Do you enjoy the current state of legacy?

[Zombie]

Yeah, finally figured out what's up with Fox: https://xkcd.com/1112/

Bad jokes aside and actually genuinely: Fox, the point is not to play game theoretically optimally. It is true that when we don our competitor-hats, our job is to make the game a nongame, as much as possible. The closer we get to turning the opponent into a goldfish, the better. The thing is, that's rarely actually very enjoyable gameplay for most people. Look at Modern, especially back in the past: People gave the format no end of hell because the format's decks really did do that sidestepping thing. They all played on different axes and games ended up being two players fiddling with their own stuff and not really able to do anything about the opponent doing anything. When we're not thinking as a competitor intent only on winning - and when talking about format health, we shouldn't, our concern should be people having fun and games testing skill - that optimal state should not be a goal or consideration: If anything, our job is to prevent it. Games become really good usually when players have to fight over a shared axis and have good tools to do it - that's why eg. Delver vs. Storm plays well, or Elves v. Blade tends to be more interesting than Elves v. old D&T.

More to the point, though, you lord over people as if they don't get that answers that can work as engines are beneficial - they do, they damn well do. There's a reason Storm pilots preferred Chain as an answer for troublesome permanents for ages on end, or why Elves pilots are routinely excited about any answer that happens to be a green Elf. The thing is, the simple removal you decry is also part of an engine - a fair deck is an engine out to create a one-sided boardstate where the player's dumb little critters can swing in freely and the opponent has no hope of clawing their way back. Killing their shit is literally both an answer, keeping them from getting ahead, and a tool to advance the engine, maintaining a maximal boardstate disparity when ahead to cement the win. It just doesn't involve fiddling with other cards you have the way engine decks do.

[Fox]

So... Show and Tell? Doesn't even care what you play, they play a single card and you lose. Teeg is unbelieveably narrow in comparison, same kind of thing as maindecking Blood Moon to hose BUG is.

Not quite correct. SnT requires 3 mana, it requires another card in hand [weak to discard], it directs you to play a deck with ~8 cards it basically can't ever cast (assume the deck is SnS or OmniSneak), and the opponent gets to put just about whatever they want into play as well. Teeg and other hatebears only requirement is that you can make 2, sometimes 3, correctly colored mana and have as little as a single copy of that hatebear in your list to potentially create a non-game that doubles as a clock. Blood Moon is not a clock, and has incredibly significant manabase/deck construction implications. Hatebears are very much unlinked [standalone] non-game creators; that's a key difference. To illustrate this point, a Storm mirror can be easily won on the spot by one player going Land -> Petal -> Teeg, Thalia, or Ethersworn; it doesn't matter that neither deck can win as its design intends since that hatebear has zero build around while still being a wincon. (this is a waste of a slot, but as idiotic as it is, that turn one play is more than good enough to crush the mirror)

[Chatto]

Fox, I'm sorry, but I can't make any sense of your posts. People will do anything to win the MU, it being reactive or proactive. I personally don't see anything bad in this. Is there anything you do enjoy in this format?

[Lemnear]

There's a reason Storm pilots preferred Chain as an answer for troublesome permanents for ages on end, or why Elves pilots are routinely excited about any answer that happens to be a green Elf. The thing is, the simple removal you decry is also part of an engine - a fair deck is an engine out to create a one-sided boardstate where the player's dumb little critters can swing in freely and the opponent has no hope of clawing their way back. Killing their shit is literally both an answer, keeping them from getting ahead, and a tool to advance the engine, maintaining a maximal boardstate disparity when ahead to cement the win. It just doesn't involve fiddling with other cards you have the way engine decks do.

Well, the reason storm used to play CoV isn't because its working as a storm engine because for that Legacy Storm runs not enough artifacts (in Vintage it's fine to be labeled as engine). The reason people ran Chain is that its 1cc ONCOLOR GENERIC INSTANT REMOVAL for all hate dropped from Leyline to Thalia, which no other card offers to this date. Moreover, CoV isn't playable these days just because of Chalice/Counterbalance everywhere and lost its SB slots to Decay (plus Krosan Grip at times), which does absolutely nothing for the decks own gameplan.

[taconaut]

I get what Fox is trying to say; he's saying there's no analogous "anti-fair hatebear" that a storm player can play that would hose Maverick or other fair decks in the same way Teeg does storm (I've felt this way at times, too). He's asking, why isn't there something like:

Leyline of Peace - 2WW
Enchantment
If ~ is in your starting hand, you may begin the game with it on the battlefield.
Skip all combat steps.
"Can't we all just get along?"

Or, for a main-deckable example:

Study Door -
Artifact
Creatures with power less than the number of cards in your hand can't attack you.
At the beginning of your main phase, if you have seven or more cards in your hand, sacrifice ~. If you do, add to your mana pool.
After years of cloistered study, the wizard burst from his study, ready to share his arcane discoveries with the world.

However, cards like that actually do exist: basically, Ad Nauseam/Tendrils of Agony. The difference is, the storm cards that hose the fair decks just end the game, whereas Teeg and friends have to attack. From a storm perspective, sometimes it's hard to realize it, because games where you get Teeg'd or Thalia'd feel awful when you're just trying to find a way to remove it so you can play, but the converse is, Maverick guy feels the same way watching us flip over a bunch of cards to Ad Naus.

On balance, both decks have some sort of draw where the other person just has to watch, and realizing it has made me feel better about the times I get locked out by hatebears, because for every time that happens, some other poor schmuck has to watch me get the nuts on turn one and draw a million cards to Ad Nauseam or something. That's just Legacy, and that's why it's fun!

(that being said, I really do hate Ramen Stompy, even if I get on an intellectual level why people enjoy it. There's just no sweeter justice than making twelve goblins on turn one before their chalice comes down )

[Lemnear]

I get what Fox is trying to say; he's saying there's no analogous "anti-fair hatebear" that a storm player can play that would hose Maverick or other fair decks in the same way Teeg does storm (I've felt this way at times, too).

~snip~

However, cards like that actually do exist: basically, Ad Nauseam/Tendrils of Agony. The difference is, the storm cards that hose the fair decks just end the game, whereas Teeg and friends have to attack.

Soooooo for S&T Elesh Norn is an anti-weenie hatebear, Griselbrand the anti-burn hatebear and Emrakul the anti-removal hatebear?

[Dice_Box]

What was the topic of the thread again? Hatebears?

[GoblinSettler]

What was the topic of the thread again? Hatebears?

I hatebears legacy.

Actually, I think it's OK. Things were more interesting several years ago. But I have a healthy weekly event. I can run Goblins or Stax with plenty of old frame cards. Can't complain much.

[Lord_Mcdonalds]

I think this thread is trying to figure out what the cancer that is killing legacy is exactly, so as to be discussed in the B&R thread later in a few months time.

[Julian23]

I feel matchups these days are more lopsided that they used to be on average. Maybe I'm misremembering, but back in 2009 I was much more scared of whom I played than what they played.

[taconaut]

Soooooo for S&T Elesh Norn is an anti-weenie hatebear, Griselbrand the anti-burn hatebear and Emrakul the anti-removal hatebear?

Hahaha, I get the sense this was mostly a joke, but the Elesh Norn example is kinda illustrative of the point: if she cost two mana and were hexproof, the feeling for fair deck players when she dropped would be analogous to how storm deck players feel when Teeg is (that is, your normal gameplan gets shut down, and the interaction you have maindeck isn't relevant anymore).

Again, I think the way it is currently is mostly fine on balance, though it's obvious Wizards prefers to give new toys to the Teeg side of the equation, for better or worse.

[ESG]

I feel matchups these days are more lopsided that they used to be on average. Maybe I'm misremembering, but back in 2009 I was much more scared of whom I played than what they played.

I don't think you're misremembering, Julian. The power level of the format has increased over time -- as is the case for all non-rotating formats -- and there has been little management via bans to compensate. Several cards have been printed that often function as end-the-game haymakers, depending on the matchup. True-Name Nemesis and Terminus did this for aggro decks and creature-based midrange decks. Griselbrand, Emrakul, and Omniscience made Show and Tell into a 3-mana bomb, whereas Dream Halls in earlier years was a riskier proposition. People who've been playing Legacy for only a few years won't remember that Show and Tell used to be not played at all in this format. We have new hatebears in Leovold and Sanctum Prelate that put their forebears to shame. Uncounterable, indestructible flying 20/20s can be had on Turn 2.

There's still balance to the format, but matchups are more polarized than they used to be.

I voted "It's okay," but I definitely would ban AND unban cards more often if I were in charge of the list.

[btm10]

I feel matchups these days are more lopsided that they used to be on average. Maybe I'm misremembering, but back in 2009 I was much more scared of whom I played than what they played.

I think this is true, and it has a lot to do with WotC's newly stated preference for 'battle cruiser Magic'. You can only push proactive game plans so far before they start losing the ability to interact with other proactive game plans that focus primarily on other axes. If you can't interact with your opponent's strategy, it pretty obviously follows that the matchup will come down to a race, and races along largely orthogonal axes tend to have matchup percentages that are hard to move since one path is generally 'shorter' than the other.

I voted "It's okay," but I definitely would ban AND unban cards more often if I were in charge of the list.

I feel the same way, but I understand why this isn't a good option for most people.

[Purple Blood]

- Being sick and tired to put up with Counterbalance and Chalice, more cantrip decks picked up DRS (for great consisteny and utility) and AD to retaliate against CotV,CB and the overall way too counter-heavy meta to have a reliable, highly flexible kill spell.

I don't play in any high level tournaments but based on the events I attend I have to agree with this. Basically Chalice and Counterbalance police and constrain the format. Almost every single deck is determined based on those two cards. Either you're playing one of those, or you're playing B/G/x so you can AD those cards, or your playing a combo deck that hopes to sneak in before the lock is in place. It pushes everything out.

The worst part to me is all the "fair" decks just end up being the exact same thing over and over Abrupt Decay, DRS, etc... You have to be in B/G and as a result pretty much 2/3 of your deck is predetermined so the space to tinker with different color combos is severely limited.

Not that I'm advocating for this but I wonder what would happen if they banned Chalice and Counterbalance. Certainly the whole format would be turned on its head. But I think it's almost a guarantee that it would become considerably more diverse.

[ironclad8690]

I actually think the format would become less diverse if they banned those two. Those cards are some of the only reasons anything besides delver or combo are putting up any results right now, both because of those cards efficacy vs said decks, and the decks that prey on the chalice decks (such as aluren for example).

I think there is space to be explored with aether vial and non-miracles counterbalance decks currently.

For instance, I think an old-school UW Vial list could be quite strong, or perhaps rug/bug/burg countertop. I also think deadguy is secretly well positioned at the moment. A nic fit deck packing Hymn to Tourach and at least 3-4 cards that trump Jace could also be good. Just speculations that could be (veteran) explored...

[LeoCop 90]

Maybe they should print more generic, maindeckable answers to permanents in colors that are not b/g. Why boros cannot have a card similar to abrupt decay? after all, red and white combined have the ability to remove any permanent from the battlefield.

[Megadeus]

Having an influx of generic maindeckable answers for things is bad in my opinion. Decay is one of them. I don't ike Decay as a card, but it's a necessity to play as long as it's legal if you're in those colors. I didn't play standard, but I heard that when Dromoka's Command was legal in the format it essentially made enchantments unplayable in the standard format that was supposed to be based on enchantments because it was such a powerful maindeckable card. Pre-Decay there was an interesting meta of if you land a sylvan library or something like that, it's difficult to remove so you debate possibly playing something like a disenchant or a vindicate in the main deck. Now you just have decay that also answers dudes it not only makes those non creatures bad, but it also pushes out other interesting options.

[slave]

The current meta just feels really un-interactive and it's getting old now.
... DnT, a deck I loved 7 months ago has become so boring and over-powered that I can't bring myself to play it, even with Foil MM Ports separating me from all the plebs who picked it up 2 weeks ago because you can buy it with 2 centrelink payments now.

LOL, centrelink - we might be the only peeps who get that. I wouldn't worry, they'll have to pay it back the way Talkbull & ScoMo are going.

I voted not really.
For me, the prevalence of the DTB (Miracles, D&T, Shardless BUG etc.) compared to the rest of the field is getting larger (where I am in the world)
The variation in decks I can expect to face is getting narrower as time goes on, and the DTB keep gaining new pieces to continue the arms-race, whilst most other decks languish. I can't see this trend changing.... maybe not ever?

When I first started, it was normal for fellaz to be running the odd rogue brew or some silly combo deck, but these days there doesn't seem to be as much imagination, everyone netdecks unashamedly, and plays only the same 2-3 decks for years. Part of this could be that the DTB have just got to the point where they're too powerful, flexible, and have all the answers. Part of this is most definitely that Legacy is so expensive it's restrictive.

My pet decks have gradually been marginalized by hate pieces, some so badly (Dredge) I have to question whether I should simply sell up and buy Miracles or D&T, or maybe even kiss goodbye to Legacy all together for a cheaper format. Spew!

[Megadeus]

LOL, centrelink - we might be the only peeps who get that. I wouldn't worry, they'll have to pay it back the way Talkbull & ScoMo are going.

I voted not really.
For me, the prevalence of the DTB (Miracles, D&T, Shardless BUG etc.) compared to the rest of the field is getting larger (where I am in the world)
The variation in decks I can expect to face is getting narrower as time goes on, and the DTB keep gaining new pieces to continue the arms-race, whilst most other decks languish. I can't see this trend changing.... maybe not ever?

When I first started, it was normal for fellaz to be running the odd rogue brew or some silly combo deck, but these days there doesn't seem to be as much imagination, everyone netdecks unashamedly, and plays only the same 2-3 decks for years. Part of this could be that the DTB have just got to the point where they're too powerful, flexible, and have all the answers. Part of this is most definitely that Legacy is so expensive it's restrictive.

My pet decks have gradually been marginalized by hate pieces, some so badly (Dredge) I have to question whether I should simply sell up and buy Miracles or D&T, or maybe even kiss goodbye to Legacy all together for a cheaper format. Spew!

I have extremely similar thoughts. I think that the efficiency of the format has gotten to a point that it is impossible to really fit in something that isn't completely streamlined. And like has been said, I think that began during the Treasure Cruise/DTT era when everyone realized that playing 8 cantrip decks and other such things are simply the best things that you can be doing. I think Fatal Push may be another tool that pushes it ever further being a 1 mana removal spell that BUG decks have adapted and now dont have to worry about clunky things like Dead Weight and Disfigure which were far more situationally good.

As an enchantress player I feel the same way too. Leovold being a maindeckabe anti draw permanent that is in the best 3 color combo in the format is probably the death knell for my enchantress days.

[Julian23]

Talking about streamlining during the TC/DTT days: I remember someone on Twitter posting his sideboard of 8 blue blasts and 7 red blasts: "I guess this is my life now"