Quote:
Originally Posted by perm
Nothing is "very very wrong". Aggro loses to combo, deal with it. You don't hear combo players whining about Counterbalance, or control players whining about Vial.
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by perm
Nothing is "very very wrong". Aggro loses to combo, deal with it. You don't hear combo players whining about Counterbalance, or control players whining about Vial.
Rock, paper scissors isn't strategy. I am not denying the reality. But there's a distinct problem when combo starts getting so good, i'm not complaining about aggro's MU's. I am prescribing against one archetype or strategy or whatever completing warping the balance to the point where "only stupid people" will be playing aggro in this entire format. Do you think that's ok?
"This is ridiculous, I can't play an aggro deck because *whatever* is so absurdly powerful!"
'wow deal with it retard, why are you playing aggro if thats not viable any more because *whatever* is broken?'
"What? there is a problem when an entire general archetype is obselete because *whatever* is at an out of control power level"
'stop crying you whiner just play that deck or the deck that beats it'
So why not make necropotence unbanned? The players would be self-regulating, right? Aggro wouldn't exist, of course, it would be necropotence decks vs control decks. Nothing very wrong at all though.
Why wouldn't control play Necropetence? It's an awesome source of cardadvantage. Drawing a fresh hand every turn is incredibly strong.
Whatever, I don't think anything is too strong right now. The current metagame is amazing, you can really play whatever you want. If your Zoo list is fast enough, you can even sometimes race combo with it. Throw some hate into your sideboard and your matchup will actually be quite reasonable. Aggro should not be able to beat combo reliably anyway. The thing that's more aparent in my opinion is the lack of old-fashioned control decks. Everything in the format becomes tempo. I think in the last eight or nine SCG open top 8's were a total of 3 or 4 aggro decks without Wasteland. But aggro with Wasteland is still aggro, just like control with Tarmogoyf is still control. There really is nothing wrong with the current meta, not a single deck is overpowered.
haha I agree, I was just using an oveprowered example. I don't think time spiral is too overpowered. But there seems to be this anti-rational state of mind going around that there is no such thing as an overpowered combo card by virtue of people being able to play specific decks/archetypes to ebat it, which of course is completely absurd.
I guess I just don't find it absurd to make fun of people who complain that an archetype loses to the archetype that it's supposed to lose to. So someone's aggro deck can't beat combo regularly. No shit. Do you think combo decks beat Counterbalance or Team America very often? How do you think CBTop generally does against Merfolk? Why is it only the aggro players that bitch when they have bad match-ups? Legacy isn't about playing one deck all the time, never metagaming at all, and just complaining to get the cards banned that beat your strategy. That's the thing that seems absurd to me.
Where's Arsenal at? I'm sure competitive fighting game players would get a big kick out this mentality. "I play Rufus and can't beat Zangief regularly. Obviously that means that there's a problem with Zangief and he should be banned. Nevermind that he has bad match-ups versus a bunch of other characters, and I have good match-ups against a bunch of other characters. CAPCOM PLEASE FIX THIS!" That kind of shit would get you laughed off of SRK, and doing the same thing here should result in similar treatment. In my humble opinion.
First of all, "archetypes" are abstract concepts and constructions you are treating as concrete things. When the first magic cards were printed, there weren't archetypes. MTG cards in a vacuum have no archetypes. If you gave mtg to a boat load of players who had never heard of it, and told them to learn. Would archetypes naturally fall into place? possibly and probably, but that's because it's A) the human actors and B) the cards printed as magic matured to conform to this mode of thinking, but i digress.
the fighting game metaphor breaks down though. Please answer me this: Is there ever a point where a combo deck becomes too good, and all the whining "aggro baddies" are not just being retarded? Let's say that most control decks can have a fair shake at beating this deck. What is the edge of bannable, in your opinion? Is "play it or play to beat it" an acceptable scenario? Metagaming arguments are anti-reason, metagames should reflect choices and trends amongst the network of players, NOT players desperately attempting to correct balance issues by building decks solely to beat ones that are too good. This isn't free market capitalism, deregulation is not efficient. Legacy is a 100% closed system that needs to have rules to correct inefficiencies, and inefficient in this case means non-competitive and non-fun. I think you are hovering on an elitist "i am above wanting to ban cards" cloud where you can easily cast down judgements of others as stupid. This "just world theory" of magic makes this card describe you well http://magiccards.info/query?q=nemes...v=card&s=cname
guess we get carried away ... the "banworthy" topic is very complex. Example?
How "banworthy" is Aether Vial? It acts as a recuring perm. Black Lotus for creatures, gives them Flash, makes then uncounterable, is cheap and colorless, makes blue unable to interact with creatures, drove control out of the metagame!
Some claim that Sprial Tide (and Survival before that and Mystical Tutor before even Survival) drove stupid aggro out of the metagame and that's so unfair, and blah blah.
Aether Vial decks tore Control apart at the beginning of the year! But, strange ... I can't hear any control player whinning?! No cryout for a ban of Vial or Nacatl? Instead they splash another color and pack "narrow" hate like firespout and grim lavamancer in their maindecks? Oh .... my .... gush!
Can it be that control players are simply .... more mature?
To be fair, no one is complaining that Counterbalance has been pushed out of the format. Thank goodness for that move. Counterbalance/Top decks can easily account for over 50% of the draws in major tournaments. I for one support this trend of pushing dedicated control out of the format, especially if it means Counterbalance is nullified.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
On a more relevant note, archetypes have existed since the first few months of Magic. The Deck is one of the first defining archetypes for control that was emulated for several years following. Same with Pox, which functionally hasn't changed much since its namesake was printed. FYI, did you know Pox was played to beat Necropotence decks in Black Summer?
I think the converse is more appropriate. Aggro players are just immature and cannot comprehend decks that play unfairly. It's also a typical case that they can't afford to build another deck, so the complaint is somewhat valid in that aspect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Yes, there does become such a point. However looking at the results of the recent SCG Opens reveals that the threshold is still too low for that point yet. The Los Angeles open was as close we've come to that threshold, and that's only partially because LA has historically been more combo oriented. Another angle is that given a vacuum of dedicated control (viz. CBTop), combo absolutely crushes the metagame. LED - still disgustingly good as a combo enabled with 2 mana tutors (BWish, Infernal Tutor). Doomsday, still a powerful, if not complex, 5 card tutor. These spells are not easy to answer using linear mechanics or cards. Combo needs to be respected in sideboard choices, or problems arise in the metagame that make it appear as though it's unbearable, and we get Peanut Gallery, Armchair commentary from the likes of Shaheen bemoaning the power level ofQuote:
Originally Posted by perm
Spiral Tidethe Hatfields.
Go watch the Hatfields playing Spiral Tide on SCG and go watch yourself play Spiral Tide. There's a huge difference in skill level. At least when I was watching it, I was definitely learning a lot as to why they made certain plays, e.g. outplaying control players, waiting for exactly the right moment to turnabout their lands, and win with FoW/Pact advantage and go off from there. Take note that the whole process on Scrolling for Pacts was not to increase the ability to resolve Time Spiral, but postspiral, when their lands are tapped down, you now have extra Pacts and FoWs to fight their 4 FoWs while shutting them off on any mana to do anything with non-FoW counterspell.
Similarly, a good control player can beat vial decks. If you bring Countertop with no EEs or outs to Merfolks/Gobs maindeck, then you're shooting yourself in your foot to lose to those decks. Can control beat vial? Sure it can, it's not easy, but it's not the end of the world (hint: play 3 EEs, Pithing Needle). The whole point of control is to know the inside-outs of your opponent's decks. You force them at every angle to try to race you and overextend, or you play cards like Planeswalkers/Shackles/countertop that force them to go all out, then you eat that card advantage and beat them. It's not easy to beat vial decks, but it's definitely easier to play against vial decks and try to bitch them rather than play a 75 reluctant to adapt and continue to whine and lose to vial decks.
This, by the way, works for any deck, whether you're playing aggro v.s. combo, control v.s. vial, combo v.s. control. If you don't learn, you're not going anywhere. Every deck has bad matchups, but those 70-30 can be shored up to 60-40 or 50-50 depending how willing you are to sacrifice other matchups. Legacy isn't Hulk Flash anymore, so the game is fair at this point.
Counterbalance can be annoying to play against; the reason to play it myself Xp I don't want to vote for Counterbalance as a deck here, but the problem is the near complete absence of the control archtype that helps any sort of combo to shine atm.
Carsten realized that too and reflects that state in his article.
FYI, there have been 5 High Tide and 1 Spring Tide out of 144 post-unbanning SCG T16 decks. That's less than each of Merfolk, Team America, Zoo, NO Bant, Goblins, and CounterTop.
24 Time Spirals and 22 Candelabras out of 8,645 maindeck cards / 10,805 total cards.
Certainly the average result per person playing the deck is likely much better, and the absolute numbers should be going up since the Tide deck is a later development, but we'll see.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomsday
QFT. I find it very appropriate to make fun of this phenomenon. I can't ever really recall hearing a combo player say "ZoMG Force of Will is so fucking broken, you should't be able to counter spellz without mana and it fucks my deck so it should be BANHAMMERED!!1111!!11" I also can't recall hearing control players call for the banning of *insert stupid aggro card here* because it has nearly pushed their archetype out of the format. And yet, the number of times I've heard somebody who plays Goblins, Zoo, some G/X deck, or whatever complain about how broken combo is...is ridiculous.Quote:
Originally Posted by Doomsday
I LOL'd at "Oh my gush." As for AEther Vial, it's probably the most bannable card around IMO because it has historically warped the format to a level that no other legal card that people call for bans of (I'm looking at you LED and SDT) has. Does that mean I'm calling for a ban on AEther Vial because Merfolk is annoying? NOPE. Format diversity plz, even if it means I have to deal with an annoying matchup or two.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Obligatory:Quote:
Originally Posted by Admiral_Arzar
Quote:
Originally Posted by rukcus
lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by rukcus
And this is why I believe there really shouldn't be bans at all, except in cases of ridiculous format dominance (Hulk-Flash is the ONLY case that springs to mind).
Hey rukcus, is that's from the same "banning survival" thread you quoted me lately for IMPS!? If so, you should maybe quote the whole thread because I feel we're repeating all that stuff said in december in this One :).
P.S. I evaded the word "immature" ... my style of making comments causes enough negative ... Erm ... Vibe? ... Let's call it vibe....
P.P.S. I well remember that list and know it comes true, but I wasn't laughing like Arzar, I ... to be on-topic ... was whinning! WHINNING! Lol
@Arzar: I love your quote, I use in my sig without permission ... Yeah, it gives me an adrenalin-kick ... I'm buckwild! ^_^
It is indeed. Funny how quickly these same threads repeat themselves.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Kay soQuote:
Originally Posted by Admiral_Arzar
Some guy makes a slippery-slope fallacy
You quote it and say that justifies your opinion for why bans shouldnt exist in a format where every card can be played, including the absurdly over the top broken ones?
Do you have like, assistants that help you get through the day, and protect you when your life-threating illogic and anti-reason get in the way?
Let's definitely unban yawgmoth's will and memory jar. Necropotence should never have been on any ban list of course, same with oath of druids.
Can you address this:
Should the game boil down to a rockscissors vs scissorpaper? That is, if any one deck is just too played, its no big deal besides everyone not being able to play normally good decks, and just play ones that exist to counter the uncompetitive deck?Quote:
Originally Posted by perm
For the record, I was never for the banning of survival (though I don't care too much) and I don't think spiral tide is too broken. I am just not dumb enough to say things like "Only IDIOT NOOBS who arent as smart and elite as me think bans should exist"
Bro, I specifically stated that I support bans in the event of something completely dominating the format (as happened in the case of Hulk-Flash - you either played it or hated it, and the deck was busted beyond belief).Quote:
Originally Posted by perm
NOWHERE IN MY POSTS did I suggest that shit like Jar and Will should be unbanned. I never discussed unbanning, so I'm not sure how the fuck you got onto this little tangent of reading things that aren't there. You might as well have read my post and said "this guy is trying to convince me to put his genitals in my mouth." That's the approximate level of relevance going on here.
Anyways, to address your last/only relevant point - I'm generalizing to cover a lot of IMPs here. Obviously that doesn't mean everybody is an idiot n00b who calls for BANZ. It seems like so many people nowadays are though, so I catch myself generalizing :P.
Dude, what's the point of posting ridiculous shit if nobody sigs it? And I'm glad I could up your adrenaline level - in a completely heterosexual fashion of course.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
My point is that yawgmoths will, memory jar and hulk flash are not the only types of situations where anti-competitive and anti-fun things occur. THere are lower-key anti-competive cards that just have to be regulated for efficiency. Format diversity is a virtue of it's own as well. Legacy is actually pretty good about this, even though it could be better. Mystical tutor isn't an OMG TURN -1 WIN MEMORYJAR YAWGWIN situation that you are describing, it just was just too much of a brainless include because it provided so much power and quality to decks. It was an absolutely justified ban and isn't a stupid draw 9999 effect.
Why shouldn't wizards ban cards to make the format more competitive, balanced and diverse? Telling players to meta against anti-competitive cards forcs them to make non-diverse decks that are not competitive outside of the warped and imbalanced format. Why does your ideological purism trump legitimate fun, balance and diversity?
Especially in Vintage WotC did Ban cards for diversity (2n gush era), but perm, do you think we are in a flawed meta atm? If so please share that makes you feel so. I hope, most player agree that an intact triangle of aggo-Control-combo is desireable and it's unhealthy if any one of this 3 is unplayable.
Due to the general Feeling of People across boards, that control is pretty much out of the metagame, simply because aggro is so good, it seems strange to me, to call for actions against combo, if aggro was the primary reason the metagame lost balance. Reacting with a combo nerf would make Play-creature-attack THE supreme strategy, that not only insults players intelligence but creates a non diverse metagame about playing the biggest ass on the smallest chair (mana-to-Power-Ratio)