How do people here feel about Brainstorm in general? I for one think it needs to be banned. Then again, not banning it might also be fine.
Printable View
How do people here feel about Brainstorm in general? I for one think it needs to be banned. Then again, not banning it might also be fine.
^^ Troll level: Stinky-DinkyQuote:
Originally Posted by Stinky-Dinkins
Could you choose a seat at a given time? You vote for a guaranteed reduction of playable archetypes on your crusade for potentially more diversity (reads: non-blue decks) at the same time. This is only a topic of color and a badly disguised one also. We can see how that logic ended up by looking at Vintage or Modern.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
What does terminus keep out of the format that can't also be explained by Batterskull?Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
The difference is that Batterskull can be "stopped" at least ealry on by bolting or Swordsing the Stoneforge Mystic. Don't get wrong, I've played Zoo and BSkull can be tough as hell to beat at times, but it's a lot easier to deal with than Terminus simply because things like Pridemage and such exist as well.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Mcdonalds
Speaking as someone who plays an aggro deck in Legacy... Batterskull can be easily managed by removal and/or simply playing bigger guys, sometimes with First Strike.Quote:
Originally Posted by Megadeus
When an opponent wipes out your entire board with one white mana, at instant speed, there's very little you can do to get back in the game, short of drawing alot of cards and hoping he bricks on drawing Jace.
Batterskull can be interacted withQuote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Mcdonalds
a) removal for the SFM before it gets BS into play
b) well-timed artifact removal.
Both which are available more easily in different colors than trying to deal with a Super-Wrath for potentially :w:.
By that logic, you couldn't ban any card ever. Just because a deck exists doesn't necessarily mean that it's an healthy influence on the format.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Come off it Julian. You know you're a Miracles player at heart. The Counterbalance has shown you its love. Reciprocate.Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian23
I have dated the devil more than once...Quote:
Originally Posted by YamiJoey
That's what happens when people think in terms of decks and not cards. They get attached to a deck (probably because they've never built one). When you look at cards, and card power level it becomes much clearer what cards should be banned with respect to some of the road apples on the current banned list.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Not to mention S&T decks being the marquee, Tier One combo archetype of Legacy is awful. Paying hundreds or thousands of dollars into a format to face herp-derp A+B combo that wins off of a bunch of stupidly designed (and rather overpowered @ 2U) cards like Omniscience or Spaghetti Monster? That's not something most people are going to be interested in.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Given that OmniTell has some fundamental and obvious weaknesses rooting in its nature which needs to be exploited in order to beat the deck, the point is that if DTT + Omniscience + S&T + Emrakul becomes the supreme mechanism to win in Legacy, WotC WILL step in with the chopblock. As long as there's an open competition between Miracles, OmniTell, Storm, D&T, Elves and Blade, WotC rightfully sees to reason to interveneQuote:
Originally Posted by Jamaican Zombie Legend
I mean, the only way the could possibly justify unbanning (and one of the big reasons I am a fan of it) is if there was a reprint coming down the pipe. Judge Promo, FTV: Tutors, something...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nuke is Good
Return aggro, unban skullclamp
Young pyromancer #sicQuote:
Originally Posted by swoop
Because Elves needs another draw engine.Quote:
Originally Posted by swoop
It's not death rite shaman 5-8, but it's okay ;)
As someone who played with Skullclamp in Standard (let alone the current Legacy card pool), No.Quote:
Originally Posted by swoop
At this point I'm all for any unbans that hurt the blue shell, no matter how absurd. Too bad Workshop is on the reserved list.Quote:
Originally Posted by swoop
Unban necro
Cheers
How about unbanning Oath of Druids? That's a green card, right? Fight blue with the power of green!
"Absurd unbannings are ok as long as it damages the blue shell" is an ok argument but "why don't you just play Modern" isn't? This thread makes my head spin some days. Legit question, if you would risk mutilating or damaging the format just so you won't have to live through the horror of your opponent resolving a cantrip, why not just play a format that doesn't have cantrips?Quote:
Originally Posted by Admiral_Arzar
People don't play modern because you can't do broken things. People don't play modern because decks like burn or affinity are overpowered and most games against them are decided only by drawing your crippling sideboard card or not. People don't play modern because they don't want to see their deck destroyed by periodical bans. I don't hate modern, but these are some of the problems of the format.
Unfortunately i'm starting to wonder whether legacy is really a better format and the answer right now is probably not because of wizards not caring at all about it. I still enjoy playing legacy more than anything else but A LOT less than years ago. I'm all in favor of any unbanning that could give a boost to non-blue decks, like survival or goblin recruiter.
Hear hear! If I recall correctly some people, including me, have been advocating this for a long time. Unban, evaluate and then ban again if neccesary.
Not to be an ass, but this thread is really going in circles, so on topic: what can we expect to be unbanned at the next announcement, if anything at all? (talking about circles :smile:)
Either Black Vise or Mind Twist, once they ban Dig in their typical prisoner exchange. Maybe not this announcement, but in the near future.Quote:
Originally Posted by Chatto
No one will ban Dig as long as it is legal in T2. You see if it is not to strong for their prime format it canīt be to strong for
the format were a high powerlevel is the selling point of the same format.
What some people still donīt understand is that it is intended that Legacy is a blue format because that is the format to go
when wanting to play on a very high powerlevel without the need to buy cards like Workshop or Power 9.
Dig is not broken it is just another powerfull blue card. If something should get banned it is TNN or Delver which are totaly
out of place as blue is not a agressive color by nature or intention.
...and people were stating that this is not motherfucking Yu-Gi-Oh where you ban, semi-restict, restrict and unban cards in Rotation based on idiocy and for selling packs with overpowered cards you ban later for obvious reasons. Seriously, unbanning cards to break the metagame in half and pissing of players just to reverse decisions 3 months later would WotC look like idiots and cause shitstorms. There is no compelling reason for dangerous unbannings for the unbannings sakeQuote:
Originally Posted by Chatto
Thank God that this is not YugiOh the game which advocates the when enough people play something wrong it becomes right rule.
Like playing a spell before you tap your mana or the change to the mull rule from having to take all your mulls at once and then pass priority so your opponent can do the same?Quote:
Originally Posted by Teveshszat
What has Dig being legal in T2 to do with the power level of older formats? Other formats have a way lower curve and better enablers for Delve. Wizards explicitely stated that they were okay with shitting out OP cards as long as they don't break Standard. Point in case: TC and DTT.Quote:
Originally Posted by Teveshszat
Besides, by that logic, we would still be flinging around TC, which is still legal in Standard, while banned/restricted everywhere else. At least they had the decency to immediately ban Dig in Modern, too.
As if people aren't pissed already... There is no way WotC can do good anyhow, or any suggestion from the players for that matter. Ban, unban or what not: you will always have people complain/ be pissed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
I for one have just decided to collect blue staples, and (in the meantime) enjoy my game of MtG when possible. Problem solved.
Definety not things players do, definitely not something worth rioting overQuote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Both of those are actually improvements to the flow of the game though.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Declaring then taping works better for people's reasoning and mental process.
As well first player mulling first gave the second player more information about his hand, as there are hands you can not keep if your opponent has a decent hand, but if they mull to 4 are worth risking.
Now removing Mana burn because of bad players would probably be a example of worsening the game because of bad player abilities.
I can not comment on mana burn, I can comment about a near full on riot when Dave Mills was DQed that forced a change in the rules. While the effect may indeed be beneficial, this is a case where a rule was changed due to the players. If you game fails to adapt then it will become stunted. I see no insult in a game changing its rules to suit it's base and that was the point I was making. This game as done it, others have done it. So what?Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmcc13
Also, announcing before paying costs vs. paying costs before announcing is pretty irrelevant in any case. Unless someone is trying to race through game actions, the opponent doesn't receive priority until both actions are completed so the information is never uncertain. Whining about 'dumbing down' is just inane.Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmcc13
EDIT: Dice_Box posted while I was writing. That's an even more narrow case and just improves the flow of the game. Even if that rule hadn't changed, the acceptance of out-of-order sequencing, especially when the game state is unaffected when priority is passed, really improves player experience.
The goal should be to reward people for doing well not punish them for ignorance, mana burn was something no one would willingly let happen (minus a few cards, none of which would be good with mana burn), how does that make the game better?Quote:
Originally Posted by sjmcc13
Removing mana burn made cards like Ancient Tomb, City of Traitors, Mishra's Workshop, Mana Drain, etc. less challenging to play as they made you also consider life lost of you had excess mana. They also often required (or at least suggested) certain deckbuilding concessions to give yourself mana sinks if you were likely to end up with excess mana floating around on a regular basis. I'm still not sure how I feel about the elimination of mana burn.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord_Mcdonalds
If your building your deck to play those cards or to generate lots of mana, it's reasonable to assume you have something to funnel it into (be it a large green Suns zenith or a lodestone golem), it does make you consider loss of life but looking at how decks are built, it's a non-issue.
"Necropotence is a fair and balanced Magic card. I mean, you lose life for cards..."
BBB lose life and you skip your draw step
Psh garbage