Shouldnt you have any of the following somewhere in that sentennce:Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
"I think",
"may be",
"will possibly",
or
"but is still hypothetical".
Printable View
Shouldnt you have any of the following somewhere in that sentennce:Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
"I think",
"may be",
"will possibly",
or
"but is still hypothetical".
And your proof for this statement comes from what exactly?Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
I am going to ignore the rest of your response until you actually provide something factual that is worth responding to.
If wizards does decide to gut Legacy considering it's popularity and the fact that it still recognizes it as a separate format, then they are incredibility stupid.Quote:
Originally Posted by denial
I find it to be quite the leap of faith to even believe that Wizards is that stupid in that regard.
The fact that Legacy is so popular and WoTC still recognizes it as it's own format ala bannings and unbannings.Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
Edit: And common sense.
I really wish you could do what you claim I should do: post something factual. For someone that thinks Death and Taxes is a tier 1.5 deck, you sure are quite high on your horse to even suggest that you posted anything worth responding to while also claiming I haven't. You haven't even shown anything to suggest that Death and Taxes is even viable, never mind Tier 1.5, so before going around and trying to discredit others, you might want to make sure your own facts are indeed facts and not just delusional opinions.Quote:
I am going to ignore the rest of your response until you actually provide something factual that is worth responding to.
Have you even been paying attention to the decks that have been winning tournaments within the Legacy Format on Magic Online ever since Legacy became available on Magic Online?Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
I will give you a big hint, for about the first month or two possibly longer, at least 10 to 25% of the meta, and at least 1 sometimes 2 of the 3-1 and 4-0 decks in a given daily had been Death and Taxes builds.
Now that the meta has been shifted more heavily towards Landstill (one of death and taxes worst matchups, but not unwinnable for a well built death and taxes deck) the decks haven't been placing as highly. However as people become aware of landstills weaknesses death and taxes will become prevalent again. In essence, Death and Taxes was a hugely popular deck on magic online when legacy first was released, it is still played quite heavily by several people, and these people are all quite skilled and capable of getting surprising results with the deck.
Further, it is one of the decks to have gained heavily from the loss of Mystical Tutor from the format as the deck is able to very easily take advantage of that loss and win games because of it. I would say that even if Death and Taxes is not Tier 1.5 right now, it will be that or better come July first 2010.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
Guess what: I don't care about MTGO. We're talking about the paper format and how overextended would affect it.
I also like how you STILL didn't post any links. Are you done digging yourself a hole?
LINK HERE NAOQuote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
Okay read all the legacy deck lists in each of the sections dated from 4/8/2010 to 6/17/2010. From what I understand the list will be updated sometime after midnight PST tonight with the most recent entry and I think that some new Death and Taxes builds will be included in the most recent entries for legacy lists in that update.
Yes I have proof, do you care to provide any?
EDIT: I would also like to point out that a new format would affect Magic Online just as much as it would affect paper. So not discussing the ramifications in both forms of playing magic is simply put: ignorant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
...
Edit: Taking a second look.
Edit: taking a second look.Quote:
Yes I have proof, do you care to provide any?
And my proof that overextended won't be replacing Legacy? Hmm, gee, considering that the rumors said nothing about replacing Legacy and WoTC doing so makes little sense (considering they banned Mystical Tutor to "help" keep combo in check, promoting a healthier format in their eyes), that there is all the proof needed: a little bit of common sense and observaing WoTC actions. On the other hand, me and a few others have gone over what could happen if overextended is a third eternal format.
And even if this overextended were to hypothetically replace Legacy, I don't give a shit: that isn't what I am talking about.
Whether WotC will actually follow through with this new format I can't say 100% for sure, but if they don't Legacy will die from over-costed duals. That much is certain.
http://www.findmagiccards.com/Cards/...al_Island.html
That shows the rising price of tropical island (revised). Within the span of 6 years, it quadrupled in value. Do you think Legacy will have a future if duals are double that average in the next 6 years?
If WoTC doesn't do something, Legacy will die. Overextended is a possible solution and I believe they want it to help Legacy stay a popular format without it also suffocating from expensive dual lands.
did you even look for any of the death and taxes builds? or do you have a pre-defined notion of what constitutes as a death and taxes build?
The MTGO Player by the name of La_Keka went with a 3-1 record on 5/24/2010 with the following deck:
LANDS
2 Flagstones of Trokair
4 Karakas
2 Mishra's Factory
11 Plains
3 Wasteland
4 Benevolent Bodyguard
3 Ethersworn Canonist
4 Flickerwisp
3 Jotun Grunt
3 Mangara of Corondor
4 Serra Avenger
3 Stoneforge Mystic
SPELLS:
4 Ęther Vial
2 Oblivion Ring
1 Runed Halo
1 Sword of Fire and Ice
1 Sword of Light and Shadow
4 Swords to Plowshares
1 Umezawa's Jitte
Sideboard
1 Aura of Silence
1 Burrenton Forge-Tender
3 Faerie Macabre
3 Ravenous Trap
3 Silence
2 Tariff
2 Tivadar of Thorn
Similarly on the same day Jarhorsk went 3-1 with his own list.
TheBizzar went 3-1 on 5/20/2010 with a green and white D&T build.
On 5/18/2010 I went 3-1 with my own build. On the same day Blazelix went 3-1. and Boin went 3-1.
On 5/17 I went 3-1 again with a very similar build. And in another tourney on the same day Gainsbanding went 3-1 as did Blazelix.
These are the most recent placings within a given week that are recorded on that site for Death and Taxes. However, I know for a fact that Blazelix has continued to play with the deck, and I am 99% sure that a friend of his mentioned his going 3-1 or better in a daily recently. Additionally almost every week prior to the one I just described above people were placing with death and taxes virtually every week on MTGO since the release of legacy into the program.
also don't use findmagiccards.com to quote prices. It is hardly the most reliable source. Blacklotusproject is better by far for doing that.
Wizards has no responsibility in this regard. They promised never to reprint the cards, not to preserve formats or decks. To suggest that they do have such an obligation is absurd, both from a legal and a practical standpoint. Wizards keeps up their end of the bargain and does not alienate the collectors directly, even if their format making indirectly does so; it's just beyond their care.Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
I have been explaining it this way for many posts on many threads in many forums. Killing Legacy in any way, whether through bannings or through marginilization, is a bad idea no mater how you look at it. Wizards must realize that, and if they do not, then it is our job as players in that format to inform them. The quote that I said remains: a new eternal format does not supplant Legacy, it supplements it.Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
(Vintage is the exception to this, because that is a truly ailing format that does not need to have continued support in any official capacity. Events can happen, but not through official channels).
A lot of argument here is devolving into semantics. There is no reason to argue about the rising price of duals. They are rising. Period. They will continue to rise over the years just by the natural growth of a format and the necessary increase in card prices.
Does this demand a new format? Maybe, maybe not. Some evidence says yes, and other evidence says no. I personally think yes, and I have given my reasons to that effect. As far as evidence goes, I will happily provide any evidence to support any of the points that I have made. This includes the rising price of staples, the direction of those trends, the necessary format modifications and their precedent, and anything else.
In general, this thread should remain on track and on the topic of the format, the arguments for and against it, and the possible methods that Wizards could implement it.
-ktkenshinx-
Please post a direct link to each deck. If you are posting proof, don't make others dig through your proof. It's rude and annoying.Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
Yet again you miss the point again. Also, can your site show how much Tropical island was 6 years ago?Quote:
also don't use findmagiccards.com to quote prices. It is hardly the most reliable source. Blacklotusproject is better by far for doing that.
Do you acknowledge that Legacy isn't sustainable?
I can't post a direct link to each deck because each deck is listed with at least 10 other decks. You will have to go to each days page and look for the decks yourself. The best I can do is post a link to each of the daily events that has at least one death and taxes list with a record of 3-1 or better. However that would be an extensive number of links due to the fact that there are at least 30 to 40 days worth of events with such deck lists. If not more.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
Unfortunately black lotus project does not go back 6 years. However its data is in fact far more reliable as far as pricing than findmagiccards is. And if you want to go that far back I am sure there are better sources out there than findmagiccards anyways.
Just post the links to the ones where DnT decks made up at least 25% of the Top 8 then.Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
Sigh, you continue to miss the point. I don't care about which site is more accruate by 5 dollars or so: the point is Legacy prices of duals are going up and have continued to spike since Legacy became more popular.Quote:
Unfortunately black lotus project does not go back 6 years. However its data is in fact far more reliable as far as pricing than findmagiccards is. And if you want to go that far back I am sure there are better sources out there than findmagiccards anyways.
Do you acknowledge that Legacy is unsustainable as it is now?
Daily Events on MTGO don't have top-8's. They are four rounds of swiss, whoever has the highest tie breakers as well as win records is considered the winners. Anyone with a 3-1 or 4-0 record gets their deck list posted on the official Wizards of the Coast website. Additionally anyone with said record recieves prize payout.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
The only events on MTGO with top-8's are the priemier events, and legacy events that are considered priemer events are a great deal rarer (I only know of one or two that have fired since the inception of Legacy on MTGO despite there being queues for them every day). As such getting reasonable results from said events would be next to impossible. At least results that mean anything.
I would have to see price projections from numerous reputable sites determining the trend that legacy staples are likely to follow over the next 2 or 3 years before I could reasonably make any conclusion about whether or not legacy is or is not sustainable at the current time or in the long run.
EDITING IN DATA:
Since you seem hell bent on seeing said list here is the a list. The following tournaments all have 30 or more participants. Additionally in each of these tournaments Death and Taxes has at least one listing in the 3-1 or better bracket:
4/07/2010
4/08/2010
4/08/2010 event #2
4/13/2010
4/16/2010
4/22/2010
4/25/2010
There haven't really been any daily events since the 25th that have reached 30 participants on MTGO that have been published as of yet.
In the Legacy Priemier event on 4/18/2010 a Death and Taxes deck got 6th Place out of 33 participants link here
The reason that there aren't 30 to 40 days worth of pages listed here is because I cut everything other than the days that had 30 or more participants. It should be noted however that this is 8 tournaments out of approximately 83 tournaments (allow for margin of error as the program that lists the tournaments and deck lists has a habbit of duplicating events from the ends of a week at the start of the next week). That comes to approximately 9% of the total tournaments that had at least one death and taxes deck in their high placement. That percentage will go up because occassionally death and taxes placed twice or sometimes three times in a given tournament. However when you think that legacy has only been on MTGO for approximately 2 and a half months, it would seem to me that a minimum 9% presence of death and taxes in the field over that time, is at the least fairly significant. And what I initially said about Death and Taxes was indeed correct, I said it was 10 to 25%. Nine can be rounded to the next even number which is 10, and even without rounding if you take into account the times when more than one death and taxes place, then you have 10% at the least.
The interesting thing to note however, is that the Magic Online Championship Series (the largest Priemier Events on Magic Online aside from Pro Tour Qualifiers) is just starting it's season seven now. And the Season 7 Championship is scheduled to be in the Legacy Format.
And I would also like to suggest that we do get back onto topic, as we have been sidetracked long enough. The topic at hand is that without proof that the new format is coming, and I mean SIGNIFICANT proof. I see no reason to argue that it is indeed coming. And unfortunately there is no significant proof that a new format is coming. All you guys have is speculation and conjecture about things that have happened, are happening, and why you think Wizards should do something about it.
Like I said, I don't care about DnT since it's on MTGO and Wizards has full control over the card quanity for their online game.
DnT is not a tier 1 or 1.5 in the paper version, which is all that matters for this discussion. Otherwise, you would have showings for the paper version.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DalkonCledwin
If you believe there is no proof and there won't be a third eternal format, then you must believe Legacy is going to die off due to dual land prices. The major problems with Legacy:
1- The dual lands are in limited supply, while the popularity of Legacy increases, which means not everyone is going to be able to get the duals they want.
2- Since the duals are on the reserved list, WoTC can not reprint them without starting a shit storm with collectors and anyone else banking on duals being valuable as a result of their scarcity.
3- There is no other eternal format that can take off some of the load of the growing popularity (and cost) of Legacy. Vintage is dead and just as, if not more so, expensive.
I'll now ask you for the third time...
Do you acknowledge that Legacy is unsustainable as it is now?
I'm curious what that even means. Sustainable for how long? Forever? 100 years? 30 years? 10 years?Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
I know you don't care about MTGO, but actually, MTGO is a good example in that even though the format is in its infancy online, people are still willing to play it. I have seen people take cost-cutting measures because they lack certain cards, especially in their mana base. I see no reason why we should doubt its [Legacy's, not just MTGO] sustainability in the short term, and you haven't really shown us any long-term time frame.
People like to talk about how Vintage is dead, but tournaments still happen, especially side events at larger tournaments. Also, proxy tournaments happen. If Vintage can survive, I don't see why Legacy can't, particularly when the bar for entry is less than Vintage. There are many areas around America (and, indeed, the world) that have little to no Legacy community to speak of, and where Legacy tournaments are populated by rogue decks, homebrews and decks with holes missing as people make due with tier 2 substitutions. That's par for the course. Does that mean Legacy, at this moment in time, is moribund? I don't think so. In my home town, even Standard tournaments had meager turnouts and were not full of tier one decks. My point is, talking about sustainability is difficult if you don't give more of a description of in which way you consider something sustainable.
legacy is far from being unsustainable as it is now.Quote:
Originally Posted by DragoFireheart
The duals are in limited supply yet there are TONS out and it s still not hard to find duals, like at all. Expensive ? sure baneslayer is 40$, JTMS is 80$, Elspetch is 50$.
There are decks in all tiers that can live AND WIN (tournament wise) without duals.
If overextended finally come out shit(shock)land won't remain that low, such as any new staple that ll rise, and all in all if that new format has any sucess - which i doubt - prices will still drastically increase just like in T2 & Legacy.
So your statements are just pointless.
and btw vintage isn't dead.
got your answer ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by MMogg
Well, this is one player who won't be playing online if thats the route Legacy is heading.
Quote:
People like to talk about how Vintage is dead, but tournaments still happen, especially side events at larger tournaments. Also, proxy tournaments happen. If Vintage can survive, I don't see why Legacy can't, particularly when the bar for entry is less than Vintage.
I don't care if Vintage is surviving: it's not thriving.
If all you want is for Legacy to be semi-casual local tournaments like Vintage then fine: Legacy is sustainable.Quote:
There are many areas around America (and, indeed, the world) that have little to no Legacy community to speak of, and where Legacy tournaments are populated by rogue decks, homebrews and decks with holes missing as people make due with tier 2 substitutions. That's par for the course. Does that mean Legacy, at this moment in time, is moribund? I don't think so. In my home town, even Standard tournaments had meager turnouts and were not full of tier one decks. My point is, talking about sustainability is difficult if you don't give more of a description of in which way you consider something sustainable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ryO!
I hear $50 for a dual land is cheap when they were $20 a few years ago.
Now? Sure, I suppose if you don't mind dropping $300 or so for your mana base. Couple years? How sure are you about that?Quote:
The duals are in limited supply yet there are TONS out and it s still not hard to find duals, like at all.
And you can crack open packs to get them. You can't do that with duals. Wizards can always reprint them to make obtaining them easier. In fact, Baneslayer is being reprinted.Quote:
Expensive ? sure baneslayer is 40$, JTMS is 80$, Elspetch is 50$.
I don't want to invest $200 on a shit Tier 2 or $400 in a Tier 1.5 deck and go 1-3-1 to drop out. I want the best or top tier hot shit deck if I am going to drive 1-2hours + to boston and will be paying a $25 entry fee.Quote:
There are decks in all tiers that can live AND WIN (tournament wise) without duals.
WoTC can reprint shocklands if they start to generate a lot of demand, which helps keep the price down. Wotc can't do that with duals.Quote:
If overextended finally come out shit(shock)land won't remain that low, such as any new staple that ll rise, and all in all if that new format has any sucess - which i doubt - prices will still drastically increase just like in T2 & Legacy.
I might agree since you didn't bother to put any thought into your response towards them, so my statements are arguably a waste of time.Quote:
So your statements are just pointless.
Lemme clarify: Vintage obviously isn't dead, but it's being pecked to death by angry vultures who are content with keeping it alive so they can continue to enjoy pecking it to death, with the vultures being the players who are hellbent on playing vintage regardless and don't mind dropping thousands on Power 9 (In Europe)Quote:
and btw vintage isn't dead.
You call your post an answer? At least raise your standards.Quote:
got your answer ?
What I think is funny is if overextended existed people would run to it exclaiming "yeah, I can afford the cards!", until they went up in price due to demand. Then they would say "at least they can all be reprinted!", as they watch the price of Tarmogoyf get even more obscene without a reprint. Then they'll say "it's better than Legacy and Vintage because there's less broken cards", as they realize how ungodly boring old Extended really was.
It's pretty horrible playing with Masques up, lemme tell you. I think Legacy is safe.
No one here is doubting the short term viability of Legacy as a format. In America, the SCG Open events are a testament to its popularity, and the dozens of regional European and East Asian tournaments reinforces its strength. Wizards' Legacy Grand Prix was also a stunning success to all involved, and Legacy's health is to thank for that. Short term, we are definitely fine.Quote:
Originally Posted by MMogg
But the concern that Drago and I are voicing is one of long term sustainability. Now, you question what that means: "Forever? 100 years? 30 years? 10 years?" These ranges are a bit outrageous to consider, but also not in the scope of the question. My worry is not about Legacy in a decade. It is about Legacy in 2-5 years. To demonstrate the problem, as I see it, we will use a small case study, the Dual Lands from Unlimited Edition. I will focus on the three most popular dual lands to demonstrate my point.
Let's take a look at the price of 3 dual lands, the 3 most used Dual Lands according to deckcheck.net (source: http://www.deckcheck.net/mpc.php?format=Legacy): Tropical Island, Tundra, and Underground Sea. We will be looking at the prices as graphed on Black Lotus Project, a website that describes itself as "The Gathering card price graphs from the Magic Online Trading League's latest non-foil physical magic card list. New prices are loaded every morning around 8:30am CST, which means the graphs are always fresh and up-to-date." (http://blacklotusproject.com/). More specifically, the site "...relies on the pricelists that Magic Traders publishes every day for the pricing data shown throughout the site. They collect data from eBay and calculate the "price" by averaging the selling price of all auctions for a given card." (http://blacklotusproject.com/blog/). Therefore, we can reasonably assume that this is a highly reliable website because it gets its data from eBay, probably the number 1 place that Legacy players would seek out cards.
Here are the price graphs for the three lands in question.
Tropical Island: http://blacklotusproject.com/cards/R...opical+Island/
Tundra: http://blacklotusproject.com/cards/U...dition/Tundra/
Underground Sea: http://blacklotusproject.com/cards/R...derground+Sea/
First, let's zoom out all the way using the scale at the bottom of the graph. That will make our earliest entry, as of June 24 2010, October 28 2008. At this time, Legacy still had not seen the Starcitygames Open Series, nor had it received too much official, sanctioned support from Wizards (especially after the ugly Grand Prix Columbus with Flash Hulk dominance). The only Sanctioned event was Grand Prix Chicago in March of 2008, with local TO's handling the rest for that year. Here are the starting prices ($) for the 3 lands as of October 28 2008.
Tropical Island: 26.34
Tundra: 40.55
Underground Sea: 34.58
And here are their prices ($) as of today, June 24 2010.
Tropical Island: 53.29
Tundra: 69.44
Underground Sea: 73.01
That's definitely an increase, but how big of an increase? To start, let's just see the overall percent change between the two dates.
Percent Increase Between October 28 2008 and June 24 2010
Tropical Island: 102.35%
Tundra: 71.25%
Underground Sea: 111.14%
Those are some big percentage increases. Looking at the graphs, we see that these are also fairly constant increases. This is most true on the Tropical Island graph, which has been going up, up, up since October. It is least constant on the Tundra graph, which has a lot of weird dips and flatlines across its progression. But all of that said, these numbers definitely hold for the overall trend of the graph.
Now, we know that it has been 607 (or 608 inclusive) days between October 28 2008 and June 24 2010. That means we can figure out roughly, on average, over the long span of time, how much the duals have been rising in price every day. To do this, we will find the difference between the old and new price, and then divide by the number of days.
Price Increase Per Day
Tropical Island: .044 per day
Tundra: .048 per day
Underground Sea: .063 per day
I understand that there are fractions of pennies in there, but I do not want to lose data with too much rounding, so 3 sig-figs will have to suffice. I also understand that it is perilous to extrapolate data like this, especially when I apply only a two year period of data to draw conclusions over a 5+ year period of data. But all that said, it's the statistics that we have, and we can't just ignore them no matter what side of the argument you are on.
So now that we have these values, we can, with great risks of course, extrapolate what MIGHT happen to duals over a given time period. Again, I stress that it is dangerous to extrapolate like this, but it is the data we have to work with, so we have to use it as best we can.
Prices ($) after 1 Year
Tropical Island: 69.49
Tundra: 86.81
Underground Sea: 96.12
Prices ($) after 2 Years
Tropical Island: 85.70
Tundra: 104.18
Underground Sea: 119.23
Prices ($) after 3 Years
Tropical Island: 101.91
Tundra: 121.56
Underground Sea: 142.34
Now, before you say "ROFL NUB LURN ECON LAWL" or something to that effect, please understand that I have qualified these results numerous times. It's dangerous to use data like this, especially our small sample size. But it is also, in this case, probably acceptable. Why? Because Legacy has seen consistent growth for the past 2 years with the largest growth occurring only in the last 12 months. Because the graphs of the dual lands have, with the weird Tundra dips aside, remained basically constant slopes for that time; in fact, many of them have had increased slopes this past year. The trend of rising dual prices has held for two years, and will probably go up given Legacy's continued popularity.
IF that happens and IF prices remain roughly the same, then my predictions might hold and we might see all three duals surpassing the $100 mark in 3 years, with 2 of them passing it in only 2 years. That's very bad news for Legacy, if it happens like that.
Now, you might say "It's not going to happen like that, and therefore you don't need to be talking about this." But that's a bunch of bull, and you must know it. Legacy will continue to grow in popularity as more events are held by SCG and other TO's, and more prizes are put on the line; why would SCG suddenly stop its tournament series, given how much money and publicity it probably gives them? If Legacy cannot have its popularity slowed, or its cards reprinted, then we look forward to the WORST case scenario which is what I have described above. It is NOT the only case that could happen, just the bad one. I hope that I have been suitably qualified in my remarks and no one tries to pounce on me for it, because that would mean you basically didn't read a word I have said.
A new format alleviates that pressure by splitting the Eternal crowd. This is not the only thing that a new format does, but it is one thing that it does well.
My advice to Wizards has always been, and always will be, to release premium products of staples (like the Shocklands and even Goyf) to the public as a promotional release for their new format. It would drive their sales, it would drive format popularity, and it would keep prices fairly reasonable. If Wizards chooses to be foolish and just launch into this format without any reprints or any promotional buzz, then it is doomed, and I will be disappointed (As will other players). But this is an easily avoidable problem, and I hope Wizards sees that.Quote:
Originally Posted by dahcmai
-ktkenshinx-