No
Yes
Relax. We're having a discussion here.Originally Posted by Setherial
To you, maybe.There is a format like that, it's called Modern, it's boring.
Brainstorm is an incredibly powerful Magic card, and it only got that much better with Snapcaster Mage (believe it or not). You're going to have people who don't want to deal with that, and that is what creates diversity. If everyone wanted to play the same thing, this discussion would be over.When I started playing this format it was pretty stable. Then a year, maybe 2 or so ago they banned Survival, a card that was concidered Tier2 until vengevine came along, then right out of the blue, lets not adjust people, lets ban, few months time, just like that, ban. And ever since it's like poeple want a ban every few months. That's what it feels like to me at least. I'm sure you all read sdematt posting 'Talking Shop...', well the guy makes sense. The fact that this poll says 78% No to banning Brainstorm makes sense. It's the people that complain that don't make sense.
You've obviously never played Combo (Storm, mid-range, /Control, etc.) - with Brainstorm. To assume it wouldn't be adversely affected by a Brainstorm-banning would be ridiculous. Brainstorm is not replaceable like a Mystical Tutor was. It's a critical draw/filter spell that presents the said player with an incredible amount of options - at instant speed - for the cost of a single Blue mana - and puts a (potentially) critical accelerant or tutor piece into your hand now rather than later.Also what's the point of banning brainstorm. Do you really think combo is going to take the hit, really?
It also acts as protection against targeted discard spells like Duress, Thoughtseize, etc., thus allowing you to keep that critical card on top of your deck and potentially setting up your next turn with the win. No other spell in Legacy could do that at Brainstorm's cost on turn one.
Not only are you massively incorrect in assuming Control variants will take the full brunt of a potential Brainstorm banning, but you'd also see a drastic change in Combo of all variants - shifting to more suicidal variants like Belcher, SI, etc. Those decks might not be exclusively the "best" choices for Combo right now as it stands, but you can take it to the bank that if Brainstorm got the proverbial "axe to the forehead," Combo decks bearing a similarly aggressive, yet partially 'auto-piloted' strategy that never used Brainstorm to begin with would surge in popularity.No control is going to take the full hit. Decks that play 24 land and need brainstorm or die like UW BladeControl and Landstill. Combo adjusts like it always does.
I just think if the people who started this silly debate were seeing more GWx Maverick and Combo Elves decks in their meta they would not cry wolf so fast.
We just banned Mental Mistep and we have a brand new meta because of it, people demanding a ban after a ban this quick is just absurd.
Brainstorm would greatly diminish the consistency of many Combo decks.
Also, you can't really blame people for wanting to discuss this matter, because when Mental Misstep was printed, no one had any idea an incredibly powerful card like Snapcaster Mage would subsequently be printed shortly thereafter - in essence creating two similar yet diverse discussions involving two cards that just happened to follow each other almost chronologically - bearing incredible popularity and results in the process.
It's no one's fault.
Why don't people learn to play against blue strategies?
Don't ban cards... Just learn to beat them. Snapcaster is awesome, so is Brainstorm. It appears in many decks. Blue is a strong color in legacy, when combined with other colors. It is a support color, why is there so much hate for it?
Honestly, if you can't stand the idea of blue being as strong as it is, you probably are better off playing Modern or EDH. I'm not bashing those formats, but Modern already has the sort of environment you anti-Brainstorm people seek to create.
I'm sorry, but this whole Brainstorm thing is just the flavour of the month. Snapcaster makes people want to play Brainstorm more often, because they are strong. Seriously, this is a pretty learned community but some of these assertions people are making are well beyond alarmist.
You should probably read some of the posts in this thread before posting.
For example: what beats Brainstorm and/or Snapcaster? Follow up: are those strategies that "beat" them narrow (Chains), weak without a very good draw (Chalice) or ineffective against them (Canonist)?
In what scenario is it better to play a deck without Brainstorm than a deck with Brainstorm?
Tom? Is that you? I thought you were going to go work on DnD?
Yeah you guys are on the wrong track with that idea.
Shitty silver bullets that don't do anything probably isn't the direction to go.
I'm more suggesting high threat density decks, with good long game. Play G/W Maverick? Also... Having a card being played in many decks doesn't equate to it needing to be banned. The card does nothing broken, it is a filter spell. I've read this whole thread and I have been quite surprised at how reactionary people have been towards the printing of SCM. Legacy has ebb and flow and the meta will shift, but there is this communal mindset, that if something isn't fun or "diverse" enough for everyone than we should fix the problem with a sledgehammer.
Can we also ban Force of Will, every blue deck plays Force of Will and I'm getting sick of losing to it. It's like, if I play blue, I almost have to play Force! Counter a spell for zero mana, that's broken! And every deck plays it! Its in every top8!
You read this whole thread? Doesn't look like to me, the force argument has been brought time and time again and not only in this topic, but everywhere.
Not a Dr. Jones alternate for the love of all that's worth of love in this world.
Well that's fine if this has been suggested before.
It is a fair comparison. Both are very heavily played blue cards, both are awesome. Neither one is broken. No one here knows me but take my word for it when I say I'm not trolling: I still am a bit surprised that actual Legacy players think Brainstorm should be banned. It is a cornerstone of the format and enables good players to make optimal plays. It can be anywhere from underwhelming to straight up bad when used improperly.
If WoTC bans Brainstorm than I see Legacy being the new Vintage. You ward off all the hardcore enthusiasts and the player base takes a dive. New players are already hesitant to start the process of investing in staples. How do you think the format would fare with many people ragequitting or just losing interest due to ridiculous bungling and mismanagement.
Is Brainstorm such an oppressive strategy that every deck has to play Dispel and Chalice of the Void to compete? Does Brainstorm make the game decidedly less fun for the majority of players? Is Brainstorm negatively affecting one archetype so much that it can't be played? The answer to all these questions is no; and these are criteria that should be considered when banning a card.
I don't think he realized you were being sarcastic.
I didn't say combo would not be affected, of course it will be affected, every blue strategy will be to some degree. I'm not a combo player like you pointed out but I know most decks pretty wel and I do playtest combo to learn how to play against them. The difference between combo and dedicated control is that dedicated control doesn't have a clock and runs a lot of land, it also can't affort to tap out to ponder effects early on. Combo does have a fast clock and they do run ponder and/or preordain and the likes and care far less about digging at sorcery speed. Not having brainstorm is bad for both strategies but dedicated control will become unplayable where combo will be affected far less.
Hiding cards against discard is a big deal for both combo and control and yes not being able to do that will hurt combo the most. But I think Hymn and Thoughtseize are powerfull enough as they are without giving them the boost of taking away the protection brainstorm offers. And looking at it from the Thoughseize pilot point of view I'm sure combo opening with leyline of the sanctity is far more devestating then brainstorm in response to hymn.
As for comparing Legacy without brainstorm to Modern, it might seem far fetched as the two still won't be anything alike but if you play control in Modern or Standard you immediatly feel what it's like not to have braintorm. It's frustrating beyond compare. It's so bad even in Modern that control isn't an option anymore.
I think it's save to say that if brainstorm is banned legacy will become faster and more aggressive. Decks like Tempo, BUG Control (Team America), GWx Maverick, Merfolk, (and others that don't immediatly come to mind...) decks that are already at the top of decks to beat will dominate even more. The meta will not become more divers, diversity will be reduced. There will be less viable strategies, not more. I would probably start playing something like BUG but I would miss brainstorm like I miss damage on the stack. One of the great mechanics playing Magic had to offer.
I've played Legacy since it was 1.5. I remember when Goblins first became a thing. I remember when white was by far the worst color (I still played it of course). I haven't played quite as long as some but I've played it about as long as anyone outside of New York.
[Snip. Less than helpful. - Bardo]
That is all ftm.
Last edited by Bardo; 12-09-2011 at 04:03 PM.
For my confessions, they burned me with fire/
And found I was for endurance made
One of the criteria for banning a card is, "every deck has to play Dispel and Chalice of the Void to compete?"? First of all, if the criteria for banning a broken 1cc card was people had to play chalice of the void then no 1cc cards would ever be banned.
The decks playing Chalice aren't consistent enough to fight Brainstorm, and the amount of times they can actually get to 2 mana (maybe upwards of 70% out of their starting hand?) multiplied by the number of times they see a Chalice in the starting 7 (around 42%) multiplied by the number of times that person will get to take their turn before the brainstorm player gets to use it, or respond to it with brainstorm, (50%) is maybe 15%. Now you have to consider the Brainstorming player has the chance to Force of Will this first turn play if they so choose (~40% chance with 4 FoW in their deck). That drops the odds of a Chalice sticking before Brainstorm does its job to ~9%, if the Brainstorm player cared enough to counter it (and why should they, you probably just wasted 2-3 of your cards to nullify their 1). Why in the hell, if Chalice or Dispel were the indicators that you needed to ban Brainstorm, would you just not play Brainstorm yourself instead of making a shitty deck?
Has anyone done studies on fun-ness of the format with Brainstorm and without Brainstorm? Fun arguments are biased and not useful due to no one having any fucking idea of what even the metagame would look like after a banning. These are just personal questions that don't make sense to ask, and definitely shouldn't be considered in the "health of the format" arguments.Does Brainstorm make the game decidedly less fun for the majority of players?
I assume you mean "negatively affecting one archetype so much that it has to be played." Ubiquitous usage would be a fine criteria, but you'd have to obviously take a percentage into account. 100% of decks wouldn't run a card unless it was absolutely ridiculous, like Ancestral Recall. But for bannings I think some number around 70% of decks using it, or perhaps decks splashing a color specifically for it, would be fine.Is Brainstorm negatively affecting one archetype so much that it can't be played?
For you? I mean one of your criteria was a funness consideration that is not answerable.The answer to all these questions is no;
Nope.and these are criteria that should be considered when banning a card.
We can consider that more people like Brainstorm. Look at the poll. It's the overwhelming majority that wants to play with Brainstorm, people who feel otherwise are the minority. This is how we can tell who likes Brainstorm and who doesn't, the poll in this thread shows us. If you read my posts you will see I don't think shitty cards are the way to combat Brainstorm. I suggested playing Maverick, because of its threat density and redundancy, G/W is very strong against blue decks.
Just because everyone plays it doesn't mean it should be banned. That suggestion is ridiculous. The card is an enabler, and does nothing broken at all. Banning something for the sake of balancing the color pie is even more ridiculous.
There just isn't any defensible reason to ban Brainstorm.
If this card stay unbanned for the next say 2 -3 years we are going to face a format that's vear near to Vintage. Look at Vintage - there is 2 types of decks - Moxen + fow + all the blue cards and Bazzar and Shops decks. We have Blue Control in Vinatage, Blue Combo with the same 20- 25 cards making the core. And most of them are blue. The same thing can happen in Legacy and it's very close to reality.
While everyone agree that the format will die if FoW is banned, no one say that the same thing will happen if Brainstorm get the axe. But i don't know which card is more dangerous - BS or Snapcaster. Also this blue Wild Nacatl doesn't make any sence.
Sooner or later Legacy will face the mandatory option to have an restricted list like Vintage. The card pool growing every 3 monts and some of the older cards , or in rare cases new ones become out of hands.
I don't think it's Brainstorm that restricts the "design space" for more cards to come (that's what's often being said to warrant the ban of a specific card), but that it's Snapcaster Mage that does so. It will significantly raise the power level of each and every instant or sorcery card in the <=3CC range that is not being printed with flashback from the get-go, and I'd rather have that little sucker go than any of the spells it makes even more so obscenely good.
What the heck? Fit of rage much?
This post was... important? This isn't really conducive to discussion at all, why are you so mad? Honestly if you want a Brainstormless format then listen closely when I tell you: Go play Modern.
Legacy and Brainstorm is like Vintage and Black Lotus. It's the posterchild for the format, for good reason.
You should go check on Wizard's website the different factors they consider when banning something. Popularity and usage alone aren't factors. Dominance (ie - high usage of a card in an oppressive and dominating strategy) and elimination or considerable lessening of one of the three main deck archetypes are reasons to remove a card from any format. Brainstorm does none of these things, looking at the situation critically, there is no reason to ban it.
It is a really common thought that stuff is banned because of how popular it is or how easy it is to throw into decks. This just isn't the case, or else we'd be discussing Dark Confidant or Stoneforge Mystic getting the axe (not comparing these cards to Brainstorm, but they fit your outline for banning a card)
And I'm going to die laughing when it eventually gets banned
Team Albany: What's Legacy?
You cannot know the sweetness of Victory, without first dwelling in the agony of Defeat.
No. When u see 70% of T8 during an year being black/white and running Bob/SFM you can say they are considerable for getting the axe. He isn't saying "it's an auto-run in the color then it should be banned". He even said before that while he didn't agree with the MM ban, he accepted it just because the card was exactly in every single deck so it was understable that people would want to see it gone.
Decks splash for these cards all the time. I'm not saying play Deadguy, I'm saying SFM and Bob get played in tons of different decks. Brainstorm isn't oppressive, it is heavily used. Mental Misstep was oppressive and very heavily used. It seriously hurt the aggro archetype, which relies on dropping a turn 1 AEther Vial or Wild Nacatl. Do you understand why Brainstorm and Mental Misstep are different enough in function that they are not comparable since they both do such wildly different things?But for bannings I think some number around 70% of decks using it, or perhaps decks splashing a color specifically for it, would be fine
Mental Misstep really hurt aggro. It made the archetype much weaker and that was reflected in tournament results. Mental Misstep was played by every deck without having to splash a color.
You obviously don't play Vintage or follow it. Vintage is the more diverse right now than it has been in years. I personally believe that legacy is extremely diverse right now and tons of different strategies are viable. I would like to know what decks are being pushed out by brainstorm.
A founding member of Team Bluff the Lotus - Bringing the crazy from Bob's Baseball Dugout
Shouldn't the real question be "I'd like to know what decks are being pushed out by brainstorm + snapcaster?" ?
I'd rather play a fun "broken" format than an unfun "fair" one any day of the week. Fun-ness is certainly subjective, but it should absolutely be taken into account when making ban decisions. If more than three quarters of the community thinks that a card is fun to play with and even against, what compelling argument can be made for its banning? That too many decks are a certain color? Who gives a fuck?
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
