Brainstorm
Force of Will
Lion's Eye Diamond
Counterbalance
Sensei's Divining Top
Tarmogoyf
Phyrexian Dreadnaught
Goblin Lackey
Standstill
Natural Order
DTT has always been better than TC, ever since the day both got spoiled I thought DTT was going to be the first to get the banhammer in Modern. And it could well have happened if Jeskai Ascendancy wasn't such a stupid card. The same translates to Legacy, the fact that one is a Sorcery and the other an Instant makes for a pretty massive difference. TC was only really playable in decks that didn't care about what cards they got since drawing off TC was a crapshoot and much worse when you were behind. TC was a beastly snowball engine and not much else while DTT is basically a blank check to get whatever you need to get yourself out of a compromising situation, thus making whatever deck it uses extremely reliable in the late game regardless of current boardstate.
But I STILL don't think DTT is good enough to warrant the banhammer. It's never played as a 4-of unlike TC was, and you can't pull the game out of the opponent's reach just by chaining cantrips early like you can with TC. It adds reliability lategame, but so do many of the cards formerly played in the format, like KotR in Maverick and Liliana + Loam in 4c Loam. DTT just does it... a little bit better than the competition.
Decks w/ 8-16 other cantrips don't need more reliability.
The problem I have with DTT isn't so much that it's so powerful on its own, but that it's powerful on top of what's already the most powerful strategy in the game, which is to spam cantrips and fetches until time immemorial.
It would be interesting to see a card that had the same effect, but cost 1 MORE for each card in your GY on top of UU or something. Though i guess you probably just play RIP/Helm with it and use it to find the other piece.
Delve is a stupid mechanic though, I'm glad there are a couple more playable big black beaters, and resolving Become Immense is fun, but the mechanic is nearly impossible to balance. Either dreck or Recall.
QFT. If they ban DTT, people will eventually discover that Temporal Trespass is also OP.
Banning DTT is just more appeasement from WotC. It didn't work for Necro, it isn't working here.
I compiled it myself (at the time) from events listed n SCG's website and MTGtop8. The data is a bit different in it's timing, but similarly shows U/R was crazy at first but settled down to being pretty much at par with Patriot (eventually being surpassed by the time of the ban).
Yeah, I caught that. I just don't think the evidence supported that view with regards to Legacy specifically. I think TC was banned as an apology more for PR than anything else, and that their explanation was a stretch.
That's how I feel about the TC ban - it was done hastily to appease angry players. This is also why I think DTT might end up being banned too.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
I played it in a UB control deck in DTK/FRF draft tonight. All it did was cycle itself, except the one time I got a token out of it from that enchantment that makes Wind Drakes for 1U when you play a noncreature spell. That time it ended the game I pulled ahead in a turn earlier.
Then there was the time I cast it and then had no cards left in my graveyard so the "Counter spell unless opponent pays for each card in your GY" I drew was completely worthless.
Wizards was so afraid of making this card too good but they let the dumb draw cards slip. Trespass should've been closer to 5UUU, but TC more like 12U and DTT 10UU.
While I would've liked to see the meta sort itself out amd find the best Treasure Cruise deck, I don't understand how the ban wasn't justified. We're not locked in some kind of purely empirical prison where we can't or shouldn't use theory to make decisions, and it isn't a great leap from empirical evidence to suggest that 'Draw three cards' for U (or 1U) is too powerful for the format. Banning Treasure Cruise was an atypically proactive move by WotC, but I can't take someone seriously who doubts the fundamental correctness of the action.
Last edited by btm10; 09-10-2015 at 11:00 AM.
TC was legal for less time than MM, despite the MM era being less diverse in terms of competitive strategies (I do not accept that running cantrips defines a deck's strategy). I'm not saying the card didn't need to go, but I dislike in principle a "proactive" hands on banned list management. In fact I despise it.
And the card isn't really draw three for or - if it were we wouldn't be even discussing it (and I seriously hope you understand that).
Also, the meta "sorting itself out" doesn't equate to a single best deck emerging! I hope you understand that also. We might have gotten a very narrow meta, but not necessarily one best deck.
Edit - my biggest problem with the TC ban was that they cited (imo) flimsy empirical data. Theory based bans are uncommon. Generally a card isn't banned for being too powerful in a vacuum, but there are exceptions...
When Legacy was born WotC had to decide which restricted Vintage needed to stay banned. Three types of effects were banned by principle - top quality fast mane, tutors, and card draw. When Mystical Tutor was banned there was little evidence of an unhealthy meta. Rather WotC reassessed it as a tier one tutor and banned it on principle.
If WotC had made s similar pitch for the TC ban, I don't think I'd have a problem with it. They hinted on it:
But I don't like this explanation because it relied on empirical evidence which I believe to be wrong. The decks that thrived without TC were indeed interactive, plus the format was still reacting and might have developed more interactive answers to the meta game. If they'd just said card draw of this caliber is too strong and left out any questionable analyses of the meta that would have been okay. Same goes for DTT.The decks that draw cards so efficiently push out many other decks, limiting the field to the strong decks that best use those card drawers and decks that don't play in interactive games with those strong decks. In that case, the best option might be to ban the overly efficient card drawer.
My big concern isn't what does and does not get banned. I just hate to see cards banned for the wrong reasons; lest we creep slowly towards a hands-on banned list and a micro-managed format.
Last edited by Crimhead; 09-12-2015 at 04:36 AM.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
While I would love WotC to manage Legacy's banned list as aggressively as they manage Modern's, I recognize that the economic concerns there are insurmountable - people can't be expected to have to shell out for an ever-rotating list of Duals and other reserved list staples every other year or so. And WotC understands this. But the alternative is to let problem cards like Treasure Cruise fester until we reach Misstep-like metagames where there is massive archetype consolidation and an obvious problem.
Of course it's not printed as Sorcery-speed Ancestral Recall. It does require decks like Ur Delver to tap out for their first three turns to play a threat and get the cost down to U, but subsequent Cruises are seldom difficult to cast for U or 1U, even on the turn after the first Cruise.And the card isn't really draw three for or - if it were we wouldn't be even discussing it (and I seriously hope you understand that).
I explicitly said (and you quoted me as saying!) 'best Treasure Cruise deck'. You've pointed out that Ur Delver's meta share was falling by the time it was banned, but ignore the fact that the main decks eating in to its meta share were UWr Pyroblade and Grixis Pyromaner Control - and those decks are all remarkably similar aside from how controlling they are. Cantrips aside, they just want to trade 1-for-1 until they can Cruise, which lets them 1-for-1 their oppoments some more. The reason those decks even existed is that they beat Ur Delver at its own game by trading in creatures for additional removal and Daze for discard and hard counters. That wasn't the case pre-Cruise when the Tier 1 decks with the biggest overlap were BUG Delver and Shardless BUG - decks that had significantly different playstyles and divergent game plans. At the time, BUG Delver was actually a macro-archetype that described the core of two different decks!Also, the meta "sorting itself out" doesn't equate to a single best deck emerging! I hope you understand that also. We might have gotten a very narrow meta, but not necessarily one best deck.
This appears to be the real heart of your problem with banning both Cruise and Dig so I'll spend some more time on it.Edit - my biggest problem with the TC ban was that they cited (imo) flimsy empirical data. Theory based bans are uncommon. Generally a card isn't banned for being too powerful in a vacuum, but there are exceptions...
...
My big concern isn't what does and does not get banned. I just hate to see cards banned for the wrong reasons; lest we creep slowly towards a hands-on banned list and a micro-managed format.
First, R&D pays next to no attention to Legacy and Vintage, meaning that most B/R decisions are based on a cursory reading of tournament results combined with intuition, which is then held up against what the players are precieved to want. It's why Brainstorm is untouchable despite it being the best card in the format by a wide margin (as an aside, I'm in complete agreement with WotC on the Brainstorm issue, so let's not get sidetracked by that). But when it comes to the Cruise banning, we don't need a ton of empirical data ans neither did WotC - they realized what was happening and took the correct action even if it was based on flawed reasoning, which I don't think it was. I'll quote the same thing you did:
I fail to see how this didn't describe the Cruise meta - the major archetypes were the Urx decks: Ur Delver, Pyroblade, and Grixis Pyromancer decks that played what amounts to conventional Legacy against each other because they could all Cruise well , Lands, which the Urx decks could either try to race or beat with Blood Moon before Lands got Wasteland and Port, Punishing Fire, or Stage/Depths online and couldn't significantly interact with once any of those things happened, Miracles, which won most of its games in the Cruise era on the back of CounterTop rather than the interactive portions of its deck, and Storm variants that capitalized on, wait for it - the fact that the Urx decks were running fewer cards that interacted with their plan than the BUG and RUG decks that they largely displaced. Those decks put up a handful of results in that era ( here and here for examples), but even a cursory glance at those decklists shows the effects of Cruise: BUG Delver with 2 Dimir Cham maindeck, and RUG Delver with Kird Ape replacing Nimble Mongoose. You might say 'that's just good metagaming', which is true, but when metagaming results in running cards that are strict downgrades on the 'normal' choices for those slots, it's at least somewhat indicative of a problem.Sometimes, a card-drawing card can be too efficient. The decks that draw cards so efficiently push out many other decks, limiting the field to the strong decks that best use those card drawers and decks that don't play in interactive games with those strong decks. In that case, the best option might be to ban the overly efficient card drawer.
I'll recount the exact moment I realized they'd ban Mystical.
*Rewinds time to the only Legacy tournament I can remember that was held in Carousel Mall on the first floor*
I was playing ANT against ... some blue deck. Can't remember, besides the point. Anyway, two of the games were decided by the same course of actions - I Mystical for AdN, and he Mysticals for a counterspell in response to my AdN, and then cantrips into it.
Side note: I was matched up with a Belcher player that day... our entire match was three games, with four total turns being taken.
We have a very different opinion/tatstes here, but I can respect yours.
Yes, but that's because of the decks which can run it in the first place, and the fact that they already held off on the first. Sorcery recall could be cast in multiples right away. High Tide could conceivably cast multiple copies on turn three - Storm on turn two. The Delve is a trivial cost only because the spell was relegated to decks which make it trivial.
I guess I assumed you meant that the best TC deck
would be the top deck of the format.
I played exclusively Lands during the TC era and I found those matches very different; especially when taking the control route.
I think Shardless was more like Jund than TA!
The R&D team are not paid to think very much about Legacy - and perhaps their bosses aren't interested in how that team feels a card will effect Legacy. But I have a hard time believing that there are no hard-core Legacy fans whoo are working for R&D, even if that exceeds their job expectations.
Had they said the card was simply too strong as card draw, and sited that as one of the few established points on which a card is banned in theory, I would be okay. When they say a single deck was too big and hurting diversity, I think that reasoning is flawed.
For one, the meta was still changing lot. Petal-Burn was just hitting the scene, as was Ascendancy combo. It's unknown how the meta would react and which weaker decks would emerge to prey on those new ones etc. One cannot apply synchronic analysis to such a meta, nor can it's evolution be reliably extrapolated.
I aggre about Storm - but lands and Miracles are the most reactive (and hence interactive) decks in the format. STD either set-up CB (interactive), or often another answer (STP, etc). With Lands, my matches against Delver decks (besides RUG, which is a breeze) where often struggles t contrl their board before I would win (or lose trying). I can't agree with you at all on this one.
Kird Ape is only a downgrade if you consider the threshold to be trivial. The fact that Mongoose's threshold and TC's delve step on each other's feet is exactly why neither of those conditions are trivial at all!
Honestly I think Legacy will be healthier without DDT - and I'll personally (probably) enjoy it even more than I do now. I just hope if it's banned they dwell on it being overly efficient card-draw (and possibly tutoring) rather than some bull shit about a meta not being diverse.
Supremacy 2020 is the modern era game of nuclear brinksmanship! My blog:
https://fieldmarshalshandbook.wordpress.com
You can play Lands.dec in EDH too! My primer:
http://www.mtgsalvation.com/forums/t...lara-lands-dec
People seem to be clamoring to have both of these cards banned. They say these warp the format too much, and cause games to be less competitive and more about who resolves DTT first. I don't find this to nearly be the case at all. Dig isn't anywhere what cruise was and brainstorm is a staple for blue based decks and imo makes legacy what it is.
Thoughts?
Dig is more widespread than Cruise was.
Brainstorm is a simple case of play it or suffer. You want just about any other effect in the game, you have a choice - all manner of removal, threats, and so on. Card selection, the cantrip shell rules supreme.
Then again, we have a 500 page thread for this, so might as well go there, no?
EDIT: Nath'd.
Originally Posted by Lemnear
Check your facts first: https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B7d...ew?usp=sharing
Oh and BTW: http://www.mtgthesource.com/forums/s...te-speculation
There are currently 1956 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1956 guests)