All B/R update speculation.

[Lemnear]

If you cannot (or do not have the time to do so, which would be understandable), give us the percentage for each of these 5, for us to see how your data have to be trusted.

If all your results are consistent, it is very interesting data indeed. If not, it would be nice from you to report so.

You can grab the last ~40 events from MtgTop8 if you like and look at the average Delver supertypes in each of the tournaments. I had not the time to do it manually for a large amount of events, so I just took the last 5 mayor ones only. If you feel like it, you can also choose to filter out online data and just look at paper events like I did for Miracles.

Actually... if you go to MTGgoldfish and sum up all Delver variants for the Leagues in August, there are more of them than there are Miracles.

As I said, I don't have the time to factor in several websites for a more detailed analysis for the Delver Supertype but just took a sample (MtgTop8 + last 5 mayor events).

[dte]

You can grab the last ~40 events from MtgTop8 if you like and look at the average Delver supertypes in each of the tournaments. I had not the time to do it manually for a large amount of events, so I just took the last 5 mayor ones only. If you feel like it, you can also choose to filter out online data and just look at paper events like I did for Miracles.

Done.
Actually, there are 168 decks in mtgtop8 registered for major legacy events in 2016. 25 of them contain CB main (15%), 31 Delver of secret (18.5%).

[Richard Cheese]

Just for the record, fuck Randy Buehler with a red-hot poker forever. He was the one that unilaterally decided land destruction was "un-fun" in the early 2000s and kneecapped a huge facet of the game because he was still butthurt about some losses in '95.

Fuck you, Randy.

Fuck you forever.

PS. - Thread is still a garbage fire.

[Lemnear]

Done.
Actually, there are 168 decks in mtgtop8 registered for major legacy event in 2016. 25 of them contain CB main (15%), 31 Delver of secret (18.5%).

Just for complete data: For all events in 2016 you get 16,1% Counterbalance and 17,3% Delver of Secrets. The relevant data at this point is Top8/Share

[Lord_Mcdonalds]

Wait, they let Randy make design decisions?

Exactly what bet did they lose, how drunk were they, how good was the weed they were smokin (and where can I get it)

[iatee]

Just for the record, fuck Randy Buehler with a red-hot poker forever. He was the one that unilaterally decided land destruction was "un-fun" in the early 2000s and kneecapped a huge facet of the game because he was still butthurt about some losses in '95.

Fuck you, Randy.

Fuck you forever.

PS. - Thread is still a garbage fire.

Market research is probably what led them to realize that land destruction is not fun. It is pretty obviously not fun for most players to lose a game because they got locked out and can't play their spells, whether it be via Counterlock or having no lands. In legacy we accept the possibility of having a not-fun game as part of the format but if standard had a bunch of prison strategies and land destruction, fewer people would be buying cards. They are a business - if most people who buy packs loved land destruction, they'd be printing one mana Stone Rains left and right.

[Dice_Box]

Just for the record, fuck Randy Buehler with a red-hot poker forever. He was the one that unilaterally decided land destruction was "un-fun" in the early 2000s and kneecapped a huge facet of the game because he was still butthurt about some losses in '95.

Fuck you, Randy.

Fuck you forever.

PS. - Thread is still a garbage fire.

With all respect due, the man had a point. I mean, no matter how your locked out of the fame, getting locked out sucks. Be that Counterbalance and Top or Crucible and Wasteland. The reason why we forgive Wasteland so readily is because we can play around it though, it's only a hard lock until you fetch a Basic. We feel like we have some small amount of control.

But having someone go "Daze, Waste, Stifle" is not at all fun.

[btm10]

Just for complete data: For all events in 2016 you get 16,1% Counterbalance and 17,3% Delver of Secrets. The relevant data at this point is Top8/Share

I'm somewhat skeptical as to how informative it is to aggregate Delver decks in discussions of whether or not something from another deck is banworthy. If switching decks was easier then it might be an interesting proxy for what meta people anticipated going in to the event, but I don't think that everyone who registers a Delver deck was faced with a choice between RUG, Grixis, BUG, Ur, and 4c. If they had other options at all, I wouldn't be surprised if they were considering for instance, Shardless vs. Grixis or BUG Delver, or Ur Delver vs. Burn.

[Spam]

With all respect due, the man had a point. I mean, no matter how your locked out of the fame, getting locked out sucks. Be that Counterbalance and Top or Crucible and Wasteland. The reason why we forgive Wasteland so readily is because we can play around it though, it's only a hard lock until you fetch a Basic. We feel like we have some small amount of control.

But having someone go "Daze, Waste, Stifle" is not at all fun.

Or Ghost Quarter, Loam for that matter...not even basics will save you!!

[Lemnear]

I'm somewhat skeptical as to how informative it is to aggregate Delver decks in discussions of whether or not something from another deck is banworthy. If switching decks was easier then it might be an interesting proxy for what meta people anticipated going in to the event, but I don't think that everyone who registers a Delver deck was faced with a choice between RUG, Grixis, BUG, Ur, and 4c. If they had other options at all, I wouldn't be surprised if they were considering for instance, Shardless vs. Grixis or BUG Delver, or Ur Delver vs. Burn.

I am not waving flags in favor of bannings. I just think we all need to share a common ground of data to discuss IF everythings fine the way it is.

P.S.: I don't have interrest in discussing Delver, but the topic was forced on me and potentially is a fitting point to compare performances/presence

[Richard Cheese]

With all respect due, the man had a point. I mean, no matter how your locked out of the fame, getting locked out sucks. Be that Counterbalance and Top or Crucible and Wasteland. The reason why we forgive Wasteland so readily is because we can play around it though, it's only a hard lock until you fetch a Basic. We feel like we have some small amount of control.

But having someone go "Daze, Waste, Stifle" is not at all fun.

Sucks for you, but that may be the very definition of fun to your opponent. I think trying to make the game fit every player's definition of fun is a fool's errand. Just make it balanced so that everyone has a fighting chance to achieve their own version of fun. Personally I think LD was a hell of a lot more fun than prison/soft-lock strategies, just because the LD player at least had to be actively trying to maintain that board position every turn instead of "achieve optimal board state, wait for win condition to appear".

To be fair, it could have been researched/market-based, but he certainly didn't make it seem that way at the time. Article, for reference:

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles...eek-2002-04-05

[HSCK]

Sucks for you, but that may be the very definition of fun to your opponent. I think trying to make the game fit every player's definition of fun is a fool's errand. Just make it balanced so that everyone has a fighting chance to achieve their own version of fun. Personally I think LD was a hell of a lot more fun than prison/soft-lock strategies, just because the LD player at least had to be actively trying to maintain that board position every turn instead of "achieve optimal board state, wait for win condition to appear".

To be fair, it could have been researched/market-based, but he certainly didn't make it seem that way at the time. Article, for reference:

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles...eek-2002-04-05

I'm positive LD and Countermagic were phased out for the same reason: most players didn't find it fun. LD is miserable in the fact it creates non-games and it's definitely been good for the game for it to be gone from modern design.

[iatee]

'Actively trying to maintain that board position', so uh, don't forget to cast Stone Rain?

From the article:

Basically, I don’t think Magic is fun when only one person can play his or her spells. I also hate fast combo decks, for pretty much the same reason. Both combo decks and land destruction decks turn Magic into a solitaire game, where one person’s strategy is designed to prevent the other player from ever getting started. While I do think it’s kind of neat to have bizarre decks running around, keeping things interesting, I don’t think these particular decks make for the most fun games.

This is pretty uncontroversial. I played Modern storm for a while, and none of my friends - who are spikes, even - ever wanted to play with me for fun. Because...it wasn't fun.

[Stuart]

I'm positive LD and Countermagic were phased out for the same reason: most players didn't find it fun. LD is miserable in the fact it creates non-games and it's definitely been good for the game for it to be gone from modern design.

This is pretty uncontroversial. I played Modern storm for a while, and none of my friends - who are spikes, even - ever wanted to play with me for fun. Because...it wasn't fun.

I agree in theory, but look at what Modern and Standard are as a result of modern design: lots of creatures being jammed into each other. Combo, land disruption, discard, countermagic, etc might not be that fun, but they keep things diverse, dynamic, and fresh. When you start kicking legs out from game design, the game gets less dynamic. Part of Legacy's strength is knowing that in any given round, you can play against fair decks, combo, control, or prison, and that you can be attacked from a bunch of different angles (LD, countermagic, etc). Some of those games might not be fun, but the overall experience should be more fun than 4 rounds of creatures butting heads.

[iatee]

Creatures butting heads can be fun too and combat math / tricks / etc. is a level of interaction that's often missing in legacy. But I mostly agree.

[Barook]

'Actively trying to maintain that board position', so uh, don't forget to cast Stone Rain?

From the article:

Basically, I don’t think Magic is fun when only one person can play his or her spells. I also hate fast combo decks, for pretty much the same reason. Both combo decks and land destruction decks turn Magic into a solitaire game, where one person’s strategy is designed to prevent the other player from ever getting started. While I do think it’s kind of neat to have bizarre decks running around, keeping things interesting, I don’t think these particular decks make for the most fun games.

This is pretty uncontroversial. I played Modern storm for a while, and none of my friends - who are spikes, even - ever wanted to play with me for fun. Because...it wasn't fun.

To be fair, Modern right now has devolved into a bunch of decks that try to ignore each other as much as possible while trying kill as fast as possible. It has always been part of the format, but it seemingly only gets worse.

As for the Buehler comment, given the amount the fucks WotC gives about Legacy, well-recognized people (from Wizards point of view) speaking out against Miracles is probably our only chance Wizards does something about the deck.

[btm10]

I am not waving flags in favor of bannings. I just think we all need to share a common ground of data to discuss IF everythings fine the way it is.

P.S.: I don't have interrest in discussing Delver, but the topic was forced on me and potentially is a fitting point to compare performances/presence

My comments were more directed toward dte, I just quoted your post because it was clearer. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

I'm somewhat ambivalent on whether something from Miracles should get the hammer. The more I play the deck the more I think that something should go and that, for a variety of reasons, it's probably Counterbalance. I'm open to debate on these points though.

[civet five]

Sucks for you, but that may be the very definition of fun to your opponent. I think trying to make the game fit every player's definition of fun is a fool's errand. Just make it balanced so that everyone has a fighting chance to achieve their own version of fun. Personally I think LD was a hell of a lot more fun than prison/soft-lock strategies, just because the LD player at least had to be actively trying to maintain that board position every turn instead of "achieve optimal board state, wait for win condition to appear".

To be fair, it could have been researched/market-based, but he certainly didn't make it seem that way at the time. Article, for reference:

http://magic.wizards.com/en/articles...eek-2002-04-05

This coming from the same 'nozzle that played 20 Counterspell.dec, has an archetype named after him, and who even has his golden signature printed on 75 worthless WC promo decks promoting said Counterspell.dec, finds a strategy "unfun" because it locks you out of playing Magic. Fuck that guy. Lets retroactively ban Rainbow Efreet just to spite him.

[Richard Cheese]

'Actively trying to maintain that board position', so uh, don't forget to cast Stone Rain?

At least LD decks had an attack step and pretty much always gave you the chance to cast 1-drops. They also had to expend their own resources almost every turn to maintain advantage. You couldn't just sit around waiting for your opponent to make the first move and then decide if it was worthy of a response or not. It was never as broken or unfun as he made it out to be because of how many ways there were to play around it, even 20 years ago.

This is pretty uncontroversial. I played Modern storm for a while, and none of my friends - who are spikes, even - ever wanted to play with me for fun. Because...it wasn't fun.

Sounds like a personal problem to me.

[nedleeds]

Just for the record, fuck Randy Buehler with a red-hot poker forever. He was the one that unilaterally decided land destruction was "un-fun" in the early 2000s and kneecapped a huge facet of the game because he was still butthurt about some losses in '95.

Fuck you, Randy.

Fuck you forever.

PS. - Thread is still a garbage fire.

I think he is genuinely excited about Magic, which is great. But his views on what constitutes interesting Magic are warped and unfortunately his voice still echoes in the halls of Wizards. These are the guys who refused to play less than 4 Misstep, 1-2 Fluster and lose the maindeck Pyroblasts and would cry about losing to shops. Complaining while wielding decks with 13-14 lands, sometimes with no basics. Decks with like 2 plows. Never acknowledging that the chance of having mox, land, bolt/plow was better than shop, mox, golem (assuming you actually played removal). The cryback was an unwillingness to concede anything in game 1 in the blue cantrip circle jerk mirror. Then he finally decides to play real removal maindeck in the form of Snuff Out and he punts completely, not knowing how LSG or Snuff Out even work. Then proceeds to not talk at all about his savage punt but cry about how shops is still too powerful. Never mentioning his incompetence.



Again all of this is 100% my fault.

http://webcache.googleusercontent.co...&ct=clnk&gl=us