So what? Ban the Blue?
Printable View
So what? Ban the Blue?
The answer is Brainstorm, it's always Brainstorm.
No lands? Brainstorm!
Discard? Brainstorm!
Unmulligan? Brainstorm!
Gas? Brainstorm!
Jace the Mindsculptor? Brainstorm!
What to ban? Brainstorm!
slightly sarcasm but mostly not
By the way, just for the record, a while ago it was claimed that Brainstorm was seeing more play in Legacy than Ancestral Recall was in Vintage, but that didn't seem to necessarily be true as that data seemed to come from MTG Top 8 comparing the last 12 months of Vintage versus the last 2 months of Legacy; if we did the last 2 months of Vintage then that wasn't true.
It's true now. According to MTG Top 8, Ancestral Recall has been in 72% of decks in Vintage in the last two months, and Brainstorm has been in 77% of decks in Legacy in the last two months.
I decided to also check out MTG Goldfish. According to MTG Goldfish, Ancestral Recall is at 72.87% while Brainstorm is at 75.74%. So same thing there.
There any other metagame sites that provide information on this to see if it's consistent there? The other ones I know of only list deck percentages rather than how frequently cards are played.
Morphling.de
I feel uneasy making comparisons between Recall and anything in Legacy on play percentages. The formats are very different and things change based on card availability, the positioning of Dredge and Shops at any given time and also if an event your looking at was allowing proxies or not. I mean, sure you can try and make a point, but I feel it is misguided.
There are issues with it, I just wanted to note that while previously I noted it wasn't true, now it actually is true. One can draw their own conclusions from the data (that's why I didn't make any argument with it), but I figured I should point out that Recall seeing more play in Vinrtage than Brainstorm in Legacy is actually true now, or at least at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Unrealistic hyperbole? Brainstorm!Quote:
Originally Posted by jam3sbob
Ok, so you're tying up your clearly limited mana on a cantrip which likely doesn't lead to a followup because, again, your mana is constrained. Even if you hit lands you're are behind the 8-ball in terms of tempo and development, which many decks right now can punish. Congrats, you've managed to overvalue a brainstorm in your opener.Quote:
Originally Posted by jam3sbob
Yes, Brainstorm is fairly solid against discard. So is redundancy and a flat distribution of card quality, if there are no egregiously important cards in a deck then getting any one of them discard isn't too big a deal. Countermagic is also a good answer to discard, since having mana for Brainstorm means you could also Spell Pierce or w/e. I don't see how this is particularly damning.Quote:
Originally Posted by jam3sbob
If I lived in the fantasy world that some posters here live in where Brainstorm is basically several Demonic Tutors, yeah, I'd want Brainstorm banned too. Sadly, I just play actual Magic where Brainstorm is another roll of the dice, sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Variance reduction =\= variance elimination, especially since your own first point shows that you'll keep awful hands (no lands, no gas, etc) just because you see a Brainstorm. "I kept a bad hand once and Brainstorm bailed me out" isn't an argument to ban a card, it's just an interesting story.Quote:
Originally Posted by jam3sbob
Yes, Brainstorm can help adjust the composition of a hand. This is most relevant in the case of combo decks, Brainstorm sort of enables a good number of them. That's said, a card that enables a number of decks and a unique dimension of gameplay seems like a net positive to a format. In the case of providing a couple of solid cards like a bomb + removal in a fair mirror or whatever, then, ok, variance is variance. Nowadays, I can just DTT for gas anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by jam3sbob
Using an incremental advantage engine to incrementally generate card advantage -- *gasp* NVM that for 4 mana I can Sneak Attack, or Tendrils, or other things that just blatantly win the game.Quote:
Originally Posted by jam3sbob
Or we could ban the broken Delve spell, either of the 2 broken blue creatures, or the 1 mana instant-speed wrath. *shrug*Quote:
Originally Posted by jam3sbob
My issue with Mtg Top8 is that it mixes MTGO events with Paper results and throws them into a blender.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Seth
There's also tcdecks.net where you can calculate the percentage, although you have wait a while for the rest of the tournament results to trickle in each month.
All miracles final at SCG Portland #NothingToSeeHere
Junk Deathblade top 4.Quote:
Originally Posted by maharis
Elves and Deadguy Ale Top 8.
#OnlyBlueDecksCanPlace
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrok
Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrok
#WhyYouDoThisSCG?Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrok
I'll never capitulate on Junk, RUG, or BUG.Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderPreaux
Mardu? Sure, nobody used Dega or Oros (at least until WotC announced Mardu and everyone tried to claim old-school cred), and Team Italia confused some people.
Jeskai? Ok, there were a million names for it, so sure.
But the others, the new names are way worse.
They're actually both DGA decks with Abrupt Decay, haha.Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrok
I would be thrilled to see Bx no U midrange take over. I don't expect it to stick though. A top 16 with no BUG decks like this one is pretty rare and those matchups are very hard for DGA. If in a month we're still seeing 1-2 DGA-style decks in top 16s I'll happily admit I'm wrong.
That all being said, two Miracles decks in the finals is still two Miracles decks in the finals.
The whole meta could be 100% Cantrip cartel+Dig decks and people would insist it's totally fine -_-'
The tournament was rather low attendance, though, and as we all know, less rounds = higher chance for nonblue decks to place by getting lucky instead of getting fucked over by long-term consistency.Quote:
Originally Posted by maharis
And to be fair, one of the Miracle players was Joe Lossett.
ThisQuote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
Yeah, looking at the lists left me even more confused about SCG naming conventions...Quote:
Originally Posted by maharis
Personally I don't want to see Bx midrange take over - I don't want to see any archetype take over (and this is where the big debate is, since some people feel that the cantrips shell is an archetype). I think this top 16 was reasonably varied. There is too much varience involved to say, "miracles mirror in finals, miracles OP" (not that you said that specifically). More interesting to me personally is that only two miracles decks made it to the top 16.
There is a huge gap between "80% of decks run Brainstorm" and "every deck runs 4 Brainstorm, 4 Ponder, 4 Probes, 4 Force of Will, 4 Dig Trough Time" in terms of judging the format health from what we have heared in this thread.Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
I still believe that bitching over 4x Brainstorm in 80% of Legacy decks as a problem per sé is as stupid as pointing to Beta Moxen and Lotus in Vintage. Mind that the worst in terms of fixed-slots we have ever seen in MTG Format history was during the second Gush Era in Vintage in which near every non-Workshop deck began it's building with 4x FoW, 4x Ponder, x4 Brainstorm, 4x Gush, 4x Merchant Scroll and Legacy is still worlds appart from such a constellation (which was really fun for Vintage players and caused a Spike in tournament attendance as skill mattered so much, just saying)
If Legacy develops into 20 fix-slots + 20 manasources + 20 cards defying your strategy and kill, we can talk again.
Edit:
It's like we blame the ~8 Fetchlands in like 95% of all Legacy deck for fueling Brainstorm, Cabal Ritual, Dig Through Time and DRS and call that "streamlining the metagame"
Oh, I only want to see the "take over" purely for the trolling opportunities. "Sorry you bought those underground seas. Scrubland >" (I bought underground seas in January.)Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrok
I was surprised to not see more Miracles decks in the top 16 after 5/16 from the last PIQ, but a mirror match in the finals is nothing to sneeze at. Miracles consistently has top placings and the decks shuffle underneath it, which is really the point. Remember when Lands was putting 2-3 players in the top 16? Now it's nearly vanished.
Miracle Control has been in the top 2 of the TCdecks ratings every month since last January except for two:
--Last July (when only 204 decks were rated instead of the usual 400-ish)
--This January (when it was third behind RUG and UR right before Cruise got the ax.)
It has been in the top slot every month since TC was banned.
It was in the top slot in May, June, August and Sept. last year (basically the four months until TC was printed)
The only deck even close to approaching it is Team America, which was the top deck at the beginning of last year, and it's been strong since (usually No. 2 or 3), but even now we are seeing Grixis take some of its market share. (This news is really good for DGA-esque decks since BUG decks are really, really tough).
I would say by the fall set, if there isn't something dethroning miracles (and especially if it gets worse with 2+ in the top 8 and a couple more in the top 16) we will see a ban. Unfortunately, I think it will be SDT or Dig Through Time rather than one of the miracle cards or counterbalance.
We really are there. The best Miracles builds play 4 Force, Brainstorm, Ponder, Dig.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
The Grixis deck plays 4 Force, Brainstorm, Ponder, Probe, Dig (or Thought Scour).
Most delver decks play 4 Force, Brainstorm, Ponder and some play a couple Probes.
Omni plays 4 Force, Brainstorm, Ponder, Dig, Preordain and Probe.
Storm plays 4 Brainstorm, Ponder, Preordain, Probe.
And of course shoutout to Esper Thopters with 4 Force, Brainstorm, Ponder, Probe and 3 Dig.
But Miracles still isn't oppressive and it still isn't present in overwhelming numbers. It's just "a deck" that happens to put up consistent numbers.Quote:
Originally Posted by maharis
Grixis taking market share from bug, so to speak, is pretty good for fair decks - I hadn't even thought of that.
I think Miracles is fine, personally, and I hate playing against it. In some ways it reminds me of Modern Twin, in others its the exact opposite.
They both have been at or near the top for years.
They both play control until they wind their wincon and then try to win in 1 turn.
They both play the best legal cantrips available.
They have similar market shares in their formats.
They both have a couple different builds that are really similar (Euro vs Legends, Blood Moon vs Tarmotwin).
On the other hand, miracles isn't really a deck you can just pick up and do well with, whereas Twin is A + B.
Miracles allows really talented players to leverage that advantage much more so than twin (twin gets most its advantage in the deck building period rather than in play).
Miracles is a combo deck (countertop) that doesn't win the game outright.
But where I'm going with this is that I don't expect a ban for miracles. If omnitell gets oppressive, I could see DTT being banned, but I don't expect that to happen either. We're going to keep seeing a bunch of miracles players stuck in the draw bracket, and the couple good ones make it to the top 8 consistently, and that feels OK to me.
As far as lands goes, its an expensive deck to build optimally (tabernacles and such) which means less players really commit to it, and miracles is going to be a rough matchup for any slow deck that runs singleton threats. If they started playing some raging ravines the miracles matchup might get a lot better (just speculation on my part). The point is that lands is poorly positioned for a Miracles Omnitell meta because it wants to be in between those two decks.
No, we are not and that's why I presented the extreme example. We don't have 20 cards overlap in various strategies. We have only 8 in blue decks in general and that's less than the usual "white shell" of Plows/SFM/Batterskull/Jitte and no one cries about that either as the best white package in Legacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by maharis
Maybe people don't bitch about the "white shell" as you call it because it isn't run by 70+% of the format.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
http://www.mtggoldfish.com/format-staples/legacy
StP sits around ~37% of all decks, SFM ~ 22%. That isn't just restricted to MTGO, before that argument comes in. If you calculate the numbers of the TCdecks March data (since it's the latest one that is completed, unlike the April data in its current state), you get a similiar outcome.
And if we go by numbers, the twelve card "blue shell" BS/FoW/Ponder still outclasses your "white shell" by a huge margin.
That is a false equivalence. The white package is one of the most efficient ways to have a board presence, but there are combo and some control decks that don't bother to show up to the board. The main point is there are certain overall functions that seem to be best served by a small package of cards, but no one really seems to have an outcry against them in any case other than the "blue shell", which itself isn't even a concrete concept because it's not as though every deck that wants to Brainstorm or Ponder necessarily wants either/both of FoW or Gitaxian ProbeQuote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Complaining about the blue shell in legacy is akin to complaining about the power shell in vintage. Vintage has a great many auto includes in each color yeah sure they can't ban cards completely there unless they're shahrazad, conspiracies, ante, or dexterity but you don't see people complain about all the black decks in vintage running vampiric and demonic. Just let it lie. You need to take the most extreme measures to make blue not the best color in legacy and I don't want the legacy banlist to be a clusterfuck like modern's.
Can we close the thread now?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dark Ritual
Not really, that same post appears every couple pages so it clearly isn't all there is to say.Quote:
Originally Posted by Star|Scream
It never ceases to amaze me what lenghts people go trying to defend their holy cow.Quote:
Originally Posted by wonderPreaux
Every card has their set of best cards. Why do people only bitch about the "blue shell" then? Because it's numerically abundant to the point where another card, Mental Misstep, was banned for exactly the same things Brainstorm (and the blue shell) does to the format, as officially stated by Wizards/Maro:
a) making it overly blue
b) being run by "every" deck (which is around ~72%, according to old tournament results) (that mainly applies to Brainstorm)
Yet Brainstorm remains legal despite being the most powerful card in the format by a wide margin and more powerful than several cards on the banned list.
That is a false equivalence.
It's actually a double standard, which everyone already admits exists.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Erik Lauer also stated that Mental Misstep was designed for a singular purpose with the understanding that failure to achieve its goal would likely result in a ban. Needless to say, Mental Misstep failed to achieve its goal and was subsiquently banned. Shitty though it may be, Mental Misstep's history is owed more to a poor design philosophy than anything else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Quote:
Originally Posted by iamajellydonut
Actually, it had two purposes:Quote:
Force of Will has long been thought of as a card that helps keep combination decks in check in Legacy and Vintage. However, it doesn't directly help decks that aren't playing blue. One idea that was floated was creating a similar card that could be played in nonblue decks. When Phyrexian mana was designed, it was an opportunity to create such a card. R&D wanted a card that could help fight combination decks, and could also fight blue decks by countering cards such as Brainstorm. Clearly printing a card like this has a lot of risk, but there is also the potential for helping the format a lot. The risk is mitigated, because if it turns out poorly, the DCI can ban the card.
Unfortunately, it turned out poorly. Looking at high-level tournaments, instead of results having blue and nonblue decks playing Mental Misstep, there are more blue decks than ever. The DCI is banning Mental Misstep, with the hopes of restoring the more diverse metagame that existed prior to the printing of Mental Misstep.
- give nonblue decks fight ways to fight combo
- counter blue horseshit like Brainstorm, which already got a special mention back then (remember, Brainstorm was at 52% in 2011 overall despite the phase where it ruled the format alongside MM with 70% meta share on its own, before Delver became the herald of the end with the release of Innistrad; it was recognized as a problem during MM's design long before Brainstorm went out of control)
The problem with designing anti-blue cards is that they're going to perform best in blue shells unless they're symmetrical. And even then, Thalia was their only success in that regard since Spirit of the Labyrinth turned out to be lame instead of the anti-blue messiah. Even cards like Abrupt Decay were adapted by blue spells.
I doubt we're going to see cards that help breaking the blue dominance instead of making it worse anytime soon.
The only real difference between Miracles now and Cruise UR Delver is that the second-best deck is slightly closer to its level than was the case with UR Delver. (This is using the TCdecks graphs). You also have to take into account that UR delver was cheaper than Miracles is as well as being a straightforward deck that didn't stick you with long rounds and draws, and Treasure Cruise was banned as soon as possible so there was no way to really see a meta adjustment.Quote:
Originally Posted by iamajellydonut
Whether or not Miracles is oppressive is a matter of opinion. I've beaten it a lot, even recently, but I still think it's frustrating to run into it round after round. People say it rewards "smart" play -- not that the people I've played who are on it are bad, but I definitely feel more like I have to play my best every time while they can always just rip Entreat and win. The deck plays Counterbalance, Entreat, Terminus and Jace which are all huge bombs. Lots of smart players played UR delver too because it was so clearly the best deck. I think Miracles is definitely at "clearly the best deck" level. Its only true foil is cloudpost, and while that deck could be played more (I don't think you need Candelabra or Tabernacle to win with it)
Is that bad? I guess that is a matter of opinion as well. I'm just posting data that has Miracles as the best deck for at least a year if not more barring wacky printings, observing a spike in top finishes, and pointing out that the best miracles players on this board say the deck is barely subject to variance at all. It doesn't seem like there's much of a reason to play another deck if you really want to win. Even then I'm not saying something from it should be banned, I'm just saying (like with Brainstorm) that all the evidence is there for it to be eligible to be affected by a ban.
We don't really disagree. I do think there's little standing in the way of Omnitell right now and if we have Miracles + Omni (and even the Grixis deck that preys on them) at the top for a while I think DTT is as good as gone.Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrok
As someone who has had my share of Creeping Tar Pits Plowed, :frown:Quote:
Originally Posted by iGrok
As usual you are being intentionally obtuse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Omnitell, the king of cantrip decks, plays 4 Brainstorm, 4 Ponder, 4 Force of Will, 4 Preordain, 4 Gitaxian Probe, and 4 Dig Through Time (a total of 24 cards). Miracles, Delver, Storm, whatever you want to say all play at least 12 of those same cards, and sometimes up to 20 of the same. So no, there isn't an exact 20 cards that are in a bunch of different decks. It's more like "You can play any 20 cantrips that you want, as long as you play 20 cantrips."
It took me a while to explicate why I don't like this, and the answer is that cantrips + fetches are SO good that there is no reason to even ATTEMPT a deck that tries anything different for advantage. Further, I disagree that the consistency makes the game more about skill, because the only cards that make it into a format are the ones that play nice with cantrips + fetches. When people say ban Delver or DTT, I have to laugh -- we can't deal with 1/1 for U? We can't figure out a way to beat an 8-mana spell? Of course they aren't that in a vacuum, but they also aren't the vacuum. Meanwhile there are cards that are actually efficiently costed or have really interesting/cool effects that are left on the sidelines because in the extra half-turn you might need to get them online you simply die to the perfectly sculpted hand -- unless you play cantrips yourself, but then of course you run the risk of just running a bad version of an existing deck.
Fantastic! Wasn't Treasure Cruise also "only" in ~40% of decks? According to that logic we need to ban Plows immediately or do numbers not matter in that case? ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Or do we change the topic back to "colors"?
I think we all agree: Ban Island, end of discussion, let's go grab a beer :cool:
Now you're just taking stuff out of context.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
StP doesn't elevate the rest of the "white shell" to 75% meta share. :tongue: If 75% of the meta ran Stoneforge Mystic, there would be something massively wrong with the format, too.
So I'm "obtuse" and you throw the bolded statement into the thread? Funny, as I can't imagine a Legacy deck with 20 cantrips so point me at one. You try to make a point because we have 1 deck in the metagame which runs all the named cards and ALL other blue Legacy decks only run a few of these?Quote:
Originally Posted by maharis
If you want to fuck with Brainstorm, Cabal Ritual, Treasure Cruise, DRS, Dig Through Time, Ponder, SDT and Co. once and for all, you need to ban Fetches. Everything else is just politicking and showing a lack of understanding what really fuels the supreme card selection. Period.
"Out of context". Cute.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
"~40% Plows is fine; ~40% Treasure Cruise is not"
"95% of decks run 8+ fetchlands is fine; 75% of decks running 4 Brainstorms is not" #BecauseBlue
"~40% penetration is fine; ~70% penetration is not" #RandomStandards
Edit: To be honest, without Plowshares in the format and in ~40% of all decks played, a lot more creatures would be playable. Ergo you can say that Plows stifle diversity
Well, the card would be banned. Outside of basic lands. Look at Survival. It wasn't 75% and it got banned, neither was Treasure Cruise, a worse blue card than Brainstorm with a lower usage rate than either and WotC banned it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
I don't think miracles is the problem with the format but rather the result of what the format has become. Miracles relies on homogeneity to be good, anything that provides a different strategy like MUD, post, and probably nic fit it just loses.
I have no idea what the solution is here, I doubt even Wizards knows, but banning Brainstorm should not be the first thing tried.
Since this thread is already full of ridiculous thoughts, here's mine: Ban TNN, that card is so lame and then maybe Goblins will return to crush Miracles. Who doesn't want to see Goblins back on the scene?
This doesn't make any fucking sense.Quote:
Originally Posted by solidbass
Worse than Brainstorm? Debatable.Quote:
Originally Posted by nedleeds
TC definitely enabled a retarded playstyle that punished your opponent for trying to interact with you in pretty much any kind of form. DTT isn't much better in that regard, either.
You think TNN holds Goblins back and not the whole range on combo-decks in the format and the fact that the deck has a pretty horrible manacurve by todays standards?Quote:
Originally Posted by solidbass