I'll take Bryant's word on this deck over anybody. He has had the most success, and has been tweaking and trying to perfect the deck for so long, we shouldn't take anything he says with a grain of salt imoQuote:
Originally Posted by Pelikanudo
Printable View
I'll take Bryant's word on this deck over anybody. He has had the most success, and has been tweaking and trying to perfect the deck for so long, we shouldn't take anything he says with a grain of salt imoQuote:
Originally Posted by Pelikanudo
You should take what EVERYONE says about Legacy decks with a grain of salt. This is a very complex game, and I think most players put too much faith in a select few people to make decklist decisions for them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Brian Pepper
That being said, both Lemnear and Cook have a ton of experience with this deck, so I trust they are both on the right track with this strategy and would have to test to see who is right on specific card choices.
The larger issue is that TES continues to not have great results over the past couple years, so instead of looking towards which individuals you guys should listen to regarding this archetype, maybe it's time for some outside-the-box innovation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by G_g
Tom is absolutely right. You need to have a very good reason for picking black mana here like already 3 Rites and two Wishes in the yard/exiled and 3+ LEDs/Rituals in the deck left to estimate that going with black mana and 8 mana playlines wields better results than the 6 mana line via red manaQuote:
Originally Posted by Tom T
I beg to pardon. Cutting white and Silence, removing all Rainbow lands, running 4 Cabal Therapy, MB EtW, running Probes etc. are all suggestions made by other users and shaped the deck to this date. Its a community work result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Brian Pepper
Isn't that the same case in like every thread here, Wilson? People look at Marc for D&T, Julian for Elves, Kai for ANT (including the SDT trolling), Philip for Miracles and round up their deck choices by looking at Top 8 results. The mechanics for deck choice and evolution of archetypes are sometimes hilariously basic. You can bet, that this frustrates me a lot.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
You can look at the Elves thread and an see what happens to it and the deck evolution if the vocal leaders leave as an extreme example.
The fundamental problem is, that there is maybe a good sense for what the decks needs in certain metagame structures, but the feedback and reflection of ideas and choices by the community isn't as analytical as I personally wish it was, which leads to the previous verbal fallout over the topic of reducing the number of Moxen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
TES had three win in tournaments with 100+ players within the last year (Belgian Legacy Cup Finals '14, SCG Premier IQ Dallas-Fort Worth, Tarmogeddon 10) from which I know and probably a lot more in medium sized ones and MTGO Dailies, but its a pain to look through those datas thanks to the constant mislabeling of Storm/ANT/TES/TNT and hybrids. I dare to mention that D&T, Patriot, Infect or Elves won less mayor events over the same time according to MTG Top 8. I sure know that you want to hint at ANT (MB PIF + ToA) with your last sentence ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
@Lemnear: Yes, I definitely agree that with every deck and thread you should take what people say with a grain of salt and test lists for yourself and create your own conclusions before you take a deck to a tournament.
For the record, I think you have done great work with this deck and are likely the one most responsible for how it has changed and become the deck it is today. I still think you guys are a couple basic Island and a Past in Flames away from the perfect Storm list though... ;D
Meh, a couple of basic Island? Whenever I played with two Islands I felt like I was just playing one less land in my deck. Especially in lists that don't run Preordain, the 2nd Island is such a waste of one precious land slot... Basic Islands are essentially -1 to your total landcount when you're trying to cast Abrupt Decay post board. I think one is fine, but two... never understood it.
All hail Peter. The most powerful wizard in the land.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
If you want to squeeze another basic in against Wasteland it would propably be better to try to fit in a Mountain since we need the Red mana go go off and Blue in TES "only" supports the cantrips. To be fair i never tested it and maybe i wrong.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
I disagree, taking everyones opinions with a grain of salt will only hinder yourself as a magic player. I'm not saying we should only listen to Bryant, but his opinion should be held higher than normal imo, also I didn't say a thing about silence getting cut so lets not project plz
The island thing was a joke because Lemnear knows I prefer ANT over TES, and that's what I was hinting at.
@Dr Brian Pepper: There is a difference between reading and soaking in information from good players to help formulate your own conclusions and opinions and mindlessly following someone who you perceive as better or more experienced than you. It will 100% hinder you as a player and human being if you mindlessly follow what someone else tells you to do. "Taking something with a grain of salt" just means questioning all information given to you so that you can formulate your own opinions, even if the information is generally good information. You should probably listen to what Bryant says regarding this deck to obtain some good information if you want to play it, true, but the "grain of salt" that you should consider is that Bryant is very emotionally involved with keeping this deck relevant because it is like his child, and he has less experience playing other decks in Legacy than some of the veterans on this forum who have played 25+ different Legacy decks in sanctioned tournaments to solid results. No one is the king of all knowledge which is why you should soak in information from a variety of sources, take all advice with a grain of salt, and then formulate your own conclusions.
While I don't disagree with the "Grain of Salt" bit, I'd like to clarify something. With Legacy being such a diverse format, you need to know the ins-and-outs of many decks - this requires often playing them. I own several legacy decks and play them at locals weekly. I also played a different deck every month for a year for the Jupiter Games series when it was still relevant (In fact, I was one of the first people to play BUG Delver & UWR Tempo which later became a blade variant after Josh Cicio saw my list, then Erik Smith then won an invitational with.), I play other things as well, just not at large events. It's required/important to make proper decisions when deck-building.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
You're grasping here...I never stated that I was "mindlessly" following anyone, so I'd appreciate if you wouldn't make up conclusion to fuel your arguments, thanks. Anyway, I do agree with most of your points, I am simply stating that you should LISTEN to other people (because you're not the best, and neither am I), and not view everything out of skepticism.Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
"The best" doesn't exist in a game like Magic which is why you should listen to but also question all information given to you. Hall of famers constantly misplay on camera and scrub out of competitive events because of poor deck choices. There is no one in this game who plays and builds decks even close to perfect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr Brian Pepper
A good friend and I constantly argue about everything Magic-related, but this process of questioning each other helps lead us to better deckbuilding conclusions than if one of us just listened to what the other was saying and questioned nothing. Expressing disagreement on what is good or bad in a deck or which decks are better or worse is a positive exercise for everyone.
"How to polish your statistics: A workshop by Lemnear" :PQuote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
If you take Top8/16 into account, TES is a joke in terms of numbers:
TES (+3 mislabelled with ANT): http://tcdecks.net/busqueda.php?toke...ide=&strict=on
DnT: http://tcdecks.net/busqueda.php?toke...ide=&strict=on
Elves: http://tcdecks.net/busqueda.php?toke...ide=&strict=on
Infect: http://tcdecks.net/busqueda.php?toke...ide=&strict=on
It feels like TES is suffering from the Doomsday-Syndrom: decent/good deck with just too few people playing it (correctly).
Thats why I said "won" in the first place otherwise we would have to look at the percentage of decks in the field to see how the decks perform in regards to their representation which is important despite usually ignored in our B&R thread. You listed 4 entries for TES with 100% of them made T16 and 50% winning the tournament. None of the other decks you listed comes close to that, but we see that the average number of them played is exponentially higher than TES' which leads to the idea that the deck is overperforming in regards to its metagame representation. ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by JDK
I guess the word "correctly" is key here. I have seen people horribly misplaying storm in sideevents sunday at the GP (I drew a number to get my stuff signed and had to wait anyways so I was observing games in the meanwhile) so I guess the potential to fuck it up is even higher with a more flexible deck like TES compared to ANT which sets it apart from Doomsday which is a deck suffering from its own inflexibility and lack of speed at the same time. TES has none of the problems which hold Doomsday back from evolving and the fact that TES manages to maintain its place over all these years and has some placings despite being a fringe archetype rewards us for our constant work on the deck which obviously got closer to ANTs (the probably better deck to fight through counterspells and manadenial) layout with non-blue decks diminishing as a result of SFM/Delver/TNN/Omni/Griselbrand/Emrakul/Probe/Preordain/Pyromancer/TC/DTT/etc. without giving up the potential for T1/2 burst plays, which are more linked to the threat density than to the number of Moxen ;p
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrunkenphat7
I disagree about the best, there are people who at the top. They are above the rest and should be considered some of "the best" at the game, and that isn't a very good example, considering you personally know each other. I'm just stating veining everything out of skepticism when you're involved in a topic you are not 100% informed is really gets you nowhere. Also, nobody said anything about being perfect...
You keep reiterating this; I don't have a problem with only cutting Chrome Mox, I have a problem with relying on a ritual that scales by playing land drops and Infernal Tutor with only one, slower win condition compared to a ritual that scales by playing any card and a tutor with a second, faster win condition. There were multiple card decisions that made that deck unbearably slow vs prison to the point where I didn't see any reason to play it over ANT/TNT etc. Chrome Mox is just better vs the non Island decks, and when we start to cut them for rituals that are better vs Island decks the "why am I not just playing ANT" argument becomes very relevant because we're possibly just playing TES to keep playing it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
As long as D&T and MUD are a thing, I think Chrome Mox still has a lot of justification behind it, otherwise the 2xCabal Ritual/1xChrome Mox build seems like as close of a compromise to Island.dec as I'd bother with.
I'm not sure if you are serious about talking stochastics with a sample size of 4 (read: four). I hope you are not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
@Dr Brian Pepper: Sounds like we're just not going to agree. The last point I'll make is this: I assume you'd agree LSV is one of the best players in world, correct? If you watch his Legacy videos and intend to learn how to play ANT with zero skepticism in the watching/listening process, you will learn how to play ANT very poorly. He makes a lot of obvious misplays with this deck, makes some very poor SBing decisions, and his ANT lists are mediocre. You can still learn a lot from him, sure, but you need to constantly question whether he is right or wrong in his plays if you want to truly learn how to play the Storm variant in his videos. This is true with ANY player. This is also true for life in general.
@JDK: Players who have 100% bought into this deck are going to make excuses for those results, and there's nothing you/we can do about it. It would be way different if you presented that information to a player who is trying to figure out what deck to build and has 20 different decks that they are genuinely considering. In the end most players on here have already bought into the deck, and their debate is "which cards should I run in these 5 slots" rather than "is this deck even viable right now?" I wish that the community at large were more open-minded about their decks choices rather than subconsciously considering decks "extensions of themselves" (psychology/marketing principle that is definitely at play here). In the end this helps a competitive player build their deck because you know a huge portion of the Legacy metagame at any given time since players are slow to change and adapt in Magic in general, but especially in Legacy.
I LOL'ed, that's awesome.