Wizards of the Coast will fix that sooner or later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kich867
Printable View
Wizards of the Coast will fix that sooner or later.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kich867
A few quick points.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kich867
It can be artifact lands as well no need for Chrome/Diamond.
The Tinker deck will play a lot more disruption.
Or in other decks, just side the 5 card package to play with Tops.
Inkwell.
Eh. If you're going to directly compare Tinker with anything it's probably Natural Order. For all the bullshit S&T brings to the table (quite literally) at least it requires you to build around it as opposed to the very compact Tinker package. Also 3cc. Also Blue. Granted I'd love to play it in a MUD/U combo/prison shell with Metalworker (getting Darksteel Forge post-sb) or even prison/aggro with Master of Etherium, but it'd get old fast.
In your given scenario, yes, I believe Tinker is worse than Show and Tell. Leviathan dies to everything emrakul dies to except Karakas (which is obviously a big deal), on top of any sort of cheaper artifact sweepers (Serenity, Seeds of Innocence).Quote:
Originally Posted by edgarps22
So this again puts it, at least in my perspective, in a worse situation than Show and Tell. Serenity is actually a ridiculous answer to Affinity which you will tend to see in tournaments. Show And Tell is good because it's hard to answer, you can't even go overboard in shutting it down because you're either dealing with an enchantment or a sorcery. If you bring in Pithing needle and put it on Sneak Attack they can still use Show and Tell and bring in grizzlebee or emrakul that way.
Each aspect of Show and Tell requires unique answers, and that's why it's hard to fight (good ol' counters can sometimes do the trick but they do run quite a few of them). The problem with Tinker here is that there's actually an all inclusive answer to the strategy, mentioned above, alongside almost all of the same options you had previously.
Not only that, Inkwell Leviathan is a 3 turn clock. Emrakul annihilation and griselbrand draw power shuts down your own answers, Leviathan and Tinker do no such things.
Yes but Show and Tell takes up 12-16 slots in your deck, tinker takes up 5, maybe 6. That is a HUGE difference in how you can build your deck and what else you can put in it. Inkwell gets around a LOT of the formats answers, no O-Ring, no Swords, not much of anything kills it, and in nearly every case it is unblockable. Specifically the commonly used answers to big fat fatties simply do not work, and the answers you suggest are found where? In Enchantress? So in one matchup I have to worry about Serenity, oh wait with all this extra room I have more Spell Pierces and Counterspells.
Heck in a head to head match I would take Tinker over Show and tell into Griselbrand because I can nail you once before you get to do a draw 7, if I hit you twice the game is over. Vs Emrakul I can just play Karakas and O-ring, which I would definitely be playing anyways for Grisel as well, and just make life horrible, with more slots available to control or tempo you out of the game. Tinker takes up so few slots it is scary in what it allows you to do with the rest of your deck. Show and Tell requires so many slots to be devoted to it that it is scary.
I have no clue that you are talking about. I argued bout the Hilarious comparisons done between Legacy/vintage and S&T/tinker and showed how the comparison lacked in their respective formats and you derail it into: "tinker in Legacy"?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kich867
Tinker is a 1-card Combo in vintage available Turn 1 with the Natural fastmana of the format and a robot somewhere in your Deck
S&T needs a creature in your HAND. In Addition it is available later or with tradeoffs like moxen/tomb/etc.
Natural Order needs a GREEN creature on the field and a Green in the Deck.
These 3 are completely different tiers with different requirements and to bite the Troll: Tinker in Legacy would be likely played with Seat of the synod, Opal mox and top instead of shit like chrome mox and ancient tomb.
Those are fair points.
I don't necessarily agree that Tinker takes up so few spots though. 4x Tinker and a target or two for sure. But now you're messing with your manabase, adding awful things like artifact lands which you can't fetch and tap for a single color. If you're looking at things like Chrome Mox or Mox Diamond you're further restricting yourself or at least drastically impacting the sort of decks you can realistically play.
To say you don't have to cater your deck to tinker I think is a simplification of the situation. You still do have to cater your deck, you still need tinker targets that won't impact you too much that you can reliably find. I would say that you want at least 8-12 tinker targets.
My suggestions of Serenity and Seeds of Innocence are in conjunction with the fact that people are running Gilded Drake and other highly focused sideboard cards in their sideboards, to me all it would be is swapping from one or two focused hate cards to one or two new focused hate cards that still have some decent applications.
I guess a turn 3 Jace is oppressive and a turn 2 Griselbrand isn't, nice rationalization.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
The other reason discussing bans is painful is that the status quo bias is everywhere and always dominant over actual reason.
It was the only part of the post I really cared to address, cool off for awhile :laugh:. I'm not trying to troll you or attack you, I'm just saying I don't think Tinker is going to be as good as people are saying it would be.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
I also have absolutely no opinion or care for vintage, I'm speaking about Tinker in legacy if that wasn't very obvious and abundantly clear by my post.
Inkwell Leviathan and Sundering Titan are about the best tinker targets you can get. This doesn't sound that scary. When you are behind against most aggro decks these guys aren't going to save the day like Emrakul, Grizselbrand, or Progenitus do. Show and Tell/Natural Order already cheat these guys in play.
Why would Tinker be more broken than Show and Tell or Natural Order? Why does Tinker need to stay banned but the other two are fine?
I get that Show and Tell has to be built around, but it brings in more devastating creatures.
Natural Order doesn't need more effort to use it than Tinker. You don't see Maverick and every green deck shoving Natural Order into it's deck or sideboard.
Why do people think every blue deck would add a few dead cards and a weakened mana base to their decks just to abuse creatures like Sundering Titan and Inkwell Leviathan? Aren't there better things these decks can do? Like flash a fleet of 4/4 fliers into play at the end the opponents turn? Or cast Jace?
I don't have much faith that Tinker will come off the B&R list considering weaker cards are still on there, but it probably could come off without dominating the format.
You can put Tinker into any deck with the requisite number of artifacts. Takes up just a few slots that you can put into any deck. There is Control Slaver, Stax, or an Accelerated Blue-esque deck. It wouldn't be hard to break it. It'd be a lot like Flash (remember that card?) where you have a fairly compact wincon in a deck with an absurd amount of disruption. You have space for things like Red Blasts, Pierces, Snares, Daze. You could have Jace as a backup plan. Welder for added resiliency, Thirst for draw, etc. I'm not sure why anyone wants Tinker unbanned. All it does is make Blue decks that much better. And the card is absurdly strong too.
I have nothing constructive to add.
Whoever suggest(ed) LED should be banned needs a cock punch.
The durdle that is a post t3 Belcher deck, I loved playing against show'n'tell when I had an LED in play and a Belcher in hand. Don't think there was another reasonable way I could've won without his help.
Tinker should stay banned because it does nothing to help me. Blah blah blah.
Cheers,
I had to share that with somoene.
Mind Twist unban?
The card is powerful, but unless you have enough fast mana to power out a Mind Twist for 3 or 4 turn 1, Hymn is better even if Hymn is BB
I love how you forgot blightsteel colossus. Oh yes, unban the card that can enable free wins with almost no effort. Tinker blightsteel in. You lack an answer? You lose. Good game, except not really because tinker is busted. Tinker is a 1 card combo, show and tell is a 2 card combo. Show and tell is tame in comparison to tinker because tinker actually TUTORS while show and tell requires the card in your hand. Ok so instead of running 8+ SnT targets, you're required to run 1 tinker target in your deck. Guess where the other 7 slots go. Oh yes, protection. You may think swords'ing BSC is an out, however why would someone tinker out a blightsteel they can't protect? Such a move is begging to be punished by a plow or some removal. And there is a LOT of protection for blightsteel in the format that would also be quite convenient in the not so uncommon mirror match (flusterstorm, spell pierce, force, daze to an extent.) Unbanning tinker isn't something I'd advise doing EVER in legacy. Unless you want tinker.format to happen. I'd love to play a FULL PLAYSET of the card as well, something a lot of people forget is that legacy is a format of 4 ofs. Having 4 ridiculously busted cards in your deck is something that no format should enjoy when said cards are yawg's bargain, necropotence, flash, etc. etc.Quote:
Originally Posted by joemauer
I don't feel attacked; I'M the one to say "Sorry" here. I just wanted to prevent a discussion about unbanning Tinker I seemed to cause unintentionally. I'm sure it's a waste to marter our brains with that being that unlikely to happen ever.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kich867
My friend, I think mana Drain would become a staple of Blue control behind FoW and BS and the undisputed "engine" of control. We might Not longer ask: do I run terminus, discard, counterbalance, explosives? No, all would Run drain (and side them out vs. Tempo), counter a Turn 3 Knight of the Reliquary, and hardcast SFM+Batterskull on turn 4 etc. Drain allows such splashy plays that i'm sure ist would be kill most of the other blue Control strategies.Quote:
Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin
Btw I never commented Griselbrand in any Post before. I just mentioned the repeating comparison between S&T with Tinker. Is tinker the stronger Single Card? Probably. Does ist have Anything to do with Legacy? No, that's the Point i endlessly repeat. I did Not comment S&T's strength in Legacy in any way so don't put words in my mouth, thanks
You know that we had mana drain's unbanning as well as S&T's banning as topics here lately, that's why i picked up both sperately before.
A thumb up @ Dark Ritual being able to differ 1-Card-combos from 2-Card-Combos ;P
Truth to the matter:Quote:
Originally Posted by ahg113
Every deck utilizing LED has the potential to win the game on the first turn at least 30% of the time, and close to 60% of the time by turn 2.
Is this something we should be proud of?
Is this something we want to encourage?
(just playing the devil's advocate)
You are making way too many assumptions about the way Tinker would be played in Legacy. Tinker doesn't have to be alternate Show and Tell it can be used as a finisher in a control deck, it can be a transformational sideboard in any deck that runs artifacts (cough Tendrils), as well as the combo deck you assume is it's only function (which is probably the worst use of it overall). You don't have to build around Tinker the way you do around S&T. It takes up significantly less slots in the deck, the entire package can be fit into a sideboard, the artifacts you will be saccing do something good on their own and are not just mindless combo pieces, ect.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kich867
Can you show where you got these numbers? Because I play both Dredge and T.E.S., and your numbers jive with neither my personal experience nor the results of my calculations.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koby
On the topic of tinker, it's not just S. Titan and Inkwell Leviathan. Possessed Portal is also a very bomby tinker target as is platinum emporium and mindslaver. The hypothetical tinker list that I would make would look like Control Slaver / Steel City Vault. Goblin Welder, Faithless Looting or Thirst for Knowledge, and 4 Tinkers and a bunch of control cards (Counters, maybe even an intuition or 2, Jaces). I'm not sure if the format is ready for degenerate control decks like this.
avg(Belcher, TES, SI/x, Dredge)Quote:
Originally Posted by funyun45
At least two of these decks have over 50% first turn kills, Dredge and TES have the capacity for first turn kills.
Adding another turn makes TES and Dredge much more consistent to win, as well as rounding out SI/x and Belcher.
The common element to all four decks is LED. No fair deck exists in Legacy that uses LED. Very few other decks in Legacy have even the potential to win the game on the first turn.
This was not your initial claim. Your claim was that every deck utilizing LED has a 30% chance of killing on turn one and a 60% chance on turn two. That claim is not equivalent to a claim about the average turn one kill rate between those decks. Dredge and T.E.S. certainly have the potential to win turn one, but nowhere near 30%. In fact, I'm dubious that either is at even 30% on turn two. Maybe T.E.S., but I'd put Dredge much lower.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koby
Now, SI and Belcher have much higher turn one (and turn two percentages). However, what they gain in consistency they lose in resiliency. Force of Will is one of the most commonly played cards in Legacy and it makes those two decks cry all day long. It's the reason those decks can only ever make up so much of the meta. So when you say this:
I have to disagree for that reason. All four of those decks are good, and "unfair" in the colloquial sense we Magic users tend to use with regards to Prison/Combo vs. Aggro/Aggro-Control. But "unfair" in that sense and "ban-worthy" are two different things. Only one of those four decks is a Tier 1 deck, and it is probably on average the slowest of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koby
However, I digress. LED is a great, borderline broken card. Your arguments for its banning may be valid. Ultimately, though, they are not what I'm contesting. I am contesting your initial claim about the statistical likelihood each deck that brandishes LED has of getting a first turn win.
You're right, the word choice was poor to convey the information I wanted. Those four (three, since SI doesn't show up consistently enough) decks maintain the stigma that Legacy can be degenerate. It also reinforces the idea that without Force of Will, the format would degenerate into the fastest LED deck. I certainly don't think a format that is binary (LED or FOW or gtfo) would be enjoyable.
I disagree look at Maverick decks they can still beat all those "degenerate" decks with abilities to win turn 1 or 2Quote:
Originally Posted by Koby
I see no reason to ban LED, now Lotus Petal well that I can see as ban-able, but not LED
I am sympathetic with your overall point (I think LED is on the "ban consideration" shortlist, along with Show & Tell), though I think the "without FoW" stigma is unfair. Obviously, without FoW the Eternal formats degenerate into craziness (in which, yes, LED decks would be at the very top of the heap, though perhaps not exclusively). To me, though, that's not a convincing argument for anything. FoW does exist in the format, and therefore inherently changes the landscape of the format. Its very legality changes the meta, much less its correct rate of presence, and much less still its actual rate of presence. So because LED decks would dominate if FoW was illegal tells us absolute nothing-- not a lot, not even a little-- about a format in which FoW is in fact legal. The format where FoW is illegal is not in the same ballpark, it's not even the same sport; Legacy and FoW-less Legacy are apples and oranges.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koby
As for a binary format, I don't think such a thing would be enjoyable either. Fortunately, we don't have to suffer such a thing. Legacy isn't such a format.
You just mentioned four.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koby
That's an interesting opinion. Why do you think that Belcher, Dredge, TES, and SI/other LED decks are objectively fair decks?Quote:
Originally Posted by Awaclus
LOL its been 3 years and you guys still wanna ban Force of Will? Why?
And yes, Both LED and Show and Tell will get banned first before Force of Will does and I don't even see these two cards getting banned. They have their stints but it wasn't as format dominating as Survival of the Fittest.
Unfair doesn't necessarily mean ban-worthy. Just like playing "fair" doesn't mean that nothing needs to be banned. It's just a strategical difference.
Fair usually refers to creature-centric strategies, interaction, trading 1:1 etc.
Unfair usually refers to strategies that plan on ending the game without giving the opponent much room for interaction, thus creating the feeling of having lost in an "unfair" way.
I think these are fair decks due to them being easily disrupted, and failing at their original mission, decks full of the durdle and dying.Quote:
Originally Posted by Koby
Having played against Dredge, appropriate GY hate (which is cheap and plentiful) cripples the deck. Surgical Extraction/Extripate, Relic of Prog., Crypt, Ooze, Nihil Spellbomb...
Playing Belcher- Thalia, discard, counterspells, Ethersworn Canonist, Teeg, Solidarity Confinement, and Leyline of Sanctity all make me cry. Thalia and Ethersworn less so than the others... but yeah... once I was "forced" to cast a Simian Grunts. I lost that game, hard.
I think these are all fair decks because they lose a lot. If they were, "I play, therefore I win," type decks, maybe they'd be unfair. It ain't fun being Wasteland locked by Aggro Loam or Maverick, yet those are fair decks? I thought LD wasn't fun so folks weren't supposed to do it...? WAAH!
LED shouldn't get banned because it's a playable deck- that's easily hated, under represented at winning tables, and gives cause for concern to other archetypes.
Banning Lotus Petals would be dumb. Said because of the temporary boost at expense of further development. It makes tempo matter. Slowing down "fast" decks to play the speed of "fairer" decks homogenizes the game, which is lame, hence dumb. When that player hits a cascade card 1st turn with a land and two quick mana cards, that's just optimization. Now, hypothetically, was that lotus petal or one of the spirit guides? And lotus petal can be countered. In a good world, there'd be a black spirit guide too.
Obvi,
What would the US gov't be with only two branches instead of three?
I can disrupt any strategy with any card. Being able to do so in theory doesn't make the deck in question fair. Long.dec can be disrupted with a Force of Will; but that doesn't make Long.dec a fair deck. Instead it's the type of interaction that needs to address the strategy that makes decks fair/unfair.Quote:
Originally Posted by ahg113
Of these hate cards, only two can operate at instant speed with zero mana. Faerie Macabre and Surgical Extraction. Against an opening with LED and a draw spell, those are the only two that are effective. Dredge openers with LED are usually the ones that are unstoppable. That is not to say the deck is unstoppable, but when interaction is limited to: 'do you have this specific card before you get your first turn?' is what is defined as unfair.Quote:
Having played against Dredge, appropriate GY hate (which is cheap and plentiful) cripples the deck. Surgical Extraction/Extripate, Relic of Prog., Crypt, Ooze, Nihil Spellbomb...
All but two of these "answers" require getting mana. Belcher especially is designed to prevent an opponent from getting a second turn. When a match is decided in as little as 4 turns between two players - is this a sign a deck is fair?Quote:
Playing Belcher- Thalia, discard, counterspells, Ethersworn Canonist, Teeg, Solidarity Confinement, and Leyline of Sanctity all make me cry. Thalia and Ethersworn less so than the others... but yeah... once I was "forced" to cast a Simian Grunts. I lost that game, hard.
A deck that loses or wins isn't sufficient criteria for being a fair/unfair deck. As Julian23 mentioned above, it's the type of interaction required to prevent the strategy that deems it fair. Aggro Loam and Maverick examples show an interaction that is taking advantage of the fact that Legacy decks play non-basics. Belcher and TES take advantage that not every deck has meaningful ways to stop spells within the first two turns.Quote:
I think these are all fair decks because they lose a lot. If they were, "I play, therefore I win," type decks, maybe they'd be unfair. It ain't fun being Wasteland locked by Aggro Loam or Maverick, yet those are fair decks? I thought LD wasn't fun so folks weren't supposed to do it...? WAAH!
<deck> is <quality> because <cards> loses to <answer>. Nice blanket statement there. Let me show you a set of Belcher decks that got Top 8 without a sideboard, or were played by complete degenerate drunks.Quote:
LED shouldn't get banned because it's a playable deck- that's easily hated, under represented at winning tables, and gives cause for concern to other archetypes.
I want to make clear that I'm not advocating banning of LED. I am however, attempting to show that LED is on a relative short list of cards that comprises a series of decks that strain the limits of acceptable level of interaction. It may very well take one new spell to finally push LED from "tolerable" to "degenerate". Examine the effect that Faithless Looting had on the Dredge archetype to finally push it away from Manaless and non-LED builds.
@Koby-
Unfortunately, a lot of decks are tuned so whomever wins the die roll is in the driver's seat. As I've read in the SCD of Gifts Ungiven, Legacy typically won't permit a player to durdle. Just as some decks strive to interact a lot (Maverick, U/R Delver) there should be balance with decks that don't want to interact at all (except for High Tide, those jerks...)
There's always FoW as an answer. I mean, I've asked what a better card against blue is than Sable Stag, and folks jumped down my throat that playing against a color is stupid (I get it...) and the best way to fight blue is play blue.
So there are options. Lack of options = unfair.
If LED were blue, would that make it more fair as Pyro/RE blast could act against it?
Who said anything about banning FoW?-- unless you're referring to some dumb shit posted pages ago.Quote:
Originally Posted by (nameless one)
If LED were blue people wouldn't run REB's to answer it but cry how overpowered Blue is.
Normal reaction today isn't metagaming but calling for the axe. That's all we have learned from Survival and Misstep. People refused to maindeck spell snare, enchantment removal or graveyard hate but spam forums with all their hatered and complaints.
Misstep was dodgeable by either overload 1cc spells (a 1cc zoo made #1 during misstep-era) or avoid strategies based on 1cc spells. But the tenor was that Misstep is so unfair because ist counters Lackey, Nacatl and Aether Vial and should counter instants/sorceries only, blaming it for the absence of Goblins as Tier 1 (hilarious as we can see). So misstep got banned before the meta adjusted once more.
Since then we had S&T as well as Brainstorm, Delver, Griselbrand, Time Spiral discussed for bannings. Half of the cards are affected by REB's but how many REB's do you see in decks that aren't named RUG that runs them for the mirror?
Misstep was bad because it introduced more variance to the game. As an UW control Player, I loved Misstep at first, but I played countless of games which revolved around who had more Missteps than the opponent. When a card is as omnipresent as MM, its not good for the metagame. And imagine it with Snapcaster Mage - that's ridiculous. It should stay where it is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Lemnear
And regarding "avoiding playing strategies based on 1cc spells": Do you suggest playing Dragon Stompy? That's not even a real deck.
Aggro-Loam would be better suited as a deck that dodges the 1 slot and is competitive.Quote:
Originally Posted by TkDodo
While there may be some merit to banning mental misstep, I still think that they acted way too quickly before the meta had a chance to bounce back from the initial hype. Everyone seems to write it off as just another unfair counterspell because it costs nothing, and because it counters itself, so the "appropriate" meta response is to have every deck running four of them. However, that logic doesn't hold up when you consider the example of force of will. It's also a free counter (force and misstep both have various advantages and disadvantages but overall they're quite similar). Also, most combo decks are running them as an answer to opposing control decks which use them as well. In fact, every aggro deck that can run them does so as well (merfolk, faerie stompy). Yet, everyone generally agrees that force of will is great for the meta.Quote:
Originally Posted by TkDodo
The reality might have been that mental misstep actually was a great widening of the color pie, giving free (conditional) counters to every color. It might have been great, but we'll never know for sure because they didn't give it a chance. Instead, we're plagued with stronger and stronger storm and reanimator decks which rely on multiple insane 1-drops, and crazy aggro decks using delver. Believe me, if we had mental misstep, it would definitely hurt those annoyingly popular decks more than it would help them. Heck, goblins might even be competitive again since they'd have a fighting chance against storm (sure, misstep counters lackey and vial, but it's not like that hasn't been happening since the beginning of time anyway, at least this way the other player would be under the threat of counterspells as well). At worst, it would allow for more interactivity in matches, for example, even if a storm deck can use mental missteps of their own, at least it would give goblins some way to interact. I don't see how you can justify banning mental misstep without also wanting to ban force of will.
Overall I think that the meta is acceptable, but it would be better with mental misstep, and they at least could have given it a few more months for people to be able to adapt properly.
Since when is it better to have fewer viable decks? It seems like people just want to play their delver/reanimator/storm/1cc decks and not have anyone else be able to interact with them at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by TkDodo
Loved that oneQuote:
Originally Posted by Malchar
I feel at this Point i should mention that at the end players began running misstep INSTEAD of FoW because it does similar things (stopping turn 1 plays on the draw and removal if they tap out for creatures).
It might have Been able to become a cheap replacement for FoW but the overreaction to misstep-battles (yeah, Swords-misstep-misstep did happen like Jace-FoW-FoW) and the pet.dec-Syndrom (especially decks that only work if their turn 1 play resolves like Aether Vial, Goblins Lackey, Wild Nacatl, delver, exploration, ritual->belcher, whatever) killed it before
In the end people defended of their 50$ counterspells from a 0.50cent one and white/red/Green from having a weapon against Combo ... Well done ... Really made Legacy more accessable.
Own topic:
Anybody Share the Feeling that Thalia is just the beginning of new permanent Wide-Range-Combo-hate?
Do you really want to play in a format with Snapcaster Mage + Mental Misstep
The real question was: do you want to play in a format with Mental Misstep?Quote:
Originally Posted by Final Ritual
The answer to that question was a resounding no for many players.
I am confused to why people would reminisce about Mental Misstep like it was the good old days of legacy.
I'm in totally agreement with you Joe. I felt the format was terrible, I was bringing up the point to Lemnear about the interaction of Snapcaster and MM.