Well, it was that. I mean, the thing dates back to the age when Tarmogoyf went and invalidated just about every threat in the format and people were splashing it more or less everywhere. The last 200 pages though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
Printable View
Well, it was that. I mean, the thing dates back to the age when Tarmogoyf went and invalidated just about every threat in the format and people were splashing it more or less everywhere. The last 200 pages though...Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
4x Loam, 4X Gamble, 4x Crop Rotation would like a word with you. Seriously, have you ever actually played this deck?Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
Glimpse + GSZ + NO is pretty solid too.
Those engines are extremely narrow and have to be built around in comparison. The brainstorm/ponder/cantrip package reduces variability in all decks that run them (which would be beneficial to pretty much any deck outside of low variability decks like straight aggro), and this package doesn't have a crux like loam and glimpse (to a lesser extent) are in those packages.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
I don't disagree at all; though I'll note that D&T gets by with redundancy as well as the aggro decks. D&T is not in a great spot these days, but the decline of Sneak Show alone might account for that.Quote:
Originally Posted by phonics
My point is that playing a more narrow engine (with the appropriate deck) =/= suffering. Anybody who disagrees ought to try out Lands for awhile (which has good to excellent MUs against the majority of the almighty cantrip decks).
In reading through this series on the History of Legacy, I found this quote that perfectly captures the situation with Brainstorm. I've been rather apathetic about the issue, but reading this quote makes things much clearer:
The miracle mechanic put us well past that point now though, and things will only get worse.Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam Barnello
The justification was sketchy - but it relied on a principle established at Legacy's birth. When Legacy was established, DCI decided the game's best tutors and fast mana would be banned. The MT justification hinged on re-evaluating the card as a top tier tutor.Quote:
It’s hard to capture this feeling of foreboding into succinct language, which is why the discussion of the justification behind the banning floundered.
For WotC/DCI to make a similar move with Brainstorm, they'd couldn't use the same rationale. Not to say it couldn't be banned - just to note the justification would "flounder" even worse. Ultimately I'm not sure how much they care about justifications these days - if they want it gone they'll come up with something.
I think if Legacy gets much more cantrip driven (and stays that way) we could see BS and Ponder banned Vintage style. Likely DTT will go before it comes to that.
Temporal Trespass requires you exile 6 cards just to make it a harder-to-cast Time Warp. It's nowhere near the power of Treasure Cruise or Dig Through Time.Quote:
Originally Posted by rufus
But it is. There's one non-blue deck in the DTB, and there's a single 4-of in every blue DTB: Brainstorm.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
This is the more applicable part of the quote, altered for relevance:
Quote:
what it did do was bottleneck the creativity and variety of decks in the format – as long as [Brainstorm] was around, it would be the first card in a list full of broken things.
Legacy is more cantrip driven than Vintage ever was. Not that the comparison is apt. If I want to play a format with 10-15 slots that are basically must plays, I'd play Vintage. Which I do. Legacy is not Vintage. 1.5 was a place where I could use cards from all the sets I've ever bought without the burden of Magics most absurd mistakes. This is the reason it was created in the first place. A format where you didn't start your deck building exercise (not that anyone actually builds decks anymore) at 48-52 cards.
I may well be wrong about Trespass, but that's not exactly a persuasive argument: If you exile 3 lands with Treasure Cruise it turns into Brilliant Plan too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Seth
Exile 6 cards with Treasure Cruise and you draw three cards for 2 mana. Exile 6 cards with Dig Through Time and you end up with... well, Dig Through Time for UU. Exile 6 cards with Temporal Trespass and you get a harder-to-cast Time Warp. The point is that at a point where Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time are yielding you wildly crazy results, Temporal Trespass is giving you a worse version of an unplayable card.Quote:
Originally Posted by rufus
In fact, let's compare the analogy you made. Sure, exile 3 cards with Treasure Cruise and you get the not-very-impressive Brilliant Plan. But that at least gives you a card that's considered "on the curve" (maybe slightly behind when one considers Concentrate, but Concentrate requires UU rather than U). Exile 3 cards with Temporal Trespass? You get Time Stretch except it's harder to cast and gives you only one extra turn rather than two. So you at least get an almost-on-the-curve card when exiling 3 cards to Treasure Cruise, but you get a card that's so behind the curve it's hilarious when doing that with Temporal Trespass. It's like comparing Grizzly Bears with Wood Elemental. Sure, Grizzly Bears may just be average, but average is still a lot better than outright awful.
No matter how many cards you choose to exile when casting the cards, Dig Through Time and Treasure Cruise still give you a significantly better mana-cost-to-effect ratio than Temporal Trespass does. Even if you go all the way and exile 8 cards for Temporal Trespass, I'd still say Treasure Cruise and Dig Through Time give you better effects at their lowest casting cost than Temporal Trespass does at its lowest casting cost (which requires more cards to exile).
The time walk effect is less broken than it seems. Miracles could easily be hitting time walks off temporal mastery if it were worth including in the deck. But if you're behind or playing a slower deck, time walking is just the same thing as casting explore. Huge difference between that and cruise's insane card advantage / DTT's card advantage + tutoring.
I don't know if time walk for UUU would even be strong in legacy, but 1UUU seems clearly unplayable. Cryptic command is in many ways time walk anyway, often it's even better, and it is unplayable in legacy.
On reflection you're probably right - Tresspass has very limited application, and it's unlikely to be a ban-worthy card.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lord Seth
That said, the argument against it is card efficiency, and not mana efficiency: Tresspass will often cost 0 net mana, but most decks that are willing to trade cards for time either won't fill the graveyard or don't want extra turns because they're storm combo.
Have been on an extended break from the format. Can someone update me on how it's been evolving in the last few months? Have people realized that dig is awful for the format and needs to go yet? I'm hoping this situation ends up like cruise where I called OP BS from the start only to be scorned...but eventually people came around.
A lot of people have been aware of how insane Dig is from pretty early on. The issue is whether WOTC notices the situation and acts upon it (and so far they have not).Quote:
Originally Posted by eays
The question at this point is really if wizards even cares enough about legacy to ban dig.
FTFY. I know you meant the more played, more powerful card.Quote:
Originally Posted by iatee
Why was Treasure Cruise banned but not Dig Through Time? DTT seems much stronger.
Because Treasure Cruise was too dominant in the eyes of WOTC. DTT has not yet been seen as such, but we will find out in a couple weeks.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
Brainstorm and Ponder are both better and more dominant than either. Why aren't they banned? The answer is lack of management of the format. Legacy isn't a Pro Tour format. Period. That's the only reason your all still unmulliganing for U and a fetch, putting Terminus back on top after opening with 2 in your hand, and laughing when you get Duressed. If Legacy was played at any high level they'd be snap banned, no non basic land has ever 32/32'ed a constructed GP and not been banned in any format but legacy. Actually ... has any card ever 32/32'ed a GP besides Derpstorm? I haven't played standard since Fires of Yavimaya. Did Jitte 32/32? Skullclamp?
I think stoneforge and jace did, not sure tho, but their presence in t2 was like 95% of the metaQuote:
Originally Posted by nedleeds
It is worth pointing out, TC did manifest itself as the core of what became the "Best Deck". Dig has not had quite the same impact on any single deck. That could make a difference.
You'll love this article:Quote:
Originally Posted by nedleeds
http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles...n-8-2014-11-25
As of that printing, Brainstorm hit 28/32 copies in 2 Grand Prix: Paris and New Jersey, both in 2014. That tied it with Mana Leak, the first Instant to do that, at GP Dallas-Fort Worth in 2011. But Kyoto this year put Brainstorm over the top.
Interestingly, other cards that have 28/32'd a tournament are
Rishadan Port
Sylvan Caryatid
Courser of Kruphix
Grim Monolith
Tinker
And the mighty 32/32:
Preordain (GP Dallas-Fort Worth 2011)
Jace, the Mind Sculptor (same)
Brainstorm (GP Kyoto 2015)
No card has done 28/32 more than once. Brainstorm did it THREE TIMES. And it will happen again.
And you're correct, BTW. Jace was banned in Standard after that GP. Preordain was fine for Standard, but a month after Modern was created it was banned there before it could put up those numbers again. But Brainstorm? Who cares.
Same situation for BS and Ponder - they support many different strategies in a format with no clear "best deck". You can't just look t power level and density without considering the texture of the meta-game (aka, variety of play-styles and strategies)Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
This is consistently ignored by folks who accuse WotC of not caring. Maybe WotC care about strategic diversity but not colour equilibrium or single card density? Lots of players feel this way, so is it such a stretch to think WotC might also?
Please stick to the conversation at hand and don't try and goad others into conversations on Brainstorm when it's not being discussed. Let's not shoehorn everything into the same worthless direction as it's only going to raise tempers and stifle any real conversation that could happen here.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
The topic has changed, thank fuck, let's go with it and leave sleeping dogs lie.
What about donating 5$ to the Gamers For Gamers Fund evertime someone dares to move the discussion to "...but blue!", "color equality" or "buh ... brainstorm" in this thread?
But then what would we spend on cards?
I think you missed the comments directly above my post, and also three posts above that.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
I'm not trying to goad anybody - and frankly I don't accept blame. People will continue to bring up Brainstorm as long as it remains legal.
What's stifling conversion is people who constantly ignore any criticism of card density as the only measure of a cards impact on the format; despite the flaws in this metric being constantly pointed out to them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Also, if people notice their tempers rising they need to do what grown-ups do and control their own emotions (lest their emotions control them).
These are the problems with this thread; I don't understand why you'd rather point the finger at me.
I ain't talking about Brainstorm, suddenly I am quoted and the topic is all about Brainstorm. I don't understand what there is to misunderstand. Since you did it, that's where the finger goes. Simple really.
Anyway topic I was talking about was Dig. Got anything productive to say on that topic or is Brainstorm the only word on your mind? Because a one track mind on that fucking card is what I see as the problem with this thread.
3 posts and already 10$ for Gamers for Gamers fund! Dear mods, this thread needs a donate-button!
Three of the previous six comments had been about BS, so I fail to understand how you though we were collectively past the topic. You made an excellent point about DTT, and I feel the same reasoning applies to BS/Ponder (which were also being discussed; and in the very context of being bigger culprits than Dig).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Have you read Needles' posts, or do you have him blocked? He's the reason we can't discuss DTT over the last several posts - he's been steadily interrupting to remind us that BS (and Ponder) see more play than DTT and are therefore what we ought to be discussing. You seem to have no problem when he drags the conversation back that way, but you're all over me if I engage him. That's what I don't get.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Edit - I do get that you don't seem to like me very much and that you wish I'd stop posting here altogether. I'm sorry if you feel that way, but ultimately it's your problem not mine.
My thoughts on DTT:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
- I would probably enjoy Legacy more without DTT - as would probably most players.
- That said, I believe the format is too healthy and diverse (strategically) to warrant a ban of any kind.
- I think there is a good chance WotC will ban DTT anyway (and I'm not sure how they'll spin the ban).
- If DTT is banned on the basis of evaluating it as top tier card draw and/or tutoring (which are banned on principle), I could accept that happily.
- I believe unbanning Twist, Vise, Earthcraft, and possibly Recruiter or Frantic Search is what WotC/DCI should be doing with the banned list (maybe not all at once). Those cards could potentially cause a shake-up, and only after the meta settles should bans even be considered.
I agree, and I don't tend to bring this card up myself. But I do challenge other peoples' complaints if I feel they are irrational and/or ignoring relevant criticism - that's how I roll. You seem to enjoy criticising me for doing this - that's how you roll. Whatever floats your boat. :smile:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
I think the removal of Dig would be a benefit and a loss. The benefits being that it's forcing the format more down a single directed path so losing it would be a bonus and it's power level I feel is above Legacy normal ceiling. (Subjective sure, but it's my view.) The loss though is that I do not feel Delve was the worst idea, only the effects on Eternal formats where not taken in to proper consideration and so the loss of another interesting card somewhat sucks. I am also not willing to state the format (Outside of my normal views of massive inbreeding) is in a bad way. Though if a certain mono Blue deck went away I would be happier. (Totally unbiased opinion based in no way on my deck choice...)Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
As for what would be unbanned, that drives me to sadness. Why the fuck do we have to wait for a banning to get something off that list. Up next, Earthcraft I hope.
Oh please, you can say the same for Ancestral Recall but last time I checked it was still banned. Or how about Mental Misstep?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
The cantrip engine is just that: an engine. It's the most powerful engine in the game and perhaps some decks using this engine win with Delver, some do with Tendrils, some do with Stoneforge, some do with Jace and some do with Show-and-derp, the end result of their playstyle is very much defined by their engine: cantrip into my good stuff and win. Lately games are simply decided by who cantripped better. Very interesting games...
Anyone who isn't partially lobotomized knows how much of a contradiction BS is to all ban criteria. You can bring up all the factors that have banned cards in many formats-including this one. All you will get is retarded argument by people too involved with their decks or complacent due to the familiarity of stagnation. The arguments are usually along the lines of: But, but... strategic diversity, bruh.Quote:
Originally Posted by jrsthethird
What you fail to realise, is that strategic diversity is actually incredible valuable in a format. Survival, Mystical Tutor, TC all promoted a single strategy, Brainstorm doesn't.Quote:
Originally Posted by menace13
Uh, TC got incorporated into a variety of decks like Dig has done. Less so, but still.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasim0ff
Same applies to Survival: Just as Dig promotes small spell focused decks with the cantrip engine to fuel it, Survival promoted the use of creatures. Apart from that, you saw Survival decks utilize just about any strategy that reasonably uses creatures - tempo decks, midrange beatdown, dedicated combo. You know what the most interesting thing about it was? UG Tempo Survival was a thing, yet in the same exact Top8's people apparently decided to play straight Team America. Exact same strategy, different engine. Same happened with engine combo (Storm v. Ooze Survival). Right now nonblue decks play prison strategies and the main overlap between blue engine strategy space and non cantrip engine strategy space is engine combo, with Elves being increasingly a niche player in the meta.
it might not have been clear: I am an opponent of Dig staying in the format, as that card limits viability of certain archetypes, and pushes cantrips over the edge. brainstorm doesn't. I do hope Dig gets banned, and I even find the card super fun (and broken, oppressive and every other negative/"positive")Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
Black Lotus, Ancestral Recall and a Mox or two all promote different strategies, ain't saying they are safe or fair either. Diversity is not what I see in Blue, inbreeding is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasim0ff
So does Yawg Will, Tinker and Lingering souls. I can name cards too, that doesn't mean it's relevant for the discussion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Oh but it is. You claim that Brainstorm is such a diversifying card, but in the end it's just a name. It's just a title. Black Lotus goes in a Diverse range of Decks, as does Recall. The argument is worthless. To say "It fits into 80% of the decks that are played (Or insert given number here) therefore it's fine seems like a silly argument. Because I know Black Lotus would also do something similar but I don't get the feeling that" But it is in a range of decks" would float anywhere when it comes to Lotus.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasim0ff
"But the format is so Diverse" is your opinion, "The format is inbreed" happens to be my own. Diversity is in the lense of the beholder in this case, because a large amount of people disagree that Legacy is in fact diverse right now. A fact hundreds of pages of shit bears out.
If you want to tell me that Brainstorm should not be Banned because it happens to slot nicely into anything with an Island in it, then I want to know why I can't have Lotus if that's the criteria we are setting ourselves. "It goes in so many things, so it must be ok."I feel is very flawed and, well I could make the same comment about the Moxen but that doesn't mean they should be legal.