All B/R update speculation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

The fair/unfair discussion is just an outstandingly cringeworthy leftover in my opinion, implying that there are ACTUALLY decks playable which do not actively try to prevent the opponent from playing their deck as they planned.

---

You mean like dredge and burn?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenix Ignition

You mean like dredge and burn?

---

In the hands of someone who knows what they're doing, Therapy is one of the best spells in Magic at disrupting any plan the enemy might have. If you can do it multiple times in a turn, especially in the first two turns of the game, you don't even need to be skilled with it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenix Ignition

You mean like dredge and burn?

---

Do Cabal Therapy, Pyrostatic Pillar, Eidolon, Price of Progress, Ensnaring Bridge & co suddenly no longer meddle with your opponent?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

Do Cabal Therapy, Pyrostatic Pillar, Eidolon, Price of Progress, Ensnaring Bridge & co suddenly no longer meddle with your opponent?

---

I think Phoenix Ignition called you out on this one, Lemnear. Call the spade what it is. With the exception of the original Sligh deck from 1996, pretty much every aggro ("fair"?) deck has had some form of dedicated disruption for particular expected opponents. The primary gameplan of these decks is pretty darn linear though. They do not want to spend cards disrupting unless they HAVE TO.

That said, I think Lemnear has the general principle correct. This is the way debate goes in here. PI, do you even disagree with his central premise? I know I do not. I think he nailed it. Fair/unfair is no longer especially valuable nomenclature. Lemnear was victimized by the GOTCHA moments that typify this thread. In a very real way, Burn and Dredge are the exceptions that prove the rule. They are both outliers in terms of how strange the gameplay is and how very not tier 1 they are. They are not exemplars of the Legacy format, but more of a garnish.

I think I could make a full-throated argument for how any deck in Legacy is unfair. In fact, I think having that "unfair" angle is the ticket price for entry into this format.

I take no offense in being called out if i, like often enough, am a bit too bold sweeping over a topic like the fair/unfair discussion or grouping "drs + blue Shell" decks generously together even if we all know there are differences

You all have a wonderful weekend :)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimhead

Only "saturation" metrics, if I recall ArFo's comments.
He also said it's a pillar. No point past that is there. The argument is over.

Arguments based on play-styles diversity (a foreign concept to you, apparently), are at the forefront. You consistently ignore this PoV, because you can't (or won't) imagine anybody could actually care about that more than engines.

You're not a fool either, so you must be purposely closing your mind to this.
I don't think "Play styles" is a reasonable argument. They all do the same thing with the card. The card has one reason for being in these decks. It's not like when Loam was played in the sideboard of some decks as a way to resist Wasteland and played as an engine in others. Brainstorm decks all use the card to do the same thing. There is no diversity in use.

They won't all be competitive if one style rises above the rest. Do you honestly believe if we unleashed Black Lotus that fair decks would even stand a chance? Lotus slots into fair decks easily enough, but that doesn't mean they could compete with the combo and prison decks that would truly abuse Lotus.
Seeing as to how the most effective deck in Vintage for ages was Delver, I think it could manage. Also turn one TNN backed up by Force, daze and Spell pierce does feel like a line that would be effective yes. You even get Recall of those nasty Prison decks.

Sometimes Intellectual honesty happens here. There is no excuse for anything less in a public discussion forum.
Your on the internet... Have you seen what happens here? At all? Like, never in passing even heard of 4chan?

Edit - why do you think I want to keep BS legal? You sure as hell aren't listening to my stated reasons, so you must have a theory? You know I have zero interest in playing the damn card...
You believe it does more good than bad for the format and you believe that it's not one all dominate force, but a nuanced group of forces. You ignore that those forces are held together by one dominate force though arguing that it's not a single card that is the issue because ANT and SnT exist as very diffrent decks. An argument I find as shallow as a toddlers pool.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by FGCmtg

I suppose I just don't care about banning the cantrips, and I spend a lot of time working out how to beat the metagame as it currently stands, because that's what the game is at the moment.

So, a summary, yes brainstorm makes terminus much better, it doesn't really make delver that much better and it'd still be better than merfolk. I suppose the main reason I don't want to ban brainstorm is because banning brainstorm makes force of will decks less viable/significantly worse, which means a large part of the format devolves into br reanimator mirrors, which sounds like hell to me. It's still better to play most things over tarmogoyf, as angler and young pyro would still be much better cards that don't have a negative value proposition when matched up against fatal push.

What do you think is stopping goblins from being t1? It has favourable matchups vs pile, miracles and delver. It loses to all the combo decks more often than not, I would say your sample size is v small.

Yes Thalia is a prison card, designed to punish cantrip decks and combo, which are a part of the format, because vanilla creatures are bad. See you later ;)

---

That is what the other threads on here are for. This one is for remembering the good old days when Kird ape was in a tier 1 deck and then blaming drs. There is a sub thread too for organising pitchfork collection.

I'm not convinced delver without brainstorm (or ponder+preordain even) is still better than merfolk is against the field. I could be wrong...it would be much closer at least.

Well yeah goblins is terrible against combo like I said. This was the same back when I played it. It was tier 2 or 3 by then already. No one really wants to go into a big event trying to optimise their chances and then pick a deck that rolls over to a fifth of the format.

Haha yeah...congrats on 4-0. You're lucky you dodged quillspike...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

That said, I think Lemnear has the general principle correct. This is the way debate goes in here. PI, do you even disagree with his central premise? I know I do not. I think he nailed it. Fair/unfair is no longer especially valuable nomenclature.

---

They are valuable when speaking in generalities like "Your deck will lose to all Unfair decks." Why? Because it's a way of saying "you have too much aggro/removal and no reliable interaction."

In the same way, people who design a deck lacking in removal without a high-tempo plan (T2-3) can expect to reliably lose to Fair decks.

In general, Unfair are weaker to counters and Fair are weaker to removal. Certainly there is a spectrum, but if you have no counters and no discard*, you will lose to every unfair deck reliably. If you have loads of Counters and Discard but no removal, you will lose to fair decks reliably. It's not useful in lots of other ways, sure, but it's specifically useful for pointing out general weaknesses.
* I do understand that D&T doesn't fit this well, but give me a break when we're speaking in generalities.

To be clear, I agree that aside from that it's fairly useless. But if you want to say "Well.. your deck is weak to Dredge, Burn, Storm, S&T, Reanimator, Elves, MUD, Stompy, [...]" you can say "your deck is going to have issues with Unfair decks {thus} you should add some Counters/Discard in place of some of your creatures/removal and sideboard cards should be mitigating those rather than being removal piece 27"

To heat up the discussion. Let have a look at the top 4 during Team Mixed in Toronto

1st Czech Pile - Lucas Siow
2nd Czech Pile - Brian Braun-duin
4th Grixis Delver - Noah Walker


Hmm, I hope for a non blue deck in the other 4th position.

I still think Fetchlands should go.

Edit: ha, found it, a non blue deck. No need to do anything with legacy. Format saved.

4th Elves - Robert Smith

But still 16 DRS in top 4 :laugh:

Well, MKM Hamburg had 1 Elves, 2 Red Stompy, 3 Dark Depths, 1 Belcher and 1 Miracles in the Top 8.

You can hate BS all you want, but this Top 8 looks like Aids to me.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDK

Well, MKM Hamburg had 1 Elves, 2 Red Stompy, 3 Dark Depths, 1 Belcher and 1 Miracles in the Top 8.

You can hate BS all you want, but this Top 8 looks like Aids to me.

---

So, in a Brainstorm dominated meta, why would you be unhappy with this top8? You have Brainstorm, you should be happy, right? Same comment applies to the previous post, btw.

I have to comment on this, becacuse I would interpret this differently than you, in fact exactly oppositely. I know I may be wrong, but this 180 degree opposite interpretation should be adressed.

What you seem to not like about this top 8 is that it seems polarized. It consists of decks that could be described as preying on cantrip decks. For Blood Stompy I think that is overly apparent, Turbo Depths can be discussed. So, what you don't like is that people play strategies that are relevant vs Brainstorm. It could be an immediate consequence of Brainstorm being a very good card.

And to try to explain one basic thing. I think very few people actually hate Brainstorm. It's a fun card, and no one gets hurt (except for the sometimes excessive cantripping, it happens that people spend minutes looking at the top 3 cards again and again, but I think this is peripheral). What I personally don't like is the polarization of the format that I think it creates. The frustration directed towards the card is probably just a symtom of an unhappiness with the meta being overly polarized, oppressive, monotonous.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDK

Well, MKM Hamburg had 1 Elves, 2 Red Stompy, 3 Dark Depths, 1 Belcher and 1 Miracles in the Top 8.

You can hate BS all you want, but this Top 8 looks like Aids to me.

---

This top 8 seems to be on the plan of, brainstorm is too good to not play unless you just go really fast. It's a strategy that works from time to time. How many people were in this event? How many rounds? I'd be more impressed if this were from an 8 or more round event

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pettdan

What you seem to not like about this top 8 is that it seems polarized. It consists of decks that could be described as preying on cantrip decks. For Blood Stompy I think that is overly apparent, Turbo Depths can be discussed. So, what you don't like is that people play strategies that are relevant vs Brainstorm. It could be an immediate consequence of Brainstorm being a very good card

---

Stop putting words in my mouth or telling me what I "like".

I never said I don't like people playing relevant strategies against Brainstorm*. What I don't like about this Top 8 is the large portion of rather linear strategies (if they happen to be good against Brainstorm or not is irrelevant for this point). Linear strategies lead to less diversity in gameplay, which is funny, considering what is being said about the "blue shell".

*Sidenote: I play Lands.

@Megadeus
Google "MKM Hamburg". Afaik it was 9 rounds + Top8

@JDK: So, I make a comment about how we can observe a polarization and that it seems bad for the meta. And you reply that it is the linear strategies you don't like. Well, maybe these are two sides of the same coin?

Brainstorm in 7/8 Top 8 decks: Ban brainstorm, oppressive!

Brainstorm in 1/8 Top 8 decks: Obviously these decks prey on brainstorm, ban brainstorm, oppressive!

All of those decks are generally favored against 4 color shit pile (maybe not belcher but that's a coin flip deck). Those people probably wouldn't be on such linear strategies if they weren't good in the meta. I can tell you from personal experience my Maverick deck is favored against most of that top 8, and I know dnt and such non blue decks are good against them. I'm not saying simply brainstorm, but 4 color pile at least struggles generally speaking

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Star|Scream

Brainstorm in 7/8 Top 8 decks: Ban brainstorm, oppressive!

Brainstorm in 1/8 Top 8 decks: Obviously these decks prey on brainstorm, ban brainstorm, oppressive!

---

It's always best to look at trends and not single data points. It's why you never see me quoting single finishes. They are too easy to rip apart in either direction with but another single finish and it's not like we lack for those to pick though and find one you want to argue your slant.

If a top 8 today was for whatever reason 2 Goblins, a Fish and 5 Delver it would mean shit on its own. Well other than I owe two goblins players a high five. That would not stop it being debated like it's a holy relic.

This discussion seems extremely irrelevant to me (probably I'm missing something), anyway, since I posted recently I feel inclined to respond. I agree with Dice_box, of course, two tournaments does not make a trend. Star|Scream, who was argued for a ban recently? I could not see any such statement on this page (especially not as a consequence of a single tournamnet). Regarding the representativeness of these two top 8's, is anyone in this thread surprised to find Grixis Delver, Czech Pile, Moon Stompy and Turbo Depths dominating in a set of two top 8's? I think not. If we are not allowed to discuss trends, what is left to discuss...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Star|Scream

Brainstorm in 7/8 Top 8 decks: Ban brainstorm, oppressive!

Brainstorm in 1/8 Top 8 decks: Obviously these decks prey on brainstorm, ban brainstorm, oppressive!

---

All the top 8 decks at hamburg (except belcher which is an outlier) have a 4% or higher meta share per mtgtop 8. It's odd I agree but as dice_box mentioned it's one tournament, and it still fits the overall meta picture right now of blue shell decks plus chalice decks plus very quick combo decks (thalia decks and lands are absent). It's one event that will not noticebly change meta share %'s. Now if it continues...another story entirely possibly.

PS: It does seem to me that thalia isn't doing great at the big events.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDK

Well, MKM Hamburg had 1 Elves, 2 Red Stompy, 3 Dark Depths, 1 Belcher and 1 Miracles in the Top 8.

You can hate BS all you want, but this Top 8 looks like Aids to me.

---

As Julian won it with elves, he might be able to enlighten us about the field. Are the Lists online already?

On a general note, the meta is so inbreed with 21%+ DRS+BlueShell that running overspecialized predators might be somewhat viable despite 4c's/Grixis' usually stable curve and mana. We will see how Grixis/4c reacts to this event.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

As Julian won it with elves, he might be able to enlighten us about the field. Are the Lists online already?

On a general note, the meta is so inbreed with 21%+ DRS+BlueShell that running overspecialized predators might be somewhat viable despite 4c's/Grixis' usually stable curve and mana. We will see how Grixis/4c reacts to this event.

---

Yes they are: http://series.magiccardmarket.eu/201...ys-main-event/ .

The linear decks are just consequence of the warped meta, because if you are playing for a longer, more interactive game, there are very few decks that operate on a similar level of consistency, versatility and efficiency that grixis DRS offers. Any deck that isnt a linear combo/ stompy deck that only draws one card a turn is being pushed out of the format.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

As Julian won it with elves, he might be able to enlighten us about the field. Are the Lists online already?

On a general note, the meta is so inbreed with 21%+ DRS+BlueShell that running overspecialized predators might be somewhat viable despite 4c's/Grixis' usually stable curve and mana. We will see how Grixis/4c reacts to this event.

---

I thought DRS was soo good, that even the 4c mana base fights through wastelands and blood moons? And now they are the natural predators?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pettdan

@JDK: So, I make a comment about how we can observe a polarization and that it seems bad for the meta. And you reply that it is the linear strategies you don't like. Well, maybe these are two sides of the same coin?

---

Me: "I don't like apples"
You: "You don't like fruits."
Me: "No, I just don't like apples. I still like pears etc."
You: "Well, they are all fruits, so you don't like fruits."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by JDK

Me: "I don't like apples"
You: "You don't like fruits."
Me: "No, I just don't like apples. I still like pears etc."
You: "Well, they are all fruits, so you don't like fruits."

---

I think what pettdan meant was that because you want Brainstorm to be a thing, you are now getting very linear strategies that prey on it. You can't have one without the other, or something of that nature.

To continue bad analogies: Legacy is a fruit salad, you want pears in it, but the fruit salads that have pears all come bundled together with apples.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MorphBerlin

I thought DRS was soo good, that even the 4c mana base fights through wastelands and blood moons? And now they are the natural predators?

---

So far this is an outliner and no way a benchmark for the meta by itself. We need to sieve trough the lists and data to see if the DRS+BlueShell players weren't just simply slacking in regards to answers to Lands & Co.

Jesus Christ why don't you all just change the name of this topic to ban brainstorm.

Pages and pages of dribble about brainstorm and drs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Sidneyious

Jesus Christ why don't you all just change the name of this topic to ban brainstorm.

Pages and pages of dribble about brainstorm and drs.

---

Fuck, that is a really tempting idea.

While the conversation in this forum in particular tends to be circular (due almost entirely to transient Magic players with outsized opinions), I feel the the extended conversation is largely warranted. Brainstorm's effect on the format and its peculiar status as having immunity on an island that has booted plenty of cards that Brainstorm caused the banning of, is a strange element of eternal formats. Legacy really is the Brainstorm format, warped inexorably around its presence. There is a lot to discuss about it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

While the conversation in this forum in particular tends to be circular (due almost entirely to transient Magic players with outsized opinions), I feel the the extended conversation is largely warranted. Brainstorm's effect on the format and its peculiar status as having immunity on an island that has booted plenty of cards that Brainstorm caused the banning of, is a strange element of eternal formats. Legacy really is the Brainstorm format, warped inexorably around its presence. There is a lot to discuss about it.

---

I would argue that it's not "the brainstorm format". It's the "brainstorm and fetchland format". both are oppressive in their own fun and unique way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bithlord

I would argue that it's not "the brainstorm format". It's the "brainstorm and fetchland format". both are oppressive in their own fun and unique way.

---

Is “oppressive” the word you’re looking for here?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WashableWater1

Is “oppressive” the word you’re looking for here?

---

I think so, according to merriam webster:

Definition of oppressive
1 : unreasonably burdensome
2 : tyrannical an oppressive government
3 : overwhelming or depressing to the spirit or senses

1 and 3 seem right :smile: .

Oppressive with Brainstorm meaning you either have to play it or be fully prepared to try and beat it. Most people will do one of these two but that doesn't mean it's not oppressive. There are a number of cards still on the banned list that wouldn't require near the effort to beat than brainstorm.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

While the conversation in this forum in particular tends to be circular (due almost entirely to transient Magic players with outsized opinions), I feel the the extended conversation is largely warranted. Brainstorm's effect on the format and its peculiar status as having immunity on an island that has booted plenty of cards that Brainstorm caused the banning of, is a strange element of eternal formats. Legacy really is the Brainstorm format, warped inexorably around its presence. There is a lot to discuss about it.

---

Which cards did Brainstorm cause the banning of? The banned cards I see that are most "associated" with Brainstorm are Treasure Cruise, Dig Through Time, and Sensei's Divining Top... all of which also got banned in formats that didn't have access to Brainstorm, so it seems silly to claim Brainstorm caused their banning.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Seth

Which cards did Brainstorm cause the banning of? The banned cards I see that are most "associated" with Brainstorm are Treasure Cruise, Dig Through Time, and Sensei's Divining Top... all of which also got banned in formats that didn't have access to Brainstorm, so it seems silly to claim Brainstorm caused their banning.

---

Sensei's Top, miracles loses a disproportionate amount of power and consistency from a brainstorm ban (as compared to other blue decks). Card was fine outside of the miracles shell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barachai

Sensei's Top, miracles loses a disproportionate amount of power and consistency from a brainstorm ban (as compared to other blue decks). Card was fine outside of the miracles shell.

---

Sensei's Divining Top was banned in Extended. Brainstorm was not legal at the time, I believe. It was also banned in Modern, but admittedly it never proved itself to be an issue as it was banned at the very start (though the same is also true of Skullclamp, of course).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Seth

Sensei's Divining Top was banned in Extended. Brainstorm was not legal at the time, I believe. It was also banned in Modern, but admittedly it never proved itself to be an issue as it was banned at the very start (though the same is also true of Skullclamp, of course).

---

They were banned for different reasons there than for legacy; in legacy, the primary motivator for the ban was its utility in a specific deck, namely miracles, which happens to be a deck that specifically values brainstorm over the other cantrips in ways that other xerox decks do not. Speculative, but without brainstorm there is a real possibility that miracles could never have achieved what it did, thus sparing Top.

Seth, on this site, possibly this thread, a few years ago I asked the Miracles players to weigh in on an extended conversation about what Miracles would look like without Brainstorm. In a strange twist, everyone seemed to agree. Miracles could not exist without Brainstorm. Interestingly it apparently can exist without Top. And yeah, there was also a good conversation about Treasure Cruise's dependence on Brainstorm just before it got axed and another one months later just before Dig got banned. They have been carving up the format to keep Brainstorm in it for a long time.

And it is seeming like DRS is next on the list to fall because of brainstorm (as it currently stands now it's probably the most bannable card anyway)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

Seth, on this site, possibly this thread, a few years ago I asked the Miracles players to weigh in on an extended conversation about what Miracles would look like without Brainstorm. In a strange twist, everyone seemed to agree. Miracles could not exist without Brainstorm. Interestingly it apparently can exist without Top. And yeah, there was also a good conversation about Treasure Cruise's dependence on Brainstorm just before it got axed and another one months later just before Dig got banned. They have been carving up the format to keep Brainstorm in it for a long time.

---

The fact that Treasure Cruise was blatantly overpowered in a Brainstorm-less format would seem to indicate that banning Treasure Cruise was not an attempt to ban around Brainstorm, as the card was clearly quite overpowered even without Brainstorm. Ditto with Dig Through Time. Heck, Modern doesn't even have Ponder or Preordain, and Treasure Cruise was still abusive just off the back of Serum Visions and Thought Scour. So the idea that Treasure Cruise was in any way dependent on Brainstorm, and/or was banned to avoid a Brainstorm ban, appears quite silly. Top is a little more plausible, but it seems there were time concerns involved in it as well, which a Brainstorm ban wouldn't fix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord Seth

The fact that Treasure Cruise was blatantly overpowered in a Brainstorm-less format would seem to indicate that banning Treasure Cruise was not an attempt to ban around Brainstorm, as the card was clearly quite overpowered even without Brainstorm. Ditto with Dig Through Time. Heck, Modern doesn't even have Ponder or Preordain, and Treasure Cruise was still abusive just off the back of Serum Visions and Thought Scour. So the idea that Treasure Cruise was in any way dependent on Brainstorm, and/or was banned to avoid a Brainstorm ban, appears quite silly. Top is a little more plausible, but it seems there were time concerns involved in it as well, which a Brainstorm ban wouldn't fix.

---

Mate, you didn't understand the mantra of this threat: "All problems that Legacy ever had, has or will have come down to Brainstorm" :laugh: