All B/R update speculation.

[kinda]

@finn: Good points. Terminus clearly is not the sole reason zoo, merfolk, goblins, elves, infect, affinity, etc are fringe decks. I also am not an expert in the miracles vs dnt matchup but my guess is dnt is a deck to beat in spite of the matchup not due to it. According to mtgtop8, 31% of the Meta right now is running terminus, show and tell, or tendrils of agony. Banning show and tell or tendrils would eliminate an entire deck. However, you can remove terminus and dramatically increase the aggro matchup vs 10% of the meta.

[TheFlyinGutchman]

The issue with these discussions is that some do not understand that Miracles in a form that remotely resembles its current concept ceases to be viable without SDT. It's literally the beating heart of the deck. "Ban SDT" is extremely close to "Ban Miracles." Which just seems like QQ to me. Brainstorm isn't going anywhere I don't think, and it really shouldn't be going anywhere In my opinion. I'm fine with a dig through time ban(though I don't think it is needed). It brings miracles and omnitell back to pre khans essentially. SCG Worcester showed how prevalent dig has become. Many games are about resolving dig, similar to how treasure cruise was. Dig ban seems reasonable to me.

[Finn]

- Wrong. Zoo was a thing during the Mental Misstep era, which was in 2011.
- D&T is a control deck, not an aggro deck. You, out of all people, should know that.
- Miracles pretty much wipes the floor with any strategy based around creatures (meaning more than just a few finishers) that doesn't run counters or Aether Vial. If you run neither of those two, you're shit out of luck.

I only said that D&T has 26 creatures.

Terminus was printed in 2012 so I am not going to argue how shitty zoo had to be in 2011 to be considered "a thing" or not. We both know it was dead by the time Miracles became a winning deck, so what are we discussing?

[MGB]

Uhh, the repetition.

I don't know that Legacy needs pure aggro. But Miracles is not responsible for its absence. I am absolutely certain of this because in this very thread you can find people complaining about it before Terminus existed. I wrote an article on it in like 2010 or something when Delver of Secrets came out. Whomever the people are that are pushing this idea need to stop.

Honestly, Elves is pretty much what pure aggro has to look like in Legacy. We have not had a nonblue aggro deck since 2009. Legacy actually has that right now. And even D&T has 26 creatures. Miracles is demonstrably not preventing creature strategies from functioning. As good as Terminus is, Legacy can clearly handle it.

I like playing Brainstorm. I like facing it. And if you ban it, Miracles is no more. This topic has been explored with examples and Miracles players acknowledging this consequence, again in this same thread. But I ask why does Miracles have to go?

There will always be a best deck. Are we on a crusade to bring down the beast simply because it is a beast? The idea of banning Divining Top because it is slow is another topic, but banning it due to its effect in Miracles is a fool's errand.

In a format that is absolutely commanded by hyper efficient blue card quality engines, you guys want to take out the one colorless one. Look past your noses, boys.

Except that that one colorless card quality engine is used almost exclusively in competitive Legacy by the premier blue control deck.

Again, please read this link:
http://tcdecks.net/busqueda.php?toke...ide=&strict=on

This is a listing of top-8 appearances of Legacy decks that feature Sensei's Divining Top since March 22, 2015. Of the 100 decks tcdeck has listed via that search query, only 37 are not Miracles decks.

Of those 37 decks:
- 10 are blue-based ANT combo decks that feature no more than one SDT in their list. Not only are they non-essential to the game plan, they are included to give a blue deck more consistency.
- 4 are UW Stoneblade lists that added the SDT-Terminus-Counterbalance package.
- 3 are Imperial Painter lists that play anywhere from 2-4 SDT.
- 2 are Sneak and Show lists that play 1-2 SDT almost as a throw-in.
- The rest are miscellaneous decks such as 12 Post, Burn, BGx Control, Mono Black, Nic Fit that play an average of 1-2 SDT as random throw-ins. Of these decks, no more than 4 of them play more than 2 SDT.

So what exactly are we losing if we ban SDT? Other than weakening Miracles, obviously, we no longer get to throw 1-2 Sensei's Divining Tops into our Ad Nauseum Tendrils decks (oh no), we no longer get to play SDT in our Painter lists (that will be a loss, but honestly, is Painter going away because it lost Top?), and we no longer get to throw 1-2 SDT into random tier 2 decks.

There is this myth that banning SDT will weaken other archetypes - that is simply false. The only deck in competitive Legacy that depends on SDT as a fundamental part of its core strategy is Miracles. Period.

[Zilla]

If I didn't know any better, I'd say there is somewhat of consensus to ban something from miracles! Is there any way to set up another poll and see where people's feelings lie? I'm not too sure if anyone still feels goblin guide should be banned...

Go ahead and make a thread/poll for it if you want. As long as it stays on topic with regards to how a particular ban would affect Miracles specifically, it can stay open. I suspect it will quickly devolve into a duplicate of this thread, at which point it will be closed, but I don't mind if you want to give it a shot.

[jmonk]

Go ahead and make a thread/poll for it if you want. As long as it stays on topic with regards to how a particular ban would affect Miracles specifically, it can stay open. I suspect it will quickly devolve into a duplicate of this thread, at which point it will be closed, but I don't mind if you want to give it a shot.

I actually disagree with you, I don't think miracles should have anything hit. I think the card that should get hit is show and tell. its not that hard to play against counter top. over the last few years of the format we have seen show and tell decks make counterbalance decks adapt away from their more traditional curve focusing on ones and twos to a curve that leaves out twos almost entirely.show and tell decks have in a way done the same thing that mental misstep did, it moved the center of gravity in the format. from what we have experienced that is usually a bad thing.

[Lemnear]

I make this quick and leave out responses to earlier posts because I'm on my way to a wedding

- D&T is a control deck, not an aggro deck. You, out of all people, should know that

It's an aggro-tempo concept all over and cards like Thalia, Wasteland, Port and Flickerwisp should make it clear that the decks plan is to choke your opponent on mana to kill him/her in the meanwhile which is the same fundamental concept Daze/Stifle/Wasteland/FoW do for Delver-tempo variants.

@finn: Good points. Terminus clearly is not the sole reason zoo, merfolk, goblins, elves, infect, affinity, etc are fringe decks. I also am not an expert in the miracles vs dnt matchup but my guess is dnt is a deck to beat in spite of the matchup not due to it. According to mtgtop8, 31% of the Meta right now is running terminus, show and tell, or tendrils of agony. Banning show and tell or tendrils would eliminate an entire deck. However, you can remove terminus and dramatically increase the aggro matchup vs 10% of the meta.

Any proof? Any evidence? Any logic line of thought behind that conclusion?

There is nothing! It's pretty cocky to throw around numbers, if you don't have any fucking hint, why people should pickup an aggro deck rather than a combo, Tempo or Midrange archetype in case of Terminus' banning. Why should non-blue aggro decks get any significant boost in playability, if they were barely viable before Terminus got even printed thanks to combo and SFM? Has the position of aggro got any better in the meanwhile as TNN, DTT and stuff saw print? No, it sure has not.

[Barook]

Go ahead and make a thread/poll for it if you want. As long as it stays on topic with regards to how a particular ban would affect Miracles specifically, it can stay open. I suspect it will quickly devolve into a duplicate of this thread, at which point it will be closed, but I don't mind if you want to give it a shot.

Is it possible to make a thread with a poll and closing it, while the poll stays up? If not, what harm is done if that kind of thread stays open for e.g. a week to get at least the poll results?

I actually disagree with you, I don't think miracles should have anything hit. I think the card that should get hit is show and tell. its not that hard to play against counter top. over the last few years of the format we have seen show and tell decks make counterbalance decks adapt away from their more traditional curve focusing on ones and twos to a curve that leaves out twos almost entirely.show and tell decks have in a way done the same thing that mental misstep did, it moved the center of gravity in the format. from what we have experienced that is usually a bad thing.

Why not collect poll entries before that?

E.g.

- Dig Through Time
- Sensei's Divining Top
- Counterbalance
- Terminus
- Brainstorm
- Show & Tell

since those are some of the most-discussed items. That would leave us with 4 other options for a multiple choice poll.

[Zulabnar]

The question should be : "How Aggro deck could be viable?"

MAgic is a game of aggro control and combo each in many ways.

nowadays are combo, control combo, pure combo etc

control, aggro control, board control etc

aggro is not viable, because of some reason: first of all combo decks are too damn easy to play: S&T -> emrakul bye. but this is normal, combo > aggro since 1996.

The fact is that aggro > Control is no more true.

The best cards are all blue, and so suited for control and combo, or tempo.

Brainstorm, Ponder, probe, Dig trough time, Treasure cruise, even the creature TNN is fuckin blue.

So is important to empower aggro, or banning some cards, or printing something new.

[Quasim0ff]

What is this interest in playing aggro?

Aggro, as an archetype, isn't fun. It's linear, but more boring than linear combo. I'd much rather play versus a linear combo deck (Sneak and Show? Burn?) than Zoo. It just opens for much more interesting games.

[Crimhead]

- However, there is a *clear* resolution if we ban Sensei's Divining Top. Miracles becomes a lot less powerful and consistent which leads to: a larger variety of aggro decks become more viable, a larger variety of control decks become more viable, and tournament organizers, tournament players, and judges benefit from less draws and less slow play.The only downside is that a handful of players who are completely wedded to the Miracles deck no longer get to crush the opposition as easily. Oh well.

Banning Brainstorm results in an unknown quantity, while banning Sensei's Divining Top results in almost entirely a positive effect on the Legacy format.

You want to ban Miracles to bolster control?
Legacy has all of two pure (aka, not creature based) control decks. One is obscure thanks to Tabernacle, and people want the other one banned?

Incidentally, Miracles isn't even all that strong. It has a win-rate (last data I saw is a month old) of actually less than 50 per cent! The deck sees good results due to sheer force of numbers. This of course makes it appear strong, and even more people want to play it. But the fact is it's very beatable and nowhere near dominant.

Edit - just found updated data. Miracles has a win-rate of 53 per cent post TC ban. This is hardly cause for alarm!

http://www.reddit.com/r/MTGLegacy/co...archetypes_dc/

[Zombie]

You want to ban Miracles to bolster control?
Legacy has all of two pure (aka, not creature based) control decks. One is obscure thanks to Tabernacle, and people want the other one banned?

Incidentally, Miracles isn't even all that strong. It has a win-rate (last data I saw is a month old) of actually less than 50 per cent! The deck sees good results due to sheer force of numbers. This of course makes it appear strong, and even more people want to play it. But the fact is it's very beatable and nowhere near dominant.

Miracles is a deck that needs a pilot who's experienced enough to play it fast to not drown in draws. The upper bound of a deck's raw strength and the average quality of its pilots are shouldn't be equated like you do.

[Crimhead]

Miracles is a deck that needs a pilot who's experienced enough to play it fast to not drown in draws. The upper bound of a deck's raw strength and the average quality of its pilots are shouldn't be equated like you do.

We can speculate, or we can look at hard data. Beating Miracles also requires skilled piloting. We can't account for pilot skill. Also, do unfinished matches somehow hurt the miracles player? It sounds like you are saying Miracles plays better post board than pre board? Can you back this up?

Incidentally, how else do you measure a decks power? You can go by top finishes. But that has the same problem of not accounting for pilot skill, plus the additional problem of favouring the more densly played decks! Win-rates are by far the best data we have to measure a deck's positioning in the meta.

[Crimhead]

What is this interest in playing aggro?

Aggro, as an archetype, isn't fun. It's linear, but more boring than linear combo. I'd much rather play versus a linear combo deck (Sneak and Show? Burn?) than Zoo. It just opens for much more interesting games.

Aggro may be dull on the surface, but matches involving aggro vs something more controlling are usually very interesting. More viable play-styles makes a better meta.
Sometimes I think Burn would see a much stronger win-rate if it were not the go to deck for budgeted newbs, and if it were not shunned by so many experienced players. But I can only guess.

It would be nice to see Affinity on the map - maybe if WotC ever gets off their behinds and unban Black Vise...

[Quasim0ff]

Miracles may be dull on the surface, but matches involving miracles vs something more tempo-oriented are usually very interesting. More viable play-styles makes a better meta.

[Crimhead]

I'm not sure what you are implying. I'm in favour of Miracles in the meta - as I said it is one of the only tier one (pure) control decks in the format! I do not advocate the banning of any cards!

I would appreciate not being misquoted, though.

[Quasim0ff]

I'm not sure what you are implying. I'm in favour of Miracles in the meta - as I said it is one of the only tier one (pure) control decks in the format! I do not advocate the banning of any cards!

I would appreciate not being misquoted, though.

I merely meant it as a future reference, not to put words in your mouth :) It's just pretty funny, all the arguments speaking for more aggro in the meta, every single argument can be said with regards to every deck in every format.

[Crimhead]

I merely meant it as a future reference, not to put words in your mouth :) It's just pretty funny, all the arguments speaking for more aggro in the meta, every single argument can be said with regards to every deck in every format.

To be fair, aggro is less of a thing than any other style. Prison and control are close seconds, though, and mostly I aggree with you. It would be nice to have an aggro presence, but not at the cost of killing control! Especially considering that there is zero reason to believe the absence of Miracles would open the door for linear aggro decks.

On the other hand, there are plenty of aggressive control decks and disruptive aggro decks, so I don't think we need any more aggro/control!

Burn and Affinity are the strongest linear aggro decks in the format, so to bolster aggro WotC should unban (or print anew) something that will help those decks but not find a home in tempo or midrange.

[Dice_Box]

Am I the only one who thinks Fish is an Aggro deck?

[Quasim0ff]

Am I the only one who thinks Fish is an Aggro deck?

Well, it's a tempo deck... So no, you're not.