All B/R update speculation.

[nedleeds]

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.

At GP Mental Misstep (referenced below) a zoo deck and a merfolk deck (2 non brainstorm aggro decks) made top 8. ~ May 30th 2011. You could dig around and see if zoo was doing well in SCGs and euro-events. Looking back I find it hard to believe that zoo deck got through a field with 80% + Misstep usage, but he had a little more 2CC+ burn to punish people interested in Shocking themselves early.

Let's look at the inception of split legacy, by Brainstorm deck I actually mean a deck with 4 Brainstorms here.

GP Philly 2005 (38%)

3 Brainstorm decks, Brainstorm makes a 12 card appearance.

GP Lille 2006 (50%)

4 Brainstorm decks, 16 card appearance.

GP Columbus 2007 (63%)

5 Brainstorm fueled decks (including 3 flash combo decks, 3 was enough to get Flash banned) 20 appearances.

GP Chicago 2009 (50%)

4 Brainstorm decks, 16 out of 32.

GP Madrid 2010 (63%)

5 Brainstorm decks, Entomb is legal as well, 20 appearances.

GP Columbus 2010 (63%)

5 Brainstorm decks, now we're getting warm.

GP Providence 2011 (75%) heating up!

6 Brainstorm decks at GP Mental Misstep

follow this trend and it's 28/32 at Paris, 32/32 Kyoto and so on.

... also of note 7 of 8 on Mental Misstep was sufficient to get that POS banned ... and then it's all downhill, there's a double DNT / Merfolk top 8 but it's pretty much been a fucking Brainstorm orgy since.

[Julian23]

Crimhead, this isn't MTG Salvation. My team's research has brought to my attention that you served 9 years there. You did your time and you seem like an overall nice dude, but ever since you started posting here, the general pattern I see a lot with you is: "Make a claim that is objectively wrong" - "People point it out" - "You renounce/change your claim".

Props to you for pretty much every time you were wrong admitting to it; seriously, we really need more of that attitude. That's why I think your a really nice dude. It's just that everywhere I look, there's a high probability of your claims being poorly researched. I'm not a mod, so you're free to just take this as a "whatever, dude" comment. Just wanted to point this out, because you seem really interested in actually discussing things, which I appreciate a lot.

[Crimhead]

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.

You're right, it sees occasional one-of play in two decks! I had to dig back to March (Richmond) to find an (11th places) u/w Blade deck with more than one copy. There haven't been a lot off Blade decks lately. Deathblade doesn't run SV, while Patriot runs zero or one.


Instead of nit-picking, let's get a little context! My wrath comments are in response to this:

Wrath-type effects, unlike other, more conditional sweepers, cost a minimum of 4 mana for good reason...

My point is that those 4cc sweepers are generally too cost intensive for this format - certainly too much to prop up a stack-style control deck. Showing me a deck or two that sometimes (but not always or usually) run a singleton doesn't really refute my point. It's nit-picking.

For a wrath to see substantial play, it needs to be cheap enough for a deck to rely on it. 4cc wraths don't qualify. The 4cc standard excludes wrath effects as a strategy in this format. Judging Legacy-staple card costs based on other formats is silly and not grounds for banning consideration. Stifle can be 1cc LD in this format. Doesn't make it broken.

At GP Mental Misstep (referenced below) a zoo deck and a merfolk deck (2 non brainstorm aggro decks) made top 8. ~ May 30th 2011. You could dig around and see if zoo was doing well in SCGs and euro-events. Looking back I find it hard to believe that zoo deck got through a field with 80% + Misstep usage, but he had a little more 2CC+ burn to punish people interested in Shocking themselves early.

May 30th 2011, MM has been legal for what, two weeks? Usually it takes time for a meta to shift, no? I wasn't following stats at the time, but my impression was that aggro (along with most decks in the format) became marginalised in that meta.

As I said, whether or not aggro thrived during MM isn't the point. The point is that by AR aggro was already tier two (meaning we cannot blame Miracles for a lack of aggro).

Crimhead, this isn't MTG Salvation. My team's research has brought to my attention that you served 9 years there.

This is a little creepy - why do you want to research my background? But I am aware what site I'm on, thanks.

but ever since you started posting here, the general pattern I see a lot with you is: "Make a claim that is objectively wrong" - "People point it out" - "You renounce/change your claim".

Exactly how a healthy debate should look!
For the record, my flub regrading probability theory was technically correct - just irrelevant! The fellow I was arguing against was "objectively wrong". Most anything else I've been called on has been either an overlooked (and irrelevant) exception, or simply a matter of semantics.

Props to you for pretty much every time you were wrong admitting to it; seriously, we really need more of that attitude.

Why do we debate if we don't want to learn? Your right we could use more of this attitude - case and point you won't admit when I've been right!

That's why I think your a really nice dude. It's just that everywhere I look, there's a high probability of your claims being poorly researched.

I can't tell if you are being passive aggressive - I'm a nice guy but I'm full of shit? Go ahead and check my sources. If you can't be bothered feel free to ignore my posts .

[Ace/Homebrew]

This is a little creepy - why do you want to research my background?

I'm not sure how much 'research' was required...
I (just now) typed 'Crimhead' into Google. The 3rd entry was "crimhead's Profile - Members - MTG Salvation". Clicking there tells you "Member for 9 years, 10 months, and 5 days."

Looks like 30 out of 37 of your posts are in this thread, which is basically a thread where the same X people argue in circles over shit they cannot control and have no influence over. A new face with a high post-per-day ratio is going to get noticed.

Julian appears to be using humor where Dice_Box fell victim to exasperation.

We have people joining the site now just to post in this fucking place, the only reason they are here. we have the same old shit going round and round offering no positive effect (or any real effect) at all. This is not some toilet bowl collecting the shit, this is the bowels making it.

I assume he's talking about you?

[MGB]

So.... anyway...

Here's something to ponder:

What if Dig Through Time is having the same effect on Legacy right now that Treasure Cruise used to have? Is there maybe some impetus to ban DTT at this point?

The #1 Control deck is playing 2-4 Digs. The #1 Combo deck is playing 4 Digs. The #1 Aggro-Control deck now (Grixis Delver) is playing usually 4 Digs.

The most recent SCG PIQ (http://sales.starcitygames.com/deckd...ion=Show+Decks) featured 2 Digs at #1, 4 Digs at #2, 3 Digs at #4, 1 Dig at #5, 4 Digs at #6, and 2 Digs at #8.

Treasure Cruise was strong, but Dig is starting to become even more prevalent than Treasure Cruise ever was.

[iamajellydonut]

Treasure Cruise was strong, but Dig is starting to become even more prevalent than Treasure Cruise ever was.

"More prevalent", regardless of whether it's true or not, is utterly irrelevant. Dig Through Time, to the best of my knowledge, has not pushed anything out of the format. That is the important part. It is simply a good and popular card. No deck has been deemed or made unplayable by the introduction of Dig Through Time. In fact, as you pointed out, it has actually introduced two and a half new decks to the format.

A point can be made that it hasn't visibly affected the format because the dominant portion of Legacy is blue anyway, but the truth is that non-blue decks don't really care much about Dig Through Time either.

[Bobmans]

A point can be made that it hasn't visibly affected the format because the dominant portion of Legacy is blue anyway, but the truth is that non-blue decks don't really care much about Dig Through Time either.

Disagree, everytime i have been on a grind against any blue deck, i have lost simply because DTT resolved and grabbed just what it needed to get out of the situation Where not having DTT winning or losing was equally balanced. For the last 2 weeks i have played 5 tournaments. And DTT was THAT card that made the difference. Basicly it outgrinds any list not playing it, simply because the combination of card quality and cardadvantage with this card is unmatched.
For me this has led me to the point where i stop playing non-blue lists and start to play a list that, well, obviously runs DTT.

[Megadeus]

Disagree, everytime i have been on a grind against any blue deck, i have lost simply because DTT resolved and grabbed just what it needed to get out of the situation Where not having DTT winning or losing was equally balanced. For the last 2 weeks i have played 5 tournaments. And DTT was THAT card that made the difference. Basicly it outgrinds any list not playing it, simply because the combination of card quality and cardadvantage with this card is unmatched.
For me this has led me to the point where i stop playing non-blue lists and start to play a list that, well, obviously runs DTT.

This. I played painter last week and got absolutely crushed by some 4 color shit box because he was simply able to easily find all of the answers. 7 red blast main didn't even help

[Crimhead]

"More prevalent", regardless of whether it's true or not, is utterly irrelevant. Dig Through Time, to the best of my knowledge, has not pushed anything out of the format. That is the important part.

Decks leave all the time. I thought the criteria was pushing one (or a small set of) decks to the point of dominance?

What if Dig Through Time is having the same effect on Legacy right now that Treasure Cruise used to have? Is there maybe some impetus to ban DTT at this point?

The official reason given for the TC ban was that U/R Delver was too strong. This is a point of contention, as in the two months preceding the ban U/R delver was a mere ~11% of major top8s, roughly the same as Patriot.

I distrust WotC to begin with. People bitch about this game a lot - I think their PR machine is more interested in damage control than in informing players about the inner workings of R&D (sometimes the two overlap and sometimes they do not).

Disagree, everytime i have been on a grind against any blue deck, i have lost simply because DTT resolved and grabbed just what it needed to get out of the situation Where not having DTT winning or losing was equally balanced. For the last 2 weeks i have played 5 tournaments. And DTT was THAT card that made the difference. Basicly it outgrinds any list not playing it, simply because the combination of card quality and card advantage with this card is unmatched.
For me this has led me to the point where i stop playing non-blue lists and start to play a list that, well, obviously runs DTT.

If you are saying that DTT has rendered blueless decks unplayable, I think data doesn't support this. As for DTT being an all-star in grindy matches, this is hardly a reason to ban the card!

I'm not sure how much 'research' was required...
I (just now) typed 'Crimhead' into Google. The 3rd entry was "crimhead's Profile - Members - MTG Salvation". Clicking there tells you "Member for 9 years, 10 months, and 5 days."

Looks like 30 out of 37 of your posts are in this thread, which is basically a thread where the same X people argue in circles over shit they cannot control and have no influence over. A new face with a high post-per-day ratio is going to get noticed.

Posting on a public forum I expect to be noticed, but not googled! No biggie, I was trying to use humour too. :)

Julian appears to be using humor where Dice_Box fell victim to exasperation.

I assume he's talking about you?

We have people joining the site now just to post in this fucking place, the only reason they are here.

If he is it's pretty funny! I've known about this site for a while, but my recent interest and increased lurking was inspired by the Elves primer (Dicebag's recommendation on Salvation), and the R/G Lands primer - his own work! Getting sucked into format discussion (on a high volume thread) was an inevitable side effect.

Dice seems very clever and is a solid contributor. In my opinion/experience he looses his cool over banned list and format health disagreements though. I guess he doesn't think I'm worthy of posting in this thread?

Edit - not really fair to assume Dice was bitching about specifically me. He used the plural 'people', and for all I know it was other new users who caused his ire.

[Varal]

Anyone got news about the banless Legacy event at GP Chiba?

[Bobmans]

If you are saying that DTT has rendered blueless decks unplayable, I think data doesn't support this. As for DTT being an all-star in grindy matches, this is hardly a reason to ban the card!

That is not what i meant. For me it has just made the edge blue decks have just a bit sharper. And i am talking about how i am experiencing it. Data may say whatever it says, but i am influenct by its impact. Also i am not advocating to ban anything other then stating what i felt.

[Crimhead]

You don't think we potentially facing a trend here?

6th place at Columbus was Grixis Control with all 24 of the spells you don't like - maybe it was more than a freak occurrence. On the other hand, 12th place Grixis Control ran no Preordains.

I'd say running that whole package is still not the norm for the deck, but it's a fairly young brew I guess. Maybe this will shape up to be the standard configuration, maybe not. Maybe there will always be a little flexibility.

http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=85811
http://sales.starcitygames.com//deck...p?DeckID=85800

[Barook]

If you are saying that DTT has rendered blueless decks unplayable, I think data doesn't support this. As for DTT being an all-star in grindy matches, this is hardly a reason to ban the card!

At what point would you consider the data relevant then? Paper is almost at 80% Brainstorm decks now, MTGO floats around 83-85%. That's higher than ever, even more than during the Mental Misstep or TC era, and a higher blue count than fucking Vintage. You can never reach 100% blue decks various reasons - card availability, cost reasons, obstinacy, having a shred of dignity left, etc.

As for Grixis Delver being a thing, we should not forget Fate Reforged introduced two black quality threats in Angler and Banana Man.

[Dice_Box]

I do not think it is fair to compare Legacy to the format where Workshop is legal. Your argument will not hold up, because the landscape is not even remotely comparable.

Also, shops is job a safe unban, just before anyone thinks that's what I am saying.

[Zombie]

Also, shops is job a safe unban, just before anyone thinks that's what I am saying.

That autocorrect tech.

[Darkenslight]

At what point would you consider the data relevant then? Paper is almost at 80% Brainstorm decks now, MTGO floats around 83-85%. That's higher than ever, even more than during the Mental Misstep or TC era, and a higher blue count than fucking Vintage. You can never reach 100% blue decks various reasons - card availability, cost reasons, obstinacy, having a shred of dignity left, etc.

As for Grixis Delver being a thing, we should not forget Fate Reforged introduced two black quality threats in Angler and Banana Man.

Bananaman is nucking futs. I'm honestly surprised we don't see more of Murderous Cut in Legacy.

[HSCK]

At what point would you consider the data relevant then? Paper is almost at 80% Brainstorm decks now, MTGO floats around 83-85%. That's higher than ever, even more than during the Mental Misstep or TC era, and a higher blue count than fucking Vintage. You can never reach 100% blue decks various reasons - card availability, cost reasons, obstinacy, having a shred of dignity left, etc.

As for Grixis Delver being a thing, we should not forget Fate Reforged introduced two black quality threats in Angler and Banana Man.

When a single deck is 15% of the meta like in Modern which we are pretty far away from on paper.

[Barook]

Bananaman is bananas. I'm honestly surprised we don't see more of Murderous Cut in Legacy.

FTFY

I'm not too suprised that Murderous Cut doesn't see more Legacy play as it eats into DTT food - or Bananaman, for the matter.

When a single deck is 15% of the meta like in Modern which we are pretty far away from on paper.

Miracles is currently at 13% in Paper - pretty far away from is a bit of an overstatement.

On MTGO, it's currently 16%, but that's a different beast.

[Dice_Box]

That autocorrect tech.

I live my phone. :)

[nedleeds]

You can never reach 100% blue decks various reasons - card availability, cost reasons, obstinacy, having a shred of dignity left, etc..

Hahahhahah ... fully half of the people in this thread don't even acknowledge the purpose of the banned list and don't care if every deck that top 8's a 7+ round legacy event from here on out has 4 x Ponder, 4 x Brainstorm, 4 x Force.

Unfortunately, it turned out poorly. Looking at high-level tournaments, instead of results having blue and nonblue decks playing Mental Misstep, there are more blue decks than ever. The DCI is banning Mental Misstep, with the hopes of restoring the more diverse metagame that existed prior to the printing of Mental Misstep.