Why should Miracles be a bad deck choice in the current meta?
It's currently a top contender in the MODO meta, so it can't be that bad. The main issues I can see in a big tournament are a) mental drain and b) time.
Printable View
Why should Miracles be a bad deck choice in the current meta?
It's currently a top contender in the MODO meta, so it can't be that bad. The main issues I can see in a big tournament are a) mental drain and b) time.
Yeah, Miracles is fine but it can be mentally draining if you aren't used to it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Also, there's HUGE regional bias with SCG data - there are events in the SE US for example for a few months in the spring and not again for a year - I played in 3 SCG opens last year, all in the spring. This year it will be 4. I'm not traveling > 5.5 hrs to play in an SCG open. I've only played Miracles in opens since they were printed, but I can't travel that much! I know this is just my expereicne but I know lots of people that won't travel more than a certain amount, and Miracles is a deck that you have to stick with to put up results.
Meanwhile, counting to three and dropping a giant Tentacle hentai monster / Daemon is so easy you could probably train a monkey to win a Legacy tournament with it.Quote:
Originally Posted by alphastryk
Except that people misplay with SnT. It's depressing.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
So what about the data I just posted from January and its parameters? Does January look bad or not?Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal
Just wondering, what would it take to get Brainstorm banned? The card seems untouchable for whatever reason.
Perhaps there's no Reason to touch it
And why ban it?
Let Brainstorm live... This is legacy, not modern. We get the opportunity to play semi-broken magic.
The real problem is that most of the good cards are blue.. and play very well together. We need good cards in other colors to fight equal (specialy :r:).
Agreed. Make better Legacy cards in Red and Black. Then we'll have a more balanced format. Give black value creatures, not always ones that a) suck, b) have infinite drawbacks.
Why is Phyrexian Negator bad? I want a Negator-esque creature again. Something blue decks will fear :P
-Matt
Sometimes I have a somewhat absurd thought: What if Magic (not just as game) must always have mind manipulation (AKA :u:) in its very nature. That is why blue is so powerfull and creates such power - Brainstorm, Ancestral, Walk, etc...
Every sorcerer should use, above all, his mind to conjure spells... so... the power seems to naturally walk into Blue.
Or maybe i should smoke less weed. :laugh:
I pretty much figured it was fair game once it got restricted in Vintage. It is much stronger than some of the cards currently banned.Quote:
Originally Posted by miguelmatix
I would too. And Mental Misstep. And Earthcraft. But Misstep mostly because it would make Enchantress better. I think the ubiquity we saw when it was last legal is more the result of people sucking and not adapting than it was a result of the card's intrinsic brokenness.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr. Froggy
Also the card is absolutely miserable to play with and against.
I've often wondered if MM would have worked as intended (ie, Force of Will for ERRYBODY) if it had read "counter target noncreature spell".
Of course, that's still a lot of pseudo-shroud for Delvers to go around.
You mean there would have been less bitching from the Goblin Lakey and Wild Nacatl crowd (they bitched because of Aether Vial as well, so what)? The miserable aspect was Misstep countering Misstep, countering misstept countering a cantrip ... The T1/2 stacksduring the time that card was legal were just stupid. Cream topping of that: free creature and combo protection for everyone. Cherry on top of the shICECREAM bowl MM was: Snapcaster Mage got printed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mewens
Do people only tend to own/play one particular deck? That's one reason I come up with why people start to claim that some card - like Nemesis - ruins the format. There are plenty of solid decks out there capable of ignoring [insert cardname].
I believe, it's more a matter of an understandable frustration as you invest serious money in a deck, that just doesn't pull it's weight against a new and wide-spread card anymore, that drives a majority into the social medias to complain.Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopo
Fact however is, that TNN caused an extreme effect of bandwagoning, so even traditional non-blue players and hard-control players choose to swim with the flow instead of taking advantage of a homogenic metagame which we have now. That fact that this is the case for now and a large potion of people mindlessly copy the mediocre TNN+SFM builds instead of far superior ones in the field, leaves the impression that the metagame still not adjusted to TNN and a ban would have been an overreaction.
I have seen a lot of Esper Control, BUG control, Loam.dec and Team America crushing Patriot to be sure, that the deck isn't untouchable. However, as long as people try to fight mirror matches all day or enter tournaments with their 2010 pet.decs, just to come back here afterwards for complaining, I would not react either in WotC's case.
I've played more than 15 different decks in the past year, and I'm currently playing a TNN deck as primary (with the best results I've ever had since I began playing Legacy).Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopo
I don't think the archetype is too dominant to ban, but its presence in the format has resulted in a higher percentage of boring and uninteractive matches. (That being said, I've also played in many interesting and interactive matches with TNN against certain archetypes.)
The thing about TNN is that he's as answerable as any combo is. Which means that decks that normally has little chances against combos will also suffer from him, except that decks using TNN are hardly combo decks, and have many other threats - but they will win a match just by tapping three mana for fish. The difference between being killed by Emrakul or TNN is just the speed they will do so, and both are as hard to answer.
In past 7 years I've had several decks. I gradually abandoned:Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopo
______________________________
- NQGw; outdated
- CB Thresh; outdated
- Moatless Stax; unreliable
- Aggro Loam; cold to gy hate
- Faerie Stompy; unreliable
- UW Tempo; idk what happened
- New Horizons; outdated
- Black Thresh; idk what happened
- Dredge; cold to the new wave of gy hate
- TES/DDFT; bah
- ANT; bothersome
- Can Thresh; that's where I'm now
So, basically it shouldn't be that hard to see the pattern, am I right?
______________________________
- tricolor Enforcergeddon deck
- blue aggrocontrol deck
- monowhite prison
- RGB card advantage deck
- monoblue prison
- UW prison
- blue StifleDazeWaste deck
- blue StifleDazeWaste deck
- blue graveyard deck
- Brainstorm decks
- Brainstorm deck
- Brainstorm deck
I progressivelly moved towards more and more BS-centric decks, leaving the dead in my wake. Blue is so powerful that you need serious reasons to not play it. Also, the amount of crippling hate against other decks (be it gy decks, or those that rely on permanent-based locks like CotV/3sphere) is unsurmountable.
Loam, beeing the slow graveyard deck had fallen the first, as there's little point in fiddling around when Relic and like are all over the place. Then all blue non-Jace piles were weeded out, as without Jace (and I deliberately decided to not have anything common with this hideous card), one can't play blue (aggro)control except for Tempo Deck Wins. RiP/DRS definitely killed Dredge (or, at least made it much more annoying to play, when 1/2 of meta consist of maindeck one-mana Relicdude). And when the new generation of Hatebears.dec changed the Storm matches into a dice roll olympiade, I sold Seas and Deltas.
So, squeezed out of any other possibilities (and that fact was supported by a spiralling dissolution of my card collection), I settled on Canadian Thresh.
No, Brainstorm ain't broken.
Uhm, but what was the question?
Oh, ok...Quote:
Originally Posted by Hopo
No, I got two decks, RUG and Terrageddon.