All B/R update speculation.

[FoolofaTook]

Fortunately I've brought stats on Miracles vs other control decks (including control-ish midrange decks):

• vs Grixis Control: 6-9-1
• vs RG Lands: 5-10-4
• vs MUD: 1-3
• vs Shardless Sultai: 8-15-3
• vs Deathblade: 8-6-2
• vs Death and Taxes: 21-18-4

Apparently Miracles is bad against most of these decks, and hardly crippling against the others! The suggestion that Miracles is keeping other control decks down is baseless and false. The biggest factor keeping other control decks down is the $800.00 price tag on Tabernacle.

The only list there that really qualifies is Grixis Control. RG Lands has the percentages it does because nobody metagames against it. Very few people know how to play against it. Rest in Peace and Pithing Needle basically tell Lands to go away but even the lists that play RiP and Needle in the sideboard rarely have more than 3 slots combined for those options. That's because those lists don't see either card as important enough to really invest in given the current meta.

MUD and D&T are both Prison Control and both have issues in the wider meta. They both die to their own inconsistency and MUD has real problems against any list that can reliably control Metalworker even with the prison elements in play.

Shardless BUG isn't a control list. It's too random in play and it folds to things like Blood Moon and is light on counters to prevent those things from happening. It's more an aggro control list on steroids that occasionally has "oops" misfires with Shardless Agent. When I play BUG Control (no Shardless Agent) against Shardless I win about two-thirds of the time because unless he's hitting Ancestral Visions with the agent I just don't care and that list has a lot of other things it can randomly hit instead. Ancestral Visions itself is a poor substitute for Ponder in this meta because it is slow when you suspend it and leaves a lot to be desired in the opening hand.

[Dice_Box]

Just as a side note my BUG Control list beat Dredge, ANT, Burn and Enchantress last night and lost to Miracles *again*. I've played variants of this list since Treasure Cruise was banned and it beats the living crap out of just about everything it faces but loses to Miracles every time I play it.

I don't see how this is a problem, everything has to lose to something. I mean I am not going to cry about my deck running one basic and 33 other lands losing to the deck running 6 main deck Bloodmoons.

[FoolofaTook]

I don't see how this is a problem, everything has to lose to something. I mean I am not going to cry about my deck running one basic and 33 other lands losing to the deck running 6 main deck Bloodmoons.

The problem is that Miracles is pervasive in the meta and a very high percentage of the top tables, particularly the draw bracket, will be Miracles. That aggro lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established at this point. That combo lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established. I think most of the impression that Miracles suffers to opposing Control is false. I think the only lists that really do well against it that are both Control and commonly played are the Grixis lists and those are a fairly recent phenomenon.

Lands is an outlier matchup. I suspect that if the good Miracles pilots saw it as a priority to beat it wouldn't be hard to achieve that result. It would require a couple of wastelands in the build somewhere alongside RiP, Pithing Needle and the realization that 1 angel token is enough to kill even a good control list that is a step slow to an answer.

[Crimhead]

The only list there that really qualifies is Grixis Control.

...Which kick's Miacles' ass!

So exactly which control decks are being held back?

The problem is that Miracles is pervasive in the meta and a very high percentage of the top tables, particularly the draw bracket, will be Miracles.

Blame the player base for liking it so much and/or believing (as you do) that it is stronger than it really is. When 20% of the field is Miracles, it's no surprise that it makes 3 spots in the top 16! That's actually less than 20%.

That aggro lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established at this point.

Did you even look at the stats I just posted? I don't thibnk so, because you seem to be saying Miracles is good against everything except Grixis!

Lands is an outlier matchup. I suspect that if the good Miracles pilots saw it as a priority to beat it wouldn't be hard to achieve that result. It would require a couple of wastelands in the build somewhere alongside RiP, Pithing Needle and the realization that 1 angel token is enough to kill even a good control list that is a step slow to an answer.

This is wrong on so many levels.
For Miracles to meta against Lands like you describe, it has to cut back on things it currently runs which allow it to hold its own against the rest of the meta. Also, have you tested this, or did you just make it up? Lands can answer or play around those things - they'll improve the match for Miracles, but not shore it up.

[dte]

That aggro lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established at this point. That combo lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established. I think most of the impression that Miracles suffers to opposing Control is false.

Fool: "That aggro lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established at this point:"

Infect: 8-9
Jeskai Delver: 3-4-1
Maverick: 7-2
Sultai Delver: 20-24-4
Temur Delver: 13-17-3

It seems to me that Delver decks (maybe they are not aggro decks, like shardless is not control?) CAN beat miracles.

Fool: "That combo lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established."

Dredge: 3-4-1
Elves: 18-6-2
Omnitell: 11-5
Reanimator: 7-7-3
Sneak and Show: 5-8-1
Storm: 16-12-10

It seems to me that a lot of combo lists can beat miracle. Only elves is really weak to miracle (or is it that with a 43% win-rate, storm -it's a combo deck, right?- can't beat miracle?).


Fool: "I think most of the impression that Miracles suffers to opposing Control is false."

Death and Taxes: 21-18-4
Deathblade: 8-6-2
Grixis Control: 6-9-1
Jeskai Stoneblade: 5-9-1
RG Lands: 5-10-4
Shardless Sultai: 8-15-3

The only list there that really qualifies is Grixis Control.

Sure, if you exclude every list here, saying that it's not control, it's better. It does not prevent miracle to lose to these decks. But can you please describe what you call a control deck? Because if you say that "Shardless BUG isn't a control list", I have no clue about how we discuss other control lists.


Anyway: Overall non-mirror: 256-230-50.
If miracle cannot be beaten by aggro nor combo lists and have an edge against opposing controls (which do not exist), These 47% matches that miracle loses, it's against what?

[FoolofaTook]

...Which kick's Miacles' ass!

So exactly which control decks are being held back?

UW non-Miracles Control
BUG Control
Junk
RUG Control (yes, actually existed with Natural Order until Terminus came along, would exist again in a heartbeat if Terminus or SDT was banned)
Various Thopter builds (not as efficient on defense and 4/4 Angels that you can produce with Brainstorm even through a Null Rod are better)

Many, many more, I'm not going to go digging through historical results of just a couple of years ago to make the point that a single mechanic - Miracles - invalidated a wide spectrum of control strategies that were employed in a much more diverse meta.

For all the people saying "power creep, get over it" just realize that if they printed a 20/20 shroud creature with flying who cast for 3 with some easily achievable hoops to jump through the same argument would apply.

There's power creep and then there's flat-out overpowered and format stifling as a result. Miracles has at least 3 cards in it that are in the latter category when combined.

[Dice_Box]

I forget because remembering the fun I had playing it makes me cry, but what was Goblins classified as and how was it's match against Miracles?

[FoolofaTook]

Fool: "That aggro lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established at this point:"

Infect: 8-9
Jeskai Delver: 3-4-1
Maverick: 7-2
Sultai Delver: 20-24-4
Temur Delver: 13-17-3

It seems to me that Delver decks (maybe they are not aggro decks, like shardless is not control?) CAN beat miracles.

Fool: "That combo lists can't beat Miracles is pretty well established."

Dredge: 3-4-1
Elves: 18-6-2
Omnitell: 11-5
Reanimator: 7-7-3
Sneak and Show: 5-8-1
Storm: 16-12-10

It seems to me that a lot of combo lists can beat miracle. Only elves is really weak to miracle (or is it that with a 43% win-rate, storm -it's a combo deck, right?- can't beat miracle?).


Fool: "I think most of the impression that Miracles suffers to opposing Control is false."

Death and Taxes: 21-18-4
Deathblade: 8-6-2
Grixis Control: 6-9-1
Jeskai Stoneblade: 5-9-1
RG Lands: 5-10-4
Shardless Sultai: 8-15-3




Sure, if you exclude every list here, saying that it's not control, it's better. It does not prevent miracle to lose to these decks. But can you please describe what you call a control deck? Because if you say that "Shardless BUG isn't a control list", I have no clue about how we discuss other control lists.


Anyway: Overall non-mirror: 256-230-50.
If miracle cannot be beaten by aggro nor combo lists and have an edge against opposing controls (which do not exist), These 47% matches that miracle loses, it's against what?

Miracles piloted by a mediocre player is a 40/60 list. A lot of mediocre players pilot Miracles. It has a long learning curve and when you make mistakes you lose games. Obviously the information isn't out there to validate this but we all know it's true.

We also know that the aggro lists you listed are a vanishingly small percentage of what aggro really is. They're all blue shell lists except Maverick, which i would argue is an aggro control list and clearly Maverick, which is the best of the non-blue aggro control lists can't keep up with Miracles.

The combo lists you listed are also blue shell with a couple of exceptions, one being Dredge which is an outlier that people do not plan to face at this point, and the other being Elves which Miracles walks all over.

The Control lists are more blue shell with the exception of Death and Taxes, which Miracles beats more often than not, and RG Lands which again is an outlier that is hard for anybody to beat without having a really dedicated SB plan to achieve that.

Miracles sits so hard on non-blue aggro, combo and control that those lists have mostly been pushed out of the meta or into irrelevance if they're occasionally played. More than any other list in the meta Miracles is responsible for the move to a full blue shell meta. It is the primary predator that pushes non-blue lists out.

[FoolofaTook]

I forget because remembering the fun I had playing it makes me cry, but what was Goblins classified as and how was it's match against Miracles?

I believe Goblins has declined over the last 4 years because the ultimate turn has moved from 4 to 3, or maybe verging on 2 at this point. Burn has also declined over that timespan but it shares enough common cards with Modern Burn that it is a reasonable buy for a player coming into Legacy.

I don't think Goblins was pushed out by Terminus. I think it was pushed out gradually by Terminus, Delver of Secrets, a bunch of good blue cantrips, Tarmogoyf (it was a big deal for the blue shell when Goyf was printed if you remember) and a few key counters and removal that were printed from 2009 onwards.

I think Goblins could come back with just a few bans and be very effective. It's gained Rabblemaster to give additional mid-game power options, the problem is the mid-game is a turn earlier than it used to be. I actually think Goblins could be very effective right now in the right meta but it's one of the lists that the blue shell squats on and so it is hard to find that meta.

[Teluin]

Obviously the information isn't out there to validate this but we all know it's true.

Ever since that dude with the pony avatar left, you've consistently been the worst poster on these forums and it's because of shit such as this. Stop talking about things you don't know about as if they were fact. New Legacy players are bound to come here and they might not know you're talking out of your ass, whether it be about 'stats' or your numerous misunderstandings about a mechanic and/or the general rules of the game.

[Barook]

Let's examine this more closely. Here are the stats for Miracles matches at major events post TC ban:


Top contender my ass!



Fortunately I've brought stats on Miracles vs other control decks (including control-ish midrange decks):

• vs Grixis Control: 6-9-1
• vs RG Lands: 5-10-4
• vs MUD: 1-3
• vs Shardless Sultai: 8-15-3
• vs Deathblade: 8-6-2
• vs Death and Taxes: 21-18-4

Apparently Miracles is bad against most of these decks, and hardly crippling against the others! The suggestion that Miracles is keeping other control decks down is baseless and false. The biggest factor keeping other control decks down is the $800.00 price tag on Tabernacle.

I never said that Miracles had the highest win percentage. (that one goes to RG Lands, due to lack of metagaming against it. Plus, broader playerbase --> more bad people playing the deck --> lower overall win percentage compared to a few "experts" piloting the deck.)

My statement still stands:

http://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/legacy#online
http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?form...y&fecha=2015-3
http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?form...y&fecha=2015-4
http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?form...y&fecha=2015-5

[Crimhead]

Miracles piloted by a mediocre player is a 40/60 list. A lot of mediocre players pilot Miracles. It has a long learning curve and when you make mistakes you lose games.

And this only applies to Miracles? As though Miracles results are held back by mediocre pilots, but never propped up by mediocre opponents?

What you are doing is dismissing swaths of hard data from tournaments on the grounds that maybe the players on one side of those matches might have been weak. Can't blame you for trying, I guess.

Plus, broader playerbase --> more bad people playing the deck --> lower overall win percentage compared to a few "experts" piloting the deck.)

Where is the evidence than newer/weaker players gravitate to popular decks more so than good players or average players?

Plus, broader playerbase --> more bad people playing the deck --> lower overall win percentage compared to a few "experts" piloting the deck.)
My statement still stands:

http://www.mtggoldfish.com/metagame/legacy#online
http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?form...y&fecha=2015-3
http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?form...y&fecha=2015-4
http://tcdecks.net/metagame.php?form...y&fecha=2015-5

These stats don't measure a deck's power. They measure it's prevalence, which is a function of it's power and of it's representation. Your statement was that Miracles has been a top performing deck. It has not. Your data shows only it's successes but not it's failures, which are as much a apart of the decks overall performance.

Let me put it this way:

1. I play 100 poker tournaments in a year, and win 10. You play 50 and win only eight. I'm obviously a stronger player!
2. More kids with IQ between 101 and 115 graduate every year than kids with an IQ over 140. Clearly kids with just-above-average intelligence out perform geniuses!

I hope you see the flaws with this "logic". In (1), we should compare our wins in proportion to our entrants. If we do, we see the whole picture, and realise that you are a stronger player. In (2), we should compare the number of graduates from each group against the number of drop-outs, and we'll see that geniuses actually graduate at higher rates.

The data you site counts only the total number of Miracles top8s, and doesn't consider this in proportion. It therefore does not support your position any more than the bogus arguments I gave above support their bogus (and preposterous) conclusions.

There is a reason in baseball they look at batting average instead of total hits. They want to compare batters' rates of hitting, not total hits over a varying number of attempts! I hope you understand why.

[Julian23]

My little spies tell me there's a "banless" Legacy tournament at GP Chiba this weekend. Not sure what exactly that means, but it should be fun to see the results of it

[supremePINEAPPLE]

I think miracles just need an errata. They shouldn't let you miracles a sorcery card on an opponent's turn.

I was thinking about something like this as well. Lands was brought back into the fold partially by a rules change.

That's definitely a perilous knob to try and tune the format with though. I think that would be a narrow enough change to not ripple outside of miracles but it would also effectively kill the current miracles deck which is a bummer. I don't think that it should be banned out of the format, just weakened.

Show and tell can suck it though.

[Barook]

Where is the evidence than newer/weaker players gravitate to popular decks more so than good players or average players?

It's a matter of Gauss distribution. The more players play a deck, the more likely it becomes that the results are going to average out since there are more average than top players.

These stats don't measure a deck's power. They measure it's prevalence, which is a function of it's power and of it's representation. Your statement was that Miracles has been a top performing deck. It has not. Your data shows only it's successes but not it's failures, which are as much a apart of the decks overall performance.

I get where you coming from, but that was not my point because you're too fixated on your definition of "performace". Call it prelevance, performance, whatever. The top tables are crowded with Miracles and not other control decks and I don't think it's just a matter of herd mentality.

Take the latest Open for example: The field was roughly 10% Miracles on Day 2, yet 7 decks placed in the Top 32 (22%). I take "prevalence" over raw win percentages every day as long as the sample size is too small like the RG Lands player pool.

E.g. when Tom Ross was pretty much the only player who played Infect and roflstomped the SCG Invitational twice in a row, the deck should have a pretty insane win-ratio. But that doesn't mean it's the best deck in the format. Other people who pick up the deck and aren't as experienced as the "deck expert" Tom Ross won't replicate the same performance or win percentage. Otherwise the Top 8s would be choke-full with Infect decks.

[Dice_Box]

My little spies tell me there's a "banless" Legacy tournament at GP Chiba this weekend. Not sure what exactly that means, but it should be fun to see the results of it

http://www.hareruyamtg.com/gp/en/#event_schedule

■Banless Legacy
Entry Fee ¥1,000
Registration 15:30～16:00
Format Legacy, Swiss Tournament
REL Casual
Prizes Winner earns a Foil Mythic Rare Uncut-Sheet of Modern Masters(2015 Edition), 2nd and 3rd place earn Foil Rare Uncut-Sheet of Modern Masters(2015 Edition).
Other prizes awarded to top players in accordance with performance.
Notes
All cards banned in Legacy( Legacy Banned List ) are un-banned except for these cards:

・"Ante" Cards: Amulet of Quoz, Bronze Tablet, Contract from Below, Darkpact, Demonic Attorney, Jeweled Bird, Rebirth, Tempest Efreet, Timmerian Fiends
・"Conspiracy" Cards: Advantageous Proclamation, Backup Plan, Brago's Favor, Double Stroke, Immediate Action, Iterative Analysis, Muzzio's Preparations, Power Play, Secret Summoning, Secrets of Paradise, Sentinel Dispatch, Unexpected Potential, Worldknit
・"Power 9": Ancestral Recall, Time Walk, Timetwister, Black Lotus, Mox Pearl, Mox Sapphire, Mox Jet, Mox Ruby, Mox Emerald
・"Manual Dexterity", "Subgame"Cards: Chaos Orb, Falling Star, Shahrazad
These cards are still banned.

Wow. Wish I was there. Want to know what I could do with MUD playing Shops, Sol rings, Crypts and Vaults.

[iamajellydonut]

So, 100% MUD?

[Barook]

http://www.hareruyamtg.com/gp/en/#event_schedule
Wow. Wish I was there. Want to know what I could do with MUD playing Shops, Sol rings, Crypts and Vaults.

That sounds pretty hilarious. 4x Shops, 4x Sol Ring, 4x Crypt, 4 Mana Vault with 4x Trinisphere should be pretty good. Oh yeah, also 4x Time Vault combo.

But there are also other competitors like Bazaar Dredge or whatever crazy crap you could do with 4x Fastbond or 4xYawgWin.

[Dice_Box]

So, 100% MUD?

I do not think so. You have a lot of options with Tinker, Bargain and Will in storm, crazy other brews with Balance (which I really think is only effective when you have 4) and some other toys. I would play MUD though because I think Shops is the most powerful deck in Vintage. But hell, think of this mana base: 4 of Shops, Acadamy, 8 SOL lands, Sol Ring, Vault and 2 Crypt (I would not run 4). Even as a Vintage Shops player, that is a mana base to envy. So much wrong with that it's just not funny. You could drop City for Factory and I would still call that overly stable and totally broken. Fuck I want to play this. So busted.

As a test I like it, I can not see how much real testing you would do with that kind of deck running around though.

Edit:

That sounds pretty hilarious. 4x Shops, 4x Sol Ring, 4x Crypt, 4 Mana Vault with 4x Trinisphere should be pretty good. Oh yeah, also 4x Time Vault combo.

But there are also other competitors like Bazaar Dredge or whatever crazy crap you could do with 4x Fastbond or 4xYawgWin.

Oh yea, I know. Fuck I want to be there so much. If I had of known this was a thing I would have bought tickets. I mean its only like 6 hours away. Wow.

Edit again:
Jar. Tinker. Will. Bargain. Fuck yes. I like broken things.

[btm10]

Yeah, this just seems like a totally reasonable format. Shops is probably the "right" deck, but I'd have a hard time passing on 4 Fastbond, 4 Gush, 4 Scroll.