Printable View
Yeah, I get that. My response was to show that it doesn't matter who likes the format at any given time because all it takes is a sign in WoTC parking lot to ban something. It shows that the vocal minority can get their way with WoTC, which isn't suprising considering their other recent pandering.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Just to be sure: In terms of numbers you mean, not matchup wise, right?Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
This is one of the reasons this thread is just circling around: people like different things about Magic or Legacy.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
And also, wow. There are still people believing in that "the street sign was the reason for the ban" crap. :rolleyes:
Guys, 2011 was seven years ago. I don't like Delvers any more than you do, but we can't pretend the power creep will just go away. I'm beginning to share an interest in the "unban things" scenario. I'm fine with things as they are (entry-to-format costs excepted), but one wonders whether there's some interesting stuff lurking in the banned list that could revitalize old strategies or foster new ones.
Not those specific match-ups, but overall aggro decks had poorer matches against the field and got edged out. Simply turning guys sideways was no longer a viable strategy because their were better things to be doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by JDK
Yeah, I get it but obviously multiple factors and I think the creature power is interesting.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
And still would be if not for a rules change and a printing. You list off a bunch of cards of which these are the only ones to see widespread play and only then they see play because of a quirk. I would argue if you had the Lands deck as it could have been then with Stage and a rules change it would have been making waves back then too.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Also there where very playable decks that cared about hosing creatures. I just went back and looked at my data for Jan 11, Supreme Blue and Landstill are well placed, with Blue playing Firespout of all the fucking things because it did the job. (Had no Green) Hive mind combo is almost a DTB midway though the year, then it becomes one, with Blade, Maverick and Thresh flat unable to agree on which is the best deck at the time. But of course that all starts to change in 2012 when Avacyn Restored gives a gift to the CounterTop decks that had until this point been a mix of Thoper, Tempo and plane of U/W control decks until that point.
Fuck, now I am remembering Landstill. I will say this much, not everything that is gone I look back at with fondness. I hate that deck.
Tabernacle, Maze and Chasm didn't need that rule change: http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckd...p?DeckID=47238Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Sure, that rules change and the printing of stage made Lands able to finish opponents much quicker which caused it to get a broader appeal for people that didn't want to grind down an opponent with Tarpit, but the main idea behind the deck didn't change. Tabernacle is as playable as it was back then.
Now how about you explain what makes those other cards on your list more playable than 6-7 years ago. Because I am not seeing it. If anything, they all became less playable because the Cantrip shell got so much more powerful over the last years because people now understand the power of Ponder (people didn't think it deserved 4 slots back than :O ) and Gitaxian Probe. Not to mention the dumb printings like TNN and Leo giving the cantrips on color threats alongside options as Delver, snapcaster and Jace...
It's simply a much better idea to play an insanely consistent pile of the best threats and efficient answers Legacy has to offer, rather than going into a defensive stance because these piles are so consistent these days they can even get out of your taxes or locks.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
You guys are missing my point. I'm just glad that any of those cards are playable. I'd love it if more of them saw play (and I'm sad they do not). But something is better than nothing, right? I'd have been happy with tier-1 Pox, Enchantress, or Stasis. I go Lands.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nielsie
Frankly I don't care if you credit the rules change or the Stage printing, or any other factor (increasingly greedy mana?). We now have a tier-1 creature hosing prison deck that is not an aggro hybrid. In 2011/2012, we did not
Standstill was more like classic control than prison (more like Miracles less like Stasis).Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Without the ability to close the game quickly, fair decks have too much opportunity to break the lock (or at least go to a draw). Lands needed that combo to compete.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nielsie
That link was not representative of the meta. I remember a MUD winning a GP several years back. Didn't make it a tier-1 deck.
Couldn't have said it better. Exactly why the "defensive stance" decks need an "oops, I win" button to combine mpete with today's good piles.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nielsie
I wouldn't blame the cantrips, though. They've been the same for years. It's the overly pushed crap they are finding that makes them better than they were.
Edit - if we are comparing today to 2011/2012, I could do without much of the silliness. I seriously doubt I'd miss:
But I don't want these gone badly enough to give up my Stage combo.
- Delver
- DRS
- YP
- Mentor
- TNN
- Leo
- Angler
- Or a slew of other cards.
I also would leave GB, because Sneak and Reanimator aren't exactly tearing up the format. I'd leave Terminus, because I like seeing a tier-1 draw-go deck. And of course I'd want to keep the Eldrazis because I'm glad we have a tier-1 stompy deck.
I also wouldn't miss cantrips, but I don't think losing them helps take the format back in time.
Lands was one of the best decks for a long time. The difference is it was a super grind of a deck and none of the pros would touch it. Once it gained random people picking it up because it had a 2 card derp win fast combo it got pros picking up the deck and telling people to play it because it was really good ( even though it had been really good before that)
I thought you where talking about decks that minimised creature interaction, thus Landstill. If your talking about Stax and Stompy I would argue it's a bit rich to suggest that decks where not playing Moat to hose creatures in such a shell. It's what Angel Stompy was designed to do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
What Grand Prix was this? A quick search yields no data. The closest I can find is a MUD deck getting Top 8 at GP Edison in 2014.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Indeed this!Quote:
Originally Posted by Megadeus
You make no sense. You were basically saying that the current format is much better than 7 years ago because at least now your list of cards is playable. I argue that Tabernacle (and the rest of that list) is as (un)playable as it has always been. Nothing changed in that regard. Lands just became more popular because in place of Tarpits or Factories you can now end games quickly with a combo which appealed more people to the deck but the general premise of it didn't change.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
But still you claim the current format to be better than 6-7 years ago? The meta used to be much more varied in engines that were used: goblins, affinity, white(/green) weenies with taxing/lock effects, eureka, bunch of red/green efficient beaters, Dark confidant, lingering souls, etc. were all engines that were viable but are simply not good enough anymore. All decks now just start with a bunch of cantrips, counters, blue duals/fetches, choose your flavor of choice to end the game: show & tell, Delver, TNN, Jace, Leo, Tendrils, Pyromance, mentor. The format got utterly boring because the number of engines now is basically: cantrips, loam and maybe sol-lands. The rest is a losing proposition, you can play it for fun but even fun is far away when playing DnT, being ahead on board and then your opponent plays brainstorm into 1 of his 2 kologhans commands, drop true ape next turn...Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
We talking 2011 & 2012?Quote:
Originally Posted by Megadeus
A brief stroll through the DTBF Philosophy thread tells its numbers were anywhere from mediocre to pathetic. I get that less popular decks tend to be better than their numbers suggest. But are we going to apply the same generosity to today's meta? Maybe non-cantrip decks are super frustrating and or dull and none of the pros will touch them? Maybe Maverick has been one of the best decks for a long time?
I'm not trying to convince anyone. Just hoping you might want to try to understand where I'm coming from.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nielsie
To me, Legacy is a collection of matches, not decks in a vacuum. Gold fishing isn't Legacy. Legacy is two players with decks opposing each other.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nielsie
I'm not that interested in how each deck manages its own resources. I'm interested in the interactive elements of the decks, because these define the matches (which define the meta).
You trivialise these as "game enders", but to me they are the heart of the deck and how it wants to interact. And each of these strategic cores demands different strategies in the various match-ups. This is why people say Shardless and Jund are basically the same deck. Different engines, but the same strategic core.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nielsie
Also, Mentor? You consider the defining difference between Miracles and Storm or Delver is the kill condition? Here's a lovely quote from the DTBF Philosophy thread:
This guy understands. He gets that Classic U/W control is completely different than Delver combo decks! I really can't fathom how anybody could not understand this.Quote:
Re: DTBF Philosophy & Deck Selection
July 2012 Update
Grognards rejoice! After an obscenely long absence, classic U/W Control has returned to the top-tier of Legacy on the wings of a bunch of cheap angels and one-mana Wraths of God! And bringing Counterbalance with it, for those of us who missed that other bastard too.
Honestly it makes me doubt your sincerity.
Do you guys honestly not remember in 2011/2012 people saying control was dead?
In the current (post SDT) meta, we have had Hard Control, Prison, and Stompy in the DTB as a norm (along with combo the "fair" creature decks as well). When was the last time we had that? I like this meta way better. Most people ITT would happily see these first three play-styles pushed to the fringe in favour of more fair creature decks but with different engines.
That's cool, but don't expect everyone to agree. And don't equate my PoV with loving cantrips or blue stew. Cantrip penetration has nothing to do with my preference for the current meta.
The issue here is that cantrip penetration has become the defining issue of the current meta. So while your defending it and and taking a dump on past metas we liked it makes you look like an apologist for everything that has gone wrong.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
"The mass of cantrips has nothing to do with my views, I just love it more when that's a defining feature of the format."
I'm not saying I don't believe you. I understand correlation is not causation, but your treading a very fine line here and not making your point very well.
Let me quote myself for clarity:Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Emphasis added.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
That's what I like about this meta - and only one of those play-styles is represented by a "cantrip" deck.
I don't care if you are finding your power-crept dudes with GSZ, Bob, BS, or Ponder. I care that there are non-combo decks that run on a different axis than your Midrange and Tempo "fair" decks*. I didn't see much of that in the meta you loved. I liked Landstill, but it was waining through 2011, and no longer a tier-1 option.
I thought the defining issue in Legacy was prohibitive prices and the RL? I don't accept the premis that the meta has issues at all.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Cantrips are an issue for some vocal people on these boards, but a lot of us really don't care about them.
I get that a lot of people are fixated engines (to the point where they pretend engines are the primary defining factor in a deck :laugh:), but the rest of us are not.
Can you not get that some of us are not fixated on engines, but rather on the ways in which a deck interacts? This is virtually all I care about in Legacy.
Right now play-style diversity is not an issue, but it certainly was by the end of 2011!
*Decks that are a healthy blend of creatures, threats, and enablers; and that play on a (more or less) fair mana-curve. By late 2011, that was every tier-1 non-combo deck. No thanks - I'll take the 2/3 cantrip meta instead please.
For the record, my true love is the 09 meta, but sematics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Both of which we can agree will not change. Also those have anyways been issues, just more so of late. So while I do agree these are problems there is likely little to be gained by hashing over them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
In 09 the best engine in the format was a 3 mana red lady that found red dudes, most of the time she found a red dude that found more red dudes. Now the best thing you can do is play the same 12 to 24 cards as everyone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
Its like saying you play Lands but your not fixated on Loam. You can say that, but you would be full of shit and I am sure we will both agree there. The engine is what makes the deck tick. You can claim otherwise but you would be wrong, naive or both. Just to call it as bluntly as I see it.
If the deck could run (competitively) on the likes of Crucible, Mulch, and Horn of Greed, I'd be just as happy. If you cannot believe that, you will probably never understand me. But is it really so hard to wrap your head around?Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
Edit - see that deck would have the exact same game plan, except a different means of finding the cards. It's the game plan I love - to frustrate my opponents efforts by Stripping their lands and neutralizing their creatures.
If being the word here. It can't. Nor can those other decks without Brainstorm, Ponder and a pile of fetches. If they could, and we had some kind of variety like we did 5 to 7 years ago, I would bitch a whole lot less. I would still bitch, mostly because I hate losing and I am a bad player, but I would not be here bitching about how everything looks the fucking same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Crimhead
If is a lovely word, if I won the lotto, if I had managed to go to bed when I wanted to a moment ago and the mailman not turned up with yet another fucking minecraft plushy... KIDS! I mean if there was some dam variety to 65% of the dam meta that did not include the same lines repeated the same way to the same boring situations over and over again... I would be a whole lot fucking happier with this pile of shit that is Legacy now. It's really hard to see you apologise for mass genocide of this format and then shit all over what was. No I understand you, I just believe completely that your wrong. Because I was there, and I am here, and I can see with my own eyes what has been wrought here. What was torn down and rebuilt in this abomination that is not in any way what was once beautiful.
On the bright side at least those who played Legacy as a stock market are happy. Have you see what Diamond is climbing too? Fuck.
Hey, man, you're the one who is insisting that my inclination to Lands is all about Loam.Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
I care about Loam only insofar as it's necessary to produce the desired play-style. Beyond that I don't give a shit that it happens to be Loam that enables my core strategies. That's not why I like Lands.
For the record, I wouldn't touch Aggro Loam with a stick. Not my style in the slightest.
I can see you'd rather bitch about than discuss it though, so whatevs.
Also, I don't have anything bad to say about Legacy in 2009. I never looked much at data back then, but it seemed like Enchantress was a quality prison deck, Ux Hard control was good, and we even had real aggro decks. Maybe I'm wrong - wasn't playing much Legacy then.
Wow, no kidding!Quote:
Originally Posted by Dice_Box
https://www.mtggoldfish.com/price/Ar...d+Valley#paper
I haven't updated this sheat in ages, but it will give you all the data I have a far back as 09.
https://www.dropbox.com/s/cvcgp8ydzz...ata1.xlsx?dl=0
I am... does that count?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kap'n Cook
Reflection on what this format was is depressing. The idea that a card not named Force of Will is given a free pass no matter how damaging I think has broken any love I had left. While I knew it was true, to have it in black and white is that last push needed for introspection. I have not enjoyed what I have found.