All B/R update speculation.

[Lemnear]

Doesn't it have more to do with Storm builds?

Would ANT or TES run it? Would it allow Solidarity to make a come-back?

Reanimator might like it too.

I've always thought it was just too bonkers of a card to be considered.

If I dare to answer. Storm and Reanimator won't run a card with such high initial cost as the decks can't afford the carddisadvantage and their plan A does not necessarily include to make 3+ landdrops. The only deck I can imagine which would profit from an unban here would be HighTide.

[Megadeus]

Especially since you'RE also taking 3 from it off of ad nauseam. I'd make a bad big blue deck with it and ramp up a bunch of colorless mana with it

[Crimhead]

The point of the Stasis on steroids metaphor is that it doesn't really mean anything if an Elves pilot, who already plays on a very different axis than most Legacy decks (12x untap rulebreakers), says Amulet of Vigor is reasonable tech to beat Stasis + new Kismet-type effect. I'm sure on some level it is fine for their deck very specifically, but using that to say such a Stasis effect is fine for the format is kind of like trolling

But there is a difference between saying "X does not indicate Y is true" vs "X does indicate Y is false".

I'm saying main-deck Boseiju in the occasional Lands list does indicate the format is in trouble. Not saying this is proof that the format is not in trouble.

but you never really jump from an expert level Lands assessment to "and while R/G Lands can do such and such/answer a problem in this way, other decks cannot...so maybe there is a power level problem." It's fine that you can make a case for Boseju in Lands since you obviously know the deck, just realize that "everything is fine b/c my deck is fine in this meta" can be toxic from the outside.

You're too kind. I have a good grip on RG Lands (and a better grip on RUG Lands), but I won't clam to be an expert. I'm probably somewhere on the intermediate spectrum.

RG Lands can hold its own vs Miracles, but other decks can too (just by different means). D&T does okay there too, and Shardless, Loam and Eldrazi do even better vs Miracles. Then there are decks like S&T, Storm, and Delver which are dogs to Miracles but still do very well overall. I would never say the meta is okay just because Lands is doing well.

Yes there is a power level issue with Miracles (I don't want to call it a problem just yet). Miracles is better positioned than the other tier decks I mentioned, and most notably it has no truely horrible matches that aren't on the fringe. But is this a problem?

Personally I think the meta sports a diverse mix of competetive decks covering almost every style of play. There are other good decks putting up respectable results which are not being forced out. So while Miracles might be doing better, the format remains diverse enough that I think that's okay.

There are some who claim that Legacy's diversity is artificial - held together only by players who are willing to "take the worst of it" with less competetive decks. The idea is that if more players realised they should be playing Miracles - the best deck - the meta would be completely overrun. But there is absolutely no proof for this.

See Miracles might be the best deck for the meta, but when more and more people choose Miracles that itself changes the meta! For instance, what if decks like Infect and 12-Post are almost good enough to be tier one? As their bad matches switch to playing Miracles, eventually this pushes them into tier one territory because the bad matches that hold them back become a smaller percent of the field. IMO, if Miracles ever hit ~25% of the meta it would no longer be the best positioned deck (between mirror matches plus the greener pastures this would create for Miracle-Killers).

Basically, while perhaps the meta cannot hold Miracles bellow ~20%, I believe it can hold it back from growing significantly beyond those numbers.

There is no proof either way - we'll never know how big a meta-share Miracles can hit without becoming a negative EV meta-call. Unless of course it continues to spike in popularity. Until then it's anyone's guess.

Some people think Miracles holding the share it currently has is enough to make the format unhealthy (regardless of how much more it could sustain and regardless of the "texture" of the rest of the meta). That's totally cool! But I think it's okay for Miracles to be top dog as long as it has a celling and the meta is overall rich. I've bolded this becuase it's the crux of the issue imo, and it demonstrates the subjective impasses that keeps the argument going round in circles.

I get pretty tired of trying to explain this position. I feel like I make myself very clear, yet my points are often missed (sometimes it seems they're intentionally being missed). I figured I'd give it one more spin because you are being very civil (downright nice) and I have been less than that recently.

So while I haven't been pushing the "everything is fine" message very heavily (I know there are some exceptions), I have been liberally disputing (I would like to think refuting) arguments that say "everything is not fine". So most of my posts on the meta lately aren't trying to prove the meta is healthy, but rather to shoot down arguments that specifically imply the contrary. Almost like I'm taking the "innocent until proven guilty" approach. A lawyer doesn't need to prove their clients innocence - they only need to poke holes in the evidence presented against thier client. For people who think the meta is unhealthy and obviously so, maybe it looks like I'm nit-picking or trolling.

Just re-read your entire post (from here in the B/R which I partially quoted), you've gone defensive to the point of angry especially with @Lemnear. I generally look forward to reading your posts, and I'm willing to deconstruct them because the underlying logic is solid; which is why I don't understand why you're not above escalating (mechanics pun!) a flame war.

You are right, I became angry, and that is shameful. Funny enough I'm generally laid back and mellow n the extreme. Life's hurdles tend to roll of me like water on a duck. This is such a stupid thing to get angry over too! Not cool.

Thank you for so graciously de-escalating.

[Crimhead]

Especially since you'RE also taking 3 from it off of ad nauseam. I'd make a bad big blue deck with it and ramp up a bunch of colorless mana with it

Yeah, I think it's High Tide (probably Reset Tide) that benefits most. One the one hand this deck is struggling at best, so the boost ought to be welcome (and I admit a fondness for High Tide). But there are some who think it would make the deck too good.

[Stevestamopz]

Has anyone watched Caleb Durward's banned series?

I watched the Survival and Recruiter ones and it felt like overall his opponent(s) were trying to lose; played very weirdly and kept absolutely shitty hands.

Are these cards actually broken anymore? Recruiter is obviously not, even with food chain but what about Survival? Is that "too degenerate fuck off you mong" or would it just be another tier 1.5 deck?

[Megadeus]

I think survival has the potential to be tier one if unbanned. But I can't see it becoming oppressive. Earthcraft I could see making enchantress a viable tier 1-2 deck. Or maybe it's still just not. The big thing is that I think it would draw more people to play the deck which would help its case. I think it's viable now. It just doesn't have a high number of players like the brainstorm orgy decks that place consistently

[LOLWut]

This is employing reason and comparative thinking when explaining to a monkey why it should do something. The list is managed by monkeys.

[Sidneyious]

Yeah, I think it's High Tide (probably Reset Tide) that benefits most. One the one hand this deck is struggling at best, so the boost ought to be welcome (and I admit a fondness for High Tide). But there are some who think it would make the deck too good.

Too good? What about storm as is?
They are obviously the better combo decks being turn 2-3 wins.
High tide needs 3-4, 3 is very hard and 4 can do it but obviously more lands better.

[Lord_Mcdonalds]

If I'm the DCI, I could not unban Survival knowing the design philosophy has been to put more power into creatures at the expense of spells. It would be in poor faith to do so knowing there is a strong chance that cards could be printed that would enable it to take over the format.

Also for that matter, if we are basing our arguments on decklists from 2010, I'm going to start pulling up necro lists from 98 playing unmask and drain life to justify a necro unban.

[Dice_Box]

If I'm the DCI, I could not unban Survival knowing the design philosophy has been to put more power into creatures at the expense of spells. It would be in poor faith to do so knowing there is a strong chance that cards could be printed that would enable it to take over the format.

By that argument then, you have to look at SnT.

I think Survival could come off, but it's far from choice #1 and there are better places to start.

[Crimhead]

Has anyone watched Caleb Durward's banned series?

I watched the Survival and Recruiter ones and it felt like overall his opponent(s) were trying to lose; played very weirdly and kept absolutely shitty hands.

I haven't seen these, but not surprised to hear it. This is a guy who wants Ponder and Wasteland banned (among other cards) and wants a format that plays like Modern but with some of the powerful goodies available to eternal.

If he recorded games/matches that indicated these cards are safe, would he even release them? For somebody who wants the format to go in the other direction, what would be his motivation?

Too good? What about storm as is?
They are obviously the better combo decks being turn 2-3 wins.
High tide needs 3-4, 3 is very hard and 4 can do it but obviously more lands better.

High Tide decks run a little more control than a typical Storm list, so they shouldn't need as fast a clock as Storm. Reset Tide has the luxury of waiting for the very last minute, vs Storm decks that have to guess (thereby sometimes going off earlier than they'd actually need to).

That said, I very much doubt myself High Tide decks would be too good. And between Counter-Top and all the Chalice decks, combo has a pretty modest meta share these days. I would totally unban it myself; but I'm not too sure about WotC/DCI.

As a side benefit, Reset-Tide is easy on the budget (relatively), so it would be good for the community and people trying to break in (especially if they happen to be masochists).

By that argument then, you have to look at SnT.

I think Survival decks like a different sort of utility creature than S&T. Sneak-Show doesn't seem to be OP, but that doesn't mean Survival would be fine.

Even if Survival is okay now, I think what Lord M means is that it is not good to unban something that has a high chance of needing to be banned again. Rotating the banned list like this - even with the best intentions - will annoy players, cost us money, and hurt consumer confidence.

Similarly if S&T ever becomes oppressive (or is otherwise banned), people won't be angry that they unbanned it in the first place becuase they didn't. But should that happen we wonn't expect an unban for a long time if ever (even if the meta again becomes more hostile to that strategy).

While we want WotC to manage the list with integrity, we have to respect that they need to avoid bad PR; and that leaving a safe card on the list is less damaging than unleashing an unsafe card.

I'm not a survival expert by a long shot (never even played the card). Maybe today's graveyard hate in conjunction with the strength of Miracles is such that the deck wouldn't actually have a high chance of needing an re-ban? If that's true it certainly "should" be unbanned. But being added to the list recently (relative to other cards on the list) it's probably a very unlikely candidate. The longer it stays off, the less embarrassing it will be if they happen to misjudge it's power.

Either way, given the pace and timing of the removal of cards, I think Survival isn't going anywhere anytime soon .

I would be happy to hear it if they unban it. Of course I'm not the one fingers will be pointing at if that turns out to be a screw up!

Please note I'm not arguing Survival should stay banned. I wouldn't even want to commit to a guess. These are just reasons I think it will stay banned.

[Lemnear]

Has anyone watched Caleb Durward's banned series?

I watched the Survival and Recruiter ones and it felt like overall his opponent(s) were trying to lose; played very weirdly and kept absolutely shitty hands.

Are these cards actually broken anymore? Recruiter is obviously not, even with food chain but what about Survival? Is that "too degenerate fuck off you mong" or would it just be another tier 1.5 deck?

That series is shit and was done by someone without any Vintage or Combo background in general which you can see in the Bargain/Necro Videos for example. His decks are horribly built and the opponent not adjusted to a hypothetical metagame with these banned cards around, which leaves the viewer with a skewed impression of what the cards could do.

We discuss about Survival every 4 pages in this thread. Most was said multiple times already over the last 20ish pages if you are interrested in the topic :)

If I'm the DCI, I could not unban Survival knowing the design philosophy has been to put more power into creatures at the expense of spells. It would be in poor faith to do so knowing there is a strong chance that cards could be printed that would enable it to take over the format.

Also for that matter, if we are basing our arguments on decklists from 2010, I'm going to start pulling up necro lists from 98 playing unmask and drain life to justify a necro unban.

This. Every time the Survival discussion comes up (ergo every 4 pages) the arguments root on pre-ban deckbuilding and the hate printed since then, but never the creatures printed in the meanwhile which would make Survival instantly absurd again if unbanned.

I think we all have no interrest in chewing through the topic again

[Dice_Box]

All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.

[Stevestamopz]

All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.

Nor did it have to deal with Mother of Runes into Phyrexian Revoker.

Lem, I would go and read the last few pages but all I see is you and crimhead ranting

Edit: I was not around for Survival's dominance in Legacy. I still don't understand how the card is so busted that it's a joke to bring it up. What I do see is a very slow value engine that seems like it dies to an exceptional amount of hate that is maindecked now. Combo is a zillion times better than it was back then and the fair decks are also better.

Also, let's be honest, the joke is on all of us. WotC do not give a single shit about Legacy and they have even less desire to unban stuff in Legacy. This is just discussion for curiosity's sake.

[Lemnear]

All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.

Except most hate just shuts off one aspect of the engine at best and Survical is an engine able to counter the hate by tutoring answers. Its pretty much the same issue we discussed with Pithing Needle against CounterTop or with hate-permanents against Miracles in a bigger context like boarding Decays to get rid of counterbalance, which however does nothing against Miracles advancing their gameplan or simply drop the next counterbalance.

Nor did it have to deal with Mother of Runes into Phyrexian Revoker.

Lem, I would go and read the last few pages but all I see is you and crimhead ranting

Thats why I said 20ish pages, so you can skip the Miracles/Terminus/conditionality chatter ;)

[dte]

All the talk of creatures getting better bites both ways. Survival of old did not have to deal with Wear//Tear, RIP, Decay, Containment Priest or DRS. The hate is better too.

Well, to restate something said plenty of times: Wear//Tear or Decay do not prevent the Survival player to tutor for witness (reactively) or into spellskite (proactively), C. Priest can be handled by shriekmaw or the like (or on the fun side by Eldrazi displacer), DRS by Revoker, RiP by Rec Sage.
And here is not the endless, classical talk about answers-to-answers in a mental magic sort which is common in such a thread, but a build-in answer in the very card we are talking about: I mentioned only cards that would be tutorable and most probably played in survival lists.

Moreover, DRS and C priest would be extremely good in survival lists. Which can be control-ish with a combo finish of 1-2 cards, but not necessarily. Survival can fit in pretty much every strategy in the combo-aggro-control-prison spectrum.

I personally toyed a bit with Fauna shaman recently, and the card is good. Remove summoning sickness, bolt-stp vulnerability, and necessity to tap it for essentially a once per turn activation, and the card is beyond broken.

[dte]

Combo is a zillion times better than it was back then and the fair decks are also better.

Storm variants are not that different than what they were then. We are talking about december 2010. Only past in Flames changed really the things here. Admittedly it is an excellent card, which open a whole new plan, but not "zillion times" difference.

[Zombie]

Survival can fit in pretty much every strategy in the combo-aggro-control-prison spectrum.

Well it's fine, then isn't it? 80% format penetration is not a problem at all if every deck ever plays the card while maintaining strategic diversity. If anything, the card would become a skill-testing pillar of the format.

[dte]

Well it's fine, then isn't it? 80% format penetration is not a problem at all if every deck ever plays the card while maintaining strategic diversity. If anything, the card would become a skill-testing pillar of the format.

The card will be definitely extremely skill testing and fun to play. Will it be fine?
For me? Yes!
But maybe I should mention that one of my favorite card is SDT, and I've kind of heard that some people doesn't like the 15-20% meta share the card have.
I do believe that survival would take quite a bigger share than that.

But I am almost certain that the card won't be unbanned, for the following reasons:
1) the card is crazily powerful;
2) why would WotC take the risk? Nothing to really win, a lot of potential ranting about "screwing everything up". The conspirationists would even say that it was unbanned on purpose, to destroy legacy, because they are evil, aren't they?

[Stevestamopz]

Storm variants are not that different than what they were then. We are talking about december 2010. Only past in Flames changed really the things here. Admittedly it is an excellent card, which open a whole new plan, but not "zillion times" difference.

I meant more Reanimator/Show and Tell. Griseldicks decks in other words.
I also find it hard to believe that Storm combo hasn't gotten better in order to keep pace with Delver, Miracles and DnT.

In any case, I have no idea how Survival is beating Omnitell when DnT gets kicked in the nuts repeatedly by that deck.

I have no idea why Show and Tell is legal

I have no idea why Goblin Recruiter isn't unbanned

I have no idea why I'm posting this.

Well it's fine, then isn't it? 80% format penetration is not a problem at all if every deck ever plays the card while maintaining strategic diversity. If anything, the card would become a skill-testing pillar of the format.

Props, you made me spit out my water from laughter.