Printable View
"There is a none zero value in letting the format breathe" is my position. We are being strangled by one deck.
Also if you position is that the format should have control, I argue that Blade Control and Death Blade are fine. They are not lock out control, but they are control.
I argue you position seems not to be about control, but about Miracles. They are not the same thing.
Well you heard it here first guys. This guy's position is the downright absolute correct one and ruins every argument against miracles being legal. Might as well not post in this thread until there's actually a problem. Game overQuote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Miracles performed the same as Delver and Eldrazi at both GPs. It didn't outperform other decks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
but brainstorm decks did outperform non-brainstorm decks :rolleyes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasim0ff
I am not going to argue with anyone on numbers of a single event. Because I can pick and choose single data points to argue my case too but in the end single points prove nothing. I will argue that over 27 months the deck has consistently proven itself to be the undisputed king. That's a lot more data, collected over a long time showing a clear trend. A trend I do not agree is healthy.
Arguments can be made for Miracles needing a bad. Specifically the argument that Miracles is holding down creature decks (or midrange decks) fails unless it can be shown why Legacy needs more (yes, more) midrange creature decks ymor than it needs a single hard-control permission deck. (Not a midrange, aggro-control deck like Blade).Quote:
Originally Posted by Megadeus
I guess I don't agree that 16-18% of the meta constitutes a stranglehold.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Like I said, if you feel Miracles is this bad for the format, it's not really relevant if it is single-handedly supporting a play-style or not. If you had been willing to concede that Miracles is border-line (arguably ban-worthy, arguably not), than this might be worth consideration. If we can't agree that Miracles power level / representation is borderline oppressive, the ban camp vs the don't ban camp will never find common ground and this entire conversation is useless (much to the surprise of nobody, I guess).
@Megadeus - the best arguments against Miracles being legal are based on the following perspectives:
#2 is pretty weak, as should be obvious to anyone who knows the difference between answers, lock pieces, and threats. (And I'm no longer willing to argue with anyone who is purposely blind to these distinctions).
- Miracles is more than a little bit too powerful & present - it is a menace.
- Miracles is not a sufficiently different style from Blade to warrant extra meta space.
#1 is subjective, and well I'm willing to discuss it there are a lot of impasses in such a conversation based on what people want or expect from the banhammer.
For the record, this is not my position. I am just saying that there is other "Control" decks. Ones that warrant no play right now because why play a substandard control deck over the objectively best one?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
I actually think (And you will likely disagree) that the removal of Miracles would help diversity of control in the format. Because right now there is no reason to play any other deck if you want to play control other than Lands.
I guess we can agree to disagree, I am ok with that and will step away. As I said before, all we can control in Legacy is if we play or don't. Nothing else is in our control, so I can't be bothered getting too worked up over this. I have enjoyed the debate though, even if I can't get as invested in them as I once did. (Likely a benefit.)
Hopefully (if there is a ban), control will prevail. But I do like to occasionally play against a control deck where I can board out Mazes (etc).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
It's hard for me to feel control decks are diverse when I fight them in basically the same manner that I fight a Delver deck. We play the same deck, so I'm a little surprised that you haven't had the same experience.
The thread could be alot more civil if people stuck to actual numbers instead of spouting random, reality-defying garbage.Quote:
Originally Posted by Quasim0ff
GP Prague had a single Eldrazi deck placing at #11 - out of 15.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
At GP Columbus, it had zero Top 16 entries, meaning 0/9 made it. Meanwhile, Miracles put a comfortable 8/13 in the Top 16.
If I wasn't dead tired and brain fried after 12 hours of work + 2 hours of driving, I could crunch more numbers, like other decks, including Delver.
What's it take to be considered the "undisputed" king?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
If a boxer loses every other bout, routinely gets knocked off but then comes back, then he's obviously a really good boxer and probably the best of his era, but it's hard to call him "undisputed" when he's only the best man in the champion's ring half of the time.
Being the best deck in the format and being double the percentage of any other deck during that time period? Does that not make it the king?Quote:
Originally Posted by Begle1
I feel like it's wins that matter the most, not Top 8's or metagame saturation.Quote:
Originally Posted by HSCK
Like, if the deck is half of the metagame and makes every Top 8 but never wins any tournaments, is it "king"? I'd say no. Definitely not "undisputed" king; those decks that beat it all the time are disputing it plenty well.
How many wins is too dominant? I don't have much skin in the game, but I'd say maybe if a deck wins a third of the time over a long period, then it's too good? I don't think it matters nearly so much if it almost always top 8's but only wins a quarter of the time; that means it's very beatable still.
So would you consider a player able to top8 ten GPs in a row worse than one able to win once?Quote:
Originally Posted by Begle1
Yeah, top8 is single elimination and even more variance prone than MTG otherwise already is. I don't think there is to much difference between 8th place and 1st place in a two day event. I also like to look at the top16, or even top32 of the very large events.
So when is the new B/R list coming out? Mothership showed July 18????? :eyebrow:
Yeah. No changes
Wouldn't be the internet then. Besides most of that is from people who are playing the deck and don't want their shit nerfed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
Format diversity can't be precisely quantified.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barook
I get that you were referring to an erroneous quantification, and that's a fair complaint. But in general numbers alone can't tell the whole story of a format.
Oh it's king material.Quote:
Originally Posted by HSCK
IMHO the reason Miracles is so good is simple - it's a very flexible control deck with good game against most strategies out there, and it's in colours that offer extremely good cards for cheap mana costs. There are very few matchups that Miracles will struggle against, including postboard, which isn't something a lot of decks can actually say.
IME, I play against D&T and Miracles a lot more often than any other decks. Miracles is hardest to beat, no matter which deck I play.
For me, I'm not saying Miracles necessarily needs a ban to knock it on the head, but I wouldn't be complaining if a ban came their way.
The thing that fascinates me the most is trying to understand what changed in the community in this couple of months that made miracles unsustainable.