Re: All B/R update speculation.
It doesn't 'feel bad' to lose to a A+B combo deck, it feels boring. Neither person actually played Magic, one person got to do some performance art. Chalice decks are similar since Sol land + Chalice is a similar "ta-da!" act. Did you really go out of your way to acquire all these expensive magic cards just to sit down in front of a stranger and say "A...plus B"?
I prefer games where both people get to make complex and meaningful decisions. I think Legacy on the whole has more of those games than Modern and Vintage. Miracles creates some non-games with Countertop, but overall it's designed to be a highly interactive deck. Eldrazi, SnS, Reanimator are basically designed to have non-games where you just need to not screw up a handful of pretty obvious decisions. How hard would it be to program a computer to play those decks competently?
Some people really don't want to do anything but attack with a 15/15 or say turn 1 Chalice and then get to play all of their favorite creatures now that the opponent doesn't get to play Magic. But I wonder if you guys wouldn't be having more fun if you were playing EDH.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iatee
It doesn't 'feel bad' to lose to a A+B combo deck, it feels boring. Neither person actually played Magic, one person got to do some performance art. Chalice decks are similar since Sol land + Chalice is a similar "ta-da!" act. Did you really go out of your way to acquire all these expensive magic cards just to sit down in front of a stranger and say "A...plus B"?
I prefer games where both people get to make complex and meaningful decisions. I think Legacy on the whole has more of those games than Modern and Vintage. Miracles creates some non-games with Countertop, but overall it's designed to be a highly interactive deck. Eldrazi, SnS, Reanimator are basically designed to have non-games where you just need to not screw up a handful of pretty obvious decisions. How hard would it be to program a computer to play those decks competently?
Some people really don't want to do anything but attack with a 15/15 or say turn 1 Chalice and then get to play all of their favorite creatures now that the opponent doesn't get to play Magic. But I wonder if you guys wouldn't be having more fun if you were playing EDH.
But why is the burden not on their opponent for having outs to chalice/countertop? :) Not arguing with the SnS one here, that's really A + B = 95% win. But resolving a Chalice is still far from winning. Unless your deck is made up of almost only CMC 1 spells.
Same with Countertop - if you play a bigger varieties of CMCs in your deck, chances are a lot smaller that just a Counterbalance + Top in the early game can lock you out?
I would guess that decks like Nic Fit have a reasonable chance against Countertop (Decay + lots of random mana costs) or chalice (exactly the same reason). Just to give an example.
Or Enchantress - very fringe, I admit, but Miracles is a good match up imho, and playing spells into an active Countertop gets a lot countered but if you invest your spells wisely, and chain a bunch of different CMCs (really not hard in the deck), and play replenish in your MD and or board, Countertop is not the end of the world. For me Prelate is more of a derp card tbh - as it doesn't even allow you to cast f.ex. 50% of the cards in your hand, and putting it on 3 is a lot easier than Chalice.
Sure, those decks are more prone to variance. But decks playing the Cantrip Cartel to avoid said variance, will lose out against Chalice on 1 (or Countertop). That should partly even out? Either you lose to your own deck screwing you over once in so many games (not fun) or lose to your opponent's deck locking you out once in so many games (turn 1 Chalice, not fun)
Same for playing against lands with an active Wastelock or even worse, Ghost Quarter lock + Tabernacle in play. Try to win against that as a non-storm deck that needs more than 0 creatures and more than 1 land :-) Legacy is full of interactions that sometimes don't let your opponent play anything at all.
I guess if people are entitled to play their 1 favourite deck forever and not innovate it properly, or switch to a deck better equipped to beat the lock decks, then indeed Chalice or Countertop need to go. Neither are unbeatable so just play stuff that doesn't care as much about these cards, and have your opponent sit there with all these useless jank cards in their deck being salty that *their* deck doesn't get to do what it wants to do.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iatee
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
Given its matchups vs SnS and Reanimator, it's kind of odd that piloting D&T has led to a mentality of Show and Tell is a problem card. Even if you're somehow losing to SnT decks on a regular basis; you're also not on a deck that either attacks the hand nor has a card they're ok dropping into play. You also need to remember what a deck like SnS protects you from in the grand scheme of things; unfair FoW decks generally love fighting even less fair decks (who are without FoW, and possibly also no discard). Control decks scrambling to cast the same white 2-drops as you aren't keeping the format honest - even if they were, cards that effectively read "I can't lose like this anymore" are intrinsically uninteractive. There's a lot of 'feels worse' ways to lose a game [without getting to play] than SnT; sometimes though that SnT deck is gonna come around and collect their service fees from you in the form of a win.
It doesn't 'feel bad' to lose to a A+B combo deck, it feels boring. Neither person actually played Magic, one person got to do some performance art. Chalice decks are similar since Sol land + Chalice is a similar "ta-da!" act. Did you really go out of your way to acquire all these expensive magic cards just to sit down in front of a stranger and say "A...plus B"?
I prefer games where both people get to make complex and meaningful decisions. I think Legacy on the whole has more of those games than Modern and Vintage. Miracles creates some non-games with Countertop, but overall it's designed to be a highly interactive deck. Eldrazi, SnS, Reanimator are basically designed to have non-games where you just need to not screw up a handful of pretty obvious decisions. How hard would it be to program a computer to play those decks competently?
Some people really don't want to do anything but attack with a 15/15 or say turn 1 Chalice and then get to play all of their favorite creatures now that the opponent doesn't get to play Magic. But I wonder if you guys wouldn't be having more fun if you were playing EDH.
re: S&T: I don't mind "unfair FoW decks". I mind the specific wincon S&T decks use because it puts me into a coma to win a game off a single sorcery. Tide is the same style of deck, just a ten million times more interesting one. In terms of power level, S&T is fine. In terms of the kinds of games it creates, it's cancer. One shitty tumor among many.
What iatee says. Playing a card that says "I win" is not a thing I consider fun. I do it because fuck, GSZ@2 vs. Storm is that good and NO curbstomps nonblue decks and Moon and RiP kill people. But it's just nowhere near as interesting as having to concoct a gamestate where you can sneak it past a counter or find a way to bait the counter and then go for it, or use the threat to build a game state where you can win by other means. NO=>Hoof is still a derpy fucking play a lot of the time, it just has constraints (higher mana cost, triggering more hate cards like Teeg, putting something into play from a zone things aren't supposed to come into play, sacrificing boardstate to even try) that make it something that makes you use a couple brain cells sometimes. RiP is more interesting when it shuts off Tarmogoyf than when it wins vs. Reanimator or Dredge. The interaction is nuanced, not absolute. It has an impact on the game instead of rendering sitting at the table an irrelevancy. Trying to mulligan against S&T with a nonblue, non-D&T deck is awful: Hey a hand full of discard. It is either SUPER amazing or totally fucking dead, all depending on whether they lucksacked into a Leyline.
Playing cards *with people* is fun. Legacy is increasingly stocking up on singular cards that you just cast and that's it. That's awful. Absolute, binary, devastating effects do not lead to good games unless they need a lot of setup or are the culmination of a lot of different cards interacting to produce a broken result. Game-ending hate is bad design and I'd love to see it go, but you can at least somewhat justify things like RiP and Moon as due punishment for extreme greed. Doesn't mean the games are good, but at least metagame-wise they are the police and not proactive win buttons.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fjaulnir
Sure, those decks are more prone to variance. But decks playing the Cantrip Cartel to avoid said variance, will lose out against Chalice on 1 (or Countertop). That should partly even out? Either you lose to your own deck screwing you over once in so many games (not fun) or lose to your opponent's deck locking you out once in so many games (turn 1 Chalice, not fun)
The problem isn't that things are unbeatable. They are not, very evidently so. The problem is that the "games" you get to (mostly not) play at the table are shit. It's the same kind of error that has Starcraft 2 in the grave: The devs didn't give a shit about gameflow and just balanced game win percentages, not nuanced interaction, enjoyable flow and fun.
You're also suggesting pretty bad decks as "counters" to the lockout decks. It's pretty telling, isn't it?
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fjaulnir
Same for playing against lands with an active Wastelock or even worse, Ghost Quarter lock + Tabernacle in play. Try to win against that as a non-storm deck that needs more than 0 creatures and more than 1 land :-) Legacy is full of interactions that sometimes don't let your opponent play anything at all.
I guess if people are entitled to play their 1 favourite deck forever and not innovate it properly, or switch to a deck better equipped to beat the lock decks, then indeed Chalice or Countertop need to go. Neither are unbeatable so just play stuff that doesn't care as much about these cards, and have your opponent sit there with all these useless jank cards in their deck being salty that *their* deck doesn't get to do what it wants to do.
I wonder if you've read anything that's been said. The endstate is not a problem. Locks and combo kills are completely fine. I've praised a bunch in my posts as great examples of fun Magic. The problem is very narrowly, cards that read or can read "Win the game." with little or no setup, including narrow, insane punishers like Leyline of Sanctity, Rest in Peace, and in some games Blood Moon.
The pet deck line is a complete strawman. No, I don't mind switching decks or overhauling a pet deck drastically. Not one bit. Metagames move, switching decks and playing completely different styles is not an issue: I love or am OK with nearly anything.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
All I can say to people complaining about losing to chalice on 1 is: that's what you get for playing mono one drops. I play storm from time to time. It happens. That's the downside you get from having retarded consistency by play 12 cantrips and force of will. Just like my downside of diversifying my deck and playing Thalia in maverick is that I stare at my opponent on their turn and hope they don't do anything I care about because I can't counter it. Or I draw my 6 on a Mulligan with one land and hope to draw another land rather than having a brainstorm to find my land. If instead of having your deck be 12 1 mana cantrips, Delver, bolt and others you played some number of impulse and two mana dudes and maybe some terminates or something you'd be fine. You know the risks. Just like I've accepted at this point that sometimes I just draw lands and have no brainstorm to put extras back, you've entered the tourney full well knowing chalice is a very powerful hate cards that exists for your deck. If you don't like it, go play modern
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Have you ever played Modern? Modern is a format *completely* dominated by people playing non-games + hoping to dodge hate cards that you auto-lose to. Eldrazi's rise made Legacy significantly more like Modern.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Complaining about Chalice is stupid, especially if you go for the interaction angle.
By that logic, how much interaction with the opponent does cantripping involve? Zero, since they don't interact with your opponent, either, unlike stuff like Fact or Fiction or Gifts Ungiven. And unless you run counters, there are are no other ways to interact with cantrips.
Finding stuff that can interact =|= actual interaction
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iatee
Have you ever played Modern? Modern is a format *completely* dominated by people playing non-games + hoping to dodge hate cards that you auto-lose to. Eldrazi's rise made Legacy significantly more like Modern.
The joke is the classic people telling people who say brainstorm is a blight on the format to go play modern if they don't like the #SkillIntensivePillarOfTheFormat that is brainstorm because it can never be banned
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
iatee
Have you ever played Modern? Modern is a format *completely* dominated by people playing non-games + hoping to dodge hate cards that you auto-lose to. Eldrazi's rise made Legacy significantly more like Modern.
I totally disagree here, except if you mean that Eldrazi made the combat step more important.
Eldrazi operates very much like Delver except it encourages you to spread your costs out rather than to play the most efficient spells possible. Many Miracles players are adapting to Chalice with more MD Explosives and Wear/Tear, so other than unreformed RUG and Grixis Delver players I can't think of anyone totally cold to a resolved Chalice the way Modern Affinity is to something like Stony Silence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Fox
Given its matchups vs SnS and Reanimator, it's kind of odd that piloting D&T has led to a mentality of Show and Tell is a problem card. Even if you're somehow losing to SnT decks on a regular basis; you're also not on a deck that either attacks the hand nor has a card they're ok dropping into play. You also need to remember what a deck like SnS protects you from in the grand scheme of things; unfair FoW decks generally love fighting even less fair decks (who are without FoW, and possibly also no discard). Control decks scrambling to cast the same white 2-drops as you aren't keeping the format honest - even if they were, cards that effectively read "I can't lose like this anymore" are intrinsically uninteractive. There's a lot of 'feels worse' ways to lose a game [without getting to play] than SnT; sometimes though that SnT deck is gonna come around and collect their service fees from you in the form of a win.
This is the same logic that says you can't acknowledge a problem until you've experienced it firsthand, coupled to a wild misconception. Delver is by far the beat police for decks like Belcher or Oops since they typically fold to 1-2 pieces of disruption if you kill them quickly. The Reanimator matchup, for example, is so bad for those decks (and so rare) that the correct choice is to hope not to play them and hope to get lucky if you do. By being mpre common, Delver actually forces them to slow down to incorporate protection (becoming more normal combo decks in the process) or dramatically alters the value calculation on playing those decks in the first place.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
btm10
This is the same logic that says you can't acknowledge a problem until you've experienced it firsthand, coupled to a wild misconception. Delver is by far the beat police for decks like Belcher or Oops since they typically fold to 1-2 pieces of disruption if you kill them quickly. The Reanimator matchup, for example, is so bad for those decks (and so rare) that the correct choice is to hope not to play them and hope to get lucky if you do. By being mpre common, Delver actually forces them to slow down to incorporate protection (becoming more normal combo decks in the process) or dramatically alters the value calculation on playing those decks in the first place.
If you look at Zombie's original post on the matter, there a lot of talk about SnT with "I don't like," which is an emotional appeal. These arguments generally come from personal experience, which is why it's odd that a DnT pilot still cares about SnT since OmniTell lost DTT (and doesn't really show up much anymore). It's fine to not like the way a card works or wins, but you're talking about a card [by itself] that the DnT deck isn't built to meaningfully interact with. You'll often have this 'ships passing in the night' scenario when unfair FoW decks run across fair non-blue decks; I get that it's not fun for fair decks to lose to combo, but their very presence means you get to play more grindy fair decks (who also have this inexplicable desire to run removal and discard spells instead of trying to win). :tongue:
It's not about whether or not you need firsthand experience, we're talking about a mindset whose knee-jerk reaction to SnT is wanting nothing more than say a D. Sphere-style effect in hand should it resolve. You can always play ridiculous magic too, and they'll have to seriously consider whether or not to even try and cast SnT. There's more annoying, and less interactive, ways to lose a game of legacy. Delver helps keep the format honest, but it also doesn't have its own mechanisms that invalidate completed (or ongoing) combos. The style of have all the right answers at all times is a fine way to deter hyper-linear combo, but it also means you lose if you ever slip up.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
So much malcontent here. :(
Every deck in Legacy (except perhaps some fringy "glass cannon" decks) has MUs which more often than not involve an interactive struggle). Most decks also have MUs than are more often than not very lopsided and hard for one player to meaningfully interact. That's simply the nature of a format with such a wide array of strategies and various means of "attacking" the game.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
So is this thread is turning into the MTGSalvation modern banlist thread? Lets ban everything that's not interactive! Lets ban everything that's not fun for your opponent! Guess what? Some people like to play cards that don't interact with your opponent *GASP* or cards that make them miserable. Otherwise Stax, Chalice Aggro and Counterbalance wouldn't be played.
You know what I find really really fun? Casting and resolving a turn 1 Chalice against Delver. It's probably the most feel-good play of all time. You know what else I find fun? Playing mono blue stasis and making my FNM legacy go 10 minutes passed time every round. Just accept that the format is how it is and go play Standard or EDH. Or you can not be so greedy and play a deck with spells that don't all cost 1.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Clearly the answer to everything is to restrict Ancient Tomb
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Blastoderm
Playing mono blue stasis and making my FNM legacy go 10 minutes passed time every round..
Is this an admission that you deliberately slow play?
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Barook
Complaining about Chalice is stupid, especially if you go for the interaction angle.
By that logic, how much interaction with the opponent does cantripping involve? Zero, since they don't interact with your opponent, either, unlike stuff like Fact or Fiction or Gifts Ungiven. And unless you run counters, there are are no other ways to interact with cantrips.
Finding stuff that can interact =|= actual interaction
While I half agree:
* Chains of Meph
* Spirit of the Lab'
* Thalia
* Notion Thief
IMO, hosers are a form of interaction; just like we say that Thalia is interaction against combo. Wasteland is interaction too IMO.
Counterbalance is even a form of interaction; except that it keeps your opponent from playing literally everything unless it's weirdly costed. Honestly.. I feel like if you're going to restrict Chalice in Vintage, you should ban CTop in Legacy. It's the same problem; but worse in legacy.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Blastoderm
Just accept that the format is how it is and go play Standard or EDH. Or you can not be so greedy and play a deck with spells that don't all cost 1.
Or 0.
Or 2.
Or 3.
Sometimes 4, 5 or 6 too if the Miracles player is lucky enough.
Also! don't play creatures because literally every possible protection, recursion, or ability to save your creature in the game (except for counterspells!) can't save your creature from terminus.
Protection? Blorp.
Comes out of the grave? JK.
Hexproof? Nah dood.
Indestructible; get that out of here.
high toughness, not good enough.
Keep your opponent from being able to cast it? Oh it costs 1 mana, almost forgot.
Run several dudes? Nah it hits all of them too.
It even kills Misthollow Griffin.
So everyone! All you have to do is:
* Run no uncounterable spells or maybe run only spells that cost 7+
* Run no creatures
* Run Blue or BGx
We get it. The deck is the best in the format, and that when it's axed there will be a new best deck at some point. The difference? This one has had it's time to shine longer than any other dominating deck; and it's done it in the most obnoxious way possible by going to time every game, and being an absolute bore for both players.
I have *zero* issues with chalice. There are 1 mana spells that get through chalice and kill it. It's useless against some decks in the format. It's only run in a shell that can't easily find it. CB however has everything going for it:
* Blue for Force
* Can lock out just about any deck.
* Is Blue for finding it with 17 cantrips.
* Doesn't require *any* design considerations.
Chalice has a downside, if not several. But again. We get it. You like that your deck is the best one, that it's been the best one for years, and that you think that since it's the best and *won't be taken off of it's throne ever given that Eldrazi, Decay, a popular Vial deck, Lands, and 12-post couldn't do it* that it should be the best deck *forever.*
That's a lame format dude. Being the best deck for 4 years running and no slowdown in sight is obnoxious for everyone involved. The format doesn't see the shifts it used to. Those top decks look the same as they did this time last year, and roughly the same as they did right before Cruise. It's getting old.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Like I've said, I don't even think miracles is necessarily over powered to the level it needs a ban. I'm just tired of it. Last quarterly win a mox I got to top 8 and game 3 I got terminused when I had 5 cards still in hand I simply scooped because I'm pretty much over playing against the deck. It doesn't provide many interesting games to me at this point. If I play against it at a weekly I'll probably just give my opponent the win and go watch another match because it's just not interesting anymore, it's just obnoxious.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
The problem with countertop (unlike with chalice) is, that the only cards, which are viable to break out from the lock, have to be uncounterable, which is the main reason BGx decks are the only decks build around low cmc cards, which survived beside Miracles.
You play either Countertoo, chalice or Decay in Legacy, if you want to actually win anything
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Lemnear
The problem with countertop (unlike with chalice) is, that the only cards, which are viable to break out from the lock, have to be uncounterable, which is the main reason BGx decks are the only decks build around low cmc cards, which survived beside Miracles.
You play either Countertoo, chalice or Decay in Legacy, if you want to actually win anything
Grixis delver agrees with you. Sneak and Show, which just won the 2500 people GP Chiba also agrees.
Re: All B/R update speculation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
Quasim0ff
Sneak and Show, which just won the 2500 people GP Chiba also agrees.
Have you seen the number of T2 S&Ts in the video coverage?
