• posted a message on Star Trek: Myriad Universes Mafia IV Signups
    Quote from Annorax »
    I, Q, appear and announce that I have collapsed several different universes together for no reason other than fun, and that I've introduced an Mafia of evil people who want nothing more than to kill everyone and everything in the universe.


    Oh, I didn't know we were using those old names, Crayak. Guess I'll have to go with being the Prophets instead of Ellimist this time.

    Don't worry, everyone, I've made sure this little game is as fair as can be. I promise that Q's mafia has its share of checks and balances. With proper skill and luck, all of you in our little DS9 town can prevail. If not, I foresee some rather enterprising Ferengi making a very lucrative voyage to the Iskoort with your remains. So good will prevail despite Q's best attempts to the contrary. Teach
    Posted in: Mafia
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from Magicman657 »
    Not that I completely disagree, but in fairness there is no deck that can have good matchups versus every possible deck that might get paired against you. Your deck / sideboard choices ultimately come down to metagame statistics and predictive analytics, such that you might have picked the "correct" 75 cards to combat the metagame, but that doesn't mean you can't get paired up against a deck that's simply unfeasible to prepare for / a deck that will not succeed against the metagame but happens to be really good against you. So yes, to some extent it can be fairly considered bad luck to lose to those decks.


    Overall, however, the more skillful player will have the higher win percentage and thus the higher proportion of top 8 finishes. It's not really any different from how skilled players can construct mana bases that minimize the effects of variance due to mana screw, mana flood, colour screw, etc, except on a more complex scale. A format without nonbasic lands, or with fewer nonbasic lands, isn't more skillful than a format with a wide variety of nonbasic land options, and it's basically the same concept with format complexity.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from ToshiUmezawa »
    Draft is more skillful than sealed that's just obvious, but it comes down to player opinion. That's why I stated that this was my own opinion based on my own experiences.


    The point I was making is that your argument basically comes down to "it takes more skill to succeed in an environment that has fewer options and less variance." In essence, that removing gameplay elements increases the impact of skill, rather than decreasing it. In essence, the less diverse the metagame, the more skill is required. The problem is that's basically saying solved formats are more skillful. The fatal assumption there is that it's assuming that getting knocked out by a rogue deck comes down to variance, when in reality it's just the player being unable to deal with a deck they aren't used to playing against.

    It's not bad luck if, say, you packed no graveyard hate and got knocked out by Dredge or Reanimator or Tinfins or whatever if your deck can't otherwise handle them. It's you failing to consider such matchups, or failing to put appropriate weighting on the likelihood of facing such decks.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from ToshiUmezawa »
    Standard is more skillful IMO since it's a lot less likely to be blind sided by a competitive brew. If you know the meta and your decks strength's and weaknesses then it's more about player skill on how to sideboard and play the matchup then a flip of the coin.


    How is that significantly different from saying Constructed is more skillful than Limited because it's more about player skill than opening good cards?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from Ebonclaw »
    See, I don't play Legacy to justify the expenditure of my deck, I don't need to.


    And on the subject of deck expenditures, well, I'm someone who has a pretty solid number of duals, other expensive staples (Lilianas, LEDs, etc), and random crap that spiked unreasonably since I bought it (e.g. Chains) and I just don't see the need to buy into Standard repeatedly. I just kind of pick an affordable deck that'll do decently at FNM and ride it until rotation. My Modern play is just whatever I can scrape together out of my Legacy collection. I certainly could do better at Standard if I bothered to buy the overpriced rares and mythics that won't be worth anything in a couple of years, and to that end I probably appear to be worse in that format than I really am, but at the end of the day, well, I can just pick up one of the several Legacy decks I built several years ago and rock that if I want to play the format. I can also choose the playstyle and level of interaction I want at a given event simply by varying what deck I play.

    Buying into the same competitive level of Standard that I have in Legacy is just a poor decision, and that distorts perception as well.



    Quote from ashley25746 »
    3) Legacy's consistency makes it easier to play in my mind. It seems like delver can always brainstorm/ponder into FOW/daze, flip the delver and go. It can run on 2 mana if it has to. Modern has no brainstorm to grab what you need every time and it has no FOW to act as a free panic button.


    Legacy might certainly look easy if you aren't considering the thought that goes into all those plays. Sure, you can run some decks off two mana, but that doesn't make it autopilot. The number of times I've run rings around bad Delver players would probably surprise you, because I know what a newbie's first instincts are and I can nudge them into suboptimal lines of play. And that's to say nothing of players who mess up their cantrip orders (for instance, I've seen people Ponder before Brainstorm without having another shuffle effect in hand and wind up not getting another shuffle effect), put the wrong cards back off Brainstorm, Force the wrong spells, and generally act like having more powerful cards means you don't have to put as much thought into things.

    Another example, this one from personal experience, is Burn vs Miracles. Miracles assembled the Countertop combo and figured that'd be enough to beat me unconditionally, especially since I didn't have a Shusher out. The end result was me playing all kinds of silly stack tricks with the inexperienced Miracles player and forcing through enough spells to kill him (I also managed to slip a Red Blast onto his Counterbalance at one point in a play that one of his friends watching the match berated him after the match for walking into). A more experienced and skillful player would've beaten me in that scenario, but I was able to prey on my opponent's inexperience to eke out a win I surely wouldn't have against a better opponent. It wasn't that his deck failed him. He failed his deck.

    The thing you should never forget is that while your cards may be powerful, your opponent also has powerful cards.

    Quote from IronPlushy »
    No combo in Standard? Well someone should have told me to stop winning with Brain on the Shore...


    That's highly disingenuous. The sheer number and variety of combo decks in Legacy dwarfs anything available in Standard. In Standard, you have a few low-tier combos like Brain in a Jar, Eldrazi Displacer/Brood Monitor, etc. In Legacy, combo runs all across the tier spectrum and encompasses many fundamentally different approaches to the game. I'd suggest playing a few matches with Legacy combo decks to see the difference firsthand.

    If you show up to a local legacy or modern tournament you're going to face the same exact decks week to week because the format is cost prohibitive.


    If you had any experience at all with Legacy events, you'd know that many players who are invested into the format have a wide variety of decks they can bring. As it is, your comments are ignorant to the point that they're the Legacy equivalent of the "just buy the most expensive cards and you can easily faceroll a PTQ without playtesting" canard with Standard.

    Personally, for instance, if you sat down across from me, you could be facing down Jund, Burn, Dredge, ANT, D&T, Infect, Pox, Loam, or a few other decks, and that's just what I can play no-proxy. I personally know quite a few players with even broader options.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from IronPlushy »
    Our store switched to proxies before the proxy ban and two standard grinders hopped over to legacy and got first and second in their very first tournament with full proxy decks. Legacy players think they're special little snowflakes and tapping a turn 1 land wrong loses the match but they can't come down to modern or standard and perform with any kind of skill.
    All the formats take skill and operate very differently, it's just eternal players need to feel special and justify their thousands of dollars spent to themselves. Playing the right deck and having a strong understanding of your lines of play matters more than the format.
    Only bad players blame luck when we all know pros that are consistently successful at limited which is suppose to be the most luck intensive format.


    Just out of curiosity, have you personally played Legacy?
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from Ebonclaw »
    Not entirely true. While Legacy is indeed a varied format, there are certain cards that gain and ebb in use as the meta shifts. Right now, for example, there is a pretty decent chance I can safely fetch on T1 since I know that Stifle is not nearly as popular as it used to be.


    Also: Local metas. Depending on what area you're in, there may be a number of diehard Delver players who've never given up their deck, and as a result are frighteningly good with it. If you scout out an unfamiliar meta or talk to people more familiar with it, then you might discover that a deck may not be as out of favour there as you first thought based on more global information.

    But in reality, the whole "am I walking into Stifle?" thing is only one aspect of the point I was making (you could also argue that these decisions don't matter as much playing with or against most combo decks, for instance, though that just kicks the can down the road because there are other decision points that are equivalent in nearly any deck). Currently, you may not be as likely to be Stifled, but you could still get aggressively Wasted if you fetch a dual, or you could wind up with mana problems if you try to stick to fetching basics. Fetching the wrong dual could cut you off having enough of a given colour later on, especially if mana denial comes into play (hugely relevant against decks like D&T where that's their game plan against decks that make these kinds of decisions). They're just things that don't factor as much into newer formats despite being game-deciding in Legacy.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    I'd argue it's not really "luck" causing a loss if, say, you fetch a dual, get Wasted, then you're off a mana for an important turn later, or if you fetch a basic and wind up with colour problems. In both cases, you made a decision that wound up being incorrect. Magic is all about making decisions based on imperfect information, so outside of situations where variance is the only thing killing you (keeping a decent hand and then proceeding to draw nothing but land, for instance), there's something you could've done better but didn't, or factors you could've weighted differently but didn't. I've played a lot against things like Delver, Stoneblade, D&T, and other grindy decks, and it really is the little, unassuming things that cost you the game in those matchups.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from Ebonclaw »
    If you can correctly pilot a deck in Legacy, without making any mistakes, you're doing better than a larger percentage of players.


    Here's an example to illustrate that concept. You play a turn 1 fetchland against an unknown opponent. In Modern, you can choose to fetch something tapped or untapped, get a specific shockland if you're in more than two colours, etc. You're safe to hold off if you want to see what your opponent's doing first. In Legacy, you have those concerns too, but you also have to consider whether your opponent is on a deck that'll Stifle your fetch if you hold off (and such decks may well Time Walk you by playing a fetchland and passing, threatening a counter-fetch into Stifle all throughout your second turn if you attempt to use that land), or a deck that'll throw a turn 1 Blood Moon at you, and even past that, you have to consider how likely it is to be hit by Wasteland and weigh that against being able to cast all your spells.

    Games can be lost by fetching the wrong thing on turn 1, even before anyone casts any spells. And the player may not even realize it.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • posted a message on Better at Legacy then Modern/Standard? What does it mean!?
    Quote from ashley25746 »
    or they are people borrowing a deck from a friend, or they're new to their deck and therefore otherwise not skilled.


    This cannot be overstated. Legacy rewards deck fluency much more than Modern or Standard do. You can't just slap together a tier 1 deck, playtest it for a bit, then take it to a big event and hope to do well, because outside of matchups hugely lopsided in your favour, you're likely to get rolled by someone who's been playing the same deck for literally years and knows its every intricacy and line of play in excruciating detail. The smaller the card pool and the less diverse the options, the more you get rewarded for other factors. There's a reason that it's good advice for someone who wants to go to a Legacy event but isn't familiar with the format is "put together a linear combo deck like Belcher, goldfish with it until you're comfortable, and pray variance is on your side."

    I've taken a solidly tier 2 Legacy deck (Jund, because I like my decks to be a value grind) to multiple top 8s at large events, but have had relatively minimal success in other formats, and that's because of the peculiarities of how Legacy works as a format. With formats like Standard, tiers mean much more because a high tier deck can have a solid game against most if not all of the field (as well as being able to sideboard against a higher proportion of your bad matchups), but in Legacy, a tier 2 or even 3 deck can just come out of nowhere and spike an event more easily than in narrower formats.

    The best comparison I can think of is that if formats were RPGs, then Legacy would be Dark Souls—not the most difficult per se, but having a fairly demanding learning curve right from the get-go and a low tolerance for foolish mistakes.
    Posted in: Magic General
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.