Dazed and Confused
Printable View
Still have to read the whole article, but...
And of course something that can't be missingQuote:
A month ago, I was oblivious about Legacy. [...]
You know what I think about?
Why in the WORLD is every single person’s deck SO BAD.
I'm sick of reading this kind of arrogant statements, and I'm sick of pro/semi pro/wannabe pro regarding the legacy community as idiots. I almost lost the will to read the rest of the article after the first few sentences.Quote:
Combo is still the best, always has been the best, always will be the best. Why are people putting Wild Nacatl and Lord of Atlantis in their decks when there are multiple ways in the format to kill you on the first turn of the game.
Edit:
Ok, finished to read the whole article. The only thing this has taught me is that one month is not sufficient to understand Legacy. It also has irritated me to the point that I'm probably going to smoke to calm me down.
Wow is that guy retarded. I'm not sure who he is, but he clearly knows nothing about Legacy. Sure buddy, you go ahead and make a deck with 29 lands in the Legacy (and I don't mean Lands.dec), and skip running fetchlands and duals to avoid that garbage deck that runs Stifles, Wastelands, and Dazes. lulz
This was the most ignorant article about Legacy that I've read since... well, since ever.
This guy is/was clearly Dazed and Confused.
To anyone who hasn't read this yet, don't. Not only will you waste your time, you will become much dumber after reading it.
He does have a point tho, Legacy decks tend to be fragile to mana disruption due to excessive usage of cantrips to smooth out the gameplan. This is partial one of the reason I think MUD is a slumbering beast...
But yeah, he does come off too condensending(sp?).
Haha, that guy is retarded :D
Horrible writer, he has a point about the fragile manabases, but the comparission he makes towards standard decks having more lands just doesn't apply. Legacy has an entirely different curve then standard decks do.
LOL!
I should have listened to Hanni's suggestion to skip reading this article.
It's real garbadge.
Has he ever played Legacy?? Really, has he ever attended at least one tournament?
A really arrogant person. Don't like duals, wastelands and fetches? Don't play them! I'd like to play against him playing a deck of 29 basic lands and see where he goes..
And all the points of Nacatl and Merfolk.. OMG..
The author is really Dazed and Confused..
No wonder a lot of people misunderstand Legacy when they get their information from crap like this.
Yes and no. It is true that Legacy manabases are far more fragile than Standard, but at the same time, the chance of running into a deck built around exploiting that weakness is less than the chances of losing by using a piece of garbage basic land manabase out of fear of such exploitation. Also, you know, you can play intelligently and not walk blindly into Wastelands and Stifles. Not that you can always do so, but format knowledge can increase your chances of avoiding disruption exponentially.Quote:
Originally Posted by Grollub
I felt my brancells dying while I read that piece of crap. Seriously, has that dude ever played in a big tournament with his oh-so good ANT with 8 Fetches, 2 Duals and 10 Basics?
Ban this topic, no one should ever waste their precious time reading that shit, and this also applies for the 90% of the articles about Legacy on "Channelfireball", written by perfect Legacy strangers or "I-know-10%-of-the-format-but-i-still-write-because-imma-pro".
Seriously, go on talking about Jund and Eldrazi, leave us the good stuff.
A poorly constructed article that quickly degenerates into him bashing a format he barely understands.
Yeah, the article was bad. Yeah, he doesn't really know what he's talking about at all. Yeah, I'll echo all the hate above. But did anybody else find his "super awesome" story at the end entirely unawesome? That was the let-down icing on the let-down cake for me.
haha, what a moron. thats all i have to say
The land counts in Legacy are lower in part because the CMC of spells you actually pay mana for generally stops around 2. Also, about half the decks in Legacy have some form of land recursion, making LD a largely tempo-based strategy. That said, the author does have a point about the level of greed in most legacy manabases. It's a bit high. Basics aren't sexy, but they are necessary, and in something like 70% of Legacy decks they should be played in greater numbers.
However, the manner in which the article was written, and several massive comparison fails/format understanding fails make it fairly bad at actually communicating it's core idea in a manner likely to be well-received by the reader.
I stopped there. Seriously.Quote:
..when there are multiple ways in the format to kill you on the first turn of the game.
Why do all the standard pro wannabes even bother with legacy? All they know about is "the Flash fiasco", "Reanimator is orgasmic good" and "get those duals for cheap, dude" stuff.
Ignorant pricks..
I actually agree with the author to a certain degree. He foolishly thinks he understands something that he does not have the background to see clearly. But there is actually an angle there. Legacy deck builders and the players who pilot those decks are constantly overstepping their safety zone to access better spells.
1. 4 color Landstill - was great for awhile. Nick Trudeau was tearing up the place over and over despite the paper thin manabase. Oh, then someone figured out he had been cheating to get proper lands all along.
2. Team America - played some really powerful spells, no basics, and was so thin on everything that it actually made Extirpate look attractive
3. New Horizons - I know it is all the rage. But it is a house of cards and will not last - for all the same reasons.
What the author does not have the familiarity to understand is that this is cyclical. It happens over and over in this format until the people playing the deck eventually abandon it due to inconsistency and hate. It is good to push the boundaries of what you can get away with. That is intelligent deck design. Good decks play good cards. The holes in your design (manabase is easy to spot and easy to take advantage of) only come to bite you in the balls when someone else calls you on it with a deck designed specifically to exploit this weakness. But until they sit across from it, the over-reaching decks will continue to pursue their Plan A successfully.
Want a deck that will be a perennial performer? Figure out a way to make it strong with as few colors as possible. It opens up doors.
This is basically what I said in the Comments section of the artcle. I could see his point, but he needs to provide decks that meet all of his stringent roles that he wants a deck to win. PV and Manuel Bucher always talks about this when discussing Legacy. They want a deck that either wins on the first turn or stops decks winning on the first turn, and have a good long game, so they play Counterbalance decks. At least they provide an idea of what they want to see played, rather than just call Legacy decks shit and not give any alternatives.Quote:
Originally Posted by Finn
While the article is not very professional, I think there are some lessons that could be extracted from the mess rather than dismiss it entirely. For example, I have to agree with him in some points.
The first one, is that Ponza is awful.
The second one, is that combo decks should be playing with Force of Will themselves.
The rest of the article is about how Merfolks is a bad deck, however, what I think it's happening here is that he doesn't realize that Merfolks is a meta-deck, that's it, a deck designed to prey on vulnerabilities self-imposed by the other decks in the format.
He is saying that all other decks bad because they make merfolk good with their design choices. It's true that if players chose to play less fetchlands and more lands they would get better results against current merfolk decks, but it could also mean that merfolk decks, being a meta-choice, would adapt to prey on a different set of vulnerabilities (mostly, there are people still playing Suicide black in legacy, for example).
I can identify with him because I remember when the difference between the North American Vintage metagame and the Spanish metagame (which is one of the countries where most people play eternal) meant that the North American top decks were terribly underperforming against the spanish meta (Phyrexian Negator for example was unexplicably popular in USA), it's easy to call them bad if they consistently show poor results in your meta because they are designed to fight wrong battles.
The author of the article wants to say (in an unpolite mood proper of reckless youngsters) that if in a given meta, only a meta-specific fish deck causes trouble to fast combo decks, combo decks should adapt so that thosee fish decks become "fish out of their bowls" decks, and he suggests some specific changes in the mana base to achieve that:
· Daze is worse if you play more lands
· Stifle is worse if you play less fetchlands
· Wasteland is worse if you play basics.
He doesn't include a graphic with statistics about the gains in resiliency minus loss in consistency of that mana base, which would have given more weight to his analysis, though.
It sounds like he is whining about nothing in particular but the format itself. Daze is really good, but so is FoW... Combo players are all doing it wrong... but somehow combo is still the best choice. Combo players lose to Daze? Wuttt?? I beat Daze all day long. What I don't beat is FoW.
Slap YourselfQuote:
The only reason people win tournaments with these garbage Legacy Land Destruction decks (read: Merfolk) is because everyone else in the room is playing a deck with poorly constructed mana. When your two ways to win the game are 1) being on the play in the mirror, or 2) hoping your opponent constructed their deck incorrectly, it’s not a very good recipe for success. Although, the latter seems to be a pretty safe bet in most Legacy tournaments these days.
I'm having a difficult time with this. I'm a TES player; my mainboard only has nine blue spells in it right now. I'm not as familiar with ANT or DDFT, but I'm looking at some lists and they don't seem that much higher. Additionally, the major storm engine--Ad Nauseum--is really, really ugly with Force of Will. I regularly kill myself from 15 life with Ad Nauseum using a deck that has an average converted mana cost of 1 because I don't hit business spells. Adding force of will would only make this worse. Thirdly, the card advantage involved with protecting your combo seems to me to be also bad--I don't often have cards left in my hand, after I Ad Nauseum, let alone a possibly useful blue spell that I could have pitched to force rather than use silence.Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJones
What decks were you thinking of when you made this comment? Some of the new Iggy lists with dream salvage? Solidarity? Do you have a decklist?
So if everyone is horrible then can we expect to see a nonhorrible player with a mana base that is full of basics and plays more then 22 lands win Columbus? Becuase that's what he's saying right?
Basically, everyone is doing it wrong with regards to their mana bases. So the correct thing to do is play more lands and more basics to make a stable manabase. If thats the case, where are the intelligent people who decided to do just that and why aren't they dominating every tournament? Becuase if it was as easy as this article makes it seem, thats what we should expect to see, right?
I dunno, whole article seems silly.
While the author is correct about Legacy having fragile mana bases, he clearly shows he knows nothing about Legacy.
God, I want my 5 minutes back please. I also want whatever IQ I lost reading that pile of trash.
I had to give a little laugh over seeing Rakdos Pit Dragon mentioned. Been a while since I've seen one of those played. Good card, but not right now. Anyway, we probably all could stand to have a few more basics, I'll give him that. Face it, Legacy players are known for having seriously greedy manabases. lol It's true, don't deny it.
The rest was obviously a lack of knowledge of Legacy which sadly became more noticeable and laughable the longer he tried to make his points. Oh well, least we know better.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LostButSeeking
In Combo-Lion's Eye Diamond>Force of Will
Lion's Eye Diamond's downside makes Force of Will unusable.
I'm not suggesting adding Force of Will to existing combo decks that cannot afford to run it, but running combo decks that can make use of it. At least, if your main concern are the Fish / Countertop matches.Quote:
Originally Posted by LostButSeeking
Well some of his article is actually dead on IMO (not all of it mind you). I dont think that legacy decks should run 26 lands like jund because your curve ends at 3 not 6. This is a bit of an exaggeration. However, you do see that all of the top 8 decks played lots of basics and all 20 or more lands.
But what combo decks can make use of it, though? Which storm deck would rather spend two cards and no mana than one card and one mana (silence or duress) as protection? Storm--by definition--wants to play all of the cards in its hand. More spells = more storm. It's hard enough comboing out with all of the cards in your hand, let alone -1 cards. The only thing I've seen that could properly use force was an interesting (if fragile) storm combo deck that used Necologia to draw enough cards to storm off. Maybe the deck will get better with leyline of anticipation? .Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJones
Hey guys, if you liked this article, you should check out the paper I'm going to publish in Nature about why quantum physicists have to use all them newfangled math symbols.
Crap.
The question is, do we enjoy insightful articles more where everything has pretty much already been said?
Or shit like this that we can both ridicule and use as a starting point to facilitate our own discussion? :P
I personally prefer REALLY shitty articles or really good articles. Anything that falls in between isn't worth my time. Its like the funny/ridiculous loop. Some things in comedy are so ridiculous that they loop back around to funny, but others are really just not ridiculous enough or too ridiculous. There's a fine balance.
Because those first-turn-kill decks don't do it every time, and you might actually play your deck, so, you should put some cards in it?Quote:
Why are people putting Wild Nacatl and Lord of Atlantis in their decks when there are multiple ways in the format to kill you on the first turn of the game.
...no.Quote:
It’s almost like they are actually playing back in 1995
...what?Quote:
People don’t play Thoughtseize to disrupt the combo decks for some reason, they play Stone Rain.
...tell us, oh Standard Master, how do we lowly Legacy players build "Daze Proof" Combo decks?Quote:
Daze beats combo because combo players build their decks incorrectly.
...yeah, that 'freaking land' really helped my turn 1 kills. Thanks a bunch!Quote:
I’m not exactly sure what the best way to do that is, specifically, but I know it begins by adding a freaking land.
Note that this is said AFTERQuote:
I honestly don’t have a clue why Merfolk decks even exist, because their strategy is inherently pretty weak.
Again, I honestly don’t have a clue why Merfolk decks even exist, because their strategy is inherently pretty weak..Quote:
2nd place – Merfolk
3rd place – Merfolk
4th place – Goblins
5th place – Goblins
9th place – Faeries
13th place – Goblins
14th place – Merfolk
...say that again...Quote:
I wonder what they will do when the combo decks realize they should start playing Force of Will themselves, and a manabase that doesn’t suck.
Quote:
combo
manabase
Quote:
combo
manabase
Quote:
combo
manabase
...you're an idiot. If you, the reader on The Source, doubt that, let me summarize his anecdote at the end.Quote:
combo
manabase
He's playing the burn mirror, he 'accidentally' looks at his opponent's hand and thinks they have the last 3 damage they need as an instant. He therefore doesn't cast his sorcery speed last 5 damage, conceding instead. He misread what cards the opponent had in hand.
As the kids say, Cool Story, Bro.
Who is this fucknut and who did he blow to get to post this garbage on channelfireball, or any mtg site.
Legacy has a problem with people getting greedy with their manabases, true. I'll concede that point. But next time you want to write an article about a format, try putting more than 1 month into it and learn how to write an article before throwing your junk out there like a highschool bully telling everyone they are wrong and you are right becuase you are semi-pro/wanna be winrar!
tl;dr: article was trash.
Although the overall article wasn't great, he had some interesting points. He's right that people play it fast and loose with their manabases. About the first thing I do with almost any list I pick up here or at SCG is add a basic Island. He's also correct that Zoo is one of the best-tuned, most consistent decks in the format, and that it will steamroll opponents with awkward draws.
/threadQuote:
Originally Posted by mujadaddy
Author of the article has played Legacy two or three times at my local store. He plays hypergenesis combo and gets angry if you have force of will or if you flip a land off your counterbalance to counter his win. True story.
Hahahahahahhahahaha. Give this man some Rep!Quote:
Originally Posted by SJUD
^loving that.
OT: even the comments are full of BS (not brainstorm):I didn't know combo was being kept in check by aggro? Good thing Goblins always draws both Lackey and SGC in their opener and always plays first and reanimator never has a counter and ANT always needs to go down to four on turn two and and and...Quote:
While I don’t play merfolk, I do play goblins and I can tell you, combos are not all they are cracked up to be.
Turn 1 Lacky(on the play) can beat a turn 2 Iona all day long in the Reanimator match. Post board it is easier to deal with a combo than it is to deal with an agro deck.
People with you attitude generally are the people type those messages online like “gosh, if you played any worse” as my Fireblast in response to there turn 2 ANT combo kills them.
Agro decks have long kept combo decks in check and I don’t need more than 21 lands with 6 fetches to drop a turn 2 Siege-gang Commander that doesn’t care if I can’t cast red spells anymore. I’ll be happy to race you.
phew, stupid people just get me rantin'
Edit: this guy is awesome though:
Quote:
I don’t think I’ve seen as much cognitive dissonance come out of Alaska since Sarah Palin.
This article isn't free! ITS TAXING MY BRAIN CELLS!