No more blue stabbing please

Open rant:

So, what's wrong with people? Every week I see at least 1 thread about "blue is so overpowered, let's ban it".

Why do people complain about blue, but don't care when goblins kills on it's turn 3 or GW goodstuff starts messing with combat math and uses GSZ just to hose you once again?

I'll tell you what's wrong: people don't want to innovate anymore. I play friggin TES, do you think I'm happy with MM? Just think of something new, damnit.

DISCLAIMER: (revealing the future here, so don't read if you don't want to know what's going to happen)

Over the next few months, the same people will post following threads:
a) let's ban fow (again)
b) let's discuss 'fair' cards that'll keep blue in check ("what about::0: I hate blue: split second, target player loses the game if he has a blue card in his deck. gnargl gnargl")
c) let's kick blue out the game, 4 colors is much more fun. ("wouldn't it be nice if everybody played aggro and we just could slap creatures at each other? RAAWR")
d) All of the above

The funniest thing about this: everytime it are the same people who bring these things up.

So who are you? What's with all the hatred against blue mages?
I don't understand it.

Or do I...
This... can't be true... I should have known it all the time...
It all makes sense to me know. You're all using alter egos. In real life you're all the same person and the only one who can have such a hatred against blue mages...

...








http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-IcA7gDYO8N...0/Gargamel.jpg

Gargamel!!! You're back!

end rant

lol

Yeah.

There should be a format named "Only Blue" where it was only allowed every blue card in the game, xD

On a more serious note, let's ban blue, it's too overpowered.

On a less serious note, I would be really really happy if WotC, once in a while, favored monocolor decks, like, building cards that function only if you control certain-basic and stuff like Blood Moons and Back to Basics and Price of progresss, but more diverse, useful against Basiclands.dec, as for Magus of the Moones, that at least are 2/2 bears... That said, let's ban non-basic Islands, they are too overpowered.

This thread is awesome, because watch a few hours from now, it'll degrade to yet another OMGBANBLUE. Calling it before it happens!

The Source: Your Source for the Same Old Shit That's Been Argued to Death Since 1993.

I agree with you that people need to innovate. The current meta is really easy to hate out right now. Merfolk is considered to be the best deck and there are so many cards that just tear that deck to threads. Play Lavamncer, Lightning Bolts, extra copies of REB/Pyroblasts in the board, Mother of Runes, Stoneforge Mystic, Jitte, Sofi, etc. You could even play them all in the same deck...

Against the Landstill control decks cards such as Blood Moon and Back to Basics just absolutely wreck them. Innovating is not that hard, people just want to play their pet decks. I play TES too, but in some metas it just isn't the right call. People need to learn to adapt; either change your favorite deck a little bit to deal with your bad matchups, or create a new deck that is good against your own personal meta

I actually started out this post thinking the numbers supported the idea that blue isn't particularly overly-dominant. Its number in SCG Open top 8s were not drastically out of whack with other colors; most decks played blue, but most also played green and black. White wasn't too far behind. Red is the only color that really sucked.

Then I actually narrowed my focus to the winners and 11 out of 13 were blue decks. And the other two were Goblins decks from the first few post-Survival tournaments.

If blue is winning every major tournament there's undoubtedly a problem, and accusing people of whining for pointing it out is just churlish.

On the other hand, the dust indeed has yet to settle at all over Mental Misstep. So we'll see.

Alternately, if they want to restore red they could just unban Goblin Recruiter and Worldgorger Dragon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gui

On a less serious note, I would be really really happy if WotC, once in a while, favored monocolor decks, like, building cards that function only if you control certain-basic and stuff like Blood Moons and Back to Basics and Price of progresss, but more diverse, useful against Basiclands.dec, as for Magus of the Moones, that at least are 2/2 bears... That said, let's ban non-basic Islands, they are too overpowered.

---

Completely disagree. Having splashes enables more variety in the format. If there were a critical mass of effective non-basic hosers, more people would opt to run only mono-color decks, within which are only a handful of basic strategies. I think wasteland and the other various tempest/saga era hosers are plenty enough to make people concerned with the stability of their manabases, and yet limited enough that the danger of playing two or three colors is outweighed by its strategic benefit.

What they should print first are good cards in the other four colors that make using blue as the splash not always the best option.

Summoning creatures is only one aspect of the game. I don't understand why newer players (this isn't directed at anyone here) can't grasp the idea that a game called Magic is heavily based around casting spells from a flavor perspective. Aggro players should rejoice that force of will exists -- sure, maybe the blue mage will 2-for-1 himself when he forces your turn 1 nacatl, but that same FoW stopped you from seeing storm, reanimator, hive mind, grind stone and other various combo decks every single round.

Blue is so weak. When are we going to see more love for blue. It's like all Wizards cares about lately is combo and aggro. Help a brotha blue mage out. Blue needs a better finisher (and don't give me that Tarmogoyf is the best blue creature ever printed nonsense). MUC 4eva!!!

<- I was reading this not 1 year ago on this very same board.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin

Alternately, if they want to restore red they could just unban Goblin Recruiter and Worldgorger Dragon

---

I think they would have no issue unbanning Dragon if the deck didn't cause inordinate amounts of draws in tournaments. It's a pity, because I really want to play that deck, and it seems fair/disruptable enough.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin

Alternately, if they want to restore red they could just unban Goblin Recruiter and Worldgorger Dragon

---

Yes, Worldgorger Dragon would certainly bring more Mountains into the format.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Nihil Credo

Yes, Worldgorger Dragon would certainly bring more Mountains into the format.

---

Although ideally you could dump Sliver Queen or Ambastard into your yard through some other method, without Bazaar, you pretty much would have to run Ghitu Fire.

I could be wrong, but I'm not sure how else you'd build the deck. Mainly Goblin Recruiter though, I don't know how good Dragon would be in this meta without Bazaars.

Honestly I can't stand this garbage. Speed Zoo is and has been a top competitive deck for years. It is favored against Merfolk and a lot of other blue decks. At no time in the last 3 years has casting creatures and winning through the attack phase been impossible in Legacy. The real reason blue is so strong is because many (though certainly not all) good players enjoy playing blue decks. Counterspells and card selection give you more intellectual control over this game of chance called Magic that we all play. If you don't like "thinking" in this fashion then just play mono-red Burn or Dredge or something. The rest of us will continue to enjoy our Islands.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Cyrus

The real reason blue is so strong is because many (though certainly not all) good players enjoy playing blue decks. Counterspells and card selection give you more intellectual control over this game of chance called Magic that we all play. If you don't like "thinking" in this fashion then just play mono-red Burn or Dredge or something. The rest of us will continue to enjoy our Islands.

---

I think there's a lot of truth to this. Good players enjoy winning most, but if there's not an overwhelming reason to play <Deck X>, players will play what they enjoy and decks that give them the ability to outmaneuver weaker players. Usually, that involves Islands, whether they be tropical or volcanic, or seas under the ground or "biomes where the tree growth is hindered by low temperatures and short growing seasons" (according to Wikipedia).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Cyrus

Honestly I can't stand this garbage. Speed Zoo is and has been a top competitive deck for years. It is favored against Merfolk and a lot of other blue decks. At no time in the last 3 years has casting creatures and winning through the attack phase been impossible in Legacy. The real reason blue is so strong is because many (though certainly not all) good players enjoy playing blue decks. Counterspells and card selection give you more intellectual control over this game of chance called Magic that we all play. If you don't like "thinking" in this fashion then just play mono-red Burn or Dredge or something. The rest of us will continue to enjoy our Islands.

---

There isn't a significant difference in the mental challenge of playing combo, control, aggro, aggro-control, combo-aggro, or whatever.

Some decks are more forgiving of misplays than others, but this isn't true of archetypes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by TheInfamousBearAssassin

There isn't a significant difference in the mental challenge of playing combo, control, aggro, aggro-control, combo-aggro, or whatever.

Some decks are more forgiving of misplays than others, but this isn't true of archetypes.

---

Not mental challenge, that's not what I said. The difference is in the level of information, control, and intellectual stimulation. For a lot of players I know, the little mini-game that goes on whenever one casts brainstorm is immensely appealing on an intellectual level. Other colors don't offer this variety of choice on a consistent basis.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Cyrus

Not mental challenge, that's not what I said. The difference is in the level of information, control, and intellectual stimulation. For a lot of players I know, the little mini-game that goes on whenever one casts brainstorm is immensely appealing on an intellectual level. Other colors don't offer this variety of choice on a consistent basis.

---

So Jace 2.0 is just mental masturbation then?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Richard Cheese

So Jace 2.0 is just mental masturbation then?

---

Pretty much!! You can either play with yourself, or you can play with your opponent's drawstep for extra lulz. It also helps that it wins games.

It's not that I hate blue, in fact, blue is one of my favourite colors.

It's that I hate games that can be resumed as "No items, fox only, final destination" and "Akuma is fair, your a n00b for not playing it", and I know that Force of Will breaks the format because I PLAY WITH IT, which is why I can say with first-hand knowledge what's wrong with it, why the decks that play it have so much advantage against all the others, that it fuels combo instead of fighting it, and that due to its existence, the game is much worse and far less fun than what it could be.

So, I hope that FoW gets axed this year thanks to the arrival of Mental Misstep, which fixes a lot of things that are wrong about FoW. If that happened, the people that enjoy blue-centric formats will still be able to play it in Vintage, but the format will be a whole lot better, a whole more fun, and a whole more popular. In fact, it would look like "Overextended" (Mercadian Masques onward) which is right now a more diverse format than this one due to the lack of cards like FOW, Show and Tell and LED.

One of the advantages of bringing back balance among colors, is that blue staples will become far cheaper. Players that love blue will be able to play blue without paying five times more for their cards.

Another advantage is that it will increase variance between games. Game design theory says that variance is what keeps players interested in a game. That principle explains one of the reasons why Vintage isn't played even with proxies or on MWS: most of the decks are a carbon copy of each other, minus a few cards.

Also, because each color is tied to a player psychographic and specific playstyles, a more balanced format would attract more players. Currently, it attracts mostly players of one single psychographic, which is why forums like this one shows the false consensus that the format is perfect as is, and that it shouldn't change. But that's true only for players within that psychographic.

So in sum, I can both enjoy blue and NOT ENJOY the way the format is going. And if I spend time developing nonblue decks is not because I hate blue, but because the more competitive nonblue decks in the format, the better for everyone.

And the problem with your analysis, sir, is you overlook the fact that this FoW-loving, blue-centric "psychographic" substantially overlaps with the psychographic of Magic players as a whole. In my experience people who love Magic cards often tend to be drawn to the intellectual/pyschological profile of the Blue mage. Just look at how often players try to "find the best blue deck" in any given format. Caw-Blade is symptomatic of this. So is the current push towards hard-control like Landstill in Legacy.

If you truly believe differently, I challenge you contest my viewpoint and back it up with hard data!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrJones

So, I hope that FoW gets axed this year thanks to the arrival of Mental Misstep, which fixes a lot of things that are wrong about FoW. If that happened, the people that enjoy blue-centric formats will still be able to play it in Vintage, but the format will be a whole lot better, a whole more fun, and a whole more popular. In fact, it would look like "Overextended" (Mercadian Masques onward) which is right now a more diverse format than this one due to the lack of cards like FOW, Show and Tell and LED.

---

Force is powerful, but hymn'ing yourself and paying a point of life to stop a card is perfectly fair. It answers threats, isn't a threat in its own right (unless you're casting it at low life). It's like arguing that StP should be banned.

Brainstorm, I get, does things that are arguably too good. I don't agree, but I can find some appreciation for the argument. But arguing against FoW is just confusing.

How many of your posts on this subject do I need to read before going insane and responding? Rhetorical question, but I think it was close to 4.

STOP TRYING TO SOUND INTELLIGENT. Your arguments are the perfect example of why a shred of knowledge is much more dangerous than none.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrJones

FoW [...] fuels combo instead of fighting it, and that due to its existence, the game is much worse and far less fun than what it could be.

---

FoW fuels combo? Only very few combos use FoW, and the ones that do are mostly 2 card combos that have troubles being consistent. They have troubles with consistency because they decide to waste deck slots for FoW instead of searching/drawing cards and therefore have a harder time even getting to their combo.

Quote:

---

In fact, it would look like "Overextended" (Mercadian Masques onward) which is right now a more diverse format than this one due to the lack of cards like FOW, Show and Tell and LED.

---

Is that why everyone is flocking to Overextended? Last I saw, it was as much of a flop as regular extended. Also, honestly, if you think it's such a better format why wouldn't you just go play that and stop advocating changing Legacy into something that already exists?

Quote:

---

Another advantage is that it will increase variance between games. Game design theory says that variance is what keeps players interested in a game. That principle explains one of the reasons why Vintage isn't played even with proxies or on MWS: most of the decks are a carbon copy of each other, minus a few cards.

---

My god, I wish you either understood math better or could at least draw the correct conclusions from it. Variance can be caused by many things, if your argument is just that increased variance = better (like you've conveyed) then you're just flat out wrong. Changing the amount of same cards you could have per deck from 4 to 1 would increase variance drastically. Ever play highlander or EDH? Every game would be completely different because your deck now has 40 different cards in it instead of just ~10 different cards. The variance would be enormous, but it would also not be fun.

Variance =/= interest in a game.

Quote:

---

Also, because each color is tied to a player psychographic and specific playstyles, a more balanced format would attract more players. Currently, it attracts mostly players of one single psychographic, which is why forums like this one shows the false consensus that the format is perfect as is, and that it shouldn't change. But that's true only for players within that psychographic.

---

Ungh, anyone else cringe over this paragraph? How do you know what "psychographic" is being drawn to legacy right now? Do you really believe each color's "psychographic" playstyle is going to attract the same number of people? As it turns out in literally every marketing field, people in general are not going to spread evenly into all different types of "psychographs." People like similar things, maybe blue being a good color is drawing more of an audience than ever because the intellectual games you have to play with blue may be the exact thing drawing every magic player in to magic anyway.

There is a false consensus that the format is perfect as is? Not only do you have absolutely no evidence of this, you really think that you have a majority of people backing you on that subject. This is just flat out astounding, I can never believe how people can just form an opinion and automatically think they are so correct that not only will they not believe in evidence to the contrary, but they actually believe that a majority of people are backing their opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wcm8

Completely disagree. Having splashes enables more variety in the format. If there were a critical mass of effective non-basic hosers, more people would opt to run only mono-color decks, within which are only a handful of basic strategies. I think wasteland and the other various tempest/saga era hosers are plenty enough to make people concerned with the stability of their manabases, and yet limited enough that the danger of playing two or three colors is outweighed by its strategic benefit.

---

I rarely see people advocating for less colors than 3, unless they are running some kind anti-nonbasic themselves. Besides, try to build a single colored deck and post it here - I give you 10 posts before the discussion "so, what will we splash" start.
Besides, every good solution printed in other colors are simply added to the 3c strategies, so this changes nothing. To be honest, most colors have good answers on their own for a lot of things, it's just that these get better with the backup of a defense able to stop whatever, read, counterspells.

All that said, I don't think anything should be banned, or that the format sux, I just said I would enjoy if they printed better cards for monocolor strategies, as much as they print things for multicolor like Wild Nacatl or Maelstrom Pulse. Cards that work better if you have basic lands would be nice =)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenix Ignition

Ungh, anyone else cringe over this paragraph? How do you know what "psychographic" is being drawn to legacy right now? Do you really believe each color's "psychographic" playstyle is going to attract the same number of people? As it turns out in literally every marketing field, people in general are not going to spread evenly into all different types of "psychographs." People like similar things, maybe blue being a good color is drawing more of an audience than ever because the intellectual games you have to play with blue may be the exact thing drawing every magic player in to magic anyway.

---

This was, and is, the thrust of my argument. Well stated. Magic players love cards, and they generally like seeing more of them in any given game and having more choices about which cards they want to play. The fact that blue is best at these abilities may be a design flaw but it does not justify banning key blue cards to make the game more "enjoyable" for a minority of players who view blue cards as unfair.

I would also point out the evidence that WoTC is a company that likes its profit margins, and yet they continue to print many strong blue cards. Obviously, they do not believe that these cards or strategies are driving any significant portion of players away from the game. On the contrary, exciting new blue cards keep a large portion of blue-loving players buying new sets, and this generates money for WoTC. Turning around and banning these same cards makes no economic sense, and therefore it won't happen.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lord_Cyrus

I would also point out the evidence that WoTC is a company that likes its profit margins, and yet they continue to print many strong blue cards. Obviously, they do not believe that these cards or strategies are driving any significant portion of players away from the game. On the contrary, exciting new blue cards keep a large portion of blue-loving players buying new sets, and this generates money for WoTC. Turning around and banning these same cards makes no economic sense, and therefore it won't happen.

---

Magic is only profitable because of kitchen table Magic players; not professional players, not people who post on online discussion forums, or travel inconvenient distances to play in tournaments, or heck, even play in tournaments at all. People who just like playing with friends and trading. The silent majority, if you will.

While the plural of anecdote is not "data," from personal experience, most casual players are not measuring the fun of the game based on the strength of blue control cards. In fact, I'll argue the opposite. Same reason land destruction is not so good these past few years.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bardo

Magic is only profitable because of kitchen table Magic players; not professional players, not people who post on online discussion forums, or travel inconvenient distances to play in tournaments, or heck, even play in tournaments at all. People who just like playing with friends and trading. The silent majority, if you will.

While the plural of anecdote is not "data," from personal experience, most casual players are not measuring the fun of the game based on the strength of blue control cards. In fact, I'll argue the opposite. Same reason land destruction is not so good these past few years.

---

I will accept that this is true. WoTC also prints cards desirable to casual players. There are many examples, too numerous to name. Anything featuring nice art and decent power with creature type "Angel" or "Dragon" seems to fit the bill.

But it's a bit silly to claim that the company is ignorant of the sales potential provided by Spikey blue cards. How many boxes of Worldwake (an otherwise lackluster set) were bought by folks hoping to score a Jace? That is definitely a quantity that WoTC pays attention to, because those sales (at whatever level) were driven by a single card. If you could print 1-2 cards and ensure that an extra 2-3,000 boxes and fatpacks sold, wouldn't you do it?

But let's abandon that line of reasoning and turn the question around. Regardless of justification, how likely is that Force of Will, Mental Misstep or Jace the Mind Sculptor will be banned in Legacy in the next 2 years? Not all 3 mind you, but just one of those cards. I'd be willing to bet $500 that none of them will be banned. That's the cold, hard truth. How many of you would be willing to open your wallet to bet against me? Probably not many....

This being the case, people should either 1) get used to Legacy with blue as it is, or 2) find another format like EDH or Overextended.

Go Blue. Screw that whole turning guys sideways thing.



I'd like blue more if we had a little more clock time. Damn draws.

Lol, props to the guy who said this was going to end into another ban blue thread.

So, as I opened the thread, some recommendations:
1. Discussion about blue banning is for another thread there are enough serial threads to discuss manbearpig
2. This thread is for trolling so don't post here if you can't make me lol.
3. Dr Jones and some others should change their pic into gargamel, just for sports (and epic lulz:wink:)

Format is unplayable, it's all Time Walks and Strip Mines. Ban Blue. I have had it with FoW and Brainstorm being the most played cards for years running.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Phoenix Ignition

FoW fuels combo? Only very few combos use FoW, and the ones that do are mostly 2 card combos that have troubles being consistent. They have troubles with consistency because they decide to waste deck slots for FoW instead of searching/drawing cards and therefore have a harder time even getting to their combo.

---

What?

Except dredge and Storm, two deck relying on very specific mecanics, every combo deck and its mom play FOW. Ever heard of spiral tide, show and tell, painter or reanimate? Those are the combo decks that actually win tournaments. One of the reason being the protection/search provided by their blue shell make them incredibly hard to hate..

There is nothing more boring than building a combo deck in legacy right now :
4 fow
4 brainstorm
*insert combo here*
4 daze
3 intuition

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by menace13

Format is unplayable, it's all Time Walks and Strip Mines. Ban Blue. I have had it with FoW and Brainstorm being the most played cards for years running.

---

Don't forget Wastelands. Every blue deck effectively runs 4 Strip Mines and 8 Wastelands as its land destruction package. When you couple that with the 12 Time Walks they also play, you really have a problem. However, if we do some close reading of the Great One's posts, we might find a solution.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DrJones

Mental Misstep is wasteland.

The format is unplayable right now because it allows some decks to run 4 strip mines and 4 wastelands. And you can't play around that strategy unless you play a deck with too many (or no) lands.

---

So, playing either too many lands or no lands at all will fix our problem. If we play no lands, they can't Strip Mine us. If we play too many lands, there are too many lands for them to Strip Mine. Problem, blue assholes?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YpS-KftnKN...%2Bscience.jpg

I still don't see how Brainstorm is even remotely as powerful as other banned cards like SotF, MT, Mox-X, or Black Lotus.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DragoFireheart

I still don't see how Brainstorm is even remotely as powerful as other banned cards like SotF, MT, Mox-X, or Black Lotus.

---

It's not powerful in the same way. It says U - Draw 3 Cards, and that's as powerful at Mystical Tutor.

Brainstorm is bonkers, so it makes sense for everyone to play it. I remember when I first played Zoo against my roomate with Dreadstill, and he was casting Brainstorms. I was jealous, because my deck couldn't do that, and I recognised the disadvantage I was at. Brainstorm makes it really attractive to play blue, because no other color has anything like it. I've since added Brainstorm to Zoo, and voila! It's a better deck.

Well, other decks still can do Divining Top, which is surely a bit more expensive but then again is permanent.
Does any one do that? Nope.
Why does nobody bitch about white?
White has StP, PtE and other goodstuff. Why not hate on it?
Or green, holy shit, green has Tarmogoyf. And if u combine Green with White.... there comes KoTr.

Nuff' trolled. Blue is good, but most of the times its the other colors spells that u dig for with Brainstorm.

Top doesn't do the same thing. Top lets you pay mana to keep scrying. Sylvan Library lets you scry for free, but only during your upkeep.

Brainstorm is a one off, but it doesn't just dig for a card, it lets you take a free mull on your hand.

If you're trying to fight Zoo, no other card can, for less than three mana, take this hand;

Brainstorm
Force of Will
Force of Will
Polluted Delta

And make it this hand:

Polluted Delta
Tarmogoyf
Swords to Plowshares
Knight of the Reliquary

That's why Brainstorm is the best card in the format. Not just because it's really good at digging, although it is at that, but because with shuffles effects, which are numerous and built into your very mana base, it becomes a better free mulligan. It lets you take a draw in the classic poker sense.


eta: Also I'd like to disassociate myself from any remarks about Force being banned. The only thing they need to do to Force is put it in a duel deck.

So Brainstorm should be banned because it's the best card? I don' think it crosses the threshold on being broken. Especially considering that the current tier 1 deck, Merfolk, doesn't even run it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by DragoFireheart

So Brainstorm should be banned because it's the best card? I don' think it crosses the threshold on being broken. Especially considering that the current tier 1 deck, Merfolk, doesn't even run it.

---

I don't want them to ban Brainstorm, I think it's the most fun card in Legacy. I just can't understand why I (anyone) shouldn't play it.

If Wotc bans the color blue no one would have to debate over which blue cards are the broken ones needing banning. Just saying.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kikoo

So, playing either too many lands or no lands at all will fix our problem. If we play no lands, they can't Strip Mine us. If we play too many lands, there are too many lands for them to Strip Mine. Problem, blue assholes?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_YpS-KftnKN...%2Bscience.jpg

---

Sir, you are the first in this thread who made me laugh and therefore you are the first who gets the goal of this thread: have a good laugh.

I salute you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by joemauer

If Wotc bans the color blue no one would have to debate over which blue cards are the broken ones needing banning. Just saying.

---

Land Tax is fucking overpowered, thank god it's banned!
...
Er wait, blue is still unbanned. Carry on with your discussion, then.