All B/R update speculation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimhead

Two things at play here:

1. Some people believe controll-ish midrange will be the go-to control decks in the post SDT meta.
2. Some people believe that with Miracles and Terminus gone the format will somehow be good for Maverick, Jund, Junk, and all sorts of other obsolete non-blue midrange and aggro decks.

(1) Might well be true, but it by no means indicates our format will be flooded with midrange.
(2) Is absurd IMO, but there seem to be some very optimistic non-blue creature deck lovers out there in for a rude awakening.

If you have another idea why (some) people are predicting so much midrange I'd love to hear.

---

I too think that DRS+TNN+Snapcaster+discard will be the upcoming top dog, because losing Miracles does not affect the base power of the UBg shell, BUT it never was about Maverick or similar decks.

All people asked for was a way to build decks which didn't completely evolve around the question of how to adress Terminus and Counterbalance at the same time. If a concept can't deal with both aspects, it was outright trash. Terminus/Counterbalance was the test to pass for every deck and after almost 4 years the only "solution" seemed to be "play a fringe and clunky deck which loses against the remaining 85% of the metagame". Again, its not about Jund, Maverick or aggro decks in general, but about giving people some room to breathe/brew. Of course, if the ban of Terminus was a subtopic in the thread, people pointed to old aggro-angle archetypes which vanished over the years to possibly return in some numbers, but in no way one hinted that Jund & Co would be a top tier deck without Miracles. It's just about giving people the option to pick up and evolve these archtypes again, which wasn't possible in the solved state the format had the last 12+ months


@Claymore

That's years of TheSource on a nutshell ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutthroatCasual

BUGx TNN + Leovold. Not that Miracles stomped over that deck (in fact, Miracles had an even to unfavorable MU against them), but now that the premier "doesn't target to remove" deck is gone, TNN will become better and Leovold will nearly always draw you a card.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CutthroatCasual

Fixed that for you. If you want to play a format dominated by midrange, there's one that shares the first letter with the archetype.

---

I really am enjoying all the whining. I am ejoying less all the nonsense, but I have appreciated plenty of others have already answered.
BUGx have many awful matchups to keep it in check: lands, burn, blood-moon stompys, basically all the combos. Plus, I am expecting elves to be the biggest winner of this ban, and it's a bad matchup also.
The most fun part of the first quote though is "Leovold will nearly always draw you a card"!!!111!!! no, really?! like a Baleful Strix but costing one more mana specific coloured? We should ban Strix before it all comes down to UB deck dominating the metagame!!!

As for the midrange consideration, even if midrange strategies would become more present in the new meta (and I don't think so), it will never be like modern. I think that you haven't played many modern games, as you haven't with bug decks in legacy. The problem in that format is PRECISELY the lack of interaction between the players, the stack being irrelevant, fast combos being almost unstoppable, blue lacking real disruption... A legacy midrange mirror can't be battled on creature board presence only; plus, in legacy you will always acknowledge the presence of combos; in a few words, a legacy matchup will always feature more interaction between the players and more fun as a consequence.

As for the issue about control being or not being playable in a "hard control" mode or if it needs some form of "aggresion" (SFM, GOYF, etc). I can't see how this could be perceived as a problem by the majority of players. But I am old, and I like control, so let's say it could be a consideration for me. Well, I remember playing hard control decks where you needed to play sorcery speed sweepers, and you hadn't any way of "closing fast the match" once you were able to more-or-less stabilize the board. Two damages a turn with Mishra? Ultimating Jace? All of that in a situation where you reached a far less oppressive and soft "lock" than top-balance. And yet, it was viable.
So I can't understand why hard-control shouldn't be viable in the new meta. There are new problematic printings, true. TNN? I remember having to play with BUG Landeed against Thrun which was not only untargettable but also uncounterable. They have not printed threats only, the have also printed answers. Toxic deluge? Oh wait, you think a hard control deck can be only UW? What about Council's Judgment then. Uncounterable wraths? Yes, we have them. Why not try something new, like As Foretold plus Restore Balance. Why not play just one terminus, personal tutor, and stadstill (your opponent can't commit to the board once they see terminus, then you plowshare their EOT plus standstill. And once again they can't overcommit cause you can always brainstorm the terminus on top any moment). I'm not saying something it will work, but that something could. Of course, it won't be AS EASY as with miracle.

From a control player perspective, the big question about miracle was not only it being "oppressive" or a real (and the actual only one) tier 0. It was that its game plan was too easy. Why should you be allowed an instant speed undercosted sweeper? Why should you be allowed to close the game fast (maybe again instant speed with EOT ETA)? The real reason everybody is whining is because now if you want to play control:
[*] you'll need to go the hard way
[*] once again you'll have bad matchups.

Will a new hard-control deck be viable? I don't know. But I think it will be fun to try and test.
A thing (try and test a different hard-control deck) that we couldn't do before (if we wanted to play competitive), because there was already a better option (just play miracle) plus a downside (apart from being probably less effective against the meta, any hypotethical different control would always lose from the CB lock).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDK

:rolleyes:

---

Just so we are clear, I do not agree with the decision. However:

• I do agree it was a reasonable a defensible call.

Also, I am by no means one of the "salty" ones:

• I won't miss the match that much. It was a unique challenge, but also very taxing mentally.
• My favourite archetypes are prison, followed by combo.
• My favourite colour is :g:.
• My favourite card type is land.
• I joined just after the Mystical Tutor ban - this is the most exciting shake-up I've ever experienced.
• My enthusiasm for MTG hasn't been this high since Eldrazi Aggro arrived last year.

So I'm pretty happy right now. In fact for strictly selfish reasons I prefer the ban!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDK

Which is funny, considering the salty ones are shouting "have fun with your midrange festival

---

Okay. Remember I'm responding to this:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dice_Box

Honest question. Why is it I am hearing how midrange is going to take over in a world where Tempo, Combo and Prison Control decks all exist?

---

I'm not sure who exactly Dice was hearing from. We can only speculate why they'd reach so preposterous an hypothesis.

We can also assume there is not a single mentality - but all kinds of notions floating around in this sea of emotions.

Yes, salty control players are reacting to the ban by venting their angst against recent (midrange pushing) design - and saying some foolish things.

Also, (formerly) salty Maverick (and) Zoo players are wetting their pants.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

IAgain, its not about Jund, Maverick or aggro decks in general, but about giving people some room to breathe/brew. Of course, if the ban of Terminus was a subtopic in the thread, people pointed to old aggro-angle archetypes which vanished over the years to possibly return in some numbers, but in no way one hinted that Jund & Co would be a top tier deck without Miracles. It's just about giving people the option to pick up and evolve these archtypes again, which wasn't possible in the solved state the format had the last 12+ months

---

That's certainly a reasonable position.

All I'm saying is these guys talking so much about bringing back their pet decks might be causing other people to adopt the irrational fear-mongering about supposed upcoming Midrange format. Again, I don't really know who is thinking such a thing, and I can only guess at their "reasoning".

Am I the only one who has a hunch that we'll look back at the Top ban in much the same way we look at the Mystical Tutor ban?

As in, questionable at the time, but pretty certainly right given what was later printed.

Or is everyone still salty about that ban?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H

Am I the only one who has a hunch that we'll look back at the Top ban in much the same way we look at the Mystical Tutor ban?

As in, questionable at the time, but pretty certainly right given what was later printed.

Or is everyone still salty about that ban?

---

I am salty about that reasoning for the Mystical Tutor ban, not the ban itself.

Mystical Tutor was a luring threat getting more powerful the more instants/sorceries get printed (similar to survival in terms of creatures), but pulling some bullshit about "MTGO practice room" and "gentlemens agreement" out of ones ass, will never be forgiven, especially as LaPille is still working in the Development Department.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I am salty about that reasoning for the Mystical Tutor ban, not the ban itself.

Mystical Tutor was a luring threat getting more powerful the more instants/sorceries get printed (similar to survival in terms of creatures), but pulling some bullshit about "MTGO practice room" and "gentlemens agreement" out of ones ass, will never be forgiven, especially as LaPille is still working in the Development Department.

---

Given that I wasn't paying much attention to Magic at the time (uni), and given that it took me forever to find the damnable thing, here's the article for anyone who's curious: http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles...ons-2010-06-25

That was, indeed, terrible reasoning on their part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I am salty about that reasoning for the Mystical Tutor ban, not the ban itself.

Mystical Tutor was a luring threat getting more powerful the more instants/sorceries get printed (similar to survival in terms of creatures), but pulling some bullshit about "MTGO practice room" and "gentlemens agreement" out of ones ass, will never be forgiven, especially as LaPille is still working in the Development Department.

---

Which is why I never read the "explanations" because they are usually just the PR pitch.

History can reveal that the spin (on the MT ban) was bogus, but the result was correct. That's fine with me.

I think time will show us this is probably another case of the same.

For all we know, there is some Miracle-esque top-deck mechanic in the future, or some other design space they are looking at.

Consider: Vizier of the Menagerie, while not really relevant to Legacy, could show an example of design space they are working into.

The new XUG Nissa as well. Descendant's Path. Delver of Secrets. Top of the library is space they're getting into, and it just happened that Miracles busted it open with Terminus and Entreat. Top was already banned in Modern and most top of the library space is creatures, which Miracles made irrelevant. I'm curious if banning Terminus or Counterbalance would've led to some other interaction being busted enough with Top around.

I mean Brainstorm and Ponder are both still around to really help you control the top of the deck. I think it'll be fine. Also I find the current miracles thread incredibly interesting right now. It is nice to see ideas being thrown around and completely different deck lists rather than the usual of "Do I run the fourth snapcaster or fourth predict?". It Looks like the fucking Nic Fit thread in there right now of just wild west lists

Update!

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles...ent-2017-04-26

haha it's just about banning Felidar Guardian in standard. They couldn't even unban mind twist with this announcement?\

Anyway, they have serious problems going on over there. Yikes.

^ lulz

Unrelated to that, but related to SDT. It's banned, whatevs. Can we start enforcing slow play now anyway?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimhead

All I'm saying is these guys talking so much about bringing back their pet decks might be causing other people to adopt the irrational fear-mongering about supposed upcoming Midrange format. Again, I don't really know who is thinking such a thing, and I can only guess at their "reasoning".

---

I mean. I could see bringing Junk again; but I don't expect to crush combo. That's the whole thing. Every other deck in the format has to deal with bad MUs. Miracles just sidestepped all that completely by being able to run loads of basics without issue, no cards you can interact with outside of Counterbalance [while being the least targetable card type in the game], and Voila.

I don't mind playing against Storm when I'm junk. That's the luck-of-the-draw aspect of legacy. If I win it's either a testament to skill difference or an absolute luck sack. Miracles was like someone somehow managing to convince you against your will "I bet you $5 you can't ride an exercise bike for 8 hours." You can. Literally anyone can. No one wants to. But inevitably on hour 5 as you think to yourself "Why am I here..?" You think.. "Well shit! I only have 3 hours to go!"

But unlike that, the bike was rigged to fall apart at hour 7.5.
Every time.
For eternity.

Until you died.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by maharis

Update!

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles...ent-2017-04-26

haha it's just about banning Felidar Guardian in standard. They couldn't even unban mind twist with this announcement?\

Anyway, they have serious problems going on over there. Yikes.

---

Wizards handling of this has been a cat-astrophe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Brael

Wizards handling of this has been a cat-astrophe.

---

So they needed 2 days to find out the amonkhet standard environment was already solved? Manglehorn was great hate both against heart of kiran as well as saheeli rai.

WOTC is seriously fucking shit up, first baning looter scooter, then emrakul, now felidar guardian. Why the fuck would you buy into a dominant deck anymore if wotc is deciding who gets to play what anyway. What a typical wotc catastrophe. I never want to hear "we only test for standard" again from wotc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bruizar

So they needed 2 days to find out the amonkhet standard environment was already solved? Manglehorn was great hate both against heart of kiran as well as saheeli rai.

WOTC is seriously fucking shit up, first baning looter scooter, then emrakul, now felidar guardian. Why the fuck would you buy into a dominant deck anymore if wotc is deciding who gets to play what anyway. What a typical wotc catastrophe. I never want to hear "we only test for standard" again from wotc.

---

The interesting thing is that going by what they said, they barely test for Standard either. They do test for it, but given the numbers of people they have on any given format it's just not possible to test much. Think about how much iterative development they have going on at a time. Then consider that any given format can only be tested for 3 months (since that's their release schedule). I strongly suspect they only get 10 rounds in with the final version of a format.

That's why their current set design philosophy is so screwed up. Remember Innistrad? It had a strong graveyard theme, yet preceding it put Tormod's Crypt, Surgical Extraction, and Nihil Spellbomb into Standard. During it we got Grafdiggers Cage and several pieces of exile based removal. After it we got Ground Seal, Rest in Peace, Deathrite Shaman, and Scavenging Ooze. That's a lot of safety valves for a format, and it allowed people to interact when GY's were an issue. But current set design has totally abandoned that philosophy. They push removal later into a format to let a sets mechanics shine, and they started pushing mechanics which simply don't work in the face of removal. Heroic? Eldrazi? Devotion? These mechanics wither and die in a world where basic cards like Doom Blade exist. Wizards started screwing up years ago, and this is what happens after going down that path. Formats need safety valves, and a lot of them. Wizards removed them all in order to push a few creatures.

The greatest irony of it all? Because Legacy/Modern aren't iterative, they would actually be easier to test for.

Edit: Going to make a called shot. They said they aren't testing the planeswalker decks either. There's about to be 3 legal Gideons in Standard for that dumb emblem, as well as a spell that tutors for planeswalkers. People can concievably run a 16 Gideon deck, so that they can't lose the game, and back that up with board wipes and so on. I bet a ban happens here too.. all because yet again, they didn't test the cards they're adding to the format or include any safety valves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bruizar

So they needed 2 days to find out the amonkhet standard environment was already solved? Manglehorn was great hate both against heart of kiran as well as saheeli rai.

WOTC is seriously fucking shit up, first baning looter scooter, then emrakul, now felidar guardian. Why the fuck would you buy into a dominant deck anymore if wotc is deciding who gets to play what anyway. What a typical wotc catastrophe. I never want to hear "we only test for standard" again from wotc.

---

I blew a couple thousand dollars on Standard before I started playing Legacy, and all I can say is that they really don't learn from their mistakes.

Every Standard iteration has its dominant deck. They can't change that, and the fact that they devote so much energy to doing so indicates that their priorities are not at all aligned with attainable goals or a realistic understanding of how the game works outside the testing room.

Regarding Standard, from my perspective, never again.

Regarding the philosophy of the Standard—and Legacy—bans, they indicate that popular opinion (important though it is for their continued attainment of a profit margin) is more important than an analysis of what's right and wrong with the game. Modern bans have long evinced this, but it's reaching the point that I can't think of a valid argument for their having any other concern but their bottom line.

[EDIT: Opposed though I am to bans of any kind, I am glad Miracles took a hit, though I'd have been much happier had the hit not been one with collateral damage.]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by bruizar

So they needed 2 days to find out the amonkhet standard environment was already solved? Manglehorn was great hate both against heart of kiran as well as saheeli rai.

WOTC is seriously fucking shit up, first baning looter scooter, then emrakul, now felidar guardian. Why the fuck would you buy into a dominant deck anymore if wotc is deciding who gets to play what anyway. What a typical wotc catastrophe. I never want to hear "we only test for standard" again from wotc.

---

Is Thalia Heretic out of standard already? I figured she'd fix the problem [although being in the same colors as the combo isn't helpful lol]

It's kinda funny that this particular combo is actually *faster* than the copy-enchantment they banned [sort of. you had to untap with your killer]

This is WOTC's chickens coming home to roost, I'm enjoying it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tescrin

Is Thalia Heretic out of standard already? I figured she'd fix the problem [although being in the same colors as the combo isn't helpful lol]

It's kinda funny that this particular combo is actually *faster* than the copy-enchantment they banned [sort of. you had to untap with your killer]

---

Flash makes that last bit mostly irrelevant.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Deuce

I blew a couple thousand dollars on Standard before I started playing Legacy, and all I can say is that they really don't learn from their mistakes.

Every Standard iteration has its dominant deck. They can't change that, and the fact that they devote so much energy to doing so indicates that their priorities are not at all aligned with attainable goals or a realistic understanding of how the game works outside the testing room.

---

I disagree with this. While it is true most Standard environments do have one deck that takes up a noticeably bigger metagame share than the rest, there are exceptions. Innistrad-RTR, for example, was actually a quite diverse Standard.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tescrin

Is Thalia Heretic out of standard already? I figured she'd fix the problem [although being in the same colors as the combo isn't helpful lol]

---

Thalia is still Standard legal. Sees a ton of play, too; MTG Top 8 says it's in 31.3% of decks.

What the actual fuck? Can't they analyze data BEFORE their regular B&R announcement? Does this mean they can now ban/unban stuff whenever the fuck they please by a Steve Jobs memorial dick move of "Oh, I barely forgot one more thing..."?

On the ban itself:
Of course it was a ban as a result of their obvious, non existing testing and of course ot was a combo deck which gets neutered. WotC is just off the hooks with their bans in Standard in a 3-6 month cycle while Legacy takes 3 years and a sign on their parking lot to actually notice that something is off

Copycat way already 40% of all 5-0 decks before the B&R announcement. Now they panic and emergency ban because it's still 40% two days later? Bullshit.

My guess is that prerelease and preorder numbers for the latest set came in and were catastrophic, so they had to change things asap, especially with sale numbers down in Q1 2017.

I think they'd be better off just leaving the format alone even if it is a two-deck affair (I mean, it's usually no more than a 3-deck format anyway so who cares?). Seems this way they are making themselves look like a total shambles and pissing off their customers who are constantly having to chop and change their decks even more often than they would do normally.

Also, dunno why they seem to hate anything that isn't just slapping each other in face with creatures for standard these days. There just seems to be so few opportunities for any kind of interesting interactions and if there is one it now gets banned.

B & R Announcement June 14:

Standard: no changes

Modern: no changes

Legacy: Julian is banned from playing Elves.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barook

Copycat way already 40% of all 5-0 decks before the B&R announcement. Now they panic and emergency ban because it's still 40% two days later? Bullshit.

My guess is that prerelease and preorder numbers for the latest set came in and were catastrophic, so they had to change things asap, especially with sale numbers down in Q1 2017.

---

it's exactly this behavior that pushes magic players to eternal or worst, hearthstone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

I am salty about that reasoning for the Mystical Tutor ban, not the ban itself.

---

An old weak gray man on the hill
Alone, sad he looks down, down the vale


I'm very close to being sad that I cannot play Magic: the Gathering anymore, at least not with the cards that I could be calling my own. The SDT affair is the most interesting B&R decision in years, and it will lead to an explosion in deck-building creativity, metagame shifts and tournaments attendance.

I really like the elegance of WotC's solution. While crippling the non-Mircles deck was bad side effect of the banning, it's still lovely that the other two "offenders" (CB and Terminus) are unharmed and there's a possibility for the archetype (and its very original cards) to survive.

While Terminus might be a cold meat, and God bless that it happened, Counterbalance is still usable, and as it is an extraordinarily interesting card (that may finally serve its duty without being misused due to the 2nd part of the lock), I'm glad that it remains.
It may become a part of "non-broken" prison style deck, a type of CB.dec that finally needs some tweaking (similarly to how other prison decks need to be builded, be it CotV/Stasis/whatever) and doesn't just get jammed into the Best Cards pile.

I know that Scroll Rack (and Tax/Rack as an archetype) is pretty far from SDT/Miracles, but that's exactly what I like about the idea. Instead of having a CB/Top hard lock that needs zero deckbuilding concession to apply, a lock that is kinda easy to operate, and one that leads to enormous number of non-games, now there'd be a "soft" lock that is operated through main phase Ponders and/or JTMS activations (that pre-emptively set the top card in an anticipation of opponent's possible plays, something that calls for the skills that only a few Cabal Therapy masters posses), with a backup of one and only Scroll Rack activation, maybe with an emergency Brainstorm.

The inability to flush the board clean during the "announce attackers" phase is a real plus, yet the one-mana Wrath is still viable, although its chances are lowered.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Can't they analyze data BEFORE their regular B&R announcement?

---

This is the main question that leads me to think it's not a bad thing that they listened to the players on Top. Assuming, of course, that they actually listened to players.

I don't know; their reasoning was flimsy this time around, too.

Also, yeah; 48 hours' worth of data? Really? Rounds of Standard don't finish in 48 hours.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by catmint

B & R Announcement June 14:

Standard: no changes

Modern: no changes

Legacy: Julian is banned from playing Elves.

---

I don't think they'll ban Julian till the 16th. They need to gather some data, right?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Deuce

This is the main question that leads me to think it's not a bad thing that they listened to the players on Top. Assuming, of course, that they actually listened to players.

---

There's real danger in listening to players. Players are usually divided, (and almost always self-interested) with the least content making the most noise. And there ks always something in this format people are screaming to have banned. Look what has been happening in Vintage.

I very much hope SDT was banned for tournament data and not player feedback.

The difference in Vintage is that they seem to be weighing heavily on one heavily inbred small metagame in the VSL. If the legacy league on MODO takes off it's a great thing, but I really hope that because we still have some large legacy tourney every month or two that any future decisions wouldn't rest solely on the Legacy MODO league

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Megadeus

really hope that because we still have some large legacy tourney every month or two that any future decisions wouldn't rest solely on the Legacy MODO league

---

That's my hope too. But I can't help thinking that Miracles was (so I heard) far more dominant online than in paper.

I don't mind the Top ban. But I would mind if WotC starts getting hands on with the banned list.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Deuce

This is the main question that leads me to think it's not a bad thing that they listened to the players on Top. Assuming, of course, that they actually listened to players.

I don't know; their reasoning was flimsy this time around, too.

Also, yeah; 48 hours' worth of data? Really? Rounds of Standard don't finish in 48 hours.

---

How many times does it need to be shown that the "explanations" in the B&R announcement is solely PR pitch? Spin, nothing more. This doesn't mean it can't have elements of truth, or be based on some facts. You don't need their explanations, you have logic you can use. Somewhat valuable life lesson: look what people do, not what they say.

I'm pretty sure they saw Zvi's article and realized what was about to happen. Kuddos for at least realizing they fucked up and fixing it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimhead

That's my hope too. But I can't help thinking that Miracles was (so I heard) far more dominant online than in paper.

---

Noticed this awhile back:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by lordofthepit

So for the first time, I got a Miracles list posted as a 5-0 in a league for which I didn't even go 5-0. Apparently, this has also happened with another Miracles player I know. Is there something about the MTGO posting algorithm that somehow may cause Miracles list to be over-represented among these 5-0 lists?

(I have also had several 5-0s for which the lists were never posted. I think these were usually with decks other than Miracles.)

---

They only post either a random assortment of 5-0 or 4-1 decks, or they curate the list. I remember awhile back they started to restrict the data that came out of MTGO dailies because formats were being solved too fast. It likely was dominant and everywhere online, I've heard it was a cheap deck.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimhead

I don't mind the Top ban. But I would mind if WotC starts getting hands on with the banned list.

---

I have to agree with you here. (Dont let it get to your head :tongue:) Right now the talk that DRS is next feels premature as fuck to me. For a long time I have had one deck in my sights, that target has been taken down. I have come to understand that Brainstorm is not going to be touched and thus no longer care to think on it. Since the only other card I feel really needs to go won't be, I am hoping we have a long period of stability with unbannings marking the large events that occur.

To the comments that DRS is next: This is Legacy, wait until at lest we have reports what you feel is going to happen has played out. A year to 18 months I think is a good amount of time to work out what comes of this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Megadeus

The difference in Vintage is that they seem to be weighing heavily on one heavily inbred small metagame in the VSL. If the legacy league on MODO takes off it's a great thing, but I really hope that because we still have some large legacy tourney every month or two that any future decisions wouldn't rest solely on the Legacy MODO league

---

We also as a format do not have a single or small group of voices that speak for us with broad appeal. We have our people that we as a community look to, but they are not really seen from the outside as voices for the format. I would happily talk of Julian and Stephen as equals in their respective fields and weight within the formats they have become titans of, outside of the formats I would argue Stephen's voice reaches out a greater distance that Julian's does. Granted, I speak as an insider of both the Legacy and Vintage formats so I may be wrong, but that is my personal perception.

So I am not sure that the VLS field itself gets more weight so much as the voices that come from it reach out past their epicenter. Legacy, without this broadcast, has a hamstrung reach that Vintage has found and delivered. This is not not because of a lack of voices worthy of the role though. I do not like personally Joe Lossett for some of his behaviour on this site but I do respect his views on the format. I would be happy if he was a voice that, aside with Julian, Reid, Bob Huang and should she wish to come back and speak, Feline Longmore all were public voices for us. I know that there are others too, Long for example, but I can not list everyone who I feel would be fit for this role. We would be here all day. I would also state these are not all people to whom I agree, but one can not have true change in an echo chamber.

This is a format I love, and it is a format I wish I could have more of a voice in. I do my part once a month as a small scale data cruncher, but as a man who can not write articles, (I have tried 3 times this year and I never manage to) can not make events outside of my local sphere and can not even claim I am a good player I must lend my voice to others to carry. At this stage I feel like the people whom that weight must rest on are doing what they can, but until some time as a true megaphone rests in their hands we are still going to sit without equals to the VSL and its influence.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimhead

I don't think they'll ban Julian till the 16th. They need to gather some data, right?

---

Following the logic of Tom LaPille, he just needs to lose against Julian in the MTGO practice room

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=mkd6JkfI4yk

It's just too perfect for the current state of things.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H

How many times does it need to be shown that the "explanations" in the B&R announcement is solely PR pitch? Spin, nothing more. This doesn't mean it can't have elements of truth, or be based on some facts.

---

That'd actually be even worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by H

You don't need their explanations, you have logic you can use. Somewhat valuable life lesson: look what people do, not what they say.

---

Don't worry; I'm one step ahead of you there (I follow politics and live in America). I don't think they'd lie, though; they don't stand to gain anything, especially when people get so angry about their decision-making.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Deuce

That'd actually be even worse.

---

What would be worse?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ronald Deuce

Don't worry; I'm one step ahead of you there (I follow politics and live in America). I don't think they'd lie, though; they don't stand to gain anything, especially when people get so angry about their decision-making.

---

I never said they lie in the "explanations," just that they are PR statements. Like any other PR statements, they are meant to spin something. It's true, they have no need to lie. They do, however, have a "need" to not state the entire truth and there are plenty of reasons why this is the case, none of which need be nefarious, but rather pragmatic. Just because you spin something, doesn't mean it wasn't true, or necessary, just means you are going to put it into a context which may be simplified, exaggerated, imagined, pragmatic, etc., when the fact of the matter is the answer is subtle and nuanced and much harder to explain.

My hunch has been, for years now, that "data" means little in the grand scheme of Wizard's B&R decisions. While I have no way to confirm this, anecdotal evidence, like their usual "explanations" gives me the strong impression that decisions are made on feelings and perceptions. Data may be used, or not, but the process is far less scientific than most would think. Like all feelings and intuitions, they'll be hard to fully rationalize, even when correct. This is why all the "explanations" we get as usually somewhat incoherent and somewhat illogical. They are post-hoc rationalizations of intuition-based decisions. That doesn't make them wrong, just makes them non-data driven.

You're correct H, read through the spin and it's entirely:

Quote:

---

CARDNAME is banned.
Explanation: We're a business and we believe this will make us more money over time

---

Anything on top of that is just koolaid

They were clever to give us two explanations and claim it was a combination of factors.

One explanation is easy to argue against. The combined effect of two unrelated factors is more vague, and less vulnerable to critique.

At least they are trying now with the B&R explanations. I was bored and looked up the B&R when Earthcraft got hit to see if it actually was dominant at the time and found this one line gem.

http://www.wizards.com/dci/main.asp?...cted_List_0303