[Free Article] The New Kings of Legacy

[voltron00x]

The post-Mystical Tutor metagame has begun to shake out, and thus far two decks - Merfolk and Madness - have been the breakout winners. While not at the same level of success, TES is also doing well, despite having considerably fewer players using it.

Why are these decks winning? Where did the current versions come from, how are they evolving, and what can the rest of the format do about them? This article should help you get your bearings. [Please note that there are a few versions of each deck in the article, but they're set up as links, so don't miss them if you're not familiar with them.]

That's my article this week, in a nutshell, along with some other random thoughts. One other item, the Affinity lists should have Glimmervoid in them instead of Blinkmoth Nexus, or at least 1 / 1 split, for color fixing purposes.

http://www.starcitygames.com/magic/l...of_Legacy.html

[Gocho]

Great article! I like it a lot :)
Thanks for post it Free.

[Muradin]

Good article, Sire. Well written and it describes very well why Merfolk does NOT suck, even if people are inclined to think so. The parts about Survival Madness and TES were also quite informative while the rest was basically, well, random thoughts.

[menace13]

Good article. Minor nit pick, but wouldnt Spell Snare serve more purpose over Annul? Snare still hits everything Annul does against Madness(Jitt,Surv) and Also nabs Mongrel along with a number of other spells in other decks.

[Cthuloo]

Another very good article from you. Your point of view on the meta is a very interesting one, we will see in the next weeks if you were correct in identifying the new tiers of the format (except for Merfolk, which will definitely be a mainstay until people hate it out, and, notably, has probably the best matchups against the other two "big" decks).
I'm really curious to see what will happen to Zoo: it's wonderful to see as the ban of Mystical Tutor did damage Zoo more than it helped it, as people cut combo hate for more creature hate. I'm not sure how the Zoo matchup against Venge-Sur is, but if it's at least even, I can see a small resurgence of the deck in the next months.

[Cthuloo]

LOLOL, not at all, but play what u want, all the cadrds are at your displsal/

Uhm, I'm going to check the Drunken Thread for an explanation to this post :P

[menace13]

Uhm, I'm going to check the Drunken Thread for an explanation to this post :P

I assume he means- "No, Merfolk is not a top deck, I hate Fish so much to the extent that I never even eat seafood, I kill goldfish while screaming die, LoA,Die.. after buying them from pet store for fun"

I could be wrong?

[Michael Keller]

I think the article has some valid points, especially regarding Vengevival as a deck currently on the rise. I do, however, feel as though his assessment of Emrakul is incorrect; with seven copies of Emrakul placing in one of the largest and most important events of the year, there is no question the appeal of cheating larger creatures - like Emrakul - into play will remain the height of popularity for as long as Zoo remains a prevalent force in the format. And Zoo will remain prevalent as the most prolific foil to Merfolk until the real "King of Legacy" fades into the ocean of obscurity. It is for this reason I believe Emrakul-based combo decks will continue to see play due to the popularity of Merfolk and Zoo in the current (and general) "Legacy Competitive Metagame".

With the stealth-like rise of Affinity on the horizon, Emrakul's "Annihilator" mechanic will become extraordinarily critical in racing down a large number of permanents dropped in such short order. Merfolk and Zoo will adjust their sideboards accordingly, and I see a potential rise in cards like Energy Flux and Seeds of Innocence seeing more play to combat the explosiveness of Affinity in the sideboards of the aforementioned. Scars is going to pave the way for Affinity becoming the new "King of Legacy", with the ability to drop disparaging "hate machines" such as Chalice of the Void or Thorn of Amethyst in a hurry. With the ability to stunt Combo quickly and out-gun other Aggro decks in the format, Affinity will soon have its say as being one of the best decks in the format.

I am not an advocate of any of these decks, for the record. But I feel it will be a contorted effort from each current "Decks to Beat" to stop "New Affinity" in its tracks...before it gets out of hand.

[voltron00x]

I think the article has some valid points, especially regarding Vengevival as a deck currently on the rise. I do, however, feel as though his assessment of Emrakul is incorrect; with seven copies of Emrakul placing in one of the largest and most important events of the year, there is no question the appeal of cheating larger creatures - like Emrakul - into play will remain the height of popularity for as long as Zoo remains a prevalent force in the format. And Zoo will remain prevalent as the most prolific foil to Merfolk until the real "King of Legacy" fades into the ocean of obscurity. It is for this reason I believe Emrakul-based combo decks will continue to see play due to the popularity of Merfolk and Zoo in the current (and general) "Legacy Competitive Metagame".

With the stealth-like rise of Affinity on the horizon, Emrakul's "Annihilator" mechanic will become extraordinarily critical in racing down a large number of permanents dropped in such short order. Merfolk and Zoo will adjust their sideboards accordingly, and I see a potential rise in cards like Energy Flux and Seeds of Innocence seeing more play to combat the explosiveness of Affinity in the sideboards of the aforementioned. Scars is going to pave the way for Affinity becoming the new "King of Legacy", with the ability to drop disparaging "hate machines" such as Chalice of the Void or Thorn of Amethyst in a hurry. With the ability to stunt Combo quickly and out-gun other Aggro decks in the format, Affinity will soon have its say as being the best deck in the format.

I am not an advocate of any of these decks, for the record. But I feel it will be a contorted effort from each current "Decks to Beat" to stop "New Affinity" in its tracks...before it gets out of hand.

The likelihood of Affinity become the format’s top deck is practically nil, in my opinion. As we saw in Extended, Zoo just outclasses Affinity on creature quality even before hate comes into play. If Zoo can actively hate against Affinity – with cards like Grudge and Serenity – Affinity would have no chance. Ditto for Goblins with Shattering Spree and Pulverize, or Madness with Seeds or even Null Rod to just shut off their mana production.

I like Affinity a lot and I think it will be good, but it needs to be a niche player to have success. It is too easy to beat if it gets popular.

As far as Emrakul, those decks only seem like a great choice when Zoo is the top dog, which it definitely isn’t for the time being, and may never be again. Depending on how the format shifts and how much people are willing to adjust their sideboards, Zoo will certainly still be a viable deck (and probably is viable right now), but I’m not sure it will be so popular that Emarkul decks become particularly good.

[Doomsday]

I hope you're wrong and Affinity doesn't take off at all. Not because I think it's a scary deck, but because I'd rather play around Mindbreak Trap and hate bears than Null Rod.

[Aggro_zombies]

I think the article has some valid points, especially regarding Vengevival as a deck currently on the rise. I do, however, feel as though his assessment of Emrakul is incorrect; with seven copies of Emrakul placing in one of the largest and most important events of the year, there is no question the appeal of cheating larger creatures - like Emrakul - into play will remain the height of popularity for as long as Zoo remains a prevalent force in the format. And Zoo will remain prevalent as the most prolific foil to Merfolk until the real "King of Legacy" fades into the ocean of obscurity. It is for this reason I believe Emrakul-based combo decks will continue to see play due to the popularity of Merfolk and Zoo in the current (and general) "Legacy Competitive Metagame".

With the stealth-like rise of Affinity on the horizon, Emrakul's "Annihilator" mechanic will become extraordinarily critical in racing down a large number of permanents dropped in such short order. Merfolk and Zoo will adjust their sideboards accordingly, and I see a potential rise in cards like Energy Flux and Seeds of Innocence seeing more play to combat the explosiveness of Affinity in the sideboards of the aforementioned. Scars is going to pave the way for Affinity becoming the new "King of Legacy", with the ability to drop disparaging "hate machines" such as Chalice of the Void or Thorn of Amethyst in a hurry. With the ability to stunt Combo quickly and out-gun other Aggro decks in the format, Affinity will soon have its say as being the best deck in the format.

I am not an advocate of any of these decks, for the record. But I feel it will be a contorted effort from each current "Decks to Beat" to stop "New Affinity" in its tracks...before it gets out of hand.

I don't think I agree with this assessment of Affinity's capabilities.

Much like voltron already mentioned, Affinity is easy to hate. For starters, Zoo already has seven to eight slots already hating on artifacts - 4 Pridemage and 3-4 Grip - without even going out of the way to try to hate Affinity. Seeds and Serenity are certainly options if Affinity gets too out of control, but Zoo already has tons of hate between bigger guys, maindeck and sideboard slots (that aren't even dedicated to that matchup), and a high density of removal.

Chalice seems particularly bad in a deck full of zero and one-drops.

EDIT: Columbus is already outdated. The format has since shifted to accommodate the tech that Columbus gave us, and the fact that Emrakul has since dropped off the map is telling.

[GGoober]

Good article Matt. Always enjoyed your articles, shows that Premium isn't always > Free.

I noticed the mention of Peacekeeper and I've been trying to get copies after Atog Lord's article but they've been sold out on almost all online retail. Managed to snag 3 from various sources for < $3.00. I personally think this will be control decks' answer to Madness/Merfolk/Emrakul decks. Humility/Moat hasn't been treating me well against those decks since it can be gripped but Peacekeeper is a super-strong Moat (with an upkeep cost) that cannot be gripped, and even against StP, you can just counter the removal and follow up with a sweeper when you're ready. I think Peacekeeper is also good against Bant Aggro/Bant Survival etc despite them running StP since you will just need to counter the StP and resolve a sweeper later. It's much easier to deal with StP against Peacekeeper than a grip against Humility/Moat.

Any extra comments on the fate of Peacekeeper would be interesting, I have a strong feeling this is a solid card for control decks answering Merfolks/UG Madness. And I'm pretty sure they've sold out on most big online card shops.

[Michael Keller]

I don't think I agree with this assessment of Affinity's capabilities.

Much like voltron already mentioned, Affinity is easy to hate. For starters, Zoo already has seven to eight slots already hating on artifacts - 4 Pridemage and 3-4 Grip - without even going out of the way to try to hate Affinity. Seeds and Serenity are certainly options if Affinity gets too out of control, but Zoo already has tons of hate between bigger guys, maindeck and sideboard slots (that aren't even dedicated to that matchup), and a high density of removal.

Chalice seems particularly bad in a deck full of zero and one-drops.

EDIT: Columbus is already outdated. The format has since shifted to accommodate the tech that Columbus gave us, and the fact that Emrakul has since dropped off the map is telling.

Targeted removal doesn't stop Emrakul, the Aeons Torn, which is why Zoo and Merfolk get crushed by decks predicated on using this as either a primary or alternate win condition. Affinity variants will see a large amount of play and cards like Qasali Pridemage will have hardly any bearing on this archetype at is stands. It requires you to go online by turn three in order to activate it, by which time your opponent should have (and probably will) overrun you with a horde of miniatures pumped up in a variety of different ways.

Targeted removal and burn spells hit those artifact creatures, sure. But when you're dedicating your early game in hopes of "out-gunning" the Affinity player by trying offset their board position by trading spells for permanents, you're in a world of trouble. Arcbound Ravager and Master of Etherium don't even care about those burn spells, as they are either just too large or they can transfer counters to different threats. The deck can find ways to replenish its hand with Thoughtcast - and in some instances, Standstill. Zoo is a decidedly slower deck and now that most Affinity builds are running Galvanic Blast and Shrapnel Blast, there is little (if any) worries to the Affinity player that if the time comes where they actually become "out-raced" with creatures, they can just throw burn at the opposing player's head.

Columbus is not out-dated, and the tech that it offered the format was only minimally intrusive to the overall state of Legacy as a whole. Even the author goes on to state how "wide-open the format is", which is true - and has been true - for quite some time now. All Columbus did was show us that Merfolk is still the deck to beat in Legacy, which it was and has been before and ever since.

Affinity is Affinity for a reason: It can just drop artifacts and play larger converted-costing creatures into play while inherently avoiding Chalice's set value. It is one of the best weapons the deck can use against fast Combo (Storm). If an Affinity player drops a Chalice set at "zero" first - before playing their threats - that's a completely different story. But in reality, there are very few one-drops in Affinity and each card that does cost zero should be played before dropping a Chalice.

The deck has strong match-ups against most of the current decks in the format and now that it has these new toys to work with, I believe it will be hard to match the shocking amount of speed and consistency this deck will deliver. The best defense is to try and sweep the Affinity player's board with cards like Seeds of Innocence or what-have-you, but it will not change the fact the deck will just laugh in the face of Land, Nacatl, pass.

[frogboy]

Krosan Grip isn't even that good against Affinity. Path is obviously insane, though.

[menace13]

I do not see Affinity beating Zoo. Chain,Bolt and Helix kill every dude they play aside Myr and Master. Ravager only Laughs at Bolts if it can eat 3 artifacts and not give up the whole board and resources to do so. Obv playing Ravager when a few turns have passed is better than exposing it to bolts turns 1-3,but then they run the risk of Prides getting them too.
Early game Crits like Worker and Frog cant get past Nacatl/Ape even with Master out or Plating on
Pridemage ,despite being online by turn 3 is pretty good vs all Artifacts on board and K-Grip isn't that good, but it does stop Ravager from gaining Counters in response to removal or blocks and can always hit Plating or Master. Goyf and Kotr Gum up the ground vs Master and Myr or Ravager mid to late.

Deed is really good against them.

Affinity still won't be any good.

[Michael Keller]

I do not see Affinity beating Zoo. Chain,Bolt and Helix kill every dude they play aside Myr and Master. Ravager only Laughs at Bolts if it can eat 3 artifacts and not give up the whole board and resources to do so. Obv playing Ravager when a few turns have passed is better than exposing it to bolts turns 1-3,but then they run the risk of Prides getting them too.
Early game Crits like Worker and Frog cant get past Nacatl/Ape even with Master out or Plating on
Pridemage ,despite being online by turn 3 is pretty good vs all Artifacts on board and K-Grip isn't that good, but it does stop Ravager from gaining Counters in response to removal or blocks and can always hit Plating or Master. Goyf and Kotr Gum up the ground vs Master and Myr or Ravager mid to late.

Deed is really good against them.

Affinity still won't be any good.

Yes, it will. And here's why:

You completely negated the fact that newer Affinity builds run just as serious burn as Zoo does, and those burn spells can take out Zoo's creatures just the same. You also neglected to mention that those burn spells directed by the Zoo player to the Affinity player's creatures will be predicated largely on Cranial Plating, as that itself acts almost as good as removal in the sense you will have to block - or burn - one of those creatures equipped by it or take a massive amount of damage in a hurry. And when you do, the Modular counters will shift to another creature.

Ravager doesn't have to laugh at anything; you just directed your burn at my Ravager, I'll sacrifice a single artifact and shift the counters over to another creature.

Early game Crits like Worker and Frog cant get past Nacatl/Ape even with Master out or Plating on

I have no idea what you mean by this, because that makes no sense. If you equip a Cranial Plating or have a Master of Etherium out and you're staring down a Nacatl or Kird Ape, you are in fact trumping those creatures because Frog would become a 3/3 and Worker would become a 2/2, both of which could become either equipped by Plating and would advertly destroy the Zoo player's blocker and resulting in a shift of Modular counters.

Pridemage ,despite being online by turn 3 is pretty good vs all Artifacts on board

Damage on the stack doesn't exist anymore, so all Pridemage becomes is a wall waiting to block or knock out one artifact out of who knows how many. The Affinity player would be just fine to see the Zoo player tap two mana to cast Pridemage, then the third to play whatever one-drop they can dish out (inherently tapping out), and then drop a Cranial Plating on an Ornithopter and deal anywhere between seven to nine damage to do you. Affinity has already won half the battle right there.

And, assuming you do pay the one to destroy whatever artifact is troublesome to you, now you've just forced your opponent to spend all three mana and an entire turn to destroy a single artifact out of the seven to nine you already have out all the while sand-bagging something like Shrapnel Blast or an extra copy of Plating.

K-Grip isn't that good, but it does stop Ravager from gaining Counters in response to removal or blocks and can always hit Plating or Master

Krosan Grip doesn't stop the shift of Modular counters, only the activation of Ravager's sacrifice ability. That is still a nice and acceptable bonus for the Affinity player when staring down a single piece of hate.

Board sweepers are good; no one is denying that. I even brought them up in my original argument. But, not everyone plays sweepers in their deck because this newer version of Affinity hasn't made a splash yet. When it does, hate will probably be more commonplace. But until that happens, this deck will still be very dangerous with all of Scars' new toys.

Affinity will be good; I'm sorry but you are wrong.

[AriLax]

Which of Affinity's burn spells is killing a Goyf or Knight? Zoo has lots of ways to kill Master/Ravager/Plating.

What happens in the end, when both decks have more creatures than removal? Both of you will end up with mediocre creatures in play, and Zoo's mediocre guys are much better.

Simply put, Affinity still suffers from the same issue it has for a while: The only cards that aren't outclassed by the average guy now are Ravager, Master, and Plating. Zoo can legitimately just get someone with Nacatl/Lynx, you can't say the same of Frogmite and Arcbound Worker, and the larger cards in Affinity don't function well without the mediocre ones.

[jazzykat]

Which of Affinity's burn spells is killing a Goyf or Knight? Zoo has lots of ways to kill Master/Ravager/Plating.

What happens in the end, when both decks have more creatures than removal? Both of you will end up with mediocre creatures in play, and Zoo's mediocre guys are much better.

Simply put, Affinity still suffers from the same issue it has for a while: The only cards that aren't outclassed by the average guy now are Ravager, Master, and Plating. Zoo can legitimately just get someone with Nacatl/Lynx, you can't say the same of Frogmite and Arcbound Worker, and the larger cards in Affinity don't function well without the mediocre ones.

Fireblast will probably kill an early night and/or tarmogoyf. Galvanic blast dealing 4 might do it too.

Cranial plating on any flyer if not killed is GG for zoo when there is a "ground stall".

I think you are mildly underestimating the speed of affinity and the impact of 4 and 5 mana direct damage spells (1 Galvanic Bolt+ 1 Shrapnel Blast = 3 of your burn). Effectively the affinitely player has to do somewhere from 5 to 9 damage on average with creatures and their 8 burn and your fetches should do the rest.

[Mad Zur]

I have a couple of issues with this article, specifically concerning the SCG Denver and Minneapolis results, because Matt cites those tournaments as data points.

First, the tone of the article makes it sound as if Merfolk just continues to perform better and better. It's true that many people have neglected the deck despite consistently strong performances in this series and in other tournaments, and Matt has rightly criticized people for doing that. It's also true that Merfolk has won several recent tournaments, including the Grand Prix. However, Merfolk's match win percentage actually hit all-time lows in Denver (46.5%) and Minneapolis (45.1%). It's possible this might be some kind of fluke, and I expect we'll see that it did better in Baltimore (based on the large amount that made top 16), but if I were arguing that Merfolk was a good deck in the current metagame, I would want to account for this. Maybe a bigger problem with the article is that I'm not entirely sure if it is arguing that. (Merfolk remained the most popular deck, though, so if we're talking about decks to prepare for, it's a clear choice.)

Another thing that's unclear is whether TES is an important part of the metagame (one of the new "kings"?) or if that's a separate part of the article. If the former, it strongly contradicts the 5K results: there were three Tendrils decks in Denver and two in Minneapolis. (Again, there were probably a few more in Baltimore, but I'd be shocked if it passed Goblins, Zoo, or certainly CounterTop.)

On a similar note, Matt says about CounterTop (in favor of running Xantid Swarm):

Additionally, for those of you not inclined to researching such things, the number of Counter-Top decks among the Top 16 of the last three SCG Legacy Opens is as follows:

Denver: 4
Minneapolis: 0
Baltimore: 1

Overall, that's only five of forty-eight, or 10.4%, and excluding Denver that drops to 3.1%!

First, looking at just top 16 doesn't seem correct, since we have a lot more data than that (any argument about particularly worrying about good players, which are more likely to make top 16 than bad players, is going to be less convincing to me than the vastly increased sample size of using the entire tournament). Also, excluding Denver seems pretty silly. Of course you can get the result you want if you throw out samples that disagree with you. CounterTop made up 17/125 (13.6%) of Denver and 16/169 (9.5%) of Minneapolis. It was the second most popular deck in both. (I'm not commenting on the wisdom of Xantid Swarm, by the way, just reporting the numbers.)

Finally, and a little less objectively (although I might be able to dredge up some zeros from 2006 if necessary), Affinity has always been bad. It's not Zoo's fault in the slightest. It also has nothing to do with hate. Affinity is older than Legacy and has never been good in Legacy. It's managed to remain bad through the rise and fall of countless other decks, and I expect it can do so again. If it becomes a good deck, it will be solely on the back of Scars cards, not because of a metagame shift. I'm skeptical that Mox Opal and Galvanic Blast are enough to bring it from where it is now up to a reasonable choice to play in a tournament (though they are interesting cards).

[voltron00x]

Good post.


The point of the article isn't so much to assert that Merfolk and Madness are successful in terms of win percentage, but rather that these are the decks that you have to beat if you want to win an SCG Open, b/c they keep winning and are flooding the top 16. Therefore, it is worth looking at where these lists were in June, and where they are now, to see how they’re adapting to the field and to think about how other decks might adapt to them. Whether their presence in the top 16 is based on actual dominance or simple popularity wasn't really my point, but perhaps I should have discussed that, so, valid criticism.

More importantly, Paul's deck, like Saito's before it, is clearly different than the other Merfolk decks, just as the Madness decks are rather different from each other. So, in writing this article, I was partially motivated by a desire to keep people focused on what matters; in this case, that would be adjusting for a metagame and working on a sideboard that actually functions in the metagame you expect, rather than just choosing a stock list.

The Kings of Legacy tag, such as it is, was more in reference to Merfolk and Madness than TES. I think TES is actually a very strong deck and my comments on it were that it has done well despite being remarkably unpopular, and to point out that the deck can function even in a metagame where Madness and Merfolk are popular, provided that the proper adjustments are made. As I wrote about the deck previously, I wanted to follow-through on an aspect that I didn’t discuss in enough detail previously. It is worth noting that the marked decrease in Countertop in the top 16 of the latter two tournaments probably corresponds to an increase in popularity in Madness and Merfolk and there is little reason to expect that trend to change. Thus, the idea of “dodging” Counterbalance (as even at 13%, 87% of your opponents are not going to be playing Counterbalance) becomes reasonable if your goal is to win the tournament, looking at the amount in the field and the amount making the elimination rounds.

Regarding Affinity, I think the idea was that the combination of a reduction of true aggro decks, total absence of hate, and new Scars cards might all work together to provide a niche for Affinity to be successful. Not break the format successful, just successful. Any argument for more than that is almost guaranteed to be false based on the lack of success Affinity has had before and the overwhelming hate options available against the deck in Legacy.