-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
Just because I'm comfortable with Miracles'power level doesn't mean I want it to be even stronger. FFS dude!
Its because you deny any numerical evidence of Miracles overperforming based on "I don't have a issue due to my personal deckchoice, so everyone should STFU with their pet.dec!".
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
Again, I'm not complaining about this - my only complaint is having to spell it out to you over and over again. I guess it must be boring pretending that you're incapable of understanding so ething so straight forward. But it's either that or admit that you're full of shit I guess, so whatever bro.
I totally get your "Miracles is a good matchup for my Lands.dec so I am fine if Miracles fucks the remaining format" point of arguing. I just don't have any respect for such selfish positions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
The real sad thing is that most of this community appatently to wants to give you a pass becuase they are also so frustrated by Miracles they no longer care if the bitching is based in fact or not. The mood seems to be to just let you vent because you have good reason to be upset.
...says the dood ignoring every numerical evidence in every thread. Just keep going arguing that Miracles only having weaknesses to fringe angles of attack is good for the format and that 50% of a T16 isn't an indicator that something is wrong
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
Wait, you think I'm complaining?
Just because I'm comfortable with Miracles'power level doesn't mean I want it to be even stronger. FFS dude!
Incidentally I'm glad that Terminus requires set up (that STP does not). If I'm trying to assemble Marit Lage I have outs to Terminus that I don't have to an actual 1cc instant. I might kill the Top before I make the token, for instance. If their plan was Plow I'm SOL; but if their plan was Terminus they are SOL (unless they meet the condition of holding a Brainstorm - a condition that doesn't apply to STP because it's unconditional).
Terminus is also not easy to flashback with Snappy, because you have to go by the actual cost and not the conditional cost.
Again, I'm not complaining about this - my only complaint is having to spell it out to you over and over again. I guess it must be boring pretending that you're incapable of understanding so ething so straight forward. But it's either that or admit that you're full of shit I guess, so whatever bro.
The real sad thing is that most of this community appatently to wants to give you a pass becuase they are also so frustrated by Miracles they no longer care if the bitching is based in fact or not. The mood seems to be to just let you vent because you have good reason to be upset.
To be fair, your posts concerning miracles in this thread and others are fairly blind to how every other deck that isn't R/G Lands operates and sees miracles. It's great content from your one vantage point, but it's still just one point of reference.
Let's create a metaphor for how busted Counterbalance is and what your posts look like there:
Stasis no longer has an upkeep clause, instead it has a fake qualifier like "on your previous turn you must have drawn >1 card." In this alternate universe you play Elves and have 12 cards (Quirion, Nettle, Wirewood) that basically invalidate what would undoubtedly be a format-warping deck due the sheer effortlessness of resolving a wildly overpowered 2-drop Blue enchantment that fundamentally attacks the symmetry of game rules. It is not necessary to also reword Stasis to say "only opponents skip their untap step," but you certainly could to give it more of the Counterbalance'y flavour.
Just because you have a deck chock full of untap rulebreakers, you can't really go around saying that such a Stasis is ok...and if they have New Thalia/Kismet-type cards, it's also not okay because you can maindeck say, a copy of Amulet of Vigor.
Just so you're aware, a lot of what you say about miracles (especially stuff like 'just maindeck Boseju') is often going to draw flak because it's so tunnel-visioned.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Guys, we are talking about Terminus being a conditional card or not.
Lands is not the only deck that can deal with a Top,e specially post board. And Miracles itself doesn't find Top on time 100%. Even without split second, you can force the Miracles player to cast Terminus "now or never". Or later, if they live that long. Lands is one example. I prefer to use real life examples from the deck I'm most familiar with to not invite a red herring should I make a trivial mistake.
I don't ignore numbers. I get that Miracles pushing a 20% meta share - I still feel the format is diverse, and that the format can "answer" Miracles well enough that there is a limit on how much more successful, if any, Miracles could become.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
Just so you're aware, a lot of what you say about miracles (especially stuff like 'just maindeck Boseju') is often going to draw flak because it's so tunnel-visioned.
Show me where I said that please!
All I said about main-decking Bosieju is (paraphrasing):
-The opportunity cost of doing this in Lands is extremely low.
- It is against the norm to main-deck Bosieju in Lands and by no means established to be superior to keeping it in the side.
And I only even mentioned Boseiju because other posters who don't seem to get Lands posted to the contrary.
Why is it acceptable that my words and positions be twisted? How can I even bother reading your replies when you pull that shit? Is your intention to frustrate me til I just stfu?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
Just keep going arguing that...
that 50% of a T16 isn't an indicator that something is wrong
One event? Nice.
I can show you multiple major events where Miracles got zero top-8s. How isn't that an that something isn't wrong?
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
One event? Nice.
I can show you multiple major events where Miracles got zero top-8s. How isn't that an that something isn't wrong?
What about taking the last 12 month of tournament data and compare metagame share and T8 presence to see that Miracles constantly overperforms?
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
Show me where I said that please!
All I said about main-decking Bosieju is (paraphrasing):
-The opportunity cost of doing this in Lands is extremely low.
- It is against the norm to main-deck Bosieju in Lands and by no means established to be superior to keeping it in the side.
And I only even mentioned Boseiju because other posters who don't seem to get Lands posted to the contrary.
I'm talking about the overall impression you make across multiple miracles discussion threads, not just here in the B/R. iirc the Boseju talk mostly occured in the now-closed "How to beat miracles pt.1." Don't focus on Boseju alone, that is more for the specific Amulet of Vigor reference in the Stasis metaphor. The point there is that the idea of maindeck Amulet should give you a sense of how anyone not on SnT or Lands perceives a suggestion like maindeck Boseju. It's the "how can you be serious about that" aspect your posts (because they're so R/G Lands-focused) that I'm attempting to highlight. Your posts often read in such a way as to ignore that other decks' viewpoints as being irrelevant because it is not your experience as an R/G Lands pilot.
If we're looking at recent pages here in the B/R, you'll get a look at what I think about a mechanic like discard. Now if I only care about my skewed view of legacy, I would love a rules update that said: "if you cast an instant/sorcery that allows you to see the contents of your opponent's hand, you lose in say, 5 turns." Seriously pushing that viewpoint would never lead to productive discourse between myself and a Jund pilot, for instance. In the same way, you can't keep pushing the R/G Lands perspective as a justification point for pieces of miracles being okay. How Lands interprets and interacts with a card isn't grounds for format-wide B/R discussions. Sure @Lemnear is taking the bait, but you're kind of stoking the fires here.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
What about taking the last 12 month of tournament data and compare metagame share and T8 presence to see that Miracles constantly overperforms?
In the post you just quoted I actually acknowledged those numbers! You are an artist at the Red Herring, ignoring parts of a very small post, and changing the subject when you are being called out.
As I said, having a deck with a higher meta-gaming share and top8 presence does not preclude (imo) a diverse meta. I see no point in going through this again (other than it allows you to change the subject about the conditionality of Terminus), but if you like I will again outline what I think needs to happen for the format to be considered warped beyond diversity. Then you can disagree and completely ignore my perspective and reiterate you tournament numbers I guess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
I'm talking about the overall impression you make across multiple miracles discussion threads, not just here in the B/R. iirc the Boseju talk mostly occured in the now-closed "How to beat miracles pt.1." Don't focus on Boseju alone, that is more for the specific Amulet of Vigor reference in the Stasis metaphor. The point there is that the idea of maindeck Amulet should give you a sense of how anyone not on SnT or Lands perceives a suggestion like maindeck Boseju.
But I didn't suggest anybody on anything but Lands runs Bosieju (and I never once suggested main-decking it, even in Lands). The overall impression I make does not give you leave to put words in my mouth, which is what you did. I have never said anything resembling that!
People who don't run Lands might perceive a main deck Boseiju as extreme, but only if they also don't understand Lands. Having eight one-mana tutors means a singleton land card will have high impact in the desired matches well having very low impact in every other match. Should you happen to draw it when you don't want it, this is Lands.dec! Pitch it to a Mox, pitch it to a Vortex, feed it to a Crop Rotation or imbue it with a Riftstone Portal. In a pinch you can even use the mana and eat a couple life - might even force a spell through for you!
This is why your Amulet analogy is way of base. Amulet will be clunkier in every single deck than Boseiju will ever be in Lands. That's why anybody freaking out over an unusual choice to main deck Boseiju (in Lands) is out of line.
Also, I straight up call BS. You don't get to invalidate everything I say about Miracles by the assertion that I come from bias. You have to critique stuff I actually wrote and call them out on being specifically biased and inaccurate. Not just slam my posts in general.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
Your posts often read in such a way as to ignore that other decks' viewpoints as being irrelevant because it is not your experience as an R/G Lands pilot.
Let's see here:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
Also, if you blow up Top, drop a Chalice, or just go too fast for them to set up (ala Infect), suddenly that condition isn't so trivial.
Looks like I've covered every deck that runs Chalice (Eldrazis, Loam, Merfolk, MUD), decks that can deal with Top (Shardless, Elves, Jund, Delver), and any deck that can win before Miracles sets up. I'll remind you again I'm mentioning these decks as being able to disrupt setting up conditions for Terminus. I'm not saying anything else about the nature of these matches (and hate that I have to type that).
I'm not ignoring the perspective of other decks - you are ignorng the fact that I'm including those perspectives.
Maybe you interpret the above passage as Lands can blow up Top, or Lands can drop a CotV, or Lands can just go too fast. But that's you who is fixating on Lands and ignoring the (obvious) facts that other decks can also do these things; and more reliably that Lands can!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
In the same way, you can't keep pushing the R/G Lands perspective as a justification point for pieces of miracles being okay. How Lands interprets and interacts with a card isn't grounds for format-wide B/R discussions.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
To be fair, your posts concerning miracles in this thread and others are fairly blind to how every other deck that isn't R/G Lands operates and sees miracles.
That's not being fair at all (see above)
I don't thing I'm the one approaching Miracles from a narrow view point. Folks here talk of Miracles as outclassing the other decks on every measurable front. I don't think that's how Shardless interprets Miracles. Or Eldrazi Shops. Or Infect or D&T or Loam or various other fringe decks. Not every deck is a dog to Miracles.
Also, I wasn't talking about anything in Miracles being "okay". That conversation goes nowhere (see my response to Lemnear). I was calling Lemnear out on talking out of his ass as usual, in this case about wether or not an alternate casting cost is conditional.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
Sure @Lemnear is taking the bait, but you're kind of stoking the fires here.
Bait? I didn't prompt him into denying that Terminus is only conditionally a one-mana instant speed sweeper. He owns that.
I'm not the only person in recent (Miracles related) threads who's called him out for spouting the first piece of tripe that pops into his head (as long as it implicates Miracles). I think three other posters have done this in recent threads (and you gotta love how he never backs down no matter how ridiculous his assertions are).
Remember that first (now locked) Miracles article thread? Lemnear insistrd Lands was a Chalice deck that could/should be main-decking Chalice. Both Dice and I disagreed. At this point he's obviously talking out his ass about a deck he doesn't understand, and being corrected by two posters who have been playing that deck for years. What does he do? He keeps arguing! That's how this guy rolls.
(You are feeding into one another, Crim, you're a dog at a bone with this topic and that is causing some issues. You do not know when to walk away either and at some point you should. You do not always need the last word, sometimes it is fine to say your piece and then leave the topic alone.)
Dice.
You come to stick up for him because you have issues with your "overall impression" of me or because he's on the same side as you regarding Miracles. Nice.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
This thread reminds me of drunks or football hooligans who come close to bashing eachother's skull in over a disagreement about their team's composition. Participants in either 'debate' have about the same influence on the decisions of the coach/DCI. Relax, regardless of who shouts loudest, it won't influence WotC's policy of ignoring Legacy anyway.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stan
This thread reminds me of drunks or football hooligans who come close to bashing eachother's skull in over a disagreement about their team's composition. Participants in either 'debate' have about the same influence on the decisions of the coach/DCI. Relax, regardless of who shouts loudest, it won't influence WotC's policy of ignoring Legacy anyway.
You're right, and it's awesome. So much free entertainment.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
Bait? I didn't prompt him into denying that Terminus is only conditionally a one-mana instant speed sweeper. He owns that.
I'm not the only person in recent (Miracles related) threads who's called him out for spouting the first piece of tripe that pops into his head (as long as it implicates Miracles). I think three other posters have done this in recent threads (and you gotta love how he never backs down no matter how ridiculous his assertions are).
Remember that first (now locked) Miracles article thread? Lemnear insistrd Lands was a Chalice deck that could/should be main-decking Chalice. Both Dice and I disagreed. At this point he's obviously talking out his ass about a deck he doesn't understand, and being corrected by two posters who have been playing that deck for years. What does he do? He keeps arguing! That's how this guy rolls.
You come to stick up for him because you have issues with your "overall impression" of me or because he's on the same side as you regarding Miracles. Nice.
We had that talk about conditionality when I pointed you to stuff like Treasure Cruise. You didn't seem to be interrested in differentiating the levels of "conditionality" at all, when we had the topic. For your arguments setting up the Cephalid Illusionist in Cephalid Breakfast doesn't differ from setting up Treasure Cruise in Delver or Terminus alongside SDT, Ponder, Jace and Brainstorm, because you just jump around yelling "its conditional! So its fair!".
Snip removed. Read the whole thread and you see that I questioned why Chalice doesn't move from SB to Mainboard and you dumbass just pointed to the 1cc spells in maindeck and call me names. It took another poster to pick up the ball outlining that the MB configuration has its advantages in game 1's with examples, which I agreed with. Sorry, that I give a rats all about people arguing based on "I want to run this setup and you are dumb" rather than bothering to give a reasoning metagame related.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Cool it. I am locking this until I can get home, clean this up and hand out warnings. Do not attack one another, attack the arguments. This is not up for debate. Do not go around calling one another fucker, do not go along antagonising others. Know when you should walk away.
Open again. Keep it civil and if you don't think you can, go catch Pokemon or something and cool off.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I think brainstorm should be banned
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I think Thoughtseize should be banned.
EDIT: And Top, hate that one :P
-
Re: All B/R update speculation
I think Necropotence should be unbanned, because it's totally conditional (deckbuilding & lifepoints) and ergo fair /s
@Megadeus
Good we are back on track ^~^
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I think frantic search should be unbanned.
You need 3 lands and you have to discard 2 cards.
You will never be able to just pitch 2 lands all the time.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I think Storm Crow should be banned.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Ban brainstorm and make the blue players pay for our entry fees.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sidneyious
I think frantic search should be unbanned.
You need 3 lands and you have to discard 2 cards.
You will never be able to just pitch 2 lands all the time.
+1
This is a card I've been hoping would get some attention for a while.
(even though it is totally broken ...)
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sidneyious
I think frantic search should be unbanned.
You need 3 lands and you have to discard 2 cards.
You will never be able to just pitch 2 lands all the time.
Doesn't it have more to do with Storm builds?
Would ANT or TES run it? Would it allow Solidarity to make a come-back?
Reanimator might like it too.
I've always thought it was just too bonkers of a card to be considered.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
But I didn't suggest anybody on anything but Lands runs Bosieju (and I never once suggested main-decking it, even in Lands). The overall impression I make does not give you leave to put words in my mouth, which is what you did. I have never said anything resembling that!
People who don't run Lands might perceive a main deck Boseiju as extreme, but only if they also don't understand Lands. Having eight one-mana tutors means a singleton land card will have high impact in the desired matches well having very low impact in every other match. Should you happen to draw it when you don't want it, this is Lands.dec! Pitch it to a Mox, pitch it to a Vortex, feed it to a Crop Rotation or imbue it with a Riftstone Portal. In a pinch you can even use the mana and eat a couple life - might even force a spell through for you!
This is why your Amulet analogy is way of base. Amulet will be clunkier in every single deck than Boseiju will ever be in Lands. That's why anybody freaking out over an unusual choice to main deck Boseiju (in Lands) is out of line.
Also, I straight up call BS. You don't get to invalidate everything I say about Miracles by the assertion that I come from bias. You have to critique stuff I actually wrote and call them out on being specifically biased and inaccurate. Not just slam my posts in general.
You come to stick up for him because you have issues with your "overall impression" of me or because he's on the same side as you regarding Miracles. Nice.
So from the closed "How to beat miracles pt.1" in the latter half we're both talking about hate cards in miracles, mostly maindeck Boseju. When reading your posts you're conveying opinions that are very R/G Lands-centric, which is fine...but it's not a holistic view. The direct quote, which doesn't matter as much as the continuous tone there is:
"How is it insane that a deck powered entirely by utility lands plus enablers would use... :gasp: a utility land hoser [Boseju] to help win a tight match-up. How is this even noteworthy? Is it equally insane that Fish & Eldrazi use CoS to beat counter-magic? I'm not getting this at all."
The point of the Stasis on steroids metaphor is that it doesn't really mean anything if an Elves pilot, who already plays on a very different axis than most Legacy decks (12x untap rulebreakers), says Amulet of Vigor is reasonable tech to beat Stasis + new Kismet-type effect. I'm sure on some level it is fine for their deck very specifically, but using that to say such a Stasis effect is fine for the format is kind of like trolling...so when people go on about Boseju maindeck in Lands being reasonable, it actually is a glaring indictment of Counterbalance as being about the most banworthy card in the format.
Now again, the content of your posts are solid from a singular point of view, but you never really jump from an expert level Lands assessment to "and while R/G Lands can do such and such/answer a problem in this way, other decks cannot...so maybe there is a power level problem." It's fine that you can make a case for Boseju in Lands since you obviously know the deck, just realize that "everything is fine b/c my deck is fine in this meta" can be toxic from the outside.
You can find examples of anyone talking about decks they don't play often/at all, your posts have an R/G Lands-slant to them and that's fine (normal even). I don't think I'm being unfair when I generally characterize the sum of your posts as (again generally) having a set point of reference. Just re-read your entire post (from here in the B/R which I partially quoted), you've gone defensive to the point of angry especially with @Lemnear. I generally look forward to reading your posts, and I'm willing to deconstruct them because the underlying logic is solid; which is why I don't understand why you're not above escalating (mechanics pun!) a flame war.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I think poor personal hygiene at events should be banned.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Begle1
Doesn't it have more to do with Storm builds?
Would ANT or TES run it? Would it allow Solidarity to make a come-back?
Reanimator might like it too.
I've always thought it was just too bonkers of a card to be considered.
If I dare to answer. Storm and Reanimator won't run a card with such high initial cost as the decks can't afford the carddisadvantage and their plan A does not necessarily include to make 3+ landdrops. The only deck I can imagine which would profit from an unban here would be HighTide.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Especially since you'RE also taking 3 from it off of ad nauseam. I'd make a bad big blue deck with it and ramp up a bunch of colorless mana with it
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
The point of the Stasis on steroids metaphor is that it doesn't really mean anything if an Elves pilot, who already plays on a very different axis than most Legacy decks (12x untap rulebreakers), says Amulet of Vigor is reasonable tech to beat Stasis + new Kismet-type effect. I'm sure on some level it is fine for their deck very specifically, but using that to say such a Stasis effect is fine for the format is kind of like trolling
But there is a difference between saying "X does not indicate Y is true" vs "X does indicate Y is false".
I'm saying main-deck Boseiju in the occasional Lands list does indicate the format is in trouble. Not saying this is proof that the format is not in trouble.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
but you never really jump from an expert level Lands assessment to "and while R/G Lands can do such and such/answer a problem in this way, other decks cannot...so maybe there is a power level problem." It's fine that you can make a case for Boseju in Lands since you obviously know the deck, just realize that "everything is fine b/c my deck is fine in this meta" can be toxic from the outside.
You're too kind. I have a good grip on RG Lands (and a better grip on RUG Lands), but I won't clam to be an expert. I'm probably somewhere on the intermediate spectrum.
RG Lands can hold its own vs Miracles, but other decks can too (just by different means). D&T does okay there too, and Shardless, Loam and Eldrazi do even better vs Miracles. Then there are decks like S&T, Storm, and Delver which are dogs to Miracles but still do very well overall. I would never say the meta is okay just because Lands is doing well.
Yes there is a power level issue with Miracles (I don't want to call it a problem just yet). Miracles is better positioned than the other tier decks I mentioned, and most notably it has no truely horrible matches that aren't on the fringe. But is this a problem?
Personally I think the meta sports a diverse mix of competetive decks covering almost every style of play. There are other good decks putting up respectable results which are not being forced out. So while Miracles might be doing better, the format remains diverse enough that I think that's okay.
There are some who claim that Legacy's diversity is artificial - held together only by players who are willing to "take the worst of it" with less competetive decks. The idea is that if more players realised they should be playing Miracles - the best deck - the meta would be completely overrun. But there is absolutely no proof for this.
See Miracles might be the best deck for the meta, but when more and more people choose Miracles that itself changes the meta! For instance, what if decks like Infect and 12-Post are almost good enough to be tier one? As their bad matches switch to playing Miracles, eventually this pushes them into tier one territory because the bad matches that hold them back become a smaller percent of the field. IMO, if Miracles ever hit ~25% of the meta it would no longer be the best positioned deck (between mirror matches plus the greener pastures this would create for Miracle-Killers).
Basically, while perhaps the meta cannot hold Miracles bellow ~20%, I believe it can hold it back from growing significantly beyond those numbers.
There is no proof either way - we'll never know how big a meta-share Miracles can hit without becoming a negative EV meta-call. Unless of course it continues to spike in popularity. Until then it's anyone's guess.
Some people think Miracles holding the share it currently has is enough to make the format unhealthy (regardless of how much more it could sustain and regardless of the "texture" of the rest of the meta). That's totally cool! But I think it's okay for Miracles to be top dog as long as it has a celling and the meta is overall rich. I've bolded this becuase it's the crux of the issue imo, and it demonstrates the subjective impasses that keeps the argument going round in circles.
I get pretty tired of trying to explain this position. I feel like I make myself very clear, yet my points are often missed (sometimes it seems they're intentionally being missed). I figured I'd give it one more spin because you are being very civil (downright nice) and I have been less than that recently.
So while I haven't been pushing the "everything is fine" message very heavily (I know there are some exceptions), I have been liberally disputing (I would like to think refuting) arguments that say "everything is not fine". So most of my posts on the meta lately aren't trying to prove the meta is healthy, but rather to shoot down arguments that specifically imply the contrary. Almost like I'm taking the "innocent until proven guilty" approach. A lawyer doesn't need to prove their clients innocence - they only need to poke holes in the evidence presented against thier client. For people who think the meta is unhealthy and obviously so, maybe it looks like I'm nit-picking or trolling.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
Just re-read your entire post (from here in the B/R which I partially quoted), you've gone defensive to the point of angry especially with @Lemnear. I generally look forward to reading your posts, and I'm willing to deconstruct them because the underlying logic is solid; which is why I don't understand why you're not above escalating (mechanics pun!) a flame war.
You are right, I became angry, and that is shameful. Funny enough I'm generally laid back and mellow n the extreme. Life's hurdles tend to roll of me like water on a duck. This is such a stupid thing to get angry over too! Not cool.
Thank you for so graciously de-escalating. :smile:
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Megadeus
Especially since you'RE also taking 3 from it off of ad nauseam. I'd make a bad big blue deck with it and ramp up a bunch of colorless mana with it
Yeah, I think it's High Tide (probably Reset Tide) that benefits most. One the one hand this deck is struggling at best, so the boost ought to be welcome (and I admit a fondness for High Tide). But there are some who think it would make the deck too good.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Has anyone watched Caleb Durward's banned series?
I watched the Survival and Recruiter ones and it felt like overall his opponent(s) were trying to lose; played very weirdly and kept absolutely shitty hands.
Are these cards actually broken anymore? Recruiter is obviously not, even with food chain but what about Survival? Is that "too degenerate fuck off you mong" or would it just be another tier 1.5 deck?
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
I think survival has the potential to be tier one if unbanned. But I can't see it becoming oppressive. Earthcraft I could see making enchantress a viable tier 1-2 deck. Or maybe it's still just not. The big thing is that I think it would draw more people to play the deck which would help its case. I think it's viable now. It just doesn't have a high number of players like the brainstorm orgy decks that place consistently
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
This is employing reason and comparative thinking when explaining to a monkey why it should do something. The list is managed by monkeys.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Crimhead
Yeah, I think it's High Tide (probably Reset Tide) that benefits most. One the one hand this deck is struggling at best, so the boost ought to be welcome (and I admit a fondness for High Tide). But there are some who think it would make the deck too good.
Too good? What about storm as is?
They are obviously the better combo decks being turn 2-3 wins.
High tide needs 3-4, 3 is very hard and 4 can do it but obviously more lands better.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
If I'm the DCI, I could not unban Survival knowing the design philosophy has been to put more power into creatures at the expense of spells. It would be in poor faith to do so knowing there is a strong chance that cards could be printed that would enable it to take over the format.
Also for that matter, if we are basing our arguments on decklists from 2010, I'm going to start pulling up necro lists from 98 playing unmask and drain life to justify a necro unban.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lord_Mcdonalds
If I'm the DCI, I could not unban Survival knowing the design philosophy has been to put more power into creatures at the expense of spells. It would be in poor faith to do so knowing there is a strong chance that cards could be printed that would enable it to take over the format.
By that argument then, you have to look at SnT.
I think Survival could come off, but it's far from choice #1 and there are better places to start.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stevestamopz
Has anyone watched Caleb Durward's banned series?
I watched the Survival and Recruiter ones and it felt like overall his opponent(s) were trying to lose; played very weirdly and kept absolutely shitty hands.
I haven't seen these, but not surprised to hear it. This is a guy who wants Ponder and Wasteland banned (among other cards) and wants a format that plays like Modern but with some of the powerful goodies available to eternal.
If he recorded games/matches that indicated these cards are safe, would he even release them? For somebody who wants the format to go in the other direction, what would be his motivation?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Sidneyious
Too good? What about storm as is?
They are obviously the better combo decks being turn 2-3 wins.
High tide needs 3-4, 3 is very hard and 4 can do it but obviously more lands better.
High Tide decks run a little more control than a typical Storm list, so they shouldn't need as fast a clock as Storm. Reset Tide has the luxury of waiting for the very last minute, vs Storm decks that have to guess (thereby sometimes going off earlier than they'd actually need to).
That said, I very much doubt myself High Tide decks would be too good. And between Counter-Top and all the Chalice decks, combo has a pretty modest meta share these days. I would totally unban it myself; but I'm not too sure about WotC/DCI.
As a side benefit, Reset-Tide is easy on the budget (relatively), so it would be good for the community and people trying to break in (especially if they happen to be masochists).
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dice_Box
By that argument then, you have to look at SnT.
I think Survival decks like a different sort of utility creature than S&T. Sneak-Show doesn't seem to be OP, but that doesn't mean Survival would be fine.
Even if Survival is okay now, I think what Lord M means is that it is not good to unban something that has a high chance of needing to be banned again. Rotating the banned list like this - even with the best intentions - will annoy players, cost us money, and hurt consumer confidence.
Similarly if S&T ever becomes oppressive (or is otherwise banned), people won't be angry that they unbanned it in the first place becuase they didn't. But should that happen we wonn't expect an unban for a long time if ever (even if the meta again becomes more hostile to that strategy).
While we want WotC to manage the list with integrity, we have to respect that they need to avoid bad PR; and that leaving a safe card on the list is less damaging than unleashing an unsafe card.
I'm not a survival expert by a long shot (never even played the card). Maybe today's graveyard hate in conjunction with the strength of Miracles is such that the deck wouldn't actually have a high chance of needing an re-ban? If that's true it certainly "should" be unbanned. But being added to the list recently (relative to other cards on the list) it's probably a very unlikely candidate. The longer it stays off, the less embarrassing it will be if they happen to misjudge it's power.
Either way, given the pace and timing of the removal of cards, I think Survival isn't going anywhere anytime soon .
I would be happy to hear it if they unban it. Of course I'm not the one fingers will be pointing at if that turns out to be a screw up!
Please note I'm not arguing Survival should stay banned. I wouldn't even want to commit to a guess. These are just reasons I think it will stay banned.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stevestamopz
Has anyone watched Caleb Durward's banned series?
I watched the Survival and Recruiter ones and it felt like overall his opponent(s) were trying to lose; played very weirdly and kept absolutely shitty hands.
Are these cards actually broken anymore? Recruiter is obviously not, even with food chain but what about Survival? Is that "too degenerate fuck off you mong" or would it just be another tier 1.5 deck?
That series is shit and was done by someone without any Vintage or Combo background in general which you can see in the Bargain/Necro Videos for example. His decks are horribly built and the opponent not adjusted to a hypothetical metagame with these banned cards around, which leaves the viewer with a skewed impression of what the cards could do.
We discuss about Survival every 4 pages in this thread. Most was said multiple times already over the last 20ish pages if you are interrested in the topic :)
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lord_Mcdonalds
If I'm the DCI, I could not unban Survival knowing the design philosophy has been to put more power into creatures at the expense of spells. It would be in poor faith to do so knowing there is a strong chance that cards could be printed that would enable it to take over the format.
Also for that matter, if we are basing our arguments on decklists from 2010, I'm going to start pulling up necro lists from 98 playing unmask and drain life to justify a necro unban.
This. Every time the Survival discussion comes up (ergo every 4 pages) the arguments root on pre-ban deckbuilding and the hate printed since then, but never the creatures printed in the meanwhile which would make Survival instantly absurd again if unbanned.
I think we all have no interrest in chewing through the topic again
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dice_Box
All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.
Nor did it have to deal with Mother of Runes into Phyrexian Revoker.
Lem, I would go and read the last few pages but all I see is you and crimhead ranting :cool:
Edit: I was not around for Survival's dominance in Legacy. I still don't understand how the card is so busted that it's a joke to bring it up. What I do see is a very slow value engine that seems like it dies to an exceptional amount of hate that is maindecked now. Combo is a zillion times better than it was back then and the fair decks are also better.
Also, let's be honest, the joke is on all of us. WotC do not give a single shit about Legacy and they have even less desire to unban stuff in Legacy. This is just discussion for curiosity's sake.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dice_Box
All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.
Except most hate just shuts off one aspect of the engine at best and Survical is an engine able to counter the hate by tutoring answers. Its pretty much the same issue we discussed with Pithing Needle against CounterTop or with hate-permanents against Miracles in a bigger context like boarding Decays to get rid of counterbalance, which however does nothing against Miracles advancing their gameplan or simply drop the next counterbalance.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stevestamopz
Nor did it have to deal with Mother of Runes into Phyrexian Revoker.
Lem, I would go and read the last few pages but all I see is you and crimhead ranting :cool:
Thats why I said 20ish pages, so you can skip the Miracles/Terminus/conditionality chatter ;)
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Dice_Box
All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.
Well, to restate something said plenty of times: Wear//Tear or Decay do not prevent the Survival player to tutor for witness (reactively) or into spellskite (proactively), C. Priest can be handled by shriekmaw or the like (or on the fun side by Eldrazi displacer), DRS by Revoker, RiP by Rec Sage.
And here is not the endless, classical talk about answers-to-answers in a mental magic sort which is common in such a thread, but a build-in answer in the very card we are talking about: I mentioned only cards that would be tutorable and most probably played in survival lists.
Moreover, DRS and C priest would be extremely good in survival lists. Which can be control-ish with a combo finish of 1-2 cards, but not necessarily. Survival can fit in pretty much every strategy in the combo-aggro-control-prison spectrum.
I personally toyed a bit with Fauna shaman recently, and the card is good. Remove summoning sickness, bolt-stp vulnerability, and necessity to tap it for essentially a once per turn activation, and the card is beyond broken.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Stevestamopz
Combo is a zillion times better than it was back then and the fair decks are also better.
Storm variants are not that different than what they were then. We are talking about december 2010. Only past in Flames changed really the things here. Admittedly it is an excellent card, which open a whole new plan, but not "zillion times" difference.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dte
Survival can fit in pretty much every strategy in the combo-aggro-control-prison spectrum.
Well it's fine, then isn't it? 80% format penetration is not a problem at all if every deck ever plays the card while maintaining strategic diversity. If anything, the card would become a skill-testing pillar of the format.
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zombie
Well it's fine, then isn't it? 80% format penetration is not a problem at all if every deck ever plays the card while maintaining strategic diversity. If anything, the card would become a skill-testing pillar of the format.
The card will be definitely extremely skill testing and fun to play. Will it be fine?
For me? Yes!
But maybe I should mention that one of my favorite card is SDT, and I've kind of heard that some people doesn't like the 15-20% meta share the card have.
I do believe that survival would take quite a bigger share than that.
But I am almost certain that the card won't be unbanned, for the following reasons:
1) the card is crazily powerful;
2) why would WotC take the risk? Nothing to really win, a lot of potential ranting about "screwing everything up". The conspirationists would even say that it was unbanned on purpose, to destroy legacy, because they are evil, aren't they?
-
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
dte
Storm variants are not that different than what they were then. We are talking about december 2010. Only past in Flames changed really the things here. Admittedly it is an excellent card, which open a whole new plan, but not "zillion times" difference.
I meant more Reanimator/Show and Tell. Griseldicks decks in other words.
I also find it hard to believe that Storm combo hasn't gotten better in order to keep pace with Delver, Miracles and DnT.
In any case, I have no idea how Survival is beating Omnitell when DnT gets kicked in the nuts repeatedly by that deck.
I have no idea why Show and Tell is legal
I have no idea why Goblin Recruiter isn't unbanned
I have no idea why I'm posting this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Zombie
Well it's fine, then isn't it? 80% format penetration is not a problem at all if every deck ever plays the card while maintaining strategic diversity. If anything, the card would become a skill-testing pillar of the format.
Props, you made me spit out my water from laughter.
