sorry, missed that one, guess I zoned out on to much of the "article"...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Because there are cards they want to play that are not legal in those formats???Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul7926
Printable View
sorry, missed that one, guess I zoned out on to much of the "article"...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Because there are cards they want to play that are not legal in those formats???Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul7926
I get wanting to make Legacy more interesting but I'd rather unban than ban things. Legacy is boring. I'd rather have more stuff to play with than less. Also I think there is Modern, sounds like maybe Caleb should go play that. ;)
Watching everyone here and on plebbit getting so assblasted about one article with ideas on the b/r list that will NEVER happen was very amusing.Quote:
Originally Posted by thefringthing
Just replace guns with brainstorm/show and tell/led/any other derpy card and you all turn into the NRA.
It seems like everyone on this board wants Miracles hurt in some way, but will immediately tell you to fuck off to modern if you dare to suggest that you agree with any of Caleb's list... the irony being that without Miracles, Legacy would be just a souped up Modern. The sole existence of a hard control deck is what separates Legacy from Miracles.
Legacy | Modern
Elves = Affinity
Show and Tell = Twin
Jund = Jund
Burn = Burn
Storm = Storm
Infect = Infect
Delver decks = Delver decks
Belcher/Reanimator/Dredge = Amulet Bloom/Goryo's Vengeance/whatever other non-interactive combo deck there is.
Sounds to me like the people telling Caleb/me to fuck off back to Modern would actually be the ones to really enjoy Modern.
I see what you are trying to say, but this is an inadequate comparison.Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevestamopz
The article is nonsense, so why bother discussing it? This is how Donald Trump gets so much camera face-time-says something ridiculous and then continues saying it.
From my phone. I do my best, dammit!
I don't particularly want to see Miracles hurt, and I'm not even be of the (presumably) large demographic of people who like to play that deck!Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevestamopz
But without arguing your questionable deck-to-deck analogies, I'll ask one question:
In "souped up modern", can you lock opponents out with Wastelands, Ports, Mazes, and Tabernacle; all the while setting up for an uncounterable, flying, indestructible, 20/20 for two mana?
That's just not true. Miracles also pins down combo pretty reasonably, making it much more difficult for Storm and Elves in particular, due to Terminus wiping out their means to winning before getting locked out (barring lucky hands or bad miracles hands.)Quote:
Originally Posted by Stevestamopz
While I'm not on either side of the fence on it, let's not just lie to ourselves. Hard control like Lands would exist without Miracles, and if we dropped CB we'd probably still have a Miracles deck, but it'd be more aggressive.
___________
Also, I don't see how something like Tezzerator that attempts to lock you out before the win isn't hard control. They just put up chalices, bridges, and grave hate for a few turns and eventually beat you to death with Thopters, 5/5's, or Tezz Ults. There's also aggro loam, but I'm sure because it's GRx with PFire/Loam, it's the same deck yeah?
The fact that we separate into "Control" and "Hard Control" just to make your distinction is another laughable point. Jund is pretty much a control deck (15 removal, 7 of it recurring, the deck only runs on card advantage.) Shardless is pretty much a control deck (it's completely based on card advantage.)
These decks also tend to lose to Combo as you'd expect, and tend to be a beating against aggro, as the "Control" slice of the Rock Paper Scissors MU style would suggest they "should."
You require evidence for your point, and currently your point is garbage due to me being able to just simply throw out 3 hard control decks and a pair of regular control decks like nothing.
________
Just because Modern lacks every engine known to man doesn't mean legacy wouldn't still have Thopters, Loam, Pfire, Jace, and other heavy-handed control pieces. We'd likely revert to UW Stoneblade decks (which still do fine) without CB. Without Terminus we'd still have a similar version of the hard control, but with worse sweepers (varying it's set of MU percentages.)
It's absolute hyperbole to suggest that somehow, Miracles IS Legacy. Or.. if you think that "Miracles is Legacy", you're just admitting you think there's a problem.
Control & Beatdown are better thought of as opposing roles which decks take in a match. These roles are fluid depending on the game state. I'm sure we've all read Who's The Beatdown.Quote:
Originally Posted by tescrin
Even control decks sometimes find themselves in a position where the opponent is in the control seat and the best plan is to apply pressure. The more difficult it is to muster that pressure, the "harder" the control deck. This usually relates to how many threats the deck runs (and how early they come into play).
For instance, when playing RUG Lands I am almost always the control deck. Decks like Shardless, Stoneblade, D&T (or Jund, I guess) can very easily "go aggro" against me. Decks like Miracles or Pox have a much harder time trying to put a clock on me - they are just not built to do that. The former are aggro/control decks, while the latter are hard control decks.
I like how the DTB list keeps getting smaller over time as the diversity of the format is getting crushed under the might of the number one deck to beat 7 of the 12 months of the year (and the rest of the time it was the number 2 deck to beat...). [It might have been more if the DTB was keep updated every month in 2015...]
But yeah RUG delver... which didn't even make it into the DTB every month... is the real problem. :rolleyes:
Remember, the bar to entry to get into the DTB section was raised at the beginning of last year from 3.4% to 4.6%. After that, yes the number of decks did decrease. The subfourm was designed to.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
Edit:
I think we can now drop all talk on the article's he writes. He was always open about his wants, but now we have all evidence needed to admit we do not see eye to eye with the man and leave him to his own musings.Quote:
Originally Posted by Caleb Durward
Link: http://www.channelfireball.com/home/...mprove-modern/
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Yeah, that is a valid point.
But I wasn't really looking at this time last year vis this time this year. I was commenting on the month to months shifts (using the same methodology). I noticed how the format expands some after a major shift (like earlier this year with the banning of Treasure Cruse, then again with the Banning of DTT.) and then constricts down to basically 4 decks and Miracles.
It's almost like Miracles should actually be called Death and Taxes since it's the only real constant...
The data I have access to actually shows RUG Delver to be the most top heavy deck of the last few years. It held its place in the DTB section longer than any other deck from what I can tell. Miracles is just the latest to take the mantle of top dog these days like RUG did once. While I will admit it's a bitch to play against that's not really a banable offence.
Unfortunately there are some/many who see it as one. :(Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
I'm not exactly sure how you can say that... RUG Delver (or the various other names it appears under, Threshold UGR, Canadian Thresh) shows up right before the words "is out." in the DTB thread a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Some numbers that I just put together.
RUG Delver Months in DTB: 10 of 21 [Since Jan 2014 when the methodology changed, 2 months were skipped in DTB]
Miracles Months in DTB: 20 of 21
RUG Delver Average Rank in DTB: 4.3
Miracles Average Rank in DTB: 1.6
Also just want to point this out... RUG Delver isn't currently a DTB by the DTB selection critera.
Sure you might have other data or a different way to look at it or measure. That's fine and that's not wrong... but this is where I am coming from when I say Miracles is unchallenged a top the decks to beat. Placing in the top 2 (it's lowest month was a 3 one time in early 2014...) month in and month out (while RUG was having a lot more variation... being in one month and out the next over and over again) tells me that Miracles is pretty much good in whatever meta, regardless of what else is going on in the format.... It's just the best deck... by a landslide.
First: I think this is a disingenuous argument. By suggesting it's all about "bad feels" you can dismiss opinions as being emotional not rational... I personally enjoy the challenge of miracles every so often, it's a really grind game against the deck I play most of the time, where you have to know what really is worth fighting over...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Second: Do you remember Modern Eggs...?
Third: That's not why I think it's bannable. The fact that it's been the top deck or the second best (going by DTB info) deck for 19 consecutive months (soon to be 20 I'd wager...) and wins in whatever meta you put it in... including meta's that drop RUG delver out of the DTB.... that maybe we should honestly evaluate if it Miracles approaching the point of being a problem.
I was talking long term, not just the past year. If you look over the history of Legacy for the last 5 or so years, Delver puts Miracles well and truly to shame. If you want to go back further, Goblins ran around with the format for longer still.
If you want to snap just the last 12 months then fine, nothing touches Miracles but that's a disingenuous scale when the format is more than a decade old. Miracles is just the latest holder of a well worn and not often passed on crown: "Most popular deck in the format".
As for Modern eggs, it was banned for the same reason given for Shahrazad. While I will agree they are not fun to play against, it was issues of tournament constrains that cost these cards. If a card could be banned for giving feel bads, I would own a set of Workshops worth considerably less than they do right now. Because that deck is hell and even with Chalice taking a hit, it's still among the very top of the Vintage tiers.
This is really the crux of the matter. Miracles' success is impossible to disentangle from the fact that it's a very popular deck that is also quite powerful. Add in the fact that it's one of the least expensive "teir 1" decks to build (there are some successful lists that only run 3-5 duals) and has both a high floor and high ceiling for play skill (i.e., it has a large differential between how well good and bad players will do with it, but CounterTop + Terminus also gives just as many free wins as Delver + Wasteland) so a lot of people are drawn to it for those reasons as well. Europe seems to have already passed peak Miracles based on TCDecks, and the European meta is usually a good leading indicator for the US meta.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
It was nearly 24 months... not 12... for nearly 2 years now nothing has come close to unseating Miracles...Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
I think recent history is far more important then data points that are years and years old. Your right that goblins used to be one one heck of a deck, but times change, Batterskulls are printed... and here we are... If we were debating what the best legacy deck of all time is... (Hulk-Flash...) then I think the fact that RUG was dominate for 2ish years from 2011-2013 is pretty relevant.
Here's my prediction Miracles will continue to dominate the DTB calculations in the format for the next 24 months (barring a banning.)
There is alwasy going to be a "Most Popular Deck" that's true. In the past people would key up on a deck and that deck would do well but then people would meta game against it and it would fall some, (not alwasy out of the DTB, but from 1 to 4 or 5 for the month)... and something else would take top slots for the month, then that deck would get meta gamed and the cycle would continue. Sure it would be like 5-10 decks that ended up at the top most of the time, but from month to month there was more verity and flux in the meta game. We just aren't really getting that now... at least not with the top decks... maybe the lower half of the DTB cycles in and out, but the top DTB is pretty much a given at this point...
So yeah it's all how you want to look at it. I just miss the days when the top deck of the format would cycle from month to month...
I know Batterskull was printed, my point was that Goblins was a very popular deck for a very long time and then things changed. I am not asking what was the best deck ever in the format, I am simply stating that a deck being Dominate is not exactly a new phenomenon. After Goblins Maverick was the best deck, again faded. Then RUG Delver, now faded. Today we are in the time of Miracles but it too will fade. That's Legacy.
Also just to point out, the time of Miracles would be over if not for the bannings of Cruise and Dig. Though artificial means Miracles holds its titile, but it did lose it. As it will again in the future.
Cruise and Dig were printed in fall 2014... Miracles fell at worst to DTB #2 (EDIT: Turn out it hit #3 a whole one time that I missed, before bouncing back into #1) during the time span from Fall 2014 (when Cruse and Dig were printed) to today (after both were banned)... So I'd like to understand how you read that information and suggest that if it weren't for Cruse and Dig being banned Miracles would be "over."Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Cruse and Dig didn't hurt miracles... very much at all... because nothing hurts miracles very much at all.
Cruise got a cycle. I wish it had more, but it didn't so total data for that is to be left incomplete.
As for Dig, Omni was taking over, chewing at its heals and taking its crown. While Miracles was still the most popular deck, it was no longer the most powerful. That title moved to Omni. The shift of balance would take time, but Miracles was losing ground as the shift took place.
Also, for the irony, Goblins hurts Miracles. Not that I would take Goblins to the bank these days.
Omni only seemed like it was taking over because it was the hot new thing, Miracles still peformed very well in that meta. In fact if you use the DTB formula there was only one month since Omnitell hit the scene in which Omnitell ranked higher then Miracles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Maybe Omnitell would eventually push Miracles out of the format, but the data doesn't really show that, it shows Miracles continuing along on top of the format like alwasy... just business as usual for Miracles...
What I bolded is a very good point. The decks that have good miracles matchups are largely unplayable now for other reasons. It's sort of like all of miracles natural predators have gone extinct.
Fair enough. I do think Omintell had staying power though.
Having never played either side of the matchup, I am told Shardless holds its own well against Miracles. If that's true I think you have a deck there that would be a fine pick. Mud does well too and if they print more draw engines like this Seagate land it might see an untick in play.
I guess with all the talk and articles we will find out in a month what Wizards thinks on the matter. If they are going to take a card so be it but I will not enjoy writing that months announcement at all. I like Miracles in the format and I would think that with the unbanning of a "Real*" card we might see something beneficial happen that doesn't mean a large percentage of the format loses their deck.
* An impactful card.
I don't think they go extinct/obsolete so much as people don't want to play them. Aggro loam and infect are still good decks but they aren't as popular with people. You do have a point when you consider merfolk/goblins aren't good because other decks in the format make them a poor choice, but I do think their are underutilized decks that could feel that spot in the meta.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
One of the 'nicer' things about being blue though is that even if something is a bad matchup, the cantrips and versatility of counterspells can leave you decently prepared. URW in particular has a lot of sideboard options.
Remember when Maverick was the #1 Deck, by a long shot? I know it's just one tournament, but these results are hilarious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
http://i.imgur.com/OjySuOP.png
Except he is backing this up by showing other times in Legacy's past when a top deck enjoyed a long reign (Thresh and Goblins). Those decks were never objected to as strongly as Miracles is, and the only real difference is that Miracles causes bad feels in a way that creature based decks do not.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
Consider Maverick in its prime. The deck was far more dominant than Miracles ever was. It even had similar objectionable features - hate bears like Teeg, Thalia, Scooze, etc gave it good matches vs both control and combo. But most people remember this era fondly because the big deck was aggro/control and not hard/prison control. Bad feels!
Wasn't that the same format that banned Wild Nacatl? Please refrain from presenting Modern banned list decisions as having any kind of precedent relevant to Legacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
But there is nothing wrong with being a top deck (or second top deck) as long as that deck is beatable and has (tier one) unfavourable MUs.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
And I have no idea what you mean by "wins in every meta". Miracles is top in the current American (big circuit) meta, and was also strong in recent such metas. It is not as Strong in the European meta, nor of course in many local metas.
Usually a deck stays at the top until new printings push it out. Maverick fell because new RTR cards made Jund better. Jund fell because of TNN. Goblins had a gradual decline as everything else around them got better over the years. Miracles is having its day in the sun, but this is nothing new or unprecedented. Only this time it happens to be a deck that gets under folks skin a little more.
Two points:Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
1) I've asked before... what are these Tier One unfavorable MU that you keep referring too... (Goblins and 12-post? :laugh:)
2) Throwing this out there, but Miracle Control predates RTR, and while it wasn't a dominate force at the time, it has been gaining ground and not giving it back up, unlike these other decks that printings have actually had a real impact on. IMO only time will tell, but I personally don't think any new printings will ever actually make Miracles worse.
In 05 I could have asked this same question about Goblins.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
I have done up an Excel spreadsheet using all data openly available from TDecks. At a glance it will tell you the DTB for each month going back to Jan 13. I am doing some larger number crunching right now and this is a first step to help me with that. I leave it here for you all to look at if you think it will be helpful while I start crunching numbers beyond 13 using data from SCG and this thread. I also have some of the old DTB data open to me as I am now doing those updates. To be honest its all that old data that got me interested in the number crunching and I would like to put datesamps on everything I have. Anyway, here is the Drop Box link. Its nothing you can not get yourself but it's all in one place and its easy to read.
PM me if you have any questions.
I gave a list a few pages back. Merfolk, Loam, Infect, and Shardless mostly. I'd argue that Lands has a slight edge - depending on The specific lists. Miracles should not do well in a meta heavy with these decks - especially if there are not a lot of Elf pilots.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
Miracles also doesn't have a lot of (tier one) MUs that are more than slightly favourable. Elves is a good time for Miracles, but Storm, D&T and Tempo deck of the week are pretty close. Miracles also enjoys the advantage of a blow-out vs the formats most popular and accessible budget deck (Burn). Overall the deck averages close to 50/50 against the field.
Any cards that directly help it's bad MUs will make those decks more prominent. Any card printed that you indirectly helps this decks (by positively affecting the meta) will hurt Miracles. And any card that Miracles doesn't use but improves other decks could potentially hurt Miracles. If enough of Miracle's slightly favourable MUs become slightly unfavourable, it won't be very good anymore. Don't expect a single new card to blow it out of the water. Expect a gradual decline (as is already evidenced in Europe).Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
Gee it sure is strange how many people and pros decide to pilot a deck that merely 50/50 against the field every weekend... maybe they haven't gotten the "it's not that good" memo yet. IDK, maybe they aren't picking a deck that's merely average...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Also doesn't that mean that Miracles is a pretty different beast then the other "Better then Miracles decks" that folded to the printing of 1-2 cards in one set?
Is it fair to say that your argument is that Miracles is actually not very good at all (only 50/50 vs the Field) and is only a Top Deck to beat 20 months running because it's over played by people who should be playing something better?
I think its a shave better than 50/50 - certainly a deck with a winning record!Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
I'm saying the reason it appears to do so much getter than the other decks with +ve records is because more people play Miracles than any other similarly powerful deck.
What you are saying is that it is over represented... so my follow up question is why if other similarly powerful decks exist do people choose to play Miracles month in and month out?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
IMO, the causality goes the the other way and the reason Miracles is played so much more then other similarly powerful decks... is because it's had more success over a longer period of time, and has the best chance to be good any given week, over decks that might be similarly powerful but need a more favorable meta to excel.
Also: About the Teir 1 Decks you picked...
Merfolk is not Tier 1.
I'm not sure about Aggro Loam, but last I heard the decks you picked are not even 60/40 against Miracles. Infect and Lands are really close to 50/50. Shardless (and maybe Aggro Loam) are the best here, and even they aren't slam dunks...
I don't think that really matters. Numbers matter. And the greater the number of players on any given deck (whatever their reason), the greater the number of finishes it needs to be considered average, good, oppressive, or whatever. You're trained in stats, so you must agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
If we want to speculate on the psychology, most people will assume (as you do) that the deck with the most top finishes must be the best regardless of its actual representation. If that deck is indeed a solid contender (above average), they have no reason to switch. People keep playing it in big numbers, so it keeps putting up proportionately big results.
Beyond that, there are many factors that go into deck selection. Miracles is the only tier-one stack-based hard control deck in the format, so old school control players flock to it. It's cheaper than most decks (specifically fewer duals); and known for rewarding skill (most Legacy players want a challenging deck - which incidentally is probably why fewer people play MUD/Post).
And of course lots of people don't switch decks very much. For anyone with less than a gauntlet, the cost is significant (even to a pro, shelling out $1000+ is not trivial, and will cut into those coveted profits). Plus it's a common conception (and probably true) that people who play mostly one deck for a long time play better on average than people who switch frequently or have been playing their current deck only a short time. The result is a lot of players won't abandon a deck unless it starts being actually bad (and this is evident in top 8s), or another deck is looking considerably better (also visibly in top 8s).
I'm not sure what you mean by "over-represented". If the deck sees top finishes in higher proportions that it sees entries, it is over-represented. To me this is what defines the strength or positioning of a deck - every tier one deck (or contender, or whatever you call it) is over-represented in the top brackets.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
Miracles is over-represented in top brackets but not by very much.
I do agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
The DTB data also shows a much higher top 8 placment rate for Miracles over the past few months, as much as double the second place deck.
I do think the casuality matters. I don't think a deck is only good because it's played by a lot of people. I think it's actually the case that it's a good deck, and that's why a lot of people play it.
Keep in mind that the only decks that came close to upsetting the status quo with Miracles in the last 12 months were only able to do so on the back of card advantage cards that are now banned because they were too good.
Look at the latest DTB data (needs that X-axis label back) BUG had over 2/3's the placements that Miracles had, but has under 2/3 of the points that Miracles achieved...
When I say overpresented, what I mean is that too many people are picking it to play given how average it is. Not how it's finishing.
Shardless is the only tier one deck out of that list, and that matchup has become less unfavorable since the adoption of Monastery Mentor. Lands is strong against novice Miracles players but struggles against those who actually know what they are doing. The point (which you have not refuted) is that there is no tier-one deck which is a blowout against Miracles. Also, Storm even against Miracles? What alternate reality are you speaking from? The matchup preboard is bad enough, between Counterbalance and a bunch of countermagic. Postboard Miracles shaves its dead cards for Meddling Mage, Flusterstorm, Blasts, and yard hate (sometimes even Canonist) whereas Storm must dilute its combo to have a hope of stopping Counterbalance AND postboard hate bears.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Then you are missing my point.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
What I'm saying is that if Miracles has twice as many pilots as the that second deck, it's actually performing the same, not better. And this is true regardless of the motivations for playing the deck - its a fact of math!
Frankly though you do not be understand the methodology of the DTBF and have no business citing it in an argument. Wanna prove me wrong? I'll ask for the fourth or fifth time for you do address the quote in my SIG (taken from the banned list philosophy page) and reconcile it with you interpretation of DTBF data.
I don't think you can, because you view is at odds with that statement. I have so far addressed every point you have made. You continually ignore this! It's incredibly obnoxious when you are investing time debating with somebody and they repeatedly ignore points you continually bring up. It also shows that you have no answer, but are unwilling to modify your view in light of evidence you can't refute.
If you want to continue you must step up your game and display some intellectual honesty.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Your entire argument consists of, "Well it's not like 50% of the top 8s and it doesn't have creatures so that's really important!" I'm not sure what kind of intellectual honesty you're looking for.
My arguments are as follows:Quote:
Originally Posted by HSCK
As for not running aggressive creatures as a main strategic tool, it should be noted that the percent of top 8s a deck can produce before being considered a problem is subjective. Any precise figure would be arbitrary. Personally I feel that the more differently a deck plays than other decks in the format (with emphasis on threats, answers, and other interactive elements), the higher a percent of the meta that deck can occupy without hurting format diversity.
- Its numbers in top brackets are strong but far from oppressive.
- Other long reigning top decks have had more impressive numbers in top brackets, but there was never an outcry to ban cards that, eg, Maverick would run. This indicates the reaction to Miracles is related to the distasteful play style rather than the numbers alone.
- Miracles is played in significantly higher numbers than other tier-one decks. This means its representation in top brackets are much less impressive when properly scaled. This is undeniably evident by the fact that Miracles decks to not decome denser between the start of day two through the final tables!
- Logistics has never been used in Legacy to ban out legitimate strategy.
You might not agree with me, but that doesn't make me intellectually dishonest! Intellectual dishonesty is intentionally ignoring any facts or considerations which stand to challenge your assertions.
This, for instance, is intellectual dishonesty! I say "15% of the top8s is not oppressive", and you replace this with the more dubious and easily discredited assertion "anything less than 50% is not oppressive".Quote:
Originally Posted by HSCK
This way you did not have to argue with me or my points - you can instead refute an exaggerated version of my views which I do not actuall hold. Classy!
1) Why assume every pilot is actually the same. Is magic a game with zero skill, and the outcome of matches is entirely deterministic and random?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
2) I do understand the DTBF, what your mistaken on is assuming that you can be a deck to beat purely by having the most people play a deck. Hint, If I convinced 100 people to play Belcher for a month, it still won't be a DTB. (Blecher is as close to a coinflip as I can come up with) It's not enough to throw monkeys at type writers, because... and again I'm stress this, it's not a random draw, the probabilities of success isn't fixed, and isn't 100% determined by deck choice... there is some element of skill involved too. Your saying it's simply a numbers problem mathematically, when in fact that math is horribly off because you are trying to make non-random, and non-discrete probabilities, random and discrete.
3) "I don't think you can, because you view is at odds with that statement." No it's not. Your just treating all pilots and all players as if they are equal, when they aren't, and making many other mistakes... It's not like if 100 people play Miracles that each of those 100 people have an equally likely chance to win the tournament... if you think random pilot number 95 who just picked the deck up for the first time has exactly the same chance of winning as Joe Lossett then I don't know what to tell you... When you assume it's just a numbers game and that 50% of the decks played means you should get 50% of the top 8s that's what you are assuming...
When a deck is as successful and cheap as Miracles people of all skill levels are drawn to it. This is a downward force that contributes to why you don't see the "best deck" performing at or above it's percentage of the field, unless that deck is truly busted in half (think Vengvine, or Hulk Flash).
As to "Intellectual dishonesty"... I mean that's such a lazy way to dismiss things you disagree with.
False. Wizards has backed away from it in recent years, but it has been cited as a reason before.Quote:
Logistics has never been used in Legacy to ban out legitimate strategy.
Then knidly explain how a deck that's not tier one can be a DTB? You can't explain this because you don't understand it! This might seem abrasive, but you continually ignore this request and change the subject. So prove me wrong, eh?Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
So calling intellectual dishonesty is bad forum, but calling somebody lazy is cool? :rolleyes: I'm not the person dismissing things. Answer the question I've asked you did times, or admit that you don't have an answer. You do this one thing, and I will resume adressing all your points. And note that I have not simply thrown the term around! I've used it twice, referring to your continuing ignoring of a question, and whats-his-name's sraw-man fallacy. That is apt use of the term.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
Citation required please. Note that I said " legitimate strategies". Shahrazard was not a legitimate strategy, and this is specifically noted in the associated banned announcement.Quote:
Originally Posted by GundamGuy
Second Sunrise and Top.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Edit: no need of more gasoline to the fire...