[Silverdragon]

This I feel is exactly what Unlocking Legacy should be! This article does not just "state the obvious" it really "unlocks Legacy".
With that said I agree with the people saying it was lacking a good conclusion. Maybe you could retroactively turn this into "part 1" of an ongoing series with more cards in the future and go into more detail on the "hate" decks like Ichorid or DragonStompy.

PS: Sorry to say it but yes I too had a good laugh at the picture, maybe you really should get another one.

[Di]

Are we going to see a thread for "It's the Fear" in the DtB forum soon?

No.








Anyway, this was an enjoyable piece. I look forward to reading your future articles. Unfortunately, you may have just set a high standard for yourself. Keep that in mind.

Btw, judging from your pic, you and I may allegedly be mugshot brothers. Mine is way better though.

[Anusien]

I didn't learn much from this article, especially because you deal with the obvious cards. A lot of your examples end up very constrained: "It's the Fear can use Brainstorm like Landstill or like Threshold" Whee! I also think you're over-constraining Threshold; you do kind of say "Threshold can use Force of Will offensively" but you spend most of the time talking about how it uses Force of Will to not die. This is valid, but considering how defensive Daze is, I tend to use Force of Will offensively quite often. All decks that have counters will use them offensively, especially free ones.

Landstill generally uses Force of Will in a defensive manner to answer some threat an opponent is trying to play. Unlike Threshold, it almost never uses it to resolve a threat of its own. The main reason for this is that Landstill has very few threats (most of them being lands).
This comes off very silly. If you're not going to explain it more, saying "Landstill has fewer threats so it does not need to protect them" comes across quite silly. And I don't know, I find they still Swords my threats pretty regularly.

I think I plain disagree with you about Tarmogoyf, and this is part of why I think you over-constrain Threshold. I've had a large number of wins where I got out a turn 2-3 Tarmogoyf and starting beating down like GAT. I think you'd have been better off if you related that to beatdown versus control; then you'd be better poised to explain that relationship. BGW Rock will play a Tarmogoyf at different times versus Goblins than Landstill.
From Richard Feldman:

Against combo and control, you attack. Against aggro, you block.

I'm sure a lot of people will love the article since you throw out tons of decklists (one of the things that make an article most popular), but I yawned a lot through it. Like a previous poster said, the presentation was excellent, but the content was meh, especially because I already think in these terms. For all your talking about Ichorid in the past few weeks, I would have put money down you were writing about Ichorid.

[Mirrislegend]

Could someone please point me to a thread about the 5 color thresh? I'm interested, but can't seem to find it. Thanks

[Zach Tartell]

5 Color Thresh
4 Brainstorm
4 Ponder
4 Thoughtseize
4 Swords to Plowshares
4 Force of Will
4 Counterbalance
3 Sensei’s Divining Top
3 Daze
1 Portent
1 Fact or Fiction
4 Nimble Mongoose
4 Tarmogoyf
2 Mystic Enforcer
4 City of Brass
4 Polluted Delta
4 Flooded Strand
2 Tropical Island
2 Tundra
1 Underground Sea
1 Volcanic Island
60 cards
4 Pyroclasm
3 Blue Elemental Blast
3 Krosan Grip
2 Ancient Grudge
2 Red Elemental Blast
1 Fact or Fiction
15 cards

[AnwarA101]

This comes off very silly. If you're not going to explain it more, saying "Landstill has fewer threats so it does not need to protect them" comes across quite silly. And I don't know, I find they still Swords my threats pretty regularly.


Well Landstill generally has control over the game when it plans to win. Its not overly concerned with protecting Mishra's Factory or even Tarmogoyf. Losing one of these cards isn't essential to it winning a given matchup, but for Threshold protecting a Tarmogoyf can be the difference between winning and losing. So in that case Threshold might choose to force through a Tarmogoyf, because it needs it to stick to have any chance of winning this type of matchup.



I think I plain disagree with you about Tarmogoyf, and this is part of why I think you over-constrain Threshold. I've had a large number of wins where I got out a turn 2-3 Tarmogoyf and starting beating down like GAT. I think you'd have been better off if you related that to beatdown versus control; then you'd be better poised to explain that relationship. BGW Rock will play a Tarmogoyf at different times versus Goblins than Landstill.


Tarmogoyf does let Threshold go aggro no doubt about it. But when you compare the deck with something like Eva Green Threshold's strategy is much less aggressive as it can spend many early turns play cantrips and holding an aggressive deck in check. Its not that Threshold can't be aggressive, its just not always the case.



I'm sure a lot of people will love the article since you throw out tons of decklists (one of the things that make an article most popular), but I yawned a lot through it. Like a previous poster said, the presentation was excellent, but the content was meh, especially because I already think in these terms. For all your talking about Ichorid in the past few weeks, I would have put money down you were writing about Ichorid.

Yeah I'm hoping to write about Ichorid since its doing so well and seems to be little coverage about it.

[Bovinious]

Yeah I'm hoping to write about Ichorid since its doing so well and seems to be little coverage about it.

YES! YES! YOU'RE THE MAN NOW DOG!

[MattH]

STP would have been a good staple, but is its function much different in different decks?
On second thought, if I can bitch about you including Tarmogoyf, I can't very well turn around and suggest STP. Neither one varies much from one matchup to the next. But you know what would have been an amazing example? Stifle! Now there's a card whose uses are wildly different. Exploring the ways Dreadstill can use a Stifle is probably an article in itself.


I don't think I understand exactly what you mean by this. Can you explain further?
What I mean is like...discard, chant effects, Cap effects like Extirpate, and counterspells can all be used either as disruption -or- protection (the distinction is not always apparent).

STP can be used for controlling the board -or- for tempo (although the lifegain is typically counterproductive to winning a race so perhaps Bolt is a better example).

A creature like Goyf is really only used in one way, to dominate combat, either offensively or defensively. But take, for example, Goblin Welder - Welder can be a big tempo boost for you by getting a 6+ mana artifact into play as early as turn two, OR if your opponent has enough artifacts, Welder can fuck with them and becomes a form of disruption.

Leyline of the Void is another good one; massive graveyard hate, but when combined with Ill-Gotten Gains it becomes a nasty Mind Twist effect.

I guess what I meant was to examine what qualities a card might have that could allow it to be used in varying ways, in varying decks, against varying matchups. As opposed to what makes a card always do the same thing, and what that means when you're deciding whether you should include this card in your deck or not.

If you wanted to open up a further can of worms, explore what this means for proponents of unbanning certain cards: some people want to unban cards with some purpose in mind, not realizing some alternate, more powerful ways to use the card. For example, someone might want Entomb back so he can Exhume an Akroma, not realizing other, stronger uses for Entomb exist.

[Bardo]

Definitely a fine effort, though it struck me as more of a "Modern Legacy Deck Catalog 101" than anything else. The style and pacing were fine, maybe commendable, as I had no problems getting to the end of it. But the strategy and overall content were thin, and not really useful to most of the grizzled veterans among us. This, of course, is the alleged problem with the column as a whole.

Anyway, have fun with the column. It was a nice start and I hope that you'll turn your attention to a deeper analysis of the format, decks, match-ups, etc.


I'll give it another once-over before I really decide whether or not it was worth that whole debacle from a couple weeks ago.

The "debacle" had more to do with quality and relevance of content over time, not over any particular article, if I remember it right.

[Peter_Rotten]

Matt's suggestions above sound like the basis for an excellent article. Maybe more of a Legacy 201 course looking at the lesser played but more complicated cards and their offensive or defensive roles.

[Mirrislegend]

@lonelybaritone: thanks, but i can read the list in the article just fine. I was wondering where I could find DISCUSSION on that list. Anyone know where I could find such information? Alternatively, is anyone here qualified (and willing) to start a thread on it?

[moonmoon]

An excellent article.