All B/R update speculation.

[Crimhead]

Maybe we should have a separate thread for complaining about this thread?

[Ace/Homebrew]

Valid points DB.

But what Lemnear said is true.
When I get to the point you are currently at, I take a break from this thread. When I'm feeling masochistic I check it again.

Take a break. Things will be exactly the same when you return.

[Crimhead]

I don't think so. The point of playing aggro was never to beat combo, that should be well understood. The point of playing it was to beat up on blue decks that were geared more towards beating combo and/or each other. The problems with the format have a lot to do with blue decks getting to the point where they could beat aggro AS WELL AS combo. Thus, the part of blue predator is now filled primarily by fringe prison decks like Lands and MUD (and of course DnT, which is widely considered a control deck despite its high creature count).

While I don't think we can equate all blue decks in the context of having the same predators, I also don't think aggro decks are inherently healthier than prison decks; they are in many ways less interactive. Lands would be less fringy if Tabernacle had been printed in Chronicles, 4th, and 5th. But it would help to have more decks for this. I think unbanning Earthcraft would be a step in the right direction, giving Enchantress a chance to possibly breathe again.

As for aggro, 2011 saw the printings of Delver and Baterskull, and I think this is when pure aggro began to really decline. They just couldn't keep up with the delver/tempo decks or midrange/stoneblade decks. Since then, those aggro control decks have only gotten more goodies, while Merfolk and Zoo have gotten almost nothing. Goblins is a moot point, because it became a midrange deck. That leaves Burn and Affinity.

Burn will likely never make a huge splash. Good players rarely want to play it, so it would require exceptional results to attract such players. A deck that is more interesting (personally I love Burn) only needs to show promising results to attract good players. Once it has good players, it gets better results, more good players, etc. Think Infect. Burn get stalled at the promising results phase, and never gets past. Too many more good players won't bother till it really proves itself, which it won't ever do without attracting more good players. Just a theory. Maybe a 4 damage Lava Spike would help? I don't think Burn can be fixed by the banned list.

Affinity needs Black Vise IMO, and that's all there is to it! I'm not sure it would be enough - its terribly inconsistent - but it could give the deck a shot (a more burny version with Atog, Fling, Shrapnel, etc).

[Barook]

While I don't think we can equate all blue decks in the context of having the same predators, I also don't think aggro decks are inherently healthier than prison decks; they are in many ways less interactive. Lands would be less fringy if Tabernacle had been printed in Chronicles, 4th, and 5th. But it would help to have more decks for this. I think unbanning Earthcraft would be a step in the right direction, giving Enchantress a chance to possibly breathe again.

As for aggro, 2011 saw the printings of Delver and Baterskull, and I think this is when pure aggro began to really decline. They just couldn't keep up with the delver/tempo decks or midrange/stoneblade decks. Since then, those aggro control decks have only gotten more goodies, while Merfolk and Zoo have gotten almost nothing. Goblins is a moot point, because it became a midrange deck. That leaves Burn and Affinity.

Burn will likely never make a huge splash. Good players rarely want to play it, so it would require exceptional results to attract such players. A deck that is more interesting (personally I love Burn) only needs to show promising results to attract good players. Once it has good players, it gets better results, more good players, etc. Think Infect. Burn get stalled at the promising results phase, and never gets past. Too many more good players won't bother till it really proves itself, which it won't ever do without attracting more good players. Just a theory. Maybe a 4 damage Lava Spike would help? I don't think Burn can be fixed by the banned list.

Affinity needs Black Vise IMO, and that's all there is to it! I'm not sure it would be enough - its terribly inconsistent - but it could give the deck a shot (a more burny version with Atog, Fling, Shrapnel, etc).

I don't get why people always relate Batterskull to the death of aggro. Kill the SFM before it gets active, job done.

Delver is the one that did the real damage, while Avacyn Restored was the nail in the coffin with Terminus and Griselbrand.

[Crimhead]

I don't get why people always relate Batterskull to the death of aggro. Kill the SFM before it gets active, job done.

Delver is the one that did the real damage, while Avacyn Restored was the nail in the coffin with Terminus and Griselbrand.

Against aggro (especially Burn) pulling a Jitte is a better plan usually. Its not Batterskull itself that's good vs the aggro decks. Rather the card was catalystic in the development of a set of decks (Stoneblade variants) which outclass aggro by other means. This is my understanding.

Tempo decks got a big boost around the same time (Delver). But I think the Blade decks were overall not good for aggro either.

[sjmcc13]

I don't get why people always relate Batterskull to the death of aggro. Kill the SFM before it gets active, job done.

You have 1 turn to kill the SFM, These deck are meant to protect SFM so they will be playing cards in their deck to protect it (FoW, Daze, etc), and most creature aggro strategies are light on removal. So you can not always kill it first. There is a good chance they will have more answers then the aggro deck has removal.
I do think Jitte is probably better in most cases against Aggro, and it is more a case that Batterskull allowed the deck to exist in the first place, then Batterskull itself stops aggro.

[MGB]

You have 1 turn to kill the SFM, These deck are meant to protect SFM so they will be playing cards in their deck to protect it (FoW, Daze, etc), and most creature aggro strategies are light on removal. So you can not always kill it first. There is a good chance they will have more answers then the aggro deck has removal.
I do think Jitte is probably better in most cases against Aggro, and it is more a case that Batterskull allowed the deck to exist in the first place, then Batterskull itself stops aggro.

It's not like Batterskull by itself is insurmountable to Aggro decks. It's still only a 4/4 lifelink... you can get bigger than it / go around it, and/or you can simply remove it with artifact destruction. And if you have bigger blockers, the Batterskull can't attack so it's just a stalemate at that point. There are options for Aggro decks when Batterskull hits the table. It's not an auto-loss by any means.

Getting Terminus'd for one white mana, however, is very hard to come back from unless you have some kind of card draw in your deck, which alot of aggro decks don't have.

[Star|Scream]

Maybe we should have a separate thread for complaining about this thread?

lol Ban the thread!

[Crimhead]

Getting Terminus'd for one white mana, however, is very hard to come back from unless you have some kind of card draw in your deck, which alot of aggro decks don't have.

Linear aggro had a foot in the grave before Terminus was ever printed. Banning Terminus will not restore the glory of pure aggro! Regardless, Miracles is the only thing in the format even resembling the old draw/go style control deck. It's unique, and not dominating the field by a stretch. Killing one play style to prop up another (even though it won't) is either arbitrary or biased; neither of these being good principles for a banned list.

[sjmcc13]

Getting Terminus'd for one white mana, however, is very hard to come back from unless you have some kind of card draw in your deck, which alot of aggro decks don't have.

If Terminus is killing aggro decks, then they do not know how to play around sweepers, and need to learn how to tell when they are over extending. You have to adapt your game plan to the deck type you are facing. In general you go all out against a combo deck as you are need to race them, against a sweeper using control deck you need to play just enough to force them to use their sweeper, which is not everything and the proper amount of pressure to place can vary from game to game, then drop more threats to finish the job.

Aggro decks have Cavern of Souls (from the same set as Terminus) as well as Aether Vial to give Counterbalance and FoW the finger, Miracles (really any counter backed control strategy) does not have enough control cards left without a strong sweeper and Terminus is the only one that is strong and fast enough for Legacy. They try making others, and they all suck. The next best one is what Toxic Deluge, and the life loss severely weakens it as you can not top deck it and stabalize the turn before you are killed like you can with a real sweeper.

Also can people stop lying about Terminus being a 1 mana sweeper, It is not, reliably activating it effect requires an investment of multiple mana and cards, it only looks like a 1 mana card if you ignore EVERY bit of set up that goes into casting it for its miracle cost. the best case scenario for Terminus if before turn BS and put it on top, draw for turn and miracle, which requires 2 cards, 2 mana and 2 turns, and instant speed activation will almost always require an investment of 3+ mana to set up and cast as you need something to put it on top, something to draw it and 1 for the terminus itself. Best case tehre is SDT, Spin SDT, put it on top and use SDT to draw a card, cast Terminus, which requires 3 mana and 2 cards, though the investment can be spread out over multiple turns. The only point Miracles costs 1 mana is if you draw it of a shuffled and 100% randomized deck with a plains in play and at the point you want to cast it, which is blind luck, and completely unreliable. If you want to discuss casting Terminus with ANY amount of intellectual honesty you need to include the all the hoops the player has to jump through as 1 mana WoG sounds bad, untill you look at what the player actually needs to do in order to pull that off.

[Kanti]

If Terminus is killing aggro decks, then they do not know how to play around sweepers, and need to learn how to tell when they are over extending. You have to adapt your game plan to the deck type you are facing.

Just when I thought I read it all. Somebody trying to explain to us that Terminus isn't really that bad, and we are just overextending into the Wrath. Duh! I'm such an idiot, all this time I've been emptying my hand hoping my opponent would 1-for-1 with me with Bolts and STPs the whole game.

Poor Miracle players, having to jump through all these hoops to cast his Termninus. It's not like SDT or Brainstorm, two 4s-of in the deck, and to a lesses extent Ponder does the work for you. 3 mana, but it can be spread throughout the turns. And unlike old aggro decks where you could win the die roll and have lethal on t4 unless your opponent was interacting with you, never letting him cast his Wrath, I just get wrecked now on t3+ at instant speed. Sending my creatures to the graveyard so I can recur them, use them to delve something out, or cast something silly like Second Sunrise to get em' back? Oh, bottom of library... but I thought only that weird 5cc Wrath... what's it called Hallowe- oh whatever, I'm putting my creatures on the bottom.

Stoneforge into Batterskull would be annoying, but lets be real here. Merfolk have Islandwalk, Goblins run a Tuk-Tuk or TSH main-deck and 4 Goblin Matrons, and Zoo has been using a 3-4of Qasali Pridemage for the last couple of years. This isn't even counting killing the Stoneforge with a Bolt, STP, or Tarfire, all cards these aggro decks in question run, or bouncing the germ with a Vapor Snag or Echoing Truth if you're Merfolk.

So remember guys, if you're having a tough time against Terminus as aggro, well it's easy... just LEARN TO PLAY. Stop forgetting to adapt your gameplan to the deck you're facing.

I don't think you would be capable of reading anything intellectual, honestly. How's that for your intellectual honesty?

[Barook]

Linear aggro had a foot in the grave before Terminus was ever printed. Banning Terminus will not restore the glory of pure aggro! Regardless, Miracles is the only thing in the format even resembling the old draw/go style control deck. It's unique, and not dominating the field by a stretch. Killing one play style to prop up another (even though it won't) is either arbitrary or biased; neither of these being good principles for a banned list.

Zoo and Merfolk were both still very alive and kicking during the Mental Misstep era. The 1-2-3 punch of Delver, Terminus and S&T as a viable strategy thanks to Griselbrand certainly did its job to give aggro a hard time.

If Terminus is killing aggro decks, then they do not know how to play around sweepers, and need to learn how to tell when they are over extending. You have to adapt your game plan to the deck type you are facing. In general you go all out against a combo deck as you are need to race them, against a sweeper using control deck you need to play just enough to force them to use their sweeper, which is not everything and the proper amount of pressure to place can vary from game to game, then drop more threats to finish the job.

Aggro decks have Cavern of Souls (from the same set as Terminus) as well as Aether Vial to give Counterbalance and FoW the finger, Miracles (really any counter backed control strategy) does not have enough control cards left without a strong sweeper and Terminus is the only one that is strong and fast enough for Legacy. They try making others, and they all suck. The next best one is what Toxic Deluge, and the life loss severely weakens it as you can not top deck it and stabalize the turn before you are killed like you can with a real sweeper.

Also can people stop lying about Terminus being a 1 mana sweeper, It is not, reliably activating it effect requires an investment of multiple mana and cards, it only looks like a 1 mana card if you ignore EVERY bit of set up that goes into casting it for its miracle cost. the best case scenario for Terminus if before turn BS and put it on top, draw for turn and miracle, which requires 2 cards, 2 mana and 2 turns, and instant speed activation will almost always require an investment of 3+ mana to set up and cast as you need something to put it on top, something to draw it and 1 for the terminus itself. Best case tehre is SDT, Spin SDT, put it on top and use SDT to draw a card, cast Terminus, which requires 3 mana and 2 cards, though the investment can be spread out over multiple turns. The only point Miracles costs 1 mana is if you draw it of a shuffled and 100% randomized deck with a plains in play and at the point you want to cast it, which is blind luck, and completely unreliable. If you want to discuss casting Terminus with ANY amount of intellectual honesty you need to include the all the hoops the player has to jump through as 1 mana WoG sounds bad, untill you look at what the player actually needs to do in order to pull that off.

The key part is here that you can spread it the mana investment over several turns, and you aren't just setting up Terminus, but other cards as well in the process. No matter how you look at it, Terminus is way too effective because it's way too cheap. Wrath-type effects, unlike other, more conditional sweepers, cost a minimum of 4 mana for good reason and Terminus completely shat on that, including counterplay with Indestructible.

[Crimhead]

The key part is here that you can spread it the mana investment over several turns, and you aren't just setting up Terminus, but other cards as well in the process.

People complain about control decks as though they always have all the resources they need to shut down the opponent however they need to. Yes, Miracles has the deck manipulation to make Terminus playable. That doesn't mean that setting up terminus doesn't tie up the Miracles player's resources, or that it's 100% reliable and has no opportunity cost.

No matter how you look at it, Terminus is way too effective because it's way too cheap. Wrath-type effects, unlike other, more conditional sweepers, cost a minimum of 4 mana for good reason and Terminus completely shat on that, including counterplay with Indestructible.

Note that none of those wraths are playable in Legacy. You think wrath effects should be costed so high they are unplayable? You just don't think we should have playable wraths, I guess.

And I'd like to express a contrary POV as to Terminus being "way too effective". Miracles is not dominating Legacy! MTG top8 lists it as 11% of the meta for the past two months (much less than Jund, in its heyday). Reddit lists Miracles with an average 53% win-rate, calculating all matches at SCG events since the TC ban. The only "evidence" for Miracles being oppressive is the absence of two decks which were tier two already before Miracles became an established deck. WotC doesn't ban cards because decks have bad matches or get pushed out of the meta. They ban cards when individual archetypes become too strong vs the rest of the field.

Zoo and Merfolk were both still very alive and kicking during the Mental Misstep era. The 1-2-3 punch of Delver, Terminus and S&T as a viable strategy thanks to Griselbrand certainly did its job to give aggro a hard time.

Your going all the way back t the MM era to show me when aggro was still tier one? I don't recall Zoo weathering MM well, but that's not the point.

Regardless, since Delver and the innovation of Stoneblade decks, aggro has had less a niche. Aggro-control decks are just as good vs control but better vs combo. In order to chose pure aggro instead, you would need a very strong match against aggro-control hybrids themselves to compensate, and aggro decks don't normally have that. Burn flirts with the top tier from time to time, but that's about it.

[Barook]

Note that none of those wraths are playable in Legacy. You think wrath effects should be costed so high they are unplayable? You just don't think we should have playable wraths, I guess.

Supreme Verdict sees Legacy play.

[Crimhead]

Supreme Verdict sees Legacy play.

I forgot that one. To be fair it is only barely playable.

I sympathise with you, and would also welcome linear aggro (mostly Merfolk, Burn, or Affinity, Zoonis dull and was looking more and more like Maverick in the later days). But I cannot advocate burning down Miracles just to restore a couple decks to their former tier-two glory. Before Miracles, most of us felt that both pure aggro and pure control were all but dead. At least we have one of those styles thriving now.

Unbanning Black Vise is the way to go for aggro.

[Quasim0ff]

I forgot that one. To be fair it is only barely playable.

I sympathise with you, and would also welcome linear aggro (mostly Merfolk, Burn, or Affinity, Zoonis dull and was looking more and more like Maverick in the later days). But I cannot advocate burning down Miracles just to restore a couple decks to their former tier-two glory. Before Miracles, most of us felt that both pure aggro and pure control were all but dead. At least we have one of those styles thriving now.

Unbanning Black Vise is the way to go for aggro.

No, Supreme Verdict isn't "barely playable". It's a pretty standard card, that actually sees a fair amount of play (in Miracles).

[Crimhead]

No, Supreme Verdict isn't "barely playable". It's a pretty standard card, that actually sees a fair amount of play (in Miracles).

Let me be specific then. It sees occasional (but not frequent) play as a 1-of in the side board of a deck that needs 4x Terminus to be competitive in the first place.

This corner case does not show that 4cc is the right cost for wraths in this format! Saying that wrath effects should cost 4cc is basically saying we don't want them in today's fast-paced Legacy.

[Quasim0ff]

Let me be specific then. It sees occasional (but not frequent) play as a 1-of in the side board of a deck that needs 4x Terminus to be competitive in the first place.

Saying that wrath effects should cost 4cc is basically saying we don't want them in today's fast-paced Legacy.

No, Supreme Verdict sees play in a fair amount of Miracles lists, in the maindeck, as a substitute for the 4th terminus in a meta where Delver and Stoneblade is dominant.

[Crimhead]

No, Supreme Verdict sees play in a fair amount of Miracles lists, in the maindeck, as a substitute for the 4th terminus in a meta where Delver and Stoneblade is dominant.

I dont see much evidence of main-deck play in successful lists.

2015-05-23 Worcester:

• 8th place - 1 copy (side board)
• 10th place - none
• 12th place - none

05/16 Dallas 5K Premier IQ:

• 5th place - none
• 7th place - 1 copy (main)
• 8th place - none
• 11th place - none
• 12th place - none

05/02 Portland 5K Premier IQ:

• 1st place - none
• 2nd place - none

04/25 Cleveland 5K Premier IQ:

• 2nd place - none
• 3rd place - none
• 4th place - none
• 9th place - none
• 14th place - 1 copy (side board)

Ovino Spring 2015 Milan:

• 2nd place - none
• 5th/8th place (rogue u/w control) - 1 copy (side board)

Grand Prix Kyoto 2015:

• 1st place - none

Looks pretty fringy to me! I didn't ever say the card is completely unplayable! I said it is barely playable; and evidence supports that it barely sees competitive play. Three copies spread over seventeen successful Miracles lists hardly constitutes a "fair amount of play". Did I miss a copy somewhere?

Again, Miracles is a deck that wouldn't exist without Terminus! Your argument in no way supports that wraths would see Legacy play if they all cost 4cc or more! Let's not lose context.

[Admiral_Arzar]

Supreme Verdict sees more play in Stoneblade variants than it does in Miracles, the reasons for that should be obvious. To say it is "unplayable" is demonstrably incorrect. To say it's usually only a one-of in Miracles is fine, but misses larger context.