All B/R update speculation.

[maharis]

I think you mean staff + cloudpost. Metalworker + Staff is closer to a win con.

Whatever works, all I'm saying is it's not like MUD just lays lands and spheres until winning off a Mishra's Factory.

Dragon Stompy seems to be decent for being 'engine-less' but it's also notoriously unreliable.

"Notoriously unreliable" being the key point here.

IMO, more generally, if 4x Silvergill Adept qualifies as an engine, then the definition so so broad as to be useless.

I shouldn't have even touched merfolk, I just felt like someone would say "You forgot Merfolk therefore your whole argument sucks."

It's a completely unique case. It is a pure aggro deck in many ways, but has access to much more meaningful disruption simply because it can play Force + Daze. It also generally doesn't have to worry about blockers because most decks play islands.

SGA is also available for card advantage to at least give it a little play. And I really expect someone to play Merfolk with the High Tide mana base and cantrips someday. The only reason not to, really, is that you can just build Delver.

[JDK]

Erm right.. whatever you say dude, that was the only Goblins deck to make day 2. Pretty hard to pick and choose from a sample size of... 1.

Again, you just pick one of the non-blue decks that proves your point.

"Whatever you say dude"

[Barook]

There are only two viable decks in Legacy that lack some sort of engine: D&T and Burn. (And you could argue that D&T at least has Stoneforge Mystic)

The lack of engine is also one of the Achilles tendons of D&T, aside from Glass cannon combo, decks that shit out removal, and Elves. "Decent board position you got there, it would be a shame if you drew five lands in a row and couldn't do jackshit about it."

I'd love to see more decks with different engines instead of "cantrips + FoW herpaderp" 3 out of 4 times. Modern isn't really an option either, since it has degenerated into "Midrange Herpaderp", (Infinite) combos or "Kill you before T4, #fuckdapolice" decks, with sprinkles of aggro thrown in.

[JDK]

I love how people call for a Brainstorm ban and rant about variance.

[maharis]

I love how people call for a Brainstorm ban and rant about variance.

The point isn't "variance is good," it's "more ways of reducing variance should be viable."

[HSCK]

The lack of engine is also one of the Achilles tendons of D&T, aside from Glass cannon combo, decks that shit out removal, and Elves. "Decent board position you got there, it would be a shame if you drew five lands in a row and couldn't do jackshit about it."

I'd love to see more decks with different engines instead of "cantrips + FoW herpaderp" 3 out of 4 times. Modern isn't really an option either, since it has degenerated into "Midrange Herpaderp", (Infinite) combos or "Kill you before T4, #fuckdapolice" decks, with sprinkles of aggro thrown in.

Then what are you looking for in a format that doesn't seem to exist? Or is it just yelling at the clouds?

[Stevestamopz]

Again, you just pick one of the non-blue decks that proves your point.

"Whatever you say dude"

I have been talking about specifically Goblins this whole time though. Maybe you should try reading what others are saying, not just your own posts.

In any case, are you really trying to argue that Legacy isn't full of blue decks? Because it sounds like you're trying to say "this blue bullshit is fine, look at all these random outliers of non-blue decks that didn't really, but kind of got close to Top8ing! the format is super healthy and diverse" which is just blatantly not true.

[Barook]

I love how people call for a Brainstorm ban and rant about variance.

Problem is that the cantrip cartell outclasses everything else in terms of consistency. I'm not even opposed trying out Brainstorm (and/or SDT) in D&T anymore since it doesn't make sense to gimp yourself by not running those tools for negligible anti-synergy.

There's a difference between reducing variance and making the format a homogeneous, blue blob.

Then what are you looking for in a format that doesn't seem to exist? Or is it just yelling at the clouds?

Legacy hasn't used to be a 75+% blue clusterfuck until recently. The format was more enjoyable in the past.

[JDK]

I have been talking about specifically Goblins this whole time though. Maybe you should try reading what others are saying, not just your own posts.

In any case, are you really trying to argue that Legacy isn't full of blue decks? Because it sounds like you're trying to say "this blue bullshit is fine, look at all these random outliers of non-blue decks that didn't really, but kind of got close to Top8ing! the format is super healthy and diverse" which is just blatantly not true.

First, look at what post I initially commented on when you chimed in. "Reading what others are saying" - nice one.

Don't put words in my mouth. I already addressed what you are trying to twist my words to. No need to use bold words and exclamation marks like a frightened child.

[Stevestamopz]

First, look at what post I initially commented on when you chimed in. "Reading what others are saying" - nice one.

Don't put words in my mouth. I already addressed what you are trying to twist my words to. No need to use bold words and exclamation marks like a frightened child.

What the fuck are you talking about? You refuse to actually say anything meaningful and instead resort to throwing out pissy insults as if they mean anything to anyone.

I'm not putting words in your mouth, I'm summarising what you've said over the last 4-5 posts. You said regarding the decklists posted here: http://magic.wizards.com/en/events/c...sts-2015-07-05 "You do realize, that those places are often only tiebreakers or 1-3 points away from top8, right? "

When someone said "Yes, I agree. Goblins in 152th place was fucked on breakers. Elves at 55 had the same issue. Oh and Fish on 112th. Those fucking breakers." you said;
"I still fail to see how you would base your argumentation solely on Top8, when other decks just missed it by some points. Don't you think they still did fine or even very well?
Remind you, this is not a reasoning against the critical view of blue and its meta share (or of a given deck). To me, it's just outright wrong to just argue with "wasn't in the top 8, so it didn't do well" or "no top 8 no influence on the meta", when the competition consists of 15 rounds and significantly over 1000 people.
Maybe I just misinterpreted the post. If that's the case, sorry and nevermind."


None of which makes much sense but moving on.

Then I commented showing the points won by the sole Goblins player because I thought you genuinely thought that Goblins lost out on breakers which obviously struck a nerve in you because you then said:
"Yup, you can pick those in the lower places to prove your point but you still don't want to see the ones in higher finishes. Oh well. Reading whole sentences/posts is so difficult.

Who doesn't dream of the old glorious days of Team Italia and Boros, right?" <--- (what does that have to do with anything)

So i apologise for trying to make sense of what you've posted because in reality, nothing you've written has made much sense at all. I think you're saying that Legacy is a wide-open format based off the "day 2 exemplar decklists" even though it's pretty obvious to me and others that these decklists are outliers and not indicative of a healthy meta.

[Infinitium]

Legacy hasn't used to be a 75+% blue clusterfuck until recently. The format was more enjoyable in the past.

the ride never ends

[Blastoderm]

The lack of innovation also hurts the format. Many players simply hop onto the bandwagon of the cantrip-cartel/delver/sneakshow/*insert wincon*. While Modern may not be everyone's cup of tea, at least there are players who are innovating and testing (most recently: Grishoalbrand). There are a few exceptions though... Sylvan Plug (which has Chokes main, not really innovation just a result of what the format has become) and from a while ago: Nic Fit. Nic Fit preyed on RUG, Maverick and all the midrange. However, it's fallen off the map due to Miracles and Omnishow being extremely poor matchups. Not to mention it's hard to outgrind other decks due to DTT. Jund faced a similar demise. D&T is also starting to feel the heat of DTT. As for the format turning into cantrip.dec ... it all started with Delver.

[Zombie]

NO Elves was a pretty big one, too. Put a more or less dead deck back on the map into much the same metagame slot as Nic Fit.

[Crimhead]

I can not respond to the whole think from my mobile, so let me cover the thing I disagree with the most.

"The tournament results are not giving us a proper evaluation of deck strengths"

This is bullshit. A deck that is barely played like Lands is putting up decent results. This is not to do with the amount of people playing it or the amount of people jumping onto a bandwagon. It's a strong deck, as proven by results. Miracles is a strong deck, proven by results. Goblins is a dead deck, as proven by results.

This is circular logic, plain and simple

You are assuming that the modest success Lands enjoys is an accurate reflection of its strength, and using that assumption to support the idea that Lands is not held down by the small number of Lands players. Please don't even reply if you can't admit you've made an error or at least try to defend this flaw in your reasoning.

Has it occurred to you that maybe Lands would have even more success if even more players had shown up with it?

If you took every Miracles player going into that tournament and replaced them with an equally competent Lands player (and vice-versa, do you not think this would affect the successfulness of both decks? And don't give be any bullshit about Lands being easier to hate out - that would be reaction and wouldn't come into play until the following tournament.

realizing that popularity matters more towards higher placings as a more popular deck has more chances to place

You'd think that should be self-evident and understood, but in fact it's inconvenient truth which nobody wants to hear.

Sorry to interrupt the haters, please resume the group hug.

[Zombie]

This is circular logic, plain and simple

You are assuming that the modest success Lands enjoys is an accurate reflection of its strength, and using that assumption to support the idea that Lands is not held down by the small number of Lands players. Please don't even reply if you can't admit you've made an error or at least try to defend this flaw in your reasoning.

Has it occurred to you that maybe Lands would have even more success if even more players had shown up with it?

If you took every Miracles player going into that tournament and replaced them with an equally competent Lands player (and vice-versa, do you not think this would affect the successfulness of both decks? And don't give be any bullshit about Lands being easier to hate out - that would be reaction and wouldn't come into play until the following tournament.

The notion that more players on any given deck yeilds an increased chance of seeing that deck in the top brackets is an inconvenient truth and nobody wants to hear it. Sorry to interrupt the haters' group hug.

Did you read his post? He said that Lands is barely played yet it is putting up results - that is, it is a strong deck (at least while people don't metagame against it). He was talking about other decks people say are good but for some reason don't up in high places as consistently as Lands/Aggro Loam tend to do nowadays. The typical argument against saying blue decks are just better than those is an argument of numbers and shit getting paired against shit so shit wins. Lands proves that a good deck with a small playerbase can and will get results. Most just aren't good enough for that, which anyone knows intuitively.

[Crimhead]

Did you read his post? He said that Lands is barely played yet it is putting up results - that is, it is a strong deck.

I did read his post, did you? He was responding to this:

The tournament results are not giving us a proper evaluation of deck strengths

And calling it "bullshit" using Lands as his counter-example. This is only an effective counter-example if we assume that the top8s Lands currently sees accurately reflects its strength (currently, without a lot of hate). That's assuming what he is trying to prove.

Lands proves that a deck with a small player base can and will get good results

Lands makes up about 2% of major top8s. Considering its small number of entrants, Lands is much stronger than the average deck in the meta (given the current levels of hate)

Take a (fringe) deck that's only average strength and sees even less play than Lands, and you'll get even less than 2% of top spots - enough less to be dismissed altogether by people who trust their intuition over math. Give that same deck 10%-20% of the field, and it will crush like Miracles.

We a similar conversation on another thread but you abandoned it when you were losing. Now you defend circular reasoning because the user in question happens to share your opinions on the format. Very poor show.

This isn't a discussion about the format; its a support group for like-minded whiners. I had hoped The Source would be better for that than Salvation - No such luck!

You'll be happy to know I don't plan on bothering very much anymore. You can lead a horse to water...

Finn had replied to me a couple pages back with something that actually looked interesting, I do plan to respond. But as for mathematics I'll leave you to your intuition and witchcraft.

[testing32]

You guys aren't going to convince each other at this point. I would like to suggest changing the topic back to "B/R Update Speculation".

I think WotC will ban Dig Through Time next week and unban something that doesn't matter (vise/mind twist). They will give a 1 paragraph explanation about "reduced meta game options" as the reason.

[Dice_Box]

Don't let the door hit you on the way out....

Also, from all appearances you came here for this thread. Your not going to get much from the site if you never branch out. You know I have made this point before.

You can lead a Crim to water.

Also, I debate that it's not sound logic. You see Lands day two a large amount of the time in low numbers, then top 8. You can see the amount played vs how many reach the top 8/16. The numbers are there. It is a sound argument to make. Strong decks make it to the top. Lands is played in small numbers and still does better than Pox, Goblins, Nic Fit, insert other pet deck here.

[Kanti]

Whatever works, all I'm saying is it's not like MUD just lays lands and spheres until winning off a Mishra's Factory.



"Notoriously unreliable" being the key point here.



I shouldn't have even touched merfolk, I just felt like someone would say "You forgot Merfolk therefore your whole argument sucks."

It's a completely unique case. It is a pure aggro deck in many ways, but has access to much more meaningful disruption simply because it can play Force + Daze. It also generally doesn't have to worry about blockers because most decks play islands.

SGA is also available for card advantage to at least give it a little play. And I really expect someone to play Merfolk with the High Tide mana base and cantrips someday. The only reason not to, really, is that you can just build Delver.

The High Tide mana-base? You mean a mana-base built strictly of fetchlands, and basics, with maybe a miser Udual for some funky splash in the sb for Electrickery and REB's or Hunting Pack and Kgrip?

What the hell are you talking about? Why would the Folk' ever drop Caverns and Wastelands?

[CutthroatCasual]

You'd think that should be self-evident and understood, but in fact it's inconvenient truth which nobody wants to hear.

Sorry to interrupt the haters, please resume the group hug.

This was why I had such a big problem with the Pod banning in Modern. Had WotC gave a different reason other than "diversity", then I would have been okay with it. A good deck does well, and a deck that does well is going to be played more. Just because 5 people want to play a bad deck (Zoo) doesn't mean its the fault of the good deck.