All B/R update speculation.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Finn

TLemnear, whatever the look of blue decks in a non-Brainstorm environment, they will all be weaker compared to every deck that does not use Brainstorm in the first place. That is not a guess, but a fact. Delver of Secrets is not quite as good. All combo is taken down a big notch. Lots of erstwhile keepable 4-land hands might have to get mulliganed. Thoughtseize is better against them. No more responding to a spell with Brainstorm only to find Force of Will or Daze. The list goes on and on. These are not scenarios relegated to any one deck, but are felt across the spectrum. You know what happens when all of these decks are demonstrably and palpably weaker? Other deck designs are elevated by comparison. Blue-based decks contract to fewer designs after a Brainstorm ban, just as you say.

Thank merciful God!

The remaining blue decks facing off against each other and retaining that 70% saturation is a silly forecast. They just took a major hit in power themselves. For every deck from today's meta we kiss goodbye, you make room for a replacement or two or three that are both strategically and tactically different. It could be Merfolk for all I care. Color is not the issue. You take away a major point of power from the best tactical design and other stuff can suddenly compete. How is that a bad thing?

Just as Natural Order decks were briefly a thing during the Mental Misstep era, we saw how quickly they disappeared once the metagame was set straight. They only existed in the first place because they were being artificially held up by a broken card. This has been happening in Legacy with Brainstorm for so long, and increasingly so, that newer players don't even recognize it for what it is. Some cantrip-driven decks will not be able to cope in the new environment and fold to it. Then you won't face several versions of Delver decks in succession at SCG or see three distinct versions of Uwx Stoneforge floating around. We want this. Only the best few will remain. That, my friends, is a healthy environment. What we have now is a bunch of funhouse reflections of a format with abominations that can only exist in the synthetic environment created by the domination - and that is what it is - of this one card.

---

The problem with this argument is that you're missing the fact that all of the blue decks are still going to be markedly better than all of the nonblue decks. Maybe the blue penetration falls to 60 or 65%. Nonblue decks will still be limited to Elves and various strategies that prey on the best way to build blue decks, and we'd lose much of the strategic continuum that comprises Legacy if we ban Brainstorm while gaining very, very little in terms of color diversity. Given that color diversity is the only stated goal of a Brainstorm ban from anyone pressing that argument, shouldn't the sheer mass of cards that are better than what every other color has give you pause? Ponder and Preordain are still miles better than whatever else is going on, and people will play them alongside Probe and Serum Visions. The overall cantrip count might fall in some decks, but that fall is going to likely come at cards aimed at the "fair" nonblue decks that will ostensibly inhabit your fantasy metagame. Only the "best" blue decks survive? Maybe, but that's an awfully narrow vision of the "best". Conditional cards are where the real fun and (dare I say?) skill in Legacy lie. If I want to run unconditionally powerful cards into one another, there are two widely supported Constructed formats where I can do that. Legacy should be about small-ball Magic and playing for incremental advantages. Cantrips allow you to do that more reliably than any other engine, and are a boon that's all but unique to Legacy.

Finally, for all the furor Brainstorm generates here, banning it alone isn't even a serious option to get where the pro-Ban crowd wants to be for the reasons I've now stated multiple times. The options are to leave the format as it is, ban Dig Through Time, or to completely reset the format by taking out at least Brainstorm, Ponder, and Preordain in one go. Anything else just a bizarre circle jerk of self-loathing.

This is where the argument has to end because we have diametrically opposed views of what's good for the format.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by solidbass

I wish wotc would say like; "ok, we're gonna ban brainstorm for 6 months in legacy, let's see what happens." There's just so much blustering on both sides it'd be nice to get some data and not conjecture.

It's also kinda strange the players seem to know significantly more about legacy than wotc does. If they don't care, which is what it seems to look like, then why don't they give up the reins to someone who does?

---

I'd be fine with a trial ban with the understanding that it would be unbanned in a year if some reasonable metric of format health (i.e., not some illusion of color diversity) weren't convincingly met. There aren't a whole lot of people who would be ok with that though. And it doesn't surprise me at all that people who play Legacy regularly know more about Legacy than people who seldom if ever play it.

I don't really think that ponder and preordain are miles better than whatever else is going on in the format. You know, paying 1 blue mana is a real cost in legacy, and while brainstorm is overpowered for that cost for reasons we all know, (instant speed, undoing mulligans,blanking discard and so on) other cantrips are just fine. I think blue decks would be a lot worse without brainstorm, and people who imagine a legacy scene dominated by a new U/x midrange shell without brainstorm are far more wrong than people who imagine the utopia of color balance.

If anything, like you've said, brainstorm should be banned for a period to see what happens.

In the end this is just what Finn said, i totally agree with him.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by solidbass

It's also kinda strange the players seem to know significantly more about legacy than wotc does. If they don't care, which is what it seems to look like, then why don't they give up the reins to someone who does?

---

It's not that strange. People invested in something tend to know more about it then those who create it if that creation is a shared burden. Many people wrote and directed episodes of Star Trek and I would bet fans know more then those who made the show about it most of the time. There is no reason this is any different.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LeoCop 90

If anything, like you've said, brainstorm should be banned for a period to see what happens.

In the end this is just what Finn said, i totally agree with him.

---

While a temporary ban of Brainstorm would be good to collect data, there would be an outrage at the end anyway. Either it stays banned because data showed the metagame actually improved (pissing off Brainstorm fans) or it comes off the BL again, pissing off Brainstorm adversaries who expected it to stay banned.

Interestingly enough, despite people claiming that the restriction of Ponder and especially Brainstorm caused the "Vintage apocalypse" (or whatever you want to call it), why would Wizards never bother to unrestrict either of those two if they were so important to the format? They restricted and unrestricted Gush in Vintage twice so far (with the second time being the same announcement as the BS/Ponder restriction, just to unrestrict it again two years later, so they do reverse mistakes) - but Wizards never saw a need to unrestrict the cantrips.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by solidbass

I wish wotc would say like; "ok, we're gonna ban brainstorm for 6 months in legacy, let's see what happens." There's just so much blustering on both sides it'd be nice to get some data and not conjecture.

It's also kinda strange the players seem to know significantly more about legacy than wotc does. If they don't care, which is what it seems to look like, then why don't they give up the reins to someone who does?

---

You are the proof that it's better to not let players run the B&R descisions, as you completely fail to realize what are you doing to the playerbase and the format, by opening doors for banning/unbannings stuff at random for "collecting data" and openly admit that you have no fucking clue about the structure of the format and therefore need the players as guinea pigs. You just ask for a shitstorm at this point and players would ragequit like with Modern and it's totally stupid B&R management which lacks what players who invest a lot of money and time in a format wants: a certain stability.

I mean you can flesh out that idea of test bannings/unbannings further and unban Mishras Workshop for three months and reban it afterwards to Piss of players losing to Workshop decks for three months and those who bought Shops at the same time!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

You are the proof that it's better to not let players run the B&R descisions, as you completely fail to realize what are you doing to the playerbase and the format, by opening doors for banning/unbannings stuff at random for "collecting data" and openly admit that you have no fucking clue about the structure of the format ...

---

Yeah. It seems like a better way to test would be a purse for a side event with custom rules. If people like it better, it will force WotC's hand. (I'm always curious about those crazy experimental formats anyway.)

The people who want brainstorm banned don't necessarily want color diversity. We just want there to be some actual thought that goes into deck building. As it is now your deck building either begins with 4 brainstorm/ponder/force, 4 chalice of the void + ways to power it out to fight cantrips, 4 Thalia plus dudes to fight cantrips, or go all in and try to go faster/ignore them (elves, burn). It'sextremely warped in the sense that you are building your deck with the thought that 4 out of 5 games you play will be against the cantrip cartel. Not only does it make forboring games over and over, but it makes for fairly boring deck building as well

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barook

Hold on a second - where did I say Miracles remains playable with Brainstorm gone? We have been over this before - Miracles would be replaced by UWx Stoneblade - which is a good thing. The deck is pure cancer and Terminus puts severe restrictions on how to build creature-heavy decks - either you have countermagic, run Vial (like D&T or Goblins) or you're at the mercy of their 1-mana Super-Wrath of Gods.

---

Vial has been an aggro staple in Legacy for years.

The flip-side is that without Miracles, options for a creatureless (or nearly creatureless) deck are beyond restricted - it would be either play Lands or play a creature deck.

Miracles is a unique deck which thrives on special synergies. Is trading that for yet another pile of good cards crammed together (Stoneblade) really a good thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Barook

How many decks can you build outside of a) blue-cantrip shells, b) Prison (either D&T (dying thanks to DTT, see link above), Lands or Chalice-based decks like MUD/Aggro Loam) to fight blue cantrip shells or c) the few nonblue combo decks that ignore your opponent (Elves, Burn) and then hope that they're actually viable?

---

So... blue-less deck's need to be either:

1. Prison decks,
2. Combo decks,
3. or fair decks running Chalice.

Is it really a bad thing if blue-less aggro-control and midrange decks rely on CotV as their go-to control card?

Aggro Loam is full blown midrange; it's basically Maverick running Mox and Chalice (plus 2x Loam) and an adjusted curve to play around CotV. Lumping this in a category with MUD and Lands is just wrong.

Exactly what kind of blue-less deck do you want to play?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Crimhead

Exactly what kind of blue-less deck do you want to play?

---

This is a long overdue question. For my taste there is a wide range of non-blue to choose from as long as you're prepared to fight back cantrips & combo or being simply faster.

I am curious: has anyone tried running an experimental Legacy tournament where Brainstorm was banned? Is there a no-Brainstorm Legacy league out there? I am sure someone has tried this.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by jrsthethird

I just played against a deck on MTGO with maindeck Chalice, Trinisphere, and Choke. And another game earlier that T1 Chalice shut me out completely. You either have FOW or scoop with so many cantrips.

Let's see how deeply Chalice decks penetrate the format in the next few months; perhaps that will point Wizards to a solution. Either play Brainstorm & friends, or Chalice & friends. Not even a rock/paper/scissors format anymore at that point.

---

I don't see the problem of the inbred blue meta getting chalice'd out. Chalice decks aren't stable enough to survive being a large part of the meta, it is a non-issue.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by btm10

Conditional cards are where the real fun and (dare I say?) skill in Legacy lie. If I want to run unconditionally powerful cards into one another, there are two widely supported Constructed formats where I can do that.

---

Legacy and Vintage? The formats with the most powerful cards ever printed? Oh, whoops...you said "widely supported"...

Because that really doesn't accurately describe Standard or Modern. There's plenty of reliance on internal synergy to make cards/decks good in both of those formats. A deck running jank like Ghostfire Blade and Keeper of the Lens top 8'd the Pro Tour.

Quote:

---

Legacy should be about small-ball Magic and playing for incremental advantages.

---

Well, it's most certainly not anymore. There's closer parallels to the Steroid Era, big-ball, with guys going all out for extra-base hits and homers, with large market teams fielding the biggest sluggers their money can buy. Cards like Griselbrand, Iona, Terminus, Entreat, Emrakul, Craterhoof Behemoth, Dark Depths, and Omniscience are anything but "incremental"...they tend to end games on the spot (or, in the case of Terminus, completely sweep away a built-up board position for the low cost of UW).

There was a really great post by Phoenix Ignition about how power-creeped threats have stifled a lot of diversity in Magic, particularly Legacy. I don't know if it's possible to roll this back, but banning their chief enablers would go a long way. And we all know exactly what those are.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lemnear

You are the proof that it's better to not let players run the B&R descisions, as you completely fail to realize what are you doing to the playerbase and the format, by opening doors for banning/unbannings stuff at random for "collecting data" and openly admit that you have no fucking clue about the structure of the format and therefore need the players as guinea pigs. You just ask for a shitstorm at this point and players would ragequit like with Modern and it's totally stupid B&R management which lacks what players who invest a lot of money and time in a format wants: a certain stability.

I mean you can flesh out that idea of test bannings/unbannings further and unban Mishras Workshop for three months and reban it afterwards to Piss of players losing to Workshop decks for three months and those who bought Shops at the same time!

---

Lemnear, your vitriol is delightful. You didn't overreact in any way, thank you. Anyways, I'm a little frustrated with wizard complete hands off approach to Legacy right now. TC was pretty broken from the get go but that's all they've done. Something needs to change and as we all know, it involves blue and somehow Brainstorm is involved. I still love the format, but I know with a little tweaking it would be so much better.

If you complain about the difficulty of brewing new decks in Legacy (Mono Grizzly Bears, or whatever your fond memory or wet dream is), remember that Legacy is an established format, possibly the most established in the history of Magic. Only Vintage is older, and that has been changed recently (2008), for better or worse, by the Brainstorm/Ponder ban. Legacy on the other hand has remained relatively stable over many years now, and the format has slowly and steadily matured in those years, the weak strategies has been eliminated, and the strong has emerged on top. Yet there are still a large number of different competitive decks, but they are all optimized and streamlined to near perfection. A handful of decks maybe are regarded as true tier 1, and not far behind are many more decks each fully capable of winning a large tournament. Is it possible to make a completely new Legacy deck that no one has seen before, and win a tournament with it? Sure it's not easy, but possible. Is it possible to win with a new deck that does not make use of some of Legacy's established, best cards, or try to exploit their weaknesses? It is possible, but we are approaching the realm of the impossible, fast.

I see this as mostly a good thing. I miss my Werebear/Armageddon deck, but I know those times are not coming back, and I enjoy Legacy very much for what it is now.

I can see why some think that younger, less established formats are more interesting right now from a deck brewer's perspective, and that's fair.

I don't think it's fair to ask for major nerfing of Legacy's established strategies just for the sake of change, because that is not what an Eternal format is about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tammit67

I don't see the problem of the inbred blue meta getting chalice'd out. Chalice decks aren't stable enough to survive being a large part of the meta, it is a non-issue.

---

2 Chalice decks Top 8'd in Lille. That says a lot about the stability of the new Aggro-Loam, or whatever the hell people want to call it. I wouldn't be surprised if other non-blue builds try to follow suit.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Tammit67

I don't see the problem of the inbred blue meta getting chalice'd out. Chalice decks aren't stable enough to survive being a large part of the meta, it is a non-issue.

---

This seems like an oxymoron. Inbred blue is fine because the solution is too fragile to be an issue. Well, if there's a problem, and the solution isn't adequate, shouldn't another solution be found? Such as, (fill in blank).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cartesian

Is it possible to make a completely new Legacy deck that no one has seen before, and win a tournament with it?
Is it possible to win with a new deck that does not make use of some of Legacy's established, best cards, or try to exploit their weaknesses? It is possible, but we are approaching the realm of the impossible, fast.

I don't think it's fair to ask for major nerfing of Legacy's established strategies just for the sake of change, because that is not what an Eternal format is about.

---

The first two questions are hyperbole, and are admitted as such with a self-provided answer of, "...realm of the impossible...". While there is that magic combination out there, it's a unicorn, that probably involves a pearl necklace, or something relating to pearled unicorn. Basically, it's not helpful until proven.

The second part of the quote, emphasis added on strategies- that's the major problem, there aren't a lot of strategies. The argument most have made is it's play the cantrip-cartel+ (what the spikes love), play something so narrow to beat it (slyvan plug, "punishg blue", red painter), uninteractive decks (belcher, dredge, burn, elves), or just bash your head against the wall (me and some other folks). That's not healthy, especially when the cantrip-cartel makes up an inordinate number of the population.

Bringing fair to the conversation is an appeal to empathy that I don't have for blue mages. Brainstorm is not fair. The four aggro (cheap cc) blue creatures aren't fair- delver, snappy, clique, tnn. Counterbalance isn't fair either, tap out t2 (or later, maybe earlier with a mox or petal) and potentially counter every spell opponent plays for no future investment, gee, so much fun! (Fun used to exploit how crap an idea fair and fun belong in the conversation.) Fair doesn't belong here. No one can define what healthy is, unfortunately, but take fair somewhere else. From current printings, if Monastery Master, Young Pyro, and Swiftspear were all printed with "if you control this creature and cast a blue spell, you lose the game", they'd be more fair.

Basically, if you're a blue spike player, you'd rather just play mirror matches and the rest of us take are cards and shove it up that unicorn's ass? Pending the unicorn is ever found and captured.

I got the itch to play again, dropped about $71 on Mentors and a 2nd set of therapies. That was probably a mistake on my part, I come back from a 6 month hiatus, and I'm already feeling burnt out again.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ahg113

Well, first off, I disagree with you that a blue deck should be able to do all of those things, or at least all of those things well. In this Utopia (secular) where colors are balanced, there's trade off, so blue would be able to do control and combo with help, but not aggro (4 referenced offenders named, old fish is fine). Just like currently, green does aggro, lil combo (elves), but not much control (city of solitude, elephant grass, and?). This excludes obvious printed hate like choke, combust, red/blue blasts, karma, gloom, lifeforce, deathgrip.

Saying conditional cards are unplayable is a fact of life. I'd love it if some cards in other cards were playable, but for circumstances they aren't. There's no panacea like b'storm in other colors to just make these fringe cards playable. The gripe lots of people have with bstorm is the opportunity costs it eliminates for these conditional cards, such as Stifle.

Tangent on example of the given conditional card Stifle:
Stifle is used as a 1-mana Stone Rain more often than not. If it were used to nullify a Griz trigger, or Top Spin, or storm trigger, it'd be fine and used as the corner case sb card that makes sense. But because it's blue, pitches to FoW, and there's no penalty for running it, spam everywhere. Bind isn't as versatile, costs 1 more, but replaces itself and gets no play. If that were a blue card, I'm sure it would see play in Legacy, just like Squelch sees (some) play in Modern. Stone Rain is not a playable card (unless you wanna get cute and break a Energy Field). Why does the LD color have an unplayable hallmark card, but the library manipulation color get a fetch-wasteland killer for U? Oh, because new players don't like LD, LD isn't fun, blah blah blah. But blue is now the best LD color.

A lot of the argument is based on blue has almost all of the toys, and blue mages want to keep them. Since WotC hasn't provided the other four colors impressive toys of their own, or toys that blue just doesn't co-op (monastery mentor, drs, YPyro) it makes sense to take something away from blue. That's the crux.

---

Lemnar, I was hoping for a reply to this. Answering your question as such- I wouldn't bother attempting to recreate all of those aspects of deck building in a blue shell. All of those different aspects are not present in other colors.

And a follow-up set of questions-
Why do you feel as though the aspects should all be available to blue? Further, why should the cost benefit of conditional cards be mitigated to further include, or exclude, their selection during deck construction?

On a roll (Sarcone's sesame seeded) the answer that will probably make everybody a smidge happier is to print brainstorm duplicate cards in the other colors. That way everyone gets to party, blue can even change their deck to 20 brainstorm varients, use city of brass, and go hog wild.

Cause fuck intelligent conversation with a goal and end-point in mind, henya?

Use the edit button. 4 posts in a row is spam. I understand that in this thread it's difficult to determine spam from seriousness, but 4 posts, even here, is blatant spam.

From my phone. I do my best, dammit!