Printable View
At GP Mental Misstep (referenced below) a zoo deck and a merfolk deck (2 non brainstorm aggro decks) made top 8. ~ May 30th 2011. You could dig around and see if zoo was doing well in SCGs and euro-events. Looking back I find it hard to believe that zoo deck got through a field with 80% + Misstep usage, but he had a little more 2CC+ burn to punish people interested in Shocking themselves early.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Quote:
Originally Posted by nedleeds
Crimhead, this isn't MTG Salvation. My team's research has brought to my attention that you served 9 years there. You did your time and you seem like an overall nice dude, but ever since you started posting here, the general pattern I see a lot with you is: "Make a claim that is objectively wrong" - "People point it out" - "You renounce/change your claim".
Props to you for pretty much every time you were wrong admitting to it; seriously, we really need more of that attitude. That's why I think your a really nice dude. It's just that everywhere I look, there's a high probability of your claims being poorly researched. I'm not a mod, so you're free to just take this as a "whatever, dude" comment. Just wanted to point this out, because you seem really interested in actually discussing things, which I appreciate a lot.
You're right, it sees occasional one-of play in two decks! I had to dig back to March (Richmond) to find an (11th places) u/w Blade deck with more than one copy. There haven't been a lot off Blade decks lately. Deathblade doesn't run SV, while Patriot runs zero or one.Quote:
Originally Posted by Admiral_Arzar
Instead of nit-picking, let's get a little context! My wrath comments are in response to this:My point is that those 4cc sweepers are generally too cost intensive for this format - certainly too much to prop up a stack-style control deck. Showing me a deck or two that sometimes (but not always or usually) run a singleton doesn't really refute my point. It's nit-picking.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
For a wrath to see substantial play, it needs to be cheap enough for a deck to rely on it. 4cc wraths don't qualify. The 4cc standard excludes wrath effects as a strategy in this format. Judging Legacy-staple card costs based on other formats is silly and not grounds for banning consideration. Stifle can be 1cc LD in this format. Doesn't make it broken.
May 30th 2011, MM has been legal for what, two weeks? Usually it takes time for a meta to shift, no? I wasn't following stats at the time, but my impression was that aggro (along with most decks in the format) became marginalised in that meta.Quote:
Originally Posted by nedleeds
As I said, whether or not aggro thrived during MM isn't the point. The point is that by AR aggro was already tier two (meaning we cannot blame Miracles for a lack of aggro).
This is a little creepy - why do you want to research my background? But I am aware what site I'm on, thanks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian23
Exactly how a healthy debate should look!Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian23
For the record, my flub regrading probability theory was technically correct - just irrelevant! The fellow I was arguing against was "objectively wrong". Most anything else I've been called on has been either an overlooked (and irrelevant) exception, or simply a matter of semantics.
Why do we debate if we don't want to learn? Your right we could use more of this attitude - case and point you won't admit when I've been right!Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian23
I can't tell if you are being passive aggressive - I'm a nice guy but I'm full of shit? Go ahead and check my sources. If you can't be bothered feel free to ignore my posts .Quote:
Originally Posted by Julian23
I'm not sure how much 'research' was required...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
I (just now) typed 'Crimhead' into Google. The 3rd entry was "crimhead's Profile - Members - MTG Salvation". Clicking there tells you "Member for 9 years, 10 months, and 5 days."
Looks like 30 out of 37 of your posts are in this thread, which is basically a thread where the same X people argue in circles over shit they cannot control and have no influence over. A new face with a high post-per-day ratio is going to get noticed.
Julian appears to be using humor where Dice_Box fell victim to exasperation.
I assume he's talking about you? :eyebrow:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
So.... anyway...
Here's something to ponder:
What if Dig Through Time is having the same effect on Legacy right now that Treasure Cruise used to have? Is there maybe some impetus to ban DTT at this point?
The #1 Control deck is playing 2-4 Digs. The #1 Combo deck is playing 4 Digs. The #1 Aggro-Control deck now (Grixis Delver) is playing usually 4 Digs.
The most recent SCG PIQ (http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckd...ion=Show+Decks) featured 2 Digs at #1, 4 Digs at #2, 3 Digs at #4, 1 Dig at #5, 4 Digs at #6, and 2 Digs at #8.
Treasure Cruise was strong, but Dig is starting to become even more prevalent than Treasure Cruise ever was.
"More prevalent", regardless of whether it's true or not, is utterly irrelevant. Dig Through Time, to the best of my knowledge, has not pushed anything out of the format. That is the important part. It is simply a good and popular card. No deck has been deemed or made unplayable by the introduction of Dig Through Time. In fact, as you pointed out, it has actually introduced two and a half new decks to the format.Quote:
Originally Posted by MGB
A point can be made that it hasn't visibly affected the format because the dominant portion of Legacy is blue anyway, but the truth is that non-blue decks don't really care much about Dig Through Time either.
Disagree, everytime i have been on a grind against any blue deck, i have lost simply because DTT resolved and grabbed just what it needed to get out of the situation Where not having DTT winning or losing was equally balanced. For the last 2 weeks i have played 5 tournaments. And DTT was THAT card that made the difference. Basicly it outgrinds any list not playing it, simply because the combination of card quality and cardadvantage with this card is unmatched.Quote:
Originally Posted by iamajellydonut
For me this has led me to the point where i stop playing non-blue lists and start to play a list that, well, obviously runs DTT.
This. I played painter last week and got absolutely crushed by some 4 color shit box because he was simply able to easily find all of the answers. 7 red blast main didn't even helpQuote:
Originally Posted by Bobmans
Decks leave all the time. I thought the criteria was pushing one (or a small set of) decks to the point of dominance?Quote:
Originally Posted by iamajellydonut
The official reason given for the TC ban was that U/R Delver was too strong. This is a point of contention, as in the two months preceding the ban U/R delver was a mere ~11% of major top8s, roughly the same as Patriot.Quote:
Originally Posted by MGB
I distrust WotC to begin with. People bitch about this game a lot - I think their PR machine is more interested in damage control than in informing players about the inner workings of R&D (sometimes the two overlap and sometimes they do not).
If you are saying that DTT has rendered blueless decks unplayable, I think data doesn't support this. As for DTT being an all-star in grindy matches, this is hardly a reason to ban the card!Quote:
Originally Posted by Bobmans
Posting on a public forum I expect to be noticed, but not googled! No biggie, I was trying to use humour too. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace/Homebrew
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ace/Homebrew
If he is it's pretty funny! I've known about this site for a while, but my recent interest and increased lurking was inspired by the Elves primer (Dicebag's recommendation on Salvation), and the R/G Lands primer - his own work! Getting sucked into format discussion (on a high volume thread) was an inevitable side effect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Dice seems very clever and is a solid contributor. In my opinion/experience he looses his cool over banned list and format health disagreements though. I guess he doesn't think I'm worthy of posting in this thread?
Edit - not really fair to assume Dice was bitching about specifically me. He used the plural 'people', and for all I know it was other new users who caused his ire.
Anyone got news about the banless Legacy event at GP Chiba?
That is not what i meant. For me it has just made the edge blue decks have just a bit sharper. And i am talking about how i am experiencing it. Data may say whatever it says, but i am influenct by its impact. Also i am not advocating to ban anything other then stating what i felt.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
6th place at Columbus was Grixis Control with all 24 of the spells you don't like - maybe it was more than a freak occurrence. On the other hand, 12th place Grixis Control ran no Preordains.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
I'd say running that whole package is still not the norm for the deck, but it's a fairly young brew I guess. Maybe this will shape up to be the standard configuration, maybe not. Maybe there will always be a little flexibility.
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=85811
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=85800
At what point would you consider the data relevant then? Paper is almost at 80% Brainstorm decks now, MTGO floats around 83-85%. That's higher than ever, even more than during the Mental Misstep or TC era, and a higher blue count than fucking Vintage. You can never reach 100% blue decks various reasons - card availability, cost reasons, obstinacy, having a shred of dignity left, etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
As for Grixis Delver being a thing, we should not forget Fate Reforged introduced two black quality threats in Angler and Banana Man.
I do not think it is fair to compare Legacy to the format where Workshop is legal. Your argument will not hold up, because the landscape is not even remotely comparable.
Also, shops is job a safe unban, just before anyone thinks that's what I am saying.
That autocorrect tech.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Bananaman is nucking futs. I'm honestly surprised we don't see more of Murderous Cut in Legacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
When a single deck is 15% of the meta like in Modern which we are pretty far away from on paper.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
FTFYQuote:
Originally Posted by Darkenslight
I'm not too suprised that Murderous Cut doesn't see more Legacy play as it eats into DTT food - or Bananaman, for the matter.
Miracles is currently at 13% in Paper - pretty far away from is a bit of an overstatement.Quote:
Originally Posted by HSCK
On MTGO, it's currently 16%, but that's a different beast.
I live my phone. :)Quote:
Originally Posted by Zombie
Hahahhahah ... fully half of the people in this thread don't even acknowledge the purpose of the banned list and don't care if every deck that top 8's a 7+ round legacy event from here on out has 4 x Ponder, 4 x Brainstorm, 4 x Force.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric_Lauer